Sign In

The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!

Author
Time
Okay just saw the trailer for the OOT DVD. They showed a clip of the new DVD "original crawl". I was looking to see if it was truely the original crawl, if it was formatted correctly. Mysetriously, the clip on the trailer cuts off just as it is about the get to the first line formatted, which is the third line in. Uh oh. What are they hiding?

Then I took a closer look at the screenshot. "The Star Wars logo looks funny--shouldn't it have receeded by now??"

Sure enough, i took a look at the Empire of Dreams original crawl footage--it is not the same.

THE UPCOMING OOT DVD CRAWL IS JUST A PHOTOSHOPED VERSION OF THE EPISODE IV CRAWL.

Here are screenshots.

From the trailer:

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i139/zombie__84/crappydvdcrawl.jpg

the ACTUAL original crawl:

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i139/zombie__84/1969b977.jpg

Take a look at the Star Wars logo. In the original crawl, everything moved at a different speed, and the Star Wars logo completely dissapeared before the text came. When Episode IV was added they had to bunch the logo and text together to make it all fit, as well as reformatting the text.

The Empire of Dreams footage is already transfered to video in the Lucasfilm archives. Why the hell would they do this???
yet another stab in the heart...

The Secret History of Star Wars -- now available on Amazon.com!

"When George went back and put new creatures into the original Star Wars, I find that disturbing. It’s a revision of history. That bothers me."

--James Cameron, Entertainment Weekly, April 2010

Author
Time
To me personally....I don't think it's the end of the world. I perfectly well see where you are coming from so don't get mad at that. It totally astounds me how they clearly have the original crawl transfered to digital because of EoD. Why they simply didn't matte it to the lame 4:3 letterbox and edit it in to the LD transfers makes no sense. It's a rather simply thing to do compared to going in and digitally making one up or whatever they did.

Hey look, a bear!

Author
Time
LOL! Well I'm not surprised. But that may not be the final version, anyhow. Who the hell knows. They may have just re-done the whole thing.

Also, in the original crawl, I think "DEATH STAR" was on one line, while in the revised version, it was split between two lines.

Author
Time
Well, that sucks. Original version my ass!
originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
I have "Empire of Dreams" on the screen in front of me still framed on the original crawl. "Star Wars" dissappears just as the line "Rebel spaceships, striking" scrolls onto the screen. This is the second line of text, and the the "Star Wars" logo fades completely out just as this line is about 3/4 visible at the bottom of the screen.

It appears from your screenshot that the trailer may simply be less cropped than the "Empire of Dreams" version, which would actually be a good thing. This would explain why the "Rebel spaceships, striking" line is fully visible while the "Star Wars" logo has not yet faded out.

I have not yet seen the trailer, so I'm going strictly on the screenshot here, versus my "Empire of Dreams" DVD.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Skyranger
I have "Empire of Dreams" on the screen in front of me still framed on the original crawl. "Star Wars" dissappears just as the line "Rebel spaceships, striking" scrolls onto the screen. This is the second line of text, and the the "Star Wars" logo fades completely out just as this line is about 3/4 visible at the bottom of the screen.

It appears from your screenshot that the trailer may simply be less cropped than the "Empire of Dreams" version, which would actually be a good thing. This would explain why the "Rebel spaceships, striking" line is fully visible while the "Star Wars" logo has not yet faded out.

I have not yet seen the trailer, so I'm going strictly on the screenshot here, versus my "Empire of Dreams" DVD.


In the EOD footage the logo is fading by the time the first line is done. Just as the second line comes up it is nearly invisible. It is totally gone about halfway through the second line.

In the trailer the logo is as strong and bold as it first appears and hasn't even started fading at all yet.

The color differences are also a dead giveaway that the dvd crawl is not the EOD source.

The Secret History of Star Wars -- now available on Amazon.com!

"When George went back and put new creatures into the original Star Wars, I find that disturbing. It’s a revision of history. That bothers me."

--James Cameron, Entertainment Weekly, April 2010

Author
Time
Maybe the crawl in the trailer is edited, with an invisible fade between the logo and the text, just to be faster? I mean, they only have like a few seconds to show us the O-OT! (and they better not show us any longer, cause it doesn't look that good...)

Han: Hey Lando! You kept your promise, right? Not a scratch?
Lando: Well, what’s left of her isn’t scratched. All the scratched parts got knocked off along the way.
Han (exasperated): Knocked off?!

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Z6PO
Maybe the crawl in the trailer is edited, with an invisible fade between the logo and the text, just to be faster? I mean, they only have like a few seconds to show us the O-OT! (and they better not show us any longer, cause it doesn't look that good...)


