LOTR: Two Towers Extended Edition Reviewed 626
akahige writes "The Digital Bits has just posted an exhaustive review and analysis of extended edition of The Two Towers, everybody that can't wait to get theirs -- or wait even longer to see the uber-cut in the theatre -- check it out. There's 43 minutes of new footage (not including the extended credits), and comparable extras to the extended version of Fellowship: 4 commentaries, documentaries, behind the scenes, etc. " I felt that FotR's Extended Edition was far superior to the theatrical release- usually these extra cuts add little, but this was the exception. I've been waiting with held breath for this one. I just wish it would ship a few days early!
Extended edition (Score:4, Funny)
I hope the new DVD has an extra-special "toilet break" feature!
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Insightful)
It does, if it's done in the same way as the FOTR extended edition. The film itself comes on two disks :-)
But what about us carousel owners? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:But what about us carousel owners? (Score:4, Funny)
Then, you can put up a website about it, post here, and become a geek GOD!
I will have to hold your responsible... (Score:3, Funny)
I'm thinking the overclocking, water cooling, and see-through side with the neon lighting wouldn't be a good idea for such a project.
I wouldn't dare post it on slash dot for fear of enciting all the core dump jokes...
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Funny)
Silly... The DVD's don't have these features, but your player has. It's called "Pause button".
Re:Extended edition (Score:5, Funny)
Those people that go to the bathroom and want to pause it are violating the MPAA's IP rights!
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Funny)
I thought they had a joint-ownership and cross-licencing deal with the RIAA...
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Funny)
Ben Hur (Score:3, Interesting)
It demands to be honoured. Pop out and relieve yourself, AND make a cup of tea, without using the accursed pause button.
'tis for wimps.
Re:Ben Hur (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm with you though, I don't like pausing movies and playing musical chairs during them. It takes me out of the emotional experience and interrupts the flow of the film.
Lawrence too (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Long movies and Intermissions (Score:4, Funny)
Obviously, you don't order and consume a 'super-sized' beverage that is at least twice the maximum human bladder capacity in the first hour of the film.
I missed the penultimate 15 minute segment of Lotr:FotR because I DID. I also discovered that when sufficiently motivated, I can be back in my seat in a time that would shame an Indy pit crew.
Re:Long movies and Intermissions (Score:5, Insightful)
They give you massive quantities so they can justify charging you up out the ass for it, it's just annoying. I know the arguement behind it, the theater makes all their money on the consessions, well too bad, if they want to make money on me, they have one of two options, charge less for concessions, or charge more for the ticket.
Sure you could argue that I buy the big gulp and not drink all of it, but I'm just a dumb animal, I'll eat/drink whatever's put in front of me to completion, which leaves me needing the pit stop. And wait a minute, it took you 15 minutes to take a piss, or did you drop the kids off at the pool while you were at it?
Re:Long movies and Intermissions (Score:5, Informative)
if they want to make money on me, they have one of two options, charge less for concessions, or charge more for the ticket.
Sadly, the second option isn't available to us -- the studio wants its cut of the ticket, whether we charge $4 or $10, because in that case we're making money off "their" movie. This is why groups can't passes for a fundraiser (ie. they buy $4 passes and sell for $5), because the studio wants that money. We make nothing off the tickets regardless of how much we sell them for -- every theater is a popcorn-and-pop shop that happens to show movies, which is why we can't charge much less for concessions either.
I know the situation sucks, but there's not really a whole lot the theaters can do about it. Blame the studios, not us.
Re:Long movies and Intermissions (Score:5, Funny)
Seven Samurai (Score:3, Interesting)
I had actually never seen the Seven Samurai before, so I figured this was the time. My martial arts teacher gave me permission to skip class for something so important ("I would not be completely unhappy if you skipped class to see the Seven Samurai.")
For those who don't know, it's over 3 hours; it started at 9:30 with no ads
'Entre' (between) 'Acte' (act) (Score:3, Informative)
2. If your considered its etymology from French, you'd realise this.
You're correct that your parent poster used it incorrectly. He meant overture.
Re:'Entre' (between) 'Acte' (act) (Score:4, Informative)
Kind of funny, since French is typically more resistant to change, whereas English will happily hypenate then combine words (e.g., to[day|morrow].
