One DVD To Rule Them All 579
Obiwan Kenobi writes "In a gala event last night New Line Cinema revealed their Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring DVD Plans. This includes a 2-disc version on August 6th (in both Pan & Scan and Widescreen, click here for box art), and a special 4-hour, R-rated cut of the film debuting in a 4-disc set on November 12th. While the August release includes some nifty features, it's the four disc version, with the longer cut and three audio commentaries, that really gets the drool flowing."
Now that's what I'm talkin about!
So... (Score:5, Funny)
So, do we hate the MPAA this week?
Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)
We like them Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.
We hate them Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday.
And we alternate Sundays.
Get with the program.
ObSimpsons (Score:5, Funny)
- Sundays attitude will be decided via a random number generator. Numbers 1-3 will mean we hate them, numbers 4-6 will mean we like them and numbers 7-9 mean we're flexible: if they put out a good movie, like The Matrix, we like them. If they put out a bad movie, like anything with Leonardo DiCraplio, we hate them.
Milhouse:- Wait...What about 0?
Bart:- Yeah, what about 0?
Martin:Re:So... (Score:2, Insightful)
What does the MPAA have to do with this? As far as I know, all they do is rate the movie (PG-13, R, etc.)
Re:So... (Score:2, Troll)
Personally, I'm trying to buy as few DVDs as possible because I have an HDTV setup and a very large VHS and laserdisc collection - I'd rather convert when there is an HDTV format available. I get some DVDs for a few key movies, but that's it. Now that I've stated my personal choice, are you going to claim all of Slashdot is holding off on buying DVDs, or the internet as a whole?
--
Evan
Re:So... (Score:3, Interesting)
No, some just support anamorphic (correct widescreen). They are still the really lousy resolution of NTSC (although higher quality signal).
Incidently, for the actual video itself, LaserDisc is still nicer than DVD. You need a decent screen to see the difference, and many older LDs are not made off of digitally cleaned up masters like today's DVDs, but the media itself provides a nicer signal - it's a raw, uncompressed feed, as opposed to MPEG2.
--
Evan "Formkeys, shmormkeys - I was called off to a meeting"
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
The way I look at it is that we may have bad feelings about drug dealers, but we sure do like them drugs.
Re:So... (Score:4, Funny)
Rated R comment. Children turn away now...
You were warned, so the karma is on you, not me.
The way I look at it is that we may have bad feelings about drug dealers, but we sure do like them drugs.
Based on my handle you know where I stand on that comment.
In this case, I'll admit it - I'm an addict. I don't mind getting bent over this time...
New Line Cinema: (slap) Who's your daddy?
BigBong: (grimacing while holding my ankles) Lord...of...the...Rings
New Line Cinema: (slap) You like it don't you little bitch?
BigBong: yes! yes! yes!
New Line Cinema: (slap) And if I come out with another box set, what are you gonna say?
BigBong: Thank you sir, may I have another?
New Line Cinema: That's a good girl...
At least all of the extra features and added violence will qualify as a good reach-around on top of a quality fscking.
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
I know the parent is modded as funny, but it's also a very insightful comment too. Unfortunately, situations like this just show the MPAA that they have us right where they want us.
Whenever a story is posted about the SSSCA, or Jack/Hilary talking about piracy killing their businesses, we all get up in arms and post hundreds of comments about the RIAA & MPAA being greedy cartels (which they are). But as soon as they release something that we geeks love (Star Trek DVDs, LOTR, etc.), we all jump for joy.
"Disney sucks, they are buying off Senator Hollings, we need to...ooooh, new edition of Tron on DVD!!"
"Hilary Rosen is trying to lock down our computers and needs to be sto...ooh, DVD-Audio!!"
I think you get the idea.
Unfortunately, I'm salivating over this just as much as everyone else on this thread. I want the LOTR DVDs. I want the Simpsons Box Set DVDs. But do I really want to give money to the MPAA & News Corp when they are trying to squash our rights? Not particularly.
