JediFlyer06

User Group: Members
Join date: 24-May-2006
Last activity: 8-Jun-2007
Posts: 89

Post History

Post: #227477
Topic: Alternate Title For Episode III
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227477/action/topic#227477
Time: 19-Jul-2006 10:38 PM

Star Wars Episode III: The Establishing Shot Strikes Back!

I swear that half of that damn movie is made up of establishing shots. Almost every cut is a 30 second long establishing shot. How many different angles can they show the Jedi Temple from? And no matter which angle they use, it looks the same. Establishing shots AND shots of landing or arriving space ships! Jesus christ! How many landing or fly-by shots were there?!

Post: #227228
Topic: SW: R.I.P. - 9/12/06
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227228/action/topic#227228
Time: 19-Jul-2006 1:06 AM

Originally posted by: JediRandy
If it's dead why sit around talking about it all day? Or do you belong to a "New Coke and Hammer Pants" message board? If that's the case then carry on.

If we didn't, then what would you do all day? A wise man once said, "Who is the more foolish? The Fool, or the fool who follows him?"

Post: #227218
Topic: 20 years ago, would anyone believe...
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227218/action/topic#227218
Time: 19-Jul-2006 12:31 AM

That the endlessly anticipated prequel trilogy would serve as about as poorly a thought out, rickety, carelessly put together and as unsatisfying a bridge to the original trilogy as one could possibly imagine.

That Anakin Skywalker would actually suck as a character, rivaled in his cringeworthiness only by Jar Jar Binks.

That Boba Fett would be rendered completely uncool and be utterly deflated of all of his mystique and mystery.

That Darth Vader, king of all villains, would or even could be ruined by Lucas, let alone reduced to a whining, adolescent puss whose turn to the dark side is a grandious way of crossing his arms and stomping his feet at not getting his own way.

That Yoda would, much like Vader and Fett, suffer the horrible fate of de-mystification and be reduced a cheap, comic book gimic.

That the revered lightsaber handed down to Luke in ANH was actually the weapon of a Sith, used to slaughter kids, and not the heroic icon that we foolishly spent 28 years thinking that it was.

Post: #226421
Topic: Ralph McQuarrie Website
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/226421/action/topic#226421
Time: 15-Jul-2006 12:14 AM

You know, to be honest, and this is not at all rooted in my modern disdain for what Lucas has become...but as a child that grew up as a part of the Star Wars generation and was beyond infatuated with the films, my interest was always in HOW it was all done. George Lucas was, to me, this nerdy guy with the big glasses. Whenever I got to see those making of specials on tv, or read about how something was done, THAT was what I was obsessed with. The guys who brought it all to life were my Mickey Mantle and Joe DiMaggio, you know? As a kid I did sort of worship these guys...Ben Burt, Dennis Muren, Phil Tippet, Ken Ralston, Ralph McQuarrie, Michael Pangrazio, etc. It was like, "Those guys are cool! I want to do what they do!".

Lucas was kind of like a general who commanded an army. His army did the fighting. He just told them where to fight.

Post: #226039
Topic: Lucas is a businessman - Don't believe what he says
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/226039/action/topic#226039
Time: 13-Jul-2006 1:50 AM

Unfortunately, there's no reason for him to give true fans what they want when the mindless masses lap up every bit of shit that LFL releases as though it were the food of the gods. Why give them filet mignon when they're happy with McDonalds? Stop buying the SAME movies over and over again. Exercise some self-control. When the cash stops rolling in, which we know it never will, but if it did, watch how quickly those "reviled and flawed" originals would find their way onto a high quality dvd.

Post: #225817
Topic: Fox France confirms the French OOT release >NOT< to be anamorphic
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/225817/action/topic#225817
Time: 11-Jul-2006 11:52 PM

As time goes by, I care less and less about the 5.1 surround mix. More often than not, the surround mixes are used improperly and in more gimmicky ways than they probably should be. And with the OT discs, aural inconsistencies abound. The surround mixes on the SW DVDs aren't that great. In a few instances they are effective, but are mostly used to just hit you over the head. Surround sound should be used to create an atmosphere, to make the walls of the theater room disappear. To my ear, very few films use surround sound to proper artistic or dramatic effect. It's all just, "whoosh", "boom", "bigger boom", "vroom-vroom". It gets boring real fast, and this is coming from someone with a pretty fine HT set-up.

