Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Elvis

I would pay 300.00

Yep.

Wonder if they would do all 6 again in one set, all 6 the theatrical versions, or if they would just focus on the original trilogy. I'd buy it either way, but it's an interesting question.

[BouCoupDinkyDau]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Yep.

Wonder if they would do all 6 again in one set, all 6 the theatrical versions, or if they would just focus on the original trilogy. I'd buy it either way, but it's an interesting question.

I'd choke down the prequels if that was the only way I could get ahold of the UOT. I'd never watch them, but I'd go through them to get at what I want.

Then if the UOT was later sold by itself, I'd grab it and sell off the bigger set.

[rbg08]

Originally Posted by Elvis

That's one thing I don't understand with these films. Several say the OT are outdated. So what! So is 2001, Planet of the Apes, Jaws, The Exorcist, Blade Runner, Alien etc..they are what they were back then. Why should Star WARS be any different? I just don't get that.

Movies made before you were born will usually look "dated". We tend to overlook this in movies from our childhood that we really like. Nostalgia puts thick rose-colored glasses on all of us. My kids love the Star Wars prequels and think the original trilogy is boring for the most part.

I still like the original, unaltered Star Wars better, but I can see why the newer versions appeal to a younger audience that grew up in a politically-correct, CGI world. Star Wars is a franchise and I don't blame Lucas, or even Disney for that matter, trying to make the franchise more appealing to a broader audience.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You know what the irony is though? Lucas himself may have given the go-ahead for the project. The timing of the Lowry restoration (sometime in 2012) against the sale of LFL (announced Oct 2012 IIRC ) is just too tight for me for Disney to have done it under their auspices. The due diligence and whatnot on the sale must've taken a while to complete prior to October, granted, so I wonder if Bob Iger got in George's ear while this was going on and sweet-talked him into restoring the originals. Perhaps the prospect of four billion simoleans also had something to do with it.

Lucas and Iger were talking about the possible sale when Lucas met Iger for the opening of Star Tours 2.0 (The Adventure Continues) in May of 2011. "When you're ready, let me know." Iger said.

[Joshitaka]

Originally Posted by rbg08

Movies made before you were born will usually look "dated". We tend to overlook this in movies from our childhood that we really like. Nostalgia puts thick rose-colored glasses on all of us. My kids love the Star Wars prequels and think the original trilogy is boring for the most part.

I still like the original, unaltered Star Wars better, but I can see why the newer versions appeal to a younger audience that grew up in a politically-correct, CGI world. Star Wars is a franchise and I don't blame Lucas, or even Disney for that matter, trying to make the franchise more appealing to a broader audience.

he tried to make it more appealing to a broader audience, but all he did was alienate a huge chunk of his original audience. No one complained about the original movies before the special editions. Everyone loved them. And no one hated George Lucas before the special editions either. So what good did it do?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Elvis

That's one thing I don't understand with these films. Several say the OT are outdated. So what! So is 2001, Planet of the Apes, Jaws, The Exorcist, Blade Runner, Alien etc..they are what they were back then. Why should Star WARS be any different? I just don't get that.

To be fair, rbg specifically said that his kids have only seen the SE's, so even a spanking new restored UOT would still look outdated to them. But my post on the subject was referencing the UOT in general and how well they would hold up, and I think they'll look fantastic.

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

To be fair, rbg specifically said that his kids have only seen the SE's, so even a spanking new restored UOT would still look outdated to them. But my post on the subject was referencing the UOT in general and how well they would hold up, and I think they'll look fantastic.

No no I get it, I was not trying to come down on him for his statement. Sorry if it came off that way. I totally understand what he is saying about the younger kids. What I was getting at was on this board so many have said "the effects are outdated" and "it looks dated". I was just saying so does the shark in Jaws or the UFO's in CEOTTK, etc, etc and I don't see people complaining about those films special effects on this board. It's like Star Wars effects have to be held to a higher standard or something. I say it's a product of its time...embrace and enjoy for what it was.

[thebard]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You know what the irony is though? Lucas himself may have given the go-ahead for the project. The timing of the Lowry restoration (sometime in 2012) against the sale of LFL (announced Oct 2012 IIRC ) is just too tight for me for Disney to have done it under their auspices. The due diligence and whatnot on the sale must've taken a while to complete prior to October, granted, so I wonder if Bob Iger got in George's ear while this was going on and sweet-talked him into restoring the originals. Perhaps the prospect of four billion simoleans also had something to do with it.

"George, I want to save Star Wars."
"You already have, Bob... you already have."

[Show spoiler]

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Elvis

No no I get it, I was not trying to come down on him for his statement. Sorry if it came off that way. I totally understand what he is saying about the younger kids. What I was getting at was on this board so many have said "the effects are outdated" and "it looks dated". I was just saying so does the shark in Jaws or the UFO's in CEOTTK, etc, etc and I don't see people complaining about those films special effects on this board. It's like Star Wars effects have to be held to a higher standard or something. I say it's a product of its time...embrace and enjoy for what it was.

