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

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

As much as I really love the new look to the Fellowship of the Ring, I find it kind of funny that the digital copy of the film doesn't have the new color timing.

You can tell by the subtitles on the digital copy in comparison to the ones on the Blu Ray itself....

Actually, it does. What are you watching it on? The effect could be minimised depending on the device.

[Jumpman]

I've viewed the digital copy on my iPod Touch, my computer, and on my television.

I don't think it's the same but it doesn't really matter.

[BohemianGraham]

It's all good. I thought I read a Ken Brown post stating the colour scheme was the same a few pages back. I honestly haven't tried my copies yet. I will tonight though.

[thethingwithnoname]

I have to say (in my opinion) it seems that if you ask some questions on a technical standpoint, that this is being frowned upon by those that enjoyed the discs?
If you enjoyed the discs and have no problem with how they have been altered, or don't even notice the alteration, then thats fine and I'm glad you are happy with them.
But does that mean you have to force your opinion on everyone else?
I don't see HeKS or Ken Brown trying to force their opinion on anyone else?

The FACTS are - a tint HAS been added to the WHOLE film, the contrast HAS been changed to darken certain scenes.

Now, some (it seems most) people are happy that this does not affect their viewing pleasure of these discs and that the remastering work done is more than good enough for them - great - watch the films and be happy

But for some, they would like to know the reasoning behind these decisions, particularly when their subjective opinion (which we all have, and we are all ALLOWED to have) says that they are not as keen on these changes.

This is particularly the case when it seems to fly against previous examples of PJ's work on how he uses colour in his films.

No-one questioning these decisions is saying that you are wrong to enjoy these discs, if you are, I and I'm sure they, are more than happy for you.

But that shouldn't preclude anyone else asking for more information on the decisions taken.

I personally think Ken Brown is a saint for walking the line so carefully as he has done while still having doubts himself. He's handled some very different opinions and some nasty comments with a patience I doubt I could keep up.
And its thanks to people like HeKS who take time to examine and question disc content that means we keep the studios on their toes with the quality of their releases.

The question that should be asked is not is this release excellent (which it obviously seems to be) but could it have been even better?

I know the majority will buy, watch and judge for themselves, but the minority who go into great detail, report on this and get changes and standards set mean its an easire task for the rest of us to trust the releases will be good enough to just sit and watch.

So I for one who do not have the time, equipment or knowledge to check these releases am very grateful to those that do, and long may they continue to do so, and hopefully with less criticism from those they are attempting to help.

[Shemp]

I agree with duggie 100%.

I've been watching the Aussie release of FOTR today and I think this whole 'issue' is much ado about nothing. What pisses me off the most is that there's been official confirmation that this is not an error but people persist on stating it must be and that view is still being actively encouraged.

[Paul Tilburgs]

Originally Posted by thethingwithnoname

I have to say (in my opinion) it seems that if you ask some questions on a technical standpoint, that this is being frowned upon by those that enjoyed the discs?
If you enjoyed the discs and have no problem with how they have been altered, or don't even notice the alteration, then thats fine and I'm glad you are happy with them.
But does that mean you have to force your opinion on everyone else?
I don't see HeKS or Ken Brown trying to force their opinion on anyone else?

The FACTS are - a tint HAS been added to the WHOLE film, the contrast HAS been changed to darken certain scenes.

Now, some (it seems most) people are happy that this does not affect their viewing pleasure of these discs and that the remastering work done is more than good enough for them - great - watch the films and be happy

But for some, they would like to know the reasoning behind these decisions, particularly when their subjective opinion (which we all have, and we are all ALLOWED to have) says that they are not as keen on these changes.

This is particularly the case when it seems to fly against previous examples of PJ's work on how he uses colour in his films.

No-one questioning these decisions is saying that you are wrong to enjoy these discs, if you are, I and I'm sure they, are more than happy for you.

But that shouldn't preclude anyone else asking for more information on the decisions taken.

I personally think Ken Brown is a saint for walking the line so carefully as he has done while still having doubts himself. He's handled some very different opinions and some nasty comments with a patience I doubt I could keep up.
And its thanks to people like HeKS who take time to examine and question disc content that means we keep the studios on their toes with the quality of their releases.

The question that should be asked is not is this release excellent (which it obviously seems to be) but could it have been even better?

I know the majority will buy, watch and judge for themselves, but the minority who go into great detail, report on this and get changes and standards set mean its an easire task for the rest of us to trust the releases will be good enough to just sit and watch.

So I for one who do not have the time, equipment or knowledge to check these releases am very grateful to those that do, and long may they continue to do so, and hopefully with less criticism from those they are attempting to help.

Hm, somehow you manage to completely disregard the assertion made (initially by Ken I believe) that this tinting was surely a mistake that needed to be rectified and that all comments to the contrary were clearly idiotic and needed to be confirmed by a reliable and verifiable source (funny that, as the "mistake" needed no such reliable or verifiable source itself: a couple of screen shots and such were plainly enough)...

