Fang Zei

There's no way to market yet another version of the SE (without the OOT) that will get people to flock to the stores. There's supposed to be a 4k blu-ray format available by the end of next year, but even if the OOT were one of the flagship titles you're talking about investing in a really expensive new blu-ray player. A regular blu-ray of a new 4k transfer of the SE wouldn't sell well without the OOT either because it would barely represent an upgrade over the blu-rays a lot of people already own.

Also, let's not forget that Disney needs to make a deal with Fox to make anything happen, and it won't happen unless there's a clear reason to believe that everyone will get rich together. The only way to guarantee that is by restoring the OOT and putting it out there on blu-ray.

He does seem to give a coy, knowing smile to the Star Wars question.

I'm betting we won't know the details of how everything will shake out until next Fall, but it would be nice if someone at Disney/LFL were to just flat out say, at some point before Christmas, "yes, the unaltereds are being restored and will be released next year." It just seems like an inevitability at this point in lieu of an official announcement.

FWIW, there's supposed to be a whole slew of Episode VII related books hitting shelves in September, several months ahead of the film's release. IIRC, we didn't get any merch for the prequels until only a couple weeks before their respective release dates. September has historically been the time for releasing the catalogue titles ('04 OT-SE, '06 GOUT, '11 blu-ray), so maybe they're timing a big re-release to coincide with the start of the Ep7 blitz.

We'll just have to wait and see....

I really highly doubt we'll ever see another release based off the 2004 transfer ever again.

A lot of evidence from employee resumés points to the 4K master having been finished prior to 2011. I bet the only reason it wasn't used for the initial blu-ray is that George felt like keeping it in his back pocket for an additional dip further down the line. Then the Disney deal happened barely a year later.

As for Iger's long pause in the interview, I'm chalking that up to either a satellite delay or just simple confusion on Iger's part from the way the question was phrased. The reporter simply asks "do you think you'll release the original Star Wars." If you watch and listen, it's almost like Iger is waiting for her to finish the sentence by saying "the original Star Wars movies," which is probably what she meant. She might not even be aware of the various versions and might simply be referring to a wide theatrical re-release, which hasn't happened since 1997 and would be a significant thing all by itself.

They need look no further than how Warner Bros handled it with Blade Runner. With ep7 hitting in December, the comparison becomes even more appropriate. They could do a grand theatrical re-release of the "final" SE from this new 4k master we've already heard about, probably in September or early October (one of the dead zones of the year in terms of blockbusters), and show it in theaters for a limited time in 2d, 3d and digital Imax 3D. It'll still be the SE (albeit in hopefully improved form), so I won't pay to go see it, but if they put it out on blu-ray in December with a restored OOT I would be all over that.

Of course I'd love to be surprised and hear Disney go "screw the SE, we're putting the original versions in theaters!" but that ain't gonna happen.

I guess since the V remake got cancelled they figured most people already forgot about it, which is probably accurate. The Overlords and everything about the actual story is something that will be fresh and new to the audience.

Ditto on Gary Lockwood, I was thinking the exact same thing as soon as this was announced. It would be cool if Rid could corral the original trio into the production somehow.

Couldn't have said it better myself, canofhumdingers!

I caught Interstellar over the weekend in 15/70 Imax and Nolan's love for both 2001: A Space Odyssey and Star Wars is ALL OVER THIS. I lost count of the Kubrick homages, and Bill Irwyn is like the Tony Daniels / Kenny Baker of this movie.

As for the "paradox," I was thinking the exact same thing at first, but after thinking about it for a couple days it actually seems to make sense. I'll need to see it again to confirm it, and also just so I can fully get a grasp of everything going on in the story. Seeing it in real Imax was like sensory overload.

I heard about this earlier today.

These books have been on my "to read" list for as long as I can remember. About fifteen years ago, one of my dad's good friends offered to give me his 90's bantam spectra paperback copies of the first two books after he saw me thumbing through them on his shelf. I refused since I had such a massive backlog of other books lying around waiting to be read (still do). Hey, I did eventually finish the Dune series, so there's that.

Anyway, I can still remember when Shekhar Kapur was talking about making this into two movies. After seeing Elizabeth, a movie that's pretty entertaining despite being mostly scenes of people talking, I could totally see why. Then just a few years ago Roland Emmerich expressed interest, oddly appropriate since he would've gone from showing us the end of the world to showing us the end of the galaxy.

