Kevin's Watch

I wait for the extended versions.

My wife has vowed to purchase the theatrical version at lunch time today. I have no problem with owning both.

We own both for Fellowship and TTT. We wll own both for ROTK. I got off work at midnight last night and bought ROTK at the all night grocery store (had to get dog food anyway). When my kids aren't in school they watch at least one of the dvd's every day...alternating.

My view is that adding "extra" scenes to a film does not necessarily make it a better film. Those extra scenes were left on the cutting room floor for a reason: to make a tight, focused movie. At least Peter Jackson and his editing team have been careful in how they have created their Extended Versions, not just slapping in scenes willy-nilly. I've only bought the two versions of Fellowship: as a DVD experience, the Extended Version is a treat, no question. But as a singular movie experience, I still prefer the original theatrical version.

I get the Extended DVDs. I already have the extended for the first two, anyway. No point missing out on anything.

Matrixman wrote:My view is that adding "extra" scenes to a film does not necessarily make it a better film. Those extra scenes were left on the cutting room floor for a reason: to make a tight, focused movie. At least Peter Jackson and his editing team have been careful in how they have created their Extended Versions, not just slapping in scenes willy-nilly. I've only bought the two versions of Fellowship: as a DVD experience, the Extended Version is a treat, no question. But as a singular movie experience, I still prefer the original theatrical version.

But according to Mr. Peter Jackson, the extended edition was the one intended to be put into the film. But due to budget constraints and editing time for the movie going audience he pulled those out. In both commentaries so far, he has stated that he prefers the extended edition b/c its a more proper tribute to Tolkien's Vision.

I prefer the extended edition. But you are right, At least Mr. Jackson didn't just throw them in with some weird editing, Mr. Jackson goes all out and re-shoots and films those scenes and integrates them as apart of the film.

Anyways, to each their own. Cheers.

I'm wainting on the Extended version. ROTK was heavily edited. I imagine there is alteast another half hour of Frodo and Sam marching to Mount Doom.

The Extended Edition of Fellowship was without a doubt better than the theatrical version. I didn't like the extended version of Two Towers, though. The extras seemed more like unnecessary add-ons, whereas the Fellowship extras enriched the experience.

I am a very patient person, but I've only seen Return of the King once. I'm not going to deprive myself of another viewing until November. If I really, honestly want to see it, then I'm going to see it as soon as possible--which is now. Plus, I don't even know if I'm going to like the extended edition yet, whereas I know I like the theatrical.

FizbansTalking_Hat wrote: according to Mr. Peter Jackson, the extended edition was the one intended to be put into the film. But due to budget constraints and editing time for the movie going audience he pulled those out. In both commentaries so far, he has stated that he prefers the extended edition b/c its a more proper tribute to Tolkien's Vision.

Well, I have neither the time nor the inclination to hunt through the commentary for what Jackson said; besides, I don't have The Two Towers. But I remain defiant in preferring the original version of Fellowship, even though Jackson has perhaps invalidated it somewhat by creating the extended version.

This points again to the thinking that the DVD format is erasing notions that there is a single definitive version of a movie. What is interesting here is the different attitudes we have, depending upon the film. For instance, people weren't amused by George Lucas's tinkering of Star Wars when he created the Special Edition. But with the LOTR films, we show no qualms about Peter Jackson changing scenes around and adding stuff for the Extended Editions.

Why is this? Maybe the LOTR films simply haven't had time to establish themselves as sacred "classics" the way Star Wars has. If the theatrical LOTR films had existed for a long time as a cherished memory, and only then someone decided to tinker with them, I'm guessing there might be an uproar.

Maybe the real reason is that the LOTR films, no matter how great they themselves maybe, will always play second fiddle to the books. So fans don't mind the longer versions of the movies because in their minds the movies don't exist in their own right, they exist only in terms of how faithful they are to the books. So the more, the merrier. I mean, look at the people out there who are screaming bloody murder because the films didn't have Tom Bombadil. Whereas Star Wars definitely exists as a movie in its own right, independent of anything else: because it is the original source, people are reluctant to accept changes to it, unlike the LOTR films.

Matrixman wrote:This points again to the thinking that the DVD format is erasing notions that there is a single definitive version of a movie. What is interesting here is the different attitudes we have, depending upon the film. For instance, people weren't amused by George Lucas's tinkering of Star Wars when he created the Special Edition. But with the LOTR films, we show no qualms about Peter Jackson changing scenes around and adding stuff for the Extended Editions.

Why is this? Maybe the LOTR films simply haven't had time to establish themselves as sacred "classics" the way Star Wars has. If the theatrical LOTR films had existed for a long time as a cherished memory, and only then someone decided to tinker with them, I'm guessing there might be an uproar.

Maybe the real reason is that the LOTR films, no matter how great they themselves maybe, will always play second fiddle to the books. So fans don't mind the longer versions of the movies because in their minds the movies don't exist in their own right, they exist only in terms of how faithful they are to the books. So the more, the merrier. I mean, look at the people out there who are screaming bloody murder because the films didn't have Tom Bombadil. Whereas Star Wars definitely exists as a movie in its own right, independent of anything else: because it is the original source, people are reluctant to accept changes to it, unlike the LOTR films.

Matrixman, you make some very valid points and I agree with a lot of them. I still prefer the extended edition. But you are correct in the DVD format slowly erasing any definitive version of a single movie. We have Criterion Edition, Special Edition, 2 Pack Special Edition, etc... it goes on and on.

Maybe I'm a hypocrite, but Peter Jackson going back and reshooting entire scenes seamlessly to add the extra goodies is a good thing in my book. But what Lucas did with just re-inserting scenes by some editing and etc, seems more harsh.

And you're probably right, it probably raises more eyebrows and uproar b/c he went back and messed with a classic, whereas LOTR is only just becoming a classic. I realize that Lucas didn't have the chance that Peter did with being able to film an extended editoin for fans as they were filming the original. But I dont know, what Lucas did seems so much worse. I hate that he messed with the classics.

Anyways, I'm a fan of both editions, its nice to have both, I'll still watch the regular edition at times when I want a quick movie, but if I want to really sit down and waste some hours and forget for a bit, then I'll pop in the extended and really enjoy them that way. Cheers.

I've got the first one, but I'll get the next one as well.

I bought the theatrical release yesterday. I plan to have an LOTR fest over the memorial day holiday. I will also happily purchase the extended version.