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

[JamesKurtovich]

Originally Posted by AreaUnderTheCurve

There were many instances of the EE BD where the greenish color from the theatrical was taken out.

See this post: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...41#post6113341

Man, a lot of those shots from the EE look pretty bad, except for the shot of Aragorn and Frodo. Most of them are darker and have that putrid green overcast, even the "Lord of the Rings" text.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

Man, a lot of those shots from the EE look pretty bad. Everything is darker and a lot of them have that putrid green overcast, even the "Lord of the Rings" text.

The top is the theatrical release. The Theatrical edition of the logo has the green stuff, not the extended. As I have said elsewhere in the thread, I care more about fine detail than the green push. The Shire looks fine given that it is almost night and it looks overcast. The sun is fading. The journey into darkness is about to begin.

of course crap like Second Breakfast is disgusting.

[BaWd]

will the single releases ever be 15$ each ?

[Brightstar]

will we get a six movie box set in the future ? which will have the Hobbit and LOTR EE in one set ?

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by 42041

There is also the question of whether the old video transfer accurately conveys the theatrical color and isn't "re-color timed" to begin with. I haven't had an opportunity to compare it to an original 35mm print but it certainly comes from an era in home video mastering when theatrical color accuracy was in desperately short supply and the color/contrast/brightness was regularly modified to make movies look "better" on television (or at least I assume that's the reason).

Crucial point. So many people always assume the previous version of a movie, or the version they are used to seeing is the standard. We have seen this countless times with DVD releases in particular and as stated, FOTR stemmed from that early 2000s era which had standards in terms of authoring and mastering below the time when the EE BD was created.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Crucial point. So many people always assume the previous version of a movie, or the version they are used to seeing is the standard. We have seen this countless times with DVD releases in particular and as stated, FOTR stemmed from that early 2000s era which had standards in terms of authoring and mastering below the time when the EE BD was created.

It STILL does not match the other two films in the series.

.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

It STILL does not match the other two films in the series.

.

Bingo.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

Bingo.

was his name-o.

.

[JamesKurtovich]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

It STILL does not match the other two films in the series.

.

It's unfortunate, because the smaller alterations (like Rivendell) make FOTR more consistent with the rest of the movies, but the tint alienates it further. PJ filmed all three consecutively, as one big story (as Tolkien wanted it), so consistency only makes sense and seems pretty important overall.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

It STILL does not match the other two films in the series.

.

Neither did the cinematic prints, since the first film underwent a much different post-production process than the other two. Which is also why the original TE disc looked awful in comparison.

[Simondio]

Are there any extras on the $10 Target EEs at all? I won't find out until Christmas. Right now they are sitting in my Christmas stocking.

[MacEachaidh]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

It's unfortunate, because the smaller alterations (like Rivendell) make FOTR more consistent with the rest of the movies, but the tint alienates it further. PJ filmed all three consecutively, as one big story (as Tolkien wanted it), so consistency only makes sense and seems pretty important overall.

True, but they were post-produced separately, and the technologies involved in colour grading changed over that time. So FotR was handled differently from the two subsequent films.

People will try to tell you that it's just your system not being calibrated correctly, completely ignoring the fact that most people who've claimed that still have to use different settings on their display between FotR and the other two (hmm, could that possibly mean that they're substantially different after all? No, of course not! It's the people who see the green tint who are ignoring the evidence!!), or will claim that this is the result of artistic intent (ignoring the fact that the only official statement about the issue acknowledged that the differences are an attempt to address problems in the original colour grading of the first film, and said nothing about the Director or DP wanting it to look this way) ... but I'm mostly puzzled by the fact that these people can't simply say, "meh, I'm happy with it the way it is", rather than inventing baseless rhetoric to "prove" that the people unhappy with this release must absolutely be wrong in all they say. That, I think, is where the obsession lies in this whole debate.

I agree with you and others who have said the look of Rivendell is better in the EE release than the preceding one, though with the deadening effect on colour tones that the green tint lends, it does look to me this time round as if all the foliage in Rivendell is dead or dying. I'm sure that wasn't the intent of the original art design.

[wzz]

does anyone know if the itunes digital copy of the lotr download in SD or HD?

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by wzz

does anyone know if the itunes digital copy of the lotr download in SD or HD?

When I redeemed what came with the first release, it was the typical SD nonsense. I don;t see why it would be any different.

[Agent Bond]

was his name-o.

Bingo Baggins? What a terrible name!

[wzz]

Originally Posted by AreaUnderTheCurve

When I redeemed what came with the first release, it was the typical SD nonsense. I don;t see why it would be any different.

thanks!

[Sons Of Sparda]

Originally Posted by hidef al

I haven't found the individual releases in my area yet. Are the discs housed in black cases??

Only place so far I saw them at is wal-mart. They were $24.96 each.

[clerk3745]

So after seeing The Hobbit last weekend I got in the LotR mood (like pretty much everybody). So I pop the bluray for Extended Edition Return of the King in and during loud scenes my back left speaker pops like its cracked. At first I thought "damn it, I'm going to have to replace the speaker or the whole surround sound system". But before I did that I tested it by popping in Revenge of the Sith and Aliens in and cranking them WAAAAY up ....crystal clear. I can even hear these pops when I turn RotK way down, so its a problem with the disc. But since I bought it when it came out a year and half ago I can't return or even exchange it. Please help.

[42041]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

... or will claim that this is the result of artistic intent (ignoring the fact that the only official statement about the issue acknowledged that the differences are an attempt to address problems in the original colour grading of the first film, and said nothing about the Director or DP wanting it to look this way)

How is one not the other? If they're correcting problems with the original transfer, then it seems to follow that the new version is closer to their desired look for the film

but I'm mostly puzzled by the fact that these people can't simply say, "meh, I'm happy with it the way it is", rather than inventing baseless rhetoric to "prove" that the people unhappy with this release must absolutely be wrong in all they say. That, I think, is where the obsession lies in this whole debate.

I'd say that goes both ways....
Hyperbolic nonsense and bogus reasoning should be challenged, because misinformation spreads like the plague over the internet.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by 42041

Neither did the cinematic prints, since the first film underwent a much different post-production process than the other two. Which is also why the original TE disc looked awful in comparison.

Yep. This needs to be a sticky somewhere.