yoda-sama said:

Frink, I do believe you missed him also saying Luca$$$film.

Also, Mr. Doom, where are you getting this "restore PT in 4K" stuff? In his foolish eagerness to completely distance himself from all things that worked well from the OT, Lucas jumped too early onto recording completely in digital for Episodes II and III, forever trapping them at a maximum resolution of 1080p. The PT will never be a 4K showcase, due to extreme shortsightedness, and Disney is not about to lead with that foot. If Star Wars ever commercially goes 4K, it would pretty much have to be just some form of original trilogy release (be it redone-from-scratch SE, or OOT), not the complete Vader saga.

I don't know if Eps 2 and 3 were technically finished at 1080. They were definitely shot that way (technically 1920 by 817 for the 2.35:1 scope framing), but I think they still did all the cgi and color timing at 2k cinema resolution (2048 by 853 for scope). Small difference, I know, and it certainly doesn't improve the limited resolution of the live-action footage, which would still be stuck at cropped 1080p.

Avatar was shot similarly. 1920 by 1080 hd cameras with the vfx and color finished at true 2k for the scope version. John Knoll said in an interview that ILM delivered some of their shots at 3k just so they would really shine in the 70mm Imax version.

When it comes to the OT SE, only 20% of it, at the most, is actually stuck at 2k detail. Most of the trilogy would still benefit greatly from 4k as it's still photochemical. They say even 35mm negative doesn't "max out" until you hit 12k resolution, although the point at which our eyes can't tell the difference is maybe only slightly higher than 4k unless we're viewing it on an insanely large screen at relatively close distance.

And even if the prequels are stuck at 2k, they can still look quite good. I just saw Avengers 2 last week, a movie that was only finished in 2k, and it looked absolutely amazing projected in 4k.