I care very little about the inclusion of surround mixes. Sonically, they don't mesh with the film and stand out in most cases as balatantly as the CG additions. Unless they make them acoustically match the quality of the original tracks, it takes me out of the experience. Spare us the amateurish surround mixes and focus entirely on getting the picture quality right...consistent color that isn't oversaturated would be nice, and fix the damn lightsabers! Give them back their cores for christ sake! Give a great picture with a 2.0 mix and I'll have all I need from the OT.

Post: #225566
Topic: SW: R.I.P. - 9/12/06
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/225566/action/topic#225566
Time: 11-Jul-2006 12:37 AM

I would agree that Star Wars is dead in the same way that Rock and Roll is dead. Music stopped being about the music a long time ago, and it has only worsened through the years, like a malignancy spreading unchecked. "Music", if you can even call it that today, is all about style not only over substance, but in place of it. All a record company needs to produce an "artist" is a pretty face and the computer technology that can make it seem as though the person is a real singer. So, it all boils down to good looks (real or surgical) and a computer generated illlusion of talent. Sounds kind of familiar...no?

Star Wars is the same way. Star Wars used to have a heart and soul to it, an authenticity. It wasn't designed to appeal to people all around the world. It just did, because it was genuine and heartfelt. Dozens of movies since Star Wars have capitalized, or tried to capitalize on whatever formula it was that they thought Star Wars was made with. Just like record companies when one has a hit, all the others copy it hoping to duplicate the success. Studios began copying and distilling Star Wars' style, but precious little if any of its substance. With the PT, Lucas has become the biggest offender in this respect. He lost interest in making films that say something and connect to people, and morphed into a businessman more interested in making a marketable, lowest common denominator appeal, kind of product. He's the living embodiment of the type of film maker and studio head that he so detested in 1976.

Star Wars died a slow death. It began with ROTJ, where Lucas began to apply his stranglehold. Through the years it was decaying behind the scenes. How bad things were was unkown until the prequels began hitting the sceen.

Post: #224568
Topic: Star Wars in High Definition: OT clips from "Science of Star Wars" in HD
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/224568/action/topic#224568
Time: 6-Jul-2006 12:01 AM

As someone who works in the "upper-mid level" audio/ video industry, I have to agree COMPLETELY with those who say that HD-DVD will emerge victorious in the format war due simply to the fact that the technology's name contains the two sets of initials burned into the collective consciousness of the CE public....HD and DVD.

People have inquired to me about HD-DVD for the past few years. Just this afternoon I was talking with a client who was inquiring about HD-DVD VS dvd. As I went into a bit of a lesson on DVD and HD-DVD, things became clearer for him. When I mentioned Bluray, his response was, "what's that?" He had no clue. And to be honest, LOTS of people don't.

All the techno-babble about storage capacity, yada, yada, yada doesn't mean a damn thing to them, and it shouldn't. All they, or anyone, should really care about is, "does it look good?", and "does it sound good?" That's it. And, to be honest with you, you'd be amazed at how many people think standard DVD discs are high definition resolution. Even today, an astounding number of people believe that and are amazed to learn that even higher definition formats are emerging. A common response I get from folks is, "how much clearer does it need to be?" Granted we calibrate and wire our display rooms as perfectly as we can, but it isn't anything folks can't achieve at home. For many, many people out there, DVD as it is is good enough for them. Aside from techno-geeks, which I don't really consider myself to be, all the back and forth technical minutae is all boring and meaningless to them. As I said, they care about two things, good picture and good sound. They don't want to know a damn thing about thet tech aspects of any of it.

I also wouldn't bet on optical discs going away any time soon. Consumers have invested a huge amount of money in dvd video libraries, and none of them is interested in replacing all of those titles all over again. I wager that any "revolutionary" video format would face a FORMIDABLE task in just survining, let alone dominating the market or replacing dvd. And don't throw the "dvd beat vhs" argument at me either. When VHS was king, we were a nation of renters and recorders. VERY few had voluminous video libraries. Today...just look at dvd sales figures. Hell, studios plan on dvd sales as a part of their profit model. I have over 400. At last count, my boss had over 650, and most on my staff have upwards of 50 titles or more on their shelves.