[CinemaScope]

I've been following this debate for over a week, in a sort of disinterested way as I'm quite happy with the standard release. It's been good for me as I only ever visited this site to look at the reviews, & now I've discovered the forum, which I think is very good. I'm one of a tiny group of people that think green is taking over movies these days, so much colour drained, green in the shadows, green in the hair, where did neutral grey go? This is the problem I have with the whole trilogy, too much colour drained out, pasty faces, & green getting in everywhere. I do like these films, but for me they're not a good look, & the very last thing any of them needed was yet more green. And yet the pictures get rave reviews, but surely there's more to a great looking picture than sharp images. If I want to see stunning images, I look to older movies like, How The West Was Won, King Of Kings, Grand Prix, & I'm sure the forthcoming Ben-Hur. Don't have a go, it's only my opinion, as I say, there's not many of us anti-green critics around, maybe we should have a special handshake.

[mdm1699]

Originally Posted by Strevlac

I have the lowly Sony BDP-S350 and it has operated almost flawlessly for almost 4 years now. I say almost because I had to update the firmware once to get Evil Dead to play.

Expensive bluray players = overrated, waste of money IMO.

I still have my S550. The ONLY movie it did not play was World Trade Center(Nicholas Cage). I returned the movie to Amazon for replacement discs that did look different from the original discs. It now plays perfectly. That thing is bulletproof.

[thethingwithnoname]

That was before Ken heard from WB sources that it was NOT a mistake. So i am going on latest info.
I too am not necessarily 100% that it wasn't a mistake. These things do and have happened before.
Its easy enough to think that because in certain scenes it is not all that visible, that someone checking this could indeed miss it
I've also heard before that some people check the results on small monitors rather than shown on large displays.
There could be many easily explainable, accidental reasons for what has happened
Or it is most likely exactly as requested by PJ and Mr lesnie
This would go away in an instant if either of them discussed the tint itself, not the whole remastering process as a whole.

This would then leave it just to the subjective discussion as to wether or not people like the changes, to which there is no correct answer.

After all, the decision to change the French Connection for its BD release was done by the director, but I personally hate the changes and will stick with my DVD. This does not mean that what he did was wrong, or that others liking this change are wrong for their opinions.

The main thrust of the arguments on here will all fall away with a two sentence response from the man himself as to his reasoning behind the tint.

This has been requested by Bill Hunt as stated in his post previously (and by Mr Brown repeatedly)

If indeed Ken stated what you say (in not quite as harsh terms as you state I believe) then this was BEFORE further information was available and was probably based on the previous attaention to detail in grading shown on these films before, for which the tint seems to fly against

Its the putting down of those asking sensible helpful questions I can't abide.

Yes some people have stupidly exaggerated the issue on both sides, but the questions remain

[Shemp]

I don't know why questions remain. It's been officially stated that there are no colour errors on FOTR and it's how Jackson wants it to look.

[thethingwithnoname]

Originally Posted by Shemp

I don't know why questions remain. It's been officially stated that there are no colour errors on FOTR and it's how Jackson wants it to look.

The simple question left then is 'Why?'
a quick response to the reasoning behind a blanket 'mild' tint would put this to bed far more thoroughly than a PR release from WB saying 'all is as intended'
No-one could question a response from PJ saying 'I added the tint to bring the look inline with 'The Hobbit' movies' or some such response.

Then people could still discuss wether they like the changes or not, but the fact remains, there is no response to the question of what reason there is for a blanket tint across a whole film.
Has there even been a film before made where a whole tint across ALL the film, regardless of content has been acheived before?
I know people mention the matrix movies, but the tint in that case was JUST for the sections inside the matrix and had an obvious narrative reason.
This explanation is all a (very) few of us are asking for. Not necessarily a doubt as to the fact if it was intential or not (hmmm...)

[Deviation]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

Actually, it does. What are you watching it on? The effect could be minimised depending on the device.

My understanding is that the digital copy uses the old DVD master. I thought this had been confirmed?

[thethingwithnoname]

Please could you point me to the answer of the question 'Why was the green tint added?'
I've not seen this answered anywhere yet

Thanks

[karlosfunkster]

Originally Posted by thethingwithnoname

Please could you point me to the answer of the question 'Why was the green tint added?'
I've not seen this answered anywhere yet

Thanks

We're all still looking forward to being given the conclusive reason...from anyone in an official capacity. So far we only know that they were subject to colour changes that Jackson made.

[thethingwithnoname]

Originally Posted by karlosfunkster

We're all still looking forward to being given the conclusive reason...from anyone in an official capacity. So far we only know that they were subject to colour changes that Jackson made.

Thanks, but my question was particularly in response to duggie saying that this question had been answered already. I haven't seen this to be the case, so was asking him where he saw that question answered as quoted by him?

