Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by shelldweller

Lucas really constantly rereleases the movies... First he releases them on VHS and Laserdisc, then he releases the SE on VHS. Then once on DVD and now only seven years later on Blu-Ray. What is he thinking? I´m glad most other movies only once came out on VHS and then no more...

that was sarcasm by the way!

actually he's released them 3 times on DVD

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by wormraper

actually he's released them 3 times on DVD

In the case of the OT, 4 times, actually.

[shelldweller]

You can´t call any repackaging a rerelease...
The original Trilogy was released once in 2004! After all the fanboy *****ing, moaning and whining the OT was released in 2006 with the theatrical versions transferred from the Laserdiscs as Bonus-Discs. The actual DVDs were the same! There wasn´t any new bonus content but the theatrical versions. After that they were repackaged into a Trilogy Box-Set. And again... they were the same DVDs.

The prequels were only released once also if you don´t count the repackaging into the Prequel Box-Set.

If movies are released in Steelbook and Digipack packagings you don´t consider them rereleases, do you?

[chip75]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

Not that I want to turn this into a Charlie thread but did he not re-work the show? I heard it was working a little better after that first night nuclear bomb?

So he's radioactive now? That stuff really will melt your face off....

Back to Star Wars....

I think there has been 3 releases of the Original Trilogy on DVD the 2004 release were available in widescreen (silver) and the gold pan ans scan version (that's 2) and the third were the releases with the original laser disc version on the bonus discs in '06.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by shelldweller

You can´t call any repackaging a rerelease...

Sure I can. I just did!

If movies are released in Steelbook and Digipack packagings you don´t consider them rereleases, do you?

It depends. There are gray areas for sure, but the way I see it, if they are released all over the place with a specific 'street date' on which they are supposed to be made available, then yes, I call that a re-release.

Things like the Best Buy exclusive steelbooks for some Disney movies that kind of 'silently' showed up on shelves with little to no warning after the movies already had their original releases are a gray area, IMO. I could see the arguement going either way in a sitution like that. But, even if it is just the packaging, there is a difference.

Technically a lot of Miramax movies are going to be re-released very soon with Lionsgate packaging since those movies changed hands over to them. As far as I know, they will have almost identical content and the packaging may even be very similiar looking with the only real difference being that there will be Lionsgate logos on the packaging and probably when you load up the disc. But, they are technically new releases of those movies with new specific street dates, and therefore, by that meaure, they are a re-release.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

Sure I can. I just did!
It depends. There are gray areas for sure, but the way I see it, if they are released all over the place with a specific 'street date' on which they are supposed to be made available, then yes, I call that a re-release.

Then that is a YOU problem if you rebuy something that has all the same content and complain that it is a re-release and being milked.

On DVD, there were two releases of star wars.

[Cook]

There have been many repackagings of the star wars films, but rereleases with new content, not so much.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Then that is a YOU problem if you rebuy something that has all the same content and complain that it is a re-release and being milked.

On DVD, there were two releases of star wars.

Please don't jump to stupid conclusions.

Did I say that I bought each release? No, I didn't.

Am I complaining that they made these re-releases? No, I am not.


I was merely pointing out what factually happened. Each of these releases occurred. It happened. It exists in actual reality. I'm not praising it, I'm not complaining about it. I'm merely pointing out that it happened. And since these are specific releases with specific new packaging and/or new release dates, they are a re-release. Plain and simple.

I'm merely pointing out what constitutes a re-release. It doesn't mean that I'm actually going to buy them each time. I only buy them if there's additional content that I actually want and/or if there's a difference in the packaging that I care enough about to buy it again. And in those cases, I don't complain.


The only thing that I bought more than once on DVD was the OT. I got the original 2004 Box set, and then I got the individual releases because they included the unalterted theatrical versions (I never bought the 2005 set without bonus disc, nor did I get the digipack set either... nor do I plan to ever get either of those). And the only thing that I was upset about at all there was the fact that the UOT wasn't anamorphic. But considering the only other versions of the UOT that I had were Pan & Scan VHS tapes, this was a HUGE upgrade, and I still would have bought them (at the same price even) if even if they were each just one disc with only the UOT movies on them. So, the fact that they came with another copy of the 2004 versions didn't bug me at all... it just meant that I had bonus back up copies.

