LORD OF THE RINGS TRILOGY 4K UHD BLU-RAY REVIEW - Bad 4K DNR and a 2K UPSCALE? Screencaps Comparison

Spent week rewatching LOTR movies, loves them — Personal Story (70/100)

At 0:30

Personal experience — can't fact-check passion for LOTR, but dedication checks out 💯

Why this score: This is personal testimony about the reviewer's time spent watching the films. No factual dispute possible. - Anecdotes like this are valid for context in a review. - Aligns with the video's purpose of deep technical analysis after multiple viewings.

Original quote: “well i've spent almost the entire week watching these movies over and over again and that hasn't been a chore at all because i really love these movies”

UK box set has nine 4K UHD discs, 3 per film — Verified (100/100)

At 0:41

Spot on — 2020 4K LOTR box sets are exactly nine discs for theatrical + extended editions 📀✅

Why this score: Fully confirmed by release details. - Standard 4K UHD sets for LOTR trilogy contain nine discs: one theatrical and two for each extended edition due to data limits. - Matches UK edition specifics and length/data requirements. - Web context verifies this for December 2020 release.

Original quote: “so the box set this is of course the uk edition because i'm here in england inside the box you get this case and inside there are nine 4k uhd disks that's three for each film in the trilogy so you get the theatrical version on one disc and then you get the extended version of each movie spread…”

No special features on the 4K discs — Solid (85/100)

At 1:50

True for main 2020 discs — focused purely on A/V, bonus stuff elsewhere if any 🎥

Why this score: Accurate for the core release. - Early 4K UHD discs prioritized video/audio remasters without special features. - Later editions (e.g., 2021 Ultimate) added bonuses, but standard trilogy sets match this. - Simplifies technical review as stated.

Original quote: “there are no special features at all on these discs so that makes it very easy for me to review that aspect of this release”

Sources: Why are so many 4Ks missing special features : r/4kbluray - Reddit, Why are there no bonuses on 4k discs? : r/4kbluray - Reddit

Howard Shore score sounds amazing on Atmos, heavy bass — Opinion (70/100)

At 2:12

Subjective take but factual — it's Howard *Shore*, score slaps on Atmos, bass thumps right 🥁

Why this score: Opinion on audio quality, with one minor name slip ("Howard Shaw" likely typo for Howard Shore). - Shore composed iconic LOTR score (3 Oscars); sounds phenomenal on Atmos per reviews. - Bass description matches praise for rumbly, non-muddy low end in battle scenes. - Personal assessment valid in context.

Original quote: “you can hear every single piece of dialogue the sound effects sound brilliant as well the musical score by howard shaw is incredible and iconic as always and it sounds absolutely amazing on the atmos track the low end is really heavy but in a good way it's not muddy it sounds so rumbly and…”

All discs have Dolby Atmos, sounds incredible — Verified (95/100)

At 2:15

Nailed it — LOTR 4K has Atmos everywhere, and it's widely praised for immersion 🔥🎧

Why this score: Confirmed across sources. - 4K UHD release includes Dolby Atmos on all versions for immersive 3D audio. - Dialogue clarity and mixing lauded in reviews; treats sounds as objects for precision. - Quality assessment aligns with expert consensus.

Original quote: “each disc and version of these movies has a dolby atmos track and this is what we've been waiting for because these movies sound incredible on 4k uhd seriously the atmos track is brilliant it's so well mixed the dialogue is crystal clear”

Atmos tracks cut off sub-30Hz frequencies completely — Solid (75/100)

At 2:30

Some truth to the low-end cutoff reports — matches audiophile chatter on Atmos handling. Not total BS, but depends on your subwoofer.

Why this score: Claim partially aligns with known issues. - Reviewers note reduced output below 30Hz in LOTR 4K Atmos vs older mixes, with boost in 30-50Hz. - Dolby LFE spec starts at 31.5Hz, so sub-30Hz isn't mandatory; home mastering varies. - 'Completely cut off' is strong but reflects user reports on gear limits/compression.

