Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Film, TV & Theatre >

The Two Towers: Extended edition MAJOR SPOILERS

Foust is SO authentic

00:35 / 29.07.03

Wow, that sounds incredible. The FotR extended edition was far superior to the original; this sounds like it will do the same for TTT.

05:42 / 29.07.03

This looks great, but I'm worried that this will become common practice for Hollywood; deliberately over-shooting a film so that they can release "extended edition" DVDs to further bleed the public dry....

Regrettable Juvenilia

08:36 / 29.07.03

I don't think it's a pointless concern at all. It's already happening, if you ask me, right now, with this example. While I loved the cinematic release version of the first LOTR film, I found the second one to be deeply flawed, and several of these scenes sound as if they would improve the film. But I may never know, and I won't be alone. More importantly, the thing that still really sticks in my craw is that certain scenes in the cinematic cut of the second film relied on a viewing of the extended DVD cut of the first in order to make sense - specifically, Frodo's magic cloak, which he suddenly has with - huh? whuh? - no explanation in The Two Towers unless you own a DVD player and shelled out the cash for the special, mmmmm, precioussssssss geek-with-disposable-income version. It strikes me that a really basic rule of storytelling is that people should be able to follow part 2 of something after only experiencing part 1 - not part 1 v 2.0 or whatever - and while Peter Jackson and co haven't violated this rule to the same extent as, say, the Wachowski brothers, I still find that this whole approach marrs what is otherwise, so far, a hugely enjoyable series of films.

Of course, the question then becomes what exactly is the alternative...

The Natural Way

12:21 / 29.07.03

Fly, it really isn't that difficult to get ahold of/view a copy of the extended editions without forking out. There isn't that much to complain about.

Regrettable Juvenilia

12:49 / 29.07.03

I wouldn't object so much if I it were a question of, for example, my enjoyment of the second film at the cinema being improved by viewing the extended version of the first. But for the comprehensibility of the second one to be affected, which I'd argue is the case... You know, no-one should have do *anything* other than watch the version of the first film that was at the cinema to understand the version of the second one that's at the cinema - can I be any more clear? Sure, you *could* hire the video without too much expense or hassle - but why should you have to?

13:43 / 29.07.03

Sure, you *could* hire the video without too much expense or hassle - but why should you have to?

Because you can't persuade Hollywood that releasing the 'Lawrence of Arabia' cut of each film is financially feasible. Fuck's sake, stop whining. The fact that Frodo suddenly has a magic cloak is really a big problem? Such difficulties we have! Greedy fanboys make my feet itch.

If this discussion had taken place 15 years ago, when presenting an extended cut of a film for home audiences was not feasible, why do I get the feeling you'd be one of the people crying about the fact that there was obviously more footage out there that you'd never see?

It's entirely possible that once all three are out, New Line will decide it's economically feasible to do a run in cinemas of the extended cuts of each. Until then, it's fucking brilliant that Jackson has the option to release a more indulgent cut on DVD while being bound by theatrical constraints he can do nothing about.

And you know, I picked up the extended cut for $26 - that's the same as the cost for many single disc new releases. How does that make it a "special, mmmmm, precioussssssss geek-with-disposable-income version" thing, exactly?

The Natural Way

13:56 / 29.07.03

Yeah, I think Vid's first paragraph sums up my feelings pretty well.

It's not that much of a big deal.

The Natural Way

14:02 / 29.07.03

I mean, all this 'I may never know stuff'.... C'mon, Fly! The reality is, you'll watch the extended editions and one day there'll be a lovely barbe-outing to go watch them all at the cinema when they get their theatrical release.

If you meant 'I' in the general sense, well, it's not too much of a problem. Those who don't watch the extended releases prolly don't give that much of a shit.

And I do believe there's already a theatrical cut of the extended FOTR.

14:27 / 29.07.03

But can't you see the point that there shouldn't be such a thing as extended versions *anyway* other than for curiosity value?

As wolfy says in the first post, the added scenes ensure the movie makes more sense. This evidently shouldn't be in the same way that variant covers of comic books in the 90s were simply a cash cow for the companies.

