Slashdot Mirror
LoTR RoTK Extended Edition Specs Released
It's pre-pre-Christmas season, and ThePrinceofWands writes "OMG! It's official, 25% more unbelievable greatness in this version." The linked description (on the official LotR site) starts "DISCS 1-2: The Feature
FEATURE (approx. 250 minutes) - A new version of the final installment in the epic trilogy! The Academy-Award winning film now has 50 minutes of never-before-seen footage incorporated into the film for this highly-anticipated video release." The extended version can be ordered starting on Oct 1st.
Jesus. Does the extended edition come with a coffee machine?
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
Frodo bit his finger first
Jonathanjk.com
I heard they even added some tater recipies!
Theory of flight?! I'll teach you the theory of fist!!
Now with 25% more "Oh, Sam!"
I was planning on having a all-day LOTR showing on my 36" widescreen for a few friends. But with it now pushing probably 14 hours with mealtimes and whatnot...jeez. Any ideas?
I held off buying the first release, then the extended edition, and I'll hold off buying this one too. Let me know when the "Director's Uncut: Raw Unedited Footage" DVD edition comes out. *Then* I'll be sure that I haven't squandered my money by buying a stripped down version.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
Jesus Harold Christ. What version was that long-ass movie I watched last year?
Those who've read the book will know that the Return of the King is (almost exactly!) 1/4th a set of exhaustive appendices of every king of the humans, elves and dwarves, a guide to elven, notes on the script, et cetera ad nauseum ... hmmm ...
... ?
Arwen teaching high elven, eh
Yeah, an extra 50 minutes, but does it have Tom Bombadil?
Get the Return of the King Extended version, and soon after they will release a complete box set of The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and Return of the King, that have even more footage than all the previous extended versions combined. Have they even released a complete set yet? It's obviously going to happen.
Are there any plans for the all three movies to be bundled? I would love to get that set.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Damn i now have 25% less on my old version of lotr. Wheres the fellowship in that!
Its a pity that the link doesn't go into more detail, but the more the merrier. The extended editions of the first two movies were great improvements on already excellent films (especially the first one), so I have high hopes for Return of the King.
On a totally unrelated note, here is some sophisticated LotR humor in the form of a 2meg wmv file.
sheep.horse - does not contain information on sheep or horses.
Despite all the arguments to the contrary, Tom Bombadil is not really an important character in LOTR. Yes, he's an interesting character and probably is used as a foreshadowing of future events, but when it comes down to the actual plot, he is just a short meander off the main line.
God knows the main plot is long enough as it is, why in the world would you want to make it longer by adding an insignficant character? This is a movie, not a book. The point of a movie is to tell a good story at a fast enough pace so that the viewer feels he got his money's worth. A book allows the author to do all the meandering he likes and the reader to take as much time as is necessary to absorb it all.
Patients, we is. Yes, patients. We waits for our boxed set, our preciousssss.
cb
Oooh! What does this button do!?
I really want to see...Saruman's demise.
...despite the fact that the standard/extended edition cycles were announced like year before Fellowship of the Ring's (first film!) DVD release.
And even if you missed that, by now you should know how it will go..pattern recognition, anyone?
Yes, there will be a boxed set with all the extended editions bundled into one nice compilation, but nothing beyond that. And if the Hobbit ever comes, they might also release a new box set with the Hobbit included. And they will release Bluray/HD-DVD versions when the formats become available.
However, the actual *content* will not change. There's the extended cut and the theatrical cut. No need to bash Peter Jackson about squeezing money out of gazillion different editions..So there will not be a "hook" to upgrade to the later box set releases (HDTV resolution on the next format might be enough, of course...but then you probably are not going to feel ripped off).
Oh Great, now we get almost an houre of volcanoes blowing up.
Did any one else think that the ending after the ring was destroied was far to looooooong
Wouldn't it be nice if schools got all the money they wanted and the army had to hold jumble sales for guns
>Is it worth hoping for?
Since they were never filmed, I'd have to say "no".
Were all the badger scenes restored, or what?
Now I know it's not the end of the world, they are still greats films and all, but this one thing just bugs me about the extended DVD's. I just can't get my head around the decision to make the boxes Green, Red then Blue.
Green for Fellowship is fine, it's the most nature centric of the trilogy, so it makes sense. To me though, The Two Towers predominant colour is blue, the film is full of old stone, dark forests, and rainy battles, it's a very cold film. Likewise, the color of ROTK is red. The film is full of fire, lava, blood, passion and anger. So why flip those two around?
Am I on my own on this one?
A distraught Lord Of The Rings fan has climbed Buckingham Palace disguised as Batman to protest the absence of the valley of Tom Bombadil in the popular movie trilogy.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
Hayden Christensen isn't at the end of the extended version is he?
Never-before-seen footage doesn't sound good. I insist that Peter Jackson look at the footage before releasing it. There just has to be at least some level of quality assurance before these things can be released to the masses.
