Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[P@t_Mtl]

The Special Edition DVD set I have look great IMO. The first 2 prequels look meh IMO but Revenge look's very good.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by bpmford

We all know the prequil Trilogy will look much more crisp and new, while the original triligy will look gritty, grainy and a bit les sharp...

But I hold firm that that's okay, they aren't meant to look the same... as long a sLucas keeps each of them true to their time, then

I think that would be perfectly fitting. The PT was a prosperous and pristine era in the saga, so it should look slick and new. The OT is an oppressed era and should be rougher with grit and grain.

[serpheus]

Q. How many Blu-ray.com members does it take to change a lightbulb?
A. 100, 1 to change it and the other 99 to run off to start their own Star Wars thread.

[DMC86X]

Originally Posted by duckland23

I am wondering will this blu-ray set come out to this year ? .. I seen on the internet that there working on this as we speak right now . But was back on april 19 , 2010 . I didn't see anymore info on the set . its listed on amazon.com , but thats it . No further info is available on it , it don't tell you the release date or anything else . I also would not mind to see in DTS format instead on dolby digital for once . After all I think DTS sound way better than dolby Digital anyway .

wow

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

The Special Edition DVD set I have look great IMO. The first 2 prequels look meh IMO but Revenge look's very good.

What on earth could possibly be wrong with the look of AOTC??

I think it looks pretty perfect for a DVD.

Please enlighten me with your infinite wisdom!

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

I think that would be perfectly fitting. The PT was a prosperous and pristine era in the saga, so it should look slick and new. The OT is an oppressed era and should be rougher with grit and grain.

Yeah, makes sense, but I don't need the gritty look, as the set design and costumes tell us that already, so I would still prefer popping colors and ture blacks etc..

[Mahatma]

Originally Posted by bpmford

We all know the prequil Trilogy will look much more crisp and new, while the original triligy will look gritty, grainy and a bit les sharp...

But I hold firm that that's okay, they aren't meant to look the same... as long a sLucas keeps each of them true to their time, then

I'm not so sure.Saw the rewamped OT in cinemas in the 90's and they looked damned good to me.

[MarekM]

Originally Posted by Mahatma

I'm not so sure.Saw the rewamped OT in cinemas in the 90's and they looked damned good to me.

+1 they were very very good

Marek

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by Bluyoda

The purists will never ever be satisfied! Never!

Sure we will. If he just gave us the originals in their original state, then I would be happy, and many with me. How can Lucas claim the SE's are what his vision was, when the DVDs were different from those versions?

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Bluyoda

What on earth could possibly be wrong with the look of AOTC??

I think it looks pretty perfect for a DVD.

Please enlighten me with your infinite wisdom!

I find both Phantom & Attack to be off in PQ. They almost seem at time to be just a slight edge over a VHS. They just don't look very sharp IMO

[Chiyo_chichi]

I wonder if George will make any other big adjustments for this release. I remember hearing he was going to do small stuff like blue-ify the white lightsaber when Luke trains on the Falcon.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by TheOneWithThePrize

So? The DVDs are still compressed. They could, and should, do them justice were they to issue these on BD.



... *sigh* again, the case in point was that surround sound existed before he was in diapers and Star Wars offered it and not just mere 2 channels.

Yes, but mono surround sound. Stereo surround did not happen until some test footage on Superman and then officially for 70mm prints of Apocalypse Now. In 35mm, it didn't happen until the introduction of DTS and Dolby Digital.

So sure, you could start from those 6-track mixes (which were actually no different than the 4-track raw mixes for Dolby Optical 35mm, except that low frequencies were sent to channels 2 and 4 for the "baby booms"), but you'd still have to remix if you wanted the stereo surround, which is important for localization of fly-overs and the like.

Even the old Todd-AO (and other similar) format 70mm releases like Sound of Music, West Side Story, Oklahoma, etc. were all mono surround as was the earlier 35mm magnetic Cinemascope.

[aox]

Originally Posted by KubrickFan

Sure we will. If he just gave us the originals in their original state, then I would be happy, and many with me.

He did in 2004. He didn't even touch them. He just put them out the way they were. The purists cried even more.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by aox

He did in 2004. He didn't even touch them. He just put them out the way they were. The purists cried even more.

Have you never heard of anamorphic???????


.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Have you never heard of anamorphic???????

Anamorphic would have required complete a new transfer.

[aox]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Have you never heard of anamorphic???????


.

so, the purists don't want the originals. I see. Lucas gave you guys what you wanted. He didn't know he was supposed to tweak the sound and audio on 30 year old films for 21st century specifications.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Anamorphic would have required complete a new transfer.

Riiiiiiiiight.


.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by aox

so, the purists don't want the originals. I see. Lucas gave you guys what you wanted. He didn't know he was supposed to tweak the sound and audio on 30 year old films for 21st century specifications.

And don't forget the HD TVs.


.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Riiiiiiiiight.

Well, shows what you know about video and transfers (as if we need more evidence).

Anamorphic DVDs are converted from 16x9 video masters, usually transferred in HD and downconverted to 480i.

The *original* (non-SE) Star Wars Trilogy did not have 16x9 masters. The last time it was transferred to NTSC digital masters at 4x3 in 1993 for LaserDisc. And it was from those the DVD "extras" were mastered. The next time the movies were transferred it was the Special Edition versions.

Getting the picture (so to speak) yet?

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Well, shows what you know about video and transfers (as if we need more evidence).

Anamorphic DVDs are converted from 16x9 video masters, usually transferred in HD and downconverted to 480i.

The *original* (non-SE) Star Wars Trilogy did not have 16x9 masters. The last time it was transferred to NTSC digital masters at 4x3 in 1993 for LaserDisc. And it was from those the DVD "extras" were mastered. The next time the movies were transferred it was the Special Edition versions.

Getting the picture (so to speak) yet?

This is just nitpicking, honestly. You know what I meant by that. Scanning in the film itself is standard practice, using a decade old master used for Laserdisc, of all things, isn't. I think he just chose the worst versions available just to prove his point. Unless you believe the originals are really gone .

[dcowboy7]

Originally Posted by KubrickFan

This is just nitpicking, honestly.

Honestly, who throws a shoe ?