14:58 / 29.07.03

>>>>It's entirely possible that once all three are out, New Line will decide it's economically feasible to do a run in cinemas of the extended cuts of each. Until then, it's fucking brilliant that Jackson has the option to release a more indulgent cut on DVD while being bound by theatrical constraints.<<<

I'm not complaining about LoTR. I'm complaining about the stuff that's to come. My problem is that the LoTR extended discs set a precedent that will no doubt be exploited, with future films deliberately PLANNED to be released in two seperate versions. Rather than material being excised for the sake of theatrical run-times and then being granted inclusion for dvd as a concession to the filmmaker, I can see material being shot with the full knowledge that it won't ever be in the theatrical release, but will be used to make the Super Special Edition dvd. Script pages broken down into "Theatrical" and "DVD" sections. They did it with Matrix Reloaded - shot hours of footage (much of which, I've heard, is actually quite important to the story) and then rather than putting it in the theatrical release, they used it for the shitty videogame tie-in. Get the full story - buy the game!

Fuck that.

16:06 / 29.07.03

Let me say that I'm speaking as someone who (gasp! faint!) hasn't read the books, and found TTT to be perfectly comprehensible.

But can't you see the point that there shouldn't be such a thing as extended versions *anyway* other than for curiosity value?

That's exactly what they are. New LIne is releasing each film on DVD in its theatrical form, with full disclosure of the fact that the longer cut is a couple months down the pipe. The extended cuts are not required viewing.

But shouldn't? No, I don't agree. New Line won't release the 208 minute version of Fellowship in theatres, opting for 178 minutes, but will allow Jackson to have his way on DVD. You're saying that shouldn't happen?

Face it, the market is changing. As much as I would wish otherwise, video/DVD sales now can equal and in some cases surpass the theatrical take for a film. I bet we can all guess what sort of decisionmaking that leads to.

You want it otherwise? Stop buying and renting films. Convince your friends, family and neighbors to do the same. Otherwise, get used to it, and be happy that Jackson can have his cake and eat it too. If only Orson Welles had the 'extended DVD' option when he made The Magnificent Ambersons, we might still have his original version to sit alongside the rather dry costume drama that exists now.

17:09 / 29.07.03

kind of pertinent to the current discussion -
I've heard that Tarantino has shot "so much footage" for Kill Bill that he's considering releasing the story in two parts.

At what stage in a shooting schedule do you pause for breadth, look around and say to yourself: "Wow, I can't believe I've shot so much stuff! What am I going to do with all this footage. Unless..."

Were his producers asleep?

Anyhoo, my $0.02 on Lord of the Rings. I loved the extended Fellowship and am really glad it's around. Unfortunately, when the theatrial Two Towers seemed a little flat for me I couldn't outright dislike it because I knew that all my little niggles might be put to rest with the super-deluxo version. From what we've read above I think that's exactly what's going to happen.

I understand it's inpractial to release a 3 3/4 hour movie. You just can't fit as many screenings into the day and so box office will be down; but is that an excuse for releasing a theatrical cut that's a little bit wee?

ONLY NICE THINGS

19:31 / 29.07.03

We seem to be falling into a fairly common trap here (apart from the one where people in Films, TV and Theatre try to make it appear that the person proposing the argument they disagree with has something wrong with them, rather than addressing the actual question, because they have never been expected by their Eltingville chums to express a critical opinion beyond "If you don't like this Batman film you are a gay", which seems prety standard) of assuming that the Lord of the rings is somehow transcendental because it has elves and Enya.

These films are an investment by a corporation, which has invested shitloads of money in the expectation of recouping shitloads plus. So, if Peter Jackson is given license to shoot extra scenes, he is doing so because his backers acept the logic of the argument that its fanbase are ready not only to pay for a movie ticket, and a DVD, but also another DVD, which will sell well despite only having to include another 45 minutes or so of extra material, which will thus more than recover the cost of shooting those extra scenes.

It's a bold piece of marketing, but I suspect it will only work for geekfests and possibly the odd auteur movie...

20:11 / 29.07.03

Fuck, at least they're trying to sell me something I want for a change. I can't think of any other blockbuster that I'd shell out cash for.

23:59 / 29.07.03

I'm not so sure this particular marketing trick will be limited to (or only be successful with) "geek" crowds, Haus - supplemental material on laserdiscs and dvd, such as director commentary tracks, deleted scenes, etc, were originally presented for hardcore film students and enthusiasts, but the idea of "extra stuff" caught on with the general public and now every single insipid and insignificant piece of shit film has a Platinum Edition 2-disc Collector's Set with ten hours of Bonus Features.

