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

[WorkShed]

Did anyone know if the digital copies are of the new transfer or the old? Has anyone a version of the Fellowship digital copy with the teal tint?

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by WorkShed

Did anyone know if the digital copies are of the new transfer or the old? Has anyone a version of the Fellowship digital copy with the teal tint?

It has the older timing, but it's in SD. Essentially, you wouldn't be getting anything above or beyond the EE DVD version if you got a copy.

[WorkShed]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

It has the older timing, but it's in SD. Essentially, you wouldn't be getting anything above or beyond the EE DVD version if you got a copy.

Thank you. I didn't see if that was confirmed earlier or not. It is nice to have it all together without an intermission on my phone!

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by jebhdb

Never say never. I have frequented these boards for a couple of years now and have seen almost this exact situation take place multiple times. The studios always deny there is a problem until they feel their sales are adversely affected and then low and behold a corrected/alternate version shows up. I understand that the company line is that Peter Jackson approved the transfer and the color timing is correct, but I wouldn't be surprised if at some point in the future Fellowship is available minus the enhanced green tint.

I know this will rub some of you the wrong way, so let me preemptively clarify: I am not suggesting the tint is an error. Let's all be adults and read this post for what it is: a quick exercise in logic and semantics. Here goes

I would like to point out "approved" is not necessarily synonymous with error-free. It can be, but it isn't always. Every time I load a review on the site, I have to click a button that says "approve" before it goes live. I click this button after extensive editing and quality checks. Yet despite my best efforts to edit, read, edit and re-read my reviews, typos still slip through. How? I approved the review. How could a mistake slip through? Because my best efforts and my approval do not guarantee that no mistakes have slipped through the cracks.

(Once, I even accidentally loaded the wrong screenshots in a review because I was so focused on reading over my text. Talk about an embarrassing series of private messages )

I want to be clear: I'm not suggesting the tint in FOTR is an error. What I am suggesting is that it isn't outside the realm of possibility that an official pre-release statement can be accurate, a transfer can be carefully and legitimately approved and errors can still be present. It happens all the time. Every production error that has been caught and every replacement program that has been instituted by any studio was proceeded by a series of pre-release checks, balances and, yes, approvals (be it by the studios, the filmmakers, or both).

That's why Jackson specifically addressing the tint would be so ideal in this situation. If the tint is intentional (rather than simply an oversight present in a director-approved transfer), then Jackson must have had a specific, artistic, thematic or intentional reason for adding it. If he had a reason for adding it, he can speak to that reason and describe it. Even if that reason is, "I liked the way it looked when we added a tint to the entire image." Good enough for me. Then all efforts could be focused on debating film revisionism

The transfer was approved. Confirmed. The image appears exactly as Jackson approved it. Confirmed. Again, though, just because a transfer is approved doesn't necessarily mean it is error-free. Directors and filmmakers are subject to mistakes, oversights and inabilities to spot certain elements of a transfer, just like the rest of us.

Final clarification, cards on the table: I'm not suggesting the tint is an error. Based on the amount of time Warner and Wingnut put into evaluating the transfer before issuing Monday's PR statement, I'm fairly convinced it most likely isn't an error. But I would be lying if I said I was 100% convinced. Sorry, I can't help it. There is a bit of lingering doubt in my mind, no matter how small it is at this point. Again, I'm fairly convinced it isn't an error based on the statement issued by Warner. I've been wrong before, though, so take all that as you will. However, I feel confident that my logic is at least sound.

[WorkShed]

Ken, that is an absolutely fantastic statement. Very well thought out and hits every point. I had been so swept up in WBHV might be lying to save their sales, that I didn't think that it could have been quickly approved without realizing there were actual errors.

I would say to trust your instincts. The green-ish title card and the off contrast are still clear indicators of problems, in my book. I want Fellowship to all be exactly as Jackson intended (not necessarily approved), but I can't accept it as fact.

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by WorkShed

Ken, that is an absolutely fantastic statement. Very well thought out and hits every point. I had been so swept up in WBHV might be lying to save their sales, that I didn't think that it could have been quickly approved without realizing there were actual errors.

Thanks. Just one thought more: I doubt anything was quickly approved. Maybe initially, but there was definitely some serious checking and approving at some point in the last two weeks. (At least as far as all reports indicate.) I don't think anyone at Wingnut or Warner was in a hurry to take anything less than a long look at the transfer before writing and issuing an official PR statement.

