Shortly thereafter, Jackson and company returned to Middle Earth armed with new filmmaking tools in their arsenal to create The Hobbit movie trilogy, which failed to meet the high expectations of its predecessor. Updating the movies to the next level of high definition had unintended consequences that negatively impacted the iconic trilogy's visual aesthetic. But when the trilogy was brought to Blu-Ray format in 2010, the reception was mixed. Naturally, this success led to various home media releases, including lengthy extended editions. Related: The REAL Reason The Hobbit Was Made Three Movies In short order, the second and third films in the trilogy were released to similar critical acclaim, each canonized in the annals of fantasy and blockbuster filmmaking while earning high placement in the celebrated IMDB Top 250 list. In short: The Lord of the Rings was a massive success. Tolkien's fabled novels to the big screen proved to be a massive undertaking, but Warner Bros and New Zealand filmmaker Peter Jackson saw their risk pay off: The first installment provided a nation reeling from the brutal reality of 9/11 a much-needed outlet for escapism, building an immersive world that measures up to Tolkein's evocative writing and earning nearly 10 times its budget at the box office. Featuring a meticulous visual overhaul and even more painstaking audio reworking, the latest edition of the fantasy adaptation is no doubt impressive - but why was the restoration made, and what specifically did it entail? Does it succeed on all levels, or does it connote unnecessary director tinkering like George Lucas's infamous Star Warsrevisions?īringing J. Peter Jackson and company exceeded all expectations with The Lord of the Rings, which nearly 20 years later, was subject to a 4K Ultra High-Definition restoration supervised by Jackson himself.