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

[El_Jay]

The Two Towers is my favorite LOTR film. Different strokes, as they say...

[Stinky-Dinkins]

I thought Gandalf's beard was too fluffy. Never so fluffy in the books.

[Sephiroth5929]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I disagree with you concerning the two I bolded. The Warg battle is one of the best action scenes in the entire trilogy and I thoroughly enjoyed Gollum's flashback because it showed the audience what he was like before the ring poisoned his mind and body.

I agree.

[Drew664]

Originally Posted by philzilla

Awesome, so could you tell me how it ends?

LOL

Ah, you know what I meant! The 1st book.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

How many of you really, really like the love story of Arwen and Aragorn as it is presented on screen? It's probably my favorite aspect of the story.

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

I thought Gandalf's beard was too fluffy. Never so fluffy in the books.

Have you seen some of the pictures from the new Hobbit movie? Although it is only sixty years before LotR, and Gandalf had been in Middle-earth for thousands of years, it looks like he's been using some 'Just for Wizards' on his hair and beard.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

I thought Gandalf's beard was too fluffy. Never so fluffy in the books.

Oh good another excuse to not buy the blu-ray's until they fix it.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

Look, I'm not criticizing Jackson about expanding the Battle of Helm's Deep. It's a battle. What I can criticize him for is a lot of the Two Towers and parts of Return of the King for drawing things out way too much...and in the case of the Two Towers, not really figuring out the script of that film out before they shot it.

It's easily the worse of the three films. The Extended Cut of that film should've been no more than 3 hours in length. That's how much fat is on that movie that didn't need to be.

That's funny, I haven't read the books but it was the only one of the 3 films I actually liked.

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by frogmort

it looks like he's been using some 'Just for Wizards' on his hair and beard.

Just for Wizards is actually just Just for Men with a tablespoon of horse semen added to it.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

The Battle of Helm's Deep is actually like a page and a half in the novel.

Look, I'm not criticizing Jackson about expanding the Battle of Helm's Deep. It's a battle. What I can criticize him for is a lot of the Two Towers and parts of Return of the King for drawing things out way too much...and in the case of the Two Towers, not really figuring out the script of that film out before they shot it.

It's easily the worse of the three films. The Extended Cut of that film should've been no more than 3 hours in length. That's how much fat is on that movie that didn't need to be.

The Warg Battle? Get rid of it.
Arwen? Didn't need to be there.
Pippin and Merry? Could've been just cameos in that film and it wouldn't have hurt it one bit.
Frodo and Sam to Osgilith? Terrible decision. Complete plot hole if you ask me.
Gimli? Bring back the proud Gimli from Fellowship, instead of the comic relief character we got in the last two films.
Flashback of Gollum to open Return of the King? Stupid and unnecessary.
Saruman's demise? Move it to the end of the Two Towers where it belongs and have a double cliffhanger of Pippin and the Palantir and Gollum's reference to Shelob.

I've been trying to stay out of the discussion because I like to see what others have to say. But viewing this post touched on something that I felt from the first time I saw the EE's. Fans of the books and movies generally prefer the EE's over the theatrical editions, because we want more of Middle-earth. IMO, the problem with the EE's is not the length, but the choice of material that Jackson and Boyens have selected. A few of the extended clips are extremely well done, for example the previously mentioned scenes of Aragorn at his mother's (Gilraen's) grave and the very brief inclusion of Faramir and Eowyn at the Houses of Healing.

I agree with some of the scenes you mention, for example, the utter waste of time spent on Osgiliath and the "warg battle". For a movie that was a special effects spectacular, the warg scene left alot to be desired. Thousands of men threatened by (a few dozen?) wargs, where the CG was not up to the level of the rest of the film IMO. This battle, which appeared to be no more than a skirmish is later commented on at Helm's Deep by Bernard Hill (one of his few bad lines) as being some kind of victory that has cost them many lives. Equally mysterious is the appearance of the Corsairs of Umbar when Aragorn and company emerge from the Paths of the Dead. He starts crying because he sees them coming up the river - in ten (?) ships? According to Alan Lee, Sauron's main force at Minas Tirith as depicted in the film was about 200,000 - so an additional thousand (if that) is the show stopper?

