The prequels should've been done right the first time. I think a lot of us - myself included - would've loved for other writers and directors to have handled the prequels, but the time for that is long past.
I'll be happy if this Disney deal simply leads to a renewed appreciation of the OOT.
I'll second that request
skyjedi2005 said:
Fang Zei said:
It ain't Vaughn.
Several weeks ago when news broke that Vaughn was dropping out of First Class 2, it was reported that he would be directing a movie of Mark Millar's Secret Service instead. Then the Episode VII news broke and people starting going "Oh, I bet you THIS is the REAL REASON he dropped out of First Class 2." Mark Millar himself even debunked the rumor.
For the time being, it appears to be down to Bird, Abrams and Spielberg.
I loved Abrams' Star Trek (and I'm looking forward to seeing what he does with the partially-filmed-in-true-15/65-IMAX sequel), but for him to go from two Star Trek movies to directing a Star Wars movie would be a little too much like what happened with Bryan Singer going from X-Men and X2 to Superman Returns. Plus, I'm already hearing people make jokes about lens flares during lightsaber duels.
I love Spielberg, but I think the time for him directing a Star Wars movie was 1999. There's too much ill will towards him now after Crystal Skull, regardless of how many of that movie's problems may or may not have been caused by Lucas.
Bird is probably my favorite all-around choice. I saw Mission: Impossible 4 in honest-to-God 15/70 and the IMAX sequences were amazing.
If Vaughn is not directing X-men First class 2, and if Bryan Singer does not step in to direct it i will refuse to see it. X3 and Wolverine origins sucked.
Singer is directing First Class 2. It's been confirmed.
Bester said:
Mielr said:
Fun idea, but I'm still waiting to see what Disney does about the OOT on blu-ray and then I'll see how excited I can get about anything else.
They won't do anything, because the rights to the OT were not part of the $4.05b deal. In fact, the rights to the OT remain with Fox until 2020.
You're mistaken.
The distribution rights to the existing six films remain with Fox, but you can be sure they were never the ones holding back a proper release of the OOT. That was Lucas.
We don't know the details of the Disney deal. Lucas may or may not have included a clause stating that the OOT is never to see the light of day. We have no way of knowing.
That's the thing about the prequels: they might as well have been completely animated.
Lucas made cgi his priority to the detriment of the cinematography on the latter two films. Episode I, for all its problems, was at least shot in the same format as the OT.
I don't think Disney is gonna greenlight an entirely cgi film. They'll want this to be unmistakably live-action.
Well, I recall Robert Zemeckis taking umbrage with Beowulf getting an oscar nomination for best animated film since he insisted it was not an animated film. An "animated" Episode VII could be an interesting artistic experiment, I suppose.
Harmy said:
Wow, that's ugly - both in their unique way. I wonder if that BD shot is actually from the BD or from some rip, because look at the background to the left of Qui-Gon - that is seriously horrible.
Whether that's from a rip or straight from the disc, that's how it looks on the actual disc. Here's the same shot from doblu's review:
http://www.doblu.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/starwarsmenace13430.jpg
and here's the only other screenshot they took from that scene:
http://www.doblu.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/starwarsmenace13315.jpg
By the way, here's that shot of Palpatine I was talking about:
http://www.doblu.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/starwarsmenace12404.jpg
Oh, and while I'm here, shots like THIS ....
http://www.doblu.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/starwarsmenace934.jpg
.... are why I wish George hadn't gone digital for Clones and Sith. That shot looks beautiful and has a look you can only get from using anamorphic lenses and 35mm film.
Atilla the Hut said:
A close-up of Qui-Gon made the rounds last year as an example of bad DNR. But that particular scene (along with the scene where Anakin's blood is analyzed) were filmed digitally on a Sony HDC-750 as a test for the other prequels being filmed digitally. From what I can dig up, the HDC-750 has a CCD resolution of 1920x1035 and stores to the older HDCAM format which is 1440x1080 (1080i, it's interlaced) interpolated horizontally to 1920x1080 on output. So it looks like crap because it was filmed on a crap prototype digital camera.
