Fang Zei

Back in September of '04, I distinctly remember my roommate and I catching something on vh1 called "When Star Wars Ruled the World." As you might've guessed from the timing, it was all an excuse to (albeit quickly) pimp the dvd set in the last moments (Ben Burtt says something like "oh, I'm looking forward to the dvd release, just because of the quality").

Anyway, another thing they bring up in the last moments is, of course, the prequels. Now, remember this was a vh1 documentary and, as such, had very quick back-and-forth sound bridge editing, but Mark Hamill definitely says (and I'll try and type this the way it sounded) "I saw the new movies, aaaaaaand, they're not Star Wars."

I wish I could just find the clip somewhere to show you guys so you could actually hear how he says it. He doesn't have a harsh tone in his voice or anything, quite the opposite. There's that very cautious way he says "aaaaaaand" like he's thinking "oh, I don't want to piss anyone off with what I'm about to say." The way he says "they're not Star Wars" is as gentle as can be.

Like I said, all of this goes by in like two seconds, but afterwards you process what you heard and you're like "...... MARK HAMILL said the prequels AREN'T STAR WARS." Obviously they're weren't any hard feelings from George. I mean, the guy invited him to Celebration V. In fact, I might just be reading too much into Mark's comment.

And who knows what he thought of ROTS!?

There is always the dilemma of "If we sell them the good stuff right now, what are we supposed to sell them later???" You can't deny that's definitely part of why we haven't seen the OOT restored and put out on blu-ray. "Nah, just slip in the deleted scenes that should've been on the dvd seven years ago. That's how we get the fans who weren't planning on buying the blu-ray because they hate the SE!!! BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!1" Pad it out with an extra commentary track and some BTS stuff, and voila, you've successfully milked the franchise for that much longer.

Hell, even George himself said this time around that "it would be too expensive" to properly restore and remaster the OOT. I think he knows the excuse that the originals "don't exist anymore" died the moment he put out the GOUT. Not that "it's expensive" is any kind of excuse either, but at least he's not kidding us anymore: it's about money.

In regards to Phantom Menace 3D, the realistic side of George had to have realized the returns were never gonna be great on that one. He even laughed at himself on The Colbert Report when Stephen asked him if he owned all the Star Wars movies on dvd and replied "I think so, I'm not sure about Episode I." All I have to say is that I saw the ROTS blu-ray on my uncle's huge projection screen and WOW, that movie is practically 3-dimensional already! So I think George was ready to take the hit for TPM 3D's inevitably shitty box office just so he could get to Clones and Sith. As we've all said before, the OT will do well because it's the OT.

As for when we'll finally see a restored OOT, who knows, but I think it will happen eventually. I'm sure they'll release the movies individually on blu-ray at some point, and that's yet another potential opportunity for them to throw in the original versions.

Speaking of which (and I've said this before), here's what I think is so good of a plan it would be idiotic for LFL not to do this:

We still haven't heard anything about a 3d blu-ray of TPM, but if LFL were smart, they would include the theatrical cut in the package. Do the same thing with AOTC in 2013 and ROTS in 2014. Then, when we get to ANH in 2015, they could go all out and throw in not only the original version, but the '97 version as well. Maybe spread out some cool extra features over all the leftover space on those several discs. Make it an elaborate collector's set just like we've seen in the past few years for stuff like Wizard of Oz, Ben-Hur, etc, and make this the only way you can get the original version on blu-ray. Repeat for Empire in 2016 and repeat again for Jedi in 2017. Yeah, it would mean we'd have to wait a while to get the entire OOT, but I think the fans would eat it up. If LFL were smart, they'd realize the business opportunity they've got here.

However they end up doing it, I think we'll see the OOT eventually. They won't be able to pull the blu-ray equivalent of the GOUT on us either. The old laserdisc masters + the fact that not as many people had widescreen tv's back in '06 meant easy money for LFL, but it's not like they've got 2K or even 480p transfers of the OOT just sitting around waiting to be dumped on blu-ray. They would actually have to put in some effort this time.

1990ocu, I would accept nothing less than what you listed. I won't even touch the prequels unless the theatrical cuts are included. Yes, that means all three versions of AOTC.

The big questions I would have for Rinzler would be:

Was David Peoples in any way involved with the script?

and (I doubt they'd bring this up)

What's the story behind DP Alan Hume's "falling out" with the production?