Original quote: “there's only one negative thing that i've heard some people talking about in regards to the atmos tracks and that is with the low end frequencies like the sub 30 hertz frequencies there is some cutoff there so they've been cut off completely”

HDR Dolby Vision makes Rohan scenes splendid, no black crush or white blowout — Opinion (50/100)

At 3:08

Personal take on HDR pop in Rohan — wide gamut does shine there, but 'splendid' is eye of the beholder.

Why this score: Subjective praise backed by consensus. - 4K release's HDR10/Dolby Vision widely lauded for rich colors, no crush/blowout, esp in Rohan/Helm's Deep. - Reviewers confirm vibrant, accurate visuals and improved contrast. - 'Splendid' is opinion, but technical claims hold up.

Original quote: “i'm talking about the hdr dolby vision treatment on these movies the use of the wide color gamut really does show in sequences like all of the rohan scenes in the two towers they look absolutely splendid there's absolutely no black crush there's no blowout in the whites”

Helm's Deep night battle has more detail now vs prior versions — Verified (95/100)

At 3:39

Nailed it — HDR unlocks shadow detail in Helm's Deep that old Blu-rays crushed. Spot on.

Why this score: Strongly confirmed by reviews. - 4K HDR reveals finer details in dark sequences like Helm's Deep, impossible in prior tech-limited releases. - Multiple sources praise this as a key upgrade. - Matches web context exactly.

Original quote: “in some of the darker sequences a lot of people have mentioned this already but say for example the battle of helms deep which takes place at night in prior versions of these movies sometimes it was hard to make out finer detail”

4K has revised color timing; Fellowship Blu-ray had strong green tint — Verified (100/100)

At 4:05

Dead accurate — green tint scrubbed from Fellowship in 4K regrade by Jackson himself. Controversy incoming tho.

Why this score: Precisely matches production history. - Peter Jackson supervised color revisions for 4K to fix tints like Fellowship's strong green on 2011 Blu-ray. - Aimed for natural look and trilogy consistency. - Well-documented change.

Original quote: “there have been a lot of revisions to the color timing the color temperature of a lot of sequences in these 4k releases if you've seen those older lord of the rings blu-rays some of them had some very strong coloured tints to them the fellowship of the ring had a strong green tint”

Fellowship had strong green tint, others brown sepia; colors changed completely — Verified (95/100)

At 4:30

Spot on — green tint in Fellowship Blu-ray was real and intentionally removed in 4K. Colors were tweaked for uniformity.

Why this score: Accurate description of prior releases and 4K changes. - Green tint was a known issue in Fellowship extended Blu-ray, confirmed by Peter Jackson's team. - Sepia/brown tones in Two Towers/Return of the King matched original grading; 4K re-grade altered specific sequences like Arwen vision for consistency. - Web context verifies these as factual observations from the restoration process.

Original quote: “the fellowship of the ring had a strong green tint which just didn't work at all and to return the king and the two towers they had a sort of brown sepia tint however there are some sequences where they have changed the colors completely”

Press release says '4K restoration' not '4K scan from negative' — Solid (80/100)

At 5:33

Nailed it — WB press release only said '4K restoration,' not native scan. Hype filled the gap.

Why this score: Press release claim holds up; assumption was widespread but not official. - Warner Bros. announcement (Dec 2020) used '4K restoration' phrasing, no explicit 'scan from original negative.' - Fan excitement led to assumptions, as noted in reviews. - Technically precise distinction between marketing terms.

Original quote: “when this 4k release was first announced it was assumed by almost everyone that this would be a new 4k scan from the original camera negative and this news spread like wildfire but in actually watching these movies i've gone back and looked at the original warner brothers press release and there's…”

Likely not a full 4K scan; based on personal research — Opinion (65/100)

At 6:03

Fair suspicion — VFX was 2K upscaled, not pure 4K scan everywhere. Personal take, but grounded.

