Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

I agree with you. Like I said I agree widescreen is better but I just don't find it eye opening these days as I did in the days of 4:3 because these days there's nothing really to compare it to. Widescreen is..'it' really if that makes sense. I don't mean this as a criticism. I'm just saying that unlike the 4:3 days where you realize how much image you were losing, you don't really have that anymore.

I see what you're saying but I still get those moments of realisation, even on new films, as when I see a certain shot I think to myself "damn they would've had to cut that in half for pan and scan".

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by bobbyh64

I just googled "Star Wars unaltered" and there are several news sites claiming that Kathleen Kennedy confirmed that the unaltered trilogy won't be released. Apparently the people claiming this don't know how to read or listen. All they do is give a quote she said but they don't even quote the interviewer accurately, who asked:

"I mean like George's final cut of the film that he left us with, like whether that might be altered over time."

This is an extremely vague question that I interpret to mean "Wil there be further changes made to the special editions?" All these news sites saying this confirms the Classic Editions won't be released are spreading false news. It might be true, but not based on what was said. You can't really trust anything you read online when people will interpret something however they want. Why can't they just report that the question was extremely vague? Better yet, why can't a reporter ask a specific question like "Are there any plans to release the unaltered versions of the original trilogy?"

The interviewer did fumble a bit, but Kathleen without question knew what he asked in the end.

What is clear is that people should understand the circumstances of what needs to take place and why she said "are you kiddin'??".

The original camera negative does not exist from what I understand. There are lots of sources that could be had, but that takes them re-buying and getting approval etc. Disney does not own the original version, Fox does, and of course Fox owns what Lucas doctored.

So in the end there are many hoops to jump through to make that happen. So Disney at best could release Empire "unaltered" which would likely never happen because what is the point? Star Wars was is and will always be the most popular. Adjust for inflation it is at least in 3rd place worldwide (Avatar...it was just that big!).

HOWEVER, the devil's advocate in me could also take the interview as being cagey and that if anything happens, it isn't her doing. His edits/additions are always his...could mean that the revisit may actually put another option. Can you imagine that...Disney altering history again to make more things family friendly..why do it with just films, why not just alter it all together. This will give UOT fans something to really gripe about. This will bring a new generation of dissension.

In doing some thinking on all of this I want to revisit a part about accurate vs what is pleasing to SOME viewers.

Take a record, limited dynamic range, and inherent flaws like surface noise and of course the inconvenience factor...yet the artists knew this, approved it, and the audience listened to it that way for years. Warts and all, it is what we as buyers that made the material popular experienced it as.

The same could be said about a flat scan vs taking a picture of a film print frame by frame. A camera is the next best thing to the human eye. It captures what we see (and some could argue better given controlled conditions) and when done in a darkened area it can actually recreate a movie experience. Not a scanned experience, but a living breathing sit in your seat movie experience. This is far far removed from taking a scan and lighting it to the nth degree and changing what was meant to be seen and distorting artist intent. When you add digital manipulation to bring out that distorted view even more (despecialized I am looking at you) well you are starting to get to surrealistic distortion. There is practically a whole generation that puts up their nose at a bluray that only looks a little better than a vcr tape, but will ooh and ahh at every little crevice of a face being shown when maybe..just maybe it was never meant to be seen that way? Hell to put it in a crude stance, the porn industry hates that because they have to work that much harder with makeup to cover what is a very simple act. You can see it in old horror films that one could argue was only meant for crappy grindhouse cinema stock.

Take for instance the Dewbacks in the paste in job (not referring to George Lucas) of the despecialized edition. There is an unsettling digital feel vs what we know to be actual sets that were built back in the day. So what is described as "grain" is actually important pieces to the puzzle, and in motion gives a more authentic look vs say the distorted look of a the low resolution 720p vs 1080p example.

