View Full Version : Will anyone buy EIVs Lord Of The Rings - Two Towers?
God, I hate to think how they'll butcher the cover...
R1 or R4 for me.... on principle alone!
Arch Stanton
11-12-2001, 12:40
I think the text being illminus green on a bright orange background surronded by quotes like ' The dwarfs are cute - TV Quick' , ' Better than Harry Potter but a bit long - Woman's own 'and ' If you liked Dungeons and Dragon's you'll Love this - Paul Ross '. Will be quite fetching.
God, I've never HATED a company as much as EIV, I refuse to buy their films.
Over here in Ireland they hold off all Entertainment cinema releases for months until they have done the rounds in English cinemas. Its a cost cutting thing, that way they don't have to do up extra prints, they can just ship shoddy castoffs our way.
Can't believe they landed the rights for Rings...
What a potential disaster . . . .
I'll also be after the R1/R4 release. They may even make the R4 one a bit special . . . . and I would hope for a agreed world-wide release date. None of this damned staggering.
I heard Warners are distributing this over here!
EiV suck, you'd think they'd update their VHS quality logo for DVD! It looks worse than the FBI screens! :D
But at least you might get a DTS track.
DTS track or not it's going to have to be R1 or R4 for me. The Traffic R2 cover was the last straw for me.
neverland
11-12-2001, 13:09
It'll be interesting to see if it follows the EIV trend of being reduced to 9.99 within 6 months of release. The same goes for the Man Who Wasn't There, which IIRC was distributed by Entertainment.
To be honest, if the disc content is up to scratch, I'm prepared to put up with dismal packaging if I can get a bargain like that. I'm just hoping they include the phrase "From the director of Bad Taste". :D
EIV are not releaseing Lord of the rings over here, we're getting warner releasing it here, cos warner now own New Line Cinema.
Can someone confirm if thats true... I saw the Entertainment logo on the free Lord of the Rings poster in last weeks Sunday Times.
Maybe Warner owns the video right?
Heres hoping...
well if you look at the theatrical poster for lord of the rings you will see that on the new line cinema logo it says under it An AOL Time Warner Company.
also warner own the rights to the original Animated movie so it could be possible that New Line dont own full Distribution rights.
New Line Cinema are owned by Time Warner but Warners won't be distributing the film in the UK, Entertainment distribute all new line product in the UK.
Personally I don't buy a dvd for the cover, it's what on the disc that counts and recently on new releases EIV have been pretty good with Rush Hour 2 etc. Yeah their covers suck but at least they don't have rental windows and offer DTS s/tracks
ian_davies
11-12-2001, 16:30
I thought Peter Jackson said earlier this year that he was gonna release a trilogy of Director's cut discs once all three had been released? Admittedly, I can't wait that long, but it will be nice to own once they're all released :)
Im sure r2-dvd.org or some such site has already posted an EIV release list for 2002 with LOTR scheduled for August
Warner Brothers have owned New Line for quite some time, but in this country Entertainment in film and Entertainment in Video holds the distributing rights for New Line films and thedvd releases in this country.
But for what ever reason Warner Brothers are going to be releasing the Lord of the Rings DVD in this country next year, even though Entertainment In Film are distributing it at the cinema. I don't whether this is due Entertainment in Video losing the rights to distributing NewLine dvds in this country or if its Just Warners buying Lord Of the Rings rights for the DVD.
Anyway you won't have the stupid comments ablazed all over the cover, "Best Speical effects since the Mummy Returns!!!!!!!" Live and King Magazine.
What you will have is snapper cases, which I like anyway so that does not bother me.
where did you hear this because it's down on EIv's release schedule for may/june next year
Graf Zahl
12-12-2001, 10:42
Originally posted by dogbert
EIV are not releaseing Lord of the rings over here, we're getting warner releasing it here, cos warner now own New Line Cinema.
Warner does not release LotR in the UK, however they will release the film in Germany. This might be an interesting alternative for the DVD. However they have already announced a date of September 2002.
tj_director
12-12-2001, 11:44
For me it's the packaging that will decide it for me.
