Slashdot Mirror
LOTR: Two Towers Extended Edition Reviewed
akahige writes "The Digital Bits has just posted an exhaustive review and analysis of extended edition of The Two Towers, everybody that can't wait to get theirs -- or wait even longer to see the uber-cut in the theatre -- check it out. There's 43 minutes of new footage (not including the extended credits), and comparable extras to the extended version of Fellowship: 4 commentaries, documentaries, behind the scenes, etc. " I felt that FotR's Extended Edition was far superior to the theatrical release- usually these extra cuts add little, but this was the exception. I've been waiting with held breath for this one. I just wish it would ship a few days early!
You mean they've made the movie even longer?
I hope the new DVD has an extra-special "toilet break" feature!
TEXT OF THE ARTICLE
review by Bill Hunt, editor of The Digital Bits
Film Rating: A
Disc Ratings (Video/Extras): A/A+
Audio Ratings (DD/DTS): A-/A
Specs and Features
Disc One: The Film - Extended Version, Part I
Part I - 107 mins (approx 236 mins total - includes 20 min fan club credit roll on Disc Two), PG-13, letterboxed widescreen (2.35:1), 16x9 enhanced, single-sided, RSDL dual-layered (layer switch at 50:42, at the start of chapter 15), custom slipcase with fold-out Digipack packaging (featuring production sketches and artwork), all commentaries feature on-screen text to identify speaker, audio commentary (with director Peter Jackson and writers Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens), audio commentary (with design team members Richard Taylor, Tania Rodger, Grant Major, Alan Lee, John Howe, Dan Hennah and Chris Hennah), audio commentary (with production and post-production team members Barrie Osborne, Mark Ordesky, Andrew Lesnie, Mike Horton, Jabez Olssen, Rick Porras, Howard Shore, Jim Rygiel, Joe Letteri, Ethan Van der Ryn, Mike Hopkins, Randy Cook, Christian Rivers, Brian Van't Hull and Alex Funke), audio commentary (with cast members Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, John Rhys-Davies, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, Orlando Bloom, Christopher Lee, Sean Bean, Bernard Hill, Miranda Otto, David Wenham, Brad Dourif, Karl Urban, John Noble, Craig Parker and Andy Serkis), 8-page booklet with foldout appendices map, Easter egg, animated film-themed menus with sound and music, scene access (31 chapters), languages: English (DD 5.1 EX, DTS 6.1 ES & DD 2.0 Surround), subtitles: English, Closed Captioned
Disc Two: The Film - Extended Version, Part II
Part II - 129 mins (approx 236 mins total - includes 20 min fan club credit roll on Disc Two), PG-13, letterboxed widescreen (2.35:1), 16x9 enhanced, single-sided, RSDL dual-layered (layer switch at at 59:56, in chapter 18), all commentaries feature on-screen text to identify speaker, audio commentary (with director Peter Jackson and writers Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens), audio commentary (with design team members Richard Taylor, Tania Rodger, Grant Major, Alan Lee, John Howe, Dan Hennah and Chris Hennah), audio commentary (with production and post-production team members Barrie Osborne, Mark Ordesky, Andrew Lesnie, Mike Horton, Jabez Olssen, Rick Porras, Howard Shore, Jim Rygiel, Joe Letteri, Ethan Van der Ryn, Mike Hopkins, Randy Cook, Christian Rivers, Brian Van't Hull and Alex Funke), audio commentary (with cast members Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, John Rhys-Davies, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, Orlando Bloom, Christopher Lee, Sean Bean, Bernard Hill, Miranda Otto, David Wenham, Brad Dourif, Karl Urban, John Noble, Craig Parker and Andy Serkis), animated film-themed menus with sound and music, scene access (39 chapters), languages: English (DD 5.1 EX, DTS 6.1 ES & DD 2.0 Surround), subtitles: English, Closed Captioned
Discs Three & Four (See Page Two)
"It is an army bred for a single purpose... to destroy the world of men."
