http://boards.theforce.net/threads/rebels-tcw-and-the-st.50018649/page-147
Continuity with the OT doesn't matter just because of the OT's age? That's one of the most outladish statements I've ever heard.
If you ask me, the OOT not being released is as likely as Jar Jar being the protagonist of The Force Awakens.
About 4K, The Force Awakens is being filmed on 35mm film, and I'm sure Kathleen Kennedy will want a matching Original Trilogy. Speaking of which, another reason for releasing the OOT is to match The Force Awakens's non-cgi effects.
SilverWook said:
Experienced force user Vader pulls a lightsaber on Bib, when a novice like Luke just mind tricks him. What's wrong with this picture?
Vader can actually do something with his saber and can threaten to bring in Star Destroyers, TIE Fighters, and Stormtroopers. Luke isn't as good as using his saber and doesn't have anything to threaten Bib and Jabba with.
Handman said:
darklordoftech said:
Ziz said:
Knowing that crowd, they're debating adding "OOT", "OUT", "GOUT", "Revisited" and "Adywan" to the dirty word filter.
One time I used "OOT" and they thought that I was talking about Zelda.
To be fair, OOT is a pretty good game.
I agree. That they thought that was if anything a pleasant surprise to me.
Tobar said: Apparently Fett lives at Jabba's.
I thought it was well-known that the Executor bounty hunters have a rock band. ;)
Has anyone here played Tony Hawk?
Ziz said:
Knowing that crowd, they're debating adding "OOT", "OUT", "GOUT", "Revisited" and "Adywan" to the dirty word filter.
One time I used "OOT" and they thought that I was talking about Zelda.
SilverWook said:
ROTS looked pretty good on 35mm. AOTC not so much.
How did 35mm AOTC and ROTS compare to blu-ray AOTC and ROTS?
Interstingly, Padme doesn't say "to be angry is to be human" in the 35mm version.
moviefreakedmind said:
Yes I was referring to Clones. Sith is also mostly forgotten but it has its fans.
Someone told me that they "saw the one where Luke becomes Darth Vader".
SilverWook said:
Maybe they can just scan a unused film print of those two?
The irony would be strong with that.
moviefreakedmind said:
emanswfan said:
If they at the least have all the raw footage still around from the PT, Disney should at least consider re-editing the films from the ground up, not having to strictly stick to the set structure of the original versions. Then they do all new modern VFX, also not having to necessarily stick to what was originally there. And even the new VFX could help modify the story, along with maybe just a little newly shot footage here and there. And they can do it all in a 4K DI, given the live-action footage is properly upscaled via the best motion-adpative upscalers available.
But we all know no studio would ever spend that kind of money a project like that unfortunately.
That seems like a huge investment for forgotten movies. The SE made sense because it was an expertly marketed theatrical re-release of beloved films, mostly done on Fox's dime. For Disney to completely recreate 2 movies, one of which is entirely forgotten, doesn't seem likely.
Which one is "entirely forgotten"?
SilverWook said:
It would be a miracle if they saved all the files for the effects after all these years.
Why wouldn't they save the effects files for the SEs and the prequels? I'm sure Lucas intended to reuse them over and over again.
Wazzles said: 2k (or 1080p?) cameras used to film that movie.
AOTC and ROTS were filmed on 1080p cameras. The special effects for all the SEs and prequels were rendered in 2K.
Wazzles said:
unamochilla2 said:
I thought the SE (at least the 2004 SE master) was stuck at 2K?
The version that exists is, but they made a 4K scan of the negatives a few years ago, which exist as the 97 SE. Some of the changes in the 2004 and 2011 are stuck at that resolution, though (new emperor scene, Hayden force ghost).
Hayden is stuck at 2k? Wooohooooooo!!!!!!
unamochilla2 said:
I thought the SE (at least the 2004 SE master) was stuck at 2K?
Unless it was redone before Disney bought LFL.
SilverWook said:
Not releasing the OOT after all the overtures they've been making to the "old school" fans would be a slap in the face, and generate bad press.
There's more awareness of the issue now than when Lucas could evade the question, or have his spin doctors brush it off.
Plus there'd be a perception that TFA is no better than TPM if the OOT isn't released.