They do a speed ramp to get through the five seconds of Logo-recession. But the last part is actually normal speed. No dissolve.

Also note the difference in stars. The EOD ones only have the brightest available. The 1993 and home video versions had the image artificially brightened and as such the stars are highly visible. The dvd trailer footage has the same star background as the ANH 1993 crawl. This, plus the colour difference (the crawl was more of an orange-yellow than a gold, as can be seen from the EOD clip) plus the differences in logo recession show that this is indeed a falsified original crawl.

So technically it is false advertising to claim this is the unaltered 1977 theatrical version. Because its not.

The Secret History of Star Wars -- now available on Amazon.com!

"When George went back and put new creatures into the original Star Wars, I find that disturbing. It’s a revision of history. That bothers me."

--James Cameron, Entertainment Weekly, April 2010

Author
Time
So technically it is false advertising to claim this is the unaltered 1977 theatrical version. Because its not.


That appears to be the least of this release's problems.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
This is what I've been fearing ever since it was first announced. That they were simply going to paint away the "Episode IV: A New Hope." And sure enough, every worst case scenario comes to fruition. Okay, so I'm definitely not buying these releases. If the picture quality had been shown to be halfway decent, I probably would have bought it. Had it just been them relegating it to the second disc as bonus material, I most likely would have bought it.

But this, this is the one thing I absolutely refuse to tolerate. In their initial press release, that was one of the things they originally touted. I knew there was a reason to get suspicious when that paragraph mysteriously disappeared for a few hours. This is just flat-out lying. This isn't even lying due to minds changing or business practices changing. And I refuse to cater or give my money to a company that is clearly lying. Obviously the footage exists! It was on Empire of Dreams for crying out loud! Wouldn't it have been easier to splice the original crawl in rather than paint out the "most offensive" element?

I'm sure most people won't be able to tell the difference. And I'm sure George and his Merry Men will be snickering about it. "Coming soon! The original theatrical cuts! Or close enough that you George vision-haters won't be able to tell the difference! Nyah-nyah!" Well, suck on this, George. You are not getting another red cent from me until you actually start producing quality products and stop lying about the less-than-quality ones you are releasing.

There is no lingerie in space...

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don't exist... then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks... and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming... Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
This is what I've been fearing ever since it was first announced. That they were simply going to paint away the "Episode IV: A New Hope." And sure enough, every worst case scenario comes to fruition. Okay, so I'm definitely not buying these releases. If the picture quality had been shown to be halfway decent, I probably would have bought it. Had it just been them relegating it to the second disc as bonus material, I most likely would have bought it.

But this, this is the one thing I absolutely refuse to tolerate. In their initial press release, that was one of the things they originally touted. I knew there was a reason to get suspicious when that paragraph mysteriously disappeared for a few hours. This is just flat-out lying. This isn't even lying due to minds changing or business practices changing. And I refuse to cater or give my money to a company that is clearly lying. Obviously the footage exists! It was on Empire of Dreams for crying out loud! Wouldn't it have been easier to splice the original crawl in rather than paint out the "most offensive" element?

I'm sure most people won't be able to tell the difference. And I'm sure George and his Merry Men will be snickering about it. "Coming soon! The original theatrical cuts! Or close enough that you George vision-haters won't be able to tell the difference! Nyah-nyah!" Well, suck on this, George. You are not getting another red cent from me until you actually start producing quality products and stop lying about the less-than-quality ones you are releasing.


Assuming, of course, that he does release a high-quality version, which doesn't look like a possibilty at this point.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
omg you cant be serious your mad cause they removed teh starwars title and had it move at a different speed... wow...
Author
Time
If I'm not mistaken the original crawl was done on a mechanical rig that spooled the crawl in front of the camera and then was composited onto the star field. I noticed that because of the close camera shot the original crawl had slight lens distortion at the edges, perhaps thats the reason for a digital crawl.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Shimraa
omg you cant be serious your mad cause they removed teh starwars title and had it move at a different speed... wow...


We're not mad about that exactly. It's more like being mad about that in light of how easily Lucasfilm could have done so much better. I guess it's also sad as well as infuriating.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Shimraa
omg you cant be serious your mad cause they removed teh starwars title and had it move at a different speed... wow...


No it just shows we are not getting the 1977 version shown in theaters. I bet that don't have the original Aunt Beru voice either. It is not a big deal to me, but it just shows that Lucas is doing a bit of false advertising when he says these are the versions from 77-83, when we are not getting the '77 version.

It is just a mountain of lies & distrust that Lucas has over this particular fanbase that has led us to doubt everything he says, and when we see little things like this, it is just another reason we feel we are getting duped.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: CO
Originally posted by: Shimraa
omg you cant be serious your mad cause they removed teh starwars title and had it move at a different speed... wow...


