**TTT Extended Edition - special features**

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Which special features have you watched on the TTT EE video or DVD? How did you like them?<P>(This thread will be opened early Tuesday morning - please post on this 'official' thread instead of starting new ones. For discussion of the additional scenes, see the official **TTT Additional Scenes** thread. If you have a new topic concerning the TTT EE that does not fit on either of those threads, go ahead and begin a new discussion. However, please do not mark your thread with the double asterisks of the official ones - those are reserved for moderators and administrators of the Barrow-Downs. Thanks, and have fun!)

[Estelyn Telcontar]

open

[Meela]

I haven't watched them yet, but I do want to ask if anyone knows the location of the Rotk trailer. I understood there would be one on the extended dvd, as there was one on the Fotr dvd for TTT. If you find it, please let me know.<BR>Oh, and I know region 1 users can locate the MTV award acceptance speech made by Gollum. It's hidden on the menus somewhere, like the trailer would be.

[Enorëiel]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Oh, and I know region 1 users can locate the MTV award acceptance speech made by Gollum. It's hidden on the menus somewhere, like the trailer would be.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>That it is! IT's located on the first disc at the very end of the scene selection... basically the same place it was last year. He, he, I love it. <P>I have yet to find the trailer yet so - whoever does - let me know where it is (I never even found the trailer on the EE of FOTR for TTT)<p>[ November 18, 2003: Message edited by: Enorëiel ]

[Arwen1858]

I know where the TTT trailer is on FOTR EE, but I can't find a RotK trailer on TTT EE! And I can't find the Gollum thing either!! Please help!!!

[lindil]

I heard tell of a Bombadil tribute, was this supposed to be on the exTTT ? or RotK or some 'finale package'?

[Estelyn Telcontar]

<B>lindil</B>, the Bombadil tribute is an additional scene in Fangorn on the TTT EE, not on the special features DVD. I won't spoil it for you, but it includes 'Old Man Willow'...

[Balin999]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I know where the TTT trailer is on FOTR EE <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Nice. Could you tell us? Maybe the RotK trailer is somewhere in the same place, only on the TTT discs, of course.

[Mattius]

The Two Towers trailer is on disc one of the FotR EE. You have to scroll through the scene access and it is at the end. I have tried this on my TTT EE but there is no RotK trailer there! Perhaps there is one there on the North American edition but I do not think there is one on the European one.

[ainur]

Just a correction--The Two Towers trailer is on the <B>second</B> disk of the Fellowship EE (at the end of the scene numbers). The first disk has the MTV take-off of the Council of Elrond. (at least that's the way it is on my copy.) <P>I haven't been able to find any trailers on the Two Towers EE for RotK so far. It makes sense to put it there, but it's possible they didn't for some reason. I <B>did</B> find the MTV acceptance speech. Very funny, but if you have small children, you should know that Gollum's language is very blue. (<B>VERY</B> blue!) I laughed though.

[Mattius]

On the UK version I'm pretty sure it is on the 1st disc as there is no MTV take off of the Council of Elrond at all on it.

[ainur]

Mattius, now that you mention it, I do remember last year when it came out someone saying that the MTV spoof was not on the UK version. I guess I didn't realize they'd moved the TT preview up to the first disk in it's place, though.

[HCIsland]

Just watch the documentary on Gollum. I love how this character evolved and how much input Serkis had. The Gollum that we saw in Fellowship was the one they had designed for some time but when the saw Serkis' dailies they realized that they should model Gollum more on him and so they incorporated some of Serkis' facial features into their design.<P>Great decision.<P>H.C.

[Essex]

the reason why the mtv spoof was not on fotr ee was the british censors would have given the WHOLE dvd a 15 rating, so it was not put on the region 2 version. I would say this is probably the same for gollum's mtv speech on the tt disk.

