Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope (US - DVD R1)
Join Chris Gould as he tackles the first ever release of the 'original' Star Wars...
Now I’ve written more than my fair share of Star Wars related content for this website, including reviews of George Lucas’ prequels, but I’ve never reviewed the original movies; the ones that started it all. This is largely due to my disappointment with the hastily released 2004 boxed set, which was fraught with audio-visual inconsistencies and idiosyncrasies. I’m also something of an original trilogy purist, in that I prefer the films without the sanitisation and incongruous musical numbers loaded with the CGI slapstick. After so many years in the wilderness I’d lost all hope of a release for the original versions of my favourite trilogy, whether on DVD or the next-generation formats. However, I’d forgotten to take one thing into consideration: the Lucasfilm marketing-machine.
In the first instalment of the Star Wars trilogy the galaxy is caught in the iron grip of the evil Empire, which rules through fear and oppression. A young farm boy, Luke Skywalker, is catapulted into a world of excitement and adventure by a desperate plea for help from the beautiful princess Leia. As a member of the Rebel Alliance, Leia has discovered a weakness in the Empire’s ultimate weapon, the Death Star; one that must be exploited if peace and justice are to be restored to the galaxy. Luke seeks out and joins forces with an old Jedi Knight, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and together with a cocky smuggler named Han Solo (and his Wookie co-pilot Chewbacca) they embark on a perilous quest to rescue the princess from the clutches of the Empire’s sinister emissary, Darth Vader.
The 2004 DVD release of the ‘original’ Star Wars trilogy left many unsatisfied, be it with the poor quality control, or the alterations to the films themselves. Although no official mention was made prior to the release, Internet rumours surfaced claiming that further alterations had been made to the trilogy over and above those made for the 1997 Special Editions (most of which proved to be true when the street date finally rolled by). There was an outcry from the vocal minority, who demanded the original versions of their favourite films on DVD. Lucasfilm—and for that matter George Lucas—remained unimpressed, with Lucas himself going on record to state that the original versions were ‘dead’ to him, and that the 2004 DVD Special Editions represented his vision of the Star Wars trilogy.
Fast forward a couple of years to a time when a new range of Star Wars toys are on the horizon, coupled with the release of the sequel to the extremely popular Lego Star Wars video game, entitled Lego Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy. Now call me cynical, but I wasn’t terribly surprised when the announcement came that Lucasfilm had decided to celebrate these events by ‘giving something back’ to the fans: the DVD releases of the unaltered versions of the Star Wars trilogy, packaged as part of a two-disc set with the 2004 Special Editions and available for a limited time only. Although initially suspicious of the reasons behind the spectacular u-turn, I actually became quite excited at the prospect of owning legitimate, quality versions of the original films on DVD; so much so that I was almost able to look past the slightly suspect marketing strategy.
However, as word of the release started to spread, things took a turn for the worse. Firstly, we were informed that the original versions of the films would actually be included as bonus material, and relegated to the second disc in the set. We were then told that the films were to be state-of-the-art… circa 1993. By this time the alarm bells should have been ringing, but people remained cautiously optimistic. After all, fans wanted to see the films the way they were originally presented, which meant ‘creaky’ old effects and Stereo (or even Mono) soundtracks, so we didn’t complain too much about the lack of glorious new 5.1 remixes. However, the final straw came when it was revealed that the transfers were to be sourced from the THX-approved Laserdisc masters, and given non-anamorphic transfers to DVD.
Cue more uproar from the vocal minority, this time with the support of incredulous editors of many a DVD website. How could Lucasfilm, a company that supposedly prides itself on quality, be releasing such a sub-standard product in the year 2006? The Lucasfilm spin-doctors went into overdrive, first telling us that the original negatives and prints were no longer available, and that we were lucky to be getting the films at all. When this didn’t wash, we were told that the release was only for the casual Star Wars fan that had yet to buy either boxed set, and not intended for the die-hards who had campaigned for so long to get the movies released in their unaltered forms. We were even told, by the brass-balled Steve Sansweet, that ‘the transfers from the bonus discs are absolutely incredible, because these are pristine master tapes, and I have never seen—despite what you may have heard on Internet rumours—a better transfer of a movie.’
