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

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

I think it was the smallest because it didn't have the trailers and other junk.

They each had the same trailers (for that movie, one super trailer and two game trailers)


I thought for sure they would make use of the entire disc for these movies, especially Return of the King and not leave 10 gigs blank in that ones case.

I don't know jack about the techincal side of things or how much the extra space would affect the quality exactly, but 10GB is a lot of space to leave blank and it seems the movies would have benefited from that extra space.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Diesel

I don't know jack about the techincal side of things, but I thought for sure they would make use of the entire disc for these movies, especially Return of the King and not leave 10 gigs blank in that ones case.

Especially in light of the hammering they knew they were going to take from not releasing the EE's. I guess I don't understand business.

[Diesel]

The EE will probably use close to the full 50GB.

They wouldn't try and squeeze 4h 10m into 40GB would they?

[mredman]

Originally Posted by Diesel

The EE will probably use close to the full 50GB.

They wouldn't try and squeeze 4h 10m into 40GB would they?

I think they will use the full disc here because there is also going to be audio commentaries on it just like there is on the EE DVD sets

And it can fit on 1 disc just look at King Kong a 200 min movie with a full length PiP track and the transfer is reference quality

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Diesel

The EE will probably use close to the full 50GB.

They wouldn't try and squeeze 4h 10m into 40GB would they?

I'm all for using two BDs per film, since I only watch half an EE at a time; and if it ensures premium video quality it's win/win.

[joenostalgia23]

I just finished watching Fellowship. I haven't seen it in its entirety since it's theatrical weekend. Wow, these movies are great.

The PQ quality was a lot better than I thought it would be. There were moments when it looked spectacular to my eyes. There was one scene that looked glaringly "wrong" to me. Very waxy. However, other scenes just looked "soft" to me and I could accept that. The picture quality is in no way terrible, I'm sure if I was showing this to my friends they would see no issues. It definitely doesn't look like a DVD either. I'm not a great judge at PQ, so don't kill me. DNR doesn't annoy me nearly as much as Edge Enhancement. I thought Pan's Labyrinth was one of the best discs, but apparently it's a huge mess. Gladiator looks like crap. If anyone's wondering, I sit about 7 feet away from a 65-inch screen(too far?).

The AQ was amazing. It's definitely one of the best discs in terms of audio. I'd consider it reference quality and I'll be demoing Blu-ray audio to my friends with this.

If ROTK seriously is a 4/5 compared to FOTR's 2.5/5... then I'm very excited to see how it looks.

[joenostalgia23]

Aren't they making it so that Blu-ray discs for movies can be up to 66 GB? That could be very beneficial for the Extended Editions.

[lDlisturb3d]

just finished ROTK 2 time. Man these movies are good, i don't understand fully why all the bashing on PQ, Overall the PQ of the 3 were good. GREAT for TT and ROTK. This trilogy couldn't of ended better, usually trilogies lose their originality but not this one. 5 stars for each movie, good job PETER JACKSON.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

Aren't they making it so that Blu-ray discs for movies can be up to 66 GB? That could be very beneficial for the Extended Editions.

I think I read somewhere that those are not for commercial use, so 50GB is the standard for us.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by deeman54

just finished ROTK 2 time. Man these movies are good, i don't understand fully why all the bashing on PQ, Overall the PQ of the 3 were good. GREAT for TT and ROTK. This trilogy couldn't of ended better, usually trilogies lose their originality but not this one. 5 stars for each movie, good job PETER JACKSON.

Well, you're talking about Return Of The King that has pretty much been reported everywhere to look fantastic, with a few but minor problems, the ROTK hasn't been bashed, only Fellowship Of The Ring which have been reported as being inconsistent and more soft, but the Mines of Moria sequence looking awesome.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

I just finished watching Fellowship. It definitely doesn't look like a DVD either.

I remember reading a few posts where someone said the BD didn't look much better than the DVD. I was thinking, "that person has some GOOD DVD's!

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by Russell_L

I've seen many people in real life who look like they've had DNR applied to their faces. Seriously.

Everyone in Hollwood these days, like.

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by jonmoz

I quite like the Ghosbusters Blu-ray,but a little Dnr would have helped on the Library scenes in particular.

Ooof. This forum gets a little nutty sometimes.

It is what it is I guess.

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

Those results are much better than I expected for that site.

"That site" is videophiles (that section, at least - it spans the spectrum from audio to ultra high end [that I could never hope to own] and back again), that's all. That site worries more about quality of content than anything else. AVS gets definitely nutty and OCD about it, sure, but like here it is what it is.

It's awesome to have inside dudes like Penton and Kleist that post shit I'd never known about (had they not posted it) that aren't active anymore on AVS but AVS is still great for examining picture quality. To have a "rivalry" between the Blu Ray forum and AVS always seemed wicked silly to me. It's a shame, there are so friggin' few well-populated hardcore A/V niche sites, and we're (AVS and here) two of the biggest ones. Both are on the same "side," really. We're on the same page, fighting between the two is almost like fighting between two groups on the same side.
Nobody fights like family.

Will have my copy Friday by the way. I will be honest as always. I've pissed and moaned so far but if it doesn't strike me as "all that bad" (or better) I won't hesitate to give my honest impression. From what I've heard in the last few days (from people whose eyes generally line up very well with mine) I honestly expect to be pleasantly surprised (if not very much so.)

