Star Wars (US - DVD R1)
You thought it would never happen, but it is. Yup, the 'Original' films are incoming!
Title: Star Wars
Starring: Harrison Ford
Released: 12th September 2006
SRP: $29.98
Further Details:
The shock news today is that Lucasfilm and Fox Home Entertainment has announced plans to release the original theatrical incarnations of the classic Star Wars trilogy. In response to overwhelming demand, Lucasfilm Ltd. and Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment will release attractively priced individual two-disc releases of Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Each release includes the 2004 digitally remastered version of the movie and, as bonus material, the theatrical edition of the film. That means you'll be able to enjoy Star Wars as it first appeared in 1977, Empire in 1980, and Jedi in 1983. This release will only be available for a limited time: from September 12th to December 31st, with each title priced at around $29.98. The International release will follow on or about the same day. Each original theatrical version will feature Dolby 2.0 Surround sound, close-captioning, and subtitles in English, French and Spanish for their U.S. release. International sound and subtitling vary by territory.
News by Tom Woodward
Starring: Harrison Ford
Released: 12th September 2006
SRP: $29.98
Further Details:
The shock news today is that Lucasfilm and Fox Home Entertainment has announced plans to release the original theatrical incarnations of the classic Star Wars trilogy. In response to overwhelming demand, Lucasfilm Ltd. and Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment will release attractively priced individual two-disc releases of Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Each release includes the 2004 digitally remastered version of the movie and, as bonus material, the theatrical edition of the film. That means you'll be able to enjoy Star Wars as it first appeared in 1977, Empire in 1980, and Jedi in 1983. This release will only be available for a limited time: from September 12th to December 31st, with each title priced at around $29.98. The International release will follow on or about the same day. Each original theatrical version will feature Dolby 2.0 Surround sound, close-captioning, and subtitles in English, French and Spanish for their U.S. release. International sound and subtitling vary by territory.
News by Tom Woodward
Advertisements
Jeez, have any of you even kissed a girl? No, but seriously, non-anamorphic is such a kick in the teeth. I wanted to get rid of my Executor VHS set, as it's taking up room for other things, but won't bother at all, now. P.S. Non-anamorphic, will that also mean that like previous releases of the theatrical versions, will Jabba's subtitles appear on the lower black bar, so that you CAN'T SEE THEM, when you zoom the damn thing?
Calm yourselves down please guys.
Whoever complained about fans claiming a creation as their own should stop being so ridiculous. When you make a film and the world accepts it it stops being yours. John Lasseter was smart enough to acknowledge that (he mentions it on the commentary for Toy Story 2) and without an audience your film is just one of many made every year. Lucas should learn to respect the people who love his films, and while it is his right as the creator to make changes, that doesn't give him a free pass to essentially p**s all over anyone who ever watched it.
And passing up ANY chance to use beautifully crafted Drew Struzan art is a CRIME. A F**KING CRIME I TELL YOU!
And passing up ANY chance to use beautifully crafted Drew Struzan art is a CRIME. A F**KING CRIME I TELL YOU!
I think The Bits hit on an interesting point - it's the 30th anniversary next year. I'm guessing these editions will be around just until the end of 2006 so they can make way for a new release next year. What with the non-anamorphic news, this kind of seals it for me. Time will tell...
rebel-scum wrote: Non-anamorphic, will that also mean that like previous releases of the theatrical versions, will Jabba's subtitles appear on the lower black bar, so that you CAN'T SEE THEM, when you zoom the damn thing?
I haven't seen the laserdisc versions, so I don't know. But on actual theatrical prints, those subtitles are printed on the picture area, right?
I haven't seen the laserdisc versions, so I don't know. But on actual theatrical prints, those subtitles are printed on the picture area, right?
Hffffff....Who let the kids out of the playground?
Shocking news about the non-anamorphic status! hell, even many cheapy budget DVD's of semi-obscure films have anamorphic transfers nowadays!
Awful.
But what to do? I may still get them as I don't have the 'newer' versions at all, and the original versions only on those OOP, first widescreen VHS releases with the silver writing.
Shocking news about the non-anamorphic status! hell, even many cheapy budget DVD's of semi-obscure films have anamorphic transfers nowadays!
Awful.
But what to do? I may still get them as I don't have the 'newer' versions at all, and the original versions only on those OOP, first widescreen VHS releases with the silver writing.
[quote=Takeshi Tetsuryuu wroteI haven't seen the laserdisc versions, so I don't know. But on actual theatrical prints, those subtitles are printed on the picture area, right?[/quote]
Correct, but all home releases prior to the '04 Dvd release have the subs on the lower bar.
