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

[imsounoriginal]

Possibly by the end of this year, according to... Reddit.

[goeagles5039]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Possibly by the end of this year, according to... Reddit.

I will probably just wait then, thank you.

[stvn1974]

I remember watching the theatrical cuts and wondering where Frodo and Sam got the magical cloaks that let them blend into the rocks. Then I watched the extended editions and was like... oh yeah.

[rexcrk]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

I remember watching the theatrical cuts and wondering where Frodo and Sam got the magical cloaks that let them blend into the rocks. Then I watched the extended editions and was like... oh yeah.

I always take for granted that there are people who didn’t watch the extended cuts as soon as they were released lol. Like it’s just hard to get in that mindset of “oh there’s even more to these amazing movies... but I’m not gonna watch it” lol.

But that’s also a great example of why I think it’s sort of BS when Peter Jackson says that the extended cuts aren’t his “true director cuts”. If that were really the case, then nothing in the theatricals would reference anything in a previous movie’s extended cut ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[imsounoriginal]

Thankfully Jackson understands the concept of "economy of storytelling." We know they got gifts from the Elves, we see what the cloaks do, we put two and two together. No need to stop the story in its tracks just to have Galadriel hand each and every item to the Fellowship and read off what each item does.

I understand the appeal of the EEs just to see stuff from the book come to life, but the theatricals are far superior movies. Two Towers is the one EE I don't mind watching once in a while, feels like that one has the most actual substance trimmed from it. The other two (especially Return) are curiosities more than anything else.

[WKoA13]

Originally Posted by rexcrk

I always take for granted that there are people who didn’t watch the extended cuts as soon as they were released lol. Like it’s just hard to get in that mindset of “oh there’s even more to these amazing movies... but I’m not gonna watch it” lol.

But that’s also a great example of why I think it’s sort of BS when Peter Jackson says that the extended cuts aren’t his “true director cuts”. If that were really the case, then nothing in the theatricals would reference anything in a previous movie’s extended cut ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I don't really recall anything in the theatricals that references items that are THAT specific in the extended cuts.

Them getting the cloaks didn't really need to be explained.

The Fellowship gets to Lorien. After they leave, they all suddenly have the same cloaks that the guards etc in Lorien were wearing. I like the scene in the Extended Edition, but, it's not like massive mystery that the whole fellowship suddenly have new cloaks and clasps after leaving the region/royal hall of a faction that supports the effort/plan to destroy the ring.

I think there is something about Saruman being dealt with in the TE of RotK. Which, in the EE, we get to see him being dealt with directly, but, the theatrical cut of Two Towers still wraps up Isengard enough that you can fill in the gaps of "Saruman has been dealt with/defeated to some degree or another.

But, since both cuts of the movies are still lengthy, I am likely forgetting one or two detailed/specific references to EE moments without reasonable explanation in the TEs.

*Edit* someone already beat me to the same point

[mjvmovieman]

I love these movies, but I always felt like ROTK already felt like an extended cut in its theatrical form. The movie would end perfectly if the end credits started right after Frodo wakes up in Elrond with the characters all reunited - smiling and embracing. Perfect ending.

Then the movie goes on for another half hour.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by mjvmovieman

I love these movies, but I always felt like ROTK already felt like an extended cut in its theatrical form. The movie would end perfectly if the end credits started right after Frodo wakes up in Elrond with the characters all reunited - smiling and embracing. Perfect ending.

Then the movie goes on for another half hour.

Granted, Return of the King's "The End... PSYCHE!" moments that happen several times got pretty comical. I remember when I saw it in the theater, people kept trying to clap when they thought the movie was over, and then everyone started laughing when the film would continue.

In Peter Jackson's defense though, everything in the ending was in the book, and he even still cut out a whole section of the story where Saruman had taken over the Shire (part of which was used at the beginning of the extended edition). Still, I'd say a bit more restraint and clever editing for the ending would have probably been beneficial, with all of the extra footage for the full ending reserved for the extended edition.

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by mjvmovieman

The movie would end perfectly if the end credits started right after Frodo wakes up in Elrond

[imsounoriginal]

The multiple endings were fine, we spent nine hours with these characters so another 20 minutes to wrap up some loose ends isn't a big deal. Jackson probably shouldn't have had fades-to-black in between each segment, but that's about the only minor complaint I could make.

[rexcrk]

Originally Posted by mjvmovieman

I love these movies, but I always felt like ROTK already felt like an extended cut in its theatrical form. The movie would end perfectly if the end credits started right after Frodo wakes up in Elrond with the characters all reunited - smiling and embracing. Perfect ending.

Then the movie goes on for another half hour.

Good god I hope this is just a joke post.

