Star Wars discussion from The Bits... - Page 20

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

Another thing it would be nice to know is whether the master being used is the 1st gen LD master... i.e. the 'clean' version before all that horrible digital noise reduction was used? If it IS the 'clean' version that's at least better than nothing. If it isn't it will look horrible on DVD and any semi-decent set-up...

Regarding the title crawl I do hope they aren't cheating and recreated it digitally - that would be awful. My guess is that they'll take it from whatever source they used for the Empire of Dreams documentary clip.... of course then you have the somewhat ironic position where they'll then have to down-convert it so it ISN'T anamorphic anymore to fit in with the rest of the transfer! This might explain why initially the set was tooted on www.starwars.com as having the original crawl... then it wasn't... now it is again!

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

Which is fine for people that have LD players and the DC lasers. But for people like myself, this upcoming non-anamorphic release essentially allows me to purchase the DC laser without having to worry about the upkeep of outdated equipment or the inherent problems of an analog medium.
This is my main issue with the argument that a non-anamorphic release has no value. It certainly has less value than an anamorphic release, but for those of us who missed the LD boat, there's still considerable value in a release that preserves the original trilogy in atleast laserdisc quality.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

I'd still prefer a well-done upconversion, as would a lot of widescreen owners I'd wager. No, there might not be much, if any, added detail, but it would add convenience for all, and a superior picture for some whose players or sets don't scale letterbox material very well.

I think what Lucasfilm is putting out would have been nice bonus material, for a Best Buy exclusive on either of the previous DVD sets. If you're going to put minimal effort into something, make it a giveaway, don't use the PR machine to make it sound like the Holy Grail and the key selling point for 2nd re-issue of the 2004 editions, that most likely still haven't had their myriad flaws corrected.

For me to exhbiit these discs properly, at a decent size, I'd have to get my iScan fixed. $300, bam. At that point, I have my pick of the LD's I can watch at just slightly less quality than the non-anamorphic DVD's will offer.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

I have to chime in with something, here, while Mr. Harris brought up great points in his emails to LF, I was a little put off at his request to cancel this release.

I don't want it cancelled, I, and many others, do not own LD players and this release will be our only shot at the OT, please, don't blow it for us by repeated requests to cancel, if LF listens to that request it would rob some that want this release. I realize that Mr. Harris' request was probably all but one to do that, but if they get that enough...

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

First of all anamorphic enhancement is not some state-of-the-art thing. It's actually pretty mundane in the DVD world. If movies from '98 and '99 can be anamorphically enhanced so could the Star Wars movies. Secondly, if the quality of the presentation doesn't matter you must think that no one should anyone ever bother remastering/restoring films, right? Also, why should we have ever moved past VHS to the better quality DVD format? Seriously, no offense is intended, but this statement is asinine.

To be quite frank, if the quality of the presentation isn't as good as it could be it very much detracts from the overall enjoyment of the film. Considering that the biggest drawing point of these movies is the visual aspect, if they can not be bothered to bring the quality of this release to where it should be they shouldn't even bother.


It might as well just be a VHS release. Seriously, why even make a DVD release of something if its going to be only marginally better than a decades-old release?

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

No, it really doesn't. The films have been preserved. Maybe not the original negatives. Maybe not anamorphically on DVD. But the originals exist. It has everything to do with simply getting the maximum enjoyment out of watching Star Wars. For 20 years no one complained about having access to or preserving Star Wars as it was originally released (the version without "Episode IV: A New Hope" in the scroll.) The reason was because it tied in nicely with The Empire Strikes Back and the episodic theme of the overall story (funny how George is allowed to modify films to flow better with the series when everyone agrees with the modifications, but when they don't suddenly this "film preserving purist" high horse shows up for everyone to hitch a ride on.)

I want the original versions to exist for nostalgia sake, and to see how far cinema has come, but I prefer the 2004 SE's so it isn't that big of a deal. Just like the altered opening scroll was never that big a deal to anyone else.

I've got beautifully preserved anamorphic transfers of the entire original Star Wars trilogy. The versions I prefer. The versions George Lucas prefers. For history's sake, I'll soon have the original theatrical releases to refer to in non-anamorphic form for nostalgia's sake. I'm cool with that. And I think many Star Wars fans are.

I'm not saying I wouldn't be equally disappointed as many people here if the versions I wanted most were NOT going to be anamorphic, because I probably would. But the issue is most certainly not about "film history."


Actually I specifically read an article in a major publication in 1997 where George stated something to the effect of "Up until now I've been happy with about 50% of the original Star Wars, now after these modifications I'd say its about 80%, but at least its finally watchable." The 1997 SE's weren't about making the films perfect, just acceptable. I'm sure he'll tinker and tinker until they are as close to perfect as George thinks he's going to get them. For some that's a good thing, for some its frightening.

