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

[nazdar]

happy to get the extendeds in blu ... hehe fellowship is green alright ... not bad but not what i would do and not what the movies nor the dvds nor the blu-ray theatricals look like ... however its a great set and as i always thought the extendeds rule ... but what were they thinking? ... emerald forest or artistic decision or wtf ... still an awesome set of blu-rays

[basketball]

To put it very simply: will the target extended exclusives look better than the theatrical version of the blu, esp. for fellowship? I just want to be assured there is an improvement.

[gettodamoofies]

Originally Posted by basketball

To put it very simply: will the target extended exclusives look better than the theatrical version of the blu, esp. for fellowship? I just want to be assured there is an improvement.

Well the Target editions are the same discs as the other sets, just the BD's. No significant difference in picture quality for TTT or RotK between the two versions. As for FotR, well that all depends on what irks you more: DNR or crushed blacks and an overall green tint. If you don't mind DNR and are watching on a smaller screen then you may lean toward the theatrical cut. If crushed blacks resulting in lost detail and a change in the entire colour palette of the film are something you can live with instead of a smeary picture then go the extended. Depends on what the lesser of two evils is for you...

[chip75]

Originally Posted by basketball

To put it very simply: will the target extended exclusives look better than the theatrical version of the blu, esp. for fellowship? I just want to be assured there is an improvement.

Fellowship looks a lot better with the EE than it does with the theatrical edition BD, the others are relatively the same although been spread out over 2 discs improves the image quality a small amount, I'm not sure I'd notice the difference unless I saw it on a very big screen or projected.

[basketball]

Originally Posted by chip75

Fellowship looks a lot better with the EE than it does with the theatrical edition BD, the others are relatively the same although been spread out over 2 discs improves the image quality a small amount, I'm not sure I'd notice the difference unless I saw it on a very big screen or projected.

That's all I'm hoping for. I thought FotR looked fab in the theater. It was sad to see it looking like a vhs tape on blu ray. No title of this caliber should receive such shabby treatment.

edit: after seeing those 'caps, I'm afraid to open the EE version as well. Neither theatrical nor extended look stellar. But that's all we got, so I'm keeping the target extended versions.

[MacEachaidh]

Originally Posted by basketball

Neither theatrical nor extended look stellar. But that's all we got.

That about sums it up for Fellowship, for sure, with its original colour timing issues ... though the EE of that film, with all its faults, does look better than the cinema version. But don't let that put you off the EE set — the other two films are pretty spectacular in their transfers.

[basketball]

I was absolutely amazed by FotR. By far my fav in the series.

This is PJ's legacy film. Will he step up to the plate and get it looking right? I know I"m a little late to this dance, but still, you could make a case that FotR is one of the top 25/30 films of all time.

Then again, I'm sure plenty of fans have taken up the cause already and it hasn't tipped the scales in our favor. Is this a don quixote-esque situation then?

[MacEachaidh]

If he's going to fix it, it won't be until he's got all three of the Hobbit flicks off his plate, surely? And then we might get a remaster for the inevitable "Whole Middle Earth" release of all six films after that.

But maybe he's not one to revisit things. I kept hoping he'd go back and fix the compositing on the Bronto stampede in King Kong before it was released to Blu (some of that sequence looks kinda bad relative to the rest of that film), but he didn't. Admittedly there wasn't as much money involved as with LotR, either in processing costs or profits to be made, but even so, it was work that he admitted himself had been rushed to be ready for the film's premiere, and that he wasn't happy with it.

He seems a perfectionist and obsessive with detail in other aspects, but maybe about FotR he'll just say, "that was then, this is now, we did what we did", and leave it at that. After all, he's never actually made a comment on the transfer that says what he really thinks about it. The only comment there was came from the studio.

[SANAFABICH]

Originally Posted by mzupeman

Are you actually implying that calibration is the main issue with people noticing the altered color timing?

I said "I guess". I'm not that tech-savvy at all to make an assumption like that, honest. I was referring to what some people mentioned several pages back.

[insomniac013]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

But maybe he's not one to revisit things. I kept hoping he'd go back and fix the compositing on the Bronto stampede in King Kong before it was released to Blu (some of that sequence looks kinda bad relative to the rest of that film), but he didn't. Admittedly there wasn't as much money involved as with LotR, either in processing costs or profits to be made, but even so, it was work that he admitted himself had been rushed to be ready for the film's premiere, and that he wasn't happy with it.

We also really need a special edition for King Kong which includes everything from previous DVD releases. On the whole budget issue: It did not need to 3 hours long, PJ

[MacEachaidh]

Originally Posted by insomniac013

We also really need a special edition for King Kong which includes everything from previous DVD releases. On the whole budget issue: It did not need to 3 hours long, PJ

Agreed on the special edition.

