- Post
- #230593
- Topic
- Star Wars DVD Covers
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230593/action/topic#230593
- Time
Go Here!
Go Here!
boris
- User Group
- Members
- Join date
- 24-Apr-2006
- Last activity
- 11-Oct-2006
- Posts
- 447
Post History
Go Here!
- Post
- #230592
- Topic
- The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230592/action/topic#230592
- Time
Originally posted by: Zion
I don't think it proves that it's the original, but it could very well be. The only reason I doubt it is because the video doesn't jump around like the EOD clip does.
Well I've not seen the hyperspace one, but could that simply mean they've removed camera-jitter? Or what did you mean by "jump around"?I don't think it proves that it's the original, but it could very well be. The only reason I doubt it is because the video doesn't jump around like the EOD clip does.
- Post
- #230591
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230591/action/topic#230591
- Time
Originally posted by: klokwerk
You're from Australia, boris? No, wellington actually.I can say that yes, that's true. While the Theatrical version of E.T. was released alongside the digitally altered version, Australia didn't get it at all.
No, but here I can go down to the local shops and have them import a version for me, if its not released in NZ and if they haven't already imported it and put it on the shelf (or if I just specifically want the overseas version). Of course I can also order online, as I sometimes do. A majority of the DVD's on our shelves are imported from Australia, and so as I've not seen an Aus DVD of E.T. being sold with the theatrical version lead to me to assume it's not been released here, nor there. We're not the only country in the world which relies on international releases either, which is why it would bother me greatly if Blu-Ray and HD-DVD tried to impose region coding on us - as you probably know, it is illegal to sell region-locked DVD players in NZ - and how Playstation and XBox get away with it I don't know, but the fact of the matter is that retailers are responcible for ensuring that every DVD player they sell will play all DVD regions or they can't sell it.You're from Australia, boris? No, wellington actually.I can say that yes, that's true. While the Theatrical version of E.T. was released alongside the digitally altered version, Australia didn't get it at all.
From what I've heard Aus has 4-5 times the number of movies released by local DVD distributors then we do, and the USA/Canada have more then 50 times the number of movies we do (which is why it's legal to import them from foreign distributors for retail - they call that parallel importing, and it's legal to parallel import movies, music, books and I think software and computer games too). Removing the vaseline smudge under the speeder in SW is roughly the same as removing the cobra reflection - its digital fudging and something they couldn't have done when the movie was made.
- Post
- #230579
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230579/action/topic#230579
- Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo
I'll bet you five bucks that when Spielberg finally noticed the reflection of the glass in the Indy cobra scene, it was way too late to reshoot. I'll bet it's a total "d'oh!" moment (even though "d'oh" wouldn't be invented for another eight years or so). That method is probably exactly what they'd do today: it's a cheap, effective, practical effect. It just had a tiny flaw. It's obviously preserved someplace in all its reflective glory (I have it in HD, for example), so I don't mind it being digitally fixed up for the DVD box set.
That's not the only change, I notice almost every single change they made, and for me it makes the film unenjoyable because I know how it used to be, and when I don't see what I'm expecting I feel it's an insult to my intelligence. They didn't have to do any digital fudging - but instead they chose to fix the things they couldn't fix before due to technology - like the blue-screen shots. One of the things about watching older movies is you know it's a blue-screen effect if there's a blue-cast on the characters (especially hair, etc). To take that out makes it look like a modern effect, which is a lie because it's an old movie. They didn't have to change anything, they shouldn't have digitally fudged it - and I refuse to purchase their fudged version. The unaltered Indy trilogy, along with the SW Trilogy is one of the things on DVD I have waited for for the longest time, and I continue to wait - and I know Lucasfilm never will release unaltered indy. The very least they could have done was seamless branching so you watch the original - but they didn't even do that. The changes are no bigger then the changes they made to The Lion King - but you check it out Lion King fans are outraged by the changes - and I for one agree. Movies should not be modified - and if they are, the original should always be available.I'll bet you five bucks that when Spielberg finally noticed the reflection of the glass in the Indy cobra scene, it was way too late to reshoot. I'll bet it's a total "d'oh!" moment (even though "d'oh" wouldn't be invented for another eight years or so). That method is probably exactly what they'd do today: it's a cheap, effective, practical effect. It just had a tiny flaw. It's obviously preserved someplace in all its reflective glory (I have it in HD, for example), so I don't mind it being digitally fixed up for the DVD box set.
