Return of the King - Extended Version

[mzarynn]

Well, I have bought the Extended Edition of ROTK, but I haven't watched it yet. Can you believe it? But my question is for people who bought the movie and the model of Minas Tirith. The box said it was five discs and the extra DVD was about Howard Shore writing the music. Has anyone watched had a chance to watch it? I didn't want to pay the extra $ for the tower to get the music DVD. But I would still love to know what I'm missing.

 

[Cailleach]

I didn't buy it, but I heard it was good. I already had a similar cd with the soundtrack and since I'm giving the term 'broke' a new meaning...

 

[EricD]

Well, personally I enjoyed the extended editions. Not so much for the extra scenes, though those are also cool, but more for the commentary and Making-of features, which I find extremely interesting.

 

[HBP]

Its so unfortunate that i haven't read the books..... i am assuming there is a lot more to it than the movie depicts. Anyway can someone plz tell me what is meant by the "scouring of the shire".............is it scouring as in "scouring". And was there really a confrontation between Gandalf and the Witch King.

 

[j d worthington]

Its so unfortunate that i haven't read the books..... i am assuming there is a lot more to it than the movie depicts. Anyway can someone plz tell me what is meant by the "scouring of the shire".............is it scouring as in "scouring". And was there really a confrontation between Gandalf and the Witch King.

Yes, there is a confrontation between Gandalf and the Witch King, which takes place just before the horns of the Rohirrim are heard... it is their arrival (along with Aragorn's forces in the ships of the Black Corsairs) that halts the confrontation... and Gandalf very well may not have been able to defeat the Witch King, incidentally.

As for the Scouring of the Shire... briefly, when the hobbits return to the Shire, they find conditions horribly changed. If you recall the image Frodo sees in the mirror of Galadriel of the Shire-folk enslaved, etc.... that is a part of it. Saruman did not die quite as presented in the film, but went (with Wormtongue) to the Shire to "work a little mischief"... destroying the peace and security of the Shire and turning it into a miniature of what he'd done to Isengard.

The point is that it was the hobbits' involvement with the greater events in the world outside (from which they had long isolated themselves) that allowed them to grow enough to confront this situation and save their own homeland; without that, the companions would have also been enslaved... and, even had the Ring been destroyed, Sauron's influence would have destroyed the Shire indirectly by its effect on and through Saruman. The "scouring", therefore, refers to the cleansing of the Shire of this blight of the Shadow, as well as the scouring away of (at least a part of) their innocence and insularity, as the hobbits once again become a part of the greater world (albeit still rather shy of being involved with the Big Folk) under the reigns of Elessar (Aragorn) and his heirs.

 

[Delvo]

A big difference between the confrontations of Gandalf and the Witch King in the book and in the movie was that the book doesn't mention Gandalf's staff breaking. I thought this would be a problem in the movie when I first heard of it, since a broken staff means the fight's already over and the wizard is done (as it did with Saruman), but the way the movie pulled it off was satisfactory, making it clear that that was just the first move of the fight, not the last, final stroke finishing Gandalf off. And the movie really needed to show the lord of the Wraiths doing something "powerful" in order to establish how dangerous he really was, since his power was mostly not shown otherwise and some people could think he wasn't really so impressive.

But the words are pretty much the same, and the flames "trickling down the blade" is the same.

One other difference is that, in the silent pause before they would presumably have fought, the horns of the Rohirrim aren't the first sound heard breaking the silence. The horns sound second, "as if in answer" to the first one: a chicken calling.

 

[HBP]

Thanks guys really appreciated..................Loads came clear.

 

[Gothic_Angelica]

I still think that some parts that were missed out is a little disappointing but I do like the extended version very much but until a few days ago I hadn't seen the films since they were out at the cinema. As much as I like the films the tv screen doesn't do it justice.

Gothic x

 

[fingy773]

theres a new 1 out withe the extended editions in 1 disc (in Australia anyway)

 

[Brian G Turner]

Finally watched this one this weekend. Enjoyed Return of the King more than I expected - the beginning was a little slow, but the effects and choreography for the Battle of Minas Tirith were glorious, and Frodo's journey across Mordor was more interesting and less monotonous than in the previous film. Good tension toward the end. Overall, enjoyable but long - it took me over 15 years to finally watched the extended versions, it may be another 15 before I watch them again!