[Essex]

I’ve just listened to the screenwriters’ reasons for changing the plot of TT. My first thoughts:<P>- Peter Jackson had the best reason behind leaving Shelob out because of the time line. I always though he would come up with this excuse!<P>- Phillipa Boyens has the most smug look on her face throughout the ‘book to script’ interviews. I haven’t a clue why.<P>- It seems that Boyens and Fran were the main force behind the script itself. All the time I’ve been dissing Jackson for the changes, and it’s probably not his fault!<P>- Boyen’s point (I paraphrase) <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>We couldn’t show both scenes at the end of the movie - i.e. helm’s deep and shelob’s lair. it wouldn’t work on film <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So what are they going to leave out on ROTK then? The battle at the black gate or Frodo at the cracks of doom??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!<P>- Boyen’s first excuse for the faramir plot change was that Frodo and Sam had to journey to SOMEWHERE in the TT film once they decided to remove the shelob scene. So I understand their point of going to Osgiliath now. I would have almost accepted the change but then realised that this was not the main reason behind the faramir plot change which Boyen states next:<P>- She points out that to show the ring as all powerful, and then let faramir state his immortal lines <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> I would not take this thing, if it lay by the highway. Not were Minas Tirith falling in ruin and I alone could save her, so, using the weapon of the Dark Lord for her good and my glory <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> would ‘kill’ the movie. Why? Why can’t we show that at least ONE man has the sense that Gandalf and Elrond have? Why would it kill the movie? Ridiculous response from Boyens. She has not noticed that Faramir says this line BEFORE he realises Isildur’s Bane is the One Ring. After this, he is tempted, yes, <B>but keeps to his vow</B> that he would not touch it.<P>- They do not mention why they had the Frodo / nazgul scene. I’ve yet to listen to the commentary so maybe they say something about it there.<P>- Having old man willow in fangorn was a stroke of genius<P>- They mentioned nothing about changing Theoden’s character. Again, they might mention this on the commentary<P>- Boyens also mentioned that they changed a LOT in the fellowship and this has been accepted. Yes, I agree a lot MORE was changed in the fellowship, but not really a massive PLOT change.<P>- Faramir’s scenes DO work better in the extended edition now we see the denethor scene. BUT THIS IS NOT THE POINT. The plot was changed, but the denethor scene only makes it clearer why, not an excuse for the plot change.

[HCIsland]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>So what are they going to leave out on ROTK then? The battle at the black gate or Frodo at the cracks of doom??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I posted quite some time ago that intercuting Helm's Deep and Shelob doesn't work because emotionally they run in opposite directions. Helm's Deep ends with victory on the heals of despair. Shelob ends in despair with a smidge of futile hope. As Boyens said, "they cancel each other out". <P>Mount Doom and The Black Gate Opens (or for that matter Shelob/Cirith Ungol and Pelennor Fields) complement each other perfectly. The emotions in each run parallel. Each scene can be used to build upon the tension of the other until the climax. There will be no reason to sacrifice one for the other.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> It seems that Boyens and Fran were the main force behind the script itself. All the time I’ve been dissing Jackson for the changes, and it’s probably not his fault! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>... or his credit. <P>H.C.

[hobbit punk]

I just got the EE yesterday and so far it is super amazing. I watched the feature about Professor Tolkien which was informative and wonderful as always. I also watched the adapting the script because those changes had been eating away at me. I did notice that Boyens was very defensive and sort of smug as someone else pointed out. I was, however, very glad that they had that feature and it helped me to understand their mindset a bit better. I still don't agree about Faramir but at least I know what they were thinking. I am so so very glad that they decided against Arwen at Helms Deep. That would've killed the movie for me. It amazed me that these people called themselves Lotr fans, yet could not understand fully about Arwen and Aragorn and how the whole point of their relationship was that they weren't together. That is all I have had time to watch for now, but it looks promising and I am looking forward to the scene with old man willow.

