Could the original, unaltered STAR WARS be on its way to Blu-ray? (1 Viewer)

[Joel Fontenot]

If this ever does come to pass, I'd finally buy SW on blu. As it is, I haven't bought them since they are not the movies I want. No double dipping the blu-rays here since there hasn't been the initial dip in the first place.

I do have them on DVD, but it's the re-issue set with the OOTs on the second disc. At least I could watch those and not have to swap out several CAV laserdiscs per movie from my Definitive Edition LD Box set. (My LD player is double-sided, but not multi-disc - which, of course, they never had). And, it is the OOTs I play when the mood strikes me - I think I've played the special editions only once since I've had them.

 

[Ejanss]

Yeah, before it was changed, it was just a cool move that Han made and nothing more. Once it was changed, it suddenly became a character defining moment. I dislike that change because I think it looks goofy.

It sets up the character gag that Han's answer to everything is to shoot first.
As we see later when he shoots the Death Star com panel when he can't think of how to get out of it. (*blam!* "It was a lousy conversation anyway...")

Other than that, that was the only '97 change that bothered me. ("Nooo!" was for the Blu-ray.)
I bought the LE disk for Han shooting first and for the no-subtitle scroll (still sends chills down the spine of us original-generation folk), but does anyone really still want RotJ ending with the Ewok National Anthem?

We just got our first 3D HDTV last week and my oldest daughter (5) has already asked to watch Star Wars in 3D. She was disappointed to find out that Star Wars is not in 3D.

I do think Disney would re-release the discs a year later without changes and CALL that the 40th Anniversary edition, however...

I suspect we're finally going to find out the fate of the complete 3D Prequel trilogy (maybe that's what she was asking about?) that was just on the verge of getting its reputation back again, when the sale threw everything up into the air.
Someone may be watching Warner's Oz very carefully, and a pre-disk theatrical release might not be off the table.

 

[David_B_K]

Does anyone really still want RotJ ending with the Ewok National Anthem?

Yep. I like the "yub-yub" song just fine. Maybe it's because I don't like the replacement music with the new added footage. Or maybe it's just because I like the ending of the film and the music is now forever associated with it (for me, anyway).

 

[Moe Dickstein]

I am not concerned with what makes more sense story wise, especially since I don't even acknowledge the prequels. Anakin used to look like Hayden Christensen? Not in my SW Universe. What really bothers me is the posterity aspect. The new and updated Return of the Jedi claims to be a film from 1983, but it no longer is. A film from 1983 cannot star an adult man who was only born in 1981. Return of the Jedi is a 2004 film (or a 2011 film, if we're keeping track). I want it to be a 1983 film again, a privilege everyone else expects from any other film released on home video.

Oh I didn't know that it worked like we all got to pick our own personal Star Wars universe, like I said I'm not so well versed in SW fandom and foolishly assumed that the creator got to decide what was canon.

 

[FoxyMulder]

It sets up the character gag that Han's answer to everything is to shoot first.
As we see later when he shoots the Death Star com panel when he can't think of how to get out of it. (*blam!* "It was a lousy conversation anyway...")

I thought Han shooting first showed him as a ruthless ask no questions type of guy and by the end of the film he finds a cause he believes in and starts asking questions, by having him shoot at the same time they watered his character down just a little bit, spoiled the journey he takes because by the end of the film we know he isn't that shoot first guy we saw at the start.

 

[EddieLarkin]

Oh I didn't know that it worked like we all got to pick our own personal Star Wars universe, like I said I'm not so well versed in SW fandom and foolishly assumed that the creator got to decide what was canon.

He does get to decide what's canon, but that's different to retconning something he doesn't like anymore by digitally scrubbing away an actor. How is that any different to, say, digitally removing Brian Cox from Manhunter and replacing him with digital-Anthony Hopkins so it fits better with Silence of the Lambs? (I'm fairly sure there's a better example out there!)

 

[Johnny Angell]

Oh I didn't know that it worked like we all got to pick our own personal Star Wars universe, like I said I'm not so well versed in SW fandom and foolishly assumed that the creator got to decide what was canon.

Sure we can. Over in the Alien franchise, I don't acknowledge the existence of Alien3. But don't think I'm in the "Lucas stole my childhood camp". I like the versions on blu-ray.

 

[EddieLarkin]

but does anyone really still want RotJ ending with the Ewok National Anthem?

Yes, even though I greatly prefer the new score (it's the one single change I liked). But again, personal preference is not the point.

 

[FoxyMulder]

He does get to decide what's canon, but that's different to retconning something he doesn't like anymore by digitally scrubbing away an actor. How is that any different to, say, digitally removing Brian Cox from Manhunter and replacing him with digital-Anthony Hopkins so it fits better with Silence of the Lambs? (I'm fairly sure there's a better example out there!)

