LOTR Trilogy : Extended Editions

jaykhunter

I would rank LOTR up with some of the best films ever made, even if they are (sorry guys) actually quite boring. The pace is quite slow. There is so much time spent relishing in Tolkien's world - so many sets, memorable music, beautiful scenes, architecture (like the Argonaths, House of Gondor), so rich, vibrant, and oozing sumptuous detail, it's no wonder the films are so long.

Please excuse my spelling, I'm not a Tolkien fan. Just a fan of the movies.

Em, I don't really want to bother with the plot synopsis, since they're huge spoilers. If you haven't seen these films, wow, WTF! Go see them! I have to say that some people don't like them. It really ends up if you're interested in the characters. I was truly hooked so I absolutely loved them, love the extended editions, and loved re-watching them because I got more layers of knowledge of the films.

I have to say, GO SEE THESE FILMS. Everything about the film is top notch - writing, acting, music, scenes, set-dressings, plot, characters - EVERYTHING. It's breath-taking and should be bought by everyone when the Blu-Ray comes out Wow, Gollum's character/dialogue is just AMAZING. I've never cared so much about a CG character before (or since)

I don't want to bang on about the different headings because I'll just be re-using the same superlatives. I'd rather just address each of the film's faults, as I have a hard time choosing which of the 3 I like best. (The good far, far, FAR outweighs the bad!) I just re-watched all 3 extended DVD cuts, so now's a good a time as any.

Grievances I have with LOTR :

THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING

• Saron and Saruman's names are too similar (lol)
• NOTHING happens in the first hour. It must be the slowest hour ever committed to film. Some hobbit has a birthday. That's it! WOW.
  Whenever the Fellowship is formed though, the movie is just fantastic. The Mines of Morior? Amazing. The tension with Boromir? Fantastic.

THE TWO TOWERS

• "I Am No Tree" Treebeard. I hate Ents. They speak, walk and plot-progress slowly. I can't stand how much time is given to Merry, Pippin and Treebeard. I get the end result is important, but holy God, fast-forward. I really think that 80% of Treebeard's air-time could've been cut.
• Eowyn hitting on Aragorn - he's spoken for, you home wrecker!

I might just mention it here. I think the Battle of Helm's Deep is amazing, my personal favourite LOTR fightscene.

RETURN OF THE KING

• Nothing happens for the first hour (again). "War is coming" is about all that happens.
• Again, Eowyn hitting on Aragorn - get your own bloke, you wench!
• In general, there's much less plot than the other two (in my opinion)
• When Gollum is on Frodo's back, it looks really CG. I mean like an animatic...because Frodo is invisible. There's nothing technically wrong, it just looks so fake.
• I understand that Frodo's supposed to be like a "junkie" by the third film, but I felt it didn't come across that way. Frodo's heel turn ("The Ring is Mine") just seemed contrived. I disapproved.
• Sam seems to get fatter as the films progress, which makes no sense!
• If you get an undead army, you've won the war. The theatrical cut left it late until the undead army came, but the Extended version has them featured more. Who cares about the war now? The side with the undead army have won!! (Jackson talks about this in the commentary)
• The gay-ass 50 bed-bouncing endings they have...it could've been done in 5 minutes, but wow it drags on.
• We never get to see Saron actually in the film*

Again, that's about it. These really are small quibbles, because I think the films are just fantastic. Peter Jackson and WETA did an amazing job. Sure, the CGI looks a bit ropey in places now, but I think it's still amazing (ROTK still holds up well IMO). Just thought I'd share anyway.



