Dek Rollins

Darth Robin said:

The OT seems to have gotten a slightly wider aspect ratio with the D+ version.

Looking at these screenshots it seems to be a case of cropping. The D+ version has less picture at the top and bottom: http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/DYLPLNNX

On this one there seems to be more picture on the sides though:
http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/J1B2FNNU

Intressting.

I’m sure they framed each shot independently. Those 19SE frames come out at ~2.39, so it’s correct at the very least.

Interesting that the '95 VHS has the correct pitch. I wonder why more care wasn’t taken in later releases.

By the way, I’m working on A Grand Day Out now.

If you’re from the US, your VHS would have been pitched lower of course. I didn’t know I was watching it with the wrong pitch until I made this thread and the correct speed became a point of discussion.

NewClear said:

If you want to slow it to 24fps, you can slow the audio down by encoding it like this:

ffmpeg -loglevel error -stats -n -i “The Wrong Trousers HD v2.mkv” -vn -sn -af asetrate=46080,aresample=48000 -c:a aac -b:a 192k -vbr 5 “The Wrong Trousers HD v2.mka”

And just remux it with the video in mkvtoolnix, de-selecting the original audio, and setting the video frame rate to 24fps.

I’m not well versed in ffmpeg, does this operation keep the correct audio pitch? I assume you’re posting this for the benefit of those who want to keep their file BD-compliant.

^ The legendary triple post.

Would be people be interested in a speed/pitch corrected edition of A Grand Day Out? Also, if I were to include speed corrections of both other shorts as bonuses with this preservation, would people prefer I use the cropped Blu-ray of A Close Shave to keep it HD, or just use a DVD video source to keep the proper aspect ratio?

With the DVD audio source in hand thanks to d00mb0yz96, I figured it was a good excuse to make a new, more complete version of this preservation. So this time around I synced it to the Blu-ray copy properly, at 25fps of course.

My old HD preservation had the BBC logo stuck in at the beginning, and the end credits had to be patched in from the altered DVD audio track. Now the entire short uses the original track via the 1999 DVD, with the only thing added from the altered track being the Aardman logo audio at the beginning, as the 1999 DVD doesn’t include any logos before the short. The opening BBC logo was left out to retain sync with the Blu-ray, since the 1999 DVD only has it at the end anyway. I found it quite a relief that there are no frame differences between the Blu-ray and the 1999 DVD, so no edits had to be made to the DVD audio at all.

I’ve also included the Blu-ray commentary track, adjusted to match the 25fps frame rate. I don’t know what the correct pitch is for the voice overs, but the audio from the short in this track matches the standard Blu-ray track, so I pitch corrected it on that basis. I also added the audio from the BBC logo at the end of the short for consistency.

This is a 4.14GB MKV. Both audio tracks are available separately as well, for those who want to correct the frame rate of their own Blu-ray copy and simply mux the audio in.

As always, drop me a PM for links.

NeverarGreat said:

I’ve decided that ranking these movies as some abstract exercise in filmic quality is folly. So I’m going to numerically rank them in terms of how I felt when they actually released:

First, the Star Wars:

1. Star Wars - A stone cold timeless classic which has never been topped
2. The Empire Strikes Back - The best Star Wars sequel and a perfect coming-of-age tale
3. Return of the Jedi - A worthy sendoff of the trilogy with some of the best optical effects ever made

Next, the Attempt at Recapturing Star Wars:

4. The Phantom Menace - A fascinating if flawed space adventure with a good mix of practical and digital effects
5. Attack of the Clones - The inflection point of the saga, whiffing on almost everything except the score
6. Revenge of the Sith - Taking all the poor choices of Clones and doubling down, officially killing the prequels

Finally, the Never Coming Close to Star Wars:

7. The Force Awakens - The opening crawl throws Star Wars in the garbage, and it manages to get worse from there
8. The Last Jedi - A sophomoric postmodernist deconstruction of the garbage fire that is this IP
9. The Rise of Skywalker - An attempt so pathetic that it truly becomes so-bad-it’s-good

So yes, the Episode numbers exactly correspond with the quality of the saga, simply because each misstep of the previous entries becomes part of the story and lessens it. The story of Star Wars is legitimately worse because of the prequels, and the 1-6 ‘Saga’ is trivialized and trashed by the ST. Attack of the Clones is better than The Last Jedi simply because TLJ never had a chance to be part of a meaningful story.

This is a perfect post.

Yeah that’s fine. I definitely understand what you’re talking about. Even regarding the difference between the original and '81 crawl, I think the bad formatting and the tilt missing the music cue makes it a different (and worse) experience than the original. And much of the SE certainly feels like a different movie.

ray_afraid said:

Dek Rollins said:

It’s still the same film.

Fair enough. In this instance, even the title change is enough for me to distinguish one as a stand alone & the other as part of a series.

I don’t think that logic applies to every situation. I watch the original version as part of a trilogy. Not the 1981 version. Yes, watching it as a standalone is simpler if you watch the original, but neither version functions only within such an exclusive setting. It’s just a movie, and it can be viewed under whatever lens the viewer chooses. The '81 version doesn’t have a “to be continued” added at the end, a la Back to the Future. 😉

I think it’s worth noting that people usually don’t say this sort of thing about other films that have “director’s cuts” that only change a couple of scenes. The DC of Star Trek II isn’t a different movie, it’s just a better version of the same movie. In the case of Star Wars, we’re talking about a release that had literally zero editing or content changes throughout the film, other than the opening shot being recomposited with a subtitle added. Again, Star Trek II didn’t have the “II” in the opening title on some prints, but nobody would argue this changes the film fundamentally.

