logo Sign In

zombie84

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

Post History

Post
#317621
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317621/action/topic#317621
Time
Fang Zei said:

If there apparently aren't THAT MANY PEOPLE OUT THERE who would like the OOT in good quality, what's to stop LFL from doing exactly what you're describing? Just put it out in a small, limited run (and then watch it run out really quickly since there actually are a lot of people out there who wanted!


Once again--they don't want to. Lucas doesn't want them to. I'm sure the Lucasfilm board of directors would jump at the chance to do this because its tapping into a huge market, but Lucas has made it very clear that he doesn't want this to happen. Since the Blu Ray sets will be absolute smash hits with just the SE, he therefore has no pressure at all, financially, to do it. Getting this yet? Look, I'm not arguing with you here because I agree it would be a good idea for what you are proposing, but you're looking at the situation from your eyes and not the perspective of the people actually in charge.

Fang Zei said:

All I'm saying is that the numbers seem to have spoken. I don't think the originally rumored '07 saga set was pushed back for any particular reason, I think it's just that we were reading too much into what happened with the 2006 release. I mean, they sold pretty well didn't they? all things considered?


Actually, word is that LFL was dissappointed. Which boggles my mind, really.
Post
#317614
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317614/action/topic#317614
Time
My point still stands though. You're just injecting your personal preference as a course of action Lucasfilm must take. The matter is that the OOT is not needed to sell Star Wars on Blu-Ray, the same way it wasn't needed to sell Star Wars on DVD in 2004. Hell, Spike TV just aired the saga in the SE--also in HD--and it was the highest rated airings on the networks history. You are just deluding yourself if you think LFL has any reason to include a remastered OOT. Given their schizenphrenia they might one day do as a token of good will to fans, but Lucas doesn't want it out, and if they just released the SE and made you have to buy the friggin prequels with it because its in a 6-disk boxset, it would still be the highest selling release in Blu Ray history. Because people will buy just because its star wars in high-def. End of story. Its a painful truth to face, but you have to stop deluding yourself.
Post
#317593
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317593/action/topic#317593
Time
Fang Zei said:

The 2006 release was a shameless cash grab. It doesn't mean it's the death of the OOT. Once you remember that's it's all only on standard dvd (granted, non-anamorphic standard dvd), it doesn't become that hard to imagine us getting a blu-ray OOT. Because, as I've said before, HOW IN THE HELL ELSE IS HE GOING TO SELL US THE EXACT SAME THING ALL OVER AGAIN?!


Star Wars SE in high def on Blu-Ray. Thats how.

As I said before, the promise of seeing the films in HD will be much, much more than enough to make the SE Blu-Ray set the biggest release in the format's history. It does not need the OOT.

If they want to do a second Blu-Ray release some years later, like they did with DVD, thats when they need to start getting creative. But there's really no reason to include the OOT on the first release unless they simply want to as a token of good faith, because its totally unnecessary for its success. People just want to see Star Wars in HD. They might even be willing to pay for a 6-film boxset just to see the 3 originals in SE form!
Post
#317540
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317540/action/topic#317540
Time
Well, in the case of Blade Runner, the third disk that has 3 cuts--they are really 99% the same. Its only a handful of chapters that actually need to be programmed--now, Alien 3, thats a marvel of branching technology!

As for Close Encounters, I honestly know nothing about the new transfer and haven't even seen it. But the whole Lowry thing was just to clean up dirt and scratches, and Star Wars was particularly abused--there are many other methods for dirt removal other than Lowry. See Criterion's work, or the archival Blade Runner cuts. You don't need Lowry to make your films look good, and in fact I'd say the SW SE looks a bit too clean. The issues with the unstable film stock really relate to color issues--certain color layers begin fading at differing rates, so you get shots tinted blue or red (most commonly--the yellow layer is particularly unstable). All this requires is color manipulation, basically an advanced version of photoshop, so its not a big deal. At a certain point the colors fade to the point where theres nothing to recover--The Searchers, in particular, is plagued with this problem--but Lowry doesn't have anything to do with the coloring anyway, they are purely a dirt-removal thing.
Post
#317535
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317535/action/topic#317535
Time
Mielr said:

zombie84 said:

Digital technology hadn't yet advanced far enough, the 1997 SE was mostly an old-fashioned photo-chemical restoration. The entire film wasn't digitized because there was no such thing as DI's back then, they just recomposited whatever shots they need, printed them back onto film and then spliced them into the neg so that it could be completed photochemically.

