Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Theatrical Versions) - April 6, 2010

[ajmrowland]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I don't have a problem with the exclusion of the Scouring of the Shire -- I have a big problem with the exclusion of some of the most powerful moments of Tolkien's Return of the King, namely damn near everything that happens to Sam once he discovers Frodo wasn't killed by Shelob up until he rescues Frodo at the top of the tower of Cirith Ungol -- hell, even the lame Rankin/Bass adaptation got those scenes right. All of them cut by Boyens and Walsh, but they gave screen time to Legolas surfing a giant elephant.

I think they actually filmed that.

They wanted Orlando to have another stunt for the girls to go gaga over.

[ajmrowland]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I would say that ratio is correct...maybe 25 to 1, but in general, I agree. When everything else is so perfect, it makes the lapses in Boyens' and Walsh's screenplays that much more noticeable.

Jackson did a bit of writing, too.

[ajmrowland]

I'm done for 2day. Just one more thing to say: Today: Blu-ray; Tomorrow: IMAX

[Bilbo21958]

I am glad to see that the Lord of the Rings may be released within the next 24 months (hopefully sooner). Does anyone know if there has been any advance whether the release will include both the Theatical and Special Edition versions. Personally I would only consider upscaling my DVD to Blu-ray editions, only if both versions were included, and all the extras features from both DVD releases.

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by Bilbo21958

Does anyone know if there has been any advance whether the release will include both the Theatical and Special Edition versions.

Nothing has been announced yet.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by ajmrowland

According to Jackson. Not having that moment would make the two hobbits nothing more than "Extra Baggage" plus, obviously, they thought Aragorn needed a little struggle. And the Scouring of the Shire would be anticlimactic. People r waaaayyyyy too critical.

Not having that moment would make the two hobbits nothing more than "Extra Baggage" -- they aren't baggage, they are the audience's eyes, our window into what is happening at Isengard. What's worse? Merry and Pippin witnessing the Entmoot and the war on Isengard, or the solution seen in the movie which creates a gaping plot hole rendering just about all of the previous Entmoot scenes utterly irrelevant?

[ajmrowland]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Not having that moment would make the two hobbits nothing more than "Extra Baggage" -- they aren't baggage, they are the audience's eyes, our window into what is happening at Isengard. What's worse? Merry and Pippin witnessing the Entmoot and the war on Isengard, or the solution seen in the movie which creates a gaping plot hole rendering just about all of the previous Entmoot scenes utterly irrelevant?

If the hole's that big, I'll have to check my copy of the book. Bu think about it, TT is only the second act of a three-act play.

[ajmrowland]

For the record, which plot hole did it leave, anyway? Saruman is killed in the beginning of RotK EE. But that was later.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by ajmrowland

For the record, which plot hole did it leave, anyway? Saruman is killed in the beginning of RotK EE. But that was later.

It takes the Ents hours to say good morning, it takes Treebeard about 5 seconds to roar, causing a mass army of Ents to suddenly appear and march on Isengard. It doesn't make sense. That's because the Ents agreed at the Entmoot to march on Isengard in the book, Pippin didn't have to trick Treebeard into going to see what Saruman was up to.

So in the movie, because of the changes, it makes it appear that it takes no time for the Ents to shout "Go to war on Isengard", and it shows legions of Ents pouring out of the forest in no time flat...if they were that close, they would have surely seen the Orcs chopping down the forest to begin with.

Anyway, best not to think about it. The more you analyze it, the more wrong it is. Boyens and Walsh said the further they got away from Tolkien, the more trouble they got themselves into, and they were right. Denethor's flaming mile is another boo-boo.

[the Bass Mechanic]

Originally Posted by kjacobs03

I have seen all of the LotR movies numerous times. The EE much more than the TC, but what scenes were in the TC but not in the EE?

I'm sorry if it seems that I am implying (implicitly, not explicitly I assure you) that some scenes from the "TC" of LOTR were not in the "EE" version in any form. What I meant by what I wrote was that some scenes from the "TC" version were completely replaced by a different (and longer) version of the same scene, but with all new footage (to us; some of it was dropped from the "TC" due to time constraints, some was from new "pick up" shots done expressly for the "EE" version) replacing ALL of the footage in the "TC" version of a scene. Of course, some of the "EE" scenes were merely 'appended' or 'extended' versions of the "TC" scene (like is done in most "Director's Cut" versions of films; where footage the studio had removed for: time, rating considerations, or just to P.O. and/or exert power over the director, editor, or cinematographer,... is restored) with most or all of the "TC" footage intact.

I have seen this with many other films; that creating a "Director's Cut" (or any other kind of 'alternate version', regardless of what they call it) often involves not just restoring cut footage (or adding new 'pick up' footage), but sometimes replacing/removing some footage that worked with the shorter "TC", is needed to make a different/longer version of a scene work right. Scenes that worked fine with the "TC" may also become redundant when another scene is added (often in a different part of the story/timeline) and can wind up being dropped entirely, rather than trying to edit it into the new scene.

One movie that actually has scenes that were in the original "TC", but not in the later "Special Edition" or "Director's Cut" versions is "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". The "SE" version is actually 3 minutes shorter than the "TC", and some scenes are not cut, but shorter in the "SE" and "DC" versions. And all 3 versions are on the same disc (via seamless branching, so they should be able to do it with LOTR too, maybe) and they give you the nice option of having an indicator on screen that let's you know if a scene is longer, shorter, new, or removed (relative to the "TC"). Let's hope they can do something similar with the LOTR discs (and maybe even have 3rd "Super Extended Edition" that includes the "Tom Bombadil" sub-plot, and some of the other parts of the books other posters have mentioned!).

