• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

The Lord of the Rings

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,456
Reaction score
1,165
Trophy Points
118
All I can say is, as someone who hadn’t read the books before seeing the movies, I found the theatrical version of Faramir totally lacking. The EE helped with that immensely for me. One of the biggest gripes I had with TTT was the lack of justification for his actions. The EE makes that clear. I don’t think book knowledge should ever be a guiding force when telling a theatrical story. In the theatrical he comes across as you say, but there is no hint of what he has been through, how he has always been in the shadow of his brother in the eyes of his father. In short, he’s a two dimensional character in the theatrical TTT that seems to just serve a narrative purpose. He doesn’t become a realized character until RotK. And I think that’s a mistake.
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,871
Reaction score
2,384
Trophy Points
228
Gaith said:
^ How much development does Faramir really need, though? In the book, he's so pure and incorruptible he says that if he saw the Ring on the ground while out walking, he wouldn't even pick it up. I think all but the most hard-core of book purists would say that would be a bad, tension-wrecking characterization to carry into the movie, but he seems pretty straightforward to me: a younger brother of Boromir, mourning his far more badass sibling and terrified for his kingdom, whose men apprehend Frodo and Sam, and he's tempted to take the Ring. Works just fine for moi without an extended flashback sequence, featuring Sean Bean.

Yeah that flashback is one of the less important additions, nice as it is to see Bean again. It does serve to establish that despite their father's cruelty towards Faramir only, there was zero resentment and only love between the two brothers. Which viewers might otherwise assume there was, since they were pitted against each other for their father's affections. I don't believe this aspect is explored elsewhere. Which gives me a thought I'd not considered before... the urge to always please his father weighs heavy on Boromir and is partly his undoing, where as Faramir is kinda relived of that burden because he's already resigned to the fact that there is nothing he could do to please Denethor, so is prepared to let Frodo go off with the ring and suffer his father's wrath.

I agree the change to make Faramir tempted by the ring was a wise one, as was removing the bit where Sam has a go with it.
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,456
Reaction score
1,165
Trophy Points
118
I finally finished my @"TM2YC" inspired rewatch I watched the EE for RotK, which I vastly prefer. I’m still not a fan of the eagles. One thought I did have is a very slight edit as the ring is destroyed. As it is Gollum is gone the ring is floating in lava and Sam is pleading with Frodo not to give up as he tried to reach him. Sam persuades Frodo to give him his hand and then we cut to the ring melting away. If we reverse those shots it could emphasize that as soon as the ring is gone Frodo’s strength and hope returns. It’s a small thing, but I personally like that better.
 

Masirimso17

Well-known member
Cover Artist
Messages
2,138
Reaction score
239
Trophy Points
93
I'm thinking of marathoning the Middle-Earth films with the girl I like and I want to show them to her the best way possible. I more or less know what I want to do with the Hobbit (like maintaining Tauriel/Kili/Legolas as much as possible as I think the elves and the romance would be the thing that would hook her in the most, plus I really like it anyway) and when it comes to tone/heaviness transition etc. I think starting with the Hobbit is the best bet for us.

As for The Lord of the Rings I don't own them on Blu-Ray like I do the Hobbit (only the PAL Theatrical DVDs) and I can't get both the theatrical and extended box sets on Blu-Ray because A) They're expensive and 2) At this time and situation I can't get them delivered anyway. So I think I'm just going to buy the collections from iTunes (the extended collection is also available on the Turkish store so with that being only around 5 dollars I would have to pay 25 dollars in total :D)

But when it comes to LotR I'm not sure what to do for several reasons. I'm pretty sure I want to edit hybrid cuts of them that stay faithful to the pace/flow of the award winning theatrical versions, but adding the best scenes from the Extended Edition.

I've heard the theatrical editions of Lord of the Rings have terrible quality and the Extended Editions have terrible color grading. For my edits, as EE has better quality apparently, would it be better for me to use EE video with an LUT and TE audio (with color corrected TE video filling in the blanks?) or just TE audio and video (with an LUT) with EE scenes added? Asking because maybe the in between theatrical video might be distracting or a different reason? Although @"TM2YC" reconstructed the Amadeus theatrical edition with low quality DVD footage and it still wasn't too distracting, so probably the first option is better. Which way is more efficient for optimal video quality?

