GigoloJoe

I hate to be a naysayer, but I’ve found these grades to have a somewhat unnatural colour pallete. It’s common in digital grading - the skin tones have a sort of apricot hue and you can’t unsee it. Having said that - it’s much better that you’ve brought the levels up and boosted contrast as the 4K83 was far too flat to begin with. The latest 1.3 minimal DNR is much improved in this respect, and retains more accurate colours.

poita said:

Cool. I posted the image from the print a page back or so.
The actual look isn’t quite as red as in the picture, the Bacta tank is more blue than it looks in that shot, but the background is quite red in reality, it is the same on the Super8 I have which is from the French release of ESB, so originally, the scene was nothing like the Blu-ray.

His Dudeness, between you and TN1, these are the most exciting developments in Star Wars these days… Actually Film in general!

Can you clear up some confusion? There are comparison videos on Youtube - ie your UK scan and German scan vs the current Grindhouse. Which print is your latest and how does it compare to all previous?

I guess I’m hoping there’s enough to put together a technicolor quality version…

Also, when you let your’s out in the wild, will you do a Grindhouse version? For me the holy trilogy has always been getting a set of scans from quality prints with most dirt washed off etc… Then the only digital cleanup being basic colour correction to counteract print fade, and removal of repetitive damage.

From that as a basic reference I think anyone can do their own version to suit taste/remove damage, grain, gate weave etc…

I can attest to having people blown away by the ROTJ Grindhouse - Star Wars newbies really appreciate the authenticity of an old film print showing how great the movies were originally… There’s a certain freshness to having every detail including the sparkling dust shine through…

Molly said:

GigoloJoe said:

I’ve always wondered. Does anyone know why bluray/official releases always seem to have such a flat tone to the image - as if to mimic the monotone digital grading of recent Hollywood movies?

You just answered your own question.

Touche´

MalàStrana said:

darthrush said:
The Force Awakens just has fun lines of dialogue that throw back to things like the Kessel run.

The bad guy being a Skywalker who turned to the dark side aka Anakin 2.0 ?
The Death Star 3.0 ?
The Emperor 2.0 ?
The Empire 2.0 ?
The Rebellion 2.0 ?
R2.0-D2.0 ?
etc.

At the risk of becoming a TFApologist I don’t feel these are as obviously lazy rehashes as you make out. The whole Star Wars galaxy revolves around the republic/empire/new republic and the central characters within those structures are the Jedi, rebellion, the Emperor and his accomplices/protagonists - namely the Skywalker family.

As these are episodes within one long story arc, it stands to reason you’d have recurring or related characters. There’s nothing to stop them making more standalone movies to explore other stories and characters.

I can imagine TFA’s era coming after a long period of retreat for the force itself. People still sense it but few can use it as fully as the Jedi could. The republic has outlawed it’s teaching and settled into a bureaucratic neutrality. The Empire 2.0 springs up as a reaction to this malaise. As in the real world, history shows old battles are re-fought throughout the generations, following periods of complacency.

The First Order shouldn’t be in the Galaxy dominating business if it ignored existing technology to blow up whole planets. Of course they’re gonna build another super weapon. It is a bit dumb that they still haven’t figured out how to protect it fully, but then it is just a plot device which the main story revolves around.

So Death Star 3.0 gets a pass from me due to how they implemented it in the film. Only just.

I do have problems with a couple of big things. Snoke is basically a bit rubbish. Mainly because of the performance/appearance. They really could have done without the CGI. It would have been way more effective and creepy as an animatronic or enhanced live actor. Same goes for Maz (Cantina?).

It did seem a little lazy to have another evil lord with a twisted face appearing by hologram. Snoke had zero motivation beyond just being wicked. Obviously this might be rectified in the next episode. Ren on the other hand is a rare thing - a villain that’s easy to hate, a great antagonist and a character with a lot of potential development. I literally have no idea where Ren’s story arc will end up.

