Star Wars DVD's 2008 re-release - Interior Art Question

[icruise]

the people wanted the original's to come out on DVD untouched with no special edition bells and whistles. And thats what the people got.

Be careful what you wish for.

An anamorphic transfer is not "bells and whistles." It is the bare minimum acceptable for a the release of ANY film on DVD, much less one of the most popular series of all time. Same with a minimum of color correction and restoration.

You'd think Lucas would want to put out a special restored version of the originals separate from the SEs just to be able to charge people for the films again, but I think the truth is that they are dead to him and he doesn't want anything to do with the films in their original form.

Oh, without the make-up Sebastian Shaw looked far too old to play Anakin.

I think that's debatable, but even if it were true, so what? It's that kind of thinking that got Lucas started on the road we are on now. I don't think it's too much to ask that I be able to see the films that I originally loved with decent picture quality. I can watch the special editions of ANH and Empire, but Jedi is just too much for me to take.

 

[Khev]

An anamorphic transfer is not "bells and whistles." It is the bare minimum acceptable for a the release of ANY film on DVD, much less one of the most popular series of all time.

Presenting an anamorphic DVD is *hardly* an "enhancement." Its just the minimum presentation requirement of...oh, I don't know, ANY movie. And it should have happened with Star Wars.

Nobody "wished" for a non-anamorphic release.

 

[Dr. Steel]

An anamorphic transfer is not "bells and whistles." It is the bare minimum acceptable for a the release of ANY film on DVD..........I can watch the special editions of ANH and Empire, but Jedi is just too much for me to take.

Here, here!

 

[thenammagazine]

You'd think Lucas would want to put out a special restored version of the originals separate from the SEs just to be able to charge people for the films again, but I think the truth is that they are dead to him and he doesn't want anything to do with the films in their original form.

While this has probably been said to death and will likely start a flame war, I think it's important to state that Star Wars is Lucas' idea. If his full vision wasn't realized with the first films due to technological limitations, I think, that again, since they are his movies, he has every right to make them everything the movie would have been in 1977-83 if technology had been where he wanted it.

That being said, at least he did re-release the unaltered versions of his films for the outcry of elitists who demanded it. And if I recall, that demanded was for "unaltered versions of the original three films," not "non-special editionized versions with anamorphic widescreen." So you kinda got what you asked for, quite literally.

 

[pixletwin]

Just get adywan's version. vastly superior to any version.

 

[icruise]

While this has probably been said to death and will likely start a flame war, I think it's important to state that Star Wars is Lucas' idea. If his full vision wasn't realized with the first films due to technological limitations, I think, that again, since they are his movies, he has every right to make them everything the movie would have been in 1977-83 if technology had been where he wanted it.

I realize that, and he's certainly within his rights to made new versions based on those films. But it's my opinion that once a film is released, the director can't just go back and erase the original version or pretend that they don't exist.

That being said, at least he did re-release the unaltered versions of his films for the outcry of elitists who demanded it. And if I recall, that demanded was for "unaltered versions of the original three films," not "non-special editionized versions with anamorphic widescreen." So you kinda got what you asked for, quite literally.

I guess we should consider ourselves lucky that he released them in color and with sound, since that wasn't specifically requested.

 

[Joker]

Ahh, George Lucas... What a greedy, greedy man.

 

[FQRizzo]

Just get adywan's version. vastly superior to any version.

 

[thenammagazine]

I guess we should consider ourselves lucky that he released them in color and with sound, since that wasn't specifically requested.

..........

 

[icruise]

My point is simply that you shouldn't have to specify something that every film released on DVD these days has.

 

[thenammagazine]

My point is simply that you shouldn't have to specify something that every film released on DVD these days has.

That's not necessarily true. I have several DVDs in my collection that don't have anamorphic widescreen. Additionally, the outrage was specifically over unaltered releases. My friend and I have this debate as he's pretty much a purist and he cried about the lack of anamorphic...literally, yet he admits that a standard letterboxed version is more appropriate for what he asked for: unaltered versions of the original films. You could always start an online petition for the BR version which should be out by 2099?

 

[icruise]

I have some DVDs that are not anamorphic, but they're older releases -- you'd be hard pressed to find many DVDs being released today (or even when the trilogy was first released on DVD) that are non-anamorphic. Certainly no big name blockbusters. I can't believe you actually think you're making a valid point with this "unaltered" business. Lucas isn't dumb. He knew what people wanted, but he didn't want to do it. Simple as that.

(And for the record, I'm generally more of a Lucas apologist than a critic, but this issue just annoys me no end. I don't care what he does to the films as long as he gives us the original versions too. But if he doesn't, then we're basically held hostage to his creative whims.)

