Sign In

What do you think was the best release of the OT at the time it came out?

Author
Time

Now, I'm not asking what is the best currently available release, but rather what release was the best when it came out - to give you an example I think the Executor set is awesome, although it's VHS only, so it definitely isn't the best currently available picture and sound quality, it was simply an awesome release in the VHS age.

Another example could be the 97SE VHS and LD release - I don't really like the version of the film presented but as movie releases go, it was great - top notch picture and sound quality for the formats they were released in, beautiful cover art and even the VHS release had bonus features, which was something I greatly appreciated at the time, as it was quite unusual.

  • www.facebook.com/despecialized
  • IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DESPECIALIZED EDITIONS, PLEASE READ THE FIRST POSTS OF THESE THREADS, WHICH HAVE UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION: SW, ESB, ROTJ, 97SE RE-ED
    IF YOU DON’T FIND WHAT YOU’RE LOOKING FOR THERE, TRY ASKING IN THE APPROPRIATE THREADS - MOST REGULAR POSTERS KNOW ALL THE ANSWERS AND SOMEONE WILL LIKELY BE ABLE TO HELP YOU.
    IF I GET A PM WITH A QUESTION, WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN ANSWERED THROUGH THESE MEANS, IT WILL BE IGNORED. SORRY BUT I AM NOT THE LOCAL INFO BOOTH. THANK YOU.
Author
Time
 (Edited)

I was pretty stoked to receive the Widebox of Widescreen Faces VHS.  It was the same time that our 60" projection TV broke and we used a 19" CGA monitor in it's place for a month.  Still the best the movies had ever looked at home.

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

For me it has to be the Excecutor VHS box set, the amount of extras that came with that set could still shame some DVD releases.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

^This for me.

When I moved into my twice previous house I had no access to a television and only garden furniture.

I watched that set on a three inch Gamecube screen (hotwired to a car VHS player no less) and instantly it felt like a home and not just a building with my belongings in boxes and bags.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6Dp2OfIT_M

Author
Time

Not sure if this differs from the other thread, LOL, but I'd say again the Executor box.

And in the time of greatest despair, there shall come a savior, and he shall be known as the Son of the Suns.

Author
Time

LexX said:

Not sure if this differs from the other thread, LOL, but I'd say again the Executor box.

Re-read the OP.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Harmy said:

Now, I'm not asking what is the best currently available release, but rather what release was the best when it came out - to give you an example I think the Executor set is awesome, although it's VHS only, so it definitely isn't the best currently available picture and sound quality, it was simply an awesome release in the VHS age.

Another example could be the 97SE VHS and LD release - I don't really like the version of the film presented but as movie releases go, it was great - top notch picture and sound quality for the formats they were released in, beautiful cover art and even the VHS release had bonus features, which was something I greatly appreciated at the time, as it was quite unusual.

 

That is an interesting question!

Probably every release as it occured was the best release!

But I would personally  go for the  original 1982 home video release.

Not because of the picture or sound quality but for the context.

The anticipation for the  as yet un-released Return Of The Jedi (or Revenge Of The Jedi!) was reaching fever pitch and SW and ESB really only existed as cinematic memories(which when you are a kid are both exotic and vague).

Being able to see SW at home for the first time was truly exhilarating.

This foto(which is not mine) captures the moment perfectly:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/35301335@N07/3789266874/

And here is some of the 1982 promotion---the blu ray could have done with some of this art work:

 

"Vibrant Stereo on VHS(mono compatible) and the highest standards of technology,materials and workmanship in assembly will ensure full enjoyment".

Classic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.

kurtb8474 1 week ago

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8


Author
Time

Some of these old, classic images are bringing tears to my eyes. No joke. Star Wars was so beautiful and meaningful once.

When I was a kid back in the early 80s we did not have cable TV or a VCR. My father could sometimes bring home one from his school over the Christmas Holidays. I remember the joy of being able to rent one of the OOT. I remember the excitement when my parents told me that Star Wars was going to be on TV (they would let me stay up late to watch the entire movie). I also have fond memories of visiting my best friends house and we could watch his versions, which were taped TV versions.

