larrythefatcat said:
And I haven't noticed it mentioned here, but the 3D Phantom Menace teaser is on YouTube in actual 3D in the side-by-side format (also viewable in anaglyph), but it's in Russian... search acordingly
Link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ephvwHFmows
It's a shame the trailer isn't available anywhere online in 3D. It would be good to evaluate the 3D conversion in the comfort of your own home.
Mind you, if LFL had any sense about them they would have included a 3D trailer on the blu-ray release.
After reading the the discussion page for the article I say it's not worth it. AndyTheGrump (a nickname he chose, not me) seems pretty determined to remove the article - reliably sourced or not - and says it has no place on Wikipedia.
This website is great for all your region free blu-ray questions.
http://bluray.liesinc.net/index.php?region=b
doubleofive said:
Correction: I didn't download the original comparisons, someone else sent me a ZIP file with all of them numbered and the numbered descriptions on a TXT file. All I did was upload them and put the captions with the correct pictures. I don't remember who uploaded them, someone here. There may have just been a link...
Anyway, credit where credit isn't due. ;-)
I don't really care about credit, but as this is about the 4th time I've seen 005 say something like this, I figured I point out where they came from.
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Fuck-the-official-site/post/328604/#TopicPost328604
I, in some sort of OCD Rain Man moment downloaded the official comparisons and uploaded them for see you auntie.
He in turn uploaded them for everyone and that is how doubleofive came into possession of them.
So yeah, I'm the original source but see you auntie and especially doubleofive did a lot better job at making them more public than I ever did. :-)
doubleofive said:
Remember one time when I joked that LEGO Star Wars was my canon. Remember another time I swore that if young Han Solo was featured in anything, it would be immediately erased from my memory?
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/5663/lego_tpm.html
CONFLICT
No.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
brash_stryker said:
adywan said:
The prequel deleted scenes, well i feel sorry for the prequel fans who wanted to see these, because they are a waste of time. The quality looks like they were ripped from youtube when it first started. There are a couple that the quality improves at times, but the majority look like crap.
What's the quality like on the 'lost 20' scene? I just read on star wars aficionado that it's included and wondered if it's good enough to insert into an edit.
It would need a lot of work doing to it before being inserted into any edit. The dialogue is all on set audio and the majority of the scene contains what appears to be pre-vis visual FX.
I also want to point out that although the alien subtitles are player generated, they appear within the picture frame (not in the black bars) and are the closest I've seen to the theatrical subtitles on an official widescreen home video release.
Oh, and AOTC is definitely uncut in the UK.
The set does appear to be shipping from several online stores. For anyone who's interested, here's what DVDWorldUSA.com has to say:
http://www.dvdworldusa.com/shopexd.asp?id=78543
Confirmed multi-region apparently, but I'm interested in what they have to say about the UK set.
Full UnCut U.S. Version in Deluxe Gatefold 'Book' Packaging. Please do not compare this with the inferior U.K. release. You have been warned!!!
Do they think the UK version is cut? According to the BBFC, AOTC is uncut in the UK with the previous cuts waived.
http://www.bbfc.co.uk/GVF172768/
Is the packaging different in the UK? Do we not get gatefold book packaging or are they just trying to sell something for £75 when you could pick up a UK set for less than £50?
Gavin- said:
rpvee said:
lol, Lucas fans are clutching at straws.
I don't think that blog post is straw-clutching, because I think they've presumed George's intentions correctly. After all, George must have had intentions, no matter how horrible and ridiculous. Is it silly to guess at them?
Neither does it sound like an apologist argument. That would mean finding some crazy way to say the new "Noooo"s are an improvement. This blog post doesn't seem to do that.
I think it's clear that George wanted this moment to "rhyme" with Vader yelling "Nooooooooooo!" at the end of ROTS. In theory it's an artistically interesting choice. It's just a shame that George doesn't realise the "Noooooooo!" moment from ROTS is one of the stupidest, most laughable, cheesiest things in the entire saga. George also doesn't seem to care that Vader's silence in this scene was always a point of strength and good drama, which can only be spoiled by voicing his feelings.
Why do people keep on saying the scene with the added "Nooooo" now mirrors the scene in ROTS? The scene without the audio tweaks mirrored a scene in ROTS already and was a lot better than Vader's "birth" scene.
My favourite scene in ROTS (yes such a thing does exist) is the bit where Anakin is alone in the council chamber and in silence looks out across the vast city contemplating what to do. At the same moment, Padme stands in her apartment looking out towards the Jedi Temple. Anakin finally makes up his mind and rushes off to stop Windu killing Palpatine, an action that will ultimately lead him to the dark side.
