Star Wars Wars the UOT Strikes Back and OTHER PEZ dispensers

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Oh really?

Reality: Gary Kurtz, what success have you had in the past 30 years?

Kurtz: Nuttin'. Well, Dark Crystal and Return To Oz have had sorta cult followings thanks to home video but they bombed big time at the box office.
I can always give you an interview where I criticize George though.



I wonder how deep that vat of sour grapes he's been using is.

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Reality: Gary Kurtz, what success have you had in the past 30 years?

Kurtz: Nuttin'. Well, Dark Crystal and Return To Oz have had sorta cult followings thanks to home video but they bombed big time at the box office.
I can always give you an interview where I criticize George though.



I wonder how deep that vat of sour grapes he's been using is.

Yeah, nothing spells success like Howard the Duck and Radioland Murders .
It seems like they both needed each other to make good movies, since American Graffiti was also produced by Kurtz.

[Aquel]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Im with you - dont worry what anyone else says. TESB is probably my least favorite SW film. Of course, being the worst SW film is like having the "worst" Lamborghini Gallardo...you are STILL doing just fine. It does get tedious - especially the asteroid chase and landing in the monsters stomach. Some of the Dagobah stuff is a little meh too. There arent any huge battles either, sans Hoth and that ends quick. Oh, and threepio starts going all "Jar Jar" on us too and gets very annoying.

TO be honest, I do found ESB to be the most humorous of the movies, with Leia and Han constantly bickering plus Han vs 3PO (Shut him up or shut him down )

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

The gold bikini is iconic.

Thank the maker Kurtz was gone. Besides, he's been so successful on his own.

The Dark Crystal was wonderful, regardless of the box office. Producing the two best Star Wars films is also something he can be rightly proud of.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by KubrickFan

Yeah, nothing spells success like Howard the Duck and Radioland Murders .
It seems like they both needed each other to make good movies, since American Graffiti was also produced by Kurtz.

ILM, Skywalker Sound, the CG division that became Pixar, breakthroughs in digital capture, editing, and presentation: all that without Kurtz. All because Lucas pursued and financed the technologies.

Not to mention a little thing called the Indiana Jones movies.

[aiman04]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

ILM, Skywalker Sound, the CG division that became Pixar, breakthroughs in digital capture, editing, and presentation: all that without Kurtz. All because Lucas pursued and financed the technologies.

Not to mention a little thing called the Indiana Jones movies.

.. and THX.

[Monolithium]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Not to mention a little thing called the Indiana Jones movies.

I'm sure Spielberg had something to do with those.

[aiman04]

Originally Posted by Monolithium

I'm sure Spielberg had something to do with those.

The discussion was about their achievements in the film industry. Gary Kurtz is a producer.

[Jumpman]

PeterTHX is on the money about Kurtz.

He's still trying to ride the coattails of Lucas to this day. It's sad.

[starwarsagent]

Those who complain and moan about UOT and Lucas...go to target and get the 1977 version.

http://www.target.com/Star-Wars-Epis...i_detailbutton

thank you.

[JamesKurtovich]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

Those who complain and moan about UOT and Lucas...go to target and get the 1977 version.

http://www.target.com/Star-Wars-Epis...i_detailbutton

thank you.

Not good enough for DVD and definitely not good enough for someone looking forward to SW in HD.

OT deserves the same treatment the SE gets.

[starwarsagent]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

Not good enough for DVD and definitely not good enough for someone looking forward to SW in HD.

OT deserves the same treatment the SE gets.

No you are wrong. And obviously never saw the movies in the theaters...

You want the UOT right? DVD version is good enough, actually closer than the originals at the movies.

If you saw star wars in 77, 80, or even up to 83...you would have seen a blurry screen with a dirty screen and a out of focus projectors. Most movie theaters were like that back then...you never saw the original in HD as you claim..therefore you are getting a DVD, even better than watching it when it came out in the late 70s.


DVD=UOT...HD is altered. Therefore, you are contradicting yourself.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

No you are wrong. And obviously never saw the movies in the theaters...

You want the UOT right? DVD version is good enough, actually closer than the originals at the movies.

If you saw star wars in 77, 80, or even up to 83...you would have seen a blurry screen with a dirty screen and a out of focus projectors. Most movie theaters were like that back then...you never saw the original in HD as you claim..therefore you are getting a DVD, even better than watching it when it came out in the late 70s.


DVD=UOT...HD is altered. Therefore, you are contradicting yourself.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

No you are wrong. And obviously never saw the movies in the theaters...

You want the UOT right? DVD version is good enough, actually closer than the originals at the movies.

If you saw star wars in 77, 80, or even up to 83...you would have seen a blurry screen with a dirty screen and a out of focus projectors. Most movie theaters were like that back then...you never saw the original in HD as you claim..therefore you are getting a DVD, even better than watching it when it came out in the late 70s.


DVD=UOT...HD is altered. Therefore, you are contradicting yourself.

Are we celebrating the creation of this new thread by trying to outdo the absurdity of the old one?

If so, keep up the excellent work.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by KubrickFan

Yeah, nothing spells success like Howard the Duck and Radioland Murders .
It seems like they both needed each other to make good movies, since American Graffiti was also produced by Kurtz.

You should also throw Marcia Lucas into that mix also-


link- In Tribute to Marcia Lucas

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

No you are wrong. And obviously never saw the movies in the theaters...

You want the UOT right? DVD version is good enough, actually closer than the originals at the movies.

If you saw star wars in 77, 80, or even up to 83...you would have seen a blurry screen with a dirty screen and a out of focus projectors. Most movie theaters were like that back then...you never saw the original in HD as you claim..therefore you are getting a DVD, even better than watching it when it came out in the late 70s.