So, what can we really do about it? Unless we, as a LARGE group all say "Enough, we will boycott ANYTHING you put out, no matter how good it is, until you respect us", nothing will change. The transgressions against us by the MPAA/RIAA will be forgotten as soon as we get our hands on our favorite shiny silver discs.
This is a perfect chance, people. What a better way to send a message than to boycott LOTR on DVD, or SW Episode 2 in the theater?? (movies that are sure to draw out the geeks who realize exactly what laws they are trying to pass.) I for one will gladly boycott, if it means that we get to keep our rights.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Repeat after me: SLASHDOT HAS MORE THAN ONE PERSON IN ITS COMMUNITY.
Now think about it.
Easiest way to screw the MPAA (Score:5, Funny)
Assuming you are a patient person, there is a way to have your cake and eat it too -
Buy DVDs second-hand
You get the discs and the MPAA doesn't see one cent of revenue. Plus, you'll have the added bonus of supporting the First Sale Doctrine, which the media and software companies are silently trying to do away with!
Twenty hour version (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
A lot of Slashdot readers like movies. That is why they care so much about digital rights. Someone who does not watch (and enjoy) movies is not going to care if he/she is able to excercise "fair use" with digital movies.
I dislike the MPAA quite a bit. I have voiced that opinion many times on Slashdot. However, I also greatly enjoy movies. I went and saw FotR twice in the theatre and will buy it on DVD.
Why? Because I feel like a boycott of movies means that the MPAA has won. They want to take away my rights. A boycott simply means that instead of *them* taking away my rights, I *choose* to ignore my right to go to a movie, hopefully to get someone to notice.
Unfortunately, I enjoy movies too much to give them up for a political point.
Call me a hypocrite, that is fine. But notice that I have never said that I am boycotting, and I have never called on others to do the same. I have written to my congressmen and I have encouraged others to do the same.
Four hours. (Score:2)
I'll say it again, in italics: four hours.
I liked LotR, but am I the only person who would smuggle a cyanide tablet in a hollow tooth just in case I really had to watch that much?
Re:Four hours. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Four hours. (Score:5, Insightful)
I understand. It's long. If you don't want the 1/2 hour extra footage you can buy the shorter version. Everyone wins.
I take that last bit back. in the end the people selling me the cd utimately win. Bastards.
Re:Four hours. (Score:2)
Re:Four hours. (Score:4, Funny)
Is that the version with two hours of Tom Bombadil's singing?
Re:Four hours. (Score:5, Insightful)
If it weren't that mini-series were always so poorly made, it would be better served in that format... Except it would be like 3 seasons long... So, maybe a regular TV show where the entire series is written and shot before it airs... But the first season would have a lot of episodes with no action, so nobody would watch it... Maybe if they took the story and put it in a series of books... Oh, wait...
Re:Four hours. (Score:5, Informative)
In fact, a little less than 18 years pass during the first book. For seventeen of them, Gandalf is researching the ring and Frodo sits on his ass in Bag End.
Five months pass between Frodo leaving Bag End until the breaking of the fellowship at Amon Hen. Two of these are spent lounging around Rivendell, and they spend almost an entire month at Lorien. I don't think we'd want to see all of these periods represented accurately in the movie. A sense of urgency in the movie is appopriate and appreciated.
Goody (Score:2, Funny)
R Rated? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:R Rated? (Score:2, Informative)
Nice.
MMM, Elves (Score:5, Funny)
Porno spoof (LOTCR) (Score:2, Funny)
Personally, I think Ron Jeremy would make a kickass Sauron. He was so darn evil in Orgasmo.
Re:Porno spoof (LOTCR) (Score:2)
Here, try this [landoverbaptist.org].
Very Secret Diaries (Score:2)
So, go read the Very Secret Diaries [diagon.org]. Great stuff.
"Gandalf told me to help poor unconscious Mr. Frodo get out of dirty clothes. So took clothes off him and gave him a bath. And another one. Then gave him another bath. Gandalf came and told me six baths was quite enough, Samwise Gamgee. Poncy old git probably hasn't taken a bath since the Second Age."