And so we come to the crossroads. The Two Towers is the second installment in Peter Jackson's epic film adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkein's The Lord of the Rings - the installment poised to make or break the trilogy. Could Jackson and company follow up on the blockbuster success of 2001's The Fellowship of the Ring? Would the film continue with the same level of quality? Would the momentum of the story build upon the climax of the first film, and prepare audiences for the ultimate confrontation between good and evil in the soon to be released final chapter, The Return of the King? The answer to all of these questions, of course, is a resounding yes.
As the film opens, we find ourselves plunged into the dark mines of Moria, to relive a few moments of Gandalf's confrontation with the fiery Balrog. But instead of playing out as we remember it in Fellowship of the Ring, this time, when Gandalf falls into the abyss, we fall with him to watch as his fight continues. The conseq
I'm waiting for the 36 hour super extended expansive authorative double wide big mac and fries too many pies massive elongated turgid spactular extravaganza sustained another beer please endless superbit DVD release.
You aren't a true fan unless you buy one. And with every purchase you get a free Lucasarts (tm) branded marquee to store it in.
Beep beep.
Here are the added/lengthened scenes:
"Among the new treasures in store for fans are several more moments with Gollum, more background on the Ents and additional scenes involving Treebeard in Fangorn Forest, Gandalf telling Aragorn that Sauron is afraid of what he may one day become, Theodred's funeral at Edoras, more of Faramir capturing Frodo and Sam, new scenes between Aragorn and Eowyn on the road to Helm's Deep, more intense footage during all of the major battles... and this is just scratching the surface. There's also a major new flashback scene in which we see Faramir with his brother, Boromir, and their father, Denethor, who is the Steward of Gondor. We learn why Boromir tried to take the Ring from Frodo in the last film, and why Faramir struggles with the same decision here. It's fantastic stuff that really fleshes out both Faramir and Boromir. It's also important for introducing us to the character of Denethor, who plays a larger part in the forthcoming Return of the King."
I've been waiting with held breath for this one. I just wish it would ship a few days early!
Let's put it this way... if you're holding your breath, and it doesn't ship a few days early, you're not going to get a chance to see it.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
In a previous story there was rumors of theatres that would be showing the entire trilogy on the same day... Anybody got any lists of theatres that will be doing this with dates and times....
I hope the local theatre here will be doing this. I will be checking shortly. I guess I am just slow, I won't be seeing the third Matrix until tomorrow.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
Do you think they could offer a version that returns to the book continuity, without the gratuitous appearance of Arwen in Rohan and the silly Aragorn dream sequence?
Or am I asking too much?
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
one movie, TWO movies, the second movie extended, and when i was the library the other day i realized there was even a book about this stuff!
Check out the video to Ben Hur, there's a 5 minute "interlude" included on the video itself which had me chuckling.
It demands to be honoured. Pop out and relieve yourself, AND make a cup of tea, without using the accursed pause button.
'tis for wimps.
ooooooh! What does this button do? - DeeDee, Dexters Lab.
I know I'm going to get flamed and mod'ed into oblivion for this, but seriously, what's the big deal about LotR? Why do people lash out viciously at movies that actually make an attempt a real depth (Matrix), while simultaneously holding up the LotR as the cinematic "Gold Standard?" I mean, sure, it's a moderately interesting story, but does it need 9+ hours to be told? Sure, some interesting fights happen along the way, and the effects are great, but are there subtle metaphors, philosophical references, and character dualities (besides Golem, obviously) that I'm missing?
Why do people bitch and complain that the Matrix was too much gobbledygook (translation: they didn't understand, and hate movies that challenge them to think about it anywhere beyond the concession stand on their way out), then act like LotR is this untouchable masterpiece?
There's this ring. It's evil. It has to be destroyed. That's where we left off after the first one. "Two Towers" and 3 hours later, that's STILL where we are. Still got that ring. Still has to be destroyed.
Why is this such amazing work, while the Wachowskis out-of-the-box conclusion to the Matrix (everyone's pretty pissed, but no one expected it, did they now), is seen as hack-work?
