Slashdot Mirror


Will LOTR:ROTK Extended Edition Hit Cinemas?

yootje writes "Two articles today on TheOneRing.net about rumours that the extended edition from The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King will come in theaters before the release on DVD. The first article can be found here, the second one here. Both come from people who work in a cinema themselves, one in the UK and one in Denmark."

285 comments

  1. Yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As long as there's money to be had, you bet they'll do it.

    1. Re:Yep by croddy · · Score: 1

      then where's my 'Peter Jackson Presents: THE HOBBIT', eh?

  2. Slashdot LoTR FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    For those not familiar with the story...

    Q: Is LoTR really based on Christian Mythology?

    A: Yes. Tolkien wanted to demonstrate that even the mentally and physically challenged were capable of success and that therefore we should love everyone, regardless of their defects.

    Q: So who represents the mentally and physically challenged?

    A: Well obviously the hobbits are the physically challenged ones here, but the central mentally challenged figure is Gandalf, responsible for the most horrible attack plan in literature.

    Q: What's so horrible about a poorly armed team of two hobbits infiltrating Mordor?

    A: Well, basically it ignores the fundamental strengths of the forces of light. Anyone who's played C&C or Warcraft knows that if you have an advantage in air units, you have to use it. Remember that elves can ride eagles, and that elven archers are incredibly potent - early on, Gimli dismounts a Nazgul with a single shot! With about a thousand eagles (given elven archers on each one), the forces of good would have matched up pretty well in the air against Mordor's air units: all nine of them. While the leader of the Nazgul cannot be killed by any living man, this does not prevent a team of twenty eagles from tearing him to little shreds, especially if Gandalf rode along for help. So basically an air battle would have been brief unmitigated slaughter of the Nazgul as about a thousand eagle-mounted elves blew them out of the sky in a hail of arrows.

    Q: But I thought that there was some other book that said that the eagles wouldn't help?

    A: We're not talking about some other stupid book here, we're talking about the Lord of the Rings. And in this book, the eagles most definitely help out, first by flying Gandalf off the tower and secondly by pitching into the Final Battle in full force, attacking ground units (stupid!) at great risk to themselves. So obviously they would have been content to take part in a brief airborne slaughter of the Nazgul.

    Q: Ok so you defeat all Mordor's air units... then what?

    A: Well with air superiority, you command the skies. Which means that you can fly right over Mount Doom and drop anything you want right in there... like a ring. Mordor only had nine airborne units, and with them out of the way Mordor has absolutely no way to prevent anyone from flying anywhere.

    Q: But the ring would corrupt the eagles trying to drop the ring in, silly.

    A: Actually, the ring can only corrupt those who touch it or those in the nearby area. This is a trivial mechanism to defeat. The first step is permanently bind the ring to a weak and helpless creature, like a rat. Second step is of course to put the rat on a long rope, so that the creature holding the rope is out of the sway of the ring. Then the eagle carrying the rope, having total air superiority, flies over Mount Doom and drops the rat in the volcano. An utterly trivial victory.

    Q: Ok, so why the elaborately stupid attack plan? Why send the physical rejects as the only hope of mankind?

    A: The lesson is that, though they succeed at great cost and great risk, they are still capable of success. This, of course, was the lesson of the Holocaust - that we should never feel so superior to the weak or inferior that we decide they have no place. Even idiot tacticians like Gandalf and weak, pathetic creatures like Hobbits can add some value here & there.

    Q: Wait a minute. I just saw the movie, and there's this scene where they're like "this is the last stand of the Men of the West", and all the men of the west are white, and they face of in total war against Indians on Elephants and "black orcs" (er... maybe we just call them "blacks" for short) and the white Men of the West achieve a total genocidal victory. Doesn't that invalidate what you just said?

    A: Well, um, no. That's all fine & good, but remember that in the Holocaust we were committing genocide against white people - which is bad. But I'm not sure Tolkien had a problem with what you describe above - as you said, it's in the book.

    Q: So, basically, we as white western men should never discriminate against our leaders even if their tactics and strategy are totally flawed, because we are inherently good and will always prevail?

    A: Exactly.

    1. Re:Slashdot LoTR FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "... elven archers are incredibly potent - early on, Gimli dismounts a Nazgul with a single shot!"

      erm, Gimli is a dwarf and uses an axe, not a bow, but apart from that - nice post.

    2. Re:Slashdot LoTR FAQ by Lethyos · · Score: 1

      Correct reflected on my weblog entry.

      --
      Why bother.
    3. Re:Slashdot LoTR FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Actually, the ring can only corrupt those who touch it or those in the nearby area.
      Actually, no. Saruman was corrupted by the Ring and as far as I know, he never came within 200 miles of it.
      So, basically, we as white western men should never discriminate against our leaders even if their tactics and strategy are totally flawed, because we are inherently good and will always prevail?
      Whoa! Talk about non-sequitur!
    4. Re:Slashdot LoTR FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, no. Saruman was corrupted by the Ring and as far as I know, he never came within 200 miles of it.

      No, it was the Palantir contact with Sauron that corrupted him.

    5. Re:Slashdot LoTR FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe the lack of air support was a marketing decision - this was doing the rounds a while back:
      -----
      THE SYSADMIN OF THE RINGS

      Management: The Ring MUST be destroyed.

      Sysadmin: How do you want me to destroy the Ring?

      Management: It must be dropped into the fires whence it was forged. Can you do it?

      Sysadmin: Yes, but...

      Management: Spare me the details, talk to the Project Officer.

      Project Officer (unfolding plan): The Ring is currently in the possession of the Ringbearer, in The Shire, here. We need it dropped in Orodruin, here.

      Sysadmin (glances at plan): That's easy, give me the Eagle King, I'll have him pick up the Ringbearer in the Shire, fly across Middle Earth, and drop Frodo straight into the fires of Mount Doom.

      Project Officer: You can't do that!

      Sysadmin: But it's the most elegant solution with the least overhead and minimal downtime.

      Project Officer: Well, Marketing feel it would be a better epic struggle of Good vs. Evil if you did it as some sort of land-based quest.

      Sysadmin (rolls eyes, thinks for a moment): OK then, give me an army of dwarves, they'll tunnel under Mount Doom, diverting its lava flow right up to the mines of Moria. Then Frodo can have an Elvish escort to the Misty Mountains, meet the lava half way, and drop the Ring in.

      Project Officer: Mmmm, no. Budget won't allow such an extravagant solution. We're not made of money you know.

      Sysadmin (thinks for a longer moment): OK, I can do it with just an army of Elves, but it'll be a close call.

      Project Officer: Sorry, but that's out of the question. HR need us to represent all the races of Middle-Earth in the solution or it will conflict with our Equal Employment policy.

      Sysadmin (thinks for a l-o-n-g, sullen, moment): RIGHT! Give me a dwarf, an elf, a wizard, two men and four hobbits. But first I'll have to re-route the Fellowship via the mines of Moria, as there's too much traffic in the gap of Rohan. Also, the firewall at Mordor means we'll need a consultant to hack another way in - and he'll probably turn out to be flaky. And it'll take until half way through the Fourth Age to do it.

      Project Officer: That's too long! It has to be done by the end of the Third Age!

      Sysadmin (smoke pouring out of ears): WHAT! OK, but we'll have to do it on practically no sleep,
      run hundreds of leagues barefoot without rest, eating nothing but lembas to keep awake. By the time the Fellowship get anywhere near Mordor, Sauron's army will have hacked into Gondor, and most of Fangorn will have crashed to the ground. And there'll be a massive bottlenecks at Helm's Deep because there's not enough resources to handle the increased load. You can also expect the Shire to be scoured but then that's probably outside your terms of reference.

      Project Officer: But can it be done?

      Sysadmin: Yes, but...

      Project Officer: Right then! Excellent! You could have just told me that at the start instead of being so difficult about it...

  3. Special version of that? by Iscariot_ · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hmmmmm... Makes me wonder... Will there be a special edition DVD for the theatrical release of the extended edition DVD?

    1. Re:Special version of that? by FortKnox · · Score: 4, Funny

      Only in the complete special edition box set in part of the 23rd DVD.

      Of course, this will only cost $139.95 which is inexpensive enough for hardcore and leasure fans to enjoy!

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    2. Re:Special version of that? by Aeiri · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Yes, and a deluxe edition, superbit edition, widescreen edition, regular edition, boxed set with free ring edition, and one that wipes your ass for you.

    3. Re:Special version of that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That where native Linux version will reside!

    4. Re:Special version of that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With silk? I love it!

    5. Re:Special version of that? by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 1

      Superbit is a Sony DVD line, and as such is limited to Sony / Columbia / Tri-Star films. The Lord of the Rings is from New Line, part of the Warner family. Whatever other DVD versions come out of these films, there won't be one with the "Superbit" marque.

  4. cool beans by mnemonic_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It'd be great if it did. Nothing quite like a theater viewing of such an epic film.

    1. Re:cool beans by Kenja · · Score: 4, Funny

      My ass and bladder hurt just thinking about it.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    2. Re:cool beans by TheGavster · · Score: 3, Funny

      Only if the theatre has toilets instead of seats, or holds an intermission ...

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    3. Re:cool beans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I recommend having a pause in the middle of the movie, we could call it something like an "intermission".
      A new and modern idea like this one would allow people to use the washroom and buy refreshments in the middle of the movie.

    4. Re:cool beans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I recommend having a pause in the middle of the movie, we could call it something like an "intermission".
      A new and modern idea like this one would allow people to use the washroom and buy refreshments in the middle of the movie.


      It does pause, when they have to change DVDs on the digital projection system. (Your theatre does have a digital projection system doesn't it?)

    5. Re:cool beans by EvanED · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oooo! I know! We'll put it at the climax. just as the heros are crossing the Bridge of De... oh wait, wrong movie...

    6. Re:cool beans by frankmu · · Score: 2, Informative

      this is all you need stadium pal

      for fecal material, i recomend an enema prior to watching the movie

      --
      Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
    7. Re:cool beans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your theatre's digital projection system uses DVDs? That seems pretty crappy.

    8. Re:cool beans by Blublu · · Score: 1

      Yes, very funny! You don't know how good you have it having no intermissions. In my country, the stupid stupid theaters always have intermissions on every movie! Even if it's only 90 minutes long! It's stupid, wrong and annoying. Gaaaaaahhhhhhhhh.... /rant

      Aaaah, now I feel better...

      --
      meh
    9. Re:cool beans by Grab · · Score: 1

      Our local arts cinema ran FotR extended edition on the big screen, and did a back-to-back showing of FotR and TTT extended (obviously with some time between for calls of nature! :-) So they'd damn well better do the thing properly for RotK...

      I warned my wife that when they did that, she'd be losing me for a day. She looked at me funny and said "But I'll be going to see it too." God, I love that woman... :-)

      Grab.

    10. Re:cool beans by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      They tried it in The Phantom Menace; it was called a "podrace."

    11. Re:cool beans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, just watch the Matrix Trilogy Extended Edition Theatrical Release before going in, and let nature take care of that for you.

  5. I think I speak for everyone when I say... by blue_adept · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I HOPE SO!!

    I would gladly shell out the money to see the extended edition in the theater.

    --

    "Is this just useless, or is it expensive as well?"
    1. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say... by strictnein · · Score: 1

      will they have bathroom breaks?

      or an intermission maybe? I guess I could just time my visit to the bathroom say... when the stupid hobbit pledges his allegiance to the old man... or something like that

    2. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say... by Timesprout · · Score: 1

      I think I speak for everyone when I say...
      I HOPE SO!!

      I would gladly shell out the money to see the extended edition in the theater.


      I think I speak for everyone blue_adept when I say thanks for offering pay for us all to see the extended version.

      PS I would actually like to watch it in Maui if you dont mind shelling out for a flight and hotel as well that would be well cool.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    3. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say... by ScottGant · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wow, how many young-uns do we have around here?

      There have always been long long movies. "Gone With the Wind" had an intermission in the middle (right after the "as God is my witness, I'll never be hungry again" speech).