I saw a screenshot comparison somewhere (can't remember if it was here or at AVS Forum) using that shot of Qui-Gon, but I seem to remember the hdtv screenshot having more detail.
Wish I could find it.
EDIT: Nevermind, found it:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/78496/
It's too hard to say for sure whether that's more detail we're seeing in the old transfer or if it's simply IP grain.
Atilla, how sure are you that the nighttime Jedi Council scene was shot digitally?? I've read the story about Anakin's blood test scene having been shot that way, but where'd you read about the other one?
I ask because there are other shots in the blu-ray transfer that've been just as badly dnr'd as that Qui-Gon shot. There's a shot of Palpatine from the meeting with Amidala that's quite waxified, for example.
Journal of the Whills: From the Adventures of ..... The Skywalkers: Episode VII: THE STAR WARS
Atilla the Hut said:
Harmy said:
Even if it was so, the current version is still stuck at 1080p plus it isn't really all that detailed to begin with:
720p has approx. half the resolution of 1080p, yet when scaled down to 720p and then upscaled back up to 1080p, the BD master definitely doesn't lose half the detail, so that effectively means that the 1080p master doesn't really use all the resolution 1080p has to offer.
Interesting...
I can tell the 720p image is a lower resolution than the 1080p image from the grain structure, BUT the detail appears identical. For the longest time I used to be under the impression a 35mm release print had some sort of amazing resolution. After I got a blu ray player and saw a few films then went back to the local cineplex, I started to question that. Then I found out that a release print was sub 720p on average due to the generation loss in contact printing. That and most new films used a 2k DI meaning if the HD version was sourced from the DI it would be hands down better than the release print (unless heavily compressed). Now the local cineplex has 4k DCI equipment so that's not a problem (and comfy seats... and a full bar)
Seeing this comparison makes me wonder how much extra detail could be extracted via a modern higher scan (with the OCN). For a film like SW, I would hate to see them not try.
Fang Zei said:
No, they used the OCN. That's why the '04 master still holds up in full HD: the scan Lowry was working with was capturing all that detail of the original source, even if the scanner was only 2K.
But you're still missing my original point, which is that Lowry was only working at HD resolution (whether it was 1080 anamorphic or 817, either way it was only 1920 horizontal). That's an hdtv master, not a cinema master. The prequels had actual 2K masters (Clones and Sith were shot at 1920, but the effects shots and everything else in the movie were rendered and finished at full 2K). I somehow doubt even Lucas would want the OT looking even worse than the prequels.
I knew what you meant. :) I would like to see a new scan too, for peace of mind, preferably at 8k. I've also read they scanned the OCN, but I also read (on this site I think, links in archived posts) that OCN=1997 SE which is an internegative two generations from the OCN. I know secret history of star wars says the OCN was disassembled and reassembled with SE footage, but that contradicts what Rick McCallum said in an old interview. The OCN was disassembled, but I don't think it was re-assembled with SE footage like Kaminski wrote. All the sources conflict with themselves and since we're not in the loop, who knows?
I just wanted to point out that the 2004 source was indeed scanned in at least 2k. The de-graining stuff was done at 1080p, but the scan was not 1080p like I've seen several people on the internet claim. Can't scan a scope film at 1080p. Well I guess you could, but it would be 1200x1080p or something like that
It was definitely scanned straight from the OCN. Jim Ward went out of his way to mention this during the press conference for the OT dvd release back in '04 with Hamill, Kershner and the Lowry guys in attendance. He said the '97 transfers were off IP, one generation away from the negative, and that detail had never been seen like this before.
emanswfan said:
I'm honestly hoping they don't release all the 3D versions of the OT before Episode 7, and I'd be surprised if they did. Episode 2 and 3 in 3D being right next to each other isn't surprising since both have so much digital elements that are already seperate, especially 3. just think how amazing the opening battle will bein 3D, regardless of it being not so great in almost every other factor. But for the OT, they don't have many digital, or atleast seperate, elements. They have to convert lots from scratch. (wondering if they'll apply DNR to the footage...) Having them speed up the process would be horrible to the 3D experience.
