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

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

That's a big reason for the heated debate that happened earlier...... "People trying not to believe" It's tough when you realize something you love is flawed.......

And for that screenshot..... I'm still waiting for it to finish loading..... it's all blurry

Maybe you just need thicker glasses.

[Maggot]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Fair enough but why should people buy inferior transfers just to help sales? If somethings not right the only way to let the studios know is by not buying this. This is not a classic title it's a relatively new trilogy and there is simply no reason for a poor transfer.

And we shouldn't base everything on Lucas who has always mllked his franchise for everything it's worth. How long was DVD out before he decided to release them. I say fair play to Cameron.

Who the hell cares about Lucas and his schemes. The guy must be a raving Star Wars fan. Holding ones breath for what one person does.......I'd say someone has too much time on their hands.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Fair enough but why should people buy inferior transfers just to help sales? If somethings not right the only way to let the studios know is by not buying this. This is not a classic title it's a relatively new trilogy and there is simply no reason for a poor transfer.

And we shouldn't base everything on Lucas who has always mllked his franchise for everything it's worth. How long was DVD out before he decided to release them. I say fair play to Cameron.

I'm not suggesting people buy something to help sales..... I'm just saying it doesn't make sense to not buy something to "Stick it to them" if it's something you want to own........ Sure it could be a lot better, but if you're a fan of the films, you'll probably want them..... Not buying them because the improvement isn't worth it to you, and you have the DVDs is completely different.... and that applies for every title..... but if you're a huge fan, wouldn't you buy these based on the AQ alone???? (I'm not a fan at all, so it's not about what I would do...)

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

That's a big reason for the heated debate that happened earlier...... "People trying not to believe" It's tough when you realize something you love is flawed.......

And for that screenshot..... I'm still waiting for it to finish loading..... it's all blurry

That's not why I was posting. This thread was almost dead for a long time. Suddenly there are people I've never seen on this thread talking about sceenshot scientists I've never heard of, telling us that the LOTR BR sucks and we should burn Warner to the ground. I wanted some balance and additional information instead of blindly following some self-appointed experts.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by KubrickFan

For every master that PJ didn't like, Warner made a new one. So I guess he saw most of them, if not everything. Otherwise he wouldn't have told them to re-do it so many times. And Warner wouldn't have obliged if they didn't want the director to be happy.

Where did you get the info that it was PJ that wanted 5 different masters? I never saw anything like that on Penton-man's thread.

[Emotiva]

Originally Posted by radagast

That's not why I was posting. This thread was almost dead for a long time. Suddenly there are people I've never seen on this thread talking about sceenshot scientists I've never heard of, telling us that the LOTR BR sucks and we should burn Warner to the ground. I wanted some balance and additional information instead of blindly following some self-appointed experts.

I agree with you 100%, but buy the the Theatrical Versions because 2012 is the end. We might as well enjoy it now. lol

[owa]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

I'm not suggesting people buy something to help sales..... I'm just saying it doesn't make sense to not buy something to "Stick it to them" if it's something you want to own........ Sure it could be a lot better, but if you're a fan of the films, you'll probably want them..... Not buying them because the improvement isn't worth it to you, and you have the DVDs is completely different.... and that applies for every title..... but if you're a huge fan, wouldn't you buy these based on the AQ alone????

Works for me.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Maggot

Who the hell cares about Lucas and his schemes. The guy must be a raving Star Wars fan. Holding ones breath for what one person does.......I'd say someone has too much time on their hands.

I agree...with Beta Man. I think if Avatar and LoTR do well enough, we'll see SW next year because Lucas is too greedy to not want a piece of the pie.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by Emotiva

I honestly dont believe in reviews anymore, Everyone was against Gladiator on Blu and I didnt mind at all. It was way better then the DVD version, and the same goes for Lord Of The Rings. Is it better then DVD? Yes, is the sound better? Of Course, and thats all that matters. Some people are too picky and nothing is good enough for them. I will buy it for sure, and will enjoy it all the way. I wonder what KEN (Reviewer) watched it on. Maybe a bubble TV lol. Dont listen to them, believe in your own eyes with your own equippment. Take Care

This mentality is the problem with forums like this, with many review sites, and with many mastering engineers.

"Better than DVD" is not the goal for a high-bit-rate format capable of 1080p video without compression artifacting and lossless quality sound that capture astonishing faithfulness to the highest quality source elements even when viewed from 1.5 screen widths in home projection.

"Faithful to the source" should be the goal for blu-ray Disc. Not "better than DVD".

