A Few Words About A few words about...™ The Lord of the Rings Trilogy - Extended Edition -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Tom M]

I wonder if Peter Jackson is going to do a George Lucas on us and replace Ian Holm's early scenes in the first trilogy and replace him with Martin Freeman, perhaps replace the CGI of Gollum so that it fits in better with the Gollum of The Hobbit

Replacing Holm with Freeman in the flashback scenes is possible but I kinda doubt it. Freeman and Holm do look similar when made up as Bilbo and those scenes are very brief so it wouldn't be worth the trouble, IMO.
The CGI (and appearance) for Gollum advanced between each of the three LOTR films and Jackson didn't bother updating for the extended version to make everything match so probably no there too.
Of course, I could be wrong, too! Time will tell.

 

[Jay G.]

Originally Posted by FoxyMulder /t/312235/a-few-words-about-the-lord-of-the-rings-trilogy-extended-edition-in-blu-ray/1110#post_4008095
I wonder if Peter Jackson is going to do a George Lucas on us and replace Ian Holm's early scenes in the first trilogy and replace him with Martin Freeman...

Not going to happen. Ian Holm is in The Hobbit as old Bilbo.
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/04/22/the-hobbit-ian-holm-is-officially-in-as-old-bilbo/

 

[Ethan Riley]

I have a question...can a blu ray even handle a film shot at 48 fps?

 

[JoshZ]

I have a question...can a blu ray even handle a film shot at 48 fps?

No. At least, not in 3D.
Blu-ray only supports 24 fps at 1080p resolution. Theoretically, it could be possible to encode the title like a 3D disc at frame-packed 1920x2205 resolution, but include the extra information in the alternate frame section of the signal rather than the other 3D eye view. If you watched that on a 3D TV that displays the frames in a sequential pattern (active 3D only, no passive or checkerboard), you would see the 48 fps motion. But you'd be forcing viewers to wear 3D glasses with a 3D TV to watch a 2D movie. That's a very hard sell, and I doubt the studio would attempt it.
Also, at least theatrically, the studio is only distributing the 48 fps version in 3D format. There will be no 2D, 48 fps screenings. It seems to be Jackson's intention that 48 fps is meant for 3D.
So, no. The eventual Blu-ray will have to be a 24 fps downconversion (which is what most viewers will see theatrically anyway).

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by Jay G. /t/312235/a-few-words-about-the-lord-of-the-rings-trilogy-extended-edition-in-blu-ray/1110#post_4008220

Not going to happen. Ian Holm is in The Hobbit as old Bilbo.
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/04/22/the-hobbit-ian-holm-is-officially-in-as-old-bilbo/

Yes but, he isn't in the film as young Bilbo, if Mr Jackson is linking these films he might have specifically shot some scenes with Martin Freeman as young Bilbo to place them in The Lord Of The Rings, that was my main asking point when i made my original post. They could do this relatively quickly.

 

[mattCR]

Originally Posted by JoshZ /t/312235/a-few-words-about-the-lord-of-the-rings-trilogy-extended-edition-in-blu-ray/1110#post_4008381
No. At least, not in 3D.
Blu-ray only supports 24 fps at 1080p resolution. Theoretically, it could be possible to encode the title like a 3D disc at frame-packed 1920x2205 resolution, but include the extra information in the alternate frame section of the signal rather than the other 3D eye view. If you watched that on a 3D TV that displays the frames in a sequential pattern (active 3D only, no passive or checkerboard), you would see the 48 fps motion. But you'd be forcing viewers to wear 3D glasses with a 3D TV to watch a 2D movie. That's a very hard sell, and I doubt the studio would attempt it.
Also, at least theatrically, the studio is only distributing the 48 fps version in 3D format. There will be no 2D, 48 fps screenings. It seems to be Jackson's intention that 48 fps is meant for 3D.
So, no. The eventual Blu-ray will have to be a 24 fps downconversion (which is what most viewers will see theatrically anyway).