Anyhow, I still hope they are planning to rerelease the originals. I so badly want to see these movies in the theatres as I missed out previous chances.
It wouldn't make much sense for them to wait until after Episode VII already hit theaters to put out Episodes IV, V and VI. They're coming early 2015 at the latest. That doesn't mean they still can't do a quality job, but they'd have to get going pretty soon. The 3D conversion of Titanic took 60 weeks to finish.
Atilla the Hut said:
Fang Zei said:
I'm bumping this thread in light of last week's Disney announcement. Several weeks ago we learned that Clones and Sith would be hitting theaters only a few weeks apart next Fall. With Episode VII hitting in 2015, we'll obviously be seeing all three of the OT-SE installments hitting theaters much earlier than originally expected (late 2014 / early 2015 at the very latest).
I bring this up not out of any interest in the 3D versions, but out of interest for what this might mean for the OT in general. Will Lucasfilm spring for 4K rebuilds of the OT now that money is no longer an object? The current Lowry masters are stuck at 1920x817, which is just fine and dandy for hdtv and blu-ray, but the standard digital cinema resolution for a cinemascope film is 2048x872. Jim Ward called the Lowry masters a "digital negative" back in '04, saying they could use that for theatrical if they wanted to.
Well, it's been eight years and (correct me if I'm wrong) that master hasn't been projected theatrically anywhere.* That says to me that, no, hdtv resolution for a 'scope film is not a "digital negative."
*Was that special screening of Empire a couple years back (with Ford in attendance) the '04 version or was it a '97 print??? That's literally the only time I can think of where the lowry master might have been theatrically projected.
No offense to Michael Kaminski, but the Star Wars films were scanned at least 2k resolution which for a scope film is at least 1828x1556. It was more likely scanned at 4k since 1828 horizontal pixels is less than 1920.
LFL used a Cintel C-Reality film scanner which scans at either 2k (at 6-15fps) or 4k (2 seconds per frame). The C-Reality cannot, however, natively output in either 2k or 4k. It only outputs in HD and lower resolutions. The full squeezed anamorphic scope frame was scanned at a higher overall resolution than HD and downconverted then output at 1920x1080 10bit color (4:4:4 RGB). Whether it was anamorphically squeezed at the full 1920x1080 or was letterboxed on output to 1920x817 is not known. The only source is Lowry saying it was "HD" and Videographer magazine saying it was 1080p, as far as I can tell so it's hard to say.
Since the C-Reality doesn't store images, the cost between 2k and 4k probably isn't much as it only comes down to time. It would be interesting to find out whether they opted for 2k or 4k. I would hope they did 4k. Even though fans don't like the colors, the overall image on the blu ray is pretty detailed. They look more detailed than Raiders and Raiders had a 6k scan with the restoration work done at down-converted 4k. LFL color 'corrected' the 1080p version and gave this to Lowry for restoration and de-graining. I would suspect they did not use the OCN either and opted for the 1997 SE internegative.
Star Wars was shot on the same film stock as Raiders except the composites and wipes/dissolves used a different film stock (among others) which faded so they re-did them either digitally or with an optical printer. Because of the generation loss with them and the effects and also if it is the 1997 IN, a 2k scan would have captured all the detail, a 4k scan would have definitely captured all the detail. The only way to make it better would be to scan the OCN parts that are salvageable, preferably at 6k or 8k.
No, they used the OCN. That's why the '04 master still holds up in full HD: the scan Lowry was working with was capturing all that detail of the original source, even if the scanner was only 2K.
