logo Sign In

My 2 cents releasing the OT on DVD

Author
Date
Author
Time
Post link
I don't know if anyone's discussed this before, but if the original theatrical versions are put on DVD it's gonna look really crappy. Even in my old VHS version of ANH, which I watched recently, lots of the effects look really bad, there's matte lines everywhere, Mos Eisley looks really sparse, fake and boring, the lightsabers are horrible looking. All this stuff is going to be amplified and look even worse when transfered to DVD, you'll see every little matte line and crappy saber effect in high resolution. In my opinion and Lucas' I beleive, it'll make the OT, especially ANH, seem crappier than everyone remembers it to be. Just look at the original entrance into Mos Eisley with the orange blob under the landspeeder, imagine that in high res? Yuch. A lot of the death star battle shots are really bad too, it's obvious it's a little model, and even though some was fixed for the SE DVD, a lot still looks crappy. I really think that's why he won't release the original versions, it just shows how bad visual effects technology was then, even though it seemed amazing at the time, which it was, but today a lot of it looks cheesy.
It's like looking at the original 1933 King Kong now, it's hard to imagine people being scared of that and fainting, but they did, cause no one had really seen anything like that before. Now it just looks like a puppet, but back then it blew people away. I made that comparision, cause I watched Kong with my brother a while ago and he thought it was really cheesy, not only the effects, but the acting. I guess what I'm saying is that I fear people are looking at the OT through rose colored 1977 glasses and, if and when it's ever released on DVD, they're going to be really dissapointed because it's going to look fake and pretty cheesy.

Thanks for listening,
Brandon
Author
Time
Post link
Believe it or not, some of us actually like the matte lines and the sparseness of sets. That's how it was when we grew up watching it. That's how we want it now. Sometimes I throw in my old VHS just to see the matte lines. They're comforting in a really odd way.
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Post link
"but if the original theatrical versions are put on DVD it's gonna look really crappy. Even in my old VHS version of ANH, which I watched recently, lots of the effects look really bad, there's matte lines everywhere, Mos Eisley looks really sparse, fake and boring, the lightsabers are horrible looking."

The '77 version won awards for best special effects. None of the re-releases have ever accomplished this. The number of Pre-SE versions of Star Wars sold over the past 30 years far outnumbers the numbers after the SE. I guess you'll never fathom how these "ugly" films sold so well, or had such a huge fan base.

"It's like looking at the original 1933 King Kong now, it's hard to imagine people being scared of that and fainting, but they did, cause no one had really seen anything like that before. Now it just looks like a puppet, but back then it blew people away. I made that comparision, cause I watched Kong with my brother a while ago and he thought it was really cheesy, not only the effects, but the acting. I guess what I'm saying is that I fear people are looking at the OT through rose colored 1977 glasses and, if and when it's ever released on DVD, they're going to be really dissapointed because it's going to look fake and pretty cheesy."

Yet people still buy the old King Kong version, and they will buy the '77 version as well. If you don't like it, that's nice, but don't go accusing people of "rose colored glasses" just because they want something that's unappealing to you. That's exceptionally small-minded. People who want the '77 version know EXACTLY what they want, and what it will look like - your opinion of it notwithstanding. If you've any doubt, look at all the people, like myself, making or looking forward to LD transfers to DVD. There are plenty of screenshots showing matte lines, a sparse Mos Eisley, horrible lightsabers, and much, much more - and yet people still want them. You really need to learn that not all people want the same thing. It's an important life lesson.

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Post link
is the jessica lang version of king kong better than the 1933 version because it has better effects......what about the remake of psycho, dial m for murder("a perfect murder" w/ paltrow), nosferateu vs dracula w/ bela vs coppola's dracula,....Do we no longer watch the movies such as Flash Gordon Serials, all the great Sinbad movies, or even more recently films such as Raiders of the lost arc (most of the snakes were quite silly)......would you rather have harrison have had the sword fight as originally scripted & remove him shooting the swordsman in the square & removing a classic piece of movie history? These movies are a time capsule from the era in which they were produced. Updating them to match the moment is a slippery road that can never be maintained & destroys the context which is what made these movies so important at the time that they were recognized as the best that there was when compared to their peers. Even Ted Turner came to recognize this fact(the master of colorazation) who now campions the clasic movie form thru his turner classic movie channel. Uninterupted, wide screen presentations with commentary at the begining & end to help viewers understand why the movie was the way it was. The original dracula was shot in 6 weeks with the english version shot during the day, & spanish at night. Does this rushed, low budget approach ruin the film?

How is it possible to understand how ground breaking a movie was when you can't even see it the way those original viewers/critics saw it. A "special edition" loses all context when you have nothing to compare it against.
Lucas=Star Wars as Colorization=Casablaca
Author
Time
Post link
Hence, why Lucas no longer refers to his altered versions as "Special Editions"; like Stimpy, he can't resist pushing the History Eraser Button.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
like Stimpy, he can't resist pushing the History Eraser Button.


That's because it's so shiny and candy-like.
Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time
Post link
I don't think any of the old effects look cheesy, including the 1933 King Kong. If you consider it cheesy, then your view of films is kinda jaded. CG looks cheesy. It'll never seem real. The effects in the original films were at some point real objects, be it miniatures or stop-motion creatures. It lends itself to making the film more real and less extravagant and over-the-top like today's films.

And for the record, the 1976 Kong OWNS. And I just watched the E.T. original theatrical version and I'm never watching the 20th Anniversary Edition again. Ever.
Author
Time
Post link
I get the feeling that if GL ever does release the originals on dvd, people will still complain....Face it, most of you are so full of nostaliga that you will never be able to see them like you once did, no matter which version it is.
Which is the more foolish, the fool (the OT) or the fool who follows (the PT)?