There have been many hypotheses put forward to explain George Lucas’ change of heart in allowing unaltered versions of the movies to be released, especially after so publicly stating that they no longer represented his vision. Did things really start as yet another attempt to release the 2004 Special Editions, only for some clever marketing executive to point out that not even Star Wars fans are gullible enough to buy the same thing three times in two years? This certainly seems to be the most popular theory, but I guess we’ll never know the real reasons. However, now that the disc is finally here it’s time to cut through the marketing crap and Internet speculation to deliver a verdict on the film that defined an era and inspired a generation: the original, unaltered version of Star Wars. Will it pass the ‘fan test’, or should a certain Mr. Sansweet be looking to book an appointment at Specsavers?
As most people’s interest in this title is sure to lie with the original theatrical version of the film, this is the area I’m going to concentrate on. Firstly, I need to mention that my DVD player will only output component video in 16:9, which presented a problem when viewing this non-anamorphic, Laserdisc-sourced presentation. I had to resort to using my TV’s ‘cinema’ mode to view the film in the correct 2.35:1 aspect ratio, which introduced its own set of problems. Firstly, zooming the image makes the flaws more apparent, and secondly, a portion of the subtitles displayed during the ‘Greedo’ scenes were cut off. While this didn’t prove too bothersome for me (I know the dialogue off by heart), it could annoy those not as well-versed in Huttese.
I’m extremely thankful that this release retains its original Scope ratio of 2.35:1 (let’s face it, we could have ended up with pan and scan), and while there’s no getting away from the fact that resolution is severely lacking, the transfer is actually better than I could have hoped for. Although there has been no official statement, it would seem logical that at least one of the reasons for this release was to curb the trade in bootleg editions of the original Star Wars. I’ve seen my fair share of those, and I’ll say now that the transfer on this disc is better than most, but not all of the bootlegs out there. Colour rendition is noticeably superior to any version I’ve personally owned, although things still look a little washed out at times and there are stability issues in a number of scenes. However, even a washed out transfer featuring the original colour palette is preferable to some of the garish hues found in the 2004 Special Edition, the opening scenes of which are terribly oversaturated (so much so that Princess Leia looks like she applied her make-up with a spray gun).
The image is also sharper than any previous release I’ve owned, although the flipside of this is that it is extremely grainy. This is particularly noticeable during the scenes on Tatooine (see the screen cap), and remains a constant presence throughout, but there are some who would argue that this lends a more ‘film like’ quality to the transfer. However, when combined with the numerous film artefacts (dirt, scratches, and the odd vertical or horizontal line) that litter the print, it can become quite distracting. If this is anything to go by, it’s easy to see why Lowry Digital had such a hard time cleaning the film up for the Special Edition. I also noticed more than a little telecine wobble, which was particularly apparent during the opening crawl and end titles. Again, whether you notice and are bothered by this is largely down to how closely you study the picture. As a reviewer I’m looking for these things, so it’s possible that the ‘average’ viewer won’t find it quite so obvious.
I was pleasantly surprised by the contrast, which also appeared to be superior to the Special Edition release. Whites are actually white, as opposed to the greyish colour seen in the 2004 release. While not perfect, black levels are also surprisingly consistent, although I did spot the odd impurity during portions of the battle of Yavin. Although progressively encoded, another phenomenon that reared its ugly head was that of aliasing, which was particularly apparent on the grill of Luke’s landspeeder. After checking the 2004 edition for signs of the same artefact and finding nothing, I was concerned that the transfer had been taken from an interlaced source. However, after running the scene through DVD2AVI, that doesn’t appear to be the case (although I’ll be the first to admit I don’t know everything about the intricacies of authoring DVD video).
