The Lord of the Rings: The Motion Picture Trilogy DVD Box Set

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Big_Orange, May 25, 2004.

  1. Big_Orange

    Cernovog Guest

    On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:53:19 -0400, TSKO wrote
    (in message <P%Qsc.677$>):

    > I myself have both the theatrical and
    > extended (being the big fan I am)


    Could you explaining your reasoning behind this, TSKO? This always boggles
    me. If you own the extended, why would you possibly want the cut theaterical
    versions? Did you actually want to own both versions, or is it because you
    were so incredibly impatient (no offense intended) that you just couldn't
    wait for the extended DVDs and bought the theaterical version to tide you
    over?

    I know that many people, most who are not fans of the books, prefer the
    shorter theaterical versions, but to own both? I never understood this.
    Cernovog, May 28, 2004
    #21
    1. Advertising

  2. Big_Orange

    JWB Guest

    "Cernovog" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:53:19 -0400, TSKO wrote
    > (in message <P%Qsc.677$>):
    >
    > > I myself have both the theatrical and
    > > extended (being the big fan I am)

    >
    > Could you explaining your reasoning behind this, TSKO? This always boggles
    > me. If you own the extended, why would you possibly want the cut

    theaterical
    > versions? Did you actually want to own both versions, or is it because you
    > were so incredibly impatient (no offense intended) that you just couldn't
    > wait for the extended DVDs and bought the theaterical version to tide you
    > over?
    >
    > I know that many people, most who are not fans of the books, prefer the
    > shorter theaterical versions, but to own both? I never understood this.
    >


    Not knocking it, but I don't really understand it either. After watching the
    extended versions of the first two films, I have no desire to ever see the
    theatrical versions again. Maybe the guy is a huge fan and wants both
    versions just to "have" them?

    I did buy the theatrical of each (because i was impatient), and later sold
    them on ebay for about $7 when the extended version of each came out.
    Considering I paid about $15 for each, I essentially got a 6-month rental
    for $8
    JWB, May 28, 2004
    #22
    1. Advertising

  3. Big_Orange

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Cernovog wrote:
    > On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:53:19 -0400, TSKO wrote
    > (in message <P%Qsc.677$>):
    >
    >> I myself have both the theatrical and
    >> extended (being the big fan I am)

    >
    > Could you explaining your reasoning behind this, TSKO? This always
    > boggles me. If you own the extended, why would you possibly want the
    > cut theaterical versions? Did you actually want to own both versions,
    > or is it because you were so incredibly impatient (no offense
    > intended) that you just couldn't wait for the extended DVDs and
    > bought the theaterical version to tide you over?


    Answering for myself (I also buy both), I intentionally want to own both,
    because they're two different movies.

    Mike
    Mike Kohary, May 28, 2004
    #23
  4. Big_Orange

    Justin Guest

    Mike Kohary wrote on [Fri, 28 May 2004 08:34:52 -0700]:
    > Cernovog wrote:
    >> On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:53:19 -0400, TSKO wrote
    >> (in message <P%Qsc.677$>):
    >>
    >>> I myself have both the theatrical and
    >>> extended (being the big fan I am)

    >>
    >> Could you explaining your reasoning behind this, TSKO? This always
    >> boggles me. If you own the extended, why would you possibly want the
    >> cut theaterical versions? Did you actually want to own both versions,
    >> or is it because you were so incredibly impatient (no offense
    >> intended) that you just couldn't wait for the extended DVDs and
    >> bought the theaterical version to tide you over?

    >
    > Answering for myself (I also buy both), I intentionally want to own both,
    > because they're two different movies.
    >


    They are different movies, the special features are also different.
    Justin, May 28, 2004
    #24
  5. Big_Orange

    Wade365 Guest

    When it comes to something I love like Godzilla, I own the Japanese (R2)
    version, the usually shoddy US release, and with the most recent films I also
    have the Hong Kong (R3) release... the R2s are for the authentic domestic
    release (including artwork, etc.), without any tampering or editting, the R3s
    are for the subtitle option in case I want to follow along word-for-word, and
    of course I have no idea why I bother to buy the dubbed US releases... probably
    just habit at that point or to have a version of the film I can take on my
    travels (which I do 250 days out of the year for business).

    I like having the "different" versions, even though some aren't all that
    different at all. It's called an interest or, at a stretch, "hobby".

    Personally I can see the sense in both sides of this... although I got rid of
    my "Fellowship" DVD as soon as I knew about the extended versions and I haven't
    bothered with the subsequent cinema-cut releases. When I saw what they did to
    "Two Towers", I was amazed. They put back all of the stuff I thought was
    missing when I went to the theater to see it, so I'm really looking forward to
    the extend-o of "King" and, as someone already posted, I have no interest in
    seeing the editted cinema version ever again because of that fact.

