Interesting article. And I did notice the gorilla in the "selective attention" video and still had the right count of the passes. Everybody bow to my brain power. What? You don't believe me? I find your lack of faith disturbing!!!
pittrek said:
You people won't like what I'm gonna write, but ...
Gotta love statements that start out with "You people..." Takes me back to the Ross Perot days! ;)
The Biggs scene was for me always a part of the movie. And I mean ALWAYS. I had a 100th generation bootleg copy with Polish (?) voiceover, a copy recorded from German TV, and a copy recorded from Czech TV, and I'm 100% sure the scene was in at least one of these copies. (I also remember a short handshaking scene between Luke and Wedge/Johny D / Red 2 after the "that's impossible even for a computer" conversation.)
I never understood why various websites claimed that the Biggs sequence was new in the special edition , I always thought that they only edited it (I remember it being longer). Since I have thrown away my VHS bootlegs after I bought the SE VHS tapes (yes, I was a fool) I couldn't check it, but you can't imagine how shocked I've been after I downloaded the EditDroid bootleg DVDs and noticed that the scene is missing !
And I have NEVER read ANY SW-comics in my whole life, and I have heard the radio drama just once, many years AFTER I have seen the SE
There's one really big problem with this...
Those Biggs scenes were never finished. They have no final audio mix, no John Williams score, and only on-set microphone sound full of clunky footsteps, dropouts, and wind across the mic. Go here and listen carefully to the audio:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO0jC5_JM5M (Biggs part 1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRYYnphssCI (Biggs part 2)
This is as far as the Biggs scenes got. They made it as far as the Lost Cut (a black & white rough draft of the film with no finished sound and big SCENE MISSING title cards where the effects shots should be) and then they were trimmed out before the movie even got a John Williams soundtrack. The only reason these clips are even in color here is because they were transferred that way for the Behind The Magic CD-ROM.
Do you think they would have let an unfinished print of Star Wars like this be released into the theaters, let alone be broadcast on television years after the movie was done?
The answer is a resounding no.
Part of the Biggs scenes (both the Tatooine segment and the Rebel hangar conversation) were shown during the "Making of Star Wars" TV special way back when. Perhaps you saw that and tied it into your memories of the film. You wouldn't be alone if you did.
--SKot / www.starwarscutscenes.com
Projects:
Return Of The Ewok and Other Short Films (with OCPmovie) [COMPLETED]
Preserving the…cringe…Star Wars Holiday Special [COMPLETED]
The Star Wars TV Commercials Project [DORMANT]
Felix the Cat 1919-1930 early film shorts preservation [ONGOING]
Lights Out! (lost TV anthology shows) [ONGOING]
Iznogoud (1995 animated series) English audio preservation [ONGOING]
No, I'm pretty sure he meant the Luke and Biggs scene before the battle of Yavin, that was partly reinstated for the SE. Although I still don't believe it true, he probably just watched the SE for a while and forgot that it wasn't there before.
Harmy said:
No, I'm pretty sure he meant the Luke and Biggs scene before the battle of Yavin, that was partly reinstated for the SE. Although I still don't believe it true, he probably just watched the SE for a while and forgot that it wasn't there before.
Ah, maybe you're right. But my assertion still stands; the Biggs hangar scene were edited out at the same time the Tatooine scenes were, as a direct result of of the backstory now missing. However, almost the entire hangar scene was shown (though from a behind-the-scenes angle) in "The Making of Star Wars"...so someone could have watched that and thought on viewing the SE that they'd seen that scene before--because for all intents and purposes, they had.
--SKot
Projects:
Return Of The Ewok and Other Short Films (with OCPmovie) [COMPLETED]
Preserving the…cringe…Star Wars Holiday Special [COMPLETED]
The Star Wars TV Commercials Project [DORMANT]
Felix the Cat 1919-1930 early film shorts preservation [ONGOING]
Lights Out! (lost TV anthology shows) [ONGOING]
Iznogoud (1995 animated series) English audio preservation [ONGOING]
Hmm......was drooling over the technicolour shots that i did not realize that the print had the edges of the frame cropped off.
I compared the same frames from the technicolour print to the 2004 DVD
I saw Star Wars in 1977. Many, many, many times. For 3 years it was just Star Wars...period. I saw it in good theaters, cheap theaters and drive-ins with those clunky metal speakers you hang on your window. The screen and sound quality never subtracted from the excitement. I can watch the original cut right now, over 30 years later, on some beat up VHS tape and enjoy it. It's the story that makes this movie. Nothing? else.
http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8
Hm, interesting, it could be a matter of the projection not the print. I hope it is, because there seems to be quite a lot cut of on both sides and a little bit at the top as well.
@Harmy
that is an interesting point.
I never knew projectors could do that.It might deserve more research.
I also had a a funny thought.
If a lot of the 35mm prints in 77' were " cropped" like the technicolour one above:
Then maybe George could not display his "original vision" in 77' after all!