I don't think that's accurate. I have several Bluray that are at 29.97fps, so I know there have to be other framerate possibilities.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by mattCR /t/312235/a-few-words-about-the-lord-of-the-rings-trilogy-extended-edition-in-blu-ray/1110#post_4008387

I don't think that's accurate. I have several Bluray that are at 29.97fps, so I know there have to be other framerate possibilities.

They can do 50fps and 60fps ( 59.94 ) but only at 1280x720, also 25fps for UK at 1920x1080 but not 48fps, i think 25fps and 29.97 are interlaced.

 

[JoshZ]

I don't think that's accurate.   I have several Bluray that are at 29.97fps, so I know there have to be other framerate possibilities.

Not at 1080p, you don't.
Blu-ray only supports 24 fps at 1080p. It can also support 60 Hz (29.97 fps) or 50 Hz, but only at 1080i, 720p or standard-def resolutions (NTSC and PAL respectively).
You may have set your Blu-ray player to output 1080p at 60 Hz, but to do that, the player itself has to either: 1) deinterlace a 1080i source, 2) apply 3:2 Pulldown to a 24 fps source, or 3) upconvert some lower resolution to 1080p.

 

[Wayne_j]

I just got back from Regal's LotR marathon. In the exclusive Peter Jackson introductions he said that this is the first time that the remastered versions for Blu-Ray were shown theatrically and that is exactly what it looked like. Fellowship was a very mixed bag of image quality, The Two Towers a great improvement over that, and Return of the King looked better than some big budget films I've seen this year.
People should be pleased to note that so far Peter Jackson has refrained from Lucasizing his films. Young Bilbo was still played by Ian Holm in a wig, and Gollum in Fellowship still didn't match his look in the rest of the trilogy.
I would love it if they went back and reassembled Fellowship from the original camera negatives, it is too good of a film to have a master that looks that bad.

 

[cineMANIAC]

I heard rumors that PJ had digitally replaced Elijah Wood with Justin Bieber as Frodo - is this not true?
New Line undertook arguably the biggest gamble in film history by greenlighting LoTR and hiring an unproven (back then) director to helm it. It's understandable if they cut corners by not spending a ton of money shooting the first film - this is likely the reason why the first film won't look pristine unless they do a complete restoration. The film looks like a million bucks when it comes to set design, costumes, special effects, etc, but will retain that certain "drab" look until a proper remaster is done, unless Jackson decides that's the way the film should look.. I think it looks good all things considered.
BTW, I don't think I'll ever be able to sit through an entire LOTR marathon theatrically. I nearly limped out of the Indy marathon back in September

 

[Patrick McCart]

Fellowship looked very grainy back in 2001 from what I remember of the 35mm print I saw.

 

[Todd H]

I attended the extended edition marathon last night as well. I agree that FOTR was a very mixed bag visually. One thing that surprised me was that the green tint didn't appear as bad theatrically as it does at home. Maybe a difference in display equipment?
I was surprised how well I handled watching all three back to back in a theater. I didn't really get tired until somewhere in the middle of ROTK. TT still remains my favorite of the three and I was glad to see the extended edition of it on the big screen.

 

[Dick]

Now I've got an expensive collection of theatrical version Blu-rays from last year that I have no idea what to do with. Does anyone have a strong, convincing reason I should keep these versions? Also, I don't have a problem with the films being split over two discs just as long they don't make me watch forced trailers or other junk after each changeover. It's a major pain the ass having to sit through ads I don't want to watch every time I pop a disc in.

I will be keeping mine - both versions. If I ever show the EE's to an audience, I would use two separate Blu-ray players, run all of the initial Shire scenes using the TE, then switch over to the cued-up EE for the rest, which I do not find as egregiously re-timed. Yes, I'd lose a few minutes of EE footage from the Shire. I am in the camp that just shouts at the screen durng the EE opening half-hour or so. I yell at Jackson for messing with something so wonderful to begin with. But as everyone pointed out, it's his film, with which he can do as he pleases. I vehemently disagree with Mr. Harris' and Mr. Hunt's opinions (with which I generally agree) of this re-timing, but that is why HTF is a wonderful place to be - we can (respectfully) express our opinions, even if they are in the minority vote.

