Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga 4K UHD (1977-2019)

[Weirded Wonder]

Originally Posted by Nicolawicz

What a worthless set.

Don't say things like that.

[RodChester]

Originally Posted by Nicolawicz

What a worthless set.

What a worthless post.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by anonymous_024

Is it just me, or had the current editions of the Original Trilogy have none of our most common complaints (i.e. Han and Greedo shooting at the same time, CGI effects in place of models, other unnecessary additions, etc.), we would have appreciated these “versions” of the films so much more.

To me, ESB still has the better special edition, mainly because of the “revisions” that were made to enhance the film, and not entirely change it. I’m trying to see this from Lucas’ point of view, that the original unaltered trilogy was basically half done. But then again, while he did fix some of the errors from the despecialized versions, he went ahead and added unnecessary changes that most of us don’t like.

Bottom line, I feel that if there’s a way we can combine the best qualities of the despecialized versions (i.e. miniature models, a more yellow tint) and combined them with the best of the special editions (i.e. McDiarmid as the Emperor in ESB, fixed Luke’s lightsaber in ANH, etc.), then we’ll all be fine.

Empire is definitely the "least-worst" modified film, but I still think it's the weaker version. The issues I have with it are smaller, but they're there: mainly the awkward re-editing of the climax with Vader returning to the star destroyer, and Temuera Morrison's weak redub of Boba Fett's voice. The rest was okay, though.

I've mentioned this before, but if Lucas had made the special editions with the same care and subtlety as Ridley Scott did with Blade Runner: The Final Cut, I would have had no problems with the revised version and only have a mild interest in the original versions for historical reasons. Fix the matte lines, some effects gaffes, a few continuity fixes (like the reshot Emperor scene with Ian McDiarmid, though he didn't need to change the dialog). And for the love of crap, if you're going to alter something like the windows in Cloud City or some rocks in front of Artoo, follow through with it and make it consistent in every shot.

[veyron]

Just noticed the UK edition of this set, has gone up in price from £180 to £200.......oh well, locked the order at 180, and I intend to purchase it, knowing we probably never will see an ultimate complete set anyway��

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Do I live in an alternate universe where $250 is considered chump change?

For 9 movies with a bonus disc for each?

Yes.

And if you think I'm wrong, I present to you the 1993 laserdisc trilogy boxed set for the same price...in 1993 dollars.

[Gold Ranger]

Originally Posted by karsten

If the Original Trilogy and the Prequels (sans any special-edition changes and sans sickly Instagram teal filtering) are ever released in a new format -- be it blu-ray, 4K, Y2K or whatever -- I will spend money on them to buy them anew.

Until then, I'm sticking to the 2006 DVDs. It's painful, especially for the non-anamorphic episodes 4-6, but there it is.

How ridiculous that JJ's excuse for their unavailability is that the negatives were purportedly altered for the special-needs editions. If so, then just go to the best first-generation prints (or "interpositives" or whatever is available) and scan those in HD. Better that than any of the specialized versions.

There was a documentary or something decades ago where they talked about how badly damaged the original reels were. They were ripped, sticking together, discolored. The restoration that went into it was painstaking. However, they cut and altered them and those restorations became the basis of the Special Editions.
Assuming that those were the master reels, yeah they are gone for good.

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

For 9 movies with a bonus disc for each?

Yes.

And if you think I'm wrong, I present to you the 1993 laserdisc trilogy boxed set for the same price...in 1993 dollars.

I don't care what the Laserdisc costs. My point is that $250 (or £190, roughly speaking) isn't chump change, regardless of whether or not the product is good value for money. That amount could pay my gas and electric bill. I don't think it's unreasonable for people to trade or sell stuff so they feel a little less guilty about spending that much money on a box set.

[Nothing371]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

I don't care what the Laserdisc costs.

Nobody with a brain, does. The amount of money someone spent on expensive laserdiscs 25 years ago is neither here nor there in regards to anything in today's home video economies.

[Hardback247]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

Empire is definitely the "least-worst" modified film, but I still think it's the weaker version. The issues I have with it are smaller, but they're there: mainly the awkward re-editing of the climax with Vader returning to the star destroyer, and Temuera Morrison's weak redub of Boba Fett's voice. The rest was okay, though.

I've mentioned this before, but if Lucas had made the special editions with the same care and subtlety as Ridley Scott did with Blade Runner: The Final Cut, I would have had no problems with the revised version and only have a mild interest in the original versions for historical reasons. Fix the matte lines, some effects gaffes, a few continuity fixes (like the reshot Emperor scene with Ian McDiarmid, though he didn't need to change the dialog). And for the love of crap, if you're going to alter something like the windows in Cloud City or some rocks in front of Artoo, follow through with it and make it consistent in every shot.

That's what we have THIS for: https://www.facebook.com/notes/star-...0581897624051/

[Scott in UK]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Do I live in an alternate universe where $250 is considered chump change?

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

For 9 movies with a bonus disc for each?

Yes.

People can obviously spend their own money on what they choose, but....

That amount of money is not small (chump) change or value for money. At the end of the day the only reason it costs that much is because it's new, and not because it's good value for money. If it was good value it would keep it's money, but it wont keep it.

Because in the grand scheme of things, or in other words further down the line, it'l end up costing alot less.

How does it justify being a good price if from the fact that right now in general you could buy nine 4K movies for less than half that price, so in that respect it makes it abit hard to accept the argument that it's value for money, or not alot of money.

Or lets say if you waited just a few months for a slight drop in price and bought all those films separately for 15 pound (19.50 dollars) each, you've then saved yourself 50 pound (65 dollars). So surely that example right there shows it's not worth the asking price, or that it costs more than it has to.

Edit: and with that saving you've made, you could use that to buy another four or five 4k films.

[ThorsScrewdriver]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Do I live in an alternate universe where $250 is considered chump change?

Huh? You completely missed the point.

If you need to be selling stuff in order to buy a $250 set.... you probably can't afford it to begin with.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by ThorsScrewdriver

Huh? You completely missed the point.

If you need to be selling stuff in order to buy a $250 set.... you probably can't afford it to begin with.

Actually I think you missed the point mon frere.

Who said I couldn’t afford it?

Offsetting the cost of something expensive by selling something you no longer need is just sound financial management.

If I trade in my old car when I buy a new one, does that mean I can’t afford the new one?

If I provide sexual favors to an old man in the park, does that mean I’m in over my head?

...I don’t think so.

[ThorsScrewdriver]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

Actually I think you missed the point mon frere.

Who said I couldn’t afford it?

Offsetting the cost of something expensive by selling something you no longer need is just sound financial management.

If I trade in my old car when I buy a new one, does that mean I can’t afford the new one?

If I provide sexual favors to an old man in the park, does that mean I’m in over my head?

...I don’t think so.

Everybody I know who is constantly selling old games or movies for the latest new release is poor as hell.

[dickdarlington]

A collection consisting of only nine films with a SRP of $249.99 is a rip-off. It's nearly a third of the cost of my 4K television to watch said films on.

For example, the Harry Potter: Hogwarts Collection contains eight films across 2 Blu-ray 3D discs, 17 Blu-ray discs, and 12 DVDs with similar packaging to this Best Buy exclusive set with a similar $249.99 SRP. However, since its not a Disney title, it has been priced as low as $79.99 on Amazon in the past.

(Or $70 if you got lucky when WB Shop screwed up pre-orders and that's the only reason I own the set.)

It's hard to justify purchasing $249.99 for a nine-film set when I've spent:

• $69.99 on said Harry Potter set.
• $24.99 on the 4K Jurassic Park set (4 films, 4 4K discs, 4 Blu-ray discs).
• $29.99 on the 4K Transformers set (5 films, 5 4K discs, 5 Blu-ray discs).
• $39.99 on the 4K Mission: Impossible set (6 films, 6 4K discs, 7 Blu-ray discs).
• $54.99 on the 4K Fast & Furious set (8 films, 8 4K discs, 8 Blu-ray discs, and 1 DVD).
• $69.99 on the Halloween set (10 films, 15 Blu-ray discs). Thanks FYE pre-order pricing mistake!
• $112.99 on the Godzilla set from Criterion (15 films, 8 Blu-ray discs).

If this was a set coming from a boutique label, sure, I could justify the cost. However, it's not.

[ThorsScrewdriver]

Originally Posted by dickdarlington

A collection consisting of only nine films with a SRP of $249.99 is a rip-off. It's nearly a third of the cost of my 4K television to watch said films on.

