LOTR Extended DVD cuts to be released theatrically for December marathon

[Virex]

Saw this yesterday.  Almost posted this in the ROTK thread, but this is unique enough that I felt it deserved a topic of it's own:

Return of the King . . . is slated to hit theaters on December 17th. Two weeks before the King release, starting on December 5th, New Line will put the extended DVD version of Fellowship on 100-150 theaters in 10 major U.S. markets and on about 20 screens in Canada. The next week, on December 12th, Towers will re-enter the marketplace just a month after debuting on DVD. The new Fellowship will run 208 minutes, while the extended Towers plays for 214 minutes.

The re-releases of the first two films will lead to a marathon of the Rings films on December 16th, when all three films will be screened back-to-back. In conjunction with exhibition guidelines, the first film will begin playing at 3 p.m., and the second will start at 7 p.m., followed by the premiere of King at 11 p.m., which will play through until December 17th, the official world release date of Return of the King.

http://www.filmstew.com/Content/DailyNews/Details.asp?ContentID=6599&Pg=1

What does everybody think about this?  Will you go back and see these one-at-a-time, in the theatre, as they're released?  Will you wait until December 16th to see all three together, back-to-back?  Or will you skip the re-releases altogether, and just see ROTK by itself?

Whatever your plan, it's still an interesting idea and I look forward to seeing how it goes over in December.  And I wonder if this'll give George the idea to do the same type of thing for Episode III. . .

[obi_robz]

If I lived in a country where they were playing, I’m not sure I would want to sit around for that length of time, especially with my Attention Deficit Disorder. The theatrical cuts were made that way for a good reason. Die-hard LOTR nuts will have the DVDs to watch and I’ll certainly be playing them back-to-back before I go out to see ROTK.

[Angry Ewok]

There's no way I could sit through 3 back-to-back movies in a theatre... maybe at home, where I could pause it or at least lay back... but in a theatre - no way.

I may see TT again, doubt it though, as I'll have it on DVD...

[MisterPL]

There is NOTHING like seeing a film on the big screen, and Peter Jackson knows it as well as I do. I only wish it weren't such a limited release. Ten markets? I wonder if Scranton can get that lucky.

As for Episode III, George would sooner release it direct-to-video than saturate the market with the first two. The only draw there would be if the movies featured even MORE additional scenes. And right now, I think he's a little too busy.

[Ben]

There's no way in hell FOTR and TTT will be played here, so I'm not worried about it.

[JediMAC]

Well Merry Christmas to me!  Hell yeah, I'm all over this!  I've been hoping that at some point they'd release a LOTR marathon like this, and considering it's with the added footage from the extended editions which never played in theaters, that's an even greater plus!  To see all movies back to back to back, to watch the entire story unfold in it's proper sequence, in all it's glory, will be a movie watcher and LOTR fan's dream!

The only thing that's a bit of a bummer, is that we won't be getting the Extended Edition version of ROTK.  But oh well, I'll live.  I can easily sit through an 11+ hour movie marathon, if it means being lost in the LOTR universe.  It's a great place, and whenever I watched the other two movies, I'm always left wanting more... for it just to continue on.  So this is a dream come true!

One of my greatest SW moments ever, was when there was a big charity screening of the entire Original Trilogy of Star Wars up in Santa Barbara when I was in college (around '95).  Watching ANH, ESB, and ROTJ all back to back to back was one of the happiest 7+ hours of my life (this was before the Special Editions had even been mentioned).  There's no better way to watch a trilogy of movies containing one story unfold.  Gotta watch 'em all in a row!

Load up on your soda and candy, wear some comfy clothes, get a great seat, and enjoy!  Doesn't get any better!  Can't wait for the LOTR marathon.  I'll probably wait to see all three in a row, rather than watching the other two separately first.  Keep my appetite whetted...

I wonder if when all is said and done, if there will ever be a 6 movie marathon with all the SW flicks shown together?  I still don't care much for the prequels, but it would definitely be a great time if it did happen!

Thanks (as always) for the great movie scoop V!  Can't wait...  