I imagine New Line's R1 will look gorgeous, hopefully a Ltd Ed leather covered edition will be released.
And thankfully New Line's transfers are so gorgeous, that the NTSC/PAL thing won't bother me so much. Have you seen the picture quality of the LOTR trailers from the Rush Hour 2 disc -- WOW!!!! :nuts:
Answer: Depends whether the R2 can match the packaging. If i really like the film, i'd probably buy the R1 packaging, and the R2 disc :cool:
ian_davies
12-12-2001, 20:26
Originally posted by tj_director
If i really like the film, i'd probably buy the R1 packaging, and the R2 disc :cool:
What's it like to have money to burn? :D j/k!
Originally posted by Si b
But for what ever reason Warner Brothers are going to be releasing the Lord of the Rings DVD in this country next year, even though Entertainment In Film are distributing it at the cinema. I don't whether this is due Entertainment in Video losing the rights to distributing NewLine dvds in this country or if its Just Warners buying Lord Of the Rings rights for the DVD.
Where did you get this information from?
Tim Murphy
13-12-2001, 08:28
Is the packaging that important? I know EIV have a bad reputation but I think it's more than a little unfair (honestly, bear with me here!). OK, many of their early releases were poor (as were early DVDs from other distributors), but recently they've been giving us lovely anamorphic transfers, tons of extras, and are one of the few UK distributors to frequently include a DTS soundtrack.
I'm really not too worried if the cover design is a bit cheesy if the disc itself is up to scratch.
what ever happened to the thread with the fantastic EIV lord of the rings cover mockup with the gandalf image ghosted 3 times on it?
someone post that image again please, its genius
Originally posted by Tim Murphy
Is the packaging that important? I know EIV have a bad reputation but I think it's more than a little unfair (honestly, bear with me here!). OK, many of their early releases were poor (as were early DVDs from other distributors), but recently they've been giving us lovely anamorphic transfers, tons of extras, and are one of the few UK distributors to frequently include a DTS soundtrack.
I'm really not too worried if the cover design is a bit cheesy if the disc itself is up to scratch.
The cover is all important, after all I don't watch the discs I just look at the cover for 2 hours
:nuts:
Talk about blast from the past. Didn't realise we had threads that old in this forum :D
beobrand
07-01-2003, 15:56
:nuts:
And the packaging wasn't too bad either... :smokin:
Originally posted by ColinP
Talk about blast from the past. Didn't realise we had threads that old in this forum :D Surely a candidate for your new Forums Gold Forum, eh ColinP?:D
Wow, it's back - changed the title to reflect year and film!
DeadKenny
08-01-2003, 13:09
If it's got the same pitch correction problems as the first film... NO (see here (http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=112448) and here (http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=134075)).
Apart from no audio glitches on the R1, and no cuts to extras, the picture seems better on the R1 too, plus they had the 5 disc set and the cover is nice and textured.
It's up for pre-order on a few places. MVC <*spit*> have it for £18.79 on June 30.
http://www.mvc.co.uk/common/product.jhtml?pid=20187720
Looks like that'll be the 2 discer but that's a couple of months before last year's release so hopefully the Extended edition may arrive around September.....
SqueakyG
08-01-2003, 14:03
Originally posted by nashie
what ever happened to the thread with the fantastic EIV lord of the rings cover mockup with the gandalf image ghosted 3 times on it?
someone post that image again please, its genius
Hey thanks! I made that. It's good to know I made something memorable.
