Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[STARKILLER--1138]

Originally Posted by frogmort

It's delicious! And it also makes you feel kinda funny. It turns all the backgrounds green and blue!

[STARKILLER--1138]

Originally Posted by Beast

No. It's called respecting the rights of the creator and the artist in this case.

I'm all about the artist having the rights to do with his work what he wants to.

So yeah, if Lucas doesn't want to put the time and money into restoring the old cuts and releasing them, I'm going to support that choice. Much like I'm going to support any creator in that area. The newest versions are far superior to the old cuts anyway, so no big loss on that.

Not to mention as has been noted numerous times, the original cuts can't be seemlessly branched, so they require a completely seperate BLU for each one. So that ups the disc count and the price of the set.

BTW, any idea when we are getting the next batch of GL kool-aid?

[Beast]

Originally Posted by STARKILLER--1138

BTW, any idea when we are getting the next batch of GL kool-aid?

Not sure. I think the next flavor is Gungan Grape. Mmmmmmmm, Bombad Grape.

[STARKILLER--1138]

Originally Posted by Beast

Not sure. I think the next flavor is Gungan Grape. Mmmmmmmm, Bombad Grape.

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Right on that.

One of my friends took his eight year old(I believe that was his age) to see RotS because he became a huge Star Wars fan due to the prequels being geared directly towards young children. So when he took him to see part III, they had to leave during the Emperor's 'Monster Mash' transformation scene as that was too much for him take, and then he ended up puking in bed later that night. And when he told me about this, I mentioned that they were lucky to get out of there before those later scenes showing major third degree burns.

Way to go there Mr. Lucas.

See below! I mean seriously!

Originally Posted by Silo5

They did put a PG-13 rating on it. You can't blame him if you don't follow the MPAA ratings.

Originally Posted by Beast

Not exactly. The murder of all those Jedi, especially children, probably played a part as well.

Let's not forget the beheading of Count Dooku, which made me gasp for air, and is still a shocking moment to say the least!
That's when you release that this time it's serious and tragic!

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

It's n not Lucas' fault your friend didn't adhere to the rating. So Lucas made a darker story. And? There is clearly a rating for a reason. A story about the fall of a hero, of course it was going to be dark. It's easily the darkest chapter of the whole saga. I just can't imagine anyone blaming Lucas because a kid got scared. If a movie is PG-13 and the kid is 8, then proceed with caution. It might be too intense for them. That's the point of the rating, so people know whats in the movie. Not to mention Star Wars isn't a kids movie, it's a family film I'd say, in line with the Indiana Jones films. Sure, Episode I might have been aimed a little bit more kids with Jar Jar, but Episode II wasn't at all, and neither are the rest of the movies. It's a family film, not a kids film. But really, adhere to ratings and it wouldn't happen. You can't blame Lucas for it at all.

Originally Posted by Duffy12

My beef with Lucas on this is that he drew in all these younger fans with poo-poo/fart jokes, Jar-Jar and a child actor in the first movie. And then for the second one we get another child actor(minor role though, but "get em daddy, get em" lines) along with a very juvenile love story and cartoon style violence. So for the final movie, he radically changes the style to a PG-13 rating which then excludes a large portion of the newer generation of fans that saw the first two movies.

'The Empire Strikes Back' was a dark movie and look at how excellent that one turned out to be. It just seems that George got very confused at what type of movies he was trying to make when he attempted to create these prequels.

Some people say that the two trilogies and not compatible together, but ironically the same might just be said for the first three prequels themselves.

Nonsense!

TPM has an innocent touch to it, because Anakin is a kid, and the Emperor hasn't taken over the galaxy yet.

AOTC has Anakin in turmoil, because of his loss, and his feelings for Padme, which he shouldn't have as a Jedi.

ROTS shows Anakin's downfall.

It's a perfectly natural progression, and if you want all movies to be the same then you have to watch LOTR, where there is 12 hours of mindless walking, and split personality.

Originally Posted by Duffy12

I guess whats kinda interesting in all of this is, that if you wanted to introduce pre or grade schoolers to these movies, you could show them all of them with the one exception being RotS.

AOTC where Anakin's arm is cut off isn't exactly too kid friendly either, is it?

SW isn't for pre-school kids.

I'd say 10 years-

You can show them The Clone Wars before the movies.

Originally Posted by Beast

Yeah, it upset and moved a number of people. Which means the scene worked as it was intended to.

Yep.