I agree with much of what you're saying, but I've got to highlight the irony of you stating "it's like Star Wars effects have to be held to a higher standard" when you've slated the CG in the prequels. Why can't that also be enjoyed as "a product of it's time"?

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I agree with much of what you're saying, but I've got to highlight the irony of you stating "it's like Star Wars effects have to be held to a higher standard" when you've slated the CG in the prequels. Why can't that also be enjoyed as "a product of it's time"?

What I was trying to say was that I don't think that the PT effects were as "ground breaking" for their time. Not that they were not really great effects. The rest of the world and other films had caught up to what was in the PT for the most part. Do you feel that say TPM was as gound breaking for it's time as say 2001 was in 68 or Star Wars in 77? I was not trying to dog the PT for it's effects at all, just that other films around that time and maybe even a couple years before were doing great things as well.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Elvis

No they have not. They are on record as saying Lucas offered them the SE's and they turned them down! OMG why do you all insist in making up rumors over and over about the same thing? They took ALL THREE films as they were originally presented and only the first two have actually been "inducted". I think its been said about 1000 times in this thread with links....

Show us the "record" because I think it's far from clear as to whether they have a print and if they do, which version it is. I can't find the quote from the LoC refusing to say which version they had, but here's some other stuff from the web.
Nowhere in my post was I making up any rumors. "OMG"? "roll eyes"? What are you, a little teen girl?

According to savestarwars.com (not that I believe this site):

Lucas Refuses to Co-operate with Government Film Preservation, Tries to Replace Library of Congress Prints with SE
The Libary of Congress and the National Film Registry, despite claiming to have archived prints of 1977's Star Wars and it's sequels, have not in fact done so. Lucas, who helped create the NFR, refuses to allow them to preserve the cultural heritage that is their mission.

SoundonSite.org:

However, according to Michael Kaminski of Save Star Wars, the NFR has never possessed a copy of the print. Following an anonymous email tip from a film restorationist, Kaminski travelled to the Library of Congress to examine the NFR’s copy of Star Wars himself. He was told by librarian Zoran Sinobad that “while both Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back are on the National Film Registry, the Library has not yet acquired new prints of either one. When the request was made for Star Wars, Lucasfilm offered us the Special Edition version.”

On the other hand, the Disney site implies that the LoC does have a copy:

The National Film Registry is the United States National Film Preservation Board's selection of films for preservation in the Library of Congress. It's purpose is to preserve films. It currently holds 15 Disney films.

and Episodes IV and V are listed. However, if "Episode IV" is listed, doesn't that also imply that it's not the original, original version?

CNN.com also has an article implying that the LoC does have a print of Star Wars, although I don't really know what "the original 35mm film stock" means:

Culpeper, Virginia (CNN) -- When the Library of Congress comes to mind, most of us don't think of movies, TV shows or old-school vinyl.
But the federal library has been collecting analog recordings of sound and moving images since the late 1800s: Early film reels from inventor Thomas Edison's lab of the 1890s. Audio recordings of Martin Luther King Jr.'s famous "I Have a Dream" speech. The original 35mm film stock of "Star Wars."
These national treasures are among the millions of cultural artifacts being stored in secure vaults in the Library of Congress' National Audio-Visual Conservation Center in Culpeper, some 90 minutes southwest of Washington.

Show us what you got!

[thebard]

Originally Posted by Elvis

What I was trying to say was that I don't think that the PT effects were as "ground breaking" for their time. Not that they were not really great effects. The rest of the world and other films had caught up to what was in the PT for the most part. Do you feel that say TPM was as gound breaking for it's time as say 2001 was in 68 or Star Wars in 77? I was not trying to dog the PT for it's effects at all, just that other films around that time and maybe even a couple years before were doing great things as well.

I see what you're saying, & personally I agree to an extent. The fx in the Prequels are quite serviceable, even astounding at times. But while everyone points to things like Episode 1 having the first interactive, completely computer animated character on film, I think the technology was definitely standing on the shoulders of giants (although to be fair, the "giants" were usually ILM themselves!).

I'm not intimate enough with the production of films life Fellowship of the Rings or King Kong '05 to say that the prequels didn't lend a hand in at least convincing studios that films could be made that way. But when I think of "groundbreaking" cgi, I typically picture Young Sherlock Homes (even though the animated screen time was minimal, as was the character interaction), Jurassic Park (even though the cgi was heavily supported/reinforced with well-matched practical effects), etc.

My 2c.

[svenge]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

However, if "Episode IV" is listed, doesn't that also imply that it's not the original, original version?

The "Episode IV: A New Hope" title was added beginning with the 1981 theatrical re-release. As for the audio, there's 3 versions that would qualify as "original": The 6-track (for 70mm presentations), stereo, and mono mixes were all exhibited in 1977 to various theaters depending on installed equipment.