Yeah, just to troll a bit, but I remember people laughing at the end of ROTK in the theater... and not the "har, that was a funny movie" laughter, but the "god, this is painfully embarrassing to be in the same theater as this movie and I can either laugher or cry" laughter. Jackson would have done best to just stick with the book (Scouring of the Shire). That's what made Fellowship the best movie of the three (and that folks, is entirely my own opinion).
Now... to figure out how to integrate blue into my dvd collection... I was honestly expecting brown, yellowish tan, or some shade of greyish something... Blue?
I mean its Blue - not brown.
That is going to look really good beside the two brown previous boxsets. Admittedly the two previous shades of brown were slightly different, but this is a very blue shade of brown.
While having Tom Baker (Dr Who #4) as Tom Bombadil may have been interesting, I don't think the movies lost anything significant from having that scene deleted.
Thank goodness that the LOTR: ROTK extended edition will be out for Christmas, because seeing the movies (preferably the first screening on New Year's Day when the cinema is nearly empty) has become something of a ritual the last few years, and it will be sorely missed (unlike Star Wars Episode 3, which will be best forgotten...)
Fun that everyone bashes Lucas for his multiple releases but it is quite silent about Jackson.
The difference is the handling of the whole thing. Lucas created a story with the original theatrical releases of the Star Wars trilogy - he wasn't using a story that'd been around in one form or another more > 50 years. After he created his story, he went back and changed the story around - making some changes that seem to have pissed off a couple of people here and there...
Biggest difference with LOTR is the attitude behind the DVD marketing. The changes & omissions from LOTR (especially the cutting of Saruman from ROTK) pissed off some people as badly as Greedo "shooting first." But instead of hiding behind artistic license or "piracy concerns" a la Lucas, Jackson's giving people a choice. He's releasing versions which reincorporate scenes that got cut - AND he's still marketing the theatrical versions for those who want them. (Do thank Jackson for not wetting on your childhood memories when you can load up your DVD, or your BD-ROM rip or whatever, of the original LOTR in 25 years.)
It's shrewd marketing, of course. Plenty of people will buy the LOTR theatrical disks and then go back and buy the expanded triology. Say what you will about Lucas and his rights to do what he wants with his movies, but I think Jackson's creating a better public image than Lucas - AND he's getting paid for it.
Oh sure they filmed a half hour of singing and spoken word poetry just for the .05% of their audience that would demand it.
Purists are never going to be happy with a modern adaptation of Tolkiens work, he wrote some wonderful stuff and created the modern fantasy novel - but he was racist and sexist as most people in his time and society were, he had an appreciation for poetry that is inaccesible and boring to modern audiences.
I love the books (I've read them more than 20 times since I was a child) but I really enjoy the movies too - but they are are alternate forms of the same story. The details and presentation must change between the two.
I personally believe that had Tolkien lived and changed with the times he would have loved the movies that have been made so far. I'm looking forward to the Hobbit eventually.
[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
I, for one, would love to see the things that were missing. The scourging of the Shire, the actual defeat of Saruman. Christopher Lee's scenes really should've been in the theatrical version! At least the EE will allow us to see those parts.
I can answer myself in part, there are four:
Audio Commentary 1: The Director and Writers
Peter Jackson (Director/Co-Writer/Producer)
Fran Walsh (Writer/Co-Producer)
Philippa Boyens (Co-Write)
Audio Commentary 2: The Design Team
Richard Taylor (WETA Workshop Creative Supervisor)
Tania Rodger (WETA Workshop Manager)
Grant Major (Production Designer)
Ngila Dickson (Costume Designer)
Alan Lee (Conceptual Designer)
John Howe (Conceptual Designer)
Dan Hennah (Supervising Art Director/Set Decorator)
Chris Hennah (Art Department Manager)
Audio Commentary 3: The Production/Post-Production Team
Barrie Osborne (Producer)
Mark Ordesky (Executive Producer)
Andrew Lesnie (Director of Photography)
Mike Horton and Jabez Olssen (Editors)
Rick Porras (Co-Producer)
Howard Shore (Composer)
Jim Rygiel (Visual Effects Supervisor)
Joe Letteri (WETA Digital Effects Supervisor)
Ethan Van der Ryn (Supervising Sound Editor/Co-Designer)
Mike Hopkins (Supervising Sound Editor)
Randy Cook (WETA Animation Designer & Supervisor)
Christian Rivers (WETA VFX Art Director)
Brian Van't Hull (WETA VFX Cinematographer)
Alex Funke (Miniatures Director of Photography)
Audio Commentary 4: The Cast
Elijah Wood (Frodo)
Liv Tyler (Arwen)
Sean Astin (Sam)
John Rhys-Davies (Gimli)
Billy Boyd (Pippin)
Dominic Monaghan (Merry)
Orlando Bloom (Legolas)
Christopher Lee (Saruman)
Sean Bean (Boromir)
Bernard Hill (Théoden)
Miranda Otto (Éowyn)
David Wenham (Faramir)
Brad Dourif (Grima)
Karl Urban (Éomer)
John Noble (Denethor)
I am willing to cut Jackson some slack, mainly because we, the consumers, knew ahead of time that there was going to be both a theatrical version AND an extended version. Therefore, we were able to decide which version we wanted to buy. It's not like he release the theatrical version, and then after everyone had scarfed up that, decided to spring the extended version on us. He told us up front that there was going to be an extended version and that if we wanted to, we could wait until that one came out.
