CHEWBAKAspelledwrong

FreezingTNT2 said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

I’d say “unbefuckinglievable”, but, unfortunately, that would be false.
Totally… utterly predictable and infuriating.

Any changes detected yet besides the new Tatooine sky and modified Greedo scene?

The silver lining is that George finally realized his true vision for the clouds, as I understand clouds were difficult to render on motion picture back in 1977…

Can you show me the new Tatooine sky?

I’d say “unbefuckinglievable”, but, unfortunately, that would be false.
Totally… utterly predictable and infuriating.

Any changes detected yet besides the new Tatooine sky and modified Greedo scene?

The silver lining is that George finally realized his true vision for the clouds, as I understand clouds were difficult to render on motion picture back in 1977…

LexX said:

More like Disney-.

😃

Now how’d I not come up with that?

Physical media is so important. Disney can’t alter a title if it’s already sitting on your shelf.

Read for yourself 😠

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/07/a-number-of-disney-movies-wont-appear-on-disney-on-launch-day.html?__source=Facebook|INT&fbclid=IwAR36tWiOyNFG6M8NLjzAYuFBYffCv2g3jhiA6eOF5UUCEtyg2Go4jjBIcSY

If it’s 1.78, it’s likely opened up slightly from the 1.85, not cropped. Any extra information you’re getting would’ve been within the error tolerances of matted projection at the time.

From Blu-Ray.com:

A word about aspect ratios: One slightly controversial element of this 4K restoration (which also extends to the included Blu-ray disc*, as as well as Warner Bros.’ 2007 Blu-ray) is its 1.78:1 framing, which is very common for WB catalog releases theatrically framed at 1.85:1. In comparison to that older Blu-ray, this new remaster also appears slightly zoomed-in by a factor of less than 5%, but nothing of great interest is lost. Take all this with a grain of salt, obviously: many home video releases presented The Shining in unmatted 1.33:1, which often ruined some of its more claustrophobic compositions, while some fans have even argued for 1.66:1, AKA “European widescreen”. (The excellent Stanley Kubrick Archives squashes that argument, showing a handwritten Kubrick note explaining that his films are composed for 1.85:1 but protected for 1.33:1 TV broadcast.) So while it’s disappointing that The Shining doesn’t keep its theatrical aspect ratio, this seems to be a fair compromise; after all, 1.78:1 is the new television standard.

JonathanArthur19 said:

Tealtanic? what? I didn’t say Tealtanic I said Titanic lmao

A reference to the above-discussed proclivity of James Cameron to release his movies on home video with a teal push in the color grading.

JonathanArthur19 said:

hope Tealtanic 4K releases soon though

FTFY

ray_afraid said:

fmalover said:

Is there a reason why the Hutts are all portrayed in a negative way?

Seriously, they are always slimy scumbags, and I don’t recall a single Hutt with genuinely noble intentions.

This has bugged me, too.
In TPM some guy says “The Hutts are gangsters!” Like, all of em? The entire species?
Stupid.

Do we know that the Hutts are a species and not just a clan within whatever intergalactic slug species they are?

SomethingStarWarsRelated said:

No matter the context, if anyone uses the words “episode one” in my mind I always add “The Phantom Menace”.

LF had a great marketing machine.

nl0428 said:

Fang Zei said:

nl0428 said:

When the Original Trilogy makes its way to 4K, it will, without a doubt, be the 2011 Special Edition. However, do you think it’s possible that Disney and Lucasfilm will at least correct both the colors and sound mixes to match the theatrical presentations and sound far less compressed?

It’s going to be from an entirely newer scan of the negative, so they’ll have to redo the color-correction anyway.

As for the sound mix, your guess is as good as mine.

True, but I do believe they did a good clean up on the original negatives back when the first Special Edition in 1997 was done.

How is that relevant to color correcting the new xfer?

😂😂😂

The New Yorker’s 1939 review of the Wizard of Oz…
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1939/08/19/the-wizard-of-hollywood

I’d say “still crickets,” but I think they’ve all died.

NeverarGreat said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

NeverarGreat said:

Lucas should have given Obi-wan a robot leg in the ANH Special Edition in 1997 so that people would have speculated endlessly over the next 8 years about when during the prequels he lost it, then never have him sustain this injury, making it clear that it just happened sometime later and had no bearing on the plot.

And he could have made it C-3PO’s missing gold right leg.

Well see now that’s almost interesting, so it would have never happened.

What, you don’t think this added interest and intrigue to Star Wars?

NeverarGreat said:

Lucas should have given Obi-wan a robot leg in the ANH Special Edition in 1997 so that people would have speculated endlessly over the next 8 years about when during the prequels he lost it, then never have him sustain this injury, making it clear that it just happened sometime later and had no bearing on the plot.

And he could have made it C-3PO’s missing gold right leg.

House of Games

Picked this up blind buy on Prime Day. Glad I did, really enjoyed it!

Relatedly: https://youtu.be/pkba-r8NmJk

captainsolo said:

I need to find a good site to organize my DVD and Blu-ray collection.

But LD on the other hand…
I forgot to post a link in here so here goes:
http://www.lddb.com/collection.php?action=list&user=sdraper

I’ve documented my Laserdisc collection in video form on my regular channel…it’s really weird to think I’m now close to 1,000 titles! These are the additions for last month:
https://youtu.be/rruLkbbFHzk

Blu-ray.com has a great library feature, including a phone app that scans barcodes.

Slart said:

You have to make your own decisions for your own kids, but here’s what I went with:
Star Wars
Empire
Jedi
Force Awakens
Last Jedi

We started before Force Awakens came out, so they got to see the sequels in the theater. I consider the current trilogy to be “their” trilogy, but they had to have a schooling in the classics first.

They know of the prequels, but I just said, “They’re not very good” and that was the end of it. The special editions have never been mentioned.

Parent of the year!

The pie porg is amazing!

DuracellEnergizer said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Star Wars
Empire
Jedi

The Force Awakens
The Last Jedi

Rogue One

Then STOP in the name of all that is good.

I take it you went on to show them the porn parody and lived to regret it.

I’ll never look at Jar Jar the same way again…

Star Wars
Empire
Jedi

The Force Awakens
The Last Jedi

Rogue One

Then STOP in the name of all that is good.

Broom Kid said:

RE: the other examples of tinkering: That decision to re-do the fanfares is so weird, in retrospect. I don’t understand why they even tried it, or further, why they thought that edit was a good idea.

I think they had to because Fox was not involved in digital distribution.

I wouldn’t want any of the stars of the Marvel universe in Star Wars. I fear it would take me out of the movie if, say, Chris Pratt or Robert Downey Jr. jumped onto the screen.

NeverarGreat said:

It’s even worse than using the original poster for each movie

What? That’s what they should do!