Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

New Lord of the Rings Trailer 253

Posted by CmdrTaco from the get-your-lust-on dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Apple is hosting the new trailer for Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. Of course, the trailer is in quicktime. Looks pretty darn good, in my opinion." I just finished the 4th disc on FotR, and am ready for TTT to be out now!
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Lord of the Rings Trailer More

New Lord of the Rings Trailer

Comments Filter:

  • And while you're so hot about the movie... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    ...remember NOT to whine about the next tactics of MPAA and/or DRM implementations and/or Palladium. When you buy the movies, you finance those operations.

    Think about it.

    • Re:And while you're so hot about the movie... (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      And what is wrong with going to see TTT or buying the LOTR DVD in an attempt to say that people will happily pay for a *quality* product, thereby reducing piracy? Think about that.
    • When you buy the movie or go to see it, you're intent is to watch a good quality movie. You do make a point, I'm paying $7.50 for my movie ticket and some of that is going to go into limiting my rights, but I'm not worrying about that, I just want to see the movie with my fiance.

      And piracy? How can anyone stand those awful telesync's? I know, I know, there as a good quality FotR dvd rip out a month after the movie, but that is pretty rare.
    • Wrong! If you don't go watch the movie, the MPAA will assume that you have watched a bootleg copy at home, thereby enforcing their belief that DRM needs to be implemented.

      Catch 22, my friend, Catch 22.

    • Re:And while you're so hot about the movie... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Floyd Turbo ( 84609 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @09:24AM (#4742902) Journal
      Oh, for crying out loud, can we please stop seeing this post modded up to +5 insightful every single time there's an article about a good movie or CD?

      There is no inconsistency between (a) enjoying the creative work of the artists who make these movies and music, and (b) decrying the oppresive tactics of the "executives" who both corrupt the laws of the varying nations to protect their stranglehold on content and rip off the artists who actually create the content.

      So yes, enjoy the film, continue to complain about the actions of the suits, and understand that doing one is not the opposite of the other.
      • Dude, I so disagree with you:

        yes, there is [almost] nothing wrong with enjoying the movie.
        But, I think you should be aware of who is getting your money, and how they are going to use it.

        p.s. Have you ever noticed that posting to have something modded up or down is usually more effective than actually moding it up your self (assuming you have points).
        Or even just asking to be modded in the text of your own message.
        If you ask me thats F*ing retarded
      • LOTR *IS* the geek book and now it is being made into a movie. To me that is news for nerds, stuff that matters. Just because the MPAA is evil doesn't mean the director (in this case Peter Jackson) and the actors and everyone else that worked on the film didn't create a great work.

        Since the RIAA has gone after music sharers and now they are making copy-protected cd's... I refuse to buy a cd ever again. The movie industry, while pissing me off with macrovision protection and regional encoding, they haven't actually gone after things that make dvd players regionless, they don't (or at least it hasn't come out that they do) rape the artists and keep all the money.

        Because of the rise of prices, I now rarely go see a movie in theaters because it's too expensive. For 2 people to go see a movie in the theater, it costs just as much to buy the dvd when it comes out. And for those movies you don't think you'd like, just head over and rent it (or download it).

        I love movies, there is no other way to boycott the MPAA than to avoid watching movies except when I go to a friends house to watch it. Movies just aren't prevelant enough on the internet to download and after spending a few hours to download movie if you have a bad quality version you just wasted a lot of time.

        If there is really going to be any change, the media needs to show people affected by these things.

        Back to the original poster, Peter Jackson is making a great movie about possibly the greatest literary work of the 20th century. And if you don't like it, go to your preference page and check off to exclude movie news. Then you don't have to put up with it anymore.
        -Chris
      • I'm not entirely sure this is relevant, but it's an interesting tidbit nonetheless.

        The best reports are that New Line spent about half a billion dollars making and promoting The Lord of the Rings, all three films, and that includes money budgeted but not yet spent on promotion and advertising for the last movie. Of that half a billion, about $300 million went into making the movies themselves. The $500 million figure includes all the cost of making, distributing, promoting, and showing the movies; basically, the studio's total costs.

