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

[Mike2060]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

No problem Mike, I just do not agree with you. Has nothing to do with what I know or do not know. Let's just agree to disagree. Good day sir.

Screen caps are used to look for problems like DNR, EE, aliasing, etc. They are completely accurate for finding these problems. If a movie uses DNR it usually looks awful so it's quite easy to tell from screen caps whether a movie looks good or not. There really is no argument, it is a fact.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

I'll take another swing at it after LoTR.

Maybe (several months?) after we recover from our group read of LoTR, if the interest is there we'll tackle it as a group. It will be tough, but we're bulldogs.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Mike2060

Have you seen the TTT pics posted earlier in this thread? They looked awful because of their DNR.

Were there, or were there not, screencaps from the other movies that people said look great?

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

One of my favorites, but imagine trying to film that. I can see why Jackson left that part out of the movie.

What's wrong with chapter 7, I ordered the novella but it's not here just yet. Expect it by Tuesday, at least I hope so.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

Do you think those screens Eric posted are accurate? Simple question. You don't seem to be able to answer it directly.

I'm not assuming anything about Bill Hunt, I don't even know what that means, man. I haven't mentioned him once or referenced him in any way.

Others on your side have accused Bill Hunt and Digital Bits of not being unbiased. That is directed at whoever did that.

How can I say Eric's screens are accurate? I can't say they are and I can't say they aren't. I am not omniscient. That's why I can't answer your question.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

I don't know, but I'm really looking forward to starting the LotR: Fellowship in my hardcover edition when I get home... ITS TOLKIEN READING DAY for crying out loud!!! And I am still eager to watch this movie on Blu when it comes out... and enjoy EVERY STINKIN MINUTE OF IT!!!

Me too. Maybe we can get into an argument about the quality of the book printing that we are reading over on the other side. Just kidding.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

What's wrong with chapter 7, I ordered the novella but it's not here just yet. Expect it by Tuesday, at least I hope so.

Tom Bombadil, a tough chapter to film, although very important in the "Middle Earth scheme of things".

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

It is very complex and "dense", as Tolkien wrote it over a period of about 50 years. I have found that accompanying references, such as Karen Wynn Fonstad's Atlas of Middle Earth, are very helpful to understand and enjoy this work, which was Tolkien's lifetime passion.

I'm surprised you aren't suggesting he get the Ted Nasmith edition of the Silmarillion.

[Mike2060]

Originally Posted by radagast

Were there, or were there not, screencaps from the other movies that people said look great?

Yeah there were. But not the ones of TTT posted in this thread.

[Fors*]

Originally Posted by radagast

I'm surprised you aren't suggesting he get the Ted Nasmith edition of the Silmarillion.

I should have gotten the Naismith edition....

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

I was expecting a prologue to the Hobbit, as in the tales of the Necromancer before he became Sauron, tales of Saruman and Gandalf before they became the characters we know and tales of Isildur and the One Ring.

You might enjoy "Unfinished Tales". There are some stories related to the Hobbit and LOTR. One is supposed to have taken place around the time Aragorn gets crowned. Gandalf is telling the hobbits how he met Thorin and how that fit in his plan to oppose Sauron. There's lots of good stuff in that book.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

Tom Bombadil, a tough chapter to film, although very important in the "Middle Earth scheme of things".

I do understand and agree with PJ's decision to leave TB out because it didn't have a direct relationship to the main plot.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by radagast

You might enjoy "Unfinished Tales". There are some stories related to the Hobbit and LOTR. One is supposed to have taken place around the time Aragorn gets crowned. Gandalf is telling the hobbits how he met Thorin and how that fit in his plan to oppose Sauron. There's lots of good stuff in that book.

Thanks, will order that when I take a swing at the Silmarillion.

[Q?]

Sorry guys, but is this thread not about the release of LOTR on Blu-ray and not the books?

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by Q!

Sorry guys, but is this thread not about the release of LOTR on Blu-ray and not the books?

It is, but the constant bickering and arguing going back and forth gives me a headache, we're just trying to lighten the mood...

[Fors*]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

It is, but the constant bickering and arguing going back and forth gives me a headache, we're just trying to lighten the mood...

+1.....and it has been discussed in many past posts in this thread without any problem whatsoever.....

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by Fors*

+1.....and it has been discussed in many past posts in this thread without any problem whatsoever.....

Right, I just see the last 10 pages or so are going round and round in circles... We can all agree that the screen caps posted really look like crap... (I think we can) We can all agree that not everyone trusts screen caps, we can also all agree that whoever wants to judge for themselves by renting/buying the films on blu, can do that too... no reason to keep going round and round in circles, sorry, but I just don't see the point, so if something gets brought up that lightens the mood, I don't see a problem. Although, if a Mod does because its off track, I am sorry and I will end my discussion of the books if I am asked to.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by radagast

I do understand and agree with PJ's decision to leave TB out because it didn't have a direct relationship to the main plot.

I can appreciate the dilemma with which Jackson was presented. On the one hand, Bombadil is an interesting character and represented something very important and rare to Tolkien: a powerful individual who had no desire to dominate or control others, only to appreciate and understand Life. But (length of the movie notwithstanding), how could you film such a character?

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by radagast

Others on your side have accused Bill Hunt and Digital Bits of not being unbiased.

Hahaha, "On my side." I'm not on anyone's side, at all. I've been registered here since 2K7 and how often have I ever bothered to complain about how a movie looks on BD? The answer is twice, for Gladiator and for this. I have no agenda.

I never accused the Digital Bits of being "anything," I honestly have no idea why you and that Mr. Pink keep saying I did. I have no idea of how being a professional reviewer or an industry insider works or the politics of it, and I don't pretend to. I know a lot about A/V and that's what I talk about.

He gave Fellowship a positive review. That's a fact. There are serious issues in Fellowship, that's a fact. DNR issues, issues that cause it to look absurdly soft, issues that cause it to look older than it should. Some people aren't bothered at all by these issues; some people even prefer the look of DNR and artificial filtering. I've read plenty of very glowing Gladiator BD impressions. I can only assume whoever gave Fellowship a positive review, there or anywhere else, wasn't as affected by its issues as someone like me would be. I don't think Bill Hunt is involved in some ridiculous conspiracy or anything. I can't deny that he enjoyed the presentation, that's a purely subjective evaluation how it appeared on his display to his own eyes... it's like arguing whether or not he prefers the taste of chocolate ice cream. Things like the application of DNR to the transfer is a factual reality though, and very evident. It can not be denied - it isn't subjective, how much it bothers someone is.

Eric's screens are accurate, sorry.

It's obvious this presentation has serious technical issues. If that doesn't bother the person watching it they are very fortunate. I wish I was one of those people. I'd love to be able to watch a bad transfer and think "This is great!" You can argue it looks fantastic until you're blue in the face, but for anyone he knows even the slightest about A/V it's obvious it isn't.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

I can appreciate the dilemma with which Jackson was presented. On the one hand, Bombadil is an interesting character and represented something very important and rare to Tolkien: a powerful individual who had no desire to dominate or control others, only to appreciate and understand Life. But (length of the movie notwithstanding), how could you film such a character?

Tom Bombadil was not filmable, no. As much as a lot of us love the character, he honestly would've done nothing except make the trip to the House of Elrond even longer than it already was.