When the Lord of the Rings trilogy makes it way to broadcast television, it will no doubt be broken down even further. In fact, I can certainly envision each movie showing over two nights, for a 6-part mini-series. (Certainly, if each movie is approximately three hours, and they will have to make room for commercials, I think breaking it up is almost a given.)
Anyway, this got me to thinking of other ways the movies could be re-released, and I got the idea of having it converted into 45-50 minute episodes and stripped into series form. This could even take into account the extended versions.
Just imagine, the entire saga could be shown in 45 minute segments, with the entire saga lasting from 15-18 episodes. Why not?
Just for the record, I saw LOTR I in the theatres two years ago, and was very tired of it by the time it got into the third hour. I was that much more cranky by the “end”, especially, when it didn’t resolve the plot of the three hours that preceded it.
I was thus extremely reluctant to watch Part II, and indeed, I only saw it a couple nights ago when I rented the DVD. The thing is, I watched it over three nights, one hour at a time, and really enjoyed it so much more.
I’m really geared up to watch LOTR III, but am scared that it won’t be as much fun having to watch it over an entire three slow hours. Anyway, I may wait for the DVD, but I’d love to see how well it might do stripped into a television show.
Breaking up the Rings into a mini series would never work.
For starters you complained yourself about the lack of ending with Fellowship. Now your saying you would be willing to watch 9 or 10 non endings? Hmm… dont really see how that would work. And because of the fact that there is so much information in the movies, imagine it was shown in mini series format and you miss one episode, basic plot points are lost on you. Although maybe you could be lucky enough in that you might just miss a battle scene or something… sorry did I say lucky? Nevermind.
If sattelite TV can show the movies as a whole then there is no reason as to why our regular stations cant do the same.
People complained about having to wait a year between each film to find out what was going to happen next, anybody who has not seen the film and decides to watch the mini series, would probaby feel the same way and get so fed up of waiting theyd go borrow or rent the movies to find out the endings and therefore it wouldnt be profitable for the TV companies to show them this way.
Ok Ive made my point Il stop now becuase Im well aware that this post is all over the place-sorry.
If the USA Network can occasionally carve out an entire day to show all eight – eight or nine, I forget which – hours of “The Stand” miniseries in one shot, then I don’t see why the “Rings” movies need suffer any kind of breakage.
When it is broadcast on network television, it will at least have to be shown over two nights, possibly consecutive. If the networks only air their shows from 8pm to 11pm, then there is no way for a three hour movie to fit into that slot, and to have lots of juicy commercials. It’s certainly not unheard of for long movies to get split up into two parts.
My thought was that it would be good for all three movies to air close together, and with the split in the middle, you’d have a six part epic.
I see your point Alzarion, I just dont agree with it.
Did Schindlers List, Titanic, Gangs of New York*, Apocalypse Now, Saving Private Ryan or Meet Joe BLack ever have to be broken up so they could be shown on normal TV? All of those films come in between 2 hrs 42 and 3 hrs 10.
If a movie was to be broken up into smaller segments then it ceases to be a movie, isnt that nearly a waste of time to be making a movie?
By the way I totally agree that showing all three Rings movies on the same night would be overkill to someone whos not particularly into them.
I can’t recall any of these movies being shown on network TV. i.e. filled with commercial breaks. A normal 1.5 hour movie balloons to 2 hours on a network, so using that ratio LOTR would be over 4 hours, and that’s not even the extended version.
If the networks ever do show the LOTR trilogy, I have a feeling they will be split up into 6 or more parts.
Well… I dont live in the USA, and obviously our stations are different but the only one of those Ive not seen on TV is Gangs of NY… for obvious reasons, oh and Im not sure about Apocalypse Now, I think Ive seen it advertised on regular TV a couple times but I could be wrong. Ive definately seen the rest though. With Adverts too.
I would have thought that the way in which TV networks operate, and show these films would have been the same, if what you say is true and none of the above have been shown on TV, then Ive assumed wrong.
In saying that, I still say its a damn shame to cut up a movie to make it work for TV, hell if they start that, whats the point in making movies at all?
And I doubt LOTR EE will ever make it to TV.
Actually Frank, some of those movies listed have made it to network television. Saving Private Ryan was even shown uncut in its entirety on the ABC network. If a Disney owned company can show a movie like that, then why cant someone bring in a movie a weekend for the sweeps period? This is of course not to mention that networks cant legally break up the movies unless given permission by new line cinema. When they buy the rights to a movie, it is stated in the contract what they can and cant do, and the film distributors dont like their movies to be shown non-consecutively, because it is a misrepresentation of the original artistic work. All this really means is that there is no chance it will be broken up, and could even be shown without commercial interruption.
I think the idea is that unlike other movie trilogies, LOTR as a whole is one 10 hour movie divided into three parts. So they’d likely play them on TV consecutively, maybe weekly, or as Alzarian suggests, they may break them up even further so as to not be too much of a headache for viewers and play them daily.
I think if there can be found natural breaks (and the Extended Editions have them, so I guess the Theatrical Editions can do similarly), then it’s not a silly idea.
[QUOTE=DellyIf a movie was to be broken up into smaller segments then it ceases to be a movie, isnt that nearly a waste of time to be making a movie? [/QUOTE]
Except that these are really just one movie and cutting it into 6 pieces shown over 6 consecutive nights makes for more continuity than what folks saw in the theaters-- 3 showings with a year seperation between 1 & 2 and 2 & 3.
Lord of the Rings is already a miniseries. In three parts, and in theaters as opposed to TV. It worked there, I don’t see why it wouldn’t still work broken up into still smaller portions. However, I don’t think that’s what will happen. Instead, I expect them to just chop the crap out of the movie until they fit both the network schedule and the restrictive standards of network television. They are awfully violent movies, and I don’t see NBC being comfortable with all those beheadings. Anyone seen the TV edit of Braveheart? Much, much shorter than the theatrical release, and not nearly as bloody.
Lord of the Rings is one book. Written By JRRT to *be * one book. It was split into three parts by the publisher who thought one big book would be a bit unweildy.
So therefore IMHO showing all three movies consecutively one Network TV, kinda keeps in heart JRRT’s original idea.
The big book,as JRRT wrote it is split up into seperate smaller books, then sepperate chapters. Much like the Bible.
So wouldn’t a little bit of editing and even the additions from the EEs fit into the Book,chapter scheme already laid out by the author? Especialy for episodic television where a cliffhanger is nessiasry for continued interest?
Don’t matter which way they show it. No matter who shows it. I’ll watch.