DVD=UOT...HD is altered. Therefore, you are contradicting yourself.

35mm film, properly projected, is far better than HD. Not to mention that the movies all got 70mm blow-up prints, which would have looked even better.

Originally Posted by Duffy12

You should also throw Marcia Lucas into that mix also-


link- In Tribute to Marcia Lucas

Oh, absolutely. I don't know whatever happened to her (the conspiracy theory of George never letting her work or something in that article seems a little bit far fetched to me), but she was a brilliant editor. Maybe she would've been Scorsese's long time editor, instead of Thelma Schoonmaker. In any case, yeah, her (and the other editors') contributions to, especially the first Star Wars are enormous. It's awful that there are hardly any mentions of her when the making of Star Wars is discussed.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

No you are wrong. And obviously never saw the movies in the theaters...

You want the UOT right? DVD version is good enough, actually closer than the originals at the movies.

If you saw star wars in 77, 80, or even up to 83...you would have seen a blurry screen with a dirty screen and a out of focus projectors. Most movie theaters were like that back then...you never saw the original in HD as you claim..therefore you are getting a DVD, even better than watching it when it came out in the late 70s.

I'm not one who thinks Lucas is this terrible guy and that if we don't have the UOTs, then life as we know it will end, but I have to disagree with your comments, although it depends upon where you saw the film.

In big cities, Star Wars played in 70mm and Dolby 6-track magnetic stereo. In its original release, the first film played in 70mm in Hollywood (Mann's Chinese), Orange County, Westwood (Avco), San Francisco (Coronet); Paramus, NJ; Hicksville, Long Island, and in Manhattan (Loews Astor Plaza, Loews Orpheum) . But remember that theatres were much larger in those days, so those 8 theatres probably represented over 12,000 seats (the Chinese alone was 3000 seats before it was multiplexed), the equivalent of at least 40 large theatres today.

By the time of "Empire...", there were 126 70mm prints made.

When "Return..." was released, there were 145 70mm engagements for opening day and another 15 to 20 within a few weeks.

And I would say that seeing any of the OT in 70mm 6-track analog mag in most of the theatres where it played was a far superior experience to anything you can see today and certainly at least as good perceptually as HD.

So sure, if one saw Star Wars in some crappy cinder-block shopping mall movie theatre or in a multiplexed old theatre that never upgraded sound and picture, it may have sucked, but if you saw it anywhere decent, it was an incredible experience, as were other 70mm films of that era in the large theatres that still existed. One of my best movie-going experiences of that era was seeing the original releases of "Close Encounters..." and "Apocalypse Now" at the Ziegfeld in New York City. IMO, nothing else since then has ever come close.

[starwarsagent]

Originally Posted by KubrickFan

35mm film, properly projected, is far better than HD. Not to mention that the movies all got 70mm blow-up prints, which would have looked even better.



Oh, absolutely. I don't know whatever happened to her (the conspiracy theory of George never letting her work or something in that article seems a little bit far fetched to me), but she was a brilliant editor. Maybe she would've been Scorsese's long time editor, instead of Thelma Schoonmaker. In any case, yeah, her (and the other editors') contributions to, especially the first Star Wars are enormous. It's awful that there are hardly any mentions of her when the making of Star Wars is discussed.

You said it. properly projected. Obviously, you never saw the original star wars at the movies..with dirt, cigarret burns and blur. The DVD is good enough it represents that the UOT looked like at the movies. Not in HD.

[starwarsagent]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

I'm not one who thinks Lucas is this terrible guy and that if we don't have the UOTs, then life as we know it will end, but I have to disagree with your comments, although it depends upon where you saw the film.

In big cities, Star Wars played in 70mm and Dolby 6-track magnetic stereo. In its original release, the first film played in 70mm in Hollywood (Mann's Chinese), Orange County, Westwood (Avco), San Francisco (Coronet); Paramus, NJ; Hicksville, Long Island, and in Manhattan (Loews Astor Plaza, Loews Orpheum) . But remember that theatres were much larger in those days, so those 8 theatres probably represented over 12,000 seats (the Chinese alone was 3000 seats before it was multiplexed), the equivalent of at least 40 large theatres today.

By the time of "Empire...", there were 126 70mm prints made.

When "Return..." was released, there were 145 70mm engagements for opening day and another 15 to 20 within a few weeks.

And I would say that seeing any of the OT in 70mm 6-track analog mag in most of the theatres where it played was a far superior experience to anything you can see today and certainly at least as good perceptually as HD.

So sure, if one saw Star Wars in some crappy cinder-block shopping mall movie theatre or in a multiplexed old theatre that never upgraded sound and picture, it may have sucked, but if you saw it anywhere decent, it was an incredible experience, as were other 70mm films of that era in the large theatres that still existed. One of my best movie-going experiences of that era was seeing the original releases of "Close Encounters..." and "Apocalypse Now" at the Ziegfeld in New York City. IMO, nothing else since then has ever come close.

Why are you guys still complaing? you have the UOT in DVD form...it represents the threater versions. crappy special effects with blurry blocks around the ships and bad colors. thats what you want right?

You want the 70's look...the red faces and the gray monotone colors of the ships. No premium color. there was no THX back then or Digital projectors. it was a lightbulb behind a projector. It looked like crap. 70mm is better than HD, but not when magnified to a huge screen. it actually loses resolution with the light and dirty particles in the air as it's projected and not to mention the people smoking in the movie theater.


the DVD of the UOT is the closest you are getting to the the original version. Star Wars was never Bluray quality..

[octagon]

It wasn't a lightbulb behind the projector, it was a candle.

And if you looked inside there was a tiny pterodactyl using its beak to chisel the image into each frame and another tiny dinosaur running on a treadmill to make the reels move.

It was horrible back then, just horrible.