logo Sign In

Obi-Wan Spicoli

User Group
Members
Join date
27-Nov-2003
Last activity
23-Jan-2006
Posts
185

Post History

Post
#164844
Topic
Info: More ANH soundmix discussion (remasters & French dub)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/164844/action/topic#164844
Time
Originally posted by: Moth3r
Anyone like to comment on the following assertions:
- The 1985 digitally remastered mix was based on the Dolby Stereo mix. (Tractor beam line from the mono mix added, what other changes were made?) I don't believe that any other changes were made. At least I haven't found any. Other than the addition of C-3PO's tractor beam line and some additional stereo effects, it's the same mix.
Originally posted by: Moth3r
- The 1993 mix was supposedly a combination of the best elements of the original 3 mixes, but many think it was mostly based on a downmix of the 6-track version.
The production notes on the Definitive Collection state that the 1993 THX sound mix is a new mix combining the best elements of the original three. I can't see any reason why they would just make that up, so I'm inclined to think it's the truth and that this mix is not the original 6-track mix as theorized. But how much of the 6-track mix was actually used is anyone's guess. However, if the THX mix was supposed to combine the "best elements" I have to wonder why it does not include "Close the blast doors," or more importantly, C-3PO's tractor beam line, especially since Burtt specifically added it to the previous home video mix.

Originally posted by: russs15

The fly in the ointment is the 1987/88/89 UK VHS Fullscreen tapes that you would expect to have the 1985 digitally remastered mix with the tractor beam line from the mono mix added. That line is missing so I am unsure what the mix on these releases is.
I am only familiar with US releases, but it sounds to me like they just continued to release the original transfer instead of the updated one. Are these releases the same as the ones that preceded them?
Post
#163420
Topic
Info Wanted: has anyone tried a Star Wars Super 8mm to DVD preservation project?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/163420/action/topic#163420
Time
Originally posted by: russs15
Some of the supposed differences between the 70mm and the 35mm (which is more or less the LaserDisc/VHS release) are listed here.

Does the 8mm resemble either of these versions??
Huh. That list was compiled by myself and Neil S. Bulk and was taken word for word from this thread. I wonder how it got to wikipedia.

Originally posted by: Jambe Davdar
Ok folks, there are two reels of 'Selected Scenes'. Basically its just a condensed version of ESB. I purchased a Super 8mm sound projector to watch them on.

Here are some of the differences, off the top of my head:

- Luke - "I don't pick up any life readings" - Different take
- Han - "I'm going back" - Different take
- More rebels of 'retreat' when Walker attack
- Leia "They're getting closer [star destroyers] - Different take - she stutters it twice
- Cloud Car pilots - Different line - will confirm with actual line asap.
- Leia "I know where Luke is" is replaced by "we must go back" or something similar
- C3P0 - new line just before "I thought that hairy beast would be the end of me" - It's something like "I'm glad we are back together"
- The frigate at the end looks decidedly different - i will have to check this.

So there is certainly another sound mix out there!

This is intriguing. I don't think I've ever watched one of those 8mm digest reels. Are you absolutely certain about those differences? Did you actually compare it with a DVD or VHS tape, or are you just going by memory? I would be very interested in an audio capture if you can get one.
Post
#147544
Topic
Classic Edition: The Empire Strikes Back by Ocpmovie (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/147544/action/topic#147544
Time
Originally posted by: ocpmovie
Although this is clearly an alternate, inferior version of the poster actually. It took me a while to figure out whether it really was a different version or if I was just imagining things, but the painting isn't quite as good in some parts in this version, suggesting that this is an early version before changes were made and certain parts of the poster fixed. I hope it's an earlier version - otherwise someone just did a really bad job of retouching it for no obvious reason! (Which might happen in Japan ...)

Actually, this is the original version. It was done by Japanese artist Noriyoshi Ohrai.

Just a thought, but this poster really doesn't fit in with the whole "the way you remember it" theme anyway. It wasn't used theatrically in the US (or UK for that matter) so it wouldn't be remembered by most of us. Besides, I think something a little more special is in order. Coov's wooden style D cover has really raised the bar.