    It's sort of like the recent special edition DVDs with a plaster bust (as with
    the Universal Monsters Legacy set) or the nasty little statue of Gollum, etc.
    that came with the "Rings" DVD awhile back... do you really want that in your
    living room?

    Some folks (a lot, actually) did.

    Not ME, but then I don't have room for it with all of my Godzilla crap.

    : )

    But thankfully for some out there, they DO offer it... and because of the great
    protector known as Democracy (or something close to it) I have a choice, and so
    do you.

    "Bless The Mess OF Fandom Diversity!"
    Wade365, May 28, 2004
    #25
  6. Big_Orange

    Paul C. Guest

    Cernovog <> wrote in
    news::

    > I know that many people, most who are not fans of the books,

    prefer
    > the shorter theaterical versions, but to own both? I never

    understood
    > this.


    What's the big deal ? It's not that expensive to own both anyway.
    You even get a coupon for money back when you buy the extended
    version. ($8 off in Canada). Hell the price of the DVD even in
    Canada isn't much more than two adult admissions to a movie which is
    over in 2 hours & then you have nothing but the memories.
    Paul C., May 28, 2004
    #26
  7. Big_Orange

    Nomen Nescio Guest

    On Fri, 28 May 2004 02:00:11 GMT, "JWB" < actually, my
    e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote:

    >"Cernovog" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:53:19 -0400, TSKO wrote
    >> (in message <P%Qsc.677$>):
    >>
    >> > I myself have both the theatrical and
    >> > extended (being the big fan I am)

    >>
    >> Could you explaining your reasoning behind this, TSKO? This always boggles
    >> me. If you own the extended, why would you possibly want the cut

    >theaterical
    >> versions? Did you actually want to own both versions, or is it because you
    >> were so incredibly impatient (no offense intended) that you just couldn't
    >> wait for the extended DVDs and bought the theaterical version to tide you
    >> over?
    >>
    >> I know that many people, most who are not fans of the books, prefer the
    >> shorter theaterical versions, but to own both? I never understood this.
    >>

    >
    >Not knocking it, but I don't really understand it either. After watching the
    >extended versions of the first two films, I have no desire to ever see the
    >theatrical versions again. Maybe the guy is a huge fan and wants both
    >versions just to "have" them?
    >
    >I did buy the theatrical of each (because i was impatient), and later sold
    >them on ebay for about $7 when the extended version of each came out.
    >Considering I paid about $15 for each, I essentially got a 6-month rental
    >for $8
    >


    In this case, I think there are a few extras on the theatrical version that
    are missing on the extended editions. At least, I remember hearing
    somthing to that effect when the first sets were released.
    Nomen Nescio, May 29, 2004
    #27
  8. Big_Orange

    Mark B. Guest

    "Cernovog" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:53:19 -0400, TSKO wrote
    > (in message <P%Qsc.677$>):
    >
    > > I myself have both the theatrical and
    > > extended (being the big fan I am)

    >
    > Could you explaining your reasoning behind this, TSKO? This always boggles
    > me. If you own the extended, why would you possibly want the cut

    theaterical
    > versions? Did you actually want to own both versions, or is it because you
    > were so incredibly impatient (no offense intended) that you just couldn't
    > wait for the extended DVDs and bought the theaterical version to tide you
    > over?
    >
    > I know that many people, most who are not fans of the books, prefer the
    > shorter theaterical versions, but to own both? I never understood this.
    >


    The extras are different on both releases. For fans who are just as
    interested in how the movies are made, I don't see a problem. What boggles
    me is folks who regularly purchase a DVD w/o having seen the movie. But to
    each his own.

    Mark
    Mark B., May 29, 2004
    #28
  9. Big_Orange

    JWB Guest

    "Nomen Nescio" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 28 May 2004 02:00:11 GMT, "JWB" < actually, my
    > e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote:
    >
    > >"Cernovog" <> wrote in message
    > >news:...
    > >> On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:53:19 -0400, TSKO wrote
    > >> (in message <P%Qsc.677$>):
    > >>
    > >> > I myself have both the theatrical and
    > >> > extended (being the big fan I am)
    > >>
    > >> Could you explaining your reasoning behind this, TSKO? This always

    boggles
    > >> me. If you own the extended, why would you possibly want the cut

    > >theaterical
    > >> versions? Did you actually want to own both versions, or is it because

    you
    > >> were so incredibly impatient (no offense intended) that you just

    couldn't
    > >> wait for the extended DVDs and bought the theaterical version to tide

    you
    > >> over?
    > >>
    > >> I know that many people, most who are not fans of the books, prefer the
    > >> shorter theaterical versions, but to own both? I never understood this.
    > >>

