Tuesday, January 5, 2010

Bakshi's Lord of the Rings on BD in March

10:08 PM / Blu-ray / Comments5 Comments

Blu-ray

That Ralph Bakshi's 1978 adaptation of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings is a superior effort to Peter Jackson's mega-blockbuster offering is a view that I doubt many will hold. I feel on considerably safer ground stating that Bakshi's version is the more interesting of the two, as awful in places as it is brilliant in others and a genuinely unique interpretation of Middle-Earth that could really only have been the product of one man.

We got confirmation today that Warner will be releasing the film on BD on April 6th as a "Remastered Deluxe Edition". Bonus features seem to be limited to a new featurette entitled "Through the Darkness: The Ralph Bakshi Vision for The Lord of the Rings", but that's a significant step up from the bare-bones standard definition release from 2001. It's also getting a Dolby TrueHD 5.1 remix (which will hopefully reinstate the music cue missing from the current DVD) and, of course, a new high definition transfer. Given that more than half the shots in the film are process shots, I'm not sure quite how good this will look, but you can bet your bottom dollar I'll be there to report on it.

Cover art for the new DVD edition, being released the same day, is below:

The

Source: DVD Times

 
5 Comments

1. Ronny said:

It's been ages since I last saw Bakshi's version of "The Lord of the Rings". If memory serves correct, it covered "Fellowship of the Ring" and some parts of "The Two Towers", but none of "The Return of the King". I have come to appreciate the movie after a few more viewings, particulary the rotoscope effects, which initially didn't appeal to me. Interestingly enough, John Boorman was planning his own movie version during the 1970s, but ultimately that fell through. It would have been interesting to see what he came up with, although from what I have read, he took quite a few liberties with the story.

(Posted on Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:23 PM)

2. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Yeah, apparently United Artists suddenly decided not to finance the second part, leaving Bakshi and co. high and dry. Contrary to popular perception, the first part was far from a box office disaster and actually recouped its modest budget nearly eight times over ($4 million vs. $30.5 million), so I can't for the life of me think why the whole story wasn't allowed to be told.

I would have liked to have seen the Boorman version too, if only to satisfy my curiosity. From what I've gathered, he appropriated a number of elements from it into Excalibur.

(Posted on Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:29 PM)

3. Kentai said:

I do love many if Bakshi's films, but I can't for the life of me find much to celebrate in his adaptation of LOTR. It's ugly, doesn't make a lick of sense, and is so devoid of the unique personality found in his better (mostlty "X-rated") films that I can't imagine a way in which this was better than Jackson's relatively straight forward epic trilogy. To top if off, what little did work was rehashed with a bigger budget and more focus in Fire & Ice.

Still, I'll look forward to hearing what you have to say about it. I'd love to hear a reasonable argument in favor of one of the more fascinating train wrecks of my youth. What a shame we aren't getting a commentary.

And where the heck is Coonskin, anyway?

(Posted on Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 7:09 PM)

4. Marcus said:

Boorman's version would have kicked ass, IMO.

(Posted on Thursday, January 7, 2010 at 3:13 AM)

5. anephric said:

Leonard Rosenman kicks Howard Shore all over the room.

(Posted on Monday, January 11, 2010 at 11:13 PM)

 
To combat spam, commenting is automatically disabled on entries older than 30 days.

Did a comment you tried to post accidentally get eaten by the spam filter? It happens from time to time. I get upwards of 200 spam comments every day and unfortunately don't have the time to weed through all of them in case something genuine ended up there by mistake. If one of your posts gets incorrectly flagged as spam, email me at whiggles[at]ntlworld[dot]com and I'll do my best to retrieve it.