Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Theatrical Versions) - April 6, 2010

[BasicGreatGuy]

I am halfway through "The Return of the King." At this point, I would place "The Return of the King" as the best of the three transfers with "The Two Towers" second and "The Fellowship of the Ring" last.

Overall, I would rate the triology release a 4. I am pleased with my purchase.

[lDlisturb3d]

Originally Posted by BasicGreatGuy

I am halfway through "The Return of the King." At this point, I would place "The Return of the King" as the best of the three transfers with "The Two Towers" second and "The Fellowship of the Ring" last.

Overall, I would rate the triology release a 4. I am pleased with my purchase.

agreed check out my review
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-L...-Reviews/5174/

[lDlisturb3d]

Originally Posted by billzfan

What did they change?

i didn't see anything changed. Its still the original review. check out my review https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-L...-Reviews/5174/

[DaViD Boulet]

that statement by your wife tells the whole story with blu-ray. a statement we shouldn't be hearing with this format. this why some studios need to step up to the plate and do the right thing. the right thing to do with the lotr trilogy is to restore the films from the bottom up.one thing that hurts these films is the use of dnr.

Fellowship would still look excessively soft/out-of-focus in those shots even if you were watching the uncompressed or photochemical original. Those scenes were soft in the source. That's not DNR.

It's possible, yes, that DNR played a role in reducing a *very slight* additional level of detail, but the source is responsible for the overall appearance, not subsequent mastering issues.

IMO, the job of the blu-ray is merely to present the "master" that the director intended as the definitive copy to seed replication. In this case, that's the DI or photochemical interpositive for these films. These BDs come amazingly close to that goal IMO. Could they be closer still sans any and all DNR? Probably, but the different would be slight. Should they have been done without any additional detail scrubbing at all? Yes. But this is still a far cry from the disaster that some perceive it to be... largely because too many folks are mistaking the flaws in the source with flaws in the mastering for Blu-ray Disc.

Now, could the team of artists be talked into (and paid $$$) to "reconstruct" the movie by rescanning all original photochemical negatives and re-rendering and recomposing the digital effects to create a brand-new "source" for digital media? Possibly, but that's not as simple as a studio "remastering" a title from existing source materials... that's literally like rebuilding the entire movie and effects all over again, and it would take a few years and lots of $$$ to complete.

I do hope, however, that this is the level of "restoration" given for the EE release.

[lDlisturb3d]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

jwbbud and I agree for once, this transfer was far beyond what I expected it to be, based on initial reviews. Can't wait to see it all after work and then one each again over upcoming weekends with my father.

this was a good but not perfect release. I don't know why some many people try to make it into a complete nightmare. I guess they just have nothing else to talk about or something.

[neo78956]

Originally Posted by Adam.C

dunno if its me, but those screens look horrible. Colors look so off, over saturated.

Because he captured them with a camera, not any kind of screencap tech. He's trying to show the detail, not the colors.

[Adam.C]

Originally Posted by neo78956

Because he captured them with a camera, not any kind of screencap tech. He's trying to show the detail, not the colors.

DOH!

[neo78956]

That, and The Two Towers has a very dark and washed out color pallette to begin with, as it's the darkest of the three tonally.

[DIGITALBATH]

I am pretty satisfied all in all with my purchase. I did play around with the 48HZ and 60HZ setttings, but on both I noticed that the opening text appears to be slightly shaky.

I also noticed that there is a scene when Gandalf is in the Shire on the road, his hat either reflects, or disappears-I can't really word it, but if you saw it you would know what I'm talking about. \

The sound was excellent.

I think that since many scenes are darker, there is less of an opportunity to display much of a color variation. I also didn't think the blacks looked all that dark, but it might be my TV.

Frodo has a huge neck, like he either wrestled, played football, or lifts a lot of weights, or all the above.

Even if it is not EE, I would rather have then have not. The soundtrack is amazing.

Sitting at 1.5 times the screen length away, I didn't see anything that looked overly bad to me, perhaps I don't yet have the skill for picking out flaws, but I have keen eyesight and have seen a lot of films. I did think that it appeared older than it is, the fact it was made in 2001, but the movie is supposed to seem like a rustic tale anyways. I think some people are a little too picky and need to relax and enjoy it. If it's that bad, either rent it, or sell it, but life is too short to be left hand wringing over a movie-even if it was one of the best of all time. Now if this happens with Star Wars...

[thebluemax]

I watched "Fellowship..." and it was pretty good, not first rate would give the PQ a 6.5/10 AQ 8/10.

[jwoodwar]

Originally Posted by Adam.C

dunno if its me, but those screens look horrible. Colors look so off, over saturated.

Whats your color temp? Warm???

[ricwhite]

Originally Posted by Adam.C

dunno if its me, but those screens look horrible. Colors look so off, over saturated.

They are not over-saturated. If anything, they are slightly under-saturated since I purposely calibrate under-saturated colors due to personal preference.

