RotK

[bladestarr]

I've seen all three movies twice exactly each in theaters. I refuse to buy any of the DVDs until they come out with (and they inevitably will) an "Ultimate Edition" DVD Trilogy Boxed Set, with 76 hours of unseen before footage! Why waste my money on inferior versions when I can wait to buy the perfect collection!

Oh, a quick question to all those that already have the EE of any of the films: is there a Peter J. commentary for the films, or did he decide to pull a Warchowski and 'let the films speak for themselves'?

---

Hehe I just made a new movie term- "pull a Warchowski": verb. To create great hype about a film or series of films, and then retreat into obscurity before or immediately after the release of the film(s) to 'let the film(s) speak for it (them) self (ves)'. I.E. I knew I f$%@ed over the fans, and I'm going to hide from explaining myself by being all mysterious and artsy. See Also: David Lynch.

[DocD83]

There is a commentary of Peter Jackson and...I think Philippa Boyens on the Fellowship DVD, and I'm pretty sure it's on the TT DVD as well, but I havn't listened to it yet. The cast commentaries are the best anyway.

[Al]

FOTR is Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh, TTT adds Philippa. They're better than average as far as commentaries go, but the cast ones are definitely a head and shoulders above the director's.

Each also has two technical commentaries. The Fellowship ones are dry, and they tend to repeat what was said in the hours and hours of special features, but they're not without their charm. I've yet to get up the nerve to watch TTT ones yet, I feel like I've had so much exposure to the MASSIVE engine and whatnot that I'll just be wasting my time. Maybe eventually, when I'm really bored.

Al

[Head Mutant]

I have two Ring-related thoughts:

The first is a question. How come when Bilbo uses the ring at the beginning of FOTR, does the eye of Sauron not spot him out the way it did Frodo (who used it... say, three weeks to a couple months later, in the movie's timeline)? Although I can think of a couple answers -- that the Nazgul weren't as close to the Shire, or that the eye tower hadn't yet been completed -- they never really say.

The second is probably my only let-down in ROTK, which is when

SPOILER: Click to show

Frodo puts on the ring at the end. We'd had two films with none of the cool ring-on effects we got in FOTR, and this was a great opportunity to show that effect again, with Frodo in that fog and Gollum attacking and the eye everywhere. Instead, we're kept on the outside, watching Gollum grapple with an invisible hobbit.

[Al]

Head said:

this was a great opportunity to show that effect again, with Frodo in that fog and Gollum attacking and the eye everywhere. Instead, we're kept on the outside, watching Gollum grapple with an invisible hobbit.

Wow, you're right. That would have been awesome... now I feel let down.

Al
-is going to cry himself to sleep tonight

[bladestarr]

It WASN'T in the script. ;D (oh, okay I'll stop that now)

[PoolMan]

If I may posit....

1) That niggled at my brain, too. I would, in the end, probably chalk it up to the fact that Gandalf and Elrond keep animatedly discussing the fact that the Eye is moving. They say it a bunch of times, as though it wasn't before. I don't know if I'd say Barad-Dur was only just set up, but perhaps it was luckily only near the formation of the Fellowship that the Eye manifests itself in a way that it can finally perceive or actively search out the ring. Like Gandalf's brief flash of it when he first goes to pick it up in Bag End. But who knows?

2)

SPOILER: Click to show

I thought Gollum on Frodo's invisible back looked kind of goofy, but I didn't miss the ring vision at all. It was used to a satisfactory degree back in Fellowship, I don't think it necessarily had to be brought back again. But heck, there may BE a shot coming on the EE version where Frodo sees Gollum tracking him despite the invisibility. Who knows?

[Head Mutant]

Ooh, here's another one thought... how come Sauron didn't disappear when he put on the ring at the beginning of FOTR?

[druidGirl]

Because he's the only one who can wield it. (The ring has no other master!) Anyone else putting on the ring slips into the shadow world (which is why Frodo was able to see the true faces of The Nine). Only Sauron can control the full power of the ring, everyone else just gets a "fizzle" effect.

Well, that's my interpretation on the whole thing.

[DocD83]

I think Dridgirl is right, but also I think it was by design that the ring by default gives everyone an invisibility power, and that it had no gem. If it gave you more power immediately and had a gem, any smart third age elf could tell you what it was, and if it did nothing Sauron risked it being thrown out or hoarded forgotten in a jewelry box somewhere. Being so simple it looked just like one of the many practice rings made before the Rings of Power.

[TheAnarchicFascist]

um, with regards to the invisibility effect, I think that just happens automatically to the less powerful people in Middle-Earth. Does anybody else recall the scene in FOTR when Galadriel is sucking power temporarily out of the ring (or something like that...could somebody clear that scene up for me? thanks)? she doesn't turn invisible, she turns into a female version of Saraun before the fall of Numenor (again, more of my conjecture), beautiful, exceedingly powerful, and without a transparent part in her body. or maybe the great PJ wanted some cool visuals...but anyway, that's my take. the truly powerful, having control (at least a great deal more control than those stupid hobbits...may they die of ghonnorea and rot in hell...) over the ring, possibly have control over the invisibility aspect, along with some really cool firepower that could have been exploited a bit more in the trilogy...oh well...

[DocD83]

Galadriel wasn't (I don't think) drawing any power from the ring. You have to be at least touching the ring to do that. She's just exceedingly powerful herself...she was one of the elves who had lived in Valinor, and she carried one of the Three rings.

I think the Hobbits have more strength in them than you think. Remember how none of the powerful characters dared even to touch the Ring, and the high regard with which they held Bilbo (possibly the weakest of the ringbearers)? The more powerful you are the more tricks you get, but only Sauron is known to be able to override the invisibility.

Were the Istari in Middle Earth before the fall of Numenor? I didn't think that they were.

[bladestarr]

I think the Hobbits have more strength in them than you think. Remember how none of the powerful characters dared even to touch the Ring, and the high regard with which they held Bilbo (possibly the weakest of the ringbearers)?

Actually, if I remember my Tolkein lore correctly, the Hobbits were somewhat 'destined' to be ring bearers. The reason why Gandalf took such interest in them and always came to the Shire was the nature of the Hobbits themselves. They are a strange people that seem to have no desire for power or excitment. (Remember the old man making nasty faces to the returning Hobbits at the end of RotK? He didn't like their "newfangled look")

And this is the key. This is why the Hobbits were able to carry the ring where others could not. They had no lust for power, and so the ring could not seduce them as easily. Gollum, who used to be one of the Riverfolk (Hobbit-cousin) has the ring for who knows how long and never brought it back to its master, because that is just how strong Hobbits are. Also, if you notice, Frodo slowly grows weaker to the ring's seductive power the closer he draws to Mordor, the closer he comes to the lands influenced and controlled by Sauron.

[Magill]

I've also heard that some people think Gandalf was so willing to have Sam, Pippin, and Merry go along with the Fellowship was so that if Frodo got injured, killed, or starting succumbing to the ring, they'd have 3 "reserve" hobbits to carry the ring.