logo Sign In

Do you REALLY think there will be remastered versions of the OOT or whatever? I don't. — Page 2

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger

Back to the Future trilogy (1985, 89, 90) listen to the Q & A audio on film one near the end, it's asked if any visibly wires were erased.


Which is what I love about that set. No attempt to digitally alter anything. Wires are all there. Original miniatures are still used. "To Be Continued..." taken out. Trailer for Part III in there. There is nothing about that set that isn't perfect! And there is nothing about that set that reeks of revisionist history. Those are the movies. The end. And when Universal misframed them, they didn't claim it was a deliberate creative decision. They did a free recall and replacement. It might have been a bit expensive and troublesome for them, but it sure made me respect them a lot more than I respect Lucas and Fox.


WOW! I had no idea about this until just now. I just checked my discs and they're apparently misframed (I have the box set from 2002). I called the number just now and imagine my surprise when someone answered. They took down all my information and are sending me the return envelope. That's awesome!
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
Those who are fans of the SEs and/or PT and don't want to give it a rest with fans of the OOT need to step back and realize it's not their "calling" to change other's minds about the movies. There are many of us who don't care for those other movies. GIVE IT UP. It's worse than saying that hardcore OOT fans whine, which many actually don't. Some people can't live with the fact that people have different taste in movies, music, art than them. So what? I don't give a flying you-know-what if people love the SEs or PT. It's their own taste in movies, and it doesn't bother me if they like something I don't.

Stop trying to be a missionary to OOT fans. We like old school Star Wars. We don't care what you think about it.
Author
Time
Post link
My main beef with Luca$hFilm over the releasing of the OOT is to do with history. I am a keen (although amateur) film historian. Knowing and understanding how films have co-existed and how influence has flowed between film makers is something that fascinates me. Star Wars was around at the same time as Saturday Night Fever, Zefferelli's Jesus Of Nazareth and Disney's The Rescuers. In the UK, When The Boat Comes In was in its third series on TV.

Luca$hFilm have not only withheld Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back and Return Of The Jedi from DVD release but they have also prevented all public screenings in cinemas. Luca$h has the right to do that and I couldn't dispute that. But am I prepared to accept that we can never again see the version of each film that people saw in 1977, 1980 and 1983? No, I'm not.

The DVDs that have just been released are very poor quality. I don't think that a company like Luca$hFilm has any excuse for that. With 4:3 displays being phased out and high definition in the ascendancy, these releases will very soon give a depressing viewing expeience to their owners, while other movies from the same time enjoy a loving transfer to DVD and then HD DVD and Blu-ray discs.

A mere two years after Star Wars came Alien. Director Ridley Scott has recently made a Director's Cut of this movie. His definitive version, if you will. But he has made no attempt to suppress the original cut. Both were given excellent treatment in recent individual and box-set releases. Blade Runner (1982) is set to receive the same respect on the Ultimate Edition release due soon. This will include the original theatrical cut, the 1992 "Director's" Cut (which Ridley Scott did not, actually, participate in) and a new cut that Scott has made. Again, his definitive version.

In recent years, Peter Jackson has not suppressed the original theatrical cuts of the LOTR movies, despite having made other versions.

I will not be satisfied until Luca$hFilm allows audiences to see all versions of their films in cinemas and at home on a level playing-field with other films of their times. Their current policies and releases are not allowing this and, therefore, are preventing audiences from fully appreciating the films' positions in and impact on film history.
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Post link
I completely agree with everything you just said, Aural. Lucas is going to see that this will come back and bite him in the a$$. Lucasfilm is far too dogmatic in control.
Author
Time
Post link
Great points, waffle.

Originally posted by: marioxb
If you love the SSSSEs and prequels, then they should look pristine and match each other so everything flows better. When I watch the movies from now on, it will always be in the order of 1, 2, Clone Wars, 3, 4, 5, 6. When going from 3 to 4, I can easily believe that 4 was filmed after 3, with the 2004 version.

