LOTR ROTK news...

bandit29 · November 8, 2003

http://www.theonering.net/staticnews/1068240351.html

Uxi · November 8, 2003

Heh. About what I was expecting... though I think it's more appropriate to be on the Two Towers EE. Hopefully that will get fixed if/when they're released in a special set (Super EE?) sometime...

Isamu Atreides 86 · November 8, 2003

so Jackson cut out an integral part of the movie to bolster DVD sales.

go capitalism..... <_<

Mr March · November 8, 2003

I'm fine with that. As a filmmaker myself, I totally understand Jackson's reasons not to dwell on the previous film and set up the hereto mysterious Sauron as the main villain he actually is.

azrael · November 8, 2003

I'm fine with that. As a filmmaker myself, I totally understand Jackson's reasons not to dwell on the previous film and set up the hereto mysterious Sauron as the main villain he actually is.

I agree. I can understand if that scene is going to slow the pace of the theater version (although you don't feel those 3 hours...). If it's going to be saved for the EE DVD, that's even better. Not like I've been buying the theater versions on DVD anyways.

GobotFool · November 8, 2003

I'm fine with that. As a filmmaker myself, I totally understand Jackson's reasons not to dwell on the previous film and set up the hereto mysterious Sauron as the main villain he actually is.

I agree. I can understand if that scene is going to slow the pace of the theater version (although you don't feel those 3 hours...). If it's going to be saved for the EE DVD, that's even better. Not like I've been buying the theater versions on DVD anyways.

I concure. While I prefere EE of Fellowship its pacing was slightly off. Problem with movie limitations is we can not have it all. Something will always have to be cut sadly I may not be happy but I can understand the reasoning. Also thats going to make people want the EE even more. So the reasons are probably a mix of art and economics.

eriku · November 8, 2003

so Jackson cut out an integral part of the movie to bolster DVD sales.
go capitalism..... <_<

That is not the implication he made at all. You have to remember that Joe Citizen is out watching these films too, and that Jackson has to take the general movie-going public into consideration when he's deciding on the final theatrical cut. Us geeky fanboys don't make up the majority of the people watching these things. By cutting out stuff like that it ensures that Joe Citizen will get more enjoyment out of the film because he wont have to sit there so long. And through the wonderful medium of DVD us geeky fanboys can have OUR version of the films too. It's win-win.

As for being an integral part of the movie, it really isn't. It's a cool segment and I can't wait to see the film representation of it, but I think it's great that it was cut out since it didn't really belong in ROTK in the first place. The only thing that bugs me a little is that the scene should be on the EE of TTT. Now, the Scouring of the Shire IS an integral part of the story, as it shows that Hobbiton really is vulnerable. I can see why it wouldn't play out well in the theaters, but Peter really should have filmed it even if just for the DVD. Think of the extra copies they'd sell with a "Includes ALL NEW ENDING!" sticker. Hell, maybe he has a surprise in store for us. There is a bit of the Scouring in Frodo's Lothlorien visions...

Edited November 8, 2003 by eriku

Blaine23 · November 8, 2003

Big whoop... I agree with Jackson. It doesn't fit well with the movie, so it doesn't need to be in the movie. The same thing goes for everything he's cut out thus far.

And trust me... capitalism is MUCH more concerned with movie ticket sales than DVD sales. Just like the movie studios themselves.

KingNor · November 8, 2003

so Jackson cut out an integral part of the movie to bolster DVD sales.
go capitalism.....

what a simple minded view.

as for cutting things, in my opinion each volume of lotr should have been made into two movies, one for each "book" but i can see why things need to get cut.

it looks to me like they are setting it up to show frodo that the shire being defiled was a reality he averted by destroying the ring.

what i'm really worried about is if their going to have aragorn hook up with eowin (the rohan girl, can't spell today)

GobotFool · November 8, 2003

so Jackson cut out an integral part of the movie to bolster DVD sales.
go capitalism.....

what a simple minded view.

as for cutting things, in my opinion each volume of lotr should have been made into two movies, one for each "book" but i can see why things need to get cut.

it looks to me like they are setting it up to show frodo that the shire being defiled was a reality he averted by destroying the ring.

what i'm really worried about is if their going to have aragorn hook up with eowin (the rohan girl, can't spell today)

Best of my knowledge, the rohan chick will be with farimir still.

bsu legato · November 8, 2003

Meh....It's not like ROTK isn't already going to have a long running time. Stuff gets cut from movies all the time, so why should LOTR be immune to it? Besides, it'll be on the EE:DVD for the completist so why complain?

