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

[MacEachaidh]

Originally Posted by MasturB

Are you sure? I was reading back a few pages in this thread and someone mentioning something about sounds from the movie not coming up during play?

There seem to be a couple of anomalies, yes, but they're not as bad as, say, missing dialogue would be.

My personal suspicion is that the FotR transfer — both video and audio — required more time and attention than Jackson was really available for, and some things got missed or were not handled as well as some of us might have liked, but I have no solid evidence for that.

How's the PQ?

The EE Blu-rays are the best transfers of all three films, despite any shortcomings. There are problems with the FotR video transfer, but the real cause of that was in the source material. They get better as you go through the series, and all three are far better than either the cinema versions on Blu-ray or the EE versions on DVD.

You're not going to get anything better until the combo set is released once all three Hobbit films are complete, and maybe even then you'll only get reissues of these existing transfers.

[JamesKurtovich]

I definitely recommend the set if you can find it for $40. They look great and the sound is amazing. Puts me back in the theater when I first saw them!

I'm okay with knowing there's an inconsistency with FOTR and TT. Just one more reason they'll need to re-visit FOTR in the future.

[MacEachaidh]

Love your avatar, JK! (Hmm, now I have a craving for jelly babies ... )

[chip75]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

There seem to be a couple of anomalies, yes, but they're not as bad as, say, missing dialogue would be.

I just checked the extended and theatrical editions of the DVD's and the sound of the staff cracking the bridge is missing from Fellowship.... and present in The Two Towers like the BD's.

So it's not like we're missing out.

[KrugStillo]

Did anyone besides me find Return of the King to be exceptionally noisy image-wise? I guess this is just inherent to the HD technology that was used to film it but it was rather obvious at times. Just an observation.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by KrugStillo

Did anyone besides me find Return of the King to be exceptionally noisy image-wise? I guess this is just inherent to the HD technology that was used to film it but it was rather obvious at times. Just an observation.

It wasn't made with HD cameras.

[42041]

Originally Posted by KrugStillo

Did anyone besides me find Return of the King to be exceptionally noisy image-wise? I guess this is just inherent to the HD technology that was used to film it but it was rather obvious at times. Just an observation.

Exceptionally? Not really... seemed pretty reasonable. Maybe you've got the sharpening cranked on your TV? The film was also shot with somewhat older, grainier film stocks from the 90s.

[KrugStillo]

My sharp setting is fine for everything else. I really thought they shot Two Towers and Return of the King with HD cameras. Oh well my bad if I'm wrong. It still looks rather fuzzy (I guess that's the best way to describe it) at times. Not Grain but almost like scanner noise or something. Weird.

[PretyHateMachin]

Starting Sunday 12/31/12 - Sat 1/5/13, these movies are on sale for $9 at Target only. They are the two disc versions with the movie only. was holding off until after Christmas in case someone got me the box set, but I didn't get it, so when i saw these by the register inside my target yesterday for $9 a piece, I grabbed them immediately! I put them inside my old Extended Edition DVD box sets, and put the DVDs inside the Blu-ray cases, not sure what I am going to do with the DVDs though. And since the special feature discs are the exact same as in the blu ray box set, this was the cheapest solution to owning the sets on Blu-ray.

I also very carefully took out the Bluray artwork and placed it inside the flap inside the DVD sets with the booklets, just in case I ever change my mind. I folded it to the side of the spine where it was already folded from being in the blu case itself, so there would be no noticeable crease if I ever decided to place it in a blu-ray case again. But those DVD sets are the best looking box sets I have ever owned, so I think I am going to keep them in there. The only thing is now the OCD side of me is kicking in, and the DVD logo on the side of the sets are slightly bothering me. Ok, maybe that is too extreme!

ANYWAYS... it is a great deal for those looking to own the extended editions on Blu-ray, and even better deal for those who own the Original 4-disc DVD box sets! My total was only $28.96, and since I own the special features discs anyways, it was a no brainer

[Blu-Velvet]

I just watched all three over the weekend, and in each one the only soft and fuzzy shots I noticed (which were quite few at times) seemed to be those with the greatest number of digital special effects applied, especially crowd sequences, the massive battles, and scenes with numerous digital sets, sky effects, etc. Normal action and dialogue scenes all looked fine, and closeups were all truly outstanding. Maybe some of the effects-heavy shots were rendered at a lower resolution to make them practical way back a decade and more ago, but I thought the effects had been done at 2k resolution (which still is only a fraction of what the best 1990s film stocks could resolve).

It made me all the more interested to watch Kino's Blu-ray of the restored NIBELUNGEN saga next weekend, with actual full-size physical sets, models, miniatures, and in-camera special effects, not to mention a bunch of the same themes and motifs that inspired the LOTR trilogy.

[KrugStillo]

Originally Posted by Blu-Velvet

I just watched all three over the weekend, and in each one the only soft and fuzzy shots I noticed (which were quite few at times) seemed to be those with the greatest number of digital special effects applied, especially crowd sequences, the massive battles, and scenes with numerous digital sets, sky effects, etc. Normal action and dialogue scenes all looked fine, and closeups were all truly outstanding. Maybe some of the effects-heavy shots were rendered at a lower resolution to make them practical way back a decade and more ago, but I thought the effects had been done at 2k resolution (which still is only a fraction of what the best 1990s film stocks could resolve).