Are you blind? The 2004 edits of the Star Wars trilogy looks like it was filmed after the prequel trilogy films? They look drastically different from each other. From the special effects to the makeup and designs, there is very little that matches the first set of three with the prequels in a visual sense. You must not look at things very closely.


Originally posted by: marioxb
Think of it this way. You make a movie and release it to theaters. You release it on DVD. Then you realize you want to improve it. The original is already out there. Would you really want people to see your old version anymore?

First, I would want people to see my old version, yes. What’s the point of hiding reality and not letting people decide what they want for themselves?


Originally posted by: marioxb
Why would you want to "fix up" your old version as well as your "new version" I know I wouldn't. It's different, because we have seen them, but those versions are now out there. We should stop complaining now. You wanted them unaltered. They are unaltered. Why aren't you happy yet?


Take your own advice, Mario, and use more effort when you “think” about things.

“Fix up” the old version? Who wants anything fixed up? The movie already exists and we wanted a transfer of that movie on DVD in normal, standard DVD quality. I won’t be happy until that is offered and I’m sure as hell not going to buy this pathetic release.

These versions are far from “unaltered.” This release is heavily altered for standard, low-resolution, 4:3 TVs and older analog formats like VHS and Laserdisc. To represent the original film as unaltered as possible on DVD (it’s impossible to not alter a film when transferring it to a new format), we would need a new digital master of the film dedicated for DVD. Think before you talk, please.


Originally posted by: marioxb
Animorphic would be altered as well.


There’s some nice stupidity.

The original films were shot in anamorphic. Secondly, anamorphic DVDs simply allow movies to be displayed in higher quality. If anything, that would simply display a film in a way that is even closer to the original version.


Originally posted by: marioxb
I, much like Lucas, would want people to think exactly like me. Why is that so hard to understand and be happy with?


Because different people think differently.

Your devotion to the prequel movies is not shared by most people. Star Wars was a pop culture phenomenon. The prequel trilogy is a silly, kiddy/geek phenomenon only.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger

Back to the Future trilogy (1985, 89, 90) listen to the Q & A audio on film one near the end, it's asked if any visibly wires were erased.


Which is what I love about that set. No attempt to digitally alter anything. Wires are all there. Original miniatures are still used. "To Be Continued..." taken out. Trailer for Part III in there. There is nothing about that set that isn't perfect! And there is nothing about that set that reeks of revisionist history. Those are the movies. The end. And when Universal misframed them, they didn't claim it was a deliberate creative decision. They did a free recall and replacement. It might have been a bit expensive and troublesome for them, but it sure made me respect them a lot more than I respect Lucas and Fox.


WOW! I had no idea about this until just now. I just checked my discs and they're apparently misframed (I have the box set from 2002). I called the number just now and imagine my surprise when someone answered. They took down all my information and are sending me the return envelope. That's awesome!


Wow, I am amazed that they're still doing that nearly four years after the DVDs were first released. Even more props to Universal for that! Take notes, Lucas!

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.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger

Back to the Future trilogy (1985, 89, 90) listen to the Q & A audio on film one near the end, it's asked if any visibly wires were erased.


Which is what I love about that set. No attempt to digitally alter anything. Wires are all there. Original miniatures are still used. "To Be Continued..." taken out. Trailer for Part III in there. There is nothing about that set that isn't perfect! And there is nothing about that set that reeks of revisionist history. Those are the movies. The end. And when Universal misframed them, they didn't claim it was a deliberate creative decision. They did a free recall and replacement. It might have been a bit expensive and troublesome for them, but it sure made me respect them a lot more than I respect Lucas and Fox.


MISFRAMED THEM??? What does that mean? I got the set shortly after its release, and I want to know if anything might be worng with them. Someone please explain it so I can check.
Watch DarthEvil's Who Framed Darth Vader? video on YouTube!

You can also access the entire Horriffic Violence Theater Series from my Channel Page.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Darth_Evil
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger

Back to the Future trilogy (1985, 89, 90) listen to the Q & A audio on film one near the end, it's asked if any visibly wires were erased.


