Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[Agent Bond]

Re: Alec Guinness not liking Star Wars

Yes, it is true. I went to the library and read his authorized biography. He didn't like the dialogue (thought Star Wars as a whole movie was amateurish compared to other films he had done), hated being in the heat where the Tatooine scenes were filmed, didn't get along with anybody on the cast except for Harrison Ford, and hated the fact that his part in Star Wars overshadowed his previous cinematic works.

He only came back for the sequels for the paycheck and as a favor to Lucas given the popularity that Star Wars had generated.

This is why I'm so glad I at least have my laserdiscs and non-anamorphic dvds. To me, it's still and always will be a character arc that develops over these three films: Star Wars (1977), The Empire Strikes Back (1980), & Return of the Jedi (1983). I don't care how much retconing Lucas thinks he can pull - the prequels were a backstory "trilogy". I view them in a completely different context from the original trilogy. So, for me, there is no six film arc.

Exactly. In the original Star Wars, they made it sound like Anakin Skywalker was this badass Jedi who turned to the darkside because he was greedy for power.

Only to the find out in the prequel trilogy that he was actually a whiny fu**ing b*tch who did it mainly to save the life of his wife. COME ON!

I will never forgive Lucas for ruining the Anakin Skywalker with his retcon bullsh*t.

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

I am a Star Wars fan. I used to be a huge Star Wars fan. I bought every magazine, toy, game, etc. I lived and breathed Star Wars. Those days are long gone, but I have fond memories of talking Star Wars with friends and reading and collecting and watching anything with Star Wars on it. But in the past ten years, something changed. Fans became more cynical, argumentative, egotistical, and judgmental. Now it seems, if you simply enjoy the films, don't mind or like the alterations, and still manage to chill out and get a kick out of Star Wars, you're an "apologist" - perhaps the silliest term I've ever come across with regards to an individuals enjoyment of a piece of fiction. It seems that to be a Star Wars fan anymore, you have obsess over miniscule alterations, talk down to everyone around you, think George Lucas is some kind of evil magician out to destroy your childhood, and take everything about Star Wars deadly seriously. Where's the fun or enjoyment in that? Honestly? How is your life bettered by endlessly bickering over frames in a film? Whether a character says a single word? I'm not angry or bitter about this development. If anything, I truly pity those who get worked up over such things.

With that said, by all means argue over a single word of dialogue, a slight change of color of a lightsaber, or blinking Ewoks, or whatever the hell else you guys can find a way to bitch about. These changes don't alter the message of the films and certainly should not deter any sane individual from being able to enjoy the films as is, whether you're for the changes or not. In a couple of weeks I'm going to be watching Star Wars in HD with lossless audio. That is something I've literally been waiting for for over a decade for. You guys cancelling your pre-orders over non-sensical fanboy ramblings can choose not to all you want. I hope your content with your decision. Me, I'm gonna have lightsabers kicking my subwoofers ass for a few hours.

How is complaining about those who care about the original versions, being any different? Saying that being called an 'apologist' is ridiculous, but then you're going on about how fanboys are rambling on over nonsensical things, is equally as patronizing and insulting.
If you're fine with the constant tinkering of George Lucas, then I won't insult you either. It would be nice if you could do the same.

[JoshKelhoffer]

Originally Posted by NYorker

a) you're about 7-8 years too late with that paragraph...

b) my 3 year old daughter makes a more convincing "nooo!" when she loses a toy...

Final scream of agony...final hiccup of drunkenness is more likely.

It's not a scream at all. It's a simple monotone delivery of "Nooo." And before someone says "but Vader has a monotone voice." Yes, but he's clearly put emphasis in his voice before. He was yelling in ANH. Even the scream in ROTS had more power and conviction.

If the average person on this board knows what a strained scream should sound like, why doesn't the sound editor, who gets paid to do this?

[Mahatma]

Originally Posted by Breather

Same here. On the other hand...

http://www.thinkgeek.com/interests/looflirpa/e8be/

Those would be ruinous if used on Fight club

[Integra8]

Originally Posted by retablo

A 4K scan would mean completely re-doing all the CG effects. In addition, AOTC and ROTS were shot 1080p digital, so they can never be 4K. The originals, yes, but not the prequels. LOTR was made from 2K scans and they look perfectly fine.

