The Lord Of The Rings Extended - Page 169

I put this up way back in post #1518, and thought I would put it up again to go along with those shots you just showed.

This, as well, has been discussed over and over. The bottom line is that some people do adjust and have no problem, while others it sticks out like a sore thumb and drives them crazy, to everywhere in-between. If you are one that it doesn't bother, then great. But that doesn't change the fact that many are bothered by the color timing on something that is questionably a mistake. There were even test images put up that people could load onto their USB sticks and put in their blu-ray players to view full screen in the proper environment in order for them to make a purchasing decision with regard to whether or not they would notice the green tint and whether it would bother them. Some had no problem, others did.

In addition to the color, the fact that the whole movie has been darkened 14% is something very real as well. There are people who prefer brightness over contrast and keep their systems calibrated at specific foot-lambert levels, tweaking irises as the bulb ages, etc. For them, this will be a very noticeably dim movie. Again, other's mileage may vary.

The thing we still don't have a 100% answer on is whether those were ARE bothered by it are bothered because it was intentional, or is a mistake.

The Caradhras scene was one of the ones that was intentionally changed by PJ. It's not an example of the green tint. So stop posting it, please.

My EE does NOT look like this gif however.

K, two things:

1) No brain is going to adapt to crushed blacks and regenerate detail on the fly
2) Having to wait until my brain adapts green to white is a ridiculous inconvenience. We snark on these forums about TVs and projectors that have a noticible (< 1 second) dynamic adjustment in contrast, but now I am supposed to wait A COUPLE OF MINUTES to not see the green? Not to mention, the fact that once I am conscious of the process of my brain doing the auto-convert, it will no doubt take longer and be even more distracting.

This mess is just plain unacceptable.

LMFAO

Hey look, it's a great trilogy. There's a lot to rave about here.

But let's face facts. The EE is just too much. Too long, too many battle sequences, too many shots of frodo suffering because of the ring, It seems almost endlessly repetitive. Some might it find tortuous.

PJ, you don't need 100 shots of Frodo in pain; 2 or 3 will suffice. We get it. We don't need to see an hour long battle sequence. 10 minutes is fine. Even that's more than enough, really. Yeah, the orcs are ugly. Yeah, we get that. They don't floss. Great.

I had to ff through the last half hour. Make that an hour. Over and over and over and over and over and over. The repetition is TOO MUCH!


The first installment is the best, by far. It's the only one I saw in theaters and it retains a great deal of it's power. I just found CG Gollum to be not very believable in the trailers, and there again was the repetition: "my precious."

Man, I'm tired of this trilogy. As good as it is, it's a huge relief to have gotten through it. Or at least most of it.

I always find it amusing when people can't/don't distinguish between their opinion and facts.

As one who just watched it (the Blu-Ray EE) all the way through last week, I would disagree with most of this (except for Frodo's pained expression - yes, that got to be tedious). I enjoyed almost every overlong minute of it, and would gladly rewatch it in all its extended glory. I haven't watched the theatrical edition since it was in the theaters. Maybe I would like the theatrical edition as well or more were I to rewatch it, but I suspect I would be thinking "What happened to that part?" and "Where did that part go?" quite often.

Just to be clear, you still haven't actually watched the movies on BD, right? All of the bile you spew is still based solely on YouTube videos and screencaps, right?

Just checking. Carry on.

My response here is more to the point of this particular conversation rather than the quote itself.

First of all, I am now the owner of the LOTR trilogy theatrical versions. With this, I have a quick question. I purchased them at Walmart on Black Friday with a "Promo" sticker attached. I figured at $4 each, how could I go wrong? Does anyone know the difference between my purchase with a "Promo" sticker and a regular purchase? What I'm really wanting to know is will there be a difference in audio/video quality with the feature presentation?

Back to the point of topic, as mentioned, I am a fan of the LOTR movies despite getting quite burned out from the nightly HBO broadcasts. I have the original theatrical dvd releases but none of the extended versions out of protest. Brilliant marketing to be sure but when LOTR was released I was quite perturbed that shortly after the EE came out. I simply wasn't going to spend the extra money, especially considering it didn't impact the story much. That is until the second installment was released and I found myself asking questions that the LOTR EE could have answered. Well, regardless, on principle now I wasn't going to buy any of the EE versions that I knew would be coming with each dvd release. When ROTK was released in theaters I was flat out pissed because the whole idea of the EE was because the studio said the movie (LOTR) would have been too long. But with ROTK it was longer than any of them and of course filled with gaps that could have been filled had I viewed or purchased the EE's.

