Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by dookiex

I sure as heck didn't need the "nooo" there for my own benefit for clarity, but in terms of why he chose to put it in, I can understand and agree with his decision. Simple as that.

Yes, but as I said earlier, the reasoning is more likely the "mirroring" that he seems to be just shy of obsessed with, and not so much for clarity. It didn't need clarity. It takes something that was already obvious and just makes it obvious a second or so sooner. That's about it. But there is tons of evidence of Lucas loving the "mirroring" between the two trilogies. That's the most likely explanation. You can keep believing otherwise if you like, but believing that the sky is plaid doesn't mean that the sky is actually plaid.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by dookiex

If you watch that scene, without the "noooo," Vader could have been thinking a gajillion different things. Maybe he wants to kill Luke himself. Maybe he wants Luke to be his right hand man and take over the Empire. Maybe a lot of things, that scene was actually pretty vague. It's only in the context of what comes after that we realize what his intent really was. Adding the "noooo" takes the vagueness out of it. It's bizarre how people are oblivious to the fact that the scene is obvious now because they know how the whole thing plays out thus they remember it within the proper context. They don't comprehend that it's adding a bit of emotion. I sure as heck didn't need the "nooo" there for my own benefit for clarity, but in terms of why he chose to put it in, I can understand and agree with his decision. Simple as that.

I don't agree with you. Movies don't have to telegraph every emotion. It's better to advance the plot via visuals than through exposition. And even if it makes Vader's intent slightly less clear, I actually think that's better. If Luke doesn't know his full intention, why should we?

But having said that, the "noooo" doesn't bother me that much, although I still think Lucas should have left it alone. I obviously don't know what Lucas was thinking, but I think the positive side of the "nooooo" is that it's a framing device. Anakin said "nooooooooo" when he first became Vader when he found out that Padame was dead and now he says "nooooo" when he stops being Vader. So I think it works from that standpoint.

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by Uxi

I am most grateful that you're dead wrong on a legal grounds and disagree with you on moral grounds, as well.

Would it be nice to those fans if he did? Sure. Is he obligated to please those who deride and libel him when he doesn't? Hell no. He doesn't owe them anything more than he's already given.

It's selfish for people to think that someone they've never met owes them because of the emotional investment they put in.

Forget about what's owed or obligated.

Imagine if something you really loved was changed for the worse. I dunno, your favorite album. Pretend it's The Wall, by Pink Floyd. Imagine if all the guitar parts were changed to accordion parts, and there was no way to listen to the old songs except on 64-bit mono MP3s that were hissy and noisy. Would you perhaps change your tune? Would you change your tune if you didn't like the changes in SW?

You're fine with someone pissing on your favorite pieces of art, music, literature, films and changing them forever in whichever manner they wish, as long as the "Creator™" makes the decision?

That's ridiculous, to me, so I guess yeah, it's something to just agree to disagree on, because those two viewpoints are so diametrically opposed I don't think there's a chance of seeing any middle ground. Good day to you, sir.

[Uxi]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

Imagine if something you really loved was changed for the worse. I dunno, your favorite album. Pretend it's The Wall, by Pink Floyd. Imagine if all the guitar parts were changed to accordion parts, and there was no way to listen to the old songs except on 64-bit mono MP3s that were hissy and noisy. Would you perhaps change your tune? Would you change your tune if you didn't like the changes in SW?

No. Because if Pink Floyd changes The Wall, they're not going to retroactively seize the CD I own or the mp3 I already have in my iTunes and on my phones. If I came into later and said yeah, "that would be so much better without the accordion," you KNOW I would be able to find a new or used CD without much effort.

I was enjoying my exploration in SACD, for example. I would love to get into blu-ray audio. Do I think Pink Floyd OWES me a copy on Blu-ray to listen to? Of course not!

See the difference?

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Uxi

I am most grateful that you're dead wrong on a legal grounds and disagree with you on moral grounds, as well.

On legal grounds? No, I'm not wrong. I pointed out the reality of the legal grounds. I merely said that it's wrong of people to use legal grounds to defend part of the arguement (i.e. that he legally doesn't owe us anything, or to speak out against fan edits based purely on legal reasoning) but then to speak out against them for other parts (i.e. that abstract "artistic rights" should trump legal ownership when and if there is ever a conflict between the two... I know that they don't in Lucas's case, but they do in most other cases of a studio owning a movie that someone else created).


My point is that those making such arguements should either s**t or get off the pot. I'm not denying the actual legal realities of things like distributing fan edits (meaning that it is technically illegal), I'm merely saying that I don't have a moral problem with it... AND if people are going to use the law as a basis to speak out against them, then they should do so across the board. If you are going to argue that since what is written in the law makes it wrong to distribute fan edits, then in the cases of someone owning (and therefore legally having the right to do what ever they want with, including change/alter/edit) someone's else's artwork, then you can't go around saying or implying that the artistic rights of the artist should superceed the law, and furthermore defend an artist if he/she were to do something in favor of their artwork that were to infringe upon the legal rights of the owner.

