Interview Lucasfilm on Star Wars the Complete Saga Blu-ray: Hands on Report (1 Viewer)

[Sam Posten]

One change I didn't like was the removal of the Wolfman alien from the Cantina scene. I miss his glowing red eyes!

I never caught this change, anyone have a youtube link comparing the two? Honestly if Han shot first (or only) I'd be ok with the rest of the special editions. That's really the only beef I have. But this one sounds interesting.

 

[Carlo_M]

JohnSM, are you saying Kayleen Walters = Rick McCallum?

 

[KlausL]

I hate the way that Ms. Kayleen Walters of Lucasfilm explains away the look of the lightsabers on the botched 2004 DVDs as a fault of the format: "You know how things just look different when they go into HD or DVD, just by the nature of how the video treats the color space? A perfect example is in 2004 with the light sabers, how in the original trilogy all of the light sabers sort of dimmed, you lost that really hot, white core. Well, we went back and wanted to really be true to the original intention of the films, so we brightened up the light saber colors and we brought back that hot, white core that was original to the film." So Lucasfilm can do no wrong - it's the colourspace of DVD that resulted in the pastel lightsabers of the 2004 DVDs - what a load of absolute bull! That's called lying between one's teeth - So we only imagined the lightsabers looking fine ** on previous LD and VHS releases then... I wish Lucasfilm would man-up now and again and actually admit they made a mistake. They dig themselves a deeper pit by all this smoke & mirrors BS. ...

I agree. It has nothing todo with video treating color-space! Because the 2003 transfer [1080p] was done from the original negatives, the colors were fading and no reference anymore. A color correction was needed. Instead of taking the time for this and use the 2K SE digital interpositives as color guidance, they took the quick path and the result was: "a sloppy mess, in technical terms; blacks are crushed, colors bleed and pop distractingly, video noise is visible because of the oversaturation, skin tones are inconsistent and often very pink, scenes have weird casts to them (i.e. the Millennium Falcon scenes look very green), everything is much too dull and dim, contrast is not nominal, and many of the lightsaber effects are the wrong color (pink for Vader, green for Luke). []http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html] It's now official: THX is no seal for quality products. The OT DVDs were rushed but got THX approved. In fact for a THX DVD certification THX is present and watching during the whole mastering process to ensure the best possible pic/sound. Lucasfilm & THX were not able to get the colors right when creating the 2004 OT master, and didn't think it is an issue during quality control. I'll go as far that they both were aware of the coloring issues during production of the 2004 master and said it's good enough for the DVD. My only hope is that the colors on the OT Blu-rays will be like the originals again. And that this lady was not talking about single particular shots being color fixed but about the trilogy as a whole being restored color-wise.

 

[johnSM]

To be fair, I think the buck for each/every release rests squarely with George Lucas rather than Lucasfilm per-se. He signs off on the dotted line. Having seen his 'ah that'll do' ** type attitude from the prequal documentaries over the past decade, I truly think it's his fault that we got a sub-standard product with the 2004 DVDs. If he'd truly cared I'm sure a man of his power/influence could have corrected the mistakes. Instead the same transfers were re-marketed again in 2006, and this time with a 1993 non-anamorphic version of the original trilogy to 'shut up' - sorry! appease - the whining fans as a bonus... The problem at the time of the 2004 DVD release was that the image WAS sharp - and that made people initially go "wow"! It' didn't help that many reviewers were reticent to garner the wrath of the Empire and mention any faults either... Some honest reporting would have really helped! Over time people have been more and more used to seeing sharp images (particularly since the advent of HD in the home) and that alone no longer cuts the mustard. Once the "wow" of the ultra-sharp 2004 DVDs waned, people started to notice the colour timing & other issues, and weren't so impressed any longer, and rightly so. It was a rushed product, and bad mistakes were made - pure & simple. Lucasfilm/THX - as I said earlier - could have regained trust/respect by admitting there'd been some mistakes with the colour timing, and the reversed surrounds, but no - excuses had to be made, and continue to be made today... I don't doubt that real effort has gone into these releases (I'm looking forward to hearing the new sound mix in particular upon reading Adam's great reports, and will rent these out), but I'm sure the ONLY person at Lucasfilm/20th Century Fox who wouldn't want to see the original included too with this set is purely George. I'm sure if it wasn't for him we'd be seeing the ultimate set that we all so badly would love to own, and gladly pay for. - John ** a great example of this is during the making of The Phantom Menace - he's obviously noticed that Yoda looks a 'little' different then he was in Empire/Jedi, but instead of doing something about it, merely laughs and says something to the effect of, "haha lets just say he changes his appearance every 100 years" (I'm sure someone can remember the exact quote!). He's fallen into the trap of thinking he can get away with what he needs to, and can always correct it further down the line with some future release... To me that's lazy filmmaking... (EDIT)