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Which also reminds me of way back in 1977 before I saw the movie, I started reading the novel but quit only after the first chapter. However from only that little bit that I had read and some of the pics in that novel, I assumed that Star Wars was a VERY dark movie, maybe even a R-rated one. And though I ended up loving the movie, I still wish that there was another darker R-rated version of it.

Maybe a re-boot can take care of that?

Duffy, it's clear to me that you are not a SW fan, because you want it to be sth. that it's not.

If you want re-boots and sequels than this must be paradise for you, as Hollywood apparently doesn't know anything else anymore.

Originally Posted by Beast

I don't see why a reboot is even necessary. There's no new direction to explore. I'm happy with the upcoming re-releases.

I can get at least another handful of The Phantom Menace viewings under my belt.

Yeah, me too. I have only seen it 15 times in the theater.

Actually, I doubt I'll go many times, as I hate going to the theater these days.

I am going to enjoy them on BD over and over and over again though.

Originally Posted by Beast

You do realize that the films were always intended to be more or less modern fairy tales for kiddies.

They never were meant to be serious films. Asking for that is ignoring what Star Wars is.

Agreed 10000000000%

Originally Posted by Duffy12

It sure as heck worked for 'Battlestar Galactica'.

Well, then watch Battlestar Galactica for crying out loud!

There are more then enough episodes.

That's why I love SW, because they have a certain innocence about them, especially the OT, but this is also why I love the PT, because it doesn't just repeat the same kind of stuff, but expands on the tone and thematic devices.

To me they are the most complete experiences ever put on screen!

Thank you George Lucas!

[Blu-man08]

Originally Posted by Beast

You mean that modern series that isn't even worthy to carry the name? Bleh.

Okay, I long had my suspicions, but this statement is irrefutable proof that you are completely out of your freaking mind. Wow. Just... wow.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Blu-man08

Okay, I long had my suspicions, but this statement is irrefutable proof that you are completely out of your freaking mind. Wow. Just... wow.

How can he be out of his mind?

Sorry but you comment is irrelevant. Beast is not the only person in the world to think that Galactica is a bad show. Just because someone does not like what you like doesn't make them crazy.

I do wonder about someone who seem to want everyone to have the same taste as him however

[JoshKelhoffer]

Originally Posted by Beast

If people want to watch those versions, they're available. Lucas hasn't sent Stormtroopers to destroy those LD, VHS, and DVD copies.

Yes, but they will stop making them. Eventually, real stores will stop selling them. You'll have to go buy a used, scratched up copy from a flea market

And who the hell wants to watch a dusty old laserdisc, vhs, or a crappy non-anamorphic transfer on a modern day television? That might fly on The Jedi Council Forums, but look at the top of the page, it says "blu ray"

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Beast

No. It's called respecting the rights of the creator and the artist in this case.

What about the respect to cinema and history?

Respect is a two way street and it isn't on Lucas Valley Road. I think we all respect GL's right to do what he wants but to ignore the important pieces of cinema history that are the original theatrical cuts and not make them available through the incredible technological advancement that blu-ray has over previous formats makes me feel deeply and profoundly sad....

[Blu-man08]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

How can he be out of his mind?

Sorry but you comment is irrelevant. Beast is not the only person in the world to think that Galactica is a bad show. Just because someone does not like what you like doesn't make them crazy.

I do wonder about someone who seem to want everyone to have the same taste as him however

I didn't say he's crazy. I said he's out of his freaking mind! For someone who shouts from the mountaintops about the creator's rights to alter his or her work, Beast's assertion that the re-imagined Galactica shouldn't bear the name of the original smacks of hypocrisy. Maybe Beast forgot or didn't know that Glenn A. Larson signed off on the new Galactica. Leaving personal taste aside, Beast is clearly cherry picking what works of art can be altered by their creators. Beast's post read like one of the Classic Trilogy defenders who are often on the receiving end of his ire.

[IndefinentBlu]

I wonder when we will start hearing any new info on the blu-ray release??

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by indefinentnj

I wonder when we will start hearing any new info on the blu-ray release??

I don't know. Comic-con? I'd prefer news sooner rather than later; this thread is getting out of control. Mods could make a living off a place like this

[miniroll32]

Film preservation? History? The "real" Star Wars? This is all typically out of control - almost to the same degree that "buffs" were giving Fantasia 1-Star reviews because less than 20 seconds of racism had been cut (which hasn't been released publicly since 1969).