Re:R Rated? Watch "Braindead" to see why (Score:3, Funny)
Is it just me? (Score:5, Interesting)
In this case the added commentary tracks are going to be great. Nearly every movie I've seen with these has been interesting. Wild Things and the movie with the kid seeing dead people (argh what was the title) had truly insightful commentaries I thought. I'll be interested to see what the commentaries for this one will have.
Looking forward to it and am glad to see it coming out so quickly. Nowadays heading to the theater just isn't high on my list - too expensive too. DVD I can watch anytime I want, unfortunatly it supports the damned MPAA
Re:Is it just me? (Score:3, Funny)
That was I'm Gonna Git You Sucka.
Re:Is it just me? (Score:4, Funny)
Either way, I'm waiting until the November release. :)
Re:Is it just me? (Score:2)
Remember back when we were kids (for me that would be back in the mid to late 80s) when a movie would show up in theatres, and then stay there for a few months?
Nowadays it's in and out. There's so much crap being produced that only the very top money-makers stay in theatres for more than a few weeks.
The industry has become a veritable automaton, churning out one box office bomb after another, ending up in such a huge turnaround that they have no choice but to head almost straight to DVD to try and make up some of the money on the failures. The top earners get a small break, staying until the revenues from box-office sales drop off enough to make it reasonable to move to DVD.
It's all about the profit-margins.
Re:LotR DVD Timeframe (Score:2)
Re:Is it just me? (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
You had me till "Enya" (Score:3, Interesting)
I buy DVDs for movies, not incessant caterwauling. Yeah, I know, I don't have to watch that part of the DVD, but, well, I'll feel dirty just knowing that the music video is on there...
On a side note, I hear that Lucasfilms has contracted John Tesh and Yanni for suitably "epic" songs for Episode 3. *grin*
Re:You had me till "Enya" (Score:2, Informative)
You do realize the video also features a lot of stuff from the film, right? Seems worth filling up the empty space on DVD to me.
Re:You had me till "Enya" (Score:2, Informative)
I find it difficult to equate Enya to Celine. What other Enya title tracks for movies offend you?
Re:You had me till "Enya" (Score:2)
Hated Far and Away. Age of Innocence as well. Don't get me started on Sweet November...
Terminator 3 and Zamphir (Score:3, Funny)
(sounds of a pan flute)
Re:slashdotted (Score:3, Insightful)
One of these things is not like the other, one of these things does not belong. Hello kids, can YOU find the proof that slashdot is run by a bunch of hypocritical weenies?
Re:Pan & Scan (Score:2)
The only thing that I can think that you might be seeing is if you have your DVD player set to 16x9 mode, then anamorphic DVDs will fill you 4x3 TV, however everything will be stretched out.
Don't start a riot! (Score:3, Funny)
Calm down now! You don't want to work people into a frenzy [bbspot.com] like those rioters in Seattle a couple days ago when LOTR didn't win Best Picture.
Insanity, I tell you! (Score:5, Funny)
I can only picture the Gollum-like fan that is going to buy both sets, plus all three of The Two Towers, plus three for Return of the King, plus The Complete Set, The Really Complete Set, The Gold Edition, The Director's Cut Complete Set and several "Behind the Scenes" specials.
Yeah, I'm talking about you >:) (me? no, of course not... I'm not that crazy... no, really.... my precioussss... I will have you... all.... real soon now....)
So... (Score:5, Funny)
Somebody walking out of the movie suggested that a good drinking game would be to take a shot every time there was a closeup of the ring. We decided that any viewer, Boris Yeltsin included, would be dead before a single RingWraith had ever appeared.
Re:So... (Score:5, Informative)
A new addition to the opening sequence in which Bilbo provides background on Hobbits and their history in voice-over as he writes his memoirs.
A new introduction to Samwise Gamgee, seen in his capacity as a gardener.
A scene taking place at the Green Dragon Inn, which introduces us to the camaraderie of the Hobbits (we see them singing together) and sets up the geopolitics of the story.
The Hobbits witnessing the departure of the Elves from Middle Earth on the way to Bree.