Other scenes were welcome but less well executed, for example the gift-giving scene in Lothlorien. I was really hoping for something spectacular here, because Lothlorien is one of my favorite chapters in the entire book - it is Tolkien's vision of heaven on earth and he put some of his most intense effort into this chapter and the character of Galadriel. In the movie, we get a somewhat frightening night scene of Caras Galadhon with an intimidating Galadriel. The EE adds the gift-giving scene with a scenario closer to what Tolkien described, with a more down-to-earth Galadriel. This is one place where huge improvements to the TE could have been implemented. Why not include the night scene at Nimrodel, one of the most enchanted places in the book, or better yet - Cerin Amroth, which WAS the most desirable place in Middle-earth. An excerpt from the book:

"... Frodo stood awhile lost in wonder. It seemed to him that he had stepped through a high window that looked on a vanished world. A light was upon it for which his language had no name. All that he saw was shapely, but the shapes seemed at once clear cut, as if they had been first conceived and drawn at the uncovering of his eyes, and ancient as if they had endured for ever. He saw no colour but those he knew, gold and white and blue and green, but they were fresh and poignant, as if he had at that moment perceived them and made for them names new and wonderful. In winter here no heart could mourn for summer and spring. No blemish or sickness or deformity could be seen in anything that grew upon the earth. On the land of Lorien there was no stain... When he had gone and passed again into the outer world, still Frodo the wanderer from the Shire would walk there, upon the grass among elanor and niphredil in fair Lothlorien.

[Aragorn] looked at Frodo and smiled. 'Here is the heart of Elvendom on earth,' he said, 'and here my heart dwells ever, unless there be a light beyond the dark roads that we still must tread, you and I."

Is that the sense we get about this most important place from the movie? The gift-giving scene was welcome, and we'll take what we can get - at least they could have included the correct gifts.

There are EE scenes that are questionable but harmless (e.g. Eowyn giving Aragorn soup), or harmless but strange (e.g., the lengthy sequence of Aragorn falling off of the cliff, being revived by Arwen and his horse and eventually making it to Helm's Deep). And then there are the bizarre scenes, such as the avalanche of skulls on the Paths of the Dead, when many other possibilities were available, such as the dramatic scene with the body of Baldor at the door of the cave to the unknown I quoted a few posts back. Lastly, the absurd scenes, such as the Witch-king breaking Gandalf's staff, Faramir's men beating the daylights out of Gollum, Frodo offering the Witch-king the Ring, etc, etc. There are just too many to list.

For people who haven't read the book and liked the movies, I would imagine that most or all of the EE scenes would be spectacular. For those familiar with the story, the two hours of added material are welcome, but frustating for the tremedous number of lost opportunities and "might-have-been" moments.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

I've been trying to stay out of the discussion because I like to see what others have to say. But viewing this post touched on something that I felt from the first time I saw the EE's. Fans of the books and movies generally prefer the EE's over the theatrical editions, because we want more of Middle-earth. IMO, the problem with the EE's is not the length, but the choice of material that Jackson and Boyens have selected. A few of the extended clips are extremely well done, for example the previously mentioned scenes of Aragorn at his mother's (Gilraen's) grave and the very brief inclusion of Faramir and Eowyn at the Houses of Healing.

