logo Sign In

zombie84

User Group
Members
Join date
21-Nov-2005
Last activity
12-Jan-2024
Posts
3,557

Post History

Post
#428983
Topic
Save Star Wars Dot Com
Time

Darth Mallwalker said:

Do you mean the quote from JayArgonaut regarding Lando's line?
IME that's describing a difference between the THX mix vs. its predecessors,
not a difference between 1478-80 & 1478-85.

So I'd forgotten about the UK PAL 1478-80, which shares the same catalog number with it's domestic counterpart. That confuses the discussion.

The NTSC 1478-80 pressed by Pioneer in Carson, California has copyright (c)1986 (not '85) and it Shirley contains a digital track. I'm holding it now.
I've got a hunch that's the one d_j captured too.

As for the actual contents of the PAL 1478-80, that's still up in the air it seems...

 Yeah I think I was confused about a discussion on the dual audio options on 1425-84. All these catalog numbers can be confusing. :p

Msycamore: The 1995 track has bits from the mono mix added into it, IIRC. I didn't know the 1993 release was THX certified though, thanks. They made such a big deal over the 1995 audio because it was THX, I thought that was the first instance.

Also, cool 70mm links, could be useful.

Post
#428592
Topic
Free "farewell" Screening of 1977 Star Wars collector's print (British I.B. Technicolor)
Time

I think you're partly in the wrong thread, but yeah I have that too. It was posted by one of the x0 people years ago to demonstrate the new starfield of the 1981 crawl I think. This is the series of photos I am looking for though.

Also, re: death star. I don't think he had them repainted. He mentioned in an interview with American Graffiti that when he showed up on set and saw how dark it was his solution was to cut holes in the set walls and have the set light itself (the trademark light panels), so that he could motivate the light and also be able to shoot more quickly. Return of the Jedi had similar struggles because the characters (all three of them) are dressed in black from head to toe so its hard to get edge definition. But as far as I know the Death Star wasn't repainted.

Post
#428544
Topic
Free "farewell" Screening of 1977 Star Wars collector's print (British I.B. Technicolor)
Time

This confirms one other thing: the Death Star interiors are not neutral grey. They are frequently green and blue tinted. I had suspected this from other sources but this just further confirms it.

People tend to think they should be a neutral colour because of the GOUT. But the GOUT/DC is not a good colour reference in this respect. The print is so washed out and pink shifted from fading that any colour that was originally there would not be detectable.

Now, the Technicolor print might have a tinge to it, and the photographing camera white balance may shift things more. But they could not possibly be responsible for the entirety of the green and blue tint. The rest of the image just looks so...right. The skin tones in particular are a dead giveaway--they look vivid and natural.

Here are some examples from the I.B. print.

Don't those look fantastic? So vivid! These shots are some of the more extreme examples--the green and blue tints vary in intensity from shot to shot. There's little consistency. And this should be considered a valid element of the original cinematography. Again, the print and the camera white balance might exaggerate things a little, but they could not possibly explain all of it.

Further proof? The 70mm cells collection from the 1990s. The Death Star is incredibly green in those. I thought maybe it was a bad print, but not any more. Also, in their 1979 book The Movie Brats, I always remember that the authors refer to the Death Star as a "grey-green" world. Not grey. Grey-green. Coincidence? Doubtful.

To confirm this, I re-timed the GOUT to natural levels. Here is the same shot of Han from the GOUT. The DC is even more pink and washed out than this.

Pretty gross looking. The 1985 IP is fading, so the image is washed out and pink shifted. First, I boosted the saturation by 40 points to get it to a level of vividness that matched the Technicolor print. The walls of the Death Star began to look pink; the tinting is otherwise hidden because the colours were so washed out. Then I dialed out the pink until skin tones looked natural, like on the Technicolor print. Dialing out a pink shift means adding green and some yellow (complementary colours) to neutralize the shift. The result looks something like this:

This is not exact; by Han's skin you can see it needs more green to get rid of some red hues, and a bit of yellow might make it better too, and the walls maybe need more blue and less green. The image lacks the deep contrast of the Technicolor print, which would bring out the colours further. But you can see--the Death Star walls here have a green hue that is very similar to the Technicolor screencap.

Now, as I mentioned, not every shot is like this. In fact, a couple shots are pretty neutral. But most of them aren't. So the green and blue hues of the Death Star interior are the original cinematography.

Post
#428432
Topic
Save Star Wars Dot Com
Time

I was looking forward to spending a weekend at my parents cottage yesterday, but due to the four consecutive jobs I work, I was unable. Burnt out from work, I became extremely frustrated. I was reading a thread on the Baltimore I.B. Screening and BaronlandoCalrissian remarked how frustrating it is that whenever there's a fucking Star Wars stickerbook released, websites like TFN will report on it, while ignoring what is probably the most important issue facing the franchise today: the suppression of the theatrical films.

In my anger, and with the help of a few beers, I decided: You know what, originaltrilogy.com is nice, but we need more than this. It's a forum and a petition, and of limited use. We need something more visible, accessible and comprehensive, and we need a brighter beacon of protest against all this bullshit.