Plus, if I remember correctly, there was a rebate for those who bought both versions. So if you really couldn't wait the extra 6 months for the extended version, you could buy the regular version and get a little bit of a break on the extended version.
If Jackson's goal was really to maximize profits, he would have released the theatrical versions, waited a few years for everyone to buy that, and then announce the extended version after profits from the theatrical version had tapered off. Plus, he would make people who bought both pay full price, rather than offer a little bit of a rebate.
Personally I find his attitude a lot more palatable than George Lucas who is obviously out to milk the Star Wars franchise for all its worth.
------
www.moneybythenumbers.com
That was useful. Chalk up another great /. review.
ThePrinceofWands writes "This DVD set will eviscerate you with pleasure. You will bleed to death."
RotK Extended Edition System Requirements: -A DVD Player -1 Day of Spare Time -$77.95 or such
The role of the writer is not to say what we can all say, but what we are unable to say. -Anais Nin
The always invokes a slack jawed open mouthed response from the counter clerks at McD's. But then that's their response to anything.
Well they have repeatedly said that Scourging of the Shire wasn't filmed; both in interviews and eg in the commentary track to FOTR (during the scene with Galadriels mirror which is a homage to the last chapter). There is also a lot of talk about why they did this and all that.
Personally I think it's a big conspiracy though. In 20 years time we will get a new release of LOTR the way "it was ment to be". Complete with 10 extra hours of songs in elvish noone understands, and in the new version Gandalf screams as he falls with the Balrog.
Seriously though, if you don't see the movies because of the lack of a specific scene then you're just stupid. Particularly the first movie is very beautiful and even the one with least digressions from the original story. Get the extended editions though.
Very few appreciate Tom Bombadil on the first read through. In order to understand his character you first need to know quite a bit about the world of middle-earth, and at that point on your first read through you still don't have that knowledge. (Just like the hobbits.) Considering that severe cutting had to be done it's no surprise that the 30+ minutes part which actually doesn't have any meaning in the rest of the movie was cut.
Scouring was cut for similar reasons. It is just yet an example of how the media differ. There are other changes I don't agree with in the movies, but these two I understand and agree with.
The link in the article is wrong... the correct link is http://www.lordoftherings.net/index_400_hv_home.ht ml
25% more? How many times will this movie end now?? I was only fooled into getting out of my seat, what, three times in the normal version before the movie really ended...
You need a FREE iPod Nano
Day One:
Ringwraiths killed: 4. V. good.
Met up with Hobbits. Walked forty miles. Skinned a squirrel and ate it.
Still not King.
Day Four:
Stuck on mountain with Hobbits. Boromir really annoying.
Not King yet.
Day Six:
Orcs killed: none. Disappointing. Stubble update: I look rugged and manly.
Yes!
Keep wanting to drop-kick Gimli. Holding myself back.
Still not King.
Day Ten:
Sorry no entries lately. V. dark in Mines of Moria. Big Baelrog.
Not King today either.
Day Eleven:
Orcs killed: 7. V. good. Stubble update: Looking mangy.
Legolas may be hotter than me.
I wonder if he would like me if I was King?
Day 28:
Beginning to find Frodo disturbingly attractive. Have a feeling if I make
a move, Sam would kill me. Also, hairy feet kind of a turn-off.
Still not King.
Day 30:
In Lothlorien. Think Galadriel was hitting on me. Saucy wench.
Nice chat with Boromir. He's not so bad.
Took a shower. Yay!
But still not King.
Day 32:
Orcs killed: none. Stubble update: subtly hairy.
Legolas told me that a shadow and a threat had been growing in his mind.
I think Legolas might be kinda gay.
Nope, not King.
Day 33:
Orcs killed: Countless thousands. V. good.
Boromir killed by Orcs. Bummer. Though he died bravely in my arms, am now
quite sure that he was very definitely gay.
Not so sure about Gimli either.
RIP Boromir.
Still not King, but at least Boromir seemed to think I was. Might however
have been blood loss.
Day 34:
Frodo went to Mordor. Said he was going alone, but took Sam with him. Why?
My God, is everyone in this movie gay but me?
Not so sure about me either.
Still not King, goddammit.
You have a sick, twisted mind. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.
I'm sorry for my lack of sources, but.... I was under the impression from reading IMDB and a few other web sites that ROTK wasn't going to come out on DVD until they put the extended addition back out in theaters. I had thought that they planned to send ROTK back to theaters to announce that they were finally done with the film the way Peter Jackson wanted it to be and that the Extended Editions werer the real versions.
anyone?
In nature, there are neither rewards or punishments, there are only consequences.
Peter Jackson has said clearly that he doesn't like the scouring of the Shire and that it would not be included.
The script wasn't written, the scenes weren't shot, it's not going to happen
Besides, do you really want the end of the move to be any L O N G E R ?