There were subsequent audio remixes done in 1985 and 1993 for various home video releases as well, but those likely wouldn't be archived by the LoC or NFR.

[rbg08]

Originally Posted by Joshitaka

he tried to make it more appealing to a broader audience, but all he did was alienate a huge chunk of his original audience. No one complained about the original movies before the special editions. Everyone loved them. And no one hated George Lucas before the special editions either. So what good did it do?

Made Lucas a lot more money. That's for sure. But to be honest, the special editions were mainly produced so the prequels wouldn't look so completely different from the originals in terms of special effects, characters, etc. In that regards, they partially succeeded.

Did Lucas upset some fans? Of course. Did any of those fans not watch the prequels? I doubt it. No harm to him, or his pocketbook. Plus, Lucas got to correct things he wasn't satisfied with in his original work. As an artist myself, you always notice things you could have done better after you finish a project. I can't blame him for trying to improve his work, even if it upset others.

[SethRex]

Here's my final say. I will only own one set of Star Wars movies. I already own them. If I were to buy the UOT, I will sell off the first release. I will not own multiple sets on the same format. I own 2 VHS sets and only one ever got used so that's it.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Elvis

What I was trying to say was that I don't think that the PT effects were as "ground breaking" for their time. Not that they were not really great effects. The rest of the world and other films had caught up to what was in the PT for the most part. Do you feel that say TPM was as gound breaking for it's time as say 2001 was in 68 or Star Wars in 77? I was not trying to dog the PT for it's effects at all, just that other films around that time and maybe even a couple years before were doing great things as well.

Yes, I do feel that the PT was groundbreaking, especially Phantom Menace. (Matrix stole some of its thunder that year, even though their 'bullet time' effect was nothing new.) But because of the success of the original Star Wars and the effect it had on the motion picture industry, chiefly in the domain of VFX, even the most whizz-bangiest most photo-realistic CG effect today is seen as nothing special by most people because we've become conditioned to it all.

I don't think ANYTHING will ever come close to the shock and awe generated by that opening Star Destroyer shot in Star Wars. Not in terms of the technical aspects of the shot, but because the genie's now out of the bottle.

[edit] And yeah, I'm fully aware that a lot of what we saw deployed in Phantom Menace (and the SE's, which were part restoration, part prequel test-bed) had already been tried in one way or another, usually by ILM themselves as thebard rightly said. But for helming a project with that much scale and scope, taking the few minutes of CG seen in Abyss, T2 and Jurassic Park and turning it up to 11, I've gotta give Lucas all the props in the world if only for the sheer nerve of it.

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Show us the "record" because I think it's far from clear as to whether they have a print and if they do, which version it is. I can't find the quote from the LoC refusing to say which version they had, but here's some other stuff from the web.
Nowhere in my post was I making up any rumors. "OMG"? "roll eyes"? What are you, a little teen girl?

According to savestarwars.com (not that I believe this site):


SoundonSite.org:


On the other hand, the Disney site implies that the LoC does have a copy:

and Episodes IV and V are listed. However, if "Episode IV" is listed, doesn't that also imply that it's not the original, original version?

CNN.com also has an article implying that the LoC does have a print of Star Wars, although I don't really know what "the original 35mm film stock" means:


Show us what you got!

[kemcha]

I just don't see this as anything more than a rumor. First, this rumor is supposedly coming from Disney, a movie studio that does not have the rights to the first six films until 2020 (with the exception of ANH which Fox owns outright). That's another six years out. Second, Fox isn't going to release a new set of films and cut into the revenue generated from the current releases of the films. Third, if Fox wants to stick it to Disney, they could simply refuse to release the UOTs.

If this news is true, and Disney is pushing for this, it could very well be that Disney has entered into an agreement with Fox where-in that Fox continues to jointly distribute the first six films under the Fox banner, much as how Fox distributes the James Bond films on Blu-ray.

has entered into an extended agreement with Disney to distribute the first six films past the 2020 date.

[thebard]

Originally Posted by kemcha

I just don't see this as anything more than a rumor. First, this rumor is supposedly coming from Disney, a movie studio that does not have the rights to the first six films until 2020 (with the exception of ANH which Fox owns outright). That's another six years out. Second, Fox isn't going to release a new set of films and cut into the revenue generated from the current releases of the films. Third, if Fox wants to stick it to Disney, they could simply refuse to release the UOTs.

If this news is true, and Disney is pushing for this, it could very well be that Disney has entered into an agreement with Fox where-in that Fox continues to jointly distribute the first six films under the Fox banner, much as how Fox distributes the James Bond films on Blu-ray.

has entered into an extended agreement with Disney to distribute the first six films past the 2020 date.

Much of the discussion over the last few pages has centered on the differences between intellectual property rights and distribution rights.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but... I think most of your points have been addressed. You may want to read back.

[Geoff D]

Wait, what? Fox will cut into their own revenue by making money? Okey-dokey.