Those who don't see the tint, or think it is a non-issue, are inadvertently making the point that a person can completely miss the tint. If anyone can miss the tint (for whatever reason) or see it as so minimal that they are quick to label it a non-issue, so too can a filmmaker, a studio rep or anyone else involved in the approval process. Hope that makes sense. I'm reading over each of my replies a thousand times before posting them

[Alan A]

Ken I read that the final production blu-rays were checked and they are exactly want Jackson wanted per the digitalbits Bill Hunt

[Clippins]

Just received my EE set from Amazon and watched the 1st half of FOTR. I previously had the EE's on DVD but traded those in a few months ago anticipating these blu's. Picture and sound are amazing! Very happy with this set!

[PRO-630HD]

There is definitely some black crush going on with the FOTR disc as well. During the Moria scenes this is very evident like at the beginning of chapter 36. A lot of shadow detail is being drowned out by black crush.

[blu2]

Originally Posted by WorkShed

I would say to trust your instincts. The green-ish title card and the off contrast are still clear indicators of problems, in my book.

Is it possible they were just resorting to some quick & dirty approach to slightly tweaking the coloring, with some occasional side effects they thought few people would notice or care about (as now proven out).

[WorkShed]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

Thanks. Just one thought more: I doubt anything was quickly approved. Maybe initially, but there was definitely some serious checking and approving at some point in the last two weeks. (At least as far as all reports indicate.) I don't think anyone at Wingnut or Warner was in a hurry to take anything less than a long look at the transfer before writing and issuing an official PR statement.

Those who don't see the tint, or think it is a non-issue, are inadvertently making the point that a person can completely miss the tint. If anyone can miss the tint (for whatever reason) or see it as so minimal that they are quick to label it a non-issue, so too can a filmmaker, a studio rep or anyone else involved in the approval process. Hope that makes sense. I'm reading over each of my replies a thousand times before posting them

You may be right, but Warner wouldn't want to go through a big recall process that would be very expensive. I think that's why they chose the words they used. Why spend the money if it looks good enough for most folks. That's why I think, if there is a problem, WBHV will run out their inventory and then have a new pressing of Fellowship. Gladiator was the same way.

Some may not want to hear from those of us who say there is a tint. There's a lot of facts backing up the tint theory. However, I feel it is important that WBHV knows that consumers (large group or small) think that not all is right with this release. Otherwise studios might become relaxed with their standards.

If it wasn't for A/V enthusiasts (and especially Bill Hunt), Universal Home Video would be absolutely fine with cranking out catalogue titles with heavy amounts of DNR. Hunt pointed out that the lower selling numbers are probably due to the use of DNR, which is not acceptable by the market of consumers that would buy a niche title like Spartacus or Flash Gordon.

Originally Posted by Clippins

Just received my EE set from Amazon and watched the 1st half of FOTR. I previously had the EE's on DVD but traded those in a few months ago anticipating these blu's. Picture and sound are amazing! Very happy with this set!

Check with Two Towers and compare. Two Towers is a revelation compared to Fellowship.

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by Alan A

Ken I read that the final production blu-rays were checked and they are exactly want Jackson wanted per the digitalbits Bill Hunt

That is correct. The quote you're referring to from Mr. Hunt, though, is an account of conversations he had. Not a direct quote from the filmmaker.

That said, my point is that a filmmaker can check and approve a transfer. A filmmaker can even be 100% satisfied with what they see. However, approval and satisfaction doesn't mean that a transfer is error-free. The possibility remains, however small, that a director can approve a transfer, be 100% satisfied and overlook errors present in that transfer. Again, if some people in our forum can't see the tint when the film is in motion, it stands to reason a filmmaker could miss it as well.

