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

[Ray_Rogers]

Originally Posted by radagast

Who has the lowest price on this?

Originally Posted by Duffy12

I was wondering this also, but I guess that we will just have to wait and see what those BB/Target sale flyers have them going for.

DVDPriceSearch has worked for me in the past but it doesn't factor in importing so it's negligible.

[blugojira]

Hey guys i'm a really new fan of Lord of the Rings and I'm still working my way through the books, So when I finish I was wondering if I should skip the theatrical versions and get the extended versions, or rent the theatrical ones before I get this.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by blugojira

Hey guys i'm a really new fan of Lord of the Rings and I'm still working my way through the books, So when I finish I was wondering if I should skip the theatrical versions and get the extended versions, or rent the theatrical ones before I get this.

Skip the theatrical editions altogether. The extended editions are closer to the books and I am relatively certain that Tolkien would have liked them better than the theatrical editions.

[JamesKurtovich]

Originally Posted by blugojira

Hey guys i'm a really new fan of Lord of the Rings and I'm still working my way through the books, So when I finish I was wondering if I should skip the theatrical versions and get the extended versions, or rent the theatrical ones before I get this.

Skip the theatricals. Once you've seen the extended editions, they seem incomplete.

Although if you're watching the films with more 'mainstream' folks, the theatricals might be easier to sit through.

I almost want to simply replace the DVDs in my EE boxset with the new BD's when I get them. The EE DVD packaging is awesome!

[Brodo Faggins]

Originally Posted by blugojira

Hey guys i'm a really new fan of Lord of the Rings and I'm still working my way through the books, So when I finish I was wondering if I should skip the theatrical versions and get the extended versions, or rent the theatrical ones before I get this.

Watch the theatricals several times over a few months until you know them like the back of your hand. Then watch the EE's, its how we all did it.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Rizor

Fans typically prefer the extended versions.

So does Viggo Mortensen, who says he doesn't consider the theatricals to be "real" versions of the films.

Always like to point that out in these non-ending "contractually obligated theatrical versions" vs. "extended edition" debates.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

Skip the theatricals. Once you've seen the extended editions, they seem incomplete.

Although if you're watching the films with more 'mainstream' folks, the theatricals might be easier to sit through.

I almost want to simply replace the DVDs in my EE boxset with the new BD's when I get them. The EE DVD packaging is awesome!

Not totally true. The Two Towers theatrical edition is perfect. They dont really leave out anything critical and some scenes are better when they are shoretr, like the Theoden's sons burial for example. Its more subtle in the TE. The pacing is also better, IMO.

Ill be getting the EE set, no doubt and I usually watch those editions when we do LOTR. I still think The Two Towers TE is a better film though. The EE version of Fellowship is WAY better than the TE. The EE of Return I suppose is better but there are some additons to that film I dont care for.

Just watch them all and make your own decisions.

[Witch King of Angmar]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Not totally true. The Two Towers theatrical edition is perfect. They dont really leave out anything critical and some scenes are better when they are shoretr, like the Theoden's sons burial for example. Its more subtle in the TE. The pacing is also better, IMO.

Ill be getting the EE set, no doubt and I usually watch those editions when we do LOTR. I still think The Two Towers TE is a better film though. The EE version of Fellowship is WAY better than the TE. The EE of Return I suppose is better but there are some additons to that film I dont care for.

Just watch them all and make your own decisions.

IMO Two Towers TE is boring as hell.

Extended Edition is way better and the best of all three.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Witch King of Angmar

IMO Two Towers TE is boring as hell.

Extended Edition is way better and the best of all three.

Huh? How so? The EE adds some or extends irrelevant scenes. We can disagree....but I dont get how the better paced film can be called boring?

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Huh? How so? The EE adds some or extends irrelevant scenes. We can disagree....but I dont get how the better paced film can be called boring?

I personally think the added backstory of Faramir is quite important in the development of his character. I know it deviates even more from the book, but I too think that Two Towers TE seems incomplete.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

I personally think the added backstory of Faramir is quite important in the development of his character. I know it deviates even more from the book, but I too think that Two Towers TE seems incomplete.

Ah yes - I do agree on that part being important. I didnt feel it outweiged some of the other additions that werent so important. Good point though.

