Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[DCW]

I agree. I've got bootleg versions of the '97 special editions on DVD that I just flipped through the other day for ***** and giggles. It's bad (ANH Jabba, Greedo shooting first, Jabba's dance number in Jedi etc.) but at least Vader doesn't yell "NO!" and Shaw is still at the end of Jedi.

I've set myself up for disappointment again as I'm now hoping that by some miracle Disney will release the unaltered trilogy when The Force Awakens get released on blu ray.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by Scarface32

The 2004 cut replaces Shaw as Anakin at the end of Jedi, he's in the 1997 cut. That alone is enough to say keep the 1997 cut and throw out the 2004 cut.

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I disagree as Shaw is included in the original theatrical cut already.

Originally Posted by Nocturnaloner

I was just poking a stick into the usual ant hive of geek-fighting.

Originally Posted by Scarface32

What does that have to do with preferring one Special Edition over another? What I'm saying is, if it's a contest between the 1997 SE or the 2004 SE, I'll pick the one that doesn't replace Shaw.

These are my people.

[Machine Gun Willy]

[damingraham]

So i looked through the first page and couldn't find my answer.

Which release Contains the Original Theatrical Versions?.

This is the definitive edition that most sought after right?

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by damingraham

So i looked through the first page and couldn't find my answer.

Which release Contains the Original Theatrical Versions?.

This is the definitive edition that most sought after right?

If you like bad CGI inserts and changes that make no sense the blu-rays are the definitive versions. If you don't then tough sh*t.

[damingraham]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

If you like bad CGI inserts and changes that make no sense the blu-rays are the definitive versions. If you don't then tough sh*t.

Very insightful?

So what i cyphered from that was maybe get the dvd releases because we don't care about picture quality here at blu-ray.com just the rest of the stuff?


So NONE of the bluray releases are the sought after original releases?

[MechaGodzilla]

Originally Posted by damingraham

Very insightful?

So what i cyphered from that was maybe get the dvd releases because we don't care about picture quality here at blu-ray.com just the rest of the stuff?


So NONE of the bluray releases are the sought after original releases?

Only the 2011 cuts, which are the latest (and probably last) versions of the Special Editions (some further changes and additions from the '97 and '04 versions) are available on Blu-ray. If you want the theatrical cuts, or even the earlier SEs, you'll have to wait and hope they'll be released eventually.

[Blu-21]

Originally Posted by damingraham

Very insightful?

So what i cyphered from that was maybe get the dvd releases because we don't care about picture quality here at blu-ray.com just the rest of the stuff?


So NONE of the bluray releases are the sought after original releases?

The theatrical cuts are available in letterbox widescreen on LD and DVD, and the '97 SE of the 3 films are in letterbox widescreen on LD. That's as good as it gets when it comes to physical media releases to date

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by svenge

I called a dude a liar because he made unsubstantiated claims that the internet somehow converted several people he knows against the PT

How's he supposed to "substantitate" that claim? Is he supposed to get them to sign sworn statements to that effect in a lawyer's office, or something? Should a camera crew from the local news station be present?

Why would he lie about it? What does he possibly stand to gain? I've seen internet posts where individuals admit to the same thing. Do you presume those people were also lying? To what end?

Remember, we're talking about - in your own words - "several people". Not teeming multitudes. Which position looks more desperate, incredible and unreasonable? The claim that several people changed their stance because of the internet bandwagon, or the position that this could not possibly have happened to anyone ever, not even once?

[Scarface32]

Originally Posted by damingraham

So i looked through the first page and couldn't find my answer.

Which release Contains the Original Theatrical Versions?.

This is the definitive edition that most sought after right?

The only release with the UOT is the 2006 DVDs*, but the quality isn't very good. It's a non-anamorphic 4:3 picture, so pillarboxing as well as letterboxing.

*Also released on LaserDisc and VHS.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Scarface32

The only release with the UOT is the 2006 DVDs*, but the quality isn't very good. It's a non-anamorphic 4:3 picture, so pillarboxing as well as letterboxing.

*Also released on LaserDisc and VHS.

It should also be noted that the ones on the 2006 DVDs are identical to the LD releases as the same source was used.

[hasslein]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

It should also be noted that the ones on the 2006 DVDs are identical to the LD releases as the same source was used.

Except all laserdiscs had A New Hope in opening crawl...

Are we allowed to mention Harmy?

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Arawn

Why would he lie about it? What does he possibly stand to gain?

He doesn't necessarily have to be lying. He could simply be exaggerating or mischaracterizing. And he could be full of shit and believe every word he's saying.

For example, people will still occasionally trot out the whole 'Lucas raped/ruined my childhood' strawman. They believe people say this. When challenged, they of course can never point to anybody who actually says 'Lucas raped/ruined my childhood' but that doesn't shake in the slightest their faith in the truth of what they're saying.

Originally Posted by Arawn

I've seen internet posts where individuals admit to the same thing. Do you presume those people were also lying? To what end?

I have no way of knowing if those people were lying because I don't know what they said. All I have to go on is your characterization of what they said. You're the guy who says he heard the story from somebody who was there. Whether those were actually there or not is anybody's guess.