Now, if you want to argue this purely on an artistic rights basis (leaving the law completely out of it), and you feel that fan edits harm and infringe upon the artistic rights of the artist, that's a legit stance to take. I don't necessarily agree with it (I feel that there is no harm in it), but at least it's coming at it from a level playing field.

But to hide behind the law in one instance, only to essentially say or imply that "the law sucks" in another IS hyporcritical... period. If you disagree with this, then you are wrong.

Would it be nice to those fans if he did? Sure. Is he obligated to please those who deride and libel him when he doesn't? Hell no. He doesn't owe them anything more than he's already given.

Well, remember that the next time someone from your side of the fence says how "sad" it is that so many people "bash" Lucas. If he doesn't owe the fans the respect to make the previous versions available, then they don't owe it back to him if they choose not to give it.

And I've said this before and I'll say it again, the "he doesn't owe anyone anything" arguement IS more of a legal arguement. If I go into a store and make a purchase, all that they legally owe me is what I purchased, end of transaction. On a more abstract/moral/ethical level, if I am a repeat customer who is there all of the time and they know me and recognize me, obviously they will want to do and should do (within reason) what they can to continue to keep me and any other customers happy and to have us keep coming back, and not take a "screw you, I don't owe you anything" attitude.

It's selfish for people to think that someone they've never met owes them because of the emotional investment they put in.

Really? I actually think most filmmakers would probably disagree with you on that one. I think most filmmakers actually want the audience to make an emotional connection with the movie that they are watching, and to enjoy it as much as possible... not just have it be something that they do for 2 hours when they have nothing better going on that they shrug their shoulders to afterwards.

As such, I would think most filmmakers would want to respect that emotional investment.

It's in the library of congress. there are millions of copies on DVD, laserdisc, and VHS available for anyone to get them. I was able to find them in 10 seconds on a quick ebay search. I'm willing to bet your life that I could find one in your local town that you could pick up within the hour, as well.

Not in reasonable, modern quality that replicates as best as possible the theatrical experience. Even the UOT DVDs were just old laserdisc masters, far inferior for DVD standards.

Nah, I would go back to the cut I like on blu-ray or DVD and simply not buy the new 20TB HoloCrysalDisc 2160p version. I wouldn't whine about it, nor would I arrogantly expect that any filmmaker should cater to me.

Well, then you are one of very, very few. The anger many people would be staggering, and I'm sure that it would include many people who currently defend Lucas.

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by Uxi

No. Because if Pink Floyd changes The Wall, they're not going to retroactively seize the CD I own or the mp3 I already have in my iTunes and on my phones. If I came into later and said yeah, "that would be so much better without the accordion," you KNOW I would be able to find a new or used CD without much effort.

I was enjoying my exploration in SACD, for example. I would love to get into blu-ray audio. Do I think Pink Floyd OWES me a copy on Blu-ray to listen to? Of course not!

See the difference?

Right, but in my analogy the only versions you could own on CD or any other medium, ever, were the garbage mono 16-bit encodes with tape hiss.

It's not like people just have dozens of editions of Star Wars in comparable quality to the Blus just sitting around.

Maybe music was a bad analogy, so that's on me. Do you really not see what I'm saying here, though? Pick a movie you absolutely love that never made it to DVD, just VHS. You have the VHS, a Blu finally comes out and it's just been totally ruined. They overdub the main actress with Fran Drescher whinnying and the soundtrack is all bagpipes that are way too loud in the mix. Etc etc.

You'd still just be like "whatever brah, directors intent! It's his movie yo!" or would you even be mildly upset?

[Uxi]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

Right, but in my analogy the only versions you could own on CD or any other medium, ever, were the garbage mono 16-bit encodes with tape hiss.

It's not like people just have dozens of editions of Star Wars in comparable quality to the Blus just sitting around.

Maybe music was a bad analogy, so that's on me. Do you really not see what I'm saying here, though? Pick a movie you absolutely love that never made it to DVD, just VHS. You have the VHS, a Blu finally comes out and it's just been totally ruined. They overdub the main actress with Fran Drescher whinnying and the soundtrack is all bagpipes that are way too loud in the mix. Etc etc.

No, I think it was a good analogy and very fitting (popular title with lots of releases), especially since I've been flirting with high def audio, as well. If I couldn't find a CD, I would look for a tape. If I couldn't find a tape, I would look for an LP. etc etc.