All-in-all this release presents me with a number of problems when awarding points for video quality. While vastly inferior to the overwhelming majority of titles in my collection, there is a certain charm to the rough-around-the-edges transfer. I actually prefer the overall look to that of the heavily-processed Special Edition, but it is impossible to overlook the lack of anamorphic enhancement. For me, that’s what’s so heart-breaking about this release—had it been given just a little bit of love and attention it could easily have been a very nice looking presentation. As it stands it’s acceptable, but only if you have the equipment to do it justice. I briefly viewed a section of the film without the benefit of progressive scan, and let’s just say it wasn’t a pretty sight…
I guess I should probably say a little something about the 2004 Special Edition included as part of this set. As with the previous release, this reissue of the 2004 edition of A New Hope is presented in its original 2.35:1 aspect ratio and is anamorphically enhanced. On the whole the image is very impressive for a movie fast approaching its thirtieth anniversary, with virtually no film artefacts and remarkable levels of detail. To the casual observer this transfer might even be labelled reference quality, but if you look beneath the glossy veneer you’ll start to notice that things aren’t quite as good as they could be.
Although colour rendition appears to be very good for the most part, there are a number of scenes where the stability falters. This is most apparent during the opening scenes aboard the Tantive IV, where the colour of the Rebel soldiers’ uniforms changes from shot to shot, and everything is terribly oversaturated. The stability issues continue through to the desert scenes on Tatooine, and although this phenomenon affected the original version of the movie it is far more obvious on the Special Edition. I had hoped that these little problems would have been fixed as part of the restoration. There are also problems created by the restoration itself, such as incorrectly coloured lightsabers and contrast issues. The image is just too dark. I don’t want to ramble on about the Special Edition for too long as that’s not the point of this review, but one can’t help but wonder what might have been if Lowry Digital had been afforded the time required to complete a thorough restoration.
The original version of Star Wars carries a Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround soundtrack. It’s interesting to note that there have been a number of different mixes over the years—be it Mono, Stereo or six channel Dolby—each with their own idiosyncrasies, raging from different sound effects, to dialogue, and even voice actors. The mix that is included here omits several lines of dialogue found in later incarnations of the film, as well as including a few different sound effects and lines of dialogue delivered by different actors. Disparities such as these raise some interesting questions, such as just who is the ‘real’ Aunt Beru? The woman who voiced her in the Stereo mix, or the Mono mix?
These questions aside, the track itself is actually pretty good. Dialogue is clear for the most part, although there are one or two lines that are noticeably inferior to the rest. This is most likely the difference between dialogue recorded on the set and ADR recorded at a later date, but I never really found it that distracting. There is also a strong presence from the frontal array throughout the film, and although it lacks the fidelity of a modern soundtrack, the various futuristic sound effects all come through loud and clear. Of course the track lacks the discrete surround of the Special Edition, but the Mono surround channel does a pretty good job of immersing the viewer in the action all the same. Although primarily utilised to emphasise John Williams’ Oscar-winning score, you’ll often hear spaceships flying overhead, blaster bolts whistling by, or some other little effect that adds to the atmosphere. For example, during the Battle of Yavin the surround channel is used to effectively transport the viewer inside the pilots’ cockpits. Bass is perhaps a little lacking when compared to the sort of modern mixes we’re all used to, but that’s not really a ‘fault’ per se. When it comes to the audio elements of this release Lucasfilm have pretty much hit the nail on the head. We asked for the original mix, and this is what we got (or as near to it as is realistically possible).
As for the 2004 Special Edition, oh where to begin… This version features a Dolby Digital 5.1 EX soundtrack that has been the subject of much Internet discussion, although the mainstream press seems to have overlooked any apparent flaws in the presentation. Well we’re not a mainstream publication, and you can rest assured that I have not been bribed with trips to the Ranch or anything else that might compromise my integrity. With that in mind, let me just say this: there are serious issues with the Dolby Digital 5.1 track found on this disc.