IHBT... (Score:3, Funny)
Since you brought it up, explain to me where my French was incorrect: does entre not mean between, or does acte not mean act?
My other statements concerned English.
Re:Ben Hur (Score:2)
Re:Ben Hur (Score:4, Funny)
Cue the Holy Grail intermission music...
Re:Ben Hur (Score:3, Interesting)
Ah, the pointless things I remember...
Re:Extended edition (Score:2)
This is all James Cameron's fault.
Re:Extended edition (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Extended edition (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Interesting)
Interesting sidenote: since the movie was in English with Turkis
Re:Extended edition (Score:2)
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Extended edition (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, you mean like the Rave Scene in the Matrix Reloaded?
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Funny)
That depends on what he was going to do in the bathroom...
Re:Extended edition (Score:3, Interesting)
I love the movie though. If only they hadn't changed Faramir and, well, the whole ending of TTT... Peter Jackson is still a director I admire. His work is outstanding on many, many levels. And besides, nothing that a guy who directed Dead Alive does can be all bad.
Pah (Score:5, Funny)
You aren't a true fan unless you buy one. And with every purchase you get a free Lucasarts (tm) branded marquee to store it in.
All you really want to know... (Score:5, Informative)
"Among the new treasures in store for fans are several more moments with Gollum, more background on the Ents and additional scenes involving Treebeard in Fangorn Forest, Gandalf telling Aragorn that Sauron is afraid of what he may one day become, Theodred's funeral at Edoras, more of Faramir capturing Frodo and Sam, new scenes between Aragorn and Eowyn on the road to Helm's Deep, more intense footage during all of the major battles... and this is just scratching the surface. There's also a major new flashback scene in which we see Faramir with his brother, Boromir, and their father, Denethor, who is the Steward of Gondor. We learn why Boromir tried to take the Ring from Frodo in the last film, and why Faramir struggles with the same decision here. It's fantastic stuff that really fleshes out both Faramir and Boromir. It's also important for introducing us to the character of Denethor, who plays a larger part in the forthcoming Return of the King."
Re:All you really want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now I have to see it, 'cause they actually put the plot back in the film.
They're called... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:All you really want to know... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:All you really want to know... (Score:2)
Alright! more stuff to further ruin/change Faramir! I still don't get why that changed him so much from the book
Re:All you really want to know... (Score:4, Informative)
But I agree wholeheartedly about the difference between telling a story via a movie as opposed to a book. I think Jackson's doing a wonderful job, all told. My biggest beef has to do with all the complaining over the Aragorn/Arwen storyline. While it may not have been front & center in the book, the story is thoroughly told in the Appendix, and obviously has a major impact on Aragorn's personal struggle throughout the War of the Ring. It ties in nicely with the whole Elves-leaving-Middle-Earth angle, and yes, it does give the female audience another avenue for identifying with the characters and becoming emotionally involved with the story...
Re:All you really want to know... (Score:4, Interesting)
All of which makes for an utterly boring and unbelievable character in the minds of the general audience, that is, those who dont live and breathe Middle-Earth and don't hyperventilate when a character puts the wrong inflection on a line.
So Faramir atones for his lapse of willpower, and *becomes* a great leader and a wonderful guy over the course of the rest of the story - how would that damage anything? Depends on how you define damage, after all.
And it makes the point that *some Men CAN resist the will of the Ring, but all are drawn to it initially*. Given all that's been shown previously, do you really think that a totally unassailable character such as Faramir would be believable? *Everyone* else has felt the temptation of the Ring, even Gandalf the Wizard.
As long as Faramir *ends up* being the Faramir of the books, the story has not been damaged, in my mind. And we get a deeper understanding of the sheer power and corruption of the Ring.
We could have done without some of the Gim[p]li scenes though. I agree with you on that.
Re:More Eowyn? (Score:4, Informative)
I think you're talking about Arwen rather than Eowyn here.
John
Held breath? (Score:5, Funny)
Let's put it this way... if you're holding your breath, and it doesn't ship a few days early, you're not going to get a chance to see it.
Theatres showing whole trilogy??? (Score:3, Interesting)
I hope the local theatre here will be doing this. I will be checking shortly. I guess I am just slow, I won't be seeing the third Matrix until tomorrow.
sold out immediately (Score:4, Informative)
Here you go.... take 2 (Score:3, Informative)
FIND A THEATER [movietickets.com]
Re:Here you go... (Score:2)
that is the list of those showing the extended editions NOT those showing the 3 movie marathon.
try again please.
