Lord of the Rings in Blu-Ray

[Darth Madden]

Picked mine up today, the Best Buy exclusive. It comes with a $10 Weta card, no SS card, but that came in the presale. The sword is pretty cool.

I am thinking about getting the sword version... do you have a pic of it?

 

[Michael Crawford]

I haven't had time to get too in depth, but there's two important notes:

1 - FOTR *is* soft, especially the early sequences with Bilbo and Gandalf.

2 - but it *is* better than up converted DVD's. I did some direct comparisons, and while FOTR isn't tremendously better (and I feel it really should be), it is better.

So yea, it's a lukewarm release, at least for FOTR. Tomorrow night I'll try to look over the other two as well.

 

[tomandshell]

If nothing else, the sound quality on this release makes me happy!

I always loved the low bass effect when Sauron explodes in the prologue. Sounds better on this release than ever before on home video.

 

[Darth Waller]

I've watched half of Fellowship and I'm happy with how it looks. It's not perfect, but it is much better than the DVD.

 

[LOTRFan]

Let's see some pics of the sword.

 

[El Skutto]

Yeah, I saw the Blur-Ray set with the sword today at work at Best Buy. The sword look almost 1/6 scale. I think it'd look great in SS's 12" Aragorn's hands. Does anyone have Aragorn and the sword? Can you post a picture of him here holding it? Thanks!

Sorry, "The Ween". I didn't mean to quote you. I was trying to quote someone else, and got yours quoted by mistake.

Actually, the sword is 1:4 scale, not 1:6. I held it up against the sword the Aragorn PF is wielding, as well as the swords on the weapons plaques and I can confirm that it is exactly the same size as those two.

The packaging is misleading because it looks like the sword only occupies half of the box, but in reality, the sword runs the entire width of the box diagonally, with the blu-ray discs tucked in behind. It comes in a box roughly the same size as those used for wristwatches.

 

[jimjimmyjones85]

Its called bull____. I would never trust screen grabs.

True. Screen grabs are compressed and treated a lot of times..

I haven't had time to get too in depth, but there's two important notes:

1 - FOTR *is* soft, especially the early sequences with Bilbo and Gandalf.

2 - but it *is* better than up converted DVD's. I did some direct comparisons, and while FOTR isn't tremendously better (and I feel it really should be), it is better.

So yea, it's a lukewarm release, at least for FOTR. Tomorrow night I'll try to look over the other two as well.

What are you using for upconverting player ?

 

[Michael Crawford]

Oppo BDP-83.

 

[Isildur's bane]

I watched Fellowship and Two Towers yesterday and they are a significant upgrade over upconverted DVD's. The transfer is not excellent but it is very good, it is probably like Cloverfield, Mr/Mrs Smith, District 9 in terms of PQ. However, the 6.1 sound is phenomenal I really don't care since I paid $18.99 for mine

Hopefully, when the EE come out they will do an exceptional transfer the likes of the Pirates trilogy.

 

[The Ringer]

Under $20!

Nice.

 

[RoboDad]

Actually, the sword is 1:4 scale, not 1:6. I held it up against the sword the Aragorn PF is wielding, as well as the swords on the weapons plaques and I can confirm that it is exactly the same size as those two.

Not true. The sword is definitely 1:6 scale. It is a full inch shorter than the Aragorn PF sword (which isn't Anduril anyway, so that comparison is kind of moot), but it is the exact same length as the Anduril on the Aragorn at the Black Gates SSW statue. And the weapons plaques are 1:6 scale, not 1:4, BTW.

 

[Valarauko]

I'm still living in the stone age, no BR player and no HDTV, so I'll have to live vicariously through all of you who have those devices. I watched the trilogy trailer on YouTube in 720p and it was incredible! I can only imagine what it's like in 1080p! Does the higher resolution hold up as well or does it negatively affect any of the CGI scenes?

 

[ColdFusion]

Anyone get through FOTR yet? Is it as bad as they say?

Got this today and watched FOTR tonight. I can't fathom why anyone would say this is bad. Unless they're just pissing on about it not being the EE's. While I'm no videophile, I'm really happy with the picture. It's obviously better picture and sound quality than it's DVD counterpart. There is absolutely no question. And since this is the only release on BD for a while, I don't really see why there is even a debate. Suck's not the EE's, but they'll be out eventually. I'll get them and keep both sets. Besides, I like having both editions. Friends who have never seen the trilogy usually prefer to start out with the theatrical releases.

 

[The Ringer]

Friends who have never seen the trilogy usually prefer to start out with the theatrical releases.

Too true.

Most people think the theatrical are too long anyways.

 

[Sithlord1975]

I watched Fellowship as well. Ok so it's not hardcore blu ray material. but it's not that bad!
I'm just an average movie watcher. All that technical stuff they try to point out, I don't even get it anyway! lol Oh there is DNR in Frodo's house, or there was edge issues here etc.
OK sure...it's not super detailed bricks popping out and mega detailed pores on faces. But it's NOT bad.
But I can see the points of inconsistency. Because the film switches gears alot with different tones and feels.
And there will be some scenes where I was like, well that looks really nice. And other times where it was not special. I think alot of it has to do with how it was filmed too. Alot of the soft light scenes for example. Where everyone just has that glow about them. You're not going to get mega detailed pores in shots like that.

It's not that bad, and it's still better than the dvd.
And these regular versions are still great to have because they are more compact, and much easier to get the kids interested and keep their attention, to get them into the material.

 

[The Ween]

Who wants to see every pore anyway.

Reminds me of PotC 3, when they show a close up of Jack's nose sniffing. Talk about huge pores! ICK!

 

[uzumaki_1]

Everyone keeps saying they'll wait for the extended editions, i know i will. What if they don't resolve the transfer quality by then. Also theres more reason that it could look the same as the films are longer in the EE which means more GB's ( i know that sounds bull____ but I love to bull____ !!!). Hell i looked at a 1080p version of Star Wars: ROTJ and it was crystal clear and i mean clear. It was like they shot it yesterday!!! Its such a shame that they cocked it up. Here's hoping that the quality issue is solved by the time we get the EE which will be apparently in 2013 ?

 

[El Skutto]

Not true. The sword is definitely 1:6 scale. It is a full inch shorter than the Aragorn PF sword (which isn't Anduril anyway, so that comparison is kind of moot), but it is the exact same length as the Anduril on the Aragorn at the Black Gates SSW statue. And the weapons plaques are 1:6 scale, not 1:4, BTW.

So, then, why does Sideshow have every single weapon plaque listed as 1:4 scale on their website?

https://www.sideshowtoy.com/listing.php?cat=The Lord of the Rings&type=Scaled Replica&viewall=true

 

[RoboDad]

That would be a mistake on their site, I guess. All I can say is that the sword is exactly the same length as the sword on the Agarorn at the Black Gates statue, and the pommel also exactly matches the shards on the weapon set. Further, looking at the bow on the Legolas set, if that is 1/4 scale, then it would be ridiculously small. It is significantly smaller than the Galadhrim Archer bow, which is 1:6 scale. And Gandalf's staff also matches up in length the 1:6 scale Gandalf the Grey statue.

 

[Darth Caedus]

New Line Cinema.....Bring us the extended edition you thieves.....YOU THIEVES !!!!!!!!!!!!!