I only actually purchased the PT movies once each on DVD. I did get a second copy of Phantom Menace for free + cost of shipping when they had some promotion around the time that Episode III came out with some brands of ceral (I think it was Kelloggs) when you sent in so many UPCs from the cereal boxes... and the only reason that I evenbothered doing that was because the 2nd disc with the bonus features on it from my original copy had a scratch and kept freezing when I would try to watch one of the documentaries. I was able to get a whole new copy to replace it with for practically nothing.



You can apologize to me now for making a ridiculous assumption and character judgement about me that you based on absolutely nothing what-so-ever other than assumptions that you pulled out of your rear end.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Then that is a YOU problem if you rebuy something that has all the same content and complain that it is a re-release and being milked.

On DVD, there were two releases of star wars.

There were 3, two 2004 releases and the 2006 ones.

1. Widescreen SE's 2004
2. Pan and Scan SE's 2004
3. SE's and LD UOT ports 2006

The UK has only had 2.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

But, they are technically new releases of those movies with new specific street dates, and therefore, by that meaure, they are a re-release.

But is that measure particularly relevant or useful? Does breaking up a set and selling them individually or gummying on a paper label that says '25th Anniversary' really constitute 'milking'?

I kind of agree that steel or digibooks can fall into a gray area where packaging itself can constitute value-added or bonus content.

But simple repackaging?

*shrug*

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by chip75

There were 3, two 2004 releases and the 2006 ones.

1. Widescreen SE's 2004
2. Pan and Scan SE's 2004
3. SE's and LD UOT ports 2006

The UK has only had 2.

1 and 2 dont count as two seperate releases. Why? Because typically you are going to buy one or the other, not both. You have those die hard ridiculous collectors who just HAVE to have everything that says Star Wars on it, but those people are hardly typical and know what they are doing.


What I am talking about is people crying about Lucas milking Star Wars releases when in fact he has been quite fair in the amount of re-releases he has put out on each format.

Lord of the Rings had 3 different releases all with different content. Nobody complained about that.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

Please don't jump to stupid conclusions.

Did I say that I bought each release? No, I didn't.

Am I complaining that they made these re-releases? No, I am not.


I was merely pointing out what factually happened. Each of these releases occurred. It happened. It exists in actual reality. I'm not praising it, I'm not complaining about it. I'm merely pointing out that it happened. And since these are specific releases with specific new packaging and/or new release dates, they are a re-release. Plain and simple.

I'm merely pointing out what constitutes a re-release. It doesn't mean that I'm actually going to buy them each time. I only buy them if there's additional content that I actually want and/or if there's a difference in the packaging that I care enough about to buy it again. And in those cases, I don't complain.


The only thing that I bought more than once on DVD was the OT. I got the original 2004 Box set, and then I got the individual releases because they included the unalterted theatrical versions (I never bought the 2005 set without bonus disc, nor did I get the digipack set either... nor do I plan to ever get either of those). And the only thing that I was upset about at all there was the fact that the UOT wasn't anamorphic. But considering the only other versions of the UOT that I had were Pan & Scan VHS tapes, this was a HUGE upgrade, and I still would have bought them (at the same price even) if even if they were each just one disc with only the UOT movies on them. So, the fact that they came with another copy of the 2004 versions didn't bug me at all... it just meant that I had bonus back up copies.

I only actually purchased the PT movies once each on DVD. I did get a second copy of Phantom Menace for free + cost of shipping when they had some promotion around the time that Episode III came out with some brands of ceral (I think it was Kelloggs) when you sent in so many UPCs from the cereal boxes... and the only reason that I evenbothered doing that was because the 2nd disc with the bonus features on it from my original copy had a scratch and kept freezing when I would try to watch one of the documentaries. I was able to get a whole new copy to replace it with for practically nothing.



You can apologize to me now for making a ridiculous assumption and character judgement about me that you based on absolutely nothing what-so-ever other than assumptions that you pulled out of your rear end.

Dude, I realize that my quote sounded like I was pointing out you, but I was making a general statement to those complaining that they are being MILKED when its merely re-releases with new packaging thats getting put out and I feel that if you buy each and every new Star Wars release that has no new content, but is in different packaging and then complain that you are being used then is the problem of you, the buyer, not Lucas the salesman.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by octagon

But is that measure particularly relevant or useful? Does breaking up a set and selling them individually or gummying on a paper label that says '25th Anniversary' really constitute 'milking'?

