The Lord of the Rings Trilogy 4K UHD Extended & Theatrical (2001-2003)

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by nick4Knight

Thanks to all those for introducing so much hyperbole and dogpiling nonsense that they locked the official thread...

Awesome members of this board.

And yet who got banned earlier? The ringleader of the complainers or the ringleader of the "Leave LOTR ALONE!!" crew? You're more level headed than some and that's cool, but you don't seem to be able to recognise that there are antagonists on both sides here...unless your reference is not just to the dissenters but to all those who've said "there is no additional DNR" and other such fairytales as to what the UHDs look like.

What I'd love to see is some balance from both camps, but when people pretend there's nothing wrong with the LOTRs and reel off that hackneyed old "I just watch the movie!" routine (why the **** are you all even watching a UHD then?) then that makes the complainers and screenshot scientists double down on their "dis is ROO-IND!!" rhetoric, which makes the IJWTM lot even more determined to discredit actual proof, which makes the.....you get the idea.

I'm gonna watch FOTR theatrical later, **** knows where I'm gonna put the review!

[Pi905]

LOTR newbie here. Is that horse ear artifact posted in the other thread a scene from the Extended or Theatrical Cut?

[androcell]

Screencap is from the Extended Cut. But the same thing might be as well in TC, I don't remember if it's an extended scene.

[3eccaTron]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Obvious answer is obvious but I'm guessing they restored one version of every shot that's common to both cuts and just tracked it into the theatrical edit where appropriate.

Same thing with the hobbit movie where the fixed Smaug’s legs in the prologue for the extended blu. Now it’s the updated shot in theatrical also

[Pyoko]

Originally Posted by Pi905

LOTR newbie here. Is that horse ear artifact posted in the other thread a scene from the Extended or Theatrical Cut?

Someone asked about what would cause this artifact in the other thread (was just about to reply when it was locked, personally didn't feel it had derailed, but maybe we have some precog mods ) and while I have no clue as to why they'd do it, my immediate thought was that they freeze-framed the background and didn't clean it up or mask out the foreground properly. It would also explain the missing top part of the staff since it moves over that same area.

[slumcat]

Just a note here. There's something in the air. Even arthouse director taking the opportunity to go back and make changes.



Maybe the reality that we all have to accept is this - in the past, it wasn't nobility or integrity or good sense or lack of inclination or dedication to the original that prevented film-makers from making changes. It was lack of tools.

It would have been difficult in the past to go back and tinker.

Now with a digital pipeline, the possibilities are endless. A film-maker from their coffee table can make changes large and small, in a heartbeat and have near real time feedback from audiences and pass on those changes.

The temptation was always there, only now there is the possibility of indulging it.

We live in a future where no film will ever be final. A film will be a temporal product - only expressing the film-makers intent at a particular point in time. That intent will be fluid and the film will change and evolve and vacillate as the film-maker sees it fit.

Those of us who have a fixed copy will be able to have a preference say. But those streaming or new buyers will be subject to the whims and fancy of the film-maker forever.

[Farerb]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And yet who got banned earlier? The ringleader of the complainers or the ringleader of the "Leave LOTR ALONE!!" crew? You're more level headed than some and that's cool, but you don't seem to be able to recognise that there are antagonists on both sides here...unless your reference is not just to the dissenters but to all those who've said "there is no additional DNR" and other such fairytales as to what the UHDs look like.

What I'd love to see is some balance from both camps, but when people pretend there's nothing wrong with the LOTRs and reel off that hackneyed old "I just watch the movie!" routine (why the **** are you all even watching a UHD then?) then that makes the complainers and screenshot scientists double down on their "dis is ROO-IND!!" rhetoric, which makes the IJWTM lot even more determined to discredit actual proof, which makes the.....you get the idea.

I'm gonna watch FOTR theatrical later, **** knows where I'm gonna put the review!

Do you perhaps have a page with links to all your other reviews?

[nick4Knight]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

What I'd love to see is some balance from both camps, but when people pretend there's nothing wrong with the LOTRs

People who you are criticizing for being in the negative camp of this release are liking your posts as though they agree with you, while they don't even realize you mean them but just aren't calling them out by name. It's pretty funny.

I'm not even in the category of people who say there's nothing wrong with the LOTR discs. I'm objectively not. So I'm not in the group of people you think need to come towards a more balanced position. I'm already there. But in a more positive mindframe based on these were always slated to be 2K upscales we didn't expect the world from.

[BaerGriggs]

Return of the King - the scene in Osgiliath when the rangers are preparing to evacuate, one of them mouths the word, “Nazgul” as they start flying overhead. On the new 4K disc, you can hear him audibly say the word where it was just him mouthing the word before I believe.

I don’t think I’m completely making this change up but feel free to let me know if I am haha.

[Geoff D]

Soderbergh fixed a couple of goofs in the 4K transfer of Sex, Lies..., Mary Lambert added a load of revised effects to Pet Sematary, Michael Mann literally can't stop tinkering (and actually said that whenever he does a new transfer of one of his movies he grades it as if he'd shot it today), James Cameron fixed various goofs in Aliens and T2. The road goes ever on and on...

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by nick4Knight

People who you are criticizing for being in the negative camp of this release are liking your posts as though they agree with you, while they don't even realize you mean them but just aren't calling them out by name. It's pretty funny.

I'm not even in the category of people who say there's nothing wrong with the LOTR discs. I'm objectively not. So I'm not in the group of people you think need to come towards a more balanced position. I'm already there. But in a more positive mindframe based on these were always slated to be 2K upscales we didn't expect the world from.

