haha, yeah, and that was all part of the scene that got changed the most 35mm vs others so it seemed especially relevant here
"I got over the damn prequel poisoning, "
whoa, is this stuff all some inside joke or actually for real?
just asking since I have a reel of AOTC (with the changed wedding scene, although it seems like you all know have the complete set and have it all covered) and some other stuff
haven’t heard before about prints being potentially toxic like that (so long as you don’t eat them)
although developer agents and stuff could be, but those don’t have much to do with prints
…then why not just post tomorrow?
well, didn’t realize it was quite so late and one is better than none
here are the rest:
Here are a few frames I scanned in with a Nikon 2000 some years ago from bits of a film trailer, if you want a look (I also have the full final 35mm theatrical release reel for AOTC, with the different wedding scene. But none of that is scanned.):
actually it’s late, sorry to be a tease hah, put up the rest tomorrow
I saw this in 35mm as well as on two different digital projectors back in '99, including what might have been the first commercial digital projection of any film in the world.
Contrary to all the net rage, theaters were packed and people generally seemed pretty happy and were NOT all laughing, raging, etc. decent bit of clapping at the end at many showings.
And for AOTC, people were racing out of the earlier showings, smiling, giving thumbs up to people still on line, saying it was awesome, audiences erupted into cheers at the end. Again, contrary to all the hate you hear coming form the net crowd.
getting the original crocodiles and waterfall would be cool!
wonder why they ever changed the crocodiles
90210 DVD set had tons of music butchered and replaced and sometimes scenes altered
In ESB when Han says “Then I’ll see you in hell.” that line used to be “Then I’ll see you in HELLLLL!!!” with the “hell” part really screamed and loud, later on they seemed to mute that down a lot.
So again, what was the motivation? Was Lucas jealous Kershner got so much credit for ESB and he wanted to stick his own contribution into the climax?
Nah, whatever it was, I don’t think it was that. If he was so crazed about credits he would have taken a screenplay credit for ESB. But he instead removed his credit and gave it to just Leigh Brackett (as an honor and tribute, although her screenplay was basically not used at all) and and to as a special thanks for coming aboard at quick notice to help him polish it up a bit. Although it seems, for some reason these days, mayeb all the Lucas haters flooding the internet with seething hate, to be mostly forgotten, Lucas actually wrote the bulk of the basic screenplay for ESB and even good chunks of the key, beloved dialogue was from his own original drafts.
This is most least liked of all the changes, one that I really do totally dislike. This one just totally chopped up the music and flow AND REMOVED the single most viciously delivered line reading EVER by Vader! How can you remove his moth seething line ever? For a weak “bring my shuttle” which narrates something that NOBODY was ever confused about to begin with.
Yes, we have the DTS discs. No they do not have the “to be angry…” scene.
I have no knowledge of how the audio was presented/processed in the DLP presentations of that time. They might have used the DTS discs, or possibly some other method.
They just brought in a giant HD with all the video and audio files and the video back then was not lossy compression either, 100% lossless (well, certainly for TPM, maybe it had changed by AOTC, but probably not)
I might have thought the to be angry was there in the DCP, but no good memory to be sure at all, could super easily be totally wrong. I wonder if I have any notes anywhere from back then.
I also got to see the DCP for TPM at two different theaters, each used a different projector type.
One of them was played at one of the original smaller twins that used to pair with one of the mammoth screens that showed Star Wars on opening day in 1977 in 70mm (since split into 8 screens!!! 4 upstairs and 4 down!) that got one of the initial 70mm print runs before the 70mm prints got a bit changed for the later 70mm release. Oh man was that something. Going from having just seen some movies on a tiny mostly mono, maybe weak stereo 35mm mall screens to a giant screen with 70mm and surround sound and that Star Destroy just coming down the screen for ages at the start! Also saw ESB in 70mm there too. Man those were something. (I am among those crazy few who could swear we saw Luke miss his first toss in the Death Star and recall the scene being longer and more suspenseful and the door took longer to prop up in that initial first 70mm showing. If it somehow truly never happened, it is weird how we all came up with that independently. I had that in notes I wrote down as a little kid back in later summer '77, long before I had ever met anyone else, beyond my parents, who had ever seen it in 70mm on opening day. How did any of us come up with that?