Aragorn watching over the sleeping Hobbits, singing the ballad of Beren and Luthien to himself in the night.
Aragorn at his mother's grave, in which we learn that he was raised by Elves and that Sauron has long hunted him.
Two new moments during the departure from Rivendale, one in which we see Arwen's emotional reaction to Aragorn's leaving, and another in which Elrond sees the Fellowship off.
A scene with the Fellowship in the mines of Moria, in which we learn how the Dwarves themselves unleashed the fire-demon that eventually destroyed them.
A scene at Lothlorien, where Galadriel bestows upon each of the Fellowship a gift which will play an important role later in the Trilogy.
And finally, more footage of the battle at Amon Hen. This is not particularly bloody footage, but its addition will likely result in this cut of the film receiving an R-rating.
9 hour marathons? (Score:3, Interesting)
Not sure 4 hours is a good thing........ (Score:2, Funny)
No DTS? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No DTS? (Score:2)
I'll always watch a movie in widescreen, and it doesn't detract from the viewing for me. But I have some friends like your's who just seem to stare at the black bars for the whole movie. I read in a magizine a long time ago, that turning off the lights helps. I tried it one time with my friends, and they did agree that they didn't notice the bars as much. I even think that is looked better myself.
As for DTS I'll agree there too, I love DTS, makes things go BOOM! I'm going to get a Yamaha DTS 6.1 receiver next time.
Re:No DTS? (Score:2)
Also, FotR was filmed in Super35, so there might actually be additional material above and below the black bars. Still, even Super35 is wider than a TV screen so you still have to crop the sides -- and the "additional" material in the frame usually isn't intended to be there, sometimes includes things that should be seen (and as such would be panned and scanned anyway) and FX shots are usually done on the matted frame rather than the open one (so FX shots are panned and scanned anyway).
If you want to convince your friends, find some movies where the additional information can be seen. Off the top of my head I can identify the scene in Star Trek: First Contact where Picard asks Data to deactivate his emotion chip. There's a website somewhere that shows still-shots from various movies for comparison purposes.
Seems I upgraded to a widescreen set JUST IN TIME! (Score:5, Insightful)
dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess we are starting to see the limitations of current DVD technology (ie not enough space for both versions when its a long movie).
Back in the day they didn't figure into the equation that interactive features would become so popular / take up so much space. So when the movie is long you run out of room.
Now would be a good time to release HD-DVD
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:2)
Bah. In any case, pan and scan isn't that bad, and more importantly, it shouldn't take up space. It's the same movie - just displaying different portions of it on screen (and if you don't have thousands of dollars for a TV, or don't want a huge intrusive aesthetically disgusting TV setup, displaying a 16:9 image on a 13" TV will, um, suck). It's just that Hollywood for some reason chose not to make technology to have a combination pan & scan/widescreen capable DVD (see other comments for explanations
Plus, I don't know what video rental places you go to: ALL the video rental places around here ONLY have widescreens for DVDs - I can't find pan & scan's anywhere.
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:2)
Pan & scan isn't that bad, you know, and widescreen TV's aren't that good an idea: they're very unwieldy, and they really only look good when they're BIG. A small widescreen TV would just look comical.
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:2)
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:2)
As an aside, you can bet your ass that any future standard will be even more of a pain in the ass to linux and such than before.
All this aside, I personally like anamorphic widescreen. Sure, you can't get 4:3 pan and scan, but if you have a 16:9 TV, you get the best of both worlds. IIRC 16:9 aspect ratio is part of the HDTV spec, and since HDTV is mandated in U.S. by 2006, then anamorphic widescreen will play great on all TVs. So from this view, DVDs are not so much showing their age, but showing that TVs aren't up to what DVDs want yet (16:9 ratio)
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:2)
Which I hate. No reason to throw out resolution on 2/3 of the image to gain an additional 1/3 which may be unimportant to the film. But that's just me, which is why I think P&S and fullscreen modes should exist together.
I can't imagine, for the life of me, why studios didn't make it so that P&S and fullscreen use the same MPEG stream, just with software pan and scan, and include the pan and scan cues on the DVD. Makes absolutely no sense.