      Ben Hur, The Ten Commandants, Lawrence of Arabia, Doctor Zhivago...all are very long movies.

      It's the media again. They think that only things are happening right now, as if for the first time to "make" the news. Like when these idiots go out on a live remote at an expressway in Chicago when it's snowing as if "what is this white stuff falling from the sky?!?! are the gods angry with us!?!?!". Gee, it's only been snowing in Chicago in the winter for what...10,000 years or so?

      --

      "Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
    4. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "I would gladly shell out the money to see the extended edition in the theater."

      I would if the picture wasn't as grainy, the seats were more comfortable, I could eat a nice dinner with it, if there was an intermission for a bathroom break, if there wasn't anybody else in the theater, and if it wouldn't bankrupt me to do it.

      Err.. you probably have a better theater than I do, I'll stick with the DVD. :)

    5. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say... by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Intermissions seem to have died though. Ben Hur, Lawrence of Arabia, and The Ten Commandments are all between 210 and 220 minutes which is only a bit longer than the original theatrical cut of RotK (201 minutes), which didn't have an intermission. Doctor Zhivago was even shorter. RotK is under 10 min longer than Titanic (194 min), which also didn't have an intermission. The Right Stuff is 193 minutes, and AFAIK, also had no intermission.

      I don't go to the movies very much, but I don't know of any released anywhere near recent memory with an intermission. Last movie I know of that had one was Monty Python's Holy Grail, and that doesn't exactly count. I'm sure there's probably a dozen or two in there, but for the most part they seem to have gone the way of the dodo.

    6. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2001

    7. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say... by cybermox · · Score: 1

      Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet had an intermission. It was 242 minutes long. That's the most recent one that I remember.

    8. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say... by tap · · Score: 1

      I'm almost certain The Right Stuff did have an intermission, at least when I saw it.

    9. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say... by sparrow_hawk · · Score: 1

      The theater I work at had an intermission for the Civil War drama Gods and Generals, mostly because, at almost four hours, the film was too large to fit on a single platter, so during the intermission the projectionist had to run to the booth and thread the second half into the projector.

      That and allowing people to void their bladders and/or purchase additional popcorn and pop, of course.

    10. Re:I think I speak for everyone when I say... by will_die · · Score: 1

      The theater I saw RoTK did have a intermission. Was around 10 mins, time to hit the bathroom and purchase a snack.

  6. All New ROTK by psycht · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now with even MORE endings!

    1. Re:All New ROTK by RedA$$edMonkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      ... With all new "Hobbits Gone Wild" footage, uncensored! See what they really mean by hobbit holes.

    2. Re:All New ROTK by Zordak · · Score: 1

      But still not as many as the book!

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    3. Re:All New ROTK by Exatron · · Score: 2, Funny

      I thought that was only supposed to be available in the deviant hobbit fancier edition?

      --
      "I think so, Brain, but 'instant karma' always gets so lumpy." - Pinky
      "Decepticons FOREVER!!!" - Ravage
    4. Re:All New ROTK by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Now with even MORE endings!

      I hope they flesh out that one ending where Frodo, Bilbo, and Gandalf get on the boat with the elves and sail away. WTF was that all about? It made it seem like they were all going to die, yet Frodo and Gandalf looked fine. Were they committing suicide on the high seas? Maybe it would've been more clear if I had read the books, but the movie should explain it well enough so one doesn't have to resort to that. I don't have time for books anymore which is why I rely on getting my culture through hit movies.

    5. Re:All New ROTK by Poeir · · Score: 2, Informative

      They were headed across the ocean, to the Grey Havens, where elves go instead of dying. I can't speak with authority on why Frodo and Gandalf were let in, but Gandalf was an Istari (so was Saruman, but he fell from grace) and, like Frodo, was a ring-bearer.

      --
      Sigs are like bumper stickers.
    6. Re:All New ROTK by Lane.exe · · Score: 4, Informative
      Fortunately, I can speak on authority.
      The "Grey Havens" were where they left from. They were going to the Blessed Realm of Aman, specifically to the city of Valinor where the gods live. It's kind of like dying, because 1) it's paradise and 2) you don't get to come back. Gandalf being an Istari (which is just Quenya for wise) means that he was one of the Maiar, a race of demiurgic beings similar to the lower choirs of angels in Christian mythology. He was born in the West, in Valinor, and so he gets to go back. All of the Elves who originally went to Aman from Middle Earth in the First Age (including Galadriel and Elrond) also get to come to the West when they are ready. Frodo and the other Ring-bearers get to go because they touched a ring of power, and this makes them special.
      And actually, yes... I did take a class on this shit.

      --
      IAALS.
    7. Re:All New ROTK by Colazar · · Score: 4, Informative
      Right on all counts except one.

      All of the Elves who originally went to Aman from Middle Earth in the First Age (including Galadriel and Elrond) also get to come to the West when they are ready.

      Actually, *all* of the Elves get to go to Valinor, even the ones who haven't been there before. Only a very few of the Elves in Middle Earth in the Third Age had ever been to Valinor (Galadriel, for one), most either refused to go in the first place, or have been born since then (like Elrond).

      It's also worth mentioning that Sam eventually goes West, since he was (for a brief time) a ring-bearer. It is also suggested that Gimli goes, too, though I don't remember what allows him to go.

      --
      He decided to just watch the government, and kind of scale it down to size, and run his life that way. --Laurie Anderson
    8. Re:All New ROTK by Squozen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It might have been clear if you'd paid attention to the repeated references throughout all three films of the imminent departure of the elves to the Grey Havens.

      Did you miss the entire leave/stay subplot with Elrond and Arwen?

    9. Re:All New ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reading a book is not something you "resort" to, blanco nino. Well... unless you're illiterate. Then I guess it would be your last resort... but then again, you didn't type up an entire question, which means you're literate. So I guess you're just stupid.

    10. Re:All New ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having just finished the silmarillyon, omg, I can actually be pedantic about trivial shit like this.
      Elrond and his brother Elros were actually half elven. Their father was Earendil, the badass mofo who took a silmaril and sailed to Aman to plead with the Valar to save middle earth from Morgoth. Earendil's father was Tuor a human who did a lot of stuff, including knocking up an elven lady (dont worry, it was in a good way).

      But anyways, Elrond and Elros got the choice to be human or Elven because their father was so cool. Elros became human and was king of the Numenorans for like 400 years or something, and Elrond chose to be Elven, which means he gets to go back to Aman when he gets fed up with Middle Earth. Or, really at the end of the third age.

      And so my point is, all Elves get to go back to Aman. Interesting though. that implies that even the Elves who engaged in Elf killing get to go back, but it clearly states in the Silmarillyon that all Elves left middle Earth at the end of the third age.

      Actually I just brought the book from out by the toilet, and it says all Noldor left Middle Earth. The Noldor being the second host of Elves who left Aman to seek the Silmarils. So who knows if that means all Elves or not. At any rate Elrond had a really great Dad, so he definately gets to go.

    11. Re:All New ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, I just looked through the book some more, and I think I found some glaring errors. According to the definiton of Noldor, it says they were led by Finwe, but Finwe was dead. He was killed when Morgoth stole the Silmarils.

      And my recollection was that Noldor was fairly consistently used to refer to the bad Elves, so either it is implied that all Elves were allowed to return, or it was a mistake.

      -Gotta love AC

    12. Re:All New ROTK by Number14 · · Score: 1

      Actually, as I recall, the ringbearers do not actually make it all the way to Aman, but go to Eressea, which is an island in view of Aman, from which there is also no return. Only elves and maiar/valar go to Aman itself.

      The ringbearers (Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam) remain mortal but are allowed to go to Eressea. (And Gimli may have travelled there as well, and what reception he found with the Valar no tale speaks of.)

    13. Re:All New ROTK by Papa+Romeo · · Score: 1

      I think that Gimli is allowed to take Arwen's spot, but I'm not sure.

    14. Re:All New ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elrond had never been to Valinor. His father (Earendil) was part human. (He was also one of the first people to make it to Valinor since the exile, and thus [indirectly] the reason that Morgoth wasn't in complete control of Middle Earth). The humans came into existence after the elves following Feanor and Fingolfin were exiled from Valinor. Therefore, Elrond's having been to Valinor doesn't quite make sense. :)
      Oh, and they get to go because the wounds that they received from the ring could never really heal. (At least that's one of the reasons). Frodo is alotted Arwen's "spot" for this reason.

    15. Re:All New ROTK by ThousandStars · · Score: 1
      Sure, the repeated references were there, but I still think the movie generally bungled the departing into the West. It was unclear that the elves were fading and why they were leaving; the veiled and overt references in the books made the need for the elves to leave, and the passing of the ring, much more necessary.

      There are numerous references, particularly in The Fellowship and ROTK concerning what happens to the elven rings after the destruction of the One. In addition, consider the final pages of ROTK: the ship bearing Galadriel, Gandalf and many others sails until the mist and darkness lifts, and they hear singing in the seas. The melancholy tone, of beautiful things fading and passing so that new things can take their place, is missing in the movie, in part due to the absense of the Scouring of the Shire.

    16. Re:All New ROTK by hunterx11 · · Score: 1

      Elrond and Elros were brothers, Arwen is Elrond's daughter, Aragorn is the descendant of Elros...omg incest! Seriously though, Aragorn is Arwen's great(x38)nephew

      --
      English is easier said than done.
    17. Re:All New ROTK by ThousandStars · · Score: 1
      To further refine your comment, I think it you should note that the Elves aren't necessarily going to Valinor proper: they may be going to Tol Eressa, which is the Isle of the Elves, closer to Middle Earth before the breaking of the seas.

      [Gandalf] was born in the West, in Valinor, and so he gets to go back.

      Maiar are not "born" per se, but rather embodied from free-floating spirits. They are a lesser being than the Valar, who one might consider "Gods" after a fashion, although there is a creator above them, named Eru or the One. Sauron is of the same class of being. Gandalf and the rest of the Istari were sent to help the free peoples contest the might of Sauron; as such, he himself is barred from matching Sauron power against power. Only if he succeeds does he get to go back.

      The curious may also wish to know that the Balrog is also a Maia (the singular of the noun Maiar), but most Balrogs were destroyed at the end of the First Age, while Lord of the Rings takes place at the end of the Third Age. Balrogs are of a mighty power leftover from an earlier time, which may be part of the reason Gandalf is allowed or allows himself to fight the Balrog. Interestingly, this is also the only place in the entire series in which he strives fully against another, putting forth all his might. In other cases -- such as Smaug in the Hobbit, the Captain of the Nazgul in ROTK, or Saruman at virtually any time, Gandalf does not actually wield his full strength.

      Moving back on topic, Saruman, who fails, does not return to Valinor, and the fate of Radagast and the other Istari is not discussed in LOTR itself.

      For a decent FAQ on the subject, see the rec.arts.books.tolkien FAQ.

    18. Re:All New ROTK by DarkMantle · · Score: 2, Funny

      I bow to your vast knowledge of the realms of middle earth. Finally someone else to converse in elvish with.

      --
      DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
    19. Re:All New ROTK by Knara · · Score: 3, Informative

      To extrapolite a little more geekily:

      First there was Ilúvatar:

      "The name among Elves of Eru, the One, from whom the Ainur had their being. Through the Music of the Ainur, Ilúvatar created the World and the beings who inhabit it, and only he fully knows its fate."

      Then the Ainur:

      The primordial spirits, who existed with Ilúvatar, and with Him created the world through the Music of the Ainur. After the creation of Arda, many of the Ainur descended into it to guide and order its growth; of these there were fifteen more powerful than the rest. Fourteen of these great Ainur became the Valar, or Powers of Arda. The fifteenth, Melkor, turned aside from that path and became the first Dark Lord. The many lesser Ainur that accompanied the Valar into Arda are known as Maiar.

      "'Valar' is the name given to the fourteen powerful spirits who took physical form and entered Arda after its creation to give order to the world and combat the evils of Melkor. They dwelt originally on the Isle of Almaren, but after its destruction long ages before the Awakening of the Elves they removed to Aman and there founded the realm of Valinor."