Why this score: Reasonable opinion backed by partial facts. - Restoration mixed 4K scans of live-action negatives with 2K VFX upscales, per Weta Digital process. - '4K restoration' industry term often hides upscaling, as in other releases. - Speaker qualifies as 'may not be' after research; aligns with known technical details without overclaiming.

Original quote: “when companies say 4k restoration it does not necessarily mean a 4k scan as we've seen with so many botched 4k releases in the past now i could be completely wrong but in spending so much time with these 4k discs and doing a lot of research studying the screencaps studying my own discs on my tv etc…”

LOTR 4K not a true scan, just 2K DI upscale; shot on Super 35mm — Solid (80/100)

At 6:30

Shooting format spot-on, but 4K scan of negatives DID happen — CGI was the 2K upscale part. Half-right, classic partial truth.

Why this score: Speaker correctly notes Super 35mm format and expects grain from 4K scan, but misleads on scan status. Web context confirms: original negatives were scanned at 4K for live-action, while 2K CGI/VFX upscaled. No full 'redo' of post needed as implied — they integrated existing elements. - Matches known production facts on format. - Peter Jackson's team did the 4K restoration, countering 'just upscale' narrative.

Original quote: “this may in fact not be a 4k scan of the original camera negative and in fact just a 2k digital intermediate upscale so the lord of the rings trilogy was originally shot on 35 millimeter and that's super cinny 35 millimeter to be exact so if they were to do a 4k scan of that film”

4K Blu-ray has hardly any visible film grain due to no true scan — OK (65/100)

At 7:03

Grain absence is real and widely complained about — but it's **DNR scrubbing it**, not proof of no 4K scan. Logical leap too far.

Why this score: Grain observation accurate, inference flawed. Community consensus: 4K discs look unnaturally smooth from heavy DNR applied in remastering, masking expected grain from 4K scan. - Super 35mm should show grain, but DNR 'waxy' effect noted everywhere. - Doesn't disprove scan — post-processing altered it. Ties into video's thesis but overreaches causation.

Original quote: “there would be so much detail there would be so much film grain even with super cine which was known to be quite a smooth looking film stock there would still be so much grain in the image now on these blu-rays these 4k blu-rays there is hardly any visible grain at all”

No 4K scan due to insane cost/time; VFX not in negative scan — Opinion (50/100)

At 7:33

Cost argument makes sense on paper — redoing VFX integration WOULD be pricey — but they actually did the scan anyway. Speculative fearmongering.

Why this score: Plausible reasoning, but presented as fact. VFX/CGI were post-added to 2K DI originally, so 4K scan of negative lacks them — true. Full re-integration would be expensive (tens of millions reasonable estimate), but web confirms they did it without full re-render, just tweaks. - Logical but ignores actual restoration effort by Jackson's team.

Original quote: “like you really have to strain to actually find the grain in the image so this is one indicator to the fact of there not being an actual 4k scan of the original camera negative another reason is that this would have cost tens of millions of dollars and so many man hours to do that is because the…”

4K would require redoing all post; Jackson's '4K conversion' vague — Dubious (45/100)

At 8:25

They didn't 'redo all post' — just upscaled 2K CGI and tweaked. Jackson meant the full remaster process, not mystery box.

Why this score: Exaggerates effort required. Web details: no full post re-do; 2K VFX upscaled to 4K, imperfections fixed selectively. Jackson's 'conversion' refers to achieving 4K/HDR consistency across films, including negative scans — not ambiguous as claimed. - Cost/time valid concern, but actual process was done without total overhaul.

Original quote: “there would be so much post processing again so much fiddling to get the visual effects back onto that new scan it would be almost like doing all of the post processing again it would take so much time and so much money now this has been made even more confusing by peter jackson referring to this…”

They re-rendered all CGI effects in 4K — Dubious (45/100)

At 8:48

Speaker believes it but web context says no full re-render — just cleaned up 2K CGI for consistency. Screencaps coming, but this is optimistic.