        According to boxofficemojo.com, The Fellowship of the Ring has made about $860 million worldwide for New Line since its release last year. That's only gross revenue to the studio generated by movie theaters; it doesn't include DVD sales or any other sources of revenue.*

        The punchline: if nobody in the world buys a ticket for the next two movies, New Line still will have made about a 72% profit on the Lord of the Rings. They could put The Two Towers and The Return of the King on a shelf, finished but unreleased, and still have made a fortune.

        * Historically, the ratio of worldwide box office receipts to worldwide revenues from all media is about 1:1.5. In other words, for every dollar of box office gross, a movie can be expected to generate about $1.50 in video sales, rentals, TV rights, book and toy tie-ins, and so on.
        • Unfortunately, those without scruples will take this large profit from the first movie to mean that the studio and actors are no longer entitled profits from the next two movies for their work on those two movies. All the more reason for them to download the DVD files of the movie and the MP3s for the soundtrack off the net without ever having paid their share, or so they believe. With so many people willing to casually perform acts of petty thievery it's no wonder things are as screwed up as they are.

          The article before this titled "Attempts To Stop Music Sharing Pointless?" may be right, though. The ultimate weapon against stealing has always been keeping your morals in place and I see no attempt at people trying to bolster that.
        • According to boxofficemojo.com, The Fellowship of the Ring has made about $860 million worldwide for New Line since its release last year.

          The punchline: if nobody in the world buys a ticket for the next two movies, New Line still will have made about a 72% profit on the Lord of the Rings. They could put The Two Towers and The Return of the King on a shelf, finished but unreleased, and still have made a fortune.

          Umm, no. That's total ticket sales. Half that money goes to the theaters. And New Line did not put up all the money alone. There are other investors involved who will be taking a large percentage of the gross. Then you need to take out all the money for the people who are receiving gross points. I'm fairly sure Peter Jackson is one, there may be others. New Line will do well out of the trilogy for sure, but it's not as rosy as you make out.
          • That's total ticket sales. Half that money goes to the theaters.

            As I understand it, the numbers reported as "box office grosses" are studio grosses, not theater grosses. The figures come from the total amount of money paid to the distributor on a given day, weekend, or (in this case) interval.

            I won't swear that this is true, but I understand it to be so. If I'm wrong, then oops.

            Also, I'd be stunned if Jackson, or anybody else, was getting gross points. Points on the net, sure, but gross points?

            (That said, I have been stunned before, so it's not impossible.)
          • Your 50% figure for the theater isn't quite right -- it's more like 20% in the early weeks when most people go to see it. The cut gradually rises to ~50% after 5-6 weeks, when the theatre is half-full or less.

            From a friend who ran one, the theaters are totally dependant on popcorn and candy to turn a profit, hence the whacko prices. (Popcorn has an even bigger margin than soda.) Here's an overview [cnn.com].

            My peeve is that box office totals are never adjusted for inflation, so the term "blockbuster" doesn't mean a whole lot in comparison to a film 20 years ago like Star Wars. On the other hand, the studios have grown much savvier about wringing every last penny out of a film, from product placements to marketing tie-ins to figurines.

            I have no doubt LOTR will be a cash cow. It's like the next Star Wars, a tightly threaded trilogy. Or maybe more -- anyone else read the Silmarillion [cts.com]? (It has been 30 years since I did.) Can you say "prequel"?
    • You also finance the artists and directors who make the effort to give us a decent picture instead of the next Home Alone dribble.

      When I pay for my movie tickets, I'm not concerned about how I'm going to watch it on DVD months later because I'm not forced into any DRM agreements there. I'm paying for my tickets because they cover my current entertainment that the transaction represents. It's the guy in the back with the camcorder and his connection to the guy selling the movie on the street that's causing the management to be nervous. He's akin to the average KaZaa'er.

      Worry about your DVD playability later when the DVD hits the shelves. But please, while about them if you're truly being infringed on and not if you are deciding that you are entitled to rip a DVD because your friend paid for it. Sorry, but I know too many people who have MP3s for music they do not own and download ripped movies that they do not own. I'm pretty sure the whole reason movie/music downloading is so popular is that it is being abused by a majority that has no right to it. If you're among them, you are no better than petty thieves; have fun leeching off humanity. Just because you *can* rip it doesn't necessarily make it right for *you* to rip it. And by giving yourself the right to perform something illegal against someone else, I see no reason someone else can't do the same to you.

