Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[rexcrk]

Originally Posted by spanky87

You guys should check out the custom covers thread if you want covers that are uniform and have original artwork.

These customs by Nissen are the ones I use:

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...ostcount=22372

Never ceases to amaze me how fans put in so much more and better work than the actual studios do.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by Arawn

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Rebo_Band

I'll take that as your way of not being able to refute the official stance on the matter.

[Yojimbo]

Originally Posted by malicedoom

Love that we're up to page 3386 of posts.

Not me. I'm at 1696 pages. I keep mine at 40 posts per page so I'm not having to go through several pages to catch up.

[BNex99]

Originally Posted by ArrestedDevelopment

Solo looked ****ing awful in the theater.

Solo, to me, is a prime example of the perils of poor projection in the wild. It's a very precisely lit film and is very dependent on properly calibrated equipment.

The first time I saw it, it was in a theater with the notorious 2D-film-through-a-3D-lens problem, which made everything look dank and completely washed-out.

The second time, I saw it in a different auditorium at the same theater, this time through the right kind of lens. Even though it was still dim, the image was much more articulate. I'm still not sure I agree with some of the stylistic choices, but they felt more purposeful at that second screening, and I could at least see what was going on.

In addition to the lens issue, a lot of theaters simply don't have their bulb bright enough, which also causes problems (judging from some reactions online, Captain Marvel also suffered from this).

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by BNex99

Solo, to me, is a prime example of the perils of poor projection in the wild. It's a very precisely lit film and is very dependent on properly calibrated equipment.

The first time I saw it, it was in a theater with the notorious 2D-film-through-a-3D-lens problem, which made everything look dank and completely washed-out.

The second time, I saw it in a different auditorium at the same theater, this time through the right kind of lens. Even though it was still dim, the image was much more articulate. I'm still not sure I agree with some of the stylistic choices, but they felt more purposeful at that second screening, and I could at least see what was going on.

In addition to the lens issue, a lot of theaters simply don't have their bulb bright enough, which also causes problems (judging from some reactions online, Captain Marvel also suffered from this).

+1. I didn't have any issues on my displays at home because they are properly calibrated, but as you said projectors are different animals. If things are just slightly off there will be problems. Before one my local theaters upgraded most of their center channels had issues, for example.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

I'll take that as your way of not being able to refute the official stance on the matter.

Lucas is ( or should I say was ) the official stance on the matter.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by BNex99

Solo, to me, is a prime example of the perils of poor projection in the wild. It's a very precisely lit film and is very dependent on properly calibrated equipment.

The first time I saw it, it was in a theater with the notorious 2D-film-through-a-3D-lens problem, which made everything look dank and completely washed-out.

The second time, I saw it in a different auditorium at the same theater, this time through the right kind of lens. Even though it was still dim, the image was much more articulate. I'm still not sure I agree with some of the stylistic choices, but they felt more purposeful at that second screening, and I could at least see what was going on.

In addition to the lens issue, a lot of theaters simply don't have their bulb bright enough, which also causes problems (judging from some reactions online, Captain Marvel also suffered from this).

Yeah, the second time I saw it there was a noticeable improvement, as though the theater had taken it upon themselves to make it look better. The blu is still dim, though.

[Noremac Mij]

Originally Posted by Arawn

Yeah, the second time I saw it there was a noticeable improvement, as though the theater had taken it upon themselves to make it look better. The blu is still dim, though.

They enabled the “vivid” mode to save that atrocity. People were probably complaining.

[Arawn]

At one point I thought maybe the studio would quietly start circulating a better print.

[Noremac Mij]

Originally Posted by Arawn

At one point I thought maybe the studio would quietly start circulating a better print.

The only way that would happen is to reshoot the entire movie with a competent DP. A second rate DP from one of those Lifetime movies would even do.

[Jodi]

I already have Ep I - III BDs (Fox) and Ep VII and VIII BDs (Di$ney), as well as Rouge One BD (Di$ney). And I am holding on veeeeeeeeeerrrrrrryyyyy tightly to my Harmy's Ep IV - VI BDs.

'Nuff said.

[Reddington]

Apologies for not being 100% on this, but I haven't watched the original trilogy in a few years, or followed this massive thread. Am I right in thinking that the original unaltered versions have still not been released on BD in any territory - and that I need to stick with my DVDs?

[Arawn]

Not officially released, no.

[Weirded Wonder]

Originally Posted by Reddington

Apologies for not being 100% on this, but I haven't watched the original trilogy in a few years, or followed this massive thread. Am I right in thinking that the original unaltered versions have still not been released on BD in any territory - and that I need to stick with my DVDs?

DVD? Dude seriously? Laserdiscs, word of the day. Check em out. Wave of the future.

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by Weirded Wonder

DVD? Dude seriously? Laserdiscs, word of the day. Check em out. Wave of the future.

Star Wars Theatrical on a pan and scan VHS dub made from a showing on cable > Star Wars Special Editions in any form

[AllOuttaBubbleGum]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

Super Green with ROTJ, Disney. Me thinks a crafty stratagem in avoiding the amber hues of Tatooine, which conjure memories of racy getups for space princesses. Even so, with "Endor Leia" so close to Jabba, they're risking a case of "contact bikini" by association...and we know how The Mouse House feels about that popular number in the boardroom these days.

Better to go iconic right out of the palace gate and stick with the original poster art; gold dreams 4EVA...


..

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by AllOuttaBubbleGum

Super Green with ROTJ, Disney. Me thinks a crafty stratagem in avoiding the amber hues of Tatooine, which conjure memories of racy getups for space princesses. In fact, with "Endor Leia" so close to Jabba, they're risking a case of "contact bikini" by association...and we know how The Mouse House feels about that popular number in the boardroom these days.

Better to go iconic right out of the palace gate and stick with the original poster art; gold dreams 4EVA...

Disney edited out an after credit scene on Toy Story 2 so I wouldn't be surprised if they covered up Leia with a black box when she is in the slave outfit.

[Gargus]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Well, the discs are going to be identical, but hey they are throwing in a digital copy this time. That's worth $16.

That's a matter of opinion and my opinion is I couldn't care less about a digital copy. If I had those I'd do what I do with all digital copies I get in movies, sell them on ebay.

So yet another release goes by and I still have my DVD copies of the theatrical cuts I'll continue to watch. Which is a damn shame. I mean some everyday folks can cut together blue ray theatrical cuts that look great but a multi billion dollar company can't. Oh well.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by Arawn

Lucas is ( or should I say was ) the official stance on the matter.

Correct. And like I said, you're unable to refute it.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by Gargus

That's a matter of opinion and my opinion is I couldn't care less about a digital copy. If I had those I'd do what I do with all digital copies I get in movies, sell them on ebay.

So yet another release goes by and I still have my DVD copies of the theatrical cuts I'll continue to watch. Which is a damn shame. I mean some everyday folks can cut together blue ray theatrical cuts that look great but a multi billion dollar company can't. Oh well.

They can. They just choose not to. Big difference. I thought everyone knew this by now.