towne32

Is that just supposed to be overscan space?

crissrudd4554 said:

As far as how the Emperor looks, the new one was shot over 20 years later so obviously you can’t fully replicate the Emperor’s original look and for that reason I’m willing to accept it.

No, they didn’t need to replicate it perfectly. But there’s no reason they couldn’t have gone for the same aesthetic. A more makeup based approach instead of thick sort of reptilian-looking rubber. And although Ian was over 20 years older, this isn’t exactly a role where an actor’s age will prevent them from being able to look the part. Assuming he doesn’t gain a ton of weight, he could probably be made to look the part when he’s 90.

But I agree with the rest of what you’ve said.

theMaestro said:

Density said:

Yeah no. The 2004 Emperor looks MUCH closer to the ROTJ Emperor because he is the real Emperor played by the same actor. Of course it’s not going to be exactly the same cause it was done over 20 years later but it’s still far, far closer than an old woman with chimpanzee eyes. Sorry, that’s just not gonna cut it. What you say about it being the “original” pretty much confirms what I said about nostalgia being the only reason to prefer it. So yeah, I get how that might pull you out of it more if you’re really that much of a purist, but to me it pulls me out way more knowing it’s a totally different actor and different everything. It’s not the Emperor I know, it’s just wrong. Besides, Palpatine was the best part of the prequels so I don’t mind the prequel connection here. Not that it is much of one considering, of course, McDiarmid was in the next movie anyway. And I don’t mind that he doesn’t look exactly like he did in ROTJ cause, again, out of universe it makes sense and in-universe you could just say that the Emperor changed up his style a little in between films, or it looked different cause it was a hologram. Either way, better than old woman chimpanzee with weird voice acting that sounds nothing like him.

To me, it doesn’t matter that the 2004 Emperor looks closer to the ROTJ one; the bottom line is that he still looks different. My point in mentioning that it reminded me of the prequels was that it took me out of the movie, not that I disliked McDiarmid in the prequels. And it took me out of the movie because it was clearly ROTS-era Emperor in a movie that’s supposed to be chronologically very close to ROTJ.

So, having said that, neither one looks like ROTJ Emperor. Yes, the 2004 version looks closer, but not close enough that it doesn’t take me out of the movie. His acting is even different. Therefore, in the absence of a choice that allows me to enjoy a proper continuity between the films, I look towards which version is more historically significant. It’s not nostalgia because, like I said, I wouldn’t have minded if it had been done the way that Adywan did it.

That’s exactly how I feel about it. If they really nailed the Emperor’s look and voice in the SE, I would say (admittedly, somewhat reluctantly) that it’s a change I enjoy. But they didn’t. They botched it. If both options are wonky in their own ways, but one is how the film was originally made and the other has screwy dialogue and imagery from the prequels, it’s a perfectly straight forward decision for me that the original is superior.

Not that I’m against a V 3.0 but unless we’re talking about a complete overhaul in terms of colour, contrast and brightness like what Neverar is doing with Star Wars I don’t see much of a point.

Well, Neverar’s color work is going to be the starting point for the color in 3.0, so…

Anyway, the main point of 3.0 is for 1080p. SW and ESB will also still have a good deal of GOUT left in their pre-3.0 versions that will be removed.

What do you mean about the brother and sister scene? On the bridge? I don’t really remember how that one looked, but I am curious what will a 35mm source offer that scene.

I’m with you in not liking the Bane arcs. In fact, I dislike the idea that the Bane character was ever written. But it was definitely more palatable in this format. The editing itself is definitely better in III than the previous releases.

I don’t think he’s going to do much in terms of really taking elements out of the series entirely. He has already said that SpiderMaul will be in it, but hopefully not as prominently (SpiderMaul was the only thing worse than Bane, IMO).

Thanks again for your efforts. I’d been holding off on grabbing the ESB movie disc since I’ll one day want to replace it with 2.5. But now I think I’ll grab it so that I can try swapping the files with multiavchd someday in the future!

TV’s Frink said:

MathUser said:

Also, JJ Abrham was displeased that he didn’t have a scene of Chewbacca hugging Leia after Hans death,

Source?

JJ did indeed mention in an interview somewhere that he slipped up with that shot. It sounded more like he would have just made sure not to capture them in a way that it looks like they’re ignoring each other, rather than directly stating that he should’ve included a hug. But he may have said that as well.

There’s pretty extensive discussion in the fan edit section as far as what people think can or should be fixed (not sure if you’ve seen it). But on top of that, I think perhaps the question is whether or not people here would approve of an officially sanctioned alternate version of any kind. I’m not against the production of director’s/extended/alternate cuts, even when they’re worse off, so long as the original is available intact. But I can see how Disney might be wary of the idea of altering another Star Wars movie. You could see the countless trolls spill out even from the false alarm of changing the flags at Maz’s place (didn’t really happen, one was an earlier render from the trailer).

yotsuya said:

tends to match

should have

should have

I’m never quite clear what you’re discussing with your project. You’re often speaking in these absolute terms of how things should be, but you aren’t quite explaining how you might be using references in an objective way. Is it fair to say that you’re discussing the way you prefer it to look? No judgement for that, since I did a version of SW that was in no way objectively colored. Just curious, since I tend to find myself confused at your posts.

suspiciouscoffee said:

old fake article said:
…given to me by someone deep inside George’s empire

That’s some sad sensationalist writing right there.

I hope it was reflected on his THX report card.

poita said:

The blue is meant to be there, the sky is quite blue in those shots, which makes the smoke etc. also quite blue.
The original prints do have a lot of blue in the Hoth scenes, not as much as the BD release, but still quite a lot more than the home releases, which appear to have been ‘auto balanced’ when the telecine was done, removing a lot of colour from the snow scenes, probably working on the assumption that snow should always be white.