"But didn't Spielberg release the untouched version at the same time?"
Yes, but I don't think we ever got an official domestic release - and i'm pretty sure australia didn't either.
- Post
- #230575
- Topic
- .: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230575/action/topic#230575
- Time
Originally posted by: blitter
My only real concern regarding the project is the preservation/restoration of its audio... has there been much discussion yet about what will be done about the audio tracks, specifically the 5.1 mix? In my opinion the Dolby 5.1 surround PCM found on the DC is somewhat weak...
There was a mono soundtrack - the one that was considered the most complete soundtrack from what I hear, a stereo sound track and a "6 channel" surround sound track that was basically 4.2 as compared to 5.1, except the 4th track was not unique like the other 3, so really it was left, centre, right, surround (which was a combination of the other 3) and 2 low-frequency channels. When shown in theatres in 1977 SW did not have surround sound equal to 5.1, it wouldn't even be equal to decent 4.1 tracks - and that's the 6-channel soundmix, the other two - well one was mono and the other was simply stereo. Most people would have seen (or rather heard) the stereo or mono version in cinemas.My only real concern regarding the project is the preservation/restoration of its audio... has there been much discussion yet about what will be done about the audio tracks, specifically the 5.1 mix? In my opinion the Dolby 5.1 surround PCM found on the DC is somewhat weak...
My feeling is if you expect to get a full 5.1 mix out of star wars, you should buy the special edition dvd, a 5.1 mix is one of the things they changed and prepared for the special edition.
- Post
- #230571
- Topic
- The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230571/action/topic#230571
- Time
Originally posted by: Zion
This would confirm that the OUT trailer crawl is somehow doctored, seeing that the logo is nowhere near this faded away in the clip and the crawl is farther along.
Yes it shows what you said before, that for the preview they faded the SW logo out later then in the real-time crawl to make it faster, I'd say that's very strong evidence that the crawl is the original (which I believe it is), and not recreated. By the way, what's that awful yellow line doing in your frames? This would confirm that the OUT trailer crawl is somehow doctored, seeing that the logo is nowhere near this faded away in the clip and the crawl is farther along.
- Post
- #230507
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230507/action/topic#230507
- Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo
I can't get too excited about changes like that. In those cases, I would actually buy George's (Steven's, James') argument that he's fixing stuff that he wanted to fix way back when, but didn't have the resources or technology.
But with my T2 example, they did all they could at the time, right down to reversing the text on the sign the truck drives past. I don't want to see the driver bought back by CGI. I don't want Arni's endoskeleton to be replaced with T3-friendly CGI as opposed to the make-up that took hours to apply. digital fudging of old and classic movies just does not float my boat. You're taking it out of context, and with the Indy movies you're pretending that movies made in the 80's were done with today's technology, yet shot on yesterdays technology, using methods they would now do in other ways? It does not work for me. It's like the replacements in The Lion King - they're just killing the classic movie by "improving it". It's film colourization, because you're digitally fudging the imperfections, which is what colourization tries to do - to fudge the imperfection of the absence of colour – to say "well I would have shot it on colour film, if I could have" and then to fudge it.I can't get too excited about changes like that. In those cases, I would actually buy George's (Steven's, James') argument that he's fixing stuff that he wanted to fix way back when, but didn't have the resources or technology.
The effects shots should look like 80's effects shots, they're not perfect – but that's how they did it back then. In E.T. you had some scenes replaced by a CGI E.T.! And you're going on about walkie talkies - and I agree changing that was stupid, but it's worrying they introduced CGI E.T. and stuff. This is why I'm looking forward to Blade Runner next year, it will be like Alien - presented well, authentically and the way the sane director wants it. I trust Scott not to digitally fudge and introduce CGI - because he respects his art.