I don't get it. I'm not a Tolkien fanboy, but I watched the first two, and I'll watch the third. But there's really nothing cool to discuss about them, is there? The Matrix movies work because there are so many different interpretations of what they mean and how they all interrelate, and it's fun to discuss. But, as far as I can tell, the LotR "is what it is," isn't it? They lay the whole story out there in front of you, and hold your hand. They don't challenge you to try and figure out what the ring really represents, or if maybe, just maybe, the good NEEDS the evil to give it a purpose to exist? The Matrix suggests these kinds of things, but the LotR seems to shy completely away from them, afraid of challenging (and alienating) their audience.
Am I wrong? What gives?
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
I really don't think Peter Jackson sees himself in such authority to re-write the story that much.
Else he'd be thrown into the fire of Mt.Doom by Tolken fans with big feet.
They are still fantastic movies, of course. But when I watched the Two Towers again, recently, with my wife, every time she asked me, "Was that in the book?" I found that I had to say, "Well, no, not really."
philcrissman.com.
A complete listing of showings for the marathon can be seen here
The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
Yes, you are the only one. So go buy it already. That version has been available since August.
Any other questions?I am usually of the same opinion, but for this movie, there is a good reason to have the extended editions and the extras on the disc... it would be *impossible* to fully develop the plot and subtleties of LotR to even reasonable standards within the 9 hours of the normal film. This is PJ's way of giving more to the fans of the book (which he is also). These scenes were cut simply because of time constraints, not because they sucked. Try watching the extended edition of "The Abyss" sometime as another example of a film that was shortened by time. In many ways, this is the exact opposite of what you claim, they are correcting and making up for the fact that they tried to make too much money by making the films shorter and more palatable to a theatre audience, rather than achieving their full vision.
In Toklein's TTT, the cliff-hanger ending is Shelob the spider almost ends the quest. I guess Jackson moved this to the part III for some reason or the other.
Personally, I think of each movie as being a 6-disc special edition. If they released it that way all at once, the total cost would end up about the same, so what difference does it make?
LordBodak's journal.
How is it rude?
Is it rude for Nissan to offer 3 versions of the Z-350? Or is it extra rude for Cadillac to come out with a V-6 version of the CTS and then release a more expensive V-8 CTS. Or horrors GM comes out with a 70K Corvette called the XLR then later comes out with the real Corvetter for 55K.
"Its a sick way to make $$ and a slap in the face to the fans."
It's not like anyone is forcing anyone to go buy both versions of TTT or FoTR.
The first version is for your casual consumer. The second has extra stuff for your serious fanboy.
Sorry if someone actually coming out with different versions of a DVD for different tastes bothers you to your core.
Yes, but they sold out within hours after the tickets were offered online.
I presume all three movies plus outtakes can be molded into a 12-15 hour special edition. I'd guess there is certain "background material" out there like the description of Hobbittown, the doom of the elves, the earlier wars, etc. that has been filmed, and can be more creatively presented in an expanded edition.
is it too much to ask for patience? do what alot of the rest of us did, wait for the collectors edition. he told us from the start that there would be 2 versions, if you wanted the version with everything all you had to do was wait a few months.
I would say that he isn't just tryinhg to make money there are two different audiences for the lotr films, the normal moviegoers who want it as they saw it, and the lotr fans who want the full thing. he's catering for both and everyone knew it.
so don't complain that he's ripping you off just because you didn't have the patience to wait for the version you wanted when it was well known that it would be around a few months later.
dave
I've seen only a portion of the trilogy (saw part of "The Two Towers" while snowbound at a con in Baltimore), but my feeling has been to wait until "Return of the King" comes out on DVD, and then collect the set in a Super Extended mode.
My wife brought up a good point: if the DVD(s) is will be stoked with so many "extra features", how much of an effect will that have on getting people to see the movie? Why bother going at all?
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
Pretentiousness
That's what separates the Rings trilogy from the Matrix's gobbledygook.
They are both fantasy stories, but Rings doesn't try to be much else. Rings isn't trying to mix heavy religious themes, moral allegory (Tolkien himself hated allegory) and pseudo-philosophy into it's storyline. It's just a cool fantasy story.