This is home-theater. Not TV. And if you're not watching in full 1080p and with a 30 degree viewing angle to replicate a theatrical-scale viewing experience, you're not experiencing home-theater, you're just watching television, and you won't be able to appreciate the level of detail that other reviewers watching with a cinema-viewing angle are alble to enjoy, and the blu-ray Disc should be faithfully delivering.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by Maggot

Who the hell cares about Lucas and his schemes. The guy must be a raving Star Wars fan. Holding ones breath for what one person does.......I'd say someone has too much time on their hands.

Me? Not a raving Star Wars fan..... although I enjoy the 'originals'

[Brodo Faggins]

Originally Posted by dborgill

I am still trying not to believe how bad FOTR will look.. then I saw this from Ken's screenshots:

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/scree...174&position=6

Wow... looks like an upscaled DVD. BOOOOO!

BUT.. looking at the TTT and ROTK shots, at least we can be excited about that. Fellowship is on par content-wise with ROTK for me though. TTT is my least fave. ARGH!

Am I missing the joke or something? Is this supposed to be an actual screenshot of the Blu-ray? I can tell you in no uncertain terms that the film paused on this exact same part compared to the screenshot im just looking at is like night and day.

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by radagast

That's not why I was posting. This thread was almost dead for a long time. Suddenly there are people I've never seen on this thread talking about sceenshot scientists I've never heard of, telling us that the LOTR BR sucks and we should burn Warner to the ground. I wanted some balance and additional information instead of blindly following some self-appointed experts.

Probably because endless speculation is a waste of time.

I only started to participate once I had seen many screen caps.

Same with the Galdiator discussion.

Is it really a mystery wy the discussion picked up again? Tons of people got their hands on early copies and started to release information about them.

[Brandon]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

Probably because endless speculation is a waste of time.

I only started to participate once I had seen many screen caps.

Same with the Galdiator discussion.

Is it really a mystery wy the discussion picked up again? Tons of people got their hands on early copies and started to release information about them.

You still don't believe there's a conspiracy, and that you're spearheading it? Geez

[captveg]

Originally Posted by neo78956

auto-pilot here having the meaning of lazy

They weren't "lazy", either.

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by Brodo Faggins

Am I missing the joke or something? Is this supposed to be an actual screenshot of the Blu-ray? I can tell you in no uncertain terms that the film paused on this exact same part compared to the screenshot im just looking at is like night and day.

It isn't a cap, no. It's just a screenshot to give a general feel of the image quality, I'd imagine.

That shot is lossy, and it's not 1920X1080.

Read the disclaimer underneath the picture.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

It isn't a cap, no. It's just a screenshot to give a general feel of the image quality, I'd imagine.

That shot is lossy, and it's not 1920X1080.

you can turn on 1080p screenshots for this site, by the way. somewhere in your user preferences.
if it's "night and day" then I imagine your two displays are set up differently because blu-ray.com's caps are typically accurate to my discs.

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Oh, didn't know that.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by Maggot

Blu-Ray and these big 1080p screens people are buying make the whole thing a new ball game. It's a completely different beast that small TV's and DVD. Transfers have to be perfect. The technology simply shows this right off the bat. By giving people Blu-ray and these wonderfully big high resolution screens, you have effectively given them something of the equivelant of a an expensive high-def stereo system..

While I'll agree that with HDTV/Blu-ray increase in 'larger' television sales etc make it imperative for transfers to be very meticulous as much smaller errors have become much more noticeable.....

However... large projection screens, and "videophiles" aren't that recent of a phenomena, and many people scrutinized the image characteristics and transfers back in the DVD days.....

[Emotiva]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

This mentality is the problem with forums like this, with many review sites, and with many mastering engineers.

"Better than DVD" is not the goal for a high-bit-rate format capable of 1080p video without compression artifacting and lossless quality sound that capture astonishing faithfulness to the highest quality source elements even when viewed from 1.5 screen widths in home projection.

"Faithful to the source" should be the goal for blu-ray Disc. Not "better than DVD".

This is home-theater. Not TV. And if you're not watching in full 1080p and with a 30 degree viewing angle to replicate a theatrical-scale viewing experience, you're not experiencing home-theater, you're just watching television, and you won't be able to appreciate the level of detail that other reviewers watching with a cinema-viewing angle are alble to enjoy, and the blu-ray Disc should be faithfully delivering.

I know that the goal is NOT that its better then DVD, I perfectly understand what Bluray was meant to be. I watch my movies in 1080P and Lossless Sound. I only prefer Lossless Audio, so I know what to look for. I hope everyone will be happy with whatever they buy. I dont need a lesson in home-theater, trust me.

[Brodo Faggins]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

It isn't a cap, no. It's just a screenshot to give a general feel of the image quality, I'd imagine.

That shot is lossy, and it's not 1920X1080.

If what youre saying is right, and that screenshot has been posted to give people a feel of the Blu-ray, it is now me who feels bad for people choosing not to purchase this because of them. They could not be any more different.