Haven't seen Person of Interest, but hearing this news just three days after seeing Interstellar makes me want to bump these books to the top of the reading pile.

I'm just glad the other stuff that's getting tv treatment are books I've either already read (3001, Childhood's End*) or already have lying around (Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars books).

Oh, and speaking of the Dune books, I can't help but wonder if Syfy wants to bring the remainder of that series to tv as well. With James McAvoy's current star power it would make so much sense to get him back as God Emperor Leto, and Heretics/Chapterhouse have scenes that would give Game of Thrones a run for its money!

*Childhood's End was also in development as a movie several years ago with Kimberly Peirce attached to direct.

Well, now that the non-spoiler thread's been bumped...

I've been debating where I want to see the movie first. The Uptown seems like the natural choice. It's DC's historic movie house (been there since the 30's) and the only one in the area showing Star Wars on 5/25/1977. It's a huge, single-auditorium theater with a balcony and a deeply-curved cinerama screen which was installed in the late 60's and left unchanged even after the most recent renovation in the 90's. Originally it was a Loews and after the AMC merger they wanted to split it up into multiple auditoriums but public opinion kept that from happening. It's always been the traditional lineup spot for stuff like Star Wars, Harry Potter, etc.

It was actually the last place I saw RotS on the big screen. I saw Blade Runner there back in '07. The picture nicely filled the large screen although the distortion caused by the deep curve was more noticeable if you weren't sitting farther back and in the center. They apparently made the switch to digital in 2010 just in time to show Tron: Legacy in 3D. They alternate 2D and 3D showtimes for the relevant movies. Interestingly, I've heard it's the only AMC in the country using a Christie projector instead of the Sony 4K's. It has something to do with either the throw or the 3D convergence of the Sony not working well with the screen. I've seen at least one 2.35:1 movie there since then and while the digital projector doesn't quite reach the corners of the screen, it actually makes the distortion less noticeable.

With Episode VII, I'm sure they'll do early screenings the night before the official release (it's become the standard thing for these big movies over the last couple years). My big question is whether or not they'll make that very first screening 3D or not. If they do, I'm of two minds about it. I'd love to be part of the first audience to see it there, but I'd really, really prefer it just be in 2d as the movie was filmed. At the same time, knowing that all the cgi is a native 3D render and that the post-converted live-action will probably look decent kinda takes the sting off of paying the extra money and wearing glasses on top of my glasses that darken the image.

The fact that some of this is being shot in real IMAX adds yet another layer to my choices. Imax is rolling out their new 4k+4k laser system next year. It will replace the 15/70 projectors while still filling the screen. Once again, it becomes an issue of whether they'll even offer 2d as a screening option.

decisions, decisions...

I'd say wait, if for no other reason than that we know there's been a 4k transfer with better colors.

This is why I'll be absolutely shocked if, in addition to a restored OOT, they don't also release a polished "final cut" of the SE by the time ep7 hits. The 2004/2011 master is a joke at this point.

Y'know, I guess it's oddly appropriate for Episode VII's title to resemble The Force Unleashed, even unintentionally.

That was also hyped as "The Next Chapter" in the saga.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I don't hate it, but it does bring to mind an image of a giant, sparking Force ghost yawning as he wakes up from a long nap.

Then I guess Spielberg's timing with the BFG was pretty good!

It also makes sense if the first ultra-early teaser trailer is just around the corner, as has been rumored. The titles for the three prequels were announced only a couple months before we saw the first trailer, which was only six months before the film's release.

There is that.

I've never downloaded/acquired any, so I guess my conscience is clean on that front.

Heh, I feel another title nitpick coming on. This reminds me of when Dawn of the Planet of the Apes was announced and everyone was like "Doesn't the dawn come before the rise?"

As an aside, it would be great if Peter Suschitzky shot one of these umpteen Star Wars movies currently in development. He just shot After Earth for Shyamalan recently, digitally on the Sony F65, so another Star Wars, regardless of format, wouldn't be his first Space Opera since Empire.

I always found it funny that he ended up becoming the cinematographer for one of the guys who could've directed RotJ, David Cronenberg.

