Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

I've seen Blu-ray's projected on a 30 foot screen and they look fine, hardly distinguishable from a normal digital screening of a new movie, which to my eyes mostly look like Blu-ray's anyway.



Not everyone is looking for flaws. It's amazing how much better life is when you just focus on the positive.

Oh come on, there is NO way these Blus look like a regular digital screening of a new movie. LMAO!

Well, in that case and logic, you might as well stick with VHS and a 20" CRT 480i display and enjoy what you may with it. Be positive! Don't look for flaws.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

The AFI Silver Theatre and Cultural Center (in Maryland) will be showing the SE of A New Hope in 35mm.

Note they state:

"This version is the Special Edition released in 1997, the only version the distributor allows to be shown theatrically."


http://www.afi.com/silver/films/2014...ial.aspx#bridg

There have been several showings lately of the 97 special edition AND the Blu-ray.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

There have been several showings lately of the 97 special edition AND the Blu-ray.

I would really like to see the 35mm viewing, but nothing like that in this area.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

I would really like to see the 35mm viewing, but nothing like that in this area.

We had one in NYC but it sold out immediately. Plus, I'm not paying to watch a Special Edition.

[popeflick]

http://comicbook.com/blog/2014/08/16...gy-to-be-rele/

Ta Da!!!!

[stvn1974]

I will believe it when I am sitting in my recliner shoving popcorn into my face and then Han shoots Greedo without ducking.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

I will believe it when I am sitting in my recliner shoving popcorn into my face and then Han shoots Greedo without ducking.

This.

And I'm a bit worried about what they'll screw up IF this comes to fruition.

BTW....is "comicbook.com" even remotely reliable?

[milo bloom]

Once Lucas made the sale to Disney, I figured it to be a foregone conclusion. Disney wouldn't pass up an opportunity to sell something to Star Wars fans.

Has that site ever broken any other news like this that turned out to be true?

[2awesome4apossum]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Why people get so angry about this stuff is beyond me. Why do you care if I like or dislike something? If I think the writing is bad in the prequels? If I prefer practical effects? If I like the junk future aesthetic more than the clean look of the prequels? Like really, why care?

Part of me absolutely agrees with you. The other part of me, the part that has been told a gazillion times I'm stupid for enjoying Episodes I & III, is kind of perturbed by the fandom in general. I don't understand the hatred for Jar Jar, I find him mildly annoying at best. It's true: fart jokes are stupid. So are a lot of jokes in the original trilogy. The movies are entertaining enough that I can look past its mis-steps (for the most part). How does this make me inferior? And yet, I'm told that it makes me a "kid" or whatever, all-the-freaking-time.

I don't like Episode II, but when I tell someone this, they immediately question my intelligence for liking Episode I better. I cite the script and specific lines that sat with me wrong (and cite "Jumper" as proof that Hayden Christiansen is unwatchable in more than just Star Wars), and instead of having a conversation I'm called names. It's obnoxious. It's an opinion, why do I have to be wrong?

I also like a lot of the changes to the original trilogy. Others, I don't care for. But I'm over it. This makes me un-nuanced or whatever, and I suppose I can live with that.

So in all the harassment, I sometimes feel compelled to mention that these movies have never had good dialogue or fantastic acting. People act like these are somehow new attributes brought to us by the prequels, because they usually saw the original trilogy as kids, and nostalgia takes over. You can make the argument that the prequels are worse. And I agree in some aspects, disagree in others. Why do I have to be definitively wrong?

Anyway. Since this thread seems dominated by people who hate the SE/prequels, I'm just trying to throw out my perspective on why someone might (inappropriately) lash out at you for having a contrary opinion to theirs -- it's exhausting to be told you're stupid for liking the prequels, as if liking only the original trilogy in ITS ORIGINAL FORM AND NO OTHER is somehow sophisticated. I have OCD (as I suspect many on this forum do), and being particular isn't always a sign of intelligence. Sometimes it's the sign of a disease that can eat away entire months of life. Doesn't mean you shouldn't be particular, it just means you should learn when to walk away from the compulsion.

This is why I respect a lot of points of view, except the "I'm smarter than you because my subjective opinion is more popular than yours" ones. Until quite recently, I never understood the big deal about changes to the OT, but someone earlier in this thread laid out the case quite nicely for me, and I absolutely get where they're coming from.

It's so weird. I don't think this argument is so heated for any other series.

Nah, it's movie fans in general. Try telling some scifi fans that you liked PROMETHEUS pretty okay and you're apparently committing yourself to a two hour explanation of why the characters do stupid things that's far more boring than any movie ever could have been. (Apparently, there are no stupid characters to be found in ALIEN or SUNSHINE -- those characters are apparently brilliant and realistic ... even though they seemed like unrealistic stock characters to a casual observer like me. I love all of these movies, but apparently there's a definitive opinion to have about them, although it seems terribly inconsistent to me.)

I think by and large the problem these days is that a group of people form an opinion, and repeat this opinion very loudly whilst forgetting to retroactively apply it to movies they had seen previously. This is how you have paradox's like the following (someone told me this just yesterday): "I liked the first ELIZABETH movie, because it's historically accurate, but the second one wasn't accurate at all and it was hard for me to look past that."