I still remember, in the the mid 90s, only having a taped, edited-for-time,  TV version of Star Wars. I also didn't have the movies memorized yet, so I would forget how wonderful some of the scenes were.

My first purchase was the 95 THX versions (the "faces" one). I remember the clarity of the sound being what was most noticable. Once I purchased them I watched them all the time for two years straight, which unfortunately does diminish the excitement of the films somewhat.

I only watch the films occasionally now, but am still passionate about getting the OOT the respect and proper preservation they deserve.

 

“It is only through interaction, through decision and choice, through confrontation, physical or mental, that the Force can grow within you.”
-Kreia, Jedi Master and Sith Lord

Author
Time

When I upgraded my VHS set to my fullscreen 2005 THX Faces box set I remember feeling blown away.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

theprequelsrule said:

Some of these old, classic images are bringing tears to my eyes. No joke. Star Wars was so beautiful and meaningful once.

When I was a kid back in the early 80s we did not have cable TV or a VCR. My father could sometimes bring home one from his school over the Christmas Holidays. I remember the joy of being able to rent one of the OOT. I remember the excitement when my parents told me that Star Wars was going to be on TV (they would let me stay up late to watch the entire movie). I also have fond memories of visiting my best friends house and we could watch his versions, which were taped TV versions.

I still remember, in the the mid 90s, only having a taped, edited-for-time,  TV version of Star Wars. I also didn't have the movies memorized yet, so I would forget how wonderful some of the scenes were.

My first purchase was the 95 THX versions (the "faces" one). I remember the clarity of the sound being what was most noticable. Once I purchased them I watched them all the time for two years straight, which unfortunately does diminish the excitement of the films somewhat.

I only watch the films occasionally now, but am still passionate about getting the OOT the respect and proper preservation they deserve.

 

 

Agreed mate and I can relate to you completely.

It is sometimes forgotten that there once a period when there were no VCR's which made going to the cinema a much more "elusive" experience---in the sense that you really had to remember that film in your mind because you were never going to see it again(unless you went back to watch it!--and you can only do it so many times) ) until it premiered on TV or video(which at that point was a very niche and expensive market)----either way it would be a case of years----which is kinda funny watching some of the members on bluray.com ALREADY salivating over the upcoming bluray releases of Pirates 4 or transformers 3 whilst the films are still in the cinemas!!

SW was broadcast on TV here in the UK for the first time in October 82'(I think).

We did not have a VCR at that point in time either ,so I remember that sunday evening when it premiered----- when I  watched it, I truly did try to "own every moment"---which of course is the new  slogan for the upcoming Blurays!

 

 

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.

kurtb8474 1 week ago

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8


Author
Time

@danny_boy: glad to see that someone shares my sentiments. The fond memories I have are one of the reasons I am essentially indifferent to all this blue-ray nonsense (or is it blu-ray?). Star Wars was not filmed in high definition, I don't remember it in high definition, so I don't care to see it in high definition. But a properly cleaned and restored SD transfer that tries to emulate the theatrical versions as closely as possible seems too much to ask from Lucasfilm I guess.

“It is only through interaction, through decision and choice, through confrontation, physical or mental, that the Force can grow within you.”
-Kreia, Jedi Master and Sith Lord

Author
Time

STAR WARS was filmed on 35mm film - 35mm film is higher than high definition.

  • www.facebook.com/despecialized
  • IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DESPECIALIZED EDITIONS, PLEASE READ THE FIRST POSTS OF THESE THREADS, WHICH HAVE UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION: SW, ESB, ROTJ, 97SE RE-ED
    IF YOU DON’T FIND WHAT YOU’RE LOOKING FOR THERE, TRY ASKING IN THE APPROPRIATE THREADS - MOST REGULAR POSTERS KNOW ALL THE ANSWERS AND SOMEONE WILL LIKELY BE ABLE TO HELP YOU.
    IF I GET A PM WITH A QUESTION, WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN ANSWERED THROUGH THESE MEANS, IT WILL BE IGNORED. SORRY BUT I AM NOT THE LOCAL INFO BOOTH. THANK YOU.
Author
Time

Harmy said:

STAR WARS was filmed on 35mm film - 35mm film is higher than high definition.