BTW, I know this as I called the 2 local theatres listed on that page and they are NOT doing the special event.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:bleh (Score:2, Funny)
Re:bleh (Score:5, Informative)
And Theoden being posessed instead of manipulated.
and fscking elves at the battle.
To think they cut out good Ent time for that.
Re:bleh (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree on Bilbo, but not on Theoden. In the book, Theoden frees himself from the control - and the control is by Wormtongue and not Saruman himself. Gandalf just gives him a hell of a pep-talk (and who knows, maybe some subtle magic).
On the screen, Theoden seems nearly completely posessed. I lik
Re:bleh (Score:3, Insightful)
"Toss me!" WTF? And him being a big whiner for the whole film just pissed me off right proper. Gimli's my favourite character.
They lost all that fun witty repartee between Gimli and Legolas, which was the best part of TtT. It was the archtype of the elf/dwarf rivalry redone in every fantasy ever made - and they completely left it out.
Re:bleh (Score:2)
gaah (Score:5, Funny)
What's the big deal? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:2, Insightful)
The Matrix doesn't really do anything new. It's a watered-down version of lots of different philosophy with imagery from various religions thrown in. If you look at it like a kung fu movie with western sci-fi trappings, it works, but it ISN'T a deep story, and all the questions it asks were taken from some
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:3, Insightful)
You can get better philosophy from an arthouse flick, sure. But how many movies do you know of that have flannel-shirted, trucker-hatted, shitkicker-clad rednecks walking out discussing ubermenschen and brain-in-a-vat theories? While not exactly pioneering anything, i
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:4, Interesting)
That's because the two Matrix sequels had most of us thinking about all the gigantic plot holes [dynamicobjects.com] that the LotR books and movies didn't have.
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:3, Insightful)
One word (Score:4, Insightful)
Pretentiousness
That's what separates the Rings trilogy from the Matrix's gobbledygook.
They are both fantasy stories, but Rings doesn't try to be much else. Rings isn't trying to mix heavy religious themes, moral allegory (Tolkien himself hated allegory) and pseudo-philosophy into it's storyline. It's just a cool fantasy story.
The Matrix on the other hand, tries to look "deep" and "heavy" where in reality, the themes and ideas it presents have already been exhaustively discussed in PHIL 101. The Matrix trilogy tries so hard to be important that it ends up a parody of itself.
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:2, Insightful)
There is no big deal in the Matrix (Score:4, Insightful)
It has languages, thousands of years of detailed histories, many epic tales as well as intense and interesting characters. Stories end and then stories begin.
The Wachowki's created a world in which people with cables in their brains become supermen and kick the crap out of computer programs. There is one interesting concept, how do we know that the world we experience with our senses exists away from our senses?
The rest of the Matrix "philosophy" is a mishmash of words or plays on words that imitate depth through ambiguity. Playing on words and their meanings is sophistry, not philosophy.
All in all the Matrix backstory is just to give geeks an excuse to proclaim the Matrix as cool not just because its about a hacker with a girlfriend that dresses in leather who learns kung-fu through a ROM chip and gets to shoot a lot of guns. Sex AND violence packaged with a nice 'deep' wrapper. Wow.
Give me five examples of depth in the Matrix?
Five from the Lord of Rings:
a) Boromir wants to use the ring to defeat Sauron. But the ring will warp its wielder to its masters will. The tool becomes the end.
b) The rebels of Rohan leave their king out of their love for their king.
c) The elves of Middle Earth help the men of Middle Earth even though they are leaving that land. Elves are immortal in normal circumstances but they do not flinch from death in combat.
d) Gondor is a shadow of itself at its height and in turn is a shadow of Numenor (the kingdom left by Gondor exiles when Sauron corrupted it). There is a rich and vibrant history behind everything. The films do not convey all of this but there is a complete absence of history behind the Matrix (apart from 30 mins of Animatrix).
e) Sauron is not defeated by force of arms but by a combination of luck (Gollum falls into Mount Doom) and heroism (Frodo and Sam). The interesting thing is that Frodo is not a messianic pure strong hero, at the end he betrays the trust in him by wielding the ring. Gollum seals Sauron's doom.