Furthermore, I'm not nearly as familiar with Two Towers and Return of the King as I am with The Hobbit (and Fellowship of the Ring to an extent), so I need help for deciding which scenes to include. I know I'm definitely going to include Saruman's death, mouth of Sauron, Boromir & Faramir flashback, etc. But I need thoughts and recommendations. Which EE scenes amplify the story and make the movies better without too much of it ruining the pace of a theatrical release? For example I'm tempted to include the Wood Elves leaving Middle Earth but that might not be necessary and could affect the flow negatively. I was also thinking of keeping Theodred's funeral as again it is a beautiful scene but I also love the cut from "Where's Theodred?" to him already buried with Theoden holding the Simbelmyne, revealing to the audience (via Gandalf) that his son is dead. (Or was that from the EE as well? If so should I include it?)

I found this article on Screen Rant, https://screenrant.com/lord-of-the-rings-best-deleted-scenes-extended-edition/ but it's not very helpful as most aren't taken from a cinematic perspective but "that was a cool scene I wish they included"

Also apparently there is a romance between Faramir and Eowyn I can't remember, is this worth including?

@"TM2YC" I think your input would be extremely helpful :D
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,871
Reaction score
2,384
Trophy Points
228
Masirimso17 said:
@"TM2YC" I think your input would be extremely helpful :D

Not really got much input to offer because there isn't much in the LotR EE that bothers me enough to want it cut. I could nitpick them all day but they're close enough to perfect that I don't care.

Masirimso17 said:
I've heard the theatrical editions of Lord of the Rings have terrible quality

Yes the blu-rays are sadly lazy upscales of the DVDs. So I'd just stick with your DVDs and save the money.

Masirimso17 said:
and the Extended Editions have terrible color grading.

As @"Gaith" pointed out to me, it's only FotR that looks bad, the other two EE blu-rays look good. You can get fan regrades that fix FotR though.

If I had to guess why it's only FotR that is messed up, I'd guess it's something to do with the era in which the films came out, when the industry was transitioning from 35mm exhibition, to Digital projection. Attack of the Clones was the first big push to digital, 6-months after FotR but 6-months before Two Towers and a year and half before RotK. So maybe they already had HD digital masters of films 2 & 3 but had to go back to the drawing board for film 1... and approached said drawing board with finger paints and crayons :D .
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,456
Reaction score
1,165
Trophy Points
118
I’m of the opinion that, if someone hasn’t read the books (as I hadn’t when I first saw the movies), I’d go with the theatrical FotR, EE TTT, and the theatrical RotK, which I think should’ve ended after Aragorn’s coronation and the “my friends, you bow to no one.” It’s just more theatrical that way. Knowing the books now I get why the endless endings were retained, but if you don’t know the books, it feels tacked on and anti-climactic. I know this won’t be a popular opinion, so bring it on! :D

But now that I’ve seen the movies and read the books, I’d always opt for the EE in all three movies.
 

Gaith

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
5,785
Reaction score
291
Trophy Points
123
It's my understanding that the green tint to the Extended FotR is to make its visuals more in line with the first Hobbit movie, which was made about the same time as the blu-ray transfer.
 
TM2YC said:
Yes the [theatrical] blu-rays are sadly lazy upscales of the DVDs. So I'd just stick with your DVDs and save the money.

Surely you mean "made from the same HD (1080p?) masters the DVDs were sourced from?" All the blu-ray site reviews I can find say the theatrical blus are good enough, especially TTT/RotK, if not amazing. The money consideration is one thing, but it sounds as though the blus are still a clear step up from the DVDs. :)
 

Masirimso17

Well-known member
Cover Artist
Messages
2,138
Reaction score
239
Trophy Points
93
Looking at the Movie Censorships site, I've come up with a list of scenes that I would add to a Hybrid Cut.