I kind of agree that steel or digibooks can fall into a gray area where packaging itself can constitute value-added or bonus content.

But simple repackaging?

*shrug*

I agree completely and people that complain about a repackaging as "milking" are the ones who have the problem not Lucas.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by merrick97

1 and 2 dont count as two seperate releases. Why? Because typically you are going to buy one or the other, not both. You have those die hard ridiculous collectors who just HAVE to have everything that says Star Wars on it, but those people are hardly typical and know what they are doing.


What I am talking about is people crying about Lucas milking Star Wars releases when in fact he has been quite fair in the amount of re-releases he has put out on each format.

Lord of the Rings had 3 different releases all with different content. Nobody complained about that.

I think they do count, they feature different video albeit different aspect ratio's than each other. By the very definition of different they are different releases. It doesn't matter who collected them. If the 4:3 versions had shown different information (I can't confirm this) on screen than the anamorphic widescreen version (like a lot of pan and scans did Air Force One, LOTR etc) I think a lot of collectors would have bought both.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by octagon

But is that measure particularly relevant or useful? Does breaking up a set and selling them individually or gummying on a paper label that says '25th Anniversary' really constitute 'milking'?

I kind of agree that steel or digibooks can fall into a gray area where packaging itself can constitute value-added or bonus content.

But simple repackaging?

*shrug*

It depends on individual importance or priority. When they released the OT in 2005 in a different slip box, without the bonus disc, at a lower price, it didn't really "matter" to me. The slip box wasn't important enough to make me want to buy it again or anything. And I didn't really "care" about that release since it didn't have anything new. None the less, technically, it was a new release of the films. I'm sure it was relavent to people who don't care about bonus features and just wanted a lower price. It was also likely relavent to people who are die-hard Star Wars collectors and actually would buy them in addition to the 2004 releases.

Whether or not a repacking or whatever is worthy of one's attention is a matter of individual opinion. But the fact that something is getting a reissue of some sort is, well... a FACT. Plain and simple. It may not mean much to some people, but it is what it is.

Originally Posted by merrick97

What I am talking about is people crying about Lucas milking Star Wars releases when in fact he has been quite fair in the amount of re-releases he has put out on each format.

Lord of the Rings had 3 different releases all with different content. Nobody complained about that.

But nobody is complaining about Star Wars in that respect here in this conversation. Sure, people have complained about it in similar past conversations on various message boards or whatever, but no one is complaining about it here.

And even if you haven't specifically seen or participated in such arguements, I'm sure that there has to have been complaints on some forums somewhere in which people complained at minimum about the 3rd DVD release of LOTR (the limited edition ones that included both versions of the flms), especially if it contained new bonus content not included with the separate theatrical or extended edition DVDs. Considering the uproar around here when only the theatrical versions were released on Blu-Ray, I'm sure DVD related complaints HAVE to have taken place in the past, even if they weren't as extensive or passionate as the Blu-Ray uproar.

Originally Posted by chip75

There were 3, two 2004 releases and the 2006 ones.

1. Widescreen SE's 2004
2. Pan and Scan SE's 2004
3. SE's and LD UOT ports 2006

The UK has only had 2.

Actually, there were 4 releases:

1. 2004 box set with bonus disc
2. 2005 box set with different slip cover and no bonus disc
3. 2006 individual releases with UOT bonus discs.
4. Digi-pack OT 6-disc box set (containing the same on-disc content as the individual releases)

I do kind of agree with merrick97 in that the Pan & Scan versions were part of the same release as their simultaneous Widescreen versions (though if you wanted to argue them as a separate release.... or at least separate edition, which I could see the latter arguement, then that actually makes 7 editions of the OT as numbers 1 through 3 on my list had both Pan & Scan and Widescreen releases. As far as I know, the digipack only came out in Widescreen).

[shelldweller]

Oh please... Can we stop this pointless debate?
I think it should be clear by now that Star Wars has not been released more often than any other movie... rather less often.

Lucas bashers won´t understand that no matter what the truth is ...

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

I went to florida and saw george lucas live...he talked about this set and showed the lost Jedi luke skywalker scene..when he's building his lightsaber...fuk that was AMAZING!!! I WANT IT IN THE MOVIE!! not some lame deleted scenes list...Peter jacko puts all the deleted stuff in his movie and people buy them...lucas is crazy if he doesn't...

