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

[Duffy12]

From thedigitalbits-


****************

"Now then... before we get to the release news today, we have a little more Lord of the Rings: Extended Blu-ray information for you. A lot of people have asked about the new 2K remaster of Fellowship. Specifically, a few people have wondered if WHV was cheaping out by not remastering at at least 4K. We've confirmed that 2K was the resolution of the final post-production/editorial master for the film. So unless and until someone goes in and rescans all the film elements at higher resolution, then rebuilds the edit and re-renders all the visual effects at the higher resolution, 2K is the highest resolution element available to master a Blu-ray from. And that's what WHV has apparently gone back to. Today, this kind of film mastering work is mostly done at 4K, but back in 2000-2001, 2K was standard.

A couple other comments on the set: A few readers have complained that The Appendices and Costa Botes documentaries are only included on DVD in standard definition. In other words: Why haven't they been upgraded to high-definition for the Blu-ray? Surely they were shot in HD? And the answer is no, they weren't. We've confirmed that all of The Appendices material was shot in 16x9 SD and the finished documentaries were in that resolution and aspect ratio. What's more, the Costa Botes documentaries were 4x3 letterboxed SD. You have to remember, from post-production to finished DVDs, this material was produced in the 1998-2003 timeframe. The HD transition had only just begun, and studios weren't in the habit of paying for HD behind-the-scenes material yet. I think it was closer to 2005-2006 that DVD producers really began shooting such material in HD in anticipation of high-def discs. In the last 5 years or so, it's obviously become standard practice to shoot "making of" in HD. But back then, not so much. So SD IS the final resolution of all this material. As to why all the SD bonus content wasn't collected onto BD-25s for this release, we can only assume it was done to save authoring costs. One other note: The set will include a collectible map of Middle Earth, and the booklets for each film will include a chapter listing and guide to all the extras. So there you go. For those of you've who had questions about these issues, we hope this clarifies things for you a little. We're expecting more technical information from WHV on the set soon, so we'll pass it on to you here as it comes in."


*****************


http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents

[X400]

Some number play here for you guys i posted this in the news comments section but id like to post it here too so there could be an actual discussion

Let's look @ the Remastered Gladiator 10th Anniversary Blu-Ray disc which looks AMAZING

MPEG-4 AVC Video has a bitrate of 17661 kbps

Gladiator has a DTS-HDMA track however its 5.1 @ 4436 kbps (let's do a very simple calculation for another audio stream 4436/6 = 739.34 so let's add another stream = 5175.38 (it's not like this i know but just for the sake of this)

ROTK Extended = 251mins = 15,060 seconds (we have to remember Credits use very little kbps but Im lazy so ill ignore it)

so

15,060 * 17,661 = 26,59GB
15,060 * 5,175.38 = 7,79GB
Total = 34.4GB

They could easily increase the Video bitrate up a great deal as there is still room for 15GB+

(the gladiator 10th anniversary disc included the theatrical and extended editions of the movie)


So don't tell me that they can't fit the extended editions on 1 disc




OR if you want to compare with the Tron Legacy blu-ray settings



the MPEG-4 AVC runs @ 24,283 kbps
the 7.1 DTS-HDMA track runs @ 5,731kbps (let's downgrade that to 6.1 = 5015kbps)

So lets throw ROTK into this running those settings

15,060*24,283 = 36,57GB
15,060*5,015 = 7,55GB

This equals 44.12GB

Let's add a French, Spanish dolby track 15,060*640*2 = 1,92GB

Disc total = 46.04GB

Commentary? 15,060*320*4 = 1,92gb

Disc total = 47.96GB


Granted this may be too jam packed I think there's some overhead needed i cant remember the amount though



Let's KEEP IN MIND the Theatrical Edition of ROTKs BLU-RAY video bitrate is @ 19,140KBPS let's Extended edition it: (15060*19140=28.8GB)
And the 5.1 DTS-HDMA Audio track is only @ 2,296KBPS (15060*2678=4.03GB) adjusted for 6.1
Disc Total = 32.83GB

+ commentaries/different languages(noted in the Tron Legacy Comparo) = 36.67GB (still loads of room for special features etc)


But you get the picture

[Cook]

Originally Posted by X400

Some number play here for you guys i posted this in the news comments section but id like to post it here too so there could be an actual discussion

This. And to anyone who says im to lazy to change a disc, no I just dont like breaks in films unless they were filmed with that break in mind. And yes I am able to set through a movie without having to go to the bathroom as usually I don't eat and drink while watching a film. Even if I do I can still watch a three hour film without having to go. I know most people can't do this and to that end you have a pause button as for myself I don't need a disc change as an excuse to stretch and take a break. I like an uninterrupted viewing experience.

