caiman

IGN has an interview with Peter Jackson up. They talk about the cuts made to ROTK, including specifics on Christopher Lee, and also Jackson's ideas about the extended editions vs the theatrical versions. Jackson states, "The theatrical versions are the definitive versions. I regard the extended cuts as being a novelty for the fans that really want to see the extra material." There's a lot more interesting stuff, so I suggest you guys read it.

For some reason, I don't like hearing that he feels the EEs are "novelties." I personally consider the EEs the definitive versions, mostly because they feel more complete. The TEs seem to be simply a necessity for the mass audiences who will see them in the theater. Jackson makes the point that he feels the additions hurt the emotional intensity of the films. Do you guys agree with this?

jaeufraser

I do see his point. I haven't seen TTT:EE, but I have seen FoTR:EE and...while I don't necessarily agree with him, I can understand what he's saying. While I think it's in his, and the company's best interest to say what he is saying, I do think for many audiences those extra scenes ARE superfluous and not really necessary. They really do give insight and extra depth to many of hte characters, but to many they just make the films longer. So while I can sympathize with his statement, and don't really think it would be wise to make the theatricals longer, I don't really agree on the first film. But I, and many of us, are not the majority and quite frankly...I think that's more of the intention...towards the majority.

Jackskeleton

What you personally consider definitive is your own taste. I personally love the theatrical version of blade runner because of the voice over, but I will be the first to say that the DIRECTOR wants the non-voice over version as the definitive version.

You don't have to accept it. like what you want, but much like lucas, Jackson feels that one version is personally perfered over the other. at the very least he has given us the choice on which one we can watch.

Jepthah

People, Jackson is saying this for PR and to get New Line's back, I promise you. He is an extremely smart man.

You can't try to convince anyone that scenes which Jackson loved (including the Lothlorien scenes and the Gondor flashback) and worked so hard over don't enrich the films immesurably. It's no coincidence that virtually everyone who sees the longer cuts regards the films in a practically new way as a result.

Jackson is able to recognize that the shorter films are better for the mass audience, but the EE versions are better films. He says what he says in order to boost the commercial potential of what he has been releasing for 3 consecutive Decembers.

Groucho

This is nothing new. Jackson has been saying this since the beginning.

dcswirl

I love the extended cuts personally. I rarely watch the standard versions. I have those because the extras are different.

Jay G.

I agree with jaeufraser and Jackskeleton. I think Jackson is telling the truth when he calls the theatrical versions definative, and I think ultimately it doesn't matter, since the EEs are going to continue to exist for fans of those versions, including myself.

silentbob007

I love the extended editions because they add more character detail and some of those little moments from the book that I just wanted to see. In regards to plot and pacing, however, I can see why the theatrical cuts are the "definitive" ones.

mee2

I;m thinking PJ just made that comment knowing that New Line execs had a sniper on a roof across the street from him, just in case he hyped up the EE version.....

Jackskeleton

some of you guys make it seem like he was forced to say this He was hired to make a movie, he made the move and like any film, scenes that didn't help pacing or were not entirely needed, or hell, ran over time had to be cut. to say that this is not his version is to say that no movie is it's directors version if it has been cut and edited to fit the requirements of the studio that hired him.

Jepthah

Though this is meant in jest, I think you're actually much closer to the truth than some people may realize...

jaeufraser

If you go over to www.chud.com they have a great little interview with Jackson about RoTK. It's on the front page right now. He speaks of "the definitive" version and really lays out why one is prefereably to the other. I think his main points rely on pacing and time constraints and the fact a theatrical movie really can't get away with such a length as a home movie which can be viewed at leisure.

TheMadMonk

The Books are the definitive version.

End of discussion.

chess

damn, and i was gonna chime in too...

definative is in the eye of the beholder. the EEs changed FotR from a great movie to an amazing one, and changed TTT from a good movie to a very good one. jusy MHO.

regards,
chess

oh, and i'm pretty sure i like the movies more than the book.

Josh H

I much prefer the EE's. I could care less what PJ or anyone else says is the "definitive" version.

I watch movies soley for my entertainment, why should I care what anyone else thinks about movies I love?

Jackskeleton

because with that mentality, you should never be apart of the group that bashes J6P for enjoying fullscreen releases of films.

Josh H

That's a terrible example.

1. Most directors hate fullscreen releases. Jackson himself makes the EEs, so he it's another version of his films that he approves of, even if he thinks the EE is definitive.

