I'm still on the fence about whether I'm gonna keep this piece of shit. This is my sister's copy....haven't decided if I'm going to open the other one I bought or take it back for a refund.
Everything about this release is retarded......except that ROTJ bonus disc, of course.
If you feel so strongly about thinking they're pieces of shit, then why did you buy them in the first place? And if you really like ROTJ the best (and think the bonus disc is up to snuff), return the box and buy ROTJ.
I bought them with low expectations and they haven't even really met those. Pretty sad, huh? I was figuring that seeing them might sway me and it really hasn't.
And I bought 3 total. 1 for my sister. 1 for my brother-in-law's brother and 1 for me. My sister let me open her's to look at so I can decide if I want the one I bought or if I should return it. Is that clear enough any? Plus I'd thought I'd share the scans and such with everyone here, seeing that there are people here who do hard work on their own DVDs of the OT and they might want to see what they're competing against.
Why own JUST ROTJ, dude? Get lost, kid...you're bothering me.
What some people don't understand is that there were imperfections in the original theatrical presentations of these films. The imperfections support the look and feel. Personally I think this was the best way Lucas could have released the original trilogy. Cleaning the print and taking out all those imperfections, along with adding anamorphic enhancement would have made it like another Special Edition release. I know many of the people here at originaltrilogy.com and other forums disagree. The fact of the matter is if you want what you got in theaters this is it. If you want pristine perfect anamorphic with no imperfections you want OUTE which stands for Original Unaltered Trilogy Enhanced. Perhaps you will get that for the 30th Anniversary?
Originally posted by: Cable-X1 Why own JUST ROTJ, dude?
I would personally keep all three because it's a trilogy, but it's up to you. You were the one who said everything except the ROTJ bonus disc was retarded.
I just tucked the inserts into the front of the cases and it does wonders for the DVD covers. Those '04 DVD photo montages are hideous, but the insert artwork isn't all bad. It's no substitute for a really nice set of covers, but it's better than the original packaging. And really, who ever reads the DVD chapter index off of the inserts?
Originally posted by: Raul2106 What some people don't understand is that there were imperfections in the original theatrical presentations of these films. The imperfections support the look and feel. Personally I think this was the best way Lucas could have released the original trilogy. Cleaning the print and taking out all those imperfections, along with adding anamorphic enhancement would have made it like another Special Edition release. I know many of the people here at originaltrilogy.com and other forums disagree. The fact of the matter is if you want what you got in theaters this is it. If you want pristine perfect anamorphic with no imperfections you want OUTE which stands for Original Unaltered Trilogy Enhanced. Perhaps you will get that for the 30th Anniversary?
This post made me chuckle. Are there really people this clueless in the world? Apparently there are. Amazing!
I think most people could have been pretty pleased with a nice, new anamorphic transfer of an existing print. Would there be some dust and flaws? Yeah, because some of that's in the original print. But that's cool. Just as long as no extra dust, noise, or 1993-spec Digital Video Noise Reduction was applied.
But that's not what was produced.
Hell, even Casablanca (almost 30 years older than Star Wars) looks much nicer on DVD, and doesn't change anything from the original. So there is no good technical reason not to have a first-rate transfer that's still faithful to the film.
Actually the only thing that really sticks out like a sore thumb on these new photoshop assemblies of the classic posters, ist that dumb prequel version of the Vader costume on them. If they actually had used the original Vader from the movies these cover arts were designed for, they wouldn't be bad at all (especially when compared to the horrid ones from the 2004 release).
I would really appreciate it if others could post hi-res the other special store bonuses. You know, I always thought the artwork on the RotJ bonus disc was some crappy photoshop job made and used for the early Asian special edition bootlegs. Where is it actually from?
Originally posted by: Cable-X1 I'm still on the fence about whether I'm gonna keep this piece of shit. This is my sister's copy....haven't decided if I'm going to open the other one I bought or take it back for a refund.
Everything about this release is retarded......except that ROTJ bonus disc, of course.
Hello Cable-X1
I am from Germany and unfortunatlly we DO NOT have this fine tinpackage here. If you do not want to hold your copy, would you send it to me here to Germany?
If the price is not to high, I would refund you for the DVD´s and postage via Paypal. Pls let me know what this would be.
Compared to Lucas's previous releases, such as the cover artwork on the '04 DVDs, these are actually not that bad. and the tin case is great. Hopefully they will still have some. I can't get to the Best Buy until tonight or tomorrow.
Actually you are clueless... "I think most people could have been pretty pleased with a nice, new anamorphic transfer of an existing print." - Karyudo
You wanted the "original" theatrical versions not a "nice, new anamorphic transfer of an existing print." See this is the reason why Star Wars fans are considered impossible to please. I know all about the technical side of the argument. The fact of the matter is anamorphic or not this transfer is pretty good.
Originally posted by: Raul2106 Actually you are clueless... "I think most people could have been pretty pleased with a nice, new anamorphic transfer of an existing print." - Karyudo
You wanted the "original" theatrical versions not a "nice, new anamorphic transfer of an existing print." See this is the reason why Star Wars fans are considered impossible to please. I know all about the technical side of the argument. The fact of the matter is anamorphic or not this transfer is pretty good.