This scene doesn't need dialogue and as I say is one of my favourite scenes. It mirrors Vader looking on in silence as Palpatine is slowly killing Luke. He makes his decision and turns on the Emperor, an action that ultimately leads to his redemption from the dark side.
Sadly, I doubt Lucas intended these scenes to mirror each other. People who think the added "NOOOOO" is the perfect mirror to the one in ROTS sadly misinterpret repetition as a form of mirroring.
It isn't, it's lazy storytelling that over explains it for sake of the few who don't understand what is going on. Even as a child, I enjoyed the scene in Jedi because despite the mask, you knew what Vader was thinking and no dialogue was needed. Then or now!
Has anyone heard if the UK disks will still have the headbutt cut out of AOTC? I can't find any information on this yet.
Harmy said:
Anchorhead said:
Bingowings said:
I thought, 'what next, Luke missing his grapple throw?'
Man, please don't get that one started ag..... too late.
Sorry, guys, couldn't resist ;-)
Nice try Harmy, but I'm not paying up!!
danny_boy
A blu ray forum poster linked up to this:
There was a massive HD monitor set up over the top of a rebel briefing pedestal, much like the one tracking the movements of the Death Star in A New Hope. We were then treated to an abridged presentation of the Battle of Yavin in full 1080 resolution and I have to say it looked absolutely stunning. There were some Special Edition shots included and they seemed to match even more flawlessly than before in high definition. It was really something you just need to see to believe. It’s going to be a stunning looking set. In fact, I was able to handle the box and the concerns over the art, both inside and out, are pretty unfounded. It looks much more well designed and good looking in person than the screen captures could ever lead us to believe.
Pardon my French but with regards to the writer of that article:
Fuck Swank!
The guys an idiot who just doesn't get it. Read about our run in with him here
http://www.bigshinyrobot.com/reviews/archives/17765
http://www.bigshinyrobot.com/reviews/archives/17816
I agree, we shouldn't comment on the blu-rays quality until we've actually seen them ourselves but lets be honest, If you over look the changes and the messed up colours, the films are inevitably going to look good presented at 1080p. That's why everyone is saying they look stunning. A messed up HD transfer is going to look good when compared to a messed up SD transfer.
I retain a little hope that the colours will be sorted but why should we expect them to give us a decent quality transfer?
They messed up the 2006 DVD's, they messed up the 2004 DVD's, they messed up the 1993 Laserdiscs and they messed up the 1989 Widescreen Laserdisc.
Sorry to interrupt your discussion on the various sound formats (please don't stop on my account, I'm actually enjoying it) but I just wanted to bring up something I read about the blu-rays today.
Check out this article:
For those who can't be bothered to read it all, it's a quick report from someone who managed to catch some footage from the actual blu-rays. Now I'm going to admit that I got a little hopeful when I read the following from the 2nd paragraph.
Well, at a private event in New York City last week, our friends at Lucasfilm and Fox pulled back the curtain all too briefly for an exciting peek at the Blu-rays as part of the 2011 Star Wars Media Day. Two clips were played (one from a classic film, one from a prequel) to demonstrate the quality of the brand-new 1080p/DTS-HD Master Audio 6.1 remasters, on a Panasonic plasma and over a Panasonic HTiB system. It was really just enough to whet our appetites (as if we weren't drooling enough already), but I am now very optimistic: the clips that we saw of films both of the original trilogy flavor and the newer prequels were stunning.
Yep, I got my hopes up when I read that the picture quality was stunning. Sadly, that hope evaporated when I read the sentence immediately following the above quote.
Release of the older films in particular on Blu-ray will be a real challenge for Fox, owing to the limits of cinematic technology of the era, but Episodes II and III should have the potential to truly amaze.
Now, I'm still waiting until September to judge for myself but from the above quote I believe that if you think only modern films look good on blu-ray because they where shot digitally and think all pre digital movies look bad because they have film grain then the OT on blu-ray will look "stunning" to you.
If however, you understand the concept that 35mm film stock can produce a much better quality picture than the current home cinema standard of 1080p, then don't expect anything too "stunning."
Oh, and guess who commented on the article as I was writing this?
Johnny Ringo said:
In case you didn't get the joke, that was 1985 in an alternate reality - on FRINGE.
I like Eric Stoltz but I don't think he could have pulled off the character in quite the same way.
If I had the opertunity, I would go and live in the Fringe alternate reality, but I would have to take my copy of BTTF with me.