The Matrix on the other hand, tries to look "deep" and "heavy" where in reality, the themes and ideas it presents have already been exhaustively discussed in PHIL 101. The Matrix trilogy tries so hard to be important that it ends up a parody of itself.
Tolkien created a world with such stunning depth that it would take a lifetime to get to know intimately.
It has languages, thousands of years of detailed histories, many epic tales as well as intense and interesting characters. Stories end and then stories begin.
The Wachowki's created a world in which people with cables in their brains become supermen and kick the crap out of computer programs. There is one interesting concept, how do we know that the world we experience with our senses exists away from our senses?
The rest of the Matrix "philosophy" is a mishmash of words or plays on words that imitate depth through ambiguity. Playing on words and their meanings is sophistry, not philosophy.
All in all the Matrix backstory is just to give geeks an excuse to proclaim the Matrix as cool not just because its about a hacker with a girlfriend that dresses in leather who learns kung-fu through a ROM chip and gets to shoot a lot of guns. Sex AND violence packaged with a nice 'deep' wrapper. Wow.
Give me five examples of depth in the Matrix?
Five from the Lord of Rings:
a) Boromir wants to use the ring to defeat Sauron. But the ring will warp its wielder to its masters will. The tool becomes the end.
b) The rebels of Rohan leave their king out of their love for their king.
c) The elves of Middle Earth help the men of Middle Earth even though they are leaving that land. Elves are immortal in normal circumstances but they do not flinch from death in combat.
d) Gondor is a shadow of itself at its height and in turn is a shadow of Numenor (the kingdom left by Gondor exiles when Sauron corrupted it). There is a rich and vibrant history behind everything. The films do not convey all of this but there is a complete absence of history behind the Matrix (apart from 30 mins of Animatrix).
e) Sauron is not defeated by force of arms but by a combination of luck (Gollum falls into Mount Doom) and heroism (Frodo and Sam). The interesting thing is that Frodo is not a messianic pure strong hero, at the end he betrays the trust in him by wielding the ring. Gollum seals Sauron's doom.
Actually the "Good Reason" that those scenes ended up being cut is that Peter Jackson was contractually obligated to deliver movies that were only 3 hours in length,(so theaters could maximize the number of times they could show it per day) with the understanding that he could then release DVD's with the special stuff later on. In a sense, they are not just taking scenes and sticking them back in, but really developing two different versions of the same film, the theatrical to appeal to the general audience and the extended DVD to appeal to the fans.
The FotR Extended version added so much to the movie that I know I could never appreciate the theatrical version again, and I'm willing to bet that Two Towers will be even better.
I have the restored version of Lawrence of Arabia with a running time of 228 minutes. This has the 'overture' and the intermission (time to change discs), still it is a good time to use the bathroom and to fetch more cold beer - watching all that sand makes me thirsty).
See my journal, I write things there
>there is generally a good reason why scenes end up on the the cutting room floor.
From what was added to the extended version of the first movie, there was no good reason except that it made the movie longer.
For me, that isn't a good reason. Tell me how long it is beforehand, keep it good and interesting and you can make it as long as you want.
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
meanwhile you can find out your name in elvish and your hobbit name!!!
my blog
> My wife brought up a good point: if the DVD(s) is will be stoked with so many "extra features", how much of an effect will that have on getting people to see the movie? Why bother going at all?
Because some of us don't have 20ft wide TV screens and high quality sound systems.
- MugginsM
Obviously, you don't order and consume a 'super-sized' beverage that is at least twice the maximum human bladder capacity in the first hour of the film.
I missed the penultimate 15 minute segment of Lotr:FotR because I DID. I also discovered that when sufficiently motivated, I can be back in my seat in a time that would shame an Indy pit crew.
I know I'm going to get flamed and mod'ed into oblivion for this, but seriously, what's the big deal about The Matrix? Why do people lash out viciously at movies that actually make an attempt a real depth (LOTR), while simultaneously holding up the Matrix as the cinematic "Gold Standard?" I mean, sure, it's a moderately interesting story, but does it need more than 10 minutes to be told? Sure, some interesting fights happen along the way, and the effects are great, but are there subtle metaphors, philosophical references, and character dualities (besides the obvious Keanu=Christ thing, obviously) that I'm missing?