Neither of those movies are historically accurate. Tudor-era history is my area of expertise, and I find it hard to believe that someone who likes a movie purely out of historical accuracy would find the first film to be good whatsoever.

So I asked them for specifics, because while I thought they were both pretty inaccurate, I enjoyed the second one a great deal more. They cited the Joseph Fiennes storyline. And I kind of went into this explanation about how history is about extrapolation from biased sources, so that even though I viewed that storyline as inaccurate, here's probably where a lot of that derived from. And then I went into a similar justification for their problems with the second film, and they told me that I should "listen to the experts, instead of making [stuff] up."

And I'm kind of irritated, because I tried to be respectful, but instead was condescended to by someone who probably only spent five minutes or RottenTomatoes or Wikipedia in my area of expertise. I was treated like an idiot, because I didn't have the "trendy" opinion that most people seem to share.

I'm getting sick of being treated inferior for discussing what I view as inconsistencies in logic (although I understand there may be reasons, which is why I have these conversations to begin with).

Anyway. Just wanted to bring my two cents to the table since I haven't seen this opinion expressed yet.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by popeflick

http://comicbook.com/blog/2014/08/16...gy-to-be-rele/

Ta Da!!!!

I believe it's true.

Like some have been saying, they are going to want to do something like this before the next movie. I also bet there will be digital theatrical viewings across the country too.

[stvn1974]

I would expect a flood of people trying to sell their existing BD sets back to stores once the UOT is released. Maybe not as many of the Complete Saga but there will probably be so many OT sets that stores will probably refuse to take them.

[Falaskan]

I'm so happy and have expected this ever since Disney got the rights. They obviously worked out a distribution deal with fox.

Also I already sold my special edition blus. Went for $80 something. They'll go for nothing as soon as this is announced. I'll be a little surprised if the special editions aren't included at all, however. I wonder what sources they are having to utilize since they say some of them are damaged.

[Elvis]

This release will outsell the 9 disc saga set by a ton. These films in their original incarnation are the holy grail of film releases.

[grim_tales]

Hmmm... I'll believe it when I see it. And didnt they say theres some damage to the original negatives, so this could take a ton of cash to restore.

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by grim_tales

Hmmm... I'll believe it when I see it. And didnt they say theres some damage to the original negatives, so this could take a ton of cash to restore.

Yeah at most a couple mil...

That might break Disney

[HeavyHitter]

As has been mentioned before, at some point, Star Wars - whether the originals or alternate version - will HAVE to be addressed for 4K which means they will have to also address the OCN although they could also go with an interpositive. (This was the case for Apocalypse Now because of OCN damage but using an IP obviously will not yield the same level of detail possible and it does show.). My guess is they will address the OCN, however. If they are going to do this, I can see them simply going the route of the originals for several reasons. Disney also seems to have a policy to preserve their original movies vs extended or alternate cuts anyway.

[stvn1974]

Even if the negatives are in bad shape and it takes Disney a couple of million to restore them it won't be a big deal. The will make it back easily. Plus there are still a few people out there like me who have refused to buy any Star Wars merchandise since the first special edition DVD set was released who might get back into collecting.

[Falaskan]

I wonder if amazon will have their issues worked out with Disney by then. lol!

[popeflick]

Originally Posted by 2awesome4apossum

Part of me absolutely agrees with you. The other part of me, the part that has been told a gazillion times I'm stupid for enjoying Episodes I & III, is kind of perturbed by the fandom in general. I don't understand the hatred for Jar Jar, I find him mildly annoying at best. It's true: fart jokes are stupid. So are a lot of jokes in the original trilogy. The movies are entertaining enough that I can look past its mis-steps (for the most part). How does this make me inferior? And yet, I'm told that it makes me a "kid" or whatever, all-the-freaking-time.

I don't like Episode II, but when I tell someone this, they immediately question my intelligence for liking Episode I better. I cite the script and specific lines that sat with me wrong (and cite "Jumper" as proof that Hayden Christiansen is unwatchable in more than just Star Wars), and instead of having a conversation I'm called names. It's obnoxious. It's an opinion, why do I have to be wrong?

Hey I'll agree with you. AOTC is the turd of all 6. Over time PM has grown on me, and I've always loved the opening 20 minutes. Sure once Jar jar arrives it drops a bit but the Flash Gordon aspect of that film was done quite well as we're introduced to world after world. ROTS is really only saved by the action set pieces, but even then the whole "I have the high ground" is a major copout: in a light saber battle you run to a hill so you can win? Dumb.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by 2awesome4apossum

Part of me absolutely agrees with you. The other part of me, the part that has been told a gazillion times I'm stupid for enjoying Episodes I & III, is kind of perturbed by the fandom in general. I don't understand the hatred for Jar Jar, I find him mildly annoying at best. It's true: fart jokes are stupid. So are a lot of jokes in the original trilogy. The movies are entertaining enough that I can look past its mis-steps (for the most part). How does this make me inferior? And yet, I'm told that it makes me a "kid" or whatever, all-the-freaking-time.

Well the people who say that stuff to you are just as bad. My comment was meant for both sides: stop attacking personal taste, either way. All it means is the other person has different taste or priorities, it means nothing else.