Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[hanshotfirst1138]

Originally Posted by Roonan

You won't get an official public statement on the matter. What we got is enough to know that George is still the one who gets to decide what versions are released. Both Pablo Hidalgo and Kathleen Kennedy have spoken that nobody touches Lucas's movies but Lucas himself.

But if people want to continue to expect for a release that's not going to happen, it's their choice.

There’s rather a difference between expecting it and wanting it.

[bobbyh64]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

When did I say otherwise?? My point is countless people refer to the KK interview as proof the OUT is never being released again when there’s basically no mention of the OUT in the interview. It just confirms there’s no plans to further alter the films. Providing the OUT along with Lucas’ “intended” versions is not “altering” the films. And before I get slammed I have zero hope for a OUT release in any capacity. That forever ended for me with the release of the Skywalker Saga set.

Yeah, the Kathleen Kennedy clip isn’t proof that the unaltered OT won’t ever be released; it’s proof that the special editions won’t ever turn into specialer editions.

[crissrudd4554]

Originally Posted by Roonan

Yes, it is. It's altering the movies to a previous state that the creator doesn't want.

Hi George.

Not if both are included together. How is that altering??? No one’s asking for his preferred version to be taken away. I’M missing the point??? Furthermore technically you’re arguing about something that had nothing to do with my initial argument in the first place.

[bobbyh64]

Originally Posted by steel_breeze

So true. The original trilogy went from being the absolute pinnacle of one type of effects technology to the friggin' stone age of another effects technology. Cinematic tragedy.

Very nicely put. This quote should be plastered everywhere.

[happydood]

Originally Posted by The Fallen Deity

Yeah it's a shame. If the DNR and EE wasn't there, they'd look perfect imo.

I have the 2019 BD's that I scored off of Ebay before I got a UHD player. Now I was thinking of picking up the UHD's and paying the blu's forward. Am I better off with the blu's? Is the DNR more pronounced on the UHD's? These things keep me up at night.

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by Neon Rabbit

The ultimate irony of the whole situation is that George Lucas pioneered the very kind of revisionism he tried to warn people about in front of congress in the 80s. The kind that defaces our cultural heritage. I don't think anyone had even attempted a level of revisionism on that high a magnitude until Lucas himself exercised it on his own work.

Even the hand full of black and white films that were colorized in the 80s were still made readily available in their original versions at the same time.

OH, this utter nonsense again! He was against people altering filmmakers' works of art.
He only changed his own, to which is fully entitled.
Don't you people understand the friggin' difference?

And yes, I know that he didn't officially direct TESB and ROTJ, but he was the maker nonetheless.

[Bluyoda]

Watched AOTC on Blu-ray on my OLED for the first time, and it looks pretty good. Sure, there are some pizelation problems in a couple of shots, and some macroblocking in the red in Palpatine's office, as well as the fireplace scene, and some shots have some posterization in the colours at times, but especially VFX shots gain some details that I had never noticed before, and look even more realistic. Although that may also have been due to the increased screen size. I wish thez had never applied that softening filter while shooting, but what's done is done. All in all, it's much more consistent and far less frustrating of an experience than TPM, and there is still plenty of detail, although close-ups rarely prove to be a revelation. I don't care what anybody else thinks, but this truly is my favourite SW movie, as I consider it the best mix of George's vision, bringing those Saturday matinee serials to live, infused with intriguing politics, and morals, and boundless fantasy.
I was itching to watch it again after enjoying Ray Harryhausens 'First Man in the Moon again', which features very primitive versions of George's Geonosians.
I don't believe I had never noticed the moving Mohawk on the Kaminoan before. Such a neat touch. Or the flexing muscles underneath Acklay's skin.
Anyway, picture quality: 3.75/5
AQ: 5/5
Film: 5/5

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by happydood

I have the 2019 BD's that I scored off of Ebay before I got a UHD player. Now I was thinking of picking up the UHD's and paying the blu's forward. Am I better off with the blu's? Is the DNR more pronounced on the UHD's? These things keep me up at night.

Nah the UHDs are the way to go.

The DNR is just as pronounced on them, but there's improvements in other areas.

[Jay G.]

Originally Posted by Bluyoda

OH, this utter nonsense again! He was against people altering filmmakers' works of art.
He only changed his own, to which is fully entitled.

He's entitled to change his own work, not to suppress the original version though.