Oh, some things I learnt from the commentary/extras discs :

• New Zealand has beautiful scenery
• Originally Frodo intentionally pushes Gollum off the ledge, they felt that was too much (I agree), so they changed it to a tussle for the ring, and both going over as a result. It also had the (literal :pac:) cliff-hanger scene, which is cathartic.
• *They had a scene at the end of ROTK where Aragorn takes on Saron in a fight -- and it looks terrible. Jackson explains that it's not the end of Aragorn's story (leading his people is/becoming King) and this fight takes away from Frodo's. That, and it looks rotten. It just looks so cheesy and fake. Aragorn can block Saron's strike just like that, eh? It's like if a 200-pound man struck a sword, which was blocked by a 50-pound child - the force itself would send the child to the ground. Anyway, it was taken out of the film, so I can't complain :D:D
• The level of detail involved in each scene is ridiculous, and alot of it is barely noticed. But that's what makes it so rich.
• Helms' Deep was re-jiggered into The White City.
• Bigatures (Big Miniatures) fuc--ng rock!

Basq

tl;dr..









.. but I do love the films!

jaykhunter

basquille wrote: »

tl;dr..

What does this mean?

Wreck

jaykhunter wrote: »

What does this mean?

Too long; didn't read.

basquille wrote: »

tl;dr..

Bit harsh, he has proper paragraphs, headings, bullet points and everything!

Love the films, and I think the slow pacing actually adds alot to the films, although watching the three in a row is a bit of a drag.

Basq

Apologies OP.

I was just joking... and hadn't had my morning coffee yet so was a bit cranky.

Your post was well thought out and concise.

By the way, the Theatrical Editions are out on Blu-ray shortly, not no sign of the Extended Editions.

jaykhunter

Wreck wrote: »

although watching the three in a row is a bit of a drag.

:pac::pac::pac: LOL I couldn't watch 12 hours of film in one sitting! What I did is watch one disc of the extended editions per night, over a week. The talk of the Blu Ray editions got me into re-watching them again. Although I'd never double-dip; i'll wait til they release the extended editions on BR (which'll probably come out a month before the Hobbit gets released in theatres)

keefg

So they've extended three films that were already too long and dull in the first place?

Just another studio exercise to squeeze a few more €/£/$ out of the fanboys.

Pardon my cynicism OP, even though I am not a fan of LOTR, I think these "Limited/Extended/Special" editions are a croc. Same goes for the deleted scene sections on DVD's, there's a reason they were deleted from the final cut.

cabrwab

keefg wrote: »

So they've extended three films that were already too long and dull in the first place?

Just another studio exercise to squeeze a few more €/£/$ out of the fanboys.

Pardon my cynicism OP, even though I am not a fan of LOTR, I think these "Limited/Extended/Special" editions are a croc. Same goes for the deleted scene sections on DVD's, there's a reason they were deleted from the final cut.

But the extended editions of LOTR were always going to come out, the reason being they left out so many scenes from the books filmed them but cut them due to the length.
At the time of realese of the normal DVD they always said when the extended edtions were coming out.

I love the books but love the movies even more.
Only once have i tried watching them all in one day. didn't make it to be honest.

Well thought out post OP, long but at least it aint all long paragraphs

fitz0

Meh, I liked the films well enough but if I want extra story I'll just reread the books. If you thought Treebeard was slow in the film, read the book. Its like they put him in double time for the film.

citizen_p

??? i got this like a year or two ago....instead of buying the three sepratley which would cost like 80 i got the extended boxset in a sale for 60.....

its good.... alot of added bits that they took out of the books (the only book ive properly read) like the corsair pirates, dunadain etc.... ohh and the

fact that aragon is like 80 or 100 years of age

MagicMarker

lol, not even going to attempt to read that.

First one was ok.
2nd one bored the arse off me.
Didn't bother with the 3rd.

keefg

cabrwab wrote: »

But the extended editions of LOTR were always going to come out, the reason being they left out so many scenes from the books filmed them but cut them due to the length.
At the time of realese of the normal DVD they always said when the extended edtions were coming out.

I can understand why some scenes (of any movie) are left out of the theatrical release (due to time restrictions) but if they were "always" going to include the extra footage then why not just do it for the first release of the DVD?