[Jumpman]

s2mikey,

You and I think alike. The Fellowship Extended is perfect. The Towers Theatrical is much, much better than the Extended. Funny enough, the first part of the Towers Extended is really, really good until we get to Theodin's son's funeral. From that point on, it goes off the rails. The King Extended in comparison to the Theatrical is kind of a wash. There are things in the Extended that help that film out but because the Towers Theatrical and Extended padded way too much, it overall hurts both versions of King. But, if you had to choose on version of King, it's the Extended...but barely.

Frankly, on a basic script level in comparison to the novel, I almost hate Towers. Had they kept close to the novel, the Towers Extended should've been no more than 3 hours in length.

[KrugerIndustrial]

This has probably been discussed here multiple times already but why 9 bonus feature DVDs instead of one Blu-ray?

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

s2mikey,

You and I think alike. The Fellowship Extended is perfect. The Towers Theatrical is much, much better than the Extended. Funny enough, the first part of the Towers Extended is really, really good until we get to Theodin's son's funeral. From that point on, it goes off the rails. The King Extended in comparison to the Theatrical is kind of a wash. There are things in the Extended that help that film out but because the Towers Theatrical and Extended padded way too much, it overall hurts both versions of King. But, if you had to choose on version of King, it's the Extended...but barely.

Frankly, on a basic script level in comparison to the novel, I almost hate Towers. Had they kept close to the novel, the Towers Extended should've been no more than 3 hours in length.

Yep - thats pretty much it. Fully agree on ROTK too. I like some of the extra footage but I hate some of it too. Its a coinflip. Like I summarized perviously:

Fellowship - EE is a no brainer
Towers - TE is the better cut
Return - I could argue all day but either one is fine. We *usually* just do the EE though, barely.

[Jumpman]

The two reasons I give the EE of King the leg up is the confrontation between Gandalf and the Witch King. Visually, it's frankly a stunning sequence. It's very dramatic and I just love everything about that sequence.

The other sequence is when Aragorn reveals himself to Sauron. Again, very dramatic, very important moments.

Had those two sequences been added to the theatrical of King, I'd go with that film.

Still, a lot of King's problems stem from the bloated Two Towers. You can tell from the get go that they never cracked the script of the Two Towers, which is odd because I think that's the one novel that's easy to crack.

First off, get rid of the Warg Rider attack. If I remember correct, Legolas, using his elf senses, sees the Warg's coming and basically it's a chase to Helm's Deep. That would've been much, much better because it would've also eliminated the really dumb aspect of Towers and that's the "death" of Aragorn.

It's just stupid. Get rid of it. That would've also cut down on the Arwen scenes, which would've been better as well because Aragorn's necklace is enough to remind the audience of her importance. That film should've focused more on Aragorn and Eowyn. The necklace was enough of a reminder of Arwen.

And damn it, the film should've ended with the demise of Saruman. How they think to cut that in the theatrical and then added to the beginning of the extended of King was a good idea, is anyone's guess. Because, on both occasions, it doesn't work.

I don't like the Boromir flashback in the Extended. I don't like the characterization of Faramir either, in comparison to the novel. I'm not a novel purist of this story in any way shape or fashion but, in the commentaries, they stated that they changed his characterization because they thought that if he resisted the Ring, as he does in the novel, it demystifies the Ring for the rest of the Saga.

Frankly, that's bull. Aragorn did it one film prior and it worked then. Faramir is just as noble.

And final, Frodo revealing the Ring to the Ringwraith at Osgiliath. Stupid decision. From a plot perspective, it makes no sense. Does Frodo not reveal the location of the Ring to Sauron by doing this? I think so....

I understand creating a moment of hopelessness but not that. It makes Sauron kind of stupid if he doesn't know where Frodo is after that action.

So, so many problems with Towers, no matter which version you watch. On a basic script level, it just doesn't really work.

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Ah yes - I do agree on that part being important. I didnt feel it outweiged some of the other additions that werent so important. Good point though.

I see your point too! But if you prefer TTT TE then that is your choice and opinion! I prefer the added stuff in all three films.

I am also of the opinion that one should not discount the TE of any of the films though. I just keep in mind that the theatrical versions are the ones that won 17 Oscars total. They are still good films and I enjoy watching the TE versions too!

[Archangel630]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

s2mikey,

You and I think alike. The Fellowship Extended is perfect. The Towers Theatrical is much, much better than the Extended. Funny enough, the first part of the Towers Extended is really, really good until we get to Theodin's son's funeral. From that point on, it goes off the rails. The King Extended in comparison to the Theatrical is kind of a wash. There are things in the Extended that help that film out but because the Towers Theatrical and Extended padded way too much, it overall hurts both versions of King. But, if you had to choose on version of King, it's the Extended...but barely.