I'd like that scene become movie proper too! It's a really nice echo of Anakin's tragedy perhaps repeating with Luke.

Originally Posted by shelldweller

I also think that scene would play nicely at the beginning of RotJ...
More than anything else I wish he´d put Alderaan scenes into ANH. Those scenes featuring Jimmy Smits as old Bail Organa would fit perfectly into the slots left by deleting Luke´s original introduction.

An Alderaan scene in ANH sound great, but what do you mean by deleting Luke' original introduction? Surely, you are speaking of the introduction where Aunt Beru calls Luke and the camera pans over to follow him (THE NEW HOPE), one of the best scenes ever!?

Originally Posted by shelldweller

Lucas really constantly rereleases the movies... First he releases them on VHS and Laserdisc, then he releases the SE on VHS. Then he releases them on DVD and now only seven years later on Blu-Ray. What is he thinking? I´m glad most other movies only once came out on VHS and then no more...

that was sarcasm by the way!

Exactly.

Originally Posted by chip75

There were 3, two 2004 releases and the 2006 ones.

1. Widescreen SE's 2004
2. Pan and Scan SE's 2004
3. SE's and LD UOT ports 2006

The UK has only had 2.

Originally Posted by merrick97

1 and 2 dont count as two seperate releases. Why? Because typically you are going to buy one or the other, not both. You have those die hard ridiculous collectors who just HAVE to have everything that says Star Wars on it, but those people are hardly typical and know what they are doing.


What I am talking about is people crying about Lucas milking Star Wars releases when in fact he has been quite fair in the amount of re-releases he has put out on each format.

Lord of the Rings had 3 different releases all with different content. Nobody complained about that.

Yes.

Originally Posted by merrick97

I agree completely and people that complain about a repackaging as "milking" are the ones who have the problem not Lucas.

Spot on.

Originally Posted by chip75

I think they do count, they feature different video albeit different aspect ratio's than each other. By the very definition of different they are different releases. It doesn't matter who collected them. If the 4:3 versions had shown different information (I can't confirm this) on screen than the anamorphic widescreen version (like a lot of pan and scans did Air Force One, LOTR etc) I think a lot of collectors would have bought both.

Wow! Seriously ridiculous!

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by shelldweller

Oh please... Can we stop this pointless debate?
I think it should be clear by now that Star Wars has not been released more often than any other movie... rather less often.

Lucas bashers won´t understand that no matter what the truth is ...

I think by your estimation, I would be a "Lucas Basher"... yet I'm not complaining about this. So, can we please stop making moronic blanket statements about people who happen to like or dislike the PT and/or SE-OT? I'm sure that there are plenty of people who don't like what Lucas has done with those movies, and don't care for his choices in general in recent years, but have no problem with the re-releases/repackaging of the movies.

And likewise, I'm sure that there are plenty of "Lucas Defenders" out there who like or even love the PT, think the additions to the OT are great, but take issue with the various releases of the movie.

Yes, I agree that plenty of other movies have had a similar number of releases... in some cases even more. Nobody here, as far as I can tell, is taking issue with Lucas in this specific regard. Hence, your blanket statement here is rendered null and void. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200. Proceed directly to jail. Have a nice day.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

I think by your estimation, I would be a "Lucas Basher"... yet I'm not complaining about this. So, can we please stop making moronic blanket statements about people who happen to like or dislike the PT and/or SE-OT? I'm sure that there are plenty of people who don't like what Lucas has done with those movies, and don't care for his choices in general in recent years, but have no problem with the re-releases/repackaging of the movies.

And likewise, I'm sure that there are plenty of "Lucas Defenders" out there who like or even love the PT, think the additions to the OT are great, but take issue with the various releases of the movie.

Yes, I agree that plenty of other movies have had a similar number of releases... in some cases even more. Nobody here, as far as I can tell, is taking issue with Lucas in this specific regard. Hence, your blanket statement here is rendered null and void. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200. Proceed directly to jail. Have a nice day.

You said you were sure he would 'milk these to death'?

Did you mean that in the good way?

[IndefinentBlu]

Originally Posted by octagon

You said you were sure he would 'milk these to death'?

Did you mean that in the good way?

If Lucas does re-release the blu's than Logically he would have to wait 4-5yrs minimum.