Why do people bitch and complain that LOTR was too much gobbledygook (translation: they didn't understand, and hate movies that challenge them to think about it anywhere beyond the concession stand on their way out), then act like The Matrix is this untouchable masterpiece?
There's this bunch of machines. They're evil. They has to be destroyed. That's where we left off after the first one. "Matrix Revisited" and 3 hours later, that's STILL where we are. Still got those evil thingies. Still has to be destroyed.
Why is this such amazing work, while Peter Jackson's out-of-the-book conclusion to LOTR is seen as hack-work?
I don't get it. I'm not a Matrix fanboy, but I watched the first one, and I'll watch the second and third (when they reach TV). But there's really nothing cool to discuss about them, is there? The LOTR movies work because there are so many different interpretations of what they mean and how they all interrelate, and it's fun to discuss. But, as far as I can tell, the Matrix trilogy "is what it is," isn't it? They lay the whole story out there in front of you, and hold your hand. They don't challenge you to try and figure out what Neo really represents, or if maybe, just maybe, the good NEEDS the evil to give it a purpose to exist? The LOTR suggests these kinds of things, but the Matrix seems to shy completely away from them, afraid of challenging (and alienating) their audience.
Am I wrong? What gives?
I was so kindly informed that my first post with a link to a theater listing was incorrect. So... here is a link that is sure to help. Simply enter your zip code and it will show you the closest theater showing the trilogy.
FIND A THEATER
> For me, that isn't a good reason. Tell me how long it is beforehand, keep it good and interesting and you can make it as long as you want.
Well, I'm with you 100 percent, and I'll be picking this extended version up posthaste, but the reason for reducing the movie isn't because viewers won't sit that long (although it is for some). The main reason theaters like movies under three hours is because with that time frame, they can get more showings in in a day. If a movie is just 20 minutes over three hours, they lose a showing per day, and that's a lot of ticket sales lost. Movie makers are sensitive to this fact, and so they make directors cut it down to size. In this particular case, Jackson did it under the promise that he'd get to release the mondo-massive version on DVD, which is what this extended set represents.
Virg
Ade_
Big Bubbles (no troubles) - what sucks, who sucks and you suck
It's spelled Uruk-Hai.
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
I would agree, except that they TOLD YOU FROM THE OUTSET they were going to do this. If you were a bit pissed when they did it for FoTR, I would agree to an extent because I got "screwed" with it too that time. This time though, the two releases were not hidden facts in the least, they actually told you the exact release dates for each edition right up front! If you bought the first edition, you have no right to be pissed because you KNEW what was going to happen, you should have waited if you didn't want to pay twice. It's not like you have been living under a rock and didn't know what was going on, were you?!?
Also, most people I know love this story so much and love how these movies have been done that paying twice doesn't bother us in the least. When artists produce something of this caliber, paying them twice (five times in my case, the twice I saw it in the theater, the once I rented it and now the twice I've purchased it) is not a problem to me, they deserve it.
Besides, do like I did with FoTR: the first one is now a Christmas present for someone you love. Not a bad deal really.
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
You can drink. You see, the cup they give you can have more than one use. Just be creative.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Which edition of the DVD do I need to buy to see the scene where Faramir passes the test and lets Frodo and Sam go without taking them to Osgiliath?
--
E_NOSIG
I think you're talking about Arwen rather than Eowyn here.
John
2. If your considered its etymology from French, you'd realise this.
You're correct that your parent poster used it incorrectly. He meant overture.
You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
That's one thing that really annoys me. That's why I don't buy food at the theaters, I don't WANT 32-64 ounces of pop and a giant tub of popcorn. A 12 ounce can, and a small thing of popcorn would be enough, thanks, but since I can't buy the sizes I want, I buy nothing, I just make sure I eat before I go to the theater.
:)
They give you massive quantities so they can justify charging you up out the ass for it, it's just annoying. I know the arguement behind it, the theater makes all their money on the consessions, well too bad, if they want to make money on me, they have one of two options, charge less for concessions, or charge more for the ticket.