As for EOD, most of thats just laserdisk footage anamorphically enhanced. It was done out of house by some company, and the entire feature is anamorphic so that means they were forced to re-render the letterbox footage as anamorphic in order to include it in the feature, otherwise it would look ridiculous to have this tiny box in the center of the screen whenever they showed clips.


Zombie, how did you find all of this out? Do you know someone who worked on it?


Yes, but I wouldn't need to, you can tell just by watching it. As for the restoration, its been well documented, and in any case it was done mostly in 1995 AFAIK, and DI's didn't exist yet, so scanning an entire film would have been a historical breakthrough. I guess they still could have done so in secret for whatever reason, but why would they do that, the whole point of the SE was that Lucas wanted the originals to go away and never be released again.
Post
#317494
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317494/action/topic#317494
Time
Yes, the negative was deteriorating, and much of it had to be replaced with dupes from other sources, or reprinted. Digital technology hadn't yet advanced far enough, the 1997 SE was mostly an old-fashioned photo-chemical restoration. The entire film wasn't digitized because there was no such thing as DI's back then, they just recomposited whatever shots they need, printed them back onto film and then spliced them into the neg so that it could be completed photochemically.

As for EOD, most of thats just laserdisk footage anamorphically enhanced. It was done out of house by some company, and the entire feature is anamorphic so that means they were forced to re-render the letterbox footage as anamorphic in order to include it in the feature, otherwise it would look ridiculous to have this tiny box in the center of the screen whenever they showed clips.
Post
#317487
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317487/action/topic#317487
Time
No, only the scenes they changed--they only needed to scan the shots that had stuff added to them. The altered shots were then printed back onto film, and re-spliced into the negative, replacing the originals. So, I would estimate about 30% of the OOT is in the computer--if it was kept at all. The negative that was scanned for the 2004 edition was the 1997 SE with the CGI, as the negative of the OOT no longer existed.

Of course, you could easily combine the 2004 scan with the original OOT scans from 1997 and edit together a virtual re-construction of the original negative--but thats one of those "work+money" things that Lucas does his best to avoid.
Post
#317474
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317474/action/topic#317474
Time
Fang Zei said:

zombie84 said:

The only reason the OOT was on DVD in 2006 was because it was already done.


That's exactly my point. What if he's just waiting until the blu-ray to put any sort of work whatsoever into remastering the OOT? Isn't that what Cameron's doing with The Abyss?

Lucas, at least so far as he's concerned, put all of the necessary work into restoring the OT back in '03/'04. True, it wouldn't necessarily take that kind of restoration all over again in order to achieve an acceptable level of quality for a 1080p master of the O-OT, but what you said is exactly my point, zombie. It was already done, so he just got THX to do whatever it needed and then slapped it on a dvd.