- Post
- #230389
- Topic
- The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230389/action/topic#230389
- Time
Originally posted by: zombie84
"the original theatrical version" is flagarant false advertising. But there's no such thing as a theatrical version on home equipment, the very statement alone is a contradiction, and your attack of it being "false advertising" is just another way to throw unjustified attacks at something you're angry about, justifying them to yourself using your own inventive convenient definitions that are still based on speculation, not based on widely-accepted definitions, and not based on factual reality.They promised us the theatrical versions. They've already made a slew of crappy decisions for this release. Now they're flat-out lying to us.
No you see, they're not. They've been honest about it. It's the forum members here who are flat-out lying about the September release, not LucasFilm, Fox or George Lucas. "the original theatrical version" is flagarant false advertising. But there's no such thing as a theatrical version on home equipment, the very statement alone is a contradiction, and your attack of it being "false advertising" is just another way to throw unjustified attacks at something you're angry about, justifying them to yourself using your own inventive convenient definitions that are still based on speculation, not based on widely-accepted definitions, and not based on factual reality.They promised us the theatrical versions. They've already made a slew of crappy decisions for this release. Now they're flat-out lying to us.
- Post
- #230384
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230384/action/topic#230384
- Time
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger
And I don't see how the Indiana Jones dvd set is like film coloring.
Film colouring changes the dynamics of the movie - it essentially pretends the movie is something that it's not - so by colouring a b&w film you make it look like it was shot on colour.And I don't see how the Indiana Jones dvd set is like film coloring.
The same thing applies to the changes they made to the indy changes. One of the changes they made involved digitally removing a reflection from plexiglass that was in the movie. It was in the movie because at the time it was impossible to digitally remove, however movies today when they're shot can have those things digitally edited with the click of your fingers. For instance, in ROTJ there's a mirrored scene with the uniforms the wrong way around, and in the 2004 version they switched the uniforms while keeping the scene mirrored. Another example is in terminator 2 when a stunt-man drives the truck off the bridge - that scene is mirrored, and while they did digitally mirror the sign the truck drives past they didn't doctor the driver and steering wheel to the other side because they didn't have the technology, so instead they darkened the windows so you couldn't see the driver.
That is why it's like film colouring.
- Post
- #230382
- Topic
- The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230382/action/topic#230382
- Time
Originally posted by: zombie84
Boris, doctoring the colour of my caps and saying "your caps look the same to me" is stupid. The.E.O.D.c.r.a.w.l.was.coloured.to.look.like.2004.crawls.made.to.look.like.pt.crawls.The.E.O.D.c.r.a.w.l.was.re.-coloured.
"FACT: The colouring matches the 1993 video"
No it doesn't. Here, see for yourself:
grow up. it doesn't match at all.
FACT: The crawl depicted in the trailer never existed
FACT: The EOD footage has a different starfield
What, are you completely out of touch with reality? Look for yourself:
The.star.field.is.the.same.The.crawl.is.the.same.
Only the SW logo is different everything.else.is.exactly.the.same.
the best conclusion drawable is that its merely a digitally re-created one, likely done using the same technique made for the prequels.
Whatever you say, sherlock.Originally posted by: skyjedi2005
I sure hope the s.o.b. burns in hell for this.
R.I.P oot.
Look, I don't know what the hell goes through your mind, but ... nevermind, "burn in hell, lucas" - i hope Lucas remembers that next time you demand something from him. Boris, doctoring the colour of my caps and saying "your caps look the same to me" is stupid. The.E.O.D.c.r.a.w.l.was.coloured.to.look.like.2004.crawls.made.to.look.like.pt.crawls.The.E.O.D.c.r.a.w.l.was.re.-coloured.
"FACT: The colouring matches the 1993 video"
No it doesn't. Here, see for yourself:
grow up. it doesn't match at all.
FACT: The crawl depicted in the trailer never existed
FACT: The EOD footage has a different starfield
What, are you completely out of touch with reality? Look for yourself:
The.star.field.is.the.same.The.crawl.is.the.same.
Only the SW logo is different everything.else.is.exactly.the.same.
the best conclusion drawable is that its merely a digitally re-created one, likely done using the same technique made for the prequels.
Whatever you say, sherlock.Originally posted by: skyjedi2005
I sure hope the s.o.b. burns in hell for this.
R.I.P oot.