I agree with some of the scenes you mention, for example, the utter waste of time spent on Osgiliath and the "warg battle". For a movie that was a special effects spectacular, the warg scene left alot to be desired. Thousands of men threatened by (a few dozen?) wargs, where the CG was not up to the level of the rest of the film IMO. This battle, which appeared to be no more than a skirmish is later commented on at Helm's Deep by Bernard Hill (one of his few bad lines) as being some kind of victory that has cost them many lives. Equally mysterious is the appearance of the Corsairs of Umbar when Aragorn and company emerge from the Paths of the Dead. He starts crying because he sees them coming up the river - in ten (?) ships? According to Alan Lee, Sauron's main force at Minas Tirith as depicted in the film was about 200,000 - so an additional thousand (if that) is the show stopper?

Other scenes were welcome but less well executed, for example the gift-giving scene in Lothlorien. I was really hoping for something spectacular here, because Lothlorien is one of my favorite chapters in the entire book - it is Tolkien's vision of heaven on earth and he put some of his most intense effort into this chapter and the character of Galadriel. In the movie, we get a somewhat frightening night scene of Caras Galadhon with an intimidating Galadriel. The EE adds the gift-giving scene with a scenario closer to what Tolkien described, with a more down-to-earth Galadriel. This is one place where huge improvements to the TE could have been implemented. Why not include the night scene at Nimrodel, one of the most enchanted places in the book, or better yet - Cerin Amroth, which WAS the most desirable place in Middle-earth. An excerpt from the book:

"... Frodo stood awhile lost in wonder. It seemed to him that he had stepped through a high window that looked on a vanished world. A light was upon it for which his language had no name. All that he saw was shapely, but the shapes seemed at once clear cut, as if they had been first conceived and drawn at the uncovering of his eyes, and ancient as if they had endured for ever. He saw no colour but those he knew, gold and white and blue and green, but they were fresh and poignant, as if he had at that moment perceived them and made for them names new and wonderful. In winter here no heart could mourn for summer and spring. No blemish or sickness or deformity could be seen in anything that grew upon the earth. On the land of Lorien there was no stain... When he had gone and passed again into the outer world, still Frodo the wanderer from the Shire would walk there, upon the grass among elanor and niphredil in fair Lothlorien.

[Aragorn] looked at Frodo and smiled. 'Here is the heart of Elvendom on earth,' he said, 'and here my heart dwells ever, unless there be a light beyond the dark roads that we still must tread, you and I."

Is that the sense we get about this most important place from the movie? The gift-giving scene was welcome, and we'll take what we can get - at least they could have included the correct gifts.

There are EE scenes that are questionable but harmless (e.g. Eowyn giving Aragorn soup), or harmless but strange (e.g., the lengthy sequence of Aragorn falling off of the cliff, being revived by Arwen and his horse and eventually making it to Helm's Deep). And then there are the bizarre scenes, such as the avalanche of skulls on the Paths of the Dead, when many other possibilities were available, such as the dramatic scene with the body of Baldor at the door of the cave to the unknown I quoted a few posts back. Lastly, the absurd scenes, such as the Witch-king breaking Gandalf's staff, Faramir's men beating the daylights out of Gollum, Frodo offering the Witch-king the Ring, etc, etc. There are just too many to list.

For people who haven't read the book and liked the movies, I would imagine that most or all of the EE scenes would be spectacular. For those familiar with the story, the two hours of added material are welcome, but frustating for the tremedous number of lost opportunities and "might-have-been" moments.

Bang on, Bob. As a person who only read Tolkien's work once, it leaves the kind of impression that once the films go away from Tolkien, you can feel it.

I've been on record as saying that the Fellowship EE is a masterpiece...the best adaptation of the bunch. Even with the adaptive scenes, they fell very much like Tolkien in that film. Somewhere down the line, Jackson and company lost something because their choices in the final two films are very hit or miss and I've longed to try to understand why in the wake of the Fellowship EE.

I'll disagree with you slightly on the gift giving scene. Different than the text, yes but still feels very Tolkien.

I like the confrontation of the Witch King and Gandalf in the EE of King only because it solves a continuity problem of Gandalf's staff in the theatrical cut of the film. And, the Mouth of Sauron should've always been in the theatrical cut of King. Also, Aragorn revealing himself to Sauron using the Palantir should've also been in the theatrical cut as well.

