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

[Avond]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

No, he is a member of what I call the "general public", but our family loves him anyway.

LMAO

I would be interested in joining if you all did something like a book club. I would at least try to keep up!!!

[Goldengirl]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

That got me thinking, especially with Goldengirl's post about the son of Aragorn and whether he would be considered a Numenorean. The first offspring of a human and elf was Dior, son of Beren and Luthien, who had even more grandiose adventures than Aragorn and Arwen. He was 50 percent human and 50 percent elf, but was considered an elf (therefore immortal, was known as Aranel, "The Noble Elf") and was the heir of Elu Thingol, but died at the untimely age of 35 at the hands of other elves (long story...). Anyway, Eldarion, the son of Aragorn and Arwen, was slightly less percentage elf, since Arwen's mother Celebrian (daughter of Galadriel and Celeborn) was an elf, but Elrond was a Peredhel, or half-elf. Therefore, I was wondering if Eldarion would also be immortal, like Dior. I don't have the book in front of me, but I don't recall Tolkien stating his death as a Fourth Age entry in the Tale of Years.

...like so many of the "half-elven" were (Elrond's brother, Elros, for example). Still, by the time he was born, Arwen had already chosen a mortal life, so she really wasn't elven anymore.

[Batman1980]

I would buy the EEs if they had the cleansing of the Shire but they don't so no double dip for me. Anyone else think Jackson should've shot the cleansing of the shire?

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

I'd be up for that. Of course, I would see the irony of reading the Kindle edition of Tolkein on my iPhone. Sounds like something Saruman would do.

You know what Tolkien thought of technology; he's probably rolling over in his grave saying "AintNoSin, you've got a mind of metal and wheels."

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

I would buy the EEs if they had the cleansing of the Shire but they don't so no double dip for me. Anyone else think Jackson should've shot the cleansing of the shire?

If he did, that would have made them even longer. Been awhile since I've read them, I might need a little refresher. Are you talking about when they return to the Shire after the destruction of the ring to rebuild? If that's what you are speaking of, it would have pushed the ending out sooooo far from the climax of the story, could have actually been a deterrant to watch. If that's what you're talkin bout n e way.

[Grand Bob]

[QUOTE=Goldengirl;2989230 by the time he was born, Arwen had already chosen a mortal life, so she really wasn't elven anymore.[/QUOTE]

Good point - Eldarion was probably doomed!

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

Anyone else think Jackson should've shot the cleansing of the shire?

I'd be all for it, but it would need some heavy revision of Saruman and Wormtongue's deaths!

[woodley56]

Hey guys. I don't really post much, but I just wanted to say thanks for taking this topic in a new directions. I'd much rather read this type of discussion than the really old "TE vs. EE" debate.

[kpkelley]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

I'd be all for it, but it would need some heavy revision of Saruman and Wormtongue's deaths!

They may have been able to play it off as some sort of ancillary invasion or another group of opportunistic scavengers.

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

It would have pushed the ending out sooooo far from the climax of the story, could have actually been a deterrant to watch.

Agreed, we had enough endings as it was.

[Fors*]

Originally Posted by woodley56

Hey guys. I don't really post much, but I just wanted to say thanks for taking this topic in a new directions. I'd much rather read this type of discussion than the really old "TE vs. EE" debate.

Here, here...I couldn't agree more!

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by woodley56

Hey guys. I don't really post much, but I just wanted to say thanks for taking this topic in a new directions. I'd much rather read this type of discussion than the really old "TE vs. EE" debate.

ITS GRAND BOBS FAULT!!! OH WAIT, YOU SAID THANKS

I agree, After reading 10 million comments that say "NO EE, NO SALE! What a ripoff!!!" It gets old...

But, our discussion really isn't about LotR Blu ray on 4/6 either, MODS might strike down the thunder and make us move the discussion

[Ray_Rogers]

Well I'm glad DTS-HD MA 6.1 has been announced. Here's hoping the same thing is true for the eventual Extended Edition Blu-ray Trilogy release.
I'll be buying this release AND the EE's.

[nikolaipromises]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

I would buy the EEs if they had the cleansing of the Shire but they don't so no double dip for me. Anyone else think Jackson should've shot the cleansing of the shire?

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

If he did, that would have made them even longer. Been awhile since I've read them, I might need a little refresher. Are you talking about when they return to the Shire after the destruction of the ring to rebuild? If that's what you are speaking of, it would have pushed the ending out sooooo far from the climax of the story, could have actually been a deterrant to watch. If that's what you're talkin bout n e way.

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

I'd be all for it, but it would need some heavy revision of Saruman and Wormtongue's deaths!

As people have said, it would have meant a completely different take on Saruman's and Wormtongue's demises. Plus, taking into account that it would've added at least 30 minutes to an already long movie, it never would've worked. Peter Jackson didn't release the extended edition into theaters for such a reason.