- Post
- #230058
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230058/action/topic#230058
- Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo
I guess I have to quote you again:
I reiterate: no matter how much you pretend to be rational and objective, you are not, as long as you continue to present "facts" such as the ones quoted above.
Anything there isn't clear evidence for is clearly identified as being speculation and not fact.I guess I have to quote you again:
Most of [the cleanup needed] is due to anomalies created by Laserdisc and not the master.
Actually, the film was cleaned up frame-for frame, and is far more extensive then the amount of clean-up that's being done by X0
[E]ven if they don't do more correction, the fact is the amount of colour correction and film cleanup they did in 1993 is way more then the X0 project is [doing].
Now, can you explain how that isn't ripping on the X0 Project?
Certainly, I was simply putting Marvolo's points into context, and if you look back he's actually edited his points now. All I wanted to show was that the points he made were biased.Originally posted by: KaryudoActually, the film was cleaned up frame-for frame, and is far more extensive then the amount of clean-up that's being done by X0
[E]ven if they don't do more correction, the fact is the amount of colour correction and film cleanup they did in 1993 is way more then the X0 project is [doing].
Now, can you explain how that isn't ripping on the X0 Project?
I reiterate: no matter how much you pretend to be rational and objective, you are not, as long as you continue to present "facts" such as the ones quoted above.
"- George is not doing for the OUT what he did for his revised versions (i.e. colour correction, cleaning, anamorphic transfer, etc.), which is disappointing since he clearly could have done better, and we know this is true even before seeing the results."
The way I see it is that it's good news that he's not going to crank up the film grain removal, and re-colour the entire film yet again.
- Post
- #230054
- Topic
- The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230054/action/topic#230054
- Time
Originally posted by: zombie84
Boris now you are just talking nonesense. The clip is not identical to EOD at all.
Really?Boris now you are just talking nonesense. The clip is not identical to EOD at all.
Because it looks the same to me, and those are your screencaps.
"The colour is different."
Yes, but they clearly recoloured it for EOD. That proves nothing.
"The entire background is different."
Rubbish, the starfield is identical.
"The black levels are different."
Again, this proves nothing. They bought the stars out better with the trailer, so naturally when doing this the black level would change (and even then there are many other reasons why it can change).
"The composition of the logo is different."
Well maybe, but I don't see that in your EOD screencap.
"We know the EOD is not photoshopped because it is taken from the 35mm originals from the LFL archives."
You're assuming this.
"But sometimes the truth can be unpleasant."
And the truth is its not recreated.
- Post
- #230031
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230031/action/topic#230031
- Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo
Are you talking about boris reading his crystal ball and condemning the X0 Project before he's even seen it? I thought so.
If you think I'm trying to rip on the X0 project then you've compleatly missed the point. Are you talking about boris reading his crystal ball and condemning the X0 Project before he's even seen it? I thought so.
- Post
- #229716
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229716/action/topic#229716
- Time
Originally posted by: DarthBalls1138
I'll tell you something I don't like: @$$holes like *Boris* detracting from the point of this site, and you can bet your @$$ that if I had moderator status I would have banned him simply for being stupid and detracting from the point of the site. But I don't have moderator status, so I leave it up to the moderators, hopefully one of them is kind-hearted enough, and as intolerant of people like this as I am, that they would not only ban him but crash his harddrive at the same time, once again for being stupid (and ofcourse detracting from the point of the site)!
One final point before I go: This is exactly the kind of hate-mongering I was talking about earlier.I'll tell you something I don't like: @$$holes like *Boris* detracting from the point of this site, and you can bet your @$$ that if I had moderator status I would have banned him simply for being stupid and detracting from the point of the site. But I don't have moderator status, so I leave it up to the moderators, hopefully one of them is kind-hearted enough, and as intolerant of people like this as I am, that they would not only ban him but crash his harddrive at the same time, once again for being stupid (and ofcourse detracting from the point of the site)!
Peace.