I'll tell you why, because they know that there will always be people fanatical enough to buy "special" editions no matter what crap is included on them and how frequently they are released.

Hard Larry

I went to Australia a few years back and a cinema in Cairns had shown these 3 SEE movies...(I missed it by a week but did catch the Matrix trilogy)

Anyone know if a cinema colud/would show these films in the future in Ireland?

Would be class to catch them on the big screen again.

PirateShampoo

I have these, they are great. Saying that though i havent gone into the commentry or extras.

PJW

I read these books as a kid in the early eighties and thought they where brillent then went to see the movie (cartoon version and it was a mega let down)

when I heard that they where making an epic movie I desided to reread the books again and again they where great until I got to the end of ROTK I thought to myself this is a big crock of sh1t....like why did'nt they just put the Frodo and the ring on the back of the "flying bird" and drop them on the firey mountain, dah. Iys just ruined it for me a serious flaw imo, antway the film are classin all its cgi glory.

satchmo

basquille wrote: »

By the way, the Theatrical Editions are out on Blu-ray shortly, not no sign of the Extended Editions.

Ah bollocks.

humanji

keefg wrote: »

I can understand why some scenes (of any movie) are left out of the theatrical release (due to time restrictions) but if they were "always" going to include the extra footage then why not just do it for the first release of the DVD?

I'll tell you why, because they know that there will always be people fanatical enough to buy "special" editions no matter what crap is included on them and how frequently they are released.

It's a case of a director making a film and a studio saying that it'd be too long for an audience to sit through. They'd feel that they'd lose money (remember that studios have very little regard for the film watching abilities of US audiences, hence the constant remakes of foreign films).

I watched these again recently and have to say they're f*cking awful. I loved them when they first came out, but that's just the spectacal of the thing. The story isn't great because they had to pretty much butcher the books in order to fit it into a film and it suffered because of it. And the direction is fairly bad too. Lots of pointless zooming in and out. It was like an early Sam Raimi movie. Add to this the terrible way they have to make the characters "cool", like Legolas surfing on a shield. I really hope some time in the future there's a remake that much more faithful to the books.

DamoRed

If the original post is too long for some of you, well, God help you when you see a book! It's got loads and loads of writing and stuff and it goes on for ages and ages, so it does.

Another thing that gets me is people typing more than three or four lines and apologising for the long post!

Great post, Jaykhunter. A mate of mine who's got a projector and a great big space to show them in, says he's going to get a few guys around at Christmas and we'll watch, or attempt to watch the extended versions of all three. With food and drink before and during the breaks. It could be a hell of a challenge.

bnt

In the case of the LotR movies, they were under tight deadlines to get all the effects shots done in time for cinematic release, especially with the third film. A year between releases was already pushing it, and the marketing is planned many months in advance.

Don't forget that cinemas make money by the screening, not by the hour, so they don't want major releases to be too long anyway. If they tried showing an Extended Edition they'd need to put in an intermission, too. The total screening time, including previews, ads, and cleanup time, would be pushing 5 hours = only two screenings per day?

I've only ever seen the Extended Editions - I didn't see them in the cinema at all. I was in no hurry, not when the Extended Editions were already being advertised. I don't have major problems with any of them, and we know that Tolkien was not writing with the screen in mind. It's not as if you have to choose between the films or the books: we'll always have both.

keefg

keefg wrote: »

I can understand why some scenes (of any movie) are left out of the theatrical release (due to time restrictions) but if they were "always" going to include the extra footage then why not just do it for the first release of the DVD?

I'll tell you why, because they know that there will always be people fanatical enough to buy "special" editions no matter what crap is included on them and how frequently they are released.

The effects work on the additional scenes wasn't finished in time for the initial DVD release. Remember also that they shot some scenes after the film had wrapped as well as having to bring some actors back for adr. Jackson said from day one that they were releasing extended cuts and that they would be out a few months after the first release, it wasn't some big secret to rip off the fans. Unlike say Zodiac which was released as a bare bones vanilla disc contained one extra, a trailer for the upcoming directors cut. Now that was a con job as the directors cut was kept very quiet.