The first thing I saw before the gross distortion of two images that aren't even close to representing the detail of HD files (being a pitiful 33kb file which shows what Harmy is willing to do to deceive audiences), is that I was also in original Star Wars mode (i.e. back to when I was young and saw it on the big screen), and there sat a distorted view of Lucas special edition bastardized because it is Harmy's down-sampled DIGITAL recreation of the magenta color that Lucas wanted in his FINAL CUT that Kennedy has a degree of respect in the interview by her saying "they will always remain his".

What compounds a lot of this is that we have younger fans that think they know what it looks like vs people that actually grew up, bought all the promotional material, saw it in first run, and then furthermore have seen it not only on re-releases, but have actually saw it on land based broadcasts vs digital recreations that are prevalent today with the advent of modern fiber optic delivery sources. Yeah in short dedicated their life too...

Of course to some this comes off as "cynical" or "condescending" or flat out lacking in what I call bedside manner. But why not look at it for what it really is. Perhaps viewers like myself actually think...gee if you are so in tune to recreating your childhood, why not go all out? Or even worse. Yeah I get offended, sorry I can't help it. Because you have a so called majority actually convincing people of my generation that should know better that this cut and paste fan edit crap is a washed out mess is right??

When I see not one person comment on the flaws of the release I think, have things really come along that bad? Do we really have people that have absolutely no clue what Star Wars actually looked like?

As for home releases, in the case of "childhood", for some of us that could mean the laserdisc releases because while not anamorphic we are still talking analog. When Lucas released the DVD's they were recreations of the source that he had released a few years back as "the last time". Again to stick one's nose up at it is to perhaps have no respect for the fact that the majority of people saw it that way (at least in cropped VHS form) to begin with!

To me, I don't know which is more dangerous. Lucas making changes to his films and perhaps wiping out the existence of the memories of how the original film looked (yeah right) or the fact that this bastardized distribution "despecialized" will actually permanently change what is the truth because it is based on what one man thinks and the film prints may one day deteriorate beyond repair to ever prove otherwise.

To me it is just another fan edit (though I respect the work put into it), and sorry if my candor comes off as not so nice.

[Rodney-2187]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

The interviewer did fumble a bit, but Kathleen without question knew what he asked in the end.
What is clear is that people should understand the circumstances of what needs to take place and why she said "are you kiddin'??".

Unless you can read minds, you can't definitively know what someone else is thinking. He did not ask the question as it pertains to the unaltered versions. He pretty much asked about making future changes. Maybe that is what he intended to ask and wasn't even thinking about the unaltered versions, who knows. She probably had an inclination of where the conversation was going, but who can blame her for wanting to avoid the subject.

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

The original camera negative does not exist from what I understand. There are lots of sources that could be had, but that takes them re-buying and getting approval etc. Disney does not own the original version, Fox does, and of course Fox owns what Lucas doctored.

Fox has distribution rights for the first six movies until 2020, and distribution rights for the first Star Wars in perpetuity. They can release Star Wars any time they want, they just have to give Fox a cut.

As far as the negative goes, I've read conflicting stories. The consensus seems to be that the negative was disassembles to create the special editions, but not destroyed. It would have to be reassembled.

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by rodneyfaile

Unless you can read minds, you can't definitively know what somone else is thinking. He did not ask the question correctly. She probably had an inclination of what he really wanted to ask, but who can blame her for wanting to avoid the subject.

What is your problem? Are you even making an attempt to read what I wrote? I put my interpretation on it and that is it. When did I ever claim to KNOW. Shouldn't this go without saying? I read her facial expression and used deductive reasoning. But in the end, it is one man's opinion over another. Shouldn't this go without saying?

Did you look at my devil's advocate a few sentences down or at this point are you just distorting just to do your own hate filled agenda?

Fox has distribution rights for the first six movies until 2020, but they have distribution right for the first Star Wars in perpetuity. As far as the negative goes, I've read conflicting stories. The consensus seems to be that the negative was disassembles to create the special editions, but not destroyed. It would have to be reassembled.