"Erased"? Releasing the films to the public is erasing them? That's news to me. I suppose we should all be flooding James Cameron's email with hate mail for erasing The Abyss from the annals of film history as well....

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

So basically you want them to think it's perfectly acceptable to release DVDs with less quality than you could get back in '98 and '99 at the outset of the format's release? I'm going to have to support Robert Harris on this. If it's not going to be a release of any quality that can't even live up to the most mediocre of movies that get anamorphic releases, then it shouldn't be done in the first place. This caving in does nothing but only serves to enable this sort of behavior in the future by Lucas and Lucasfilms.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

Maybe "postponed" might be a better term to use? Although a timeline to release the OT on DVD is tight, considering the 30th Anneversary editions are slated to be released in 2007. Maybe do restoration work on the originals and release them next year to make it a true "Archival" Edtion?

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

"I'll soon have the original theatrical releases to refer to in non-anamorphic form for nostalgia's sake. I'm cool with that"

I'm glad you are - really. I on the other hand am not, hence posting on this thread and writing letters of complaint to Lucasfilm. I also disagree that this isn't about film restoration, it is partly. Have you not read the posts by Mr Robert Harris in this thread? These NEED to be preserved properly for future generations to enjoy (not some 13 year old master used for a laserdisc release in 1993) and serve as a perfect document on how special effects were achieved before the advent of CGI, and also - perhaps - how the story was more important than the special effects which seems to have been lost these days... (give or take a few noteable exceptions).

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

It most certainly is. It's rather hypocritical of Lucas to at one point go on and on about how colorizing of films were changing and destroying film history and yet finds no problems with doing basically the same thing to his films. Preserving film history is definitely the core of this issue. If Stephen Spielberg can release both his original version and his director's cut of E.T. on DVD remastered and restored, Lucas can do the same. He just simply refuses to do so.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

I guess I missed that announcement from Lucasfilm. Care to site them where they have announced such a box? All I've ever heard is the fan rumors of such a box and apparently since it's been repeated enough people somehow assumed that it's definitely going to happen.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

If the motivation for this release is purely financial, then it just does not make sense? Why not make the minimal effort and release these anamorphically? Like I posted a while back: It is as if Lucas simply cannot accept or comprehend that not everyone appreciates his updated "artistic visions" for the films as much as he does.

To Mr. Lucas:
I fully support your right to do as you see fit with your films. They are yours. However, as someone who obviously has a great interest in film preservation as you, do you not see the value in preserving and properly presenting your original films? You were very vocal (and correctly so) in opposing Ted Turner's colorization of many films years ago. I applaud you for doing so. I also understand that this is a slightly different situation in that YOU are the filmmaker choosing to modify your own films and Mr. Turner was doing it to someone else's work without their input or approval. I understand the difference there. But still, if those filmmakers were alive and able to approve the "updates," would you so willingly accept a modern, updated "vision" of films that were important to you? If Merian C. Cooper were still alive, would anyone really want him buying up every print he could find and then having WETA recreate and update the special effects so that he could give us his "true vision" of King Kong? I doubt it.

Mr. Lucas, we are not trying to prevent you from updating your films. I would be willing to bet most people clamoring for the Original versions already own the 2004 versions. We have purchased and have financially "supported" your true vision for your films. So, please just give us the films as we saw them in a presentation consistent with modern technology. I don't mean modify the films themselves. I am talking about the transfer. Retransfer from the elements available (and no one believes that quality sources are not available) and make the discs anamorphic. Is that really that difficult? The fact that many of us want quality releases of the original "workprints" that helped you become a billionaire has nothing to do with your preference for the 2004 versions. I respect your desire to constantly change your films. Maybe in 20 years you can re-release them again using some kind of advanced holographic technology to represent the films in true, 3d visual quality respresentative of your "more true" vision for the films. Perhaps in 25 years, Hayden and Natalie will have procreated, had twins and you could enlist them to re-re-re-recreate your "even more true than the previous truer" editions using Anakin and Padme's real twin children.

Sorry for the sarcasm. I am not trying to be rude. I am only trying to get across the point that I don't care how many times you update your films. Do what you want. Just give us the original versions is a decent release - the versions that won numerous technical awards with their "dated" effects - one of which is in the National Film Registry.

For someone who obviously has a great love and respect for film history, I just can't understand why you seem intent on making these historic films look as poorly as possible in comparison to the spruced-up, altered, modernized 2004 versions. What do you possibly have to lose by giving us better transfers? We will already have to buy your 2004 versions (again) to get the original films. Yes, laserdiscs are of "passable" quality, but transfer-wise, the originals will pale in comparison to the 2004 releases.

