Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda

I haven't sat down and done a careful comparison of the optical mono pulled off of the 16mm PG films, and Belbucus'.  Although I did listen to the latter.  One thing though that I have learned from experience, is that it is generally easier to work with digitized optical audio, than to work with digitized audio from a VHS tape.  The sort of degradation that happens on mag tape is tough to work around.  Overall, I agree with Zombie's characterization of the optical audio on the PG, but I still like the sound - it has a nice natural-sounding EQ and great clarity. You can hear all the effects clearly and nothing sounds buried.

zombie84 said:

One way to appreciate what good mono would sound like is to simply listen to a good stereo mix in mono;

Really?  In some cases, listening to a stereo mix in mono will cause some low end phase cancellation, depending on if the stereo mix was engineered specifically to be listenable in mono or not. The better mono mixes are separately-made mixes produced with mono listening in mind.

By the way, the mono mix used in the PG was from the 16mm film, not from VHS.

Hi Mike,

It's not quite that easy.  To do the same thing in HD also requires some special hardware acceleration.  The company that makes the WorkPrinter has very recently come out with HD versions of their rig, here is an example:

http://www.moviestuff.tv/wp_16hd.html

Indeed, back in the day most systems were mono, and so it was assumed that most people would be listening to it (be it a movie, LP, the radio, whatever) in mono.  Therefore, sometimes a lot more care was put into the mono mix.  i.e., in many cases, the stereo mixes were novelties, whereas the mono was the "serious" mix that the mass success of the product depended on.  I can remember when you'd buy an LP, you had the choice between the mono and the stereo version.  The mono wasn't just a sum of the stereo, but more often were entirely different mixes. Most engineers back then knew what they were doing, and knew that a summed-stereo mono would suffer from all kinds of cancellation artifacts, so they'd make separate mixes.  And for the reason mentioned above, more often than not the mono version was the better one!

Great examples were some of the mid-60s bands like the Beatles, Donovan, etc.  The stereo mixes were often obviously rushed and lackluster, but the mono mixes kicked ass.  Many people feel the same way about the Star Wars original mono mix.  I don't feel strongly myself either way, but I do think it is VERY important to preserve mono mixes when they are available - often they represent the producers' best effort at the time.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I wish I had lived in the heyday of vinyl records. Something about the format just appeals to me. But I've never, ever played one =(

It's never too late :)
Seriously, it's extremely easy to put together a decent turntable/amplifier setup.  And if you're patient, you could probably find one for cheap, even free.

A well-mastered Blu-Ray disc (i.e., that hasn't had all the grain scrubbed out of it), played back on a nice tv monitor, is a huge step up from SD. I suspect that there just aren't many people on this forum who were lucky enough to have seen movies in 70mm.  Good HD reminds me of that experience.  Anyone who thinks that DVDs look better, either needs to have their setup examined, or their head. :)

Lucas suppressing the original films that won 7 Academy Awards is not an opinion about which version is "better".  Even if the SE improved the films, that is no excuse for making a film that is a cinematic and cultural milestone unavailable. This is not opinion, it is a singular fact and that is what this site is about.  I enjoy many of the SE changes too, but that doesn't make altering history acceptable.

Davnes007 said:

TheDoctor1987 should have said:

I was [thinking]: "Why Lucas?...Why!? I much prefer the 1997 remastered ending, with Sebastion Shaw. That's how Anakin should be after he died."

The victory celebration fits perfectly. I always hated the 'Yub Nub' song.

Fixed...I think.

Thanks, that makes more sense.  I honestly couldn't figure that out.  Now Hayden really IS rotj.

none said:

And the colorization issues was a front to gain Moral Rights in US copyright legislation which would in turn give creators the ability to limit or outright not allow derivative works.

Apparently, the colorization issue was really a front to give one creator the right to allow only derivative works.

Hi Fate...  I too don't remember any flaming.  Lots of silliness, yes, but that's rather normal here.  In general I've found most people here to be quite nice, quite tolerant, and I might add from personal experience...... quite patient. :)

TheDoctor1987 said:

I was why Lucas why i much prefer the 1997 remastered ending with Sebastion Shaw that's how Anakin should be after he died the Victory Celebration fits perfectly i always hated the Yub Nub song.

Two things...

(1) sorry I couldn't parse your sentence... "I was why Lucas why i..." ????

(2) can someone go back and fix the title of this thread?  "is" should be "in".

Crystal Skull isn't a good movie, but IMHO it is a heck of a lot more enjoyable than any of the SW prequels.

I just dread the thought of those big tubular lips jutting up to an inch in front of my nose.

Of course there will be changes for 3D.  George will want things that leap at the viewer to show off the 3D, so things will need to be added that do this. I expect that as they're driving through Mos Eisley, various new creatures will fly by and towards the viewer at random times.

The one I'm dreading is Jedi Rocks in 3D.

canofhumdingers said:

Gaffer Tape said:

Forgive me for my ignorance (as I've never seen 2001)

 Holy crap.  Stop everything & go get the bluray NOW (last time i was in Target they had it for $10, IIRC).  No self respecting geek can really call themselves self respecting & not see 2001.  It's fantastic.  & the bluray is spectacular.  Seriously.  Go get it!

Agreed!

zombie84 said:

TOD is a horror film, and horror films are all about the psychological experience of watching them, and that's why the sheer "ride" aspect of the film, the intensity, whether in character (evil Indy), in storyline (human sacrifice), in mis-en-scene (all the bones and blood and fire) or in action sequences (mine cart, spike room, etc,) is a fundamental and integral part of how the film is constructed and how--and why--it works.

Although of course you have every right to your artistic opinion, I completely disagree with this interpretation of the film.

Got back a few days ago, and playing catch up at work.  I also have spent the past 3 days restoring an old skipfield CV open reel videotape deck. Totally stoked that I was able to get it to work!

Although the blending worked rather well, there were enough improperly aligned frames that I think I'm not going to use it.  I'll just choose scenes from each of the three captures and live with it (like I did for PG).  It's still a slow process.  And I still have to grab a few missing segments from another print.  So we're still quite a ways away from the finished product.

But I will do the upscaled HD... THAT is worth it.

I thought that the T-Rex effects in Jurassic Park were terrific.

I have nothing against CGI, just opposed to Lucas' use of CGI in the OT.  It's hard to generalize this situation, because it is rather unprecedented.

greenpenguino said:

I

<3

Speilberg

<3= love heart

Simple. Sheesh!

Geez I feel old.  There's no way I would have ever gotten that.

theprequelsrule said:

a lot of the credit goes to the editing skills of the two Lucases (Luci?).

Wasn't it Richard Chew who rescued the film by re-editing it based on the pacing of the actors rather than the pacing of the script's intention?

the original film is kind of in a separate category of it's own and is almost always the film I choose to watch when I watch a Star Wars movie. It is, in a way, the only Star Wars movie.

This is pretty much my view as well, although I enjoy the others.

Have to admit, I wish I were there for the sunset!

CP3S said:

As precise and perfect as I have ever seen it in writing. It simply cannot be argued with. Found my new signature.

Glad to be of service. Anything else you'd like concisely eloquated? :)

Easterhay said:

It's Lucas's call, not ours.

"It's Kim Jong-Il's country, he can do what he wants" doesn't make it right, and doesn't mean that people should stop putting whatever pressure they can to effect change.

Easterhay said:

Look, it's only really the fans of the original originals who are hacked off with this.  Everyone else accepts the Star Wars films as they are just fine.

It makes no difference which version of the film I or anyone else"prefers".  The original theatrical versions won seven academy awards including editing and special effects. Changing the editing and the special effects while not allowing a decent release of the award-winning versions creates an unprecedented historical artistic void that could and should be rectified.

kilik64 said:

Lastly Puggo did a fantastic job with his Puggo Grande version of Star Wars. Even though I was no where near being born in 77, makes me get an idea of what it was like to be there watching it then.

Thanks for the kind words.  To clarify, watching the PG, in my opinion, is not at all like watching it in 1977.  Because, in 1977, the prints were still pristine.  Watching Harmy's HD versions is more like what it was like in 1977.  The PG is what it was like watching SW revivals in theaters in the mid-80s, after the prints had gotten all scratched up and were still being shown at midnight matinees.