- Post
- #229715
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229715/action/topic#229715
- Time
Originally posted by: Zion
The cleanup involved in the 1993 release actually did remove a lot of dirt and scratches. The immense amount of dirt in the pre-THX LDs is evidence enough. But the cleanup didn't remove everything and the ghosting it left behind is almost unbearable for me to watch anymore. You'd be surprised how many burn marks were still in the video after their extensive cleanup job. All of these will be absent from the X0 release, as will the shots horribly affected by the DVNR.
I don't doubt that, all I was trying to say is that if you started with the digital SD tapes that Lucasfilm started with in 1993 before any cleanup was done, I don't believe your version would be anywhere near as cleaned up as theirs.The cleanup involved in the 1993 release actually did remove a lot of dirt and scratches. The immense amount of dirt in the pre-THX LDs is evidence enough. But the cleanup didn't remove everything and the ghosting it left behind is almost unbearable for me to watch anymore. You'd be surprised how many burn marks were still in the video after their extensive cleanup job. All of these will be absent from the X0 release, as will the shots horribly affected by the DVNR.
You can take it for granted that Lucasfilm monitors this site, and so I could easily speculate that they've employed a team to clean up their 1993 digital master beyond the extent that you could with the LD captures. Of course I can only speculate on this, and I'm not in anyway saying it will happen - it's just a thought. Another thought is that if you started with the OUT DVD's and cleaned them up, wouldn't they look better then the cleaned-up X0 capture?
Anyway, I'm going to do other things now so until tomorrow or whenever I return - stay well.
- Post
- #229710
- Topic
- The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229710/action/topic#229710
- Time
Originally posted by: zombie84
Boris, its not plain speculation--its based on evidence! Its based on video examples! LOL! What more do you want! The trailer for the dvd which is designed to sell the OOT's release contains a clip which says in a flaming blue banner "original crawl" and the crawl is clearly not the original crawl. How much more evidence do you need? Clearly the clip proves that it is not the original crawl--all that remains to be seen is if this clip was doctored for the trailer, and this is the only point that is speculatory.
It's only evidence because you choose to believe it is. Zion made a good point that they could have been deliberately speeding it up - shaving a couple of seconds here and a couple of seconds there in adverts does make a difference. The crawl looks completely identical to the one in empire of dreams (except for when the SW logo fades). There are so many other explanations available, and you've chosen to jump to conclusions and to believe just one of many reasonable explanations. And the one you've chosen to believe, I feel is much more far fetched then believing that the crawl is the original. So, how do you know the Empire of Dreams crawl is not photoshopped and is the original? Because of the ANH crawl on the 2004 DVD? The ANH crawl on the 2004 DVD was recreated, wasn't it? Surely you must have some better evidence. Boris, its not plain speculation--its based on evidence! Its based on video examples! LOL! What more do you want! The trailer for the dvd which is designed to sell the OOT's release contains a clip which says in a flaming blue banner "original crawl" and the crawl is clearly not the original crawl. How much more evidence do you need? Clearly the clip proves that it is not the original crawl--all that remains to be seen is if this clip was doctored for the trailer, and this is the only point that is speculatory.
- Post
- #229705
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229705/action/topic#229705
- Time
Originally posted by: Marvolo
the only reason why I said that is because he said he didn't like the site.
Read what I wrote again, I said clearly there are many things about the community which I don't like - that is very different to saying I don't like the site. the only reason why I said that is because he said he didn't like the site.
- Post
- #229702
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229702/action/topic#229702
- Time
Originally posted by: Zion
What I mean is once I own the September DVD's I will post screenshots from other DVD's I have that are equal or lower quality - and probably have the scratches and hairs that the SW Trilogy won't have, and will clearly show the "OUT" is not unreasonably low in quality. boris said:
I am going to prove that this is wrong in September, when I will show everyone official DVD's that I own, that I had no problem buying and look worse then the September SW trilogy OUT discs.
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this. I am going to prove that this is wrong in September, when I will show everyone official DVD's that I own, that I had no problem buying and look worse then the September SW trilogy OUT discs.
- Post
- #229699
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229699/action/topic#229699
- Time
Originally posted by: Marvolo
Let me explain to you the difference between the XO Project and the "Added Value Bonus" piece of shit we are getting in September.
XO ProjectLet me explain to you the difference between the XO Project and the "Added Value Bonus" piece of shit we are getting in September.