First things first - The mythical "real" Star Wars (i.e those originally seen in theatres) came from O-Neg's that no longer exist in their original form. In the excellent essay by Michael Kaminski (2009), research will tell you that the these Negatives had shrunk and contained more than 20% colour dye loss. Back in the early 1990's (when the O-Negs where found in this state), the technology wasn't there like now to restore these film digitally as we can now. There was no 4K scanning, and even if they could, it was too costly and time effective.

Therefore, prepare for the Copy and Paste Wars, the 1997 Special Edition's in effect saved the Star Wars saga. Restorers dismantled the master negatives and washed them, since this was one of the most effective ways of cleaning the dirt. But through digitally enhancing only portions of the film that were in the worst condition, they could make cleaner cuts, and Lucas made additions that were previously not possible.

And who could blame him? This was 1993-1996; the technology was there, and he was keen to use it for the better. Had these Kodak film elements not been inspected back in the early 90's, goodness knows what kind of state it'd be in now. In fact, I would almost encourage that the Special Editions have their effects re-done, since they weren't rendered in 4K back then.

"Han shot first"

Given Han is not a cold-blooded killer, I actually think this was a good edit. By having Greedo shooting first, there was a genuine reason for self defence, whereas having Han shoot first looks out of character as the film goes on.

Secondly, their is the issue of "this is the film I grew up with - its the real one".

Actually, many people grew up with the 1997 Special Editions. So to them, that is the real film, and they have every right to see that film as Lucas intended, restored on Blu-Ray. The sheer excitement of the 1997 Star Wars release is unforgettable, and the majority of friends were lucky to own this set on VHS, which to them, was a brand new experience. And later this year, a new generation of film fans - young and old - are going to see Star Wars for the first time, and that will be their special first experience.

If Lucas see's the Star Wars saga as an on-going project, then thats fine. But please, don't complain out of the sentimental 'boo-hoo' attitude. Just because technology has lent itself to the enhancement of a film does not justify a mass cull of arguments over what is right and what is now. Instead, be thankful we can finally see these films with a clarity and depth that was never thought possible even 10 years ago.

Be thankful too that the films contain essentially the same important elements; with the same actors, same music, same props, same locations. Technology may enhance how the film looks, but those vital elements mentioned formerly are what engage audiences.

[Jay444]

Originally Posted by Blu-man08

I didn't say he's crazy. I said he's out of his freaking mind! For someone who shouts from the mountaintops about the creator's rights to alter his or her work, Beast's assertion that the re-imagined Galactica shouldn't bear the name of the original smacks of hypocrisy. Maybe Beast forgot or didn't know that Glenn A. Larson signed off on the new Galactica. Leaving personal taste aside, Beast is clearly cherry picking what works of art can be altered by their creators. Beast's post read like one of the Classic Trilogy defenders who are often on the receiving end of his ire.

I was thinking the same exact thing. How can one say the Rebooted BSG shouldn't bear the name of the Battlestar Galatica but by the same token say the Star Wars OT (unaltered) bears no merit next to the Special Editions? Makes little to no sense. You can't have it both ways. I think maybe he was referring to his enjoyment of the series, but he phrased his feelings very much like a few here do in regards to OT vs. Altered OT. Kinda funny.

I will admit it took me a while to warm up to the rebooted BSG though. Then I found the subcontext of religion and politics to be quite fascinating. Very good series, just took a while to really get moving.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Jay444

I was thinking the same exact thing. How can one say the Rebooted BSG shouldn't bear the name of the Battlestar Galatica but by the same token say the Star Wars OT (unaltered) bears no merit next to the Special Editions? Makes little to no sense. You can't have it both ways. I think maybe he was referring to his enjoyment of the series, but he phrased his feelings very much like a few here do in regards to OT vs. Altered OT. Kinda funny.

I will admit it took me a while to warm up to the rebooted BSG though. Then I found the subcontext of religion and politics to be quite fascinating. Very good series, just took a while to really get moving.

Agreed on BSG - The wife and I loved the new show although I was very skeptical at first.

As for Star Wars - I would like to see the original OT included in the blu-ray set just for "completeness" reasons. I hate when "ultimate sets" come out and they lack something. The new Alien set is a great example of how to do it right. Sure, I hate the 3rd and 4th films but I appreciate that you get each film and each version of the films. Then, you get a boatload of extras. Perfect. Done.

Now, studios might thate the idea of completeness since now they cannot milk additional releases but at some point they have to realize its over. Just release the defacto set and be done with it.