"Stay back, or Mr...Fett gets it!"
Author
Time
Post link
I love it when people complain about complainers. LOL. I suppose you are pleased as punch with your official SW DVDs, then? No complaints, right?

.....rose colored glasses, indeed.
Author
Time
Post link
First I just wanted to say look who started this post. Some first time poster who hasnt posted anything since. I dismissed his opinion no sooner than i had read it based on this fact and the fact that he is coming onto a board and basically telling the posters that everything this site stands for is wrong. He obviously has no sense in movies as he appears to think that a movies greatness is how its special effects hold up to current day movies.

He says himself that the king kong effects were amazing at the time, so isnt that reason enough to preserve it? So what if they look cheesy today, and you dont have the imagination to watch the movie and see it for its story and 'fear' king kong, all i can say to that is glad im not you.

But based on this argument we should get rid of all the information on those silly room sized computers. I mean compared to a PDA those look 'cheesy' and their not nearly as good (powerful) so why keep any history of them around...Your talking about basically eliminating a piece of history...Star Wars changed the face of special effects, and even though you apparently dont care, some people are interested in seeing the how things were done 'back in the day' before all this technology for cgi came about.

I watched The Day After Tomorrow the other day and their is a scene where they show these wolves in a zoo (the wolves are actually shown later on too, but that doesnt matter) the point is, during their first short scene one of them howled and the first thing that came to my mind was they're cgi, they didnt look real at all. the movement that they gave to the cgi model just looked fake. It just goes to show that cgi isnt always better.

-Darth Simon
Why Anakin really turned to the dark side:
"Anakin, You're father I am" - Yoda
"No. No. That's not true! That's impossible!" - Anakin

0100111001101001011011100110101001100001

*touchy people disclaimer*
some or all of the above comments are partially exaggerated to convey a point, none of the comments are meant as personal attacks on anyone mentioned or reference in the above post
Author
Time
Post link
I would prefer an OT release with CGI "clean-up", but not alteration. Basically using CGI to make the original scenes look better without adding anything or remaking any shots. I can dream, can't I?
Author
Time
Post link
You should go take a look at what mverta is doing. Here's the link: Star Wars Legacy.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
The person's premise is the kind of moronic thing you hear at every forum. The way films are made today, it is no wonder people believe this. Today, effects are the substitute for story. Making an effect now is a matter of pressing some buttons. In 1976/77, they had to do actual work. I would put the special effects of New Hope and Empire Strikes Back up against anything coming out today. I happen to like the orange blob under the speeder. I think it looks like the speeder is picking up dirt and sand. It adds realism. I've never noticed the matte lines. I was to busy with the story. The saber effects and Death Star attack are not crappy. They looked great up on the big screen before Lucas changed them and they'd look great on a DVD player.
Author
Time
Post link
"I happen to like the orange blob under the speeder."

I may actually try to fix that.

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Post link
Good luck, MBJ.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Brandonrf1, I'm glad you shared your opinion. Because believe it or not most of these SW fans here that want to see the O-OT released officially on DVD share your view to a lesser extent. They hate the changes lucas has made, but in their hands they would still make changes to certain effects. Awful isn't it? See, you are saying "this is my apple, I expect it to taste like an apple. Don't bring me an orange because it won't taste like an apple". So is anyone else who would make the least of changes. Because you're tampering with the material.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
I don't know if anyone's discussed this before, but if the original theatrical versions are put on DVD it's gonna look really crappy.


Well you know what else looks really crappy... movies that are made with computers... and you know what else... movies that are intimate and honest, that have crappy computer animated monsters put in. Does anyone agree with me? Most CG still looks like crap, and I'd take an elephant in a costume over CG anyday of the week! Please put out these DVDs so I can quit watching the tape of the 3 movies my dad made for me when they were on TV in 1987!!! WHEN I WAS TWO YEARS OLD!!! I'm getting sick of the FORD TEMPO car adds. And yes, I do own the new DVD's, they just don't feel half as real anymore!!! Maybe Lucas will keep altering them until they are as cheesy as Ep1 and Ep2! That would be great! But hey, without Lucas, I wouldn't even have anything to hope for, so God bless him.
"I love you..."

"I know..."
Author
Time
Post link
"I'm getting sick of the FORD TEMPO car adds."

LOL! I'd love to know what the other ads are for. Talk about a time capsule.

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Post link
Well I'll tell you. Every second add is a Dash Tours add for the 1988 Winter Olympic Games in Calgary! Right on!
"I love you..."

"I know..."
Author
Time
Post link
I can't say that I wouldn't enjoy a Star Wars where I see all those matte lines and that blob underneath the speeder.

No, not everything in that movie may look realistic, but does CGI look anymore real? No. I don't care about matte lines, and I don't care about blobs. I certainly don't care about more storm troopers.

When I watch SW on VHS and I see that blob, it reminds me that erasing those wheels was actually a challenge in 1976. They had to put vaseline on the freaking lens. If that's not inventive, I don't know what is. Digitally removing the wheels sure as hell isn't.

I do want the original, unaltered versions of the SW trilogy to be released on DVD. I want to bask in the matte lines and blobs and every little thing. I don't want a single change made. Not one single effect needs to be "slightly improved" or "enhanced" in any way. The movies were perfectly fine the way they were. So what if all those little things will be more visible in the high resolution of DVD. That's how movies were made in 1976.

And I don't care how many facial expressions you can create on a computer, cgi Yoda looks no better than the cartoon Yoda on the Clone Wars cartoons. Puppet Yoda looks like an actual living thing.

Off topic, but has anybody seen that recent picture of General Grevious w/ his two guards on sw.com? It reaks of Buzz Lightyearness.