http://www.gavinclayton.co.uk/lotr.jpg
tj_director
08-01-2003, 14:34
oh that's pure class !!! :clap:
by the way i did end up buying both the R2 and R1 theatrical cuts!! my sister took the R2 with her to college, so wasn't that much of a waste. Funny to see how we thought the packagaing would be utter crap.. when it was virtually the same, better maybe. (though not the extended cut though!!!) :brickwall
Michael Mackenzie
08-01-2003, 14:44
Reasons why I will never buy from EIV:
1. That awful bright blue copyright warning you have to sit through every time. It gives me a headache.
2. They often have crap packaging. Some of their more recent releases have been okay, but they're still hardly stellar.
3. LOTR pitch-correction debacle (also a problem for the R4, apparently).
4. Se7en 2-disc edition -- riddled with compression mistakes.
5. Forgetting to include subtitles for the Chinese dialogue in Rush Hour.
6. Gosford Park open-matte fiasco.
7. Cheap cases, such as the wierd plastic thing used in Se7en that had the booklet just floating about inside it.
Doesn't exactly encourage you to put your trust in them, does it?
spida1998
08-01-2003, 14:58
EIV's packaging and general presentation of their DVDs is appalling. After owning 3 of their films (Blow, Traffic and Se7en) I've opted for different region's versions now, slightly more expensive but worth it IMO
Grandmaster
08-01-2003, 15:46
EiV products are not entirely fit for the discerning DVD collector - the bright blue copyright screen, which looks like its from a third generation betacam tape really does annihilate the sense of quality look and feel, and packaging too has been shoddily put together in the past.
It's ironic because I understand that the company has a very hard line on region one imports and from a corporate perspective has allegedly tried to put a stop to the early release of R1 products, particularly in view of the 'early' release of the first version of FOTR (it didn't work, clearly).
The simple solution, as I suspect most of us have realised, is to vote with your money.
Steven Lewis
08-01-2003, 18:40
Originally posted by tj_director
by the way i did end up buying both the R2 and R1 theatrical cuts!! my sister took the R2 with her to college, so wasn't that much of a waste. Funny to see how we thought the packagaing would be utter crap.. when it was virtually the same, better maybe. (though not the extended cut though!!!) :brickwall
I ended up getting a total of four copies of the LotR DVD's: the R1 and R2 versions of both the theatrical and extended cuts (R1 version is the collectors box). Have to agree that, apart from the sound problems (which are quite annoying when you know they're there), EIV did a brilliant job with the R2 releases. It does lessen my view of the company though to know that they have the facility to produce discs with full colour images on them yet chose never to do so, instead opting for cost-cutting plain black text. I get the impression that New Line were very specific in how they wanted EIV to release LotR and hence we got a disc nearly the same as the R1. If EIV had been left to their own devices I dread to think what could've happened to the cover.
I think the R1 versions of both are better though. The R1 (US not Canadian) theatrical cut comes in a very funky dark green Amaray, and the R1 extended edition is in a much thicker, higher quality cardboard slip case.
Erm.... did anyone else notice just ONE tower in this movie??
And what's with those talking trees?? And that battle at Helm's deep? Obviously just movie filler
:confused:
SILVERBACK
18-01-2003, 14:31
dont think it really matters who does the film to be honest be it WARNER or EIV for the simple fact if you get the EIV you get a dodgy cover an if you get WARNER you get ****** snapper cases.god i hate those snappers if it comes to that im taking EIV lmao SNAPPERS SUCK,warner are so cheap :mad: :mad: :mad:
DeadKenny
18-01-2003, 14:40
Originally posted by Otto
Erm.... did anyone else notice just ONE tower in this movie??
And what's with those talking trees?? And that battle at Helm's deep? Obviously just movie filler
:confused:
There are two, but there isn't much made of it. One is Sauraman's tower (Isanguard), and the other is the Dark Tower of Sauron's (the one with the fiery eye at the top). There's a lot more in the book about it. Supposedly it's all about the connection between Sauraman and Sauron.
The talking trees are the Ents, they're in the book, as is the battle at Helm's Deep (which is almost exactly how I imagined it!). Not just movie filler ;)
The film jumps about the 2nd book quite a lot though. A lot has been shuffled around to inter-cut the scenes with each of the groups of characters (which in the book are more separated in their own chapters) and bits left out (though some might turn up on the DVD, so long as they don't just decide to use more of the 20 hours! worth of Helm's Deep footage they shot :eek: ), a fair bit changed with new stuff chucked in, and most controversially some of the last chapters have actually been moved into the last film! (though I'd say that's acceptable otherwise the last film runs the risk of being a bit short, or full of some fairly dull bits of the last book to pad it out).