Thanks for that, and I heard differently (Hence me typing "from what I understand"). And there you have it. Although, here you say "the consensus". This means we all generally agree? How can you know this? Are you in our heads? See how that works?

p.s. The negative when "disassembled" was reported to be in bad shape before it was scanned in (see my criticism of that). I have my own doubts (not that I am claiming I know) that it is as simple as pasting back together again. In this case another print would likely be used....gee you know...like what has already happened?

[Rodney-2187]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

What is your problem? Are you even making an attempt to read what I wrote? I put my interpretation on it and that is it. When did I ever claim to KNOW. Shouldn't this go without saying? I read her facial expression and used deductive reasoning. But in the end, it is one man's opinion over another. Shouldn't this go without saying?

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

Kathleen without question knew what he asked in the end.

What is clear is that people should understand the circumstances of what needs to take place and why she said "are you kiddin'??".

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

Although, here you say "the consensus". This means we all generally agree? How can you know this? Are you in our heads? See how that works?

Originally Posted by rodneyfaile

The consensus seems to be that the negative was disassembles to create the special editions, but not destroyed. It would have to be reassembled.

I would say the majority of articles on the subject reflect that the negative still exists and wasn't permanently altered or destroyed as once thought.

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

Did you look at my devil's advocate a few sentences down or at this point are you just distorting just to do your own hate filled agenda?

I do not have a hate-filled agenda toward anyone.

[Cobra Kai]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

The original camera negative does not exist from what I understand. There are lots of sources that could be had, but that takes them re-buying and getting approval etc. Disney does not own the original version, Fox does, and of course Fox owns what Lucas doctored.

So in the end there are many hoops to jump through to make that happen. So Disney at best could release Empire "unaltered" which would likely never happen because what is the point?

The theatrical cut of Star Wars has already been restored. Mike Verta's 4k restoration looks superior to the official blu-ray, and has been offered to Fox/Disney on a silver platter. Mike has gone completely quiet since he was last reported to be in talks with representatives from both Fox and Disney, so no one knows what is going on there.

Aside from that - even though the original negatives are now conformed to the special editions, they still have access to all the original cut pieces, and could assemble the original edit digitally. And we have even heard from a certain poster here that said they have already scanned those original elements (although that is pretty standard for archival purposes and doesn't indicate they were doing it for a restoration).

[Rodney-2187]

All these VCR posts and pics are so interesting, it's honestly deserving of its own thread. Anyone still have Betamax?

[ElvisForever]

rodneyfaile,

None of your quotes to me prove anything. I said what I thought and you apparently feel so inclined to take it to a personal level and blow it up for what it isn't.

I do not have a hate-filled agenda toward anyone.

Yes you do and it is me...oh wait, that is my opinion. In case you couldn't figure it out because I don't speak for others. Want an example. Am I the only one that states their opinion? Am I the only one that states something in a way that could be taken as speaking for others? Do you quote those people that way?

Of course not, because they don't fill your agenda. If you don't have one, then knock it off and let me have my opinion and let the ones I go against speak for themselves if they have a problem with it. Or keep doing what you are doing, your choice.

xxxxxxxxxxx

Cobra Kai,

I didn't speak about the negatives being necessarily literally destroyed (though they could be, I put nothing past Lucas....NOTHING). No one has ever been told a definitive. What is likely to be the case is instead of assembling pieces, just get another print. The negative is not always the be all end all.

And yes..I have heard about that 4K restoration and know it ...just a little bit...

There are 4 frames of mind and this has nothing to do with bootlegs.

1. You have the originally artist change what they want digitally to conform what is in his minds eye.

2. You digitally change something to make it look like what you want or what you think is true.

3. You do a 4k camera image (also a scan technically) of a print to recreate what the audience saw in the theaters.

4. You do a flat bed scan of a print and produce a higher detail but not exactly what was seen in a theater.

5. You do a various down samples of artist visions in home media releases or release beta versions that aren't final cuts.