Are the originals being offered only because Lucasfilm has no big release this fall? If so, fine. You have a business to run. I would be happy to part with my money to own the original films in decent quality. However, are the originals being offered also in shoody quality so as to make the updated, 2004 versions look even better by comparison? One must wonder.

Please forgive the overly long post. I am just a bit frustrated by this whole situation. It is as if Lucasfilm (or probably more accurately, George Lucas) does not want fans to own the originals in anything but laserdisc quality...making the revised films look (at least, visually) even better by comparison. I will say this yet again: I will not purchase these discs this fall. I'd love to and I love the films, but I won't support them. I'll also continue discouraging anyone who will listen from buying them as well. Oh, and I am not quick to jump on the "boycott bandwagon." In fact, this is only the second time I have just refused to buy a film that I love (the other being the original P&S Willy Wonka release. Thankfully, Warner listens to its fanbase). Re-think this strategy. Please. Successful sales of high-quality transfers of the Original Trilogy in no way takes away from your 2004 versions. I want to own high-quality DVDs of the versions I grew up with. If you reconsider and do this right, I guarantee you I will be at my local retailer on release day purchasing copies for myself and as gifts. As it is now, I'll spend that part of my DVD budget on other titles.

Thank you.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

Pardon me, but I must say that is sort of selfish. I understand where everyone is coming from, I really do, but I and others like Adam want this release, yes it may be substandard, but I don't own the OT trilogy in their original theatrical forms and would like this opprotunity to get them.

By asking for it to be cancelled it is unfairly speaking for those that actually do want them. Mr. Harris is a wise man indeed, but he doesn't speak for all of us in his request for cancellation.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

I don't see it being selfish at all. If he is not willing to put in the most minimal of effort to release this movie it should not be released at all. I'm sorry, but enabling such unforgiveable behavior is not what we should be doing. Like I said, if directors like Stephen Spielberg can release both the original and director's cuts of their movies remastered and restored on DVD, Lucas can do the same.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

Adam,
Even if I didn't have the LDs, I wouldn't buy this release. I don't need the OOT that much. I want it. I do. But not with money I can spend on much higher quality releases. You could buy an LD player and the Faces discs for the MSRP on these DVDs.

No pressure on those buying them. I'm not. And I'm not buying the 30th Anniversary set. Or any other SD release. No need to worry about HD...we're years away from worrying about that. LFL has to milk the existing train as long as possible first.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

Excellent letter ZackR!!!!! Spot on!

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

That's how YOU feel, that doesn't represent how I and others feel. Those asking for cancellation are failing to take that into consideration. Let them put it out and let them discover that it isn't selling, that will get the message out and those that do want it will be able to get it.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

UPDATE 5/24


Have just gotten off the phone with Home Media Retail magazine,
whom you may recognize from their prominant flash display on our home page.

They are also doing a story on this Star Wars debacle, and fortunately,
the woman who is writing the piece is a fan of the films and shares the
overall frustration of what has been expressed here.

I am happy to see that along with Video Business Magazine, we have
two industry papers bringing our voices to the front page.

I don't expect Lucas will do the right thing here. His mind will not be
changed. After all, these are the films he considers to be his "bastard"
children even though for the fans, they are the definitive versions. At
the very least, we have voiced our opinion as loud as we can, and now
have to ultimately decide if we are going to purchase these discs or not.

From what I have read, most will not.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

I'm not failing to take that in consideration. I realize that you want this movie to be released on DVD as do I. The point of contention is that they shouldn't be allowed to release such a shoddy product and think that it's perfectly okay because a lot of people may buy it. If this were any other film would you truly go out and support it if it were given such a shoddy release?


No, the only message that George Lucas is going to get from it not selling well is that no one wants the original trilogy unaltered. The point of releasing it so shoddily is to fulfill this notion he already has in his head. As has been repeated before, if other mediocre movies can get remastered, anamorphic releases then something as big as Star Wars deserves exactly the same.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

That's funny, I found the 1977 version perfectly watchable. So did a lot of other people. They were "good enough" for the rest of us, but GL seems to have forgotten that it was the theatrical releases from 1977 through 1983 that put him on the road to being a billionaire.

Without them, Skywalker Ranch is just some undeveloped land in Marin County.

Without them, ILM is just another special effects house, if they exist at all.

Without the first film, it's possible the Indiana Jones films are never made.

It wasn't the 1997 or 2004 versions that rewrote the rules of blockbuster filmmaking and marketing or turned George Lucas into an 800-lb gorilla in the film industry. Without the original theatrical editions, he's just another filmmaker.