      On the Maiar:

      "Of the many spirits that descended into Arda at its beginning, those of lesser stature than the Valar, though they were still powerful, were known as Maiar. Each of the Maiar was attached to the 'people' of a particular Vala. So, for example, the Maia Ossë, as a spirit of the sea, belonged to the people of Ulmo, while Curumo, the Maia who came to Middle-earth as Saruman, belonged to the people of Aulë the Smith.

      In the Third Age, there were still Maiar in physical form to be found in Middle-earth. The most important of these were Saruman, Sauron (originally also of Aulë's people), and Olórin, known as Gandalf, who belonged to the people of Manwë and Varda. " (Manwë and Varda are, in essense, the King and Queen of Arda; Arda being Elder Speech for the world and all taht is in it)

      Notably speaking of Gandalf:

      "In origin a Maia of Manwë and Varda, Gandalf came to the northwest of Middle-earth after a thousand years of the Third Age had passed, with four others of his order. At the Grey Havens, Círdan entrusted him with the Red Ring, Narya, to aid him in contesting the will of Sauron.

      Gandalf wandered widely in Middle-earth, and learned much of its races and peoples. Unlike his fellow Wizards Saruman and Radagast, he never settled in a single place. He was instrumental in the victory of the War of the Ring, but during that conflict he battled with a Balrog, and though he was ultimately victorious, his spirit left his body, but was sent back to Middle-earth to complete his task.

      Gandalf finally left Middle-earth in 3021 (Third Age), when he departed over the sea with the Ring-bearers."

      And no, I didn't memorize all this, but everyone who is curious about the twisty, turny, more-involved than any sane fiction should be world of Middle Earth should check out The Encyclopedia of Arda

    20. Re:All New ROTK by karstux · · Score: 1

      For a second I thought you meant that he's to marry Aragorn... ghastly image in my mind, go away!

      --
      Don't whistle while you're pissing.
    21. Re:All New ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet you had time to write your post, you damned hypocrite. Read the book or shut the hell up.

    22. Re:All New ROTK by stanmann · · Score: 1

      Yup, they cut out my favorite ending.. and PJ stated that he never filmed it, so... we'll never see Scouring.

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
    23. Re:All New ROTK by Creedo · · Score: 1

      He led them into Aman in the first place.

      --
      All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
    24. Re:All New ROTK by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly, but isn't it also said that Frodo and Bilbo won't make it all the way to Valinor because no mortal can complete the journey? (thereby confirming your statement that it's 'kind of like dying')

    25. Re:All New ROTK by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      And actually, yes... I did take a class on this shit.

      They have a class on Lord of the Rings? Jesus, this is a lot more complicated than the movie presents. I guess I may have to break down and read the books. Though, I guess I can't berate you guys for being huge geeks because I could probably spout off tons of the same kind of useless trivia about the Dragonlance universe. ;-)

    26. Re:All New ROTK by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      It might have been clear if you'd paid attention to the repeated references throughout all three films of the imminent departure of the elves to the Grey Havens.

      Did you miss the entire leave/stay subplot with Elrond and Arwen?

      No, I didn't, but from the sounds of it the elves were just retreating to some island until the war died down. From the way people are describing it the Grey Havens is more like an afterlife that you never return from.

      I guess I'm getting it confused with the elves in Dragonlance retreating to Southern Ergoth to flee the coming of the Dragon armies. That was a physical place they were sailing off to and not really a permanent evacuation.

  7. Crazy by snwobird122 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is absolutely getting out of hand. First the matrix 10 DVD box set now this. Should I be on the edge of my seat for the 30 DVD LOTR box set?

    1. Re:Crazy by nightsweat · · Score: 1

      Yes, but it fits on one Super Blu-Ray disk.

      --

      the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
    2. Re:Crazy by BdosError · · Score: 1

      That's what I've been expecting for next year, as it's the 50th anniversary of the publishing of the first book. Maybe the year after for the 50th anniversary of the publishing of the last. My original guess, before the FotR extended edition came out, was 14 discs. Clearly, that's a misunderestimation so now I predict 148 discs, and instead of some weak bookshelf sized Argonath, you get fullsized ones, which are the sides of the shelf to hold all the discs.

      --
      Complexity is Easy. Simplicity is Hard.
    3. Re:Crazy by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Should I be on the edge of my seat for the 30 DVD LOTR box set?"

      That depends, are you a fan of LoTR? I heard somewhere that if you aren't that interested in it, you don't actually have to buy it.

  8. Longer?? by SIGALRM · · Score: 4, Informative
    Extended version would be shown in a select number of cinemas
    As much as I loved LOTR/ROTK, it felt drawn out in places (especially the many endings). I'm not so sure I want to see an even longer version.
    --
    Sigs cause cancer.
    1. Re:Longer?? by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Then don't fscking watch it. It's not that hard.

    2. Re:Longer?? by xenophrak · · Score: 5, Insightful


      As with the two films before ROtK, I felt that there were places that were cut poorly, or didn't fit well together.

      Once I saw the finished extended editions, they were a more pleasant experience.

      After the "two-hour" limit is removed (even though ROtK was > 2 hours) it made a good deal of difference to the final output.

      I expect that ROtK EE will be in the same vein.

      --
      Contrary to popular belief, life is not a bitch. It is far far worse.
    3. Re:Longer?? by brysnot · · Score: 3, Funny

      I hope they draw it out longer. A three hour nap just wasn't long enough.

    4. Re:Longer?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      First of all, I'm assuming you mean the three-hour limit.. To be honest, while some of the footage was a great bonus (I couldn't see why it was cut in the first place), there was also a lot of footage that SHOULD have been cut. Especially during the first half of TTT:EE.

    5. Re:Longer?? by Dachannien · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I liked most of the endings. The one that I thought was poorly cut was where Frodo and Sam are on that rock in the middle of a bunch of lava, crying and blubbering and whatnot, and the screen fades to black.... and then fades back in, to the same shot of them still blubbering on the same damn rock!

    6. Re:Longer?? by Papa+Romeo · · Score: 1

      It was done to show the passage of time, you saw that they were unconscious (sp?) by the time Gandalf came with the eagles to rescue them.

    7. Re:Longer?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then don't. Problem solved, asshole.

    8. Re:Longer?? by TwistedSquare · · Score: 1

      Having watched it with people who hadn't read the book, I believe that that (particularly long) fade was to tease people into thinking that it was the end of the film, as it was black for just long enough for them to wonder... and then it faded back in. Clever, I thought.

    9. Re:Longer?? by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      I don't think it was so much a tease as a visual cue that the main story arc was in fact complete. Everything that followed was basically an epilogue. It might have been a little clearer if they had a caption that said "EPILOGUE" or some such, but that would make it no tease at all.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
  9. Will it hit cinemas? Of course!! by feed_those_kitties · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As long as there is more money to be made, or even suspected of being made -- it will be in your local multi-plex someday...

  10. I love the movies by Neil+Blender · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But I think I'll watch the extended versions in the confort of my own home. Movie theaters don't have pause buttons.

    1. Re:I love the movies by jdray · · Score: 4, Funny

      No kidding. I could barely sit through the original theatrical release without having a theatrical release of my own.

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    2. Re:I love the movies by DroppedPacket · · Score: 1

      I don't think my butt could take 4 hours in a theater seat.

      --
      I am not a resource! I am a free man!
    3. Re:I love the movies by isorox · · Score: 1

      They should have released the series as 6 x 2 hour movies

    4. Re:I love the movies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you nuts?!!
      They should have released it as a single 24-hour movie, or preferably as long as the story took (was it a year or what?) so we could follow everyone in real-time.

    5. Re:I love the movies by DoktorSeven · · Score: 1

      Next year on FOX: 24 - The Lord Of The Rings version!

      *cue a screen with a sundial, replacing the ticking digital clock*

      Starring Keifer Sutherland as Bilbo and Dennis Haysbert as Gandalf...
      and Elisha Cuthbert as Arwen, who travels around Middle-Earth getting into all kind of trouble...

      --
      This is a sig. Deal with it.
    6. Re:I love the movies by EvanED · · Score: 1

      I can't find my copy of RotK so can't look at the timeline, but thta's one of the complaints I have about the movie. It didn't show time scale AT ALL. How long did I think it was between when Gandalf told Frodo about the ring and what to do about it until when he set off for Rivendell, after seeing the movie? About a week. Probably a little less. In any case, I thought it was just about immediate. Of course it was actually like three months or something. About the same thing happened in Rivendell. I thought their stay was a week or two. But no, they sent out all their scouts to look for the Nazgul and whatnot, and it was another three months.

    7. Re:I love the movies by hunterx11 · · Score: 1
      I hope I'm not the only one who tries to read the tengwar in the movie!

      Actually, I correct myself. I like the human race and I want it to continue to exist, therefore I mustn't wish things which would inhibit procreation.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
  11. I can't wait by demonbug · · Score: 4, Funny

    until I can get the LOTR:ROTK WS EE DVD for my DLP HDTV - I only use DVI IC's for superior IQ.

    1. Re:I can't wait by strictnein · · Score: 1

      will that DVD be a SUPERBIT DVD?

    2. Re:I can't wait by suyashs · · Score: 1

      No, it will be the Superbit Criterion release!!!

      --
      http://chrono.posterous.com/
    3. Re:I can't wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FFS, STFU

    4. Re:I can't wait by TheShadowHawk · · Score: 1

      FFS, Could you cram any MORE ancronyms into one sentence!?

      --
      Friends don't let Friends use Internet Explorer.
  12. Marathon! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Now they can show all three extended versions at your local cinema (for $10/movie) with breaks for lunch and supper. :-P

    m'eh.. I'll prolly wait for the DVD.

    1. Re:Marathon! by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 1

      Just think, if you buy the refillable tub o' popcorn in the morning, you're set all day long!

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    2. Re:Marathon! by harkabeeparolyn · · Score: 1
      Just think, if you buy the refillable tub o' popcorn in the morning, you're set all day long!

      The place would go up in a huge methane explosion long before then.

    3. Re:Marathon! by dwheeler · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't forgot breaks for second breakfast, elevensies, ...

      --
      - David A. Wheeler (see my Secure Programming HOWTO)
  13. Article Text by th1ckasabr1ck · · Score: 4, Informative
    Getting very slow already, so here it is (not much):

    Article one:

    Extended Editions Headed to the Cinema?
    7/06/04, 9:43 pm EST - Xoanon

    Gandalf of Denmark writes: I work in a cinema in Denmark, and on the latest list of releases, it was mentioned that in mid-October Lotr 1,2 & 3 Extended version would be shown in a select number of cinemas. It would seem likely that they are showing the extended versions, a few months ahead of them coming out on dvd, so the December release, seems like a good bet for the dvd's so far.

    Article two:

    Further Evidence ROTK EE Coming to Theaters
    7/07/04, 11:59 am EST - Celeborn

    Ringer Baggins of the Shire sends in this tidbit: I work for Odeon cinema chain in the UK, we recieved a letter on Tuesday 6th July explaining that during October the 3 extended editions of the Lord Of The Rings films will be shown on Sunday's. This means ROTK EE will be shown before it is available to buy on DVD!

  14. Hmm... by Cyno01 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Hope theres an intermission, or else a free catheter with every ticket. They should do what they did when it was originally released. They showed FotR EE, TTT EE and RotK back to back the day before RotK opened. That sold out around the country in a matter of hours. I'd be even more willing to sit through all 3 EEs in the theatre. With that said i'm still waiting on the RotK EE Platinum Collectors Boxed Set to go with my other two...

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    1. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow this fucking joke just isn't tired enough yet?

  15. Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by Lispy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    It all started with Star Wars Special Edition and now hell is breaking loose. Whenever something is selling just a bit they don't release a sequel nomore, nohooo, they bring back the movie with 2 more minutes, or even more ugly CGI.

