msycamore

The TV-spot is definitely an original 1971 TV-spot, the GP rating was revised the following year to PG. Thanks for posting, SilverWook!

Spaced Ranger, the spot oddly enough didn't play in my mediaplayer either but VLC handles it just fine.

Damn, just got news about the recent screening in London in another thread, don't believe I could have attended even if I knew about it. Great to hear a few here went to the screening, hope you guys had a good time. Can post the different TV-version and theatrical version of that short scene with Donald Pleasence if you guys are interested.

Haven't visited this thread lately due to being pissed off and burned out on THX with all the hurdles getting a simple LD-preservation out there. Spaced Ranger still haven't received the stuff I sent him last year. :( I presume it to be lost after all this time. Damn postal service, I lost two packages in the mail last year, can you believe that!

Anyway, I need to go back a few pages and read what's been going on...

imperialscum said:

While I appreciate the original versions and I support the struggle to get them released in HD, I just prefer 1997. I am very sensitive to visual aspects and quite frankly most of the original Tatooine scenes in ANH are unsatisfactory and below my standards.

That's some pretty high standards you got there.

CatBus said:

If he'd added a few wiggly dinosaurs on the moon, or had Hal be the first one to get locked outside the pod bay door, or similar inanities, it's quite possible 2001 would not be considered a classic today. 

 :)

Tobar said:

Yeah...if you can't trust Phil Tippett, who can you trust? He was more directly impacted by the SE's than any of us. Let us not forget, when asked about them he said:

Tippett: ...you know it was about re-releasing something to get more money to feed the beast and all that kind of stuff. So...

Interviewer: So you don't like it?

Tippett: No, it sucks. No, I mean the whole thing with the whole uh, what was the name of the town, Mos Eisley...I mean the way that he shot it like Sergio Leone was just great and a breath of fresh air and so true to the material. And then when he went back in, put in all that stupid stuff.

JEDIT: Actual video clip of the conversation.

A better video clip of the same conversation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-xzROnZAMQ 

That's an epic beard, Tippet! Love this guy.

adywan said:

http://www.princecharlescinema.com/events/events.php?seasonanchor=jedi

This was supposed to have been a showing of the unaltered version but ended up being a digital showing of the blu-ray instead. How can you have it as a 30th anniversary with a version that is a year old? And no mention in the advertisment that is was NOT going to be the original and even attaching the original trailer for it. Bit of false advertising.

Screening a version from 2011 for its 30th anniversary... that's fucking ridiculous. Why not just cancel it if you cannot receive a print of said film.

SilverWook said:

That's unfortunate, as it's the venue that recently showed a 1970's print of THX 1138.

Say what!?

Harmy said:

In all pre 2004 versions of this shot, the stormtrooper passing near the camera seems to have been affected by some composition error where something was scribbled over one of the composite elements. Check it out, there's clearly a sign saying something like B FFET 23 over his path:

As I have nothing more productive to do in my free time I decided to check this out and to me it looks like the line in the middle says: B PFTT. 23

The glare from the stormtrooper helmet in one of the frames makes the T look like an E. Under it, it looks like it says B-7 or 3-7, the line above them is impossible to make out but there seems to be a letter M in there. Something like this:

            M
B PFTT. 23
       B-7

Someone should make a t-shirt of that. :)

mverta said:

Crawl update, sportsfans.  Go check out the video in the Legacy forums!

Fascinating what can be done. What's up with the letter 'a' in "...that can save her people..." ? Looks like a digital artifact to me.

Just remember, bkev, if all else fails use fire.

skyjedi2005 said:

Wow the Eastman stock prior to LPP is purple, ouch.

Vinegar syndrome print?

 Yeah, looks more like fading to me.

TServo2049 said:

Sorry for starting this by addressing -1. I was addressing the Team as a whole too. I guess I'll ask none if he has any leader info or anything.

Wasn't none announced being part of the team a few months ago?

TServo2049 said:

The paper rings around the reels are something different, they will identify the studio, sometimes the lab, sometimes other info. If the prints had them intact, and the team has any pictures of them, they might hold a clue as to the origin and purpose of the print. I've already said why I don't think it was for TV broadcast.

