Ginge

Guspaz said:

A theatrical release of Phantom Menace seems like a waste of Harmy's considerable talents. Getting to see Jar Jar in all his theatrical glory is not something I particularly feel a need to do :P

I couldn't agree more, a theatrical Phantom Menace is a complete waste of time. You can't polish a turd... the prequels are garbage and should be forgotten. 

I finally got to view this masterpiece last night and all I can say is that it's simply stunning. From all the screenshots and clips Harmy posted over the many months it's taken him to complete this remaster, I was still unprepared as to just how gorgeous this film can look. In fact, if I had no knowledge of OT.com and someone would have showed me this version and told me that it was taken from an original print, I'd believe it! That's about the highest compliment I could pay. Never again will I suffer through inferior version of Star Wars! My, my...how I've longed to say those words!

If I have a (very) minor complaint, it's that Harmy's own Despecialized Edition credits begins too soon...while the end credits music is still playing. I had a similar problem with the first version and while this isn't as bad (they begin much later this time, it's still a bit distracting if you want to absorb yourself into thinking it's 1977. It kind of goes against the point of preserving every inch of the film exactly as it was in 1977 and I personally would have prefered a few extra seconds of distance between the main film and the DE credits. But all in all, it's a very minor gripe... and I shouldn't harp on it.

Fantastic job all around Harmy, you should be proud! 

Great job on the new clip, big improvement!

TheBoost said:

Every New Years Day I host a "Watch all the Star Wars Movies!" Party. Traditionally I goes:

• Phantom Edit (7:00 am)
• Attack of the Phantom
• ROTS
• SW:R
• ESB SE
• ROTJ GOUT

 

And I always give out the DVDs of the fan edits to people who show up.

This year I switched it up and showed the DeSpecialized OT. It went over great and I actualyl had to burn a second set when two people were arguing over who got to take the DVDs.

 

Wow, aside from the ROTJ gout, that sounds like a dreadful lineup! That would be the worst New Years Day imaginable for me... It's a good thing you switched it up with the DeSpecialized Edition!

I kind of liked the shot as it was in the second workprint... it was just about perfect. The new one looks a bit washed out and does a number on the flesh tones. Hopefully the hue shift took care of the problem. 

I couldn't agree more with Mike; I've always hated that blast doors line as it's needless revisionism. I'm only interested in the original 70mm mix (reconstruction in this case), so thankfully I won't have to deal with it.

One piece from the mono I do like though is Luke saying "Blast it Wedge, where are you?" as opposed to saying Biggs. It just makes more sense and I wish it was in the stereo mix. 

I love the new transition... it looks great and I know that wasn't easy to achieve! 

I'd love to check out the workprint...sign me up.

As someone who has seen the film projected last summer, I can say that I do recall the starfield being bright and vivid... not dull and muted. Great job Harmy!

Hey h_h, it's so wonderful to read about the level of care you're putting into this new update ... I'm sure everyone else is excited as I am about it. I really like the bass in the 97 version, so the fact that you're leaning more towards that is great to hear. I don't know about the bass from the 04 version as I've never brought myself to view those editions, but I trust your judgement. I just have a couple of questions about your release structure.

I know a while ago you said you were contemplating a lossless DTS MA version, is that still the case? I'd personally love to have a lossless version to mux into the film(s)... space is not a concern for me. 

Will you be issuing another 2.0 mix? I thought it was great to have the first time around for those without a proper surround setup.

I'm trying to play catch-up with this thread, but that's great news Harmy! An artist should always have the best tools at his disposal. I'm very pleased to hear You_Too's color corrections will be utilized in your version... I've been very impressed with what he's been able to achieve. Version 2.0 is going to look far superior than we all thought was possible!

Odd, I only get the Death Star explosion shot when I download from that link.

Hey Harmy, that megaupload link is just of the new Death Star shot, not the five shots.