Re:There is no big deal in the Matrix (Score:3, Insightful)
Okay, slightly offtopic here, but I'm going to comment anyhow...
To call the ending "luck" is simply not fair to Tolkien. The ending was setup way in advance. Several factors come into play:
Re:There is no big deal in the Matrix (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:There is no big deal in the Matrix (Score:3, Interesting)
I'll play.
Re:There is no big deal in the Matrix (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Barliman Butterbur served ale at the Prancing Pony. Where did he get the ale?
2) The children at Bilbo's birthday party bear a strong resemblance to the children cowering in fear in the caves under Helm's Deep. What is the relationship between hobbit and human children?
3) Elrond says Rivendell does not have t
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:3, Interesting)
Having said that, the movies mostly gloss over the depths of the bo
Or to rephrase that slightly..... (Score:5, Insightful)
I know I'm going to get flamed and mod'ed into oblivion for this, but seriously, what's the big deal about The Matrix? Why do people lash out viciously at movies that actually make an attempt a real depth (LOTR), while simultaneously holding up the Matrix as the cinematic "Gold Standard?" I mean, sure, it's a moderately interesting story, but does it need more than 10 minutes to be told? Sure, some interesting fights happen along the way, and the effects are great, but are there subtle metaphors, philosophical references, and character dualities (besides the obvious Keanu=Christ thing, obviously) that I'm missing?
Why do people bitch and complain that LOTR was too much gobbledygook (translation: they didn't understand, and hate movies that challenge them to think about it anywhere beyond the concession stand on their way out), then act like The Matrix is this untouchable masterpiece?
There's this bunch of machines. They're evil. They has to be destroyed. That's where we left off after the first one. "Matrix Revisited" and 3 hours later, that's STILL where we are. Still got those evil thingies. Still has to be destroyed.
Why is this such amazing work, while Peter Jackson's out-of-the-book conclusion to LOTR is seen as hack-work?
I don't get it. I'm not a Matrix fanboy, but I watched the first one, and I'll watch the second and third (when they reach TV). But there's really nothing cool to discuss about them, is there? The LOTR movies work because there are so many different interpretations of what they mean and how they all interrelate, and it's fun to discuss. But, as far as I can tell, the Matrix trilogy "is what it is," isn't it? They lay the whole story out there in front of you, and hold your hand. They don't challenge you to try and figure out what Neo really represents, or if maybe, just maybe, the good NEEDS the evil to give it a purpose to exist? The LOTR suggests these kinds of things, but the Matrix seems to shy completely away from them, afraid of challenging (and alienating) their audience.
Am I wrong? What gives?
The funny thing is... (Score:3, Interesting)
What Neo really represents: Is he human? Is he just another program introduced by the Architect to cull the dissenters from the Matrix and make ever-more-perfect iterations of the simulation world?
Good needing evil and vice versa: Not only in this case does good need evil, evil also needs good. In fact, Neo coming back from "death" and "killing" Agent Smith in the first movie is what showed Smith that the "purpose of life... is
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:3, Funny)
You're right. That's your future ex-wife's job.
Yes, but are they going to release... (Score:3, Interesting)
They are still fantastic movies, of course. But when I watched the Two Towers again, recently, with my wife, every time she asked me, "Was that in the book?" I found that I had to say, "Well, no, not really."
Re:Yes, but are they going to release... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's not annoying so much to condense something (like Theoden being possesed rather than somewhat brainwashed). Even though I'd have preferred to see the confrontation between Saruman and Gandalf face to face (one of my favorite parts of the book), at least I can understa
Re:Yes, but are they going to release... (Score:3, Interesting)
I used to have a problem, like many, with the Arwen stuff in the first two movies. But think about this - she is not mentioned except in passing reference in the book until she reappears to become queen at the end. They don't have the time in the movies to have Gandalf and Elrond sitting and talking about her for half an hour like in the book, so some liber
Marathon showings. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Marathon showings. (Score:2)
this is for the extended edition's only not the complete 3 movie marathon.
wheres the spider? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:wheres the spider? (Score:5, Informative)
It is to Jackson's credit that he is taking full advantage of the DVD to release a version of each film that does not take theatrical scheduling into account.