The Fellowship of the Ring
  • Theatrical audio & EE visuals with LUT (Theatrical shots used and color corrected if necessary)
  • Scene with Aragorn and Elrond talking about Aragorn's mother
  • Gandalf mentions that Gollum used to be called Smeagol
  • Galadriel gives the Fellowship special Elvish cloaks (it explains how Frodo & Sam are invisible to the Mordor guards in the Two Towers)
  • May or may not include Legolas explaining lembas bread to Merry & Pippin and the joke about Pippin eating 4 of them. It's funny, and it explains how Frodo/Sam are surviving on a few Lembas loafs on the way to Mordor, but it is also unnecessary and I kind of like the idea that, when the audience doesn't know how filling Lembas is, it feels harsher and more difficult watching Frodo and Sam rationing just a few loafs of Elvish bread for the road. What do you guys think?
  • Galadriel speaks to Aragorn about Arwen (I don't think I'd include the other gifts of Galadriel)
  • Aragorn & Boromir argue by the lake about going to Minas Tirith-- Boromir accuses Aragorn of abandoning his kin
The Two Towers
  • Theatrical audio & EE visuals with LUT (Theatrical shots used and color corrected if necessary)
  • "Real elvish rope" scene as it explains why Gollum feels pain when tied to the rope. I could include Galadriel's gift to Sam in Fellowship but I think it's better to have it explained closer to the aforementioned Gollum scene, plus I really like the roast chicken dialogue not because it's funny and opens the film well with a little humor but also because it's a further reminder of how far from home they are (similar to the scene at the beginning of Return of the King)
  • Orcs talking whether they should take the Hobbits to Mordor or Isengard (I like how there is some sort of rivalry here between Sauron and Saruman since as much of an ally as Saruman is to Sauron, the wizard will also be his greatest threat to complete world domination when he wins the war, and I want Saruman to have kind of his own agenda)
  • Speaking of which, I will be trimming Saruman saying gullible things like "We shall rule this Middle Earth together"
  • Adding "They think we have the ring!" although I think I will cut Ugluk saying they have "an Elvish weapon" as I think it muddles things a little bit
  • Faramir's short speech before saying "Bind their hands!" to the captured Hobbits
  • Maybe add Theodred's funeral, what do you guys think?
  • Introduction to Brego the horse
  • Eowyn and Aragorn talk about his age and his being one of the Dunedain
  • Faramir's vision of Boromir on the river
  • Osgiliath flashback with Boromir
  • Eowyn tells Aragorn she wants to fight at Helm's Deep
  • Use the theatrical establishing shot that doesn't have Minas Tirith in the background of Isengard because apparently it is confusing and people think it's Helm's Deep
  • Final kill count (might cut "nervous system" mention but I dunno, I like the delivery)
  • Frodo & Sam say farewell to Faramir
The Return of the King
  • Theatrical audio & EE visuals with LUT (Theatrical shots used and color corrected if necessary)
  • Saruman's death
  • Drinking game
  • Denethor argues with Faramir about Boromir's loyalty
  • Faramir & Pippin talk
  • Mouth of Sauron
  • Added portraits of Sir Christopher Lee and Brad Daurif to the credits
Do you guys agree with these inclusions or would you take some out/add some more? What do you think about the things I'm unsure about? Hope talking edit concepts in a general movies thread isn't off topic as I was wondering how adding certain EE scenes to the theatrical cut would affect the films
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,456
Reaction score
1,165
Trophy Points
118
Sounds good to me. I’ve stated this before, but when initially saw TTT I hadn’t read the books and I thought Faramir was very underdeveloped. So I’m for including all his EE scenes. The omission of some of Galadriel’s gifts never bothered me but I like it when I watch the EE which is all I do now. Finally I have to agree with Sir Christopher that Saruman’s death should never have been cut in the first place.
 

DigModiFicaTion

DᴉმWoqᴉԷᴉcɑꓕᴉou
Staff member
Faneditor
Messages
8,609
Reaction score
3,509
Trophy Points
168
I smiled the entire time, laughed out loud throughout, and even shed a tear or two at times during this. Without a doubt, The Lord of The Rings is one of the greatest productions ever.
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,871
Reaction score
2,384
Trophy Points
228
Time to follow up a re-watch of the LotR trilogy, with a re-watch of the Hobbit...

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)
No wonder Peter Jackson was prepared to arrange production on The Hobbit around Martin Freeman's other commitments because it's difficult to imagine anybody more perfect as Bilbo Baggins. Every little nervous hand gesture and facial tick brings the character to life without him needing to speak a word of Tolkien's dialogue. It's a shame he's too often overshadowed by lumbering spectacle, too many characters and a wildly inconsistent tone. The comedy songs, fart jokes, Ori's lisp and pathetic slingshot, Nori being a kleptomaniac, Bifur having an axe in his head and Radagast's f**king rabbit sleigh were stupid elements that derailed the movie. The attempt to give all 13 Dwarves their own distinct personalities, weapons, silhouettes, skill-sets, hairdos and moments to "shine" just ends up with them often being a confused, cacophonous, annoying and very silly group. To me, only Balin, Dwalin and Gloin actually look like my conception of traditional Dwarf warriors (the way Gimli absolutely did in LotR). Making Thorin initially distrust and dislike Bilbo, then for him to respect the Hobbit because of his deeds was a decent idea for their character arcs across this movie, in theory but it wasn't followed up on in the next two films. Ian McKellen is once again perfect as Gandalf. His speech about "ordinary folk" is as powerful as anything in LotR. This time I noticed Jackson has framed him against the rising sun, so it appears Gandalf has a halo. It's moments like that where Jackson still shows his craft as a filmmaker, when he's not getting lost in his CGI sandbox. There is a noticeable crispness and artistry to the FX shots in AUJ, that the two sequels lacked. I suspect they were just in less of a rush to hit deadlines in this first phase of post-production. AUJ has some truly epic helicopter shots of our heroes marching over the tops of New Zealand's mountains, set to Howard Shore's music. It's that location filming in NZ which can make these movies feel grounded and this trilogy doesn't have enough of that. 'An Unexpected Journey' is an enjoyable adventure overall but it's no 'The Fellowship of the Ring'.

(FYI: I watched my own "Entirely Respectable" fanedit but the review is my feelings about the original cut)

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,871
Reaction score
2,384
Trophy Points
228
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)
'The Desolation of Smaug' is the weakest and longest of the Hobbit trilogy, much like it's characters, it's lost and uncertain of where to go. Unfortunately when faced with a lack of direction in his story, Peter Jackson tries to paper over it with tons of CGI nonsense, fight scenes, overblown emotions and ill-judged humour. There's also the feeling of some sections being a Frankenstein creation, stitching together the pieces of when this was supposed to be two films. There's that scene when the company first meet Bard that looks like it was hastily shot by an intern against a green screen on the morning the film was released, with the actors doing their own hair and makeup. There's that terrible unfinished looking gold statue FX too. If PJ had directed his energies (and the film's budget) into finessing character moments and story structure, instead of into inventing the exhausting, ridiculous and pointless 20-minute forge sequence (or the over elaborate barrel ride), he might've ended up with a more successful film. The company petulantly giving up at the hidden door, Bombur turning into a whirling barrel tank and the misjudged humour between the Master and Alfrid were all low points. That's not to say I don't enjoy the film, it's got many plus points too. Tauriel's a great new character and her "starlight" theme music is one of the best pieces Howard Shore wrote for the trilogy. All the business involving Gandalf, Radagast and Sauron is pretty damned epic.  It's nice to have Orlando Bloom back as Legolas because he's got some awesome fight moves. Luke Evans makes a striking and likeable hero as Bard the Bowman. Martin Freeman continues to be wonderful as Bilbo.  Some of the little comic gestures he makes, like when Bilbo is left alone after the barrel escape are worth the re-watch alone.