But you're still missing my original point, which is that Lowry was only working at HD resolution (whether it was 1080 anamorphic or 817, either way it was only 1920 horizontal). That's an hdtv master, not a cinema master. The prequels had actual 2K masters (Clones and Sith were shot at 1920, but the effects shots and everything else in the movie were rendered and finished at full 2K). I somehow doubt even Lucas would want the OT looking even worse than the prequels.
That was the theory for those random extra visual changes they did for the blu-ray. "Oh, I bet they did that for the 3D version." It didn't make sense to me at the time, because I was like "why would they be adding the changes now (in 2011) when they're not hitting theaters until 2015-2017???" Obviousy, this Disney news changes things a bit, but that doesn't explain why they would've added the changes last year when they weren't (at the time) gonna hit theaters until years later.
Plus, ya never know. George might've just wanted to make those extra changes for the hell of it, just for the sake of changing things because "it's the big blu-ray debut." He took the same opportunity with the dvd in '04. The "Noooooo" certainly didn't have anything to do with 3D.
It ain't Vaughn.
Several weeks ago when news broke that Vaughn was dropping out of First Class 2, it was reported that he would be directing a movie of Mark Millar's Secret Service instead. Then the Episode VII news broke and people starting going "Oh, I bet you THIS is the REAL REASON he dropped out of First Class 2." Mark Millar himself even debunked the rumor.
For the time being, it appears to be down to Bird, Abrams and Spielberg.
I loved Abrams' Star Trek (and I'm looking forward to seeing what he does with the partially-filmed-in-true-15/65-IMAX sequel), but for him to go from two Star Trek movies to directing a Star Wars movie would be a little too much like what happened with Bryan Singer going from X-Men and X2 to Superman Returns. Plus, I'm already hearing people make jokes about lens flares during lightsaber duels.
I love Spielberg, but I think the time for him directing a Star Wars movie was 1999. There's too much ill will towards him now after Crystal Skull, regardless of how many of that movie's problems may or may not have been caused by Lucas.
Bird is probably my favorite all-around choice. I saw Mission: Impossible 4 in honest-to-God 15/70 and the IMAX sequences were amazing.
I'm bumping this thread in light of last week's Disney announcement. Several weeks ago we learned that Clones and Sith would be hitting theaters only a few weeks apart next Fall. With Episode VII hitting in 2015, we'll obviously be seeing all three of the OT-SE installments hitting theaters much earlier than originally expected (late 2014 / early 2015 at the very latest).
I bring this up not out of any interest in the 3D versions, but out of interest for what this might mean for the OT in general. Will Lucasfilm spring for 4K rebuilds of the OT now that money is no longer an object? The current Lowry masters are stuck at 1920x817, which is just fine and dandy for hdtv and blu-ray, but the standard digital cinema resolution for a cinemascope film is 2048x872. Jim Ward called the Lowry masters a "digital negative" back in '04, saying they could use that for theatrical if they wanted to.
Well, it's been eight years and (correct me if I'm wrong) that master hasn't been projected theatrically anywhere.* That says to me that, no, hdtv resolution for a 'scope film is not a "digital negative."
*Was that special screening of Empire a couple years back (with Ford in attendance) the '04 version or was it a '97 print??? That's literally the only time I can think of where the lowry master might have been theatrically projected.
Akwat, are you by any chance referring to the stuff that contradicts certain stuff we find out in X-Men 3??? 'Cause Bryan Singer had nothing to do with that movie and he's the guy who produced First Class and is now directing the sequel. There are even rumors that the time travel shenanigans in the sequel could very well write x3 out of the continuity.
Anyway, thought I'd also drop the news in this thread as well:
"Furthermore, Arndt’s treatment will be looked over by several top directors including Brad Bird, Steven Spielberg, and J.J. Abrams, though none are confirmed to be involved at this time."
http://www.slashfilm.com/toy-story-3-scribe-michael-arndt-likely-to-pen-star-wars-vii/#more-147400
Latest unconfirmed rumor from "inside sources" has Michael Arndt attached as one of the writers. He's apparently written a 40-page treatment.