On a related but totally different note, has anybody else played the new BTTF game yet?
doubleofive said:
Actually, they re-rendered the movie in 3D. Which is the way to go with movies like that. Impressive they still had the files there with all the old textures and stuff.Bobby Jay said:
I managed to catch Toy Story 2 a couple of weeks ago, it was alright but the movie wasn't made in 3D so didn't show off the benefits of 3D.
Time for Toy Story 1 & 2 Special Edition, re-rendered with the Toy Story 3 character models? ;-)
That, I didn't know. I wasn't overly impressed with Toy Story 2 and put it down to the conversion. Maybe it has something to do with the broadcast quality (1080i).
xhonzi said:Don't forget Super StarDust HD too! That has a 3D mode and is one of the other welcome back games.
Sweet. That's my 2 free games sorted!
I recently upgraded to an LG 42" LED TV with active shutter glasses. I wasn't in the market for one but at the bargain price of £450 it was too good to pass up and I figured it would make a good entry into the world of 3D.
Thanks to my existing Sky+HD box it was simple enough to get the Sky 3D channel at no extra cost. I've watched some football and rugby on it but if I'm being honest the 3D sports coverage is a bit hit and miss. I managed to catch Toy Story 2 a couple of weeks ago, it was alright but the movie wasn't made in 3D so didn't show off the benefits of 3D.
I've also hooked up my PS3 and thanks to ebay, I acquired the Samsung exclusive blu-ray of Monsters Vs Aliens. The quality is awesome compared to broadcast 3D and I would recommend this disc to anyone wishing to demo their kit.
I plan on trying to get Avatar and all 4 Shrek movies via ebay in the future but I don't want to pay stupid money for them. I also want to get Tron Legacy so I can compare it to the cinema experience and the 2010 World Cup so I can compare it to the broadcast quality 3D football.
Also, when the Playstation Store reopens, I plan on getting my free copy of Wipeout HD to test out the 3D gaming experience!
More info here, here (if you can get the video to work) and here.
This is not the shot used in the '97 SE and hasn't been seen in any version of the movie.
How come no ones mentioned Dana Scully yet?
Also, this thread has made me realise why I've always had a thing for red heads!
The Blu-rays of Alien and Aliens contain a 4.1 Dolby Surround track on them, are these reproductions of the 70mm 6-track mixes of those films?
Incidentally, the scene in Aliens where Bishop is ripped in half on the floor and Lance Henriksen's body can been seen was altered for the blu-ray release as discussed here:
This is an alteration many people seemed to accept but most people are against redoing the optical effects in Star Wars. Removing scratches and dirt is fine because these are imperfections that have appeared since the film was released and are not what was originally intended to be seen by the viewing public.
Any imperfections to the film that happened during post-production was originally deemed acceptable by the film maker and released to the viewing public. These versions might not be "acceptable" by today's modern standards but they need to be preserved for their historic value.
Can't believe I forgot to post this.
"You forgot the first rule of remakes (SPOILER), Don't fuck with the original."
Scream 4
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Fuck-the-official-site/post/336852/#TopicPost336852
Just a bunch of dead links now and I'm almost ashamed to admit I no longer have these. :-(
Did anyone download them at the time and still have them?
Alexrd said:
It was on some review site. I'll search for it.
EDIT: Here it is.
Have I missed some sort of joke here? I read that article a few years ago and took it to be a tongue-in-cheek look at the prequels. Maybe I'm being naive but the author seemed to use humour (perhaps misplaced) to mock PT gushers.
That's my interpretation, it might be wrong. I personally wouldn't use it as evidence that the author is a PT nut.
Edit: Sorry, just read the comment section of the article and the author himself admits it was a joke. Now I need to know if you guys knew it was a joke and where playing along or if you just over reacted?
xhonzi said:
Bobby Jay said:
PS: I never thought I'd ever have to search for "6 breasted woman" on Google!
What did you find?
Find out for yourself
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=6+breasted+woman
Ironically enough, 6th one down ;-)
This thread in video form:
http://www.cracked.com/video_18249_why-star-wars-secretly-terrifying-women.html
Discuss!
RedFive said:
I thought I'd already named it "Phantom Grappling Hook Syndrome." I guess we could call it an Inception instead. It does sound slightly cooler. If you hadn't guessed from the first line of my signature, the whole fauly memory thing is one of my pet peeves.
I did challenge everyone to find and post video evidence of the missing grappling hook scene but I will have to say that if it shows up on the deleted scenes of the blu-ray and someone edits it back into the film, I won't be paying out.