I saw Star Wars in 1977. Many, many, many times. For 3 years it was just Star Wars...period. I saw it in good theaters, cheap theaters and drive-ins with those clunky metal speakers you hang on your window. The screen and sound quality never subtracted from the excitement. I can watch the original cut right now, over 30 years later, on some beat up VHS tape and enjoy it. It's the story that makes this movie. Nothing? else.
http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8
I PMed Zombie about this, hopefully he'll be able to shed some light on it.
The Comparison Krew have been combing over the differences between the various versions of these movie, here's their current thread:
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Complete-Comparison-of-Special-Edition-Visual-Changes/topic/11927/
Here's a comparison from the mthr '77 widescreen boot:
Yeah, that's standard for theatrical projection, it's part of the system. You have those adjustable curtains that you use to crop the image, I think projectors themselves have gates that can be adjusted to crop too but I'm not sure about this. Whenever you see a film in theatre, there will be some mild cropping, and you get this in home video too (the 2004 transfer is the most open-gate transfer ever seen, so the difference seems more severe). The idea is that you don't want to see the edges of the frame or the side of the film or the white of the projector light, so you crop the sides; it's inevitable that you overcompensate a bit. This case looks a bit more severe on the sides, they may have had it that for another print that had a slightly different ratio and just didn't change it. For non-scope prints, the full negative area is used and it's up to the projectionist to frame the aspect ratio properly, so prints contain all the information that gets covered up in black bars on home video and it's the theatre that provides their own "black bars" (via the screen curtains or gate size).
I suppose it could be in the print itself as well in this case, I don't know if anyone has ever looked at IPs and prints versus the negative in terms of framing. I suppose when they are copied there could be a mild shift that eliminates picture information and the projectionist has to re-centre the frame. But I notice cropping in theatres all the time on scope prints and whenever I do I can see the "cropped" footage playing on the side curtains so its there its just that the projector and screen haven't been positioned 100% perfect.
So the bottom line is that it is far more likely that the cropping is due to projection than the print itself? I'm woried about this in terms of a possible use of this print as a source for an HD transfer of the original. It would suck if it was cropped this much.
Yeah, it's more likely to be from the theatre than the print, but I'm not totally qualified to say for sure. Maybe it's a combo of both. You always get some cropping from the screen, so even if the print itself is cropped, it won't be quite as bad as it looks here. As for using this for a restoration, it's unlikely that whoever owns this is interested in doing something like anyway, or has the means to do so. In any event, a cropped version of the film is what we have been watching all along anyway, this cropping, if you can imagine more picture info existing around the borders that the curtains are framing a bit, is close to many of the previous telecines.
This will usually will happen in historic and art house theaters when showing original prints and the like. You always have to make do with some slight cropping in some instances depending on the projector, screen, distance, or projectionist. The better the theater, the better the image. This kinda recalls the reasons why the THX certification was first introduced.
Last year I saw an original print of Get Carter that actually had image on the curtains like Zombie describes above.
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
Every once in awhile I hear an older guy lamenting the lost art of being a good projectionist, "all these multiplexes, minimum wage kids who aren't trained right" , etc., it's probably just that. ( I've seen 2 mainstream movies in the last couple years that had subtitles at the bottom cut off enough to be unreadable.)
When I saw Brainstorm in a theater, it was totally messed up. Apparently the projectionist was clueless as to the fact the movie had multiple aspect ratios. The screen was set for 1:85:1, and the 2:35:1 seqeunces spilled out over the curtains! This same theater did get things like Fantasia projected right, so I guess it was a fluke.
At home, we're often seeing more picture information that anybody ever saw at a theater. On one of my old Laserdiscs of 2001, a tiny bit of the lens hood on the camera can be seen at the bottom of the frame during Gary Lockwood's jogging scene.
Where were you in '77?
Most projectionists used to be union guys, and you needed special training to operate those big projectors. Now, it's often the guy working the concession stand.
I was lucky enough to know someone back in college who worked at a local theatre. It was a crackerbox compared to other screens in town, but being invited up to see the projection booth is an experience I'll always remember. I also learned how dangerous 35mm projector bulbs can be. ;)
Where were you in '77?
Someone on another forum has come into possession of a few reels of a 70mm print of Star Wars 4. I also noticed that a 35mm copy from Poland recently sold on ebay for $600, it was hard to tell but the color didn't appear to be half bad, I wonder if that was not technicolor too since the color appeared to be natural still (although it was a little hard to tell really from their screen shots) and the print was not made in the US (where technicolor had already ended).
Too bad that Polish print had subtitles, it looked better than the last two 35mm prints that were on ebay.
Where were you in '77?
Jawa77 said:
Someone on another forum has come into possession of a few reels of a 70mm print of Star Wars 4.
Are you telling us this just to make us jealous? (it's working)
"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars
Comparing a 70mm film cell from Jedi.net to the 2004se DVD:
Looks like it is the 2004 dvd that comes up a bit short!
There is just a tad bit more in the 70mm frame on the left hand side.