Just wanted to bump this thread to add:

I saw the second half of the RotS blu-ray at my uncle's place a couple weeks back and there is no way Lucas is gonna pass up converting the other two prequels into 3D because this movie is pretty three-dimensional already!

What's funny about reading this is how I can remember a discussion on these very forums from several years ago on the subject of the materials at the LoC. I came away from it thinking, "hmmm, I guess it's nice to know they have actual 35mm prints of the movies, but they'd be so faded by now and not really useful for any kind of restoration."

It's getting news like this that makes me happy I live in Northern Virginia.

It's too bad this didn't get an IMAX release (Journey 2 had that staked out). That way, for 18 bucks, the people who saw this could've been guaranteed a great audio/visual experience. Instead, it sounds like a lot of people are paying 16 bucks and getting swindled. Even if everyone is seeing this in real-d and not one of the offbrand 3d techniques like dolby or xpand, there's still a lot of variables like the type of projector being used. With IMAX, a lot of those variables are taken out of the equation.

Then again, it may simply be that moviegoers have different expectations for their 3D presentations. What's crap quality to one person might be amazing to another.

I would actually buy the theatrical cuts of the prequels (in state-of-the-art quality, as ThiefCobbler said), if for no other reason than historical preservation. TPM had the second highest U.S. box office of the 90's if I'm not mistaken. How appropriate that both it and the highest U.S. box office of the 90's are now getting 3D re-releases ....

Wow, I finally saw the edit in AOTC that everyone's been talking about since September. Some guy recorded it off his camera while it was playing on his tv and put it up on youtube, I couldn't find a better version.

Anyway, what a terrible change!

Yoda's sighing in defeat and Dooku's ship is still right there next to him. Slice the damn thing open with your lightsaber! And don't gimme that whole excuse of "Yoda was exhausted from the fight" or something /plinkettvoice.

Seriously, what a stupid alteration to make. Lucas once again in his "I'm gonna paint it Jar-Jar" mode.

Pretty ironic how the first two prequels have now been even further removed from their theatrical cuts and yet we now have ROTS exactly as it was (probably because the wipe was removed for the hdtv/dvd transfer without actually touching the source files and then they just forgot when they went back for the new transfer, but that's just my guess).

The only big problem with the proliferation of digital projection is the phenomenon of theater chains projecting 2D movies through 3D setups.

Let me explain.

The Sony 4K projector that is being used on a lot of screens right now is apparently quite complicated to calibrate for seperate 2D and 3D uses. As a result, theaters will usually just leave it in its 3D configuration when showing 2D movies because, apparently, 12 bucks a ticket still isn't enough to justify the trouble they would need to go through in order to properly set it up for 2D. Seriously, the fucking real-d polarizers are still on there and everything.

Now, I should note that it's not necessarily a huge problem. I saw Warrior projected through a 3D setup and the only drawback was a slight dimming of the picture. On the other hand, I saw J. Edgar the same way and ..... wow was that a shitty presentation. Not only was it dim, there was a weird strobe effect plaguing the picture. I should've asked for my money back.

The Christie projectors are apparently able to switch between 2D and 3D modes at the push of a button. I saw Rise of the Planet of the Apes at the midnight opening back in August and noticed the real-d screen was still in front of the lens. I told one of the employees about it and they fixed it before the movie started.

AMC has said they will be completely digital by the end of this year.

Digital projection for new movies isn't a bad thing, imo. Just about every new movie that gets made today goes through digital intermediate, so it's mastered in digital before it's even filmed back out onto a 35mm print for distribution. You're actually one more step removed from the master when you see it in 35mm instead of digital.

The problem is the mess that this Sony projector has created, as I described above.

Harmy,

If you watch the Hobbit trailer, you can see what it looks like at 24 frames per second. There's no "Saving Private Ryan" choppiness. It looks just as it would had it been shot at 24 fps. Remember, they need this to look good on what will still be many 35mm projectors. That's the whole reason they're shooting at 48 and not 60, they still need to make 24-frame-per-second versions for 35mm, blu-ray, etc.

The Avatar sequels, meanwhile, might take even longer to reach the screen. Cameron and 20th Century Fox had originally said 2014/15, but Cameron's producer Jon Landau recently said "four years from now," which would put it in the 2015/2016 time frame. By that point, there may very well be enough digital projectors deployed in movie theaters that eliminating 35mm prints from the equation might not be a big problem and Cameron can just shoot at 60fps.