You're assuming that he will do a remaster in the future though. The 2006 DVD does not require this to explain its existance. In fact, Lucas has been on record stating the exact opposite--that he has no plans to re-issue the OOT and that he does NOT want to spend money to remaster it. So I'm not sure why you keep assuming he's going to. The GOUT was thrown on as a bonus feature because it just happened to be lying around in the archives, if it wasn't for that it would have never been done.
Post
#317459
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317459/action/topic#317459
Time
The only reason the OOT was on DVD in 2006 was because it was already done. The masters were made long ago and just sitting there for exploitation. It costs no money. So you can just slap them on as a "bonus feature" to get people to buy the individual movies, which was the point of that release. LFL thought people would be happy with that, but their misjudgement is really besides the point. The OOT cannot be presented in any higher quality than the GOUT without spending money, and Lucas seems very opposed to doing that. Thats why the odds are massively stacked against it. If there was a 2K telecine just sitting around waiting to be taken advantage of, okay then I can see it at some point being used as a Blu-Ray "bonus feature," but theres not. I think if this was the case then Lucas would okay it, because I don't think he's quite as much a Nazi as we suspect, but the truth is that Lucas doesn't give a shit and doesn't want to spend money on something he sees as either a piece of junk or inferior. Thats why when everyone was asking him why the 2006 release is so crappy he went on about how he dind't want to commit money to restoring a version of the film he isn't even happy about people seeing in the first place. And I think he likes that too, because it gives him an excuse other than "screw you guys."
Post
#317453
Topic
Robert Harris Godfather Restoration WHY cannot lucas restore the oot ?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317453/action/topic#317453
Time
Johnboy3434 said:

zombie84 said:

I DID restore the trilogy, it costs millions of dollars and came out on DVD in 2004. Ugh.


Well, if he worded it exactly like that, you really couldn't fault him for anything. He DID restore the OT, just not the version you guys wanted.


Its not a restoration, its an alteration. In the process of altering it, some of the original elements were refurbished. And yeah, we can fault him for mincing words with these semantic games--any idiot could see we're talking about a restoration of an unaltered original and not some CGI-filled re-edit.
Post
#317451
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317451/action/topic#317451
Time
The thing is though, Lucas DOESN'T WANT the OOT to be available. So it doesn't matter if it would help future sales because the fact is that future sales will be outstanding WITHOUT IT. Its the exact same reason the 2004 boxset was popular--yeah, its the SE but its Star Wars on DVD!! Thats exactly how it will be with Blu Ray. Yeah, its the SE, but its Star Wars on Blu Ray! He doesn't have to include the OOT because the promise of seeing the films in high-def is more than enough to make it the years most popular release. And thats the bottom line. He doesn't have to do it if it he doesn't want to, and he doesn't want to.
Post
#317426
Topic
Originals: A New Preference
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317426/action/topic#317426
Time
Welcome to the right side.

You know, it doesn't always have to be OOT versus SE, because why can't the two co-exist? It doesn't seem to be a problem for virtually every other film ever made in the history of the medium. And regardless of whether some people prefer the SE, theres a certain charm in the originals, in their low-tech unpretentiousness--and I think thats really the defining trait that they have. But more importantly they are a part of history and deserve to be preserved.

I remember, I had a sort of epiphany like you did. It used to be that I loved the originals but liked the SE more because I thought the effects were better and the image was cleaner. But then I put in my old tape of Star Wars--and somehow it just "clicked". It all cohered as this charming, old-fashioned adventure story. I remember the shot where the X-wings take off--I had always loved the SE revision of the exterior shot of them taking off from Yavin because the original version was so poor. But then I got it. Somehow, that low-tech shot of animated white streaks racing to the sky worked, and I think it was because I realised the "Saga" wasn't working and let go of the need for it to be a totally consistent, modernised 6-episode serial and finally saw Star Wars for what it was for the first time in many years: a terrific, old-fashioned adventure fairy tale made in 1977. Somehow I had forgotten that in the hype that laid in the wake of the SE/prequels.
Post
#317425
Topic
Robert Harris Godfather Restoration WHY cannot lucas restore the oot ?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317425/action/topic#317425
Time
ChainsawAsh said:

IIRC, Robert A. Harris has publicly stated that he has an open offer to Lucas to restore all of the original 'Star Wars' movies, provided that they are the ORIGINAL versions and not the SEs, either for free or for a substantially discounted cost. Lucas has not responded.

(I may be a bit fuzzy on the facts there, but that's how I remembered it)


Yup, he said so on the Digital Bits.

Lucas' response to this would be: I DID restore the trilogy, it costs millions of dollars and came out on DVD in 2004. Ugh.

