Star Wars discussion from The Bits... (1 Viewer)

[Robert Anthony]

My thinking is, and I'm totally guessing, but the amount of work you'd need to do to do an after-the-fact approximation with the 2004 DVD's by subtracting elements would cost more than what letting Robert Harris do restoration would cost, and would be BETTER than an "approximation" because it would be the real thing.

 

[Jeff Whitford]

Pretty simple:
NO RESTORED ANAMORPHIC TRANSFERS = NO SALE

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Agreed.

I am pretty taken aback by this as well, but I have many dvd's in my collection that aren't anamorphic and they look great (Armageddon CC and The Abyss SE anyone?), plus, my projector has an outstanding deinterlacer in it that cleans up non-anies exceptionally well.

I'm still buying them, I mean it's not like they're being released in pan-n-scan.

Bright side, folks, bright side.

 

[Vic_T]

I absolutely agree. I believe most of us are not "unsatisfiable fanboys". We're not asking for every bell and whistle. It would be nice, but we're not. We understand that this release isn't going to get the 5 star treatment. All I want is an anamorphic transfer. If so, I will buy. If not - no sale. A delay of the sale date is fine by me, if that's what it takes. I'll even take a bit of a price hike. It's a shame that the original versions of the largest grossing films of all time are being treated as a mere after thought.

 

[Ricardo C]

The only bright side I see is that I'm apparently gonna save myself $60-90 in September

 

[Matthew Brown]

I have a widescreen TV and have the laser discs so I don't need to by DVD's with the same transfer. For what is planned for release, these could have been released back in 1997 and there probably would have been few complaints.

Matt

 

[JeffMc]

I can just see the scathing reviews of these discs when they hit the streets if they come out as currently planned. The target audience for these discs IS exactly us die-hard DVD and film fan/collectors, as well as the countless die-hard SW fans (who probably already have the lasers or boots of these three films). The SE's are already out there for everyone else at a much lower price. The only point of these new discs is for the unaltered originals - and if most of the target audience is already up-in-arms and angry about these seemingly tossed-together throwaway releases in just two days, then who is actually going to buy them?

I'm more of a casual SW fan, having loved the OT when they were first released. Over the years, my interest has disippated a bit because of the changes Lucas made to the films and not caring at all for the prequels (I still haven't seen "SITH"!). However, I would have bought these in an instant if they were being presented properly. But no way will I purchase a non-anamorphic laserdisc-port in this day and age.

I also am perturbed with Fox/Lucas' marketing of these titles and sales sheet as they are clearly designed to hide any information that these original versions were being presented this way. And claiming the original versions are only "extras" is ludicrous. At $90, if the original versions aren't really worth anything, why not just buy the older SE's for much less?

If this set comes out as currently planned, it may be the most maligned DVD release in history.

 

[Patrick McCart]

Well, a great 4x3 LBX DVD is at least better than a bad 16x9.

No idea where the point of this release comes in, though.

 

[Carlo_M]

John, I used to be in agreeance with you, owning an RP91 which does a good job scaling. But going back and looking at those titles, even with the good scaler in the RP91 (and I own both discs you refer to), still does not measure up to a good anamorphic transfer.

And not everyone owns a good scaling DVD player or TV, and some older HDTV sets "lock on full" when presented with a 480p signal. My Panny HDTV does, so thank god for the RP91. Those owners with that kind of TV set (and there are a considerable number) would be forced to either watch in stretch mode, or windowboxed. Both options.

In today's day and age, there really is no excuse for a non anamorphic transfer. I can't name a widescreen major studio DVD release that wasn't anamorphic in the last 2-3 years.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

That's my bright side as well, Ricardo. I'd rather be getting them

John, I can't get excited about a 2006 release from a studio known for their technical acumen on their flagship title. Calling it a special feature to "ease the pain" only makes it more bothersome.

And very few of us (if any) are an unsatisfiable fanboys. Check the main SW threads.

 

[Carlo_M]

Especially when, as others have pointed out in this thread, all the special features for the previous DVDs are 16:9 enhanced. So this feature isn't even ranking up there with other special features from SW DVDs. It's like the redheaded stepchild feature.

That's a good name for it: Star Wars: the redheaded stepchild edition

 

[JayHM]

I strongly disagree. The whole point is to preserve the films as they existed in their original theatrical release. The effects in those films were a milestone, and dated as they may be by today's standards, they are an important part of film history.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Your right on all counts, but I can recall the day I bought the original trilogy on LD and being thrilled at the way they looked, these dvd's couldn't look any worse than that...could they? I'll admit that the term "non-anamorphic" doesn't really do much to discourage me from this release, but the term "unrestored" scares me a little.

 

[ShaunG]

The editorial may not belong in this thread, however it changes my attitude about GL decision to not release the original on DVD.

 

[Will_B]

I won't swear off buying all Lucasfilm products - after all, the Young Indiana Jones chronicles must be about ready by now - but my interest in this Star Wars release started to fade when I heard the sound would be in 2.0, and has lessened since reading all of this.

Next, I am expecting to hear it will be a

 

[Sean Richardson]

Whether or not the editorial even makes sense (which I don't think it does), it's clearly not appropriate to this forum, as the question of why he was choosing not to release them previously is moot, and we're trying to show a unified voice regarding what we want from that release.

That, plus it's speculative gossip, to put it kindly. I think we should drop the discussion of it, at least from this thread.

