Two of the most ambitious fantasy series in recent memory arrived within weeks of each other in 2022. The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, produced by Amazon, and House of the Dragon, HBO’s prequel to Game of Thrones, entered a crowded streaming landscape with towering expectations. Both sought to claim the mantle of prestige fantasy, but they approached the genre with markedly different aims, aesthetics, and storytelling traditions. Comparing the two is less about declaring a winner than understanding what each set out to achieve, and how well they succeeded.
World-building and Setting
The Rings of Power takes place during the Second Age of Middle-earth, thousands of years before the events of The Lord of the Rings. Its scope is vast, spanning the island kingdom of Númenor, the Southlands, the elven realms of Lindon and Eregion, and the dwarven halls of Khazad-dûm. Visually, the series is rich, with sweeping aerial shots, intricate costumes, and digital landscapes that echo Peter Jackson’s cinematic legacy. The tone is mythic and elevated, aiming to capture the feel of a timeless legend.
In contrast, House of the Dragon narrows its focus to Westeros, specifically the political and familial tensions within House Targaryen. Set nearly two centuries before Game of Thrones, the story unfolds in a world already familiar to viewers, but it does so with greater intimacy and political complexity. The architecture, customs, and factions are more grounded, and while dragons soar above the castles, the conflict remains rooted in inheritance, ambition, and betrayal.
Plot and Pacing
House of the Dragon tells a tightly structured story about the slow collapse of a dynasty. It spans several decades, with time jumps used to establish shifting alliances, marriages, and the next generation of schemers. Despite these jumps, it maintains dramatic tension through well-written character dynamics and a clear sense of impending civil war. The political manoeuvring feels earned, with each episode building towards fracture.
The Rings of Power adopts a more meandering approach. Its first season introduces multiple storylines with little direct overlap. The slow pace allows for character moments and world-building, but it often delays major revelations or developments. For some, this was a sign of confidence; for others, it felt unfocused. The introduction of Sauron and the forging of the first rings are major narrative beats, but they come late in the season, with uneven build-up.
Characters and Performances
House of the Dragon benefits from a strong ensemble cast. Paddy Considine as King Viserys delivers a subtle and tragic performance that anchors the series. Emma D’Arcy and Olivia Cooke, as Princess Rhaenyra and Queen Alicent, bring emotional weight to the shifting rivalry. The characters are flawed, calculating, and human, which fits the show’s political themes.
In The Rings of Power, Morfydd Clark stands out as Galadriel, portraying the character with steel and restlessness. Robert Aramayo’s Elrond offers warmth and diplomacy, especially in his interactions with the dwarf prince Durin. However, some performances are held back by the script’s stylised dialogue and tonal constraints. The characters often speak as symbols of archetypes, rather than fully formed individuals.
Visuals and Production
Both shows are technically impressive. The Rings of Power reportedly had the largest budget in television history, and the production values are visible on screen. Locations, costumes, and creature design are lavish, aiming to recreate the grandeur of Tolkien’s world. Khazad-dûm, in particular, stands out for its scale and life.
House of the Dragon, while slightly more modest in scope, excels in atmosphere. The Red Keep and Dragonstone are familiar, yet given fresh perspective. The use of practical sets, subdued colour palettes, and tightly framed interiors suits its themes of decay and internal rot. The dragons are convincingly rendered, but they are used with care, supporting the drama rather than overwhelming it.
Rings of Power trailer:
Themes and Tone
The Rings of Power explores hope, perseverance, and the long shadow of evil. Its tone is idealistic and rooted in high fantasy. It draws heavily from Tolkien’s themes of fate, temptation, and the cost of resistance, but occasionally struggles to balance grandeur with emotional intimacy.
House of the Dragon is more cynical, examining power and legacy through the slow disintegration of trust and kinship. It continues the Game of Thrones tradition of moral ambiguity, but with a more focused emotional centre. While it retains moments of spectacle, its core strength lies in political drama and character decay.
House of the Dragon trailer:
Swords and Combat
In terms of weaponry and combat style, the two series reflect the worlds they are trying to build. The Rings of Power presents a cleaner, more stylised form of swordplay. Elven combat is fluid and balletic, drawing from previous depictions in The Lord of the Rings films. Galadriel’s duels are choreographed with precision, relying on speed, agility, and form. The Númenórean soldiers fight with discipline, often in formation, reflecting their role as a professional military force. The weapons themselves are ornate, with elven blades curved and graceful, and Númenórean swords bearing subtle decorative elements.
By contrast, House of the Dragon embraces a more brutal and grounded approach to violence. Sword fights are quick, bloody, and often poorly lit, emphasising desperation over elegance. The show avoids glorifying battle and instead highlights its cost, with injuries, fear, and sudden death forming part of the visual language. Swords are largely functional, in keeping with the Targaryens’ noble status and the period setting, though certain heirlooms such as Blackfyre and Dark Sister carry political significance as well as martial utility. Armour is also more varied, with heavier mail and plate visible among the knights of Westeros.
This difference in presentation reflects their contrasting thematic goals. The Rings of Power sees combat as part of mythmaking, while House of the Dragon treats it as an extension of political failure.
Audience Reception and Legacy
House of the Dragon was met with critical acclaim almost immediately. Many praised its writing, pacing, and character development, viewing it as a return to form after the divisive ending of Game of Thrones. It attracted strong ratings and sparked active discussion week to week.
The Rings of Power received a more divided response. Some admired its visual ambition and commitment to Tolkien’s ethos, while others criticised its pacing and character writing. It fared better with casual viewers than with sections of the Tolkien fanbase, where concerns about lore fidelity and tone were more prominent. It remains a visually ambitious project with the potential to grow in later seasons.
Both The Rings of Power and House of the Dragon mark significant entries in modern fantasy television. One offers grandeur, symbolism, and the weight of myth. The other presents a slow-burning tragedy within a fractured royal house. In terms of narrative cohesion and character depth, House of the Dragon has the edge. In scale and visual ambition, The Rings of Power sets new benchmarks. Even their depictions of combat reflect their priorities: one reaching for the epic, the other grounded in consequence. In the end, the better series depends on whether you prefer your fantasy elevated or embattled.
