Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Nicolawicz

Its pathetic original capture resolution. The thing is about 800 lines, since it's cropped 1080p, not real anamorphic. I even remember complaining at the theater because I thought the projector was out of focus.

That's what I was worried about.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

That's what I was worried about.

Chances are he was watching a film print, which indeed looked poor.


In the extremely few digital projection showings it looked very good at the time, a completely different experience.

Originally Posted by bobbyh64

Is there even a point to shooting anamorphic with a digital camera? Wouldn't that just reduce the number of pixels on the sides of the image?

A lot of films are shot digital anamorphic, for years now. ROGUE ONE is an example.

[bobbyh64]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

A lot of films are shot digital anamorphic, for years now. ROGUE ONE is an example.

How does it work? Does the lens squeeze the planned 2.35:1 image so that it fits the entire 16:9 frame?

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by bobbyh64

Well, he could have done it all over again! He could've spent the money to to re-create the originals. To him a few million dollars is a couple bucks. Or, if he was really serious about reverting the Han Greedo scene back to the original, he could've done it for the Blu-ray, right?

Spielberg made sure to include the original version of E.T. for the 20th anniversary DVD release, after the fan and critical outcry over the alterations in 2002. He bought back a lot of good will by doing so -- he listened, audiences appreciate that.

For the Blu-Ray, he didn't even bother to include the vilified 2002 version, and few missed it, and he is now on record saying he'd never do such alterations to his films again (new foley f/x in Jaws, a third editorial pass on Close Encounters, and an extended cut of 1941 preceded the 2002 version of E.T.)

I think Mr. Lucas is simply a bit more stubborn than Spielberg.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

I watched the Star Trek episode City On The Edge Of Forever a bit earlier and the fact that they give you the option to watch both versions makes me hate what Lucas did that much more.

There are two versions?

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Arawn

There are two versions?

On the Blu-Ray, you can choose between the original version that aired in the 60's, or the recent HD version with re-imagined visual f/x.

[Arawn]

Which version is the one that currently airs on television, the remastered one?

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Arawn

Which version is the one that currently airs on television, the remastered one?

Star Trek - The City on the Edge of Forever - special effects comparison - YouTube

[bobbyh64]

The history of the OT is similar to Anakin's life. Both started out pure and then years later both turned to the Dark Side. Hopefully the OT will soon be redeemed like Anakin and returned so its original Light Side glory!

Could this have been Lucas's plan all along?

[Nicolawicz]

Originally Posted by bobbyh64

Is there even a point to shooting anamorphic with a digital camera? Wouldn't that just reduce the number of pixels on the sides of the image?

Right, I think the crappy digital camera Lucas used had a 1920x1080 (16:9) sensor. Modern digital cameras have a more square sensor for anamorphic.

[Arch Stanton]

The TOS reimagined effects look so stupid

[PrestigeWorldwide]

Originally Posted by Arawn

Which version is the one that currently airs on television, the remastered one?

Don't know about the version airing on TV, but the streaming version on amazon prime and Netflix have the new special effects.

[Roy_Batty]

It always amazes me that these huge studios with all their wealth, power and influence seem to be obstacles to the fans getting what they want. On the flip side, the impossible is always accomplished by the die hard fans as can be seen on this website.

http://www.thestarwarstrilogy.com/st...e/Project-4K77

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Roy_Batty

It always amazes me that these huge studios with all their wealth, power and influence seem to be obstacles to the fans getting what they want.

It's more ambivalence. They're making billions in the theaters, they've got a lot of plates in the air. They can only devote so much time and resources to home video stuff that makes a lot less.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Roy_Batty

It always amazes me that these huge studios with all their wealth, power and influence seem to be obstacles to the fans getting what they want.

Speaking from personal experience, especially with Disney fans, it's never enough. Whatever home video product they make or how hard they work on it, it isn't enough. "It's missing x from the 2001 DVD! It's missing y from the TV special from 1992! Not enough new content! Why no commentary?" etc. etc. etc., on and on, never ending. And if you think that's bad, the message boards for the Disney Theme Parks are particularly radioactive. It's so tired, I just try and tune it out.

[Hardback247]

Originally Posted by JimSmith

George Mucus just loves smearing feces right in all of our faces doesn't he?

Stay classy.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Arch Stanton

The TOS reimagined effects look so stupid

I think they did a pretty decent job, overall. I fairly quickly gravitated back to the original effects but was pleasantly surprised by some of the new stuff. Granted, the CGI Enterprise can look a lot like a model at times but then again, so did the one hanging in the Smithsonian

[JimSmith]

Originally Posted by Hardback247

Stay classy.

Well this has always been such a classy forum.

[rickah88]

[Falaskan]

if the 4K remasters aren't the UOT, I can only assume Disney is saving them for the 50th? Would they wait that long??