His speech made it clear that, as a member of society, we're entitled to protect our cultural heritage:
http://www.forcematerial.com/home/20...altering-films

I am not here today as a writer-director, or as a producer, or as the chairman of a corporation. I've come as a citizen of what I believe to be a great society that is in need of a moral anchor to help define and protect its intellectual and cultural heritage. It is not being protected....

A copyright is held in trust by its owner until it ultimately reverts to public domain. American works of art belong to the American public; they are part of our cultural history...

...Tommorrow, more advanced technology will be able to replace actors with "fresher faces," or alter dialogue and change the movement of the actor's lips to match. It will soon be possible to create a new "original" negative with whatever changes or alterations the copyright holder of the moment desires. The copyright holders, so far, have not been completely diligent in preserving the original negatives of films they control. In order to reconstruct old negatives, many archivists have had to go to Eastern bloc countries where American films have been better preserved.

In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be "replaced" by new altered negatives. This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten.

...The public's interest is ultimately dominant over all other interests. And the proof of that is that even a copyright law only permits the creators and their estate a limited amount of time to enjoy the economic fruits of that work.

...Attention should be paid to the interest of those who are yet unborn, who should be able to see this generation as it saw itself, and the past generation as it saw itself.

Other filmmakers deal with this situation with far more grace. Ridley Scott has fiddled with Blade Runner twice since its theatrical release (Director's Cut and Final Cut), but not only allows the original theatrical versions to be available, but also put out a workprint cut, something unfinished and never intended to be seen, on home video.

Terry Gilliam has a Final Director's Cut on Criterion Blu-ray, but there's also the US version and European version on spearate Blu-ray releases, and the Criterion release also includes even the director-[b]un[b/]approved "Love Conquers All" TV edit.

While most films don't have 5 versions on home video, It's really not at all uncommon for a Directors/Unrated/Extended cut to be accompanied with the original theatrical version, or at least the original version available on a separate release.

And directors aren't infallible, even with their own works. Spielberg altered ET, then realized he made a mistake:
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...142746809.html

"For myself, I tried [changing a film] once and lived to regret it. Not because of fan outrage, but because I was disappointed in myself. I got overly sensitive to [some of the reaction] to E.T., and I thought if technology evolved, [I might go in and change some things]…it was OK for a while, but I realized what I had done was I had robbed people who loved E.T. of their memories of E.T. [...] If I put just one cut of E.T. on Blu-ray and it was the 1982, would anyone object to that? [The crowd yells "NO!" in unison.] OK, so be it."

The people that want the unaltered versions of the original Star Wars Trilogy (at least, a pre 1997 SE version) aren't saying that's the only version that should be out on home video, or that Lucas's 4x revised versions can't be available too. We just want a quality version of the original versions of these films, the versions a generation grew up watching, which won SFX awards for the original work, not the CGI reworkings, etc. They're part of our cultural heritage and are in demand by a portion of the public.

[hanshotfirst1138]

Or, if Lucas really believes that the so-called Special Editions are superior, he could put his money where his mouth is and let viewers decided which version they prefer, but I don’t think his fragile ego could handle the fact that many prefer the originals.

[Narcissus]

Originally Posted by hanshotfirst1138

Or, if Lucas really believes that the so-called Special Editions are superior, he could put his money where his mouth is and let viewers decided which version they prefer, but I don’t think his fragile ego could handle the fact that many prefer the originals.

More importantly, he would fully expose how much he RapeConned the OTC in order to make it fit his "ultimate vision".

[crissrudd4554]

Or how apparently the SE meaning the 1997 SE was his “definitive versions” yet even those versions haven’t been available in nearly 20 years.

[Bn43]

Considering how processed the UHDs look, I don't really want official releases of the originals anymore anyway. I'm dead certain the colors in an unaltered trilogy set would still be revisionist and there would still be digital noise reduction and stuff. My collection will be complete with 4K80.

[Spooked]

Originally Posted by Bn43

Considering how processed the UHDs look, I don't really want official releases of the originals anymore anyway. I'm dead certain the colors in an unaltered trilogy set would still be revisionist and there would still be digital noise reduction and stuff. My collection will be complete with 4K80.

Dare I ask for a link where I can follow the progress on these? I'm currently using the Despecialized Editions as my go-to, but I'm kind of interested in seeing the differences...

[Neon Rabbit]

Originally Posted by Jay G.