Sorry, should have mentioned that the 4K transfer were for the original trilogy, not interested in the last 3.

Jeff

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by phansson

Someone can correct me, but yes I think that the PQ is the same, but the AQ is better on the LaserDiscs. I think that is what I have read. I don't own, nor have I ever owned a LaserDisc.

I am not so sure, the PQ on the DVD is not great at all, I find they seem to look better on the Laserdisc but that's just me.

[punisher]

Originally Posted by phansson

Someone can correct me, but yes I think that the PQ is the same, but the AQ is better on the LaserDiscs. I think that is what I have read. I don't own, nor have I ever owned a LaserDisc.

I no longer have LD's but did own 3 different versions of the Star Wars trilogy including the se box set.....LD's looked and sounded very good and you had to have an ld player capable of DD and a DD receiver which there wasn't much of back then..most of the ld players were capableof dolby pro logic only...also most ld players were incapable of still frames unless the LD disc was in CAV format...bit for bit the non anamorphic dvds should hold more audio video info than the LD's
I know i sold everything off after seeing my first dvd and they were all non anamorphic and some were flippers..thus if still capable of comparing..I would give the nod to the dvds

[double_l4488]

Originally Posted by jrmac2000

I have to wonder how many people are saying they will not buy this but secretly will buy it anyway.

Why would somebody secretly buy movies they do not want? WTF are you talking about?

[danny_boy]

Originally Posted by Breather

I'm not being dishonest at all. The saber never appeared green in any shot until 2004. Check every home video release. Give it up already. Trying to have the last word won't make you right.

I am not (and have never) disputed that every home release has a blu/white saber.

But the documentary predates the 1st home release by at least 5 years.

In other words the 1977 making of documentary sourced what would then have been a fresh 35mm print for the clips that it used----unlike the 1982 home video release that sourced a 3-4 year old pinkshifted (in certain scenes) print.

So it is something that should be considered seriously when evaluating the film's appearance during it's initial theatrical run.

[WannabeSpiderMan]

Originally Posted by Maggot

I didn't mind Christopher Lee in the roll, per se, as he has that great voice and presence. Very much the presence that Peter Cushing and Alec Guinness had before. The problem I saw was that Dooku was such an under-developed character. Darth Maul and General Grievous were jokes. I'll say this again......the prequels had no meaningful character development as much as Lucas tried. I cared for nobody's fate in the prequels, while with the original three, I actually cared and rooted for Luke, Lea and company. The poor direction, the poor(and I mean extremely wooden)acting made for characters that were as thin as paper. I'll certainly get the Blu-ray set, but I hold the prequels in such distain. It's only that there's some core element to the Star Wars story that makes me watch them. I wish they'd just re-do the prequels with someone who knows how to direct and doesn't go hog-wild on the CGI/FX.

I completely understand what you are saying, but keep in mind if you had seen the prequel films as a young child, you would have been blown away, and character development would have been the last thing on your mind. You would have been swept up in the spectacle, much like we were with the OT in our childhoods. We don't develop a heavily critical mind regarding such things until we are judgmental adults. These films, while enjoyable for adults, are ultimately for children, and we as fans who grew up with them forget that. We want more depth for our adult minds, and are quick to complain.

I for one can't wait until my infant son is old enough to watch the films with, to enjoy his enthusiasm.

[jonmoz]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

I am not so sure, the PQ on the DVD is not great at all, I find they seem to look better on the Laserdisc but that's just me.

The picture quality was better on the dvd's,as on the laserdisc you had to use your displays zoom feature to view the correct aspect ratio.

The dvd's were anamorphic,which in other words were enhanced for widescreen displays.

Of course if you were watching on an older 4:3 display the difference between the two would be minimal.

[Jar Jar Stinks]

For those who have the discs, are there any
Easter Eggs?

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Originally Posted by jonmoz

The picture quality was better on the dvd's,as on the laserdisc you had to use your displays zoom feature to view the correct aspect ratio.