While I'm intrigued, has it been confirmed that this blue cast is actually a print anomaly and not just a result of their scanning approach?

-1, have you released any of your workprints other than the small chunks on vimeo?

Keep up the good work guys!

StarThoughts said:

and all arguments to the contrary just end up sounding condescending because Lucas is making it about us not being able to suss out what happened in this extremely straightforward scene.

Yeah, he has always been great at communicating with his fanbase. But he is only making himself a laughing stock with his statement. Apparently it was confusing to him.

It's his name on the film, this is the legacy he will leave behind. He will always be remembered for creating Star Wars but he will also be remembered for taking a big crap all over it.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Well, if Greedo had to shoot first (I don't want him to, but if he had to) I'd prefer it had been done in a way that looks professional.

This

isn't professional in any sense of the word.

It's good enough to George Lucas. It still amazes me after all these years how fucking retarded that tweak is, even without Solo's incredible dodge, which looked even more amazing in '97, Greedo would have missed. :) One of ILM's proudest moments...

Wolfman said:

 

Lucas said:

The controversy over who shot first, Greedo or Han Solo, in Episode IV, what I did was try to clean up the confusion, but obviously it upset people because they wanted Solo [who seemed to be the one who shot first in the original] to be a cold-blooded killer, but he actually isn’t. It had been done in all close-ups and it was confusing about who did what to whom. I put a little wider shot in there that made it clear that Greedo is the one who shot first, but everyone wanted to think that Han shot first, because they wanted to think that he actually just gunned him down.

 Gary Kurtz said at the Elstree Empire Day that Han's actions were pre emptied. He knew Greedo was going to kill him so Han shot him first. That's that !

Well, we don't even need someone like Kurtz explaining it to us, the scene as it plays out in the original film is very simple and speaks for itself. You need to be a brainless toddler if you don't understand what's going on in that scene.

imperialscum said:

I judge for myself what suits me the best. Just because some of you are unable of any analogous view when it come to Star Wars, it doesn't mean the rest of us should follow your discrete way of thinking.

 Well of course. I did not claim anything beyond that.

CatBus said:

However, I think that if you do accept the idea of altering movies to tie them in better with one another, you can still reject the idea of altering movies to tie them in better with crappy other movies.  So that's where the "97 is best" opinion can arise.

Definitely, but I suspect that there are no crappy other movies in Lucasland.

CatBus said:

Although frankly I do have to agree with Frink. If you're already on board with the film alteration train for the first fifty miles, I honestly can't see how you can very well complain about another inch and a half.

Frinkly I do have to agree with Frank as well.  Seriously though, I think it may be that the bastardized versions were what some were first introduced to, so that is Star Wars to them. They didn't meet the natural good looking girl, they only met her when she had already gotten breast implants and silicone lips.

Don't know if you're still updating this but I noticed a couple of undocumented changes in the first film when I IVTC'ed a LD-transfer recently, a couple of reframings akin to the Falcon zooms in ESB but usually a bit more subtle. This was often done when they went back to the negative (wipes, dissolves and flipped shots etc.). Examples of this can be seen in the remade detention shootout whenever they tinkered with the background:

Sometimes shots received a tighter framing and sometimes they were adjusted horizontally... I can post a few examples when I get access to it.

imperialscum said:

First of all, mind that this is my opinion. Unlike many of you around here, my favourite versions are 1997 SE. The important difference between 1997 SE and the following two releases is in the nature of the alterations.

Majority of the changes in 1997 were related to upgrading the SFX and audio (yes I pretty much love every one of them) and a few changed/additions to some story-related stuff (i.e. Greedo, which I don't like but can live with it, and new celebration song with shots of other planets, which I love - I can't stand YubNub crap).

Well, I respect your opinion but it seems to me you're only seeing the reasoning behind the changes being different because you don't like the prequels and because the '97 Special Edtions happens to be your favorite versions. The nature of the alterations besides the need for restoration in '97 are really no different.