One for sure beyond sure thing is the whole “close the blast doors! close the blast doors!” “open the blast doors! open the blast doors!” thing which later got removed and then mangled and not sure any home release has ever had the full length sequence of that as it was originally.)
1080p blown up to imax size, gee that sounds beautiful.
it looked good though!
saw it at the Boston Aquarium IMAX, I think that is 80’?
They didn’t do it like they do today, back then they pan and scanned them to fill the entire screen or at least most of it, so beyond just cutting and unfortunate amount away time wise they also trimmed away a lot of each frame. That said, it was still quite a cool experience! It really did look pretty good.
I also saw both the 35mm theatrical version as well as the 35mm DCP and yeah, the hand thing was the one big thing I recall sticking out the most of all.
I actually have the full final 35mm reel, the one that contains the changed marriage scene.
Pretty cool that you did this!
A few notes though…
In 1997 Disney scanned in the original 1989 final production negative used as the basis to print the theatrical release from and then touched it all up in computers and then put it back to film. So I’m not sure we can really take a 1998 print as giving us the true original 1989 look (where to find a 1989 reel though, I have no clue sadly, I also wonder if some of them would not be a bit faded by now, I forget around what time the typical print strated becoming a bit more color fast).
The colors on this seem reallllly muted. And they have sort of a drab yellow-green tint. Do you know what color space the scanner company provided your scan in? Are you really sure it was sRGB/REC709? Just comparing your scanned samples to the quick flashlight trick picks you first showed, color seems to have gone way muted. And if you swap the profile on those images to say AdobeRGB, they start to begin to look a bit more reasonable (and perhaps they were scanned in an even larger colorspace than AdobeRGB). I sort of have a feeling that you were delivered files that were not sRGB/REC709 but then treated them as if they were?
I think we forget that film could provide pretty rich colors, even in 1989. We are just so used to how faded out old prints become over time (other than for a few ones printed out on certain long lasting stock, which most were not).
FWIW, I have various pieces of what appears to be perhaps a 1990 trailer from the UK (didn’t get released there until very late 1990) for the Little Mermaid (can’t, at least not all of it, be from 1989 US trailer since one part has overlayed text about having won two academy awards, which happened in early 1990), although perhaps it is for the 1997 release, maybe some of it is even from regular release print and not all trailer, it’s a bit confusing, trying to figure out exactly what the various little set of scraps I have is from. What I have has no digital sound stuff encoded on it, just 2-track analog and it’s on some sort of Eastman Kodak stock. Not sure if all of the 1997/1998 re-release trailers and prints had digital audio encoded or whether some might still just have had 2 track analog only.
Anyway, what I have, has absolutely BRILLIANT colors and eye popping saturation. Some of her tail and some of the red on Sebastian in some frames is beyond anything seen even in any home release. I think it’s beyond what sRGB/REC709 can even display and you need wide gamut to see it all. The colors look sort of like a mix of the 2019 blu (probably closest to this overall, well the UHD even more but I haven’t gotten to compare that yet) but still clearly different, this and 2006 get her tail a bit closer to intensity although 2006 seems to make it too green; 2019 seems to often make her shells too dark and saturated though), 2013 blu and 2006 DVD and stuff simply not like any release has that I’ve seen. Flounder also has a more deeply saturated color.
Anyway, FWIW, the bits and scraps of 35mm I have for this look radically more saturated and colorful and without any hint of that drab yellow-green cast shown on the examples for the scan in this thread (look a bit closer to like your initial flashlight shots).
I have a feeling that something is off with the colors shown as examples from the scan here. Maybe wrong color space assumed or something else?
Gonna try to scan a few frames on Nikon 2000 stills scanner.