[Sith]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

Wait won't be long. I am already preparing myself for the first screen shots and the screen shot police day

There is really no Star Wars news but a release date and a picture of a box and that thread is out of control. When there is actual news it's gonna be time to just sit back and grab some popcorn.

[Exile]

*spends 10x as long complaining that the movies will be on 2 discs than the amount of time spent changing those discs during a lifetime*

[Gardenofstone10]

Blu Ray split on two discs......good god. Well, I'm a ***** for these movies and will purchase this edition and then the next, and the next....

[Cook]

Originally Posted by Exile

*spends 10x as long complaining that the movies will be on 2 discs than the amount of time spent changing those discs during a lifetime*

Lol, I'm at work most of the time I'm on here so in a way I'm getting paid to express my displeasure. What is funny is that had these been on one disc a piece there would be far more whining going on. People were whining about it plenty when it was only speculation. Its always easy to deride others of their opinion when your getting what you want.

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by nathan_393

When is screen shot police day going to be declared a national holiday?

Isn't every day, screen shot police day?

And there would be complaining whatever Warner did. If they put every movie on a separate Blu-ray, then there would be complaints about the quality. If they put all of the bonus material on a single Blu-ray, then they would complain why they wouldn't be in HD, or why there aren't any new features.
I'm really excited for this set. It looks like they're going to improve the PQ, and the extras for the Extended Editions were among the best ever made. So we get those, and the Costa Botes documentaries on top, and it's still not enough?

[joenostalgia23]

I really don't think it's that big of a deal. I mean, there are several films that can be see in separate parts.
Harry Potter 7 is being released in two parts, and it takes several months to change the disc.
Kill Bill was a film cut in half that actually flowed better as two distinct entries than as one long film.
Hell, The Hobbit, the prequel to these films, is split in two as well.

To me, the extended editions are unbearably long(Can't imagine sitting down for over 4 hours and didn't when I saw ROTK), but watchable when divided into parts. The changing of the disc can be treated as an intermission or as a split between a halved film.

And yes, it is possible to fit the film onto one disc, but it would compromise quality. Grindhouse ended up losing lossless audio so that the special features would stay and so the PQ wouldn't need to be more compressed.

There are long length films, but none reach the length of Return of the King and none feature 6.1 lossless audio tracks. When the audio track features 7 lossless channels, lasting for over four hours, in addition to commentaries which also equal that length, plus alternate language tracks, and on disc special features(videogame trailers, advertisements) and subtitles, etc. then quality is going to be compromised SOMEWHERE.
And if Return of the King was split while the other entries were kept on one disc... that'd just appear strange(this is simillar to why WB wouldn't want to fit all 3 SD DVDs worth of features onto one single Blu-ray, because it'd generate confusion)

I personally think there's other things worthy of being discussed such as the transfers for TTT and ROTK and whether they should be remastered, or the probability of discreet 6.1 etc. that we're ignoring to talk about how much we hate getting up to change a disc or how fat you think someone is because they have that personal preference.

[SleeperAgent]

Well I'll have it day 1 regardless.

I just wish it was 9 discs, 6 for movies, and an HD supplemental disc for each movie. 15 is just way too many. Feels kind of unnecesarry. If they had an Extended trilogy 6 disc set without special features I'd but that instead. I know they will eventually transfer all the features to HD for the ultimate Hobbit + LOTR Trilogy super extended boxset (limited edition)

[Jumpman]

I know they will eventually transfer all the features to HD for the ultimate Hobbit + LOTR Trilogy super extended boxset (limited edition).

Can't be done. The supplements were shot in SD, not HD.

http://thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents

[Josh]

I'm not sure why Warner is claiming to be remastering FOTR. The theatrical version and extended edition would be two separate masters regardless. That is also likely the reason why you are seeing the film split on two discs - the orginal masters for the extended edition were split, so they just haven't taken the time to put them back together for this release.

There will be another release after The Hobbit is put on Blu-ray. Peter Jackson has already commented that he has more special feature material that he was planning for this release, but didn't have the time since he had to take up work on The Hobbit. Maybe we'll see the films released on single discs for that release.

[NYorker]

I asked Bill Hunt why only FOTR was remastered and not the other two films. I understood that Fellowship was finished before HD post production, and therefore required a new transfer.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

From thedigitalbits-


****************

"Now then... before we get to the release news today, we have a little more Lord of the Rings: Extended Blu-ray information for you. A lot of people have asked about the new 2K remaster of Fellowship. Specifically, a few people have wondered if WHV was cheaping out by not remastering at at least 4K. We've confirmed that 2K was the resolution of the final post-production/editorial master for the film. So unless and until someone goes in and rescans all the film elements at higher resolution, then rebuilds the edit and re-renders all the visual effects at the higher resolution, 2K is the highest resolution element available to master a Blu-ray from. And that's what WHV has apparently gone back to. Today, this kind of film mastering work is mostly done at 4K, but back in 2000-2001, 2K was standard.