No need to erase Brian Cox, they simply re-made the film as Red Dragon. ( same title as the book it's based on )

 

[EddieLarkin]

Oh, better example: digitally replace Ed Norton with Mark Ruffalo in The Incredible Hulk. Is that OK?! (yeah okay, not a great movie)

 

[FoxyMulder]

Oh, better example: digitally replace Ed Norton with Mark Ruffalo in The Incredible Hulk. Is that OK?! (yeah okay, not a great movie)

Digitally replace Paulie Shore in any film he has ever been in, now that's an improvement.

 

[Mark-W]

I will gladly repurcahse these if we get the cuts as they were first released in theaters.

While there are mulitple issues with the revisions, the dropping of Hayden's head on a squeezed Sebastian Shaw body is just bad f/x work. One would think a group known for F/X would not do such shoddy work over and over again in the new cuts.

Sure, the dogfight over the Death Star in the new cuts looks phenominal, but the items like inserted Hayben's head were just so bargain basement in the manner they were done.

Who knows, buy the time these get released, Hayden may be old enought and they can re-do it again!

 

[Walter Kittel]

Personal preference is all fine and good in terms of 'tweaking' the Star Wars films to satisfy each viewer's subjective desires and the related discussion regarding which scenes and actors work for you and which do not.

For me it is all about getting the original films that I saw theatrically in '77, '80, and '83 with the best possible presentations of those films with their original content - warts and all. Nothing more, and nothing less.

If I were going to wish for SE content - I would love to see the original making of specials for Empire and Jedi that aired on network television (CBS?) to promote the films. At least that is an extra that I would love to re-experience again.

Not a big fan of most of the changes.

- Walter.

 

[JColl]

Personal preference shouldn't mean anything. Just let the movie be what it actually is instead of this new embarrassing grandma with botox.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Oh, better example: digitally replace Ed Norton with Mark Ruffalo in The Incredible Hulk. Is that OK?! (yeah okay, not a great movie)

It's apples and oranges. Those films you mentioned aren't meant to be a seamless "set" of films but rather are re-boots. They also don't share the same creative force behind them. Plus you take the argument to ridiculous lengths of replacing an actor for an entire film rather than basically a one shot cameo. The moment of seeing the Annakin we come to know in 3 films again at the end of 6 is far more powerful in that context than seeing the face of an actor that we've seen on screen under heavy makeup for perhaps a couple minutes.

 

[EddieLarkin]

Well, it would be more powerful if it didn't a) look totally fake, b) Christensen wasn't doing his "evil Vader" stare and c) didn't remind me of the fact that RotJ now features actors that were babies in 1983.

 

[Sam Favate]

Since no one has mentioned it: From the Digital Bits' ComicCon report:

Last but not least, a particularly interesting topic of conversation among our industry friends at Comic-Con this year was the likelihood that the original unaltered Star Wars trilogy will finally be released on disc in high quality now that Disney is in the driver’s seat on the franchise. The expert consensus was that it’s quite possible. In fact, it’s almost unthinkable that it won’t happen. Disney has the best marketing machine in the business, and what better way to instantly spark fan enthusiasm and good feelings for the studio’s planned Episodes 7, 8 and 9 feature films than by giving fans what they’ve always wanted too: the unaltered theatrical cuts of Episodes 4, 5 and 6 on Blu-ray? Again, this is just somewhat informed speculation, so consider it Rumor Mill worthy. But every time jaded fans think they’re finally done with this franchise, the Empire finds new ways to pull them back in. The Saga continues, folks.

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/072213_0010

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Well, it would be more powerful if it didn't a) look totally fake, b) Christensen wasn't doing his "evil Vader" stare and c) didn't remind me of the fact that RotJ now features actors that were babies in 1983.

The first two weren't an issue to me (I mean he's a ghost is that supposed to look "real") and the last one is your own personal hangup.

 

[lukejosephchung]

If this is indeed coming down the blu-ray pipeline in a year or 2, it'll be interesting to see if Disney antes up the budget necessary to do a full 4k archival restoration with photochemical and digital cleanup of the original camera negatives and effects shots...if that happens, I'll be a first day buyer of this newly-minted set of the true Original Trilogy of the '70s & '80s!!! I like the Special Editions, but was DEEPLY disappointed that GL refused to release the original theatrical presentations with them...

 

[Joel Fontenot]

Since no one has mentioned it: From the Digital Bits' ComicCon report:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/072213_0010

Actually, although shortened a bit, that's in the very first post that starts this thread.