_________
1. Anamorphic
No it's not. It's pseudo-anamorphic. It's resized non-anamorphic video.
2. Cleaned up frame by frame.
Most of this is due to anomalies created by Laserdisc and not the master.
3. Color corrected where ever it needed it.
4. Done by people who care about the films and take the time to do the project right.
5. Mastered from a generational analogue source.
6. Transferred by fans.
George Lucas' "Added Value Bonus" shit
_____________________________
1. A straight to disc transfer of the movies from laserdisc with no clean up.
Actually, the film was cleaned up frame-for frame, and is far more extensive then the amount of clean-up that's being done by X0
2. Absolutely not anamorphic.
3. No color correction and no dirt or smudge cleanup on any of the frames.
Actually, the film had extensive colour correction, and had dirt, scratches, fading and other deformities cleaned when they made the master in 1993.
There is also no evidence that there isn't going to be some more colour correction and cleanup done to the masters before DVD release, what you've said is based on speculation. And even if they don't do more correction, the fact is the amount of colour correction and film cleanup they did in 1993 is way more then the X0 project is.
4. Done by someone who could care less about the OOT and is trying to capitalize on the bootleg market and make a quick buck.
Absolutely not true. Lucas had a real passion for releasing the theatrical version in 1993, and that is the master the Sep DVD's are coming from.
5. Mastered from a digital source.
6. Transferred by professionals who are well paid to do a commercial-grade job.
I could add many more points. You choose to ignore so much, and to see things the way you want to believe it. Well that's fine. I'm very happy to be getting the OUT on DVD. Unlike some others here, I don't own the LD's. I have pirated LD rips, and I would much, much rather have the September DVD's over pirated LD rips, over the X0 copies and over official THX laserdiscs. There is so little to actually complain about the September DVD's that you guys have strung out the little things and blown them way out of proportion - such as it not being anamorphic. And to make things worse, there's not enough of these to complain about, even when strung out - so the ot.com forum members make up things and speculate about what "could" be wrong with them, and then act as if they know that there are going to be these little problems - and then string them out, and complain about them!
Like the opening crawl. Like the sound mix. Like the video being interlaced. Like the possible small little glitches in the digital masters. You don't actually KNOW there's going to be anything wrong with any of this - but you'll complain about it, and string out those complaints anyway.
As far as I'm concerned to Lucas ot.com is probably what PETA is to KFC. Whether or not you've got legitimate concerns, you string out everything way beyond the scope if it's meaning - you harass, vent hate and anger, expect everything to be done your way - you're convinced that there's nothing wrong with the way you bring your concerns, you're convinced that all of your concerns are valid, you're convinced that you're right and they're wrong on every single thing. I have never heard of PETA deliberately working together with KFC, all they do is complain, harass, complain, harass, and hate. They blame KFC for things outside of their control like how the hens they buy from factory farms are raised. Just like people here blame Lucas for things like Industrial Light and Magic selling off the physical effects unit.
I wouldn't give an organization like PETA a grain of salt because I know that they're hatemongering pigs that think just because they stand for something moral like Animal Rights they can do whatever they like, however they like and still get respect for it and be doing the right thing. Now I'm not saying that ot.com is as bad as PETA, hell I wouldn't dream of saying that. But honestly, the direction this forum has taken, the lengths to which people here string out their complaints, the way in which they speculate about things they can complain about, and the way in which they talk about Lucas is, well, disturbing.
The DVD version of the Indy trilogy is like film colourization.
I come here because there are some great members of this forum with something genuine to contribute.
- Post
- #229686
- Topic
- The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229686/action/topic#229686
- Time
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi
"1. how do you know the empire of dreams has the original version? 2. How do you know that there weren't 3 slightly differently formatted crawls for the 3 theatrical versions?"
Now you're just making shit up. Until you know otherwise, your musings are mute.
Until you and Zombie know otherwise, your points are mute."1. how do you know the empire of dreams has the original version? 2. How do you know that there weren't 3 slightly differently formatted crawls for the 3 theatrical versions?"
Now you're just making shit up. Until you know otherwise, your musings are mute.