There ARE dozens of editions of Star Wars. DVD, laserdisc, VHS, Beta. You want it, you can find it. It's precisely my point that I feel no sense of entitlement to comparable quality every time there's a new format. I'd love to have the latest and greatest of my favorites in every format, but I don't think the creator of that content OWES it to me personally.

You'd still just be like "whatever brah, directors intent! It's his movie yo!" or would you even be mildly upset?

I could understand the frustration but I don't feel he owes it to me personally because I made an emotional investment in it. If he wants more of my money, he'll please me and get it. If not, he won't. Ranting about it won't help.

[SixSpeedSamurai]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

That's not the point. How does Luke know who the young Anakin is? He could be anybody - he could be some other Jedi who died and was a friend of Yoda and Obi-Wan. It's not like Luke grew up with photographs of his father as a young man.

I didn't mind this change until I realized that there was no reason for Luke to know who this guy is. For me, that makes it completely illogical. It would only have made sense if Sebastian Shaw was replaced by an "aged' Christensen in the unmasking scenes.

Irrelevant. Luke can sense it's him through the force. They sense each other many times without being in sight distance between the end of Empire and Jedi.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Uxi

I could understand the frustration but I don't feel he owes it to me personally because I made an emotional investment in it. If he wants more of my money, he'll please me and get it. If not, he won't. Ranting about it won't help.

Ranting about it doesn't guarantee results, but it still can and sometimes does help.

Despite the disapointment in the DVD versions of the UOT just being transfers of the Laserdisc masters, had people not spoken out, we might not have even gotten those. And for anyone who never owned a laserdisc player and only ever had the movies on VHS, this was still a big step up (and it's arugably beneficial to those who might still have them on laserdisc, but don't like having the flip/change discs to watch the whole movie).

So, I see plenty of reason to keep up the fight and keep ranting. There could possibly be an even better release down the road.

[kemcha]

George Lucas improves these movies every time he releases them and I've purchased every single release of these films. Can't wait to see how he plans to release them next year, for the 35th Anniversary of the original Star Wars film. I'm expecting that we'll see an ultimate version of the Star Wars films on Blu-ray. Possibly even single Blu-ray releases that include both the theatrical version and the special edition on Blu-ray.

[al cos.]

Originally Posted by Uxi

There ARE dozens of editions of Star Wars. DVD, laserdisc, VHS, Beta. You want it, you can find it. It's precisely my point that I feel no sense of entitlement to comparable quality every time there's a new format. .

You're the one who keeps bringing up "entitlement" when somebody wants a product they buy to be the best it can possibly be. It's like an epic misunderstanding of the situation, unique to touchy Star Wars fans.

[HDPlasma]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

No, to be totally honest, I didn't spend $93 on this set so I could complain about it on the internet.

It is pretty awful, for a 1999 big budget epic with a presumably pristine 35mm print. There isn't one truly redeeming quality on that transfer. The fact that it's not the worst-looking movie I own from that year is about the best thing I can say about it (American Beauty is worse, and it makes me really sad).

What do you have to put in the positives column for this one?

Sorry, I really don't have some secret hidden agenda on this one, it truly is a bad-looking movie (as I said, for a 1999 movie etc). I actually came into watching it with higher expectations, because in the screencaps it looked like the DNR was applied selectively, only to faces to smooth them out, but in the finished product it affects everything.

Here are some blurbs from reviewers that are at least "professional" enough to end up on Cinema Squid, the aggregate BD review site:

"I want a refund. Simply put, this ain't "1080p." I'm sorry, but no. DNR, DNR, DNR, DNR, and some more DNR. And a film that isn't even 1080p native, to boot. Yeah, that's a real winning combination, right there. When we say we want unedited films, we also mean non-smeared, non-****ed up, actual DETAILED films." - Nate Boss, Project Blu, also reviews for High Def Digest.

"Let's get the bad out of the way first. Namely, The Phantom Menace. Somehow it seems appropriate that the worst film in the series would have the worst picture quality of the set, but it's still disappointing. The main culprit here is digital noise reduction." - Casey Broadwater, Blu-Ray.com

"Who would have thought that one of the prequels would end up being the worst looking one of the bunch? I didn't. Still 'Episode I' is a DNR'd mess of waxy faces, flat shadows, and murky colors.

It looks extremely dated, and in HD even more so. Almost every face in the movie is devoid of any real fine detail. Pores have been scrubbed away. Hair comes to us in giant matted masses instead of standing out individually. Blacks are flat and at times take on a bluish tint. They have no depth to them. Crushing is a standard offender, swallowing up faces, textures, and characters." - Aaron Peck, High Def Digest.