So I made http://savestarwars.com

Now, it is under construction. I literally just started last night, working from a website template since I have virtually no html skills. Many of the texts and graphics are temporary. Many pages don't exist. But you can view the home page, the editorials page and the resources page and see what is there (the individual articles aren't up, except for How the Grinch Stole Star Wars).

But you can see what I am going for. I don't want to pull any punches, but I don't want it to be just fanboy bitching. And I want it to be well researched and informative, to actually educate people.

I'm posting the work in progress here for some input and suggestions. I might also want to bring in a guest editorial from some people here.

What I know I need right now: 1977 screen photographs. I know the X0 people had a bunch. I've seen them posted from time to time in threads. But they are floating around in a million threads. Does anyone have this complete collection? I'd like to preserve it. Moth3r, I'm looking at you. :p

Also, mods: I realize this should be in the "support" thread. I'll move it there once it's up and running but for now I want to keep it here for visibility while I build it.

Post
#428336
Topic
Free "farewell" Screening of 1977 Star Wars collector's print (British I.B. Technicolor)
Time

Baronlando said:

Mielr said:

I made a thread:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/forum/thread/302634/senator-theatre-farewell-screenings-of-star-wars-technicolor-ib-print

The more eyes that see this- the better. :-)

Good idea. (The force.net and the official site have a blurb every time a new sticker book comes out but didn't mention this.)

Yeah that bugs me too. Every time Peter Mayhew shows his face in public or every time there are more than two Star Wars fans dressed in costumes standing in the same room, this site will post it as news, while ignoring important stuff like this.

Post
#427972
Topic
Free "farewell" Screening of 1977 Star Wars collector's print (British I.B. Technicolor)
Time

I'm still shocked that there is a privately owned Technicolor print. This is really the holy grail outside of access to the Lucasfilm archives. It looks like it hasn't been shown too much as well, judging by how little scratching and dirt there is. It could easily be digitally cleaned and made into a new 2K master if every official source were to be lost.

Post
#427947
Topic
Free "farewell" Screening of 1977 Star Wars collector's print (British I.B. Technicolor)
Time

Baronlando said:

Thanks for the pictures, that print is really something. Everything looks so "right" and matches the idealized version in my head, collected from vague, semi-accurate memories. The sunset scene, those big solid red lasers against the cell block wells (sorry adywan), the look of that great matte painting of the Falcon (that has since been replaced). Also I can't help wondering: if you're this guy who owns the print and you're going back to Britain, do you just put it in the overhead bin? It wouldn't fit, would it? Or it gets checked with the luggage? Jesus, that sounds nerve wracking. Unless the guy is flying on his own private plane, in which case he's just awesome.

 You would have to have it shipped seperately. If the owner is British, he probably just sent the reels over for the screening. Would still be expensive though, since the half dozen reels weigh something like 100 pounds.

Post
#427116
Topic
Free "farewell" Screening of 1977 Star Wars collector's print (British I.B. Technicolor)
Time

Backlighting it is a bit tough because of the dye layers, but with modern scanning tools it can be done. Not ideal, but more than doable. Take a look at all the films that are Technicolor negatives--Wizard of Oz, for example. Looks pretty kick ass to me. The bigger issue is that the layers shrink at different rates, so you often have to seperate them and scan them individually, but for something 33 years old that's probably not an issue. The biggest issue is that the 100% fade-free claim is a bit misleading. It doesn't fade, but it never gets printed 100% faithful. You can see in the clip, there is a bit of a tint to it, although the white balance on the video camera is probably making it worse. The problem is that the color balance of the dyes is never 100% the same, so no two prints are exactly a like. If you want to use Technicolor for color reference, it's the best source possible but it will always be a tiny bit off if you want to start splitting hairs.

Post
#427112
Topic
Free "farewell" Screening of 1977 Star Wars collector's print (British I.B. Technicolor)
Time

The Jaws print was a 1975 original to be sure. It looked and sounded very rough.

As to how many Technicolor prints...I'd say maybe a half dozen at the most. I.B. Technicolor didn't exist in the U.S. in 1977, but it still was being done in England. So, you probably had 2 Technicolor prints per major city in England, probably approaching a half dozen in total. That's a complete guess on my part, but it's what I would peg it at. Plus, one that Lucas had printed for himself. So it's pretty rare that one of them was privately purchased or stolen. It's clearly a collector, given how greatly the print has been cared for--hardly any dirt and scratching at all, and this must have been used in a regular theatrical run. I wonder if it was put through a formal cleaning process at some point.

Post
#427043
Topic
Free "farewell" Screening of 1977 Star Wars collector's print (British I.B. Technicolor)
Time

The Star Destroyer shot looked really pink, but the rest of the film looked pretty much fine. I'll bet that was a 1981 splice to a 1977 original.

Also, you can see the odd spec of dirt really clearly--and by this means, you can tell how clean the film looks otherwise. None of that huge, coarse grain that the GOUT has for the first reel or two! Love that velvety Technicolor texture, you can see it on the video clip if you look closely.