    I really enjoyed the LOTR trilogy, but this is all getting out of hand. I know, nobody forces me into a cinema (yet) but it's no better with (special, extended, final, definitive, directors cut, redux, whatever) DVD editions!
    It's just too much these days.

    Relax! It's just a movie. What's wrong with making a few million dollars when it's in cinema and get back to work on some ORIGINAL creative vision?

    Why do they have to flog the dead horse until it smells? Harry Potter, what have you? ;-/

    1. Re:Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by AuMatar · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The difference is that the LotR extendeds DO add to the film. That extra half hour in the past two added so much from the book that was cut due to time constraints. For people who love Tolkien's work, the extended is definitely the far better film, and seeing it in theater would be awesome.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    2. Re:Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by Clock+Nova · · Score: 4, Informative

      You also have to keep in mind that Peter Jackson stated publicly, before any DVDs were released, that there would be two editions of each movie, and that fans were free to choose which one they wanted to buy. Of course, that didn't stop some people from buying both. But this is not the same thing as, say, releasing four unique editions of Terminator 2 on DVD, with very little to differentiate them, or selling a "Collector's Edition" of the Mummy that wasn't even in widescreen, then immediately releasing an "Ultimate Edition" in widescreen and with more extras. At no time has Peter Jackson or New Line attempted to cheat or otherwise expoit their fanbase. Please remember that before you start complaining again.

      --
      There they were, sitting in the van with all those dials, and the cat was dead. -V. Marchetti, CIA
    3. Re:Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by Lispy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, I know. As I said before, I really enjoyed the film and I read the book several times. What's more is that I didn't give credit to Jackson who is actually working at another piece of original art (the KingKong movie).

      But still, I can't shake the feeling that the whole business got greedy to the point that it starts to make the industry look bad. Say what you want about Michael Moore but when he said that he didn't care if people download his movie he had a point. They are making "enough" money, and filesharing won't kill cinema.

      I could have downloaded LOTR but I rather spent the money on the movie since it was worth it. But bringing the same movie on the screen, over and over again is just lame. I like double features, though. But please no more OBVIOUS ripoffs... ;-)

    4. Re:Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by Xaroth · · Score: 1

      Ah yes... the Collector's Edition. I can hear the tagline now:

      "For those who collect copies of 'The Mummy'."

      It all seems very silly to me.

    5. Re:Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by the_consumer · · Score: 1
      I didn't give credit to Jackson who is actually working at another piece of original art (the KingKong movie).

      Yeah, that's original.

      Don't get me wrong, I loved LOTR, Bad Taste, and Dead Alive, but do we really need another giant monkey movie? Ah well, I'll probably blow my 10 shekels on it anyway...

      --
      "If you're thinking what I'm thinking, you're right." -
    6. Re:Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by dirvish · · Score: 1

      They are making us wait longer for the extended edition DVD than the regular DVD. I doubt that is because it isn't ready. They would just like to sell some people both versions. I fell for it with the first one, but not the second or third. ;)

    7. Re:Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by dirvish · · Score: 1

      BTW, anyone want a non-extended edition FOTR? ;)

    8. Re:Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heck, even for people, like me, who didn't particularly love the books, the extended versions are a heck of a lot better... I own the first two extended versions, and am waiting eagerly for the third :)

      (Don't want to get into why I don't like the books much - lets just say I prefer a different style of writing (though I love stylised fantasy as much as the next person - Ursula Le Guin is one of my favourites :^) Just wanted to point out that even "regular viewers" like me appreciate the extended versions much more :)

    9. Re:Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give it to a friend or family member who liked the movie, but hasn't got around to buying it yet... in other words, an average person you know.

      You can even give it to them for a birthday or Christmas present - works as a gift, which is almost like getting your money back on it! (since of course you were going to buy them something anyway).

      That's what I'm doing with my Matrix trilogy (which I only bought a week ago, just before hearing that there was going to be a box set! Yeah, yeah, don't criticise me 'cos I liked all 3 movies!)

    10. Re:Cinema is selling out waaay too much... by Clock+Nova · · Score: 1

      What's to fall for? They told you there were going to be two versions. They even told you when they would be released - and with the first two, the EEs were certainly delayed because they weren't done. Sounds to me like you just couldn't wait to see it again, though you could have rented the theatrical release rather than buying it.

      --
      There they were, sitting in the van with all those dials, and the cat was dead. -V. Marchetti, CIA
  16. Dear I'd-pay-to-see-that by Letter · · Score: 0, Interesting
    Dear I'd-pay-to-see-that,

    I don't know if LOTR:ROTK Extended Edition will hit the cinemas, but my crystal ball says that it will hit the internet!

    -Letter

    P.S. Hopefully it will be available as a patch to the Original Edition.

  17. Way to milk it for every ounce... by eeg3 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Having three seperate movies kind of irked me anyway; I mean one realllly only needed to see the last movie. The first two movies were okay, but I don't like paying to go see a movie without an ending, that's a cop-out, especially when I have to wait a year or more for the next one. Their whole let's milk the hell out of this series mantra isn't something that's admirable.

    I, for one, am not going to spend $20 on movie tickets to go see the same movie extended a tad bit. But, alas, i'm sure the die-hard people will, and that's why they do it. I didn't really like the trilogy anyway, which might make me a little biased.

    1. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by AuMatar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So they should have released one 10 hour movie?

      The Lord of the Rings was too large and had too much happening to be done in one film. The book itself is split into 3 volumes. As it is, they probably should have shot 6 movies to match the 6 books Tolkien wrote, they had to cut out way too much.

      Do you honestly think the 3rd movie was stand alone? You'd have no character advancement, missed all the buildup on the ring and the world of middle earth, and started with 2 guys wandering in a swamp and a bunch of others in a military camp. It wouldn't have made sense. Do you dislike the Star Wars trilogy too?

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    2. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by Zordak · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I personally loved the movies and the books, but honestly, what's up with modding the guy as "Flamebait?" I mean, how dare he blaspheme against the Holy LOTR on Slashdot?

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    3. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by mdarksbane · · Score: 1

      This is why I honestly think that a television miniseries is a much better format for an epic than a movie, or series of movies, can ever be. I could pull a million examples out of anime of a depth of character development and plot that you just can't get in three hours, but I've got a better one.

      How many people remember Band of Brothers? It was an HBO miniseries about world war II that came out right after Saving Private Ryan, done by the same director and such. Comparing the two, Saving Private Ryan is much more famous, but I love BoB much more. Because the director now has ten hours to work with, you can develop more characteres in greater depth, and explore different aspects of the message of the war. You don't have a holocaust movie or a D-Day movie, you have a sense of the whole breadth of the war. I highly recomend it if you haven't seen it already.

      Best of all, it's in hour-long segments that you don't have a wait a year between the release of. Much easier on the bladder, and significantly easier to maintain interest.

      I wish that more epics would be released in the States that really used that format, instead or relegating television shows to completely self-contained stories with only slight continuity. It's amazing how much better a series gets when you can look at it as a whole and see the story arc. The only shows that really attempt that these days are soap operas.... it'd be nice if someone did something *good* with the format.

    4. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by jdbo · · Score: 1

      Given the hude upfront cost of producing LOTR, there was really no chance of a live-action mini-series being put together (even given the much larger economic returns of "blockbuster" movies vs. "blockbuster" mini-series, LOTR was very much considered a bad, bad investment on New Line Cinema's part prior to FOTR's release).

      Howevber, given the movie's huge success (2.8 billion+ worldwide theatrical take for the trilogy, - $400+ million for production & marketing = lotsa $), the economics of Middle-Earth/Fantasy-related storytelling have undergone a huge boom. Still, this only makes a mini-series adaptation a possibility.

      At least, it will require several (5+) years (for the concept to seem "fresh" and for the FX to get cheaper (and ideally to ride the wave of a "Hobbit" theatrical release) before a mini-series has a real chance of happening. And should this happen, keep in mind that it likely never would've happened without the theatrical versions of LOTR.

      Given all that, I'd love to see a mini-series version of LOTR; then again, I'd probably also sit through a 9-hour theatrical adaptation of Tolkien's Silmarillion. ;)

    5. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by eeg3 · · Score: 1

      You'd have no character advancement, missed all the buildup

      Well, they managed to skip The Hobbit and it made sense. Why wouldn't it make sense with just the third one?

      So they should have released one 10 hour movie?

      Well, they could've not made three 4-hour movies, and just made one that didn't have every teeny scene in it. I'm sure everyone can name a ton of scenes that they thought were not absolutely necessary. Guess what you do if you want ever miniscule detail? You can read the books; however, most people are probably too lazy for that, unfortunately. Buying the series of books is probably cheaper, as well; especially with the way you get gouged with ticket prices and whatnot as theaters today.

      Yes, I do dislike the Star Wars trilogy, but I don't see how that's relevant. (I'm sure i'll get modded down for not liking star wars, but what can ya do.)

    6. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by Colazar · · Score: 1
      This sounds like hindsight speaking, I know, but I always wondered why it was considered such a bad investment. I would have expected that even 3 mediocre movies of LoTR would have made back the $400M fairly easily just off of the hardcore fans. And then you would have a property that would, because of the nature of the fanbase, reliably sell DVDs in perpetuity.

      I certainly wouldn't have expected it to be the cash cow that it's become. But a safe bet to make a little bit of money, yes.

      But then, I too would sit through a 9 hour Silmarillion (I've always preferred that to the LoTR anyway), so what do I know.

      --
      He decided to just watch the government, and kind of scale it down to size, and run his life that way. --Laurie Anderson
    7. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what's up with modding the guy as "Flamebait?"

      I did one of them in lieu of there being a '-1, Stupid' moderation option.

      Claiming the LotR trilogy is being milked because 'three seperate [sic] movies' [were made] is retarded.

      Moaning that the first two films were a 'cop-out' because they didn't have endings is retarded. Needing deus ex machina resolution is the requirement of a simpleton.

      Whining that the intervals between films were too long is retarded. The release schedule was impressive.

      In addition, spelling 'really' with four l's is just... really retarded.

    8. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by jdbo · · Score: 1

      Good point - the problem is that It's less a matter of proving it hardcore fans (i.e. me and, apparently, yourself) than proving it to Hollywood executives with lots of $, a fear of losing that $, and little actual knowledge of what the audience is actually interested in seeing... (or a pompous and unspoken confidence that they can market predictable crap to an audience more easily than a quality product). I'm still amazed that Hollywood doesn't attempt scientific polling to test movie concepts on the general public - most of their "testing" is to fine-tune/fix a semi-finished->finished product, but that's what you get in such a basically dysfunctional industry.

      Totally unrelated: the opening of the Silmarillion could be very nicely served using a (differently stylized) general animation techniques used in richard Linkater's "Waking Life".

    9. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by mdarksbane · · Score: 1

      I wasn't really talking about LotR specifically, but of epics in general, and lamenting the lack of more series with a cohesive story arc.

      Since LotR, there's been a surge of new fantasy-based movies. I think it would be really neat to see some other classics on film, but most of them just couldn't fit into a good movie; you lose too much of the massive scope of the plot. A series could really do them justice.

    10. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by Walkiry · · Score: 1

      The Lord of the Rings was too large and had too much happening to be done in one film. The book itself is split into 3 volumes. As it is, they probably should have shot 6 movies to match the 6 books Tolkien wrote, they had to cut out way too much.

      People would have fallen asleep in the 4th movie/book.

      No, really, it's a very very good read, but I get the feeling that those things that happen when the nasty little hobbitssess are travelling to Mordor wouldn't translate well into a film.

      --
      ---- Take the Space Quiz!
    11. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by stanmann · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually if you skip those scenes, you get Lord of the rings and Return of the King And we all know how great those were.

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
    12. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by Creedo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think that Robert Jordan's "Wheel of Time" series would be great in miniseries format....

      --
      All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
    13. Re:Way to milk it for every ounce... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that Robert Jordan's "Wheel of Time" series would be great in miniseries format....
      ITYM trilogy format. That's about how much real story is there, the rest is just filler. This is also the first book series I have read where I wanted to meet the characters. Not because I liked them, but because physical manifestation would allow me to beat them to death with a shovel for being so _utterly_ _fscking_ _stupid._

  18. See the Flying Palantir? by eamacnaghten · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe the scene where the Wormtoungue throws the Palantír at the fellowship - one of my favourite scenes from the book - filmed but sadly cur from the film....

