Wazzles

Can you throw in the BD frame for comparison?

nickyd47 said:

theMaestro said:

I get the sense, from what Mike Verta had to say on the matter, that the Disney execs don’t seem all that interested in a theatrical version release (hopefully that changes once they hear his pitch). So I’m not sure if they have anything in the works. But on the other hand, we do know that Lucasfilm requested a scan of a print from the Library of Congress. So…maybe they do have something in the works? I dunno. I feel like there’s a lot of mixed signals on the official end of things.

But my optimism is more with this site and the projects people are doing. Even if nothing is released officially, projects here and only getting better and better. If we think Despecialized looks good now, it’ll look even better after utilizing DrDre’s tools and cleaned up Silver Screen Edition scans (& perhaps Technicolor scans in the future?).

Didn’t Mike say that his 4K restoration cost about 100K? To me, this information should be enough to persuade Disney to either release the OUT or begin restoring it. It’ll cost Disney practically nothing to restore these films and they’d make total bank. With millions of hits on those OUT and Special Edition comparison videos, and also the popularity of the despecialized editions, I would find it hard to believe that Disney is unaware of the demand for these versions of the films. I have a feeling it has something to do it FOX still retaining rights until 2020. Maybe Disney wants all the monies

That’s just his personal investment, not price of labor. An official restoration would cost much more.

moviefreakedmind said:

The real trolls are the people who think that RLM says everything they mean and mean everything they say.

The Plinkett character’s opinions on movies and Star Wars are that of his creator. He initially did the voice because he didn’t think people would care if it was just him ranting for an hour. Obviously he’s no murderer.

Knightmessenger said:

Fang Zei said:

Thinking back on it now, would it really have cost all that much money in 2006 (compared to your average dvd of just about any other film) to simply do a new telecine of the same '85 IP elements that were used for the '93 laserdiscs?

I know Lucasfilm’s form response letter said “existing prints are in poor condition,” but come on.

Are you gonna tell me they were in worse shape than whatever film element was used for the examples I listed in my long-ass post like Dune or The Thing or Blade Runner?

George’s whole thing was “don’t spend a single cent of my money remastering it,” but was it really worth the backlash?

I know, I know, “he was surrounded by yes men.” It’s still hard to comprehend.

I think the claim was the prints that had not been restored and re-edited for the special edition were in poor condition and either had faded worse than their 1993 scan or would have required all new color correction and mastering if they didn’t use the existing THX mastered final output.
It’s still lazy. I’m still surprised they never made a film to video transfer of the restored print in 1995 before the alterations were made, as some kind of backup. The oot footage included on the 1997 making of special looks better than the actual gout. (but it’s pan & scan)

Well they never fully restored it in 1997. Many of the elements were too far gone for a standard photochemical restoration to save, which is why a lot of the digital composites happened (although they could have used elements from inter-positives or the separation masters). They had to go back to the individual pre-composite plates and rebuild them in the computer. Then they removed the original degraded shots and replaced them with the re-comps.

Looks good. I’m surprised how good you were able to make the HDTV portions of those frames look!

Staggered releases are good.

Yes.

CatBus said:

Past Lucasfilm releases have always been an exercise in how to get the most money from the least amount of effort. In the extremely unlikely scenario Lucasfilm issues a new improved OOT home video release, er, ever, it’s going to have the 81 crawl, the 93 audio, effed up colors, and degrain/regrain, at the very least–and likely some horrifying audio remastering as well, because that’s the established workflow and changing that would require effort. Access to the original negative only matters if you care about the film.

Even THAT would be something.

Fang Zei said:

Wazzles said:

The 2004 DVDs were announced in February and released in September.

FTFY

Even better.

Z6PO said:

They have access to the original negative, but they can’t compete? (facepalm)

In terms of accuracy, most likely no. In terms of overall detail, yes.

TV’s Frink said:

I’ve said this elsewhere, but with njvc’s custom Blu-ray project featuring Despecialized, I’m not sure I care about an official original release any more. I don’t see how it could compete.