You really hate me don't you MeBeJedi? LOL, I can't remember how many times you've tried staring a flame war with me, but it's gotta be 5 or 6 times now at least. It just seems to me that saying:
The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
When there is no real evidence to prove this is true is just plain speculation and general Lucas hate-mongering. That's my opinion, and if you don't like it then by all means believe that the original crawl on the SW OUT DVD is a simulation, and if you want to believe in elves and aliens as well and that there once was a real star wars and that Lucas is a big fat phoney then by all means you're welcome to.
I don't have to share them, and I think I have every right to point out just how ridiculous they are. Honestly, they simulated the original crawl? Give me a break!
- Post
- #229665
- Topic
- Info: Some thoughts on this community.
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229665/action/topic#229665
- Time
This is a continued discussion from the X0 thread, and as it’s off-topic and I don’t want to derail the thread I’ve produced this new one.
It’s killing you, isn’t it Boris…
It’s starting to become all too clear now…
The X0 version is going to show up the offical OOT. I can hardly wait.</div>
Personally, I will buy the DVD’s in September, and have no problem with it. Every little thing that is complained about the release on these forums is 1. speculation and 2. blown way out of proportion. I don’t understand not wanting to buy the official product on DVD, and then expecting to download a pirated DVD copy made from Laserdsic - honestly, I don’t. I can understand if you own the LaserDiscs and in September you say “these are still better quality” - and you then go and make a back-up copy of your own - I can understand that. It seems to be killing you vbangle, that I will buy these and have no problem with it… Lucas has given us exactly what we want.
He could have ruined it with a new transfer. Remember what they did with the Indiana Jones trilogy? I refuse to buy the DVD’s, and I have absolutely no plans to obtain a pirated version of it either. It’s not that the films have been bastardized to the point of the SW trilogy, it’s the fact that I can’t buy an authentic version. I don’t care if there’s a few small changes between the home video release and the theatrical version, it’s to be expected - but it’s when they make the kind of changes that censor the original work that I do. As consumers we have a choice, and my choice is not to buy it. There are so many things he could have done wrong with a new SW transfer. And so all there is to complain about is:
And I mean why all the PT bashing? The PT is not the OT, so therefore why does it matter to originaltrilogy.com if the PT was fantastic or not? I’m a Spielberg fan, but you don’t see me complaining about every movie he made that I didn’t like as if it somehow ruins the movies I did like. You don’t see me complaining about some of the shit that Craven has directed when I talk about the great movies that he made. In fact, you don’t really see anyone do this - so honestly as far as I can see the members here are so unforgiving and critical of a great filmmaker - for many the filmmaker who made their favourite saga. In addition to this they’re rude, arrogant, insulting and all too negative. Here’s a thought, if ot.com held an official convention and invited Lucas to come, and lets say tfn.net held a convention in honour of the prequels the same day, with the same number of people - and you are Lucas, and you’ve been invited to both - which one would you rather go to? Would you rather go to all the hate-mongering ot.com members who keep defaming your name, and calling you a liar, a cheat, a scumbag - have no respect for you and seem to hate everything that you’ve done? Or do you go to TFN’s convention where there are people who will smile, who appreciate your work - who don’t defame you, who’ve sent nice letters to you and have made you feel really good about yourself?
I do appreciate what the X0 team is doing, I really do. I’m certainly not a “fan of the project” - but I do believe in preservation, and I do appreciate their dedication for what they love and I appreciate their goal to preserve the Laserdisc is the highest possible quality. Hell, I’m not a fan of this site either. You may wonder then why I keep coming back - well I wonder too.
But as far as I can see, so many members that frequent this forum just do not seem to be the kind of people who are going to motivate Lucas to do what they want - they just seem to be the kind of people who want everything their way, and vent anger and hate towards Lucas at every opportunity. My favourite thread is the SW covers thread, because at least there people are positive, they don’t say bad and negative things all the time, they share their own original work - and they represent real love for Star Wars.
Perhaps the thing that worries me most is how everyone seems to have already judged the September release based on nothing more then speculation and bias. I am going to prove that this is wrong in September, when I will show everyone official DVD’s that I own, that I had no problem buying and look worse then the September SW trilogy OUT discs.