Firstly, there are innumerable scenes where the quality and consistency of the dialogue varies from moment to moment. Characters can be having perfectly audible conversations, only for the next line out of their mouths to sound like they are speaking through a towel while gargling with razor blades. Ok, so perhaps that’s a little bit of an exaggeration, but the inconsistent quality and levels of the dialogue are terribly distracting. One extremely obvious instance occurs when Tarkin says to Leia ‘You would prefer another target? A military target?’ in a crystal clear voice, only for his next line of ‘Then name the system’ to sound like it was recorded on a bargain-basement Dictaphone. Of course this is a problem that also affected the original release, but it is far more noticeable in the Special Edition. One would think that—with all the technology at their disposal—Lucasfilm could have done something to address the issue for their ‘bells ‘n’ whistles’ edition .
Furthermore, there is at least one instance when the Academy Award-winning score is completely drowned out by the effects. Unfortunately this occurs during the climactic battle of Yavin, as the Rebel X-Wing fighters dive towards the Death Star. This was originally underscored by a triumphant rendition of John Williams’ Force theme, but now you almost have to press your ear against the speaker to hear it. Worse still is the reversal of the score in the rear surrounds. What this means is that instruments—such as brass—that play in the front right hand speaker, play in the rear left, and so on. This just doesn’t sound ‘right’, and makes the score difficult to localise—you could achieve the same effect by wiring your speakers up incorrectly.
Lucasfilm were quick to issue a statement dismissing these problems as ‘creative decisions’, but the very fact that the French Dolby Surround track carries the Force theme in all its glory makes a mockery of that statement. I’ve no doubt that these ‘creative decisions’ will be quietly fixed for a future release, but until then we’re stuck with a half-arsed attempt. It’s very disappointing.
Before I examine the bonus material, I’d just like to take the time to comment on the menus. As some of you will know, Van Ling is the man responsible for the overall look of the 2004 Special Edition DVDs, as well as the three prequels. He has created a unified look, with each disc presenting a choice of three distinct menu themes built around a different location from the Star Wars universe. For the 2004 edition of A New Hope viewers are presented with gorgeous animated menus that feature footage from Tatooine, the Death Star and Yavin IV. Each of the sub-menus expands upon the theme of the main menu, creating a truly immersive experience. The menus for the bonus disc are extremely primitive by comparison, although there is a brief animation when the disc first loads. A group of hand-drawn X-Wing fighters fly into view before a static shot of the one-sheet ‘B’ poster artwork appears. There is no other animation, but each menu screen is accompanied by music from the film. Although not as impressive as the Special Edition menus, it was more than I expected. Ironically, the menus for both versions are anamorphic…
Of course the main reason to buy this set is disc two itself, as this is where you’ll find the unaltered theatrical release of Star Wars (sadly reduced to nothing more than ‘bonus material’). The disc also includes a demo for the Xbox version of Lego Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy, which is a fun little game that significantly expands upon its predecessor. It’s worth noting that, yet again, Lucasfilm has included an Xbox dashboard update on the DVD. This was also present on the bonus disc for the 2004 Special Editions, and caused outrage among Xbox users who claimed that it was ‘malware’. I can’t personally confirm or deny any of this, but I thought it was worth mentioning all the same. A trailer for the game is also included, just to further whet your appetite.