The Warg battle? Have it as it was in the book, which essentially was a chase sequence. By doing that, you get rid of a lot of fat that was added in the middle of Towers...especially the stuff with Aragorn. It's just not a good sequence as presented in the film. I think Jackson even comments on it in the commentary saying it was a sequence they figured out and finished very, very late in post-production of Towers.

It shows.

But, I do agree with your notion Bob that if somebody has not read the books, the extra stuff in the EE's is a treasure of goodies.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I disagree with you concerning the two I bolded. The Warg battle is one of the best action scenes in the entire trilogy and I thoroughly enjoyed Gollum's flashback because it showed the audience what he was like before the ring poisoned his mind and body.

But, it's not needed. Frodo is a walking example of what the Ring can do to a person. We don't need a flashback to remind us. We've had 8 hours up to that point of examples of the power of the Ring.

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

Just for Wizards is actually just Just for Men with a tablespoon of horse semen added to it.

I thought it was giant eagle semen.

[Lope de Aguirre]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

Look, I'm not criticizing Jackson about expanding the Battle of Helm's Deep. It's a battle. What I can criticize him for is a lot of the Two Towers and parts of Return of the King for drawing things out way too much...and in the case of the Two Towers, not really figuring out the script of that film out before they shot it.

It's easily the worse of the three films. The Extended Cut of that film should've been no more than 3 hours in length. That's how much fat is on that movie that didn't need to be.

The Warg Battle? Get rid of it.
Arwen? Didn't need to be there.
Pippin and Merry? Could've been just cameos in that film and it wouldn't have hurt it one bit.
Frodo and Sam to Osgilith? Terrible decision. Complete plot hole if you ask me.
Gimli? Bring back the proud Gimli from Fellowship, instead of the comic relief character we got in the last two films.
Flashback of Gollum to open Return of the King? Stupid and unnecessary.
Saruman's demise? Move it to the end of the Two Towers where it belongs and have a double cliffhanger of Pippin and the Palantir and Gollum's reference to Shelob.

Exactly.
In addition I hated the hero fun during the battle of Helm's Deep.
Gimli and Legolas joking and measuring penises during a dramatic battle?
Legolas surfing on his shield?
Aragorn and Gimli singlehandly fighting hundreds of Uruk-Hai?

Man that was weak...

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by Lope de Aguirre

Exactly.
In addition I hated the hero fun during the battle of Helm's Deep.
Gimli and Legolas jokming and measuring penises during a dramatic battle?
Legolas surfing on his shield?
Aragorn and Gimli singlehandly fighting hundreds of Uruk-Hai?

Man that was weak...

Again, I don't understand Jackson going "Hollywood" with the text in the last two pictures when he and his team were very elegant, graceful, and respectful of the text, while also adapting it in the Fellowship of the Ring. It's like Jackson and company put together the Fellowship of the Ring, while imposters put together the last two.

There's this fatigue in the craftsmanship in the last two films. This is why I have a hard time watching the Battle of Pelennor Fields. It's a start, stop, restart wave of CG that doesn't look as good or feel as good as the small engagement at the end of the Fellowship of the Ring.

And I'm not against CG. I'm a lover of the Star Wars Prequels, so I see CG as a great tool. But, in my opinion, it wasn't deployed properly at the Battle of Pelennor Fields. It was at Helm's Deep.

[Lope de Aguirre]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

Again, I don't understand Jackson going "Hollywood" with the text in the last two pictures when he and his team were very elegant, graceful, and respectful of the text, while also adapting it in the Fellowship of the Ring. It's like Jackson and company put together the Fellowship of the Ring, while imposters put together the last two.