At first I was dissapointed that the title had anything to do with the force, although this is still better than having Jedi or Sith in the title. It's just that we already had a much-hyped Star Wars event (granted, it wasn't a movie) where The Force was also the first two words of a three-word title.

...Then I realized how it works on a subconscious level, reminding us how the franchise is "awakening." Sure, it has a symmetry with the three-word titles of the first parts of the other trilogies (and Empire is the only one aside from TPM to start with "the," so there's that), but more than anything else they're appealing to our feelings of the franchise itself.

Episode VII probably won't specifically follow either version. It will probably only reference stuff that all versions of the OT share in common.

At the most we'll get a "Han shot first" joke, a wink to the audience.

It was just how the media referred to it, since the first film was simply titled Star Wars.

When you think about, that must've been a cool, clever way of surprising everyone. It's like "oh, by the way (like it's nothing), this is Episode V, not Episode II."

I wonder what all the fanzines and newspapers (and, heck, the nascent internet) made of it in the days after Empire hit theaters.

People wouldn't have even been familiar with the concept of Star Wars movies having episode numbers until May of 1980.

As for the title being smaller, that might just be the mystery box at work and them thinking it would be a fun way visually to unveil the title. I'm sure the marketing departments at Lucasfilm and Disney are gonna be busy trying to come up with a catchy-looking logo a la Empire and Jedi. The selling points for all three prequels were the "filling in the blanks" of Episodes I, II and III, hence that was the biggest part of the logos. Episode VII is, arguably, an equally big selling point, but I think they want to avoid anything that will remind people of the prequels in the marketing.

I remain very curious as to how they're going to open the movie without the Fox fanfare. At this point I'm assuming Johnny's just gonna come up with a new piece of music to play over the Disney and Lucasfilm logos and then the rest of the opening will be identical from there.

There are literally thousands of blu-ray releases out there more worthy of your cash than the 2011 Star Wars set. The deleted scenes, which should've been on the '04 dvd anyway, were pretty much the only selling point imo. That wasn't enough to get me to buy what was essentially the '04 hd master at its full resolution and with a few tweaks.

Episode VII's production has managed to generate enough consistent buzz to distract from the complete and total lack of any OOT news whatsoever. Disney's radio silence on the matter is the reason we flipped out both times those rumors popped up.

But they can't expect to just keep ignoring the gigantic elephant in the room. Maybe something really is blocking them from releasing the originals, I just find that hard to believe. If Fox and WB can work out an agreement over the Adam West Batman series, I really don't see what's stopping Fox and Disney. Could George have made it a condition of the sale to Disney? It's possible, but I think $4 Billion speaks a little louder than that. The only other possibility is the rumor of people at Fox feeling "uncomfortable" having anything to do with a restored OOT release while George is still alive.

I have a feeling the radio silence may be part of the plan. By April/May we will have heard something.

Don't spend a cent on the 2011 set.

Lucas waiting two whole decades and not doing any credited directing in all of tnat time are two big strikes against the prequels that the Hobbit movies don't have. It helps that LotR was made after the digital vfx wave had really got going, so that even the cgi overload of The Hobbit doesn't seem too out of place by comparison. The RED cameras are a much closer match to the Super 35 of LotR than the sony 2/3" hd cameras are to the cinemascope of TPM and the OT. You can bet that if The Hobbit actually had gotten made pre-2009, they would've just shot it on film.

The comparison comes from doing the prequel (written first by Tolkien before he wrote LotR) after you've already told the "main" story on film. You suddenly feel the need to force all these connections to the originals. The irony is that the Star Wars prequels, titled episodes 1-3, feel so disconnected from the ones titled 4-6 while a movie of the Hobbit, which could've done its own thing, feels bolted to a movie titled Lord of the Rings.

Bingowings said:

Ironically I have more HD-DVDs than Blu-Rays and I have nothing to play them on thanks to that flipable Star Trek OS remastered box set of mine. 

Haha, wow, you just brought me back with that comment. Wasn't that during the hot minute when Paramount and CBS dropped blu-ray?

Do you have any Universal hd-dvd's? Some (not all) of those look slightly better than their blu-ray counterparts no thanks to a needless application of DNR.

The truly jaw-dropping moment for me was when I saw a breakdown of the vfx in Zodiac revealing much of the crime scene - including the moving cars - to be entirely cgi.