The same thing happened with Watchmen, Zach Snyder has said from day one that his intended cut of the film would be released on DVD awhile after the first DVD release. He advised fans to wait for it and not to double dip.

A lot of people don't want extended cuts of films. For them the theatrical cuts of Lord of the Rings are enough, and extra hour to each film does not interest them. I can't wait for the complete Watchmen but I know a lot of people who are happy with the theatrical cut DVD and point blank refuse to watch a version of the film that's over an hour longer.

jaykhunter

PJ always had in mind the Extended Editions because there was just so much information/so many scenes in the book that PJ wanted to do it justice; i.e. have in as much (relevant) stuff as possible. Realising that for the film to be popular in a broad appeal too, he had to trim down the films for a theatrical release. I reckon the theatrical versions are the shortest 'adequate' version PJ was prepared to release, as a huge mark for LOTR. It's not like he's 'forcing' you to buy both! I'd rather have the option to watch the extended cuts...but I would've liked the Blu-Ray Extended Editions to come out at the same time. It's a bit c*nt-errific, but at least we know they are coming; unlike a certain Star Wars director (who has no plans on releasing Star Wars on Blu-Ray anytime soon)

Since LOTR is of a certain pace and mindset already (it really enjoys showing different sets/locations) I felt the Extended Editions were much better. I mean, you're already spending so much time on watching the film, why not spend a little more to get the 'fullest' version. It really boils down to how much you love LOTR.

On a side note, after watching Terminator 2 (in my top 3 films of all time)'s Extended Edition, I have to say, the film drags. It adds some unnecessary exposition in the film (Arnold smiles 'like a horse') but is nice to see. With LOTR, it usually expounds a smaller plot (like what happens to Eowyn and Faramir; which is really nice). Although I love T2, it does not nearly have as much going on as LOTR.

dimejinky99

Didjis find the hidden easter eggs on the extended editions? they're so brilliant and very funny.
put in disc 1 of ROTK, go to scene selection on the menu, push up to get to the last of the scenes listed, which is The Siege of Gondor, then push down. A little ring will appear beside *new scene. Hit it for giggles.
It's pretty hilarious and it works on TTT, and that ones good too but I think you might have seen it, but the one on ROTK is best. Also and there's one on FOTR i *think* but I'm not certain. They're well worth a look.

This is pretty funny too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2-t4_qKPSo

nix

PJW wrote: »

when I heard that they where making an epic movie I desided to reread the books again and again they where great until I got to the end of ROTK I thought to myself this is a big crock of sh1t....like why did'nt they just put the Frodo and the ring on the back of the "flying bird" and drop them on the firey mountain, dah. Iys just ruined it for me a serious flaw imo, antway the film are classin all its cgi glory.

Perhaps the giant eagles would have wanted the ring also and killed frodo for it?

krudler

PJW wrote: »

I read these books as a kid in the early eighties and thought they where brillent then went to see the movie (cartoon version and it was a mega let down)

when I heard that they where making an epic movie I desided to reread the books again and again they where great until I got to the end of ROTK I thought to myself this is a big crock of sh1t....like why did'nt they just put the Frodo and the ring on the back of the "flying bird" and drop them on the firey mountain, dah. Iys just ruined it for me a serious flaw imo, antway the film are classin all its cgi glory.

Isnt it explained in the books just why they dont use the eagles?

MikeC101

The eagles are would have been corrupted too fast, it's made clear that even a Hobbit (innocent though they are) might have refused to throw the ring in.

The eagles are big and obvious, and would have alerted Sauron to their presence too quickly and the Nazgul on their Fell Beasts would have simply intercepted them.

I don't think any of the above really comes across in the movies all that well, there are a few other explanations from the books as well.

Though they are the Deus Ex Machina of Middle Earth it has to be said.