Jawa77 said:
Someone on another forum has come into possession of a few reels of a 70mm print of Star Wars 4.
Are you telling us this just to make us jealous? (it's working)
kenkraly2007 said:
What if by some chance LFL does'nt recycle the HD masters from 2004 and make new ones for the blu-ray release? Then what?
There must be a clinical name for this condition.
pumpkin said:
I have hated all the special editions and was pleased to find a site like this. Where should I start ....i mean...which preservations are the best of the best to watch!
My favorites are (not necessarily in this order):
But there is much to explore, and much in the works!
Sorry for the delay. The film transfer and encoding is done, along with the "about the restoration" short. Got hung up on the extra and the menu, and sidetracked by the end of the semester. The project will definitely be released before Dec. 31.
Obscure 1982 production out of the National Film Board of Canada, that made the indie film circuit back then. Documentary that shows the lead up to the Karpov-Korchnoi world championship match, and the political cold war drama that accompanied it, as well as some wonderful footage of Bobby Fischer and other famous players, as well as historical footage and discussion about every conceivable angle of the game of chess.
This film has been out of print for a long time. I bought a VHS copy of it in the rare window of time that it was available, and am lucky that it still is in very good condition.
A couple of weeks ago, I managed to score a mint in box Panasonic AG-1980, one of the best VHS decks for digitizing. Finished a nice transfer, and am now encoding it for DVD.
This is a real niche item… doubt that too many folks here would be interested, but thought I’d post just in case.
kenkraly2007 said:
Yea the color changes are noticeable on the cool setting not warm or warm 2.
Whenever colors are messed up, there is always a cost when correcting it on your set. For instance, if things got tinted blue, then reducing the blue will turn things that are supposed be blue into light blue. Altering colors in post-production = loss of information.
Mine says Naboo but that wouldn't have been my guess.
Leonardo said:
so I don't exist? or the place I've lived in for 21 years doesn't exist?
Huh?It's likeAlderaanout there.Try again, or try another city.It might be a temporary error, or the system might not know that place.
Well, if your city doesn't exist, Alderaan would be about right :)
kenkraly2007 said:
The blu-ray release is going to be good. It will be a good release and the picture and audio quallity be better than in 2004. Some don't belive that but it will be. Until we see the screen shots from LFL we will not know.
This is really good news! Thank you!
SilverWook said:
The HS was released theatrically? Wouldn't that have caused riots or something? ;)
Given its notorious fame, surely there has been some occasion, an obscure festival or pot party or something, where a bootleg has managed to be shown in a theater (even a small one).
You know, there is a very good chance that when the Holiday Special comes out on Blu-Ray, it will be the only Lucas movie ever released in high quality in its original theatrical form. Wouldn't THAT be ironic.
doubleofive said:
The GOUT has really bad blurring and smearing, which a good 35mm scan would not have.
I don't believe that the blurring was caused by the scan, but by postprocessing after the scan.
One issue is the quality of the print. In my experience, quality control of the 16mm prints I used was very poor. The ones I've used were severely overcropped, poorly centered, hairs in the emulsion, had subtitles crossing frame boundaries, and missing frames. Older prints often experience varying degrees of color shift. And any print, including 35mm, is going to get scratched just from normal use. I think that if you want to make a really good transfer, you need to get a 35mm print that is as close to pristine as possible. Then you also need a very high quality scan.
none said:
Besides the quality issue, how else did the GOUT not help people remember the essence of the originals?
The way in which he issued the GOUT was a clever ploy to "prove" how poor the original one was. Now, most people walking the street believe Lucas' BS, based on the GOUT, and are thankful that he rescued it with the SE.
Sluggo said:
Oh sorry. This:
I don't think the OT ever painted Anakin as a hero. Obiwan called him the "best starfighter in the galaxy, and a good friend." So he was a nice guy with first class skills. He didn't have to be "the chosen one", he could have just been one of the guys.
How to convey that in a film? There are so many ways. The Jedi don't have to be so elaborate. They just have to be a set of spiritual police that roam around the galaxy keeping order and having some adventures. GL painted himself into a corner with the "chosen one" stuff. Episode one could be just a simple adventure like SW, with some villain that they beat together. Their commaraderie would have to be built through the script and the acting. Episode two could still be about the clone wars, but it would need to include how Anakin got introduced to the dark side, and how he starts to get wrapped up in it. He could have his two kids in ep.2 also. Then in episode three, he would need to start getting evil, losing control of himself, and leaving a saddened Obiwan to join a an evil empire that takes over the galaxy. This also makes his wife sad (like Leia said), and she ends up dying in some tragedy trying to help Anakin resist the dark side. By now, the kids are already 7 or 8 years old, and being parentless they are adopted by their uncle - who by the way we should have met a LOT earlier than was done in the actual PT (because his change from a jolly guy in Ep.3 to a bitter old man in SW would be a good side effect).
Sluggo said:
I agree with that, but how would you convey that in film?
Convey what?
Sluggo said:
But if Anakin was in training to be a Jedi, wouldn't that have the hero mystique built in?
To me, a hero is someone who does something really great, like risking oneself to save a bunch of people. Being a Jedi could lead to becoming a hero, but just being a jedi, I don't know. Luke became a hero before he was a jedi, by destroying the death star. It's two different things.
xhonzi said:
Just for arguments sake, would you agree that most of those are external factors, and somewhat are not the choice of the character in question... therefore making him a tragic victim rather than a powerful villain?
Right. And that's what was said in the OT... Vader was "seduced" by the dark side of the force. Like Bilbo was seduced and ultimately addicted to and changed by the Ring (and Gollum too). It didn't have to be completely a choice.
xhonzi said:
None of those (which I have seen/read) really present a fallen hero, right? Maybe some normal people gone bad... which is also a good thing, but still in something of a different class than what we'd expect from Star Wars. Or am I wrong?
I don't think the OT ever painted Anakin as a hero. Obiwan called him the "best starfighter in the galaxy, and a good friend." So he was a nice guy with first class skills. He didn't have to be "the chosen one", he could have just been one of the guys. And I never thought of his portrayal in the PT as being consistent with "a good friend". I always thought a better Anakin character would have been a nice, mild-mannered, kind, well-intentioned and highly skilled young man who unfortunately was also a little gullible and ended up being seduced by and ultimately controlled and changed by dark forces. That way, it would be scarier because it would show that anyone could end up on the dark side, if you're not careful.
xhonzi said:
Can you name some, Puggo?
There are many different ways that someone can go bad. It can be due to addiction, seduction, power, insanity, chemicals, or other reasons. Just off the top of my head, some movies/stories that use a variety of these themes would be The Hobbit, The Godfather, Animal Farm, The Invisible Man, The Fly, Re-animator, Requiem for a Dream, All the King's Men...
By contrast, I still don't know why Anakin went bad.
One of things conspicuously absent was Anakin being "seduced" by the dark side (as Obiwan put it in SW). When I think of that, I think of the thrill the emperor seems to get by zapping people. There should have been some sort of hypnotic appeal or addiction to the dark side -- sort of like the effect of the ring in the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings. But in the PT, Anakin never seemed to enjoy anything about the force or its dark side - mostly he was in agony, not being "seduced" by the dark side.
Ghostbuster, you should have written Ep.3. It would have been considerably better than what George pooped. Your idea for the cave is really clever.
My only expectation was that it was going to be better. When it came out, all the reviews were pouring in saying "at last! finally! the episode we've been waiting for! it's great! 10 stars!". But when I saw it, I thought it was the worst installment of the entire saga, and a total unmitigated crapfest. I had actually enjoyed Ep.1 enough to see it three times, saw Ep.2 once or twice and thought it was kinda fun. But Ep.3, I literally almost walked out of.
Good people turning to evil is an age-old theme that has been done successfully in thousands of movies. There were so many ways it could have been done. George managed to find just about the only way to screw it up.
ChainsawAsh said:
Yeah, Puggo, you're misreading what the "purist edition" is. It's "Revisited" - still a fan edit - but with some of the less really radical changes.
Ok, I stand corrected on that count. However, if I understand correctly, both the "Purist" and "Revisited" versions remove many of the SE changes, and the "Purist" version removes many of the "Revisited" changes as well. So although they both are fan edits and contain changes made by Adywan, it could be said that "Revisited" is more of a fan edit than "Purist". So by Crygor's standards, "Purist", being less of a fan edit (given his contention regarding the relative merits of fan edits) would be the preferred version by definition. Still seems relevant to the topic. Sorry to play devil's advocate :)
TV's Frink said:
The thread is for discussion of adywan's Purist vs. Revisted edits, and thoughts about a hybrid version of the two. It's not about the relative merits of fanedits.
But if you did want to discuss the relative merits of fan edits vs. preservations, wouldn't Adywan's two versions - one considered by many to be the best preservation, and the other considered by many to be the best fan edit, and both being built from basically the same elements, be an ideal centerpiece for such a discussion? After all, the title of the thread is asking for users to contrast a fan edit and a preservation! Crygor's response was a pretty direct answer to the question. His justification for his answer was just different than everyone else's, so it seemed out of place. But upon reflection, it doesn't seem off-topic to me.
Also, you can empathize with Crygor64's dislike of fanedits, but to claim that faneditors are worse than Lucas is ludicrous.
I certainly never said anything of the sort, and I think that if Crygor did it was hyperbole.
By the way, I love Adywan's work... so it feels strange to defend Crygor's posts.
Sluggo said:
Crygor64 said:
This forum has roughly 60,000 posts. 30,000 of those posts are in two topics related to Adywan's "Extra Special Editions." If George has seen this is must make him laugh.
Aside from the massive amounts of hyperbole and extremism, I generally think Cygor is right.
I too empathize with Crygor64's stance. I'm generally not interested in the fanedit stuff, and am mainly here for the preservation effort. Probably 90% of my posts are in the preservation section. And although I understand the difference between someone who does fanedits AND wants the originals restored, versus someone who wants to replace the originals with a fanedit, I do get a little annoyed by posters who think that our purpose is to make the "best" Star Wars, rather than rescuing the original versions of the movies. There seem to have been a glut of stuff appearing lately that has that ring to it, and it makes it harder to get the word out.
Crygor's claim is simply that our forum would make it look to a newcomer that we are mainly a fanedit site (heck, the "fanedit" section comes before the "preservation" section!!), and on that I'd have to agree with him. The recent CNN article is a perfect example of someone misconstruing the whole issue, and Crygor is arguing that we are inadvertently contributing to it. There is no reason to get mad at him - as acerbic as he is, I think he is trying to help.
That said, I think that the reason there is so much more discussion about fanedits than about preservation, is because frankly there is little that we can substantively DO to preserve the original films. We have very little high quality raw materials to work with. DarkJedi has squeezed about as much out of the GOUT as there is to squeeze, doing 16mm telecines is never going to be more than a curiosity, and we haven't yet obtained the resources to do a 35mm telecine. So we wait, nibble away at what we can, and some of the folks pass the time by doing fanedits because it's fun. Perhaps if the fanedits thread wasn't higher on the topics list than the preservation thread, it wouldn't look like that was our primary purpose.
Mielr said:
Guaranteed, Ewan McGregor will be a force ghost at the end of Jedi. :-/
Maybe Jar Jar will be a force ghost at the end of Jedi.