In '97 you had "ESB & ROTJ-parasites" and Shadow of the Empire-products in the first film, likewise ESB received some "ROTJ-parasites" as well. It's just Lucas' hamfisted and embarrassing attempt to connect all the films with each other. In fact, this goes all the way back to his retitling of the first film in 1981.

imperialscum said:

On the other hand, in 2004 and 2011 most of the changes were basically PT related crap inserted into OT. Some of these include: Hayden in ghost scene, "NOOOOO", Boba Fett voice change, Emperor having prequel style make-up in ESB, JarJar screaming "wessa free!" in one of the celebration scenes, Dug in Jabba's palace, etc.

Yeah, but is there really any difference between inserting Vader's "NOOOOO" from the prequels in ROTJ and inserting the Emperor's scream from ROTJ in ESB? To think that he's making these changes just for toying with a whiny fraction of the fanbase who still keeps buying his stuff anyway is just absurd to me. In Lucasland it all makes sense, after all he put it in the prequels first for a reason.

And I guess a few are probably business decisions, you have to remember that he's no artist, he hasn't been a true director since the first SW-film. The guy who made ROTJ, the SE and "directed" the prequels was a studio mogul. His MO has been "good enough" ever since. If he wanted to have new movie related toy sales even if it hurts the film, he insert Boba and Jabba in ANH ("Cool, I only have the Jedi one!"), the shuttle from ROTJ in ESB ("Cool, I only own the one from ROTJ!") except kids doesn't perhaps use the word "cool" these days. ;) I don't know, was/is there any Anakin (Hayden) ghost figure in the stores?

Baronlando said:

The '97 certainly started out as an honest restoration, which the movie needed, even the original plan of a few shots wouldn't have been unreasonable, but then turned into a perfect storm of drunken digital crayon mayhem and classic movies being used as R&D. The lameness of the blu-rays is probably just basic cheapness.

True, it may have started out as an honest attempt at restoration but it was pretty clear from the beginning that Lucas was also going to revise the film. They started storyboarding changes to ANH in 1993, added Jabba in 1994 for example.

What I don't understand is why the heck did FOX pay for all this restoration and not release a home video release of that effort or even produced new prints before the drunken digital crayon mayhem began?  Instead they went with George's wishes and re-released the '93 telecine as a "Last time available" video in '95, simultaneously with this "restoration" being worked on. But I guess they were Lucas' lapdog at that point with the forthcoming prequels on the horizon. I don't think a restored original release on the shelves would have diminished the income for their Special Edition theatrical release either.

Fox is basically as much guilty as Lucas in this travesty.

Tobar said:

I don't know if it was trolling so much as indifference. I kind of imagine it going something like this.

Lucasfilm: Hey George, we're going to be releasing the original trilogy on blu-ray soon. Was there anything else you'd like to update for this release? It'd probably up the value for the collectors. You know how they are.

George: Um....well. I never was happy with that Krayt dragon call. Oh and I was always disappointed we couldn't find the right rock on location for Artoo to hide behind. I was never quite happy with Marquand's delivery of the death of the Emperor...needs more emotion somehow....OH and you're going to start work on the 3D releases soon right? Why not see what you can do with Jabba's door or something so we can get that out of the way now.

I honestly believe people inside Lucasfilm would just go up to George and ask for suggestions and then take whatever he came up with on the spot as law. What lead to the fall of 1313.

Here's a funny story from Marc Weilage, one of the colorists working on ANH and ROTJ in 2004:

BTW, note that there was stuff from the 2004 transfers I did where we ran out of time and Lucas was not able to get more fixes done. Whenever this happened on a specific shot, George would turn to his assistant and say, "note that as a BSI fix." After he left the room, I turned to my data op and asked, "what's a 'BSI'?" And he laughed and said, "that's a Boxed Set Issue, because George eventually wants to put all six films out as one set, which will be the final-final versions." To my knowledge, this set has yet to be released. http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/true-original-star-wars-trilogy-blu-rays-coming-in-2014-or-2015-from-disney.324294/page-7

To my knowledge that BSI was released in 2011.

The Terminator said:

At least Lucas had the courtesy to release the 1997 SE in VHS labeled as such. In 2004 and 2011 it was false advertising.  