    --

    Web Sig: Eddy Currents

    1. Re:See the Flying Palantir? by AuMatar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They cut the scene between Gandalf and Saruman at Isengard twice so far (seriously pissing Christopher Lee off). I'd hope they don't do it again.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  19. Holy crap by transient · · Score: 4, Funny

    Extended edition? You mean I saw the short version!?

    --

    irb(main):001:0>
    1. Re:Holy crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Extended edition? You mean I saw the short version!?


      No, you saw the *VERY SHORT* version. The _Extended Edition_ IS the =Short Short Version=.

      The Long Version isn't available due to the fact that MPEG4 standard definition single language no subtitle non-Superbit featureless double sided quad layer BluRay discs aren't available at press time, so it couldn't be packaged into a nice 10 disc set, for only ROTK.

    2. Re:Holy crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't it just be the bitch if they second languaged the whole thing in elvish!

    3. Re:Holy crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Wouldn't it just be the bitch if they second languaged the whole thing in elvish!


      Nah, BLACK SPEECH!

    4. Re:Holy crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah you missed the scenes where Frodo and Sam finally admit their undying love (as in love love) for each other only to have the actor who plays Gandalf try to join in forcing Peter Jackson to cut out the whole scene. With the success of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, Peter succumbs to pressure and puts the scene back in.

  20. Marathon Catheter Madness by Cordath · · Score: 5, Funny

    I am willing to bet there will be theaters which offer screenings of all three extended editions, back to back. Let's do the math:

    12 hours of LOTR
    + Pshychotic LOTR-crazed fans
    + several hundred litres of movie-theater pseudo-soda
    + no catheters
    -----
    = one helluva carpet cleaning bill

    and you can bet that those theaters will be full of psychotic LOTR-crazed fans... You can also bet that such a theater would be a great place to sell special movie-theater priced catheters to go with the special movie-theater priced colas...

    1. Re:Marathon Catheter Madness by FortKnox · · Score: 0

      Don't worry... there will be loan officers available to help pay for all those special 'movie priced' foodstuffs you desire!

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    2. Re:Marathon Catheter Madness by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I think the theaters would already be prepared, given that nearly every fangirl pees her pants every time Orlando Bloom strikes a pose.

    3. Re:Marathon Catheter Madness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      and you can bet that those theaters will be full of psychotic LOTR-crazed fans... You can also bet that such a theater would be a great place to sell special movie-theater priced catheters to go with the special movie-theater priced colas...


      You forgot the colostomy bags.

  21. More nerds in line! by TheOtherAgentM · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    We can see more nerds line up in front of theaters all over the world! Then after it hit theaters, New Line can release a new DVD with scenes from outside the theaters of the last theater release. That's got to be another 2 discs or so, and that's another $50 New Line can take out of the pockets of nerds everywhere.

    1. Re:More nerds in line! by 100_Monkeys_Typing · · Score: 1

      Flamebait... you call that Flamebait? Seems to hit a too close to home for someone. PS i have already pre-ordered the scences from outside the theater. I can't wait!

  22. What's next? by DarthVeda · · Score: 1

    An extended version of Gods and Generals?

    1. Re:What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An extended version of Gods and Generals?

      No, but I hear they are coming out with an extended version of the unabridged oxford english dictionary.

    2. Re:What's next? by Flounder · · Score: 1

      It's been rumored that there's going to be a five hour version of Gods and Generals released next year.

      --

      No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

    3. Re:What's next? by secolactico · · Score: 1

      An extended version of Gods and Generals?

      An extended version of that movie would be longer than the civil war was.

      Call it the M*A*S*H syndrome: the TV series lasted almost 4 times longer than the Korean war itself.

      --
      No sig
    4. Re:What's next? by hunterx11 · · Score: 1

      I call it the DBZ syndrome: the five minute destruction of Namek took more than five 20-minute episdoes.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
    5. Re:What's next? by stanmann · · Score: 1

      Yup, every year they revise it and it usually has more volumes than the previous year... BUT it comes with a shelf to put them on.

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
  23. in the cinema? by rickbrodie · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Well, i live in Britain and I don't recall the cinemas showing the extended versions of the first two films before they were released on dvd. I wish they had, cos that would have been well worth it.

    For each of the three films, i was pretty disappointed when i saw them in the cinema for the first time. Yes, they were pretty spectacular, but they just were not as great as i'd hoped. Yet, several months later, when i bought the extended version on dvd and watched it, i found myself to be much more impressed. Those extra half hours in each of the films makes a very real difference. Getting the chance to see the "proper" version on the big screen would certainly make the wait for the dvd a little more bearable ^_^

    It seems a little strange (assuming my memory is to be trusted on this) that they would choose to show only the last of the trilogy in the cinemas. Unless of course they mean to show all three (now that would be worth waiting for.)

    1. Re:in the cinema? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      well.. umm.. read the article? or at least another one of them?

      "Gandalf of Denmark writes: I work in a cinema in Denmark, and on the latest list of releases, it was mentioned that in mid-October Lotr 1,2 & 3 Extended version would be shown in a select number of cinemas. It would seem likely that they are showing the extended versions, a few months ahead of them coming out on dvd, so the December release, seems like a good bet for the dvd's so far.
      "

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:in the cinema? by eetiiyupy · · Score: 1

      In Bristol (UK), after TTT, the extended FOTR and TTT extendeds were shown once each on one screen in one theatre. IIRC on a Monday and Tuesday night respectively. I think there was a sign on the box office saying "beware of the leopard".

    3. Re:in the cinema? by kahei · · Score: 1

      They did show them, actually, in a couple of places (like that one on the south edge of Leicester Square), and yeah, it is much better, especially 'fellowship' (two towers has a bit too much comedy dwarf stupidity for my taste).

      --
      Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
    4. Re:in the cinema? by arwel · · Score: 1

      The week before ROTK opened the Filmworks in Manchester was showing the extended editions of FOTR and TTT a couple of times a day each.

  24. Ow, it hurts already by Sean80 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Geez, my ass already hurts just thinking of sitting through this sucker in the theater.

    My wife and I have already spent the GNP of a small African nation going to see these movies (what was it, 5 times for FOTR, 4 for TTT and 3 for ROTK, plus a shyteload of popcorn and hot dogs) and I guess we'll be in the theaters to see this as well.

    I myself have no problem giving my money away to this particular cause though. Damn good movies, and they're absolutely worth every last penny.

    1. Re:Ow, it hurts already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geez, my ass already hurts just thinking of sitting through this sucker in the theater.

      I bet that's not the only thing it hurts from.

    2. Re:Ow, it hurts already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I thought Trekies were bad. Do you wear hobbit feet as well?

  25. Re:Will it hit cinemas? Of course!! by mdvlspwn99 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and we'll all take it hook, line, and sinker!

    So, when do I get in line?

    --
    If reality was like Slashdot, most people would be (-1) Redundant.
  26. Re:Article Text -- Cristopher Lee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remeber Christopher Lee boycotted the Premiere of ROTK because they removed his Sauruman scenes.

    Out of loyalty I too boycotted ROTK ( well downloaded it ) so hopefully Sauruman will be reinstated ( perhaps even the excellent Shire in ruins ending so essential to the mythology ).

    Lee must return to the Silver Screen and this slight to Britain's GREATEST actor removed.

  27. Festival Setting by ndavidg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This would need to be in a festival-type setting where you can walk around, shop for LOTR-related items, buy a soda, burger or pizza slice, and get sprayed with water.

    Sitting in the theatre for three hours without so much as an intermission was difficult enough, I could not imagine a full day of sitting on my ass without moving. My legs would fall asleep and I would have to crawl out of the theatre.

    Most of the people I've talked to feel that three hours was too long time without an intermission.

    1. Re:Festival Setting by chochos · · Score: 2, Funny
      I could not imagine a full day of sitting on my ass without moving

      Have you never heard of the Summer of George?

    2. Re:Festival Setting by tgd · · Score: 4, Funny
      I could not imagine a full day of sitting on my ass without moving.

      Don't work in software, do you?

  28. Both previous extended versions released in UK by plesur · · Score: 4, Informative

    I saw both of the extended versions of Fellowship and Two Towers at a cinema in the UK in the two weeks leading up to the release of ROTK. Well worth seeing first on the big screen, so I'll be looking out for the extended ROTK (and the triple-bill extended all-dayer!)

  29. And now... all three in a row! by danimrich · · Score: 0, Troll

    I wonder whether some theatre will screen all three extended editions as a triple-feature... that's probably gonna take more than half a day!

    --
    where's all that Karma?
  30. For Comparison... by the_skywise · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The first two movies clocked in at around 2 and a half hours. The extended editions put them both around the 3 and a half hours.

    ROTK STARTED at 3 and a half hours... How long is the *extended* edition going to be!?!

    (and will it include the destruction of Hobbiton scenes?)

    1. Re:For Comparison... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I don't think those scenes were ever filmed; they were never intended to be a part of the films.

    2. Re:For Comparison... by jimhill · · Score: 2, Informative

      sigh

      No, the extended RotK will not include the Scouring of the Shire. It wasn't even filmed.

      --
      Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus
    3. Re:For Comparison... by Xytras · · Score: 1

      Read somewhere online that the ROTK EE would be abour 4 hours and 10 min can't be bothered finding the link, to tired and to little coffee Xy

    4. Re:For Comparison... by Bloody+Pulp · · Score: 2, Informative

      IMDB indicates that the extended edition is 250 minutes.

      http://imdb.com/title/tt0167260/combined

    5. Re:For Comparison... by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1
      ROTK STARTED at 3 and a half hours... How long is the *extended* edition going to be!?!

      I'd be happy if it were about 15 minutes shorter (remove the going-to-the-ships ending, for starters), but I guess I can always hit the skip button on my DVD remote to get the same effect.

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
    6. Re:For Comparison... by jdbo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's the general info:

      FOTR theatrical: ~ 3 hours
      FOTR EE: ~ 3 hours, 30 minutes (not counting the "fan credits" tacked to the end, which take a -long- time to run)
      diff: 30 minutes

      TTT theatrical: ~ 3 hours
      TTT EE: ~ 3 hours, 40 minutes
      diff: 40 minutes

      ROTK theatrical: ~ 3 hours, 20 minutes (incl. 8 minutes of credits)
      ROTK EE (announced): ~ 4 hours, 10 minutes
      diff: 50 minutes

      (The "Scouring..." chapter was never filmed (outside of a series of "hommage" shots shown in the "Mirror of Galadriel" sequence of FOTR; however, scenes depicting the fate of Saruman himself have been announced for inclusion.)

      For FOTR and TTT the new footage was re-integrated into the main film, and significant parts of the score re-recorded to accomodate these changes.

      As someone who has watched both the theatrical and EE cuts multiple times (and expierenced the "Trilogy Tuesday" oening of ROTK last December), I am confident that the ROTK EE will improve the pacing and characterization issues of ROTK (that also afflicted FOTR and TTT) in the same way that the EEs improved those films*.

      While additional eye candy and additional treats for those who want to see "more of the books" onscreen are more or less a given for these EEs, it's actually the pacing changes and deeper characterization thatmakes the EEs improvements over the theatrical cuts.

      * For those who wonder about the whole "EEs feel shorter" assertion, here's a quick explanation: while the EEs are longer in timespan, the more measured pacing in the EEs gives more chances to the audience to breathe and "catch up" with the events of the film, while becoming more familiar with the characters; more varied pacing allows the audience to re-engage and become more involved with the characters and their experiences, thereby extending their patience for long sequences and making the film "feel shorter" to them despite the longer running time.

    7. Re:For Comparison... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Improve the pacing?" What the hell were you smoking when you saw them? The pacing went to hell in the extended editions. Thats generally why most of the cut scenes were cut in the first place.