Which is what I love about that set. No attempt to digitally alter anything. Wires are all there. Original miniatures are still used. "To Be Continued..." taken out. Trailer for Part III in there. There is nothing about that set that isn't perfect! And there is nothing about that set that reeks of revisionist history. Those are the movies. The end. And when Universal misframed them, they didn't claim it was a deliberate creative decision. They did a free recall and replacement. It might have been a bit expensive and troublesome for them, but it sure made me respect them a lot more than I respect Lucas and Fox.


MISFRAMED THEM??? What does that mean? I got the set shortly after its release, and I want to know if anything might be worng with them. Someone please explain it so I can check.


A quick google and I found this

I love everybody. Lets all smoke some reefer and chill. Hug and kisses for everybody.

Author
Time
Post link
There's a Wikipedia listing for Back to the Future as well. If you've got the box set with Doc, Marty, and the car on the cover (what I've got), then your set is likely misframed. The first set that was released without the misframing was just the car on the box.

The 800 number was awesome though. They didn't ask me for anything except an address where they could send the envelope to. And I got a live person at 11pm (I think they were in India though).
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
But, anyway, for a quick rundown, the problem stems from the films being shot in an open matte ratio. That means that the actual exposure of film was a standard 1.35:1 ratio (like with standard TVs) but it was cropped to 1.85:1 for the theatrical release. The DVDs cropped the widescreen version incorrectly for the sequels, different from the theatrical versions, and occasionally important information was lost.

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.

Author
Time
Post link
So they were really shot in full screen? Does that mean I should have the full screen set?

If not, what's the number to call? I've watched these movies dozens of times, and I want to make sure my hundreds of future viewings are the correct versions.
Watch DarthEvil's Who Framed Darth Vader? video on YouTube!

You can also access the entire Horriffic Violence Theater Series from my Channel Page.
Author
Time
Post link
no the fullscreen version are the matted version pan and scanned
Author
Time
Post link
Um, no, they're not. The fullscreen version actually shows more in this case. Usually, though, you'll want to go with the widescreen. Some mistakes have arisen from watching open matte movies in fullscreen. Directors won't notice that things get in the edges of the frame that they don't intend to get in there, such as boom mikes. As for BTTF, there are no such troubles, so it's really up to you.

EDIT: And, sadly, Darth_Evil, I've long since forgotten the number since I did it over three years ago. I bet that lordjedi can help you, though, since he just did it.

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.

Author
Time
Post link
Terminator 2 is shot this way too I believe. I say this because I remember an article on the subject and quite a few mistakes were pointed out that can only be seen on the Fullscreen version.
Author
Time
Post link
Actually, that was shot in Super 8, which I really, really despise. That way, you see different things in both full and widescreen, but you get the full picture in neither. Joy!

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.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Actually, that was shot in Super 8, which I really, really despise. That way, you see different things in both full and widescreen, but you get the full picture in neither. Joy!

I hear Cameron shoots all his movies that way- Titanic, etc.

Author
Time
Post link
Yeah, I hate Super 8 too. Thanks for the info. on the back to the future set, and don't worry, I found the numbed on Wikipedia.
Watch DarthEvil's Who Framed Darth Vader? video on YouTube!

You can also access the entire Horriffic Violence Theater Series from my Channel Page.
Author
Time
Post link
I don't even have the BTTF set yet. I just have the letterboxed LD of the first movie. I never liked the sequels as much. It would be nice if they'd sell them separately.

Also- there's a blurb on the BTTF 'framing' site about a framing error on the 'hard day's night' dvd (which I DO own)- this I had never heard of!

Author
Time
Post link
Yeah, from what I'm heard, it's one of the more infamous framing errors, and it's what's kept me from watching that movie in the past 15 years.

And I'm glad you managed to find the number.

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.

