Tiptup

Originally posted by: Mike O
She proably said what the "official LFL response" said. Again, we must remember, that Lucas is still contemptuous of these versions. He wants to test the waters, and as we all know, he'll be surprised by the results. "Now we'll find out whether people wanted the original or the improved versions. It will all come out in the end." What is the end? The 30th anniversary? Everybody cross their fingers.

Originally posted by: rennervision
I thought "Close the blast doors!" was in the original, original, original version of Star Wars, then it somehow got omitted in all the home video versions that followed. All of us who watched it on VHS for years got accustomed to this version. So when we saw the SE, we thought we were hearing it for the first time when, in actuality, the SE restored this original line back into the soundtrack.

Originally posted by: Bissrok
Yeah. And things the 500 page topic talking about how great Ian McDiarmid was in the movies.

And then there's thing like this... It's by a guy called 'darthsith19':




I'm pretty sure none of these people have seen AOTC...

Originally posted by: Invader Jenny
I don't care what soundtrack they use as long as the lines "Close the blast doors!" and "You're lucky you don't taste very good." are in the movie.

My laserdisc is missing the former line. It makes me sad.

Originally posted by: Mielr
Since I saw AOTC, I thought they were missing out on some interesting plot elements in ROTS by not having Obi-Wan secretly in love with Padme (without Ben expressing his feelings for her, though. I don't think he would have done that to Anakin or to Padme). I think a kind of "love triangle" like that would have deepened the drama, especially when Ben essentially watched her die in ROTS (and watched the torment she went through with Anakin), and would have given Anakin another motive to want to fight Ben, if he sensed his Ben's feelings for Padme. They sort of barely hinted at something like that- but it really never came to fruition.

Originally posted by: skyjedi2005
My advice is you already own them don't bother buying them again unless he releases the oot in anamorphic widescreen with 5.1 and digital restoration, and all the old documentaries and deleted scenes.

Originally posted by: Mielr
What address should we send them to? Should we send them to the Jim Ward address?

Originally posted by: boris
I disagree, the Blu-Ray format goes way too far. The HD-DVD format goes too far. And what's up with those regions? Now we share "ours" with China and Russia? The courts will make region coding illegal like they did with DVD anyway, but that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

I’m not sure where Australia/New-Zealand would be since the page I found doesn’t say. I’d assume you’d be in the Japan/Americas region. Even then, hopefully they’ll dump the region idea completely. I don’t know if the currently released Blu-ray discs are region free or not (so far the HD-DVD discs seem to have no region encoding).




Wow, you really are reaching far in your criticism of Blu-ray over HD-DVD. You’re incredibly repetitive regarding topics I have already answered in detail and you are thus increasingly unfounded in your opinions. Do you work for an HD-DVD company or something like that?

First, let me talk about storage: I don’t always want to purchase an HDD every time I might want to store data. A large capacity, DVD style format would be handy in general. Even then, you’re being irrational, since I’m not in the entertainment or electronics business and I’m not the one spending billions of dollars to force these formats on people. The most-adopted format will offer me the most CONVENIENCE and I prefer that format be more versatile. Is that so hard for you to understand? I’m not fucking asking you to “buy my argument” and go buy Blu-ray yourself. I’m asking you to see my point of view. If you are so unreasonable that you can’t do that, then please, simply remain silent.

As I said earlier, Blu-ray discs cost a bit more to produce, but they are not selling for more than HD-DVDs. As a consumer I won’t be “bleeding my wallet dry” in comparison. Where the heck does this “double the price” nonsense come from?

Of course, publishing companies won’t be making as much money with Blu-ray at first, but as more discs are printed and more machines are built, the discs will have very little cost difference with HD-DVD discs. As for the cost of players, they’ll go down in no time, just as HD-DVD players dropped in price after their initial release.

Also, HD-DVD is almost just as bad with the copy protection, so I don’t understand why you’re phrasing that element as if it offered some major critical contrast. You’re once again sounding “ludicrous” (using your chosen word).


Originally posted by: Jobel
I'm willing to give them a chance once they start putting out discs that offer image quality that is at least as good as what HD-DVD have put out, but until then, the ball is no longer in their court.

Originally posted by: Harlock415
it just irks me to no end. Lucas has vast resources and people willing and able to do it for him. This whole huge cost line is a crock. THe restorers would consider it a labor of love.

Originally posted by: Jobel

There's still this bizarre idea that capacity = better for a movie playback platform. The plain and simple fact is that a VC1/AVC encoded movie will not need 50GB. Not even with extreme picture quality. Not even with the inclusion of lossless audio codecs.

Uhh, so, you believe the amount of data a disk can hold doesn’t matter? Is that why I have a two 200 GB hard drives on my computer?

There are many useful reasons to support a format that has higher storage capacity beyond simply watching a single movie. It’s ridiculous to simply toss aside such an advantage lightly. If we’re going to have some new format forced on us by electronics and entertainment companies, then I say we should get the one that is more versatile and will last longer in general.




Did I say ‘bandwith’?

It is the transfer rate that is higher on a Blu-ray disc, and that is what I meant by “faster” reading and burning. The reason the transfer rate is higher is because of the way data is written on the disks. A BD does not need to spin as quickly to be read as fast. That means for the same speed drive, a BD will get you more information in the same amount of time. This is a nice step beyond DVD and HD-DVD.


Originally posted by: Jobel

Blu-Ray most certainly is not the only proper option. HD-DVD is just as 'proper.' That's the whole point, the formats are interchangeable. Being an advocate of either is ludicrous.

Originally posted by: Mielr

A lot of actors don't like to watch themselves on film, what I meant by "fan" is that he was always the one hanging out in the Star Wars FX dept., watching how the visual effects were coming along, collecting memoribilia, and speaking enthusiastically and passionately about the films in public. He's often spoken about how excited he was to be in the Star Wars movies, because of the fact that he was such a fan of adventure movies when he was a kid.

Originally posted by: Scruffy
Really?

Well, if you're asking about the line you quoted from me, then yes, laypeople who don't care about terms are calling Blu-Ray discs an HD-DVD. Sounds dumb, I know, but that does affect the general market's recognition of names which is what I was discussing. (And, if they aren’t calling it a ‘superior’ HD-DVD then they should in my opinion.)



Originally posted by: Jobel
HD-DVD hardware is half the price of Bluray hardware too. Consumers will vote with their wallets here.

Originally posted by: Mielr
I've always loved Mark Hamill, aside from the fact that he's a great family man, he was always the one member of the SW cast who seemed to be a fan of the films, and not just an actor in them. He never tried to distance himself from the films, like Ford and Fisher did.