A couple other comments on the set: A few readers have complained that The Appendices and Costa Botes documentaries are only included on DVD in standard definition. In other words: Why haven't they been upgraded to high-definition for the Blu-ray? Surely they were shot in HD? And the answer is no, they weren't. We've confirmed that all of The Appendices material was shot in 16x9 SD and the finished documentaries were in that resolution and aspect ratio. What's more, the Costa Botes documentaries were 4x3 letterboxed SD. You have to remember, from post-production to finished DVDs, this material was produced in the 1998-2003 timeframe. The HD transition had only just begun, and studios weren't in the habit of paying for HD behind-the-scenes material yet. I think it was closer to 2005-2006 that DVD producers really began shooting such material in HD in anticipation of high-def discs. In the last 5 years or so, it's obviously become standard practice to shoot "making of" in HD. But back then, not so much. So SD IS the final resolution of all this material. As to why all the SD bonus content wasn't collected onto BD-25s for this release, we can only assume it was done to save authoring costs. One other note: The set will include a collectible map of Middle Earth, and the booklets for each film will include a chapter listing and guide to all the extras. So there you go. For those of you've who had questions about these issues, we hope this clarifies things for you a little. We're expecting more technical information from WHV on the set soon, so we'll pass it on to you here as it comes in."


*****************


http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents

Thanks for the info. That should quiet all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, but I doubt it.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Josh

There will be another release after The Hobbit is put on Blu-ray. Peter Jackson has already commented that he has more special feature material that he was planning for this release, but didn't have the time since he had to take up work on The Hobbit. Maybe we'll see the films released on single discs for that release.

God, I seriously hope NOT.

The ONLY thing that I can see Jackson adding to the original set that would make it worth a double dip would be the inclusion of Tom Bombadill that were never shot. Rumor has it that is why Elijah Wood and other have made a return to the set so he CAN shoot those scenes.

Unless the set we are getting in June has terrible transfers I can't otherwise see what else they would add beyond the special features we already have.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by radagast

Thanks for the info. That should quiet all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, but I doubt it.

Even if the extras were shot in standard definition they still should be on one Blu-Ray instead of 3 DVDs. Its a shame these weren't shot in HD

As I said this is a 15 disc set that should have been a 6 disc set

[threefiftyrocket]

OMFG! Now people are complaining about a 2k remaster!?!? This is ridiculous! No matter what information gets brought out, most of it good, people wanna complain. The movies spread over 2 discs (hopefully so they can make the bit rate SUPER high to necessitate 2 discs) people complain. The special features, not on BD but like that REALLY matters since they are all shot in SD (as I said from the beginning) people complain. Now they are going back to the original 2k master for FotR since so many people complained about the PQ of the TC on BD, and people complain that its not 4k. Seriously!?!?

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

OMFG! Now people are complaining about a 2k remaster!?!? This is ridiculous! No matter what information gets brought out, most of it good, people wanna complain. The movies spread over 2 discs (hopefully so they can make the bit rate SUPER high to necessitate 2 discs) people complain. The special features, not on BD but like that REALLY matters since they are all shot in SD (as I said from the beginning) people complain. Now they are going back to the original 2k master for FotR since so many people complained about the PQ of the TC on BD, and people complain that its not 4k. Seriously!?!?

Man, you took the words right out of my mouth! haha
It's getting a little out of hand here.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by merrick97

God, I seriously hope NOT.

The ONLY thing that I can see Jackson adding to the original set that would make it worth a double dip would be the inclusion of Tom Bombadill that were never shot. Rumor has it that is why Elijah Wood and other have made a return to the set so he CAN shoot those scenes.

Unless the set we are getting in June has terrible transfers I can't otherwise see what else they would add beyond the special features we already have.

No, no, no...Elijah Wood has returned for shooting, but not Dom, Billy, or Sean. That should tell you we'll be seeing some kind of bridging device with Frodo, not re-shoots on any of the films. If anyone will do re-shoots, it will be Andy Serkis, so that the bug-eyed CGI version of Gollum in Fellowship of the Ring can be corrected for continuity with Two Towers and Return of the King.

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

No, no, no...Elijah Wood has returned for shooting, but not Dom, Billy, or Sean. That should tell you we'll be seeing some kind of bridging device with Frodo, not re-shoots on any of the films. If anyone will do re-shoots, it will be Andy Serkis, so that the bug-eyed CGI version of Gollum in Fellowship of the Ring can be corrected for continuity with Two Towers and Return of the King.

And even then, couldn't they just fix that with effects to make him look like the other Gollums?