Despite the differences from the book, it's still an excellent film. There are flaws in it that I didn't see so much in the first film, and I'm hoping the extra stuff on the DVD will iron this out. Jackson did say he was dissapointed to have to cut out some of the stuff for the cinema release (whereas with the first film they were less important scenes that are nice to have on the DVD but just not important for the cinema, but in the second the studio just couldn't stomach a 3 hour+ film).
DeadKenny
18-01-2003, 14:43
Originally posted by SILVERBACK
dont think it really matters who does the film to be honest be it WARNER or EIV for the simple fact if you get the EIV you get a dodgy cover an if you get WARNER you get ****** snapper cases.god i hate those snappers if it comes to that im taking EIV lmao SNAPPERS SUCK,warner are so cheap :mad: :mad: :mad:
I hate snappers too and would prefer a cheesy EIV amaray to a Warner snapper, but LOTR in R1 is release by New Line, which although an AOL/Time-Warner company, they do not use snappers and in fact produced a fantastic box for the 4-disk LOTR:FOTR (same box in fact that EIV used, although EIV didn't manage to get the 'textured' effect on the cover for some reason). The PAL versions suck though for the pitch correction audio glitches (though I'm not sure that's EIV as the R4 is the same and I don't think EIV did the R4?).
LouBarlow
18-01-2003, 15:14
EIVs cover of LOTR was better than the Canadian version...as was their Blade II.
mountains and molehills etc etc
Michael Mackenzie
18-01-2003, 16:23
Originally posted by LouBarlow
EIVs cover of LOTR was better than the Canadian version...as was their Blade II.
mountains and molehills etc etc What? You're telling me the Canadian Blade 2 is worse than the UK one? I never imagined that could even be possible! I agree about the 2-disc FOTR though.
neilalford
20-01-2003, 08:46
Originally posted by DeadKenny
and in fact produced a fantastic box for the 4-disk LOTR:FOTR (same box in fact that EIV used, although EIV didn't manage to get the 'textured' effect on the cover for some reason). The PAL versions suck though for the pitch correction audio glitches (though I'm not sure that's EIV as the R4 is the same and I don't think EIV did the R4?).
No, the EIV box is pants compared to the New Line version, it's really thin flimsy card with obvious joins, the New Line one is big thick carboard box which has been covered with textured paper, it even has a nice black inner lining, rather than the EIV's white card interior! And then tere's the BBFC and other extra logos!
neilalford
20-01-2003, 08:46
Originally posted by DeadKenny
and in fact produced a fantastic box for the 4-disk LOTR:FOTR (same box in fact that EIV used, although EIV didn't manage to get the 'textured' effect on the cover for some reason). The PAL versions suck though for the pitch correction audio glitches (though I'm not sure that's EIV as the R4 is the same and I don't think EIV did the R4?).
No, the EIV box is pants compared to the New Line version, it's really thin flimsy card with obvious joins, the New Line one is big thick carboard box which has been covered with textured paper, it even has a nice black inner lining, rather than the EIV's white card interior! And then there's the BBFC and other extra logos!
Hateincarnate
20-01-2003, 09:06
In answer to the packaging differences between R1 and R2 ext edtn. the standalone R1 ive got has the cool packaging but the stand alone R2 has the rubbish flimsy card, but ive heard the R2 that came with the statues has the funky textured cover --anyone confirm, it would be interesting if its true...
DeadKenny
20-01-2003, 10:21
Originally posted by neilalford
No, the EIV box is pants compared to the New Line version, it's really thin flimsy card with obvious joins, the New Line one is big thick carboard box which has been covered with textured paper, it even has a nice black inner lining, rather than the EIV's white card interior! And then tere's the BBFC and other extra logos!