It could be said that these events aren't absolutely essential to the plot. If you've read reviews of the movie, though, you'll have noticed that perhaps the only common criticism is the way it seems to have several endings closely following each other. This is partly due to the loss of the story of the Scouring, which stands between these various endings in the book.

The Scouring of the Shire is arguably one of the book's most important serious statements, though admittedly it's hard to see how the film-makers could have hoped to communicate all this in the closing scenes of the movie.

And, Jackson gave a glimpse of the scouring in "Fellowship" anyway.

The writers went into it pretty well as to why they didn't do the scouring. Watch the special features on the Extended Editions to hear their take.

[My_Two_Cents]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

I would buy the EEs if they had the scouring of the Shire but they don't so no double dip for me. Anyone else think Jackson should've shot the scouring of the shire?

Sorry, that bugged me.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by kpkelley

They may have been able to play it off as some sort of ancillary invasion or another group of opportunistic scavengers.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by nikolaipromises

The Scouring of the Shire is arguably one of the book's most important serious statements, though admittedly it's hard to see how the film-makers could have hoped to communicate all this in the closing scenes of the movie.

Yes, I think Jackson was in the same dilemma with "Scouring" as he was with Bombadil, too much subject matter and difficult to portray, and once the demise of Saruman at Isengard was inserted into the EE, it became a moot point. Tolkien endured criticism for including Scouring in the book, but in his letters he said it was necessary to complete the story, to show that "happy endings" are not without consequence; in this case, the Shire was not untouched by the seemingly foreign conflict, and the Hobbits that returned were not the same.

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by nikolaipromises

And, Jackson gave a glimpse of the scouring in "Fellowship" anyway.

Thank you, NOW I know what part of the book Wolverine was referring to now. Yes, I agree, ESSENTIAL to the story and the book, but in the movie... I dunno. I agree I would have enjoyed it, along with Tom Bombadil and the addition of some lesser characters as well. This because I have read the book tho. I understand that these movies were made to make money, not to cater to those who are fans of the books. If Jackson/New Line/Warner tried to please the fans, LotR would be 6 movies long and a total of 20 hours. General public wouldn't watch a movie that long, it would be too boring for them.

[davidlg1971]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

Tolkien endured criticism for including Scouring in the book, but in his letters he said it was necessary to complete the story, to show that "happy endings" are not without consequence; in this case, the Shire was not untouched by the seemingly foreign conflict, and the Hobbits that returned were not the same.

True. The Scouring is one of the most important chapters in a book filled with important chapters.

I completely understand Jackson's reason for omitting it at the script level. There are sooo many endings already. Still, while I love the films, its omission is the one significant mistake they made. (Sorry old Tom B.)

Everything is in those books for a reason. And The Scouring makes one of the most important points in the book. For those that do not know, Tolkein utilized his own experiences in war, specifically WWI, to create this story. He came home to see his beloved English countrside overrun by factories, pollution and all the effects of industrialization. It was a bittersweet homecoming, to see the home he fought for was forever gone, along with most of his friends that had died.

As you point out, that is the purpose of the Scouring - to demonstrate what gets lost in war. More than being an additional ending, it's one of the primary messages of the novel. It's much more important than any of the several 20-minute battle scenes, or ancillary storylines derived from the appendicies. (Most of which are given very little page time in the book.)

And by removing the Scouring from the ending, and moving Saruman's death scene to the beginning of act 3, the resolution of his arc also loses its impact. So much so Jackson had to later remove the scene entirely from the primary cut of the film. Ouch!

Which goes to show: Moving away from Tolkein's intricate and unusual plot structure is generally a bad idea. In fact, god love Jackson because he has himself said just that: As they continued to work on the films they realized whenever they had strayed from Tolkein's story, they found themselves stuck and needing to get back to the path of the books. His humility in seeing that, in admitting that, is admirable.

Don't get me wrong; these are magnificent films, and some of the characters are actually improved from the novel - Boromir, Theoden, Gimli and so on. I doubt anyone could have done this better. This book was called unfilmable for good reason.

[saprano]

Since when did warner change the codec to 6.1 DTS?

[aherron]

This is a nice review from someone on AMAZON. Thought I'd copy and paste it on here.

As much pain as it will cause me to wait another year to see my favorite movies (extended) in blue-ray glory, none of us should give in to this cynical and downright nasty marketing ploy. Who hasn't already bought these movies at least once ? We should be sending our views on this debacle directly to the studio too. A hundred stars for the movies, zero for greed.


As I scroll down and read other reviews on this on Amazon, a lot of people actually prefer the EE editions and get their money's worth. They want a movie that's complete, not some missing parts (scenes). Thank you.