Post
#137445
Topic
Why no mention of "Sith" in Episodes IV-VI?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/137445/action/topic#137445
Time
As already mentioned, "Sith" is an old concept. Vader is referred to as a Dark Lord of the Sith in the novel among other places. The "Knights of the Sith" appear in the first rough draft written in 1974. The character of Darth Vader becomes a "Black Knight of the Sith" in the second draft in 1975 before finally ending up a "Dark Lord of the Sith" in the third draft.

The term "padawan" has even older origins. It appears in the very first line of Lucas' original story treatment from 1973 along with the name Mace Windu.

But I believe the two Sith rule is strictly a prequel concept.
Post
#121610
Topic
SW fonts
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/121610/action/topic#121610
Time
Originally posted by: Trooperman
So all of the theatrical versions of all films in the saga sported subtitles in ITC Franklin Gothic Demi Bold.
Well, we know with absolute certainty that the theatrical Episode I used that font. I would assume that Episodes II and III did also.
http://www.starwars.com/episode-i/bts/production/news19990302.html
It's supposedly a "match" to the subs in the original trilogy, but there's no real way to confirm that without some kind of reference. I checked my very grainy theatrical Star Wars bootleg and it's difficult to make out the font. It could be FGDB, it could be News Gothic Bold too. But they are very similar.

Originally posted by: Trooperman
2. What font was used for the original version of "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away" (not prequels, because it was done incorrectly)

The general consensus we came too in this thread is New Gothic Medium. Although Trade Gothic may be a possibility as well.

I'll try to help with the other questions later.
Post
#120695
Topic
Hyperspace
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/120695/action/topic#120695
Time
I can kind of understand Lucas' reasoning here, but I still think it was a mistake. The 'hyperspace effect' has a certain familiarity that is sorely missing from the prequels. But they wouldn't be any better with it.

Anyway, this question was featured on 'Ask the Jedi Council' at the official site a couple of years ago. That entire feature seems to have disappeared from the site, but here's the actual quote:

Quote
Why haven't we seen the stars stretch into lines when a ship jumps to hyperspace in the prequel trilogy?

For the definitive answer, we turn to none other than George Lucas himself. Here's what he had to say:

"I think of the series as one movie. In order to keep the impact of the hyperspace jump in Episode IV, I have decided not to use it in the first three films. If you're watching them from one to six, you'll get the same thrill."
Post
#115578
Topic
Episode IV title Crawl question
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/115578/action/topic#115578
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Simon
Unfortunatly, this changes some of my assumptions made, so based on the information present in the copyright listing for Star Wars and the dates the LoC aquired their copies if the crawl was already made and could have been present in the 1977 version than its possible that the versions that the LoC recieved in '78 & '79 include this crawl...the two things that makes this seem unlikely however is that the copyright date is may 25 1977, and when the subtitles for the hearing impaired were added this was noted in the copyright so it would make sense that the addition of information to the crawl would also have been noted. Also, the fact that the rereleases of Star Wars were all without the Episode IV until 1981 and the copies the LOC recieved were before this date.

I don't believe that any print of the film contained the updated crawl until 1981. The '78 and '79 theatrical presentations were the same as in '77, and there was no 1980 release. I DO believe that Lucas had "Episode IV" in mind as early as 1975, but it was NOT implemented into the film until late 1980 and was not presented theatrically until the following 1981 re-release. Therefore, if the LoC acquired 35mm prints in '78 and '79, those prints must contain the original crawl.

There was a page at the official site (which seems to have disappeared) in which Lucasfilm film archivist Sterling Hedgpeth stated:

"I found a box with all the positive elements for the 'revised' opening crawl, and the assorted trim boxes are dated from October through December 1980. This, then, is consistent with the view that Episode IV: A New Hope was added for the first time to the opening crawl for the April 10, 1981 re-release."

This is significant because he specifically mentions the raw film elements for the revised crawl as being dated Oct-Dec 1980. Therefore, the revising of the crawl could not have taken place before these dates.
Post
#115256
Topic
Episode IV title Crawl question
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/115256/action/topic#115256
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Simon
In addition to when it was first shown with the new crawl, does anyone know when Lucas actually added the crawl to the film? was it while he was working on ESB? (when did production of ESB start? does anyone know?)