[Essex]

HCIsland,<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I posted quite some time ago that intercuting Helm's Deep and Shelob doesn't work because emotionally they run in opposite directions. Helm's Deep ends with victory on the heals of despair. Shelob ends in despair with a smidge of futile hope. As Boyens said, "they cancel each other out".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR>Yes, you make the point clear here and I understand it. But why do we HAVE to end the two towers on a note of victory? The book does not, it ends with the best cliffhanger in literary history. ie "Frodo was alive but taken by the enemy". Just imagine, as many people did back at the begining of publishing these books, that they had to wait a year for the next installment! <BR>Jackson did not require a happy ending in the first film, so why did we have to end TT on an upbeat note? It IS heart warming but not in the spirit of the book. I do not agree that there would have been a problem to show both scenes. But Jackson tells us to wait to see why shelob works best in rotk, so I can't wait to see this.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Mount Doom and The Black Gate Opens (or for that matter Shelob/Cirith Ungol and Pelennor Fields) complement each other perfectly. The emotions in each run parallel. Each scene can be used to build upon the tension of the other until the climax. There will be no reason to sacrifice one for the other.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I stand corrected on this! Thank you.

[lindil]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> - It seems that Boyens and Fran were the main force behind the script itself. All the time I’ve been dissing Jackson for the changes, and it’s probably not his fault! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>Well, he still ok'd the nonsense.<P>Why is she looking smug? Maybe it has something to do with making many millions despite fans of JRRT's writings thinking you hacked one of the coolest characters?<P>And the whole thing of' we had to come up with something new once we left Cirith Ungol out...<P>hmm how about the legitamate Faramir scenes and speeches in Ithilien? How about a muster or at least a regrouping in ROhan [too anti-climatic for PJ and co I am sure] or how about Aragorn taking off on the Paths of the Dead? <P>Well, anyway, I will admit ex-TTT [finished it last night finally[!] ws a great improvement over the theater version, which left a truly bitter taste in my mouth for all of it's glorious moments.<P>MY scoring is as folloows.<BR> FotR - C<BR>EXT Fotr - A-- or B++<BR>TTT - D [saved from an F only by the scenery and a few good scenes]<BR>Ext TTT - B- <P>So PJ gets decent marks for the extended versions, but should be severly punished somehow for waiting 11 months after the initial hatchet jobs to fix his messes uo! [imo that is]

[The Saucepan Man]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> hmm how about the legitamate Faramir scenes and speeches in Ithilien? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Scant, if any, tension.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> How about a muster or at least a regrouping in ROhan [too anti-climatic for PJ and co I am sure] or how about Aragorn taking off on the Paths of the Dead? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Didn't involve Frodo and Sam.<P>I have not watched the interview yet, but I imagine that the point that she is making is that there had to be some tense climax to Frodo and Sam's journey in the film, parallel to that provided by the Battle of the Hornburg. And that, for me, is a valid point.<P>I agree, as a fan of Tolkien's works, that the extended version is infinately better than the theatrical release. But clearly a film of this length would not have been commercially viable as a cinema release, and many of these additional scenes will be of little or passing interest to the majority of film audiences. I would have swapped some of these additional scenes for some of those that were included in the theatrical release. But I can understand most of the choices Jackson made in his editing of the theatrical release, bearing in mind the <I>entirety</I> of the prospective audience, and not just the minority who get angry about things like the portrayal of Faramir. And believe me, we are in a minority. Most of the audience will never previously have read the book and, even of those who have, not many hold it in quite such a high regard as us for it to really get to them. <P>I find it interesting that the extended edition scores such a hit with those whose quarrel with TTT was that it failed to reflect Tolkien's story, given that it is still a different story to that told in the book. Film Faramir, for example, is still a very different character from book Faramir. Book Faramir hardly hesitates in rejecting the Ring, despite knowing its worth to his father, whereas film Faramir still takes some time to reach the same point. What the extended edition does do, however, is make this alternative Faramir more likeable by more clearly depicting the rationale behind his initial decision to take the Hobbits and the Ring to his father, while at the same time making his ultimate decision to let them go far more believable.<P>Yes, it is nice to see the inclusion of more material from the book and touches that greater reflect the spirit of the book, but, for me, the best thing about most of the additional scenes is that they improve on the story told in the film, rather than that they bring it closer to that told in the book.<p>[ November 21, 2003: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]