It's only because it was released by Fox, later video releases when Lucas had bought the film labeled them without the Special Edition title.

imperialscum said:

1997 - an honest attempt to improve the films

2004 - chance to include his prequel parasites into OT

2011 - he was simply trolling the fans

I guess some would also describe the prequels being an honest attempt telling a backstory to the original trilogy. What makes the 1997 SE any more honest than the two video edits that followed? IMO there wasn't anything honest about it. In fact, most of it was just R&D and an experiment for ILM in preparation for the prequels. An experiment and a fun little 20th anniversary for the fans which have now sadly replaced the historical films. A butchering and bastardization of a beloved classic is how I would describe it.

The modern "filmmaking"-touches of Lucas we got a taste of in 1997 is very consistent with what we were presented with in 1999. Seriously, if Lucas was simply trolling the fans with his BD updates, what is it about those 2011 changes that are so radically different compared to the poor choices and filmmaking style seen in the '97 SE, Prequels, THX 1138 SE, '04 SE that makes people seriously think he would go to such length? Please, explain it to me.

poita said:

Derann never released ESB on Super8, no-one did.

The condition is pretty good, not quite as good as a derann release but it has really good colour on the first couple of reels and great colour on the last reels.

Considerably better than the Cineavision of Star Wars for example.

It used to only be available on slightly yellowing film stock, but is now available on brand new poly stock so should have better colour. It is taken from a foreign negative, so the crawl is not in English, but the audio is English or German depending on the print. Both are from the same source.

Do you happen to know if the super 8 prints of ESB uses the 35mm cut version of the film throughout in terms of film elements? I guess they do but it would be damn cool if they somehow was sourced from the 70mm cut film material such as the one from Ken Films with select material.

Yeah, perhaps in the near future we will all get a version that is tailor-made for each individual or better yet a version that gets altered in a random fashion whenever you get the urge to watch it. Sigh... Lucas really did create a monster with his SE.

danny_boy said:

It does not matter if the OUT is released on Blu Ray or 4K............you will never be satisfied due to viewing oversaturation spanning  3 decades.

Speak for yourself. There are many films that I have been way overexposed to in a similar manner from time to time through the years but I was perfectly satisfied with their video releases and I enjoy them immensely. Like I said in my earlier post, I can personally enjoy Star Wars in crude form, but we have basically been forced to enjoy it that way since it left the theater. I think fans and film lovers deserve something better.

danny_boy said:

So you channel your anger at Lucas' s unwillingness to release the OUT or the changes he has made(both cosmetic and story wise)to the "special edition".

You very immaturely call a video technician who worked on the 2004 DVDs ,Vidiot(of the SteveHoffman forum) an Idiot for straying too far from the original colour pallete despite THE FACT you have absolutely no clue as to what the original colour pallete is.

Sure....you own a few transperencies(35mm or 70mm) and you have seen a few screen shots of the senator theater showing in 2010 ...... but that does not give you the authority(or anyone-else on this forum) of having a say in exactly how these film looked originally.....when the FACT of the matter is that the quality of resolution and colour reproduction of any theatrical viewing of SW in the late 70's or early 80's would have varied from cinema to cinema and from print to print(be it 35mm or 70mm) .

It is one of the main reasons why 35mm is being phased out in favour of digital (2K or 4K both of which have been scientifically proven to be better than 35mm projection).

No, no I didn't call him an idiot for straying too far from the original color palette, that's your words and also an indication that you are indeed aware that they are far removed from the original. I was only making a jokey guess on what it may have been that he was surprised of being green colored. ;) It is actually a pretty well known fact that the lightsaber Luke wields in the 1977 Star Wars is blue colored, and that the green lights on Vader's belt are consistently green throughout the film. You don't really need an authority on these matters. But that is only scratching the surface of the poor 2004 color grading...

