Wazzles

Does anyone know if the 30th Anniversary set uses a new master or if it's the current one?

brycebayer said:

Ha ha ha ha.  Oh Frink.  You nut....NEVER!!!!

 I read that as Frink never nuts. Hmm.

The new trailer looked strangely un-Star Wars to me. There's just something about it that doesn't look right. I'm cautiously optimistic about the film regardless. 

StarChewyWar said:

I think you have to see Phantom Menace as a kid to apprieciate [sic] it. Unlike the original trilogy which can be enjoyed at all stages of life though the nostalgia helps lol.

I agree that you have to see Phantom Menace as a child. I think I would have hated it if I saw it any older than like 13. It was one of, if not the, first films I ever saw in theaters, and I still prefer it to Clones as a result. 

Unfortunately, I have to disagree that the OT can be seen at any age. I showed Star Wars to an 11 and 12 year old recently and they seemed really bored by it (oddly, their younger sister seemed pretty engaged). This could vary from child to child, but I think you have to see it either really young where it blows you away or when you're old enough to appreciate it. 

Voted as well. Surprised to see The Big Sleep hasn't been released already, as well as any food packaging using the word "moist". That's something you don't see a lot of today.

zee944 said:

Noone put any effort into it. It's pure incompetence and negligence the way they handled the transfers. Perhaps they didn't even want to remove the pillarboxing, but even if they did they had the wrong reason for it. It was pointless (overscan in 2006 anyone?), they've lost information on both sides and the encode didn't even have new detail.

They just didn't care. It was hard to swallow, but it's been 9 years already. Let's move on.

 I wouldn't day incompetence or negligence- this would imply that they were even trying. 

I don't think you're going to change anyone's mind here. Also, I can sum up the ring theory in one word: recycling. 

Am I the only one who never noticed the slugs until it was pointed out that they were removed from the Blu Ray?

I'm definitely not trying to say the SE's are better or anything. I just meant that their existence doesn't bother me. It's fun to look at them once and a while. I'm just bothered that the OOT isn't available alongside them. And the SE's are by far worse than the OOT, but I like some aspects of them and can see how some may prefer them. 

I'm honestly surprised George didn't try to censor that, but censor the cell block shootout instead.

That's my only real problem with the SEs- the previous versions of the films are not made available.

We could just use both meanings, but I don't think poita would feel much better as a result.

Darth Id said:

Tobar said:

 

 There is zero incentive for anyone that already owns the films to buy them YET AGAIN,

 I guess somebody's never heard of a little thing called...

STEELBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 Do people actually collect these or something?

towne32 said:

Mike O said:

but why spend the tons of money and time on a restoration of a version with a tiny existing interested group of purchasers when the existing versions, for which they already have HD masters, are selling like heroine?

 If they ever want to release in 4K (and not just an upscale), they'll need to either release the 1997 version as-is, or spend money modifying them in some way. That could mean re-building something that resembles the 2011, the OOT, or both. 

 Well not even the 97's as-is would work. AFAIK, the CGI is rendered in like 2k. So to release the current version (or something that resembles it, they would have to re-render the added CGI from 97, 2004, and (probably) 2011, and then upscale the content shot digitally (the Emperor in ESB, Hayden in RoTJ). No matter what, releasing the SE in 4k will be some sort of a pain in the ass. It's likely that the OOT may be easier to restore at 4k since there is no CGI, save for a few wire-frame models that would look fine regardless. 

joefavs said:

First thing I tried, they don't have them and they're more like $20 on Amazon. I think I'll just keep my eyes peeled for those at other thrift stores.

 That's really your best option. I don't know what the VHS market is like where your are, but almost every time I am at Goodwill (and I mean specifically Goodwill) I see a copy of the 95 trilogy. Occasionally I run into the older releases, and those seem to be easier to fine at other thrift store. Anyway, good luck!

You could just go to Goodwill and pick up the 95 tapes for like $3.

Mavimao said:

Harmy said:

For an effect shot, the original negative is the first generation copy of the finished shot, which would be in the assembled negative cut, not the individual elements - those are the original negative of the individual elements but not of the shot.