Yes, blue. First one: Green. Second one: Red. Last one: Blue.
:)
If you had trouble seeing the colours, then I suggest (as I suggested to another person who thought the first two boxes were various shades of brown) that you get your eyes tested for red-green colourblindness or a form of it.
Up to 5% of all males have some form of colour deficiency apparently, and red-green is the most common form...
There are online tests you can take to check. Have fun
This is the movie that I have been wanting to see.. and for all you trolls out there at least Peter is releasing it to DVD when compared to that George guy...
If Peter Jackson does get the rights/funding to make The Hobbit, then that will in effect be Episode I of the LOTR saga.
I can't wait to see the cynicism from the cognoscenti once they learn there's a prequel in the works: "the actor who plays young Bilbo is terrible and he doesn't even sound like James Earl Jones, why did they have to destroy my childhood?"
...more Liv Tyler? I'd pay to have more Liv. Liv Tyler is really hot. That's what I found was lacking in the original DVD set. Not enough Liv Tyler. Did I mention I like Liv Tyler?
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
break out the Depends and catheters.
I have gas, but my car uses petrol.
Good news! Peter Jackson is currently producing the story of Tom Bombadil. Unfortunately for us hard-core Tom Bombadil fans, I have heard rumors that the role of Tom is being played by a 60 foot tall ape.
Liberty you never use is liberty you lose.
Maybe I'm missing something... but where does it say when this Extended Edition will actually be released? It says it can be pre-ordered as of October 1, but when does it ship?
If any of the stuff they cut actually made the movie better they would have left it in the theatrical edition.
What you mean is "If any of the stuff they cut actually made the movie better in theaters they would have left it in the theatrical edition."
DVD is not theater - different audience (fans), different viewing environment (couch, pause button, etc), all of which means that the judgement of what is "best" is different. And it seems to favour longer movies, with more extras.
e.g. for the first 2 LotR movies, the DVD versions are in my opinion far superior, but I don't know if I could have sat through either in a cinema.
My Karma: ran over your Dogma
StrawberryFrog
The good ol' Pervy Hobbit Fancier's Diary.
If you want to read the originals, direct from the original author, pleased to be visiting http://www.livejournal.com/users/cassieclaire/.
Thanking you.
Well, Jackson has Lucas to thank for being able to do the movies in the first place.
I would cut Lucas some slack, he is leading the development and introduction of new movie-making technology.
If there weren't a consumer demand for the products he puts out, then nobody would be buying them right? So if people are buying the stuff he produces, then there is a demand and he is doing the right thing in producing them?
We all knew there would be a special edition of Star Wars long before 1997. And we knew there would be a DVD re-release as well, long before it was officially announced. And there will be a Blu-Ray HD release as well in a few years.
So cut Lucas some slack, he is acutally investing the money I (and maybe you) put in his pocket to a great extend in pushing movie-making technology forward. Last I heard, it is not like he is sitting in a palace bathing in his dollar bills and going to fancy-smancy rich people parties, right?
http://www.pvponline.com/archive.php3?archive=2002 1112
Go Super Tiger Dragon Edition!!!!
"The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."
I'm not so sure about racist bit but I think he's defendable on the sexist charge. His female characters, while few, are strong. Who kills the witch king, after all?
I personally believe that had Tolkien lived and changed with the times he would have loved the movies
It's not like Tolkien was in sync with popular culture and entertainment forms in his own time. Why should he be enamoured of ours?
http://www.switch2firefox.com/
"If any of the stuff they cut actually made the movie better they would have left it in the theatrical edition."
Mmm, no the theatrical version was cut for time because you can't show a 4+ hour movie in a cinema today. Had there been no time limit, this probably would have been the version in the cinema.
"Remember these are not director's cuts where the director is given the freedom to include (or leave out, think Blade Runner) whatever he wants in the film"
Um, yes, it is.
So that post is 'insightful'? Should be moderated '-5, Talking Out Of Backside', IMHO.
Because Tom Bombadil is, by far, the most interesting character in all of Middle-Earth.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
http://homepages.nyu.edu/~amw243/diaries/
When credits roll, you have time to digest and go through the movie experience, relax, and reflect, while still maintaining the 'mood' that the movie has created.
And what is preventing you from doing this on your way out to the car along with the rest of the non-anal-retentive audience?
You could at least wait through the initial credits sequence
Why? Should we take notes on who the 10 co-executive producers are?
Look, if you want to hang around to the end of the credits, that's your business. But don't put on airs of superiority just because your time is so worthless that you have to sit around through a list of a thousand names of people that are completely irrelevant to your existence.
I read elsewhere that there is a commentary with gollum and smeagol. You know, andy serkis doing the whole bit.... Honestly.. I really hope not. It would be too much like bubba-ho-tep's "The King COmmentary"..and that just wasnt funny,.
Now if only they would move that last weird sequence of scenes -- everything after Frodo and Sam are saved from Mount Doom -- to the end of the credits, then I would feel like I have watched a single, massive, coherent movie.
As it stands, the last 20 minutes really irk me. The silly laughing and and slow motion and curtain-call-like greetings are way overdone, such that they do not belong within the context of the actual movie... in my opinion.