Sure you could argue that I buy the big gulp and not drink all of it, but I'm just a dumb animal, I'll eat/drink whatever's put in front of me to completion, which leaves me needing the pit stop. And wait a minute, it took you 15 minutes to take a piss, or did you drop the kids off at the pool while you were at it?
Recently, the Charles Theatre in Baltimore began a Kurosawa marathon. They'll be showing a different one of his movies each week, once on Saturday night and once on Thursday night.
I had actually never seen the Seven Samurai before, so I figured this was the time. My martial arts teacher gave me permission to skip class for something so important ("I would not be completely unhappy if you skipped class to see the Seven Samurai.")
For those who don't know, it's over 3 hours; it started at 9:30 with no ads or trailers, and we got out of the theatre at about 12:40. When that intermission (5 minutes, IIRC) hit in the middle, I was pretty glad, and it looked like at least half of the theatre was too. I had even made sure not to drink vast amounts of anything (I usually drink a lot of water), but of course, Murphy's Law WILL bring the magical feeling upon you right in the middle of a great movie.
WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
From digitalbits.com:
Discs 1 and 2
[tech stuff snipped]
"It is an army bred for a single purpose... to destroy the world of men."
And so we come to the crossroads. The Two Towers is the second installment in Peter Jackson's epic film adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkein's The Lord of the Rings - the installment poised to make or break the trilogy. Could Jackson and company follow up on the blockbuster success of 2001's The Fellowship of the Ring? Would the film continue with the same level of quality? Would the momentum of the story build upon the climax of the first film, and prepare audiences for the ultimate confrontation between good and evil in the soon to be released final chapter, The Return of the King? The answer to all of these questions, of course, is a resounding yes.
As the film opens, we find ourselves plunged into the dark mines of Moria, to relive a few moments of Gandalf's confrontation with the fiery Balrog. But instead of playing out as we remember it in Fellowship of the Ring, this time, when Gandalf falls into the abyss, we fall with him to watch as his fight continues. The consequences of these moments will resound throughout much of the remainder of the story, as Frodo and Sam continue their quest to carry the One Ring into Mordor, and Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli race to save Merry and Pippin from the orcs. Along the way, two important new story elements come into play. The first is the character of Gollum, who is bound to the Ring in such a way that he simply must follow it to Mordor. As we watch, Gollum's dual personalities fight for dominance, one wishing to help Frodo and Sam in their quest, and the other seeking to kill them and take back the Ring that was stolen from him (as told in The Hobbit). Meanwhile, Aragorn and company have made their way into the horse realm of Rohan, whose king has fallen under Saruman's dark spell. The people of Rohan are made to suffer too, for Saruman has built a army of murderous orcs numbering ten thousand strong. Together, the white wizard and the dark lord, Sauron, mean to rule Middle-earth, and their first step in this conquest is to wipe out the kingdom of Rohan, and all of Mankind, once and for all. What follows is nothing less than a truly epic battle, in which the fate of both Middle-earth and the Quest of the Ring literally hang in the balance. Trust me when I say, it's like nothing you've ever seen before on film.
What I appreciate most about The Two Towers is that Jackson has made no compromises for the audience. Middle-earth is a world where violence is commonplace, much blood is shed and evil stands a very real chance of winning and must be confronted head-on. There is no sugar coating on these bitter pills to make them easier to digest. As a result, the journey one takes in this film is just that much more satisfying. An additional compromise that Jackson manages to avoid is obvious right from the opening frames of The Two Towers. You simply MUST have seen the previous film in order to understand what's going on, because there is no recap of the action. Other than the very brief opening flashback, this film launches you immediately into the story, picking up right where Fellowship left you hanging. And the pace throughout much of the film is relentless, pausing only occasionally to let you catch your breath.
