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

[Underworld54]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

I don't understand why the apologists and deniers are still here. You have no dog in this fight since you have a version of FOTR you are 100% satisfied with. The only reason you could still be involved in this discussion is arguing for the sake of it.

I don't understand why you guys are still here either. Since Warner came out and said this is how PJ intended the film to look, I guess you guys have no dog in the fight either.

[Anubis2005X]

Originally Posted by Karl Murks

Since this apparently got lost in the latest eruption of flames, please can anybody check?

The digital copy is the old transfer...



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by MEB

Please calm down. You have been very vocal that there is absolutely no green tint whatsoever when you watch FOTR EE Blu-ray. Given the overwhelming objective proof that the FOTR EE Blu-ray DOES have some green/teal/cyan tint, I simply stunned by your absolute certainty that no such tint exists. There are VERY few people claiming the complete and utter lack of a green tint. Most people are saying that they see the green tint (to varying degrees here and there) but they don't find it objectionable. THAT is a subjective opinion that I can understand.

I'm pleased for you that you are so happy with the transfer. But if you are so happy, why are you so angry? Why are you so bothered by the fact that some of us CAN see the green tint and wish to discuss it? If you don't want to read anymore about it then I suggest simply not reading this topic. I could understand it if it was only 1 or 2 people mentioning the green tint. But it's far more people than that. All of these reviews mention the green tint:

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/4590..._extended.html

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-L.../19929/#Review

http://blubrew.com/2011/06/16/the-fe...ended-edition/

That last one was recently updated with even more information about the green tint!

My apologies for asking you to prove to us that your FOTR EE Blu-rays are completely free of the green tint. I'd like to see this utter lack of green tint. But there are so few of you taking that position and you were so vocal about it, I figured you were a good candidate to show us the white. Obviously, I was mistaken.

Mark

Thank you for pointing out the update at blubrew, I wasn't aware of it.

[oaguirre]

I'm just waiting for PJ to say something, not WB...

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by Underworld54

I don't understand why you guys are still here either. Since Warner came out and said this is how PJ intended the film to look, I guess you guys have no dog in the fight either.

What a broken record.

Peter Jackson hasn't personally made a peep about this. I would cite examples of misleading PR statements made in the history of marketing, but I'm pretty sure it would break the internet.

We want a different version of FOTR. Therefore, we are trying to motivate people to let WB and PJ know.

You don't want a different version of FOTR. Therefore, you are only here to argue with those who do.

[Karl Murks]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

I don't understand why the apologists and deniers are still here arguing. You have no dog in this fight since you have a version of FOTR you are 100% satisfied with. The only reason you could still be involved in this discussion is arguing for the sake of it.

I think some people are deriving a perverse pleasure out of disrupting the discussion with pointless attacks.

Or they just can't deal emotionally with the possibility that their 'precious' may be defective...

[Underworld54]

Originally Posted by mredman

Yeah i don't think he will do that. I still think he thinks it is enough that he made the statement at the theaters and warner did it for him last week.

The evidence is so clear that this is intentional. I just find it hard to believe that anyone thinks otherwise even after warner's statement last week on the issue.

Frankly I think PJ might be a little turned off by the *****ing over how he intended the movie to look. He doesn't owe anyone an explanation. Either buy the films or don't, there's your choices.

[JamesKurtovich]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

What a broken record.

Peter Jackson hasn't personally made a peep about this. I would cite examples of misleading PR statements made in the history of marketing, but I'm pretty sure it would break the internet.

We want a different version of FOTR. Therefore, we are trying to motivate people to let WB and PJ know.

You don't want a different version of FOTR. Therefore, you are only here to argue with those who do.

The version we've known, owned, watched, and loved for the past 10 years.

Plus, intentional or not, most agree that the film would only benefit from the removal of that imposing green tint. Giving someone feedback is not a crime or something only internet trolls do. The internet is a powerful medium for voicing an opinion.

[Karl Murks]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

I would cite examples of misleading PR statements made in the history of marketing, but I'm pretty sure it would break the internet.

A considerable number of PR statements are ultimately bullshit because the main reason for their release is to sugarcoat failure.

And that's why I don't believe anything they state unless confirmed by a trustworthy source.

[Underworld54]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

What a broken record.

Peter Jackson hasn't personally made a peep about this. I would cite examples of misleading PR statements made in the history of marketing, but I'm pretty sure it would break the internet.

We want a different version of FOTR. Therefore, we are trying to motivate people to let WB and PJ know.

You don't want a different version of FOTR. Therefore, you are only here to argue with those who do.

I think I'll head over there and tell them I think it looks great and to not change a thing. I'm more than pleased with the set.

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by Karl Murks

I think some people are deriving a perverse pleasure out of disrupting the discussion with pointless attacks.

Or they just can't deal emotionally with the possibility that their 'precious' may be defective...

I think it's a little of column A, a little of column B.

People are personally offended that their subjective perception or eyesight is being called into question, so they sling a little mud, some mud is slung back at them, and then "it's on!"

