CatBus said:
Alderaan said:
I think watching Star Wars is a little different than watching something like The Godfather, don't you think?
Absolutely. One of them looks and sounds like it did in theatres (although some argue this point because they don't think the yellow tint is from bulb-matching), and one of them clearly doesn't, which is rather the point.
EDIT: If you're talking about "looking dated", you simply need to look at the haircuts. They are movies from the seventies. The VFX, editing, haircuts and fashions are all dead giveaways. I'm sure it's possible to give everyone a digital haircut, freshen up the fashions and color schemes a bit, do some more jump cuts and fewer wipes, and remove the matte lines, but that would just turn it into a seventies movie trying to be a modern movie (and failing). Which, in a lot of ways, is one of the primary problems with the Special Editions. To focus exclusively on matte lines is really no different than focusing exclusively on haircuts. It's the same "I don't like the look of films from that period" writ small. Not that it isn't a valid opinion to have, but that's what it is.
It's also not my intention to be dismissive of your opinion, just of the idea that you can extrapolate/evangelize your opinion to what everyone else might want. Heck, I wouldn't mind changes to the originals myself (no cue marks, no gate weave, no burn marks, some dirt & scratch removal), but I know there's plenty who would disagree with me on some or all of these.
Largely I agree with Alderaan, in that newly composited original elements (but no CGI embelishments), put together as a "Showcase" version for a modern DCP/Blu-Ray/4K, would be ideal for a wide release of the Classic cuts. Though CatBus makes a perfect point about preserving the film(s) as a product of their time (and where would Disney hypothetically draw the line should they decide to play in the Lucas sandbox?), I believe tidying up the original compositing would eliminate the biggest remaining distraction for modern audiences. Everything about set design, hairstyles, costumes, etc., should remain as it is, because, those are aspects that contemporary audiences *expect* to see, and will not find jarring, in the way that a blurry landspeeder (1970's VFX) or ronto creature (1990's VFX) would on a modern screen. In other words, cheap sets and costumes, by themselves, don't degrade the image quality in the way that photochemically-composited VFX may have (in some cases). I think that most of us here, though, understand that the original VFX needs to be acknowledged and preserved, whether seamlessly branched or presented on an alternate disc, as a concrete duty to film history.