For example, the Harry Potter: Hogwarts Collection contains eight films across 2 Blu-ray 3D discs, 17 Blu-ray discs, and 12 DVDs with similar packaging to this Best Buy exclusive set with a similar $249.99 SRP. However, since its not a Disney title, it has been priced as low as $79.99 on Amazon in the past.

(Or $70 if you got lucky when WB Shop screwed up pre-orders and that's the only reason I own the set.)

It's hard to justify purchasing $249.99 for a nine-film set when I've spent:

• $69.99 on said Harry Potter set.
• $24.99 on the 4K Jurassic Park set (4 films, 4 4K discs, 4 Blu-ray discs).
• $29.99 on the 4K Transformers set (5 films, 5 4K discs, 5 Blu-ray discs).
• $39.99 on the 4K Mission: Impossible set (6 films, 6 4K discs, 7 Blu-ray discs).
• $54.99 on the 4K Fast & Furious set (8 films, 8 4K discs, 8 Blu-ray discs, and 1 DVD).
• $69.99 on the Halloween set (10 films, 15 Blu-ray discs). Thanks FYE pre-order pricing mistake!
• $112.99 on the Godzilla set from Criterion (15 films, 8 Blu-ray discs).

If this was a set coming from a boutique label, sure, I could justify the cost. However, it's not.

I completely agree. Especially considering there are very few people who actually want all 9 movies.

All 9 movies should be $150 tops. And that would still be overpriced. My price point for the entire saga is $100.

[y2jman]

I loved star wars but I really don't want this saga boxset in order to get bonus discs

I wished there was a 4k digibook like the blurays were, I supposed standard 4k movies won't have bonus discs inside that saga boxset

well I do have birthday in april, so if I have to a few individual in march I will<-man I sure had not used that 50 best buy gift card last week towards gemini man junglebook 4k steelbooks could had saved it towards either saga boxset or 2 or 3 individuals meh


however if we find out the bonus discs are from saga bluray boxset nothing new, there's really no need for anybody to get boxset, then again who knowd

[anonymous_024]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

Empire is definitely the "least-worst" modified film, but I still think it's the weaker version. The issues I have with it are smaller, but they're there: mainly the awkward re-editing of the climax with Vader returning to the star destroyer, and Temuera Morrison's weak redub of Boba Fett's voice. The rest was okay, though.

I've mentioned this before, but if Lucas had made the special editions with the same care and subtlety as Ridley Scott did with Blade Runner: The Final Cut, I would have had no problems with the revised version and only have a mild interest in the original versions for historical reasons. Fix the matte lines, some effects gaffes, a few continuity fixes (like the reshot Emperor scene with Ian McDiarmid, though he didn't need to change the dialog). And for the love of crap, if you're going to alter something like the windows in Cloud City or some rocks in front of Artoo, follow through with it and make it consistent in every shot.

Yeah, I guess a lot of Boba Fett fans want the original actor’s voice. I think one of my biggest complaints is the change of the line, “You’re lucky you don’t taste very good!” to a more generic “You’re lucky to get outta there!” I’m not sure why Lucas had to desensitize that too. 🤔

[SuperFlyHighGuy]

Originally Posted by ThorsScrewdriver

I completely agree. Especially considering there are very few people who actually want all 9 movies.

All 9 movies should be $150 tops. And that would still be overpriced. My price point for the entire saga is $100.

So you're cheap but not poor, got it.

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by ThorsScrewdriver

Everybody I know who is constantly selling old games or movies for the latest new release is poor as hell.

Nah, I knew people that did that and there was no logic to it. My dad is a millionaire and he used to have us ration toilet paper plys. No it wasn’t a joke.

[r9800pro]

I was thinking about getting the UK version of the "Saga" in 4K because £180 was cheaper than $250 AND I can get it shipped to me in Egypt from Amazon but I was still waiting for reviews before actually paying for my order.

Funnily enough, Amazon UK (or Disney UK) decided to hike the pre-order price up to £199.99.

Since the box-set will not have the original versions of the first trilogy, will probably have poor HDR (like it was on Disney+) and Atmouse, I don't think £199.99 even comes close to be justified. Maybe £99.99 pre-order price and then again, I would only pay £50-£75 for it on sale after release.
I already have the 6 movies "complete saga" and both TFA and TLJ in 3D.

It is so infuriating how Disney wants to charge more than other studios for their subpar 4K releases.