I saw Star Wars in 1977. Many, many, many times. For 3 years it was just Star Wars...period. I saw it in good theaters, cheap theaters and drive-ins with those clunky metal speakers you hang on your window. The screen and sound quality never subtracted from the excitement. I can watch the original cut right now, over 30 years later, on some beat up VHS tape and enjoy it. It's the story that makes this movie. Nothing? else.
http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8
captainsolo said:
This will usually will happen in historic and art house theaters when showing original prints and the like. You always have to make do with some slight cropping in some instances depending on the projector, screen, distance, or projectionist. The better the theater, the better the image. This kinda recalls the reasons why the THX certification was first introduced.
Last year I saw an original print of Get Carter that actually had image on the curtains like Zombie describes above.
The art house\historic theater angle was my first thought when I read the post. There is a 1930s-built theater here in town that shows old films regularly. Just sitting in there eying the screen, it looks to be VistaVision aspect ratio. Since it was built in the 30s, it was probably Academy ratio originally. They have curtains at the sides, as do most theaters, so they can alter the screen accordingly.
It's been a long time since I last saw a film there, but from what I can remember, the building doesn't seem like it could hold Cinemascope. If they showed Star Wars they would almost certainly have to crop it down the way the Senator theater did.
*edit*
Like Solo and Zombie, I've seen a few modern films incorrectly cropped to where they had image showing on the curtains or above\below the screen. It's not limited to old films or old theaters.
Wow, cant believe this thread has been dead for almost a year. Time to update it......
@Anchorhead,
Practically any theater back in the day could show a movie in scope, providing they had the proper lenses and aperture plates for the format. Theater size has nothing to do with it. Also if the image spills onto the curtains then the aperture plate was not cut right to fit the screen. A common problem still for cinemas today. As far as the cropping goes, ( again ) it's mainly due to an improperly cut aperture plate, and most theater chains don't care much about that to fix it, especially if the theater is not getting any complaints.
Venerable member of the “Red Eye” Knights
It's amazing just how clueless the multiplexes can be these days about projection.
Last summer I saw a nice digital projection of Splice at my nearby amc.
Too bad everything was still set-up for scope.
Stuff at the bottom of the screen was completely blocked. stationary shots of a car pulling up now became just shots of "sky." Tops of peoples heads were getting cut off to an extent that would be ridiculous even for a Super 35 film. Too bad I didn't know what the AR was going in. The problem didn't become apparent into well into the film.
Then there's what happened when I saw Don't be Afraid of the Dark a week after it opened.
Middle of the day on a Friday, so barely anyone attending or running the theater. This time I know the movie is academy going in. I get there during the trailers, and oh man, I immediately know something is wrong. It's the trailer for Drive and the light is spilling onto the top and bottom black curtains which are still set up for scope. I've learned from experience that if something is wrong during the trailers, it's gonna be wrong during the movie. I run out and tell a guy about how they gotta open up the screen in auditorium 7. The guy says "ok," gets out his walkie-talkie and I run back. By the time the movie starts, they still haven't fixed the problem. I run back out to tell the guy again. He gives this frustrated look as he reaches for the walkie-talkie, a look that says "I told them to fix it."
I run back to the theater.
After several minutes, I notice the guy standing by the entrance to the aud. He's looking at the screen, trying to figure out what's wrong. Then, finally, they open up the curtains.
But the cluelessness doesn't stop there.
They fiddle with the lens, switching it to anamorphic for a few seconds, which makes everything look like stretch-o-vision hdtv. Then they switch it back and leave it the hell alone.
Whoever was in that booth had no clue what they were doing.
I always stay till the very end of the movie, and this time I noticed something interesting.
When the logo appeared after the end credits, it was spilling out over the 1.85:1 screen, which told me that it must've been 1.37:1 full-frame academy for that one shot. Of course, this means that the projectionist also didn't have the projector plate set up properly. Luckily that didn't matter. The print itself must've been hard-matted to 1.85:1, otherwise that spill-over would still been going on during the whole movie.
When the logo appeared after the end credits, it was spilling out over the 1.85:1 screen, which told me that it must've been 1.37:1 full-frame academy for that one shot. Of course, this means that the projectionist also didn't have the projector plate set up properly. Luckily that didn't matter. The print itself must've been hard-matted to 1.85:1, otherwise that spill-over would still been going on during the whole movie.
Screens are not 1:85:1. The screen pretty much fills the whole wall. The screen masking is what frames image at either scope or flat. It sounds like the aperture plate for the movie you watched needs replacing if you have image spill from a flat print thats not matted. I have seen that many times. Sadly, most all aperture plates are not cut exactly to academy standards.
Digital projectors as opposed to 35mm projectors are alot different. They use only one lense and everything is set electronically. In fact, they are so different that they require a laptop with networking accessibility to set up.
Venerable member of the “Red Eye” Knights
We saw The Hangover Part II at the cheap theatre last month, and throughout the entire movie, you could see a bit of the previous frame at the top of the screen. First time I'd ever seen that happen =)
This signature uses Markdown syntax, which makes it easy to add formatting like italics, bold, and lists: