Average rating: (7 reviews)

The Iron Tower Trilogy

In:

92 votes
+48
|
-44


Appears on 2 lists in total.
Appears on 1 master lists.
Appears on 1 voting lists.
Appears on 0 non-voting lists.
25
Dennis L. McKiernan's Mithgar books are among the most beloved in all of fantasy fiction. The Iron Tower includes the first three novels set in the world of Mithgar-collected in a single volume for the first time-with an all-new introduction by the author....

MORE
  • Author: dennis l. mckiernan
  • Publish Date: 2000-12-01
  • People Who Like The Iron Tower Trilogy Also Like...


    the iron tower trilogy Ranks On The Following Lists:


    Worst Fantasy Books Ever(Ranked 13 out of 37)

    The publicly ranked version of the "Worst Fantasy Books Ever" list (http://bestfantasybooks.com/worst-fantasy-books.html). Vote on the entries and submit any books you feel that deserve to be on thi...

    MORE

    Worst Fantasy Books Ever(Ranked 32 out of 120)

    The publicly ranked version of the

    Reviews/Comments On the iron tower trilogy


    1 out of 2 people found this review helpful
    RE: Worst Fantasy Books Ever
    By: Michael Reed McLaughlin
    2013-07-26 08:04:47

    I, for one, quite liked The Iron Tower trilogy. I've read quite a few of McKiernan's books and enjoyed them all. They are quite Tolkienish, but then again, that's precisely why I like them so much.

    Was this review helpful to you?
    2 out of 3 people found this review helpful
    RE:
    By: Jacob
    2014-05-29 08:48:43

    I read The Iron Tower trilogy quite a long time ago (20 years?), but I remember really loving it. It feels weird to me to see it on a "worst" list. I would imagine if there was any actual credible claim of plagiarism to be made, the Tolkien estate would have made it by now. I have to disagree with this site and recommend The Iron Tower trilogy strongly.

    Was this review helpful to you?
    1 out of 3 people found this review helpful
    RE:
    By: rick
    2015-04-14 03:30:17

    I thought it a good read.I think lord of the rings is one of the best.But there was enough difference's .i don't think frodo could do the things Tuck could,like the review mentioned.Don't let the reviews keep you from a good trilogy

    Was this review helpful to you?
    0 out of 1 people found this review helpful
    RE:
    By: Anonymous
    2016-01-20 01:45:50

    Loved it.

    Was this review helpful to you?
    0 out of 0 people found this review helpful
    RE:
    By: Anonymous
    2016-04-23 05:44:49

    Fully agree with the inclusion on "Worst Fantasy Books Ever" list. Mediocre writing at best, and I kept getting yanked out of the plot because I couldn't stop comparing it to the almost scene by scene similarity to The Lord of the Rings.

    Was this review helpful to you?
    0 out of 0 people found this review helpful
    RE:
    By: Anonymous
    2016-09-06 06:11:11

    I think you are too kind to Dennis L. McKiernan's works. It's not just crap, its outright plagiarism. If these stories were handed in for a college English class, Dennis would have flunked out because this, and rightfully so.

    The idea that copying Tolkein's work makes him an author on par with JRR (as you can read in the back cover accolades) makes me want to puke. That I actually shelled out cash for these novels is mind boggling, but thankfully, this was back when paperbacks were about $3.00 to $4.00 a copy.

    If I could rate this series with negative numbers I would.

    Was this review helpful to you?
    RE: RE:
    By: Anonymous
    2017-07-02 02:53:53

    Odd that one reader called it crap AND a scene by scene copy of The Lord of the Rings. Does that mean Tolkien wrote crap? The story was enjoyable despite the similarities.

    0 out of 0 people found this review helpful
    RE:
    By: Anonymous
    2017-07-12 09:27:33

    I enjoyed these books quite a bit, and even reread them within the past year because I was worried about nostalgia creeping in. I love Tolkien, and I see the similarities, after all that was the author's point in writing the books for them to be similar to LotR, but I see these books as different enough. It is easy to focus on the similarities, but one could focus on the differences.
    1. No dwarves/Gimli.
    2. Tuck looks like Frodo, but functionally in the story his actions are much different and the outcome is certainly different. The martial skill difference between the two characters alone makes them extremely different from one another, not to mention that Tuck does not have to shoulder the burden of an evil magical ring. Their purpose in the two stories is vastly different. The only similarity is that they come from a people who are about half the size of a human. Hobbits do not have the jewel eyes of Warrows, for example, allowing them to see even farther into the darkness than elves.
    3. No magic ring.
    4. More female characters that are independently relevant to the story (Merrilee for example).
    5. More focus on characters and their emotions, less focus on the world and travel (although there is still some).
    6. No Ringwraiths. The Ghuls are not Ringwraiths in any important way other than they wear black cloaks. The ring and the Ringwraiths are crucial to the LotR story, that their absence in the Iron Tower changes the story significantly IMO.
    7. No Gandalf.

    Is it a great trilogy? No, not "great" but I think it's a lot better than one star.

    Was this review helpful to you?





    How Would You Rate The Iron Tower Trilogy? (leave blank if you just want to comment on the book and not review it):