[HCIsland]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>But why do we HAVE to end the two towers on a note of victory? The book does not, it ends with the best cliffhanger in literary history. ie "Frodo was alive but taken by the enemy". Just imagine, as many people did back at the begining of publishing these books, that they had to wait a year for the next installment! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>There is no reason Towers had to end on a note of victory, in fact Jackson makes a point of ending on a rather ominous note with Gollum leading Frodo and Sam to "Her". I wasn't saying you couldn't put Helm's Deep and Shelob in the same film, just that you couldn't intercut them. You would make Shelob the climax of Towers which, as everyone knows, would work wonderfully.<P>The problem becomes, what to do with Helm's Deep? You would have to scale it back considerably as it no longer is the show piece of the film. The other problem is that Tolkien wrote a beautiful climax for Helm's Deep which feels like an ending. You would somehow have to defuse that if you were still to have another 45 minutes or an hour of film to go. Add to this the timeline issues that Jackson brings up on the DVD and the simple fact that getting Shelob out of the way does give Sam and Frodo much less to do in King.<P>I think, with all this added together, Jackson made the right decision. Towers really turned into the Aragorn show, but personally I'm very glad that so much of Sam's and Frodo's material has been pushed back into King. I think ultimately it will make it a much stronger film and will allow Jackson to concentrate more on Frodo's plight, which ultimately is what the movie should be about.<P>In one more month, we will all know how well this worked or not.<P>H.C.

[lindil]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> In one more month, we will all know how well this worked or not. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Chances are not HC.<P>Cause if PJ stays true to form, we are likely to see a rather different extended version of RotK, who knows how many months later. Not to mention the possibility of an 'ultra-extended version' available only when buying the whole dang series all over again...<P>I origianlly posted a suggestion for a replacement of the Osgiliath ring scene: hmm how about the legitamate Faramir scenes and speeches in Ithilien? <P><BR>Saucepan posted:'Scant, if any, tension.'<P>To which I say, there was already plent of built in tension, just wondering what PJ might mess up next! A few minutes of authentic dialogue could hardly spoil PJ's built in [for many here I would say] tension. <P>You have a pont though, but I am quite confident that if the original motto had been: '<B>Stay true to the Books'</B> some sort of cinmatically satisfactory ending could have been found, like.... <B>Shelob</B>!!!<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Yes, it is nice to see the inclusion of more material from the book and touches that greater reflect the spirit of the book, but, for me, the best thing about most of the additional scenes is that they improve on the story told in the film, rather than that they bring it closer to that told in the book. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That is the very thing that saved it [to me]. PJ merely manages to clean up some [certainly not all] of the mess he created in TTT.<P>It is, I think a twist on the bait and switch tactic, only here you serve up something similar in appeal to Arwen's stew [ the theatrical release] and then add a little spice and soy sauce, and now the same stew [which is still a butchering of the original recipe] now tastes palatable, since we do not compare it anymore to the original recipe, but to the horrid [to many here] version whose sour [bitter?] taste was in our mouths for 11 months!.<P>But I am not really complaining so much as deconstructing, cause I admit I fell for it too. <p>[ November 21, 2003: Message edited by: lindil ]

[Essex]

HCIsland,<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> I think ultimately it will make it a much stronger film and will allow Jackson to concentrate more on Frodo's plight, which ultimately is what the movie should be about. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I'm just worried we will see a LOT of the screen time based on the pellonor fields and the black gate, as we did on Helm's Deep. I think the paths of the dead will take up a large chunk as well (although if the paths look anything like the EA game then they will be fantastic). <P>We'll probably see a lot of action scenes regarding Sam battling the spider(s) and in the tower (which I will not mind), but I'm already wondering how much time that leaves for the tension between Sam/Frodo and partly Gollum...<P>Still worried, but hopeful.

