Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[Beast]

Other than many of the points being inaccurate or flawed. Especially Pro-UOT #2.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by Beast

Other than many of the points being inaccurate or flawed. Especially Pro-UOT #2.

lol

You've learned well Beast.

Re-editing your master's history.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by Beast

Other than many of the points being inaccurate or flawed. Especially Pro-UOT #2.

But that's the argument-- I'm not saying what has merit or what doesn't. These are all the basic points I can think of from both sides of the argument, which has gone on for years now. Pretty much every possible argument has been said 100 times over by now.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by octagon

So stop clicking it.

Our bickering isn't likely to break the internet so why care?

Moderator:

Originally Posted by Beta Man

If you only want to bicker, turn off your computers.

[kenkraly2004]

This bickering is pointless.

[Uxi]

Originally Posted by Beast

Other than many of the points being inaccurate or flawed. Especially Pro-UOT #2.

Indeed. #3 is pretty subjective, too. #4 has an issue with the strings and obvious flaws, as well.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by kenkraly2004

This bickering is pointless.

Now Lord Vader will provide us with the location of the Rebels' hidden fortress by the time this station is operational. We will then crush the rebellion in one swift stroke!

[kenkraly2004]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Now Lord Vader will provide us with the location of the Rebels' hidden fortress by the time this station is operational. We will then crush the rebellion in one swift stroke!

Very fun quoting the movies so many great lines. Star Wars has so many good lines in the films.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

The point is that if you don't watch the prequels before Jedi, the conclusion loses it's emotional catharsis because you weren't following the prequel trilogy with young Anakin beforehand. So when Hayden appears it doesn't work (in my opinion, of course).

Well..that's a good point and another reason why Lucas was wrong for changing Anakin at the end of ROTJ. Others have pointed out other reasons (why is Obi-Wan old and Anakin young?) in previous discussions. (I originally thought it wasn't a big deal, but everyone convinced me otherwise.)

But if Lucas made that change because he thinks that most people will now watch strictly in episode order, I think he's made a big mistake because IMO, the story works far better seeing the OT first. If you watch the PT first, you don't wonder why V

[Show spoiler]ader is the way he is and you lose the surprise of Vader telling Luke that he's his father because you already know it.

IMO, that's the biggest moment of all six films. You also already know that

[Show spoiler]Luke and Leia are siblings.

All these great moments get destroyed. That's okay for those who have seen these films six million times already, but it's not okay for those new to the series.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by kenkraly2004

Very fun quoting the movies so many great lines. Star Wars has so many good lines in the films.

Lotta catchphrases in the first film alone:

I've got a bad feeling about this.

That's no moon. It's a space station.

I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Use the force Luke!

Let the Wookie win.

And that's just off the top of my head.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Well..that's a good point and another reason why Lucas was wrong for changing Anakin at the end of ROTJ. Others have pointed out other reasons (why is Obi-Wan old and Anakin young?) in previous discussions. (I originally thought it wasn't a big deal, but everyone convinced me otherwise.)

He wasn't "wrong", you simply don't agree with the change. The reasons for why it makes more sense having Anakin appear as he once did have been stated and restated numerous times. The change fits everything discussed by Yoda in ESB, and fits with Obi-Wan's "Point of View" of Anakin. There's more to it, but you can find the long posts about it elsewhere in the thread. So no need to go over it again.

But if Lucas made that change because he thinks that most people will now watch strictly in episode order, I think he's made a big mistake because IMO, the story works far better seeing the OT first. If you watch the PT first, you don't wonder why V

[Show spoiler]ader is the way he is and you lose the surprise of Vader telling Luke that he's his father because you already know it.

IMO, that's the biggest moment of all six films. You also already know that

[Show spoiler]Luke and Leia are siblings.

All these great moments get destroyed. That's okay for those who have seen these films six million times already, but it's not okay for those new to the series.

No. He made the change to get rid of Humpty Dumpty's corpse and replace him with the ghost of Anakin Skywalker. And as noted above, it fits what both Yoda and Obi-Wan tell Luke in ESB and RotJ. Also, the Audio Commentary for Return of the Jedi details it pretty well from Lucas' standpoint.

As for the Vader = Anakin Skywalker and "I am your father" reveal in ESB and the Luke/Leia sibling thing, both are so ingrained in the pop culture, that the only real change is that you shift the shock of the reveals from the viewer to the characters. They still retain their power. It's just no longer a cheap shock reveal, but one where you feel for the characters as they react when they learn the truth.

[OdyM]

[Rizor]

What are those images from? I imagine a new Star Tours given the Disney copyright.

