Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[marlon dingle]

Originally Posted by sxerunner

Except then 3 spoils the fact that Leia is Luke's sister...

This is true, it would have been better if in 3, Padme didn't name Leia. So in 4 and 5 you dont see Leia's parent's, so you wouldn't know for sure that Leia was Luke's sister. Even though all the clues would have been there, it wouldn't be confirmed until the 6th film.

[KeithBL]

Originally Posted by gregmasciola

Which is why I mentioned different packaging/cover art. People can spend their money however they want. I just think it's a bit crazy to spend twice the money just for better packaging (and even more crazy just to be a completist).

The main problem comes from the extra's only being included with the complete set. If they released a 4 disc prequel, and 5 disc OT set, this wouldn't be an issue. But I can totally understand someone wanting the complete set just for the extra's, and the two seperate sets or the superior packaging/playability without wear issues.

[earmullet]

Originally Posted by KeithBL

EVERYBODY regardless of whether they're a fan or not has known that Vader is Luke's father for 30 years. That spoiler ship has sailed. I vote for chronological order.

Damnit! I was holding off until the blu ray to watch them in order, you ruined for me

[AlexSing]

Originally Posted by marlon dingle

This is true, it would have been better if in 3, Padme didn't name Leia. So in 4 and 5 you dont see Leia's parent's, so you wouldn't know for sure that Leia was Luke's sister. Even though all the clues would have been there, it wouldn't be confirmed until the 6th film.

completely agree, I think the powers that be really didn't think that one through

[hipster.doofus7]

Originally Posted by marlon dingle

This is true, it would have been better if in 3, Padme didn't name Leia. So in 4 and 5 you dont see Leia's parent's, so you wouldn't know for sure that Leia was Luke's sister. Even though all the clues would have been there, it wouldn't be confirmed until the 6th film.

Meh. When watching in 4-5-1-2-3-6 order, it works out best if the Big Revelation about Leia happens at the end of Episode III. Think about it. Which has more dramatic impact for a new viewer: Finding out about Luke & Leia's relationship at the climax of Ep III... watching them born one after another? Or hearing about it second hand from the the ghost of old ben RotJ? Methinks the former is more effective. IMHO the Leia reveal in RotJ was not done very well. If you watched Ep 4 & 5 never realizing she was Luke's sister, then you witness their births at the end of 1,2,3... that'd be quite shocking. Especially since it was never even hinted in RotS that Padme was pregnant with twins. One baby comes out, and then unexpectedly... another one.

It also serves as a payoff at the end of a long flashback (1-2-3), to help tie it in with the events of the final movie (RotJ).

Another benefit of the 4-5-1-2-3-6 order is that the 4 strongest films serve as bookends for the entire saga. The weaker films (TPM, AotC) is sandwiched in between, which is the best way to do a narrative. Start strong and finish strong.

[Shaft Windu]

Originally Posted by phatrat1982

The big reveal is to the character not the audience, Luke's reaction and performance does not change because the viewer already knows before hand.

Watch them in any order you chose but I was just pointing out my reasoning.

Exactly! Episodes IV - VI are much more exciting when watched as sequels to the prequels. This "surprise-issue" is very overrated! I would rather trade a much deeper experience of the movies against one moment of surprise! And if you watch episodes IV - VI first you would spoil much more to a first-time-viewer... You'd already know that Obi-Wan survives E3, that the Emperor wins, that all the Jedi are getting killed and that Anakin would succumb to the dark side! That's much worse because it spoils parts of the narrative rather than two character-affiliations....

[Merlinpants]

aren't all these 'watch in this sequence' posts irrelevant?

The Star Wars Saga is the story of Darth Vader, his rise, his fall, his redemeption. Watching them in the order they are titled (i.e. 1-6) is the only way you can appreciate this journey and feel any empathy towards the main protaginist.

[Shaft Windu]

Originally Posted by Merlinpants

aren't all these 'watch in this sequence' posts irrelevant?