      And what moron thought the extended editions "feel shorter"?

    8. Re:For Comparison... by jswalter9 · · Score: 1

      Honestly I thought the theatrical Fellowship was better paced that the extended.

      The two towers was, I have to assume, shot to be the extended version and hacked, badly I might add, to reduce the time on the theater release.

      Since ROTC, er, ROTK has some of the same flow problems that two towers had, I'm guessing it's the same.

      So what made Fellowship different? It was the deal-maker. Fellowship had to engross the folks who hadn't read the books, so the theater release was actually more important.

      And that's my 2 cents, which, adjusted for slashdot accounting, works out to approximately nothing.

      Enjoy the trilogy as much as I do. :)

      --
      Retired from software... maybe. Sort of.
    9. Re:For Comparison... by Avatar8 · · Score: 1
      If you watch all of the "Making of..." shorts on the EE of Two Towers, you'll see several scenes that will be in the EE RotK.

      Here's a short list that I can remember or that I expect to be there due to discontinuity:

      -interaction with Saruman at Isengard

      -Wormtongue throwing the palantir down from Isengard

      -Merry swearing fealty to Theoden before Rohan marches to Gondor (from DVD)

      -Gandalf facing the witch king (leader of the Nazgul) as he tries to enter Minas Tirith just before Rohan arrives (from DVD)

      -Sam struggling with the Watchers to enter Cirith Ungol using the Light of Galadriel (should be a similar scene to get out)

      -scenes of Aragorn healing Merry, Eowyn and Faramir in the Minas Tirith house of healing

      -speaking with the Mouth of Sauron at the gates of Mordor (from DVD)

      -Frodo and Sam's march across Mordor, possibly including their involunatry inclusion in an orc regiment (did you notice that their orc armor disappeared without any explanation and they were suddenly on the far side of Mordor?)

      No scouring of the shire, but 40-50 minutes of footage replaced.

      It will be worth every minute.

  31. Here I go again... by geekwench · · Score: 3, Funny
    The fangirl in me is shouting "squeeee!" and hyperventilating like the soon-to-be-ravished heroine of a bodice-ripper romance novel. However, the practical (and far more sensible) part of me is holding out for a release date. I refuse to go back into training for the sit-in-the-uncomfortable-seat-for-3-plus-hours marathon before I absolutely have to.

    (And no, sitting around while reading /. doesn't count. My sofa is very comfortable, thank you.)

    --
    Doing my level best to piss off the religious right wing...
    1. Re:Here I go again... by H0ek · · Score: 3, Funny

      OK, like much of the Slashdot readership, I had a really difficult time getting past the first sentence. I'm happily reading the latest in geek rants about catheterization when suddenly I'm struck with a comment the references bodice-ripping.

      As much as I appreciate the comment, please, no more, or my wife will regret me coming home from work.

      --
      H0ek
      Think you're smart? Prove you've got brains!
    2. Re:Here I go again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope and ACs are not either.

    3. Re:Here I go again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, let's be fair, she'll regret it no matter what.

    4. Re:Here I go again... by kahei · · Score: 2, Funny


      The first sentence of that post is one of the sexiest things I have ever read.

      --
      Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
  32. Does this mean.. by jjholt1213 · · Score: 2, Funny

    That in 5 years we will have Lord of the Rings prequil trillogy and see the transformation of the White Wizard into the right hand of ultimate evil??

    1. Re:Does this mean.. by Tebriel · · Score: 2, Funny

      Saurman really was a little hobbit who grew up enslaved in Hobbiton. And Rangers aren't long lived because of their ties to elves, but due to contracting a bacterial infection at an early age.

      --
      The Blaster Master Fighting for Truth, Justice, and Evil Pie since 1979
    2. Re:Does this mean.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, the bacteria that infect Rangers are known as mitichlorians. Thus Lucas takes over the LoTR franchise, and proceeds to make three more movies based on the Silmarillion, featuring Jar Jar Binks.

    3. Re:Does this mean.. by stud9920 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I heard that Pete Jackson is planning a stupid prequel with stupid "Bilbo when he was young", meeting "Gimli when he was young" and stupid "Gollum before he fell for the dark side".

      Also, it seems the script for all this is aimed at children.

      How could he sell off like this ?

    4. Re:Does this mean.. by harborpirate · · Score: 1

      Actually the "prequel" to LOTR is already written, by Tolkien himself. Its called "The Hobbit", and its actually rather good. I've already heard rumblings that it will likely be made into a film.

      So, no need to worry yet. When they've completed The Hobbit, and they're looking for more material, thats when things could get ugly...

      Needless to say I don't trust the hollywood writers to make a watchable movie out of the Silmarillion.

      --
      // harborpirate
      // Slashbots off the starboard bow!
  33. Re:Article Text -- Cristopher Lee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG U R teh ubah-G33kX0r. ^^

  34. Who says loyalty has a cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have an interesting definition of loyalty. If the extended addition doesn't have Sauruman either, do you plan to shoplift the DVD?

    1. Re:Who says loyalty has a cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Sauruman is not in the extended version I will loyally download it ( I have 2 see it ) but the snubbers of Britain's finest will not profit by my overwhelming need 2 see it.
      Well I will probably have 2 sneek into the cinema because to be quite honest elephant battles just don't cut it on the small screen. ( Although I will probably b spotted by the ushers with night vision anti screener goggles - h'mm unless I reflect no light at all - or maybe pay to see another film then swap over ).
      Lee better be in star wars 3 I tell ya.

  35. Re:Article Text -- Cristopher Lee by TMacPhail · · Score: 2, Informative

    Despite Sauruman's absense, the movie still worked. It should be good to put him back in though. I too would have liked the scouring of the shire, but you have to face it, it isnt going to happen. They didnt film it.

  36. Re:is this the one... by ThePlague · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well, sort of: in this version, Frodo isn't seduced by the ring just before he's about to throw it into Mount Doom. Rather, he still has it around his neck, and Gollum bites off his finger for no good reason.

  37. may contain spoilers by Psymunn · · Score: 1

    Actually, the extended edition, as strange as it sounds, probably won't feel as drawn out. Why? Well my biggest complaint with the movie is the last half an hour was all this tiresome conclusion and rap up. But, inbetween the crowning at rivendell, and frodos final departure, there is the return to hobbiton, an action packed event. This was filmed and is to be included on the extended edition. So, infact, you won't have to sit through two long scenes of people hugging and crying, back to back

    --
    The Neo-Bohemian Techno-Socialist
    1. Re:may contain spoilers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, no, the return to Hobbiton (if you mean 'Scouring of the Shire') was not filmed. Jackson has said this many times over now. It will not be in the Extended Edition.

    2. Re:may contain spoilers by Squozen · · Score: 1

      The scouring of the Shire was not filmed. Peter Jackson specifically mentions in the commentary on the Fellowship special edition that it will not appear in any form.

    3. Re:may contain spoilers by Number14 · · Score: 1

      Do you mean the Scouring of the Shire? That was never filmed and will not be in the extended edition.

    4. Re:may contain spoilers by sindarin2001 · · Score: 1

      As others have said, Jackas^H^Hson left out the Scouring of the Shire...because he didn't like it. Personally it's a great ending because it emphasizes that even the "neverchanging, everprotected" Shire was affected by the war.

  38. Discworld would make a great fantasy movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    with Monty Python alumni for the main characters.

    (Eric Idle was great in the computer games)

  39. I know... by the_skywise · · Score: 1

    And the scenes aren't really THAT big of a deal for me. (It'd just "add another ending" as other people have been complaining about... not realizing that that was EXACTLY how the book "ended")

    But it'd be nice as an ultimate gift of fan service and maybe as a sign of respect for the art/story to do it.

    (Besides, I can't think of how much more footage he can put back in besides the trashing of the Shire... Though I'm sure others on here will tell me. :) )

  40. Re:Article Text -- Cristopher Lee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMFG, you're so l33t!! You're the king of l33t!! You're so l33t that you make l33t itself look totally l4m3 by comparison!! There's a picture of you under l33t in the dictionary!! Your the conductor of the train to l33t city!! All aboard!! w00t w00t!!

  41. Peter Jackson's The History of JRR Tolkien's TLOTR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    That's what I've been expecting for next year, as it's the 50th anniversary of the publishing of the first book. Maybe the year after for the 50th anniversary of the publishing of the last. My original guess, before the FotR extended edition came out, was 14 discs. Clearly, that's a misunderestimation so now I predict 148 discs, and instead of some weak bookshelf sized Argonath, you get fullsized ones, which are the sides of the shelf to hold all the discs.


    Well... perhaps we'll have an annual DVD replete with all the *other* cuts, production notes, etc, for the movie series... a la Christopher Tolkien's The History of Middle Earth series.

    AND maybe a _new cut_ turning The LOTR into a single film, with new title sequence, and lacking of the current title sequences.
    (and special theatre viewings for the 12 hour film version, like watching _1900_ at festivals)

  42. MOD PARENT SIDEWAYS!! by Trikenstein · · Score: 3, Funny
    either right or left will do.

    Tink Kyew

  43. Agh! It's trying to kill me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    The extended edition in theaters! Awesome. I can't wait to see it. Sitting there for over three hours. With no bathroom breaks. This is going to be...hey..wha...agh! Help! My bladder is trying to strangle me!

  44. theaters smell bad enough by Zed2K · · Score: 1

    I've encountered numerous shows where people don't shower before hand and stink horribly, and thats for a short movie! I can't imagine sitting with geeks that don't believe in personal cleanliness for 4+ hours. Nasty nasty nasty.

  45. The War of the Silmarils centology? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whats next? TWOTS centology?
    * The Hador trilogy
    * Tinuviel trilogy
    * The Turin trilogy
    ** After Tuor
    ** Nargothond
    ** Forbidden Love
    * The Hurin trilogy
    * The Earndil trilogy
    etc...

    Or THE HOBBIT trilogy
    * The Loss of Lonely Mountain
    * There and Back Again
    * The Battle of Dol Guldur

    Or the Numenor trilogy?
    * The Ship Kings
    * Ar-Pharazoan
    * The Last Alliance (with actors already preselected, and graphical designs :)

    etc...

    1. Re:The War of the Silmarils centology? by Creedo · · Score: 1

      Is it bad that I would happily watch these?

      --
      All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
  46. Extended is better? Not necessarily. by timealterer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While extended versions can be great for people who "just can't get enough" of their favourite franchise, they can be annoying to those who just like movies. For example, while I like The Matrix movies, but if that robots-coming-through-the-roof-and-being-shot scene went any longer, I'd be reaching for my fast-forward button.

    Of course the Extended Collectors' Editions are made with fans in mind, but sometimes that's the only one you can buy in the store. I ended up with the Extended edition of The Lion King, for example, that stuff that was new to me and took away from the nostalgia and wanes the kids' attentions pan. Just my $2/100.

    --
    - Allen Pike
    Altering time, one time at a time.
    1. Re:Extended is better? Not necessarily. by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Generally I'll agree with you, but there's just soo much stuff in the books that aren't in the theatrical cut that it makes LotR different in my opinion. Having not read the books until after seeing TTT and the extended edition of Fellowship, I can say that the latter greatly helped with my understanding of the movie. I'm sure a lot was due to seeing it for the second time too, but there was so much that was explained by the cut scenes that I think it improved the movie immeasurably.

    2. Re:Extended is better? Not necessarily. by jfengel · · Score: 1

      When the Fellowship extended edition came out, Peter Jackson was pretty clear: the real movie is the one you saw in the theater, and this is just the version with extra stuff for the squeeing fanboys/girls. The new material was interesting, but it generally didn't add much to the story.

      When The Two Towers came out, I heard no such explanation from Jackson. Many important scenes were left out of the theatrical release, including a scene that gave crucial backstory to Jackson's radically different interpretation of Faramir. (His Faramir was potentially more interesting than the goody-two-shoes in the book, but without that scene, he was just a jerk.)