I stand corrected. I guess I just don't like the look of Blu-ray, but I won't open that argument again.

“It is only through interaction, through decision and choice, through confrontation, physical or mental, that the Force can grow within you.”
-Kreia, Jedi Master and Sith Lord

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Harmy said:

STAR WARS was filmed on 35mm film - 35mm film is higher than high definition.

 

Well we have to compare apples to apples.

You are refering to a 35mm camera NEGATIVE.

Comparing a camera negative to a high definition image is wrong because the negative is not what you see projected on a cinema screen.

If anything you would want to compare a camera negative to the  sensor(which captures the image) in a digital camera like the genesis(used for Superman Returns)------ which then down samples this 6K recorded information to output a 1080p signal:

John Galt:Panavision Senior Vice President of Advanced Digital Imaging

"The Genesis would be 6K. Because(it's sensor) has 5760 pixels on one line: 1920 red, 1920 green and 1920 blue."

http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/the-truth-about-2k-4k-the-future-of-pixels

So a 6k image captured on a digital camera's sensor  is easily above the supposed equivalent of a 4k image captured  on a 35mm camera negative frame.

So end to end digital is better than 35 mm film.

As it has been scientifically tested and proven that a 35mm interpositive theatrical release print shown in cinemas has/have  an average of 700 Line Pairs Per Picture Height(lpph)

Which is well below the resolution of  Blu Ray's 1080/24p.

That is the reason why Lucas went digital and chose to shoot the prequels and  Red Tails on 1080/24p digital cameras

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.

kurtb8474 1 week ago

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8


Author
Time

Theprequelsrule said STAR WARS wasn't shot in high resolution and I said it was, I never said anything about theatrical prints (though even 700 lines is still HD) but that aside, there was also a 70mm release of all STAR WARS films, which would definitely resolve way above 1080 lines.

  • www.facebook.com/despecialized
  • IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DESPECIALIZED EDITIONS, PLEASE READ THE FIRST POSTS OF THESE THREADS, WHICH HAVE UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION: SW, ESB, ROTJ, 97SE RE-ED
    IF YOU DON’T FIND WHAT YOU’RE LOOKING FOR THERE, TRY ASKING IN THE APPROPRIATE THREADS - MOST REGULAR POSTERS KNOW ALL THE ANSWERS AND SOMEONE WILL LIKELY BE ABLE TO HELP YOU.
    IF I GET A PM WITH A QUESTION, WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN ANSWERED THROUGH THESE MEANS, IT WILL BE IGNORED. SORRY BUT I AM NOT THE LOCAL INFO BOOTH. THANK YOU.
Author
Time
 (Edited)

Harmy said:

Theprequelsrule said STAR WARS wasn't shot in high resolution and I said it was, I never said anything about theatrical prints (though even 700 lines is still HD) but that aside, there was also a 70mm release of all STAR WARS films, which would definitely resolve way above 1080 lines.

 

The 1080/24p Attack Of The Clones was blown up to fill an IMAX screen which has  a bigger surface area than the conventional 70mm screens (that the 35mm Star Wars was blown up to**)----with no complaints.

I saw ROTJ in 70mm in August 83' on a triple bill with SW and ESB(both of those were shown in 35mm) and the difference that my 9 year old mind comprehended when the curtains rolled back was the size!!!!

I obviously was not paying attention(or was aware of) concepts like  sharpness or dynamic range.

It would be interesting to compare The Imax version of AOTC to a 70mm version of one of the 1st 3 star wars films.

 

** 35mm frames being blown up to 70mm frames

 

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.

kurtb8474 1 week ago

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8


Author
Time

The whole resolution debate is a bit of a smoke and mirrors thing, because film has no fixed resolution, and resolution is not what we should be measuring anyway. The measurement is resolving power, that is, how many lines of detail can be detected on the screen. You can have a "2K" image that looks like shit and won't be anymore detailed than a really high quality 16mm negative. And, you can have an "HD" image that blows away a 35mm original camera negative. I know, because I've seen both. So saying 4K>2K>HD doesn't even necessarily tell you anything, it's just a measurement of the fixed amount of pixels the image is composed of. That film is not a digital image drives this home, as their is nothing to count--instead you measure what the results are, and there is no standard result for each format. In the case of 35mm, it depends mainly on film stock and lenses (and to some small degree, the aperature, if there are filters used, etc.). And in the case of HD (or 4K, etc.) it depends on the camera sensor/electronics, and the lens (and again, to some degree aperature, filters, gain, other small things, maybe even settings like gamma preferences). So you just have to examine it on a case by case situation and judge by eye which one looks more detailed or has more picture information.

