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

[Kevin EK]

Assuming UHD editions of the Star Wars movies are released within the next ten years, I'd expect the most current versions. Doesn't rule out something in HD of the original theatrical versions, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Lucasfilm to go back to those versions.


I also agree that there are fans who would be very happy to buy the original versions in HD, but I don't know that the number is high enough to justify a release on its own. Which is why we're more likely to just see the originals included as bonuses, as they were in 2006.

 

[Clinton McClure]

I'm in the "original versions or nothing" camp.

 

[SilverWook]

Wouldn't all the 2004 and 2011 changes have to be re-rendered again for UHD?

 

[Oliver Ravencrest]

I wouldn't mind the OOT being included as bonus features on a HD set, as long as they are anamorphic and restored. I never would have minded changes made to the films had the originals been made available. I never bought the last release of the OOT because of the way Lucasfilm had treated them and I already own the SE box set with the excellent Empire of Dreams doc, didn't need 2 versions of the SEs. I'm interested in the Blu box for the Complete Saga for the extras but with the new movies coming, I'm expecting more sets to be made. Wouldn't want to buy it then find out a new set is coming with the OOT. I can wait...

 

[Dave H]

Wouldn't all the 2004 and 2011 changes have to be re-rendered again for UHD?

Yes.

 

[Dave H]

Assuming UHD editions of the Star Wars movies are released within the next ten years, I'd expect the most current versions. Doesn't rule out something in HD of the original theatrical versions, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Lucasfilm to go back to those versions.


I also agree that there are fans who would be very happy to buy the original versions in HD, but I don't know that the number is high enough to justify a release on its own. Which is why we're more likely to just see the originals included as bonuses, as they were in 2006.

This is a possibility of how it may play out.


However, even if they release the unlatered versions as a bonus - I really wonder if there is even source material feasible to do this? It would probably take a lot of work which makes me think perhaps there will only continue to be one version - the most recent.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

This is a possibility of how it may play out.


However, even if they release the unlatered versions as a bonus - I really wonder if there is even source material feasible to do this? It would probably take a lot of work which makes me think perhaps there will only continue to be one version - the most recent.

I know the negatives were conformed to the '97 SEs, but what happened to the interpositives that were used to create the '93 laserdisc transfers? Are they still in decent shape? Obviously, the negative would yield better results, but I would be perfectly happy with new 2K scans of those IPs (if they're still scannable).

 

[Worth]

The laserdisc transfers were taken from an IP made in 1985. I think it's extremely unlikely that there are no usable IPs or INs available.


http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/05/could-disney-finally-give-us-the-remastered-unedited-star-wars-we-want/

 

[Kevin EK]

I was thinking they'd use an IP unless they have separation masters. Basic 2K scan with nothing fancy on it.

 

[Yorkshire]

Assuming UHD editions of the Star Wars movies are released within the next ten years, I'd expect the most current versions. Doesn't rule out something in HD of the original theatrical versions, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Lucasfilm to go back to those versions.


I also agree that there are fans who would be very happy to buy the original versions in HD, but I don't know that the number is high enough to justify a release on its own. Which is why we're more likely to just see the originals included as bonuses, as they were in 2006.

Kevin, on the one hand I agree that the general public's desire for the original versions is small, and distorted by the deafening screams for them at internet forums.


However, the numbers not being high enough to justify standalone releases?


No, I can't agree with that.


Look at Twilight Time. Releasing titles at $30 a pop, and limited to a maximum of 3,000 copies, breaking even (apparently) at 2,000 copies.


And that's mail order only.


I simply refuse to believe the original Star Wars trilogy would fail to sell 2,000 copies worldwide, in shops and at Amazon, even if they charged $40 a pop.


And you only have to look what's being released elsewhere. Just look at some of the titles Arrow are releasing in the UK. The Honeymoon Killers, from an extremely expensive new 4K scan and restoration, selling in the UK at £18 (that's almost $30).


Is anyone genuinely arguing that a 2K scan on an IP is more expensive than a 4K scan of on OCN, or that The Honeymoon Killers has higher demand the original cuts of the Star Wars trilogy?


You could be right, but I find it hard to believe. I think if you get the world's 100 biggest Star Wars nuts who are also pretty rich, and they'd pay for it on their own.