(FYI: Again, I watched my own "Entirely Respectable" fanedit but the review is my feelings about the original cut)

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,871
Reaction score
2,384
Trophy Points
228
The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (2014)
The Hobbit trilogy didn't turn out as well as 'The Lord of the Rings', so this final part felt like a bit of an obligation on the viewer, rather than a finale you'd really looked forward to seeing. Still I thought it was perhaps the best of the three. It doesn't have the tonal inconsistencies of the first film and it doesn't have the wobbly sensation that Peter Jackson and the writers were flailing around trying to figure out where the hell the story focus should be like in the middle chapter. You can tell that Jackson is reveling in the opportunity to play with his $300 million box of toy soldiers. It's testament to his skills as a filmmaker that he makes what is mostly a big long battle constantly entertaining, filling the screen with visual imagination and spectacle. I'd compare it to the accomplishment of George Miller's movie-long chase in 'Mad Max: Fury Road', although of course I'm not comparing the overall quality of the two films. Sure Jackson succumbed to some of the same CGI brain rot as George Lucas but to compare the two Directors is madness. Look no further than the visual symbolism he employs when the armored Dwarves march between Bilbo and Thorin as the former is trying to argue the latter out of going to war, or the scene where Bilbo and Gandalf just sit in total silence exchanging glances but no words, yet the meaning is so clear. Jackson also shows the same command of editing and direction he demonstrated in the battle of Helm's Deep. Despite thousands of CGI creatures flying everywhere, you always know exactly where his characters are, what their goals are and understand the stakes of the fight.

(FYI: Once again I watched my own "Entirely Respectable" fanedit but the review are my feelings about the original cut)

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,871
Reaction score
2,384
Trophy Points
228
Peter Jackson on the new 4K versions:


As I thought, he appears to confirm that the awful look that FotR:EE had on blu-ray was because it was handled differently at a time when the industry was transitioning between analogue and digital.  The talk about giving everything a "consistent look" sounds suspect but these new 4K trailers appear to look very good and FotR definitely looks dramatically better.  The aggressive teal tint that the Saruman scenes had in FotR:EE are gone (assuming the trailers are accurate).  If he changed the Hobbit to look like LotR, I'd be okay with that to be honest ;) .

The 6 new official 4K trailers:





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAo95e7_XKA[/video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRg2QEeBLuY[/video]
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,871
Reaction score
2,384
Trophy Points
228
The comparison shot of Saruman at 09.10 in this video looks very encouraging, the mint green tint is gone in FotR:

 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,456
Reaction score
1,165
Trophy Points
118
So are these the versions that are currently up on iTunes to buy? It says 4K but there’s no fanfare indicating that they are new versions.
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,456
Reaction score
1,165
Trophy Points
118
I watched the new 4K versions of the extended editions over the past two weeks. I found the effects actually looked worse for the first two movies. The CGI stood out more and things in general looked poorly composited. I think the colors look better but the effects in this version feel more dated. However, it didn’t seem as bad in RotK.
 

revel911

Well-known member
Messages
1,080
Reaction score
60
Trophy Points
48
Moe_Syzlak said:
I watched the new 4K versions of the extended editions over the past two weeks. I found the effects actually looked worse for the first two movies. The CGI stood out more and things in general looked poorly composited. I think the colors look better but the effects in this version feel more dated. However, it didn’t seem as bad in RotK.

The movies are 20 years old, was pretty freaking great back then.
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,456
Reaction score
1,165
Trophy Points
118
revel911 said:
Moe_Syzlak said:
I watched the new 4K versions of the extended editions over the past two weeks. I found the effects actually looked worse for the first two movies. The CGI stood out more and things in general looked poorly composited. I think the colors look better but the effects in this version feel more dated. However, it didn’t seem as bad in RotK.

The movies are 20 years old, was pretty freaking great back then.

Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough. I watched the previous release (the Blu Ray versions) within the past year. I didn’t think that release looked nearly as dated as these new 4K releases, at least for the first two movies. So, in summary, my opinion is the new 4K releases are an improvement in terms of color grading but are of diminished quality in terms of effects compositing. It has nothing to do with how old the movies are.
 
Top Bottom