Star Wars Saga DVDs - Page 2

HD would just increase the resolution, it doesn't alter the movie.

That's just the problem with movies in general, especially science fiction movies and movies with special effects in them. They tend to date quickly. If they can alter certain things, what's to stop them altering other things? Lucas could alter every background in every scene to update it, but it wouldn't be Star Wars anymore. The Terminator looks dated compared to Terminator 2 as well, but James Cameron is smart enough to leave it all alone.

And what do you mean by that last sentence? Film has a greater quality than Blu-ray has, so how would scanning the film and cleaning it up be altering a film?

digitizing film doesn't alter it, but george lucas will inevitably alter the content of star wars, lol. when finally get to direct downloads of 4k, 8k res. on our IMAX@home using 3-D minus glasses, we wouldn't recognize the star wars then! it might turn into the long fabled ewok musical completely reworked, remastered, "director's cut" ;) in 24.8 surround sound 128-bit/5jillion hertz. the moment u begin playback of the film, the universe will end.

I guess it does not "alter it", I guess my point is that there is a difference, It will not be the original. You are wanting it updated, clearer and crisper but that is not the movie, then you hear "it needs to 5.1" (not this forum, but others), so where do you draw the line, he will not satisfy everyone. I would like continuity through all six films, but as I said before, as long as the established character development does not change.

There is a difference with what Lucas is doing that is different than just changing a film. If this film was made today it would be completely differ. If Spielberg would to make a sequel to Schindlers List and went back and colorized the original, that would be wrong. Cause he had the choice to make it in color at that time and chose B/W. SW needs to fall along with the same quality as its prequel or the experience will be tarnished for kids growing up today, that is what he was trying to accomplish.

This just coming from my graphics background that I would always like to improve everything I do, past and present. If he can improve his work and make it better then Im all for it. But Lucas painted him self in a corner with PT and this is his way out. But more importantly he is in it for creative control and money, fans demanded OT on DVD unaltered and like said before, no money in for him.

And as far a Terminator, that is his choice, but it wouldn't hurt my feelings if he polished it up a little.

I think you're under the false impression that old movies don't look good on Blu-ray. Star Wars was shot on film so a Blu-ray release would most likely be inferior to how good it originally looked in the theaters in 1977. A SW Blu-ray would look better than it did on VHS or laserdisc or DVD but none of those are accurate representations of what a print of the movie looked like. In other words, a Blu-ray with a "clearer and crisper" picture is closer to the original than any other home video version of the movie.
Edited by TravisR - 7/10/2009 at 09:59 pm GMT

That probably is correct and if so then it is understandable. But then they will never be equal from trilogy to trilogy? What I mean is... Take away effects, just purely film to film quality, will they ever become close. And really SW IV is the only one that stands out as completely differ as far as quality goes, the others are "close".
But I still believe that work needs to be done in all departments to match the movies. One big thing is the boxes around ships. They fixed them SE VHS but for DVD quality you can see them. So Converted to HD they would be beyond obvious and annoying. If you clean them up, then why not just replace with CGI? That is the type of changes I like... improvements.

It just seems that a lot of people want to hang on to feeling that makes them feel like they did the first time they saw it. They keep chacing that feeling, when in reality, it will never be there.

George Lucas would be the first to agree with you. It's just you both probably have different ideas of what is and is not an improvement to the movie.

On a semi-related note, I've always felt that when someone says that they want the original versions of the movie, they should want the original version with the matte boxes, weaker effects shots and rubber monster masks in the cantina. If someone wants the SE's corrected effects just without Greedo shooting first, they don't want the originals- they want to pick and choose the new elements that they like. I'm not saying that anyone is wrong for wanting just the new effects but that isn't the original movie.

That's exactly what I would like. I'm all for director's intent and all that, but the audience has it's rights too, once the film has been released. But a restored version (with matte boxes and all) of what was in the theaters then is fine by me. And I never understood the complaints of a film being in stereo when it was released that way. Cutting a film to fit it into a screen is wrong, but remixing the original soundtrack to fill all speakers should be almost mandatory? Doesn't make any sense. It's even worse when the original mono or stereo track gets left off of discs because of additional dubbings, but that's another complaint.

i don't believe in the audience rights. artists should do whatever they want, even if it means destroying their own works like friedman (sp?) for French Connection. after all, it's their baby, not urs =).

as for SW, i don't mind any of this greedo stuff. all i want is audiovisual quality to blow me up in the HT . besides, these films were supposed to emulate buck roger/flash gordon era. that's that's the whole point, extra cheese please =).

