[tom_vidal]

How in the world can you have a discussion about DVD packaging and special features without mentioning the Lord of the Rings trilogy extended edition box sets? Not only did the movies come in beautiful collector’s cases with two DVDs per movie, they were also completely packed with special features, the run time of which exceeded that of the movies themselves. Hours and hours of in-depth making-of documentaries. I used to watch the special features for all the movies in a row when I was home from college during the holidays. Probably because before the advent of streaming, this was the longest, highest-quality content I had access to.

But the special features themselves… man. Getting to see the craft of filmmaking and propmaking was one of the biggest inspirations for me in pursuing a career as a maker. That was the first time in my life anyone had pulled back the curtain to that extent on what it took to create something as complex and powerful as Peter Jackson’s LOTR. You could tell the profound love and dedication that went into every inch of that film. To anyone who was involved in creating those special features and deciding to include them in the extended edition box sets, thank you.

[navbaker]

I absolutely consider the EE discs to be the canonical version

[justinator]

I consider the books to be canonical, honestly.

[gjsman-1000]

+ 1 Here.

I can hardly sit through The Two Towers, extended or otherwise, without cringing constantly at nonsensical plot changes.

No, Faramir was not a moody nihilistic relativist who changes his entire outlook without any character development.

No, there was no alliance, and getting from Lothlorien to Helm's Deep in the span of a few weeks, with a full army, is physically impossible even if the army were already assembled. (This was only in the movie after a last-minute cancelled attempt to turn Arwen into a warrior; seriously.)

No, Treebeard didn't spend 2/3s of the book stalling.

No, Frodo did not offer a wringwraith the ring, even for a second. And if he did, there's no way he would've survived afterwards.

And on, and on...

[dTal]

In Peter Jackson's defense re Treebeard...

Treebeard did spend what seemed to Merry and Pippin an interminable amount of time deliberating, including a full three days in agonizingly plodding discussion with other ents, and it is emphasized that this is THE defining character trait of ents. The shape of the interaction between the hobbits and the ents was of the hobbits becoming extremely bored and impatient. It is more important in a film adaptation to capture the feel rather than slavishly copy the book blow by blow. There is only so much screen time to go around, and the character trait has to be conveyed somehow while still moving the plot along. If the movie faithfully compressed the entire ent episode into its runtime, including the 3 day entmoot, it would be both incredibly boring, and spiritually less accurate because it would feel rushed and cramped.

[stronglikedan]

A movie adaptation of a book is a retelling of a story for a completely different type of audience, so it's an apples to oranges comparison always.

[gjsman-1000]

There's a difference between adaptation; and retelling the story in a way that damages the integrity of the original. Many of the above changes don't make sense even within the movie's own material. Even if the books didn't exist, Faramir's filmic story arc (as just one example) would be a badly executed example of character development.

[bombcar]

That's the real problem - nobody really cares about Arwen at the Ford vs Glorfindel; it doesn't change the story much at all.

And even changing characters somewhat but still having a development or purpose is arguably fine - it's the changes that aren't good in the context of the movie that are most baffling, especially considering the dedication shown in other areas of the films.

[pie420]

The retelling of a story can never damage the integrity of the original, and it is very foolish of you to even suggest that it could. The original is always the original, and is unimpacted by anything that comes after...

This is as silly as suggesting that Tolkien's work somehow tarnishes or damages nordic/germanic mythology. utterly ridiculous.

[RandomThoughts3]

I also dislike the way Faramir was adapted but it makes sense. It puts a greater emphasis on the exceptionality of Aragorn by removing the complexity of the Faramir character and basically making him a second Boromir. Considering that the movie is necessarily a more condense experience than a book, it's a good choice.

[MisterTea]

> completely different type of audience

A general one. And if you think about that its sad that a story has to be rewritten in order to ensure maximal appeal to generate maximal profit. The story isn't rewritten for the screen, it's rewritten for the investors polluting the story with money.

But on the flip side the story reaches a large audience, perhaps larger than the books might have, though not in true form. Double edged sword really.

[hx8]

That is how Hollywood does movies. Other film traditions will more accurately adapt the source material. For example, many animes are a shot-for-shot recreation of manga.

[entropicdrifter]

>For example, many animes are a shot-for-shot recreation of manga.

This is something of a newer phenomenon in the grander history of anime as an artform. Osamu Tezuka, one of the founding fathers of the modern anime industry, notably created the filler-heavy formats of yesteryear that were the dominant form of popular televised anime well into the 21st century. There are notable early outliers like Yu Yu Hakusho and Death Note, but most of the popular anime had their runtimes padded all to hell in order to continually cash in on the unpredictable zeitgeist popularity of their source material. This trend of creating manga-accurate adaptations was largely spawned during the mid-80's OVA boom (wherein many one-shot OVAs were functionally made as high-production-value advertisements for their corresponding manga), but it largely didn't make the leap to TV anime until well after the turn of the century.

[pie420]

shot-for-shot recreations are a waste of time. a robot or algorithm could copy. we watch adaptations to see a new perspective on an old tale. if you want a copy, just read the original.

[Yeul]

Now that the last family member who gave a shit is dead LOTR is whored out. They want it to be the next Marvel universe.

[vunderba]

I'm also swiftly bored by interminably long epic "battle sequences" - I usually find the choreography to be bland and uninspired, which I think partially stems from a childhood of golden harvest Hong Kong cinema.

[buttercraft]

Ugh, don't get me started on the troll scene in The Hobbit...

[disambiguation]

For me, the fact they don't spend hours singing songs of lore makes it literally unwatchable.

[navbaker]

The article, the OP, and my comment weren’t talking about the books.

[syndicatedjelly]

I considered Canonical to be canonical

[robbs]

If you haven’t already, get yourself to Wellington and take the tours at Weta. You might even recognize a few of the faces that still work there.

[ksec]

I want something that is small, May be Mini-CD size but with TeraByte of storage. That is able to fit that whole LOTR and all the Extra, in 4K Ultra High Quality in one disc.

It took a really really long time for Vinyl to make a come back. I hope we could one day innovate enough and bring physical media to the market again.

[astrange]

Most of the people I know who talk about LOTR movies are women who watched them once, but mainly rewatch the making of parts, because they don't care about the story as much as they care about seeing a group of dirty-looking men be friends with each other in ways that sort of look homoerotic but aren't explicitly.

Should be familiar if you know any anime fangirls.

[Damogran6]

I think this was the point where they started looking not at ticket sales, but overall lifetime earnings per family...sure, it's the ticket, then the DVD, then the BluRay, then the Extended BlueRay, then the Criterion Edition (with Sting)