"As I watched "Episode I: The Phantom Menace," I wondered if Lucas deliberately dialed down the sharpness. It´s softer than the DVD, with more grain. " - James Plath, DVD Town

"Phantom Menace isn't just the most disappointing film of the six in terms of narrative, but visually as well. It was originally shot in 35mm and it appears that some digital smoothing has been employed here, perhaps to make it look a little more like the two later films, which were both shot in HD. You can understand the reasoning, but it results in a softer picture with less detail than we got in theaters." - Cindy White, IGN

So either all these gentleman/ladies are part of The Big Conspiracy™, or The Phantom Menace is an ugly-looking 1999 film, and it's not because of a poor source.

QFT

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Frogmort:


Have you been-

[Show spoiler]

.

Yes sir. That's exactly how I looked last night, including the racing outfit. I apologize to the mod who had to clean up my mess.

I have watched all six movies, and browsed through a good bit of the bonus material, but I have several new movies I haven't watched yet, so I think I might take a breather from Star Wars tonight. Man, there's a lot of bonus material to go through!

[goldenrod]

I am experiencing problems with episode I-III bonus disc. Fist time it don't want to load, so I have to close the player and re-start, then it plays, but everything is fine with the movies. Watched TPM and AOTC and bits and pieces of the other 4.

[Batman1980]

I'm hoping a lot of people are complaining about this packaging so we can get Fox to issue us replacement packaging, this junk is worse than the BttF crap.

[42041]

I completely expected TPM to be the best-looking of the bunch (or tied with ROTS) since they had to create a fresh digital master for the 3D release I wonder if this is what will run in theaters?
George Lucas really needs to call up his buddy Spielberg and get some advice on how to properly remaster a 10-year-old movie...

[HonestJohn]

Well finally got a chance to start watching these, beginning with A New Hope and plan on viewing them in order of release. So far I am more than pleased with the PQ, audio well ya know. From what I've read that will change drastically for the better as I move from the OT to the Prequels and understandably so.

Less pleasing is the packaging. I like the overall look of the Book style, but despise the way the discs wedge into the cardboard pages. Yeah, I know it's been mentioned before, so please bear with my venting. The first few discs were stuck in so tight I've already managed to start screwing up the edges of the cardboard. 3/4 of the discs have some extra wiggle room to get the discs out but still. This set is getting a defiinite repackaging. I plan on using the outer case and buying five dual-disc 6mm cases as it look like I can fit 5 of them in the outer case. Worst case 4 and I'll have to leave 1 out.

As far as the changes go ... trying to overlook them. Although Obiwan's new Krayt call and R2D2's houdini rock trick are hard to miss .... can't wait for the others. NooNooooooooooo!!

[WJWS Channel 13:Amity]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

Well... they used a separate actor for Darth's physical acting, his voice, and his face... there was no need to have Sebastian Shaw there at all. They could have picked any actor that represented that look better.

I just don't like the flimsy excuse that his ghost represents when he died as a Jedi, that just seems so nonsensical... one of those, "Well TECHNICALLY..." explanations that are pure retcon. If that were the case, the Force ghost could have been a younger actor than Sebastian Shaw. It's not like technology precluded them from hiring a young actor that resembled Luke for that one shot. It's just retcon that in my opinion doesn't need to be retconned.

again as i said just my theory, no need to get all defensive about it a blathering on about retcon.
And my theory isnt saying thats his apperance in ROTS represents when he died as a jedi,
cause he actually dies as a jedi on the death star II when he fulfilled the prophecy of the choosen one and killed the emperor and restored balance to the force. At that moment he became a jedi once again, so he died as a Jedi on the Death Star II.
not saying it was the correct choice or not, but Hayden does look closer in apperance to how anakin would have looked in his early 40s as opposed to sebastian shaw who was 73 years old at the time that ROTJ was filmed.

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by frogmort

Yes sir. That's exactly how I looked last night, including the racing outfit. I apologize to the mod who had to clean up my mess.

I have watched all six movies, and browsed through a good bit of the bonus material, but I have several new movies I haven't watched yet, so I think I might take a breather from Star Wars tonight. Man, there's a lot of bonus material to go through!

Yeaaaaah buddy!

I have to watch Empire and Jedi tonight from the start and then move on to the bonus features.

I watched 13 Assassins in between trilogies. LOVED IT!

I have a big ass backlog of stuff to catch up on, even though I've seen most of it, I haven't watched my Blus yet: Braveheart, Heat, Bourne Ultimatum, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Thunderball, Goldfinger, Gone With The Wind, Memento, The Godfather III... probably a few more. Lots of work ahead of me.

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by 42041

George Lucas really needs to call up his buddy Spielberg and get some advice on how to properly remaster a 10-year-old movie...

While he's at it I hope he asks for advice on whether or not a director should release a film as it was originally released in theaters instead of shitting all over it and then releasing it... Spielberg has made it crystal clear how he feels about that in the last few months...