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

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

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!

Yeah, and since I'm a sucker for both versions, and these movies completely, I will now own them both on DVD and BD, and I just can't seem to part with my DVD copies either

Oh yes, one of these days Fors* LotR HT won't have NUTHIN on mine! (Not really, that thing kix @$$!)

I don't know if I can wait another 6 weeks or so, I need these on BD NOW!!!

[radagast]

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.

And as I have said before, I hate everything about that scene. In fact I hate that scene more than any other change PJ made to the movie. It is in opposition to what happened in the book, and doesn't make sense when compared to at least two other scenes in the movies, AND worst of all, it is an abomination to anyone who understands who Gandalf and the Witch-King were.

Gandalf would have toasted the Witch-King if Rohan had not shown up and if Denethor hadn't gone barking mad.

It would have been fairly easy to have edited that scene to put it in line with the book.

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by radagast

And as I have said before, I hate everything about that scene. In fact I hate that scene more than any other change PJ made to the movie. It is in opposition to what happened in the book, and doesn't make sense when compared to at least two other scenes in the movies, AND worst of all, it is an abomination to anyone who understands who Gandalf and the Witch-King were.

Yeah, I have said also that if there was going to be a showdown between Gandalf and The Witch King, it could have been so much more epic than Gandalfs staff exploding and him falling to the ground. I don't like the scene being there to begin with but if its going to be there, at least make Gandalf look BADASS like he did against the Balrog, but as it stands Gandalf was pwnd by the Witch King which just isnt right...

Sorry I just don't believe a being that was once a mortal man (even empowered as he was by Sauron) could stand against one of the Maiar...

[radagast]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

Yeah, I have said also that if there was going to be a showdown between Gandalf and The Witch King, it could have been so much more epic than Gandalfs staff exploding and him falling to the ground. I don't like the scene being there to begin with but if its going to be there, at least make Gandalf look BADASS like he did against the Balrog, but as it stands Gandalf was pwnd by the Witch King which just isnt right...

Sorry I just don't believe a being that was once a mortal man (even empowered as he was by Sauron) could stand against one of the Maiar...

Exactly. As Gandalf the GREY, he defeated a Balrog, which is also a Maiar. Before the confrontation with the Witch-King, Gandalf the White drove away SEVERAL Ringwraiths who were attacking Faramir.

The Witch-King was brought down by a mortal woman and a hobbit. And yet the Witch-king, whose origins is that of a mortal man, is going to get the best of Gandalf, who Tolkien described as being of an "angelic order"?

Sauron himself feared Aragorn and what Aragorn could have become had he chosen to wield the Ring. And yet one of Sauron's servants can get the best of the greatest and wisest of the Istari?

Rubbish, gibberish and drivel.

The Wizards were commanded not to oppose Sauron directly with their powers. They were powerful enough to do so. But when Gandalf chose to act and not hold back, he drove away several Ringwraiths.

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by radagast

Exactly. As Gandalf the GREY, he defeated a Balrog, which is also a Maiar. Before the confrontation with the Witch-King, Gandalf the White drove away SEVERAL Ringwraiths who were attacking Faramir.

The Witch-King was brought down by a mortal woman and a hobbit. And yet the Witch-king, whose origins is that of a mortal man, is going to get the best of Gandalf, who Tolkien described as being of an "angelic order"?

Sauron himself feared Aragorn and what Aragorn could have become had he chosen to wield the Ring. And yet one of Sauron's servants can get the best of the greatest and wisest of the Istari?

Rubbish, gibberish and drivel.

That I did not know...

But yes, after finishing RotK for the first time in years, I now more fully understand the gripe that has occurred over that scene. All I can say though is at LEAST they didn't keep the Aragorn vs. Sauron fight at the Black Gates like originally planned, that would have just RUINED the entire ending of the film...

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by radagast

Gandalf would have toasted the Witch-King if Rohan had not shown up and if Denethor hadn't gone barking mad.

It would have been fairly easy to have edited that scene to put it in line with the book.

Yes, that was definitely a foo-bar. The battle as hinted at in the movie would have been unfair from the Maia (Gandalf) vs. "merely" evil being (Witch King) standpoint, but the fact that Gandalf had returned with enhanced power as "Gandalf the White" and also had one of the three Elven-rings would have ended it doubly-quick. It also shortchanged the entire good vs. evil theme. Bad screenwriting.

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

Yes, that was definitely a foo-bar. The battle as hinted at in the movie would have been unfair from the Maia (Gandalf) vs. "merely" evil being (Witch King) standpoint, but the fact that Gandalf also had one of the three Elven-rings would have ended it doubly-quick. It also shortchanged the entire good vs. evil theme. Bad screenwriting.

Huh? I thought Gandalf wasn't given Narya until they left at the Grey Havens? Did I miss something? Was it given to him before that?

[KrugerIndustrial]

Originally Posted by KrugerIndustrial

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

eh?

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by KrugerIndustrial

eh?

for cost reasons. They just used the old DVD encodes instead of re-encoding separate BD's for all the bonus features. They are not adding anything new and all of the bonus features would be in SD (due to the way they were shot) so it would have cost them more (most likely the reason) to put them on BD instead.

And they would have had to do at least 2-3 BD's for the bonus features, not just one. With all of the appendices and the Botes docs, probably would have had to do one BD of special features per film.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

Huh? I thought Gandalf wasn't given Narya until they left at the Grey Havens? Did I miss something? Was it given to him before that?

Gandalf received Narya about 1000 Third Age when Cirdan recognized him as a Maia from Valinor. With foresight, Cirdan recognized the trials Gandalf would be up against and is quoted as saying (from the Appendix):

"Take now this Ring ...for thy labours and thy cares will be heavy, but in all it will support thee and defend thee from weariness. For this is the Ring of Fire, and herewith, maybe, thou shalt rekindle hearts to the valour of old in a world that grows chill".

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

for cost reasons. They just used the old DVD encodes instead of re-encoding separate BD's for all the bonus features. They are not adding anything new and all of the bonus features would be in SD (due to the way they were shot) so it would have cost them more (most likely the reason) to put them on BD instead.

I'd rather have the EEs without all of the extras because I have seen them all on my DVD set, but of course it increases the perceived value of the BD set in the studio's eyes.

[KrugerIndustrial]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

for cost reasons. They just used the old DVD encodes instead of re-encoding separate BD's for all the bonus features. They are not adding anything new and all of the bonus features would be in SD (due to the way they were shot) so it would have cost them more (most likely the reason) to put them on BD instead.

And they would have had to do at least 2-3 BD's for the bonus features, not just one. With all of the appendices and the Botes docs, probably would have had to do one BD of special features per film.

That's what I thought too.

It's a shame as this is a major film and I'm sure it doesn't make the Blu-ray vs DVD battle any easier. I seriously doubt I'll be watching more than 2 of those bonus feature DVDs, just because of the idea of changing discs every single time. + It's going to be a massive box.

[Jumpman]

rocket and radagast,

Thinking about your remarks about Gandalf and the Witch King, I can see your point.

Honestly, I only read Lord of the Rings once in my lifetime so their confrontation in the book is very, very vague to me.

I've been meaning to re-read the Lord of the Rings for a good long while to see if it'll change my opinions on the Extended Editions.

I don't think reading them will change my love and affection for the Fellowship Extended. Through and through, it's an almost masterpiece. It's the best fantasy film since the original Star Wars film.

It's the other two that I think could get killed in my mind if I re-read the trilogy again. It might be time to do it.

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I'd rather have the EEs without all of the extras because I have seen them all on my DVD set, but of course it increases the perceived value of the BD set in the studio's eyes.

I wish I had the option too, although I don't have the Botes Docs so I do want to see those.

[Adam.C]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

Yeah, and since I'm a sucker for both versions, and these movies completely, I will now own them both on DVD and BD, and I just can't seem to part with my DVD copies either

Oh yes, one of these days Fors* LotR HT won't have NUTHIN on mine! (Not really, that thing kix @$$!)

I don't know if I can wait another 6 weeks or so, I need these on BD NOW!!!