I personally believe that had Tolkien lived and changed with the times he would have loved the movies that have been made so far. I'm looking forward to the Hobbit eventually.
I'm just worried that I'll be disappointed when Jackson edits it so that Bard shoots first.
I know tons of LOTR fans already know the release date, but I hadn't bothered to look yet since I was waiting on announcements about this specific edition. So for those not in the know, the Extended Edition of Return of the King will be available December 14.
Even on a DVD, these are still movies. And thus they need to take in account needs that the medium require. If you want the full story, turn off the TV, go to your local library, and read the damn books.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Hasn't anyone else noticed that the pre-order link brings up the widescreen theatrical release, and NOT the extended edition?
WTF?
And I tried looking on Newline's site but can't find it there either.
WTF?
Preciousssss I's needs the PRECIOUSSSSS WHAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
You're right. I hope that was a typo.
Regarding Tom Bombadil, one of the things the screenwriters mention in TTT commentary is that they switched a lot of the expository dialogue between characters if the tone remained the same. So, in TTT extended, Treebeard actually has some of Tom Bombadil's speeches (for example, it's Tom Bombadil's poem he recites to calm the tree that entangles Merry and Pippin). John Rhys-Davies (voice of Treebeard) also has some improvised lines in the movie, like about enjoying going South (it feels like walking downhill).
It's a testament to PJ's love and understanding of the original text that allows him to incorporate these rearrangements into his story without ruining the tone of the movies.
- Bachelorhood is the father of necessity.
I don't think he would be in love with the popular culture of our time (I mostly hate it myself), but I think the movies would impressed him (except that stupid snowboarding shield scene and maybe PJs take on Faramir). Jackson manages to be tell a somewhat sophisticated story about good and evil without political preaching, allegory, or telling it in such a way that depended on the audience having read the books.
[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
Oh, give it a fucking rest. Jackson is done with the project. Unlike Lucas, he knows how to move on with his professional life. Besides, the scenes on the on the extended editions involve a fair amount more work than just dropping in some digital footage a la Lucas. That limits the number of times it can be done to "once".
Of course they're going to release a complete boxed set. The DVD content will be what you can get now. I imagine they'll throw in some extras in the packaging (posters or whatnot), but they're hardly going to be able to slip in extra dialogue or scenes.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Important is a relative term. It's an opinion. Tom Bombadil, for many people, is one of the most memorable and entertaining characters in Lord of the Rings. I believe sacrifices must be made in movies.
To me, the loss of Tom Bombadil doesn't make the movies suffer so much for missing Tom Bombadil himself, but more the fact that they're never in the Barrow-Downs, Merry never recieves his Westernesse-enchanted blade, and the ability of him and Eowyn to kill the Witch King of Angmar makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. But maybe only a Tolkien nerd would care about that.
The only downside to making movies of these wonderful books is that so much of the essence of the story in Lord of the Rings isn't about the destination, but the journey. In a movie, the journey is the first thing on the cutting room floor.
Someone throw this guy into Mount Doom for me.
When I first heard it on the trailer for the two towers I almost wet myself, thats almost, took a while but the full mix is out there. Two Towers - Lux Aeterna Orchesta Remix.mp3
And one thing to keep in mind: if George Lucas hadn't pioneered the path first, filmmakers like Jackson would have a much more difficult time getting studios to go along with such massive projects and additional, extended DVD releases. Praise Jackson all you want, but maybe next time, tone down the screams of anguish and accusations of hypocrisy directed at George Lucas. His trilogy was made in much more difficult circumstances, using a great deal of his own money, while trying to change the playing field with the corporate studios. He never had the kind of opportunities to release extended versions shortly after the theatrical releases came to video, and the only reason directors like Jackson even stand a chance is because guys like Lucas showed that those kinds of films can be wildly profitable.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
One of the teaser-trailer-for-TV clips, I think, showed Aragorn holding a palantir wrapped in a towel and saying something sound-bite-ish. Since all of that segment of story was moved from TTT to ROTK, it would make sense for this scene to be in their third film as well.
Counter-argument: in the movie, Aragorn and Co are surprised by Sauron's attack on Minas Tirith. In the book, Aragorn uses the palantir to let Sauron know that he is alive and kicking, in order to jolt Sauron into attacking before his armies are fully prepared. So if the movie shows Aragorn flipping Sauron the bird via one of the Stones, then Aragorn shouldn't be so surprised later on.
(Related to the "Aragorn Battles Sauron" concept: did you notice than just before Aragorn leads the final charge, Sauron speaks to him? Calls him once by his name, and then a second time by his title. That was a nice nod.)
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's called catering to different markets. Nobody's forcing you to buy the extended editing. And I highly doubt they're throwing in *every* cut scene. Each movie would probably be 4 hours long if that were the case.