      For pete's sake, how do you expect people to respond when you walk into their house and steal from under their nose? You have to identify yourself before you can walk in. Now, thanks to those without morals, we who follow the rules get to deal with DRM to go into that house of entertainment. Who wants to finance a decent picture when they know the public will rip them off in exchange for their work rather than applaud them? That's when we end up with formula pictures like Home Alone 17.

  • read the book (Score:4, Insightful)

    by AstroMage ( 566990 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @08:28AM (#4742748)
    As nice as seeing the movie is, if you still haven't, read the book [amazon.com]! It's worth it :-)

    Signed: an old-fashioned geek :-)
    • The World is composed of two kinds of people...
      • Those that have read the books...
        and those that will read the books.


      Enjoy them...

    • Re:read the book (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Nasheer ( 179086 )
      I wonder what part of the book will be sniped now. You all (who read) remember that Tom Bombadil was cirurgically removed from the FotR. I have no concerns about this, indded, I am very thankful. I almost stopped reading because of the stupiduty of such a character. But having read The Hobbit before made me proceed.

      The part of Merry/Pippin and Treebeard is not as boring (and nonsense) as the Bombadil's, but is is the slowest part of the whole TTT. And even being huge, there's no scenes of it in this "new" trailer.

      So, what should I wait, and what I shoudn't? Either way, it will be great to discover.
      • Treebeard is in (at least) one of the scenes - at 02:33. And cheers for that, Treebeard is just awesome, I'd have hated to see him removed. Seeing Bombadil (and like 30 pages before and after him) cut was bad enough, but he at least wasn't as essential to the story as Treebeard is.
      • Since Treebeard is being played by John Rhys Davies of Gimli fame Treebeard is in. The recent trailer, if you bothered to watch it, showed a Huorn picking up Merry or Pippin. People should get over Tom Bombadil...Tolkien himself said it wasn't that pertinent to the story so they shouldn't give it any more importance than it deserves. I also thought it was a left-over from the Hobbit, but the book soon picked up nicely after that.

    • Note that this trailer has a big spoiler! (Score:5, Informative)

      by eddy ( 18759 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @09:08AM (#4742848) Homepage Journal

      .. so if you haven't read the book already (what kind of a geek are you?) but are watching the movies, then DON'T WATCH THIS TRAILER, IT'LL SPOIL IT FOR YOU.

      What were they thinking?

  • Why is this on Slashdot?? (Score:5, Informative)

    by PsORoK ( 73520 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @08:29AM (#4742750) Homepage
    What kind of news is this? I skimmed it and thought there was a new trailer, got my hopes up, watched it, got mad. Instead it's just that the trailer I've watched 100 times is being hosted by Apple? Even that is weeks-old news. Why is this on Slashdot?

  • Direct Download (Score:5, Informative)

    by daveirl ( 177821 ) <slashdot+regs.davidoneill@net> on Sunday November 24, 2002 @08:30AM (#4742757) Homepage
    Direct Link 40MB - HERE [aol.com]

  • Not a new trailer (Score:5, Informative)

    by wpugh ( 204847 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @08:32AM (#4742764) Homepage
    This is not a new trailer. It has been out for quite a while, at least a month, but probably several.

  • how to play in linux (& link) (Score:5, Informative)

    by oskie ( 324496 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @08:32AM (#4742765)
    To play this crap in linux:

    1. wget "http://progressive.stream.aol.com/newline/gl/newl ine/lordoftherings/TheTwoTowers-tlr_fs.l.mov"

    2. Follow instructions on http://mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/tech/qt-libwine-howto.txt

    I'm not sure it will work, but it's worth a try...

    • Re:how to play in linux (& link) (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      This works great, better than any apple quicktime player i have ever used :-) , btw: to play the ttt trailer ( fullscreen version ) append -vid 5 -aid 6 so that mplayer starts with the right video and audio track...

  • I can't wait for this movie to hit the theater. If it is anywhere near as good as the first, which I fully expect it to be since they were all filmed together, this has to be considered one of the best movie series of all time. Don't you think? And it's about time, too, as good fantasy is hard to find these days.

    The new trailer's not bad either. And at least everyone can watch it now thanks to the linux plugin.

    And as one of the probable few who haven't read a single word of the books, this series has definitely put them on my "to read" list. The hard part is going to be finding the time...