 

[Mark Oates]

I'd like to echo the post that pointed out LucasFilm's nigh-on thirty-year reputation for striving for excellence in audio and visual quality. This is the company that introduced THX and has done more for the development of the art and science of the cinema than any other company involved in the movies.

But what does this release say about the company? Look back over the past few weeks at the sheer buzz the announcement of the release made in the media. It completely eclipsed all the talk of HD-DVD, it started threads on various forums that were being read and contributed to by thousands of people.

Ahem. Potential customers.

Then we start hearing odd things that worry some folk. Firstly there's a red herring - Dolby Digital 2.0 sound. Although there were 70mm six-track presentations of the movie, most of the however hundred million people who saw Star Wars in theatres would have heard it with the original one-of-the-first Dolby soundtracks. And that would be worth preserving.

Then we hear that the original version of the movie will be an extra on a second disc, and that the primary disc in the release is the previously available 2004 redux. That revelation doesn't sit quite so well, because most fans will have bought that glorious four-disc box set of the 2004 Special Editions.

Curiously, the release is being trumpeted as the final debut on DVD of the "original versions" of the trilogy. That the presence of the original cuts of the movies is the reason and major selling point of the release. Why then are the "original versions" being listed as extras rather than the main feature.

Then it emerges that rather than being beautiful showcases of the original movies that everybody remembers so fondly, transferred to digital for the best audiovisual experience, the discs will be mastered from thirteen year old source material that doesn't even have the benefit of an anamorphic transfer. It will be letterboxed and have the inherently reduced vertical definition of such a transfer.

Will that say much for the LucasFilm sound and vision reputation?

Consider what the release could have been, and still could be with a postponement to Christmas and the timely intervention of Mr Harris.

A single disc, relatively bare-bones. A state-of-the-art digital transfer with anamorphic widescreen and maybe two audio options (Dolby 2.0 and a 5.1 mix-down of the six-track for those who absolutely must have one). You could have the transfer done at HD ready for that mega-box-set next year exclusively in HD, but downscaled for the Christmas DVD release. Stick it in an Amaray with the classic Tom Jung or Drew Struzan artwork on the front. Nuts to it matching the six-film set as it isn't even supposed to be part of them.

You'd clean up, and the fans wouldn't be bitching because you'd listened to them.

Win-win, I'd say.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Since they're presumably using the same standard definition master used for the LD, they should look atleast as good. "Unrestored" in this case seems to mean that the source won't look any BETTER than the source of the LD.
I think that's why I'm still so interested in this release why many others aren't. I never owned the laserdiscs, so getting the originals in at least Laserdisc quality still excites me quite a bit. And my computer monitor, at 1680 x 1050 resolution, is the only display device where anamorphic makes a big difference.

Here's a question: How many people would be appeased by Lucasfilm using a professional quality upscaler to create an anamorphic source, even though the actual resolution wouldn't be any better?

 

[Paul_Scott]

the problem is Sean, that everyone here could be arguing the point from a totally clueless position- shooting arrows where we think the target is, when we are really just shooting into a fog bank.

A fog bank purposefully put out there to distract from the real target.

It may not come down to the ego of the artist.
It may not come down to spiting the fans' (which is what I honestly thought in the past, but now may be willing to say I may have been off base)
It may not come down to solely not wanting to spend the money to do it right.

the point is, if we knew for certain what the sticking point was with Lucas to getting a halfway decent edition of these released on whatever is the current format and up to the current technical standards, then we could appeal to him from that position.

in the absence of that, what is there that can really be said to effect a change in attitude? There had to have been some substantial reason why he would purposefully release these like this.

I'm sorry, I realize this is not conducive to the propulsion of unified chanting of "just do it right, George or else we may not buy it". But then I fully believe this release, in its current unsatisfactory incarnation, is a foregone conclusion at this point.

unless he cancels it.
In fact, that's what I would hope for now. Just cancel the thing, for now. Tell us you want to do it right, so you will need some more time- apologize for the delay, and I know I would give him the opportunity to do that.
In fact, I would further suggest that he only concentrate on one film every year. make it something to look forward to again- and at the same time he will be assured of some kind of 3/4th Q revenue for the next three years.

 

[Robert Anthony]

But Paul--so is Lou (T'bone) mostly because--a) how does he know that the Special Edition changes somehow cut Marcia out of monetary compensations (Her name is still on the credits even) and b) how does he know that's Lucas' mindset and reasoning?

The whole matter has jack stamp to do with what's trying to be achieved in this thread. Playing armchair psychoanalyst with suppositions from a fansite based on navel-gazing is alright, but it doesn't fit here and is only serving to slowly derail this thread like the two previous. Stop, please. Ron's contacted the industry magazines like you wanted. Robert Harris has now even gotten involved. You've been mildly nay-saying since the mere concept of making Lucasfilm aware of these complaints has popped up, please don't contribute to making this particular thread devolve into sewing circle gossip, no matter how justified it may seem to you. You're a good guy Paul, so don't take that wrong.

I'd rather risk coming off as white noise alongside Bill Hunt, Ron Epstein, Robert Harris, Video Business and the rest of the fans who have called and written letters and made suggestions, than to not risk it at all and have these LD dumps unmercifully unloaded onto the store shelves with no resistance at all. There's an alternative. White noise or no, I think it's at least worth pursuing.