The Star Wars Saga is the story of Darth Vader, his rise, his fall, his redemeption. Watching them in the order they are titled (i.e. 1-6) is the only way you can appreciate this journey and feel any empathy towards the main protaginist.

You're absolutely right! I'm also a little taken aback by the problem too... The movies are numbered so it's not up to debate really. It seems watching the films out of sequence is only an issue to people who don't like the prequels and try to reduce them to footnotes or flashbacks!

[Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Shaft Windu

Exactly! Episodes IV - VI are much more exciting when watched as sequels to the prequels. This "surprise-issue" is very overrated! I would rather trade a much deeper experience of the movies against one moment of surprise! And if you watch episodes IV - VI first you would spoil much more to a first-time-viewer... You'd already know that Obi-Wan survives E3, that the Emperor wins, that all the Jedi are getting killed and that Anakin would succumb to the dark side! That's much worse because it spoils parts of the narrative rather than two character-affiliations....

As we have discussed there are no sequels in this series. You have an OT and a set of prequels. The prequels have diminshed TESB as a film. How can the suprise be overrated when everyone in the audience in 1980 was very suprised! Watching all six would be a no brainer at 456 then 123. The prequels are just footnotes in film history; sort of an after thought or a jee whiz because in no way shape or form do these two set of trilogies go together in look, style or feel. In no way to they go togther because of the gaping plot holes, so a 456-123 BD watch in my opinion is the only way to watch them on Sept 16th.

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by Cowboy

As we have discussed there are no sequels in this series. You have an OT and a set of prequels. The prequels have diminshed TESB as a film. How can the suprise be overrated when everyone in the audience in 1980 was very suprised!

Because it's not 1980.

[Shaft Windu]

Originally Posted by Cowboy

As we have discussed there are no sequels in this series. You have an OT and a set of prequels. The prequels have diminshed TESB as a film. How can the suprise be overrated when everyone in the audience in 1980 was very suprised! Watching all six would be a no brainer at 456 then 123. The prequels are just footnotes in film history; sort of an after thought or a jee whiz because in no way shape or form do these two set of trilogies go together in look, style or feel. In no way to they go togther because of the gaping plot holes, so a 456-123 BD watch in my opinion is the only way to watch them on Sept 16th.

Well, back from suspension and here we go again! Well, it's your loss that you got only three films to enjoy and not six - not mine! I'm in luck that the prequels have turned out as good and better as I could have hoped for and Lucas has made 6 movies that fit exactly my taste. Much care has gone into the 6-part-saga to make the viewing-experience feel seamless and epic.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Cowboy

No the saga is not all about Vader as some try to make it out to be. Vader was just one of the players in the OT and then Lucas decided all these years later to make him the main focal point. Vader is no more important than Luke.

Funny, Luke doesn't appear in all 6 films like Anakin does. So I think that Anakin/Vader is the focus of the films.

Since it's about the Life, Rise, Fall, Redemption, and Death of Anakin Skywalker. As Lucas himself has noted.

Though you could say it's about the entire Skywalker family. But it's chiefly about Anakin.

[shelldweller]

Originally Posted by Cowboy

As we have discussed there are no sequels in this series. You have an OT and a set of prequels. The prequels have diminshed TESB as a film. How can the suprise be overrated when everyone in the audience in 1980 was very suprised! Watching all six would be a no brainer at 456 then 123. The prequels are just footnotes in film history; sort of an after thought or a jee whiz because in no way shape or form do these two set of trilogies go together in look, style or feel. In no way to they go togther because of the gaping plot holes, so a 456-123 BD watch in my opinion is the only way to watch them on Sept 16th.

We know that you don´t even try to see Star Wars as grand saga by now... it´s all very subjective of course.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

Because it's not 1980.

Exactly. The whole "Father" thing is so ingrained in pop culture now there is no surprise anyway.

[miniroll32]

Just going back to the transfers of the original trilogy (or at least A New Hope), whats interesting is that most of the comparisons made have been shots of the galaxy/space, as the issue of 'crushed blacks' is obviously an important aspect of this release. The fact that snippets of the Battle of Yavin were played at Comic Con only encouraged those comparisons.

