logo Sign In

Star Wars coming to Blu Ray (UPDATE: August 30 2011, No! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!) — Page 131

Author
Time

Very interesting! Was it common to shoot 16:9 at the time?

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Maybe instead of writing to Lucas we should start writing to Spielberg telling him to go slap some sense into his BFF.

"George, we hate you for making more Star Wars movies.  Please make more Star Wars movies."

-The Internet

Author
Time

^Except Spielberg also lost his marbles at some point in the last 20 years....

Author
Time

S_Matt said:

^Except Spielberg also lost his marbles at some point in the last 20 years....

That would be about 1988-after Empire of the Sun.

Zombie is right. EoD wouldn't have been in filmed in HD simply due to the time in which it was made.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

Wait a minute. Doing some studying on the SE's came across this:

"In fact, the original negative from the Jabba sequence had disappeared: all that existed was a 15-year old interpositive."

If a deleted scene can be put alongside the ON, why can't they scan that IP or another one for the OUT?

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress

Author
Time

doubleofive said:

Wait a minute. Doing some studying on the SE's came across this:

"In fact, the original negative from the Jabba sequence had disappeared: all that existed was a 15-year old interpositive."

If a deleted scene can be put alongside the ON, why can't they scan that IP or another one for the OUT?

because they're lazy buggers, that's why

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time

I think it was leant out for the SW To Jedi doc in 1983 and it disappeared somehow.

Author
Time

Well, a negative for what was for a long time (and should have remained that way) a deleted scene.  Even as notorious a hoarder as Lucas apparently is, it's understandable that that scene might have been lost. I mean, look at the available footage we have of the Anchorhead scenes...

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

Gaffer Tape said:

Well, a negative for what was for a long time (and should have remained that way) a deleted scene.  Even as notorious a hoarder as Lucas apparently is, it's understandable that that scene might have been lost. I mean, look at the available footage we have of the Anchorhead scenes...

To bring it all back around, I suspect we'll finally be able to see Anchorhead at full-frame-rate with the Blu Rays. Not sure of the resolution, but it'll be better than what we've got.

ROTJ Storyboard Reconstruction Project

Author
Time

I find it hard to believe that it was THAT hard to shoot in HD back in 2003.  "Attack Of The Clones," Michael Mann's "Collateral," and several Robert Rodriguez films were shot in HD a few years before or at the same time Empire of Dreams was released.  The tech already existed, and was being used by some pretty hefty filmmakers at the time.  I hardly think Rodriguez would've been shooting HD if the technology and hardware were so cumbersome.  He's all about streamlining the process, and was talking about the ease of shooting and producing films in HD back in 2003.  And TV shows looking to cut costs (such as Star Trek: Enterprise) were beginning to shoot in HD at this same point in time.  Maybe for the regular consumer, it was not possible, but for professional production studios and filmmakers, it was clearly possible very early on in the last decade.

-NJM

Author
Time

But a feature film production is something else than a documentary meant for DVD.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

@Nicholas

Trust me, it was hard to find HD productions. Almost no one was shooting in HD in 2003, Lucas and Rodriguez were exceptional and experimental in this regard. Think of the preportion of the amount of theatrically distributed feature films that were shot HD to the amount shot on film from 2003 to 2005. 1:1000 maybe? You can practically count the HD ones on your hands. You have Lucas, Rodriguez, one-offs like Collatoral, and, uh...Lucas? I never even saw an HD camera until 2004, and I never used one until 2006. 2005 is around the time you finally saw them being used here and there, but it was still pretty unusual, the "new" thing. Documentarians began using them first--the Cinealta that Lucas used was not intended for feature filming--because of the long-format tapes, but the cameras were so incredibly expensive that most people just shot on stuff like Digibeta if they wanted to go video. Hell, into 2006 I was still working with Digibeta here and there. And then when the cameras started being adopted for feature use, no one wanted to use them, from the producers standpoint because they were costly and slowed down your post flow, and from the camera crew's standpoint because they were cumbersome, delicate, awkward and difficult to use. I protested the use of HD cameras until 2008 or so when they finally started getting their act together and designing models with feature filming in mind. The older ones that Lucas and Rodriguez were using were simply pieces of junk. It cost the production more money than film, it frustrated the camera crew because they were so bulky and tethered by wires, it frustrated the cinematographer because it restricted his shots and made him compromise his lighting, it frustrated the post people because it was sometimes difficult to work with and was often slower than with a film daily, it frustrated FX people because there was no detail or range to work with so they had to spend more time, and the results looked like shit on the screen at the end of the day. So there was absolutely no point in bothering when film was cheaper, easier, and looked beautiful.

Finally, as Harmy pointed out, DVD extras were usually made like corporate videos and promotional stuff, pretty low budget, small crew, small production, not intended for long-term viewing or high-end viewing. I don't think people started shooting extras in HD until HD formats like Blu Ray came along, and even then most the extras you see even today are not in high def.

Author
Time

If they shot Empire of Dreams on 16mm film, wouldn't an HD version be possible?

You know of the rebellion against the Empire?

Author
Time

I just emailed Prometheus Entertainment personally.  We should have an answer sometime soon.

-NJM

Author
Time

Erikstormtrooper said:

If they shot Empire of Dreams on 16mm film, wouldn't an HD version be possible?

 It would be, but I can pretty much guarantee you they didn't shoot in 16mm. For one, it wouldn't be practical or cost-effective, and number two it really doesn't look like 16mm. Also, since a lot of the doc is not original footage (talking heads) but b-roll from other sources it would depend on the source quality of those (dailies, footage seen in other docs like Making of SW and never-before-seen clips, newsreel footage, miscellaneous, etc.).

Even if the raw footage of the interviews was shot in 16mm--which it likely wasn't--the master was probably a standard-def video one, probably on something like DVCPRO or Digibeta.

Author
Time

 

CP3S said:

Does anybody know the name of this? Is it any good? Sounds kind of interesting.

adywan said:

 Star Wars: The legacy revealed was a completely different Doc

Nicholas J. Michalak said:

That History Channel special was likely "Star Wars: The Legacy Revealed."

-NJM

 I've got to admit that I was surprised that none here did a fan project preserving the History Channel special Star Wars: The Legacy Revealed since Lucas won't let the History Channel sell the special on DVD in their online store or anywhere else for that matter.

“Anakin had those qualities so rarely seen, exuding an unmistakable confidence and yet still able to touch one’s heart in simply knowing how he was so flawed… wounded.”

Author
Time

It's on the internet already, in a pretty decent capture.

Author
Time

zombie, do you have any idea when video editing/post production became the norm for tv documentaries, even if shot on film?

Classic Creatures seems the odd man out of all the OOT docs, as it seems to have been finished up on video. 16mm copies of the others have been spotted in the wild.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

zombie84 said:

It's on the internet already, in a pretty decent capture.

A fan made custom DVD with Menu? Chapters?

It's not the one on tehparadox, is it?

“Anakin had those qualities so rarely seen, exuding an unmistakable confidence and yet still able to touch one’s heart in simply knowing how he was so flawed… wounded.”