CatBus said:
darklordoftech said:
CatBus said: they ALREADY have "Star Wars" HD masters, no new scans needed. They can milk that 2011 release via streaming/broadcast licensing indefinitely at no additional cost (I think they recognize that further physical media releases are not really going to go very far, but they probably attribute that to "our brave new streaming world" and not "our version of Star Wars blows"). To them, these 2011 films are Star Wars. Why re-scan what you already have?
Are you aware that they already rescanned in 4K?
AFAICT that was already in the pipe before Disney came along. Disney has done nothing, and could very well do nothing with that scan too.
Disney could have cancelled it at any time if they wanted to. Corporations don't spend money on absolutely nothing, hence Disney didn't cancel the scans and will do something with the scans, OOT or no OOT.
CatBus said: they ALREADY have "Star Wars" HD masters, no new scans needed. They can milk that 2011 release via streaming/broadcast licensing indefinitely at no additional cost (I think they recognize that further physical media releases are not really going to go very far, but they probably attribute that to "our brave new streaming world" and not "our version of Star Wars blows"). To them, these 2011 films are Star Wars. Why re-scan what you already have?
Are you aware that they already rescanned in 4K?
RicOlie_2 said:
I'm afraid I have to agree with Imperialscum. The average person doesn't even know about the SE, never mind care about the controversy. Maybe it's more well known in some regions, but where I'm from (and where I live now--thought that doesn't really count), Star Wars isn't really that big. You may get the impression that a lot of people know about this by hanging out with other Star Wars fans and movie-lovers, but the average Joe or Jane on the street won't have a clue about all this. Even movie-lovers aren't much in the know unless they are Star Wars fans.
It's not a matter of what the average person thinks (most people don't remember the prequels and those that do think that "Sith" is Palpatine's race and call Anakin "Luke"), but rather it's a matter of if there are enought fans to make a difference in the sales and whether or not the average person has any desire to re-buy the blu-rays.
imperialscum said:
I really don't care about the title... all I care is about the actual film.
Once the film comes out, this, but since we don't know anything else about the film at the moment, I'm going to enjoy the title.
Yesterday was the 30th anniversary of ESB on VHS.
Tobar said:
Lucasfilm just posted an excerpt from a Q&A about the Clone Wars Lost Episodes, more specifically about Darth Bane.
I'm happy that he doesn't wear a cloak or robe and doesn't wear black.
imperialscum said:
RicOlie_2 said:
Is it? Why would releasing the same thing again be more profitable than releasing something different?
Well the ratio between profit and investment would be maximised. They would practically spent nothing to release it while it has been proven over and over again that Star Wars fans buy just about everything LucasFilm releases.
In spite of all the fans who think Han shooting first destroyed Star Wars forever and the people who are willing to restore the OOT for free?
GlastoEls said: How smart is another Blu-Ray of the 2011 cuts?
Dumber than time-traveling to August 5, 1945 and moving to Hiroshima.
moviefreakedmind said:
Easterhay said:
I know what people were calling it back in the day; I was one of them. And now it's been re-titled.
The point is not that is was once called something else; the point is that some still call it that. It's a stupid intellectual argument to continue to call it something which it isn't. You may as well say that people "used" to say the world was flat.That's a horrible analogy (no offense intended). The world was never flat, people only thought that it was. Star Wars was titled and referred to as Star Wars for 20 years, so why should you decide that no one is allowed to call it that anymore just because it's now advertised as "A New Hope"?
Furthermore, if I want to say that the world is flat, I have the right to do so. Nobody's going to stop me. Also, what I call a movie isn't an "intellectual argument", it's a choice of words.
unamochilla2 said:
I don't think Disney/Lucasfilm would change Lucas' latest vision without his consent. I think they have too much respect for him and people may say it's in bad taste or disrespectful and I'm sure Disney doesn't want that kind of publicity. They've actually made changes to some of their films to avoid criticism... although, they then received some in exchange for the changes.
I don't think Disney paid $4 billion to not release the very movies that made Star Wars such a valueble intellectual property. It's not a matter of if the OOT will be released; it's a matter of when.
Tobar said:
While I agree his short story is completely stupid, IG-88 is not a creation of the EU.
I know. I was referring to the story.