But what about other scenes featuring solely the actors? We've compared the shot of Luke looking up at the two planets outside his home and that proved just how much the gamma and brightness have been improved. But then take a look at some other shots.

(TOP image = 2004 DVD, BOTTOM image = Comic Con footage)





The colours of the new images are far closer to the 1997 Special Editions, which are in my honest opinion is closer to how the films looked than any transfer so far (discounting the 'new' additions). They look warmer with more vibrancy and in some places, more detail. In Luke's shot, the equipment to the right of the frame is now fully visible whereas in the 2004 transfer, the detail is lost in the darkness. Same goes for Hans cockpit - the detail of the lights/instruments behind him are now far more visible. And the colour of their flesh at least reflects how I used to remember the films, and not looking like they've been dead for a week!

These are only two comparisons, but it demonstrates that just can't just take the Battle of Yavin scenes - which are mostly black and grey anyway - as a means to decide whether this transfer has been altered or not. The most likely outcome was that they went back to those 2K scans that had been cleaned up, and simply started the colour timing from scratch to get them right this time round. The only explanation for particular effects that appear similar to the 2004 transfers is that those changes were intended in the first place, and that is why were seeing different results. As for the screenshot on Star Wars.com of Vader and Luke in Empire Strikes Back, Vader's Lightsaber doesn't look pink to me. And until we get more footage, there is no point in arguing more about it.

Also, we shouldn't forget the email response that many people have had from Lucasfilm.

The Blu-ray discs will feature the 1997, 2000, and 2003 versions of the film, with additional edits made by the filmmaker. There is now one definitive version of the films thanks to technological advances, which have made it possible to achieve the visual effects the filmmaker originally intended. This will be the version released on Blu-ray

In other words, the films on Blu-ray are going to combine footage from the 1997 and 2003 versions of Star Wars - be that the film stock, edits, new effects... Therefore, these are not going to be "the" 2004 transfers of the films, but will simply refer to them in particular scenes (most likely, the cleaned up special effects and additions such as Hayden/new Jabba). Even the Blu-ray trailer used the original 1080p footage for the 2004 DVD's, as if you watch this trailer on YouTube, you'll note that the scene with Han in this cockpit (same as the image above) has the 2004 colour timing - not the one seen from Comic Con.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by KeithBL

EVERYBODY regardless of whether they're a fan or not has known that Vader is Luke's father for 30 years. That spoiler ship has sailed. I vote for chronological order.

Wait .... what?!?! Well you just saved me $80 ... Now that I know thatt I see no reason to buy this ... Next you'll be trying to tell me that sweet old man in episode I becomes evil!!!

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Beast

Exactly. The whole "Father" thing is so ingrained in pop culture now there is no surprise anyway.

Actually there are still people who do not know about Star Wars. We here of course not along with all the other nerds out there but not everyone else may know about it.

Example, my wife! When I first meet her, she had never seen Star Wars and knew nothing about it. The prequels were out but I decided to let her see the movies starting with a New Hope and then after the other two original go for the prequels. Now of course when we watch them we see them from 1-6. She rather enjoy the entire series now, not a crazy fan like me of course but always enjoy seeing them.

She is not alone, a lot of people just never really cared that much to see this movies.

[adywan]

The Star Wars saga was never about Darth Vader. For 30+ years it was always known as "The Adventures of Luke Skywalker". This title first appeared on the cover of the original novel, then again in many tie-ins. It was only when George decided to film the prequels that he decided to change the saga to the story of Anakin Skywalker.