What I think most people are really wanting is to replicate the experience they had when they first saw the film, and to see it through those eyes again.  It's about trying to recapture the moment and reliving the magic.  Part of that is about the story and scenes being the same as you remember it, and for some, their memory of specific scenes is what has had an impact on them; hence, when they see it in a different way than in their memory, there's a discontinuity that either is one of those "wow, I guess I remembered it wrong" moments...or the scene was actually changed.  Facing the former is chastening, but also at least acceptable, whereas to a lot of people, the latter is seen as wrong because "someone is messing with our cherished memories".  The other and more inevitable part is where you realize that the things you accepted without question (quality issues, technical stuff, plot holes) when you were younger just may not be as acceptable to you now that you're older... this is the nostalgia part.  And this is why we don't mind certain fixes (like white lightsaber blades being correctly colored) but balk at Greedo shooting first.  It still comes down to the initial experience, how compelling the storytelling is, howmuch of an effect it had on us and how it made us feel, that determines how much we'll accept revisions to it.  It's different for everyone.

For George, I reckon he sees the film's flaws and remembers the production battles he had, the reactions he got, and the compromises he had to make, so his responses can be seen in that light.  This is typical for any artist in reviewing their own work.  Some call it evolving the work, others call it cheating.  Personally, I find it to be a fascinating way to gauge what a person's priorities are and where their head is at when they are making these changes.  It's also a great way to understand more about the elastic nature of storytelling... but that's also predicated on being able to compare the original versions to the revised ones, which is why I would like to see the originals still available in some form.

And when I say original, I mean for example the pre-1979 version of Star Wars that did NOT read "Episode IV" at the head of the crawl... THAT was the version that had the most meaning and impact and thus nostalgia for me.

V

Well, there is a lot of nostalgia out there for the original Star Wars, but there's also a basic dislike for cartoon dinosaurs getting pasted into 70s movies!  Anyway, I've been wondering how visible those matte boxes would even be with a modern transfer? I always thought they were only noticeable on VHS/laser because of the limitations of  home video.

Certain things change your perspective on this. I realize that my 5 week old will never care about the original edition. The Special Edition would be around 15 years old on the eventual great day that I play it for him and I doubt he will love it any less.
For myself, I have only watched the Special Edition of Close Encounters of the Third Kind up until the blu-ray release. The original was nice to see, but to me the SE "is" CEOT3K.

Hi Van it looks like Steve Sansweet just made your life a little busier

http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-2730-Star-Wars-Examiner~y2009m7d29-Star-Wars-on-Bluray

i can barely remember what i had for breakfast let alone an experience of a movie i watched 12 years ago when SE 1997 remastered was released, lol.

When I saw the SW SE in 1997 I was blown away that Boba Fett appeared in the new Jabba sequence outside the Millenium Falcon.  I thought "Aha!  That's why he showed up as a toy in 1979 a full year before the release of ESB."  It was very compelling to me that he was always there on Tatooine and I contemplated what it meant story-wise for his character and all sorts of things.  Then when I learned that he never was in that shot when it was filmed in the 70's and that he was just digitally composited into the film my inner film snob instantly took over and I hated that his character was "cheapened" by reducing him to a Tatooine homebody who just did whatever Jabba told him to do.  I'm such a hypocrite, lol.

I think this issue includes another, complex aspect, which is the preservation of cultural heritage, to which I count those 3 films. For me, the alteration of them is not only altering "cherished memories", but also altering history. When George Lucas says that the originals are not his preferred versions anymore, trying to bury them in hope that new generations will forget them, for me, it has some creepy Orwellian tone to it ("we've always been at war with Eastasia").

The 1997 and 2004 versions are a forgery. Like a 300 year old book, hand-written in ink, with pages torn out which have been replaced by new pages, re-written on a computer. I think this is the most appropriate way to describe how CGI creatures and scenes fit into a film, which was made more than 3 decades ago, in a whole different time period. If CGI would have been as available back then as today, George would have made those films in a totally different way. Films are always a product of their time. If Lucas laments about how his vision was compromised back in 1977, then I would just answer that the limitations and stress put on him resulted in the creation of one of the most famous films ever created. Some people work much better under those circumstances, despite not enjoying the actual experience.


If storytelling is the most important part of filmmaking (which I agree), then why is there any need to change a film which obviously got a phenomenal response from the audience? Why fix something which more than obviously was never broken?

I always have the feeling that this talk about "those were never my preferred versions" is not the whole true story. That there were also other motivations to change those films.


One could do such a great special edition Blu Ray of Star Wars by exactly adressing all those interesting and compelling points you mentioned here. By releasing both versions and address the change of attitude, storytelling and filmmaking in the extras:

- The special effects: 1977 vs. 1997, practical effects vs cgi
- Thr origins of ILM, perhaps including this footage: http://www.vimeo.com/5494280 (genuine home footage of ILM from 1976 , 77 and 78)
- The restoration of the trilogy
- Beloved flaws and bloopers
- Filmmakers which were inspired by Star Wars

Again, I don't need a restoration of the original version from the original negatives. Lucasfilm just needs to find the best source materials they have in their vaults and just doing a straight HD transfer from them. Everything with all flaws, grain, etc. It should just look authentic.