TV and Movie aspect ratios... (Score:2)
Widescreen TV aspect ratio is 1.77:1. This is narrower than both of the common movie aspect ratios, however, which are 1.85:1 and 2.35:1. Movies in 1.85:1 are often filmed full-frame or Super35, so usually you can just open up the matte a little bit without introducing complications and thus the movie fills the entire screen. If not, you could just zoom in a bit and the amount of information lost in the sides is miniscule (especially compared to what you get from cropping to 4:3).
2.35:1 movies will still retain black bars at the top and bottom -- they're just smaller than the ones you'd get on a 4:3 screen.
Re:TV and Movie aspect ratios... (Score:2)
I don't see why everyone is always so perfectly fine with black bars at the top and bottom of the screen. They're not 'okay', they're a pain, and I would rather have a director/editor choosing what's important to the film and what's not rather than blandly scrapping information from the whole film in general.
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me explain: normal TVs are in one format (NTSC), and movies are in a different, but all of the movies are wider than the TV, right? So, Pan & Scan movies aren't cropping, or zooming, or anything: all they're doing is displaying only a "portion" of the screen, and another remaining portion is left offscreen.
WHY didn't the movie makers come up with a standard to allow a DATA track along side the DVD MPEG stream which cues the DVD player to pan & scan ON ITS OWN? Most people already have "Zoom" features on the DVD player, and then with "left" and "right" buttons you can "pan and scan" manually. All you need is a cue track to move the 'window' left and right. It's a joke - honestly. It would take no effort, everyone would have everything they want, and we'd be happy. And better yet, if there were some scenes where the director said "um, no... I really want to retain the widescreen here" it could simply switch out of pan and scan for a portion of it. Best of both worlds, and all it requires is a really trivial amount of coding (come ON, I could do this in my sleep!).
Grr. Rant off. Pan and Scan will always be around, simply because different films use different transfer techniques, and while most people say "who cares, I don't mind the black bars" the fact is, it's not the black bars - it's the fact that you're tossing resolution in one direction to gain information (which may be meaningless) in another. I'd rather have the option to see it full screen (that is, pan and scan) rather than having widescreen shoved down my throat.
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:5, Informative)
First, most DVD players don't have a "zoom" feature. Mine doesn't, and I think that it's only really common on Toshiba players.
There actually is a standard in the DVD spec for panning and scanning a "wide" image based on the DVD player's setting (16:9 vs 4:3 letterbox vs 4:3 p&s). If it's ever used, it's used in menus that can be displayed wide. Unfortunately it's too flaky to work with the movies themselves.
Another problem is that it would only be useful for 1.77:1 images. A movie that is 2.35:1 (like Blade or Contact or FotR) couldn't be panned and zoomed without still having small black bars at the top and bottom.
I'm not sure how having 16:9 resolution affects it either -- though if allowing a movie to be p&sed by the player would require dropping the 16:9 resolution then you can forget it; widescreen affectionadios are not going to be happy sacrificing image quality to appease the peons who like watching butchered films.
And finally a number of movies aren't filmed directly in the aspect ratio they are shown; they're filmed "full-frame" or at least with more of the image at the top and bottom than what you see onscreen -- it's just that the extra information is matted by the black bars. In those cases you'd look for scenes where you can get away with showing that extra information to minimize the panning and zooming that needs to be done, however there will be times when the top and bottom information shows things that don't need to be there, like set equipment, and CG FX is usually rendered and applied to the finished frame rather than the open frame, so those shots need to be cropped more. Very complicated work and doing that on the fly is not in the DVD spec.
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:2)
When you get to the special effects shots, redoing all the effects for the P&S version would be absurdly expensive, so those are almost always just cropped versions of the widescreen image where you are losing almost half the image. I've never seen the end of Titanic in P&S and never want to, but I imagine all those effects scenes lose most of their impact.
