Page 1 of This multi disc Lord of the Rings Set - why didn`t they bring this out in the first place?

Fortunately, I didn`t buy LotR when it first came out on DVD but I must admit I`d be pretty pi**ed off if I had now that they have brought out this multi disc set.

Why didn`t they just bring this set out in the first place?

Cashing in on the Lord of the Rings phenom.. (sorry can`t spell phenomena) ?

Dave

This item was edited on Monday, 11th November 2002, 00:15

because its a collectors style edition, the movie is on 2 discs, this is a turn off to some people also its 4 discs in total, which cost`s more then your average 15.99 at ASDA DVD, so there is no reason to be p*ssed off.

One is for the avergae movie watcher and the other is for collectors.

Yeh I read about a 4-disc box set being planned for a release sometime after the normal 2-disc version! I still havent seen the film yet but have had to put off buying the first release due to this new one coming out!!!

Knowing my luck I`ll pay 30 odd quid for it and will hate the film!!

Both versions were well publicised long before the release of either. This new, four disc set is aimed at total LOTR nutters, who want an extra 30 mins of film (and we don`t know if that`s a good thing yet), DTS sound, loads of commentaries, 2 discs worth of specially created geeky extras and don`t mind swapping discs half way through the film.

It also cots £30, which is a bit more than the average punter will pay for a DVD on the high street (which, lets face it, is still where most people buy their DVDs). For once I`m not p***ed off, as they made a decent effort to inform people of their intentions. What really does p*** me off is a release like Shrek, where R2 consumers are given an over-priced, cut down version of the film, only for a "special Edition" to be released a while later at a price that`s tantamount to theft. And what do we get for our £27? DTS, a second disc with a pan and scan version of the film, some kiddies extras and a CD soundtrack. So, the same as the original R1 disc (bar the soundtrack) that cost £14 when I bought it? Great deal that one... These are the people who deserve your contempt, not the people that made LOTR, who actually seem genuinely passionate about the project.

I read in SFX, who are really picky when it comes to big blockbuster movies has said that the extended version is much better than the theatrical version of the film and is literally 100% to the book.

So if SFX say its excellent then it must be worth it, because that magazine has the most nit picky bunch of reviewers in the world.

I think the reason they didn`t bring it out in the first place, is because of so much information etc that needs to be put on to 4 discs, and besides not everyone has seen the theatrical version on the cinema, so why not bring it out first so everyone will have a chance to see it. because the theatrical version is 178 min, and the extended version is a ball breaking 208 min

Also I think its to beat piracy as well so they rush release it, then concentrate on putting all the extras and stuff on the 4 disc collection.
Besides not only is peter jackson overseeing the extra footage on Fellowship of the ring, he`s also overseeing the latest installment of the Lord of the rings trilogy.

The Extended Edition DVD includes the following changes to the film.

More time with the Hobbits including a musical number. Extra scene
further underscores the Hobbits sense of isolation and the growing realization that they can`t ignore the outside world for much longer.

Frodo and Sam POV watching the elves going to the "Undying Land".

When the Hobbits are sleeping, Frodo is awakened by Aragorn`s singing of an elvish tune that foreshadow`s his relationship with Arwen.

More at Rivendell with Aragorn.

More on the departure of the Fellowship from Rivendel.

More in the Mines before the cave troll fight.

As the Fellowship leaves, Galadriel gives them each a personalized gift
that will end up being critical to their future. Legolas gets a special bow,
Sam gets some elvin rope that comes in handy when he faces ************ in The Two Towers, and a touching moment between Gimli and Galadriel.

More violence in the ending battle (yessssssssssssssss)

Floyd

Let`s not be too kind to the Man...

Everything people have said about the reasons for having two versions is true. However, the main reason for releasing the Extended Edition now IS to make more money. If they wanted to be nice to the fans, they would have released both at the same time, then we could all have made our choice and been happy campers. As it is, plenty of people will have bought it twice (yup, this does happen)... Also there will be many more people giving the higher-margin Extended Edition for Christmas now, so yet more money.

But then, this is reality we live in, and no-one gets ahead in business by being nice to everyone. Although having to wait for the version I want is a pain, it was made a bit more bearable by the quality of the product. This is the film the way Peter Jackson wanted it - that extra half hour would have put a lot of people off in the cinema. You have to consider sore bums and the average audience`s attention span! I`d love to see more films released this way - the "blockbuster version" for the cinema, and the "completist`s version" on DVD. Let`s just have a shorter gap between release dates!

I would have been mightily upset if this version had been released with no forewarning, but as it is I`ve known about the two different cuts since day one. Those who wanted the extended edition but couldn`t wait the three months have no willpower ;) I As it is, I have the theatrical and extended cuts, mostly because my girlfriend loves the film. She wanted the theatrical cut back in August for Legolas, whereas I held out for the extended edition because of DTS, commentaries and extras. Everybody`s happy. I made a conscious decision to buy both versions, and find it hard to believe that others felt compelled to buy both because they were impatient.

Not that I disagree with much of what you said, BTW.

"I read in SFX, who are really picky when it comes to big blockbuster movies has said that the extended version is much better than the theatrical version of the film and is literally 100% to the book"

this is not true actually. if it was then 1) the hobbits would have just sat in the shire for about 6 months before setting off for rivendell and 2) we would have been forced to endure huge amounts of singing from tom bombadil (although he does have a bigger part to play later on so maybe we will see him then).

but im just nit-picking really. mr. jackson did a superb job of bringing LOTR to the screens and everyone has known about the 4 disc version for ages so i dont really see that it is a valid complaint to be honest.

yeah but tom bombadil was a pointless piece of wafflle who served no purpose to the story. I and thousand others was glad he wasn`t in the film.

Floyd

Poor Tom - he got left out of the BBC radio adaptation too! (and the animated film!!) Heh, heh!!

This item was edited on Tuesday, 12th November 2002, 16:05