Personally, other than the Greedo shoots first & the stoopid Jabba palace song in ROTJ, I have NO problem with the 1997 versions of the OT. Heck, I like them better. The cleaned up effects, better dogfights during the battle of Yavin, and various other new scenery makes them line up better and feel more attached to the prequels.

[Jay444]

[QUOTE=miniroll32;4441920]
"Han shot first"

Given Han is not a cold-blooded killer, I actually think this was a good edit. By having Greedo shooting first, there was a genuine reason for self defence, whereas having Han shoot first looks out of character as the film goes on.[QUOTE]

Han Solo has never shot first under any circumstances. Nope. Nothing to see here, move along, move along...

Please see 6:15 in the below video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8tGOjW10ls

Oh and 4:30 into the below video too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2FL1radLQE

Yup, Han Solo sure is noble. I guess he LEARNED from the Greedo experience to SHOOT first...LOL

[IndefinentBlu]

[QUOTE=Jay444;4442016][QUOTE=miniroll32;4441920]
"Han shot first"

Given Han is not a cold-blooded killer, I actually think this was a good edit. By having Greedo shooting first, there was a genuine reason for self defence, whereas having Han shoot first looks out of character as the film goes on.

Han Solo has never shot first under any circumstances. Nope. Nothing to see here, move along, move along...

Please see 6:15 in the below video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8tGOjW10ls

Oh and 4:30 into the below video too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2FL1radLQE

Yup, Han Solo sure is noble. I guess he LEARNED from the Greedo experience to SHOOT first...LOL

Please no more of the han shot first or else the idiot(JERSEYAL1976) will come back on here and bash us!

[Duffy12]

[QUOTE=Jay444;4442016][QUOTE=miniroll32;4441920]
"Han shot first"

Given Han is not a cold-blooded killer, I actually think this was a good edit. By having Greedo shooting first, there was a genuine reason for self defence, whereas having Han shoot first looks out of character as the film goes on.

Han Solo has never shot first under any circumstances. Nope. Nothing to see here, move along, move along...

Please see 6:15 in the below video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8tGOjW10ls

Oh and 4:30 into the below video too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2FL1radLQE

Yup, Han Solo sure is noble. I guess he LEARNED from the Greedo experience to SHOOT first...LOL

Jay444:


You do realize that they are changing those scenes for the upcoming BDs, right?


And here are a couple of examples that they have changed over so far. See the links right below-




Control Panel Shoots First



Trash Compactor Shoots First





Got to make EVERYTHING conform, correct?


.

[Jay444]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Agreed on BSG - The wife and I loved the new show although I was very skeptical at first.

As for Star Wars - I would like to see the original OT included in the blu-ray set just for "completeness" reasons. I hate when "ultimate sets" come out and they lack something. The new Alien set is a great example of how to do it right. Sure, I hate the 3rd and 4th films but I appreciate that you get each film and each version of the films. Then, you get a boatload of extras. Perfect. Done.

Now, studios might thate the idea of completeness since now they cannot milk additional releases but at some point they have to realize its over. Just release the defacto set and be done with it.

Personally, other than the Greedo shoots first & the stoopid Jabba palace song in ROTJ, I have NO problem with the 1997 versions of the OT. Heck, I like them better. The cleaned up effects, better dogfights during the battle of Yavin, and various other new scenery makes them line up better and feel more attached to the prequels.

I agree with you 100%. I have no problems with the special editions (just I don't buy a few of the claims as to why some of the changes were necessary though, as Greedo shooting first doesn't really work in any way, but whatever). I want them included for historical purposes and of course I would like to see a nice before and after thing in my own home under the best possible circumstances. They should be included so fans get the everything and the Lucas raping on the net finally comes to an end.

BSG was a great series, and I LOVED Dean Stockwell's character.

[Jay444]

[QUOTE=Duffy12;4442116][QUOTE=Jay444;4442016]

Originally Posted by miniroll32

"Han shot first"

Given Han is not a cold-blooded killer, I actually think this was a good edit. By having Greedo shooting first, there was a genuine reason for self defence, whereas having Han shoot first looks out of character as the film goes on.



Jay444-


You do realize that they are changing those scenes for the upcoming BDs, right?


And here is just one example that they have changed over so far. See the links right below-




Control Panel Shoots First



Trash Compactor Shoots First



Got to make EVERYTHING conform, correct?


.

LMAO! That is awesome. There is one with Vader shooting first too.