Disc one features the same supplementary material as was present when it arrived in boxed set form. What this means is a commentary track from Lucas, Ben Burtt, Denis Muren and Carrie Fisher. It’s the same old track, with Lucas dispassionately droning on about this and that, most of which seems to be unrelated to what’s occurring on screen. There’s very little insight into the creative process, and I have a strong suspicion that the track was completed before many of the 2004 Special Edition ‘tweaks’ were implemented, as Lucas often seems to refer to unaltered scenes. Burtt may be a legendary sound designer (his editing skills aren’t quite in the same league), but personally I find the man’s voice annoying. Carrie Fisher’s role seems to be to add some levity to the otherwise stodgy track, a role that she fulfils with mixed results. The only other material on the disc comes in the form of links to both the standard and DVD-specific Star Wars websites. At the time of writing, I couldn’t get dvd.starwars.com to work with any of the nine discs in my collection…
For once, I’m not really sure what to say. On one hand this release isn’t as horrific as I had feared, but neither is it as good as it should be. In fact, one has to wonder exactly who it is aimed at. If we are to believe Lucasfilm, and this set really is for the ‘casual’ Star Wars fan (if such a person exists), the huge emphasis on the unaltered original trilogy aspect doesn’t make much sense. Surely a ‘casual’ fan won’t care if Han shoots first, or if Jabba the Hutt remains on the cutting room floor? However, if this disc was really intended to placate the hoards of rabid geeks that frequent Star Wars message boards claiming that George Lucas raped their childhoods, why do such a half-arsed job? There are better fan-made bootlegs out there, assembled by people who appear to have more admiration and respect for the film than its creator. Personally, I think this disc is intended as nothing more than a way to raise the profile of the original trilogy tie-ins, be they toys or video games, while selling off the surplus stock of discs left over from the ill-fated 2005 re-release.
Technically I guess I should be judging this release on the merits of both versions of the film, 1977 and 2004. However, as Lucasfilm has pushed the ‘original trilogy’ angle to such an extent, I have decided to base my final score solely on the second disc in the set. It is, after all, the only real reason to buy this release over and above one of the earlier boxed sets, especially when you factor the retail prices into the equation. You might think I’m being a little tough on Lucasfilm, but if they want to sell us a product using such a highly focussed marketing campaign then they deserve to be criticised based on the quality of that specific aspect of the product. If you really want to read a detailed review of the 2004 Special Edition, it has been ably covered by my colleague Bryan Rickert.
It’s a pity that George Lucas appears hold the original version of the film that made his career in such contempt. Perhaps one day we will see a completely restored and remastered release, in much the same way that other genre classics such as Alien, Back to the Future and Blade Runner have been cleaned up and reissued, but until then people have to make a choice between this official set and one of the many available bootlegs. On balance I would probably have to give this release the nod, primarily because it’s legal and has a slightly better transfer than the majority of the fan-made, Laserdisc-ripped bootlegs (although that’s not particularly high praise). However, when you know that there are versions of this film floating around with commentary tracks, isolated scores, Easter eggs and more, Lucasfilm’s offering doesn’t look quite as attractive. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the coming months witnessed the arrival of bootlegs based on this transfer, but with the supplemental material to back them up…
Whatever the shortcomings of the technical aspects of the release, being able to sit down and view the original version of one of my childhood favourites proved to be an extremely enjoyable experience. It had been a long time since I’d watched one of the original films in its entirety, and I have to say it was all the better for the absence of computer-generated imagery and redundant scenes that served only to slow the pace of the film. I didn’t care that the effects were old and ‘creaky’, or that I could see the matte lines around TIE-Fighters, I was just happy to watch the film I grew up with. When I last watched the Special Edition I felt that it dragged, but the two-hour running time flew by without the unnecessary additions. Should you go out and buy this release if you already own the boxed set? Can you really bring yourself to dig deep into your pockets and hand over your hard-earned to George Lucas one more time? Well, I guess that really depends on just how much you love the original, unaltered version of Star Wars. I’ll just say this: Jabba the Hutt is nowhere to be seen, and Han blows Greedo’s sorry arse away before he even has time to miss at point-blank range…
1977
2004
Feature
In the first instalment of the Star Wars trilogy the galaxy is caught in the iron grip of the evil Empire, which rules through fear and oppression. A young farm boy, Luke Skywalker, is catapulted into a world of excitement and adventure by a desperate plea for help from the beautiful princess Leia. As a member of the Rebel Alliance, Leia has discovered a weakness in the Empire’s ultimate weapon, the Death Star; one that must be exploited if peace and justice are to be restored to the galaxy. Luke seeks out and joins forces with an old Jedi Knight, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and together with a cocky smuggler named Han Solo (and his Wookie co-pilot Chewbacca) they embark on a perilous quest to rescue the princess from the clutches of the Empire’s sinister emissary, Darth Vader.