 

[Worth]

I'm sure Spielberg also recounted how George was accusing him of making Raiders of the Lost Ark "too good", instead of "good enough"!!!

Aren't you referring to Kershner on Empire? Given that Spielberg brought Raiders in under schedule and under budget, I don't think Lucas had any complaints.

 

[johnSM]

Ah I think you may well be right - I've edited my post accordingly. I'm sure he (Gary Kurtz, not Kershner?) was quoted as saying that George Lucas has said something about, "the audience only cares about the roller-coaster ride, rather than the story & script" ? Wish I could find it...

 

[johnSM]

Found it: http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=14979&page=5 "PLUME: From your personal experience, how would you compare the George you worked with on American Graffiti to the George you worked with towards the end of The Empire Strikes Back? KURTZ: It was quite different, actually. He was very different. I think the most unfortunate thing that happened was the fact that Indiana Jones came along, and Raiders of the Lost Ark had come out in between. George and I had many, many discussions about that, but it boiled down to the fact that he became convinced that all the audience was interested in was the roller-coaster ride, and so the story and the script didn’t matter anymore. Now Raiders is not a bad film, but the script actually was much better than the finished film. There were a lot more nuances in the character, and there was less action. It would’ve been a better picture if that script had been made. But, as it is, it’s an interesting and entertaining film – it’s just that this idea that somehow the energy doesn’t have to be put into getting really good story elements together. One of the arguments that I had with George about Empire was the fact that he felt in the end, he said, we could have made just as much money if the film hadn’t been quite so good, and you hadn’t spent so much time. And I said, “But it was worth it!”

 

[Carlo_M]

Wow, that just explains so much regarding the way the OT has been treated in his hands, along with the lack of quality and story in the PT. The pieces just fell into place for me. And no, I'm not just taking Kurtz at his word. I'm looking at the body of evidence Lucas has given us since the 1997 re-release of the OT SE. It all aligns with the quote from Kurtz relaying his conversation with Lucas (and just look at Lucas's laissez faire attitude on many of the "making of" docs in the PT DVDs). In fact, looking back, you can see Lucas beginning to take this "good enough" attitude in Return of the Jedi, with the Death Star rehash, making Leia Luke's sister, Ewoks, etc. Many shortcuts in that film that served to adversely affect the movie. The only reason I'm still invested in Jedi is the characters that we'd grown to love over the first two films. But after screening the OOT over the last three days, it is clear to me that Jedi feels markedly different from SW and ESB.

Found it: http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=14979&page=5 "PLUME: From your personal experience, how would you compare the George you worked with on American Graffiti to the George you worked with towards the end of The Empire Strikes Back? KURTZ: It was quite different, actually. He was very different. I think the most unfortunate thing that happened was the fact that Indiana Jones came along, and Raiders of the Lost Ark had come out in between. George and I had many, many discussions about that, but it boiled down to the fact that he became convinced that all the audience was interested in was the roller-coaster ride, and so the story and the script didn’t matter anymore. Now Raiders is not a bad film, but the script actually was much better than the finished film. There were a lot more nuances in the character, and there was less action. It would’ve been a better picture if that script had been made. But, as it is, it’s an interesting and entertaining film – it’s just that this idea that somehow the energy doesn’t have to be put into getting really good story elements together. One of the arguments that I had with George about Empire was the fact that he felt in the end, he said, we could have made just as much money if the film hadn’t been quite so good, and you hadn’t spent so much time. And I said, “But it was worth it!”