It'll take a few days or more for me to watch 'em all though. A lot of stuff here.

[Bluray_ne1]

Well, what I did see of the trilogy looked pretty sweet. I got mine today from Amazon. I popped in the FOTR. I got as far as the menu and everything went FUBAR from there.

I was able to get the menu to work just fine. When I hit play and it started in on the trailer before the movie, there was no sound. I suspected my system first, so I checked all the settings, connections, etc. Everything was fine and still no sound. I fast forwarded to the movie, no sound and no picture. I pressed "Select" on the PS3 controller to look at my stats. The timer was rolling but there was no info on the codecs. I skipped through all the chapters until the end of the movie...only 21 chapters and 1:21 and 36 seconds on the disc. I went back to the main menu to select a chapter above 21 and it took me to the disclaimers they play after the credit finish. CRAP!! Bad disc. Nice.

I popped in the other two to check them out. Like I said, pretty sweet. Only now I have to send the whole thing back for a replacement. It's like giving a kid some candy and then jerking it out of his hands after the first taste. **sigh** Thanks Warner Bros.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by TrenchRun

and thats supposed to be the super-awesome sapphire edition or some damn thing.

As far as I can tell, all "Sapphire Edition" means is that it is a Paramount blu-ray of a film that won Best Picture.

Originally Posted by Rob71

I decided to read through this thread while I wait for my set to arrive. This is the best description I have seen in my almost three years posting here. I am in the middle of dinner and actually had to give myself the Heimlich maneuver after reading it.

Hope you don't mind if I borrow it.

Feel free... my vulgarities are not copyrighted.

Originally Posted by ungood

i thought he was gollum?

No, Sam Cassel did not play Gollum... he played the Korean convenience-store owner in 'Falling Down', following in the footsteps of Boston Celtics legend Robert Parrish, who played Calibos in the original 'Clash of the Titans', and Pittsburgh Steelers coach Mike Tomlin, who regularly appears on that doctor-show 'House'.

Originally Posted by mredman

And it can fit on 1 disc just look at King Kong a 200 min movie with a full length PiP track and the transfer is reference quality

The EE of 'Return of the King' is more than a half-hour longer than the EE of 'King Kong', and there isn't diddly for extras on that blu-ray, compared to any of Peter Jackson's Extended Edition DVDs.

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

Aren't they making it so that Blu-ray discs for movies can be up to 66 GB? That could be very beneficial for the Extended Editions.

Originally Posted by Q!

I think I read somewhere that those are not for commercial use, so 50GB is the standard for us.

No, the 128GB are not for commercial use. By all reports, the 66GB are on the way, and a firmware update will make them playable on a PS3.

P.S.: AVS forum is a great big posture-fest. There's nothing authoritative about that site. At least this site has real insiders, instead of just a bunch of tools who think that a larger HT budget and a lack of social skills makes them an expert.

[Q?]

I stand corrected then, 66GB should be plenty for LOTR EE then huh?

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by Q!

I stand corrected then, 66GB should be plenty for LOTR EE then huh?

I think so... and at a pretty good bitrate, too.
As long as they confine all the extras to a separate disc, (or discs), that should be plenty of space.

[DIGITALBATH]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

As far as I can tell, all "Sapphire Edition" means is that it is a Paramount blu-ray of a film that won Best Picture.



Feel free... my vulgarities are not copyrighted.



No, Sam Cassel did not play Gollum... he played the Korean convenience-store owner in 'Falling Down', following in the footsteps of Boston Celtics legend Robert Parrish, who played Calibos in the original 'Clash of the Titans', and Pittsburgh Steelers coach Mike Tomlin, who regularly appears on that doctor-show 'House'.



The EE of 'Return of the King' is more than a half-hour longer than the EE of 'King Kong', and there isn't diddly for extras on that blu-ray, compared to any of Peter Jackson's Extended Edition DVDs.





No, the 128GB are not for commercial use. By all reports, the 66GB are on the way, and a firmware update will make them playable on a PS3.

P.S.: AVS forum is a great big posture-fest. There's nothing authoritative about that site. At least this site has real insiders, instead of just a bunch of tools who think that a larger HT budget and a lack of social skills makes them an expert.

I have gotten so much more help and and information from this site compared to AVS, it's astounding. Most of the people on that site are worthless a-holes that won't answer a question, but they're quick to criticize when you're wrong about something. The people on here are awesome and have given me a lot of good advice and insight, and they were cool about it.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

As far as I can tell, all "Sapphire Edition" means is that it is a Paramount blu-ray of a film that won Best Picture.

That's not the impression I got from reading this.

Rob Moore, vice chairman of Paramount Pictures:
“Because of Blu-ray’s phenomenal capabilities,” he said, “the Sapphire Series will deliver the best pictures in the best picture.”
http://www.homemediamagazine.com/blu...e-series-16141

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Q!

That's not the impression I got from reading this.

Rob Moore, vice chairman of Paramount Pictures:
“Because of Blu-ray’s phenomenal capabilities,” he said, “the Sapphire Series will deliver the best pictures in the best picture.”
http://www.homemediamagazine.com/blu...e-series-16141