 

[thenammagazine]

I have some DVDs that are not anamorphic, but they're older releases -- you'd be hard pressed to find many DVDs being released today (or even when the trilogy was first released on DVD) that are non-anamorphic. Certainly no big name blockbusters. I can't believe you actually think you're making a valid point with this "unaltered" business. Lucas isn't dumb. He knew what people wanted, but he didn't want to do it. Simple as that.

(And for the record, I'm generally more of a Lucas apologist than a critic, but this issue just annoys me no end. I don't care what he does to the films as long as he gives us the original versions too. But if he doesn't, then we're basically held hostage to his creative whims.)

Not trying to make any points bub. Just stating that people got what they asked for. And whether you like it or not, they are unaltered versions of the first three films. But, I guess, that is the point, isn't it?

 

[Khev]

My point is simply that you shouldn't have to specify something that every film released on DVD these days has.

Trust me icruise, your point is loud and clear to everyone understands what constitutes a basic release of a film on DVD. Apparently we should feel lucky they came in cases, since, you know, all we wanted were the movies themselves.

And what's funny is no matter how you look at it, we didn't get unaltered versions of SW and ROTJ. The original burned in subtitles in the scenes with Greedo and Jabba were removed and replaced with ugly player-generated subtitles (that are partially obscured when you expand the picture to fill a widescreen.)

 

[JustinLuck]

That's not necessarily true. I have several DVDs in my collection that don't have anamorphic widescreen. Additionally, the outrage was specifically over unaltered releases. My friend and I have this debate as he's pretty much a purist and he cried about the lack of anamorphic...literally, yet he admits that a standard letterboxed version is more appropriate for what he asked for: unaltered versions of the original films. You could always start an online petition for the BR version which should be out by 2099?

What does unaltered have anything to do with letterbox or non-anamorphic? Nothing! The original, unaltered films are on celluloid, having no correlation with lines of resolution on a TV screen or compression format on a disc.

 

[thenammagazine]

What does unaltered have anything to do with letterbox or non-anamorphic? Nothing! The original, unaltered films are on celluloid, having no correlation with lines of resolution on a TV screen or compression format on a disc.

...sigh...Viewing an unaltered film means viewing it in it's original context, which, in the case we're talking about is the original letterboxed format in which it was filmed. But you just wanted to chime in with a cheap shot at someone who always calls you on the questionable content in a lot of your posts and the outlandish threads you start. And yet, here we are, doing it again....

FYI, the anamorphic factor everyone's talking about has nothing to do with screen resolution or disc compression. It stretches the letterbox format to fit the television screen. An example would be stretching a 4:3 letterbox display to fit a taller 16:9 widescreen tv. So in the end, you have to ask yourself...did your post make you feel better? Did it get you where you wanted to be?

 

[icruise]

...sigh...Viewing an unaltered film means viewing it in it's original context, which, in the case we're talking about is the original letterboxed format in which it was filmed.

No, viewing it in its original context would mean viewing it on film in a theater. The whole concept of letterboxing only makes sense if you're viewing widescreen content on a 4:3 television. An anamorphic transfer, which allows films to be seen full screen (or nearly so) and undistorted on a widescreen display, is the closest thing we have to watching the films in an unaltered form.

Besides, all this arguing over the meaning of "unaltered" glosses over the point that anyone with common sense understands -- people wanted the films they originally saw without Lucas's changes in their content. It has nothing whatsoever to do with picture formats or transfers.

 

[CelticPredator]

When we say unaltered....we mean no horrible CGI bull^^^^ randomly placed in the scene that have little purpous or meaning. The Mos Eisly scene is horrible. Things walking in the frame, crap everywhere...

And the biggest crap, Hayden Anakin...ugh. Jar Jar too....

The only thing, and I mean the ONLY thing (aside from updated lasers and sabers) they did right, was replace the ESB Emporor with Ian McDermid. Smart move.

Lucas sucks so much its not even funny. Greedy horrible man he is.

 

[Khev]

...sigh...Viewing an unaltered film means viewing it in it's original context, which, in the case we're talking about is the original letterboxed format in which it was filmed.

If you actually believe that Star Wars was filmed in a letterboxed 4:3 aspect ratio then you should find whoever told you that and slap him. Hard. Because whoever gave you such woefully inaccurate information is responsible for you appearing very, very ignorant.

Maybe next time you should do a little more "research."

 

[BrooklynWolf X]

effin ridiculous. keep it up lucasfilm...keep this s*** up. when more and more people get tired by your stupid re-re-re-re-re-releases and SW fizzes out, don't blame us.

morons.

i love the films, but lucasfilm is getting out of control with this crap. seriously.