I guess it has more to do with nerdy semantics than anything. : )

Of course. Semantics can always be discussed.

The only effects change made to the 1981 release is a recomposite of the flyover after the crawl, which obviously had to be done since they used a different starfield for the opening. Every other supposed effects change was made during the original release. Some of the '81 release was even done by splicing the new opening onto old prints. It’s still the same film.

I would say every “special edition” version is a different film, but the 1981 release is not a different film just because a subtitle was added to the opening ruining the musical cue. It’s just a worse version of the same film.

I’m kind of indifferent to the ANH title being added, but the poor editing and the awful reformatting of the crawl itself means I can’t say it doesn’t hurt the film. I think it works better without ANH anyway. Since it is the first film, it seems reasonable for episodes to be ‘missing’ between SW and TESB.

In conversation I always call it Star Wars, and if someone wants me to clarify, I say “the first one” or “the original.”

He always comes back. I hope he does again.

ray_afraid said:

How do you pronounce Tantive IV?
I’ve always said “Tant-ev Four” but apparently it’s supposed to be “Tan-tee-vee Four”???

Tant-iv Four (like “is” or “if”), and anyone who says different is wrong. 😉

d00mb0yz96 said:

Dek Rollins said:

The altered version is the only version available on DVD and Blu-ray in any country. That’s why I made this project.

Hi there, I just made an account to finally help in.
I do have the 1999 CBS/FOX US DVD release of the W&G trilogy and I can confirm that the original unaltered soundtrack for The Wrong Trousers is present in this release. Also to confirm, the fps is still slowed down from 25 to 29.976 on A Grand Day Out and Wrong Trousers, except for A Close Shave. These are the same masters used as the mid-90 US VHS releases by CBS/FOX.

I’m aware of that release. In the post you’re quoting, I was referring to all DVD and Blu-ray releases still available today.

I have ripped the DVD using MakeMKV, then brought the MKV to VirtualDub and exported the audio as a WAV, using FLAC. Please PM me if you want the original audio, DVD quality. I would like to see a BD version of The Wrong Trousers but has the original audio since you’re on to that, sadly I don’t have a BD copy of the W&G shorts yet. Since this is DVD quality audio, there shouldn’t be any buzzing or degradation such as audio in a TV broadcast, especially analog TV.

The TV broadcast doesn’t have any buzzing (it was a digital recording I believe, not analog), but I’d be interested in that audio regardless. Thanks for bringing this up, as I couldn’t find the 1999 DVD anywhere!

EDIT: PM sent

Yeah, the mirrored shots are not changed in 4K83.

Most people call it “Episode IV” these days. I think Ep IV and ANH are used on most media now.

You should use the HDTV broadcast of the theatrical version rather than the Blu-ray. The one from the same master as the Director’s Edition DVD.

https://nowthisnews.com/pop/jj-abrams-wants-the-original-versions-of-star-wars-released

There’s the interview, and they talk about the originals at 6:13. He doesn’t actually say “get despecialized” but he name-drops it. I’m assuming that’s what he was referring to.

emanswfan said:

Fated-Dualist said:

‘Skywalker Saga Boxset - Disney Star Wars 4K is a ZERO Sum Game’:-

Star Wars on Disney 4K in a huge box? Is it worth it? Find out!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TE5OTopl5A - on the RetroBlasting YouTube channel. (5 mins long)
 

Some decent information on the boxset - and a reminder of the quality and limitations on offer in it.
 

Nope, there is a lot of misinformation in that video not to mention how he’s so rude. The biggest one being is that all three movies of the ST are in native 4k.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLkNMKNOP3s

Tobar said:

TNG is very formal, everyone is rather stiff because they have to show proper respect to rank. On DS9 it’s much more casual and to me, a lot more fun.

I find this kind of funny, because my problem with TNG is that the cast (other than Picard) is too casual. In TOS, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy are best friends, but they’re also fellow officers, and they treat each other as such. The same goes for the lower ranks. TNG, it seems to me, did this a lot less.

I’m 5 feet 11 1/4 inches.

Ronster said:

Yes I agree it is an assembly and it would have had for instance different options included within it.

My point about montross is that this was turned into a continuation of the Jabba scene first and unwritten if we are to trust the actor that originally played greedo.

Then a new version was filmed during principle photography that allowed for another option and a much better way to do the scene.

It is an assembly of options all on the table at once. You will have multiple takes of scenes also perhaps strung together it would not be like watching a film but multiple versions of scenes with options. At 13 reels it will have a lot of alternate angles and various dialogue changes and tonality deliverance of lines from actors.

It’s not that there is a massive amount more just that there are options to what is there with a bit of deleted scenes naturally most things are alternatives than a deleted scene in film.

I seriously doubt the rough cut included multiple different takes of the same scene in sequence. That’s not how a rough cut is assembled.

The differences between the two fourth drafts don’t have anything to do with the lost cut. Only footage that was shot has any importance, and we have the Greedo footage that was presumably used in the lost cut right there. The existence of Montross in earlier drafts isn’t any more significant than other early draft differences.

Sure, it’s interesting to look at stuff that didn’t make it to the shooting script, but that should be discussed in a ‘script differences’ thread in the OT discussion area.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8sD6-u7g2Y

Ronster, you’ve seen this, right? That’s the first edit of the Greedo scene, with different takes and alternate dialog.