Steve W

 

[Sam Favate]

I still maintain that the template for releasing the original versions should be the excellent blu-rays of Close Encounters and Blade Runner.

 

[Fozziwig]

I'm in the "original versions or nothing" camp.

I'm with you too!


It's a real mystery to me why people tolerate - or shockingly prefer - the changes made to the original Star Wars trilogy when they would be marching with torches and pitchforks if , for example, Ray Harryhausen's magnificent skeleton battle from 'Jason And The Argonauts' was remade with CGI and all versions showing the original animation were removed from circulation.


With Star Wars (aka 'episode IV'), never mind the silly narrative changes - Greedo being a useless killer (or using a defective weapon) and Jabba's redundant appearance (where he basically repeats Greedo's lines) - the worst aspect is the trashing of ILM's great - and groundbreaking - model FX work and many of Harrison Ellenshaw's matte paintings.



A release of the untouched original Star Wars trilogy will sell well without doubt - there are probably tens of thousand of Star Wars completists who will buy all releases regardless and then there are tens of thousands of people like me (and Clinton) who would never buy the revisionist version. Oh, and neither would the Library of Congress whose storage space for Star Wars (1977) remains vacant.

 

[Dr Griffin]

I still maintain that the template for releasing the original versions should be the excellent blu-rays of Close Encounters and Blade Runner.

Yes, especially in the case of the original Star Wars. Give us a single release (containing at least 2 BDs) of the first fim with all the versions, showing the evolution of the film. 3 versions maybe, all scanned at 4K with a ton of extras, poster etc. Doesn't this film and its huge fanbase deserve it?

 

[Salacious Ackbar]

I'm with you too!


It's a real mystery to me why people tolerate - or shockingly prefer - the changes made to the original Star Wars trilogy when they would be marching with torches and pitchforks if , for example, Ray Harryhausen's magnificent skeleton battle from 'Jason And The Argonauts' was remade with CGI and all versions showing the original animation were removed from circulation.


With Star Wars (aka 'episode IV'), never mind the silly narrative changes - Greedo being a useless killer (or using a defective weapon) and Jabba's redundant appearance (where he basically repeats Greedo's lines) - the worst aspect is the trashing of ILM's great - and groundbreaking - model FX work and many of Harrison Ellenshaw's matte paintings.



A release of the untouched original Star Wars trilogy will sell well without doubt - there are probably tens of thousand of Star Wars completists who will buy all releases regardless and then there are tens of thousands of people like me (and Clinton) who would never buy the revisionist version. Oh, and neither would the Library of Congress whose storage space for Star Wars (1977) remains vacant.

The disdain for those with differing opinions is shocking. Why do you care if someone prefers something that you do not?


Greedo was a pretty terrible bounty hunter in the original version too. He sits there and babbles like a Bond villain and doesn't even notice that Han is grabbing his blaster. And they pretty much shoot at the same time anyway. The intent of the scene is left unchanged. In both versions Han is unholstering his blaster to kill Greedo. Only in the new version they shoot at practically the same moment. If anything, the new version makes Greedo more menacing, that he actually gets a shot off as opposed to be completely inept and not even taking a point blank shot.


The effects technicians recognize the faults with their effects work and limitation of the technology. Funny how they probably don't mind it nearly as much, if at all, as these fans who can't seem to give it a rest. They are there to serve the filmmaker and the film, not get worked up over who's work gets on screen. Whatever looks best to the filmmaker is what goes on-screen. And there were a lot of bad effects shots, that maybe didn't look bad 30+ years ago, but have not held up. The new additions to the Death Star attack for instance, look magnificent and make the dogfights faster and more visceral.


If released, it would sell. It's Star Wars. Of course it'll sell, but not nearly as much as the Lucas-approved versions.

 

[Fozziwig]

The disdain for those with differing opinions is shocking. Why do you care if someone prefers something that you do not?


Greedo was a pretty terrible bounty hunter in the original version too. He sits there and babbles like a Bond villain and doesn't even notice that Han is grabbing his blaster. And they pretty much shoot at the same time anyway. The intent of the scene is left unchanged. In both versions Han is unholstering his blaster to kill Greedo. Only in the new version they shoot at practically the same moment. If anything, the new version makes Greedo more menacing, that he actually gets a shot off as opposed to be completely inept and not even taking a point blank shot.