What i find funny is that a while back the "supporters" of GL were bashing anyone who spoke about how the transfers were the same as the 2004 versions from what was seen on the videos from comic con. And how we were stupid to use a video filmed from a camera as proof (even when images were taken direct from the source and not a camcorder) and that we were all idiots because we didn't have proof that these were even showing footage from the blu-rays. But now, all of a sudden these that are convinced that george will have fixed the colouring issues are using these same videos as proof that the colours have been fixed. Now speaking to people i know who actually went to comic con and saw the video have all said that they looked the same as the 2004 DVDs; crushed blacks and cyan tinting, but that the monitors brightness seemed to be pumped up. Now if you truly want to compare the 2004 version with what was shown at comic con then just check out this video:
http://youtu.be/NxKTJQizURg?hd=1
Now this contains some footage DIRECT from the source and not just something that was shot on a camcorder. Now that is the same colouring as 2004. Video cameras will change colouring when filming from a screen and you can see from the screencaps above that miniroll32 posted that the whole image is overly bright, oversaturated and blown out.

Now it was mentioned a while back about the new audio mix done for the 2004 DVD's for ANH and why they didn't just use the laserdisc 5.1 for this because that one didn't have the problems. Well the laserdisc 5.1 for ANH is more of a dolby pro logic mix than a true 5.1. The rear channels are mono plus the dialogue isn't centre channel only and bleeds into the left & right channels. Eps 5 & 6 however have a proper 5.1 mix on the laserdiscs. Now it was Matthew Wood that did the new mix for the 2004 DVDs and not Ben Burtt. They did a new mix for ANH in 2007 (confirmed in the link below) and this is what is likely to be on the blu-rays
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/07/...3d-theatrical/

[The Apocalypse]

I'm not sure that latest screenshots are all that representative to be honest, I mean, they're taken off a TV whose settings might affect the way the image is screened, and ultimately the best way is to see the release for yourself in September.

[phatrat1982]

how about instead of lumping everyone together into two groups why not just quote and reply to individuals form now on ok Adywan thanks. I tend to respect your opinions a lot on here and your posts usually are informative but I do not like how you think everyone is the same. I personally do not care about the color issues, because to me I never even noticed and if nobody had pointed it out I would still not even know about it. So I am not a supporter or whatever I won't try and argue they are or not the same transfer for me it is just they look good enough so what is all the fuss.


But since I am talking directly to you now I will reply directly to your view point in hopes that you can clear things up for me. Is it really as big of a deal as you and others make it out to be or is it possible your exaggerating it to make a point? Please do not take this as hostility I am only curious because I honestly do not have an issue with the DVD set and before stumbling into this particular thread I have never even heard anyone else have a problem with it either. And I used to frequent the official star wars boards a lot and I have even asked all my friends about it and out side of this thread I have never even heard of the issue, which makes sense because this is the only site I frequent devoted to picture and sound quality so it makes sense people here are particular but that is why I am asking is it possible the problem is not as bad as you make it out to be but more a perfectionist issue? If it is a perfectionist issue I can give you that except to me that leaves it to you, where as those that don't notice issues like that won't really care.

I guess it is because I am one who while I enjoy a good picture I prefer images that are cleaned up and fixed personally, meaning when people complain that grain is removed oh yeah I went there, as one who likes grain removal is it one of those types of deals like you are pro grain and a a perfectionist etc and that is your problem with it or is it because of your hurt feelings over different issues? I am just curious because generally I do respect your views but sometimes it seams like in this regard to me it seams petty and I just want to know is it petty or is it something else?


I am an aspiring film maker myself, just got into school recently and it is fascinating to me as I learn more about this stuff so my opinions are changing all the time as I learn new stuff so I at this point am more curious than anything because you sound knowledgeable but sometimes sound eccentric. So I am hoping you can just clear things up and that would be good for me.


I bring that up because I do care about picture quality to a good degree otherwise I would not be in this forum at all, but I also care more about the story and little things do not usually bother me. OK on the grain issue, Robocop bothered me it look too dirty because of the grain.


I am curious about the history of the films but I suppose you could say I do prefer the six movie saga to have some uniformity so maybe the color issues didn't bother me because they did blend the two together better I don't know. I don't think it is an issue with my eyes or set up because I have had the DVD's since day one and gone through six tv sets and countless dvd players since then and all my friends tell me the same thing so I figure it is just something a perfectionist or someone who really pays attention to detail notices and the rest of the world just doesn't see it maybe?