And, interestingly, when clients and "lookers" inquire about high definition video discs, they almost overwhelmingly, 99 times out of 100, refer the the technology as "HD-DVD". That's what the consumer knows, and my bet is, that's where they'll throw their support in the long run.

Post: #223450
Topic: Remember when everyone hated Return of the Jedi?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/223450/action/topic#223450
Time: 30-Jun-2006 12:20 PM

Ewoks were not a horrendous BACKGROUND character. But, even at the age of eleven, I never believed that a band of teddy bears with sticks and stones would defeat a legion of the Emperor's best troops in a single afternoon..."not no way, not no how." That was just silly.

Post: #223368
Topic: Remember when everyone hated Return of the Jedi?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/223368/action/topic#223368
Time: 30-Jun-2006 1:37 AM

Originally posted by: THX
A lot of people nowadays cite the loss of the 3 Ks as SW's downfall: Kershner & Kurtz for Jedi, Kasdan for the prequels. Kersh & Kurtz may well have made Jedi better, but there was talk at the time ('83) that Kasdan may have been part of the problem. After all, Jedi's script (Kasdan) was weaker than Empire's (Brackett & Kasdan), so, logically, Brackett was a genius and Kasdan a hack (at the time, Lucas was seen as infallible). Of course, history has shown that Lucas was probably the main culprit.

I would never fault Kasdan for any of Jedi's failings. When you look at the man's body of work in terms of screenplays, the evidence just doesn't lead to that conclusion being a logical one. Jedi's weakest points were Lucas' largest contributions...the Ewoks and everything on Endor is all him. The Endor sequence is actually a tiny window into what the prequels would be. Kasdan actually wanted to take the story to a darker place. In fact, he wanted to kill Han Solo off entirely, as did Harrison Ford. The reason the character endured was because of Lucas' demands that the character remain. I'm sure we can also attribute all the other changes to the story to Lucas as well.

The story for Jedi, as Gary Kurtz states, was MUCH different from it ultimately wound up being. I'm sure Kasdan never had Ewok's in mind, and we now know they were not part of the original plan, nor was a second death star. All that revision came from Lucas in the period after Raiders. Jedi was where Lucas began to establish his stranglehold on the process. At that point, he had two Star Wars films and Raiders to his credit. He had accumulated more managerial clout, so to speak, and could more readily assert his demands. This was where collaboration in the entire process began to evaporate for good. This is where Star Wars begins to suck. I would argue that the only thing that saved Jedi was Kasdan's influence, however diminished it was at that time.

Post: #222880
Topic: Sets
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/222880/action/topic#222880
Time: 29-Jun-2006 1:02 AM

Some fans might shoot me for saying this, but during the making of the OT, techincally speaking, Lucas was probably the one who contributed least to the final product of the trilogy as a whole. What I mean is, he of course wrote and directed the first one. Yet, there were other script collaborators who fleshed out not only characters and story to make them more interesting, but they also helped Lucas to bring the story itself into a tighter, more coherent focus. And, you want to talk dialogue? That isn't Lucas' dialogue throughout most of the trilogy. The oft quoted and most memorable lines were contributed by Kasdan, by the directors, etc.. We all know Lucas' knack for bad dialogue. If you have a least favorite line in the OT, chances are it was written by Lucas. The general frame of the story is all Lucas. But the characters that we all know and love, the personalities, the banter, the chemistry, the subtextual layers that keep the OT as much fun to watch for the 200th time as it was the first time...most of that came from creative collaborators. If it all came from the man himself, then the PT would have measured up and been worthy of the name of Star Wars.

I would LOVE to have seen the PT made 20 years ago. For all he bitches about the limits of technology keeping him from telling his story, he doesn't realize that nobody really cares about what's going on in the background when you aren't even connected to what's happening in the foreground. Apparently, what technology has afforded him is the ability to create absurd, disposable and forgettable background characters, to allow for the inclusion of DOZENS of sweeping establishing shots, and to suck the humanity out of the main characters in deference to emotionally devoid and pixelated non-reality.

McCallum has a quote in one of the OT docs that so succinctly encapsultaes how little both he and George get it. The quote is, "The essence of the storytelling had to be sacrificed for the limits of technology." How can technology really affect the "essence" of the story? The essence of the story is in the characters, in their journey, in the story that binds them. As the OT showed, and as the dramatic tradition has shown for millenia...the story is in the characters, period. Technology should serve only to aid in the telling of the tale, not become the focus of it.

