my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (Page 3)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King Darren Briggs Master Film Handler Posts: 371 From: York, UK Registered: Dec 2001 posted 12-21-2003 06:34 AM                        I screened the film before we screened it to the public last wednesday morning, Dolby Digital, Fader 7 in a THX auditorium. Amazing sound, pretty damn good image to say its all been through a computer, just think if they spent a little of the budget filming in 65mm and then having 70mm DTS prints along with 35mm. It wil only take a big budget film like this to be shot in 65mm to get 70mm up and running again. Ive had calls from a few of our cinemas saying the SRD track is failing in reels 4 and 10 at one site, 5,6 and 10 at another. The one I have is fine. Maybe they rushed so many prints through the quality has gone down, ots of Neg dirt at reel ends especially reel 8 i believe. Shoddy for such a huge epic film. Darren 65mm photography and 70mm projection is the way to go!  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 12-21-2003 12:40 PM                     I think the 70mm thing is a pipe dream. A nice one, mind you. But a pipe dream all the same. 1. Printing costs -- not worth it. Showing this movie in 70mm won't sell any more tickets. Sold out is sold out. 2. Shipping costs. As we've discussed numerous times, the studios are hoping that dCinema will eliminate certain distribution costs. Going back to 70mm would be counterproductive as far as this is concerned. 3. dCinema. As far as something looking/sounding better than 35mm, the studio execs think that dCinema is the answer. Fact is that 70mm has been relegated to being an art-house gimmick. Sad but true. Nobody wants to see "Hello Dolly" in 35mm. I seriously doubt if many people have a need to see it in a theatre. I patronized some 70mm screenings in Los Angeles out of a morbid curiosity about the format itself. Even with "Lawrence" or "2001" I was really there to see a 70mm show "one last time" before it goes away. Terrific presentations! But do I think 70mm is better than today's 35mm with SRD? No. More than likely the difference is that 70mm shows get a better class of projectionist -- No theatre wants to go down in history as being the place that damaged the last surviving 70mm print of "Willow." Also, with any kind of specialty screening, you can't afford to screw up or your name will be mud! And I'll tell you something else: I believe that every time a PROJECTIONIST complains about the so-called shortcomings of 35mm, it creates a more stable platform for a dCinema rollout. Do you really want that? Who was it that said -- right here on Film-Tech -- that "better projection pays" ? I think that is the answer. Good 35mm showmanship -- even with analog SR -- can be quite impressive. As for an IMAX Experience -- I think they'd have to cut a lot out of this movie or else introduce another platter upgrade for this one title. 70mm fans are snobs!  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 12-21-2003 02:15 PM                     This is the movie review forum guys. Please open up a new thread in FHF.  |  IP: Logged John Anastasio Master Film Handler Posts: 325 From: Trenton, NJ, USA Registered: Sep 2000 posted 12-22-2003 06:45 AM                        Okay, this time I'm in the right string. Saw it at AMC Hamilton 24, house #12. Loved it. My ears are in heaven. Looked for the CAP code and couldn't find it on their print. This trilogy has raised the production bar for complexity. It's not just film, it's a monument to filmmaking and storytelling.  |  IP: Logged Ron Lacheur Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 650 From: British Columbia, Canada Registered: Feb 2002 posted 12-22-2003 09:16 AM                     12/21/2003, Famous Players Capitol 6, Cinema #1, Dolby Digital EX. I'm not too big of a fan of LOTR series but I really enjoyed this. The 3hrs, 20mins flew by pretty fast which is a good sign. The ending dragged on a bit, but otherwise a very well done show. Presentation wise: Despite the dirt on the ads and trailers. The presentation would have BEEN perfect. Until Reel 8, where we were greeted with a base side scratch on the right side of the picture. The sound was absolutely awesome. I think someone has been reading the comments we have been making on this theater and has done something about it. Besides the scratch, an awesome 4 hours at the movies.  |  IP: Logged Richard Greco Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1180 From: Plant City, FL Registered: Nov 2003 posted 12-22-2003 12:20 PM                     I saw this at a screening on the day before opening day. Having never seen any of the films before, I wasn't looking forward to this screening. My boss however, said for me to get on the clock for it. I WAS interested then Overall, I actually enjoyed this film and it made me want to see the other 2 on DVD. The battle scenes were superb, the hobbits played really well, and the graphics were great. I liked the sound mix in DTS This screening was an open employee screening and it turned out to be similar to an episode of MST3k. I also thought that it was amazing that a whole film went without cursing once. (Yes I do realize that it was medievil times and those words didn't exist) I give it a 3.5 out of 4 stars because of the slow ending. Oh BTW, This is my 100th Post!! Woo-Hoo!!!  |  IP: Logged Kamakshipalya Dhananjay Expert Film Handler Posts: 190 From: Bangalore, India Registered: Aug 2002 posted 12-23-2003 06:08 AM                     Really waiting to see it in theatres here in INDIA. Was at Amsterdam last week and now wish I was there for another week to catch this marvel. I have seen the previous films in the series and have great expectations about this one. Saw the reviews at Rottentomatoes.com and was amazed to see such agreement between critics over the likeability for ROTK. This particular review stood out for me, from the SEATTLE POST INTELLIGENCER Review from the Seattle Post Intelligencer Also pleased to note this film breached the 250 million mark internationally in just 5 days since release. Unfortunately, all of this means nothing back here in INDIA. It is somewhat expected that this too will pass unnoticed like the previous two films. Somehow, the previous two films made losses for the distributor and I hope this one will, if not help it recoup the earlier losses, at least make some money for its distributor, Warner Bros. Poor distribution skills and strategy on the part of Warner Bros deprive movie lovers in India to catch this film while it is still talked about overseas. Pirated copies of digital masters of ROTK have flooded the streets across India and few, if at all, will wait to catch this film, after a long wait, at the theatres. I cant cease to wonder on how the Pirates have been so successful in throwing out really pristine dvds of digital masters of most big films in less than two days from the US release. With presentations in movie theatres in most theatres in the country rated as being anywhere from 'below average to poor' and in most cases, 'repulsive', the Pirates seem to know just what the people want and have been getting better and better and giving just that. Anyway, wish ROTK will come soon to theatres in India. I will wait to watch this film at theatres. And in dts.  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 12-24-2003 12:54 AM                     Loved the movie. Watched in a remodeled Regal Perimeter Pointe in Atlanta. Very good sound and properly framed bright picture.The series seems to have gotten better for the non readers of the book as it went along as we get to realize that it is not the annoying Frodo and Ring show as we feared after watching FOTR. Best thing about the movie was that when I went home and watched FOTR EE on Starz, I wasnt bored at all. That's the hallmark of a good final chapter, it makes the preceding chapters more interesting. Example: Baromir. He was OK when I first saw FOTR. However, now that I know about his family in ROTK, his death in FOTR resonates more. Also, whenever Frodo goes through his lil Ring spell, I don't sit impatiently thinking how many times do I have to see Frodo struggle with this inthe next 12 hours. Now, I know the other hobbits have a purpose. Serkis technically qualifies as supporting actor. So whatever techncalities hollywood had for not nominating previously are gone. His screen time as Smeagol is more than the screen time previous winner Judi dench had as Queen Elizabeth in Shakespeare in Love. Sean Astin and Ian McKellan are worthy too. Sean is the star in this movie. My only problem is that they could have taken out the earlier scene with the boring Liv Tyler and give us the deleted Saruman scene. Arwyn is one character who sucked in this series. Eowyn would have been a preferable choice to marry the king. The multiple endings didn't bother me because all the characters grew on me. However, i agree the fadeouts were like fakeouts. They should have done a brisker transition. KD from India: I am not sure how popular the LOTR movies are in India. Howeger, I wouldn't be surprised at the lack of buzz since Indian mythology is full of great stories which are complex and fun. Just like a Western audience may not watch a Mahabharata movie in droves despite it being a great piece of writing, I guess there is no big scandal if Indians dont watch this series in huge numbers.  |  IP: Logged Shane Hoffmann Film Handler Posts: 68 From: Fond du Lac, WI, USA Registered: Feb 2003 posted 12-24-2003 01:15 AM                     Pravin: I think Professor Tolkien would have had a bone to pick with you if you think Eowyn should have married the king. I'm not horribly disappointed about the Saruman scene being on DVD. It means I still have something to look forward to. If anything, they could have saved a few of the multiple endings for the DVD to keep the Saruman sequence in the theatrical (even though I liked the endings).  |  IP: Logged Jim Leko Film Handler Posts: 90 From: Redondo Beach, CA, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 12-27-2003 07:43 AM                     You will have a LOT to look forward to. http://www.dvdtown.com/announcement/DVD_version_of_Return_of_the_K/249/ Peter Jackson recently attended his last premiere for the last chapter in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Last stop was Copenhagen the capitol of Denmark. There he gave a very interesting interview to a Danish newspaper. He told that the first cut of Return of the King had a running time of four hours and fifty minutes. When asked why this was too long for the theaters but fit for DVD he answered. "It is different with the DVD version. People watch it at home. They can lay on the couch or spread the experience over two-three nights. That is the amazing thing with DVD. It gives a whole new dynamic and I can assure you that the DVD version of Return of the King will be longer than 4 hours and 50 min." -- Note that this was translated into Danish by the newspaper and then back to English by us. I don't know what to believe. We will just have to wait until it gets official. One thing is sure, I'm looking forward to see the three hour and twenty minute version at midnight today in the local theater =)  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-27-2003 01:40 PM                     With the "extended version" length of "Return of the King" easily eclipsing 4 hours (and perhaps even closing in on the 5 hour mark) I would not be surprised to see a 5 or 6 disc version with the movie spread across 3 discs (gotta fit that high bitrate video quality, all those commentary tracks and DD 5.1 EX and DTS-ES 6.1 audio).  |  IP: Logged Greg Mueller Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1687 From: Port Gamble, WA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-10-2004 08:09 PM                        The wife and I finally got in to see this film. We really liked it. But we both agreed that they could have ended it about 20 minutes before the credits rolled. They just kept having these grandiose endings, one after the other. One would fade and you'd expect the credits to roll and then another grandiose ending. When it finally said "The End" I said hooray! Maybe they couldn't decide which ending they liked so they used them all? Excellent film  |  IP: Logged David Favel Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 764 From: Ashburton, New Zealand Registered: Feb 2002 posted 01-10-2004 09:08 PM                     Maybe they couldn't decide which ending they liked so they used them all? But then they deleted the Saruman ending.  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 01-10-2004 09:50 PM                        Well, the story has many different characters with different backgrounds from different places, so it`s only natural there have to be multiple endings, just like in the book. I think it`s a shame they cut the whole section when the Hobbits come home and the Shire is getting industrialized by Saruman.  |  IP: Logged Evans A Criswell Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1579 From: Huntsville, AL, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 01-15-2004 10:42 AM                        Attendance: 2004/01/12 19:30, Regal River Oaks Cinema 8, Decatur, AL, Auditorium 6, DTS I waited a while before seeing this movie. The movie was very impressive and I enjoyed it tremendously. Most of the comments I have match comments already posted in this thread that don't need to be duplicated. There were lots of long-haired guys in this movie, and one thing I found humorous was that even though these guys were out in battle and outside all the time, their hair was always perfect and not messed up in the slightest. Being a long-haired guy, I know better. Another scene I wondered about was the one where Frough-Dough and Sam were on the rock next to the volcano. They were just a few feet above the ground which was covered with flowing lava. Would six feet above the ground be enough to shield you from being cooked or burned alive by the heat from a solid flowing lava ground cover? The film presentation was excellent, with no noted defects.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.