I agree with 1 and 3 of these options.

p.s. Don't you think John Kreese could be the same weenie in Rambo if you follow through the posing he did in Karate Kid with his cutouts and weapon poses in dojo vs Miyagi who got the congressional medal of honor for basically being ripped away from his family and forced to fight and being part of historically the most decorated group by percentage that just wanted to get back home? I just always found it fascinating how his character seemed very close together. No shot at your choice of avatar, just an observation.

[crissrudd4554]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I see what you're saying but I still get those moments of realisation, even on new films, as when I see a certain shot I think to myself "damn they would've had to cut that in half for pan and scan".

Funny I was just watching a movie on Netflix last night and had the same feeling.

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by Cobra Kai

The theatrical cut of Star Wars has already been restored. Mike Verta's 4k restoration looks superior to the official blu-ray, and has been offered to Fox/Disney on a silver platter - free of charge. Mike has gone completely quiet since he was last reported to be in talks with representatives from both Fox and Disney, so no one knows what is going on there.

Interesting...

[Rodney-2187]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I see what you're saying but I still get those moments of realisation, even on new films, as when I see a certain shot I think to myself "damn they would've had to cut that in half for pan and scan".

Rogue One VHS trailer commercial - YouTube

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by rodneyfaile

She probably had an inclination of where the conversation was going, but who can blame her for wanting to avoid the subject.

.

I'm almost positive that it occurred to her that he was getting at the UOT, or just the idea of it crossed her mind when mentioning different versions, but she specifically has nothing to say on the subject. Even if they were definitely planning to roll out a 4K UOT with the next year or two, its common practice that you remain tight-lipped about that kind of thing until your official announcement.

But whether she was thinking it or not, her answer did seem to be specifically responding to "are you going to tinker with the films some more?" which answers the question of any kind of enhanced "Final cut" being a possibility

[ParkerAL]

Part of me thinks we're all fools for hoping Disney will release the Stars trilogy as it was originally shown.

Look at how the company treats it's older animated movies. Most are either Smeared with DNR or digitally repainted frame-by-frame. I wouldn't give them a track record for catering to purists.

[BluMonday]

Originally Posted by rodneyfaile

Rogue One VHS trailer commercial - YouTube

It's just missing: "Two Thumbs Up!" - Siskel & Ebert, AT THE MOVIES

[Nailwraps]

See!? What did I tell you!?

Kathleen Kennedy laughs off the idea of changing George Lucas's last edit - Steele Wars interview - YouTube

[HeavyHitter]

At this point based on what Kennedy said, it's obvious out of respect for Lucas he WILL get the final say on whatever iteration of the original trilogy is released. Unless he has a change of heart, it's unlikely the UOT will ever be released at least in his lifetime. I guess the question is, when will they release the remastered SEs? Given a 4K SE of A New Hope exists, I would have thought this year would have been great for a BD release, but...

[Geoff D]

I honestly do think that as long as the dude's still alive then the restored UOT will never see the light of day.

[bobbyh64]

What is the point of not releasing the Classic Editions until Lucas is dead? If Lucas's wishes are that the Classic Editions never be released ever, okay whatever, but to release them after he's dead...? If that's the plan, what's gained by keeping them hidden and then releasing them in two decades?

[Geoff D]

A Clockwork Orange was removed from UK distribution at the request of Stanley Kubrick in the mid '70s, it wasn't until his death a quarter of a century later that we FINALLY got to see it on these shores again.

I know it's not the exact same situation because people could still personally import ACO if they wanted to, it wasn't banned by the BBFC or anything, but it still shows the power that some directors hold over their material. And there's some anthology film which got a recent Blu release where one of the directors (Polanski, I think?) requested that his segment be removed.

Shit happens. Sometimes you just gotta wait it out.

[Arch Stanton]

He might have twenty years of life in him yet, ol' George.