And as far as GL's "vision"goes, the army of artists from McQuarrie on down gave him his vision. They came up with the concepts and the designs. He just said, "I like this one." I'm sure he offered some input ala "faster more intense", but the physical world of Star Wars was created by, and born from the minds of others. The IDEA was born in Lucas' mind. It was a VERY broad, very expansive idea. That idea was given form and life by everyone else around him. The man deserves his credit. But, to be fair to the hundreds of people who brought it to life, he doesn't deserve as much credit as he gets. Muren, Dykstra, Tippet, Pangrazio, McQuarrie, Kershner, Kasdan, Brackett, Kurtz, and ALL the others are the real magicians who made it all happen. TOGETHER with Lucas, it was their heart, soul, and passion for the story they were telling that made the OT what it has become. It's the humanity that went not only into the characters, but into the process of making the story come to life, that has allowed the trilogy to endure the test of time, as it will for many years to come.

Post: #222164
Topic: OK, the DVDs are coming...so how bad are they going to look?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/222164/action/topic#222164
Time: 27-Jun-2006 1:29 AM

Originally posted by: Windexed

Originally posted by: Guy Caballero
Here's a dumb question: Just got a plasma TV. Will having a dvd player with HDMI/"upconverting" make any difefrence in how these discs will look?

I have a dvd plaer that "upconverts" to a 50" DLP. While it may vary depending on the quality of the dvd player, from my own experience I think "upconversion" is a double-edged sword. It makes good transfers look better, but unfortunately makes bad ones look even worse.

Exactly. Upconverting is really only going to magnify what's already on the disc. If the disc looked great to begin with, it'll look great upconverted. If it looked awful, well, it'll still look awful when upconverted. I wouldn't wager this will look to hot upconverted if they haven't done any restoration.

On a regular 4x3 tube it should look fine. But, I think the widescreen HD crowd is screwed. After all, they're only "bonus material" :rolleyes

The biggest advantage of the HDMI connection is the fact that the siganl is kept purely in the digital domain, without the possible degeneration attendant to the digital-to-analog and back again conversion process when using analog cables.

Post: #222127
Topic: John Williams' Music
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/222127/action/topic#222127
Time: 27-Jun-2006 12:31 AM

I've felt EXACTLY the same thing. With the exception of one or two pieces, the music is about as memorable as the movies themselves. That is to say...not very. I think Williams wasn't as engaged by, or moved emotionally, by the PT as he was by the OT. So much of the music seems cliche, and very un-Williams like. There's no heart and soul to it, just like the PT.

Post: #222124
Topic: George ruined the drama in his own stories.
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/222124/action/topic#222124
Time: 27-Jun-2006 12:28 AM

I don't think Lucas even remembers what Star Wars was supposed to be. He's given so many different answers to the same questions...he's almost like a politician.

If Star Wars was originally to be three trilogies, which no matter how many times he denies it is the truth, then the series should have ended with what we know as the OT. THOSE should have been episodes 7, 8, and 9. The first trilogy could have established the Republic in its waning years, the grandeur and history of the Jedi and their relationship to and conflict with the Sith. Obi-wan could have been the focal character for this particular set of movies. The final film of the first trilogy could have dealt with the introduction of Anakin and the beginnings of his realtionship with Obi-wan.

The second trilogy would have dealt with Anakin's maturation and quest for greater power as a Jedi that ultimately leads him away from the order. The seduction could have been stretched over the three movies, as well as the rift between Anakin and Kenobi. Sort of set up the first cracks in the foundation at the end of the first film, and then develop them into the full fledged split by the end of the second film, which could see Anakin's wife fleeing into hiding with Obi-wan at her side. The third film would focus on the culmination of Anakin's turn, the beginning of the annihilation of the Jedi order, and Obi-wan's hunting of Anakin that leads to the big duel. Each film in this trilogy would have to be at least two and a half to three hours to do it right.

If there were to be three trilogies, I think something along these lines would have worked best.