Then can do it, as they have proved with the 2006 DVD, which has the original opening crawl transferred from original film elements for this release.


Of course. The 2006 DVD at least has the original crawl. Do you, by any chance, know what sources were exactly used to make this happen?

Thanks for your participation, Van. Your contributions and thoughts here are priceless. Don't take it too personal when people complain too much. We all love you. ;)

The 1996 book "Industrial Light + Magic: Into the Digital Realm" by Mark Cotta Vaz and Patricia Rose Duignan   www.amazon.com/Industrial-Light-Magic-Digital-Realm/dp/0345381521/ref=sr_1_1  details the 1997 re-releases and how the Original Camera Negative was not up to the archival spec everyone had hoped. A few scenes were scanned at high res for the addition of new digital visual effects, but most was restored without digital scanning by using traditional optical means. Does anyone have a good source of info on how the 2004 editions were restored - were all scenes scanned at high res from OCN or from 1997 dupe elements?  Any word on what elements the upcoming Blu-Ray editions will be sourced from?  Time for a brand new 8K scan of all OCN?  I know there was talk of Star Wars in 3-D, as well.

A great article about the restorations of 1997 and 2004
http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html

Jerome, thank you for the link to that fabulous restoration information.  It was a terrific read!

 Thanks Jerome, a fascinating read !

i echo the sentiments. great read, i read that long while ago, forgot to thank you for the link =)

I'm not sure I agree with that article as much as others here. By the end It seems that either the writer doesn't quite get the concept of 1080p resolution or he does and he's just using deception to launch into an anti-Lucas tirade.

So you think 1080p resolution is acceptable as an archival negative resolution? I find this strange, considering that the 35mm originals should resolve roughly 5 times that resolution, and considering double the resolution of 1080p has been the standard for film scanning since the days of Terminator 2 and Jurassic Park.

No I just don't like this guy's hypothesis that Lucas elected to scan them at 1080p as being part of some sort of sinister plot to link them to the prequels. Its overeditorializing at its most absurd.

That's the "most absurd"? Then you need to read more editorializing! (I read the article, there's really nothing about a "sinister plot" ).

 Not to change the subject, but the Godfathers movies were all changed when remastered, to match the tone and look of the third (that's my opinion), so there's a precedent to filmmakers changing the look of a film, to make for a coherent whole of a saga.

hmm not surprised that IGN are reporting this as they are sponsoring this event.

Still good to know that it's coming out in 18 months time.

Time to start saving perhaps

I think the sound mix on Star Wars is more dated than the actual effects work, they tried fixing this but i still feel the dynamic range is just not there for that film and there is only so much they can do.

I sure would love to see Han shoot first again but know it's unlikely to happen and i would also like the original menacing Boba Fett voice in The Empire Strikes Back as the Australian voice is not at all menacing, indeed thats my main gripe with Empire.  I know why they did it but for me i would have much preferred they change the Australian actors voice on Attack Of The Clones than change the menacing voice in Empire.

George has made a huge amount of money and a business empire from Star Wars and it would be great if he gave the fans the original films with lossless Dolby 4.0 channel sound mixes as well as his updated vision.  Sure restoration would be needed to bring the originals up to scratch but they are a part of history and blu ray would be a great way to preserve them for film fans and its not like George is lacking a few million to do the job right.  Yep it won't happen but it should.

For the record i actually like the new updated effects and have only a few issues listed above but i do still think the original versions are a part of film history and should undergo a restoration and be released as "extras" on a new blu ray release sometime in the future.

I am not a fan of the remixes, either.  Not so much from the "historical" or "preservationist" perspective, but from the perspective of a fan of John Williams' brilliant score.

IIRC, Ben Burtt was the "brains" behind the modern remix done for the special editions - and it's clear he's a "sound effects" guy, not a "sound" guy.  He's so in love with his effects, he bumped the levels up to such high levels in places, that the score was practically lost.

I remember it being particularly noticeable during the final Death Star battle of ANH.  There were several shots (I think one was when the x-wings first start their trench runs - but I can't be certain) where the score originally swelled to the forefront in such a way as to perfectly emphasize the emotional gravitas of the scene at hand.  With the newer mix, the music was practically gone, and all you hear is a "whoosh" of the x-wings or something to that effect.  Bummer.

Regardless, I find myself growing more and more apathetic to the question of "Which version will be released?" or "What changes are done this time around?".  I simply don't care about it all that much any more.

I look forward to sitting down with my boys in a few years (they're only 2 now) and watching the movies - whatever form they're in.  I won't bother trying to explain to them how "Originally Han fired first" or "Cloud city never had so many windows."  Whatever - it won't matter to them in the least, and by then, it won't matter to me either.

Just my $.02.