You'll get the spider in December.
Thr Ring Cycle -Seeing the Uber-cut in the theatre (Score:2)
However the thought of three Uber-editions running sequentially in a theatre (think a total of a tad over 11 hours running time) would bring a whole new meaning to the Ring Cycle and endurance. Even Germans, raised on Wagnerian opera may have problems there (usually the other Ring is shown on co
Waiting for combo-movie directors cut (Score:4, Interesting)
Why See the Movie When You Can Wait for the DVD? (Score:4, Insightful)
My wife brought up a good point: if the DVD(s) is will be stoked with so many "extra features", how much of an effect will that have on getting people to see the movie? Why bother going at all?
Re:Why See the Movie When You Can Wait for the DVD (Score:4, Insightful)
Because some of us don't have 20ft wide TV screens and high quality sound systems.
- MugginsM
What about some details?? (Score:4, Funny)
Ade_
Special editions (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Special editions (Score:3, Insightful)
Given that Sauron has a sizeable army at Minas Morgul.
Given that Minas Morgul is within marching distance to Osgiliath.
Given that Sauron now knows the location of the ring in Osgiliath, on his very borders through the Nazgul that Frodo encountered there.
Given that Sauron wants the ring back.
Seems to me that Sauron would do two things at this point.
1. Send more forces to Osgiliath to secure the ring where it is.
2. Keep forces at Minas Morgul to guard the pass instead of sending them into
Slashdotted! - Clipped Article Content Below... (Score:5, Informative)
From digitalbits.com:
Discs 1 and 2
[tech stuff snipped]
"It is an army bred for a single purpose... to destroy the world of men."
And so we come to the crossroads. The Two Towers is the second installment in Peter Jackson's epic film adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkein's The Lord of the Rings - the installment poised to make or break the trilogy. Could Jackson and company follow up on the blockbuster success of 2001's The Fellowship of the Ring? Would the film continue with the same level of quality? Would the momentum of the story build upon the climax of the first film, and prepare audiences for the ultimate confrontation between good and evil in the soon to be released final chapter, The Return of the King? The answer to all of these questions, of course, is a resounding yes.
As the film opens, we find ourselves plunged into the dark mines of Moria, to relive a few moments of Gandalf's confrontation with the fiery Balrog. But instead of playing out as we remember it in Fellowship of the Ring, this time, when Gandalf falls into the abyss, we fall with him to watch as his fight continues. The consequences of these moments will resound throughout much of the remainder of the story, as Frodo and Sam continue their quest to carry the One Ring into Mordor, and Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli race to save Merry and Pippin from the orcs. Along the way, two important new story elements come into play. The first is the character of Gollum, who is bound to the Ring in such a way that he simply must follow it to Mordor. As we watch, Gollum's dual personalities fight for dominance, one wishing to help Frodo and Sam in their quest, and the other seeking to kill them and take back the Ring that was stolen from him (as told in The Hobbit). Meanwhile, Aragorn and company have made their way into the horse realm of Rohan, whose king has fallen under Saruman's dark spell. The people of Rohan are made to suffer too, for Saruman has built a army of murderous orcs numbering ten thousand strong. Together, the white wizard and the dark lord, Sauron, mean to rule Middle-earth, and their first step in this conquest is to wipe out the kingdom of Rohan, and all of Mankind, once and for all. What follows is nothing less than a truly epic battle, in which the fate of both Middle-earth and the Quest of the Ring literally hang in the balance. Trust me when I say, it's like nothing you've ever seen before on film.
What I appreciate most about The Two Towers is that Jackson has made no compromises for the audience. Middle-earth is a world where violence is commonplace, much blood is shed and evil stands a very real chance of winning and must be confronted head-on. There is no sugar coating on these bitter pills to make them easier to digest. As a result, the journey one takes in this film is just that much more satisfying. An additional compromise that Jackson manages to avoid is obvious right from the opening frames of The Two Towers. You simply MUST have seen the previous film in order to understand what's going on, because there is no recap of the action. Other than the very brief opening flashback, this film launches you immediately into the story, picking up right where Fellowship left you hanging. And the pace throughout much of the film is relentless, pausing only occasionally to let you catch your breath.