      Now, to my tastes, the battle scenes in TTT went on a bit too long, and I would have edited the movie somewhat differently, losing some stuff and adding much of what was cut. Regardless, Return of the King makes more sense if you've seen the extended Two Towers.

  47. Re:Article Text -- Cristopher Lee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree does anyone want to help film the missing scenes at the end of the book, we could release them as a super-extended version over the usual channels. Is the book in the public domain yet?

  48. The Elves... by devphil · · Score: 5, Informative


    ...can go to Valinor whenever they feel like it. Frodo and Sam pass such a group in the extended first DVD, and in the books there's a much longer sequence involving them.

    (And there's no rush; the "last ship" in the movies wasn't about to sail, because there was no last ship. Plenty of Elves were left in Middle-Earth, and Cirdan "sail all you want, we'll make more" the Graybearded just kept building the damn things...)

    Galadriel, however, was special. She was the only remaining one of the Noldor who had been banned from Valinor. (The others were dead or had returned.) The ban was rescinded at the end of the First Age. She was still too proud for her own good, though, and refused to accept the invitation. Also, she was one of the first to rebel, so the Valar were not keen on letting her back in.

    Once she had learned how to get along with others, and in reward for her work against Sauron, the invitation was re-extended to her, and she accepted. So in her case, yeah, she had to wait until she was ready.

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
  49. MOD PARENT UP by WotanKhan · · Score: 1

    +1 Pedantic ;), but also quite correct.

  50. How about seeing the /second/ palantir at all?! by devphil · · Score: 4, Insightful


    I was greatly disappointed that Denethor was never revealed to have been using another palantir (as was his right and duty as Steward). The movie portrays him as generally being a hardass until he goes insane, but the book shows that Sauron had played a large part in driving him insane via the palantir.

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    1. Re:How about seeing the /second/ palantir at all?! by Colazar · · Score: 1
      100% agree! That was my biggest complaint about the 3rd movie. Especially since if they'd revealed it the same way they did in the book (the palantir rolling away from his charred corpse), it would have only added about 1 min of screen time, including explanations.

      --
      He decided to just watch the government, and kind of scale it down to size, and run his life that way. --Laurie Anderson
    2. Re:How about seeing the /second/ palantir at all?! by nevets · · Score: 1

      It is referenced in the movie, when Denethor says he has seen more that Gandolf knows. I assumed (and hope that I'm right) that this is one of the things that get shown in the EE.

      I also prefer the book version of Aragon playing tricks with Sauron using the palantir. ie. Making him think that Aragon has the ring with the confidence he shows.

      --
      Steven Rostedt
      -- Nevermind
    3. Re:How about seeing the /second/ palantir at all?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tricks yes, but the key part to me there was Aragon fights Sauron head on in a contest of will and WINS - he wrenches control of the palantir away from Sauron. It's actually a critical plot device in the book - that's how they know the black fleet is coming and that he has to dare the mountain pass. But to me it says WHY man is still of interest to middle earth - in the books Aragon, and to some extent Faramir, show the strength to fight the dark temptations and powers and come out on top. The strongest of the Elves might have been able to duplicate Aragon's feat, but even the mysterious and powerful Gandalf knows he could not have done what Aragon did. To me that duel was what really stamped Aragon's right to rule in stone. And the movie totally ignored it! Auugh.

  51. Fucking stupid moderators... by Lethyos · · Score: 0

    In case those who moderated this post negatively missed the point: this post is a joke. Get it?

    --
    Why bother.
    1. Re:Fucking stupid moderators... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah dinkwad, they got it. Thanks for looking out for the little people.

      However it should be modded -1: troll for this little morsel:

      "This, of course, was the lesson of the Holocaust - that we should never feel so superior to the weak or inferior that we decide they have no place"

    2. Re:Fucking stupid moderators... by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 0

      Every good joke needs a seed of identifiable truth to lay at it's heart or it would not be funny.
      I'll leave it at that.

  52. Hey, whatever it takes by realmolo · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm all for anything that keeps all those loser LOTR fans locked up in a dark room for hours on end.

  53. New Acronym? by zbrimhall · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    RTFBBMJATMWWNAGATBA*!!!

    * Read The Fucking Books Before Making Judgements About The Movies, Which Weren't Nearly As Good As The Books Anyway.

  54. Elrond was born in Middle Earth!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Elrond was born in Middle Earth at the end of the First Age, the son of Earendil the Mariner and Elwing, granddaughter of Beren and Luthien.

  55. No thanks... by vashathastampedo · · Score: 1

    I'll wait for the DVD's and have my own private EE marathon.

    1. Pause whenever I feel like it. My undersized and overworked bladder thanks me.

    2. Equivalent price for equal volume of carbonated beverage is savings enough to help offset the cost of my HDTV. Why willingly support the wretched business practices of the "poor" Movie Industry so that I can enjoy a Coke or two during the show?

    3. Not having to smell the foul reek of pure unadulterated nerd - is there a cost associated with this?

    I'll pass... I guess I'm still one of those non-social geeks.

  56. Gimli by ThousandStars · · Score: 4, Informative
    It is also suggested that Gimli goes, too, though I don't remember what allows him to go.

    Actually, it's not suggested that Gimli departs, it's stated in the Appendices to The Return of the King.

    "1541: In this year on March 1st came at last the Passing of King Elessar. It is said that the beds of Meriadoc and Peregrin were set besides the bed of the great king. Then Legolas built a grey ship in Ithilien, and sailed down the Anduin and so over Sea; and with him, it is said, went Gimli the Dwarf. And when that ship passed an end was come in Middle-earth to the Fellowship of the Ring."

    I don't feel like looking it up, but I recall that Gimli was allowed into the West because of his great friendship with Legolas and Galadriel.

    Also, this post addresses a question elsewhere in this thread: there is no hard time limit on when Elves can depart from the Havens; in fact, Galadriel, Elrond and others tarry for a few years in Middle Earth, after the destruction of the One Ring. Those that stay longer, however, were subject to a sort of fading. That is what the Three, the Elven rings, were forged to protect against. Thus those Elves who wielded the rings held the the memory of the Elder days.

    What ultimately happens to Elves who remained in Middle Earth is never explicitly stated so far as I know.

  57. The "Director's Cut" Editions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suppose the next step would be the Director's Cut editions, with the First Cut superlong 6 hour versions of each film...

    Then we can spend an entire day in the theatre (plus intermissions)

  58. HAHAHAHA--please people, this joke is old by rd_syringe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why do we have to suffer through idiotic "super duper 23rd special bronze edition" jokes in every single LOTR article?

    Since 2001, it's always been standard release, then extended. Nothing more, nothing less, and they've been upfront since the beginning.

    Oh, yeah, I forgot, hahahahaha, yeah, multiple versions of a DVD! MPAA sux0r!

  59. Not me by nwbvt · · Score: 0, Troll
    The extended versions of the first two were crap. To dispense with all the knee-jerk responses I will be getting: no, I'm not just saying that because I just watched the two movies for the sword fights, and no I can stand movies that are longer than 3 hours (assuming they don't suck), and no I don't hate everything other than the commercialized theatrical versions of movies.

    I actually have nothing against director's cuts, often they make a film much better (think "BladeRunner" or "Apocalypse Now"), but these don't appear to be cut at all. Basically they just stuck in all the extra scenes they could find, regardless of whether or not they made the film better. Often this ended up in redundant sequences (the first movie effectively has two opening sequences which is one too many), bad timing (in the original, after Theoden asks "Where is my son", there is a cut to a flower growing on his grave, which I consider very moving. But in the extended edition, they stick a funeral sequence in between the two scenes which, while not a bad scene in itself, screws up the original cut), more deviations from the books (the flashback to Faramir and Boromir just serve to make Faramir look more pathetic), and tedious drawn out scenes (look again at the Faramir/Boromir flashback). Keep in mind, what works great in a book doesn't always work in the theater.

    If the cut scenes served the movie well, they would have most likely been kept in the theatrical version. If for some reason the studio forced Jackson to pull a scene or two, he could have included it in a directors cut. But all these extended versions have is everything that did (and probably should have) ended on the cutting room's floor. They are just an excuse for Jackson to sell DVDs at twice the normal cost.

    Watch, some mod who foolishly spent extra money on the extended versions will -1 Troll me.

    --
    Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
  60. Extended Edition eh? by rune2 · · Score: 1

    I bet that George Lucas wishes he'd thought of that...oh wait...

    1. Re:Extended Edition eh? by Strenoth · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, what I bet he's really wishing is that he'd PATENTED it.

      --

      "It takes a very long time to count to 2 in binary." ~'Fourlegged'

  61. Re:Article Text -- Cristopher Lee by GregChant · · Score: 1

    Dear god no. It was only written 60 years or so ago; public domain lasts for 95 years if the copyright is renewed regularly; Christopher Tolkien and the Tolkien Estate have been doing so ever since J.R.R. Tolkien's death.

  62. Re:Article Text -- Cristopher Lee by GregChant · · Score: 1

    Additionally, a movie version could not be made over the "usual" channels: the movie rights are definitely owned by the studio.

  63. LOTR EE by swingwing · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is the way it should have happened...... Gandalf: That ring is bad news, Frodo, it must be destroyed. Frodo: How so? Gandalf: It must be placed in the fires of Mount Doom. Frodo: Oh well, I guess that means a lot of walking, camping and then running away from monsters, lots of death and almost losing all my friends? Galdalf: Nah, I know some big eagles that can fly us straight to the mountain and we can drop it in the lava. We'll be home by tea. Frodo: Nice one!

    1. Re:LOTR EE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frodo: And how are we going to get past the bad guy? He has this big eye you know

      Gandalf: Bah! Behold my great power!

      Eagles get close to Mordor, while the Nazgul are in pitiful horses around the Shire.

      Sauron: Oh, they are bringing the ring to me, how nice of them!

      Great magic happens, Gandalf, who couldn't even face Saruman, is now a pile of ash, Sauron puts ring in finger.

      Sauron: Yup, let gets conquering!

  64. In theatres first? One reason to think so. by crashnbur · · Score: 1

    The best reason to believe that the extended edition of Return of the King will hit theatres before DVD is that a release date has not been announced yet! In 2002 and 2003, the release dates of the extended editions of FOTR and TTT had been announced well in advance of their theatrical versions' DVD releases. That the same is not true of ROTK suggests that more is in store.

    Of course, they could just be working on putting together some special stuff for a final release with special stuff for the extended edition trilogy.

    Or Peter Jackson and crew could be devoting more energy to a sixty-foot ape.

    1. Re:In theatres first? One reason to think so. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ROTK Extended Edition is due out on 22 Nov, according to Play.

  65. "Extended"? by WhiteBandit · · Score: 1

    Oh man.

    Wasn't LOTR:ROTK extended enough? ;)

    My opinion is probably tainted by the uncomfortable movie theater seats that I was eventually fused into by the end of the movie. :p

  66. Re:-1 Troll - Anti-Semitic Hitler Salad Cream by pualo · · Score: 1

    What makes you think he's talking about Jews? The Nazis killed mentally disabled people just as much, which seems to be what he's referring to.

  67. Oh, god! I had to pee so bad with the SHORT one! by csoto · · Score: 1

    Guess I better not get the "super saver" sized Cherry Coke...

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
  68. Re:Will it hit cinemas? Of course!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As long as there is more money to be made, or even suspected of being made

    More money, you mean, than whatever movie it would take the place of, in the theatre. Just because it will make some amount of money doesn't mean the theatre owners would want to give up space for it.

  69. Re:-1 Troll - Anti-Semitic Hitler Salad Cream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just as much? I think you need to re-read your history books chump. I'LL BEAT YOU WITH A WOODEN SALAMI HO DOG!

  70. I'm sorry, but it's long enough as it is! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the truth. The last 30 minutes of LOTR:ROTK should have been replaced with footage that didn't bore me to death.

    I don't know, maybe it's the rest of the fans that can't see how boring those 30 minutes really are. Maybe they love what they see because it resonates with a certain meaning inside their very souls.