[MisterPL]

Will there be a Lord of the Rings Marathon Commemorative Catheter? A little Frodo "Bag-Ins?" Otherwise you'll be using that "one ring" to... you know...

[Scott]

True story from the Minneapolis PD, they caught a guy wearing a vacuum hose attached to his penis.  Why may you ask?  So he could sit at a bar all night long and drink.  Well what does the hose have to do with that?  So he could just urinate in the hose which was long enough to reach the floor of the bar.  

"Hey the floor is all wet here..."

I could see this coming in handy for the LOTR Butt Numb a Thon

[SiteC]

well since it will never make it to backwoods PA, no, I won't see it.

I'd rather just watch DVDs anyway....

[BigDumbWookiee]

If they make it to a theater within a reasonable drive, I will probably go see them individually, just to make sure I get to see the extended versions on the big screen, but will also go see the big marathon, but more just to have fun and not soak in the first two movies.

God I hope they make it out here......

[Jesse James]

I'm all for seeing them individually and all at once in a drunken stuper one evening.
 
Of course I'll want to see them individually more to soak them in like Adam said.

Should be a fun thing...    

[Ben]

Too bad they don't have a list of what markets are getting lucky. I might make a road trip to see these.

[Virex]

Too bad they don't have a list of what markets are getting lucky. I might make a road trip to see these.

Yeah, I was wondering about that myself, yesterday.  Here's a list of the top-twenty biggest-populated cities from the 1990 census:

 1.  New York, NY
 2.  Los Angeles, CA
 3.  Chicago, IL
 4.  Houston, TX
 5.  Philadelphia, PA
 6.  San Diego, CA
 7.  Detroit, MI
 8.  Dallas, TX
 9.  Phoenix, AZ
10. San Antonio, TX

11. San Jose, CA
12. Baltimore, MD
13. Indianapolis, IN
14. San Francisco, CA
15. Jacksonville, FL
16. Columbus, OH
17. Milwaukee, WI
18. Memphis, TN
19. Washington, DC
20. Boston, MA

http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0027.html

Of those, NYC, L.A., and Chicago are definites.  At least one Texas city will get it, but which one?  (I'm thinking Dallas, not only because it's more centrally-located, but also closer to me)   Phoenix and Philly will probably get it.  And even though San Diego and San Jose are more-populated, I'd guess that San Francisco will get it.  There needs to be a city in the southeast with it, so it could go to Jacksonville, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Atlanta get it, even though it's not on the list.  Baltimore and D.C. are pretty close together, so I'd guess that one of those will probably get it.  And, it's not on the list, but I might guess that Seattle will get it too, just because the next-closest one would be in northern California, which is still a good deal away.

So, just for fun, here's my guess-timated list.  We'll see if I was close at all when they announce the cities eventually:

• New York City
• Los Angeles
• Chicago
• Philadelphia
• Dallas/Houston
• Phoenix
• San Francisco
• Atlanta/Jacksonville
• Baltimore/Washington D.C.
• Seattle
• Scott Pearson's house

[Scott]

I would modify that list by saying the biggest metro areas...which are

1. New York, NY
2. Los Angeles, CA
3. Chicago, IL
4. Philadelphia, PA
5. Detroit, MI
6. San Francisco, CA
7. Washington, DC
8. Dallas, TX
9. Houston, TX
10. Boston, MA
11. San Diego, CA
12. Atlanta, GA
13. Minneapolis, MN
14. Phoenix, AZ
15. St. Louis, MO
16. Miami, FL
17. Baltimore, MD
18. Seattle, WA
19. Tampa, FL
20. Pittsburgh, PA

This just means Minneapolis has a better shot than say San Antonio or Indianapolis

I say your list looks pretty close Matt, maybe not Phoenix and maybe not Seattle probably Houston and Saint Louis or Minneapolis instead

[Virex]

This just means Minneapolis has a better shot than say San Antonio or Indianapolis

I say your list looks pretty close Matt, maybe not Phoenix and maybe not Seattle probably Houston and Saint Louis or Minneapolis instead

Hey, I went ahead and added a location to my guess-timated list above, if that'll get you to quit yer' bitchin' about Minnesota not getting the marathon. . .