The 2004 DVD release of the ‘original’ Star Wars trilogy left many unsatisfied, be it with the poor quality control, or the alterations to the films themselves. Although no official mention was made prior to the release, Internet rumours surfaced claiming that further alterations had been made to the trilogy over and above those made for the 1997 Special Editions (most of which proved to be true when the street date finally rolled by). There was an outcry from the vocal minority, who demanded the original versions of their favourite films on DVD. Lucasfilm—and for that matter George Lucas—remained unimpressed, with Lucas himself going on record to state that the original versions were ‘dead’ to him, and that the 2004 DVD Special Editions represented his vision of the Star Wars trilogy.
1977
2004
Fast forward a couple of years to a time when a new range of Star Wars toys are on the horizon, coupled with the release of the sequel to the extremely popular Lego Star Wars video game, entitled Lego Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy. Now call me cynical, but I wasn’t terribly surprised when the announcement came that Lucasfilm had decided to celebrate these events by ‘giving something back’ to the fans: the DVD releases of the unaltered versions of the Star Wars trilogy, packaged as part of a two-disc set with the 2004 Special Editions and available for a limited time only. Although initially suspicious of the reasons behind the spectacular u-turn, I actually became quite excited at the prospect of owning legitimate, quality versions of the original films on DVD; so much so that I was almost able to look past the slightly suspect marketing strategy.
However, as word of the release started to spread, things took a turn for the worse. Firstly, we were informed that the original versions of the films would actually be included as bonus material, and relegated to the second disc in the set. We were then told that the films were to be state-of-the-art… circa 1993. By this time the alarm bells should have been ringing, but people remained cautiously optimistic. After all, fans wanted to see the films the way they were originally presented, which meant ‘creaky’ old effects and Stereo (or even Mono) soundtracks, so we didn’t complain too much about the lack of glorious new 5.1 remixes. However, the final straw came when it was revealed that the transfers were to be sourced from the THX-approved Laserdisc masters, and given non-anamorphic transfers to DVD.
1977
2004
Cue more uproar from the vocal minority, this time with the support of incredulous editors of many a DVD website. How could Lucasfilm, a company that supposedly prides itself on quality, be releasing such a sub-standard product in the year 2006? The Lucasfilm spin-doctors went into overdrive, first telling us that the original negatives and prints were no longer available, and that we were lucky to be getting the films at all. When this didn’t wash, we were told that the release was only for the casual Star Wars fan that had yet to buy either boxed set, and not intended for the die-hards who had campaigned for so long to get the movies released in their unaltered forms. We were even told, by the brass-balled Steve Sansweet, that ‘the transfers from the bonus discs are absolutely incredible, because these are pristine master tapes, and I have never seen—despite what you may have heard on Internet rumours—a better transfer of a movie.’
There have been many hypotheses put forward to explain George Lucas’ change of heart in allowing unaltered versions of the movies to be released, especially after so publicly stating that they no longer represented his vision. Did things really start as yet another attempt to release the 2004 Special Editions, only for some clever marketing executive to point out that not even Star Wars fans are gullible enough to buy the same thing three times in two years? This certainly seems to be the most popular theory, but I guess we’ll never know the real reasons. However, now that the disc is finally here it’s time to cut through the marketing crap and Internet speculation to deliver a verdict on the film that defined an era and inspired a generation: the original, unaltered version of Star Wars. Will it pass the ‘fan test’, or should a certain Mr. Sansweet be looking to book an appointment at Specsavers?
1977
2004
Video
As most people’s interest in this title is sure to lie with the original theatrical version of the film, this is the area I’m going to concentrate on. Firstly, I need to mention that my DVD player will only output component video in 16:9, which presented a problem when viewing this non-anamorphic, Laserdisc-sourced presentation. I had to resort to using my TV’s ‘cinema’ mode to view the film in the correct 2.35:1 aspect ratio, which introduced its own set of problems. Firstly, zooming the image makes the flaws more apparent, and secondly, a portion of the subtitles displayed during the ‘Greedo’ scenes were cut off. While this didn’t prove too bothersome for me (I know the dialogue off by heart), it could annoy those not as well-versed in Huttese.