CoryHolmes · November 9, 2003

Because this is MacrossWorld, and complaining about every little detail that doesn't fit the true fan's ideas of what things should be is the only thing that occurs in any regular basis here?

GobotFool · November 9, 2003

Because this is MacrossWorld, and complaining about every little detail that doesn't fit the true fan's ideas of what things should be is the only thing that occurs in any regular basis here?

LOL! So true. But thats how it is with any fan forum community. Someone makes something kickass, someone complains, thus another fan-angst thread is started :rolleyes:

Isamu Atreides 86 · November 9, 2003

i'm just saying, where are the cuts gonna stop? Sam and Frodo escaping the Orc tower? with the battle before the gates? the cleansing of the shire? Frodo and Bilbo leaving for the Havens? how much is jackson willing to cut just to make this film "pleasing" to all the viewers with ADD who can't seem to wanna sit through a proper tellling of a cultural treasure?

I have been, and continue to be a huge fan of the films, but how many cuts to the story are they gonna make?

CoryHolmes · November 9, 2003

You know, there are those of us that don't like the books, but enjoy the movies greatly.

Given what little I've read of Fellowship, I'm extremely pleased with the changes made by Jackson.

bsu legato · November 9, 2003

I understand your concerns, Isamu. But a 4 hour film is pretty tough for many people to sit through, even with an intermission. Take it from me, as I was once dragged to that full length version of Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet. Watching something like that in the comfort of your living room is one thing, but in a crowded theater even I start to look at my watch hopig it's almost over.

Also, theaters in general don't like longer movies. It cuts down on the number of $howing$ they can sqeeze into a day, if you catch my meaning.

Mr March · November 9, 2003

i'm just saying, where are the cuts gonna stop? Sam and Frodo escaping the Orc tower? with the battle before the gates? the cleansing of the shire? Frodo and Bilbo leaving for the Havens? how much is jackson willing to cut just to make this film "pleasing" to all the viewers with ADD who can't seem to wanna sit through a proper tellling of a cultural treasure?
I have been, and continue to be a huge fan of the films, but how many cuts to the story are they gonna make?

I would be much less critical of the film's length and more critical of the film as a whole. Attention Deficit Disorder aside, we Tolkien fans should feel damn lucky we are getting theatrical releases of the Lord of the Rings films that are as lengthy as they are. Any other film would have been criticized as too long and boring (which many non-fans are still calling LOTR) but luckily LOTR gets away with it. However, Jackson knows he's stretched audience attention to its limits and is aware that he cannot shove all the books in a film...no one can.

Also, the film has to be marketable. Sorry to say this, but films need mass appeal. We have not yet reached a point where the population can make a film profitable based on fanboy attendance alone. Films like Wing Commander, Final Fantasy, and numerous other examples prove that. So LOTR, for better or worse, must work as a piece of commercial entertainment first and foremost. If Jackson can bend the rules as far as he can without breaking them and satisfy as many fanboys as possible with the quality and detail of the story, consider that a victory.

Edited November 9, 2003 by Mr March

EXO · November 10, 2003

I was trying to avoid this thread for the fear of spoilers but Cinescape had it in one of it's headlines. I'm glad I read it though, or else I would be saying WTF during the movie. Idiotic move if you ask me. Not that he's cutting it out of ROTK but he cut it out of TT. And now after admitting that it doesn't belong in ROTK he's still going to splice it in the EE version. If I was him I would release the scene on the internet and on shows like Entertainment Tonight or something. he not only owes to Tolkien fans , he owes it to the casual viewers. All in all, I'm still happy with the movies, but to cut out Christopher Lee seemed like a dick move.

Agent ONE · November 10, 2003

I was trying to avoid this thread for the fear of spoilers but Cinescape had it in one of it's headlines. I'm glad I read it though, or else I would be saying WTF during the movie. Idiotic move if you ask me. Not that he's cutting it out of ROTK but he cut it out of TT. And now after admitting that it doesn't belong in ROTK he's still going to splice it in the EE version. If I was him I would release the scene on the internet and on shows like Entertainment Tonight or something. he not only owes to Tolkien fans , he owes it to the casual viewers. All in all, I'm still happy with the movies, but to cut out Christopher Lee seemed like a dick move.