I think that the consumer public is conditioned to want to buy anything that's touted as "bigger" or "more" and we'll be seeing more and more films that are planned from day one to have two versions, the incomplete theatrical release and the "extended" home version.

Foust is SO authentic

01:47 / 30.07.03

I'm interested in the LotR extended editions because they feature more scenes from the books that I love; part of the joy of watching a movie inspired by a book is seeing it all on screen.

I wouldn't be so interested in seeing an extended edition of a movie with an original story, however. Yes, I watch the deleted scenes on a DVD, but I wouldn't buy or not buy a DVD because of these scenes. Whereas I will buy all the LotR extendeds.

The Natural Way

09:34 / 30.07.03

Whilst I completely agree with Cam - this IS setting a precedent - I don't see why I should care. I mean, what's the problem? I'm sure it'll largely be blockbusters that'll be affected by this trend, and I don't give much of a shit about them anyway, so I haven't got a lot to grouch about.

But I'm probably not ignoring a whole bunch of potential repurcussions here. You know me.

Our Lady of The Two Towers

16:26 / 30.07.03

For me, I like the fact that New Line have been very open all the way, saying each time "We're releasing the 2 disc movie version here, and the 4 disc extended version here." What irritates me is when a DVD is released, everyone buys it, and then 6 months or a year later it's suddenly rereleased with 'bonus material' (and you can obviously substitute CD for DVD here too). If WB suddenly released an extended version of 'The Matrix' (or New Line a six hour FotR) then I would be pissed off. I think these sorts of moves are more damaging to the companies because while there are slavering fanboys out there that have multiple copies of the Star Wars movies and DVDs ith each different cover I think it can turn off the more aware purchaser who will wait and not spend his cash, waiting for the 'special edition'. However, with The Matrix, at least they released that making of thing as a seperate package, so fans who wanted it weren't completely ripped off.

01:36 / 31.07.03

Cameron, I see your point but don't share your pessimism. There's nothing that suggests to me that theatrical releases are, in effect, going to become adverts for the longer, more complete DVD version.

Those 2-disc sets and bonus features don't change the fact that the primary film in any given package is invariably what was seen on cinema screens.

But what you do get, once in a while, are 'R' rated films that show up unrated, or other similarly censored films in uncut form. But these are typically cuts originally submitted for distribution that were forced back into editing. So again, we have films that could or would not be presented in cinemas available to the filmmaker and audience. This strikes me as a good thing.

11:23 / 31.07.03

I think I can only bear all this thing of extended and cinema movie versions for LOTR. Period. Given the format and the aims of Jackson and producers, well, you can only think that they either do six cinema releases like in the old old days of yore, or they go to this cinema-DVD split. Otherwise I think you loose money. Movies longer than three hours freak most people out or make them have serious considerations about going to see them or not. Three movies of these duration, well, chances are you'll leave your arse, your soul, and your life at a filthy cinema.

I will still regret to not have seen in cinema the full extended versions. And what's the point after all if they were filmed for theater? But in exchange, and if I belong to the distinguished DVD player owners elite, I can still watch it with all the commodities while I fart and scratch my groin at home.

And now, I suppose the same will happen with the ROTK movie. And that will be as far as I can go, all this matter verging on idiocy as I see it.

Things went better with Blade Runner.

Keith, like a scientist

12:49 / 31.07.03

I bought the theatrical and the extended version of FOTR, and couldn't be happier. They each have different bonus material, the extended version is one of the nicest DVD packages I've ever seen (those illustrated book page menus!). I've basically watched every minute of the bonus material on both sets.

And I'll do the same for TTT.

My only concern is that after all the movies are released, the regular and extended DVDs are released, that PJ and New Line with release a mondo trilogy box set with SUPER extended versions all cut together nicely like some 12 hour movie or something with even more material (like the much discussed idea of going back to film Tom Bombadil and insert him in there).

Years ago, PJ did these long interviews with AICN and he said that that was a possibility, going back to fill in some scenes...

And all us LOTR fanatics will lap it up, of course. What a cash cow. I'm bitter and happy about the prospect.

13:03 / 31.07.03

And I suppose by 2015 they will insert a Hobbit prologue, and a full Hobbit movie will be released by 2022 and a LOTR with Hobbit recapitulation prologueand inserted flashbacks by 2025.