Yup, all those little details seem to be there. If you were tell me that shot was lifted and restored from the technicolor print... I'd believe it. It's above and beyond what I expected was possible with that shot given the materials Harmy has to to work with. This was always one of the more offensive shots in the SE for me. It's such a crucial shot in the film and for it to be re-arranged and hampered with digital nonsense is just criminal. The SE made it look like the explosion of Praxis (the Klingon moon) at the beginning of Star Trek VI (not surprisingly, the same guy who did the explosion effect worked on both films). Now, this shot is restored to it's former glory and looks even better than in V1... thanks Harmy!

I love the new Death Star explosion... it's nearly flawless! Absolutely wonderful... 

I think the new Falcon shot is a big improvement, well done Harmy! 

TServo2049 said:

Ginge, could you see the painted troops clearly in the Senator screening?

You could see them if you looked right at them, and they did look pretty bad, but not on the level we see in V1. You're right about the the matte not being as bright and obvious, it wasn't as bright. It wasn't as terribly distracting as it is now though, especially on a giant screen where your main focus is on the center of the screen.

This is one of the few alterations I actually agreed with, I though the SE shot made the scene more natural. It's a shame a new matte can't be created from that. 

Damn, that closing celebration matte has never looked good, has it? I can see why you were torn... there's not a lot to work with. That original matte looks horrible in the original film print and has always stood out. I have to say that I would probably prefer the way it was in 1.0 since darkening the sides is hugely distracting... I mean everyone knows that scene and how it's supposed to look. It just appears to be noticeably altered and will be distracting when viewing the film. I sympathize, because this must be a tough, touch call.

If it were me, I'd actually go with the SE shot as it's not an offensive inclusion and it looks so much better and more natural in HD. Have you considered freezing the SE shot to create a new matte? That way the guards wouldn't be moving and would emulate the original shot, but wouldn't look as horrific.

Wow, I am really impressed what you were able to achieve with the BR source so far... they almost like "Star Wars" should! I really commend your efforts here, I love your color correction schemes... to me they look very accurate for the most part. There are some scenes that require more attention than others, but you seem to have a handle on how to undo the horrific color scheme that was applied. 

Oh man, I really don't want to see any artificial hairs or dirt in the image of "Star Wars". That is just going way too far in my opinion and would cause me to lose all interest in this otherwise fantastic project. Adding artificial elements such as this is dangerously close to Adywan territory in my opinion, and I'm not fan of his editorial decisions. 

I don't want to go back over the subs shake thing again (I stand by all the statements I made previously), but in a true restoration using film elements, you are trying to bring out the original version intended by the filmmakers. In your case, you want to replicate what it looked it originally, but in its best presentation possible. No professional restoration job would actually add elements such as dirt and hairs though, that's the opposite of preserving the best possible image. You want to go for how the film looked in a theater on opening day, not how it looked three months after it's initial release after the print had been played endlessly. The only times I see hairs and dirt tossed into a film artificially are for films like "Grindhouse" where they are going for a distinctly dated retro look in a campy sort of way. I don't think "Star Wars" should be treated like that.

If you do decide on fake dirt and hair, etc.. I hope you would at least consider a version that doesn't include those elements. As for the grain, I think the fine grain level is perfect as it is. These transfers thankfully preserved a fair amount. 

Incredible. I was not expecting that much of a difference, but it's shocking to hear how dull and lifeless the remix is compared to the original. It's a real shame that the majority of people are subjected to that garbage mix.

I trust my memory from only a year ago quite well versus the memory of others from 30+ years ago regarding the amount of times Luke threw the grappling hook... ;-)

I don't see it as evidence that the level of shake you applied is accurate. There may have been a very slight float effect as the subs were very three dimensional, but not the level of shake you applied. I stand by that since I was there, but you are free to think there should be excessive shake. Anyway, if I can get a shake-less version in the future, I'm a happy man... so there is no real need for further debate. 

Again, I don't see that video being reliable, even with artificial stabilization applied. I trust my own eyes and memory from the actual screening over a poor video capture of it.

Anyway, a shake-less version would be awesome Harmy, thanks! There's no rush of course... 