Christopher Lee's character isn't really important in the thrid installment... he has already been beaten. If he shows up in the book, it is only because he was in the other two stories, not because he adds anything. Who cares. The movie will be awesome anyway.

EXO · November 10, 2003

So, as a casual viewer, am I just assume that he's sitting there in his Tower afraid to come out because of all the walking trees outside ready to give him the beat down? Hehe...

I'll wait for the movie and see how they explain it... :lol:

bsu legato · November 10, 2003

So, as a casual viewer, am I just assume that he's sitting there in his Tower afraid to come out because of all the walking trees outside ready to give him the beat down? Hehe...

You overestimate the IQ of the casual viewer, I'm afraid. I bet Joe Average couldn't even tell you "Evil Tower Guy's" name, let alone the actor who played him. Heck, they've probably forgotten about him already. Two Towers was an entire year ago....that's a long time to remember the plot of a movie, you know.

The casual viewer just wants to wedge his/her lardass into the theater seat and watch the pretty eye-candy for 3 hours, all the while cramming popcorn and milk duds into their craw. Please don't ask them to think too much.

Blaine23 · November 10, 2003

Like I said before, Peter Jackson is going to make the movie he is going to make and his instincts have been dead on thus far, in my opinion (and most of the audience opinion - judging by the grosses of the previous films).

Here is a statement he made to Aint It Cool news -

Saruman thing you describe is a muddle of half-truths.
We have decided to save the Saruman sequence for the DVD. It's a great little scene. 7 mins long. Chris is wonderful, as usual. Brad is in about 6 shots. It was a film maker decision - nothing to do with the studio.

The problem is that the sequence was originally shot for The Two Towers, as it is in the book. Since The Two Towers couldn't sustain a 7 min "wrap" after Helm's Deep, we thought it would be a good idea to save it for the beginning of the Return of the King. The trouble is, when we viewed various ROTK cuts over the last few weeks, it feels like the first scenes are wrapping last year's movie, instead of starting the new one. We felt it got ROTK off to an uncertain beginning, since Saruman plays no role in the events of ROTK (we don't have the Scouring later, as the book does), yet we dwell in Isengard for quite a long time before our new story kicks off.

We reluctantly made the decision to save this sequence for the DVD. The choice was made on the basis that most people will assume that Saruman was vanquished by the Helm's Deep events, and Ent attack. We can now crack straight into setting up the narrative tension of ROTK, which features Sauron as the villian.

It was a very similar situation to last year when we decided to take a nice Boromir/Denethor flashback out of The Two Towers, and put it in the DVD. It was causing us pacing problems in the theatrical version, but with the Extended Cut just coming out now, fans can see this great little scene. Thank God for DVD, since it does mean that a version of the movie, which has different pacing requirements, can be released later. The Saruman sequence will definately be a highlight of the Extended ROTK DVD.

We have a lot of great DVD material this time around. As we crafted the movie, we reduced it from an over 4 hour running time, down to 3.12 (without credits - about 8 mins long). This was done by us. There were no studio cutting notes. We now have a movie with a pace that fells ok for it's theatrical release. One more week to go. We are nearly there. Will we still be standing? It's going to be a close run thing.

Cheers,

Peter J

I dunno, it makes perfect sense to me. Those who don't like changes made to the movie from the books should probably just stick to reading the books, since they'll never be happy anyway.

Isamu Atreides 86 · November 10, 2003

like i said: great, no purging of the shire.....

:angry:

EXO · November 10, 2003

Me wanna see evil Tower guy... Evil tower guy has cool floors!

Like I said, weird move, but I've enjoyed the movies so far and excited about the last one. The news just struck me as odd.

Go Joe Average!!!

Agent ONE · November 10, 2003

Me wanna see evil Tower guy... Evil tower guy has cool floors!
Like I said, weird move, but I've enjoyed the movies so far and excited about the last one. The news just struck me as odd.

Go Joe Average!!!

You are watching the family learning channel.

bsu legato · November 10, 2003

Hey! That's the kid from Billy's Balloon!

Edited November 10, 2003 by bsu legato

Mr March · November 10, 2003

Me wanna see evil Tower guy... Evil tower guy has cool floors!
Like I said, weird move, but I've enjoyed the movies so far and excited about the last one. The news just struck me as odd.