The effects technicians recognize the faults with their effects work and limitation of the technology. Funny how they probably don't mind it nearly as much, if at all, as these fans who can't seem to give it a rest. They are there to serve the filmmaker and the film, not get worked up over who's work gets on screen. Whatever looks best to the filmmaker is what goes on-screen. And there were a lot of bad effects shots, that maybe didn't look bad 30+ years ago, but have not held up. The new additions to the Death Star attack for instance, look magnificent and make the dogfights faster and more visceral.


If released, it would sell. It's Star Wars. Of course it'll sell, but not nearly as much as the Lucas-approved versions.

My being shocked by people preferring altered versions of classic films is just my opinion, which you seem to be treating with disdain (I'm even more shocked by that and have had to have a lie down to recover). Do you wish to deny my views on what people say about altering classic films?


Do you wish to correct the faults in Forbidden Planet, King Kong (1933), Casablanca (that plane at the end was obviously a terrible model)? I would be appalled if those films were 'updated' and the originals removed from circulation. Would you seriously find that acceptable. If not then you do have some understanding of my (and many others) feelings in this matter.


You are of course welcome to your opinion that altering Star Wars (1977) is a desirable thing. I simply find that attitude shocking.


I Hope you're not too shocked by that!

 

[TravisR]

If released, it would sell. It's Star Wars. Of course it'll sell, but not nearly as much as the Lucas-approved versions.

In fairness, whichever version that came out first would be the biggest seller. I can't imagine that the average person is sitting there thinking about which version of the movie George Lucas approves any more than they worry about the original cuts.

Do you wish to correct the faults in Forbidden Planet, King Kong (1933), Casablanca (that plane at the end was obviously a terrible model)? I would be appalled if those films were 'updated' and the originals removed from circulation. Would you seriously find that acceptable. If not then you do have some understanding of my (and many others) feelings in this matter.

Not that I really disagree with you but that's not a great analogy. The creator of the Star Wars movies made the changes as opposed to a random guy updating Forbidden Planet or King Kong or Casablanca. Before anyone points that Lucas only directed Star Wars, Kershner and Marquand were hired to bring Lucas' vision to the screen so if any one person has 'ownership' of the movies, it's Lucas.

 

[Dave H]

I was thinking they'd use an IP unless they have separation masters. Basic 2K scan with nothing fancy on it.

I guess why not just scan them at 4K in that case?

 

[questrider]

As far as defending the alterations for the Special Editions, what would be the reaction if Lucasfilm cropped the film to 1.85 for HDTVs and then made it impossible to purchase the 2.35 OAR versions?

 

[Salacious Ackbar]

My being shocked by people preferring altered versions of classic films is just my opinion, which you seem to be treating with disdain (I'm even more shocked by that and have had to have a lie down to recover). Do you wish to deny my views on what people say about altering classic films?


Do you wish to correct the faults in Forbidden Planet, King Kong (1933), Casablanca (that plane at the end was obviously a terrible model)? I would be appalled if those films were 'updated' and the originals removed from circulation. Would you seriously find that acceptable. If not then you do have some understanding of my (and many others) feelings in this matter.


You are of course welcome to your opinion that altering Star Wars (1977) is a desirable thing. I simply find that attitude shocking.


I Hope you're not too shocked by that!

The problem is your tone, which seems to be looking down at others who disagree with you. The fact that you find someone who disagrees with you "shocking" says everything - your inability to understand others differing viewpoints or why they would have them in the first place.

Not that I really disagree with you but that's not a great analogy. The creator of the Star Wars movies made the changes as opposed to a random guy updating Forbidden Planet or King Kong or Casablanca. Before anyone points that Lucas only directed Star Wars, Kershner and Marquand were hired to bring Lucas' vision to the screen so if any one person has 'ownership' of the movies, it's Lucas.

What he said.

 

[Wayne_j]

Right now the easiest versions to release in UHD would be the '97 SEs (scan the current negative) followed by the OOT (scan the IP in 4k).