  • Am I missing something? (Score:4, Informative)

    by 10Ghz ( 453478 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @08:43AM (#4742794)
    I have this very same trailer on my computer. Have had it for a long time now. Slashdot is only about 1.5 months late with this one ;)

    • Re:Am I missing something? (Score:5, Informative)

      by koorneef ( 145397 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @08:52AM (#4742812) Homepage
      The 2 Towers trailer is also included on the 2nd DVD of the extended version.

      To find it you'll have to go to the 'select chapter menu' and have a look at the last chapter. When you move up again you'll see in the bottom right of the screen two towers. Select that, press ok .. and you'll see the director congratulating you for finding this easter egg.

      Have fun !
      • Uhh, maybe you should mention that this only applies to the Region *2* disc, the Region *1* disc does NOT have this easter egg (I just tried it repeatedly, then searched on Google and found out it was an R2-only egg apparently; R1 has a DIFFERENT egg I guess, how LAME, god damn region encoding BULLSHIT).

        [sigh]

        • Re:Am I missing something? (Score:5, Informative)

          by DarkEdgeX ( 212110 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @03:49PM (#4745006) Journal
          sigh...

          It's on the R1 disc, the instructions weren't quite clear exactly WHERE you had to press DOWN at. You press down from the far-right group listing, NOT from the chapter name itself (mentally split the three areas you can navigate left and right into three columns, you want to be on the bottom right item, then press DOWN, and you'll get the Towers graphic as the original poster described). On the FIRST disc of the Extended DVD you can get to the MTV spoof of the Council of Elrond scene by going to the last chapter (this time the SECOND/MIDDLE column of selectable menu items) and press DOWN on the last item (doing this on the 2nd disc moved you to the first chapter, on the 1st disc it brings up a small ring icon in the bottom/middle area, press ENTER on this ring icon).

          Sorry for my previous rant. I still think regions are lame though. ;)
  • Is it just me, or does the music in the background of the trailer sound very much (i.e. exactly) like the main theme to Requiem for a Dream? Is this actually the music from the main movie, or is it just incidental trailer stuff? Does Clint Mansell know?
  • that trailer's f***** old!
  • Good to see it rising, as /. headlines Google News with a month-and-a-half old story...

  • Movie industry (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Gary Franczyk ( 7387 )
    Isn't it funny how the same people who complain about movie and recording industry "fatcats" are the same ones that slobber over the newest trailer for a series of movies that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to produce?
    • With the LOTR, the inital budget was $200,000 for three films. We seem to be getting quite good value for our money and some of the incom from the first film seems to be being tuned around into better postproduction for the others.

      Peter Jackson is definitely not commanding a high salary (he doesn''t have enough experience), although I rea;;yy hope they give him a point or two of revenue. The same goes for the rest of the cast: no big budget names there.

      Instead, we have got a picture that looks like a lot of money was spent on it. If someone at newline ends up making a bundle out of it, so what, we have ended up with a good film. Rgerttably that can not be said of a lot of movies out there.

      • Sorry, I meant of course $200,000,000. Still cheap for three major movies.
      • LOTR cost way more than $200,000. $200 million would be more like it.
      • Peter Jackson is definitely not commanding a high salary (he doesn't have enough experience), although I reallyy hope they give him a point or two of revenue.

        Sure, they'll just give him 10% of the profits. [slashdot.org]

      • Re:Movie industry (Score:2, Informative)

        by S.O.B. ( 136083 )
        Typo aside, according to The Internet Database [imdb.com] the three movies cost $297 million to make. If the next two moives make the same as the first they should collective gross almost $2.6 billion. Even with Hollywood's creative accounting they should make a huge profit.
        • I had heard $200mill earlier (before FOTR) came out but the postproduction was incomplete for the other two films. The word is that New Line liked the results from the first so much that they increased the post production budget.

          To be honest, I guess that New Line didn't really guess how big it would be until the first came out. Many fantasy films do not do that well and maybe they didn't realise the place of LOTR.

          New Line seems better than many companies, but if they realised how big this was worth, I guess they wouldn't have given it to Jackson or the cast. As it is, as there were no superstars there (or their egos), just a very good team and the movies was the better for it.

    • Gary,

      I still havent seen the movie and I havent read any of the books. Am I the only one? :)

    • We complain about Hollywood and MPAA fatcats, the fatcats who pump out the same derivative drivel year in year out with the single goal of making money.

