Poll 1: Gonna get the LOTR DVD?

I'm gonna wait at least until the extra-neato version that's apparently coming out in the fall, and possibly until all the movies have been released and I can get the whole thing on 27 discs. :) (then again, I don't have a DVD player yet....)

Any truth to the marketing rumor that there are different extra-neato features on this week's DVD release than the fall release?

Cool it is a really good DVD now and I am probably going to get both copies. This version is 2 disks and the SE version will be 4 can you believe that! There is shit loads of stuff on the fall version but this one kicks it too.

When you are looking to get a DVD player I suggest you get a Playstation2 ;) It is only $50 more than a regular DVD player.

you need an option for the super-duper 4 disc version.

(I know this poll is really just to test your new code, right?)

Well I was asking about the regular version but I could. Hey I didn'e even have this this morning. I have been tweaking the Template check it out.

Since I live with the ultimate geek, I already own LOTR. Nothing pisses me off more, tho, than to buy the DVD and then 3 months later a 'special edition' comes out. Just one of my pet peeves. We had a talk in my house about that the other night. No more buying 8 copies of a movie!!!

We're getting both. Of course. We're nerds. (I remember, not a geek, it's a nerd thing.) I wanna see it, over and over and over, so I am content with buying both.

I am going to have to explain the differance between a nerd and a geek. Hey Otter from your IP I can tell you are at Washington Mutual or wamu.net that is my bank I love them.

The LOTR DVD was INCREDIBLE. Just terriffic.
I saw it only once in the theater cause I worked a lot when it first came out.
Jeezus that movie is friggin awesome. (I've read
the books several times and for a book to movie adaptation, it only comes second in accuracy to the Harry Potter flick) I'll have a "backup copy"
made of the fancy four disk version. But I'll buy the first one. Hell if I'm paying for it twice... But I did see on the DVD a Special Edition documentary. How shitty is that!?! I mean, they are even admitting that they're going to try and dupe you into buying it twice. Lame-o.

The Harry Potter movie was missing the 2nd Quidtich match and the 2nd cenatar Both were damn good but I am going to have to give the metal for best movie from a book to Lord of the Rings. Some one please tell me why this was shafted at the Oscars?

Regardless of how well done the movie was (and it WAS well done), it was still a popcorn flick to most of the American audiences and apparently most of Hollywood too. The only people who will take LOTR trilogy seriously (unfortunatley) will be the die hard fans. That's why I feel the movie was shafted at the Oscars.
As far as what was missing from the translation from book to movie... First of all, we all should know by now that the majority of the time the book is a better overall experience than any movie adaptation of it. Secondly, there was A LOT that was cut from the book, but for good reason. If they kept all of the story line in the FOTR book, the movie would have been five or six hours long. So there was some substantial sub-plots that had to be taken out altogether.
In Harry Potter, a much shorter book I might add, there were really only a few very minor things missing from the book to the movie. Therefore, the reason I felt that the movie was a great translation of the overall feel of what J.K. Rowling intended (not to mention she was an advisor to the film makers).
J.R.R. Tolkien, however, cannot me called on for opinion on the matter and I don't know if his son Christopher was directly involved in the films making. I doubt it.
In a lot of ways, though, Harry Potter and FOTR are not really fair comparisons in hind-sight.
Two different worlds, ideas and audiences that they're aiming for. But hey. Like we already mentioned, they are both great flicks.