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

[LORDs_angellos]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Not true -- the Extended Cut was re-scored by Howard Shore, so its a bit more complicated than missing shots.

That is true, my bad. Shows how much I know about the theatrical versions. I wouldn't touch them with a ten-foot pole.

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

As long as I get the EE's with lossless audio, I don't care if they come in a Hefty bag.

A bit drastic, are we? :P

You've made your point, but I'm one who cherishes the whole package. I have the extended trilogy box set and all three extended edition soundtrack packages. Those ancient-looking books on my shelf are the bomb.

[mredman]

Originally Posted by LORDs_angellos

1- Seamless branching is probably gonna happen, but I'm a EE-only person myself. The theatrical versions seem butchered after you watch the EEs.
2- Absolutely. The EE DVDs already have DTS 6.1, so it's obvious the master data is already there for 7.1 DTS-HD MA.
3- This would be very convenient, but if the movie takes up too much space on one BD-50 for the commentaries to be included as well, I'm perfectly fine with splitting the movie onto two discs.
4- All the standard definition extras will be able to fit onto a BD-50. If they decide to rerelease them in HD though, it may require an additional disc.
5- I think that's pretty much a given. The Lord of the Rings EE DVDs have the best packaging of any release I've seen.

All that lossless talk and no PQ comment . Of course i want lossless.
But i would rather have top notch PQ for my movies. It would be weird if the sound was perfect but the PQ was very bad

[LORDs_angellos]

Originally Posted by mredman

All that lossless talk and no PQ comment . Of course i want lossless.
But i would rather have top notch PQ for my movies. It would be weird if the sound was perfect but the PQ was very bad

I'm not talking about the PQ because I know without a doubt it's gonna be drop dead gorgeous.

Last night I was watching Return of the King EE using WinDVD 9 set to All2HD 1080p upscaling, and the movie looked utterly fabulous! Not Blu-ray quality, of course, but A++ by DVD standards. It's obviously a direct transfer from the digital master, resized and compressed for the DVD. By the way, from what I've heard, the extended DVD transfers use higher bitrates than the theatrical ones.

Oh wait, I thought I wasn't talking about the PQ.

[mredman]

I hope you are right they will look drop dead gorgeous. But i am only saying this because warner released Outbreak and the PQ on that movie is actually the worst PQ i have ever seen on a BluRay

[BaronVH]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

In a perfect world, all the scenes with Denethor would be sent back for major re-writes to bring them into compliance with the novels. The Denethor scenes are a tragedy -- so well played and shot, so wrong-headed in the writing. Denethor sends Boromir to bring the Ring back to Gondor? Denethor isn't driven mad by Sauron because Denethor is using a Palantir? He's just upset because his favorite son died?

Come on...

Yes sir, you are a friend of mine. That was a very big aspect of the books; how easliy it was for men to be ensnared. He just wasn't a mean old fart.

[ajmrowland]

Originally Posted by BaronVH

Yes sir, you are a friend of mine. That was a very big aspect of the books; how easliy it was for men to be ensnared. He just wasn't a mean old fart.

But, there is one sign of corruption that is key, Denethor wants the Ring. Plus, I don't see anything on how, in the book, Faramir says "I'd never pick that thing up if it lay by the wayside". That's pretty good on pj's part.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by ajmrowland

But, there is one sign of corruption that is key, Denethor wants the Ring. Plus, I don't see anything on how, in the book, Faramir says "I'd never pick that thing up if it lay by the wayside". That's pretty good on pj's part.

I didn't dig the whole "corruptible Faramir" -- what made Faramir cool was that he was the opposite of Boromir and he demonstrated the nobility of the men of Gondor and the line of the Stewards. But we're not going to get into that old debate again -- the films are what they are. So no sense hashing up the oddities of the screenwriting....like Frodo revealing himself (and the ring) to a Nazgul in Osgiliath and then trying to stab Sam when Sam tries to stop him. What was the point of all that? Oops, there I go again.

[BaronVH]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I didn't dig the whole "corruptible Faramir" -- what made Faramir cool was that he was the opposite of Boromir and he demonstrated the nobility of the men of Gondor and the line of the Stewards. But we're not going to get into that old debate again -- the films are what they are. So no sense hashing up the oddities of the screenwriting....like Frodo revealing himself (and the ring) to a Nazgul in Osgiliath and then trying to stab Sam when Sam tries to stop him. What was the point of all that? Oops, there I go again.

My thought is this. I hated the corruptible Faramir and was really shocked when the ents said "no", but a huge problem was how to end The Two Towers as a movie. If they ended the Two Towers as it did in the book, there would not be much to do in the last movie, and they certainly made the second movie exciting at the end. So, as a fan of the book, I did not like it, but as a fan of movies, I can let it pass. I really think that if they knew the movies would have been as popular as they were, they might have been more faithful to the books. All this being said, I thought the movies were amazing, yet they don't diminish my love for the books at the same time. Wouldn't it be cool if after The Hobbit we get installments of the Silmarillion?

[andyman1970]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

I would never have believed it, but:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...rbluinsert.jpg

According to the Digital Bits, it's true.

I hope by then Warner will be smart enough to provide the titles in highest bit rate video and full HD audio with no extra DNR. Hopefully they'll also be the extended editions.