      LOTR is not a Hollywood movie. It was made by people with a genuine love of Tolkien. So stop babbling formulaic counter-counter-culture cliches. Honestly.

  • Excerpt from Clip (Score:5, Funny)

    by Sponge Bath ( 413667 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @10:30AM (#4743094)
    Camera zooms in on face of Aragorn...

    "I was entering my quest plans on a PC and it went, like, beep beep beep..."

    OK, you know the rest.

  • Its just a rumor (Score:3, Funny)

    by Sorklin ( 88002 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @10:30AM (#4743098)
    But I heard that they might even be making a LIVE ACTION version of the Lord of the Rings! I heard Michael J. Fox would play Frodo!

    Jesus, how can Slashdot be this far behind?

  • In Quicktime, SO WHAT?? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 24, 2002 @10:49AM (#4743187)
    Of course, the trailer is in quicktime

    So fucking what? You think I can't play it on Linux? You're wrong. MPLAYER [mplayerhq.hu] is the solution.

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @11:21AM (#4743355)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Arwen--what? (Score:2, Redundant)

    by stevarooski ( 121971 )
    Not a troll, but *why* is Arwen in The Two Towers?? Are those supposed to be flashbacks for Aragorn? I hope so, because I shudder to think about how would they work in a quick trip back to Rivendell just to justify Tyler's presence in the movie!

    I loved the production design and art direction of the first movie, but some of the character portrayals made me sad. And I still haven't figured out why Jackson is pushing Arwen so much. Is it really his interpretation of the story or did someone tell him to make the movies more romantic to appeal to a wider audience than those who have read the books?

    • Not a troll, but *why* is Arwen in The Two Towers?? Are those supposed to be flashbacks for Aragorn?

      I get the sense that they are partly a flashback, but mainly a separate plot thread involving the elves leaving for the Undying Lands.

      And I still haven't figured out why Jackson is pushing Arwen so much.

      This has been answered by PJ many times. Tolkien's work has many great themes. Among them are the end of the things and the beginning of others. The story of Arwen and Aragon is the perfect vehicle to bring these to cinema.

      Or did you think that LOTR was just some geek hobbit jaunt through Middle Earth?
    • You ought to take a look at Alejandro Jodorowsky's plans for Frank Herbert's Dune for an example of what a bastardization of a story looks like (http://www.orlok.co.uk/prime/history.html). Jackson's license with Arwen would pale in comparison. I'm sure they are just flashbacks meant to flesh out Aragorn from the rustic barbarian he started out as at the beginning of FotR. He has feelings, too, you know.
    • An excellent question; I started wondering whether she'd be in it when I first watched the movie. The reason I did that is that Aragorn didn't seem to get Narsil reforged in FOTR (as he did in the book).

      I just finished watching the extended edition (whew, LONG movie, very very worth it), and my suspicions are confirmed: they didn't reforge Narsil because Aragorn wasn't ready for it/didn't want it.

      Therefore, it'll be reforged in TTT, and someone will have to bring it. Guess who?

      As to why Peter's pushing Arwen: that's pretty obvious. She's needed to build up Aragorn's character. Without her, he's just an action hero.

      Tolkien had a lot of liberty in the books that Peter doesn't have for the movies. I think Peter, by and large, made some very good choices; delaying the reforging of Narsil was one of them (although cutting out the part where they talk about it was not such a good choice, IMO, since that talk makes Aragorn's character more evident).

      I do miss Glorfindel, though. Seems he always gets dunked in the movies (he's ALWAYS cut out). I don't blame the producers, and in fact Tolkien really shouldn't have put him in because at the time of LOTR he was ___DEAD___, but poor guy...

      -Billy

  • What, this IS the old one... (Score:3, Funny)

    by dzym ( 544085 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @02:52PM (#4744602) Homepage Journal
    Thanks for getting my hopes up and then dashing it, you bastards.

    Must ... wait ... till ... December ... 18th.

  • Ha! I claim a new buzzword. (Score:3, Funny)

    by SecretAsianMan ( 45389 ) on Sunday November 24, 2002 @11:04PM (#4748417) Homepage
    TTT
    I hereby claim the coinage of T2T.

Slashdot Top Deals

One person's error is another person's data.

Close