Arndt won the best original screenplay oscar several years ago for Little Miss Sunshine and wrote the screenplay for Toy Story 3.
http://www.slashfilm.com/toy-story-3-scribe-michael-arndt-likely-to-pen-star-wars-vii/
Again, this is all unconfirmed rumor.
Well, here's the thing:
It's been thirty years now - in real life - since Hamill, Ford and Fisher shot Return of the Jedi in 1982 (for an '83 release date).
In the EU, they're now up to 40 years after the events of ROTJ, but there's also a big gap of time between 26 and 31 years after ROTJ (the period of rebuilding after the Yuuzhan Vong War). They could easily set the new trilogy in that timeframe.
Either do that, or they could set it after the 40 year mark, age up the big three with makeup and let the EU authors know the premise of Episode VII so they can "build up" to it over the next couple years. That would be the smartest strategy, honestly.
It's also a question of what this new trilogy is gonna be about. They could make it have nothing to do with anything we've seen before if they wanted to. The possibility's are endless. I hope they don't box themselves in with the story just because they feel like they have to make certain "connections" to the other movies.
Bingowings said:
It would be nice to have an Asian lead character in there seeing as so much of the inspiration for the series came from the Orient.
This, to me, has been one of the supreme ironies of Star Wars for quite a while now.
I don't think there's even a single Asian extra in the OT, and I can count on one finger the number of Asian characters in the prequels (Bultar Swan).
On the Latin side of things, I think George always intended Alderaan to be the Mexico of that Galaxy Far, Far Away. From Wookieepedia:
George Lucas commented the hairstyle in Time magazine: "In the 1977 film, I was working very hard to create something different that wasn't fashion, so I went with a kind of Southwestern Pancho Villa woman revolutionary look, which is what that is. The buns are basically from turn-of-the-century Mexico."[124]
Also, let's not forget that when George was making the original '77 film, he may very well have intended Leia to be Bail Organa's biological daughter and not his adopted daughter. It could just be a coincidence that Carrie Fisher has dark hair and dark eyes, but who knows?
Once we get to Clones and Sith, we've got Jimmy Smits playing Bail Organa. One of his senatorial aides was also hispanic, but I can't remember the character or actress' name.
Tyrphanax said:
I was just telling people the other day that "if the money was right..."
Be interesting to see more as it develops.
He probably saw the headlines reading "Disney buys Lucasfilm, Episode VII in 2015" and thought "no paycheck is too big," continued reading, saw "Lucas will not be writing or directing" and thought "I'm in!"
Haha
Anyway, this is my first post in this thread since the news broke just over a week ago. Here are my thoughts:
As several people have noted, we're looking at (potentially) the first live-action Star Wars (one with EPISODE in the title, even) to not have the 20th Century Fox fanfare. I guess it's not THAT big of a deal, but I must admit, against my better judgement, the nostalgic part of my brain just does not like that prospect.
I could almost see Disney doing the following:
Bartering with Fox to get home video distribution rights on the six existing films (TPM 3D hasn't even hit blu-ray yet!). Fox would probably ask a pretty penny for those rights, so to sweeten the deal, Disney gives them theatrical distribution rights for the upcoming sequels. Disney would hold on to distribution rights for Blu-ray/dvd/download/television etc which is where the REAL money is anyway. Also, let's not forget, Fox would only be getting a small cut of the gross. The bulk of the box office would go to LFL and therefore to Disney.
Still, it would give Fox the pride of continuing to release this legendary franchise in theaters, and nostalgic nerds like me will get to hear Alfred Newman's music when the lights go down.
Y'know what would also be nice?