    > >
    > >Not knocking it, but I don't really understand it either. After watching

    the
    > >extended versions of the first two films, I have no desire to ever see

    the
    > >theatrical versions again. Maybe the guy is a huge fan and wants both
    > >versions just to "have" them?
    > >
    > >I did buy the theatrical of each (because i was impatient), and later

    sold
    > >them on ebay for about $7 when the extended version of each came out.
    > >Considering I paid about $15 for each, I essentially got a 6-month rental
    > >for $8
    > >

    >
    > In this case, I think there are a few extras on the theatrical version

    that
    > are missing on the extended editions. At least, I remember hearing
    > somthing to that effect when the first sets were released.


    Oh, that's right! I forgot about that. The extras weren't duplicated. Ok, so
    it's easy to see why someone, especially a fan, would want both in their col
    lection.
    JWB, May 29, 2004
    #29
  10. Big_Orange

    JWB Guest

    "Mark B." <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Cernovog" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:53:19 -0400, TSKO wrote
    > > (in message <P%Qsc.677$>):
    > >
    > > > I myself have both the theatrical and
    > > > extended (being the big fan I am)

    > >
    > > Could you explaining your reasoning behind this, TSKO? This always

    boggles
    > > me. If you own the extended, why would you possibly want the cut

    > theaterical
    > > versions? Did you actually want to own both versions, or is it because

    you
    > > were so incredibly impatient (no offense intended) that you just

    couldn't
    > > wait for the extended DVDs and bought the theaterical version to tide

    you
    > > over?
    > >
    > > I know that many people, most who are not fans of the books, prefer the
    > > shorter theaterical versions, but to own both? I never understood this.
    > >

    >
    > The extras are different on both releases. For fans who are just as
    > interested in how the movies are made, I don't see a problem. What

    boggles
    > me is folks who regularly purchase a DVD w/o having seen the movie. But

    to
    > each his own.


    I admit I buy lots of DVD's of movies I have not seen. I'd say one third of
    my collection (300+) was bought without first seeing the movie. For me, it
    kind of replaces the theater - I never go to the theater anymore (too many
    idiots). I rent movies I just want to "see" (like "Wrong Turn" or "Scary
    Movie 27"), but if it's a movie I'm pretty sure I'll want to own (like X-Men
    2 or Kill Bill Vol. 1), I buy it. I'd say my perception (that I'd like it
    enough to own it) is right about 80% of the time.
    JWB, May 29, 2004
    #30
  11. Big_Orange

    Invid Fan Guest

    In article <>, Mark B.
    <> wrote:

    > "Cernovog" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:53:19 -0400, TSKO wrote
    > > (in message <P%Qsc.677$>):
    > >
    > > > I myself have both the theatrical and
    > > > extended (being the big fan I am)

    > >
    > > Could you explaining your reasoning behind this, TSKO? This always boggles
    > > me. If you own the extended, why would you possibly want the cut

    > theaterical
    > > versions? Did you actually want to own both versions, or is it because you
    > > were so incredibly impatient (no offense intended) that you just couldn't
    > > wait for the extended DVDs and bought the theaterical version to tide you
    > > over?
    > >
    > > I know that many people, most who are not fans of the books, prefer the
    > > shorter theaterical versions, but to own both? I never understood this.
    > >

    >
    > The extras are different on both releases. For fans who are just as
    > interested in how the movies are made, I don't see a problem. What boggles
    > me is folks who regularly purchase a DVD w/o having seen the movie. But to
    > each his own.
    >

    I'll do it if a) the film isn't avalible for local rental, or b) I know
    if I like it I'll want to own it, and don't want to pay the full price
    plus the cost of a rental.

    --
    Chris Mack "Refugee, total shit. That's how I've always seen us.
    'Invid Fan' Not a help, you'll admit, to agreement between us."
    -'Deal/No Deal', CHESS
    Invid Fan, May 29, 2004
    #31
  12. Big_Orange

    Cernovog Guest

    On Fri, 28 May 2004 21:07:46 -0400, Mark B. wrote
    (in message <>):

    > What boggles
    > me is folks who regularly purchase a DVD w/o having seen the movie.


    What? Really?

    So, somehow, it's okay to pay $8 (+ gas, parking, and maybe outrageously
    priced refreshments) for the theater, but spending $5, $10 or $15 for a movie
    (a portion of which you can get back by selling it used if you don't like it)
    is mind-boggling???

    It's not like you can sell your ticket stub and empty popcorn bucket online
    or at a yard sale and at least get $5 back for your troubles if you didn't
    like the film.

