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

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by merrick97

The reality is this:
Most of the people buying this set will have NO CLUE that the color has been changed. Nor will they care either. Most people have not watched these films 100s of times over to know the exact looks of each of these films and I suspect that all of them will be MORE than happy with what they see.

Yeah, I'd say the vast majority will have no idea the color timing is different. Then again, the vast majority will also neither realize it's been remastered nor that it offers a huge jump in PQ over the Theatrical release... so obviously Warner is interested in appealing to more than just the "average" consumer. They wouldn't have put so much effort (and listened so closely to the PQ criticism of the last presentation that I'm sure the most consumers were completely unaware of) into this release. What you could or couldn't get over on the average consumer isn't really a good way to measure a release's quality.
The majority of consumers probably had no idea anything was wrong with Gladiator either, let alone that they're able to exchange it for an improved version. Hell, some people here in this niche community refused to think there was anything wrong with it for quite a long while.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by frogmort

If there was a mistake, I really don't think anyone would mention it, and I don't think there would be a recall. It would be a devastating financial blow to WHV. If there is a problem, they will probably quietly issue replacement discs for just FOTR a few months after it has been released. To me, that just seems to make the best financial sense, unfortunately.

I agree with this 100%.

I understand where Todd Smith is coming from I really do, but to me it makes NO SENSE from a financial standpoint alone to start retransfering the films to original timing standards.

As I said, most consumers would be none the wiser about this color change.

As uther said, we should NOT EVER accept slop which includes sub-par transfers, DNR and Edge enhancement. That is stuff that we should (and DO) complain about and it seems like Hollywood is getting the message.

However, I do feel it crosses the line when fanboys try to tell filmmakers how their films should look and what their viewing intents should be.

There has to come a point where WHV has to say: Buy it or Dont.

Again, if an error was indeed made I will be right there complaining and demanding a replacement, but I have a VERY hard time believing that actually happened.

[WorkShed]

It just popped into my mind, but what if the filters were accidentally doubled in certain sequences? Doing color correction on my own projects, I once made a mistake of putting a color filter on a sequence twice. It came out much darker and the color was definitely pushed to an extreme. It was embarrassing and I have since made sure to watch a project all the way through, before calling it finished. Ah, school deadlines.

The BD masters would have had to be made well before the Fathom screening. Considering the conflicting reports, maybe some sequences had double-filters that were fixed for the theatrical screening.

This is absolute speculation, but just a thought.

[petmic10]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

I imagine the current debate will continue until Jackson or Lesnie make a direct statement on the matter. Third-party reports will always kindle doubt, helpful as they may be in narrowing down the most likely answer

If someone involved in the process of approving a transfer has the time to answer a direct question asked by a journalist or reviewer, they have time to give that journalist or reviewer a quote that can be posted for all to see.

I certainly appreciate any report that surfaces, like Mr. Hunt's latest, and I hope he continues to provide whatever news he can. However, it would be nice to have a direct quote from Lesnie rather than a general account of a conversation. A direct quote would settle the error-vs-intention debate altogether and we could all start getting along again

Well Ken, someone linked your wonderful review on Peter Jackson's
Facebook page. Hopefully he reads it and finally comments on what
his real intent was.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/...57&topic=17423

[Todd Smith]

Originally Posted by merrick97

I agree with this 100%.

I understand where Todd Smith is coming from I really do, but to me it makes NO SENSE from a financial standpoint alone to start retransfering the films to original timing standards.

As I said, most consumers would be none the wiser about this color change.

As uther said, we should NOT EVER accept slop which includes sub-par transfers, DNR and Edge enhancement. That is stuff that we should (and DO) complain about and it seems like Hollywood is getting the message.

However, I do feel it crosses the line when fanboys try to tell filmmakers how their films should look and what their viewing intents should be.

There has to come a point where WHV has to say: Buy it or Dont.

Again, if an error was indeed made I will be right there complaining and demanding a replacement, but I have a VERY hard time believing that actually happened.

I am not telling PJ how his film should look, I simply want the option to buy the film as I know and have loved it all these years. If he wants to do 10 different revisions and put them all out on blu, then great as long as he puts out the "original" as well which is the one most of us fell in love with and the one MANY of us want. This is not being unreasonable by any means IMO.

Originally Posted by petmic10

Well Ken, someone linked your wonderful review on Peter Jackson's
Facebook page. Hopefully he reads it and finally comments on what
his real intent was.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/...57&topic=17423

That would be awesome if he comments as it would put to rest a big part of this whole issue

[Mahatma]

On that colour-correction thing:On my BD player,it has the ability to shift certain colours.If one doesn't like a particular hue,there might be a way to correct that.Granted,not all players support that,and it may affect other scenes adversely,but it is an option.maybe play with it during various scenes

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

Where I disagree is when Ken mentions:

"the sharp-penned threesome evoke the author's language, imagery and intentions at every turn, even when making departures from his text."