I really wish people would try to educate consumers on the fact that 16:9 HDTV becomes the standard in 4 more years, you will likely own a widescreen set at that point, and so you will have to replace all your DVD's that you get cropped at this point with the widescreen versions in the future. Oh well, I'll take my 2.35:1 widescreen version on my 27" TV and be happy.
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:2)
In synopsis, the technology is called "Anamorphic pan&scan," it does precisely what you're bitching about: it encodes screen placement for the DVD for those with the 4:3 option set on their DVD players. Currently it is only seen on some Columbia/Tristar releases, but if it got the recognition it deserved we wouldn't have the MGM debacle where the extras are one side of the disc and the widescreen/pan&scan version of the film is on the other.
Also, since those links I posted above are slashdotted to hell, make sure you check some of these links for information:
The Digital Bits [thedigitalbits.com]
DVD Angle [dvdangle.com]
DVD @ IGN [ign.com]
Re:dvd tech is showing its age .. (Score:2)
The Sony DVP-CX860 [epinions.com] will automatically switch to the other side of the dvd and resume playing.
don't buy it yet!!!! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:don't buy it yet!!!! (Score:2)
Finally...it's not a kids movie (Score:2)
Damn It! (Score:5, Funny)
One DVD to Rule Them All (Score:2, Funny)
One DVD to rule them all
One DVD to find them
One DVD to bring them all
And in the darkness bind them
So, naturally, I'll wait for that one..
This is a riot (Score:2)
I guess now, I'll get a chance to see.
There's still a lot like Tom Bombadil, the trolls, etc that I understand P.J. having removed. Some great big gobs of the book have to be cut, even if you make it a FIVE hour movie, and everything that he kept is, IMHO, either essential to the story or essential to getting the movie audience to understand the feel/background of the books. Even the expanded love intrest bit was a way to sneak in some info about the elves.
Re:This is a riot (Score:2)
-Sean
Re:This is a riot (Score:3, Insightful)
I just found the Tom Bombadil parts to be highly tedious and annoying, and never saw any sort of explanation for him being a "powerful entity".
Dinivin
The Real Scoop on Tom Bombadil (Score:4, Interesting)
There is an wonderfully written writeup on Bombadil over here [greenmanreview.com]. I quote
"Likewise, Tom Bombadil was originally a Dutch doll also belonging to Michael Tolkien. John, his brother, put the doll down a lavatory. Bombadil was rescued and Tolkien wrote The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, originally published in Oxford Magazine in 1934. Tolkien later offered to his publishers the idea that Bombadil's story could be expanded into a sequel to The Hobbit, but they didn't bite, so Tom appeared anyway in The Lord of the Rings. Tom makes his debut in the form found in this collection.
The author's method reminds me of the ways in which painful losses are explained in many other cultures. Examples include some Native American mythologies explaining the disappearance of American bison, and German legends about the disappearance of magical creatures from the world. Tolkien's explanation also seems similar to stories told about the rise of iron and technology and the passing away of old traditions, or of the disappearance of the unicorn (it missed the ark), and the rise of the dichotomy that rends myth from objective "reality." One can see the theme at work in the poem "The Last Ship," present in this collection, and in Tolkien's later writing -- elves sailing out of Middle Earth forever, making way for the age of men.
Bombadil's Adventures, however, is a heroic comedy in part about his capacity to escape disappearance -- to endure. One kind of disappearance is that of loneliness, where one fades from the view of others, becomes "mythical," alien, other -- larger than life and yet too small to see, casting no shadow. It is the solitude of being attached to other worlds, worlds where story is more than pastime, worlds where real objects have more than one kind of life and significance, and the loneliness of being unable to weave the other worlds and this one seamlessly together, to make everyone understand."
Bob
The Two Towers (Score:4, Informative)
There's your reason to go see it again.
Stupid Obvious Point (Score:2)
YES! (Score:2, Interesting)
you can count on my hard earned cash when these dvds are released
As humans.. (Score:5, Funny)
Dissapointed that they're offering pan & scan! (Score:2)
Obviously I'm quite happy that there will be a version that preserves the original aspect ratio (as well there should be), but I just don't get the need to butcher the artform and release a pan and scan version at all. It's time for said Wal-Mart shoppers to get with the program.