In addition to Jackson's deft direction, the savvy adaptation and great performances by cast members new and old, there is much technically to be impressed with here as well. The character of Gollum, entirely created by computer graphics, is astonishing. At last, we have a CG character that gives a real dramatic performance on screen. This is thanks to the work of WETA Digital, as well as the strong acting of Andy Serkis. Serkis not only provides Gollum his voice, but his movent as well thanks to the process of motion capture. Serkis also performed the character on set with the actors, lending the final digital creation a particular presence and immediacy it would otherwise have lacke
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'm a theater employee, and I can sympathize with you on the bladder-capacity issue. If I have even the smallest amount of soda, I will inevitably have to run the the bathroom. I got lucky in LotR:FotR -- even though I didn't buy any concessions, I still had to dash, and got back just in time to watch Gandalf's fight with the Balrog. (The upside is that concessions can make certain movies more bearable, however.)
if they want to make money on me, they have one of two options, charge less for concessions, or charge more for the ticket.
Sadly, the second option isn't available to us -- the studio wants its cut of the ticket, whether we charge $4 or $10, because in that case we're making money off "their" movie. This is why groups can't passes for a fundraiser (ie. they buy $4 passes and sell for $5), because the studio wants that money. We make nothing off the tickets regardless of how much we sell them for -- every theater is a popcorn-and-pop shop that happens to show movies, which is why we can't charge much less for concessions either.
I know the situation sucks, but there's not really a whole lot the theaters can do about it. Blame the studios, not us.
My problem will be that I can run 6 DVD's in a row. I guess when all three are out it'll be the LotR - Exploded Bladder edition for me. :-}
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Because it is not mentioned in the story or any of the highly modded comments yet, I thought I'd remind the masses once again that the extended version of The Two Towers will be released to the masses on November 18. I will be among the first in line!
That the Matrix deals with just exactly the issues you're saying it doesn't:
What Neo really represents: Is he human? Is he just another program introduced by the Architect to cull the dissenters from the Matrix and make ever-more-perfect iterations of the simulation world?
Good needing evil and vice versa: Not only in this case does good need evil, evil also needs good. In fact, Neo coming back from "death" and "killing" Agent Smith in the first movie is what showed Smith that the "purpose of life... is to end" but that it the end could come on his own terms, setting him free to pursue his own nefarious goals. Also, Smith's assimilation of first the Oracle and then Neo are what ultimately cause his demise - you can say this is because as total opposites of each other, Smith and Neo cannot exist without each other... or that Smith's "assimilating" Neo's abilities allowed Neo to eliminate him from the inside out. Either way you choose, once Neo dies, so does Smith. (And if the Oracle and Seraph are back at the end of the film, shouldn't that mean that Neo should also? They were all "killed" by Smith's assimilation, and you'd expect that programs would be more irreversably effected by Smith than Neo.)
Not to mention, the whole "world as illusion" motif from the first movie, which certainly took a bit of time to wrap your mind around. At which point, they showed us Neo's ability to sense and act within the two overlapping worlds... gave us the Architect's speech and its ramifications... there's plenty to think about here if you want to look deeper than the very cool fight scenes and special effects.
Last but not least, do a search on Amazon and get a listing of all the books that have sprung up dealing with the series and its origins in (and perspectives on) theologies, mythologies, and general world views...
Having said all that, I whole-heartedly agree that LOTR is a much deeper creation, because it was first created as a book, for which more detail is just a part of the process. (A process which Tolkien took to a much more impressive length than most other authors.) Still, the Matrix movies are fun to watch, and while there may be plot holes and imprefections... when was the last time any action movie really gave you any deep topics to discuss in a coffee shop or theology class?
Come on, be creative: install a toilet IN your couch!
I'm thinking the overclocking, water cooling, and see-through side with the neon lighting wouldn't be a good idea for such a project.
I wouldn't dare post it on slash dot for fear of enciting all the core dump jokes...
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
If you watch any of the interviews where Peter Jackson is talking about the extended versions, he answers the question as to which is the 'real' version and why the extended versions were produced.
"Director's cut implies that the theatrical version was not the movie I wanted to make." is what he says. The Extended Versions were created for the purpose of giving that little something extra to the fans.
Because the price charged for the ticket determines the class of the theater which determines how quickly said theater gets movies.
-- Terry
Since you brought it up, explain to me where my French was incorrect: does entre not mean between, or does acte not mean act?
My other statements concerned English.
You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.