Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Josep5349

I strongly dislike some of the CG of the PT, though I think the worst for me is in ROTS around the 51 minute mark, Obi Wan is talking to some Clones. There’s a fairly close up shot at first which is ok but then it cuts back to a wider shot and the CG troopers just look terrible, they don’t have their helmets on and they literally look like cartoons.

Yep yep yep, that bit is soooo bad. Without going over all the whys and wherefores of the "THEY'RE CLONES" thing, it's actually the all-CG sequences that I think they look their best, I know someone just posted a gif up there ^ (which is a bit misleading as it's kinda sped up and looks much jankier than it actually is) but that last couple of reels is where I actually start to enjoy AOTC. The Clones no longer look like terrible digital constructs painted into a live-action world, they now look much more 'organic' to their surroundings because it's ALL digital and that we don't have any terribad shots of them with their helmets off.

I mean, why are their bodies still all CG even when they take their helmets off and we see Tem Morrison underneath? Yes, I get the "THEY'RE CLONES" thing but when you're dealing with a live-action head then for ****'s sake, just put him in some real armour that you can touch up digitally to show different wear and tear and/or markings for different clones. It would in no way be cheaper to do the armour all digitally in those shots, that's Lucas being an obstinate arse just because he can.

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

It's not about how they look now. Old effects always stand out more decades later. My point is the original trilogy had amazing, top-tier effects for its time. Not just technically, as in how they were made, but also visually. They looked more realistic and impressive on screen than anything before them. In contrast the prequels looked terrible even when they came out. Well, 1 and 2 did, 3 looked better. It was too early to emphasize CG that much. I remember sitting in the theater in 1999 when the gungan/robot fight was happening and thinking it looked terrible.

And there were rough, obvious effects in 1977. No movie is perfect, especially ones that are breaking new ground technologically. In 1999, nothing like what ILM was creating for Episode I existed on screen. It was new and incredible. Hell, WETA went to ILM for advice and Lucas even loaned out some of his animators and digital artists to WETA for LOTR. That's how much of a seismic shift Episode I had on the industry. Yeah, everyone was copying bullet time, but that was a fad. Digital armies, digital doubles, green screen sets, etc. That was the future and Lucas was right there on the forefront like he was in 1977. At least with the Prequels, Lucas was free to have the look and expanse he always wanted.

[captainsolo]

Greedo Remix Vol. 5 is easily the worst ever done because it completely ruins the edit and flow of the scene in ways that haven't happened before.

I still swear that all the CG effects on AOTC and ROTS looked much better when printed back to 35mm for the theatrical screenings. I saw each several times and always on film. Actually saw both on their midnight releases if I'm honest.

Except for seeing AOTC in an Omnimax Dome...bad idea.
And IMAX...super bad idea....but it was the exclusive shorter cut.

If Disney indeed scanned the 97SE materials to make a new 4K version that's what I've said for years is the easiest no brainer solution to get something out there and get away from the **** Lowry abomination masters.
If they could go back to the 97 5.1 audio tracks it would be amazing as they were the last great sounding mixes for the OT aaand of course not.

We can't even get TPM without DNR and have both the theatrical cut and 5.1 EX audio mix.
And AOTC went into teal land.
Grrrrr...it's sad when even the prequels aren't right!

[Geoff D]

Greedo remix Vol.5 is easily my favourite edit of it so far (as far as edits go, would prefer the original to be there but hey ho, them's the breaks) as it's precisely BECAUSE it changes the rhythm so much that I dig it. It's not the same scene that it was before and that's the right way to approach it IMO, it was geared so much to be this blasé comedy moment but adding in him shooting first has *already* ruined the entire flow of the joke. By adding another beat before he fires and then speeding up him slumping over, as well as removing the few frames of the exploding dummy completely, it doesn't feel so much like a comedy moment retrofitted with a conscience any more, it's starting to feel a bit more matter-of-fact.

[bobbyh64]

All these years of fans complaining about Greedo shooting first...what a waste of time now that no one shoots first.

[badfingerboogie]

I'm just waiting for the "Han never shoots at all" cut where Greedo just straight-up commits suicide.

[darkness2918]

Originally Posted by badfingerboogie

I'm just waiting for the "Han never shoots at all" cut where Greedo just straight-up commits suicide.

[bobbyh64]

Originally Posted by badfingerboogie

I'm just waiting for the "Han never shoots at all" cut where Greedo just straight-up commits suicide.

Or Greedo’s laser blast ricochets off the wall and kills him.

[Gold Ranger]

Why couldn't they have digitally altered it so that Han shoots Greedo. But in doing so, when Greedo is shot and killed, his body/hands tightend up and it was reflex as to why he "pulled" the trigger on his blaster, thus making him shoot and mis at such close range.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by happydood

Is there a possibility that you're not taking into account the kids who saw the CGI in 1999 and 2002 and 2005 and thought it was better than what came before in the same way that you thought 77-93 were better than Ray Harryhausen? And that maybe film is an evolving visual medium that requires you to evolve with it? I'm honestly not trying to be patronizing or pedantic. But, there's an artistry to every generation of effects. I think folks who grew up in the 70's and 80's- of which I'm a card carrying member on the wrong side of 40- need to come to modern movies the same way they go to silent movies and movies from the 30's and 40's and 50's and 60's. And so often I see that they don't visit those movies. Rather- and this is exactly the kind of blanket statement I'm trying to avoid. Alas.- They judge modern tech through the prism of the practical effects that they enjoyed when they grew up. And they miss the value of what's being done now. And make no mistake, on a narrative level, I'm fully in the Scorsese camp regarding modern movies, but I don't think the effects are the problem. George Lucas absolutely had a story to tell regardless of how folks took the execution of it.

This is a very good observation. I’ve often chalked up a lot of the outrage to an aging fanbase. As we grow older we become more discerning to newer things and more sympathetic to things...in this instance films.

[anonymous_024]

In case anyone is curious, the VUDU and YouTube (Google Play) versions of ANH now have the “McClunkey” edit of the film. Only the iTunes, MA, and FandangoNow digital versions still have the 2011 edit.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by anonymous_024

In case anyone is curious, the VUDU and YouTube (Google Play) versions of ANH now have the “McClunkey” edit of the film. Only the iTunes, MA, and FandangoNow digital versions still have the 2011 edit.

Well, that makes the BD worth having then. I also intend to keep the 2004 DVDs and the 2 disc 2008 DVDs.

[Scottishguy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGZm...ature=youtu.be

[Class316]

I'm late in the game. Does Disney plus feature a new version of the Han/Greedo scene?

[Jar Jar Stinks]

Did ESB and ROTJ get any alterations for the new streams?

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Class316

I'm late in the game. Does Disney plus feature a new version of the Han/Greedo scene?

Yes.

[anonymous_024]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Well, that makes the BD worth having then. I also intend to keep the 2004 DVDs and the 2 disc 2008 DVDs.

I intend to do the same. When it comes to digital versions of films, nothing really lasts forever.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

[Show spoiler]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGZm...ature=youtu.be

So, in other words 4K displays that are over 400 nits such as LG's OLEDs having nothing to take advantage of with the OT on Disney+.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

So, in other words 4K displays that are over 400 nits such as LG's OLEDs having nothing to take advantage of with the OT on Disney+.

Well by that analysis they don't have much dynamic range. I'll be interested to hear from Geoff and others more technical when they are around.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Well by that analysis they don't have much dynamic range. I'll be interested to hear from Geoff and others more technical when they are around.

They top out at 400 nits. So, most HDR 10 displays should be good with that. Mine tops out around 500 nits.