In addition to Jackson's deft direction, the savvy adaptation and great performances by cast members new and old, there is much technically to be impressed with here as well. The character of Gollum, entirely created by computer graphics, is astonishing. At last, we have a CG character that gives a real dramatic performance on screen. This is thanks to the work of WETA Digital, as well as the strong acting of Andy Serkis. Serkis not only provides Gollum his voice, but his movent as well thanks to the process of motion capture. Serkis also performed the character on set with the actors, lending the final digital creation a particular presence and immediacy it would otherwise have lacke
Just a Reminder: November 18! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:0 comments and /.ed already? (Score:2, Informative)
review by Bill Hunt, editor of The Digital Bits
Film Rating: A
Disc Ratings (Video/Extras): A/A+
Audio Ratings (DD/DTS): A-/A
Specs and Features
Disc One: The Film - Extended Version, Part I
Part I - 107 mins (approx 236 mins total - includes 20 min fan club credit roll on Disc Two), PG-13, letterboxed widescreen (2.35:1), 16x9 enhanced, single-sided, RSDL dual-layered (layer switch at 50:42, at the start of chapter 15), custom slipcase with fold-out Digipack packaging (featuring pro
Re:GOLLUM DIES IN TTT (Score:3, Funny)
Else he'd be thrown into the fire of Mt.Doom by Tolken fans with big feet.
Re:Am I the only one? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, you are the only one. So go buy it already [mysimon.com]. That version has been available since August.
Any other questions?Re:Am I the only one? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Am I the only one? (Score:2)
How so? If you want the same movie you saw in the theater, you can alway buy the regural edition that was released a while ago. The
Re:Am I the only one? (Score:5, Informative)
The FotR Extended version added so much to the movie that I know I could never appreciate the theatrical version again, and I'm willing to bet that Two Towers will be even better.
Re:Am I the only one? (Score:5, Insightful)
From what was added to the extended version of the first movie, there was no good reason except that it made the movie longer.
For me, that isn't a good reason. Tell me how long it is beforehand, keep it good and interesting and you can make it as long as you want.
Question of Venue (Score:4, Informative)
Well, I'm with you 100 percent, and I'll be picking this extended version up posthaste, but the reason for reducing the movie isn't because viewers won't sit that long (although it is for some). The main reason theaters like movies under three hours is because with that time frame, they can get more showings in in a day. If a movie is just 20 minutes over three hours, they lose a showing per day, and that's a lot of ticket sales lost. Movie makers are sensitive to this fact, and so they make directors cut it down to size. In this particular case, Jackson did it under the promise that he'd get to release the mondo-massive version on DVD, which is what this extended set represents.
Virg
Re:Extra Footage on seperate DVD release (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I think of each movie as being a 6-disc special edition. If they released it that way all at once, the total cost would end up about the same, so what difference does it make?
Re:Extra Footage on seperate DVD release (Score:4, Insightful)
Is it rude for Nissan to offer 3 versions of the Z-350? Or is it extra rude for Cadillac to come out with a V-6 version of the CTS and then release a more expensive V-8 CTS. Or horrors GM comes out with a 70K Corvette called the XLR then later comes out with the real Corvetter for 55K.
"Its a sick way to make $$ and a slap in the face to the fans."
It's not like anyone is forcing anyone to go buy both versions of TTT or FoTR.
The first version is for your casual consumer. The second has extra stuff for your serious fanboy.
Sorry if someone actually coming out with different versions of a DVD for different tastes bothers you to your core.
Re:Extra Footage on seperate DVD release (Score:3, Insightful)
is it too much to ask for patience? do what alot of the rest of us did, wait for the collectors edition. he told us from the start that there would be 2 versions, if you wanted the version with everything all you had to do was wait a few months.
I would say that he isn't just tryinhg to make money there are two different audiences for the lotr films, the normal moviegoers who want it as they saw it, and the lotr fans who want the full thing. he's catering for both and everyone knew it.
so don't complain tha
Re:Extra Footage on seperate DVD release (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, most people I know love this story so much and love how these movies have been done that paying twice doesn't bother us in the least. When artists produce something of this caliber, paying them twice (five times in my case, the twice I saw it in the theater, the once I rented it and now the twice I've purchased it) is not a problem to me, they deserve it.
Besides, do like I did with FoTR: the first one is now a Christmas present for someone you love. Not a bad deal really.