I'm really looking forward to the new Godfather disks though. I know they've screened them in a few theaters already, would be nice to have a slightly wider limited engagement like what happened with Blade Runner (which was the best theater experience I had since 1997). I have to assume that a Blu-Ray release is in the near future here--and that will be sweet ass.
Post
#317424
Topic
New 'The Clone Wars' movie trailer
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317424/action/topic#317424
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

i think their are three writers because they are combining several of the tv episodes together to make this movie. Though some material will be exclusive to the movie and an eventual dvd release.


That makes sense.

This way they can make people buy the show twice! Wait, plus the thater ticket. Its a cash cow that Walt Disney could have never imagined.
Post
#317418
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317418/action/topic#317418
Time
Actually, I'd be surprised if Lucas lived past 75, what with his diabetes. Here's hoping he lives longer, but I honestly think he has about a decade left.

The thing is, whether or not the SE becomes entrenched as "the" version to LFL or the general public--and I'd argue that it kind of already is--there's always going to be a demand for the original-original version, not from Joe Meathead who will be watching Attack of the Clones in a full-screen version, but from the film-buff/preservationist/hardcore-fan group, which will make for a more and more important demographic as the films move out of the limelight. Its the same reason why Warners put out 4 versions of Blade Runner, why Anchor Bay put out 4 versions of Dawn of the Dead, and why Universal put out 3 versions of Close Encounters--do you think these are for the mass audience? Absolutely not, those people will just watch the single-disk directors cuts, or whatever is sold as "the" edition to get. But the collectors market is huge for classic films. Thats why there is a 4 disk Gone With the Wind, a 3 disk Wizard of Oz and a 3 disk Seven Samurai. I mean movies like Wizard of Oz have a wider, family appeal too, but the collectors/classic-film-buff appreciators arguably drive it more than the forty year old moms who say "oh, look Wizard of Oz is out on DVD".

As much as optimists get blindsided by hope, I think you also have to realise that we are on the tail end of the peak of Star Wars' popularity. 1999-2005 was the pinnacle, and thats when Lucas really pushed the whole "SE only" thing, and thats also when your average viewer was buying into the SE. More people saw ANH between those years than probably the entire twenty years before it, and thats sort of created an impression upon us that is exaggerated to what the future will bring. Because Star Wars was popular at that time--it was in theaters. And on the news, and magazines, and the toys and videogames were all over Toys R Us. Kids on the playground were into Star Wars because it was "in" again. Now, it will continue to be that way, but its status as a current trend--just like Pirates of the Carribean was from 2003-2007--will fade more and more. Kids won't play with the toys as much because theres not a new movie in theaters, and so on.

Obviously though, there IS a new movie in theaters, and a TV show as well, but these will not compare to even a fraction of the mainstream popularity you saw in the days of the prequels. And over time, the classic-film movie buffs, the preservationists and the collectors will emerge as a bigger and bigger demographic, and the kids/average-viewer group will fade more and more. You'll still have the SE touted as the version of the film to judge it by, the version touted by its creator as the only valid version, but the original 1977 will gather more and more status as it gets over. You know, Wizard of Oz still has a surprising amount of younger fans for a film thats almost seventy years old, its not just viewed by fans of classic films, but those casual viewers don't really care about it THAT much and really have no bearing on its video releases, its the fans that really drive the market, that nitpick that the colors be right, that all the scenes be intact, etc.
Post
#317416
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317416/action/topic#317416
Time
generalfrevious said:

Nothing is ever going to be planned for the OOT in 2009, or 2010, or even by 2015! I can't believe how delusional some people are towards the false hope of getting the OOT on Blu-ray. Lucas will not even release a SE version of the OT until the format is on its way out. Plus, anything positive associated with the OOT is NEVER, EVER going to be released. I don't care if I have said this a hundred or a thousand times over; it is Lucas absolute goal to destroy the OOT from the public's minds and replace it with a SE/PT arc that has the PT as the centerpiece of the the saga, not the OT in any manner whatsoever. The OT, even in its latest revisionist form, is regarded as an afterthought to the PT. Since the shocking abuse the OOT two years ago, fans of the original trilogy are now living in delusion. Once I'll state for the thousandth time: the GOUT is the BEST we are ever going to get from Lucasfilm, and that is the absolute LAST time we will see the OOT for time immemorial.