I've had my hands on both the EIV 4 disc (2 copies of it in fact) and the New Line 4 disc, and the only difference I could see is the texturing on the cardboard of the New Line. Very little difference in thickness of the cardboard, maybe a small amount, but it didn't seem too flimsy. As for the inner lining of the box... who would look there? The outer-box doesn't open out and the majority of people would never notice or be bothered by it.
I wouldn't say EIV's box is bad by any means. It's nothing like their normal stuff, which is probably a contractual thing to ensure all the sets around the world look roughly similar.
I don't give a rats arse personally about BBFC and other logos :p. So long as it's not cut by the BBFC (unfortunately the UK R2 is, at least on the extras).
However, I've got the R1 New Line version purely for the fact the picture quality is better (even given it's NTSC, as normally I'd go for PAL), and most importantly the audio is not screwed up. Well, in fact I went for the 5 disc gift set for the additional book-ends and national geographic disc :D
GrossePointeJack
20-01-2003, 11:31
You mean there was a better cardboard covering for the R1 version! My god - what have i done! I bought the R2 version because i wanted to watch the film, but now i see there is better packaging availible, well i may as well fork out for that seeing as im the only person who will notice the damn difference!
Originally posted by DeadKenny
There are two, but there isn't much made of it. One is Sauraman's tower (Isanguard), and the other is the Dark Tower of Sauron's (the one with the fiery eye at the top). There's a lot more in the book about it. Supposedly it's all about the connection between Sauraman and Sauron.
I believe that the two towers of the book are Orthanc (Saruman's tower at Isenguard) and Minas Morgul, the twin city of Minas Tirith, controlled by Sauron. However, since Shelob's lair has moved to the third film it does make The Two Towers a little dubious in the naming standards.
I for one think it's a shame we got a bloated version Helm's deep, combined with an extended and pointless Faramir sequence to pad out Frodo and Sam instead of Shelob, only to lose the all-important Scouring of the Shire.
*sigh*
DeadKenny
20-01-2003, 12:13
Originally posted by TheoGB
I for one think it's a shame we got a bloated version Helm's deep, combined with an extended and pointless Faramir sequence to pad out Frodo and Sam instead of Shelob, only to lose the all-important Scouring of the Shire.
I can see them glossing over the ending of the 3rd film completely. It's a bit of an anti-climax I guess in cinematic terms.
Michael Mackenzie
20-01-2003, 12:51
Originally posted by TheoGB
I believe that the two towers of the book are Orthanc (Saruman's tower at Isenguard) and Minas Morgul, the twin city of Minas Tirith, controlled by Sauron. However, since Shelob's lair has moved to the third film it does make The Two Towers a little dubious in the naming standards.In the preview for The Two Towers on the 2-disc release of The Fellowship of the Ring, Peter Jackson states that (in his view anyway) the Two Towers are Isengard and Barad-dûr. When I read the books, I always thought that they were Isengard and Minas Morgul/Ithil, but what you're saying makes sense, because with Minas Morgul removed completely from the second film, it makes sense to have to go and find another tower!
DeadKenny
20-01-2003, 13:00
Originally posted by Whiggles
In the preview for The Two Towers on the 2-disc release of The Fellowship of the Ring, Peter Jackson states that (in his view anyway) the Two Towers are Isengard and Barad-dûr. When I read the books, I always thought that they were Isengard and Minas Morgul/Ithil, but what you're saying makes sense, because with Minas Morgul removed completely from the second film, it makes sense to have to go and find another tower!
Ah. Which one's Barad-dûr? I can never remember.
Michael Mackenzie
20-01-2003, 13:02
Originally posted by DeadKenny
Ah. Which one's Barad-dûr? I can never remember. Barad-dûr is Sauron's tower, the one with the massive 3D eye at the top of it. It translates as Tower-Dark -- the Dark Tower.