Correct, but all home releases prior to the '04 Dvd release have the subs on the lower bar.
Does the Jack stand for jackass?
The guy just asked a question.
The guy just asked a question.
Thanks Ray, I decided to do some reading on Digital Bits about the differences between anamorphic and non-anamorphic, and what he is doing seems a little bitter and unfair. So I guess I'll save my money for when he releases them in better quality..hopefully someday. Or next year knowing him.
I still hold to the fact, that we complain way to much, but I guess that's what the internet is for right?
I still hold to the fact, that we complain way to much, but I guess that's what the internet is for right?
Tyler Foster wrote: Whoever complained about fans claiming a creation as their own should stop being so ridiculous. When you make a film and the world accepts it it stops being yours.
I think we just have different views. Being a filmmaker and a musican myself I do not believe that my work is anyone but my own as well anyone who helped me of course. I mean I would hope people will like what I do, but at the end of the day if I'm happy with my work that's all that matters. Now I have usually agreed with Lucas on the creative changes for the most part, but as I said above I did more research and this SW release looks to be a pretty s**tty cash-in.
This brings up a good debate topic: As an artist in any form, who claims ownership after it's been publically consumed? The artist or the audience?
I think we just have different views. Being a filmmaker and a musican myself I do not believe that my work is anyone but my own as well anyone who helped me of course. I mean I would hope people will like what I do, but at the end of the day if I'm happy with my work that's all that matters. Now I have usually agreed with Lucas on the creative changes for the most part, but as I said above I did more research and this SW release looks to be a pretty s**tty cash-in.
This brings up a good debate topic: As an artist in any form, who claims ownership after it's been publically consumed? The artist or the audience?
Oh, and by the way... some of us actually have girlfriends or wives who put up with our anamorphic geekness.
Well, once we've explained it to them, anyway. And then they still look at us like, "Why?"
Some of us DO look gift horses in the mouth and complain when there is no need to complain. I've reserved most of my complaints, but this one I cannot...
"This aggression will not stand, man."
-- The Dude.
Well, once we've explained it to them, anyway. And then they still look at us like, "Why?"
Some of us DO look gift horses in the mouth and complain when there is no need to complain. I've reserved most of my complaints, but this one I cannot...
"This aggression will not stand, man."
-- The Dude.
NON-ANAMORPHIC! That is BULLC**P!
How is a $29.98 price tag "attractively priced"? Seriously, set it at $19.99 so that we don't have to shell out $60 just to have them. That price is as attractive has Lucas' chin sack, sorry George but honestly these are c**p sets.
Whoa! It's the original poster art but instead of paintings...it's photoshopped with exact photos! WHY?!? Does not compute.
kal-el wrote: Whoa! It's the original poster art but instead of paintings...it's photoshopped with exact photos! WHY?!? Does not compute.
Because royalties don't have to be shelled out for the Photoshop jobs.
Because royalties don't have to be shelled out for the Photoshop jobs.
I just posted this in the general area but I'll toss it up here too -
Here's a good point thedigitalbits.com brought up in their lastest post about the movies.
The original 1977 Star Wars movie now titled Episode IV: A New Hope is being released without it's A New Hope Title. The first time that's EVER happened on home video. If you recall, you saw it briefly on the Empire of Dreams documentary. If you also recall it was ANAMORPHIC. So, if you put two and two together - if you saw something that has never been seen before, and it was anamorphic and Lucas claims to be using old laserdisc ports for the movies on DVD when we KNOW it was remastered for anamorphic widescreen, guess what? Lucas is full of s**t and lying to the public about not having a better source. Likely, to get you to buy the anamorphic version later in yet another re-release.
That's just great. George Lucas just gave all of us a big 'ole F**K YOU! and I'm willing to bet he's gonna try to do it again next year for the 30th anniversary. Hopefully by then, Rick MacCullum will toss him down a giant Death Star II pitt.
--------------
Since I wrote this I tossed in the empire of dreams doc, all of which is anamorphic widescreen. It's not just a new hope. They show scenes from each of the sequels from the original cuts - ex) the imperial walker being seen through the piller of the fighter cockpit on hoth, overglow in the engines of star destroyers, super high yield glow on the lightsabers in Jedi and various other things. The only SE effect I could dissern in the retrospective is the Deathstar II blowing up with that ring around it, which could have been a creative choice by the documentary maker.
In other words - I think it's official. Lucas is trying to pull a fast one on everyone.
Here's a good point thedigitalbits.com brought up in their lastest post about the movies.
The original 1977 Star Wars movie now titled Episode IV: A New Hope is being released without it's A New Hope Title. The first time that's EVER happened on home video. If you recall, you saw it briefly on the Empire of Dreams documentary. If you also recall it was ANAMORPHIC. So, if you put two and two together - if you saw something that has never been seen before, and it was anamorphic and Lucas claims to be using old laserdisc ports for the movies on DVD when we KNOW it was remastered for anamorphic widescreen, guess what? Lucas is full of s**t and lying to the public about not having a better source. Likely, to get you to buy the anamorphic version later in yet another re-release.
That's just great. George Lucas just gave all of us a big 'ole F**K YOU! and I'm willing to bet he's gonna try to do it again next year for the 30th anniversary. Hopefully by then, Rick MacCullum will toss him down a giant Death Star II pitt.
--------------
Since I wrote this I tossed in the empire of dreams doc, all of which is anamorphic widescreen. It's not just a new hope. They show scenes from each of the sequels from the original cuts - ex) the imperial walker being seen through the piller of the fighter cockpit on hoth, overglow in the engines of star destroyers, super high yield glow on the lightsabers in Jedi and various other things. The only SE effect I could dissern in the retrospective is the Deathstar II blowing up with that ring around it, which could have been a creative choice by the documentary maker.
In other words - I think it's official. Lucas is trying to pull a fast one on everyone.
JackJackMN wrote: Steven Carrier wrote: This is so confusing. I dont get it. The original films will be laserdisc! What the hell. They wont be anamorphic. This is stomach churning, Lucusfilm is a leader in top notch DVDs, so why would they be doing this. ITS SO STUPID! And that cover art, horrible. So ugly. This is so disheartening. I might just keep my regular DVDs.
HELLO, do you NOT READ. LASER DISCS? Dummmb ASSSSSSS. They are saying they will be using the transfer from the laser disc. You have posted 1,082 times? I don't even wanna think how many other stuid questions you asked.
Stop being a jerk. The confusion stems from the fact that most assumed Lucasfilm would use the master print created for the '93 laserdisc set to create these DVDs, not the actual output from those masters that was pressed onto laserdisc and which cannot be anamorphically enhanced for DVD.
Way back when, a lot of the studios would simply port whatever the latest home video transfer they had over to DVD to get their titles out quickly and cheaply. These widescreen transfers were all 4x3 letterboxed or non-anamorphic because of the technological standards of the time. No one does this anymore because 16x9 has by and large become the standard for widescreen films, and when the studios have re-released such titles, such as the recent Mission: Impossible, they've had to go back to the original source material to get any benefit out of making the output video anamorphic.
What Lucasfilm is doing is exactly what the studios did several years ago when DVD was in it's infancy, a practice that has been outmoded by advances in technology, and just a cheap way of doing things all around. The Star Wars DVDs have all been superior from a technical perspective, so the last thing on my mind when it came to these discs was whether or not the discs would be anamorphically enhanced; I, like just about everyone else, assumed that it was a given. I should have known better.
That being said, the DVDs featuring the same video transfer as the laserdiscs will still have better overall picture quality than those laserdiscs just because of the differences in the two formats, but on a much slighter scale without the anamorphic video that I am assuming most of the people that actually take the time to regsiter and post here can take advantage of.
HELLO, do you NOT READ. LASER DISCS? Dummmb ASSSSSSS. They are saying they will be using the transfer from the laser disc. You have posted 1,082 times? I don't even wanna think how many other stuid questions you asked.
Stop being a jerk. The confusion stems from the fact that most assumed Lucasfilm would use the master print created for the '93 laserdisc set to create these DVDs, not the actual output from those masters that was pressed onto laserdisc and which cannot be anamorphically enhanced for DVD.
Way back when, a lot of the studios would simply port whatever the latest home video transfer they had over to DVD to get their titles out quickly and cheaply. These widescreen transfers were all 4x3 letterboxed or non-anamorphic because of the technological standards of the time. No one does this anymore because 16x9 has by and large become the standard for widescreen films, and when the studios have re-released such titles, such as the recent Mission: Impossible, they've had to go back to the original source material to get any benefit out of making the output video anamorphic.
What Lucasfilm is doing is exactly what the studios did several years ago when DVD was in it's infancy, a practice that has been outmoded by advances in technology, and just a cheap way of doing things all around. The Star Wars DVDs have all been superior from a technical perspective, so the last thing on my mind when it came to these discs was whether or not the discs would be anamorphically enhanced; I, like just about everyone else, assumed that it was a given. I should have known better.