 

[Dave H]

I attended the extended edition marathon last night as well. I agree that FOTR was a very mixed bag visually. One thing that surprised me was that the green tint didn't appear as bad theatrically as it does at home. Maybe a difference in display equipment?

Proper calibration plays a huge role here. I watched the extended BD of Fellowship several nights ago as my 65ST30 Panasonic plasma was recently calibrated for a tuneup and the teal tint was very slight in several scenes and not an issue at all - despite the fact I was looking hard for it. All in all, I thought the BD looked fantastic and very film-like. Same goes for Two Towers - hoping to watch Return of the King tonight as I am getting prepped for The Hobbit.

 

[Garysb]

$39.99 at Costco after $10 instant off. Many instant off deals currently at Costco.

 

[oscar_merkx]

Yes but, he isn't in the film as young Bilbo, if Mr Jackson is linking these films he might have specifically shot some scenes with Martin Freeman as young Bilbo to place them in The Lord Of The Rings, that was my main asking point when i made my original post.  They could do this relatively quickly.

I found the following info from a Philippa Boyens interview with Collider.com

My question about how much longer can fans look forward to the extra footage being? Is there five minutes? Is there fifteen minutes?
Boyens: I can very honestly tell you that that is still literally being figured out. It’s literally an ongoing discussion in terms of the effects, and what works and what doesn’t. So how much and how long it’s going to be, you know I don’t honestly think it’s going to be hugely that much longer, because truthfully most of the stuff that we needed to get in for the storytelling is in there. But I’ve got one personal thing that I love that I wish was in there and you’ll see it, it’s a little thing between Bilbo and Elrond. It’s probably, within the context of the greater whole, the six films; it’s going to work really beautifully when you see Bilbo in Rivendell in Lord of the Rings. But we had to be very, very careful that weren’t being too self-referential and that we weren’t writing for the prequel. You know what I mean? That we weren’t just writing stuff just because it was going to have a certain resonance with Lord of the Rings. We tried to be careful that we didn’t do that too much.

Does this mean (text in bold) that this will be filmed for new scenes for a new Fellowship BD at some point in the future ?

 

[Jay G.]

Originally Posted by oscar_merkx /t/312235/a-few-words-about-the-lord-of-the-rings-trilogy-extended-edition-in-blu-ray/1110#post_4016728
I found the following info from a Philippa Boyens interview with Collider.com
Does this mean (text in bold) that this will be filmed for new scenes for a new Fellowship BD at some point in the future ?

Here's the link to the interview:
http://collider.com/philippa-boyens-the-hobbit-interview/217111/

She's talking about the extended edition of The Hobbit, which will contain a scene with Bilbo and Elrond that will add resonance to the scenes with Bilbo in Rivendell in LOTR. They're not adding footage to the LOTR series; it's going to be in The Hobbit still.

 

[Bryan Ri]

After much internal deliberation, I decided I'm going to buy the extended edition set. I really love the EE's of Fellowship and Two Towers, but parts of ROTK feel clunky in that extended cut. Nevertheless, I think I will like having the options of watching one or the other. Plus, the extras are outstanding on those sets!
Now I just have to wait for a sale!

 

[Dave H]

After much internal deliberation, I decided I'm going to buy the extended edition set. I really love the EE's of Fellowship and Two Towers, but parts of ROTK feel clunky in that extended cut. Nevertheless, I think I will like having the options of watching one or the other. Plus, the extras are outstanding on those sets!
Now I just have to wait for a sale!

I too agree parts of ROTK feel a little clunky - I'm not sure which I prefer, but probably will just rely on the extended. But, nice to have either option.

 

[Bryan Ri]

I too agree parts of ROTK feel a little clunky - I'm not sure which I prefer, but probably will just rely on the extended. But, nice to have either option.

I remember when I saw ROTK in the theater, when Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli jumped off the pirate ship with the dead army with them, it was a HUGE moment for the audience. People cheered, clapped, etc. That moment is rendered useless from the EE because we find out much earlier that the army of the dead decided to go with Aragorn, and we see them begin to fight the pirates. That's really the big hangup I have about ROTK EE.