Then there's the niggling concern in the back of their minds that the green is NOT awesome, and they just don't want to accept that this release is not ideal, so "Peter Jackson says so" is enough to convince them of what they wanted so badly to believe.

I just don't get what they will get out of it if they are "right". No new version, no change, just the satisfaction that they "beat" someone else in an internet argument? I know the people asking for a green-free remaster at least have an end result they're working towards.

[Karl Murks]

Originally Posted by Underworld54

Frankly I think PJ might be a little turned off by the *****ing over how he intended the movie to look. He doesn't owe anyone an explanation. Either buy the films or don't, there's your choices.

Or complain and try to effect change. Admitting defeat and crawling back into the corner is a loser's stance.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

Now you're singling out individual users and judging them. Way to take the high road.

What exactly are you doing to "reduce aggression" here in your attempt to instigate a conflict between us?

Glass houses.

I'm not putting members down (including yourself) for having an opinion about the films, I'm having a go at the people like u who are putting down other people for thinking differently, there's a difference. If the Mod's go over this thread after their holiday weekend, then I'm sure they will see what I see when it comes to your posts. Anyway if u want to disrespect and patronize others that have a different opinion to u then keep doing what u have been doing if it makes u feel good.

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by Underworld54

I think I'll head over there and tell them I think it looks great and to not change a thing. I'm more than pleased with the set.

To what end? So you can still have the exact same version you currently own that nobody can ever take away from you?

Oh right, just to spite the other side of the argument. I hope you at least retain enough perspective to understand how unbelievably, irrefutably petty and childish that is.

[lDlisturb3d]

Can we just appreciate the movie fellas, Lets talk about how great it is instead of its FLAWS.

[Underworld54]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

To what end? So you can still have the exact same version you currently own that nobody can ever take away from you?

Oh right, just to spite the other side of the argument. I hope you at least retain enough perspective to understand how unbelievably, irrefutably petty and childish that is.

To give them their due respect for putting together a great blu-ray presentation. Are they not allowed to get praise?

[Ispoke]

Originally Posted by Karl Murks

A considerable number of PR statements are ultimately bullshit because the main reason for their release is to sugarcoat failure.

And that's why I don't believe anything they state unless confirmed by a trustworthy source.

Maybe, but this may shed some light on the question of if he has seen the EE. This quote is from an interview with PJ before the release of the theatrical Blu-ray

Well, it keeps changing. I am not the best person to ask about that believe it or not as I am not in charge of the Blu-ray, Warner Home Video is. I believe it is scheduled for sometime next year. They keep changing the date…I don’t know why. I’ve seen the Blu-ray as they sent it to me to approve and I looked at the film and it looks fantastic on Blu-ray but I don’t know the date.

So he was sent the blu-ray for approval first. Now does anyone see any reason why Warner would not do the same with the EE? Their statement would seem to suggest they did.

Another interesting quote (to do with the Hobbit)

Somebody wrote something on the internet and a lot of nonsense happened. You don’t want to believe everything you read on the internet.

Relevant to this discussion, no?

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by Ispoke

So he was sent the blu-ray for approval first. Now does anyone see any reason why Warner would not do the same with the EE? Their statement would seem to suggest they did.

Why is it so hard to believe that PJ did see the original master, but that the master was accidentally altered before going to print? I mean doesn't the green tint, putting aside completely how it looks, seem totally out of place? It doesn't fit with the other movies, it doesn't fit with previous versions, TTT and ROTK look roughly the same on BD and DVD, and the tint has some side-effects like swallowing up detail and compressing the color spectrum.

I mean this is just logical, "it doesn't add up" detective work, not a subjective opinion on whether or not it looks good.

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by Underworld54

Frankly I think PJ might be a little turned off by the *****ing over how he intended the movie to look. He doesn't owe anyone an explanation. Either buy the films or don't, there's your choices.

I honestly don't have any problem with you, and I'm not angry.

I bought the set, and have watched FOTR about 3 1/2 times already. I am very impressed with the added detail in most shots, and the color grading changes don't really bother me at all. The blanket tint does bother me though. In some shots, I think it actually looks great, but quite a few parts look too dull, and a few look too green.

Peter Jackson and Andrew Lesnie did do some color grading changes, which is what I think they approved. I personally don't think the blanket tint is what they intended, but I would just like to hear them say something about it either way.

It really isn't that bad overall, when actually watching the movie in motion, in a darkened room, but if I had the choice, I would rather have the movie with the new transfer detail and new color grading but not the dull tint.

[Karl Murks]

Originally Posted by Underworld54

So is constantly whining about something that is indeed intentional. It's a losing battle pal.

Only if it is indeed intentional. I'm still not convinced because the thing is just too gross and too blunt and too simplistic.

And even then, maybe it does help. The first Gladiator release was of low quality but could not under any circumstances be considered defective. And yet we got an exchange.

As I said, admitting defeat is a loser's stance, especially when not all cards have been dealt yet.

Originally Posted by Underworld54

To give them their due respect for putting together a great blu-ray presentation. Are they not allowed to get praise?

You might tell them that, if it's your opinion.
But you may not tell others to shut up just because they disagree and consider the scientifically proven changes detrimental to the film.