That being said, the DVDs featuring the same video transfer as the laserdiscs will still have better overall picture quality than those laserdiscs just because of the differences in the two formats, but on a much slighter scale without the anamorphic video that I am assuming most of the people that actually take the time to regsiter and post here can take advantage of.
If it's not been posted before The Digital Bits have confirmation from Fox and Lucasfilm these will be non-anamorphic meaning it's a definite non-purchase for me.
Wah wah wah wah wah wah wah wah. I knew this was going to cause a crybaby fest and it has panned out that way.
Don't buy these.
Go get your old VHS copies of the movie, burn it to DVD. Load up whatever photo software you want, create your own disk covers and slap those on there. Buy you some DVD cases and create your own covers for them. Problem solved and the rest of us can purchase these if we want and we don't have to listen to your constant crying about complaining.
Don't buy these.
Go get your old VHS copies of the movie, burn it to DVD. Load up whatever photo software you want, create your own disk covers and slap those on there. Buy you some DVD cases and create your own covers for them. Problem solved and the rest of us can purchase these if we want and we don't have to listen to your constant crying about complaining.
Nice one! will be getting it, even though I already own the trilogy box set
Jonny "Me You" wrote: In other words - I think it's official. Lucas is trying to pull a fast one on everyone.
Sure they are, and the line about the '93 version being the best they have of the unaltered trilogy is totally bogus. Before they began work on removing matte lines and adding in all the CGI junk they had to have a baseline from which to start, and that baseline was a restored print of the films that simply removed scratches, debris, color fading and the like; a restoration not unlike what has been done for The Wizard of Oz as someone mentioned and numerous other films. I highly suspect that this is the footage shown in the Empire of Dreams documentary and that we'll see it released sometime in the future.
Sure they are, and the line about the '93 version being the best they have of the unaltered trilogy is totally bogus. Before they began work on removing matte lines and adding in all the CGI junk they had to have a baseline from which to start, and that baseline was a restored print of the films that simply removed scratches, debris, color fading and the like; a restoration not unlike what has been done for The Wizard of Oz as someone mentioned and numerous other films. I highly suspect that this is the footage shown in the Empire of Dreams documentary and that we'll see it released sometime in the future.
rebel-scum wrote: P.S. Non-anamorphic, will that also mean that like previous releases of the theatrical versions, will Jabba's subtitles appear on the lower black bar, so that you CAN'T SEE THEM, when you zoom the damn thing?
I have the Definitive Laserdisc collection and I am pretty sure that Jabba's subtitles (in fact all subtitles of alien speech) are within the frame of the picture itself and not in the black area below the picture. You should be able to safely zoom and not lose the subtitles.
If this is indeed just a port of the laserdisc and is non-anamorphic, I see no reason to buy it.
I have the Definitive Laserdisc collection and I am pretty sure that Jabba's subtitles (in fact all subtitles of alien speech) are within the frame of the picture itself and not in the black area below the picture. You should be able to safely zoom and not lose the subtitles.
If this is indeed just a port of the laserdisc and is non-anamorphic, I see no reason to buy it.
Adrian wrote: I have the Definitive Laserdisc collection and I am pretty sure that Jabba's subtitles (in fact all subtitles of alien speech) are within the frame of the picture itself and not in the black area below the picture. You should be able to safely zoom and not lose the subtitles.
No, they're in the letterboxed portion of the frame, but still should be visible when zoomed depending on your display.
No, they're in the letterboxed portion of the frame, but still should be visible when zoomed depending on your display.
Matt wrote: Adrian wrote: I have the Definitive Laserdisc collection and I am pretty sure that Jabba's subtitles (in fact all subtitles of alien speech) are within the frame of the picture itself and not in the black area below the picture. You should be able to safely zoom and not lose the subtitles.
No, they're in the letterboxed portion of the frame, but still should be visible when zoomed depending on your display.
Aaah, you are right. They are 2.35:1 movies so part of the letterbox frame is still visible when you zoom.
No, they're in the letterboxed portion of the frame, but still should be visible when zoomed depending on your display.
Aaah, you are right. They are 2.35:1 movies so part of the letterbox frame is still visible when you zoom.
