I find myself calling it the GOUT when I am talking about it and all my friends look at me like I am nuts. This page helps.
EDIT: About the anamorphic issue: Would it be important to mention that while the feature of the gout discs aren't anamorphic, the menus are?
I wanted to point something out, i know it is nitpicking but the japan special collection for star wars the first film came out in 1986. Thought you might want to know if it is important to have correct information. I can see why you made the mistake however as the 1989 us release came from the same master, just was in CLV not CAV.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
Which version/release of the OOT has the yellow TIE lasers in both TESB and ROTJ? I seem to remember this on my 1995 VHS tapes:
Just a few points I've noticed re-reading...
On a general point I would alter any reference to respect or love for the 'franchise'.
I appreciate that in modern parlance franchise has generally come to be seen as referring a series of films, television shows etc and related material but strictly speaking it refers to authorised distribution and selling.
Seeing as our main beef is with the authorised versions not being the original films we want to see, it would make sense in my view to change that to respect and love for the films themselves and drop all reference to "the franchise".
On the Guardian article page there is a line seemingly describing OT.com and the petition as not being user friendly or detailed.
I think you meant in the context of getting information about the history of the changes to the films and the attempts to conserve them and not at all in reference to the petition or the forum itself (as just a forum).
The information on the front page of the site is a very reasonable primer to the issues and the petition is easy enough to sign. the forums are as user friendly as most forums are (more so compared to some I've been on).
Reading that line as it stands makes it sound like the site and petition isn't very user friendly (which may put some people off joining up and signing) so it could do with a little adjustment for sake of clarity.
On the Theatrical Sound section in the second paragraph part of a sentence reads "excepting the two-decades-out-of-print".
I'd alter that to "except for the two decades out of print"(if you want to add emphasis underline it, the hyphens look strange rather than percussive).
On the Fan Preservations section paragraph three the part of the sentence which reads, "Laserdisc had barely died in the United States".
That doesn't really say what I think you mean it to say.
Please correct me if I'm wrong but don't you mean 'Laserdisc was already on the wane in the United States' (or however you want to word it)?
The original line suggests the format was already dead but only for a short while where as you seem to be suggesting with the rest of the text that the format had peaked and was in decline at this point.
I'll let you know f I spot anything else.
I think this is completely awesome and you're a great writer Zombie, I already knew like 95% of the information in these articles but I still enjoyed reading them :-) The only thing I would suggest is that there should be a simpler article for each of the main issues and then you could click "for a more in depth analysis" that would be your editorial article. These articles are great for us who are already passionate about these issues but if someone who isn't familiar with the problems read those articles they might feel overwhelmed with information, so it would be nice to give them a simplified matter of fact articles that would show rather than describe (more comparison pics, maybe even clips). I might try and put something together myself but I'm having my good computer repaired now and it may take up to a month so I don't even have photoshop now.
Bingowings said: I appreciate that in modern parlance franchise has generally come to be seen as referring a series of films, television shows etc and related material but strictly speaking it refers to authorised distribution and selling.
I agree.
Bingowings said: On the Theatrical Sound section in the second paragraph part of a sentence reads "excepting the two-decades-out-of-print".
I'd alter that to "except for the two decades out of print"(if you want to add emphasis underline it, the hyphens look strange rather than percussive).
I agree with changing excepting to except, although this is preference, but you are wrong about the hyphens. It has nothing to do with emphasis: it is accepted practice when one uses a long phrase as an adjective/modifier.
I bow (not to anything in particular I just get the overwhelming urge to genuflect whenever I see a your avatar).
I'm not familiar with that use of hyphens so cheers for pointing it out to me.
You're welcome, Bingo! :-)
Harmy said:
I think this is completely awesome and you're a great writer Zombie, I already knew like 95% of the information in these articles but I still enjoyed reading them :-) The only thing I would suggest is that there should be a simpler article for each of the main issues and then you could click "for a more in depth analysis" that would be your editorial article. These articles are great for us who are already passionate about these issues but if someone who isn't familiar with the problems read those articles they might feel overwhelmed with information, so it would be nice to give them a simplified matter of fact articles that would show rather than describe (more comparison pics, maybe even clips). I might try and put something together myself but I'm having my good computer repaired now and it may take up to a month so I don't even have photoshop now.
Do you mean like the equivalent of an FAQ? I have toyed with that. Something that was meant for mass audience and stays fairly light was the article How the Grinch Stole Star Wars, as it touches on everything but doesnt get too detailed. On the about us page I have suggested this as a starting point for the uninitiated. I do see your point though, I'm just worried about making something that is redundant. My best thought was an FAQ that has short simple answers and then points to the corresponding article on the subject for greater detail.
Also, thanks everyone for the suggestions and corrections. Will fix things up eventually.
Yeah, FAQ could work. But I thought more like on the example of GOUT, have a short article that would go like:
Although the original versions of the films were relaesed on DVD in 2006 this cannot be thought of as a true preservation, because 1993 LaserDisc [with a hypertext to some site that explains what a LD is] masters were used as a source and therefore the DVDs suffer from following problems:
1) Non-anamorphic transfers.