I know you're not even in that group, did you miss the part where I said you're being more level headed than most? Now that's funny. And I get that you figured these would be more upscale than not, I did too, but other people aren't at that stage, particularly when all the "pro" reviews keep regurgitating that these have been rebuilt from camera negative, so people are fighting back against it which in turn agitates the IJWTM brigade who won't dare admit that these might be less than perfect and are going to ridiculous lengths to justify/discredit what's being shown, it's like the last 10 years didn't happen and we're right back to arguing over some DNR disaster from Universal which is quite plainly ****ed. Though LOTR isn't a disaster, just uneven AF.

But it's you appointing yourself the rolleyes spokesperson and implicitly blaming one side of the argument - judging from your previous posts - for closing the thread that's jarring here, as you want to have your lembas and eat it too. If you want to be a centrist then be a centrist, either throw shade at both sides - like I do - or don't do it at all.

[1924]

Originally Posted by BaerGriggs

Return of the King - the scene in Osgiliath when the rangers are preparing to evacuate, one of them mouths the word, “Nazgul” as they start flying overhead. On the new 4K disc, you can hear him audibly say the word where it was just him mouthing the word before I believe.

I don’t think I’m completely making this change up but feel free to let me know if I am haha.

No. He always said it

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by farerb

Do you perhaps have a page with links to all your other reviews?

Staying Salty keeps a list here, scroll down a bit: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...=293133&page=3

[Farerb]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Staying Salty keeps a list here, scroll down a bit: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...=293133&page=3

Thank you

[nick4Knight]

I am in the pro leaning camp on this like with Forrest Gump. I keep saying this is my position and my read of what kind of release this is. I got critical of the weirdos trying to draw a line between LOTR discs and Patton on BD, that could only lead to decreased sales of this release.

I think my criticism wasn't eye rolly, wasn't antagonistic for no reason, but exactly on point based on the fact its now a locked thread merely posts after that dogpiling series of screengrabs/posts from the (overly) negative camp

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by slumcat

Just a note here. There's something in the air. Even arthouse director taking the opportunity to go back and make changes.



Maybe the reality that we all have to accept is this - in the past, it wasn't nobility or integrity or good sense or lack of inclination or dedication to the original that prevented film-makers from making changes. It was lack of tools.

It would have been difficult in the past to go back and tinker.

Now with a digital pipeline, the possibilities are endless. A film-maker from their coffee table can make changes large and small, in a heartbeat and have near real time feedback from audiences and pass on those changes.

The temptation was always there, only now there is the possibility of indulging it.

We live in a future where no film will ever be final. A film will be a temporal product - only expressing the film-makers intent at a particular point in time. That intent will be fluid and the film will change and evolve and vacillate as the film-maker sees it fit.

Those of us who have a fixed copy will be able to have a preference say. But those streaming or new buyers will be subject to the whims and fancy of the film-maker forever.

I find this interesting, but there is always kind of a line between preservation and revisionism with most releases dancing back and forth with it. Geoff mentioned this before, but home video transfers are always a revision on some level, you cannot avoid it, short of becoming a collector of film prints if you're rich (Hugh Hefner was big on that, for example).

I've never heard of these films, but it's interesting that on the negative you can look at it like "this isn't like what was released" or you can look at it from the director's perspective of "finally, these films are being presented right. "

But yeah, releases being tweaked at the director's discretion can be a double-edged sword, especially if said director is the eccentric type who wants to add cartoon dinosaurs to a film from 1977 or regrade his entire film to a pastel-purple.

[wildphantom]

The main thread got locked did it? I wondered why there’d been no posts for a couple of hours!

[cavedoctor]

The thing I never will get about 4k is this.
The fanboys of that format don’t care about resolution and sharpness, yet they care about the 4k format, of which the sole purpose is resolution and sharpness.
You can get HDR on a 1080p Blu-ray, and even Dolby Atmos.
With the new VVC codec that’s coming, you could get better bit rates at higher compression ratios, while using a good 4k master.
You could get 24p as well with that, instead of 23.976.
So, when I really don’t see what the point of this format is, if the 4k/sharpness aspect doesn’t even matter to begin with, and all that really did matter was the hardware and codecs.

So, most everyone spent money on upscaled 720p, don’t worry though, telling the truth makes one a troll now.
Any amateur could have baked lines into the letter box using edge enhancement.
This product is a ****ing embarrassment.

Don’t worry though, I hear 8k is right around the corner, and 480p upscales look great on it.

[motorheadache95]

LOL I like how they closed the main thread and everything just migrated right over to this one. I sense another closure incoming...

[tama]

Originally Posted by cavedoctor

The thing I never will get about 4k is this.
The fanboys of that format don’t care about resolution and sharpness, yet they care about the 4k format, of which the sole purpose is resolution and sharpness.
You can get HDR on a 1080p Blu-ray, and even Dolby Atmos.
With the new VVC codec that’s coming, you could get better bit rates at higher compression ratios, while using a good 4k master.
You could get 24p as well with that, instead of 23.976.
So, when I really don’t see what the point of this format is, if the 4k/sharpness aspect doesn’t even matter to begin with, and all that really did matter was the hardware and codecs.

So, most everyone spent money on upscaled 720p, don’t worry though, telling the truth makes one a troll now.
Any amateur could have naked lines into the letter box using edge enhancement.
This product is a ****ing embarrassment.

This post is also an embarrassment