 Unless you're Stanley Kubrick on 2001, in which case, every element is shot on the same piece of film. 

 I believe they did this with Blade Runner as well.

joefavs said:

^Because they've got most of it redone with digital compositing already from the SE. I'm not saying they're more likely to restore the 1993 version or something than the theatrical one, I'm saying I think they could end up making a new thing with the same content as the theatrical version, but cleaned up. Like what the SE should have been.

 The problem with that is that they are then still ignoring the Oscar-winning effects of a ton of great artists. And really, a lot of us would be perfectly fins with the SE if a good version of the OOT existed on home video. Then fan editors can do the things like keeping in certain recomps and what not. Basically what kk650 is doing. I think if Lucasfilm/Disney released something like that, it would be awful. 

Fang Zei said:

Yeah, a restoration should and in all likelihood would have the '77 version of the crawl.

I honestly don't care if they include the '81 crawl as an option or not, but since it would be the easiest thing I guess they should do it simply out of completionism for the theatrically released versions of the movies. Although, if we're gonna go down that slippery slope, where do the 70mm edits and the various sound mixes fall on the importance scale?

 I would really love it if Empire was released with both the 70mm and 35mm versions, but I don't think that will ever happen.

hairy_hen said:

Ass Windex?

Well, they say the eyes are the window to the soul.   So it seems there is no other logical explanation than that Mace's ass is an eye, which is a window to . . . well, something.  (The soul of the Force?)  Presumably not a very clean window if it needs Windex to be able to see into it.

 

I challenge anyone to try to disprove this, because you know you can't.  Yeah, I said it.

 Well, carrots are good for your eyes, and since orange is pretty much the opposite of purple, your logic holds. Flawless.

DuracellEnergizer said:

towne32 said:

It's turned into a pissing contest of who can most effectively destroy the franchise that people are already kind of "meh" about. 

Meh? Bah! I'd rather see an actual decent Fantastic Four movie than another mediocre, overrated Buttman movie anyday. 

 Hehe, butt.

Honestly I don't think we'll ever see the 81 crawl again. And by 81 crawl, I mean the one that has the ESB starfield. 

CatBus said:

Now, if they release Star Wars in HD with the 81 crawl, 93 audio, and poorly-restored colors (and that's your most likely scenario, IMO)

 I don't see the first two as a real possibility. They already released the GOUT with the 77 crawl, meaning that they have the elements, and that it's more common knowledge that it's the original crawl. I don't think the 93 audio is a possibility since it's only a 2.0 track. What seems more likely to me is a half-assed 5.1 or 6.1 remix. 

Poor colors, on the other hand, is pretty much a given, looking at Lucasfilm's track record recently with Star Wars grading. What I would be more concerned about is getting a transfer on par with Star Trek III or IV, where they just threw a quickie DNR'd transfer together and called it good. The thing is, even if we got something with shit colors, poor colors, and a mediocre soundtrack, it would still be better than the GOUT, and provide more material for fan preservations.

DominicCobb said:

I've stated at length why Disney wouldn't want to do this in the 4K thread. Now, why they might: canon.

That's the one thing that'd make them pause. Now that there's apparently a story group, there's certainly a question of which version they consider canon. Right now it's the SE. But with the OOT release likely impending, and with people like Rian Johnson being the main authors of the new continuity, I wouldn't be surprised if there are some conversations about changing that. But then what, the OOT is canon and the SE isn't anymore? Would they want to change their minds? Would that switch actually change anything, continuity-wise?

Probably not. But if the quandary really gets under their skin, we could see a new version. Ultimately, though, I think it's not worth the effort and most people will probably say "who cares" anyway.

 What's most likely happening is that the ST will be written so that either will work canon, making no mention of anything specific in the SE or OOT. Unless they make a Han shot first joke.

SilverWook said:

Seems a little short sighted for EOD to have been shot in standard def in 2004.

 It's not the only documentary from that era to be shot in SD. Metallica: Some Kind of Monster was also shot this way. Probably just a status-quo type of thing.