I have intentionally not bought any of the extended editions until all three of them are out. Now, for those of you in the know, are there plans to bundle all three extended editions into one boxed set to have some sort of definitive edition, or will owning the three extended editions individually give me the same content? I can't imagine that there is possibly anything more that can be put into the DVD's, but I want to know what Jackson's plans are. I can't wait to own all three standard editions, but I just want to make sure that I don't buy the three individually only to learn that a super-duper boxed set is around the corner. I know we can't fortell the future, but has anyone read or heard what the plans are?
"Oh dear, she's stuck in an infinite loop and he's an idiot" -Prof. Farnsworth (Futurama)
A truly hopelessly geeky Tolkien nerd would point out that the Shire calendar was offset from the British calendar by several days. Tolkien described it all in the Appendices.
Damn, now I've outed myself.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Obviously, huh? I've been watching the SW DVDs for the last week and, while some of the changes come as a bit of a shock for a long-time SW fanatic like me, I'm having a hard time arguing that the changes should not have been made. Most of them improve the films whether those of us overprotective of our childhood memories like it or not. Why are you so confident that Lucas is simply milking the movies? Try to consider the circumstances surrounding Lucas's movies versus those surrounds the LOTR movies. It's easy to see why Lucas has dared to alter the most holy of trilogies now. He didn't have a chance to do it back then the way Jackson gets to now.
No real difference.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
What exactly did they add in the extended editions? The first had an extra beginning (with Bilbo reading his book). Did that add anything to the story? No. Did it hurt the story? In my opinion, yes.
Well, I thought that the pacing of the DVD versions of FotR and T2T was better, less rushed and choppy. Your milage may vary.
If you want the full story, turn off the TV, go to your local library, and read the damn books.
Been there, done that several times. That's part of why I like the longer films.
My Karma: ran over your Dogma
StrawberryFrog
Extended edition running times of FotR: 208, tTT: 208, LotR: 250. Combined: 666.
I'd be really dissappointed if they added the 50 min. and left no room on the DVD for easter eggs. Or will that come on a separate DVD?
Don't laugh until you hear the laugh track.
http://tinyurl.com/3t236
PJ said that he wanted Frodo to be the focus of the theatrical editions, the character and the changes he goes through.
The EE is more all-encompassing, giving more importance to the various places, people, and things to help flesh out the world.
The irony here is that the pacing of the theatrical editions also wound up removing some of the slower, more character-driven scenes that would have benefitted a more character-centric edit.
So in addition to these expository "diversions" like the Bilbo scene you have many other details like the extended fencing thing with Boromir that really help make the characters more three-dimensional rather than just running from one chase to another.
I have to disagree with you. The average running time of movies is going up, driven largely by Titanic and other movies that claim to be epics.
It's just that once you pass the 3 hour mark you really limit how many times you can show a movie. However, up to that point you can compensate pretty easily by dedicating multiple screens to the same movie.
Kill Bill was never epic enough to justify Tarantino's requested running time, which is why it was split into two.
I also think the two Civil War movies that Ted Turner did went over the line on running time.
But in general I think the studios are okay with releasing movies up to 3 hours long if they are genuine spectacles.
Just kidding :)
Go out and buy it you sneaky bastards!
okay having just turned in my LOTR cred... Who is this Tom Bombadil? but you LOTR geeks and Tolken's dense writing are a bit too much for me could you dumb it down a bit for me and explain why he is important.... I got that he may be an immortal or something.... help?
That's not true. Scriptwriters generally know how long a movie is going to be when they are writing it. It's roughly 1 minute per page average.
While most movies have at least one or two cut scenes, they are usually only a few minutes long total.
This extended edition stuff is probably only going to be the domain of adaptations that require a lot of cutting down for screentime, and only in the case of productions which intentionally shoot large chunks of story they know they can't get into the theatrical edition.
Perhaps PJ will influence this kind of moviemaking, but not everyone follows that path.
Compare the cut scene percentage of LOTR vs. the Harry Potter DVDs for instance.
Most filmmakers are too disciplined to shoot so much footage they know can only potentially be shown on DVD. It won't happen unless there is a mandate from the studios to spend the time and effort on it.
Lensing the pages of LOTR was seen as a civic duty by PJ which is why he pushed to do it that way. Most other literature adapted to screen is seen more as a product and not so much a sacred cultural artifact.
I personally believe that had Tolkien lived and changed with the times he would have loved the movies that have been made so far. I'm looking forward to the Hobbit eventually.
I believe you are absolutely correct in this regard. Tolkien has an excellent preface to the version of LOTR that I have, and in it he discusses how LOTR is not a parralell of World War II. He also discusses how he hates allagory it all its forms. He also then makes brief mention (and perhaps it is also in the Tolkien letters, but I cannot remember) that he has no problem with changing a story to fit a format. There is much in that preface that suggests that he would have made similar changes to what Jackson has done.
One can argue that the LOTR books are "pure" and should be left unchanged in a movie format. However, for those of you who are hung up on this, I suggest you read the rough drafts published by Christopher Tolkien for LOTR. Here is a pre-warning though - you will seriously spoil the magic of the story. Here is a minor spoiler:
Aragorn was originally a hobbit, and his name was "Trotter" not Strider. Tolkien also had no idea what the characters would do after they reached bree, but he knew that they should head on to bree. After that, there was no story at all.
