The Lord of the Rings: The Motion Picture Trilogy (Extended Edition) (2001-2003)

[flodsby]

Originally Posted by KaiGusto

Yes, really.

Ok. what the heck I'll give it a try.

[joenostalgia23]

Yup the discussion still isn't over, even after an official confirmation. I'm pretty sure that if Peter Jackson also confirmed that the color timing was his own decision, people would think he had some ghost writer put that out.

People won't accept this until they sit in a room with the FOTR playing on a screen with Jackson present in the room, Clockwork Orange style, to admit that yes, he wanted the film to look the way it currently does on Blu-ray.

The truth is that many directors will alter their films if it means that thy can bring their vision fully to life. Coppola altered The Godfather, Scorsese has altered Taxi Driver, Ridley Scott has altered Blade Runner, etc. We should be glad that Jackson didn't add in CGI dewbacks, but altered the colors to make some scenes look(arguably) better.

[amoergosum]

I guess WB didn't feel like having a replacement program...

[flodsby]

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

yup the discussion still isn't over, even after an official confirmation. I'm pretty sure that if peter jackson also confirmed that the color timing was his own decision, people would think he had some ghost writer put that out.

People won't accept this until they sit in a room with the fotr playing on a screen with jackson present in the room, clockwork orange style, to admit that yes, he wanted the film to look the way it currently does on blu-ray.

The truth is that many directors will alter their films if it means that thy can bring their vision fully to life. Coppola altered the godfather, scorsese has altered taxi driver, ridley scott has altered blade runner, etc. We should be glad that jackson didn't add in cgi dewbacks, but altered the colors to make some scenes look(arguably) better.

+1

[42041]

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

Yup the discussion still isn't over, even after an official confirmation. I'm pretty sure that if Peter Jackson also confirmed that the color timing was his own decision, people would think he had some ghost writer put that out.

People won't accept this until they sit in a room with the FOTR playing on a screen with Jackson present in the room, Clockwork Orange style, to admit that yes, he wanted the film to look the way it currently does on Blu-ray.

The truth is that many directors will alter their films if it means that thy can bring their vision fully to life. Coppola altered The Godfather, Scorsese has altered Taxi Driver, Ridley Scott has altered Blade Runner, etc. We should be glad that Jackson didn't add in CGI dewbacks, but altered the colors to make some scenes look(arguably) better.

I'm looking for something very simple: either Jackson or his DP to explicitly confirm the green tint is intentional (or objective evidence that it's not present on the discs).
Vague statements like this only suggest WB does not intend replace the disc, it does not clarify that issue and says nothing we haven't heard before.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by HeKS

From what I can tell, what you are calling "perfection" is what others, including myself, are calling "no green tint and hyper-boosted contrast through the whole film, please." And THAT is a standard that would be perfectly easy to achieve. In fact, it WAS achieved at some point in this process, right before the EXTRA step was taken of applying a green tint and hyper contrast across the film.

HeKS

I guarantee had the transfer not had the LOL GREEN TINT and remained the same, people would complain about the reds. You people can't be satisfied.

Originally Posted by Roy Batty

Oh, sorry, I wasn't aware I could not care and should not care about how people lowering their demands and expectations from any product and settling up for a flawed product contributes to the producers and suppliers of that very same product lowering in turn their quality production standards and, thus, hurts my chances of getting a good product.

I will try to control myself and not care from here on.

There's no evidence of a flawed product. Period.

When the Star Wars set is released, there's going to be a shitstorm rivaling Katrina.

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by amoergosum

I guess WB didn't feel like having a replacement program...

[Dave_6]

Originally Posted by JLTucker

When the Star Wars set is released, there's going to be a shitstorm rivaling Katrina.

LMAO probably so!

[bookcase]

Originally Posted by oaguirre

Originally Posted by Robert Harris:

This just in from Warner Home Video:

“Warner Bros Home Entertainment Group confirms that The Lord of the Rings The Motion Picture Trilogy Extended Edition Blu-ray accurately represents the intended look of each of the three features.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring™ was remastered from the original digital production files in order to reproduce the full color imagery of the feature.”

Discussion on this matter is finally coming to an end. I´ll place my order and move on.

Thank you Robert!

What a happy day that would be if you were right.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

Yup the discussion still isn't over, even after an official confirmation. I'm pretty sure that if Peter Jackson also confirmed that the color timing was his own decision, people would think he had some ghost writer put that out..

Or sold out and became a shill for WB. Hell, those of us who like the way the screens look apparently work for WB or are blind. It's all black and white.

[Ispoke]

Originally Posted by 42041

I'm looking for something very simple: either Jackson or his DP to explicitly confirm the green tint is intentional (or objective evidence that it's not present on the discs).
Vague statements like this only suggest WB does not intend replace the disc, it does not clarify that issue and says nothing we haven't heard before.