So my point, George, is that maybe you owe a lot more respect to the films that made you what you are today.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

Except Spielberg still hasn't released the original version of Close Encounters of the Third Kind on DVD.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

I really don't think "future generations" would enjoy the original theatrical releases more than the current SE's. I seriously doubt WE would have chosen the originals if the SE's were released side by side with them in 1977, 1980, and 1983.

I know it really bugs some people who just want the exact versions they saw in the theater 20-30 years ago but after this generation passes I think that sentiment will pass for the most part as well.

Let's take the recent 1933 King Kong DVD. If the director had gone back in 1953 and added a ONE SECOND scene of a native throwing a spear at King Kong first before being eaten (when in the original version Kong ate him without a spear being thrown) I wouldn't care less. Who would? But it would definitely be nice to see the scene as it was originally filmed in some form just for the heck of it. And that's these DVD's offer. I do wish they were anamorphic, but since NO ONE protested the "Episode IV: A New Hope" addition I don't see how anyone can claim that film preservation is truly the primary motive for wanting the originals anamorphically enhanced.

George got to add the new subtitle and people were content to let that be the version of Star Wars "future generations" would enjoy, the new enhancements are no different (only different in your mind.) You'd think with the uproar that the entire original trilogy was based on Greedo, Boba Fett's gravelly voice, and Sy Snootles.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

Okay, what exactly does that have to do with my statement?

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

Yes, but they are painfully aware by now that this release isn't being recieved well, but they are going through with it nontheless, so, what are my options, to ignor the release or buy it?

Well, considering how many will not be buying this release, it will make little difference if I and few others buy it, we will have it and the detractors will be happy to learn that the release was still an awe-inspiring failure.

My point is, I get the issues here, i've read the thread, but I want the OT and i'm merely asking for the chance to have it, don't take that chance away when LF has already heard and acknowledged the concerns voiced all over the net.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

That other filmmakers can release altered versions of their films with hardly a hint of protest that SW has. Look at the Apocalypse Now thread here in which yet another non OAR release is planned for DVD. That thread is miniscule compared to that one, and Bill Hunt of The Digital Bits OKed the cropped AR approved by Francis Ford Coppolla and Vittorio Storaro for the latest DVD release right after criticizing Lucas for the non anamorphic transfers.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

They can digitally erase and "fix" the crawl on the LD master, or transfer the whole section from an original print or pre-print element and replace that section of the master - probably the same source as used in the documentary.

As for using an LD master tape created before the grain/noise reduction occured, it's quite possible that the device was part of the original one pass film to tape transfer and so therefore a non "improved" master may not exist.

M

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

This whole thread, even after throwing out JeffRay's post, has sorta devolved into a Special Editions vs Original Trilogy debate. Which really isn't helping.

Maybe we're just all too tired and we'd rather settle? That's sorta what I'm reading here. It hasn't even been 12 hours since I went to sleep, but the whole tenor of the thread seems to have shifted. Focus has sorta shifted, too.

Instead of asking Lucasfilm why they can't do what they say they wanted to and not make fans angry or upset, why they can't make more money THIS time out, why they can't keep their reputation for high quality consistent on this release--we've sorta turned to asking ourselves why we shouldn't just settle.

We're directing the questions to the wrong people on the wrong subject, I think.

Not to be too corny but "Stay on Target" might be appropriate here?

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

How so? I've heard plenty of people getting mad over that. The thing is they probably aren't quite as vocal or numerous as Star Wars fans. I certainly for one don't give Speilberg a pass on that. The entire point of my statement was to give praise for one example of which a director has the respect to release both versions of their film.


First of all, why should I be held responsible for the statements of others? Secondly, as I said above Star Wars fans are usually far more vocal so that's why you hear more when it comes to Star Wars then other movies.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

I think that the comparison of Star Wars to Close Encounters is more valid because Spielberg was also not at all happy with the version the studio rushed him to put out, so like George he probably isn't making a restored original cut of the film a high priority.
However in 1982 Spielberg was perfectly happy with E.T. and sees the importance of that version. His decision to update the film had to do with his changing perspective as a more mature person and a father.

Re: Star Wars discussion from The Bits...

I hear you Robert, I primarily wanted to address the "its all about film preservation for future generations" argument.

Nobody complained about TPM not being the theatrical version on DVD.

Nobody complained about "Episode IV: A New Hope" being in the scroll.

And as for the future generations, that's where the OT vs. SE's comes into play. I think they'll choose the SE's.

So my point was not to debate the originals vs. the SE's, it was just to highlight that it isn't about some altruistic goal on behalf of history and children of the future. That's simply being thrown out to add a sense of moral entitlement to people's personal desires for the films.

I'm not saying that film preservation is bad, far from it. I just don't think that that is the issue here.