Printer's Devil on 4/5/2006 at 23:09
Celebrate the love!
Scots Taffer on 4/5/2006 at 23:15
Quote Posted by piln
Of course we're talking about character development in Star Wars, it's the entirity of the story for fuck's sake. For example SPOILER WARNING
Darth Vader comes good in the end, did you miss that one too? That's character development, folks, and it ain't exactly an trifling detail in this story.
Christ, yes. I forgot that he'd changed even the ghost parade at the end of Jedi to have a young Anakin which
so utterly and irrevocably fucks the universe's continuity up it's own ass that it makes my anus bleed.
Parker'sSire on 4/5/2006 at 23:43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rug Burn Junky...and having those channels split out into discrete digital channels...wouldn't be quite as good as a good 5.1 mix, but it would be better than having to rely on a 2.0 decoder, and would be a fairly simple process.
Absolutely.
If they don't have the original elements, then they certainly have the optical Dolby Stereo matrix intact.
The original 70mm release was in
discreet 6 channel Dolby. There were 5 channels behind the screen and the dialogue was directional. The version I saw in Boston was the second 70mm mix with left, center, right, and surround (effects) channels. But the 70 mm soundtrack was magnetic, (encoded with Dolby A noise reduction) and surviving prints (if any) probably wouldn't be in very good shape. That's one of the reasons for 35mm optical tracks.
My guess is that the 70mm prints weren't expected to have a very long life.
But then where did the digital 5.1 mix for the "Luca-enhanced" versions come from? Unless Lucasfilms replaced all the effects and foley stuff and kept just the dialogue for the "enhanced" versions.
The original music tracks certainly must exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rug Burn Junky..in either case it would likely not be up to the THX standards
I saw a special showing in the early/mid 90s of all 3 "real" Star Wars films in a one day marathon with representatives there to tout the magnificent THX theater we were in. They did mention that you could hear the improvements in the soundtracks from film to film. Yes, you could hear that Empire sounded better than Star Wars, but Return of the Jedi sounded better than both.
There's plenty of processing that they can now do to brighten it up, give it some depth (we can produce a hell of a lot better dynamic range than we did back then) etc but they might not because we are screaming for... (deep breath) "THE ORIGINAL".
edit:
For those who don't understand why people want the original...
I say that we get them to fix the original King Kong. Screw the Jackson version.
They can replace that awful puppet Kong with a nice new CG kong and just match his actions frame by frame. They can also colorize it (again). Excellent.
I think they should also re-edit Gone With THe Wind so that there's not so much killing in those horrible Civil War parts. And...and..when Scarlet shoots the Yankee soldier in the face, they can change it to her pushing him down the stairs and he dies by accident. Much improved.
demagogue on 4/5/2006 at 23:48
Quote Posted by Epos Nix
If it's gonna take you longer than the period of time between now and December to save up ~$25, I'd recommend saving that money :tsktsk:
I don't know where you got that number...
Quote Posted by Amazon
Star Wars Trilogy (Widescreen Edition with Bonus Disc) (1977)
List Price: $69.98
For a non-working student on a tight budget, $70 is nothing to sneeze at ... And I've got a queue for DVD's I want to buy as it is. It's more for convienence than anything else that I'd like to buy it when I want and not within the little window I'm given.
Epos Nix on 5/5/2006 at 00:31
I just made that number up randomly. My point still stands. Get a job.
Quote:
For those who don't understand why people want the original...
I don't understand it but only because I can't wrap my mind around the idea that people would spend money on this series of movies
again. Maybe seeing it for the 30th time will make you feel more 'complete'?
Parker'sSire on 5/5/2006 at 01:21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epos NixI don't understand it but only because I can't wrap my mind around the idea that people would spend money on this series of movies again. Maybe seeing it for the 30th time will make you feel more 'complete'?
1) uh...I haven't spent any money on this series yet, except to see it in the theater.
So as far as I"m personally concerned , I ask: "Ever buy a DVD of a movie you really loved? Or, if it's on sale, one you really liked?"
Isn't that... uh... the reason they sell DVDs????
Most people who got the "newer" versions prob. won't buy this version. And vice versa... most people who really want this version prob have not forked out the dough for the others. I can't speak for those who would buy every edition there is, but they have nothing to do with my point re. Lucas', IMHO, needless cutting/editing. Needless "cutting" usually comes from the ego, not the head or the heart and the end result usually isn't too impressive. (Just look at Michael Jackson)
My point was... if it ain't broke, don't fix it. And no matter how many people told Lucas that it ain't broke, he didn't/doesn't get it. He didn't want to make it better... he wanted to make it sooth his own ego.
Didn't work for Coke and "New Coke".
Didn't work for Moxie in the 60s.
Didn't work for Star Wars.
uh... wouldn't work for King King (1932) or Gone With the Wind.
2) ...make me feel more complete??? I think you've been reading too many argumentative, sarcastic, thread posts. They only work when they make some kind of sense. Exactly what does a person saying that they prefer, for example, an original 1969 Volkswagen Beetle over a current New Beetle have to do with your comment which went something like this: "Maybe driving it for the 30th time will make you feel more 'complete'?" I don't get the question.
Getting the 1969 Beetle would complete that person's desire for a Beetle.
And getting a
good DVD set of the original versions of the Star Wars trilogy which (this part is important... we're talking about an opinion here)
I feel is superior to the new altered versions, will complete my Star Wars collection.
... which now numbers exactly.....zero... none...nada.
If that's what you meant to ask, then I'll take it as complementary to my patience and taste.
Epos Nix on 5/5/2006 at 01:27
I wasn't addressing you directly there, though I did quote you. That was a general statement to those who actually do buy every boxed VHS and DVD and laserdisc and VCD and whatever Starwars release Lucas puts out now and in the future. Sorry for the confusion.
Parker'sSire on 5/5/2006 at 01:44
Gotcha.
The statement you quoted had been directed toward people who didn't get why some folk don't want things changed. It was more the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" thing.
... and you forgot the comic books, graphic novels, paperback novels, soundtrack cds, and on.... :)
I hear what you're saying, but then again, I've done it with other things in the past, so I really can't fault people for absolutely falling in love with something.
Unless, like with one of my current students, it starts to become really obsessive. Then it kinda gets scary. (I come from a Star Trek fan background... I know of what I speak...I've lost many friends and some family to the dreaded Roddenberry-beast...you could say I've been in recovery for years. I can still love Star Trek, but in moderation. :D )
(I'm kidding Dia)
aguywhoplaysthief on 5/5/2006 at 02:25
Quote Posted by Chimpy Chompy
So what exactly is the appeal of the "original version"? Are people really that bothered over whether Han shot first? Or is there some crazy irrational love of ye olde effects over modern computer-graphics?
All I ask is that they not change the voice of Fett to the abusive father from
Once Were Warriors, and that Anakin at the end doesn't look like the annoying twit from the last two prequels.
Is that really too much to ask for?
Slightly improving the visual effects and adding lost scenes are one thing, but changing the acting is on a different level entirely.
Mr.Duck on 5/5/2006 at 07:16
I am your father*
* (no DNA testing, thankyou).