Actually, any information you can provide as far as the release dates of star wars, when changes were made, and early info on ESB (such as the production) that is/could relate to release/change dates of Star Wars (ANH) would be most helpful.

To be more specific than what has already been said, the updated crawl first appeared on the two week re-release that began on April 10, 1981.

Before that, however, the updated crawl first appeared in print within the book "The Art of Star Wars" that was published in November of 1979. This book contained the script complete with the "Episode IV" crawl.

However, when Lucas actually came up with "Episode IV: A New Hope" is open to debate and speculation. I do now believe, however, that he did have it in mind early enough to use it for the May 25, 1977 release if he had so chosen.

In the commentary on the official DVD, Lucas states that the studio would not allow him to release the film with the subtitle. This obviously implies that Lucas already had it in mind. But being from the official DVD, one might think that this statement is nothing more than revisionist propaganda; however, it does have precedent. In a 1980 issue of Bantha Tracks that was released just prior to The Empire Strikes Back, Lucas said this:

"Star Wars was the fourth story in the saga and was to have been called, "Star Wars, Episode Four: A New Hope." But I decided people wouldn't understand the numbering system so we dropped it. For Empire, though we're putting back the number and will call it Episode Five: The Empire Strikes Back."

So, in 1980 Lucas said it was HIS decision not to include the subtitle, but in 2004 he said the studio would not let him. But in both cases he claims that it was already in place.

An important note in all of this is that Gary Kurtz backs up Lucas' statements. I somehow find Gary Kurtz to be more reliable. This is from a 1980 issue of Globe:

"George dropped the episode number and sub-title because he thought it might be confusing," said Kurtz. "Also, after showing each of the nine treatments to the people at 20th Century-Fox in 1975, they thought that episode four revealed more information about the characters and would make a better introduction to the story."

What's different is that Kurtz says the execs at 20th Century-Fox were actually in favor of the subtitle from the very beginning, whereas Lucas now says the were not.
Post
#112986
Topic
Info: A new edit <em>(The Lost Cut - it was a prank; but some good info in here)</em>
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/112986/action/topic#112986
Time
Are you saying that you have (or your friend has) a copy of THE "Lost Cut" that was edited by John Jympson before he was fired and replaced by Richard Chew and Paul Hirsch?? I have heard rumors of Lost Cut bootlegs but I never believed them. Or is this a fan edit meant to replicate the Lost Cut? I wonder if this is actually Deleted Magic... or a joke.
Post
#112889
Topic
Star Wars: Deleted Magic (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/112889/action/topic#112889
Time
Originally posted by: ocpmovie
Spicoli - Nice cover! Koo Stark!

The color scheme on Deleted Magic is a little off, and I miss Tosche Station in the background of that Luke/Biggs shot, but this is one of the better versions. With thanks to all the versions previous. =)

Strange to see a "disc art" image that isn't the official one, but that one is nice ... Star Wars in red instead of yellow tho'? =)

I've been wanting to use that Koo Stark photo for ages.

Anyway, I just used a standard metal gradient for the logo and a different font on the cover as well. And I don't have that image with Toshi Station in the background, otherwise I may have used it. And no disrespect to your 'official' disc art - I just got going and couldn't stop. You know how that goes. As for the red 'Star Wars' - that's an homage to the first VHS release of the film which featured a red logo with a white outline. I've always been fond of that look.

Post
#109401
Topic
SW fonts
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/109401/action/topic#109401
Time
Originally posted by: wannabegeorge
Thanks Obi-Wan Spicoli ... if you would be so kind check your PMs

Anybody know what the fonts are on the official DVDs? Specifically, the movie credits on the back? Thanks!!

No problemo. What do you mean by movie credits on the back? Do you mean the back of the DVD cover? If so, that's Albertus MT.
Post
#109387
Topic
HI-Res Poster Art
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/109387/action/topic#109387
Time
Originally posted by: TheCassidy
The ESB poster is the Style "C" US one sheet. I've had the hi-res version in my image archives for a while, and removed the text for anyone that wanted to add their own.

It's a favourite of mine too - I think reprints are readily available.

Cheers.

Actually, this is not a US release poster. It was used for foreign releases (South America, Australia, Spain, Japan for example) and is considered the international style "A".

By the way, that textless Star Wars "D" is nice. Thanks!