Generally speaking though, most typical 35mm negatives are about comparable to a typical 4K image, but this is a fast and loose rule. And, generally speaking, most typical 35mm positive release prints have about the same or slightly less than a medium-quality HD image. Especially since it was a popular film, the Star Wars negative and interpositives got dirty real quick, and a movie house played their copy over and over again, so by the time a lot of people saw it for the second or third time it probably would be beat by a 720p image in terms of clarity and detail.

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

It was the late 90's. I was a newcomer. I didn't know of a SE existing. It was all about the movies.

I miss going down to my basement at 8 years old, and popping in those VHS's, just to enjoy them. These movies were perfect to me. There wasn't any such thing as poor picture quality to my young eyes. It was the same with video games, low res sprites weren't low res sprites. They were a lot of fun.

I miss being able to see the world without judging it.

 

"The other versions will disappear. Even the 35 million tapes of Star Wars out there won’t last more than 30 or 40 years. A hundred years from now, the only version of the movie that anyone will remember will be the DVD version [of the Special Edition], and you’ll be able to project it on a 20’ by 40’ screen with perfect quality. I think it’s the director’s prerogative, not the studio’s to go back and reinvent a movie." - George Lucas

<span> </span>

Author
Time

Those are the 1992 release, I believe. They were always my favourite because they had the best boxart. No Fox logos, Hi-Fi stickers or publicity photos, just the poster art wrapping all the way around the front. When I purchased this version of ESB in 1994 it was the first time I had ever paid money to watch the films. To this day, I still get nostalgic seeing that specific transfer, for the dirt and grain structure that was unique to whatever print it came from.

Probably I would have consider the Executer set the best, but I've still never laid eyes on it. With that said, I'd then give my nomination to the 1995 THX 'Faces' set. The box art, while kind of weak in one way, is also a good concept in another way when you see the three tapes in a set, it works well as a "trilogy" concept. I loved those Leonard Maltin interviews--in fact, I think this was the first time I ever saw an interview with Lucas. There was also a trailer included for the special release, which was pretty cool and I still have it memorized to this day. Back then, it was unusual to have any extras on VHS, as even Anchor Bay wasn't doing it yet--the only thing I can think of was the clamshell Fox Widescreen releases which had the original theatrical trailer, but those might have only come out the year afterward.

The picture quality of the films themselves was probably the best and cleanest I had ever seen at the time, and as was mentioned the sound quality really stood out for its clarity and fidelity.

Ah, remember when new Star Wars video releases were exciting?

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

zombie84 said:

Ah, remember when new Star Wars video releases were exciting?
Sadly Yes, sadly because its no longer the case! :(

On a slightly different note I do wonder how much George would make if he released a proper archival Blu-Ray box set of the OT including:

1977 Star Wars
1981 Star wars
1997 Star Wars
2004 Star Wars
201* Star Wars (3D)
1980 The Empire Strikes Back
1997 The Empire Strikes Back
2004 The Empire Strikes Back
201* The Empire Strikes Back (3D)
1982 Return Of The Jedi
1997 Return Of The Jedi
2004 Return Of The Jedi
201* Return Of The Jedi (3D)

+ Any Extras

Now that would be a box set I could get excited about! ;)

Personally I couldn't care less for the '04 and 3D versions but I included them for the sake of completeness.

Original Trilogy in Replica Technicolor Project
Star Wars PAL LaserDisc Project

Author
Time

LeeThorogood said:

 

zombie84 said:

Ah, remember when new Star Wars video releases were exciting?
Sadly Yes, sadly because its no longer the case! :(

 

And yet look how much we talk about it!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

timdiggerm said:

LeeThorogood said:

 

zombie84 said:

Ah, remember when new Star Wars video releases were exciting?
Sadly Yes, sadly because its no longer the case! :(

 

And yet look how much we talk about it!