An interesting update to a topic of much contention over the years here.

MathUser said:

nickyd47 said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

The digital bits article still stands behind the PT set rumors, too.

Edit: http://thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/081016_1230

Keep in mind, our sources are still telling us that there may also be a Blu-ray 3D box set of the Star Wars prequel films as well, and we’ll post more on that soon.

Huh, I just assumed that this was it. Hmm, interesting. Not interested in buying though, because those movies are still trash, 2D or 3D lol. I see Disney has their priorities straight, assuming the rumor is true

You mean Fox right? Fox owns the PT right now. And yes, Fox made the mistake of releasing sequels before prequels before. Don’t expect them to keep making the same mistake.

Fox has the distribution rights. I don’t know if they would actually be involved in the production of the 3D conversions at all after the Disney sale. Doesn’t make sense to invest that kind of money on something you won’t be able to profit from in 3 years. Fox’s involvement these days is probably just getting their cut on sales.

Also, what do you mean sequels? Are you referring to the OT as that?

Yeah, it was a reasonable way to handle it on their part (a temporary torrent). Will be curious to see how they would respond to the idea of uploading the others under the condition that they be removed if Paramount ever gets their act together to re-release them.

Thanks again for that upload. It is indeed a decent cap. For all we knew, the new BD could have been much worse than it!

Wazzles said:

Discostu said:

Shalashaska said:

You guys think this is the best version of the film? Trying to decide between this and the TeamNegative1 transfer.

Depends on your taste. This one has overall better quality, looks like a Blu Ray but is in many places only a recreation of the original version. TN1 has less detail, looks more like film projection than Blu Ray and is 100 % original Star Wars 1977.

For the time being I’m sticking to the scans. I know that they’re fully theatrical and the overall quality is much more consistent.

Makes sense for SW. The others are still to rough to be ‘go to versions’ for me. ESB due to the color and red light flashing/bleed through. Jedi looks gorgeous but the print damage is just a bit too much for me to sit down and enjoy the movie.

Yeah, a couple shots in Jedi are still screwy as well. And the colors in the ANH duel are really inconsistent still.

So in VLC, that’s the case for all of them? I forget how to get to 16-235 in VLC. Googling just gives hundreds of results on how to adjust your graphics card setting.

To answer the original question, the 2004 versions are worse overall than the 1997 ones. If for no other reason than the fact that they completely botched the look of the lightsabers. It’s too iconic of a thing to screw up that badly. They were producing the PT films at the time, and rendering pretty great looking lightsabers for those. If they were going to redo the OT sabers concurrently, why make them look like garbage? I think this has recently become among my least favorite changes, up there with Hayden and Jedi Rocks. It’s nice that they fixed about 80% of the saber shots in 2011 despite screwing other things up.

Jedi gets substantially, aggressively worse with each revision. The 97SE would be the least terrible by far, if it were available in decent quality. It’s fairly smooth sailing after the song and dance number (which is the worst part of the trilogy), and the Sarlacc beak.

It’s a recurring thing where people claim they remember Luke trying and failing once or twice to throw the grappling hook, before finally getting it. Conversations sometimes get quite heated as people don’t like to hear that their memory might not be perfect. But there’s no evidence that such a thing was ever shown.

There were other examples around here of false theatrical memories, but I don’t recall the specifics.

Edit: Not sure about Darth Maul, though. If it really was produced for ratings purposes (which certainly seems plausible), perhaps there is footage out there that people have seen. Shown theatrically, though? The theatrical version certainly had the ‘cut in half’, rather than being specifically added for video.

http://boards.theforce.net/threads/darth-maul-wasnt-cut-in-half.16593500/

Looks like this is an old rumor, mostly based on a few people not remembering it happening. In 2004 there was a short blurb where someone claimed it to be true: https://web.archive.org/web/20040727113927/http://cgi.theforce.net/theforce/tfn.cgi?storyID=5121

Looks like the origin of that image. Supposedly, it was an alternate version made in case it needed to be changed to get the rating they wanted. But there’s nothing that convinces me in that poorly written “article”. Not sure what “an THX screener’s report card” is supposed to mean, and I’m not convinced that a 300x300 pixel image isn’t doctored just because they say it isn’t.

Even if they really made this version, I doubt anyone saw it in theaters. I think it’s just another grappling hook phenomenon. Maybe people mis-remembered because it was a terrible Yosemite Sam style death where the body took a second or so to fall in half.

Frank your Majesty said:

Apart from Luke screeming in Empire, no change was reverted for the '04 SE, it only got worse with each iteration, so I’d definitely prefer the '97 SE over the DVD or Bluray versions.

The Greedo shot was partially reverted, in a way, as they deleted a bunch of the extra frames that they added. Tried to make it slightly less ridiculous.

I’m pretty ignorant when it comes to things like this. So they don’t go from the 23.976 fps master to 25 fps. They go from 23.976 to 29.97 to 25?

Are the alien subs burned in for these Sky HD caps?

Shalashaska said:

Does anyone have an NTSC copy of the Director’s Edition? Living in the PAL region myself, I would love if someone, anyone could share a VIDEO_TS or ISO of the film. It’s impossible to find anywhere, especially with seeders.

Why do you need the NTSC version if you’re in the PAL region? The PAL is on rutracker, and it should be higher resolution, right? Amazon and iTunes have digital versions for sale that you could probably go for. Not sure what the actual resolution and framerate are on the digital ones, though.

It’s possible that it wasn’t the raw file, and the uploader did something to it. I forget, and can’t check anymore since it’s deleted. 😃