Anyway TFA, with it’s flaws, is definitely a pretty good episode of Star Wars. Fun, likable characters told with humour. A well put together old-school space adventure told within a few epic landscapes. After years of comic-book crap, Transformers (and the prequels) this was a relief… Hope it lasts

TV’s Frink said:

SwissArmyTin said:

imperialscum said:

To continue the rehash tradition and expand it on trilogy level? If EP8 reveals that Rey is related to someone we already know, this will be downright ridiculous.

So if she’s related to a pre-established character, that immediately makes it a total rehash?
whut

I hate how there are lightsabers in TFA. Total rehash.

I think characters are part of a story that unfolds in a specific way.

Lightsabers are furniture of the Star Wars universe to be used by the characters as required by the story. Such as hyperspace, droids, the force etc.

TFA mercifully restricts their use to plot devices portraying them as quasi-mythical. Luke’s is kept hidden until discovered by Rey. Ren’s is custom made and a symbol of his character’s struggle to emulate his grandad.

If Rey is related to any previous character that really would be a major rehash, specific to the plot.

Better if she is random. She could be from a family that believed in and taught about the force. Such teaching may have become forbidden after Luke’s failure to train more Jedi without awakening the dark side in others. Snoke and Ren’s training would have the opposite effect in stirring the force to “awaken” in Rey - as well as guiding BB8 into her hands. Perhaps she can be the one that balances the light and the dark side within herself and so achieving what Luke couldn’t.

She definitely shows a few tinges of the dark side in the movie.

Much Empire Emperor talk going on which is good. Probably my biggest problem with any of the changes over the years. Although - it appears some people don’t get why we need the original cuts at all…

Density said:

Wazzles said:
I hate the 04/11 emperor

I really don’t understand this. The old Emperor was just awful, it was the worst part of ESB and it stuck out like a sore thumb when viewed with the rest of the series. Literally the only possible reason I can imagine for preferring the chimpanzee-eyed old woman over Ian Fucking McDiarmid is nostalgia. That’s it. I mean seriously, ask yourself: If it was the other way around, would you still prefer the chimp Emperor? Hell no, you’d think it was among the most outrageous of all SE changes. Let’s not kid ourselves. If that was the only change George made, that would have been just fine with me.

The original is clearly superior in this scene. His appearance is more ghostly and sinister. The dialogue and delivery shows how the Emperor has Vader on strings, as if he’s controlling him through his speech. It’s completely effective and very out of the blue considering how commanding Vader was up to that point.

It’s such an important scene because it’s the first moment that takes you out of the narrative drive of the movie, explaining Vader’s motivation and highlighting what’s at stake in just a few lines.

Not to take away from Ian McDiarmid’s work in Jedi, deliciously wicked as it was, I sometimes find his emperor a little too obviously evil in the overall context of where the story was coming from. It would have been rather interesting to see the final showdown as more a battle of wits, illusion and manipulation with a slightly charming, non-cackling Emperor. Ironically, he gets closer to this in the prequels before he gets electrifried (in an otherwise painfully dull trilogy).

Nobody ever thought it was a problem that the two appearances didn’t match up before they changed it - and so it went for every other change. Completely unnecessary and often altered the meaning of a scene - as if Lucas never really understood what any of the subtext was i.e. Luke screaming after he chooses his own sacrifice.

All that being said, aside from Luke’s scream, I can’t think of anything the DVDs or Blurays put right, so the 97s win by default. Too many other unforgivable additions to the editions!

I’ve always wondered. Does anyone know why bluray/official releases always seem to have such a flat tone to the image - as if to mimic the monotone digital grading of recent Hollywood movies?

Never understood why, with many great films that have have such iconic imagery, someone goes to the trouble and cost of remastering the negative only to suck the life out of it. I’ve got loads of DVD and HDTV broadcast movies struck from older prints that beat the Bluray most of the time.

And for the life of me I really would like to know why they change the colour palette so noticably. Raiders, Star Wars trilogy, Lord of the Rings etc…

This looks great! Filmic colours, contrast, pops & grain is how Indiana Jones is supposed to be so I may have it for breakfast sometime…

Can’t wait to grab a copy.

I do wish every classic movie was released this way. Commercial colourists don’t seem to have a clue.