# LoTR Director's Cut - 4.5 hours



## Ghostwind (Dec 2, 2002)

A few weeks ago, I came across a news announcement/press release that Peter Jackson had agreed to release a Director's Cut (despite previously saying he would not) of the first movie. The movie was supposed to include many scenes never put into the final cut and was set to be approximately 4.5 hours in length with a release date set next year. Since that lone announcement, I haven't heard or seen a peep since. Anyone have other news or still have the link to the press release? I believe it was originally posted to TheOneRing.net, but I don't see it in their archives.


----------



## CCamfield (Dec 2, 2002)

I _thought_ that was the initial plan for the extended version, which was then scaled back to 3.5 hours.


----------



## Ghostwind (Dec 2, 2002)

No, this announcement mentioned that the 4.5 hour version was in addition to the regular and extended release versions.


----------



## Phowett (Dec 2, 2002)

Heh... cool, we get an added 30 minutes to the narrative beginning.


----------



## KnowTheToe (Dec 2, 2002)

I hope not, I mean why?  What is there left to tell that is really going to make the story better?  

Maybe it will be another hour of boring commentary and interviews   Just thinking about it makes me tired.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Dec 2, 2002)

I haven't heard anything at all about this, and I check the big LoTR news sites on just about a daily basis.  

The only things I know are that they plan on doing the theatrical cut/extended cut with TTT and RoTK, and that at some point after that there's been talk of a single DVD set that combines all three movies into a single cut - in accordance with Tolkien's feelings that LoTR is ONE book, not three; therefore one long movie.

The big LoTR news right now is that the first advanced screening was last night, and reviews are beginning to pop up on the net.


----------



## KnowTheToe (Dec 2, 2002)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> *I haven't heard anything at all about this, and I check the big LoTR news sites on just about a daily basis.
> 
> The only things I know are that they plan on doing the theatrical cut/extended cut with TTT and RoTK, and that at some point after that there's been talk of a single DVD set that combines all three movies into a single cut - in accordance with Tolkien's feelings that LoTR is ONE book, not three; therefore one long movie.
> 
> The big LoTR news right now is that the first advanced screening was last night, and reviews are beginning to pop up on the net. *




Where?  I want to read them.


----------



## Dagger75 (Dec 3, 2002)

Here is the only mention I have seen for the 4.5 hour running time for Fellowship of the rings

http://us.imdb.com/Trivia?0120737


 Alot of movies run, long. Directors cut stuff. Some of the stuff cut doesn't do anything for the movie. Some scenes look good on paper but when seen in the movie don't add anything. Others are just cool to see but don't really add to the whole movie experience.

 Brotherhood of the Wolf for example.  The DVD has an extended opening fight scene with the brigands.  Both characters are shown kicking some butt.  I was more surprised when the main character was doing all the kung fu stuff at the end it was a pleasant little suprise. A longer movie does not mean a better movie.

 I am sure the lame Tom Bombidil garbage is in that missing footage


----------



## CCamfield (Dec 3, 2002)

Dagger75 said:
			
		

> *Here is the only mention I have seen for the 4.5 hour running time for Fellowship of the rings
> 
> http://us.imdb.com/Trivia?0120737
> *




Ahhh, now that's interesting.  _Original_ cut.

For what it's worth I did a websearch and came across references to a 4.5 hour DVD release, and it was (as I remembered) (at least) the initial length quoted for the "Director's Cut" (aka Extended) version, back in January.

http://filmforce.ign.com/lotr/articles/317493p1.html


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Dec 3, 2002)

KnowTheToe said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Where?  I want to read them. *




Check out The One Ring for links to several reviews, including the below:

Lights Out Entertainment 
Be careful with this one, LOTS of spoilers from what I understand - I'm not reading it for that reason.  They also have a spoiler filled film FAQ.

Ain't It Cool News 
They have their own review and links to the one above.  This one has very few spoilers.

As they roll in, Rotten Tomatoes will be the place to go for all the reviews you can eat, all assembled in one place.  I checked them out daily last year for FoTR reviews, but thiis year I want to go in much blinder than I did last year.  So far its working, but I have to go 16 more days without reading spoilers!


----------



## Ranger REG (Dec 3, 2002)

Uh, *Ghostwind.* We're going to need to see this press release or any official announcement ourselves.

As for the article (link provided by *CCamfield*), it was back in January. I have the theatrical DVD, in that 2-disc set it features a preview of the Extended Edition with commentary from Peter Jackson himself, and in his own words, he does not like the term "director's cut." So the above article is probably referred by other people.

IOW, the originally planned 4.5-hour Director's Cut has now become the final product: 3.5-hour Extended Edition.


----------



## Ghostwind (Dec 3, 2002)

That's what I am asking about. If anyone else has seen the release or can find the link because I can't find it anywhere which is making me wonder about the validity of the whole thing. I'm fairly certain it popped up on TheOneRing, but GamingReport was where I saw the initial headline which linked to the main source. Searching through both sites, I cannot find record of it anymore. So if someone else has seen it and/or knows of a link, I'd appreciate it.


----------



## Ghostwind (Dec 3, 2002)

HA!!  Found the link...

http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=2373

which takes you to here:

http://filmforce.ign.com/lotr/articles/317493p1.html

I knew I wasn't hallucinating this time... ;-)


----------



## CCamfield (Dec 3, 2002)

I don't really like being the bearer of bad news, but look at the dates on those articles.  The second link is in fact the same one that I posted.


----------



## Ghostwind (Dec 3, 2002)

Ahh... figures. The thing that threw me was the fact that Gaming Report had posted it quite recently...


----------