 

[JoeDoakes]

Wow, that just explains so much regarding the way the OT has been treated in his hands, along with the lack of quality and story in the PT. The pieces just fell into place for me. And no, I'm not just taking Kurtz at his word. I'm looking at the body of evidence Lucas has given us since the 1997 re-release of the OT SE. It all aligns with the quote from Kurtz relaying his conversation with Lucas (and just look at Lucas's laissez faire attitude on many of the "making of" docs in the PT DVDs). In fact, looking back, you can see Lucas beginning to take this "good enough" attitude in Return of the Jedi, with the Death Star rehash, making Leia Luke's sister, Ewoks, etc. Many shortcuts in that film that served to adversely affect the movie. The only reason I'm still invested in Jedi is the characters that we'd grown to love over the first two films. But after screening the OOT over the last three days, it is clear to me that Jedi feels markedly different from SW and ESB.

I think that is true, but there is more to it than the production. I think ROTJ suffers because of its cast. Mark Hamill looks much older than his age, and the freshness he had in the original film is completely gone. Its no wonder that his career was over by that time. Carrie Fisher and even Harrison Ford seem kind of bored with the whole thing.

 

[johnSM]

Wow, that just explains so much regarding the way the OT has been treated in his hands, along with the lack of quality and story in the PT. The pieces just fell into place for me

Yep after reading that it was the same for me too, though I'd oft-suspected Kurtz was one of the real unsung heroes of the first two Star Wars films, as the tone changed so much after he left and was replaced by Howard Kazanjian. I think George just wanted a 'yes man' at his side, and was tired of Kurtz calling him out on things. Kurtz provided the necessary balance to George's wilder Star Wars whims, and without that the films started to suffer as a result.

 

[johnSM]

I think that is true, but there is more to it than the production. I think ROTJ suffers because of its cast. Mark Hamill looks much older than his age, and the freshness he had in the original film is completely gone. Its no wonder that his career was over by that time. Carrie Fisher and even Harrison Ford seem kind of bored with the whole thing.

So because Mark Hamill looks SLIGHLY older than he did in Star Wars, his career is over?! I'm sorry I don't buy that line of reasoning at all... He might not have had the success of Harrison Ford (few have!) but he's certainly successful and has adapted to different vocations over the years instead of doing the same thing over and over again. I think the man's a legend personally! And the actors all looked bored undoubtedly because of the script, and the direction! I think George was ghost directing half the time, perhaps more from what I have read over the decades...

 

[Worth]

I think George was ghost directing half the time, perhaps more from what I have read over the decades...

That sounds plausible. Jedi cinematographer Alan Hume walked off the production because he felt Marquand was being mistreated: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/aug/17/alan-hume-obituary

In 1983, Hume was given the job of DP on the Star Wars film Return of the Jedi, although he fell out with the producers when he protested about what he felt was their mistreatment of the director Richard Marquand and was replaced by his assistant Alec Mills.

 

[Carlo_M]

I think there's a few who believe this. I view the Lucas/Kurtz/Kasdan/Kershner partnership as an example of where the sum is greater than the parts. All have had mixed success individually (and yes despite the billions in revenue I consider Lucas's output starting with ROTJ to be mixed in terms of quality, and downright poor with the Prequels), but when they had a partnership which culminated in Empire Strikes Back and Raiders (minus Kurtz & Kershner but plus Spielberg) the results were awesome. And if you listen to people recounting the making of those movies, there were a lot of challenges thrown at all parties, from story and plot to dialogue, etc. I recall Lucas talking about how exhausting those early shoots were, and contrast that with how he just sits in his chair, reclined back and looking at multiple monitors for the Prequels. Sometimes there is no substitute for hard work, and sometimes what doesn't kill you does indeed make you (or the end product) stronger.