[ajmrowland]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

It takes the Ents hours to say good morning, it takes Treebeard about 5 seconds to roar, causing a mass army of Ents to suddenly appear and march on Isengard. It doesn't make sense. That's because the Ents agreed at the Entmoot to march on Isengard in the book, Pippin didn't have to trick Treebeard into going to see what Saruman was up to.

So in the movie, because of the changes, it makes it appear that it takes no time for the Ents to shout "Go to war on Isengard", and it shows legions of Ents pouring out of the forest in no time flat...if they were that close, they would have surely seen the Orcs chopping down the forest to begin with.

Anyway, best not to think about it. The more you analyze it, the more wrong it is. Boyens and Walsh said the further they got away from Tolkien, the more trouble they got themselves into, and they were right. Denethor's flaming mile is another boo-boo.

I don't care about how much sense treebeards roar makes. Just say that it happened to be a war call for all the ents who were closest to where he was at the time. I don't care! Use your imagination! U no, that little thing that nobody has anymore!? typical.

Now that's said, you are right about what Boyens and Walsh said. Remember the would be fight between aragorn and Sauron that never made it? And the director's commentary already pointed out the boo-boo with the Flaming mile.

[R3P0]

Originally Posted by the Bass Mechanic

Let's hope they can do something similar with the LOTR discs (and maybe even have 3rd "Super Extended Edition" that includes the "Tom Bombadil" sub-plot, and some of the other parts of the books other posters have mentioned!).

Tom was never filmed; neither was the return to the shire there are other cuts out there still locked away but I know for a fact those 2 things were never filmed in fact some of Toms Lines were given away to Treebeard. I doubt we will ever see a true representation of the books but let us be honest i am completely happy with the EE. They were fantastic movies

[ajmrowland]

Originally Posted by the Bass Mechanic

I'm sorry if it seems that I am implying (implicitly, not explicitly I assure you) that some scenes from the "TC" of LOTR were not in the "EE" version in any form. What I meant by what I wrote was that some scenes from the "TC" version were completely replaced by a different (and longer) version of the same scene, but with all new footage (to us; some of it was dropped from the "TC" due to time constraints, some was from new "pick up" shots done expressly for the "EE" version) replacing ALL of the footage in the "TC" version of a scene. Of course, some of the "EE" scenes were merely 'appended' or 'extended' versions of the "TC" scene (like is done in most "Director's Cut" versions of films; where footage the studio had removed for: time, rating considerations, or just to P.O. and/or exert power over the director, editor, or cinematographer,... is restored) with most or all of the "TC" footage intact.

I have seen this with many other films; that creating a "Director's Cut" (or any other kind of 'alternate version', regardless of what they call it) often involves not just restoring cut footage (or adding new 'pick up' footage), but sometimes replacing/removing some footage that worked with the shorter "TC", is needed to make a different/longer version of a scene work right. Scenes that worked fine with the "TC" may also become redundant when another scene is added (often in a different part of the story/timeline) and can wind up being dropped entirely, rather than trying to edit it into the new scene.

One movie that actually has scenes that were in the original "TC", but not in the later "Special Edition" or "Director's Cut" versions is "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". The "SE" version is actually 3 minutes shorter than the "TC", and some scenes are not cut, but shorter in the "SE" and "DC" versions. And all 3 versions are on the same disc (via seamless branching, so they should be able to do it with LOTR too, maybe) and they give you the nice option of having an indicator on screen that let's you know if a scene is longer, shorter, new, or removed (relative to the "TC"). Let's hope they can do something similar with the LOTR discs (and maybe even have 3rd "Super Extended Edition" that includes the "Tom Bombadil" sub-plot, and some of the other parts of the books other posters have mentioned!).

Oh, like the original title shot for the Two Towers, where the camera flies over the forest?

They never shot Tom Bombadil. They never even had it in the script, but they have considered other footage to add. Or, at least joked about some of it. Like Aragorn and Arwin's first meeting.

[billypoe]

Originally Posted by R3P0

Tom was never filmed; neither was the return to the shire there are other cuts out there still locked away but I know for a fact those 2 things were never filmed in fact some of Toms Lines were given away to Treebeard. I doubt we will ever see a true representation of the books but let us be honest i am completely happy with the EE. They were fantastic movies

The scouring of the shire was filmed. At least part of it, anyway.

[drichter33]

Sorry, but how can you get upset by a placeholder someone set up on this site for WHEN the movies are officially announced? Do people on these forums really have the inability to discern what is a legitimate announcement and what is speculation?

Oh, I am sorry, didnt mean to use a big word there- how about this:

Cant you tell what is real and not real? Or are you still excited about Santa Claus and cant wait for him to bring you some warm foot-ie jammies so you can bear the cold of your parents basement.

[Barbie-Shrimp]

Originally Posted by drichter33

Cant you tell what is real and not real? Or are you still excited about Santa Claus and cant wait for him to bring you some warm foot-ie jammies so you can bear the cold of your parents basement.

That's cold, d.

[jimmybobo]

Extended cut or I shall wait.

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by billypoe

The scouring of the shire was filmed. At least part of it, anyway.

Only enough for the Galadriel's Mirror scene.

[Brandon]

Originally Posted by ajmrowland

I don't care about how much sense treebeards roar makes. Just say that it happened to be a war call for all the ents who were closest to where he was at the time. I don't care! Use your imagination! U no, that little thing that nobody has anymore!? typical.

No kidding.

[ajmrowland]

Originally Posted by billypoe

The scouring of the shire was filmed. At least part of it, anyway.

Yeah, for Fellowship.