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
Maybe they'll extend that cheesy love scene between Sam and Frodo at the end, we all know where it was going. "Oh Sam" C'mon.
Merry never recieves his Westernesse-enchanted blade, and the ability of him and Eowyn to kill the Witch King of Angmar makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
In the movie, the hobbits get their blades from Aragorn. As a Dunedain, he could have some Westernesse-enchanted blades. Makes sense to me.
"Long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead." (John Maynard Keynes)
TheOneRing.net reports on confirmed and presumed new scenes in the extended edition.
"I just want to watch all 3 back to back like they appeared in the goddamned theatre" edition come out?
That's the one I want. So it doesn't feel like work.
cyn, free software and *nix operating systems enthusiast.
> Seriously though, if you don't see the
> movies because of the lack of a
> specific scene then you're just stupid
This is you being serious? Okay you could be right. But personally that was the only scene I wanted to see, I am not a big LoTR fanatic but I know what I like, and I fell in love with this scene and read it over and over in the book. I don't remember it to be full of windy speeches, what I remember is a truly magical, wonderful place that had more care and majesty built into it than most any other work I can remember. (Perhaps there are other good parts of Tolkien's books, if so please let me know). Perhaps there was some sexism in there, I don't remember from the years ago when I read it, but I do remember quite well the woman in the valley, and his love and longing for her. Perhaps I misinterpreted it at the time?
I'm the kind of guy who likes the first 5 or 10 minutes of movies the best, when things are quiet and the director takes the time to build his world up for you. If I see enchanting environments - there were some in the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen too - I would like to see more of them and just enjoy being shown around them. Maybe I'm part of a demographic of future full-immersive media one day.
I didn't stop seeing LoTR because it was just "missing one scene". It struck me while watching the movie that it was filmed in a relatively crass way to me, in particular I felt that the parts that would have required the most imagination and probably the most financial investment in computer graphics, were simply dropped. To me (wrong or not) Tom Bombadil's valley would have been a masterpiece if done by a true artist with an unlimited budget (or maybe just a true artist with just an ordinary budget, you know?), and it felt like a total cop-out. Other parts of the film caused this realization to resonate in me and I was not looking forward to seeing more of what just seemed like characters being forced to slog from one scene to another in relatively uninspired fashion.
So I realize this is coming from someone who is not perhaps a major LoTR fan, nor even knowledgeable enough about the trilogy to argue intelligently about it or its directors, and I probably will buy the extended set one day. But personally - and there just might be more like me out there - I would pay 5 times the normal entrance fee for the film if I could just see the quiet, beautiful parts of the film, and if Tom Bombadil was done right.
I always thought the fact that Merry and Eowyn are not Men was the critical factor. Anduril is a much more powerful weapon than Merry's, but I doubt Aragorn could have used it to kill the Witch King.
cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
My wife and I did and we loved it. Trilogy Tuesday, we were able to see the extended versions of The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers before the premiere of The Return of the King. Most people would think you'd have to be insane to want to spend 12 hours in a theater. Luckliy, none of those people were there in the theater with us. It was our 21st anniversary, and we spent it in the company of 400 other people who loved the same thing we did. Best audience I've ever seen a movie with.
I wish they'd promote the DVD release by doing it again this year and show all three extended films in a row. I'd happily pay $50 a ticket for the privilege.
"How perfectly Goddamn delightful it all is, to be sure" Charles Crumb
Yeah, I know some of the scenes in the extended editions were good, but others just ruined them. I already mentioned the opening scene and the funeral scene, but another that comes to mind is the flashback with Faramir and Boromir before Boromir leaves. That particular scene was not accurate to what the book said and only served to make Faramir look like a whiny little brat, which is very different than how he is portreyed in the books.
Again, an actual director's cut with only the scenes that bring something positive to the movie (or swapping in cut scenes for redundant existing scenes) would be nice, but don't fool yourself into thinking that is what you are buying when you get the extended edition.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Just one man's opinion, of course, but to me, the significance of Tom Bombadil's cameo appearance in LOTR is the revelation that the Ring of Power does not, in fact, hold sway over all of Middle Earth.
English is easier said than done.
But the point is that they were made in Arnor during the war against the Witch-King, and thus were made specifically to fight him. Of course this is a pretty hair-splitting point if there ever was one. Still, I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought of this :)
English is easier said than done.
The Hobbit is an excellent children's story, but it is a children's story. Compared to LoTR, the characters are thin, the plot episodic, and the background underdeveloped. It doesn't have the wealth of historical detail, the layers of meaning and significance, the depth of character, the grand themes of loss of innocence, betrayal, loyalty, corruption, redemption, evil, fate, epic struggle, and so on.
I don't doubt that they could make a very entertaining film (though I suspect that many of the episodes would need to be shortened or cut, and it would probably need further closure added in the form of foreshadowings and other references). Had LoTR not been filmed, it would probably have been reasonably successful, too. But LoTR is such a grander work that people will inevitably have false expectations of a prequel, and so it'd be bound to disappoint many.
Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.