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

In retrospect, I think I enjoyed the "making of" parts more than I did the added scenes to the movies themselves in the extended editions. Seeing how the movies were made, how the costumes, sets, and so forth were created, some of the things they thought about doing but didn't, fascinated me. Buying the extended editions so I could watch those particular disks was well worth the price. The added scenes not so much. If it was up to me now, I would want something even shorter than the theatrical editions, realizing that scenes I would have especially liked to see added were probably never filmed anyway (so are not really within the realm of possibility for these movies) while a lot of the scenes that were added in the extended editions were just more of the same sort of thing I could have done without in the theatrical versions (scenes made-up by the scriptwriters out of their own imaginations, rather than parts of the story that Tolkien wrote).

There were parts of all three films I thought were beautiful, heart-breaking, inspiring, moving etc. but the definitive version of The Lord of the Rings has, in my opinion, yet to be filmed, and unless somebody gets on it pretty darn soon, will almost certainly NOT appear in my lifetime.

I will also say that after the self-indulgent mess Jackson made of The Hobbit, though I loved the first three movies profoundly at one time, I can now see their flaws more clearly than I was willing to do before. Or perhaps I should say that I am less willing to excuse and justify those flaws than I was while still under the spell of the parts that moved and enchanted me.

 

[soulsinging]

I will also say that after the self-indulgent mess Jackson made of The Hobbit, though I loved the first three movies profoundly at one time, I can now see their flaws more clearly than I was willing to do before. Or perhaps I should say that I am less willing to excuse and justify those flaws than I was while still under the spell of the parts that moved and enchanted me.

This is pretty much exactly why I haven't seen the Hobbit movies... afraid of this.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

This is pretty much exactly why I haven't seen the Hobbit movies... afraid of this.

It's a definite danger for those who have a particular fondness for the book. On the other hand, people with little familiarity with the book will tell you that what Jackson added improved the story immensely, made it exciting, made it thrilling. That's a matter of taste I suppose, but there is no doubt that much of what he added strayed a long, long way from the book, not only so far as the incidents themselves but particularly in the spirit of the story.

 

[paranoid marvin]

It somewhat surprises me that the Tolkein estate allowed Jackson to not only deviate some much from the book but also to add some much unecessary stuff. The thing is, in my opinion, it wasn't added to improve the story but to pad it out in order to make it a three-parter. LOTR absolutely needed to be a trilogy, Hobbit absolutely did not.

Still some really good bits; I did like Sylvester as Radagast, Stephen Fry as the Master, Eddie Izzard as the Goblin King, Benedict Cumberbatch as Smaug and Billy Connolly as Dain. But over all? The Hobbit as Tolkein intended it is not.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

"unnecessary" is exactly the right word. :/

 

[Alex The G and T]

What's not to like about the Minas Tirith stashbox?

 

[HareBrain]

there is no doubt that much of what he added strayed a long, long way from the book, not only so far as the incidents themselves but particularly in the spirit of the story

A perfect illustration of how Jackson ignored the spirit of the story is Smaug. To my mind, Tolkien's own illustration of him can't be beaten -- it has bags of charm and character without negating the sense of danger. I don't know what was in the design brief for the dragon in the film, but the first two elements clearly weren't on it -- it was just a tiresome "modern Godzilla with wings" kind of thing, devoid of anything except scale (pun intended). But I guess it fitted the rest of the wretched film.

 

[paranoid marvin]

A perfect illustration of how Jackson ignored the spirit of the story is Smaug. To my mind, Tolkien's own illustration of him can't be beaten -- it has bags of charm and character without negating the sense of danger. I don't know what was in the design brief for the dragon in the film, but the first two elements clearly weren't on it -- it was just a tiresome "modern Godzilla with wings" kind of thing, devoid of anything except scale (pun intended). But I guess it fitted the rest of the wretched film.

I have a similar issue with AA Milne's Winnie the Pooh. The original artwork looks so much nicer than the screen adaptations (especially Piglet).