Given what we've been told over the past week, it's not entirely unreasonable to think that George is no longer in a position to dictate terms of the OOT's release. Fox wants to make money, Disney wants to make money. You would certainly hope that 4.05 billion was enough to convince George not to be such a control freak. Seriously, if he included some ironclad clause about the older versions never again seeing the light of day that's just sad.
So here's what would be nice:
Whether it's from Disney or Fox, I'd like to see Ultimate Edition blu-rays of the six movies. Perhaps put them out one by one following their theatrical 3D releases. Starting with Episode I, an all-out set with the newest version and the original theatrical version. Same with Episodes II and III. For the OT, I would absolutely love it if we got all three theatrically-released versions of the three films, all in HD ala the Blade Runner set. Disc One would be whatever version ends up in theaters in a couple years, Disc Two would be the '97 version and Disc Three would be the original.
Are you listening, Disney (and/or Fox)?????
I will settle for nothing less!!!!
I'll save my thoughts on Episode VII for that thread.
How about we simply focus on getting more signatures for the existing one?
The current number is abysmally low, only 5,000 or so compared to the 30,000 the original petition got back in the dvd era.
Ah, somehow I'd forgotten completely about the changes done for the blu-ray release in 2011.
Still, I wouldn't be surprised if LFL decides to do an ultra-thorough, frame-by-frame 3D conversion from fresh 4K scans. Look at what happened with Titanic. From what I've heard, that conversion was so thorough that it looked as if it could've been shot in 3D. Granted, Cameron's only ever used spherical lenses to shoot his movies, so that's one huge advantage the anamorphic OT doesn't have (Clones and Sith will benefit immensely from their spherical origins, whereas TPM was shot with anamorphic lenses just like the OT). But if Lucas really wants to wow us, he'll do a Titanic-level conversion and blow people away with a 3D trailer for Star Wars "like you've never seen it before."
It makes me wonder how they're gonna handle the originals.
I kinda wouldn't be surprised if they decide to wait until the big 4-0 in 2017 and just spread them out over a few weeks like they did in '97.
On the other hand, the only reason I care even the slightest bit about these 3D re-releases is quite simple:
The chance exists that Lucas will do fresh 4K scans for the OT.
Honestly, I can't see it going any other way.
For TPM, they had the 2K files to go back to. Presumably it will be the same for Clones and Sith (yes, the cameras were only 1920:1080, but the movies' visual effects and final mastering were "finished" at 2K rez).
The originals were scanned at 2K almost a decade ago for the dvd, but lowry's restoration was only done at 1080p (1920 horizontal resolution, scaled down slightly from 2048). I don't know what source LFL used for that 3D "test" of the ANH footage they did years ago, but the Lowry-restored stuff is stuck at hdtv resolution, not cinema resolution. That means they either go back to the 2K scans and have Lowry (or some other company) re-do the restoration at full 2K this time, or they do the smart thing and just start all over from scratch at 4K.
If they were to do that, I find it very likely they would also see fit to finally restore the original versions as well. THAT'S the only reason I care about all this 3D post-conversion bidniss.
AOTC 3D will be released September 20, 2013. ROTS will follow just three weeks later on October 11.
http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-episodes-ii-and-iii-to-get-back-to-back-2013-3d-re-releases/
captainsolo said:
"just as the rod removed for the boulder has been confirmed as gone."
Thank you for finally illuminating for me just what was done to that shot!
Heck, I only just saw a youtube comparison of the snake pit reflection a few months ago, and that was after hearing about it for all these years!
I've just spent the last several minutes searching google for a visual comparison - in any form - of the digital alterations made to the boulder shot, but I haven't been able to find anything.
Could someone help me out????
I'm too young (27 years and a month) to have seen the original versions on the big screen in one of their official releases, but the theater where I saw the SE's in '97 and TPM on May 19th of '99 (and twice more in the following weeks .... no, I'm not proud) is now a GYM.
Oh, the irony.