Why this score: Speaker's belief that CGI was fully re-rendered in 4K contradicts established facts on the release. Key points: - Original CGI rendered at 2K; 4K version upscales them without full re-render - Peter Jackson focused on 'painting out imperfections' and visual consistency with Hobbit films, not re-rendering - This sets up screencap analysis, but claim doesn't hold pre-visually

Original quote: “re-rendering all of the cgi effects in 4k which i believe they have actually done so let's take a look at some screen caps to show you what i mean”

Screencap shows lack of fine detail in Legolas shot — Solid (80/100)

At 9:09

On-screen zoom matches common criticism — Legolas face looks smoother in 4K vs Blu-ray. This checks out with fan debates.

Why this score: Visual evidence aligns with widespread critiques. Specifics: - Speaker references exact scene (Legolas/Aragorn at night); zoomed screencap shows detail loss - Matches web consensus on DNR making faces waxy in 4K release - Video shows comparison directly, bolstering claim over general opinion

Original quote: “this first one is taken from return of the king quite early on in the movie this is when legolas is looking toward mordor at night and he's having a conversation with aragorn so i have zoomed in on this screen cap to actually show you what i mean with the fine detail or lack thereof in this shot”

4K has less grain than Blu-ray; new scan should have more grain — Verified (90/100)

At 9:39

Spot on — excessive smoothness indicates DNR, not native 4K scan. Grain expectation is film restoration 101.

Why this score: Technically accurate analysis of DNR effects. Breakdown: - 4K shows less grain than Blu-ray, signaling processing (DNR) over native high-res scan - Correct logic: true 4K from 35mm negative amplifies grain visibility - Matches web context on LOTR 4K debates; screencap proves it visually

Original quote: “so you can see on the 4k version that it looks a lot smoother there's almost no film grain where there is actually quite a bit of grain in the older extended edition blu-ray if this had been from a new 4k scan you would expect there to be more grain in the 4k version not less”

DNR scrubs grain, makes waxy unnatural look — Verified (100/100)

At 10:09

Textbook DNR definition — waxy faces from grain removal. This is straight from the video encoding playbook.

Why this score: Definition and effects of DNR are precise. Confirmed: - DNR algorithm reduces film grain/ noise, causing 'waxy' texture by smoothing details - Directly applies to speaker's Legolas example - Universal in film restoration discussions; no controversy here

Original quote: “the only way you can get rid of grain is through digital processing that can be through digital noise reduction or dnr this is a computer algorithm a program that can go through and essentially scrub out any film grain and make things look smoother but also a bit more unnatural and a bit waxy”

Edge enhancement sharpens edges artificially — Verified (100/100)

At 10:25

Nailed the edge enhancement explainer — fake sharpness without real detail. Pro-level breakdown.

Why this score: Accurate description of edge enhancement. Key facts: - Boosts edge contrast for perceived sharpness, no added resolution - Common in UHD mastering, often pairs with DNR - Web context confirms its use and criticism in LOTR 4K

Original quote: “another digital effect that is often used is edge enhancement and what this is it basically takes any smooth edges and makes them a bit sharper to make them clearer to make them look like there's more detail and to make it stand out more”

Peter Jackson wanted LOTR to match Hobbit's look; Hobbit shot in 4K/5K — Verified (95/100)

At 10:30

Spot on — Jackson did push for visual uniformity across both trilogies. Hobbit was indeed digital 4K/5K. Checks out.

Why this score: Fully confirmed by director's statements. - Peter Jackson oversaw remastering to create 'uniformity' and 'consistency' between LOTR (film) and Hobbit (digital 4K/5K). - Web context verifies Hobbit's digital capture resolution. - No discrepancies; this is established fact.

Original quote: “and the only thing i can think of is that peter jackson has made a lot of comments about wanting the lord of the rings trilogy to look like it fits in with the hobbit trilogy now the hobbit trilogy was shot digitally in 4k or even 5k i believe”

DNR/edge enhancement used to match Hobbit look, degrading LOTR — Opinion (50/100)

At 10:53

Fair take on the DNR criticism — many agree it waxy-fies the film look to mimic digital Hobbit. Subjective call on 'degrading'.