People ask repeatedly for these original cuts on dvd, yet they forgot to ask for anamorphic & 5.1 audio. LOL
ok so i'm not a techy here so forgive me if i'm wrong about this but......we have an hdtv widescreen tv in our living room and I recently watched the x-files movie on it, this is the disc that came out in 1998 so if i'm correct its not anamorphic at all..so when I watched it I did notice that the "black bars" were bigger than when I watch widescreen movies that ARE anamorphic (i'm talking about those at 2:35 cuz those at 1:78 fill up the whole screen)...ok anyway I was p**sed about this but figured this was the price of non-anamorphic on widescreen tvs...but my tv has a button to change the screen shape and I just played with it and was able to make the image bigger and look like every other anamorphic disc i've watched on it...and the movie itself wasnt stretched or squished or anything...it just fit the screen the proper way...so my whole point is whats it matter if these star wars arent anamorphic? i'm sure every tv has this option of playing with the screen shape....
now as I said i'm no techy so maybe i'm wrong and x-files is actually anamorphic so if it is I apologize but from everything i;ve read i'm pretty sure it isnt...cuz this "bigger black bar" problem sometimes occurs when regular televsion playes widescreen movies
oh and i've never seen a movie have "bars" on all four sides as some people posted here...maybe our tv's default setting is on this so called zoom but as I said up there...picture quality isnt affected...the x-files disc looked just as nice after I pushed that button as all my other dvds..
now as I said i'm no techy so maybe i'm wrong and x-files is actually anamorphic so if it is I apologize but from everything i;ve read i'm pretty sure it isnt...cuz this "bigger black bar" problem sometimes occurs when regular televsion playes widescreen movies
oh and i've never seen a movie have "bars" on all four sides as some people posted here...maybe our tv's default setting is on this so called zoom but as I said up there...picture quality isnt affected...the x-files disc looked just as nice after I pushed that button as all my other dvds..
Bouncy X wrote: so my whole point is whats it matter if these star wars arent anamorphic? i'm sure every tv has this option of playing with the screen shape....
You are missing the point. A non-anamorphic disc is really no better than VHS quality. It does properly take advantage of the best quality image that DVD has to offer.
Some non-anamorphic discs look great, even when they are stretched to fit a 16:9 frame. Some look horrible. The point is that this is not 1997 (or 1998 in the case of the X-files). It is 2006 and there is no excuse for not going back to the original film masters and making an anamorphic image from it. Lucas is being cheap and lazy by just porting the laser disc over to DVD.
You are missing the point. A non-anamorphic disc is really no better than VHS quality. It does properly take advantage of the best quality image that DVD has to offer.
Some non-anamorphic discs look great, even when they are stretched to fit a 16:9 frame. Some look horrible. The point is that this is not 1997 (or 1998 in the case of the X-files). It is 2006 and there is no excuse for not going back to the original film masters and making an anamorphic image from it. Lucas is being cheap and lazy by just porting the laser disc over to DVD.
Bouncy X, anamorphic has nothing to do with filling the screen or black bars. It has to do with improved resolution vs. a letterbox non-anamorphic version. Anamorphic typically looks significantly better on a widescreen TV. Read the primer at thedigitalbits.com to understand it.
And I'm pretty sure X-Files is anamorphic.
And I'm pretty sure X-Files is anamorphic.
Have you noticed how many original star wars laserdiscs being sold on ebay,may as well copy the laserdisc to dvd and save money,the laserdisc transfers were state of the art for the time and will still look good on a small set,i think the double disc set is pointless as we all have the 2004 version why cant they release the originals at a cheaper price as we've already paid for them over the years
FOLLOW DVDACTIVE
Follow our updates
OTHER INTERESTING STUFF
Horrific Reviews
Undead
UK - DVD R2
Legion Of The Dead
UK - DVD R2
Blade
NL - BD
Cujo: 25th Anniversary
US - DVD R1
Cello: A Mystery Horror
KR - DVD R3
Hot Interviews
Bruce Boxleitner Interview: Area 51
DVD | BD
Rick Dean
DVD
Craig Smith
DVD
Vic Armstrong
DVD
David Prior: Part Two
DVD
Latest News
Legend of Korra: Book One: Air
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Disney June Animation 2-Packs
US - BD RA
Disney Animation Blu-rays
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Prince of Darkness
US - BD RA
ABC TV
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Most Talked About
More Scream Factory News
US - BD RA
Texas Chainsaw (2013, 2D)
US - BD RA
Prince of Darkness
US - BD RA
Host, The
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Universal Steelbooks
US - BD RA
IF you say so, you ask stupid questions, you get a smart assss answer!
Anomorphic is a process in mastering a DVD which allows the a widescreen tv remove the black bars and fill the entire tv with the movie, if it is aspect ratio 1:85, if 2:35 you will still have black bars just not as big.
NON anomorphic will produce bars around all 4 side of the movie, making the veiwer ZOOM in to remove the bars and cause pixalation of the image.