And no, I'm not accusing you of lying about what these people did or didn't say. I'm simply expressing a reluctance to take at face value your characterization of what they've said.

For instance, you say you know somebody who saw TPM 9 times and now bashes the prequels whenever he gets the chance. The clear implication here is that your friend/acquaintance was browbeaten by the internet into changing his or her opinion of movies (or at least a movie) he or she previously liked.

But what does your friend say about his or her change of heart? Does your friend say 'I hate the prequels because the internet told me to' or is that simply your interpretation?

Originally Posted by Arawn

Remember, we're talking about - in your own words - "several people". Not teeming multitudes. Which position looks more desperate, incredible and unreasonable? The claim that several people changed their stance because of the internet bandwagon, or the position that this could not possibly have happened to anyone ever, not even once?

Nobody has said that the 'internet bandwagon' has never changed a single person's mind about the prequels. For my money, I have no doubt people like that exist but I find it a little hard to believe that Panama Jack personally knows several of them.

Again, it's a lot like the 'Lucas raped/ruined my childhood' thing. Over the past couple decades somebody somewhere has probably sincerely and seriously said 'Lucas raped/ruined my childhood' but the people who say 'oh yeah, you see that all the time' are still full of shit.

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by octagon

For example, people will still occasionally trot out the whole 'Lucas raped/ruined my childhood' strawman.

Let's face it, some of those childhoods were asking for it. Did you see what they were wearing?

Originally Posted by octagon

I find it a little hard to believe that Panama Jack personally knows several of them.

[stvn1974]

Lucas didn't rape any childhoods, he did ruin Star Wars, however.

[motorheadache95]

I went ahead and picked up the steel books of the original trilogy. I avoided buying these versions of the OT up to this point, but I really love that packaging. It reminded me of getting my first copies of the trilogy on VHS, which was that 1995 "faces" release.

Plus at this point we know these are Lucas' final versions, since Star Wars is (thankfully) now out of his hands. So no more OCD tinkering in any future release. So I kind of see these versions as half the "George Lucas Saga," whereas the UOT I would think of as completely standalone just like it was back in the day.

These discs ain't gonna get much play once Disney releases that UOT 4K restoration, but I'll keep them anyway as "curiosities" in the history of the Star Wars films.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by Scarface32

What does that have to do with preferring one Special Edition over another? What I'm saying is, if it's a contest between the 1997 SE or the 2004 SE, I'll pick the one that doesn't replace Shaw.

At this point I'd be pretty indifferent to Disney re-releasing the 1997 versions along with the UOT. For me it would be like how I have the option to watch the 1992 Director's Cut version of Blade Runner in my set. Cool that it's there for posterity, I guess, but I pretty much just watch the Final Cut or watch the theatrical version for the completely different experience.

For Star Wars I'm pretty much in the same place-- I'd watch the UOT 90% of the time, but if I occasionally wanted to revisit the Lucas altered versions, I'd just go balls out and watch the "Complete Saga" Blu-rays to see the movies in all their ridiculously wonky glory.

[happydood]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

I went ahead and picked up the steel books of the original trilogy. I avoided buying these versions of the OT up to this point, but I really love that packaging. It reminded me of getting my first copies of the trilogy on VHS, which was that 1995 "faces" release.

Plus at this point we know these are Lucas' final versions, since Star Wars is (thankfully) now out of his hands. So no more OCD tinkering in any future release. So I kind of see these versions as half the "George Lucas Saga," whereas the UOT I would think of as completely standalone just like it was back in the day.

These discs ain't gonna get much play once Disney releases that UOT 4K restoration, but I'll keep them anyway as "curiosities" in the history of the Star Wars films.

Maybe once the originals are finally released (a thing I'm ALL for btw) people will maybe stop treating Lucas like an abusive father and enjoy what he created for what it is minus a whole heap of unnecessary drama that treats him like an idiot savant that got lucky to happen upon a whole mythology that he crafted over several years. I would think film purists would want the originals (again which I'm all for) but also be respectful of the artists' intentions- however misguided. I don't like most of the changes Lucas made to the original incarnations of these movies, but I like the entitled approach of 'It's my right to have the versions I want the way that want them, so let's wrest them away from him like he's a senile grandpa' even less.

[svenge]

Originally Posted by happydood

I don't like most of the changes Lucas made to the original incarnations of these movies, but I like the entitled approach of 'It's my right to have the versions I want the way that want them, so let's wrest them away from him like he's a senile grandpa' even less.

With all due respect to what he did in the 70s and 80s, Lucas did become the cinematic equivalent of a 90-year-old with full-on cataracts and limited cognitive abilities behind the wheel of his Lincoln Town Car after that.

I can accept him making bad films in an existing series long after the good films were made (e.g. Indiana Jones / Crystal Skull), but retroactively degrading already-existing and much-beloved films in a half-assed attempt to tie into those subsequent cinematic abortions (e.g. the SE changes) is beyond the pale.

We're just lucky that Spielberg had enough respect from Lucas that the original Indiana Jones films didn't get "Special Editions" themselves.

[dubious]

Spielberg did give E.T. that abomination of a special edition, but he later came to his senses, and disowned it, citing the theatrical as his preferred vision.