-S
One extended cut to rule them all... (Score:5, Funny)
Workin for the DVDs... (Score:2)
Just since January we have (released or announced):
- Star Trek TNG season 1 (*drool*)
- AbFab, the entire season (ok so this one isnt recent but damn i can't resist the gin-soaked duo)
- Harry Potter - the Sorcerer's stone
- Monsters Inc
And now LotR. What's a lowly programmer to do?
Thank god for birthdays and christmas.
Seriously though, isn't this all a bit of overkill? Do we REALLY need to have THREE seperate versions of a single movie released?
Sure the extra footage is neat, and yes there's probably call for the individual movie and a box set version once all three are released, but do we need the extra release in November?
Things are getting out of hand when they're packaging extra DVD releases just to fit in all the junk that ended up on the cutting room floor. there's a reason it was cut: it was extraneous and unnecessary.
ok i'll probably be crucified for that.. but really.. enough is enough. Give us one version so we don't feel like we have to choose between the rent and DVDs.
The only reason I can see for going this route is to make more money for the already overly commercialized and money-grabbing movie industry. Any die-hard LotR fan (and there's a lot of them) is just GOING to have to have the first version as soon as it comes out. Then, three months later, bang here comes the second release of the same movie with new and improved pretty widgets. And all those same die-hard fans are going to rush out to have the latest shiny new version, complete with extra cutting-room floor bits.
We won't go into the hypocrisy implied by those same people coming back to
How about a D-Theater, HDTV D-VHS release? (Score:2)
The only thing that would be better is a full HDTV 1920x1080i version of this beauty. A few months ago, JVC announced their "D-Theater", HDTV on a digital VHS tape. LOTR would be the ultimate movie to show off this technology & all your HDTV equipment.
Pan and Scan is a crime against nature! (Score:2)
Actually, no. They should be forced to wear blinkers for the rest of their lives. The IDIOTS who decide to release movies in Pan and Scan movies should be shot. There should be NO OTHER OPTION than to purchase a movie in the proper format.
What the hell is the POINT of taking a movie with mile after mile of gorgeous scenery, and cutting all the scenery out? What! Why! What kind of FUCKWIT would buy that?
Put the little cracker assholes in blinkers. They don't want to see the rest of the world except that bit right in front of them. And kill anyone who decides to release a Pan and Scan version.
Directors should get it in their contract that not under any circumstances is their movie going to be made available in a pan and scan format.
From The Digital Bits (Score:3, Informative)
-A new addition to the opening sequence in which Bilbo provides background on Hobbits and their history in voice-over as he writes his memoirs.
-A new introduction to Samwise Gamgee, seen in his capacity as a gardener.
-A scene taking place at the Green Dragon Inn, which introduces us to the camaraderie of the Hobbits (we see them singing together) and sets up the geopolitics of the story.
-The Hobbits witnessing the departure of the Elves from Middle Earth on the way to Bree.
-Aragorn watching over the sleeping Hobbits, singing the ballad of Beren and Luthien to himself in the night.
-Aragorn at his mother's grave, in which we learn that he was raised by Elves and that Sauron has long hunted him.
-Two new moments during the departure from Rivendale, one in which we see Arwen's emotional reaction to Aragorn's leaving, and another in which Elrond sees the Fellowship off.
-A scene with the Fellowship in the mines of Moria, in which we learn how the Dwarves themselves unleashed the fire-demon that eventually destroyed them.
-A scene at Lothlorien, where Galadriel bestows upon each of the Fellowship a gift which will play an important role later in the Trilogy.
-And finally, more footage of the battle at Amon Hen. This is not particularly bloody footage, but its addition will likely result in this cut of the film receiving an R-rating.
It seems like the added scenes will add much needed depth to the movie.
Re:Two and Four disc? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Two and Four disc? (Score:4, Insightful)
Firstly, forget the 'dual layer, double sided' discs - every piece of research has shown that most people would rather have two single sided disc than one double sided one. Nice disc artwork rather than tiny, hard to read writing to check where side one is, the selling point of a two-disc set and the fact that plenty of people have multi-disc changers but no-one has a player that reads both sides are the main reasons.