To be clear: I'm not suggesting that happened. That's why Jackson's thoughts on the tint would be so ideal. If the tint is intentional, he had to have a reason to intentionally add it to the image. If so, he can speak to that intention, explain it in a sentence or two, and settle any doubt, however small, that some may have

Also, in case you haven't read it, Mr. Hunt posted this message several pages back:

Originally Posted by Bill Hunt

I've submitted my suggestion to the various "powers that be" that a direct Jackson or Lesnie quote on the matter would he helpful. My own suspicision - and I want to be clear that these are my thoughts only, uninformed by anything other than my own feelings - is that the lack of one stems from one or all of three things: 1) Jackson may consider this a non-issue, being happy with the look of the film and discs personally, and having already had Lesnie look into it [Harry Knowles' AintItCool.com] report, 2) he's just extremely busy with production on The Hobbit films, and/or 3) Jackson may be aware that - right now - it's only people on a limited number of online A/V enthusiast forums and websites who are even aware of the issue, whereas the moment he issues a personal statement on the matter, it might get picked up by the more mainstream entertainment press (understandably curious about The Hobbit production) and suddenly an limited Internet forum kerfuffle gets blown up into a much larger headache. But again, this is speculation at best.

[Grand Bob]

I couldn't hold off, so I finished Fellowship. I began adjusting more to the different tint/contrast, but it is seemed strange to the end, a different film. There is no doubt that the film is darker. This was especially noticeable with the Lothlorien scenes, but that is one part of the film that has been least successful at reproducing the feel of the book anyway. However, I am still amazed at the increased definition of the new transfer. So onward to The Two Towers, or as Aragorn might say, "Let's hunt some orc." (Actually, the chances of him saying that are zero, but screenplay writers have to have fun, too. )

[ckenisell]

Perhaps the person who performed the color change failed to calibrate his monitor first. And/Or Peter Jackson approved the Blu-Ray when looking at it on a set that was not calibrated properly.

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by ckenisell

Perhaps the person who performed the color change failed to calibrate his monitor first. And/Or Peter Jackson approved the Blu-Ray when looking at it on a set that was not calibrated properly.

"If" overload! Seriously, though, I'm sure if they were evaluating a color issue, they made sure to do so on properly calibrated displays. I'm also sure some of the people posting in this thread who don't see the tint are watching the film on properly calibrated displays. Even those with no display issues are capable of missing the tint or considering it so minor as to be a non-issue

Originally Posted by PRO-630HD

There is definitely some black crush going on with the FOTR disc as well. During the Moria scenes this is very evident like at the beginning of chapter 36. A lot of shadow detail is being drowned out by black crush.

I can definitely attest to the crush and loss of shadow detail, and I mentioned it at several points in my official review. The only thing is that if Jackson intentionally made every change we see, as the Warner statement certainly indicates, and he approved it with 100% satisfaction, then we have to infer that he intentionally wanted those details to sink further into the shadows than they had before. It doesn't mean you have to like it, but it does suggest that the contrast changes, crush and loss of shadow detail are intentional, just like the tint. Hope that all made sense. It's almost my bedtime

[raygendreau]

There are many references to the “look” of LOTR EE BD. i.e “It doesn’t look the way it is supposed to look” or something to that effect.
There are only two people that truly know/knew how Lord Of Rings was supposed to look. Obviously, we aren’t going to get a critique from JRR Tolkien, but the books are available. The images are in narrative form, but at least they are readily available. The only other person that knows how Lord of The Rings is supposed to look is Peter Jackson. We have been told via WHV PR release that what you see on the EE BD is exactly how Peter Jackson wants it to look. There was never an issue of this sort with The Harry Potter BDs since JK Rowling is alive and well and accessible for comment.

How can we be sure that what WHV PR is telling us is true? I’m satisfied, but some of you are not. Perhaps it would help to contact Peter Jackson for a direct comment. We know people are trying, but so far… no luck. Has Peter Jackson ever said anything about this issue? Yes he did, in 2001. There is no reason to believe that his “vision” for the movie has changed over the years. The time, money and technology available to realize the changes, “to nudge it sideways from reality” as he says at the beginning of the Regrading Video has changed and has enabled him to more accurately set the mood and tone of the Fellowship of the Ring that he wanted from the beginning. Will he change it again in the future? Certainly a possibility. If you buy into what I’m saying and don’t want to watch the entire video again, just check the statement at 4:30 about the look he was going for in the Prancing Pony Scene, “green and uriney” in his words. EDIT: This video is included only to make the point that Jackson's objective to "nudge the movie "sideways" from the reality of New Zealand toward the mythic land and time of Middle Earth was not achieved in 2001, hence the second, more successful attempt with the changes to the new release. Please don't dwell on the techniques they used at the time in their attempt accomplish that goal.