I think we’ve reached a point that unless whatever Lucasfilm puts out is perfect, then what the fans are doing will surpass it.

I doubt it. These things take time, and they generally don’t announce anything like this until around 6 months before release, when all the work is practically done. The 2004 DVDs were announced in February and released in November, and those likely started being worked on in late 2002 or early 2003.

Bingowings said:

Wazzles said:

Piett19bby said:

Where can I download this version of The Empire Strikes Back?

I wouldn’t if I were you. There are much better options available today.

Harmy’s versions are more accurate to the original experience but I still love this version. The colours may be different but they lend a freshness to the image. The reverse effect to uniform cyan tint on the 2004SE or the magenta fade in the GOUT. It plays perfectly well on my by modern standards small telly. It’s still the one I watch most because my stupid media player would constantly go out of sync playing Harmy’s disc images.Something I can’t fix in the settings. So I’ve only seen his versions a couple of times on my even smaller computer monitor.

I mean, if we’re going with SD, I prefer Dark Jedi’s GOUT V3, which actually makes the GOUT watchable. DED 2.0 is pretty damn great, but I personally prefer Grindhouse, since it is 100% theatrical and 100% HD. The colors suck though.

EDIT: I know the colors are intentional on Grindhouse, and I appreciate the work that was done, but they’re a little too off for my taste.

“The 2011 versions are the distribution versions from now on, I would figure.”

Yuck.

Williarob said:

However, I would anticipate the Team Blu releases to be as high quality as we can possibly make them, without being destructive or straying into Special Edition or Despecialization territory.

Does this mean the Team Blu stuff is going to be entirely 35mm?

JawsTDS said:

joefavs said:

You know what? I’m going to go out on a limb and say 2004, because of the prequelisms. The argument that the 1997 cut is superior because it doesn’t have the PT references doesn’t really work for me, because if you’re trying to ignore the PT, you should just watch the OUT, because they’re just better movies. The only thing the SE can really claim to bring to the table is smoother visual continuity with the subsequent installments of the saga, and in that regard the 1997 version is kind of obsolete.

This is a refreshing read. Great points!

The 04 is probably the most justifiable in the sense that it has both updated effects and attempts to tie into the PT. I also like the concept of the 97 (using modern technology to “finish” a film that the creator deemed incomplete), but that leaves the 2011 versions. These should have been simply used as a chance to fix the issues with the 04, but instead were changes for the sake of changes.

The glory days of Star Wars were when you grew up with them. For me, that’s 95-05. It varies for all.

TV’s Frink said:
Basically it’s the Schrödinger’s cat of Star Wars restorations.

Can this be the new title of the restoration?

Sounds primarily like color changes. The best quality thing to do would be to drop in the roofs from the HDTV cap and throw the DTS track under it. You could also do some color work.

There will probably be a US release eventually. I don’t mind you recreating it in the mean time, though. I hope someone can get their hands on a print and scan it some time.

The Phantom Menace is a bad movie. Yet, I like The Phantom Menace.

towne32 said:

You don’t mean TPM? The HDTV version of that is extremely grainy, and the blu-ray is heavily DNRed. AoTC was shot digitally, so I’m not sure there was a need for DNR. The picture quality is better on blu-ray, though.

I’ve heard others say AoTC was DNRed too. Being shot on early digital cameras, it’s not too surprising that there would be a lot of digital noise. This noise would look similar to grain, but it would be less prevalent. It’s simply an artifact of the ancient sensors the film was shot on.

The Blu Ray is the shorter version only, and the OAR is 2.76:1

I think the screener was the digital version. You may be able to dig up a theater recording as a reference, but it would obviously be useless as a source.

towne32 said:
And it’s a very grainy transfer, but that’s probably not as noticeable unless you look at the HDTV version.

That’s my favorite part of the DVD- it actually looks like film! Unfortunately, if you have an HDTV, the edge-enhancement is really obvious and distracting.