Author
Time
Post link
I think you mean super 35. Titanic was also done this way. Gladiator is 2:35 widescreen but it was actually shot 1:85 and has been shown with the full image on an HD channel. The Fifth Element is also super 35 but only matted for the non special effect shots. The sfx parts had the regular pan & scan done. Harry Potter 1 & 2 had varying amounts of more vertical picture in the fullscreen versions but 3 actually lost a bit of vertical image in addition to about half on the sides. Not sure about 4.
http://plum.cream.org/HP/

Take back the trilogy. Execute Order '77

http://www.youtube.com/user/Knightmessenger

Author
Time
Post link
Oh, yeah, that reminds me. The effects shots for the BTTF movies were filmed 1.85:1, as opposed to the rest of the movie. So if you get the widescreen version, you're losing some picture in regular scenes but seeing the full picture in the effects shots. In the fullscreen version, you're seeing more picture in regular scenes but getting cropped effects shots. You lose a little bit each way, just like with Super 35.

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.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Oh, yeah, that reminds me. The effects shots for the BTTF movies were filmed 1.85:1, as opposed to the rest of the movie. So if you get the widescreen version, you're losing some picture in regular scenes but seeing the full picture in the effects shots. In the fullscreen version, you're seeing more picture in regular scenes but getting cropped effects shots. You lose a little bit each way, just like with Super 35.


Yeah, but isn't the important thing the way it was shown in theaters, the way it was intended to be shown? It's not about getting more or less picture.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Cable-X1
I'd say it's about quality....and respect to three films upon which great importance is placed.....not only as an influence to a generation, but as a benchmark in SFX evolution and a milestone in American cinema. There is no difference between these films and Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Lawrence Of Arabia or The Godfather. They are all important pieces of art in the history of American film and they deserve to be preserved so future generations can see how cinematic art progressed in the 20th century.....


Hear hear!! Couldn't have said it better myself! Why can't people realize that this issue is NO different than if someone had colorized Casablanca for a DVD release and said, "Sorry folks, but this represents the vision of the original filmmakers and the B&W version is now obsolete." It's really that simple!!

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger

Back to the Future trilogy (1985, 89, 90) listen to the Q & A audio on film one near the end, it's asked if any visibly wires were erased.

Which is what I love about that set. No attempt to digitally alter anything. Wires are all there. Original miniatures are still used. "To Be Continued..." taken out. Trailer for Part III in there. There is nothing about that set that isn't perfect! And there is nothing about that set that reeks of revisionist history. Those are the movies. The end. And when Universal misframed them, they didn't claim it was a deliberate creative decision. They did a free recall and replacement. It might have been a bit expensive and troublesome for them, but it sure made me respect them a lot more than I respect Lucas and Fox.


They made a really, really big mistake, but at least the honed up to and did something about it other than send out a form response.

Hear hear!! Couldn't have said it better myself! Why can't people realize that this issue is NO different than if someone had colorized Casablanca for a DVD release and said, "Sorry folks, but this represents the vision of the original filmmakers and the B&W version is now obsolete." It's really that simple!!


I've tried that argument, but the answer I always get is, "They're his movies, so he can do whatever he wants to them." I wonder what Marquand, Kershner, Kurtz, and the gang think of that.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Mike O
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger

Back to the Future trilogy (1985, 89, 90) listen to the Q & A audio on film one near the end, it's asked if any visibly wires were erased.


Which is what I love about that set. No attempt to digitally alter anything. Wires are all there. Original miniatures are still used. "To Be Continued..." taken out. Trailer for Part III in there. There is nothing about that set that isn't perfect! And there is nothing about that set that reeks of revisionist history. Those are the movies. The end. And when Universal misframed them, they didn't claim it was a deliberate creative decision. They did a free recall and replacement. It might have been a bit expensive and troublesome for them, but it sure made me respect them a lot more than I respect Lucas and Fox.


They made a really, really big mistake, but at least the honed up to and did something about it other than send out a form response.


Yup, and that's what makes me respect them. A company can make as many mistakes as they want, but if you just come and say "We made a mistake," people will forgive you. The truth will set you free. Lucasfilm doesn't understand this. If they'd fixed the colorization problems on the 2004 discs and replaced them, we wouldn't be mad at them for it. But when they lie and say "It was always that way," we just get angrier at them.
Watch DarthEvil's Who Framed Darth Vader? video on YouTube!

You can also access the entire Horriffic Violence Theater Series from my Channel Page.