Post: #221403
Topic: What Special Edition changes (if any) did people like?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/221403/action/topic#221403
Time: 24-Jun-2006 1:37 AM

The ONLY additions that I don't mind are the ones that were originally filmed during the making of the original series, and since there are only two additions that fall under that category... However, the Jabba scene was terribly done with both CG attempts. But, it is an original sequence, and it was nice to see it resurrected.

Post: #221392
Topic: George ruined the drama in his own stories.
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/221392/action/topic#221392
Time: 24-Jun-2006 1:02 AM

Originally posted by: Skyranger
Another problem I have with the PT, specifically ROTS, is that Vader's talent with the force is used to fight "younglings" (I still hate that term), and the seperatist leaders. The clone army (5 milllion Cody's) are used to kill the Jedi Knights in short order. What happened to Vader helping the Emperor hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights? Vader didn't destroy one full fledged Jedi Knight that I saw (not counting Count Dooku, the used to be Jedi). "You underestimate my power." "My power has more than doubled."

Also, I feel no betrayal when brat boy Anakin turns to the dark side. All of his whiny, childish behavior makes me wonder why any Jedi trusted him.

Another point with regard to the killing of the Jedi kids...which was just friggin' stupid, not shocking, just stupid because Anakin's turn could have and should have manifest itself in ways far more numerous, interesting, and exciting...BUT...since the killing of the Jedi brats is all we have to work with, then so be it. In that case, the revered weapon that Obi-wan passes onto Luke in ANH is not the weapon of a hero, but the weapon of a fallen knight, stained with the blood of innocents. Another classic moment in the OT that is screwed to hell and back again by the PT failures.

Post: #221391
Topic: Yoda slices first.
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/221391/action/topic#221391
Time: 24-Jun-2006 12:55 AM

Well, it was always intended to be that way. But, with time and money constraints, there was just no way to make the clones shoot first.

Post: #221390
Topic: Watched ROTS on HBO, UGGGH!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/221390/action/topic#221390
Time: 24-Jun-2006 12:54 AM

You can't compare the characters of R2 and 3PO to toasters. Bad Analogy. For one, toasters don't have names. If yours does, that might be a cry for help.

Toasters also don't have personalities. It might be more appropriate to equate the droids to beloved family pets that one most certainly never forgets. If anything the series has shown the droids R2 and 3PO to be viewed as indispensible and irreplaceable companions to the main characters whom they serve. They most certainly are not viewed as appliances.

Post: #220751
Topic: Watched ROTS on HBO, UGGGH!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/220751/action/topic#220751
Time: 22-Jun-2006 1:43 AM

Great post, and never really thought of it that way, cause I never think of 1-6 order, always thinking 4-6, 1-3. But I will even go a step further, and not even have Luke & Leia being named in ROTS either. And not even showing them going to their foster parents either so the only thing you see is Padme giving birth, having two kids and dying.

Thus the reveal in ESB is preserved about Vader being Lukes father, and the reveal about Luke/Leia being siblings in ROTJ is preserved.

Oh, I agree with you. Luke and Leia should not have been seen or named. In a world of good storytelling, Anakin's wife would have fled Anakin, probably with Obi-wan as her guardian, to protect her unborn child from what her husband has become (because the turn to the dark side wouldn't happen in five minutes), and the birth of the twins would happen off-screen, or better yet, between movies. The children and their fates would be unknown to the viewer until ANH. THEN, after her children have been safely hidden, she would try to confront (if at all) Anakin to win him over to the dark side, yada, yada, yada. So many wasted opportunities to weave a really deep and continuous story as opposed to a movie version of star wars theme ride.

Post: #220716
Topic: Watched ROTS on HBO, UGGGH!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/220716/action/topic#220716
Time: 21-Jun-2006 11:50 PM

Vader NEVER should have been shown, or even referred to by name in ROTS. He only ever should have been seen physically as Anakin Skywalker, and referred to as Anakin Skywalker. Vader should be seen for the first time in ANH, and not fully revealed as Anakin until ROTJ. That would maintain the mystery, the drama, and the surprises of the OT when the movies are watched chronologically. The last we should see of Anakin as an audience is when Kenobi supposedly kills him. As an audience, you think he's dead. Then, in the OT you're shocked to learn that he survived and has become Darth Vader. That's good storytelling, something Lucas has made every effort to avoid.