Secondly, no offense to you personally but I trust the likes of David Prior and Charlie De Lauzirika to choose the optimum bitrate and encoding settings for the absolute best in picture quality than I do anyone on Slashdot. Most people here seem to think that MP4 is watchable. I've seen the original and Superbit releases of Fifth Element, and I can see the improvement. Mind you, I think that someone seriously dropped the ball at Lucasfilm over the Pile-O-Cack Episode 1 transfer, so you can tell I'm a picky git.
On an unrelated note, I only need to know one thing: is the Theatrical Cut going in the four disc set as well, or is there value in buying both (not that I won't probably get both anyway).
Re:Two and Four disc? (Score:2, Interesting)
FOUR! Unless you're changing the disc every 30 minutes, bitrate don't have nuthin' to do with nuthin'.
Everyone who replied to me can pant and drool over bitrate all they want, but don't tell me some New Line exec didn't think, "Hey, two disc sets are popular. Think of how they'll jizz over FOUR!" =)
Re:Two and Four disc? (Score:2, Insightful)
I do know that with the film eating up most of the first two discs (and minimal menus on the second so you can get back into the film asap) the decision to squeeze all the extras onto discs three and four was taken, which seems reasonable to me. Apparently there are well past 6 hours of extras to get on those two discs, so they don't fit on one - he has already stated that he is dropping things to avoid it being FIVE!!!
If you've heard about the legendary four hour documentary Jackson did for The Frightners, then him providing the DVD team with enough stuff to fill these discs seems reasonable.
MIRROR (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~mohanc/lordoftherings_fel
Re:MIRROR (Score:2, Funny)
The small print : (didn't win any of the good ones)
Re:We want Indy ! (Score:2)
Pleaseohpleaseohplease....
That's exactly what I was thinking (Score:2)
Of course, for Star Wars, all I saw was people crying about what a money-grabbing jerk Lucas was for releasing two versions. Now everyone seems happy that the same thing is being done for FotR.
Re:That's exactly what I was thinking (Score:2)
Re:Just because you wanted Jar Jar cut... (Score:2)
I'm of two minds about them. The additions which were more than 3 seconds I could do without, i.e. the Jabba-Han scene. It wasn't too bad, but I didn't really feel it added much. (I have a mental block preventing me from addressing the Greedo-fires-first issue.) The extra sub-3-second bits they added to the dog fight scenes I felt flowed well and added to the visual tension, although you could tell they were different from the original dog fight scenes. I don't remember the difference breaking the continuity from scene to scene or disrupting the immersion. Then again, I don't own the rereleases, so I've only seen those extra scenes once.
Re:You paid to see the ad, now pay to see the film (Score:2, Insightful)
1. They were in the film.
2. The non-stone trolls were in "The Hobbit", not FotR.
Granted, the fight scenes are there to sell the movie. If you've read the books, you'd realize Tolkien skipped the ork battle, instead he described it as a second hand accounting from Pippin/Merry.
long, tedious fight scenes? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:R Rated? (Score:2, Funny)
C'mon, you want to see it too.
Well, his feet are just so big, you have to wonder....
Thoughts on 4 hours == long movie (Score:2)
No, that's a long movie if it's dull, stupid, insipid or beyond comprehension (e.g. Cable Guy)
If you sit through 4 hours of gripping epic tale and mayhem and suddenly notice the sun, which was high in the sky is now gone and the stars are out, it's a great movie.
My only concern is when movies span discs. Unless I have a player that switches between them seemlessly, the illusion will be broken and I'll notice I'm watching a movie on a TV, the sun is a bit lower, my chair is uncomfortable, I've got the munchiest, etc.
And if you're still of the mind that it's long, just wait until all 3 films are out and you're juggling DVD discs (unless there's one BlueRay [slashdot.org] to bind them.)
Do you have to read the books to enjoy to movie? (Score:2)