LOTR blu ray...are you kidding me?

I bought the trilogy at black friday...well my mom did and she arrived yesterday, so I took the fellowship of the ring and put it on the PS3, on a 1080p 52" panasonic plasma tv...and I just cant believe it! it looks like complete crap! how do they even dare saying that its in HD? Im not sure if the movie was in 720 or in 1080 but either way it still sucked and looked nothing like HD...it seriously didnt looked any better than an SD DVD (and I have watched the same movie on a regular DVD on a regular tv like 4 years ago...it seriously didnt look any better)

it just amaazes...its almost a scam...the only reason why I dont think its a scam is because its the lord of the rings...but seriously they should just take their time to make a proper hd blu ray film conversion...

Hmm that's good to know. Hopefully Star Wars will be re-released a little better.

So I was like "Yeah....that's what she said!" - Oh wait, wrong forum. *Leaves*

Yea, I bought the blu-ray trilogy a few days after release. I was disappointed with the quality. I heard they re-released them as individual blu-rays and they're supposedly alot better.

Hi, I am the one who formatted the blue ray dvd.. HAAHAHHAAH, got ya, NO RETURNS SUCKER! But yeahhh, I really dont see the point of high definition, you spend WAY more dollars, and what do you get? A slightly better black level, glad I just use my pc as a movie player.

Hmm that's good to know. Hopefully Star Wars will be re-released a little better.

Pirate700

The thing is that FOTR wasnt shot in HD or generally that high resolution so its expectable that most of it will look like its smudged over.

I have read in a review though that the ROTK blu-ray version looks almost as good as one would expect.

Hmm that's good to know. Hopefully Star Wars will be re-released a little better.

Pirate700

Yea, I bought the blu-ray trilogy a few days after release. I was disappointed with the quality. I heard they re-released them as individual blu-rays and they're supposedly alot better.

KamuiFei

hmm I heard quite the opposite from a friend who had bought them a few weeks ago. Perhaps you're doing wrong.

The thing is that FOTR wasnt shot in HD or generally that high resolution so its expectable that most of it will look like its smudged over.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

The thing is that FOTR wasnt shot in HD or generally that high resolution so its expectable that most of it will look like its smudged over.

LionsBridge

Idk maybe there was a detail in the review I read -besides the excuse that it wasnt shot in HD- that I cant remember now.

Hi, I am the one who formatted the blue ray dvd.. HAAHAHHAAH, got ya, NO RETURNS SUCKER! But yeahhh, I really dont see the point of high definition, you spend WAY more dollars, and what do you get? A slightly better black level, glad I just use my pc as a movie player.

mahlasor

why the hell would anyone want an extended version of any LOTR movie?....was hours of walking really that entertaining?.....do we get to see them walking in more open fields?.....if anything I pray they release the heavily edited versions....Omni-Slash

I didn't get it cause it ain't even the Extended version.

why the hell would anyone want an extended version of any LOTR movie?....was hours of walking really that entertaining?.....do we get to see them walking in more open fields?.....if anything I pray they release the heavily edited versions....Omni-Slash

why the hell would anyone want an extended version of any LOTR movie?....was hours of walking really that entertaining?.....do we get to see them walking in more open fields?.....if anything I pray they release the heavily edited versions....Omni-Slash

Thats why the DVD Extended Editions also came out in limited copies. At least thats what it says.

hmm I heard quite the opposite from a friend who had bought them a few weeks ago. Perhaps you're doing wrong.

Serraph105

[QUOTE="Omni-Slash"]why the hell would anyone want an extended version of any LOTR movie?....was hours of walking really that entertaining?.....do we get to see them walking in more open fields?.....if anything I pray they release the heavily edited versions....funsohng

the movies were probably some of the most dragged on slop of editing I've ever watched.....I liked the books...but man....the movies were just so dull at times with mindless scenery shots and soap opera-esque facial shots...the thought of extending those movies is just baffeling to me....Omni-Slash

why the hell would anyone want an extended version of any LOTR movie?....was hours of walking really that entertaining?.....do we get to see them walking in more open fields?.....if anything I pray they release the heavily edited versions....Omni-Slash

the movies were probably some of the most dragged on slop of editing I've ever watched.....I liked the books...but man....the movies were just so dull at times with mindless scenery shots and soap opera-esque facial shots...the thought of extending those movies is just baffeling to me....Omni-Slash

[QUOTE="funsohng"][QUOTE="Omni-Slash"]why the hell would anyone want an extended version of any LOTR movie?....was hours of walking really that entertaining?.....do we get to see them walking in more open fields?.....if anything I pray they release the heavily edited versions....lightleggy

the movies were probably some of the most dragged on slop of editing I've ever watched.....I liked the books...but man....the movies were just so dull at times with mindless scenery shots and soap opera-esque facial shots...the thought of extending those movies is just baffeling to me....Omni-Slash

Of course it does abide by them to some degree.