I would revise that last part with "in Lucas' lifetime."

Star Wars, the 1977 film, will never be allowed to dissappear because its too important, and even though the SE on High-Def will sedate a lot of people, over time demand for the original--not as a means to replace anything, but just for the sheer appreciation of it as a historically-relevant work of art--will be too hard to ignore for a corporation designed to sell product.

When the saga comes to Blu-Ray it will be SE-only, because that will be enough to get people to buy it. People like us are in the minority--true, most people would prefer to have the originals included, but its not going to stop them from buying it if they are excluded. The promise of seeing the films in HD on Blu-Ray--regardless of which version--is enough. And thats why it will probably be at least a few years after the initial SE release that any hope of the OOT in high-def will appear. It'll be just like it was on DVD.

Of course, LFL is totally and completely unpredictable when it comes to this stuff--ie the 2006 release that came out of nowhere--but I would agree that people are probably too optimistic about this. But the OOT will be available--one day. It just a shame that it might have to take something as extreme as Lucas himself dying before the wheels can be put in motion to get this happening.
Post
#317214
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317214/action/topic#317214
Time
You don't need a big screen to see a difference. Even on a 19" screen its like night and day. If you have a good monitor and good source that is--when most people say "theres not that big a difference", they have seen 720p examples of some crappy HD television broadcast compressed to death on a crummy TV to begin with. If you can't spot Blu Ray on a 19" 1080p television I would say you might need to get your eyes checked.

NTSC and PAL aren't obsolete yet, because standard def is not obsolete. Not only is standard def not obsolete but its by a huge margin the majority format. One day it might be though, but not for a while. LCD's and digital signals don't make a difference.
Post
#317197
Topic
Indiana Jones IV
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317197/action/topic#317197
Time
RRS-1980 said:

[And to say this I didn't need to know the exact plot twists which would lead Indy there, zombie...


Thats not what you were talking about. You were talking about the very fact that a soviet character is seen in a publicity photo to be in an American base. Whether that is feasible or not is entirely unknown because we have no idea what the plot is, what the circumstances of her being there are, who the character even is, how its explained, etc, etc. To bitch about this based on a vague publicity photo is just dumb. Wait for the film and find out what the actual story is and then bitch.
Post
#317176
Topic
Indiana Jones IV
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317176/action/topic#317176
Time
RRS-1980 said:

Yeah, they won't forget about candy bars, but they will drop the common sense somewhere in the way.

Saw another promotional photos today. Two of them featured that female agent, I.Spalko. I'm not the kind of guy who counts how many shots Indy fired from his 6-shot revolver (and other usual nitpicking), yet I simply have problem with swallowing the amount of improbabilty in this upcoming movie.

She's dressed in some kind of a uniform (let's not get into details if it's done properly or not - it has Soviet star on the belt buckle, so it's at least supposed to resemble uniform, right?). I thought she will appear like that in S.America, commanding the detachment of troops. Yet I see her in that super secret US Army base, the one with that mysterious warehouse. Well, she's only missing big letters "hello, I'm a Soviet spy folks!" on her back! And she's marching straight into secret warehouse, hidden in the middle of the nowhere and guarded by US troops.

Right...

And another shot: she threatens to kill poor Indy by putting some blade to his throat. Oh gee, what an intriguing action shot! But what is that weapon? A rapier? A some sort of straight sabre (e.g. like in US Navy) ? She marched into US base, in 1957, with a 2-foot long sabre? "Oh, I beg your pardon, I'm just a Soviet sporstwoman-fencer and I got lost here"

WTF?

Who gets paid for such scripts? >:(


I like how you are judging the feasability of a plot that you honestly know nothing about based on one or two shots you saw in a promotional photograph.