logo Sign In

Should I buy the Original Trilogy Blu ray? I already have the 2004 DVD. — Page 2

Author
Time
 (Edited)

knreuben said:

AntcuFaalb said:

knreuben said:

Guys why do you prefer the Original Version when the Special Editions have improved CGIs?

Is this a joke?

 I'm just 15, I grew up with the special edition and the prequels. :)

We have a few 97SE and PT fans here and I can totally respect your preference.

With that being said, you must understand that many (most, perhaps) fans here consider the Special Editions to be garbage for one reason or another.

We probably wouldn't care about the SEs if the original-originals were given the same treatment and respect by LFL, but they weren't.

My opinion: "Improved CGIs" don't belong in a film released in 1977.

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time

Respect and understand are two different things. ;-)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV's Frink said:

Respect and understand are two different things. ;-)

Indeed. I understand him a bit because I prefer to watch the OOT in P&S. :-X

JEDIT: Last post JEDITd. I'm JEDITing away today!

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time

I agree that some changes made by George weren't for the better but he just wanted to make it look as similar as the prequels. I do hate the lightsaber colour with Vader's being pink!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

knreuben said:

I agree that some changes made by George weren't for the better but he just wanted to make it look as similar as the prequels.

1. The Special Editions came out before the prequels (1997 vs 1999, respectively).

2. It's not about "better" or "worse". It's about preserving film history. The Special Editions didn't win all of those Academy Awards way back when; the originals did.

Would you be OK with Leonardo da Vinci suddenly coming back to life and painting a mustache on the Mona Lisa? Most people wouldn't, especially if the original were destroyed in consequence.

Art has value in its original form.

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time
 (Edited)

“Improved CGIs” is part of the problem. The original effects didn't have any CGI… it didn't exist yet.

The original effects as seen in 1977, 1980, and 1983 respectively were ground-breaking for their era. Nobody had seen anything like what these movies were showing them before, and they played a significant role in the world-building of the Star Wars.

You can argue that some of the revisions are good ones, but they are not the effects that changed what cinema looked like.

“That’s impossible, even for a computer!”

“You don't do ‘Star Wars’ in Dobly.”

Author
Time

I wish people would give the colorized version of Casablanca a second chance now that they've got proper displays to finally appreciate it the way it was always meant to be.

Author
Time

AntcuFaalb said:

2. It's not about "better" or "worse". It's about preserving film history.

 For me, it's pretty much about better and worse.  To belabor your metaphor,. the SEs aren't as if Leonardo "improved" a masterpiece with incongruous elements--it's more as if Leanardo's deranged uncle scrawled a bunch of crude pornographic day-glo doodles all over it.

Author
Time

I don't think it's quite that bad...by your analogy, one would expect to see the stormtroopers wearing pink skirts in every shot of the SE. Perhaps a better analogy would be if Leonardo painted a horse in the background--using acrylic paint.

Author
Time

knreuben said:

AntcuFaalb said:

knreuben said:

Guys why do you prefer the Original Version when the Special Editions have improved CGIs?

Is this a joke?

 I'm just 15, I grew up with the special edition and the prequels. :)

 So did I, but that's no excuse to like them! ;)

Author
Time

Easterhay said:

darklordoftech said:



1. That's a faded 35mm print.

2. I shouldn't have to buy a 4k projector to enjoy a movie.



No, but if you care about films then you should at least have a decent set-up. Or does the love of an untouched oringal trilogy round here extend to watching the film on the kind of home entertainment system that existed in 1977?

I agree with Danny Boy; the Blu-ray transfers are the best way to enjoy the films at the moment. I find the audio aspect of the six films to be more impressive than the visual aspect, though, although Revenge Of The Sith is probably just as impressive to look at as it is to listen to.

For a balanced and informed critique, you're best bet is to check out the review on blu-ray.com http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Star-Wars-The-Complete-Saga-Blu-ray/14903/#Review

 I wouldn't consider that as a decent set up. A decent set up would be like a 40" 1080p TV with a sound bar and a Blu Ray player. A 4k projector, while awesome, is just kind of overkill for the average person.