[TravisTylerBlack]

Originally Posted by Arawn

There's so much important stuff only seen in the extended ROTK, especially for fans of the books: the death of Saruman, the death of Gothmog, the Houses of Healing ( complete with song by Liv! ), Gandalf vs. Witch-King, the Mouth of Sauron...

Not to mention a skull avalanche.

All of these moments are essential for me, especially as someone who loved the books first. I get that some people prefer the tighter pacing of the theatrical cuts, but I get pretty perturbed when people fervently claim that the extended cut of ROTK didn’t add anything significant. For me ROTK is the most satisfying of all the extended cuts.

How could anyone say that the fate of a main antagonist (Saruman) is insignificant? Or that the Gandalf/Witch-King showdown isn’t a great moment (albeit too brief) that should have been in the release version.

And the mouth of Sauron? His cruel statements regarding Frodo provide the emotional breaking point that drives the Fellowship forward during that final confrontation at the gates of Mordor.

I just...how can anyone claim to be a huge fan of these films/characters/world and prefer the abridged (yes to me they’re abridged) cuts? Longer does not always equal better but in LOTR case it absolutely does.

[XavierTheaterPotato]

Originally Posted by TravisTylerBlack

All of these moments are essential for me, especially as someone who loved the books first. I get that some people prefer the tighter pacing of the theatrical cuts, but I get pretty perturbed when people fervently claim that the extended cut of ROTK didn’t add anything significant. For me ROTK is the most satisfying of all the extended cuts.

How could anyone say that the fate of a main antagonist (Saruman) is insignificant? Or that the Gandalf/Witch-King showdown isn’t a great moment (albeit too brief) that should have been in the release version.

And the mouth of Sauron? His cruel statements regarding Frodo provide the emotional breaking point that drives the Fellowship forward during that final confrontation at the gates of Mordor.

I just...how can anyone claim to be a huge fan of these films/characters/world and prefer the abridged (yes to me they’re abridged) cuts? Longer does not always equal better but in LOTR case it absolutely does.

I sure as hell agree. Longer cuts doesn't always mean it's better. But personally for me I have a hard time even critiquing the LOTRs films on their own in Theatricals, the Extended Versions makes me feel the experience. And It's sure as hell is Rewarding when the ending arrives when you watch all three Extended versions in one day!

[levcore]

I find that it's been so long now since I've seen the theatrical cuts I'm struggling to remember what the additional scenes are that weren't always there in the extended cuts. I used to know every added scene but I'm so used to the extended cuts as my default watch that the theatricals are a long distant memory.

[oilers73]

The theatrical cuts were excellent previews for the full versions to come. I loved those cuts at the time of their release (we all did), but I don't see any point in watching those versions again.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by mjvmovieman

right after Frodo wakes up in Elrond

[NotASpeckOfCereal]

Originally Posted by mjvmovieman

I love these movies, but I always felt like ROTK already felt like an extended cut in its theatrical form. The movie would end perfectly if the end credits started right after Frodo wakes up in Elrond with the characters all reunited - smiling and embracing. Perfect ending.

Then the movie goes on for another half hour.

The people that complain about the so-called false endings — which for some was on the side of Mount Doom right after Frodo throws the ring into the fire (but before the eagles show up) — are people that didn't read the books or just forgot about the actual ending.

The number of people that would have complained if the film stopped at your so-called "perfect ending" would have been FAR GREATER than the above group. (Much larger than the group that actually did cry out about stuff that wasn't there.)

The story, quite simply, doesn't end until after they return to the shire.

Chris

[Deadend45]

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

The people that complain about the so-called false endings — which for some was on the side of Mount Doom right after Frodo throws the ring into the fire

Frodo does not throw the ring into the fire, he tries to keep it.

[WKoA13]

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

The people that complain about the so-called false endings — which for some was on the side of Mount Doom right after Frodo throws the ring into the fire (but before the eagles show up) — are people that didn't read the books or just forgot about the actual ending.

The number of people that would have complained if the film stopped at your so-called "perfect ending" would have been FAR GREATER than the above group. (Much larger than the group that actually did cry out about stuff that wasn't there.)

The story, quite simply, doesn't end until after they return to the shire.

Chris

Pretty much. Though I agree the "fade to black" on each scene was sort of poorly thought out. For those who didn't read the book, more than a few of those felt like an actual/legitimate ending. Even those of us who did read the book, it still threw a weird...."this is an ending but no it's not!" tone shift in there.

Still, I understand those complaints at least slightly more than all of the "That's it!? That's stupid!" crying I heard at the end of FELLOWSHIP during the first weeks of its run. Even without reading the books, everything from the way the movie was titled, to the ending itself made it obvious that more was coming.

[levcore]

Originally Posted by Deadend45

Frodo does not throw the ring into the fire, he tries to keep it.

Buuuurn!