- Post
- #229366
- Topic
- .: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229366/action/topic#229366
- Time
Originally posted by: Hal 9000
I mean, I own the original laserdiscs anyway, right?
Do you own the actual original laserdiscs used for the transfer? And did you transfer them yourself? No, well the copies you obtain from the X0 project would not under US law be considered "personal back-ups". Unless I'm mistaking (and Zion, correct me if I'm wrong) - the purpose of the X0 project is to digitally preserve the THX Laserdiscs of the SW trilogy in the highest possible quality, with all flaws due to the Laserdisc format and the digital transfer such as ghosting, stray pixels causing image flaws, hairs, scratches and the 2:3 pulldown fixed - not to serve as an alternative to legally purchasing the September DVD's - is this correct? I mean, I own the original laserdiscs anyway, right?
- Post
- #229363
- Topic
- OOT DVDs - interlaced or progressive?
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229363/action/topic#229363
- Time
- Post
- #229362
- Topic
- The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229362/action/topic#229362
- Time
Originally posted by: zombie84
Also note the difference in stars. The EOD ones only have the brightest available. The 1993 and home video versions had the image artificially brightened and as such the stars are highly visible. The dvd trailer footage has the same star background as the ANH 1993 crawl. This, plus the colour difference (the crawl was more of an orange-yellow than a gold, as can be seen from the EOD clip) plus the differences in logo recession show that this is indeed a falsified original crawl.
So technically it is false advertising to claim this is the unaltered 1977 theatrical version. Because its not.
I completely disagree, the shot continues seamlessly into the first space shot of the movie. The ANH crawl was composited onto the same star background as the pre-ANH crawl, this is plainly obvious. Also note the difference in stars. The EOD ones only have the brightest available. The 1993 and home video versions had the image artificially brightened and as such the stars are highly visible. The dvd trailer footage has the same star background as the ANH 1993 crawl. This, plus the colour difference (the crawl was more of an orange-yellow than a gold, as can be seen from the EOD clip) plus the differences in logo recession show that this is indeed a falsified original crawl.
So technically it is false advertising to claim this is the unaltered 1977 theatrical version. Because its not.
- Post
- #229359
- Topic
- The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/229359/action/topic#229359
- Time
Originally posted by: zombie84
Okay just saw the trailer for the OOT DVD. They showed a clip of the new DVD "original crawl". I was looking to see if it was truely the original crawl, if it was formatted correctly. Mysetriously, the clip on the trailer cuts off just as it is about the get to the first line formatted, which is the third line in. Uh oh. What are they hiding?
Then I took a closer look at the screenshot. "The Star Wars logo looks funny--shouldn't it have receeded by now??"
Sure enough, i took a look at the Empire of Dreams original crawl footage--it is not the same.
THE UPCOMING OOT DVD CRAWL IS JUST A PHOTOSHOPED VERSION OF THE EPISODE IV CRAWL.
And, 1. how do you know the empire of dreams has the original version? 2. How do you know that there weren't 3 slightly differently formatted crawls for the 3 theatrical versions? Did you know that when creating the opening crawl it would have been composited together? Therefore isn't it reasonable to assume that they would do this composite each time they made a theatrical master? And as they had to make 3 different masters, there could be 3 slightly different versions? And so in doing so isn't it reasonable to think that in some instances the SW logo will be more faded faster then in other instances?Okay just saw the trailer for the OOT DVD. They showed a clip of the new DVD "original crawl". I was looking to see if it was truely the original crawl, if it was formatted correctly. Mysetriously, the clip on the trailer cuts off just as it is about the get to the first line formatted, which is the third line in. Uh oh. What are they hiding?
Then I took a closer look at the screenshot. "The Star Wars logo looks funny--shouldn't it have receeded by now??"
Sure enough, i took a look at the Empire of Dreams original crawl footage--it is not the same.
THE UPCOMING OOT DVD CRAWL IS JUST A PHOTOSHOPED VERSION OF THE EPISODE IV CRAWL.
There is no solid evidence that this is a recreated crawl. Also the percieved difference could be due a simple difference in cropping (though by looking at the stars it does appear this is not the case)
.
Stop jumping to early conclusions and complaining about every grain.