The people that want the unaltered versions of the original Star Wars Trilogy (at least, a pre 1997 SE version) aren't saying that's the only version that should be out on home video, or that Lucas's 4x revised versions can't be available too. We just want a quality version of the original versions of these films, the versions a generation grew up watching, which won SFX awards for the original work, not the CGI reworkings, etc. They're part of our cultural heritage and are in demand by a portion of the public.

This is exactly what I mean. I don't understand the attitude from people who think this is an unreasonable thing for fans to ask for. What Lucas did with these films is a fairly unprecedented thing that I don't think any other filmmaker in history has ever done to this extent.

There may be a few films for which only one cut was available on a certain format for awhile like Blade Runner, but pretty much any other film besides Star Wars that has ever had any kind of major revisionism or re-editing is presently available in a high quality format alongside whatever version is now preferred by the filmmaker. I understand that Lucas is entitled to change his own work and I have no problem with that, what I do have a problem with is that he somehow gets a pass when it comes to his continuing suppression of any other version being available on any modern format.

I wouldn't care about his compulsion to incessantly change these films if the original cuts were available on the same format in the same quality like nearly ANY OTHER FILM this sort of thing happens to. As it is, We can't even get the same edit of these films from one format to the next because his 'vision' has constantly changed.

[buck135]

It doesn't matter anymore. 4K77, 4K83 and soon 4K80 are better than anything Disney will ever be willing to release. The window slammed shut the second Fox was acquired by the mouse.

[Bn43]

Originally Posted by Spooked

Dare I ask for a link where I can follow the progress on these? I'm currently using the Despecialized Editions as my go-to, but I'm kind of interested in seeing the differences...

I got that picture from the official page. I don't know of any site where you can really follow it.

https://www.thestarwarstrilogy.com/project-4k80/

Star Wars and Return of the Jedi are done, however. I recommend Star Wars 4K77 version 1.4 and 4K83 version 1.3.

[Bn43]

Originally Posted by Spooked

I'm kind of interested in seeing the differences...

I didn't pay attention to this part. If you just wanna compare it to Despecialized, I have some screenshots. You can find the minute and second at the end of each file name.

Star Wars: https://ibb.co/album/Gf98rL

Return of the Jedi: https://ibb.co/album/jyGVBJ

Pictures are about 11 megabytes each.

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by Jay G.

[Show spoiler]He's entitled to change his own work, not to suppress the original version though.

His speech made it clear that, as a member of society, we're entitled to protect our cultural heritage:
http://www.forcematerial.com/home/20...altering-films


Other filmmakers deal with this situation with far more grace. Ridley Scott has fiddled with Blade Runner twice since its theatrical release (Director's Cut and Final Cut), but not only allows the original theatrical versions to be available, but also put out a workprint cut, something unfinished and never intended to be seen, on home video.

Terry Gilliam has a Final Director's Cut on Criterion Blu-ray, but there's also the US version and European version on spearate Blu-ray releases, and the Criterion release also includes even the director-[b]un[b/]approved "Love Conquers All" TV edit.

While most films don't have 5 versions on home video, It's really not at all uncommon for a Directors/Unrated/Extended cut to be accompanied with the original theatrical version, or at least the original version available on a separate release.

And directors aren't infallible, even with their own works. Spielberg altered ET, then realized he made a mistake:
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...142746809.html


The people that want the unaltered versions of the original Star Wars Trilogy (at least, a pre 1997 SE version) aren't saying that's the only version that should be out on home video, or that Lucas's 4x revised versions can't be available too. We just want a quality version of the original versions of these films, the versions a generation grew up watching, which won SFX awards for the original work, not the CGI reworkings, etc. They're part of our cultural heritage and are in demand by a portion of the public.

He was clearly talking about copyright holders here, aka the studios, not the filmmakers themselves, so again, he is the creator, not the copyright holder. Big difference.

Look, would I want the UOT to be preserved and available to the public? Sure thing.
But I'd also like updated versions with truly awesome VFX in the highest possible quality, and a gorgeously filmic presentation of TPM and the OT, but that's obviously not going to happen.

I am a composer myself, and also remixed my first CD, re-recording some parts, including solos, for improved sound quality, and making it a discrete surround sound experience, and I'd change more, if I could, and it's certainly my right, even if a billion people had bought my original CD, as I am the creator.
Same here. It's pretty simple IMHO.

[hanshotfirst1138]

No one is disputing the fact that Lucas has the legal right to do what he does. That doesn’t mean anyone has to like it or can’t criticize him for it.