Actually I think there's some confusion, guys.

If you watch the trailer in 1080p at the Apple site, you don't see the DNR that's on the BD. This makes me think LFL only DNR'd the blu-ray master but left the actual 2K master alone.

Baronlando said:

Seeing the 2D version sounds kind of depressing. That movie was such an event the first time,  this time you can basically go watch the blu-ray with 6 other guys in dinky Theater 14.

Take away the DNR and bump up the resolution slightly, and yeah, pretty much.

If Lucas were smart, he'd include the theatrical cut of TPM with next year's blu-ray 3D release, do the same for AOTC when that hits. It would be a sign of goodwill toward the fans. Then he could finally include the theatrical cut of ANH in 2015 and charge a hefty price tag for it. Then he could do that with Empire the next year and finally with Jedi the year after that.

Mark my words, people. Lucas is crazy but he ain't dumb. Eventually he'll see the $$$$$ and give us what we want.

The farthest they've ever gone is comic book adaptations of some of the novels.

Darth Editous said:

 

Star Trek VI is a 1080i-to-1080p conversion for crying out loud!

There's really only a semantic difference between the two when you're talking about film transfers - it's not like 1080i has half the resolution of 1080p in this case.

Since they only released 2, 4, 6 and 8 individually and never got around to the other six movies

Whatchoo talkin' bout? I can see 1, 3, 5, 7 all on Amazon.

DE

 

Maybe in your neck of the woods, but here in the States you can only get 2, 4, 6 and 8 individually on blu-ray. The only other options are in a I-VI boxset, a II-IV "trilogy set" and a four-film set of the TNG movies.

The fact that they're releasing even a sample disc of TNG episodes in HD is pretty ridiculous when the actual big-screen films are yet to get decent blu-ray transfers (Wrath of Khan's restoration notwithstanding). Star Trek VI is a 1080i-to-1080p conversion for crying out loud! Since they only released 2, 4, 6 and 8 individually and never got around to the other six movies, I'm still holding out hope that Paramount will do new transfers of all ten movies (well, except Wrath of Khan) and put them out whenever the next Abrams movie hits theaters.

I don't have the set, wouldn't even if I had the money, but from what I've seen of the screenshots I kinda hate AOTC's new color-timing. I've been scratching my head at why they changed it. ROTS looks exactly the same as before, color-wise. It's almost like they don't want those two movies to have the exact same look, so they changed one of them.

I've heard it mentioned that the old transfer of AOTC didn't have the exact same color-timing as the theatrical release either, but I prefer the look of the hdtv broadcast over this new teal-shifted job.

Also, I have to say, stuff from eps II and III sticks out like a sore thumb. At least Episode I was shot in the same format as the OT. Yeesh.

danny_boy said:

 

And it's hands down by far and away the best it has ever looked on home video

 

 

Uhhhh, it's a blu-ray.

It had damn well better be the best it's ever looked on home video.

zombie84 said:

I doubt they saved the digital files because for the 2004/11 SE it looks like they either painted over the existing work or went back to the original pre-comp camera negatives (e.g., this is what it looks like they did for the re-done Jabba).

They probably did save some elements though--a lot of them were re-used in TPM. The one exception to my theory that I can see is that they re-did the "entering Mos Eisley" shot and completely re-comped individual elements--so maybe there was some instances where they had all the digital data for the scene. It's really impossible to say what they have and don't have because it's all just files sitting on a computer that only select ILM employees even know about. But it certainly seems like there is no massive "1997 Special Edition" server that has every scene, element, plate and work record.

And yeah, the 1997 shots are from film scans, not a direct-digital transfer. It's the 1997 film-out that was cut into the negative. This is part of what makes me think a lot of the raw data is gone, or at least the whole scenes. Probably a lot of the data can't be read very easily now anyway, the systems they built and rendered them on aren't used any more and you'd have to probably convert them into a readible format or write a lot of custom software to get the new programs to read and run it.

Thanks for the info.

I just thought it was worth asking. After all, we recently learned that ILM (Lucasfilm itself?) still had the 2K files for TPM, and the SE was only a couple years before that.

bigmonkey2382 said:

In all honesty it SHOULDN'T kill the goose as there will always be a better format to release the OOT on.

Yeah, but who knows when or what that will even be. I kinda doubt there will be another physical format after blu-ray, but who knows? If they could figure out how to get a 4K file onto a disc I'd probably invest in it (eventually, when I could afford it), but I don't know how the industry would pull that one off. It wouldn't happen for well over another decade at the earliest, if at all.

