Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[pats3553@]

Does anyone know how much the price has been fluctuating? I was going to buy the saga last week when it was at 69.99, but I was waiting for my trade in credit at amazon. Now its up to 84.99. So do you think it will go back down, or should I just get it now?

[MCT]

Originally Posted by ObiTrentKenobi

NEW TOPIC PLEASE! NEW TOPIC PLEASE! NEW TOPIC PLEASE!

@haters;
if you people hate the movies so much - get off this thread!

@self-righteous
Lucas is not evil, unless by some account you can prove beyond any doubt that he has in fact committed an unforgiveable haneous crime worthy of making him "evil", by which I don't know what standards you are basing this upon anyways - so declare.

@transferbabies
Does the DNR'd Episode look better than the DVD transfer? BY FARRRRRR! So shut it. Is it perfect? probably not, but hey - look forward to 2 or 3 more bluray relases, hopefully with a non-dnr's episode 1

@UOTwackos
We just may have to suck it up eventually and live with the 2006 LE's: I've come to the realization that it may not happen again. But then again, we didn't expect it to happen pre-2006 either - it was a welcomed surprise! The UOT on the 2006 LE's look 100 times better than any of my VHS copies do, so i'm happy with them!

Let's end this conflict - and show the blurays some love instead of whining about every pixel and word of dialogue.

IF you hate the movies or bluray release so much - go make your own movies and come back to this thread and show us how pretty you are. I dare you.

END! End! End!

no.

[Jay444]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Only those who irrationally hate Lucas would dwell on such minutiae.

I don't hate Lucas by any means, just saying he is a little out of touch if he doesn't even know when his own movies are coming out (sort of a big difference from winter to summer, ya know?). I mean, if they put so much effort into the 3D you think he would have a clue as to when it was hitting theaters. Unless of course they delay it....

[Jay444]

Originally Posted by VenomBrock

I remember paying 100 bucks for these Saga DVD cases. So worth it!

NOW that is sweet! Nice art!

[Monolithium]

Originally Posted by ObiTrentKenobi

Let's end this conflict - and show the blurays some love instead of whining about every pixel and word of dialogue.

People can voice their opinion about how good or bad these discs look or sound.

[sardaukar1977]

Originally Posted by MrJoeKalel

ALL the waxy images in the message boards

Btw, I like your avatar, and that you live in Dallas

lol, thanks!

[sardaukar1977]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

Then we must agree to disagree. Short answer: DNRsville.

Yeah well, it still beats the DVD's by far.

[tigertron]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Intentional or not, TPM still looks like shit. The DVD was so ****ing hideous that I was expecting the Blu-ray to blow me away. It did not, which speaks volumes for how badly they screwed the pooch on TPM. Again.

I'd love to see what your definition of good is. TPM isn't brilliant by any means because of the DNR, but its a million miles better than the DVD and better than alot of Blu-ray films out there. I'm hoping on a re-release at some point with a DNR-less TPM and an AOTC without the teal tint and softness; but for now we'll have to make do and its not a bad thing.

[balthazar_bee]

Originally Posted by sardaukar1977

Yeah well, it still beats the DVD's by far.

Which you could say about any blu, working from a 35mm source, that's not an absolute abomination. And TPM had an extra advantage going in, namely that the DVD was such crap to begin with, as other comments have noted, we should have been blown away -- even if it had been mediocre.

In the theatre, TPM had things like detail, film grain; on blu-ray, it does not.

And I must respectfully disagree with the other fellow who believes it's a million times better than a lot of other blus. Or, if it is, I don't own them/haven't seen them.

[Sephiroth5929]

Originally Posted by ObiTrentKenobi

NEW TOPIC PLEASE! NEW TOPIC PLEASE! NEW TOPIC PLEASE!

@haters;
if you people hate the movies so much - get off this thread!

@self-righteous
Lucas is not evil, unless by some account you can prove beyond any doubt that he has in fact committed an unforgiveable haneous crime worthy of making him "evil", by which I don't know what standards you are basing this upon anyways - so declare.

@transferbabies
Does the DNR'd Episode look better than the DVD transfer? BY FARRRRRR! So shut it. Is it perfect? probably not, but hey - look forward to 2 or 3 more bluray relases, hopefully with a non-dnr's episode 1

@UOTwackos
We just may have to suck it up eventually and live with the 2006 LE's: I've come to the realization that it may not happen again. But then again, we didn't expect it to happen pre-2006 either - it was a welcomed surprise! The UOT on the 2006 LE's look 100 times better than any of my VHS copies do, so i'm happy with them!

Let's end this conflict - and show the blurays some love instead of whining about every pixel and word of dialogue.