Post: #220576
Topic: Peter Jackson the new Luca$???
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/220576/action/topic#220576
Time: 21-Jun-2006 1:34 PM

Oh, come on. That's not totally fair. At least Jackson has given the fans something SUBSTANTIAL with each release of the discs, and bonus materials that leave noone wanting. Nobody has released more verisions of the same movie than Lucas has, and nobody has done less to make those releases less special than LFL. has.

I agree that repeat releases gets tiresome. But, at least in Jackson's case, he really does deliver the goods to the fans and offer something with each release that makes it of value in some way. Jackson is also the ONLY director that I've seen offer discounts on new versions of the films if you already owned the previous releases. He did that with the extended editions. Let LFL. try that one.

Post: #220461
Topic: Sets
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/220461/action/topic#220461
Time: 21-Jun-2006 1:19 AM

If you look at who made the OT...the producers, the writers, the designers, the effects pioneers...they're the ones who really made Star Wars what it is. Lucas planted that seed, but it took others to nurture it. Lucas was one part of the machine back then. Today, he is the machine, and he insists his way is the right way, even when it is obviously the wrong way. What made the OT great was creative collaboration. Lucas didn't write those scripts or develop those characters all by his lonesome. And we know damn well that he didn't direct them all by his lonesome.

With the PT, Lucas was all things. He was the dictator, so to speak, surrounded by arrogant yes-men, and we see what that resulted in. Lucas has probably only one real strength, and that is in ideas. He's a good idea man, but he DESPERATELY needs others to bring those ideas to life.

Post: #220443
Topic: Sets
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/220443/action/topic#220443
Time: 21-Jun-2006 12:27 AM

Upon further inspection, the films just don't look real at all. It honestly looks like one big animated film with real actors dubbed in. Now the one thing about real sets, is you are constrained on what you can do, and that is what is so appealing to CG, is that you can do almost anything.

Yours is a point Lucas always makes. But, I would argue that this is precisely why cg should not be used, or used only sparingly. Not only does cg allow you to do things that you can't do with sets...it allows you to do things that you just shouldn't do...like turning Yoda into a teenage mutant ninja turtle. Those things that shouldn't be done are a big part of what so weakened the PT. The entire focus of the PT was the technology used to make them...just listen to the commentary. That's all they talk about. Note to LFL...we don't need Rob Coleman, or anyone else, to tell us when a shot is cg. It's pretty glaringly obvious! If they had spent 10% of that energy on the story and the script, the PT would have been amazing instead of amazingly bad.

George should read a philosophical page from his own book..."just because you can do something doesn't mean you should."

Thank merciful god that Lucas didn't have the technology available back in the 70s to do what he did with the PT. If he had, Star Wars would suck. The more time goes on, the more apparent it becomes that Star Wars succeeded in spite of George Lucas, not because of him.

Post: #219698
Topic: Sets
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/219698/action/topic#219698
Time: 18-Jun-2006 12:05 PM

Real sets with enhancsments, all the way. With all this cg crap, they have gotten good at "seamlessly" comping the actors in, for the most part. What they sorely fail at now, and is just as bad if not worse than garbage mattes, is the difference in sharpness, contrast, and lighting between the actors that were comped in, and the environment that they're supposed to inhabit. That's awfully done. It always looks like they're standing in front of a movie screen.

The worst example of bad compositing in ROTS is with C-3PO on the veranda of Padme's apartment when Anakin leaves for Mustafar. Look at the difference in color, calrity, and sharpness between 3PO and Padme. It's insanely bad, especially the shot from behind 3PO looking at Padme when she says "No thank you, 3PO".

Post: #219571
Topic: I actaully PREFER seeing the black bars, even on my widescreen TV.
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/219571/action/topic#219571
Time: 17-Jun-2006 10:37 PM

It isn't so much a question of bars or no bars. It's more a question of quality. Personally, I also prefer the black bars because it allows you to see everything that was originally captured on film. If a movie was shot in 2.38 : 1 or in 2.78 :1, then that's how I want to see it. Having it fill a 16 x 9 screen sacrifices video information, and I'd rather not do that. If a film is shot in 16 x 9, then cool. Otherwise, give me the bars.

But without an anamorphic transfer, trying to watch it on a widescreen monitor is going to distort the picture terribly. It'll be like watching it through a carnival mirror. That's the issue.