Oh this is too rich.... "I know all about the technical side of the argument." .....right
Alien features the original theatrical version along with the special editon and it doesn't say anything about remastering that version. The DVDs say they are the "original theatrical version". See this is the reason why Star Wars fans are considered impossible to please. You want anamorphic? You got it! The 2004 editions give you all the anamorphic enhancement and craptacular remastering you could ever ask for. The theatrical versions are EXACTLY what they are supposed to be. Honestly, this release has something in it for everybody especially those who didn't buy the 2004 boxset. Next year when we get the 30th Anniversary boxset people will be complaining again so we should all look forward to that!
Here is the specs for the Alien (2 disc) to prove my point. Notice there is nothing here about "anamorphic". Also you will notice that the original theatrical version is not listed as digitally remastered either.
Features: Disc 1 Full-Length Audio Commentary by Director Ridley Scott, Writer Dan O'Bannon, Executive Producer Ronald Shusett, Editior Terry Rawlings, Actors Sigourney Weaber, Tom Skerrit, Veronica Cartwright, Harry Dean Stanton and John Hurt (for both versions 1979 Theatrical Version 2003 Director's Cut (Digitally Remastered) Introduction by Ridley Scott
Disc 2 Behind-the-Scenes Featurettes, Including - "Star Beast: Developing the Story," "The Visualists: Direction and Design," "Truckers in Space: Casting." "The Eighth Passenger: Creature Design, Sigourney Weaver Screen Test, "The Chestbuster: Creature Design Multi-Angle Scene Studies Still Photo Galleries Deleted and Extended Scenes, and More! Video: Widescreen 2.35:1 Color
I am as big a fan as the rest of you. I have done some fan editing too. For an "official" DVD I don't have a problem with the theatrical release. Star Wars in not the only film to present it's theatrical version in a non-anamorphic state and that is my entire point. I am not saying that I wouldn't appreciate anamorphic enhancement with some clean up. However this is acceptable in my opinion and if we do not get a remastering next year thats fine too. Lucasfilm did give us THE ORIGINAL THEATRICAL VERSIONS. Clearly these are better transfers than the 1993 Laserdiscs and the bootlegs. My technical knowledge on the subject is what is motivating my position. Obviously Lucasfilm felt that the original trilogy did not warrent ANY enhancement. Lucas didn't touch it because he knew that SOME would consider anamorphic enhancement and print clean up as an alteration. I don't blame him because everybody is a critic and wants things their own specific way. At least by releasing it as is he cannot be bashed because he didn't present the original versions. Oh wait a second... THIS IS A STAR WARS FORUM so no matter what he does people are going to bash him to hell for one reason or another.
Here they are cropped and rotated, but not recompressed. Cable-X1, feel free to update with these ones if you like. Some were not blessed with brains. <blockquote>Originally posted by: BadAssKeith
You are passing up on a great opportunity to makes lots of money, make Lucas lose a lot of his money and make him look bad to the entire world and you could be well known and liked
None of us here like Lucas or Lucasfilm. I have death wishes on Lucas and Macullum. we could all probably get 10s of thousands of dollars!
Originally posted by: Raul2106 Here is the specs for the Alien (2 disc) to prove my point. Notice there is nothing here about "anamorphic". Also you will notice that the original theatrical version is not listed as digitally remastered either.
But the original theatrical version of Alien on that release IS anamorphic. And it IS remastered.
That's the thing about these releases of the Star Wars discs. The Alien DVD came out in 2003. A whole 3 years ago. The specs don't list things like remastered and anamorphic because back in 2003, it was EXPECTED for a high profile release to have a remastered anamorphic transfer. Maybe if these SW discs were released in 1997, they could be given some slack since the format was in its infancy at that time. But today, these discs are below DVD standards in basically every sense. They may look decent. They may even look good to the untrained eye, but they're far from the type of quality that is expected for a release of this magnitude.
Raul, you're crazy. I don't know what crappy movie theatres you go to, because last time I checked, theatrical editions were supposed to look good. In fact, film is supposed to look better than any kind of DVD. So why on earth would you possible think that these relatively decent quality DVDs are supposed to represent the "theatrical versions" and that anything better than a non-anamorphic Laserdisc master is supposed to be too good for the theatres? And what are you smoking to think that we can just satisfy our craving for good looking picture quality and an anamorphic transfer by watching the special editions?! No, I'm afraid you have no idea what you're talking about and know nothing about the technical side of this issue in the least.
There is no lingerie in space…
C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I think the disc art for ROTJ disc 2 looks completely awesome. As do the menus for that disc. The cover art on all movies is really nice too, with all the original poster art and variations on it. I'm so happy with this release, mostly because of the packaging. When I took the tin out of the shrinkwrap and got a look at it, I was so impressed. By the time I'd looked at all the discs and cover art, I was positivly giddy. I'm proud to have that tin sitting on my shelf with those DVD's in it. (2004 aren't in it now)
Anyway, I just really like the packaging for this release, and the menus, which are much better than anything the 2004 release threw at us.
"I know all about the technical side of the argument." .....right