[A bunch of pictures (maybe gifs to show it in motion) illustrating the problem]
[A link to a more in-depth analysis of the problem]
2) Execive amounts of grain:
[A bunch of comparison pictures (maybe gifs to show it in motion) illustrating the problem]
[A link to a more in-depth analysis of the problem]
3) DVNR smearing
[A bunch of comparison pictures (maybe gifs to show it in motion) illustrating the problem] [A link to a more in depth analysis of the problem] and so on... It should be more graphic IMHO, like have moving gifs and maybe highlighting or zooming on the issue in question in the pictures. I'm even toying with an idea of doing a documentary that I'd put on youtube when I get my good computer back. I hope you wouldn't mind me citing some of your execelent articles in it.
I've not read every single post in this thread so forgive me if I'm repeating what someone else has said.
Content-wise, I've got nothing to add or to criticize. Quite the opposite, it seems like the http://savestarwars.com page is a nice little summation of a lot of things people have been saying (and are right about) here for years. So my hat is off in terms of content.
However, in terms of presentation, it seems that the editorials are the site's main attraction. A good move might be to have some kind of brief intro text at the top of the homepage that very quickly summarizes what your page is all about and then, from there, lists of the various editorials. Off to the side, you can have that FAQ and the other sections as well.
Also, you may want to think about linking the text title of each editorial to the editorial's URL. For example, you would make the "How the Grinch Stole Star Wars" text into hyperlink text pointing to http://savestarwars.com/howthegrinchstolestarwars.html. And so on.
All I really want is each film as it was originally seen and heard in theaters; no fixes, corrections, "improvements" or modifications necessary.
The more I think about it, the more an FAQ seems like a good idea. So, bridging the two suggestions above, I think I will put a little disclaimer above the editorials page stating that for the uninitiated a browsing of the FAQ might be the best place to start, with the editorials here linked for further detail. That way, people looking for simple, to the point answers can find them in the FAQ, and if they want further info there will be a link back to the full articles on each corresponding topic from the editorials page. I might also put a glossary of terms there. I try to define all acronymns within the articles themselves, but this might be helpful nonetheless.
It's really thorough and impressive, gotta love it. It represents some real care and labor. Maybe it's too crass to do this, but I would love to put a real dollar amount on the cost of a potential transfer in there and have it very prominent on the front page. I've heard it's doable for about 75 grand, but I don't know if that's reliable. (I guess the lowest number that yields a good basic vanilla disc is best for the sake of making a point). Maybe put it up in the corner next to a "stock ticker" of Lucasfilm's worth. Anyway, really good work.
avoidz said:
Which version/release of the OOT has the yellow TIE lasers in both TESB and ROTJ?
That problem is on the 1993 telecine so the yellow TIE laser glitch in Empire and Jedi is on every '93/'95LD, VHS and GOUT release. My '95 PAL VHS copy of Empire have also blue TIE lasers. I really don't know what was causing these faults in the transfer, maybe the fantastic THX remastering. ;)
We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions.
Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com
I've just checked the starwars.com comparison list for Empire and it seems they did a really good job on that one. The only things not listed that I know of is the A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.... text and a minor special-fx correction done to the "Space Slug scene," in the original film when the space slug comes out of the asteroid to reach out after the Falcon, you can see the whole asteroid bounces a little at the end of it.
The funny thing is, if you don't count the added scenes in the SE to the trilogy, The Empire Strikes Back is the most altered film of the three, it's just that the changes happens to be more subtle and tastefully done.
We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions.
Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com
Okay, compiling a list of questions for the FAQ. Suggestions welcome. My audience for this is newbies who have no knowledge or only some knowledge of the subject, and TFN Lucas gushers who will be skeptical of the whole concept of the site. Here is the list of questions I have so far, not necessarily in sequential order:
Q: Weren't the original theatrical versions released on DVD in 2006?
Q: Won't the original versions look really crude and in poor condition? Isn't that why Lucas had to enhance and restore them for the Special Edition?
Q: Restoring or presenting the original versions in high quality is very expensive isn't it? Lucas does not have the money or desire to do so, nor should he be forced to.
Q: I heard the original versions do not exist as film. The negatives were destroyed, and there are no good copies. Is this true?
Q: It seems like every Star Wars fan expects something different for an "original DVD or Blu Ray." In terms of how original, whether any clean-up has been done, how many defects to leave in like matte lines and scratches. Isn't it sort of impossible to please everyone?
Q: The Special Editions are the same basic film. Is it really that important to have the originals?
Q: How can you demand that Lucas relinquish the originals? As both the legal rights holder and also the artist behind the films, shouldn't they be his to do with as he pleases? Isn't forcing an artist to make a choice they do not wish an unethical practice?
Q: Is the 2006 DVD better than any bootleg DVD? And if not, which ones are best?