Author
Time

RicOlie_2 said:

knreuben said:

AntcuFaalb said:

knreuben said:

Guys why do you prefer the Original Version when the Special Editions have improved CGIs?

Is this a joke?

 I'm just 15, I grew up with the special edition and the prequels. :)

 So did I, but that's no excuse to like them! ;)

As Homer Simpson playing Mr. Burns would say: Exactly. 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

RicOlie_2 said:

knreuben said:

AntcuFaalb said:

knreuben said:

Guys why do you prefer the Original Version when the Special Editions have improved CGIs?

Is this a joke?

 I'm just 15, I grew up with the special edition and the prequels. :)

 So did I, but that's no excuse to like them! ;)

 Nailed it!

AntcuFaalb said: My opinion: "Improved CGIs" don't belong in a film released in 1977.

Nailed it!

The CGI looks terrible and out of place, specially on the SE where the technology of that time for CGI wasn't good enough, for example the part where Han ''steps'' on Jabba's tail looks like the cheapest effect ever and Jabba itself is awful. Once you see the Harmy's DEED's there is no way back.

<span>The statement below is true
The statement above is false</span>

Author
Time

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

If all great movies were "improved" the way that George did to Star Wars, imagine what that would do to our great cinematic heritage.  NNNOOOO!!!!!!

 

Or All About Eve with the dinosaurs the director wanted to include, but couldn't.

The Errol Flynn Robin Hood would be better with Maid Marion replaced with Angelina Jolie.  

It seems like people are really embracing the new characters. In fact, the big question people ask me now about Star Wars is, “Are Finn and Poe gay lovers?” And really how the f*ck would I know? My second husband left me for a man, so my gaydar isn’t exactly what you’d call Death Star level quality. ----Carrie Fisher

Author
Time

Another reason to buy the Blu-rays is that each film comes with an additional archive commentary track. I sat down and watched The Empire Strikes Back whilst listening to the exclusive commentary last night and it was well worth it. Very nice to hear some comments from Alec Guinness, too.

That's some bad hat, Harry
Author
Time

lovelikewinter said:

The Errol Flynn Robin Hood would be better with Maid Marion replaced with Megan Fox.  

Fixed. ;-( 

Author
Time

I'm just going to answer the OP's query by channeling my inner Vadur:

ahem--

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Author
Time

lol @ improved CGI.

that CGI looked shit in 1997 and it looks no better now.

the blurays, i borrowed them once and well, for official releases they are in fact the best looking versions of Star Wars, if you want de-grained movies full of bad CGI sure with incorrect colour timing sure, not to mention the audio being mixed incorrectly for surround systems. I wouldn't bother personally unless you really like the special editions.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Easterhay said:

Another reason to buy the Blu-rays is that each film comes with an additional archive commentary track. I sat down and watched The Empire Strikes Back whilst listening to the exclusive commentary last night and it was well worth it. Very nice to hear some comments from Alec Guinness, too.

 

Man, I wish I could hear what Alec Guiness had to say about that 2011 production...

We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions. 

Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com

Author
Time

The Star Trek movie blu-rays also had more commentary tracks and I abstained from buying those for the exact same reason (crap picture quality). Although at least those are the theatrical cuts of the movies.

Author
Time

msycamore said:

Easterhay said:

Another reason to buy the Blu-rays is that each film comes with an additional archive commentary track. I sat down and watched The Empire Strikes Back whilst listening to the exclusive commentary last night and it was well worth it. Very nice to hear some comments from Alec Guinness, too.

 

Man, I wish I could hear what Alec Guiness had to say about that 2011 production...

 Wasn't he dead by then?

Author
Time

Fang Zei said:

The Star Trek movie blu-rays also had more commentary tracks and I abstained from buying those for the exact same reason (crap picture quality). Although at least those are the theatrical cuts of the movies.

 I have the DVD versions, and they're not terrible. It's mostly just a lot of frozen grain due to DNR. I didn't really notice waxy faces, but again, DVD.

Author
Time

I would say blu ray but its a bit pricy way better than the 2004 set Adywans Star Wars is my new favorite version of A New Hope but downloading the better set of the Definitive Collection now can't wait to see how the theatrical versions look.