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

[flodsby]

Originally Posted by Lyle_JP

Why does not wanting to buy the same 9 DVDs all over again make no sense? It's not even a hard concept to understand. Pretty straightforward really. I don't like paying extra for something that is exactly the same as what I already own. Can you explain why that makes "no sense" to you?

I just want the new blu-rays. I've already got the rest.

Then don't buy it.

[HeKS]

I've watched it on a big screen in a dark environment and noticed the green tint and contrast issues, which is what motivated me to post here.

You haven't actually identified anything I've said that is not objectively true so as to claim it has no merit.

Further, have you seen me trying to dissuade people from buying the set or telling them that they shouldn't like what they see? No. My posts have been geared around addressing objectively false statements people have made that have been supported by nothing other than their own subjective opinions.

A lot of people in this thread who don't mind the green tint and contrast issues have come on here over and over and made matter-of-fact claims about the tint not being present, the picture not being any darker, the screencaps being inaccurate or outright fakes, etc. All these statements are objectively false. The fact that these people don't perceive the issues as strongly when watching the film without a non-tinted reference point does not mean that what they are actually seeing is even remotely different from the screencaps (unless one or both of their systems is improperly calibrated) or that those of us who do notice the problem are just complainers who like to complain.

Those people just keep trying to tell us that green is white and we should shut-up.

We just keep pointing out that green is green, even though your eyes may trick you into thinking it's white, and the fact that we are able (or are cursed) to perceive the distinction doesn't make us complainers.

[mikej327]

Why does not wanting to buy the same 9 DVDs all over again make no sense? It's not even a hard concept to understand. Pretty straightforward really. I don't like paying extra for something that is exactly the same as what I already own. Can you explain why that makes "no sense" to you?

I just want the new blu-rays. I've already got the rest.

Because you are not paying extra for them. I guarantee it would be the same price regardless of the amount of extra dvd's(or if the extras were on blu rays)

Personally I bought the set for the movies and the huge improvement in picture quality over the dvds, not for the extras.

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by 42041

nice strawman you've got there...
now find this shade of white anywhere in Fellowship: https://images.blu-ray.com/reviews/4425_1_1080p.jpg

I was well on my way to researching this very issue (I even had a piece of white paper next to my TV as a guide) when I began actually watching the film and enjoying it. I'll get back to you in 3½ hours...

By the way, I'm not disputing the fact that a tint exists, for anyone who's curious. I just find this whole thing stupid after having viewed the discs for myself. In fact - and I'm surprised no one's suggested this yet - if you own a PS3, just pause your disc during the fade to white scene just before Frodo wakes up in Rivendell and then hit the triangle button. There you have it. The function icons are white. The screen isn't. And again I say - big whoop. The film looks absolutely fantastic - with or without "pure white" anywhere on display.

[HeKS]

Originally Posted by flodsby

I don't think you need to put your own "version" into the mix. I don't think it will help this forum in any way except to confuse. I don't mean to sound mean or ignorant.

Hi flodsby,

The only reason I did that was to show the bit of fine detail loss. This fine detail loss was also noticeable in kingkong650's corrected shot from about 100 pages ago or so

[steelers1]

Originally Posted by Lyle_JP

Why does not wanting to buy the same 9 DVDs all over again make no sense? It's not even a hard concept to understand. Pretty straightforward really. I don't like paying extra for something that is exactly the same as what I already own. Can you explain why that makes "no sense" to you?

I just want the new blu-rays. I've already got the rest.

you ever thought that there might be a lot of people out there that dosen`t have them yet?

[Ken Brown]

Blanket dismissals are most ironic considering the topic at hand is a blanket tint

Come on, gents. There's room to have a real, beneficial discussion here. Can members of both camps please stop dismissing the opinions of others? State your peace and let others state theirs. Cheap jabs only derail what could be an educational, expectation-setting discussion that will help more people enjoy FOTR as it is, and help them to understand the changes and improvements the new transfer affords.

Sorry to be Dad of the thread, but for every good discussion that evolves, a distracting argument gums up the gears again.

This isn't aimed at anyone in particular, just the trend that continues to make this thread so uninhabitable for those who have something other than an extreme opinion to offer. Thanks as always for posting!

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

Oh, no problem. I wasn't correcting you as much as I was making sure others didn't read that sentence and misunderstand what aspect of the process the increased detail traces back to

As to your questions: an added tint could reduce perceptible detail, but it isn't entirely clear if anything like that is at play. Contrast and black levels are a bit heavier, as has been noted in many reviews including my own. And that heaviness does reduce detail in darker scenes by some small measure. But that could easily be another aspect of Jackson and Lesnie's color grade, making any decrease in shadow detail as intentional as the color changes and the tint itself. If Jackson wanted a scene to be darker, he couldn't do so without losing detail somewhere. But that doesn't make the lost detail a problem; just an intentional choice.

Ultimately, though, it's all conjecture. Unless Jackson and Lesnie sat down and discussed their new color grade at length, it's impossible to tell. We can guess, but it's just that: a guess. Dizzying, isn't it?

Dizzying is absolutely the right word for this sort of thing! I really am pleased with the set though. Great buy!

Your insight, as always, is much appreciated Mr. Brown. Thanks very much!

[little flower]

I just got back from seeing Lord of the Rings 'The Return of the King'. It was very nice to see this film in the theater again and I had a lot of fun. It was nice to see the introduction by Peter Jackson on this film and on all the films. It was also nice that they played the fan club credits on this film and on all the films and that I saw my name on the fan club credits on this film and on all the films

[TheForce8686]

Originally Posted by mikej327

Because you are not paying extra for them. I guarantee it would be the same price regardless of the amount of extra dvd's(or if the extras were on blu rays)

Personally I bought the set for the movies and the huge improvement in picture quality over the dvds, not for the extras.

Honestly I am surprised this hasn't been brought up more. Everyone is complaining about an imaginary green tint but what about the fact that you are buying a Blu Ray box set where 60% of the discs are dvds? I don't care about special features at all but I figured it would bother some of you.

[Lyle_JP]

Originally Posted by mikej327

Because you are not paying extra for them.

You believe that the 9 DVDs in the set are just free? That they're not worked into the cost of the set in any way? That New Line is just giving them to us out of the goodness of their hearts and not one dime of the price reflects their presence in this set?

I assume you must also believe that no one involved in the myriad of documentaries presented here doesn't expect to see a penny in royalties? Not even Costa Botes?

I guarantee it would be the same price regardless of the amount of extra dvd's(or if the extras were on blu rays)

But it won't be the same price (or even close) to the inevitable individual releases, which I'm willing to bet won't be 5-disc affairs.

[42041]

Originally Posted by TheForce8686

Honestly I am surprised this hasn't been brought up more. Everyone is complaining about an imaginary green tint but what about the fact that you are buying a Blu Ray box set where 60% of the discs are dvds? I don't care about special features at all but I figured it would bother some of you.

Clearly you didn't read this thread before the screenshots came out

[monque]

Just watched FOTR and the image looks good to me. I did notice a few scenes where the tint was a shade of green or blue, but overall the image is amazing. I am one that is happy with this purchase. The color thing is not that big of an issue TO ME. Now if the color schemed had been changed throughout the WHOLE movie, then I would have an issue. This just my opinion.

[flodsby]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

Blanket dismissals are most ironic considering the topic at hand is a blanket tint

Come on, gents. There's room to have a real, beneficial discussion here. Can members of both camps please stop dismissing the opinions of others? State your peace and let others state theirs. Cheap jabs only derail what could be an educational, expectation-setting discussion that will help more people enjoy FOTR as it is, and help them to understand the changes and improvements the new transfer affords.

Sorry to be Dad of the thread, but for every good discussion that evolves, a distracting argument gums up the gears again.

This isn't aimed at anyone in particular, just the trend that continues to make this thread so uninhabitable for those who have something other than an extreme opinion to offer. Thanks as always for posting!

I totally agree. I would like to talk about the movies as they are and not how they should be.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by JLTucker

I said this tens of millions of pages full of complaints ago, but without Arwen, Aragorn would not have become King.

Perhaps in the movie edition, but in the book he would have managed OK without her.

[Byte19]

unbelievable.... simply unbelievable this place...

[Lyle_JP]

Originally Posted by steelers1

you ever thought that there might be a lot of people out there that dosen`t have them yet?

Did I say I was speaking for everyone?

Hell, I didn't even come to this thread to complain about this set being over 50% recycled DVDs, I mentioned it only to illustrate that there were things that could rightly deserve more complaint that Peter Jackson's re-timing of the film (which seems to be a minor "fault" to an otherwise excellent transfer). But of course, any post even mildly critical of this set invites accusations of being "nonsensical", which I felt required a response.

In my opinion, we should have had the choice of individual releases right out of the gate, especially for those of use who have already brought our wallets to the LOTR well at least twice before. For those who have never owned the EE of these films before, the set is a good buy.

[Petyr_Baelish]

It's too bad lord of the rings couldn't have been part of the Criterion collection. Then it would have been perfect.

[ranitasus]

Originally Posted by TheForce8686

I am so glad I got one of the fixed non green copies. I am watching it right now and am loving it.

Wait wait..so there are copies that don't have the green? im all confused now lol there are fixed and non fixed copies?

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

Perhaps in the movie edition, but in the book he would have managed OK without her.

How much of a presence does she really have in the books? I've read them multiple times over the years, but I sometimes forget the finer points of Tolkien's minor characters

You're far more knowledgeable when it comes to the original text than I am, so I thought it was worth asking. If you're willing to dissect her presence in the books amidst all this tint chatter, of course