Frankly, on a basic script level in comparison to the novel, I almost hate Towers. Had they kept close to the novel, the Towers Extended should've been no more than 3 hours in length.

It may just be me, but I thought, concerning TT EE, wasn't the extra scene with Pippin and Merry getting high in the pantry as Treebeard walks by, what totally MADE the film? Just sayin.

That puts the EE by and large well ahead of the TE anyday in my book. And I don't even smoke.

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

The two reasons I give the EE of King the leg up is the confrontation between Gandalf and the Witch King. Visually, it's frankly a stunning sequence. It's very dramatic and I just love everything about that sequence.

Wow, this is surprising considering A LOT of people really dislike and detest this scene. I'm not a big fan of it myself.

Originally Posted by Jumpman

I don't like the Boromir flashback in the Extended. I don't like the characterization of Faramir either, in comparison to the novel. I'm not a novel purist of this story in any way shape or fashion but, in the commentaries, they stated that they changed his characterization because they thought that if he resisted the Ring, as he does in the novel, it demystifies the Ring for the rest of the Saga.

This was done in the same manner that Bombadil was cut. The people who had never read the books before would have been like WTF? To a guy that says, "Nope, I wouldn't take this if it were laying on the side of the road! Well, see ya later!" I just don't think it would have worked in the film at all for the general audience. For those of us that have read the books its a littlbe bit different though.

[Jumpman]

I don't know. Maybe I'm just weird, but despite how short it is, I love that moment between the Witch King and Gandalf. Every time, I get goosebumps. There's just something about it.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

The two reasons I give the EE of King the leg up is the confrontation between Gandalf and the Witch King. Visually, it's frankly a stunning sequence. It's very dramatic and I just love everything about that sequence.

The other sequence is when Aragorn reveals himself to Sauron. Again, very dramatic, very important moments.

Had those two sequences been added to the theatrical of King, I'd go with that film.

Still, a lot of King's problems stem from the bloated Two Towers. You can tell from the get go that they never cracked the script of the Two Towers, which is odd because I think that's the one novel that's easy to crack.

First off, get rid of the Warg Rider attack. If I remember correct, Legolas, using his elf senses, sees the Warg's coming and basically it's a chase to Helm's Deep. That would've been much, much better because it would've also eliminated the really dumb aspect of Towers and that's the "death" of Aragorn.

It's just stupid. Get rid of it. That would've also cut down on the Arwen scenes, which would've been better as well because Aragorn's necklace is enough to remind the audience of her importance. That film should've focused more on Aragorn and Eowyn. The necklace was enough of a reminder of Arwen.

And damn it, the film should've ended with the demise of Saruman. How they think to cut that in the theatrical and then added to the beginning of the extended of King was a good idea, is anyone's guess. Because, on both occasions, it doesn't work.

I don't like the Boromir flashback in the Extended. I don't like the characterization of Faramir either, in comparison to the novel. I'm not a novel purist of this story in any way shape or fashion but, in the commentaries, they stated that they changed his characterization because they thought that if he resisted the Ring, as he does in the novel, it demystifies the Ring for the rest of the Saga.

Frankly, that's bull. Aragorn did it one film prior and it worked then. Faramir is just as noble.

And final, Frodo revealing the Ring to the Ringwraith at Osgiliath. Stupid decision. From a plot perspective, it makes no sense. Does Frodo not reveal the location of the Ring to Sauron by doing this? I think so....

I understand creating a moment of hopelessness but not that. It makes Sauron kind of stupid if he doesn't know where Frodo is after that action.

So, so many problems with Towers, no matter which version you watch. On a basic script level, it just doesn't really work.

Yes, yes, and yes. You must be butter cuz you're on a roll!

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

I see your point too! But if you prefer TTT TE then that is your choice and opinion! I prefer the added stuff in all three films.

I am also of the opinion that one should not discount the TE of any of the films though. I just keep in mind that the theatrical versions are the ones that won 17 Oscars total. They are still good films and I enjoy watching the TE versions too!

Yes, sir. Its all opinion at the end of the day. I know people who despise the theatrical editions and people who dont care for the extended ones either. Im just glad we are getting the EEs on blu-ray finally.... thats the REAL positive here that we can all agree on!