The color palette in The Two Towers is quite blue-gray and dreary in nature whereas the Fellowship of the Ring is much warmer. I'm not sure if that is what you are referring to. Both the Fellowship and the Two Towers shots are taken with exactly the same equipment and calibration, yet they look markedly different because of director's intent.

Here is a shot from The Fellowship of the Ring, followed by a shot from The Two Towers. Both are using drastically different color palettes.

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

Fellowship would still look excessively soft/out-of-focus in those shots even if you were watching the uncompressed or photochemical original. Those scenes were soft in the source. That's not DNR.

It's possible, yes, that DNR played a role in reducing a *very slight* additional level of detail, but the source is responsible for the overall appearance, not subsequent mastering issues.

IMO, the job of the blu-ray is merely to present the "master" that the director intended as the definitive copy to seed replication. In this case, that's the DI or photochemical interpositive for these films. These BDs come amazingly close to that goal IMO. Could they be closer still sans any and all DNR? Probably, but the different would be slight. Should they have been done without any additional detail scrubbing at all? Yes. But this is still a far cry from the disaster that some perceive it to be... largely because too many folks are mistaking the flaws in the source with flaws in the mastering for Blu-ray Disc.

Now, could the team of artists be talked into (and paid $$$) to "reconstruct" the movie by rescanning all original photochemical negatives and re-rendering and recomposing the digital effects to create a brand-new "source" for digital media? Possibly, but that's not as simple as a studio "remastering" a title from existing source materials... that's literally like rebuilding the entire movie and effects all over again, and it would take a few years and lots of $$$ to complete.

I do hope, however, that this is the level of "restoration" given for the EE release.

I'm guessing some people don't even bother reading your posts. Otherwise you wouldn't have to be repeating yourself. Your detailed review(s) are appreciated though and I'll likely be picking this set up after work tomorrow knowing that the so called issues are more source related than Warner dropping the ball.

[jwoodwar]

Originally Posted by ricwhite

They are not over-saturated. If anything, they are slightly under-saturated since I purposely calibrate under-saturated colors due to personal preference.

The color palette in The Two Towers is quite blue-gray and dreary in nature whereas the Fellowship of the Ring is much warmer. I'm not sure if that is what you are referring to. Both the Fellowship and the Two Towers shots are taken with exactly the same equipment and calibration, yet they look markedly different because of director's intent.

Here is a shot from The Fellowship of the Ring, followed by a shot from The Two Towers. Both are using drastically different color palettes.

Your comparing Gandalf the grey to Gandalf the white. Why?

[mjbethancourt]

The next person to mention DNR, needs to get kicked in the head.

Not a single person posting in this thread has ever once disputed that DNR has been used on this release. That is a complete non-issue.

It has been pointed out by some of the more sensible members, that virtually every blu-ray has DNR; so again, saying "this release has been DNR'd" is basically meaningless, it says about as much about the PQ as saying "this release is 1080p"... while true, it is pointing out the absurdly obvious, and makes the implication that there is something unusual about that fact. It is a tedious observation that does not differentiate this title from any other.

Just drop it.

[ricwhite]

Originally Posted by jwoodwar

Your comparing Gandalf the grey to Gandalf the white. Why?

I was just pointing out the color palette differences between the two movies overall, not any specific character differences or similarities. The Two Towers is mostly devoid of any warm colors (except for some sparse scenes in some fire lit structures). The movie is dominantly cool in color and quite dark and dreary. My response was directed toward those who thought the screenshots looked off in color.

Fellowship of the Ring screenshotsl

The Two Towers screenshots

[mjbethancourt]

All three movies have deliberately different color, and certain scenes are deliberately soft and fuzzy. Some scenes have even had their playback speed adjusted to appear more surreal.

Different parts of the trilogy depict different seasons, different moods, and "magical" places that are meant to look and feel "otherworldly".

A film is an artistic construct, not a recording.

[jeffrow]

Just picked up the box set. I couldnt hold off anymore. Oh well!!! I used store credit so really it was free.

[Grand Bob]

Finished TTT. The PQ is so good on this that I gave up looking for visual defects early. Put away your DNR goggles, average and peak bit rate per second meters, spectral analysis gear, and average brightness per screen pixel energy detectors, and just enjoy the show!

[jeffrow]

Originally Posted by ricwhite

I was just pointing out the color palette differences between the two movies overall, not any specific character differences or similarities. The Two Towers is mostly devoid of any warm colors (except for some sparse scenes in some fire lit structures). The movie is dominantly cool in color and quite dark and dreary. My response was directed toward those who thought the screenshots looked off in color.

Fellowship of the Ring screenshotsl

The Two Towers screenshots

Either your pics are horriable examples or these blu-rays look worse then dvd. I watched Two Towers on tv this weekend and it blows away those pics u have up. I hope thats not how it really looks.