For the most part - yes, but not at every turn. The oft-mentioned sequence where Frodo and Sam are captured by Faramir's men (although cinematically well-done) is certainly a substantial departure from the intention of the book, and I for one, wonder why the screenplay involved the trip to Osgiliath when it was not only expensive from an already overburdened time standpoint, but added nothing to the story. I believe that Tolkien, were he alive, would have applied similar comments quoted above to this section of the film. But aside from that, another great review by Ken.

Good point, sir. I have to say I agree. I reworked the sentence and removed some of the problematic hyperbole

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by WorkShed

It just popped into my mind, but what if the filters were accidentally doubled in certain sequences? Doing color correction on my own projects, I once made a mistake of putting a color filter on a sequence twice. It came out much darker and the color was definitely pushed to an extreme. It was embarrassing and I have since made sure to watch a project all the way through, before calling it finished. Ah, school deadlines.

The BD masters would have had to be made well before the Fathom screening. Considering the conflicting reports, maybe some sequences had double-filters that were fixed for the theatrical screening.

This is absolute speculation, but just a thought.

Anything is possible, but I think some of you have reached the point of pure craziness!!!! Yall are splitting hairs at this point looking for any shred of hope.

Give it a rest!!!

p.s. I am saying the above in a light-hearted funny way please dont take it personally

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

At the beginning of Ken's review of The Two Towers, he mentions Tolkien's reaction to the attempted 1957 Zimmerman attempt to film the story. Tolkien reacted to this in his letters:

'If Z[Zimmerman] and/or others do so, they may be irritated or aggreived by the tone of many of my criticisms. If so, I am sorry (though not surprised). But I would ask them to make an effort of imagination sufficient to understand the irritation (and on occasion the resentment) of an author, who finds, increasingly as he proceeds, his work treated as it would seem carelessly in general, in places recklessly, and with no evident signs of any appreciation of what it is all about.....
The cannons of narrative art in any medium cannot be wholly different; and the failure of poor films is often precisely in exaggeration, and in the intrusion of unwarranted matter owing to not perceiving where the core of the original lies.'

With regard to that passage, I would agree with Ken's assessment that Jackson was careful to heed that advice, and for the most part did a great job when faced with the difficult task of simultaneously filming three story threads in time. Where I disagree is when Ken mentions:

"the sharp-penned threesome evoke the author's language, imagery and intentions at every turn, even when making departures from his text."

For the most part - yes, but not at every turn. The oft-mentioned sequence where Frodo and Sam are captured by Faramir's men (although cinematically well-done) is certainly a substantial departure from the intention of the book, and I for one, wonder why the screenplay involved the trip to Osgiliath when it was not only expensive from an already overburdened time standpoint, but added nothing to the story. I believe that Tolkien, were he alive, would have applied similar comments quoted above to this section of the film. But aside from that, another great review by Ken.

A very thoughtful, and civil post GB. I almost forgot about the actual story, and film with all of this coloring talk. That was a breath of fresh air.
Thanks!

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Todd Smith

I am not telling PJ how his film should look, I simply want the option to buy the film as I know and have loved it all these years. If he wants to do 10 different revisions and put them all out on blu, then great as long as he puts out the "original" as well which is the one most of us fell in love with and the one MANY of us want. This is not being unreasonable by any means IMO.




That would be awesome if he comments as it would put to rest a big part of this whole issue

IMO that is unreasonable because, its time consuming, expensive and not very environment friendly. WHat makes it worse is the fact that its a feature that almost nobody would take advantage of and therefore it simply makes no economic sense to do so. Bluray feature budgets are getting slashed and I would MUCH rather them err on the side of director intent than going out of their way to try and please every single person.

The same story also goes with Star Wars. I am very much willing to bet that the amount of people not buying the bluray set because it doesn't have the originals is literally in the 1000s.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

I've been reading this thread for weeks and I've decided that I'm just going to wait until my copy arrives in the mail to decide whether I like it or not. I'm expecting that I won't even notice it as long as it is consistently integrated into the overall atmsophere of the film. I've watched my EE DVDs at least 15 times each, so I definitely have a reference point from which to just properly.

[mrpink134]

Originally Posted by Todd Smith

I am not telling PJ how his film should look, I simply want the option to buy the film as I know and have loved it all these years. If he wants to do 10 different revisions and put them all out on blu, then great as long as he puts out the "original" as well which is the one most of us fell in love with and the one MANY of us want. This is not being unreasonable by any means IMO.




That would be awesome if he comments as it would put to rest a big part of this whole issue

Sounds that way. If this is the film that Jackson intended then thats that! Everything I have been reading points to that way. All this complaining will go no where.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

I've been reading this thread for weeks and I've decided that I'm just going to wait until my copy arrives in the mail to decide whether I like it or not. I'm expecting that I won't even notice it as long as it is consistently integrated into the overall atmsophere of the film. I've watched my EE DVDs at least 15 times each, so I definitely have a reference point from which to just properly.

I keep trying to stay away from this thread, but for some reason I keep on coming back to try and tell these people who want a replacement how wrong they are!!!!!!!!!!

They just need to just kiss the studio's and Peter Jackson's butt.

[nametag]

Originally Posted by mikej327

Then why are you buying the extended editions? The theatrical editions are the way they were originally presented and the official versions of the films.