It made me all the more interested to watch Kino's Blu-ray of the restored NIBELUNGEN saga next weekend, with actual full-size physical sets, models, miniatures, and in-camera special effects, not to mention a bunch of the same themes and motifs that inspired the LOTR trilogy.

That about sums up my thoughts on the LOTR's set. It's also interesting how dated these movies are beginning to look. At the time they were state of the art but now the seams are showing a bit. Still, a great trilogy andvery entertaining but it does make an argument for practical effects versus CGI. For me it's mostly about the movie itself not how the effects were done but I do still think that practical effects movies tend to hold up better than CGI movies do. My opinion of course.

[Simon_LDT]

Just watched FOTR EE for the first time. Thought it looked stunning. I did notice the green push in certain scenes but in others it wasn't so easy to spot. Whether intended or not, it certainly didn't hamper my enjoyment of the film and the picture quality. At least the image looked like film (No DNR or EE that I could see), and with a very healthy bitrate in the 30's.

Just wondering, whats with the almost 30 minutes of credits at the end? Most bizarre thing I've ever seen, not only that but the list of names looked very low-res to me. I was hoping there was going to be a scene or something at the end.

[bandit29]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Okay. I have a Samsung Infuse phone and used it for the following images taken from my pro calibrated plasma.

The quality of these shots is not good (I have hardly ever taken pictures with it) as they are soft and contrast blown out a bit in the breakfast shot as well as "crushed" from the camera; but it DOES show the color differences I am talking about it.

These photos represent much closer to the color I am basically seeing (still not exact, but close) - and as you can see they look nothing like the heavy teal screenshots we are all seeing on our monitors. That is my only point to show with these.

I watched this the other night..and my system is not pro calibrated by any means..those scenes were not heavily teal or green tinted on my set up either. I was expecting it though after reading this thread. Mine is the movie only pack from Target. I have the EE DVD book style sets from years ago. So I just picked up the Target versions instead of buying the box set.

[bandit29]

Originally Posted by KrugStillo

That about sums up my thoughts on the LOTR's set. It's also interesting how dated these movies are beginning to look. At the time they were state of the art but now the seams are showing a bit. Still, a great trilogy andvery entertaining but it does make an argument for practical effects versus CGI. For me it's mostly about the movie itself not how the effects were done but I do still think that practical effects movies tend to hold up better than CGI movies do. My opinion of course.

Agreed. Watched all 3 this weekend, they are starting to age and much faster than say any of the Star Wars OT movies or Aliens.

[DarkDune]

Originally Posted by bandit29

Agreed. Watched all 3 this weekend, they are starting to age and much faster than say any of the Star Wars OT movies or Aliens.

Funny.

I don't think they're aging at all. They still are some of the best fantasy genre films out there.

People are so dazzled by the current tech that they can often lose site of what makes good film-making.

Of course 3D 48-fps presentations of the new Hobbit movies will make anything previous look "dated" LOL

[DarkDune]

Originally Posted by Simon_LDT

Just watched FOTR EE for the first time. Thought it looked stunning. I did notice the green push in certain scenes but in others it wasn't so easy to spot. Whether intended or not, it certainly didn't hamper my enjoyment of the film and the picture quality. At least the image looked like film (No DNR or EE that I could see), and with a very healthy bitrate in the 30's.

Just wondering, whats with the almost 30 minutes of credits at the end? Most bizarre thing I've ever seen, not only that but the list of names looked very low-res to me. I was hoping there was going to be a scene or something at the end.

The greenish tint is easily resolved by adjusting the HUE slightly up or down (a notch or two). That is why some people notice it, and some do not. Some are used to their HUE, so it makes little or no difference to them.

[billzfan]

I just watched the EE of Fellowship for the first time. I have seen the theatrical 3-4 times and found the additional scenes really worthless and even dragged the pacing of the film down by a lot. Every scene that was extended was unnecesarry, mostly because it appears that Jackson added dialogue that implies a lot of what was discussed in the added scenes. Are Two Towers and Return of the King more of the same with extended scenes? If so, I won't waste my time.

[bandit29]

Originally Posted by DarkDune

Funny.

I don't think they're aging at all. They still are some of the best fantasy genre films out there.

People are so dazzled by the current tech that they can often lose site of what makes good film-making.

Of course 3D 48-fps presentations of the new Hobbit movies will make anything previous look "dated" LOL

This is why I avoid this thread....

I didn't say that they've aged and now they are considered bad. I love these movies...but there are a few shots here & there that haven't aged well..all things age..just the way it is..especially with movies that are heavy with CG. For the most part the movies are still impressive.

I didn't see the Hobbit in 3D 48fps...just 3D 24fps..and I'm not using it as a comparison to LOTR anyway.

I'm not impressed with most movies made today. I prefer old school film making like Star Wars OT, Raiders, Aliens, etc..

done here

[42041]

LOTR isn't that different from Star Wars. They used tons of miniatures.
My only issue is that the compositing of effects shots and green-screen live action tends to be pretty obvious.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by Simon_LDT

Just wondering, whats with the almost 30 minutes of credits at the end? Most bizarre thing I've ever seen, not only that but the list of names looked very low-res to me. I was hoping there was going to be a scene or something at the end.

It honors members of the fan club. There are a boat load of names.