    I suppose I am being slightly dramatic about all of this. Maybe I'll just re-edit the movie by myself from the extended edition DVD and then I'll have exactly the kind of LOTR movie I would actually pay money to see again!

  71. Time to be discredited by DarkMantle · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    and that elven archers are incredibly potent - early on, Gimli dismounts a Nazgul with a single shot!

    Gimli is a Dwarf... not an elf

    ith about a thousand eagles (given elven archers on each one)

    Well... you never tried to fire a bow from anything that moves have you? Besides... Gimli couldn't sit on an eagle too well, he has a hard enough time with horses. Not to mention the "Full force" attack you mention earlier... there was 6 eagles... not 1000

    "black orcs" (er... maybe we just call them "blacks" for short) and the white Men of the West achieve a total genocidal victory.

    Read the books... the men of the north (besides the dunedain (Aragon, or Strider whichever you prefer) had dark skin, and the victory was not genocidal, there where still plenty left (again read the book, and actually look on the screen at the end of the 3rd movie... the 3rd movie is the one that just came out in case you're too dumb to realize that)

    I could continue discretiting you but you're not worth the time.

    --
    DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
    1. Re:Time to be discredited by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's a joke, you pompous tool!

    2. Re:Time to be discredited by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      It's funny. Laugh. It's not supposed to be serious.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

  72. READ THE BOOK by DarkMantle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    People are complaining about length, content, and many endings... READ THE BOOK and find out how much longer it would have been if Peter Jackson didn't cut alot of it out. (My best guess is a set of 7-9 three hour movies)

    --
    DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
  73. Theatrical release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Paul Reubens? Pee Wee, is that you?

  74. Tell you what... by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
    ... if they promise never to come back with theatrical Special Editions 20 years down the road with redone special FX, and promise not to replace swords with foam noodles in scenes where hobbits are around, or do anything else to sully the legacy... then I promise I'll go watch ROTK EE in the theater.

  75. And the Title will be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Springtime for Saruman

  76. lotr. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As far as my knolidge goes Tolkkien used allot of "kalevala" a Finnish folk "tale" (mythology) in his creation of LOTR.It is not just christian mythology it is also Finnish mythology.

  77. For the Tolkien fans by jinxidoru · · Score: 1

    Here's the deal. I loved the extended editions with quite a few other geeks like me. Though, having said that, I will admit that the extended editions are not for everyone. It's my opinion that they were made primarily for the Tolkien addicts that even though it added nothing to the movie thematically wanted to see Galadriel giving stuff to the Fellowship. That's the reason they were made. So don't troll him for saying the extended editions sucked, it just means he's not as big a geek as you and I. His loss, or maybe ours because we don't have girlfriends. *shrug*

  78. Mod parent funny by rynthetyn · · Score: 1

    That's great, though there is one problem--"Bilbo when he was young" didn't meet "Gimli when he was young", he met Gimli's father Gloin.

    --
    Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
  79. Re:Special Edition DVD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    don't buy. wait for the extralarge extended

  80. wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU are the MAN, sir!

  81. Break or no break? by MROD · · Score: 1

    I wonder if there'll be a convenient toilet break in the middle so they can change media.

    That's the best bit of the Extended Edition DVDs.

    --

    Agrajag: "Oh no, not again!"
  82. No thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am still wainting for Lord of the rings porn movie DVD :-)

  83. Re:Will it hit cinemas? Of course!! by blancolioni · · Score: 1

    When you go to the store, do you point at the shelves full of bread and cry "You're only putting the bread here because there's MONEY TO BE MADE!!!"

    Because if you buy something, the capitalists have already won.

  84. Re:-1 Troll - Anti-Semitic Hitler Salad Cream by Milnok · · Score: 1

    Killing mentally disabled, handicaped and uncurable ill people is called euthanasia, and that was "only" one part of the Holocaust.

  85. When's the adult edition coming out? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on Jackson, there's good money to be made, and no end of crude puns on the word "ring". I've seen the way Sam looks at Frodo at the end of FOTR.

  86. I'm waiting for the Michael Moore cut by eetiiyupy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Y'know with Gandalf driving around in the ice-cream truck warning of impending doom

  87. The elves that remained... by leadsling · · Score: 2, Funny

    They eventually began to shrink in stature and began to live in the trees, taking up occupations such as shoe cobbling and baking.

  88. I'm there by Avatar8 · · Score: 1
    Yes, I'm a Tolkien uber-geek. Though I despise what was left out and what was changed, the LotR movies are still the greatest presentation of the trilogy to date.

    I missed the half day full trilogy showing at the release of RotK. Only one theater near me showed it, and the tickets were sold out the day it was announced, three days before I even heard about it. I'll be watching this time.

    Too long? P'shaw. I have a strong bladder, and there's a restaurant right next to my favorite theater.

    The DVD's announced release date is 12/17. I thought this odd because it's a Friday. Videos are typically released on Tuesdays. I was thinking this was going to coincide with a re-release in the theaters. October is much better. A couple of months to see it on the big screen before bringing it home.

    I liked someone's idea of a festival. A theater would do well to have a gaming convention in parallel with showings of the LotR EE's. Have a regular daily schedule of movies, and have dealer tables and gaming rooms running all day and into the night. A 2 day con would go well with these movies.

  89. Faded Elves by stewate4 · · Score: 2, Informative
    The Elves that remained behind in Middle-earth 'faded' into some sort of spirit world, in fact the same one that the Nazgul inhabit, and that Frodo started to enter when he was wounded by the Witch King. The Elves were supposed to inhabit both worlds at that time, and Frodo sees one of them, Glorfindel, as he is in this other world as a bright figure. In the films he sees Arwen in much the same way. Tolkien does in fact describe briefly what a faded Elf would be like in Morgoths Ring (in the Laws and Customs of the Eldar from the last version Quenta Silmarillion in that book - the published Silmarillion was adapted from this and other writings). Here he calls these faded Elves Lingers, in contrast to the Houseless souls of elves who have died violent deaths and not been reincarnated. Here he says;
    "...Moreover, the Lingerers are not houseless, though they may seem to be. They do not desire bodies, neither do they seek shelter, nor strive for mastery over body or mind. Indeed they do not seek converse with Men at all, save maybe rarely, either for the doing of some good, or because they perceive in a Man's spirit some love of things ancient and fair. Then they may reveal to him their forms (through his mind working outwardly, maybe), and he will behold them in their beauty.....For the hearts of True Men uprise in joy to behold the true likenesses of the First-born, their elder kindred; and this joy nothing evil can counterfeit"
    This was in a note supposedly added by the 9th century English mariner Aelfwine who met them, and was supposed to have copied all the Elvish legends and histories from faded Elves he met on an island in the Western oceans he found on one of his voyages. The contrast with Houseless souls of elves is interesting, as these were basically the Evil Dead of Middle-earth. Elsewhere in Morgoths Ring it says;
    "Some say that the Houseless desire bodies, though they are not willing to seek them lawfully by submission to the judgement of Mandos. The wicked among them will take bodies, if they can, unlawfully. The peril of communing with them is, therefore, not only the peril of being deluded by fantasies or lies: there is a peril also of destruction. For one of the hungry Houseless, if it is admitted to the friendship of the Living, may seek to eject the fe"a from its body; and in the contest for mastery the body may be gravely injured, even if it is not wrested from its rightful habitant. Or the Houseless may plead for shelter, and if it is admitted, then it will seek to enslave its host and use both his will and his body for its own purposes. It is said that Sauron did these things, and taught his followers how to achieve them"
    Sauron was called the Necromancer in the Hobbit, and the last sentence in this paragraph explains why.
  90. Re:Article Text -- Christopher Lee by arwel · · Score: 1

    Is the book in the public domain yet?

    Good grief no. Tolkien only died in 1973. UK copyright law is life+70 years, so you have to wait until 2043.

  91. Re:Like The Art of Computer Programming by stanmann · · Score: 1

    Well, it will really break you to find out that he's planning 3 more. Of course, you knew that.

    --
    Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
  92. Noldor Kings and High Kings by stewate4 · · Score: 1

    Finwe was the first King of the Noldor, who led them into Aman. As you say he was killed by Morgoth, when he was suceeded by his son Feanor who led a rebellion of the Noldor to try and get the Silmarills back. Some Noldor decided to turn back and stay in Aman, where they were ruled by Feanor's younger half brother Finarfin, the rest followed Feanor back to Middle-earth, the house of Feanor taking with the curse of the Valar.

    Feanor was killed by Morgoth soon afterwards, and the Noldor decided on Fingolfin as High King of the Noldor. The last Noldor High King was Gil-galad, and Galadriel was next in line, but there were too few Noldor left by then, and she never claimed the post. She also fell under the curse of the Valar, though Tolkien changed his mind about this in the end. At any rate she was forgiven in the end as she resisted Sauron and refused the One Ring, and allowed to return to Aman.

  93. Legolas & Gimli; Sam, Merry, Pippin; Aragon's by peter303 · · Score: 1

    The movie did not show some of the endings in the book: Legolas and Gimili each visit each other's homelands; The three hobbits all raise families; Sam gets to ride the boat to Valinor; Aragon has a long and productive life and dies; Arwen eventually dies.
    Not to mention dropping the whole sub-story of the scouring of the shire- includes Saruman's and Wormtounge's ends.

  94. I wasn't joking... by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

    There really is a Platium Collectors Boxed set of the EEs. Of which i have both. And no theres no other jokes to be had since i havn't bought any of the theatrical releases not do i plan i buying the trilogy set.

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  95. Extra scenes by stewate4 · · Score: 1

    Then again some of the scenes missed out would have been very good on-screen. How about the spooky bit on the Barrow Downs? Or putting the army of the Dead where they belong destroying the Corsairs on the Coast of Gondor (I don't think they worked at all well on the Pelennor). Or mining the Appendices for Aragorn and Arwen's backstory, which would introduce Arwen's character better and allow them to follow the rest of the book more closely, with Glorfindel meeting Aragorn and the Hobbits rather than Arwen (which I though in the film actually worked quite well) and Frodo defying the Nazgul on his own at the Ford which adds strength to his character.

    You could even work in some of the extra scenes that Tolkien wrote later (published in Unfinished Tales) like the Battle of the Fords of Isen where Theoden's son is killed, or the Hunt for the Ring where the Nazgul are trying to find where the Ring and the Shire are. You could even (as it's an adaptation) have included scenes not in the book though hinted at, like Boromir's journey to Rivendale (that Tolkien wanted to write but never got around to)

    As others have said though, treating the LotR's like this would work a lot better as an extended miniseries like Band of Brothers. That way you could even include the Scouring of the Shire, which would have been difficult in a film, as a penultimate episode.

  96. Re:-1 Troll - Anti-Semitic Hitler Salad Cream by hesiod · · Score: 1

    > Killing mentally disabled, handicaped and uncurable ill people is called euthanasia, and that was "only" one part of the Holocaust.

    Hitler thought that being Jewish, Polish, etc. was a disability, so it was euthanasia all around.

  97. Re:Oh, god! I had to pee so bad with the SHORT one by Aero · · Score: 1

    It could have been worse...remember, Titanic was 3 hours long, and the last hour and a half was full of rushing water...

    --
    We can believe in you for 3 minutes, but beyond that, even the King of All Cosmos can't be expected to wait.
  98. Re:-1 Troll - Anti-Semitic Hitler Salad Cream by Slurm-V · · Score: 1

    pedant
    Euthanasia is from the greek - 'Good Death' and is more properly applied to 'mercy killings' and assisted suicides. I think you're thinking of eugenics - which means making sure undesirable (physical, mental or religious) elements don't perpetuate themselves in the gene pool, either by sterilisation or a swift bullet to the back of the head. /pedant

    --
    Of course it's going off the rails. How else is it ever going to fly?
  99. Re:-1 Troll - Anti-Semitic Hitler Salad Cream by hesiod · · Score: 1

    D'oh, you are, of course, right.

  100. Re:Oh, god! I had to pee so bad with the SHORT one by csoto · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but after the nude scene, it's kind of... hard... to go... you know... in that... "state."

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom