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

[Gretiem]

Waiting and hoping for a 4k release

[Early Memphis]

Originally Posted by Cook

The story is a good adventure. Unfortunately it's extremely hampered by the way Tolkien wrote it. Skimming over and summarizing a lot of moments and extremely lacking in character development. The book reads like a paraphrase of a longer and better book.

Your opinion, and that's fine. Fortunately, however, that opinion isn't shared by the millions of readers who made it a classic (over 150 million copies sold … and counting). As far as the often overblown "character development" criticism - often dredged up in lieu of anything of substance - all of the characters, save the Hobbits, who were virtual children, were quite grown and "developed" (many having lived far longer than "normal" human beings). These people had become leaders, heroes, firmaments in their world - i.e., they were fully "developed" characters - and each of the Hobbits changed immensely over the course of the four books. Obviously not your cup of tea, but many would politely disagree.

[Cook]

Originally Posted by Early Memphis

Your opinion, and that's fine. Fortunately, however, that opinion isn't shared by the millions of readers who made it a classic (over 150 million copies sold … and counting). As far as the often overblown "character development" criticism - often dredged up in lieu of anything of substance - all of the characters, save the Hobbits, who were virtual children, were quite grown and "developed" (many having lived far longer than "normal" human beings). These people had become leaders, heroes, firmaments in their world - i.e., they were fully "developed" characters - and each of the Hobbits changed immensely over the course of the four books. Obviously not your cup of tea, but many would politely disagree.

I'm talking about the Hobbit. Not LOTR. And not the appendices. Also a character isnt developed just because theyre old.

[Kinsella5]

Originally Posted by Monkeker

I am holding off buying the extended trilogy. I just know a week or two after I buy it they will announce a 4K trilogy set.

I say buy it but you only have a short time left if it changes at midnight. This has never been this low so when/if a 4K set is announced, you could probably sell this Blu-ray set on eBay for at least what you paid.

I had originally purchased this when it first came out, in fact I pre-ordered it when Barnes and Noble had a price mistake on their website and at the time I paid $49.99 for my pre-order which at that time was unheard of. Since then I don't think I have ever seen it below that price. My nephew and his friend have been asking me to monitor the price as they both want it so every day I would check. I just happen to be online last night checking just before bed, it was a few minutes after minute so it must have just changed. When I saw the price I sent them a text in the morning and they both were happy campers so I had Best Buy price match and got them each a copy today.

[jamesdevil]

Originally Posted by deto

I think the price today is prime for picking up...

Just a PSA: I got one as a gift and it was the Canadian version with French on the cases and front of the box.

[calmblueocean81]

Originally Posted by justincheckin

$26 for the extended trilogy today, just noting.

Where is this? It's still over £100 in the UK Amazon.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by calmblueocean81

Where is this? It's still over £100 in the UK Amazon.

Amazon.com -> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007ZQAKHU

However, it’s back up to $56 USD now.

[NotASpeckOfCereal]

Originally Posted by rexcrk

Honestly though isn’t a 4K release for these sort of impossible because of all the digital effects in them?

Why is it impossible?

It's work and added expense, to be sure, but if they have all of the original elements, they can re-render them.

I'm not in the industry, but it's my impression that it is only impossible for some old projects where they didn't archive all of the original elements that the effect intermediates were made from.

There are stories about those kinds of projects that are impossible to remaster because of missing source, but I've never heard them when referring to LotR — please let us know if you've heard otherwise.

Chris

[calmblueocean81]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Amazon.com -> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007ZQAKHU

However, it’s back up to $56 USD now.

Thanks! I rarely import stuff from the US now because of customs fees/import tax. Shame that the UK set has been such a horrible price for so long.

[Early Memphis]

Originally Posted by Cook

I'm talking about the Hobbit. Not LOTR. And not the appendices. Also a character isnt developed just because theyre old.

Okay, but … The Hobbit was a children's book and it was written in bits and pieces mostly for his children. The book was about Bilbo Baggins, who developed by leaps and bounds. Supporting characters don't "develop", especially in a children's book. How many movies have been criticized because of useless subplots attempting to involve and "develop" secondary characters. Gandalf was a fully developed firmament figure, how could you develop him? Should he have had a romantic subplot? Thorin certainly developed - due to his lust for the Arkenstone and subsequent redemption - in death.
The book was well-received - as a children's book. The only other characters were the dwarves and I don't recall anyone in Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (also 1937) developing either. Hey, you didn't like it, okay, but character development - in a children's book?

[NotASpeckOfCereal]

Originally Posted by Early Memphis

As far as the often overblown "character development" criticism - often dredged up in lieu of anything of substance - all of the characters, save the Hobbits, who were virtual children, were quite grown and "developed" (many having lived far longer than "normal" human beings). These people had become leaders, heroes, firmaments in their world - i.e., they were fully "developed" characters

That's not what character development means. As Cook said, it doesn't mean just because they're old, or just because they have a certain stature in life, as described in a few introductory paragraphs.

(And yes, we are just talking about The Hobbit, the single, short book..)

Character development means that a significant amount of a book — usually the first parts and usually a large part of it, sometimes as much as the entire first third or half of the book — are spent detailing parts their life in narrative (often while they are happening); experiences over a period of time that gives you a good-seated understanding of who they are and how / why they are that way.

Note: I'm not a Hobbit detractor (hater of the book). But it's really short and just didn't have enough time for a proper character development.

You could probably say that you have some idea of Bilbo's character by the end of the book, at best; but it's not as rich as, say, understanding Aragorn, as his character and past are rolled out (quite slowly, over a large part of the LotR trilogy). Frodo also has much better character development in LotR than Bilbo did in The Hobbit.

Chris

[Early Memphis]

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

That's not what character development means. As Cook said, it doesn't mean just because they're old, or just because they have a certain stature in life, as described in a few introductory paragraphs.

(And yes, we are just talking about The Hobbit, the single, short book..)

Character development means that a significant amount of a book — usually the first parts and usually a large part of it, sometimes as much as the entire first third or half of the book — are spent detailing parts their life in narrative (often while they are happening); experiences over a period of time that gives you a good-seated understanding of who they are and how / why they are that way.

Note: I'm not a Hobbit detractor (hater of the book). But it's really short and just didn't have enough time for a proper character development.

You could probably say that you have some idea of Bilbo's character by the end of the book, at best; but it's not as rich as, say, understanding Aragorn, as his character and past are rolled out (quite slowly, over a large part of the LotR trilogy). Frodo also has much better character development in LotR than Bilbo did in The Hobbit.

Chris

Children's book (and inspired/influenced by earlier children's books) … never intended as anything else - and not treated as a "serious" piece until LOTR appeared (Google the early reviews). After LOTR, this revisionist criticism began to appear, when it was treated as a prelude to LOTR. Tolkien wanted The Silmarillion to be his next book - but publishers rejected it, saying readers wanted more hobbit's stories. By the time he wrote LOTR, his children (and his readers) were older (and WWII was darkening the world) and so LOTR was a darker, far more complex tale. All I'm saying is it's unfair to criticize something out of the context of what it is. Apples are great, but they ain't oranges.

[Batman90]

Surprised these movies haven’t gotten the 4K treatment yet. You think Warner would have wanted these done asap.

[Spartan21]

Originally Posted by Batman90

Surprised these movies haven’t gotten the 4K treatment yet. You think Warner would have wanted these done asap.

I'm surprised too. These movies would be spectacular in 4K!! I hope they make fresh 4K scans from the original negative for all the movies, theatrical and extended. Hopefully next year.

[Rizor]

Well, if they wait til 2021, they can do a 20th anniversary thing. But who wants to wait that long?

[NotASpeckOfCereal]

Originally Posted by Early Memphis

[I]C After LOTR, this revisionist criticism began to appear

There's nothing revisionist about this. You keep using words and phrases that don't apply.

A new Tolkien reader could pick up and read The Hobbit today and remark that there is little character development.

That doesn't mean that everyone that says this hates the book. It's just a valid observation.

Anyway, back to the films: Jackson fixed the above problems with a trilogy of films that fleshed the story out more (though some would call it filler), and this is actually a LotR thread / forum area. Regardless, they ALL need to be remastered and released on UHD.

However, while I would get The LotR extended trilogy on UHD in a heart-beat, I probably wouldn't spring for The Hobbit trilogy on UHD until it was on sale at a deep discount (Black Friday kind of prices).

Chris

[jayman3]

Originally Posted by Batman90

Surprised these movies haven’t gotten the 4K treatment yet. You think Warner would have wanted these done asap.

All I know is it'll just be my luck when I buy the blu ray set a 4K collection will be announced.

[WestMan]

Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Game of Thrones, and a few others are on the top of my list for 4K releases.

Its not of matter of if they will be released. It is a matter of when.

[Gretiem]

Originally Posted by WestMan

Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Game of Thrones, and a few others are on the top of my list for 4K releases.

Its not of matter of if they will be released. It is a matter of when.

Season 1 of GoT is in 4k .. weird that they havent released any other season yet though.

[TheHutt]

Both LOTR and The Hobbit have 2K DIs. And the one person who could reliably supervise a HDR treatment has died.