Extended RotK Expected December 14

sbowles writes "DVDAnswers is reporting that New Line plans to release the four-disc extended edition of Return of the King on the 14th of December. As of yet, the LotR official site has not posted an official release date or an official list of contents for the set. This older IGN article gives some great details on the sneak preview presented at the San Diego Comic Con."

Comments

Cue the adjective jokes

[rd_syringe]

Let us rally together and write trite "Super Ultra Mega-Expanded Edition" jokes as though you didn't know there has been a theatrical release and an extended release since 2002 and that New Line and Peter Jackson weren't open about it all along. Bonus points for a George Lucas reference, especially if you use "Lucas" as a verb.

Remember, you must exaggerate that there is a theatrical release and then half a year later an expanded release. You must make it sound like there are multiple versions. "Super Duper Triple Mega Ultra Redux Version Mod Me +5 Funny Because I Use Lots Of Adjectives Edition."

Re:The trilogy was great.. but

[ArchieBunker]

Welcome to surround sound. Maybe its me but I liked the old style sound before they switched to surround. The dymanic range is too great. The quiet parts are too quiet and the loud parts are too loud. Luckily my tv has an automatic volume limiter which does come in handy. The shitty cable co. can't regulate the volume across all their channels.

I am so looking forward to this!

[b4rtm4n]

This is going to make my year! :-)

I am disappointed that the scouring of the Shire is missing but I can fully understand it from a filmmakers pov as it'd really mess up the pace of the end of the film. Although it may have helped offset the length of the endings.

The biggest edit I would like is the removal of Legolas surfing the Oliphant. That was just pathetic.

Still, nearly an hour of extra footage will be fscking brilliant.

Roll on December!!!

Re:A little dissapointed

[HeghmoH]

I was under the impression that Peter Jackson said that the extended edition would be released at the same time as the theatrical cut, since the trilogy was at an end.

I never heard such a thing. Furthermore, it doesn't make any sense. Making the extended edition isn't a matter of just plunking in a few more scenes and burning another master. The editing alone is a painstaking process. The LotR people are so fanatical that they actually re-score and re-record the music to fit with the new scenes. All of this takes much longer than simply transferring the already-finished theatrical film to DVD.

It may also be a way to squeeze money, but it's hardly a scam. Unlike some films, they let everybody know way ahead of time that they could expect an extended version. Nobody got caught buying the DVD and then finding out afterwards that there was another DVD they really wanted.

But RotK needed -trimming-, not extending...

[mccalli]

Seriously - the ending just dragged. I could feel people squirming in their seats as yet another cinematic false ending was foisted upon them.

Now I'm a huge fan of the books, and believe that the Scouring should have been retained as it was a major part of the book's point, to the extent that the book had a point beyond pure myth building. So it's not that I'm moaning about length as such. Just that if you're going to cut the plot, you should also cut the congratulationary stuff that goes on around the sub-plot you cut. And yes, that means straight to the Grey Havens and no Shire scenes for you, m'lads.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:But RotK needed -trimming-, not extending...

[MagicDude]

I don't think that having a half hour ending for this movie is bad, because it's not the conclusion to just ROTK, it is the resolution to the entire Lord of the Rings series. 30 minutes of character and plot resolution in a 10 hour movie is the same as having 5 minutes of resolution in a typical 90 minute movie. We've spent 3 years getting to know these characters, and I know I'd feel disapointed if all I got after the ring was destroyed was a "Good Job Frodo" and they cut to credits. Plus, the ending gave us a glimpse into how Frodo was still affected by the Ring, how he never really recovered from it. I think what everyone is complaining about is the departure for the gray havens scene, where they schmaltzed it up a little, but honestly, it's just a sign of the time of how short of an attention span people really have if they can't take 5 minutes of artistic liberty after 3 hours of butt-kicking action.

My 2c

[Aqua_Geek]

A friend of mine had this to say about leaving the "Scouring of the Shire" part out of the ending: in the Fellowship when they reach Lothlorien, Frodo looks into the Mirror of Galadriel. If you recall, it cuts to some shots of what he sees. Correct me if I'm wrong, but these are shots of the Shire being burned and whatnot, aren't they? After he sees these images, Frodo is told by Galadriel that this is what will happen if he fails. But he didn't fail. The ring was destroyed, so it should make sense that he comes back to find the Shire alive and well and NOT in ruins (or under the control of Saruman).