So, when do you say a movie is finished? I think these guys have found a nice money making machine of a franchise which they will be able to re-release during the whole first quarter of this century as ideas keep coming up. ITs kinda an evolving project.

Jack The Bodiless

11:54 / 04.08.03

Well, like the man said, they've been upfront about the release schedule. Can't really complain about that. Personally, I'm very happy with my extended version of FOTR. And I'll be just as happy with my extended version of TTT, and probably with ROTK. I even considered not seeing ROTK in the pictures, because it's relatively evident that the definitive version will be released on DVD next year (only for about five minutes, though).

Strikes me Peter Jackson's too down to earth to want to spend any longer on this trilogy than he has to. I think once the extended cut of ROTK is released in November 2004, that'll probably be it for him... and since it's his baby, and no one else probably knows a tenth of what he does about it, and since the FX company is his own and the writers are all his mates and his partner, and everyone's a Jacksonite, the suits would have to get a whole bunch of entirely new people to shoot anything new he didn't feel needed being shot.

As for the theatrical cut - it's clearly subordinate to the extended cut that's on the second DVD release. So this is being made for posterity, as well as to make a box office killing - they're planning on providing something to the fan base (who comprise the producers, director, actors, FX guys, crew and designers of the films as well as the geek in the street) that will justify the hype. Which they appear to have done, by and large. If TTT extended edition fixes the flaws in the theatrical version which made me frown - if it turns my frown upside down - then I'll be a happy camper.

11:02 / 05.08.03

If this trend results in 3 hour home versions of movies that were much shorter in the theater, I'm all for it. Why? I like long movies. Hollywood has constrained filmmakers to the 1:30 format, but this medium allows the full story to be told as intended by the filmmaker, not Hollywood. Its license for filmmakers to really do what they want with the movies, as they know there will be an outlet for it in the extended DVD home market.

I'm sure some will try to exploit this, but there is a form of natural selection at work that will keep this from being a problem: Shorter movies that suck will not sell many extended edition DVDs.

The Natural Way

15:28 / 05.08.03

Barely anything clocks in at 1:30 anymore. That was a really 80's thing.

04:10 / 28.08.03

Good God. I've just seen the preview for the extended version of the movie, and so far it looks so superior to the cinematic release that it feels like a different movie. What I've seen of the restored Faramir/Boromir/Denethor scenes actually outclasses anything that made the theatrical cut. Huorns!

14:46 / 28.08.03

This is as good a time as any to mention that the extended editions are hitting theatres, at least for a short time.

Yotsuba & Benjamin!

17:06 / 29.08.03

I'm definitely in the EXTENDED/BONUS TREND = GOOD camp.
If it's a shit film with shit extra features, I could care less. But, since the trend is becoming widespread, we've got films that I would love to see some bonuses for coming out in new and better editions (Fargo comes to mind) on DVD. They're getting the Coens to actually do commentary; someone like Paul Thomas Anderson is applying his Megalomania to the DVD releases, so we get even more good stuff from him. And still, thankfully, the theorom stands: Shit + Making Of Shit + Pieces Of Corn And Peanuts Originally Intended For Shit = Shit.

But now instead of getting a paltry release for a film that actually deserves further study and consideration, you get extra footage and other quality nuggets of goodness.

Thank Criterion.

With Your Money.

They Actually Need It.

The Natural Way

13:26 / 02.09.03

SPOILING DISGUSTING PIGS

Having just seen the preview for the extended version, I have to say that it looks very cool indeed. The AICN rumours are on the money: sure enough, you get hobbits abseiling down Emyn Muil [sp?]; Hobbits fleeing Osgiliath through the sewers; Ent-draughting; Huorning!!! AND, most importantly, a really cool flashback sequence that puts the whole Sinister-Faramir thing into some kind of perspective. I remember Jack Fear, after having viddied the theatrical version, muttering something about Jackson 'Placating secondary, action-movie audiences' with his new, slightly spikey son of Gondor.... But I think there's more to it than that. Jacko appears to be trying to wring all the drama out of the Denethor-Faramir-Boromir love triangle that he possibly can. The ring is Fara's chance to 'Prove his quality' and win his father's love and respect, and this is what the extended edition sets out to underline. So, 'action audiences'? Maybe. But this shit's all about the mutharin' books, also! Oh, yes!

What else?