It is one thing to make a film look more modern for todays audience (as clearly was the intention in this case) but let's be honest and call it what it actually was - a technically subpar product, period. Lucasfilm even tried to shamelessly find a way to use some of the "deliberate creative decisions" made in 2004 to their advantage as an before and after example in a promotional piece on the official site when it was time for the BD release of that same master: http://starwars.com/news/saga_bluray_restoration.html 

Completely ridiculous. From what I've heard the majority of the transfers still look exactly the same. But at the end of the day this is what Lucas himself wanted and approved so the colorists shouldn't really be blamed too much.

I'm no authority on it but I have absolutely a clue as to what the original color palette is. I also saw a LPP projected last year. However, if you want real evidence of how prints look in comparison to the 2004 master I'm sure we could get a few examples displayed for you as there's a guy on this forum who we can pretty much refer to as an authority on these matters as he have access to LPP's and happens to own a IB-Tech print but it would be quite pointless when the flaws of those SE masters are pretty well known. You may as well continue to live in your fantasy world where you think it was possible for a print to look like that in the 70's.

danny_boy said:

And if you cant enjoy it(any version on any format) then dont watch it.

Again, like I said, I can personally enjoy 1977 Star Wars in crude form. I can however not enjoy what currently is passed off as Star Wars by Lucasfilm in any form.

danny_boy said:

LexX said:

I like how every post from danny has to include the remark of him owning some 4K equipment, like we should be in awe or something.

No I don't expect anyone to be in awe of 4K.

I want them to understand that it is not some magic number that will resolve all the flaws that maybe inherent in an anlogue production like the original Star Wars.

Yeah, but I think people here fully understand that, and we get that you are worried about it.

danny_boy said:

4K will merely highlight the limitation of the resolution of the optical dupes that constituted large parts of the original camera negative. that made up Star Wars back in 1977.

4K works best with footage that has been shot "in camera".

2001 Space Odyssey and Alien fit into this bracket.

Close Encounters,Superman I and Star Trek The Motion Picture(and Star Wars) on the hand featured so many optical composites that 4K scans(and subsequent projection) would accentuate the disprecancies that exist between 1st generation negative (that features no optical compositing) and dupe negative(for all the VFX).

This makes for a very uneven presentation.

The lower resolution of 35mm projection(relative to 2K or 4K) and the obviously even much lower resolution of VHS and laserdisc obscured these same discrepancies.

You are of course absolutely right about higher resolutions being much less forgiving when it comes to the shortcomings of the source material in a film such as Star Wars, that's why you preferably scan a theatrical interpositive like they did with the 1982 Blade Runner. Could be done this week if Lucasfilm wanted to. Some of the discrepancies should be there, it's a product of its time. Sure there would be fans such as you with their fancy 4K projectors that would still complain about the softness and grain if it was done correctly, there always are but that's what your Special Edition is for - a grain reduced Frankenstein Monster straight from the negative. (upscaled to 4K in your case. ;)

And you may not know this but there are advantages and benefits for restorations to be done in 4K or higher even if the end product is 2K/1080p.

Well, whatever it is, it seems to me after some further calculations that it most likely was outside the theatrical ratio standard almost exactly. That's probably why they kept this take in the film. They knew that it would not be seen in the theater. While 2.39:1 is a wider ratio than 2.35:1, the change of the projector aperture in the 70's was a reduction in height not an increase in width.

A few b&w contact sheets of the first film I don't think I've seen before:  http://theeditroomfloor.blogspot.se/2013/06/unseen-photos-from-star-wars-death-star.html#!/2013/06/unseen-photos-from-star-wars-death-star.html It's sad they are in such poor quality.

Lord Dark Helmet without his cape in a rehearsal. See the battery pack hanging from his waist.

SilverWook said:

Are you sure that's not the thing at the top of the moisture vaporator?

I'm not so sure if it is a boom mike or not but it's definitely an object that is part of the film crew. It's moving along with the shot for a few frames.

Here you can see a little more of it:

from the Special Collection LD which is often much too open in it's framing.

msycamore said:

team_negative1 said:

There is a boom mike visible for several frames, this will be cropped out

Yeah, that should fall outside a theatrical framing of 2.39:1...

I take that back as I'm not so sure about it any longer. Would be interesting seeing this frame from your print uncropped.