Do you really beleive the studio would issue such a statement without first having at least discussed the issue with PJ?

[flodsby]

Originally Posted by JLTucker

When the Star Wars set is released, there's going to be a shitstorm rivaling Katrina.

I think it might even go to Camille levels

[Atreyu]

Originally Posted by BasicGreatGuy

Has anyone who ordered from Amazon, gotten a shipping notice yet, or the "preparing to ship soon.." ? I just checked mine and no hint of entering the shipping phase.

Me neither, and I pre ordered it when it was first made available on Amazon.

[borninusa]

Originally Posted by flodsby

I think it might even go to Camille levels

Ah..that is going to be a fun day in the world of bluray.com

[42041]

Originally Posted by Ispoke

Do you really beleive the studio would issue such a statement without first having at least discussed the issue with PJ?

I wouldn't put it out of the question.
There are many discs with objective flaws out there. I've complained about some to these companies only to get boilerplate dismissals.
I was hoping for a straight answer that cut completely past the crap for once, but clearly that just ain't in the cards when you're dealing with movie studios.

[flodsby]

Originally Posted by borninusa

Ah..that is going to be a fun day in the world of bluray.com

Indeed

[Roy Batty]

Originally Posted by HeKS

I would certainly take PJ's word over the studio that would likely be responsible for the seeming error we're noting.

That said, even if this bizarre color change that isolates FOTR from the rest of the films is PJ's intentional choice, that won't make most people think that it's a remotely GOOD choice. The fact remains that adding a green tint to the whole film and boosting the contrast up to the limit makes FOTR a sub-par release, - even if it's from a new master with more detail than the TEs - and significantly lower in overall quality and enjoyability than the other two films.

No, no, no, you are going completely WRONG on all this!!!

Don't you know that, the minute it is "officially approved", you have to LIKE IT, no matter if it remains the same transfer you loathe before?

Otherwise, you will get called whiner, naysayer, argumentative and worse.

And some may even point the finger at you for not giving due respect to the creator's vision, and rightly so!

Because, you know, the fact that you don't like the new transfer means that you think you know better than Jackson, or that you are implying that he needs your approval to do those changes.

Because, well, that is what you mean when you insist on it being dark, contrasty and subpar, isn't it?

Well, then hear me, and hear me well, because now the transfer is approved, so there is no room for any personal opinions or any further discussion!! Understand? So shut up your whining, stop posting, and get out and buy yourself a copy!

[omicron]

Originally Posted by HeKS

I don't think YOUR comment is fair, because he's talking about a very specific and all encompassing change (even if it isn't ALWAYS apparent) that seems to many people to be a clear mistake, and one that reduces the effectiveness of the effort that went into LEGITIMATE color improvements.

In terms of having something to compare as far as the EE with the green cast removed, kong posted a corrected shot several pages ago that he might be able to direct you to or repost here.

Mistake? Quite probably. Whose mistake? Jackson's? The studio's? We don't know. Maybe we will never know. Will we get a correction? We don't know. If there is a correction, when? We don't know.

Saying that if we remove green tint will make things all better? Maybe, maybe not. Depends if the color grading was done with the assuming the tint would be in place or not, which we don't know.

Saying that removal of the green tint from Rivendell makes it better isn't helpful. I don't know if I will ever be able to buy such a film.

As far as the idea that we should punish the studio by not buying something with flaws in it, I don't have much hope that will work. Studios have been selling flawed product since the first VHS tapes. Their attitude is we should feel lucky to be able to buy movies at all. Galling? Yes. Can I change it? No. Most people out there buying videos have no where near the standards that the people on this site have. Would the studio would be able to measure the effect of a videophile boycott? It sounds like not buying is not going to affect the studio. Only me. That is not productive.

So all I have to do is make a decision based on the product available to me. Rent, buy do nothing.

Rent? Pay per View? I went to Netflix. Fellowship of the Ring EE Blu-Ray - Not in catalog. PPV? Who knows if it will be available that way? Not me. Besides I want to be able to watch on my schedule.

Buy? Not a problem. Click here and you have it on release day.

So the question boils down to is the quality worth it? Pristine audio (and I have a really good audio system - 3kW amp power, dual subwoofers, Revel speakers) plus very good to excellent video on 2 out of 3 films, and improved video on the other? To me that is a yes.

[Ispoke]

Originally Posted by 42041

I wouldn't put it out of the question.
There are many discs with objective flaws out there. I've complained about some to these companies only to get boilerplate dismissals.
I was hoping for a straight answer that cut completely past the crap for once, but clearly that just ain't in the cards when you're dealing with movie studios.

Fair enougth, but I suspect PJ would cause a s**t storm if they didn't pass it by him first

[Illy Scorsese]

Originally Posted by 42041

Vague statements like this only suggest WB does not intend replace the disc, it does not clarify that issue

Basically...