Lord of the Rings extended ver. dvd
Nov 15, 2002 at 4:50 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 37

zchen

New Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 15, 2002
Posts
36
Likes
11
Anyone pick up this set? I just got it today , haven't got a chance to watch it though. Not sure if I want to use the free Two Towers movie ticket that comes with it.
confused.gif
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 5:56 AM Post #2 of 37
I got the set. If you like the movie (I do), there's about 30 minutes more of it. It adds a bit more flavor, but nothing was really lost in the theatrical edit, IMO. I haven't had a chance to look at the extras yet.

The free ticket is a nice bonus.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 6:10 AM Post #3 of 37
Since I obviously have good taste,
smily_headphones1.gif
I realize the MANY ways in which the longer version is vastly superior. Sorry but you just aren't entitled to your difference of opinion in this matter. NO offense but anyone halfway interested in storytelling should understand how the little bits they added completely revitalize what was previously a special effects showcase.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 7:13 AM Post #4 of 37
Ai0tron, having read the books more times in my youth than I can even remember, the movie is at best a brief digest of what's in them. I didn't need the fleshing out, as I know the story oh so well. The extra bits simply emphasized some aspects of the movie, in some places enhancing, but usually distracting. I *don't* like the deviations from the original story, even though I can sometimes see the cinematic necessity. If you really want to revitalize the story, read Tolkein.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 7:24 AM Post #5 of 37
Quote:

anyone halfway interested in storytelling should understand how the little bits they added completely revitalize what was previously a special effects showcase.


Interesting opinions. I thought the movie was a decent action movie, but a poor portrayal of the spirit of the book. Although I already thought the movie was too long for what it offered (2-dimensional characters, overdrawn dialogue, hammy acting), I *was* wondering whether another half hour might change things completely.

I have a feeling Hirsch is closer to the mark here, though.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 9:28 AM Post #7 of 37
Quote:

Originally posted by shivohum
Interesting opinions. I thought the movie was a decent action movie, but a poor portrayal of the spirit of the book. Although I already thought the movie was too long for what it offered (2-dimensional characters, overdrawn dialogue, hammy acting), I *was* wondering whether another half hour might change things completely.



I just got it today, but haven't watched it yet either. Am I alone in thinking that the movie was a bit disjointed?? At times I felt like I had no clue about what was going or why, even after knowing the book's account quite well. My wife was totally confused from teh beginning of the movie and was still asking questions when it ended. I don't think she'll want to watch it again, extra 30 minutes or no.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 9:56 AM Post #8 of 37
Perhaps the best route is Tolkien... And truthfully, this being the fourth time I've sat through this movie I was a rather bored although more informed viewer. I still feel moments where the story could use a lot more fleshing out, just to give pause in some cases... The theatrical edit is like falling down a steep hill. These events just come rushing up to whap you in the face over and over then suddenly the movie ends. At least with this longer edit the events seem to progress over time rather than spontaneously blowing up in your face. And that in my opinion is what gives a movie real value, does it take you through the time the movie represents in a sort of transcendental fashion.

I think the major flaw of the movie is that even with the longer version, there is not enough relaxing. The characters still rarely just sit about and shoot the **** so we can get a feel for who they are. They makers try to hard to keep your attention and it ends up being more of a bore because the constant drama, musical especially, really starts to wear thin.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 10:07 AM Post #9 of 37
I find the extra bits a bit distracting, when I notice them. Although, they explained (note, I don't know any of the names, so I'll use "That Guy") how "that guy" (guy who didn't ditch the ring) got shot by three arrows, rather than just floating down the stream with arrows in his back.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 10:09 AM Post #10 of 37
Myself, aka me,

Loved the signature!! Got quite a kick out of the "team cheap" idea!!! Actually, we all end up in team broke or team cheap every once in a while after reading some reviews of more products.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 3:30 PM Post #11 of 37
Quote:

I think the major flaw of the movie is that even with the longer version, there is not enough relaxing. They makers try to hard to keep your attention and it ends up being more of a bore because the constant drama, musical especially, really starts to wear thin.


This is definitely a large part of the problem and contributes to (though is not totally responsible for) the nauseous melodrama of certain scenes like the death of Boromir and the mourning of Gandalf. I also couldn't stand what Galadriel did.

Quote:

Am I alone in thinking that the movie was a bit disjointed??


Yup. It's quite disjointed and choppy.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 4:35 PM Post #12 of 37
The big problem with the boxed set is that next April there will be another boxed set, of the first two movies. And then next August, another "special edition" boxed set. And the year after, the same thing but with all three movies, and then the special edition, and then probably the director's edit of the whole thing into one LONG movie - I'm not buying this until it's all released. I refuse to pay for any part of it twice.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 7:14 PM Post #13 of 37
I have to say the longer version is better, well worth the money if you are a fan of the book. All of the scenes involving Galadriel were expanded and make more sense. I though that whole part of the theatrical version was rushed. The coming theatrical releases will have to show flashbacks to some of the new material or else they'll have people wondering where these gifts of hers came from. Also by adding the scene in the bar in the Shire you get a better sense that Merry/Pippin are friends with Frodo/Sam, as well as a bit involving Sam that is a setup for the final movie. Also the melodrama of the Boromir death is much lessened now that there is the additional footage of both Aragorn and Boromir at Rivendell (and elsewhere if I'm remembering right) which reveals more about their desires, beliefs, and goals. In summary, most of the additions served to improve the relationships of the characters with each other, or to shed further light upon each character's desires and goals. That helps remedy what was the largest weakness of the original. Sure there remain many choices the director/screenwriter made that I disagree with, but this version I think does a better job than the original and is well worth the money.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 7:14 PM Post #14 of 37
I think it's kind of strange to release a "director's cut" without first giving audiences the chance to buy the movie they saw in the theatre and loved. Perhaps the thought was it was a "valued added" (god, how I hate that phrase) approach. Still, I'm not always convinced the director's cut IS the definitive version - what the hell is the editor's role then? Like music, cinema is a lot about pacing isn't it? Plus, it just throws off viewers memories of an experience they've had (and it's always most profound the first time, if you weren't day dreaming, that is). I know I'm in the minority (or at least I am among my friends) but I liked Blade Runner WITH the narration rather than the director's cut without it. Maybe I had just gotten used to seeing it that way and the missing voice over bothered me, but that was always one case of me NOT prefering the director's cut. But I would be curious to see what was adding to LOTR, I enjoyed it the movie. I tried reading the books again after seeing the movie, but I abandoned them for the second time in my life. I had tried reading it once before when I was 12, but I found them tedious - whereas I read The Hobbit twice (same characters and literary concept, but a complete tale in one volume. I was always more interested in Sci-Fi than sword and scocery, anway). Thirty years later, I still found them tedious. I heard my classics professor's voice ringing in my head, shades of Sir Gawain and Beowulf.
 
Nov 15, 2002 at 8:49 PM Post #15 of 37
Quote:

Originally posted by ServinginEcuador
Myself, aka me,

Loved the signature!! Got quite a kick out of the "team cheap" idea!!! Actually, we all end up in team broke or team cheap every once in a while after reading some reviews of more products.


Yeah.. But.. I tend to get many cheap things (oooohh it's cheap! BUY ITTT!) So..

It's mainly MD gear though.. my E900 was US$180.. I think my PC1 was about US$200 (AU$400) reduced from $1299.. I haven't actually got many 'phones, and the ones I do have are probably insulting to mention on the board (NOT streetstyles though).

Is the moria monster (the one with the giant hammer) scene extended? I didn't see FOTR enough to remember.. It just seemed longer.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top