Originally posted by: Daniel
May be somebody can answer me this question: How come nobody acknowledges (if not praises) how much better the Battle at Yavin looks in the SE-ANH? I can pretty much understand every complaint except this one. The newer Battle at Yavin looks SO much better than it did in the OOT (and I was there in 1977 being 12 yrs old at the time).
May be somebody can answer me this question: How come nobody acknowledges (if not praises) how much better the Battle at Yavin looks in the SE-ANH? I can pretty much understand every complaint except this one. The newer Battle at Yavin looks SO much better than it did in the OOT (and I was there in 1977 being 12 yrs old at the time).
Oh, I will grant you that. In fact, perhaps now is the time to admit I often watch Star Wars original up to that point in the film, but switch to the SE for the vastly superior Battle of Yavin (and then cringe when the Death Star blows up like something out of Star Trek).
Yeah, I was there in 1977 being 16 yrs old at the time ... and then, as now, it's not merely the lame effects that mar the battle of Yavin, but shots and editing that make murky what is going on. It's not a matter of the SE version looking slicker, it really communicates the action far better than the original.
A true improvement, imo, one of perhaps 3 SE modifications thruout the trilogy that I consider for the better.
Edited to add : I know it's sacrilege to prefer soulless digital over charming models, but I don't often watch Star Wars as an historical exercise. I honestly think the SE version of this one scene has remarkable clarity of action that the original version lacks.
.