2. I bash J6P for a lot of things, but I could care less if someone would rather watch fullscreen releases. What ever floats their boat. As long as films continue to see widescreen only, or WS and P&S releases, I could care less. It's good to cater to both IMO.

Jackskeleton

1. Most directors hate it but for the most part, they sit there and make sure the information in the fullscreen is up to some standards. Just because they have a hand in a non-OAR doesn't mean they have to support it or like it.

2. That's great. the point being, feel that way. Like I said, I love Blade runner better in it's theater form, no matter what the director says. It works for me better as a film in that way. Will I say which one I think is the one and only? no, director makes that call. I just watch what I like.

Josh H

1. Directors often have no choice in non-OAR releases. The publishers require af P&S version, so they have their hand in it to make it as good as possible. AFAIK the studio didn't require Jackson to make the EE's, he just wanted to to give the die hard fans a more "complete" version that had more stuff from the books etc. Thus its still a bad analogy.

2. Good, we're in agreement, though I'm baffled why you posted the first comment if you feel the same way as what I stated.

DVD Polizei

The Theatrical cuts are definitive for the theater. PJ is very much into extended editions, and if he wasn't, there wouldn't be anything but theatrical releases. The extras on the FOTR: EE kind of mention this.

Supermallet

I think it doesn't matter what the "definitive" edition is, because they're both available for us to watch.

That being said, I think Fellowship is a perfect film in theatrical form. The extended edition is great, but the additions add shading to the story, not huge revelations. Aragorn singing the Lay of Luthien might make his relationship with Arwen a little more dimensional, but, in the end, you get the gist of what they're going through without that. Gandalf talking about the worth of Mithril is fun, but doesn't add anything to the story, and, in fact, actually detracts from the surprise of Frodo's being skewered by the cave troll. The theatrical cut, on the other hand, is immaculate. It works perfectly. The pacing, the character interaction, the surprises, it all works. The theatrical cut is perfect. The extended cut is nice, but not necessary.

Now, let's take The Two Towers. Here was a film that was good in the theatrical cut. It gave you what you needed to know for the plot. But the character interaction left me a little disappointed. I liked seeing Legolas and Gimli get more chummy, but Aragorn's relationship to the Rohan, and Eowyn in particular, was muddy. The extended edition takes care of that. Every scene added to the extended version should have been there in the first place. I saw The Two Towers three times in the theater and once on DVD, and each time I was left with the same conclusion: great action, not as moving as Fellowship. With the extended scenes, the film was elevated considerably. I got what I was missing from the theatrical cut.

Now, Return of the King was amazing. The best film of the year. But there's so much in it that cries for an extended version, so I think the extended version will end up being the best version of this film.

Again, it's all in the eye of the beholder, but that's my take on it.

jough

I don't know how he can say that more time and thought are put into the theatrical release edits when they rushed the Two Towers out the door literally at the last minute, and its jarring cuts and bizarre edits in the theatrical version made it look like it was cut with a f**king meat cleaver rather than an avid editor.

The two EEs were much better edited, and as far as the Two Towers goes, more tightly paced.

But whatever. As long as I can buy both versions on DVD I'm happy. I'll get the Return of the King when it comes out and watch the theatrical version a few times until the EE is released, and from then on will likely only watch the Extended Version.

That is, if it's as good as the first two. And there's no reason to believe it won't be.

Jepthah

I fully agree -mallet, and after seeing the theatrical cut ROTK tonight, much as I adored it, the thread title now has to make me when I think of how much greater the extended ROTK will be. So much had to be left out to keep the film to a reasonable running time, but it's all going to be so amazing when it's put back in!

DVD Polizei

What I'm looking forward to is possibly more extended battle scenes and special effects.

What's really interesting is just how much footage is actually available. I mean, we're talking around 800 hours for the entire trilogy, and only .015% of it was used for public viewing (including the average of 4hrs for the EE editions for all 3 movies). I bet PJ could make an "Ultimate Edition" that made each movie 8 hours long if he wanted. What I don't understand is why was so much footage created. There has to be another reason and we may know of this reason a few years from now, after the ROTK: EE is released, and everyone has had time to swallow it.

Jay G.

Wasn't there something like 12 hours of just horse chase footage from FOTR?

The amount of footage recorded isn't a good way to measure how much footage could be used. A lot of that stuff would be alternate takes, or additional footage of people fighting/running/riding, or extra scenery shots.