Don't get me wrong, a new 4K format would offer some big advantages: increased resolution, better color space, and maybe even a true 24 fps playback (and not the 23.976 that almost all blu-ray titles have for backward compatibility with older hdtv's).

But let's not forget two big things. 1) the theaters and multiplexes will always stay at least one big step ahead of the home video industry, and 2) a lot of new releases made over the past decade have only gone through DI and had their effects done at 2K resolution, not 4K.

If the day comes when there are 30 million 4K televisions out in the wild, it'll be time to start thinking about a new format. Until then, blu-ray is "good enough" for the most part.

bigmonkey2382 said:

Must have been an older LD, most newer ones are wide screen.

..... It was widescreen. Still, it's almost as far away from ideal for that movie as you can get without watching it on pan n' scan vhs (that's all I meant).

True Story:

The first (and so far only) time I ever actually used an LD player was three years ago. The media center in the basement of my university's library had a viewing room and some of the tv's had LD players hooked up to them. They have a collection of about 250 laserdiscs. I wanted an excuse to both 1) use a laserdisc player and 2) watch Ben-Hur (which I'd never seen before). So I went up to the desk and gave the girl the call number and she gave me the set, a pair of headphones and a remote control. The booth I'd been assigned to was a 20-inch sony crt.

Yes, I realize that's about as far from ideal a format for that movie as you can get without watching it on pan n' scan vhs, but believe it or not it was actually a pretty cool experience.

You know what I find the supreme irony of Star Wars?

There was never some huge petition to get the original theatrical versions of Close Encounters, Apocalypse Now, or The Exorcist released on home video. But when those flicks hit blu-ray the original versions were included almost as if it went without saying.

Or take any modern new release title that gets a director's cut on home video. More often than not, the theatrical cut is at least made available (they usually just throw it in the same package, again, as if it went without saying).

The special edition of Star Wars is so well-known that it's entered pop culture. "Greedo shooting first" is probably the most infamous change ever made to a film. I don't think I've ever met anyone who knew about Star Wars and didn't know it had been revised. I would suspect only kids who are like 5 right now have no clue about the history of the films.

That's what makes the situation so ridiculous and why I'm convinced this is all about Lucas milking Star Wars. As others have said, he knows that giving us a pristine restored OOT would be like killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

It's amazing just how clueless the multiplexes can be these days about projection.

Last summer I saw a nice digital projection of Splice at my nearby amc.

Too bad everything was still set-up for scope.

Stuff at the bottom of the screen was completely blocked. stationary shots of a car pulling up now became just shots of "sky." Tops of peoples heads were getting cut off to an extent that would be ridiculous even for a Super 35 film. Too bad I didn't know what the AR was going in. The problem didn't become apparent into well into the film.

Then there's what happened when I saw Don't be Afraid of the Dark a week after it opened.

Middle of the day on a Friday, so barely anyone attending or running the theater. This time I know the movie is academy going in. I get there during the trailers, and oh man, I immediately know something is wrong. It's the trailer for Drive and the light is spilling onto the top and bottom black curtains which are still set up for scope. I've learned from experience that if something is wrong during the trailers, it's gonna be wrong during the movie. I run out and tell a guy about how they gotta open up the screen in auditorium 7. The guy says "ok," gets out his walkie-talkie and I run back. By the time the movie starts, they still haven't fixed the problem. I run back out to tell the guy again. He gives this frustrated look as he reaches for the walkie-talkie, a look that says "I told them to fix it."

I run back to the theater.

After several minutes, I notice the guy standing by the entrance to the aud. He's looking at the screen, trying to figure out what's wrong. Then, finally, they open up the curtains.

But the cluelessness doesn't stop there.

They fiddle with the lens, switching it to anamorphic for a few seconds, which makes everything look like stretch-o-vision hdtv. Then they switch it back and leave it the hell alone.

Whoever was in that booth had no clue what they were doing.

I always stay till the very end of the movie, and this time I noticed something interesting.

When the logo appeared after the end credits, it was spilling out over the 1.85:1 screen, which told me that it must've been 1.37:1 full-frame academy for that one shot. Of course, this means that the projectionist also didn't have the projector plate set up properly. Luckily that didn't matter. The print itself must've been hard-matted to 1.85:1, otherwise that spill-over would still been going on during the whole movie.