The dvd's were anamorphic,which in other words were enhanced for widescreen displays.

Of course if you were watching on an older 4:3 display the difference between the two would be minimal.

The unaltered dvds are not anamorphic. They are 4:3 letterboxed.

[WannabeSpiderMan]

Originally Posted by chip75

I posted this in the UK thread:



It takes an amazing performance and I think David Prowse's one was pretty good to convey thoughts and feelings without talking and most of Vader's scenes and emotions are silent. James Earl Jones does a good job don't get me wrong but it's just his voice (a wonderful one at that). He's also usually the first one to point out that he wasn't the guy in the suit. Prowse was so much more than that. The 'No' at the end of Sith is one of the Saga's most terrible moments one I cringe at everytime I see it. Maybe if Lucas had introduced Vader earlier it may have worked. Both (or rather all three) 'No's' are out of character. The idea that everything needs to fit into a nice neat liitle package is one of the great flaws of the prequels, it was never needed. Life isn't perfect and it sure isn't symmetrical (unless you love The Lion King).

I don't mean this in a snarky, disrespectful-of-your-perspective way, but when you say David Prowse's performance was amazing, you must realize that he just stood there and turned his head back and forth, right? All of the dramatic emotion that the moment carried, along with the emotional conflict going on inside the character himself due to the story, is all projected upon him by YOU, the viewer. The helmet is blank, with no emotion visible. Every bit of power in that scene comes from the power that you give it due to your investment.

The moment is still the same, and if the "No" had been there since day one, nobody would have been upset. You still would have been swept up in the moment.

[Shaft Windu]

Originally Posted by WannabeSpiderMan

The moment is still the same, and if the "No" had been there since day one, nobody would have been upset. You still would have been swept up in the moment.

exactly!

[Breather]

Originally Posted by danny_boy

I am not (and have never) disputed that every home release has a blu/white saber.

But the documentary predates the 1st home release by at least 5 years.

In other words the 1977 making of documentary sourced what would then have been a fresh 35mm print for the clips that it used----unlike the 1982 home video release that sourced a 3-4 year old pinkshifted (in certain scenes) print.

So it is something that should be considered seriously when evaluating the film's appearance during it's initial theatrical run.

The documentary was showing how the saber effects were done. That was a test shot, not the final color of the saber. The green shot was not how the saber in the film ever looked theatrically. It was never green. Using documentary test footage to make a case for the saber being green in the film...

[LaserD]

Originally Posted by Shaft Windu

I didn't mean in sales-numbers but rather in fun and curiosity and the willingness to go along for the ride. It's just no fun anymore to talk to fans about the movies. It's always about what they hate about them and not what they love about them. That's just my impression by this forum and the internet in general, even and especially Star Wars sites like theforce.net...

You are quite correct, and it's everywhere, not just here and not just Star Wars. I stopped frequenting the forums at Startrek.com for this very reason a few years ago. Endless bickering about the producer hijacking and demeaning the franchise. Who needs it. Watch films like Starwoids or Star Wait if you want a picture of some of the folks we're dealing with on these issues. Find a hobby you enjoy and follow William Shatner's advice about finding something meaningful in life (a paraphrase).

[danny_boy]

Originally Posted by adywan

You actually proved why the sabre is green in the one shot but not the obi-wan shot. Just looks the the two images. The Luke one has a very green/ yellow black area while the other one has a better black level. The obi-wan final shot also doesn't have the same yellow cast that the falcon one does. Check the first VHS pressing, which was before thx etc, and you will see that the sabre isn't green. Its just the way the two scenes were presented in the documenatry, nothing more.

Yup--well spotted with the differences in the black levels---and your analysis could be the reason why there is this greenish discrepancy.

I just rewatched that segment of the documentary and noticed something:

As the seeker ball hovers around Luke the saber has the greenish tint----but as it zapps luke it turns blu--all in the same shot!



It may just be something that was unique to this print(or several prints) that were released at the time.

As an outside bet maybe this doc could have sourced the original 70mm opening week engagement print (which edited off the Dianoga and Chewie growling at the mouse droid)---it could have had a slightly different colour timing---seeing as it's audio was considered incomplete?