IF you hate the movies or bluray release so much - go make your own movies and come back to this thread and show us how pretty you are. I dare you.

END! End! End!

George Lucas is like Jesus.

Decent enough guy, but his fans suck sometimes.

[Chiyo_chichi]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

In the theatre, TPM had things like detail, film grain; on blu-ray, it does not.

And I must respectfully disagree with the other fellow who believes it's a million times better than a lot of other blus. Or, if it is, I don't own them/haven't seen them.

Can you explain by what you mean by "detail"? Watching the bd, when Maul pulls down his hood at the final battle, his horns stand out as being glued on. I never thought that when I saw it in theaters.

It's obviously not the best looking bd out there, which is a shame because it should be up there. Maybe its the best they could have done without doing a new master? Or as others have said, intentionally blurred it to fit with the others which is just bad "directing".

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by ObiTrentKenobi

NEW TOPIC PLEASE! NEW TOPIC PLEASE! NEW TOPIC PLEASE!

@haters;
if you people hate the movies so much - get off this thread!

@self-righteous
Lucas is not evil, unless by some account you can prove beyond any doubt that he has in fact committed an unforgiveable haneous crime worthy of making him "evil", by which I don't know what standards you are basing this upon anyways - so declare.

@transferbabies
Does the DNR'd Episode look better than the DVD transfer? BY FARRRRRR! So shut it. Is it perfect? probably not, but hey - look forward to 2 or 3 more bluray relases, hopefully with a non-dnr's episode 1

@UOTwackos
We just may have to suck it up eventually and live with the 2006 LE's: I've come to the realization that it may not happen again. But then again, we didn't expect it to happen pre-2006 either - it was a welcomed surprise! The UOT on the 2006 LE's look 100 times better than any of my VHS copies do, so i'm happy with them!

Let's end this conflict - and show the blurays some love instead of whining about every pixel and word of dialogue.

IF you hate the movies or bluray release so much - go make your own movies and come back to this thread and show us how pretty you are. I dare you.

END! End! End!

"Love everything Star Wars unconditionally and regardless of quality or personal taste. If you don't feel this way, you aren't allowed to speak.

Sincerely, a guy with a Star Wars name who is clearly objective about all this."

Did I miss anything?

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by tigertron

I'd love to see what your definition of good is. TPM isn't brilliant by any means because of the DNR, but its a million miles better than the DVD and better than alot of Blu-ray films out there. I'm hoping on a re-release at some point with a DNR-less TPM and an AOTC without the teal tint and softness; but for now we'll have to make do and its not a bad thing.

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.

The Big Lebowski.

Predator UHE.

Besides that, I can't think of any BD I've seen that TPM looks better than.

Then again, I don't own a lot of shitty BDs.

[tigertron]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.

The Big Lebowski.

Predator UHE.

Besides that, I can't think of any BD I've seen that TPM looks better than.

Then again, I don't own a lot of shitty BDs.

Just because something has been DNR'd, doesn't mean that it looks crap. Yes, fine detail has been lost and in some instances the characters do look waxy (Qui-Gon) but it scores top marks on clarity and there are some reference quality shots, so if you think that makes it only marginally better than the aforementioned titles then I'm shocked.

[El_Jay]

Originally Posted by tigertron

Just because something has been DNR'd, doesn't mean that it looks crap. Yes, fine detail has been lost and in some instances the characters do look waxy (Qui-Gon) but it scores top marks on clarity and there are some reference quality shots, so if you think that makes it only marginally better than the aforementioned titles then I'm shocked.

Yes, it does.

What's the point of high definition, higher resolution, if they smother the resolution and don't show fine detail?

"Top marks on clarity"? Wtf does that even mean? It lacks fine detail, yet it's "clear"?

Show me one "reference quality shot" in the whole 2 hour plus runtime. Good luck with that.

It is only marginally better than those titles. In fact, The Big Lebowski looks better than it.

[crazyBLUE]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

Yes, it does.

What's the point of high definition, higher resolution, if they smother the resolution and don't show fine detail?

"Top marks on clarity"? Wtf does that even mean? It lacks fine detail, yet it's "clear"?

Show me one "reference quality shot" in the whole 2 hour plus runtime. Good luck with that.

It is only marginally better than those titles. In fact, The Big Lebowski looks better than it.

I took these with my Dslr camera from my Projector screen & would call them reference quality.

[Jay444]

Originally Posted by El_Jay

Yes, it does.

What's the point of high definition, higher resolution, if they smother the resolution and don't show fine detail?

"Top marks on clarity"? Wtf does that even mean? It lacks fine detail, yet it's "clear"?

Show me one "reference quality shot" in the whole 2 hour plus runtime. Good luck with that.