Go Joe Average!!!

LOL

I'm sure ROTK will be great.

GobotFool · November 10, 2003

like i said: great, no purging of the shire.....

I don't see why its all that important to be honest.

Isamu Atreides 86 · November 11, 2003

its the end of the war of the ring. its Frodo and his friends homecoming. its when they show everyone around them the heroes they've become. merry and Pippin establish themselves as soldiers of the west, and note the coming of the King of the West.

that and Grima and Saruman get what they deserve.

bsu legato · November 11, 2003

I always thought that the "scouring" bit was really anti-climactic. It's been over a decade since I read LOTR, but I recall Saruman was nearly reduced to the level of a Scooby Doo villain, which wasn't really a satisfactory end for a character of his (former) stature.

I for one won't miss the scouring.

Blaine23 · November 11, 2003

I always thought that the "scouring" bit was really anti-climactic. It's been over a decade since I read LOTR, but I recall Saruman was nearly reduced to the level of a Scooby Doo villain, which wasn't really a satisfactory end for a character of his (former) stature.
I for one won't miss the scouring.

"And I would have gotten away with it, too! If it hadn't have been for you meddling hobbitts!"

Agreed. The whole "Sharkey" bit was out of place, IMHO. Still it was nice seeing the former most powerful wizard in Middle-Earth get trounced by a bunch of wee peoples.

The movie should really peak at Mount Doom and wrap up with the ships leaving for distant shores.

yellowlightman · November 11, 2003

Sometimes I got a better deal since I have yet to read the original books. Granted, the 'purists' criticize me for never having read them, but all the same I think it allowed me to enjoy the movies a lot more. I know if I had read them, I'd probably be too busy finding fault with the movies to really enjoy them.

For once it pays to be part of the uneducated masses. :lol:

Uxi · November 11, 2003

Saruman's end was an important part of his character arc, though it did mess with the pacing of the book. His failure to find redemption (and Frodo giving him the chance and foiling his revenge) was necessary. His end, complete with the ghost/spirit rising over his body and looking towards the West before being blown away was a sign that as Frodo said, he was of a greater order than they were and was once good.

The natural ending point of the movie is with the Fields of Cormallen (sp?), Aragorn's crowning and marriage to Arwen. I'm expecting we'll see the ringbearers depart, not in a couple years after like in the books, but literally leaving Gondor to the ships. Again, typical weird Tolkien pacing versus something more appropriate to the movie venue.

bsu legato · November 11, 2003

His end, complete with the ghost/spirit rising over his body and looking towards the West before being blown away was a sign that as Frodo said, he was of a greater order than they were and was once good

You see...I didn't even remember that part. I agree that's the way his demise should have been handled, but I just thought it's placement in the book was a bit off. Tolkien should have wrapped up his story arc at the end of Two Towers.

Mr March · November 11, 2003

Sometimes I got a better deal since I have yet to read the original books. Granted, the 'purists' criticize me for never having read them, but all the same I think it allowed me to enjoy the movies a lot more. I know if I had read them, I'd probably be too busy finding fault with the movies to really enjoy them.
For once it pays to be part of the uneducated masses.

I think it's great you love the films. I do believe the books are better because, as a huge fan, the books simply give me so much more of my beloved story than any other format such as film. I did read the books before the films, but luckily I'm also a huge fan of film and a filmmaker myself. The movies are exceptional work and are great as films despite the fantastic story adapted by Peter Jackson.

Anyway, don't be worried about what the whining, complaining "purists" might say. Enjoy the films and I encourage you to read the books if you want some more. Unwahsed masses is where it's at

Sign In

LOTR ROTK news...

Recommended Posts

bandit29

Uxi

Isamu Atreides 86

Mr March

azrael

GobotFool

eriku

Blaine23

KingNor

GobotFool

bsu legato

CoryHolmes

GobotFool

Isamu Atreides 86

CoryHolmes

bsu legato

Mr March

EXO

Agent ONE

EXO

bsu legato

Blaine23

Isamu Atreides 86

EXO

Agent ONE

bsu legato

Mr March

GobotFool

Isamu Atreides 86

bsu legato

Blaine23

yellowlightman

Uxi

bsu legato

Mr March

Join the conversation

Activity