YouTube - ‪LOTR Digital Color Grading Part 1 of 2‬‏

So far, I have watched Disk One of FOTR. So far, I think Jackson nailed it. It no longer looks like some medieval swashbuckler based on historical fact shot in New Zealand (disregarding the big hairy feet and pointy ears and people flying around on giant eagles, of course). I have now been whisked away to a mythic land of the ancient past to take part in a desperate mission to save my world. It took me about 30 seconds to become completely engrossed in this wonderful world of middle earth with the heroes I came to love when I read the Lord of the Rings for the first time in the mid ‘50s.

The way the BD is supposed to look is… well….the way it looks.

[gregmasciola]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

Honestly I wish I'd never read any of these threads. It's the curse of being an "enthusiast" of anything.

So do all who read such threads, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the Blu-Rays that were given to us.
Seriously, though, I'm in the same boat as you. If they were to offer an exchange (which I'm not expecting), I'll jump on it. But in all honesty, the movie didn't look nearly as bad as some of the screenshots do. The only times I was really bothered by the tint was when Sauroman was using the Palantir (he looked like a rotting corpse ) and some shots at Bilbo's birthday party, mostly when there are extreme hilights in Bilbo's hair. That's why I think the problem I have is more with the boosted contrast. There are some crushed blacks but at times the hilights are overblown a bit, which seems to have eliminated some detail. But I still enjoyed watching the movie just as much as I always have.

[Grand Bob]

One more thing; in answer to an earlier query, despite the new transfer Gandalf's sword Glamdring still does not possess the ability to detect orcs. Neither does Sting when the Fellowship reaches the 2nd Hall of the 1st Deep in Moria (the large chamber where they are introduced to the Balrog).

[WorkShed]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

I can definitely attest to the crush and loss of shadow detail, and I mentioned it at several points in my official review. The only thing is that if Jackson intentionally made every change we see, as the Warner statement certainly indicates, and he approved it with 100% satisfaction, then we have to infer that he intentionally wanted those details to sink further into the shadows than they had before.

I just don't understand why he would want to lower the white levels, though. That just doesn't make sense to me. When the main goal with this remastering of Fellowship was to make everything clearer, why make the whites duller?

[Sean72]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

There are many references to the “look” of LOTR EE BD. i.e “It doesn’t look the way it is supposed to look” or something to that effect.
There are only two people that truly know/knew how Lord Of Rings was supposed to look. Obviously, we aren’t going to get a critique from JRR Tolkien, but the books are available. The images are in narrative form, but at least they are readily available. The only other person that knows how Lord of The Rings is supposed to look is Peter Jackson. We have been told via WHV PR release that what you see on the EE BD is exactly how Peter Jackson wants it to look. There was never an issue of this sort with The Harry Potter BDs since JK Rowling is alive and well and accessible for comment.

How can we be sure that what WHV PR is telling us is true? I’m satisfied, but some of you are not. Perhaps it would help to contact Peter Jackson for a direct comment. We know people are trying, but so far… no luck. Has Peter Jackson ever said anything about this issue? Yes he did, in 2001. There is no reason to believe that his “vision” for the movie has changed over the years. The time, money and technology available to realize the changes, “to nudge it sideways from reality” as he says at the beginning of the Regrading Video has changed and has enabled him to more accurately set the mood and tone of the Fellowship of the Ring that he wanted from the beginning. Will he change it again in the future? Certainly a possibility. If you buy into what I’m saying and don’t want to watch the entire video again, just check the statement at 4:30 about the look he was going for in the Prancing Pony Scene, “green and uriney” in his words.

YouTube - ‪LOTR Digital Color Grading Part 1 of 2‬‏

So far, I have watched Disk One of FOTR. So far, I think Jackson nailed it. It no longer looks like some medieval swashbuckler based on historical fact shot in New Zealand (disregarding the big hairy feet and pointy ears and people flying around on giant eagles, of course). I have now been whisked away to a mythic land of the ancient past to take part in a desperate mission to save my world. It took me about 30 seconds to become completely engrossed in this wonderful world of middle earth with the heroes I came to love when I read the Lord of the Rings for the first time in the mid ‘50s.

The way the BD is supposed to look is… well….the way it looks.

There is nothing done in the new EE that couldn't have been done back in 2001 with the tools that were available then. I think the new regrade is fantastic aside from the green tint and the black crush (which may very well be tied together depending on the shade and the blending mode used for the green overlay.)