The Hoth shot looks good and I'd actually be OK with Lucas redoing all the special effects in the OT with CGI...just as long as he gives us the original version in HD as well.

[BMM]

Originally Posted by OdyM

That picture is awesome.

[OdyM]

Originally Posted by Rizor

What are those images from?

From sw.com. You can see here: Disney startours

[kamphausd1]

Originally Posted by Beast

He wasn't "wrong", you simply don't agree with the change. The reasons for why it makes more sense having Anakin appear as he once did have been stated and restated numerous times. The change fits everything discussed by Yoda in ESB, and fits with Obi-Wan's "Point of View" of Anakin. There's more to it, but you can find the long posts about it elsewhere in the thread. So no need to go over it again.

What would fit better with what Yoda had discussed in ESB would be for Anakin to become one with the light side of the force and appear as the man he would've become had he been a Jedi all his life and never turned to the dark side, which is exactly what happened in the original version. Why the hell should he turn back into the whiny, annoying and murderous little ***** that he was as a young man? I mean yeah, I understand everything Yoda was saying in Empire, but why does that mean he should turn back into that particular form? Especially since he became Anakin Skywalker again before he died. It's your opinion I guess, but the original way just feels much more fitting, particularly because that was a form that Luke could recognize much better.

Originally Posted by Beast

No. He made the change to get rid of Humpty Dumpty's corpse and replace him with the ghost of Anakin Skywalker. And as noted above, it fits what both Yoda and Obi-Wan tell Luke in ESB and RotJ. Also, the Audio Commentary for Return of the Jedi details it pretty well from Lucas' standpoint.

Okay seriously, what is it with you and this "Humpty Dumpty" crap? It wasn't funny or amusing the first several times you used it, and now it's just beyond irritating. And if having Anakin's spirit appear as that of a young man in his early to mid twenties truly completes Lucas' vision, it's funny how he didn't have a young actor play Anakin originally in 1983 and just have him made up to look older for the helmet reveal scene.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by Uxi

Indeed. #3 is pretty subjective, too. #4 has an issue with the strings and obvious flaws, as well.

Just to make clear, my post was a list of all the arguments used from both sides, not my personal take on anything. You'll notice that the points from either side contradict each other.

The idea was to point out that the same arguments are being used over and over so people would stop posting them. I personally prefer the UOT, but recognize the fact that years of arguing the same points on various message boards do not really accomplish anything.

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by Imrahil2001

Yeah, that's a really inept analogy, because underpaintings aren't exhibited as finalized works. The Star Wars trilogy was.

Yeah. If I were the Academy, I'd have been pretty miffed about the "workprint" garbage - "workprints" don't get nominated for Academy Awards.

Thankfully he has stopped with that absurdity and is now referring to them as the "classic" editions.

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

He cut the negatives for the SE's. That's what the OP was saying.

That is correct. The original negatives were destroyed in the making of the SE, because there was not the digital scanning tech we have today. Basically, he should have done this SE thing now, and not fifteen years ago - the CGI, and digital scanning, simply were not advanced enough to do what he was trying to do. That's why it looks like cartoons inserted over film - because that's exactly what they were.

In fact, some frames of Star Wars in the original negative are lost - forever. In order to splice film (which is what they did, they literally cut it into pieces) you need to lose a frame on either side of the cut. So it might not be apparently noticeable, but each cut that was made lost a frame on either side. Those frames are lost forever now from the original print, no matter what.

There is an excellent article here about the current state of those negatives and the process that got them to where they are today :

http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html

[nametag]

Originally Posted by BillieCassin

There is an excellent article here about the current state of those negatives and the process that got them to where they are today :

http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html

Really informative article, thanks!

Though it makes me worry how good the Blu-ray will look, even in its Special Edition incarnation...

[danny_boy]

Originally Posted by nametag

Really informative article, thanks!

Though it makes me worry how good the Blu-ray will look, even in its Special Edition incarnation...

It will look better than it ever did in the theatre in 1977,78',79',81' or 85'.

The degradation of the photochemichal/emulsion workflow that is involved in releasing prints to cinemas is the reason why Lucas shot digitally for the prequals.

You can see a video of a screening of an original 1977/81 IB technicolour print of Star Wars that was held at the Senator theater in Baltimore last summer.
Notice the amount of dirt specks and the pink shift of the colour(this could also be due to the film's age) .

YouTube - The Senator Theater's Last Night

This is roughly how audiences would have experienced the film in 1977.

I don't think that will be a problem afflicting the blu rays.