[NYorker]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

I am a Star Wars fan. I used to be a huge Star Wars fan. I bought every magazine, toy, game, etc. I lived and breathed Star Wars. Those days are long gone, but I have fond memories of talking Star Wars with friends and reading and collecting and watching anything with Star Wars on it. But in the past ten years, something changed. Fans became more cynical, argumentative, egotistical, and judgmental. Now it seems, if you simply enjoy the films, don't mind or like the alterations, and still manage to chill out and get a kick out of Star Wars, you're an "apologist" - perhaps the silliest term I've ever come across with regards to an individuals enjoyment of a piece of fiction. It seems that to be a Star Wars fan anymore, you have obsess over miniscule alterations, talk down to everyone around you, think George Lucas is some kind of evil magician out to destroy your childhood, and take everything about Star Wars deadly seriously. Where's the fun or enjoyment in that? Honestly? How is your life bettered by endlessly bickering over frames in a film? Whether a character says a single word? I'm not angry or bitter about this development. If anything, I truly pity those who get worked up over such things.

With that said, by all means argue over a single word of dialogue, a slight change of color of a lightsaber, or blinking Ewoks, or whatever the hell else you guys can find a way to bitch about. These changes don't alter the message of the films and certainly should not deter any sane individual from being able to enjoy the films as is, whether you're for the changes or not. In a couple of weeks I'm going to be watching Star Wars in HD with lossless audio. That is something I've literally been waiting for for over a decade for. You guys cancelling your pre-orders over non-sensical fanboy ramblings can choose not to all you want. I hope your content with your decision. Me, I'm gonna have lightsabers kicking my subwoofers ass for a few hours.

I think you're generalizing too much here. I (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) never got worked up on the minutest details of SW, lightsaber color etc.
But this is not a nonsensical issue: this is a serious (in my opinion) discussion of an alteration of a film that, because of its status as a cinema touchstone, or whatever, is not the same as it was, even in '97.

This thread was supposed to be a celebration of one of the greatest trilogies in film history (in the top three, in my book), but because its creator continued to modify it incessantly and, by many fans, without reason - it is no longer the case.

Is it going to sell millions of copies? probably. Will it leave a good taste in people's mouth? absolutely not (I skipped on the obvious pun...). Why?

Instead of being treated to what was supposed to be the "crown jewel" of the format, fans perceive they are treated to a release that a complete effort may not have been thrown in it, and the film creator himself as added changes that were a) unexpected and b) so unnecessary that it tarnishes the release, the film and its legacy, and the franchise's creator himself, George Lucas.

Understand this: from a film point of view, from a story point of view, these changes make zero sense. Zero! that is what gets a lot of these people so worked up. Some people have given up entirely on SW. Others, like yourself, want to brush it aside and say, "I can live with it, now I finally have it in 1080p and 6.1 sound." Fair enough.

But you know what the worse thing is...?
Choice.
GL leaves us no choice but either to settle for the frankensteinian creations, or not watch at all. So I, like others, choose not to watch it (I have my '04 DVD, good enough for me).

He could have easily taken a page from the books of PJ, JCameron, Ridley Scott or any other director who released a director's/extended cut in addition to the original release.

So why didn't he? maybe for the same reason he added the pathetic "nooooo," and the Ben "How to scream like a dragon" yelp and "peekaboo" R2:

Because he can.

[danny_boy]

Originally Posted by Breather

The documentary was showing how the saber effects were done. That was a test shot, not the final color of the saber. The green shot was not how the saber in the film ever looked theatrically. It was never green. Using documentary test footage to make a case for the saber being green in the film...

But the documentary does show a continouse clip from the film(after showing those test plates).

The clip has effects and dialogue(which prove it is from the film---and not test footage).

I just showed this to Ady:

The clip has the saber being green as it moves around Luke, but as it blasts him it turns blue:



I never gave this greenish tint in the documentary a second's thought---until it resurfaced in the 2004 master(which is the best the film ever looked on home video).

So I don't think it is a coincidence.