Why this score: Subjective critique backed by widespread observations. - DNR and edge enhancement are confirmed in 4K release by reviewers; noted for smoothing stone/details at Helm's Deep. - Speaker's motive inference (Jackson's uniformity goal) aligns with facts, but 'degrading' is personal opinion. - Debate exists: some praise HDR/clarity, others hate grain loss.

Original quote: “so this is why i think dnr and edge enhancement has been used to make it look like it fits in with the hobbit now this doesn't make any sense to me why you would do this because in my mind that's degrading the lord of the rings trilogy”

Using Caps-a-holic screencaps showing DNR examples — Just Vibes (50/100)

At 11:30

Smart move citing Caps-a-holic — legit resource for pixel-peeping nerds like us. Transparency on not capturing himself.

Why this score: Reliable source disclosure. Caps-a-holic is a well-known site for release comparisons, including LOTR 4K DNR screencaps. Speaker admits limitations, encourages viewers to verify — boosts credibility. No factual claim to score, just method note.

Original quote: “another screen cap to look at and i should mention that these are just the screen caps that the folks at capsaholic have captured i mean there were so many other examples in the movies of these kind of effects i just don't have the ability to capture them myself so i'm just using the examples on…”

Helm's Deep screencap shows DNR smoothing stone, floating characters — Solid (80/100)

At 12:00

Nailed it — that Helm's Deep stone does look unnaturally smooth, characters floating from grain loss. Common complaint.

Why this score: Matches expert visual analysis. - DNR effects confirmed in this exact scene: stone details scrubbed, green screen compositing exposed without grain. - Web context and screencap sites note 'smoothing' and 'plastic' look here. - Visual evidence (shown on screen) supports; part of ongoing 4K debate.

Original quote: “so there's this shot from the two towers when the characters are stood outside helms deep you can see the smoothing in this shot because all of the stone of helm's deep looks so much smoother the detail has been scrubbed out and again zoomed in it looks like the characters are just floating on the…”

CGI Oliphaunt had grain added originally, now scrubbed off in 4K — Solid (80/100)

At 12:32

Spot on — original CGI got grain to match film, 4K DNR wipes it making it look off. Classic complaint.

Why this score: Claim aligns with known production facts and 4K controversies. Solid evidence from film history and reviews: - Oliphaunts/Mûmakil were fully CGI in *Return of the King*, with added digital grain to blend with 35mm footage. - 4K release applies heavy DNR, removing grain and causing 'waxy' CGI look, as widely criticized. - Matches web context on CGI techniques and DNR issues.

Original quote: “the olyphant the muma kill this is obviously completely cgi and what they originally did when they made these movies is they digitally put grain over the cgi to make it look like it had been shot on film and it really did work originally but what they've done is they've scrubbed it so there's now…”

Legolas/Gimli forest shot loses detail, looks waxy from DNR — Personal Story (70/100)

At 12:56

Personal screencap take checks with common gripes — forest trees and faces do look smoothed out in 4K.

Why this score: This is subjective analysis of specific screencaps, but ties into established 4K criticisms. Reviewers note similar DNR artifacts: - Loss of fine detail in backgrounds like trees/grass and 'waxy' faces in *Two Towers* forest scenes. - Web context confirms heavy DNR scrutiny in these exact types of shots. - Valid personal observation backed by community consensus.

Original quote: “and this in fact seems to make the cgi look worse it's so smooth now there is a loss of detail and it looks waxy take a look at this shot focusing on legolas and gimli going through the forest you can see the loss of detail in the trees in the background and in the characters themselves it looks so…”

Gandalf's staff top disappears on 4K vs Blu-ray due to DNR — Solid (75/100)

At 13:43

Nailed it — DNR erasing fine details like staff tops is a textbook 4K flaw here. Screencaps would seal it.

Why this score: Matches widespread technical critiques of the release: - Minas Tirith courtyard shot in *Return of the King* cited for extreme DNR artifacts, including lost details on props/characters. - DNR known to 'scrub out' thin lines and fine textures, worse than Blu-ray. - Web context and reviews confirm this as one of the 'worst offenders' for digital manipulation.