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by thethingwithnoname

The simple question left then is 'Why?'
a quick response to the reasoning behind a blanket 'mild' tint would put this to bed far more thoroughly than a PR release from WB saying 'all is as intended'
No-one could question a response from PJ saying 'I added the tint to bring the look inline with 'The Hobbit' movies' or some such response.

Then people could still discuss wether they like the changes or not, but the fact remains, there is no response to the question of what reason there is for a blanket tint across a whole film.
Has there even been a film before made where a whole tint across ALL the film, regardless of content has been acheived before?
I know people mention the matrix movies, but the tint in that case was JUST for the sections inside the matrix and had an obvious narrative reason.
This explanation is all a (very) few of us are asking for. Not necessarily a doubt as to the fact if it was intential or not (hmmm...)

Aside from curiosity perhaps, what does it matter? Sure, it could be any of the reasons you came up with. It could be green is his favorite color. It could be he had green socks on that day. The disc is not going to be changed, so I don't see why the question keeps being asked, it's an exercise in futility.

[thethingwithnoname]

Originally Posted by lemonski

Aside from curiosity perhaps, what does it matter? Sure, it could be any of the reasons you came up with. It could be green is his favorite color. It could be he had green socks on that day. The disc is not going to be changed, so I don't see why the question keeps being asked, it's an exercise in futility.

True - he may never answer the question, but are you honestly saying no-one is allowed to ask why someone does something?
I'm not standing outside his office with placards DEMANDING an answer?
But as a massive fan of these films, and of PJ's work as a whole, the blanket tint does not sit well with me as to what he has previously done, so a simple question I don't feel is too attacking?
It obviously does not matter to you, but does that mean that for those it does matter to have to be shouted down for asking it?
I am in total agreement with you that the way things have gone it would be very unlikely the discs will be changed, so that if anything means my question is more relevant as we have been given a change with no choice to one of our favourite films. For those who are unsure of wether this change was to their liking, is it so wrong to ask why?
Or are we giving all directors, DOP's etc carte blanche to change their work as they feel fit without even a quick explanation of why?
I'm truly surprised at the level of distaste being shown to those asking very simple questions in a calm and rational manner - a shame

[karlosfunkster]

Originally Posted by thethingwithnoname

True - he may never answer the question, but are you honestly saying no-one is allowed to ask why someone does something?
I'm not standing outside his office with placards DEMANDING an answer?
But as a massive fan of these films, and of PJ's work as a whole, the blanket tint does not sit well with me as to what he has previously done, so a simple question I don't feel is too attacking?
It obviously does not matter to you, but does that mean that for those it does matter to have to be shouted down for asking it?
I am in total agreement with you that the way things have gone it would be very unlikely the discs will be changed, so that if anything means my question is more relevant as we have been given a change with no choice to one of our favourite films. For those who are unsure of wether this change was to their liking, is it so wrong to ask why?
Or are we giving all directors, DOP's etc carte blanche to change their work as they feel fit without even a quick explanation of why?
I'm truly surprised at the level of distaste being shown to those asking very simple questions in a calm and rational manner - a shame

There is no harm whatsoever, and I too would be interested to find out more! But I think Duggie refers to those that insist it MUST be a MISTAKE and that there is no way on middle or our earth one could want the colour to manupulated slightly towards green. That doesn't mean the picture is actually green, if anything it only subdues/tempers certain tones...

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by thethingwithnoname

My question is and has always been, could it have looked EVEN better without the tint, and can we have a brief explanation about the tint.

In light of the statement from WB, I'm not surprised PJ hasn't answered your question - asking if it would have been better without it calls into question his artistic choices and Lesnie's technical competence. Coming from an Internet forum, this is exactly what duggie meant by the "lunatic fringe" (please be clear that I am not referring to you specifically)

[Troy73]

Originally Posted by thethingwithnoname

True - he may never answer the question, but are you honestly saying no-one is allowed to ask why someone does something?
I'm not standing outside his office with placards DEMANDING an answer?
But as a massive fan of these films, and of PJ's work as a whole, the blanket tint does not sit well with me as to what he has previously done, so a simple question I don't feel is too attacking?
It obviously does not matter to you, but does that mean that for those it does matter to have to be shouted down for asking it?
I am in total agreement with you that the way things have gone it would be very unlikely the discs will be changed, so that if anything means my question is more relevant as we have been given a change with no choice to one of our favourite films. For those who are unsure of wether this change was to their liking, is it so wrong to ask why?
Or are we giving all directors, DOP's etc carte blanche to change their work as they feel fit without even a quick explanation of why?
I'm truly surprised at the level of distaste being shown to those asking very simple questions in a calm and rational manner - a shame

Bill Clinton once said," the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result". Asking the same question on this forum over and over is just as insane. Until there is an official statement the tint/color change is a take it or leave it scenario. Not much more to discuss in that respect to this release. That's why moving on seems relevant.