Heck yea. I am going to hold on the the TE, even though i'm not sure how much if at all I will watch them once I get my hands on the EE blu

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

Gandalf received Narya about 1000 Third Age when Cirdan recognized him as a Maia from Valinor. With foresight, Cirdan recognized the trials Gandalf would be up against and is quoted as saying (from the Appendix):

"Take now this Ring ...for thy labours and thy cares will be heavy, but in all it will support thee and defend thee from weariness. For this is the Ring of Fire, and herewith, maybe, thou shalt rekindle hearts to the valour of old in a world that grows chill".

D'oH! Well thanks Grand Bob, shows me for NOT reading the appendices, I just finished last week and I wanted to fit The Hobbit in before the reading group kicks in at the end of May... tsk tsk tsk... I tried to cut corners and I got caught

Good info though, I had no idea that he had a ring of power during the war of the ring... I'm sure THAT little trinket helped him with the Balrog too!

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

rocket and radagast,

Thinking about your remarks about Gandalf and the Witch King, I can see your point.

Honestly, I only read Lord of the Rings once in my lifetime so their confrontation in the book is very, very vague to me.

I've been meaning to re-read the Lord of the Rings for a good long while to see if it'll change my opinions on the Extended Editions.

I don't think reading them will change my love and affection for the Fellowship Extended. Through and through, it's an almost masterpiece. It's the best fantasy film since the original Star Wars film.

It's the other two that I think could get killed in my mind if I re-read the trilogy again. It might be time to do it.

That's it though, they didn't have a confrontation in the book... Thats something that was changed for dramatic effect by Boyens/Walsh/Jackson. Just like the scripted fight between Aragorn and Sauron (which Thank Eru he DID NOT go through with).

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

D'oH! Well thanks Grand Bob, shows me for NOT reading the appendices, I just finished last week and I wanted to fit The Hobbit in before the reading group kicks in at the end of May... tsk tsk tsk... I tried to cut corners and I got caught

The Appendices are alot to handle for many people after finally getting to the end of the story. Some of information (example: Sam Gamgee's real name is actually "Banazir Galbasi") becomes too detailed for many readers.

[Jumpman]

rocket,

See, this is what I mean. From my vague recollection, the Fellowship of the Ring Extended is a pretty damn accurate adaptation of the novel, with a lot of liberties that felt very Tolkien.

Whereas the other two films are not. The last two films that have parts that feel very Peter Jackson and usually those are the worse parts. But, there are parts that are very Tolkien and you come to find out that that's because they stayed pretty close to the text, even while adapting it.

Again, this is why The Fellowship Extended is the ace of spades in that trilogy. It just works extremely well.

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

rocket,

See, this is what I mean. From my vague recollection, the Fellowship of the Ring Extended is a pretty damn accurate adaptation of the novel, with a lot of liberties that felt very Tolkien.

Whereas the other two films are not. The last two films that have parts that feel very Peter Jackson and usually those are the worse parts. But, there are parts that are very Tolkien and you come to find out that that's because they stayed pretty close to the text, even while adapting it.

Again, this is why The Fellowship Extended is the ace of spades in that trilogy. It just works extremely well.

I agree with this completely, I think it was Grand Bob who said that when they stick really close to the source material, the scenes were very effective (Like the Eowyn showdown with the witch-king, although it was changed A BIT, it was still pretty close). But when they deviate too much, it just gets kinda ridiculous. So I completely understand why you may like TTT and maybe RotK TE more at times. Which is why we have a beautiful thing called CHOICE! (Here's looking at YOU George Lucas!)

While I can separate the films from the books and see that they are two different entities, as Radagast pointed out with Gandalf getting pwnd by the Witch King, but then the WK being taken down by a Hobbit and a Human Woman, kinda sends the message that Eowyn is more powerful than Gandalf that makes no sense.

There are discrepancies in the films themselves which probably results from WAY too many rewrites and changes and just overlooked stuff.

Overall I'm very happy with the films and I'm glad they were made, and I'm a HUGE fan of the EE. Can't wait for the BD's!