No it just shows we are not getting the 1977 version shown in theaters. I bet that they don't have the original Aunt Beru voice either. It is not a big deal to me, but it just shows that Lucas is doing a bit of false advertising when he says these are the versions from 77-83, when we are not getting the '77 version.

It is just a mountain of lies & distrust that Lucas has over this particular fanbase that has led us to doubt everything he says, and when we see little things like this, it is just another reason we feel we are getting duped.


Author
Time
Originally posted by: CO
Originally posted by: Shimraa
omg you cant be serious your mad cause they removed teh starwars title and had it move at a different speed... wow...


No it just shows we are not getting the 1977 version shown in theaters. I bet that don't have the original Aunt Beru voice either. It is not a big deal to me, but it just shows that Lucas is doing a bit of false advertising when he says these are the versions from 77-83, when we are not getting the '77 version.

It is just a mountain of lies & distrust that Lucas has over this particular fanbase that has led us to doubt everything he says, and when we see little things like this, it is just another reason we feel we are getting duped.
Author
Time
For reference purposes, this is what the first paragraph and the first line of the second paragraph should look like.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/Indysolo/1977_original_crawl_1.jpg

Neil

Well at least the reversed surround channels have been addressed.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Shimraa
omg you cant be serious your mad cause they removed teh starwars title and had it move at a different speed... wow...


Yeah, I am. Is that a problem for you?

Think about it this way, Shim. What if, on Return of the Jedi, they decided to use the '04 DVD elements in the last scene. But to make it the "original" version, they took the Hayden Force ghost scene and pasted Sebastian Shaw's head on top of Hayden's head. Would you consider that to be original?

They promised us the theatrical versions. They've already made a slew of crappy decisions for this release. Now they're flat-out lying to us. Geez, Shim, what would Lucasfilm have to do before you lost trust in them?

There is no lingerie in space...

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don't exist... then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks... and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming... Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
I have to buy these no matter what the crawl looks like because I have one set of the OOT and that is the very first VHS ever released and I don't think it can hold up much longer. Besides, I never watch the crawls anyways. I just skip right to the movie.


Author
Time
Originally posted by: Marvolo
I have to buy these no matter what the crawl looks like because I have one set of the OOT and that is the very first VHS ever released and I don't think it can hold up much longer. Besides, I never watch the crawls anyways. I just skip right to the movie.


Blasphemy!

Just kidding.

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/1113/userbar381851ln2.gif
http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/8653/userbar381853dp6.gif
Super Mario Bros. - The Wicked Star Story
"Ah, the proverbial sad sack with a wasted wish."
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Originally posted by: Shimraa
omg you cant be serious your mad cause they removed teh starwars title and had it move at a different speed... wow...


Yeah, I am. Is that a problem for you?

Think about it this way, Shim. What if, on Return of the Jedi, they decided to use the '04 DVD elements in the last scene. But to make it the "original" version, they took the Hayden Force ghost scene and pasted Sebastian Shaw's head on top of Hayden's head. Would you consider that to be original?


Not the best example, seeing as they did the reverse to put Hayden there in the first place (his head pasted onto Shaw's body). They'd just be restoring the scene to its original state I'm assuming you weren't being facetious. The reason for the digital crawl is probably to cater for multiple language options, nothing else.
"Whatever! I digitally put Jabba the Hutt back into the original Star Wars movie! I'll do what I want!"
Author
Time
Actually, I think that's what makes it the perfect example. I know the exact thing was done to put Hayden there in the first place. So basically they'd just be editing something that's already been edited. Which is my point. That's stupid. And it's the same thing they've done with the title. They had the original crawl. Then they replaced it with a new one. Then they took the new one and altered to make it look similar to the original. Same thing with my example. Original. Altered. Altered is altered to look like original.

There is no lingerie in space...

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don't exist... then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks... and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming... Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
"The reason for the digital crawl is probably to cater for multiple language options, nothing else."

Then they need only have recreated the other languages. These could have still been combined with the original video of the '77 crawl.
MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
JediRandy: They're certainly beyond any repair you're capable of making.


MeBeJedi: You aren't one of us.
Go-Mer-Tonic: I can't say I find that very disappointing.


JediRandy: I won't suck as much as a fan edit.
Author
Time
I never said they couldn't, but we're dealing with Lucasfilm/Fox here. They've proved time and again that they couldn't give a stuff about quality when it comes to the original Star Wars trilogy.
"Whatever! I digitally put Jabba the Hutt back into the original Star Wars movie! I'll do what I want!"