Lord of the Rings

Get Both.

The 2 Disc version out now contains the Theatrical Version of the film and a bunch of extras that won't be on the Extended Edition set.

If you want both versions of the film and all the extras, you'll want both.

After seriously debating with myself for about 2 minutes I came to the conculsion of getting both.

I feel so far it has been worth it.

I though PJ said that there was no R rated material, because the movie was never intended to be rated R and you don't waste time and money shooting footage that you don't intend to use. Unless by rated R you mean footage that just didn't make it into either the theatrical or special edition for whatever reason.

Jackson was always shooting for a PG-13, for himself and contractually for New Line. He's debunked the R-rated rumour about 4000 times in the last year.

no R rated stuff on the Extended Edition. there's some more fighting scenes put back in it, but nothing bloodier than was in the original film (mind you, it did feature two on-screen beheadings, an arrow piercing an eye, etc.). for example, there's been a few additions to the fightscene between Aragorn and Lurtz, the Uruk Hai captain. the guy who played him did say that they did shoot some heavier stuff for that one, but that it didn't make the final cut, and wouldn't appear on the Extended Edition either. one thing that did make it back in was Lurtz licking his own blood off Aragorn's knife after he pulls it out of his leg...

Dude. PJ has talked about the extended version. He has stated he never shot R-rated scenes, because the movie was always meant to be PG-13. Both the Theatrical and Extended one. The stuff he is putting back in is more stuff from the book ie more Shire stuff, the Elven gift-giving etc. It's not going to be R-rated. PETER JACKSON has said this.

Yea but a certain guy at a certain Ranch says ome stuff too and, well we know how that ends up!

I got my LOTR DVD for $15 at Fry's.

Count me in as one who will be getting the four disk package in November.

Can't wait for all the goodies

I'm holding out for the extended edition. A rental of the theatrical cut will do fine for now. I'm not interested in the promo-extras they're offering, and I doubt I'll ever watch the theatrical cut after I own the extended version. Too bad, because November is still a ways off.

Really??? May I ask why?

Listen folks, no matter how great a film is adding 30 minutes to it does not automatically make it better.

These will be two completely different cuts, and thus, two films. And even Peter Jackson himself has openly claimed that he prefers the Theatrical Cut (that's the reason why the Extended Edition isn't called a "Director's Cut").

I actually read somewhere that the first cut of the film clocked in at 4 and half hours. I guess that only 30 minutes of that cut hour and half is coming to the Extended Edition. That's kind of upsetting because I'd love to see all the cut material.

That's internet/urban legend and not true. In fact, most of the added footage in the Extended Edition had to be finished and was done so especially for the DVD release, ala the Deleted Scenes on the TPM DVD.

Jackson has repeatedly denied the existence of a 4 hour cut or Rated R version of the film.

My bad. Thanks Carl.

In terms of the extended cut, I thought Almost Famous: Untitled would be better than the theatrical. No dice. It's worse. Longer, fatter, and uncut. Theatrical cut is so much better.

Carl is right. 30 extra minutes does not make the movie automatically better. I think though that the movie will become better.

But the extended version is definitely the director´s cut. Peter is lying when he says he prefers the theatrical cut. Peter´s prefered cut was originally 3 hours and 17 minutes but New Line said to him that the movie had to be under 3 hours. He had to agree(New line is the boss).

The added footage will not make it two completely different movies. The plot, the characters, their motivations, the themes will all remain the same. I could be wrong, but I doubt that the differences will be as drastic as the different versions of Brazil or Blade Runner.

I will inevitably prefer one over the other. If that happens to be the theatrical cut, then I'll just sell off my extended edition and buy the theatrical cut which will likely be spilling over in Blockbuster's $10 previously viewed bin.

I'm not discouraging anyone from purchasing the theatrical edition. There's no right or wrong about this. I just know that if I own both, one of them will inevitably wind up collecting dust.

I figured this was the best place to post this.  Don't see anyone else mentioning this, or a better spot for it:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Lord-Rings-Picture-Trilogy-Extended/dp/B0026L7H20/ref=sr_1_8?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1299534047&sr=1-8

 

I will definitely be buying this.  I love this series more than anything and I especially love the extended versions.  Interestingly, the announcement for this seems to have brought out a whole new wave of haters.  Apparently, a huge chunk of the film loving community hates on these like crazy.  They are considered: "flabby, underacted, underwritten, overwritten, too much CG, shallow, full of plot holes, etc."  Personally, I think they are as close to perfect as a movie can get.  Of course, they aren't absolutely perfect, but in this day when remakes, sequels, prequels and television shows of the past are mangled into the bulk of the movies released, I lovingly look back on the magic captured by this flicks.  In many ways, I think these are some of the most timeless flicks ever and sometimes I kind of hate my fellow film fans for being such bratty bitches.

 

I am so happy to see this announcement.

 

::cough::

Mu. Ther. FUCKER.  I searched and nothing seemed to pop up.  Son-of-a-bitch.  So sorry people. 

 

Regardless, maybe my little rant is still more appropriate for here.