Anyway what I say can come off as excuses but thats my opinion.

the movies were probably some of the most dragged on slop of editing I've ever watched.....I liked the books...but man....the movies were just so dull at times with mindless scenery shots and soap opera-esque facial shots...the thought of extending those movies is just baffeling to me....Omni-Slash

That trilogy was probably my three favorite movies of all time :lol:

[QUOTE="LionsBridge"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]

The thing is that FOTR wasnt shot in HD or generally that high resolution so its expectable that most of it will look like its smudged over.

Teenaged

Idk maybe there was a detail in the review I read -besides the excuse that it wasnt shot in HD- that I cant remember now.

Both movies were shot on film!

Saying they were shot in HD implies shot on video.

The reason Psycho looks amazing is that Universal did a remaster and the transfer was done well (*GASP*)

No EE or DNR applied to it. The detail is there to see. LOTR:Fellowship did not get a good transfer. DNR was applied heavily to many scenes removing detail and softening the image. The other 2 films look better with ROTK looking the best.

The Extended editions will be available on blu sometime around the release of The Hobbit. Hopefully the transfers will be done well.

Oh, I too bought the individual movies on blu during the black Friday sales. I was tired of waiting for them and $8 per movie was a pretty good deal. When the Extendeds are released, I'll sell the theatrical cuts. I really hope the new transfers are worth the wait (and money!)

The thing is that FOTR wasnt shot in HD or generally that high resolution so its expectable that most of it will look like its smudged over.

I have read in a review though that the ROTK blu-ray version looks almost as good as one would expect.

Teenaged

Both movies were shot on film!

Saying they were shot in HD implies shot on video.

The reason Psycho looks amazing is that Universal did a remaster and the transfer was done well (*GASP*)

No EE or DNR applied to it. The detail is there to see. LOTR:Fellowship did not get a good transfer. DNR was applied heavily to many scenes removing detail and softening the image. The other 2 films look better with ROTK looking the best.

The Extended editions will be available on blu sometime around the release of The Hobbit. Hopefully the transfers will be done well.

Oh, I too bought the individual movies on blu during the black Friday sales. I was tired of waiting for them and $8 per movie was a pretty good deal. When the Extendeds are released, I'll sell the theatrical cuts. I really hope the new transfers are worth the wait (and money!)

Rusteater

What? It was shot for a theater screen. The big screen's resolution is much higher than 1080p. They wouldn't shoot a sub-HD movie, and then upscale it to theater screen resolution.Guppy507

Here's a review of the disc that mentions the fact that Fellowship was shot on 35mm film. It also discusses the use of DNR.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/3237/lord_of_the_rings_the_fellowship_of_the_ring_blu_ray_movie_review/index.html

High-Def Digest goes into more detail about the use of DNR in their review.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/3622/lord_fellowship.html

Here's a review of the disc that mentions the fact that Fellowship was shot on 35mm film. It also discusses the use of DNR.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/3237/lord_of_the_rings_the_fellowship_of_the_ring_blu_ray_movie_review/index.html

High-Def Digest goes into more detail about the use of DNR in their review.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/3622/lord_fellowship.html

Rusteater

I am just making clear where I got my info from and the fact that I dont know much about that stuff you mention lol.

I was hoping to get this for Christmas....

why the hell would anyone want an extended version of any LOTR movie?....was hours of walking really that entertaining?.....do we get to see them walking in more open fields?.....if anything I pray they release the heavily edited versions....Omni-Slash

I say , its about time for LOTR blue ray darnit!

[QUOTE="Rusteater"]

Here's a review of the disc that mentions the fact that Fellowship was shot on 35mm film. It also discusses the use of DNR.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/3237/lord_of_the_rings_the_fellowship_of_the_ring_blu_ray_movie_review/index.html

High-Def Digest goes into more detail about the use of DNR in their review.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/3622/lord_fellowship.html

Teenaged

I am just making clear where I got my info from and the fact that I dont know much about that stuff you mention lol.

I just thought you might like to read some of that stuff :)

They go into to it a bit more in depth.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Rusteater"]

Here's a review of the disc that mentions the fact that Fellowship was shot on 35mm film. It also discusses the use of DNR.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/3237/lord_of_the_rings_the_fellowship_of_the_ring_blu_ray_movie_review/index.html

High-Def Digest goes into more detail about the use of DNR in their review.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/3622/lord_fellowship.html

Rusteater

I am just making clear where I got my info from and the fact that I dont know much about that stuff you mention lol.

I just thought you might like to read some of that stuff :)

They go into to it a bit more in depth.

[QUOTE="Karnage108"]I haven't read through the whole thread, but how many discs did it come with? I've heard that Target took discs out and repackaged the boxes. Don't ask me why. I think the full thing should come with 9 discs. Are you sure you have the Blu-Ray discs?lightleggy

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=61612

According to that, it's supposed to come with 9 discs. The Target thing I heard about could have just been one incident, but still, something doesn't seem right.

Good to know, I'll just stick with the DVD extended versions.

I was actually looking at these the other day. The image quality isn't even the biggest offense. It's missing extended scenes that makes me mad.

I was actually looking at these the other day. The image quality isn't even the biggest offense. It's missing extended scenes that makes me mad.

starfox15

:evil: