logo Sign In

ShiftyEyes

User Group
Members
Join date
11-Jul-2004
Last activity
26-Jun-2025
Posts
640

Post History

Post
#249064
Topic
For Those who bought the Sept. 12th Release, Thoughts so far?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/249064/action/topic#249064
Time
Is the non-anamorphic quality bothering more than you thought?
I don't own a widescreen set, but when I heard the DVDs would be non-anamorphic, I was pretty pissed. It's not that I simply wanted a DVD enhancement that I wouldn't be able to use, I wanted the best product for the money that I paid. I view any DVD purchase as an investment for the future. If I were to ever upgrad to a widescreen set, I would hope that all my DVDs would hold up.

So, right now, it's more of a psychological thing. The nonanamorphic thing shouldn't really bother me, but it's a sign of the disrespect for these versions of the films, and I also think if I shelled out $60 for the films again ($20 more than I paid for the 2004 release), it should've been for a more worthwhile release.

Is the quality actually better than you expected?
It looks better than any VHS copy or bootleg I've seen, so I think it does look better than I had expected.

Are you just putting aside any quality issues and just enjoying the movies again pre-97?
Yes, but to an extent. Watching the 2006 DVDs was probably the most fun I've had watching these Star Wars movies in a long time. I still noticed the aliasing and combing problems, but I was still able to enjoy the films.

Have you put your hands up, and just become disgusted with Lucas and SW in general now?
My opinion of Lucasfilm goes on as it always has. I think Lucas is stubborn in his refusal to put out good quality versions of these films, but I've never really bitched about the issue. It was always more like a big sigh everytime I thought about it.

Has it made you want to watch the PT movies and become a saga fan PT + O-OT, or are now a true O-OT fan and the story ends with ROTJ, and begins with SW.
After I watched ROTJ, I did pop in ROTS for whatever reason. I've always liked the prequels though I do recognize their flaws, so my opinion of them is unchanged. I recognized the flaws of ROTS, but I was still able to enjoy it.

Actually, the most interesting reaction I've had with these DVDs is that I've noticed how much SW is its own standalone film. Regardless of what vision Lucas had in store for the sequels, the original Star Wars was always just Star Wars. Sure, it was left open for sequels, but the "Episode IV" title was never there originally, and it's a perfectly fine standalone film. I prefer ESB, but it's allowed me to see the gradual evolution in the trilogy more in terms of how it was made. I've also started to feel a little more ill-will towards ROTJ, seeing how good ESB was. I still think it's an enjoyable movie and it has some great moments, but so much of it feels like we've been there before.

So I don't really suscribe to either the two schools of thought which say there's only either the original trilogy or there's the prequel trilogy + original trilogy. I can see more configurations now.

1. Star Wars, the original film.
2. Star Wars and its great sequel, The Empire Strikes Back.
3. The Star Wars Trilogy: SW, ESB, and ROTJ.
4. The Prequel Trilogy + The Original Trilogy

Have you pushed others to buy it who were on the fence?
Nope.

If a remastered O-OT never comes out again, will you be content with this set?
I'd probably drop the cash for a remastered set, though with a big dramatic sigh as I do it.

Post
#248191
Topic
Idea: for... Custom Made DVD Sets
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/248191/action/topic#248191
Time
Lawrence of Arabia: 6-Disc Epic Collection

DISC ONE & TWO
These are the two discs from the Superbit release, which contains superior video and audio.

DISC THREE & FOUR
The original 2-disc Limited Edition. Though the video quality is inferior to the Superbit's it's still worth owning for it's wealth of DVD-ROM content and supplemental content on disc two.

DISC FIVE
The "A Dangerous Man: Lawrence After Arabia" film, starring Ralph Fiennes as T.E. Lawrence.

DISC SIX
The PBS documentary, "Lawrence of Arabia: Battle for the Arab World".
Post
#247503
Topic
Star Wars prequel film noir (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247503/action/topic#247503
Time
I think this sounds like a very cool idea. Remember to add grain and add some scratched and dirt. And even play with the lighting for a bit of a more flat look. I can understand going for pan & scan, but it us rather ugly. Reframing the 2.35 image to something like 1.78 would be a faire trade off.

While Herrman was mentioned for music, I'd suggest going for other film noir scores as well. Laura was mentioned, and that had a very rich score which could be used for some of the early scenes - more idyllic Anakin. You also mentioned skipping on the music from Psycho, but Psycho does have some precedence in a Star Wars film. There was a cue from Psycho used in Star Wars.

I guess some of the cornier moments from the PT would work well. Especially weepy Padme in ROTS. While film noir is known more for the femme fatale, they have their share of weepy women.
Post
#247011
Topic
Lucasfilm to sell Physical Effects Unit
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247011/action/topic#247011
Time
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Geez, I didn't think the CG Yoda looked anything like the puppet Yoda, and, like I've said before, it was because of the eyes. And I find it really weird because I've seen the documentaries when they were recreating Yoda scenes in ESB to test the technology, and the CG Yoda I saw on the screen there actually looked like Yoda! But the one they actually used in the movies looks nothing like him. He doesn't have that Freeborn/Einstein eye area that is so instantly recognizable. Even the puppet from TPM did a better job of getting those eyes than the CG Yoda. And in case you didn't know, most of our emotions and recognizability are in that space of our face, and ILM just totally messed it up, even though I've seen them get it right!
I noticed something else about his eyes in the prequel trilogy. They move! The original puppet was so limited that his eyes were able to move in maybe 3 or 4 shots of ESB. Maybe this was improved for ROTJm but for the most part, he just looks like he's staring off into space with his eyes fixed to one point.

On another note, I agree that the CG Yoda doesn't look quite right. He's better than the stoned Yoda puppet from Episode I, but there is still something rather off about his appearance. I'll give props to the animation department though. He just doesn't look like he's really there.

And maybe they should have motion captured Frank Oz's puppet for the animation, if they really wanted authenticity. Though I'm sure Oz was happy not to do Yoda again. The guy was probably thinking during TPM, "What they hell am I doing here? I don't need to crouch under the floor tiles. I'm a successful director now!"

Post
#246638
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246638/action/topic#246638
Time
I see no problem with Anakin being 9 in the first movie. For what Lucas was going for, he had to be young at his introduction. The way I see it, there are three critical points in Anakin's fall to the darkside.

1. Anakin leaving his mother
2. Anakin watching his mother die
3. Anakin wanting to prevent the death of Padme

If you want to start the movie with Anakin already a Jedi, his fall to the darkside doesn't work. It relies on the fact that he left his mother at an early age. At nine years old, he's just a kid. The world's too big for him and the only thing he's got is his mother. The separation at an early age scares the shit out of him. Flash forward 10 years. And all he has is his memories of her. When he left at 9, he was still years before teenage angst. His love for his mother was idealized. There was no one he loved more. Then when he finally visits her, she's taken from him like that. It was a huge loss. And he meets the loss with an outburst of uncontrolled anger. Had he had more time with his mother, his grief may have been more mature and more introspective. His regret at not coming sooner and not being able to save his mother drives him to want more power to save the ones he loves. And then obviously, Padme enters the picture, replaces the void left by his mother's death, and it's the same story all over again.

One of the things I like the most about Revenge of the Sith is that feeling that's in the air. While watching it, there's a mood of constant doom that you can't shake off. It's like a nightmare. You know things are going to go down a slippery slope full of unimaginable horrors, and the worst thing about it is you can't wake up. You have no choice but to be subjected to it. That's the feeling I get out of the movie. It's like a descent to hell. No matter how hard you try, you know you can't climb out again. And some of this is obviously due to the original trilogy. Without a doubt, the fact that you know what's going to happen is like a sick joke. It has shades of Macbeth and Oedipus in the whole fate vs. free will motif. You know how things are going to end and no matter how hard the characters try, they can't escape the fates that have been written for them.
Post
#246048
Topic
Do you REALLY think there will be remastered versions of the OOT or whatever? I don't.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246048/action/topic#246048
Time
Originally posted by: Max Reebo Rocks
Hear hear!! Couldn't have said it better myself! Why can't people realize that this issue is NO different than if someone had colorized Casablanca for a DVD release and said, "Sorry folks, but this represents the vision of the original filmmakers and the B&W version is now obsolete." It's really that simple!!
Irony. Probably the only reason Casablanca looks so good on DVD today is because back in the 80s, Ted Turner decided to colorize the movie. In order for the process to work, they needed to restore the film.

Post
#245342
Topic
Greedo subtitles outside the 16:9 frame
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245342/action/topic#245342
Time
Originally posted by: consumer_x
I know this is not an anamorpic release, but how do traditional anamorphic DVD releases handle subs? Are they in the black for 4:3 viewing, but overlay the image for widescreen TVs?
I believe usual DVDs that don't feature burnt in subtitles feature two subtitles for each language option. The first is formatted for 4x3 TVs and the second is formatted for 16x9. Depending on what your TV settings your player is set to, it will play the appropriate subtitle. However, since these discs are not anamorphic, the subtitles are only formatted for 4x3 TVs and they get cut off on 16x9 displays.
Post
#245336
Topic
Ideas for the inevitable Super-Mega-Special-Ultimate 2007 Boxset
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245336/action/topic#245336
Time
Originally posted by: crazyrabbits
And I'm fairly certain that Denis Lawson is still around. At the very least, he recorded dialogue as Wedge Antilles for the 2001 game Rogue Leader.


He won an Emmy award for his work in a miniseries this year, if my memory serves me correctly.
Unfortunately, he lost. Denis attended the show and his face was onscreen as well as the other nominees' when they announced the winner. He was beat out by Jeremy Irons' work in "Elizabeth I".

Post
#245304
Topic
How Do You Tell If the disk is anamorphic? (not what you think)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245304/action/topic#245304
Time
Personally, I just pop my disc into my DVD player, switch my TV mode to 16x9 (I don't own a widescreen TV), and if the image looks stretched out, it's anamorphic. If it plays as it normally does, it's not.

I don't understand how PowerDVD would be able to check if it's not playing the DVD. Where would it get its information otherwise? I know that if you're playing a DVD, you can go to "Configuration" and go to the "Information" tab and it'll state whether the aspect ratio is 16x9 (anamorphic) or 4:3 (nonanamorphic).
Post
#245100
Topic
Ideas for the inevitable Super-Mega-Special-Ultimate 2007 Boxset
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245100/action/topic#245100
Time
Personally, I'm just hoping this new boxed set doesn't end up being a rush job like the 2004 discs. I hope Lucasfilm has allotted the time to giving care to each film. No more incosistent color timing and wonky lightsaber effects. After that, I had hoped they would spend more time in providing each film with a great indivisual release. If there is a series of films which deserve big, multi disc sets for each movie, Star Wars would be it. My dream would be to get the original theatrical versions of each film as well as the altered definitive version George has cooked up. Then give 2-3 discs worth of extras. These would include both older, vintage programs as well as newly produced material. Then you'd have your deleted scenes, commmentaries, etc.

It all depends on the scope of this release. I doubt they'll include the theatrical cut of any of the films since they probably want to keep it in line with Lucas' new visions of the films. If each movie gets its own extras disc, the perfect example would be the Alien Quadrilogy, which packs over three hours worth of great, comprehensive documentaries, deleted scenes, screen tests, and extensive galleries onto a bonus disc for each film in the series. But for Star Wars, that would mean 12 discs, which is already up there in the disc count. If they go for more discs, then great and the possibilities would be endless. If not, then the Alien set would be an ideal model, even if the original versions of the films aren't included. My only hope is that the extra material is, for the most part, new material created for or released exclusively on this set. This way, it would feel less like they're making us buy the same discs for the 20th time.
Post
#244843
Topic
OOT on HD DVD
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244843/action/topic#244843
Time
Hmmm. DVDs first came out in 97. Lucas waited about seven years to release the Special Editions of Star Wars on DVD. Considering that they already have HD masters of the SEs, I'd expect a little sooner. Maybe if next gen DVD formats really take off, I'll give them about three to four years to get released. He'll then probably wait another two years for the original versions. Unfortunately, I wouldn't be surprised if they were released in standard def as bonus material (whereas all the other SW bonus material will be hi-def).
Post
#244842
Topic
Bill Hunt's (Digital Bits) Review of GOUT
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244842/action/topic#244842
Time
Originally posted by: Windexed
I agree 100% with his review, especially the part about who should and should not pick these up. I thought that was spot on. BUT, my problem with him, is that in 2004 he went ga-ga over the "Original Trilogy" release and thought it was the best thing since sliced bread. He had no balls. Instead he gushed about how great they were and how lucky we were to have them at all. Now, 2 years down the road, he jumps on his pedestal and starts ranting. Thanks Bill! Nice timing!
As a member of the boards that Bill occasionally posts at, I recall him being quite the Negative Nancy when the 2004 discs were first announced. He was bitching up a storm about how Lucasfilm couldn't get their stuff together to really honor the films with more elaborate extras, etc. He eventually mellowed and I guess was happy enough to finally have the SW films on DVD. Remember folks, for many people, SW was the reason they bought DVD players back in the day. And they had to wait year after year asking over and over again "When will we get Star Wars on DVD?" I remember when the discs were first announced many people were just as shocked as when Lucasfilm announced the OUT were coming out on DVD earlier this year. People couldn't believe it.
Post
#244835
Topic
Limited Edition Packaging Scans
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244835/action/topic#244835
Time
Originally posted by: Raul2106
Here is the specs for the Alien (2 disc) to prove my point. Notice there is nothing here about "anamorphic". Also you will notice that the original theatrical version is not listed as digitally remastered either.
But the original theatrical version of Alien on that release IS anamorphic. And it IS remastered.

That's the thing about these releases of the Star Wars discs. The Alien DVD came out in 2003. A whole 3 years ago. The specs don't list things like remastered and anamorphic because back in 2003, it was EXPECTED for a high profile release to have a remastered anamorphic transfer. Maybe if these SW discs were released in 1997, they could be given some slack since the format was in its infancy at that time. But today, these discs are below DVD standards in basically every sense. They may look decent. They may even look good to the untrained eye, but they're far from the type of quality that is expected for a release of this magnitude.