LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

I'm currently debating whether or not to get the LOTR: Extended Edition Box Set on Blu Ray (released today) or the cheaper Theatrical Cut Box Set.

When I checked prices on Amazon for the latter, though, I noticed that most people have trashed New Line for even releasing the theatrical cuts at all, loudly proclaiming that the Extended Editions are the only acceptable versions and nothing less will do. And that really surprises me.

Don't get me wrong, the extra footage is mostly great and smartly integrated into the films, and I own the Extended Editions on Standard DVD myself. But for me, those versions are way too long for a casual sitting and some of the added scenes are just silly or prolong sequences for too long. I've popped them in for friends who hadn't yet seen them or for the not-so-often LOTR marathon. But I still think the theatrical cuts are excellent. They're mercifully tighter, the editing feels smoother, and they lack some of the goofier additions that just didn't need to be in the films.

But that's just me. So I'm curious which version my fellow Mofos prefer. Theatrical or Extended? What say you?

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

The extended editions are just too long for me. I honestly don't see how anyone has the time to watch any of them, because the third one is over fours hours long. Who has that kind of time to watch one movie?

The theatrical editions are fine by me, but then again, I've never been the biggest Lord of the Rings fan to begin with.

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

I think the Theatrical Cut of Fellowship of the Ring almost ruins the film. The missing development of the hobbits at the start, the missing Lothlorien footage that is REQUIRED for later scenes in the series to make sense. "Say, where did the hobbits get that fancy cloak they just hid under? I don't seem to remember anything about that...", Not to mention the Starlight Frodo uses in RotK...

However....the other two films, I think you have a point. The editing and pacing in The Two Towers definitely suffers in the extended cuts, but I love the fact that Aeown is developed and her relationship and infatuation with Aragorn actually have an arc and make sense... Tough call though, the pacing is rough.

RotK is missing some critical events with the orcs, but I think the film still works without it in the theatrical version.

I guess i am more ambivalent about the latter films, but for Fellowship, the extended is the clear winner for me.

I have plenty of time to watch them, and I am a busy guy. It's funny this came up, as Lisa and I just watched both Fellowship and The Two Towers extended Sunday afternoon/evening. We will watch the third film this week! :D

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

I've been wanting to watch the Extended Cuts again for ages but it's such an effort to find the time for them. I do feel watching the Theatrical cuts is only half the experience and would chose the Extended ones everytime, though it's getting to the point where Theatrical might be more practical. I think it comes down to more whether you've read the books and know what's missing from the films, I found both cuts to be as well put together as each other.

Eh, I think you can explain the cloak thing as a feature of hobbits being so stealthy and able to hide easily (but you're right, the Elven cloaks are described as having that ability in the books... even to change color for better camouflage).

The Light of Elendil is still in the Theatrical Cut, though it's the only Galadriel gift that's highlighted.

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

Yeah, I was gonna say, I saw LOTR: FOTR six times in theaters and they definitely show us the Light of Elendil. The cloaks and brooches are absent, though, I believe.

That said, they still manage to give us a hint; in The Two Towers, Aragorn finds one of the brooches and remarks "not idly do the leaves of Lorien fall," or somesuch, which vaguely suggests that they're wearing them.

Yeah, the cloaks are definitely shown, just not explained. The one that isn't, though, is in TTT when Gimli finds one of the hobbits' dagger belts. You don't know they even had elven daggers unless you've read the book or have seen the extended gift-giving scene in Fellowship.

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

But that explanation...nah I don't buy it. It's a magic cloak that makes them look like a rock - needs at least a mention!! The extended cut makes an effort to go over the cloaks and the rest of the gifts, spending more time in one of the film's best and most magical locales. I feel ike the theater cut somehow pulls the magic from the shire, as it doesn't develop the hobbits or the location nearly as well, and to a lesser extent, i feel the same about Lothlorien.

Just remember, I think Extended Fellowship of the Ring is pretty much the perfect fantasy film, even with a couple of overly melodramatic slow-mo crying scenes that irk me a bit. I may be biased! Fellowship currently resides at number 10 in my all-time favorites list here on MoFo...

I have to say, I watch this thing pretty much once a week, if only in sections sometimes...

I definitely agree that Fellowship is the best of the extended cuts. For one, it's the shortest :laugh:, and the additions all fit into the film just right and really add something worthwhile. I think I still like the visual opening of Frodo sitting under the tree, though. Bilbo's introduction is definitely really nice, but after seven minutes of exposition and prologue, there's something very cinematic and exciting about being suddenly dropped into the Shire. :)

In TTT and ROTK, there are some stupid scenes involving Gimli and Legolas as comic relief, and I'm not terribly fond of the Mouth of Sauron either (his design is very cool and clever, but I think he's a touch too outlandish and bizarre for LOTR).

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

I prefer the Extended Edition. I'm already looking forward to the extended editions of the Hobbit films. The length doesn't bother me, as I rarely get to watch movies for myself all the way through anyway. Plus, they're split up on the DVDs so you can treat it like six movies in a way. I just think the Extended Editions add so much more. My brother prefers the theatrical versions, though, for the simple "too long" reasoning. I don't think he's even watched the Extended Editions just because of the length.

I can see arguments both ways, my preference just leans toward the Extended. Heck, I wish there was even MORE in there...:D

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

The extended editions are better, IMO. Especially if you're really into the books.

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

I just bought the BluRay Extended Edition on Tues.

I think the biggest complain about the LOTR Theatrical cuts being released on BluRay wasn't so much that the films are "bad" - it is that most of us already spent money on the theatrical cut DVD (because that was the first thing that came out)...then spent more money on the extended cuts.

Then - they released the Theatrical cuts again on BluRay and made us wait forever to get the extended cuts. Well, I already own two copies of the movies...I think the upgrade to BluRay is well worth the $$$, but only for the most complete edition. I know our local store was upset noone was buying the theatrical cuts. I said it is because we KNOW the extended will be coming out eventually - just shame on them for thinking we'd spend $$$ on the incomplete versions.

I do think the extended additions adds a lot to the movies.

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

This is interesting reading. I haven't seen LOTR in quite a long while. I'm often like that; I prefer to leave a movie alone and come back to it much later, experiencing afresh.

I saw the theatrical cuts when they were new and haven't watched any at all since. Now I intend to get the extended editions soon and watch them. They may be long but I loved those movies and I'll make time, by god.

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

Just got the Extended Blu-Ray box set yesterday. My god, it's a thing of beauty. There's 15 discs in this beast! Each movie is split into 2 parts, which is a bit annoying but TOTALLY worth it.

I'm planning on dedicating a lot of time just to check out all of the special features and documentaries, too.

Also, I noticed that the Blu-Ray cases for this set aren't the standard blue jewel cases, but black ones. LoTR has officially debuted the ominous "Black-Ray" :cool:

Re: LOTR: Theatrical or Extended Cut?
 

I would have to go the extended editions, just because I want to see more of the story line.

Think of it as having 6 films not 3, they are good to watch in halves. I ve rarely ever watched a full extended in 1 go except for the Fellowship Extended, which is one of the greatest films ever in my opinion.

I watched all the Special features on my Extended DVD set, (12 discs). They are well worth it. Makes you wish that you were part of the epic project.