Harmy's clip does look great, there is no denying that. Han's flesh tones seem to be a bit off from what I remember, but that's again due to the limitations of the source material. You are correct Tim, the subtitles at the screening did have a dimensional look to them, but they weren't shaking. When I see Harmy's clip, it does not exactly reflect what I saw at the screening due to the level of shake he applied. The video isn't reliable since the camera itself shakes and there is a ton a flicker since it's a NTSC video camera capturing a moving film image. While the subtitles appear to be crisper than in Harmy's version, it doesn't "conclusively" show anything either way sadly.

I won't say there was no shake at all on the print for the Greedo scene, but I had a great seat for the screening and as I said, I studied that scene pretty intensely as it played. If there was shake it was extremely subtle and certainly not at the excessive level that Harmy's clip applied. Harmy's shake is obvious and a bit overkill, which unfortunately doesn't represent the actual print. I think some people just have it in there head that there must be shake, and will try to find ways to convince themselves and others, but I'm telling you... it wasn't the case.  

I guess you're gonna leave it this way, and that's fair... I would just like a shakeless version of that scene if it's at all possible Harmy. I would be very appreciative as it would look the way I remember seeing it last year. Unfortunately, I lack the skills to recreate this myself.

Harmy said:

And Ginge, where on earth did you see a pristine print of the original SW? If it was original, that is, because if it was SE, then the fact that the subs didn't shake isn't valid, as the subs were redone for the SE.

And if it was an original 77 print, the shake would most likely have been there, only you wouldn't notice it, unless you were looking for it, since there would be a slight shake to the whole picture and your eyes simply get used to it.

And like I said, the shake is actually imported from stabilized PG footage, so it should be legitimate, since PG is probably a 16mm dupe of a 35mm print, so if the shake on the subs is there after you stabilize the footage, it was on the source print as well.

I saw a print of "Star Wars" (the original theatrical cut) last summer in Baltimore, MD at the Senator Theatre. This was a beautiful single-screen theatre that was closing it's doors and the owners decided to have a free screening of Star Wars as a fitting end to the life of the theatre. I drove from New York as this was obviously a special event. There was two showings, one at 4 and one at 8 (I went to the 8). The print was an original in pristine condition that was owned by a collector who generously allowed the theater to use. It looked magnificent... free of any horrific coloring modifications or digital graffiti. 

You can view photos of the screening here (the photos don't even capture just how blue Luke's saber is on the Falcon, but gives you a good idea):

http://petergaultney.smugmug.com/Movies/historic/Star-Wars-at-The-Senator/13089279_nXePV#948662138_wuqj9

I paid very close attention to the Greedo scene for obvious reasons and my memory of it is still very vivid. Your version is nearly identical (despite some coloring issues obviously related to the transfer), but the subtitles on the screen did not shake; they appeared crisp and rock solid. It wasn't a matter of my eyes getting used to it either... the shake simply wasn't there (I definitely would have noticed).

As I said earlier, the credits did not shake either, they were solid and crisp just like the subtitles. This thinking that any text on the screen must shake is a total myth... not all text in a film of this era shakes. The shake might have been there on the 16mm print for whatever reason (transfer issues maybe), but to claim it was on the source print as well is just guessing and not a very accurate assumption. I saw this with my own eyes last year on a 35mm print of the film... there wasn't any shake present, trust me.

If you want to keep it the way it is, that's your call of course... but if you are trying to capture what it was like to see this film the way it was presented in 1977, the shake should not be present in the subtitles or the credits. If for some reason you feel the need to add shake, it shouldn't be at the excessive level you have them at now. This is just my two cents as someone who has seen a projected print recently. I would at least love to have this scene and the credits without shake in the text so  I can splice them into the completed film myself... as this would be more accurate to what I saw on screen. I hope this came off helpful and not like an attack or rant... that's not what I'm going for. 

I love the look of the new subs Harmy, but I have to agree with Atlantis, the shake is overkill, to the point where it's kind of distracting. I saw a print of Star Wars last summer and in the  projected image, there was no shake on the subtitles or credits. The print was in pristine condition. I think if you were to do a proper transfer of a print, you would not see that amount of shake applied to text. If you plan on using this amount a shake for your final version, would it be possible to include a shake-less version of the scene for download? I'd much prefer to watch that.