Lotr - 1 , 2 , 3

G

GymmyluvsU

New member
did you know that LOTR ( lord of the rings) are doing extended versions of each 1?

40 mins ....... i think its a bit wrong..... if you went to watch the film then you'd want to go and see it AGAIN for the extra 40 mins its just a rip off dont go !!! ive seen them all


post your replies:)
 
Are you sure you are not referring to the "original" DVRAB. They released the theatrical version of the films, as well as the "original" one. The films had to be cut down, for cinema showing (by about 40mins-1hr) they are selling the uncut one on DVD. Is this what you are referring to?
 
Well i guess you are two years to late on that one:rolleyes:

As for it being a rip-off, no i dont think they are. There are some here who much prefer the theatrical version of the films to the extended version. Take FOTR for example, many people still to this day prefer the theatrical version of the film to the ee version.

So they are basically catering for both audiences. Plus if you are new to the LOTR films you would hardly like to watch 40 minutes-1hour extra footage wouldnt you.........Because you wouldnt know whats new or what was already there lol, so it wont really make a difference. The Extended editions are really for the fans, and they (including i;) ) love the EE versions.

So is it a rip-off...........maybe for those buying it reluctently, but for the rest.......no
 
are you talking about the extended versions being put out in the cinema?
cos one of my frienRAB went to see the extended version of The Two Towers in the cinema about 2 weeks ago. i'll just wait for the extended dvd though.
 
A flim should a film and be done with it. I believe they should be put out there untouched, uncut wherever they're shown. I'm not against a movie being added to though afew years later, the director should have a say then, as it's there art on the screen.

I've been in some shops in the past and tried to advise people about DVD's they were buying, LOTR being one of them, and they were totally unaware that longer versions were but afew months away!!!.

The scam with LOTR is a farce, and more than likely they way of things to come, especially with the scheming DVD market already proving to be a success with constant re-issues of films.

I think the fact of some preferring a shorter Rings is that it does drag in many places for non-fans.

Any fan of a movie would enjoy more of it, that's obvious.
 
;1594406']The extended editions have allowed the director to add in parts of the film, that while not esential to the story, do add life to the characters and stegngthen to story in some way.

There is no way that the studio would have allowed the EEs to be released at the cinema, as they were too long (almost 4 hours). People wouldn't be able to sit through a film that long and the cinemas, would loose revenue on ticket sales (longer film = fewer screening = less tickets sold).

So it was much better to shorten the film, by taking out some of the less important bits of the story, for the cinema release and put them back in the DVD.

It's not as if they kept the EEs a secret, they were on the pre order lists of most of the websites at the same time as the earlier cinematic releases and I'm sure it was mentioned on some of the TV magazine shows.

The only thing that anoid me, was the trailer for the extended edition of FOTR on the cinematic version DVD.
 
You obviously dont do your research dont you:rolleyes: !

Everybody knew (well most anyways) about the EE editions months before the actual original version was released in the cinema! It was on pre-order for about 5 months before:confused: ........so a farce.......i dont think so.

No way could New Line get away with putting the extended editions in the cinema because it would be waaaaay to long for some cinemas to run it, therefore very few cinemas will show the actual movie which isnt going to be good for the film isnt it?

Peter Jackson always said he prefered the theatrical version because thats the version he choose to put out there, but he also added that because of the vast amount of scenes they shot, they decided that some fans would like to see some of the added scenes..........so in comes the EE DVD.

So i dont actually see where the farce is???? I mean to pay
 
I DO research DVD releases!!!.

It's the poor general film buying that appears to have no knowledge about it, or even care about extras on movies.

Many just buy them just to say they have it, then dump it later when the "real" one is out.

I like fantasy movies, and the Rings does have some good parts, but it has never captured my imagination like Star Wars has.

You don't sound old enough, as you made a quote earlier about parents having Star Wars,( you having the Rings), to really appreciate Star Wars anyhow, you've been spoilt by alot of new film making techniques, the magic is gone from many films, the Rings are drab in comparison to Star Wars.
 
Entertainment In Video (who release New Line Cinema's films in the UK on video and DVD) did make it clear that they would be releasing two versions of the film BEFORE they released the shortened version of The Fellowship of the Ring. The pattern continued with The Two Towers and all of this was written into reviews in Empire and other reputable film magazines. It will continue with The Return of the King, where Peter Jackson is reported as saying that he will restore Saruman (played by Christopher Lee) to the extended version after the actor was upset about being cut. What other tricks he has up his sleeve for extending the extended versions (when, doubtless, all three versions are released in one fell swoop with a commemorative orc in a cage or something) remains to be seen. Cinema and home Tolkeinathons could go on for days and days
 
I'm thinking about editing my very own LOTR movie out of my favoutite scenes of the three EEs. I will probably end up with a movie no longer than three hours.
It will start with the Council of Elrond, then use about 20 minutes of the rest of FOTR, loose as good as everything concerning the Sam/Frodo/Gollum storyline from TTT and the battle at Helm's Deep has to go too (it will focus on the Treebeard storyline, basically).

Haven't seen ROTK yet, but I'll probably be able to use about 45 minutes from it.

Always thought the book was too damn long, so I still believe the movies (being a faithful translation) are too long too.
 
Poor acting, kiddie style narrative and last but by no means least, Jar Jar Binks! But the Star wars films are a good no brainer fun never the less.

However i take back that comment i made about Star wars being of a particular generation to LOTR, because the LOTR books were made 50 years ago and laid the fondation for many fantasy's to come. So infact it is Star wars that is drab in comparison to Star wars due to LOTR being the grand-father of fantasys so to speak.

There are more darker, complex themes running in LOTR then Star wars, which to me is somehow very childish, which is not a bad think but i like fantasys with a bit more depth and history then just a simple dark-vs-good thing etc etc, i like the cultures and myths......which is why probably LOTR is more attractive to me then anything.

But to me LOTR wins hanRAB down with Star wars. And that is not because of the special effects comparison, its due to the character development, acting, human emotion and sheer depth into the history of the damn thing. Sure some may say that Star Wars does have a history behind it hence the prequals, however its still a very theatrical simple childrens story to me, and again there is nothing at all wrong with that however, i like depth.

So i guess at the end of the day its down to the taste of the particular individuals. Plus i'm a girl so depth and some of the themes in LOTR book and films appeals more to me then of Star wars, which is basically a teenage boys fantasy really..........though yes some girls do enjoy it as well.....but in general no.
 
I had no idea you were female, that could say alot about how we feel.

With Star Wars, it's the first thing that I could say captured my imagination when i was younger, something that hasn't been matched since(and never will!!).

LOTR doesn't quite kick enough ass, looks good, but something missing for me...
 
Thats the point...it captured you when you were younger! Thats why the spark has lasted!

IHowever i watched Star Wars quite recently and thought it was quite pap actaully lol.

I guess for me LOTR kicks arse because its made for quite an older audience and its more darker. I guess this sort of dark material is what teens today are attracted to.

Its all a matter of opinion and feelings..........I think LOTR kicks alot of arse lol:D
 
Back
Top