Been holding a grudge a long time on that one so when BD came out I simply refused to buy it especially with all of the banter back and forth about the green effect and all of that. I'm not even sure if I would even notice it at this point. But now with the $4 deal I figured it was time but still not the EE versions, which I'm ok with as it's been a while since I've watched them and at this point don't feel I'll miss anything.

Nope...lend me yours?

And just to be clear, you do realize that the color shift and dimming have been proven beyond a doubt right? Enough people see it that I don't want to waste my money on an obvious mistake until the studio corrects it. The more noise we make, the more likely they will fix it in a future release. If nothing else, at least we will reduce some profit from going into the studios hands (see post above) for refusing to admit they screwed up. Got anything else to contribute?

LOL so true.

Two things I can't tolerate:

1. People who deny the problem exists
2. The problem exists

Not necessarily in that order.

I like tight pacing, and I felt like the third installment simply dragged things out unnecessarily. It's a very powerful film overall, but several themes, such as frodo's angst, just get beaten into the ground mercilessly. The closeups of Frodo's pained ambivalence as he attempts to balance his will to destroy the ring, his compassion for smeagol, and his attempts to resist the will of the ring itself--powerful. But it's the same friggin' closeup, the same pained expression, the same idea and plot point: over and over and over. It just becomes laughable.
It's reminiscent of Kristin Stewart's similar pained expression in snow white; an inferior film, mind you, but it's the same principle.

If a comedian tells the same joke 10X in the same performance, it's simply not as entertaining during the 10th telling, eh?

It's a great film, but 4 hours of sitting is just a bit much. And I took several breaks. Perhaps I would have enjoyed it more over the course of multiple evenings.

The third film to me feel redundant after watching the first two. The Helms Deep battle looks and works better than the way too similiar but less exciting and too long battle in Gondor. (I understand following the book this is the way it has to be in some way though)

In one way, I feel making 2 films out of the three books could have worked better. Remove the battle of Helms Deep (which isn't really needed), remove much of the Ents and insert the part of the Hobbits having to fight back Sauroman themselves in the end.

But ofc I respect them for making it as close to the books as they felt they could. And If I were a huge fan of the books I would have been more thrilled.

But as I said I don't really need the third film after watching the first two - and the story with Frodo and the destroying of the ring never feel that interesting, fun or important (apart from Gollum being funny).

According to who?

LOL

So you never grew tired of the one million moments of Frodo saying "Dear Sam" during their trip to mount doom?

That was few in comparison to the 'dear in headlights' look Frodo keep giving to the camera.

Just making sure those reading the thread know where certain people are coming from. By all means, carry on.

Few, if any, have denied that the colors have been changed.


The rub is, there are those who accept the fact that this release is the first we're seeing of the full-DI/full-color timing version of this film and are willing to give PJ and company the benefit of the doubt that this is the intended look of the film. The reality is, most people who actually watch it (as opposed to flipping back and forth between screencaps and YouTube videos) will (and do) think it looks fantastic. YMMV.

Because the changes are too much to be explained by only a tint, it's simple math. The green tint is a known element, a fixed constant, and can be removed with a single operation. If the scene still looks different than the theatrical edition, then it obviously contains other changes besides that tint. That scene is one of them, as is "second breakfast". Removal of the tint does not result in an image like the theatrical. Combined with official statements from WB and PJ that "Yes, we changed a few things", and I don't think it's too much of a leap.

Nice to see my GIFs are still being quoted!

Hehe. True true.

It just came across funny, since destroying the ring is a somewhat important element of the story.

I aagree that the extended edition of the third one has some pacing issues if you try to watch it in one sitting. I think of the extended editions as something you watch like a mini-series over 5 or 6 evenings. I like the theatrical editions if I want to watch them more like movies.

I completely agree. I think my mistake was that I attempted to watch the trilogy in 3 sittings. It really should've been 6. But the first half of "king" ends with a cliff hanger right in the middle of a battle sequence! So of course I had to soldier on myself and watch the second half. Thank goodness for the FF button!

I thought everybody was supposed to watch all 3 EEs in one sitting....

There seems to be a sickly teal tint in the Shire in this commercial for "The Hobbit":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=I3IPy-q7w6U


Gone is the warmth of the Shire that we had in FOTR. It looks more like the tint in FOTR EE. I'm not denying that there is a mistake on the EE (where there is no pure white at all), but it looks like Jackson may not have only wanted to change the grading in the snow scenes in FOTR, but in the Shire as well.

That's how we do it. Pacing is great that way.

My son is watching Lord of the Rings with me for the first time before he sees the Hobbit. We are watching one disc of the Extended Editions each night and we are on number four out of six. I don't think he could sit still for eleven hours to watch them all in one sitting.