We will be doing the same in 8 years time when it comes out on Red Ray:-lol!-

 

http://nofilmschool.com/2011/04/red-demonstrates-red-ray-4k-playback-system/

 

And we will be watching it on one of these babes:

 

 

 

 

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.

kurtb8474 1 week ago

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8


Author
Time

danny_boy said:

The 1080/24p Attack Of The Clones was blown up to fill an IMAX screen which has  a bigger surface area than the conventional 70mm screens (that the 35mm Star Wars was blown up to**)----with no complaints.

My friends and I saw pixelization in the theater during AOTC on a normal sized movie screen.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time

zombie84 said:

The whole resolution debate is a bit of a smoke and mirrors thing, because film has no fixed resolution, and resolution is not what we should be measuring anyway. The measurement is resolving power, that is, how many lines of detail can be detected on the screen. You can have a "2K" image that looks like shit and won't be anymore detailed than a really high quality 16mm negative. And, you can have an "HD" image that blows away a 35mm original camera negative. I know, because I've seen both. So saying 4K>2K>HD doesn't even necessarily tell you anything, it's just a measurement of the fixed amount of pixels the image is composed of. That film is not a digital image drives this home, as their is nothing to count--instead you measure what the results are, and there is no standard result for each format. In the case of 35mm, it depends mainly on film stock and lenses (and to some small degree, the aperature, if there are filters used, etc.). And in the case of HD (or 4K, etc.) it depends on the camera sensor/electronics, and the lens (and again, to some degree aperature, filters, gain, other small things, maybe even settings like gamma preferences). So you just have to examine it on a case by case situation and judge by eye which one looks more detailed or has more picture information.

Generally speaking though, most typical 35mm negatives are about comparable to a typical 4K image, but this is a fast and loose rule. And, generally speaking, most typical 35mm positive release prints have about the same or slightly less than a medium-quality HD image. Especially since it was a popular film, the Star Wars negative and interpositives got dirty real quick, and a movie house played their copy over and over again, so by the time a lot of people saw it for the second or third time it probably would be beat by a 720p image in terms of clarity and detail.

thanks for the info

I guess SW is in a unique position because it has been transposed from one  evolving technological home video format to another for the best part of 35 years. And each time it is re-released it looks that much better(including the 2004 DVDs!).

Because of this we have a qualitative perception of the how the films look and sound because we are able to compare a current release to a previous one.

That can't be done with something like Inception or Avatar because their initial 2010 Blu Ray  releases are already of exceptional video quality(unlike Star War's humble VHS/Betamax/V2000/laserdisc 1982 debut!!!!).

Will Avatar(shot on digital) or Inception(shot on film but still encoded into a 2k digital master) look any better in 30 years time---maybe by a negligable amount.

Watch this 1979 CBS 60 minutes documentary which researched piracy in the then embrionic home video market:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZtfEDyTXiU

Watch out for this:

 

  It is what I am assuming to be the first bootleg of Star Wars which according to the FBI surfaced just 2 weeks after it debuted in the cinemas!.

This is how it looked to  the very first generation of home video enthusiasts(pirates!).In september we will see how it has evolved in terms of quality when it comes out on Blu Ray!

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.

kurtb8474 1 week ago

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8


Author
Time

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

danny_boy said:

The 1080/24p Attack Of The Clones was blown up to fill an IMAX screen which has  a bigger surface area than the conventional 70mm screens (that the 35mm Star Wars was blown up to**)----with no complaints.

My friends and I saw pixelization in the theater during AOTC on a normal sized movie screen.

 

12/03/02 10:15 PM
I just saw Attack of the Clones on IMAX and here is my question:
The movie was shot in digital (something like 1920 X 1080 pixels I'm told) and transfered to the 70mm Imax format. by my calculations (1080 lines divided by an 80ft. screen) each line should be roughly 1 inch high. But I looked and damned if I could find ANY pixelization, vertical or horizontal. How do they do this?

http://forums.howwhatwhy.com/showfla...-222100&fpart=.

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.

kurtb8474 1 week ago

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8