[jonathan32]

I agree that the Shelob scene in the book was the greatest cliffhanger in liteary history and I was mortified at what they did with TTT. Helm's Deep did not have to be the huge centerpiece it was and I thought it was actually pretty boring i9n many parts .. too dark, too rainy and too repetitive. they made such a fetish of that battle that they can't help but make a bigger fetish of Pellenor Fields and the Black Gate. Helm's Deep was NOT a cilmax in any way odf the book ... there were two climaxes ... both extremely dramaytic and very fil-friendly .. the Orthanc confrontation and Shelob .. and PJ left them BOTH out to fetishize Helm's Deep which was good but nowehere near as impresive as the buildup indicated. I think he essentially sacrificed the flow and dtrama of the story to a perceived need tomake us care about Theodon and company, which we would have anyway ...

[The Only Real Estel]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>- It seems that Boyens and Fran were the main force behind the script itself. All the time I’ve been dissing Jackson for the changes, and it’s probably not his fault!<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I still suspect that PJ has the final say (that's pretty clear cut, I think), & so anything done well/badly would still be put on his record.

[Liriodendron]

"Battle Fetish"! Good call! I liked the clearer view of Faramir's boys kicking and beating Smeagol. They could have showed even more for my money, it underscores the return of Gollum, and Gollum's desire for revenge, on the hobbits. I can't remember exactly how that is dealt with in the book. I'll have to reread that part. <P>Oops! Wrong thread I see. <BR> <p>[ November 23, 2003: Message edited by: Liriodendron ]

[Balin999]

This is not fitting into the ongoing discussion, but this thought haunts me and I have to write it to you. And I found it on the Appendix.<BR>Has anyone of you heard it when PJ says that there were actually plans to bring Arwen to Helm's Deep?<BR>*Urgh* I guess I'd have fallen from my chair in the theater. But not of joy! I even cried out loud when Haldir came, I guess I'd have gone insane if Arwen approached, waved back her hair and said "Hello, Ari-Darling, it's me!"<BR>*shiver*

[ArathorofBarahir]

I have watched them all and I personally thiknk that they are fantastic!

[Diamond18]

I never thought the actors actually peeked at these Tolkien messageboards, but there was the part in "From Book to Script" where Liv Tyler says she actually did and ended up crying because of all the things people were saying about her.

[Meela]

Oh god... I hope she doesn't come here. I pesonally love what she did as Arwen, but I would hate to think that we made her cry in any way. She's such a sweet girl.

[Tar-Alcarin]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> She's such a sweet girl <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>and hot. You forgot hot. But, this is coming from a 14 year old kid, so.......<P>But i really liked the commentaries. especially the cast one. The whole thing with the Leeeeeeeeembas bread was pricless. LEEEmbas bread. lol

[daisy willow]

Help! I've checked the FOTR EE 2nd disk and i can't find the TT trailer.....it's supposed to be at the end of the numbers on the right hand side, right? I'm in N. America....Canada to be specific. I do have the MTV speech on the 1st disk....I'll check again....

[Finwe]

I think it's rather sad that some people feel the need to blame everybody in sight, even when half the people they're blaming are not to blame. It wasn't Liv's fault that Arwen's character underwent many changes. If anyone should be blamed, it should be PJ, Fran, and Philippa! Even though all these characters were changed, the movies were still damn good, so I really don't see why people were complaining.

[The Only Real Estel]

Finwe: <P> I agree with most of that. It ticks me off that Liv is 'blamed' for Arwen, & Elijah is 'blamed' for Frodo. It's also not fair that all the 'blame' for changes is layed on PJ, as people seem to forget that Fran & Philippa are also 'to blame' or whatever they want to call it.<p>[ 10:40 AM January 13, 2004: Message edited by: The Only Real Estel ]

[Meela]

I don't think anyone should be blamed. Anything the films or actors represent for Lotr that you don't like is not a fault, just something you disagree with.<P>Stop the blame and light the flame of love and peace. Or something...

[The Only Real Estel]

Meela:<P> I like to have someone to mildly complain to about the changes (to myself/friends of course) . But yeah, blaming is kind've pathetic (that's why I have 's around them all in my last post), you can wish that things weren't there, & maybe complain about them, but it's hard to blame PJ & co. for putting their ideas in there. Even if they are suspect at times...