Loads. The film's going to seem even fucking bigger. Honest.

15:22 / 09.09.03

You get an ass achingly long film (however much I love it to pieces) to watch in the cinema and then another even longer film to watch on DVD.
And you think this will catch on?
The general public's patience s supposed to be getting shorter and you think a 5 hour super extended double sized fold out version of a rubbish action movie will pull in the punters?
Hardly.
LOTR has been a success DESPITE its absurd length. The DVD's have been a bigger success because you can pause the damn things and have a wee or make dinner halfway through.

I love that the ext versions make more sense, there are gaping holes in the theatrical versions because of the sheer depth of the source material.
Spielberg couldn't pull this off with one of his half assed scripts. There isn't enough there to warrant the extra time.

Deleted scenes have been on DVD's for years... LOTR isn't doing anything particuarly new except in the fact that the story is enhanced by including those scenes that just had to be dropped to keep the running time at an acceptable level.

That said it is annoying to know that you won't get the full story for another ten months after the film has been released.

17:47 / 09.09.03

All I can say is this:

1) I love both the first movie and The Two Towers.

2) Writing "TTT" in italics, as one poster did above, makes it look for all the world like "777". Draw your own magickal parallels if you are so inclined.

Our Lady of The Two Towers

18:39 / 09.09.03

I think rawkusboi has something of a point, I think people are putting up with the length thing because it's LotR, even people who haven't read the book seem willing to accept the 'we need three three-hour films to even make a stab at telling the story properly' reason, but if we had something akin to the Wachowski's making The Matrix (new directors, unknown quantity and a film that's three hours or longer) I wonder if people would complain then?

I am keen to see the Faramir footage as I felt his character was badly treated by the theatrical version, although it gave the script-writers an excuse to bypass the whole Minas Morgul bit and set Gollum up nicely to decide to betray them (although he was already leading them to Shelob at this point, which makes me wonder if Frodo had never given him a reason to think they'd betrayed him, what Gollum would have done about Shelob) I felt Faramir let Frodo and Sam go for the wrong reasons, not as in the book he's one of the few people (and with Aragorn one of the two men) who are able to resist the lure of the Ring. This leaves cinematic Faramir seeming to be a rather weak character.

But I watched the cinematic version on DVD on Saturday afternoon, second time I've seen it. And it did seem better than the first time I saw it. The fight at Helm's Deep was wonderful, and rather than the bangs and flashes of say 'Attack of the Clones' did seem as if it had been put together by army tacticians, little things like the tortoise of orcs under their shields, and the ladders with the hooks to catch on to the turrets, total bliss-out.

20:28 / 09.09.03

I watched FOTR on my friend's superhuge TV screen and we switched to Yoda's fight scene for a few minutes and the whole thing just looks like an empty cartoon.
LOTR has this dirty, grounded feel to it.
It just oozes realism, which is pretty hard considering almost everyone is in prosthetics. Star Wars however looked... painted. Like someon had rushed the effects and just used a 'blur' tool to cover up any errors.

14:38 / 18.11.03

I saw this yesterday and have to bump the thread, despite not having been able to absorb it enough to be able to make many intelligent comments...

...Holy Living Fuck. It's a COMLETELY different movie. The pacing is better, the editing far superior, the story flows elegantly and there are hardly any jarring leaps between the storylines.

It blows the theatrical cut out of the water on every level. Much more has gone into the story for the four Hobbits, Merry and Pippin particularly have a lot more to do. Gandalf's return is dealt with far better, there's more exposition here, much more of a sense of his objectives in the narrative. Aragorn's character is developed in a much smoother and more complex fashion, and there's more time given to his relationship with Eowyn. The best addition has to be the Boromir/Faramir/Denethor flashback. Great to have more Sean Bean action, and to give Faramir something to do. Plus Huorns!

Stunning piece of work.

21:50 / 18.11.03

I think rawkusboi has something of a point, I think people are putting up with the length thing because it's LotR

Er, no. I'm giving it a chance because watching a three and a half hour movie at home, in my own time, at my leisure, is an entirely different experience to watching one at the cinema. Seems pretty self evident.

Secondly, loved FoTR EE. Plumper, smoother and far more tasty.

Thirdly, have just watched the first half of TTT EE. Verdict so far: much, much better than the theatrical version. Every story arc feels richer, more powerful. A bloody good time.