logo Sign In

Post #547805

Author
TServo2049
Parent topic
Theory on the 1997 "restoration".
Link to post in topic
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/547805/action/topic#547805
Date created
22-Oct-2011, 6:01 PM

Yeah, it was a dark time for color film stock. When I saw Star Trek II in 70mm in L.A. last year, the host warned that it was a print from Metrocolor, and that prints from that lab were notoriously fade-prone. This print was faded enough that they put a blue filter on the projector to "correct" it.

Last year, I also saw Ghostbusters at the American Cinematheque. Also 70mm, also printed at Metrocolor, except it was on LPP. No fading. The age difference between the two prints was only two years, but the difference in the color was like night and day.

Back to the subject at hand, other effects-heavy films from the same time period as SW, which used the same kinds of negative stock, have been restored and presented in their original form. Close Encounters had similar issues with its O-neg, and was also full of optical composite shots on CRI, yet the restoration that's on Blu-ray looks darn good (and it has three different cuts of the film.) Superman had similar issues, and it also looks very good (though there was some digital color correction and recompositing done on that film). Both of them have a couple color flaws and noticeable grain (though I'm sure a lot of that was due to the cinematography), but they look very very good nonetheless.

The point is, I believe that the same *can* be done for the OOT, and that the fact that it hasn't been done is due to unwillingness, not inability.

Also, remember that all the hubbub about the restoration centered around the first film; I'm willing to bet that the original elements of ESB and ROTJ are in better condition.