I don't mind if the appendices aren't included as I'll keep my DVD sets, but if they are converted to Hi-def I'm good with that too
*****
While the graphic indicates coming soon, TheDigitalBits.com indicates that the titles are in fact coming in 2009.
*****

Well, I just checked out this link and according to the coming soon poster, if you enlarge it, it only say Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. This could mean they are only going to release them one at a time. I personally hope it will be the extended versions. I'm not getting my hopes up yet until something official is announced on either Warner Bros web site or New Lines website.

[HeavyHitter]

Here is what I'm thinking as a possibility.

Warner will release each movie every several months in 2009. Each movie will contain the theatrical and extended cut but at something like a $39.95-49.95 list price. Why? They figure if they just release the theatrical, too many people will pass on it and just wait for the Extended Cut - as a result they will miss sales on the theatrical. So, they'll charge a bigger price to, in essence, get for what would be a double dip anyway and to maximize sales for both versions of the movie. I mean this is Lord of the Rings, so people are going to pay a fairly big price for it anyway especially if they are getting both cuts of the film along with a ton of features it will seem as not a bad value to many people.

Also, releasing them every several months builds anticipation and gives people a little bit of a breather in terms of money spent instead of throwing down a lot more money to get all three at once...especially if these are priced like I'm thinking.

[MarekM]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Here is what I'm thinking as a possibility.

Warner will release each movie every several months in 2009. Each movie will contain the theatrical and extended cut but at something like a $39.95-49.95 list price. Why? They figure if they just release the theatrical, too many people will pass on it and just wait for the Extended Cut - as a result they will miss sales on the theatrical. So, they'll charge a bigger price to, in essence, get for what would be a double dip anyway and to maximize sales for both versions of the movie. I mean this is Lord of the Rings, so people are going to pay a fairly big price for it anyway especially if they are getting both cuts of the film along with a ton of features it will seem as not a bad value to many people.

Also, releasing them every several months builds anticipation and gives people a little bit of a breather in terms of money spent instead of throwing down a lot more money to get all three at once...especially if these are priced like I'm thinking.

+1

I will be OK with that price if it contain both cuts... with ton of features..
and of course 6.1 or 7.1 lossless soundtrack....

Marek

[Jayromy]

Of course I'd like to see the EE's in 7.1 DTS MA with all the trimmings...

But I would also like to see them replicate that classy EE packaging for Blu. It would be a shame to have to replace those beautiful boxes with crappy standard slipcases. Hopefully they will come up with something really nice.

[Jason-X-666]

As far as I heard there will be only the theatrical version on Blu Ray first, right?

[MarekM]

Originally Posted by Jason-X-666

As far as I heard there will be only the theatrical version on Blu Ray first, right?

no, there is no info yet, if it will be theatrical, or EE, or both via seamless branching..

M.

[DanFan]

Originally Posted by Jayromy

Of course I'd like to see the EE's in 7.1 DTS MA with all the trimmings...

But I would also like to see them replicate that classy EE packaging for Blu. It would be a shame to have to replace those beautiful boxes with crappy standard slipcases. Hopefully they will come up with something really nice.

Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

I don't care that much about the packaging, I just want stellar video and audio plus all the extras. That's what is most important. The packaging just sits on the shelf anyway with all the other blu's, never to be seen until I pull it down to watch.

Welcome,

Jay-Romy

(Colts Suck!)

[Jason-X-666]

Originally Posted by MarekM

no, there is no info yet, if it will be theatrical, or EE, or both via seamless branching..

M.

the last option would be my favorite one...

[ajmrowland]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I didn't dig the whole "corruptible Faramir" -- what made Faramir cool was that he was the opposite of Boromir and he demonstrated the nobility of the men of Gondor and the line of the Stewards. But we're not going to get into that old debate again -- the films are what they are. So no sense hashing up the oddities of the screenwriting....like Frodo revealing himself (and the ring) to a Nazgul in Osgiliath and then trying to stab Sam when Sam tries to stop him. What was the point of all that? Oops, there I go again.

The Faramir in the book could've undone the power of the Ring. Frodo could have given it to him all along and be rid of it as he wanted/needed. These are Oddities that make sense. They wanted frodo to be pushed to the edge. All in the EE extra material.

[ajmrowland]

Originally Posted by BaronVH

My thought is this. I hated the corruptible Faramir and was really shocked when the ents said "no", but a huge problem was how to end The Two Towers as a movie. If they ended the Two Towers as it did in the book, there would not be much to do in the last movie, and they certainly made the second movie exciting at the end. So, as a fan of the book, I did not like it, but as a fan of movies, I can let it pass. I really think that if they knew the movies would have been as popular as they were, they might have been more faithful to the books. All this being said, I thought the movies were amazing, yet they don't diminish my love for the books at the same time. Wouldn't it be cool if after The Hobbit we get installments of the Silmarillion?

my point exactly. But, the filmmakers already knew the popularity of the books, being fans of Tolkien themselves. Once again, the bonuses on the dvd are really informative.

[ajmrowland]

Originally Posted by DanFan

Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

I don't care that much about the packaging, I just want stellar video and audio plus all the extras. That's what is most important. The packaging just sits on the shelf anyway with all the other blu's, never to be seen until I pull it down to watch.

Welcome,

Jay-Romy

(Colts Suck!)

Personally, I love the EE packaging. Besides It's listed as a digibook release, anyway. It would save money to use the EE package for it.

[MarekM]

Originally Posted by Jason-X-666

the last option would be my favorite one...

+1

Marek