Morpheus2000
20-01-2003, 13:22
Originally posted by SqueakyG
Hey thanks! I made that. It's good to know I made something memorable.
http://www.gavinclayton.co.uk/lotr.jpg
I've never seen that cover before. It's disgusting! :gag:
Niceguygeoff
20-01-2003, 14:10
That cover is genius, pure and simple. BTW, why do people keep giving EiV kudos over their recent releases? They're carbon copies of the R1 efforts! Blade 2 and LOTR in particular are virtually identical to their R1 counterparts. It's not as if EiV slaved over these discs for months and months doing the menus, sorting out the compression, gathering all the extras together etc. The ground work for many of EiV's discs is done by New Line home video, so people praising EiV for merely replicating existing product (whilst including glitches of their own) seems a bit silly to me. Other companies have been matching their R1 discs in R2 for years, and we see it as standard practice, so it's high time that EiV followed suit. It's the very least we should expect from them, IMO.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very glad that EiV are finally starting to get their act together, but their disdain for the dvd format in the past (ie missing subs and incorrect aspect ratios) and their altogether lacklustre attitude towards presentation means that it'll be R1, not R2, getting my cash when TTT:EE hits the streets.
jroadley
20-01-2003, 14:39
I didn't think there was anything wrong with Region 2 packaging of the theatrical release... (I even bit the bullet and bought the R2 of The Man Who Wasn't There - now that is a bad cover!)
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jonathan.roadley/misc/fotr.jpg
And will get the R2 of The Two Towers (Cover art depending :p )
Michael Mackenzie
20-01-2003, 16:43
It's not the cover that bothers me, it's the horrible garish copyright warning, awful EIV logo, player-generated subtitles for Elven speech, and the prospect of another pitch-corrected botch-job that is keeping me away from putting down money for the R2 (or R4, for that matter).
Originally posted by Whiggles
In the preview for The Two Towers on the 2-disc release of The Fellowship of the Ring, Peter Jackson states that (in his view anyway) the Two Towers are Isengard and Barad-dûr. When I read the books, I always thought that they were Isengard and Minas Morgul/Ithil, but what you're saying makes sense, because with Minas Morgul removed completely from the second film, it makes sense to have to go and find another tower!
I can't actually remember any more but in the separate 3-volume versions of the series it used to say what the two towers were. I seem to remembe it being the two I mentioned but I could so very easily be remembering what I thought they were!! :D
Walrus Man
20-01-2003, 18:14
I recently read (but I can't remember where) that Tolkien didn't ever define which two towers the title refers to, and did not choose that title himself, the publisher did. There are at least five major towers in the trilogy, I'm not sure which two of those are most prominant in the second book, but I guess Orthanc would be one, not sure about the other....
I got the R1 FOTR and will prob get the R1 TTT as well.
Michael Mackenzie
20-01-2003, 18:53
Originally posted by Walrus Man
I recently read (but I can't remember where) that Tolkien didn't ever define which two towers the title refers to, and did not choose that title himself, the publisher did.No, I think Tolkien did choose the titles himself; however, they were different from what he originally intended. As we all know, the story is split into six "books", and each "part" contains two books. Tolkien originally wanted it to be published as one book, but budgetary constraints in post-war England meant that it would have been too big a financial hurdle. The History of Middle-Earth books dealing with the original drafts of The Lord of the Rings state that Book One (the beginning to possibly around Moria) was to be called The Return of the Shadow, and Book Two would have been The Treason of Isengard. I actually prefer these titles to the names of the published books.
Originally posted by TheoGB
I can't actually remember any more but in the separate 3-volume versions of the series it used to say what the two towers were. I seem to remembe it being the two I mentioned but I could so very easily be remembering what I thought they were!! :D However, Tolkien did go on the record as saying that the Two Towers is deliberately ambiguous. The blurb is italics at the end of parts 1 & 2 in the current versions is editorial, and not by Tolkien.
Dead Kenny: Gray Havens is definitely in, so PJ isn't ducking the bitter sweet nature of the ending, although the scouring is definitely out, which to an extent is understandable, since it would take quite a lot of screen time to setup and resolve, all after the climax.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.