I was hoping when the digibook of Kong 2005 came out they might have taken the opportunity to make it a whizz-bang release like the last deluxe DVD — in its existing SD format, all that extra material would even have fitted on the existing disc, though I'd want *some* of it at least to be HD ... and don't forget the Production Diaries! — but I forgot that Universal is (sadly) celebrating its centenary year and showing how innovative it is by simply re-releasing existing titles and transfers. (Boo-hiss!)

But I'm afraid I disagree with you about the length, insomniac. I really liked the scope of Jackson's version.

[faglun]

Wow my bestbuy 39.99$ triology set came form bestbuy all damaged so pissed they didnt even put the cardboard sleeve protection like amazon does, now I ordered a few blurays from amazon instead cancelled my besbuy order

Also I ordered an ipod form bestbuy will it come in a paper sleeve I am afraid it will break on the way lol

PS - did anyones bestbuy order come with hobbit cash mine didnt

[Jarvid]

Originally Posted by faglun

Wow my bestbuy 39.99$ triology set came form bestbuy all damaged so pissed they didnt even put the cardboard sleeve protection like amazon does, now I ordered a few blurays from amazon instead cancelled my besbuy order

Also I ordered an ipod form bestbuy will it come in a paper sleeve I am afraid it will break on the way lol

PS - did anyones bestbuy order come with hobbit cash mine didnt

Best Buy is renowned for its crappy customer service.

[basketball]

I am trying to watch the EE of FotR. I've had to stop several times due to my disappointment with this transfer.

It's an upgrade over the TE, but only because the TE is subpar.

There is a tremendous loss of detail due to heavy use of DNR. So much so that I'm surprised by the appearance of grain. It's also difficult to make out the transition to noisier CGI'ed shots since the DNR is so heavy.

Sad to see such an epic title treated in such a shabby fashion.

As far as the EE, it's amazing. Which only doubles my disappointment.

[gettodamoofies]

Originally Posted by basketball

I am trying to watch the EE of FotR. I've had to stop several times due to my disappointment with this transfer.

It's an upgrade over the TE, but only because the TE is subpar.

There is a tremendous loss of detail due to heavy use of DNR. So much so that I'm surprised by the appearance of grain. It's also difficult to make out the transition to noisier CGI'ed shots since the DNR is so heavy.

Sad to see such an epic title treated in such a shabby fashion.

As far as the EE, it's amazing. Which only doubles my disappointment.

Seriously? Where are you seeing this heavy DNR? Of all the things the EE transfer could be accused of having excessive... actually any noticeable DNR is not one of them. PJ employed the use of tools to soften certain shots (e.g. ones with Galadriel have a diffused look to them) but wholesale DNR on the disc? Not seeing it.

The theatrical cut on the other hand - well it's coated on there...

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by basketball

I am trying to watch the EE of FotR. I've had to stop several times due to my disappointment with this transfer.

It's an upgrade over the TE, but only because the TE is subpar.

There is a tremendous loss of detail due to heavy use of DNR. So much so that I'm surprised by the appearance of grain. It's also difficult to make out the transition to noisier CGI'ed shots since the DNR is so heavy.

Sad to see such an epic title treated in such a shabby fashion.

As far as the EE, it's amazing. Which only doubles my disappointment.

Methinks the person doth protest too much.

Seriously, I know it's not a perfect transfer, but it is nowhere near as bad as you are talking. DNR is not a problem at all with the transfer. Aside from the green tint (which I don't even see in the slightest on my screen), the only real blemishes occur with some crushed blacks. But, DNR?

[retablo]

Originally Posted by basketball

I am trying to watch the EE of FotR. I've had to stop several times due to my disappointment with this transfer.

It's an upgrade over the TE, but only because the TE is subpar.

There is a tremendous loss of detail due to heavy use of DNR. So much so that I'm surprised by the appearance of grain. It's also difficult to make out the transition to noisier CGI'ed shots since the DNR is so heavy.

Sad to see such an epic title treated in such a shabby fashion.

As far as the EE, it's amazing. Which only doubles my disappointment.

There's grain because there isn't any DNR. Perhaps you should learn your video anomalies before posting mis-information?

[basketball]

Cool, so the film has an intentionally soft look rather than suffering from DNR. I should refrain from posting about this film until I've seen it in it's entirety. I'm only about ten minutes in.

I think we are all incredibly spoiled by recent blu ray releases. So far, detail is very disappointing in this blu ray. Again, this is from a jaded, spoiled perspective after having seen many dozens of extraordinary looking blu ray transfers.

[MifuneFan]

You're only 10 minutes in and you've had to stop it several times? Are you actually trying to watch the movie, or study its pixels?

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by basketball

It was sad to see it looking like a vhs tape on blu ray. No title of this caliber should receive such shabby treatment.

That sentence invalidates anything else you have to say about this transfer. Either you're trolling, or you need to see an eye doctor.