Yep after reading that it was the same for me too, though I'd oft-suspected Kurtz was one of the real unsung heroes of the first two Star Wars films, as the tone changed so much after he left and was replaced by Howard Kazanjian. I think George just wanted a 'yes man' at his side, and was tired of Kurtz calling him out on things. Kurtz provided the necessary balance to George's wilder Star Wars whims, and without that the films started to suffer as a result.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

I'm getting the complete saga, although I would have preferred having the OT included. Not sure the extras interest me much, just don't have the time to go wading through all that, and I'm not a huge fan of the packaging either. Having seen the OT so many times when they came out, I'm not sure how many times I'll actually be viewing these now anyway, and the prequels are eye candy but the acting and stories are pretty meh.

 

[Jason Charlton]

Originally Posted by johnSM
I think George just wanted a 'yes man' at his side, and was tired of Kurtz calling him out on things.

Sadly, I think this has been GLs biggest problem for a long time. He's surrounded by sycophants whose presence is most definitely counter productive to producing films of a high quality.

 

[johnSM]

That sounds plausible. Jedi cinematographer Alan Hume walked off the production because he felt Marquand was being mistreated: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/aug/17/alan-hume-obituary

In 1983, Hume was given the job of DP on the Star Wars film Return of the Jedi, although he fell out with the producers when he protested about what he felt was their mistreatment of the director Richard Marquand and was replaced by his assistant Alec Mills.

Wow that's extremely interesting - didn't know that little factoid! Doesn't surprise me though - from many production stills Lucas always seems to be there in the background overseeing everything. Must have been very frustrating for poor Richard Marquand. He just wasn't afforded the same opportunity to put his 'stamp' upon the franchise as Irvin Kershner was - I would loved to have seen Jedi with him being allowed to have a more personal role in the direction/shape of the film, but by the third film Lucas just wanted everything done his way.

 

[johnSM]

I recall Lucas talking about how exhausting those early shoots were, and contrast that with how he just sits in his chair, reclined back and looking at multiple monitors for the Prequels. Sometimes there is no substitute for hard work, and sometimes what doesn't kill you does indeed make you (or the end product) stronger.

10000 percent agreed Carlo! Lazyness does not a good film make... (sounds like Yoda!!!). No pain no gain as they say!

 

[Dave H]

Wow, that just explains so much regarding the way the OT has been treated in his hands, along with the lack of quality and story in the PT. The pieces just fell into place for me. And no, I'm not just taking Kurtz at his word. I'm looking at the body of evidence Lucas has given us since the 1997 re-release of the OT SE. It all aligns with the quote from Kurtz relaying his conversation with Lucas (and just look at Lucas's laissez faire attitude on many of the "making of" docs in the PT DVDs). In fact, looking back, you can see Lucas beginning to take this "good enough" attitude in Return of the Jedi, with the Death Star rehash, making Leia Luke's sister, Ewoks, etc. Many shortcuts in that film that served to adversely affect the movie. The only reason I'm still invested in Jedi is the characters that we'd grown to love over the first two films. But after screening the OOT over the last three days, it is clear to me that Jedi feels markedly different from SW and ESB.

I completely agree! That Kurtz interview is merely reinforcement for what I already knew. It's been obvious to me for a long time what Lucas' goals have been. Regarding Jedi, I feel the same way. I loved it when I saw it at 11 years old. However, nowadays I see how it's nothing compared to the first two films in terms of script and acting.

 

[DarthYotsuya]

Honestly if Han shot first (or only) I'd be ok with the rest of the special editions. That's really the only beef I have. But this one sounds interesting.

Yes, Han shoots first and Hayden never appears in Ep VI. Those are the two changes I truly hate.

 

[SilverWook]

That sounds plausible. Jedi cinematographer Alan Hume walked off the production because he felt Marquand was being mistreated: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/aug/17/alan-hume-obituary

In 1983, Hume was given the job of DP on the Star Wars film Return of the Jedi, although he fell out with the producers when he protested about what he felt was their mistreatment of the director Richard Marquand and was replaced by his assistant Alec Mills.

It will be interesting to see if the forthcoming book on the making of Jedi even goes near any of this.