I don't have a problem with extended/edited/revised/whatever versions as long as the originals are still available. The extended editions don't replace the theatricals, they supplement them... they're separate, that's fine. In the case of LOTR, 'original' doesn't refer to the Theatricals because of this separation.

The point is that FOTR was never originally released or intended to look different from the rest of the trilogy, as far as I'm aware. The original EE was on DVD. It was the TE with added scenes, no great visual overhaul, which it would seem is not the case here.

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

Whether you think the new color grading is ugly or not is absolutely irrelevant.

And yes, you are free to make your subjective judgments - and when you share them people are free to point out that your judgments are off. In other words, the only authority on the subject is the director, and if, his intention is respected by the release, which the information that is circulated at the moment indicates that it has been, there really isn't an issue - regardless of how much you and a few other people have been insinuating that there might have been/has been.

Pro-B

With all due respect, I just don't think I can agree with this. I don't understand the 'artist's-opinion-wins-all' attitude once a film is released to the public - surely by this logic it would be completely fine for an artist to completely revise his past work in a far more aggressive manner than Jackson or even Lucas has done. It assumes that a film has one artist who can do whatever they want to a huge piece of cultural history to satisfy their own desires - how can that always be inherently right?

Whether one 'likes' the changes or not is of course a subjective opinion, surely the most objective option here would be to respect what the historical/culturally significant 'version' is, and not support anyone, director or not, who is putting their subjective preference over everybody else's?

[Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Todd Smith

I am not telling PJ how his film should look, I simply want the option to buy the film as I know and have loved it all these years. If he wants to do 10 different revisions and put them all out on blu, then great as long as he puts out the "original" as well which is the one most of us fell in love with and the one MANY of us want. This is not being unreasonable by any means IMO.



That would be awesome if he comments as it would put to rest a big part of this whole issue

You mean like we dont have with Star Wars? Like those originals that us old folks love and cherish? I knew this would happen as I always said let PJ change something in the LOTR series and all hades will break loose. What I find really funny is some of the same people that don't want LOTR touched are all good with Lucas stiffing the original fans of that trilogy....ahh well.

[Todd Smith]

Originally Posted by mrpink134

Sounds that way. If this is the film that Jackson intended then thats that! Everything I have been reading points to that way. All this complaining will go no where.

BS! If he intended this, it should have been this way from the beg. We have been watching this film for 10 years almost at this point and I think this original version is JUST as valid as any. He wants to change it, fine but offer the original so those who dont care to go along with the new UGLY IMO green issue going on dont have to watch it that way. I dont think we should be forced to just go along with a change to a film we have been viewing for nearly 10 years, especially a dramatic (IMO) change like this one. You dont agree, fine....lets agree to disagree.

Give me the film I Love the way I know it and have known it for nearly 10 years with no major changes please!

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by Todd Smith

BS! If he intended this, it should have been this way from the beg. We have been watching this film for 10 years almost at this point and I think this original version is JUST as valid as any. He wants to change it, fine but offer the original so those who dont care to go along with the new UGLY IMO green issue going on dont have to watch it that way. I dont think we should be forced to just go along with a change to a film we have been viewing for nearly 10 years, especially a dramatic (IMO) change like this one. You dont agree, fine....lets agree to disagree.

I have to break my commitment. Why are you still saying green? It has been proven that it isn't green. Are you blind?

Give it to me the way I want it?! I don't care what you think, Mr. Color-Changing Director!

[Todd Smith]

Originally Posted by JLTucker

I have to break my commitment. Why are you still saying green? It has been proven that it isn't green. Are you blind?

Give it to me the way I want it?! I don't care what you think, Mr. Color-Changing Director!

Green, blue, cyan, teal call it whatever you want.......you know what I mean

Originally Posted by JLTucker

Give it to me the way I want it?! I don't care what you think, Mr. Color-Changing Director!

If you are going to quote me, get it right since one or two words can make a huge difference and that is not what I am saying........read it again.

[greg_achen]

Originally Posted by retablo

And since the new reports that the cinematographer approves and signed off on the discs themselves, there shouldn't be any debate. This is how he intended the movie to look, Oscar or not. I think he probably knows what he was trying to achieve visually more than anyone here.

You are wrong. This is how he intends the movie to look now, Oscar or not. It's funny how I haven't heard a single reviewer who actually knows what he or she is talking about try to argue that this is the way the film looked in its original theatrical run and Jackson and his cinematographer merely "restored" the color timing lost on the DVDs and TE Blu Rays. This is an alteration of their original color timing, which I never said wasn't in their right to do, even if I don't like it.

[WorkShed]

Originally Posted by JLTucker

I have to break my commitment. Why are you still saying green? It has been proven that it isn't green. Are you blind?

Give it to me the way I want it?! I don't care what you think, Mr. Color-Changing Director!

Most of the time when people say a particular color, they don't mean that exact color. Few people say teal or cyan. Just like when someone says something looks red, they may actually mean magenta. It's just a more well-known crayola color.

This little color gaff honestly isn't something to continually make a big deal about.