There's this fatigue in the craftsmanship in the last two films. This is why I have a hard time watching the Battle of Pelennor Fields. It's a start, stop, restart wave of CG that doesn't look as good or feel as good as the small engagement at the end of the Fellowship of the Ring.

Again fully agreed. And I'm not really familiar with the books (read "The Hobbit" and Fellowship but not the other books) just as movies I think FOTR is easily the best and TTT clearly the weakest.

Originally Posted by Jumpman

And I'm not against CG. I'm a lover of the Star Wars Prequels, so I see CG as a great tool. But, in my opinion, it wasn't deployed properly at the Battle of Pelennor Fields. It was at Helm's Deep.

Are you a huge fan of the LOTR books? Otherwise I can't really understand one critizising the last two Ring movies but enjoying the first two SW prequels.

[Jumpman]

The thing I find most frustrating about the Lord of the Rings viewing experience is that once you've seen the EE's, it's almost impossible to watch the theatrical cuts, especially the first two. You pick up on so many continuity errors that are essentially fixed in the EE's.

At the same time, the EE's add stuff that either hurt, help, or are odd additions that make the EE's a weird viewing experience.

I hope, one day, that Jackson goes back to the last two films and makes a mix of the theatrical cut and the extended cuts that he would consider his definitive cut of the last two pictures.

Through editing (and maybe a reshooting session), he can fix those last two pictures that would hold up well against the Fellowship EE.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by Lope de Aguirre

Again fully agreed. And I'm not really familiar with the books (read "The Hobbit" and Fellowship but not the other books) just as movies I think FOTR is easily the best and TTT clearly the weakest.



Are you a huge fan of the LOTR books? Otherwise I can't really understand one critizising the last two Ring movies but enjoying the first two SW prequels.

I've read Lord of the Rings once and that was on the eve of the release of the Fellowship of the Ring in '01 because I didn't understand the hype around it and why people said that it was going to be better than Star Wars. Back then, that was blasphemy to my ears (kind of still is in areas).

As for Star Wars vs. Lord of the Rings, it has more to with enjoying and being engulfed in that world and those characters more than the Rings Trilogy. I feel the same way about the Matrix Trilogy vs. the Rings Trilogy. I like the world of the Matrix more than Middle-Earth. The same goes for Potter, which I feel is the greatest of all cinematic franchise (even more so than my beloved Star Wars).

But, I won't deny the entertainment value of the Rings Trilogy. And again, I feel that the Fellowship EE is the greatest, pure fantasy film since the original Star Wars film. It's that good. It's the main reason I rail against what Jackson did with the last two pictures. He got off on such a strong start that I thought it was inevitable that he would kill it with the last two pictures.

I mean, I was starting to leave my love of Star Wars behind after viewing Fellowship for the first time. But, the last two Rings pictures happened and then Lucas pulled off Revenge of the Sith and I just felt there was no comparison.

And, in all honesty, there's no comparison after what Yates did with Deathly Hallows Part 2. To me, it's the greatest franchise finale by freaking miles....

[Andrew-Kenneth]

Originally Posted by AreaUnderTheCurve

How many of you really, really like the love story of Arwen and Aragorn as it is presented on screen? It's probably my favorite aspect of the story.

If you liked the love story so much I can recommend the blu-ray of Jodhaa-Akbar (2008) to you.

I've often described this film as kinda like LotR but firmly focussed on the love story between the leads. (Imagine a LotR with the Arwen-Aragorn love story at it's center and the war of the ring and Frodo's quest as subplots.)
Since Jodhaa-Akbar is a quite long film (210 mins.) it still has time for it's subplots.

Anyway, Jodhaa-Akbar's director is clearly a Jackson fan. In "The making of"-docu he's interviewed in his study with a large LotR-poster behind his desk.

Here's a excerpt showcasing the two leads =>

HD 720p Mann Mohanaa Jodhaa Akbar - YouTube

[Brightstar]

How can you compare Jodhaa-Akbar to Lotr ?? its bang out of order