That's the beauty of opinions. We all have them, and we can back them up with our reasons why. What works for you may not work for me, and there ain't nothing wrong with that. But since you also wait unti the end, and you also like watching credits, I would think you could at least comment on my reasons in support of my opinion, or tell us why you like to wait, rather than call me a name.
I read an interview with the LoTR sound geeks in Audio Technology (Australia) magazine and they said they'd been working on stuff for the extended edition bundle. All the box art, special features etc are apparently already complete. My guess is that it'll be out next xmas, if this season's product is the stand alone RoTK.
Vino, gyno, and techno -Bruce Sterling
The threatre release itself went through 63 different bloody endings before the film actually finished.
I can't believe I'm doing this -- I'm going to look nerdy even for Slashdot.
The reason they say that no man can kill the Witch King is because of Glorfindel (you may have remembered him from the movie, but his part in the book was given to Liv Tyler instead) who prophesized that not by the hand of man would he fall. The reason Eowyn was able to make good the prophecy is because the blade Merry stabbed the witch king with was made long ago by the Numenorians to defeat him specifically when Angmar was at war with them.
Actually, believe it or not, RotK is not "each movie," the term used in my comment. But very funny!
In the LOTR ROTK book, the hobbits return home to Hobbiton only to find it mastered by Saruman, Wormtongue, and their scoundrels. The battle-hardened hobbits set to and clear out the vermin in no time. They've grown in wisdom and experience. In a lot of ways, this helps put a successful close on an important part of their individual life journeys.
Now, some of you might remember that Christopher Lee's Saruman character was completely cut from the ROTK film. Apparently, a surprise to him at the time.
Has anyone else seen whether those deleted scenes made their way into this superfly, extended, crazy, huge DVD box set-a-rama?
--
Break the rules. Keep the faith. Fight for love.
Enjoying the music? Basking in the aftermath? You masturbate in the tub while listening to Kenny G, don't you?
Well, since Merry is not a man either and it was he rather than Eowyn that had the blade in question, then Eowyn was not really needed by your theory. The Witch King himself knew he couldn't be defeated by a man and I doubt he knew anything of the prophecy.
I will be waiting for the "Full Trilogy Extended Ultra Edition" in a big treasure chest, and a Realdoll(TM) version of Galadriel
There will also be versions with Arwen, Eowyn, Legolas, Frodo and Gilmi to meet personal taste...
Crivens! I kicked meself in me own heid!
>Did they remix the center rear channel into the >right and left rear speaker or what??? Er, yes. DD EX's 6th channel is matrixed into the SR and SL channels, so, strictly speaking, there are only 6 (5.1) discreet channels. If you have a 6th speaker and compatible reciever, the matrixed channel is extracted, as a Dolby Surround/Pro Logic track is.
I'm planning to have a marathon 12 hour party with all three extended DVDs when this comes out. Gotta get surround before then...
Well if you did feel that the first time you read the book then I believe you are in a small minority. I don't think I've ever met anyone before that actually enjoyed the parts with Tom Bombadil in the beginning. Same really goes for the parts at the Shire in the beginning. Most people I've talked to feel it's just 200 pages of nothing before things happen. (I disagree with them, but it's been so long since the first time I read it I really can't recall what I though then. Since I as pretty young I imagine I just wanted them to get on with it, I stuck to it though.)
In order to see what is special about Bombadil you first have to understand the power of the one ring. At your first read through this it quite impossible since it's powers have barely been shown at that time. Furthermore you need to understand that even all the other powerful and old creatures are influenced by it. It wasn't until I re-read the books after watching the first movie that I noticed that Tom Bombadil is completely uninfluenced by it. You probably should read some of the additional material too in order to see what a peculiar thing that Tom Bombadil is.
Personally I much prefered the parts in the Shire (particularly on subsequent reads), Rivendell, Lothlorien and even Mordor (it wasn't nice, but that's interesting too) to Tom Bombadil on my first times through.
The biggest problem is naturally time and money. If they could add another 30 minutes or an hour to the movie I'm sure they could add Tom Bombadil. OTOH I'm still not sure that is the best place to put those resources.
The fact remains that a movie and a book are two different things. You can't make them identical and expect both results to be good. Personally I'm content with reading the books and having that a slightly different experience from the movies.
In many ways that makes them both more precious.
Actually, according to the Book of Lost Tales, Saruman did secretly wander around the Shire for a time. He was marking out routes for his operatives later, and gathering up sources of leaf. He had to hide his interest in that area to avoid being embarassed by Gandalf.
All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
It's niggling, and they both "aren't men" and they both killed him together. My understanding of the text is that Merry's blow sundered his protective sorceries and Eowyn finished him off.
Dear Hast,
Thank you very, very much for your considerate, detailed reply. I think your comment is great!
I'll take your advice. I do remember the first time I touched Tolkien I was probably way too young, and had the same experience as with Marion Zimmerman Bradley (Halcion, I think?) - that it was way too boring. I'll put all the Tolkien books back on my reading list for one day and look forward to seeing all the movies on the extended set on a vacation some time.
Thanks!
Matt