I was playing follow the link yesterday and stumbled upon something kind of stupid. The link following began over at John Gushue's blog where I saw the trailer for the new Robin Hood movie....a movie I really, really hope is better than this trailer which looks like Gladiator set in in England, except dumber.
From there it was the trailer for Alice in Wonderland, which actually looks like a lot of fun. At some point you would think I'd get tired of watching Johnny Depp chew scenery in Tim Burton movies, but it hasn't happened yet. On a side note, I mentioned to Cathy I've never read the book, and she was horrified. I don't know how it happened. I actually know most of the story, but I've just never read the novel. Funny that.
And from there, it was the trailer to Lord of the Rings. Yes, I am aware that movie has been out, dear god, nearly 10 years now. However, this is the trailer for the movies re-release into Blu-Ray for April.
Oddly enough, we just finished re-watching the movies this weekend. Cathy probably watches them every couple of months, but this is the first time I've sat down and watched all three in probably two years. And I'm always pleased to see how well they're holding up. It was never the story or the acting I was worried about, but the special effects. And yes, there are some clunky bits that haven't held up well, but considering the extended versions of the movies add up to 11 hours or, I think that's pretty damn good.
I'd been looking forward to seeing the trilogy come out in Blu-Ray. Cathy has a rule about movie purchases since we got the Blu-Ray player, and it is this: we're not allowed to buy a movie in Blu-Ray that we already own in standard DVD format. We've only broken that rule once, to buy WALL-E. However, I think Lord of the Rings might be another of those exceptions. It's that epic in scale that I want to see it in Blu-Ray.
However, I noticed some curious wording within the trailer about "theatrical release" and a quick check confirmed it - this is the Blu-Ray version of the original theatrical movies, and not the extended cuts.
I understand why the movie companies are doing this (think "money"), but it doesn't make it any less stupid. Blu-Ray is still very much a geek technology. If you're using the players, odds are you're a tech geek and if you're one of those, you tend to be a geek in other parts of your life as well. And I don't know a single person who prefers the theatrical release of these movies compared to the extended versions of the movies. In fact, I haven't seen the theatrical versions since I first saw the movies in the theatre. Why bother when the extended cuts are so very much better.
It seems the extended cuts will come out on Blu-Ray closer to when The Hobbit gets released. Which is fine and all. I understand the marketing strategy behind this. However, I honestly don't know who is going to buy these. I won't. It really strikes me as being a huge waste of money.
Then again, considering the movies have made a couple of billion dollars, I guess you're allowed to waste the odd dollar here and there.
Last Five
1. You're the reason I'm leaving - Franz Ferdinand
2. Trying to pull myself away - Glen Hansard
3. Hard road - Sam Roberts
4. The long and winding road - The Beatles*
5. Stumble blind - Drive
3 comments:
We will be awaiting the extended Blu-Ray edition, thanx
Christmas gifts from people who don't know the difference and think it would make a great gift.
People who have blu-ray players of some type, but are not actually techno-geeks. (Think PS3 owners (not all of them would know the difference), or owners of cheap blu-ray players combined with cheap flatscreens.)
People who have to collect every version.
And, some people might actually prefer the theatrical version.
Jesus, that Robin Hood trailer is awful. It doesn't even look remotely like a Robin Hood movie.
I love who they ended by showing Crowe with a bow drawn, just to make sure you realized that, yes, this is Robin Hood and, yes, he will shoot a bow and arrow at least once during the movie.
Post a Comment