It is only marginally better than those titles. In fact, The Big Lebowski looks better than it.

The actors look waxy, and there is no fine detail (hair looks terrible, almost like matted fur...lol). Jar Jar and Boss Nass look MUCH more cartoony than they did in the past as they have lost some detail (the moment Jar Jar is asked to be a general looks terrible imo). It is very bothersome as most spent $90+ on this set and one of the main offerings looks pretty poor. I was very excited to see TPM as they added an extra 8% to the picture, but it appears they killed it with the DNR.

Maybe its just personal preference about the DNR, I don't know. To me TPM looks terrible.

On a side note, I watched ANH last night and its pretty amazing to see some of Mark Hammil and Harrison Ford's make up had smeared on the storm trooper uniforms they stole (watch the scene when Luke is trying to convince Han to save the Princess, and look at the breast plates just beneath their necks..lol). I found that kind funny.

[Charon]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

Which you could say about any blu, working from a 35mm source, that's not an absolute abomination. And TPM had an extra advantage going in, namely that the DVD was such crap to begin with, as other comments have noted, we should have been blown away -- even if it had been mediocre.

In the theatre, TPM had things like detail, film grain; on blu-ray, it does not.

And I must respectfully disagree with the other fellow who believes it's a million times better than a lot of other blus. Or, if it is, I don't own them/haven't seen them.

I was expecting the worst considering all the scrutiny, but I think it looks fine. I personally wouldn't be bothered either way because I hate the prequels and try not to acknowledge their existence. From what I saw (to be fair, it wasn't much) and from the screenshots, both TPM and AOTC look great. There are worse looking blu-rays. Batman Begins comes to mind. TPM looked better than the theatrical FOTR transfer. Thankfully the OT looks superb. People are holding these films to a higher standard because it's Star Wars.

I can assure you that you did not see any detail in theaters not present on the blu. 90% of TPM was scanned into 2k Spirit DataScene scanners and downsampled to something like 1920x804 (it is anamorphic on the negative, filmed with anamorphic lens and also some shots were Vista Vision) where the CG was then applied. They basically used a digital intermediate before there was a term for such a thing. An internegative(s) was then created from the digital version from which the release prints were created. An interpositive was created from the internegative on a better film stock than the release prints. This interpositive was telecined and is the source for both the digital cinema and DVD releases. Sorry if I confused anybody.

Like with extended edition of FOTR, the remaining 10% of the film was scanned to create a 100% digital master. This master is the source of the blu-ray and the upcoming 3D conversion.

What you saw in theaters was a generation removed from what is on blu-ray. You couldn't have seen any extra detail. The 90% 2k original would lose 1/3 of its resolution going from IN to RP and over 50% when projected. It was barely better than a DVD. You no doubt saw grain and people mistake grain for actual detail. It's pretty common. That and being under the illusion that a projected release print has an insanely high resolution just because the negative has a theoretical maximum insanely high resolution. (ignoring all the generation loss, the loss of detail when projected, the 2k DI, etc. in favor of blaming dim bulbs and lousy projectionists, not that they help though).

Reliance Entertainment (formerly Lowry Digital) lists TPM and even AOTC on their 'resume' of restored films. The Lowry process uses "Super Resolution" algorithms (combining details from adjacent frames) which also reduces grain and dirt. For those who want to watch it, TPM on blu-ray has never looked better. They would have to create new digital effects at a higher resolution, re-composite them onto a newly scanned film for it to look any better. Not going to happen.

All these reviews that talk of over-DNR remind me of the DVD era when they always spoke of edge enhancement completely oblivious to the fact that the majority of what they considered edge enhancement was MPEG2 compression 'ringing' and also the effect of 720 pixels being stretched to 854. Sure there are some badly DNR'd blus with the grain removed and waxy people but most of the time these reviewers are seeing films that had a 2k DI and are telecined from negatives rather than the digital version.

[crazyBLUE]

More reference pics I took. I don't see where they look waxy & plenty of fine detail is there...











I forgot one

[tigertron]

Thanks for the pics CrazyBlue. When I meant reference quality I was definatly referring to Darth Maul during dual of the fates, you can easily make out all the sweat on his face as hes about to fight the Jedi; now for something that has been DNR'd alot, thats pretty impressive.

Also, when I say TPM has alot of clarity, thats exactly what I mean - clarity. The film is pristine from any artifacts and dirt. Just because some fine detail has been lost as a result of DNR, it does not mean the film isn't clear and clean. The reviewer even acknowledges this "The main improvement here, aside from the obvious increase in clarity from standard definition, is that there's actually more of the image onscreen now."

Once again I'm restating that I don't think TPM is by any means perfect, but for a film with alot of DNR, it certainly doesn't look terrible.