Shame though, that the only way to watch prints of the film now is if you have a Technicolor print. I saw Jaws the other month, and the opening credits that were supposed to be black on white were blood-red on white. I thought it was an alternate title card because it was vividly red, and I thought maybe it was supposed to be the color of blood since it sort of worked in that way, but sadly the rest of the print, while not so red, was very, very pink, on the borderline of watchability.

Post
#426857
Topic
Free "farewell" Screening of 1977 Star Wars collector's print (British I.B. Technicolor)
Time

1) Since the theatre was closing, they probably feared no reprimands or boycotts from Lucasfilm.

2)Since the screening was free of charge, I'm not sure they are actually clearly breaking any laws. The owner of the print can be fined or prosecuted, but for all we know he may have actually obtained the print legitimately, as this happened from time to time way back when.

3)Lucasfilm may act like Big Brother, but in the end the people that actually police this stuff are probably only in the amount of dozens, so if something like this happens without much advertising it tends to fly below the radar. We didn't hear about it--and we hear about things long before Lucasfilm does!

4)Since it was a one-time screening to a theatre that no longer exists as a business, done as a free community event, I doubt Lucasfilm cares to act on it. It would just make them look bad.

However, someone raised a good point. This print didn't self-destruct when the theatre closed its doors. Somewhere, possibly in Baltimore, that beautiful print is sitting in some cans RIGHT NOW. I doubt they will simply let random internet fans have access to it, due to the legal trouble. If anyone knows the organizers or former-owners, they might be able to convince them to...do something with it. Any leads?

Post
#423194
Topic
The Empire Strikes Back Panic Attack Cut
Time

The wampa scenes were never in any cut. For the simple reason that they were never completed. There was nothing to cut out in the first place because they never had a scene, just a few isolated shots and inserts. I don't even think they could "finish" the sequences with CG today, because when they realized it wasn't working they abandoned it, so they left out more than just a couple of Wampa inserts, there is significant live-action portions as well.

Regarding the assembly cut, there actually are a few references to cutting in Once Upon a Galaxy, now that I think about it, nothing too detailed but a few asides. Towards the end, Kershner started cutting the footage he had shot. He says that at first he didn't even want to show Lucas dailies and wanted him to wait for the rough cut before he saw anything; but then (and probably hastened by all the production delays, in truth) he decided to send Lucas dailies and also allow him editorial input as they cut it. I'm not sure if this was after or during shooting though, you might find out if you skim through the second half of Once Upon a Galaxy.

Post
#422846
Topic
Star Wars OT & 1997 Special Edition - Various Projects Info (Released)
Time

dark_jedi said:

Erikstormtrooper said:

dark_jedi said:

Then on to SW's Remix.

What remains to be done to the Star Wars mixes? I thought those were completed already.

(Not trying to sound impatient. I'm just eager to get these puppies!)

I am ripping all the '85 remixes as well and sync'ing to the GOUT video, I am putting together a master raw PCM set of all stereo mixes, I am getting this from the JSC set I have, then it is off to Jedi, but it is getting easier now with all the experience I am getting now, not as frustrating anymore, Adywan was right, Vegas is very COOL once you get used to it.

Not sure if the remixes will be on the DVD's or not but they might.

 Very cool! Sounds like a lot of work!

I guess we shouldn't expect to ever have true 70mm mixes available, considering the source. Which is awesome since we virtually have one for Star Wars. This is unrelated to the current topic, but would it be possible to basically turn the ESB/ROTJ 1993 mix into a 5.1 upmix using the same methods? I must assume these come from the 70mm stems just as Star Wars did.

Post
#422362
Topic
Info: OT Reel lengths...
Time

I have no idea what the original Laserdisks were sourced from. Maybe an IP, maybe just a theatrical print.

In 1985, a new IP was printed for the specific purpose of creating a new, high quality source for home video (the existing IPs were falling apart and old). This was the source for every single (American) home video release since then, as far as my research shows. It was the source of the GOUT/DC, and the source of the Faces set. (It was even used as a source for the SE restoration).

My understanding is that the only post-1985 LD releases with burn marks are the PAL disks--which makes sense since they were taken from a different source. Thinking about it now, it does make sense that burn marks are not put in to the IP, because the IP is basically the raw master for the film (since the O-neg doesn't have color timing). The 1985 IP doesn't have subs either, since they were electronically (I'm pretty sure) generated for specific video releases as countries dictated. Probably this was done on the D1/2 master of each specific release.

...however, since the 1985 IP was never intended to be used as a theatrical base, maybe this is why there was no theatre artifacts like burn marks. You don't need burn marks if it is made for video. So, there is still an out there.

Let me ask you this: was there ever an American Laserdisk release after 1985 that had burns? And does the DC/Faces themselves have burns?

If the answer to the first is yes, then there are a number of possibilities there. But if the answer to the second is yes, then...well, I don't know what that would mean except that they couldn't possibly be derived from the GOUT unless we find evidence of image tampering to hide them (which would be extremely difficult on 1993 electronic video telecine technology).

EDIT

After further research, changeover burn marks can be added either to prints or to IPs. It's basically up to the lab and/or producer's preference. The 1985 IP doesn't have any, if GOUT is any indication.