    Just like going to the movie theater, I research the movie, read reviews, ask
    my friends about it and so on and so forth before I buy.

    In addition, I watch mostly foreign films so it's kind of hard for me to buy
    a DVD of a movie I *have* seen. ^_-

    You are doing yourself a disservice if you limit yourself to just the movies
    that American cinemas deem fit for you to watch.

    But that's just my opinion.
    Cernovog, May 29, 2004
    #32
  13. Cernovog wrote:
    >
    >>What boggles
    >>me is folks who regularly purchase a DVD w/o having seen the movie.

    >
    >
    > What? Really?
    >
    > So, somehow, it's okay to pay $8 (+ gas, parking, and maybe outrageously
    > priced refreshments) for the theater, but spending $5, $10 or $15 for a movie
    > (a portion of which you can get back by selling it used if you don't like it)
    > is mind-boggling???


    Yeah, it's too *new* a concept to those of us who're used to paying
    $20.95 a month for Netflix to RENT the movie, and *not* have to spend
    money on gas, parking, refreshments, OR buying and selling the movie back.

    ("Rent"....Okay: It's something we do now with disks that we weren't
    able to do in 1998. Ask your kids about it.)

    Derek Janssen (scary, isn't it?--I mean, I only go back to '99, and I've
    at least heard of rental)
    Derek Janssen, May 29, 2004
    #33
  14. Big_Orange

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Mark B. wrote:
    > What
    > boggles me is folks who regularly purchase a DVD w/o having seen the
    > movie. But to each his own.


    I do that all the time, too. :) I read lots of reviews and am generally
    able to predict what I'm really going to like, so I buy on that basis. Only
    once or twice have I ever been disappointed.

    Mike
    Mike Kohary, May 29, 2004
    #34
  15. Big_Orange

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Derek Janssen wrote:
    > Cernovog wrote:
    >>
    >>> What boggles
    >>> me is folks who regularly purchase a DVD w/o having seen the movie.

    >>
    >>
    >> What? Really?
    >>
    >> So, somehow, it's okay to pay $8 (+ gas, parking, and maybe
    >> outrageously priced refreshments) for the theater, but spending $5,
    >> $10 or $15 for a movie (a portion of which you can get back by
    >> selling it used if you don't like it) is mind-boggling???

    >
    > Yeah, it's too *new* a concept to those of us who're used to paying
    > $20.95 a month for Netflix to RENT the movie, and *not* have to spend
    > money on gas, parking, refreshments, OR buying and selling the movie
    > back.


    Same difference as going to the theater, only cheaper. You still end up
    paying more if you ultimately buy the movie, than if you'd just bought it in
    the first place.

    And besides, I'm a general collector. To some extent, the money doesn't
    really matter.

    Mike
    Mike Kohary, May 29, 2004
    #35
  16. > What boggles
    >me is folks who regularly purchase a DVD w/o having seen the movie. But to
    >each his own.
    >
    >Mark


    Based on reviews I do this a lot. I can't afford to spend my well earned
    shekels on a DVD I may not like so I'm constantly reading the various reviews
    on the net.

    Best,

    Mark Allen Zimmerman * Chicago
    MarkZimmerman, May 29, 2004
    #36
  17. >I rent movies I just want to "see" (like "Wrong Turn" or "Scary
    >Movie 27"), but if it's a movie I'm pretty sure I'll want to own (like X-Men
    >2 or Kill Bill Vol. 1), I buy it. I'd say my perception (that I'd like it
    >enough to own it) is right about 80% of the time.

    Have to agree with this one.
    Best,

    Mark Allen Zimmerman * Chicago
    MarkZimmerman, May 29, 2004
    #37
  18. Big_Orange

    W.K.M. Guest

    On Sat, 29 May 2004 05:10:55 -0700, "Mike Kohary" <> wrote:

    >Mark B. wrote:
    >> What
    >> boggles me is folks who regularly purchase a DVD w/o having seen the
    >> movie. But to each his own.

    >
    >I do that all the time, too. :) I read lots of reviews and am generally
    >able to predict what I'm really going to like, so I buy on that basis. Only
    >once or twice have I ever been disappointed.
    >
    >Mike
    >


    That's what your parents said too.

    Claire D. Lune
    W.K.M., May 29, 2004
    #38
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. DVD Verdict
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    441
    DVD Verdict
    Dec 1, 2003
  2. Modemac
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    973
    Peter Rongsted
    Dec 29, 2003
  3. aeQea
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    4,993
    Jordan Lund
    Apr 27, 2004
  4. Replies:
    7
    Views:
    634
  5. Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,908
Loading...

Share This Page