4K restoration on Star Wars — Page 202

TV’s Frink said:

I personally don’t care if it’s an ultimate box set or a stand-alone or it comes attached to the back of an emu. I just want it.

doubleofive said:

I like the short bit being an image leading to the longer letter.

I like this idea also.

We’ve got two weeks to work on the longer version.

I like the letter, maybe it would be good to sneak a number in there about the extent of the changes? Like- “today is the 40th anniversary of a milestone in filmmaking. The current version has over 150 distinct differences (or whatever a good ballpark number is) from that milestone.”

doubleofive said:

I would say over 900 instances of visual differences, plus how many ever audio differences. Didn’t we have a breakdown of how many frames were different at one point?

I think pointing out the insanity of 900 changes works for those of us who are already on board about the subject. I think TFN’ers and redditors (i.e., Lucas apologists) and such often point out the minor changes we discuss as reasons that we shouldn’t be taken seriously. If any time is to be spent discussing what has changed, it might have more impact to discuss the more glaring changes, where bits of the films were unambiguously lost in the process. Some of the 900 things, normal (uninformed) people might consider to be standard “remastering”.

I think sending them a small novel listing all the compositing differences may not be the way to go.

Yeah, we don’t need to list the differences.

The SEs are very blatantly not the same films that were released back in 77-83, especially the first one.

I think what baron lando was saying earlier about pointing to the multi-version treatment Blade Runner recieved and telling LFL “do that” (in so many words) should be enough.

ETA: ray afraid posted as I was writing this. Linking to the comparison might be a good idea.

Fang Zei said:

Yeah, we don’t need to list the differences.

Yeah, I think it’s the wrong way to go. Listing or even giving a count. Mention a shitty one or two, if needed. I think the fans that care about recomposited shots and tweaked sound effects are pretty much confined to this forum. The fans that dislike seeing a closeup of a cartoon bug’s uvula or Hayden Christensen (in no particular order) are surely more numerous. Show something that was lost, like the desolate Mos Eisley pre-dinosaurs.

multipost

SilverWook said:

                                                                                  5-25-17

Dear Disney and Lucasfilm,

Today being the 40th anniversary of Star Wars, we just wanted to ask:

Will you ever release the original Star Wars trilogy in their original theatrical versions on Blu-ray?

Yes or no?

Please don’t leave us hanging. We would buy these over and over again if we could.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
The staff and members of Originaltrilogy.com

FTFY

Looks very effective, Wook!

I wouldn’t mention the SEs at all.

Listing the changes is not necessary. Theyre well aware of the changes and know it’s what drives our desire to see the originals restored. Listing the changes might come off as degrading the SEs which is not the purpose of the message. For once I agree with Alderaan. Mentioning the SEs as less as we can, aside from maybe mentioning that we can respect that they are the canon versions and are how Mr. Lucas intends them to be, is probably a smart option. We just want the originals restored and released regardless of what release method they should choose to do so.

crissrudd4554 said:

Listing the changes is not necessary. Theyre well aware of the changes and know it’s what drives our desire to see the originals restored. Listing the changes might come off as degrading the SEs which is not the purpose of the message. For once I agree with Alderaan. Mentioning the SEs as less as we can, aside from maybe mentioning that we can respect that they are the canon versions and are how Mr. Lucas intends them to be, is probably a smart option. We just want the originals restored and released regardless of what release method they should choose to do so.

We could even take it a step further and show we’re also not prequel haters by pointing out that those movies aren’t available in their original forms either (at least TPM and AotC aren’t).

Including the words “the original and prequel trilogies” and “all versions” in the relevant parts of the longer letter would be just subtle enough.

SilverWook said:

Good - but I’d cut the yes or no line

Actually I like the yes or no line. I think the message should be pointed without being confrontational. Our goal is to get a straight answer, not some PR nonsense.

I would word it a little differently:

“Are you ever going to restore the original theatrical version of the original Star Wars trilogy?”

I think “restore” is a better catch-all term.

For starters, the films do need to be restored before any kind of modern release can happen. “Restore” also implies a blu-ray release and the possibility of theatrical exhibition.

But “restore” also conveys the importance of the matter in a single word whereas “release on blu-ray” just makes it sound trivial.

Silverwook, turn off the targeting computer and trust yourself!

Alderaan said:

Actually I like the yes or no line. I think the message should be pointed without being confrontational. Our goal is to get a straight answer, not some PR nonsense.

I agree. With this and certainly with “release” instead of “restore”. This should be as direct and unambiguous a question as possible. If I’m not mistaken, this push is at least partially inspired by (in addition to the anniversary), the absolutely terribly phrased question in some podcast, where the guy essentially gave Kennedy an ‘out’ built into the phrasing.

SilverWook said:

Too many cooks! 😉

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrGrOK8oZG8