Q: Have the originals been shown anywhere since the 1997 Special Edition came out?
Q: I have heard people complaining about the video quality of the 2004 Special Edition, but the picture and sound looks great to me, very clear and sharp, the best I've seen the films. What are people talking about?
Q: Where can I find original video and film material of the films as they were when they were released?
Q: I've heard about difference sound mixes of the films. Which sound mix is the original mix?
(Sorry about the colouring)
Sluggo said:
EDIT: About the anamorphic issue: Would it be important to mention that while the feature of the gout discs aren't anamorphic, the menus are?
Agreed. That's a peeve of mine as well. It should definitely be mentioned.
Some more questions:
I agree about wanting the Original Trilogy on Blu-ray, but it seems the upcoming set in 2011 is the only way. Are there any alternatives?
What is AVCHD?
Q: Is the 2006 DVD better than any bootleg DVD? And if not, which ones are best?
I wouldn't call out specific bootlegs by name. Maybe just mention that several bootlegs are better than the official 2006 Bonus Disc version, but are not good for long-term use & archiving because they aren't pressed DVDs. Maybe include a link to an article about the differences between pressed and DVD-R for longevity.
I don't mean to break the current topic conversation, but it is a relief to find a site like this on the internet. A site full of the original classic trilogy fans, (with all due respect to Anchorhead, who I believe used to post on theforce.net forums under a different name.) who have taken offense to the current state of the Star Wars universe.
I have been a fan of Star Wars since before I could remember. I grew up when the films were first released, my earliest memories where watching the original release of Empire, and the 1981 release of Star Wars. And having older brothers who saw the original 77 Wars when I was 1 years old, I basically grew up with complete knowledge of the film before I had cognitive memory.I used to listen to the album soundtrack, and had one of my older brothers read me the novelization, and played with the Kenner action figures. With the advent of home video, my father finally bought a Beta Max, and the first film we owned was Star Wars, which a watched till the tape wore down.
My point being is that I grew up with these films, and there was a time period when being a fan of Star Wars was not a niche, but a cultural landmark that was shared by all kids who I went to school with, And it is a shame that Lucasfilm has taken this away from the world by declaring that the abominations known as the SE's are the only true representation of these pieces of American film history. It is as if MGM decided to alter The Wizard of Oz, or Disney Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, and declare the new and improved versions to be the true definitive versions of these cinematic classics.
I know of the argument that Lucas was the original creator, he owns the rights, and has every right to change what he feels like. This would ring true if the original versions are preserved properly, and made available to the world. To not do so is an affront to film historians, enthusiasts. and fans everywhere. It shows a true arrogance towards history that is befuddling as well as it is complete and utter bull@!#$. Lucas was once a visionary genius, I feel no hatred towards the man, only sadness on what he has become.
As an artist myself, once I am done with a project, I am done. It is, for good or bad, an extension on what I was feeling and where I was at at (pun) the time I created it. If I feel disappointment on what I did, I move on and try to improve my next work. I just do not get his attitude.
Sorry for my long rant, but this forum has struck a cord with me, and more people in real world than anybody in this forum might suspect. Star Wars is an American icon, everybody I know do not like the SE's or PT's, people who do not consider themselves Star Wars of science fiction fans. Hopefully Lucasfilm will come to this realization and do what is the only right and noble thing to do, release the originals in a format that truly shows their cinematic greatness. To not do so would be a crime to art everywhere.
"I'm making ice cream!"
msycamore said:
avoidz said:
Which version/release of the OOT has the yellow TIE lasers in both TESB and ROTJ?
That problem is on the 1993 telecine so the yellow TIE laser glitch in Empire and Jedi is on every '93/'95LD, VHS and GOUT release. My '95 PAL VHS copy of Empire have also blue TIE lasers. I really don't know what was causing these faults in the transfer, maybe the fantastic THX remastering. ;)
Thanks. A bit like the lobster-faces on the Indiana Jones DVDs then :)
Ugnaught said:
(with all due respect to Anchorhead, who I believe used to post on theforce.net forums under a different name.)
This is the only Star Wars board I've ever been a member of.
In defense of Anchorhead, I don't believe he ever posted on TFN. I know that cause he used to ask many of us what was it like over there? And we used to respond 10% bashers, 90% gushers.
I haven't posted there since I was permabanned around the GOUT release, so I would be interested if idiots like Gomertonic still post there.
Ive just read through this whole thread and what a fantastic idea, George Lucas needs a wake up call . Im so glad i found this site , i will get in contact with all media that i can think off . Has anyone in the U.K. emailed the U.K. film mags asking for support ?.
CO said:
In defense of Anchorhead, I don't believe he ever posted on TFN. I know that cause he used to ask many of us what was it like over there? And we used to respond 10% bashers, 90% gushers.
I haven't posted there since I was permabanned around the GOUT release, so I would be interested if idiots like Gomertonic still post there.
Go mer tonic got so ridiculous the mods had to finally permaban him. Don't worry, there's about 30 idiots filling the void nicely.