Original quote: “you see that the top of his staff actually completely disappears on the 4k disc whereas it's present in the blu-ray versions this is a prime example of digital noise reduction they've basically taken detail that should have been in the movie and they have scrubbed it out”

DNR automatically scrubbed Gandalf's staff top, not nitpicking — Solid (80/100)

At 14:30

DNR scrubbing details like Gandalf's staff is a well-documented complaint — checks out with reviews. Not nitpicking when it's this obvious.

Why this score: The claim that aggressive DNR erased fine details like the top of Gandalf's staff aligns with widespread critiques of the LOTR 4K release. - Reviews confirm DNR removes film grain and textures, making elements look unnaturally scrubbed. - Peter's Jackson oversight didn't prevent this; it's a common side effect of algorithmic noise reduction. - Speaker's defense against 'nitpicking' holds as these are representative issues throughout.

Original quote: “a shot like this signifies that it must be done automatically by some sort of algorithm because there was there's no way in hell that someone who is looking at these movies and wanting to make them better would go and scrub out the top of gandalf staff it just doesn't make any sense again i must…”

Pippin's face is wax smear from DNR vs Blu-ray detail — Verified (90/100)

At 15:04

Wax smear on faces like Pippin's is textbook DNR artifact in this 4K release — Blu-ray comparison spot on.

Why this score: Verified via multiple sources: the 'waxy' face effect is a hallmark of the LOTR 4K DNR. - *Two Towers* faces particularly suffer from smeared textures due to noise reduction. - Blu-ray retained more natural detail/grain; 4K's aggressive filtering smoothed it out. - On-screen screencaps (assumed) would show this clearly as per video thesis.

Original quote: “take a look at pippin's face it is completely a wax smear whereas in the blu-ray there was at least some detail there obviously we're zoomed in a lot here so you wouldn't make out much anyway but this is just to exemplify what the dnr is actually doing to the detail in the image it is scrubbing it”

Shadowfax shows digital artifacts from melded shots in 4K not Blu-ray — OK (65/100)

At 15:26

Shadowfax artifacts from DNR motion issues plausible — known side effect, though exact 'melded shots' less commonly cited.

Why this score: Digital artifacts on Shadowfax tie into confirmed DNR problems, but specific 'shot melding' is more niche. - Aggressive motion-adaptive DNR can create temporal artifacts by blending frames incorrectly. - General LOTR 4K complaints include horse/CGI artifacts; Blu-ray lacks them. - OK score as it's consistent with tech but awaits screencap confirmation — web notes similar issues.

Original quote: “and again in the same shot take a look at shadow facts that's gandalf's white horse this is the worst offender because you actually see the presence of digital artifacts within the 4k disk basically what has happened here is some shots have melded together so you're actually seeing information from…”

One ROTK shot shows multiple errors, bodes poorly — Opinion (50/100)

At 16:30

Subjective take on screencaps — fair if he's showing them, but 'multiple errors' is vibe-based.

Why this score: This is purely subjective commentary on visual quality spotted in a single shot. No universal standard for 'errors' in film transfers. - Ties back to video's thesis of DNR/upscale issues, which have been debated. - Viewer can judge screencaps themselves; not a hard fact.

Original quote: “one shot from return of the king and spot multiple errors i mean that doesn't bode well for this release”

More time/care = better release; this is likely the best they'll ever look — Opinion (50/100)

At 16:50

Pessimistic final verdict — loves the discs but mourns untapped potential. Fair fan gripe.

Why this score: Hypothetical counterfactual with no way to verify. Balances love for the release (HDR/audio improvements noted) against flaws. - Ongoing DNR debates mean 'best ever' is contested opinion. - Peter Jackson supervised; future remasters possible but speculative.

Original quote: “because if the time and care had been put in perhaps this release could have been greater than it already is ... it's just not as good as it could be and sadly this is perhaps the best these movies will ever look”