I’m extremely thankful that this release retains its original Scope ratio of 2.35:1 (let’s face it, we could have ended up with pan and scan), and while there’s no getting away from the fact that resolution is severely lacking, the transfer is actually better than I could have hoped for. Although there has been no official statement, it would seem logical that at least one of the reasons for this release was to curb the trade in bootleg editions of the original Star Wars. I’ve seen my fair share of those, and I’ll say now that the transfer on this disc is better than most, but not all of the bootlegs out there. Colour rendition is noticeably superior to any version I’ve personally owned, although things still look a little washed out at times and there are stability issues in a number of scenes. However, even a washed out transfer featuring the original colour palette is preferable to some of the garish hues found in the 2004 Special Edition, the opening scenes of which are terribly oversaturated (so much so that Princess Leia looks like she applied her make-up with a spray gun).
1977
2004
The image is also sharper than any previous release I’ve owned, although the flipside of this is that it is extremely grainy. This is particularly noticeable during the scenes on Tatooine (see the screen cap), and remains a constant presence throughout, but there are some who would argue that this lends a more ‘film like’ quality to the transfer. However, when combined with the numerous film artefacts (dirt, scratches, and the odd vertical or horizontal line) that litter the print, it can become quite distracting. If this is anything to go by, it’s easy to see why Lowry Digital had such a hard time cleaning the film up for the Special Edition. I also noticed more than a little telecine wobble, which was particularly apparent during the opening crawl and end titles. Again, whether you notice and are bothered by this is largely down to how closely you study the picture. As a reviewer I’m looking for these things, so it’s possible that the ‘average’ viewer won’t find it quite so obvious.
I was pleasantly surprised by the contrast, which also appeared to be superior to the Special Edition release. Whites are actually white, as opposed to the greyish colour seen in the 2004 release. While not perfect, black levels are also surprisingly consistent, although I did spot the odd impurity during portions of the battle of Yavin. Although progressively encoded, another phenomenon that reared its ugly head was that of aliasing, which was particularly apparent on the grill of Luke’s landspeeder. After checking the 2004 edition for signs of the same artefact and finding nothing, I was concerned that the transfer had been taken from an interlaced source. However, after running the scene through DVD2AVI, that doesn’t appear to be the case (although I’ll be the first to admit I don’t know everything about the intricacies of authoring DVD video).
1977
2004
All-in-all this release presents me with a number of problems when awarding points for video quality. While vastly inferior to the overwhelming majority of titles in my collection, there is a certain charm to the rough-around-the-edges transfer. I actually prefer the overall look to that of the heavily-processed Special Edition, but it is impossible to overlook the lack of anamorphic enhancement. For me, that’s what’s so heart-breaking about this release—had it been given just a little bit of love and attention it could easily have been a very nice looking presentation. As it stands it’s acceptable, but only if you have the equipment to do it justice. I briefly viewed a section of the film without the benefit of progressive scan, and let’s just say it wasn’t a pretty sight…
I guess I should probably say a little something about the 2004 Special Edition included as part of this set. As with the previous release, this reissue of the 2004 edition of A New Hope is presented in its original 2.35:1 aspect ratio and is anamorphically enhanced. On the whole the image is very impressive for a movie fast approaching its thirtieth anniversary, with virtually no film artefacts and remarkable levels of detail. To the casual observer this transfer might even be labelled reference quality, but if you look beneath the glossy veneer you’ll start to notice that things aren’t quite as good as they could be.
1977
2004
Although colour rendition appears to be very good for the most part, there are a number of scenes where the stability falters. This is most apparent during the opening scenes aboard the Tantive IV, where the colour of the Rebel soldiers’ uniforms changes from shot to shot, and everything is terribly oversaturated. The stability issues continue through to the desert scenes on Tatooine, and although this phenomenon affected the original version of the movie it is far more obvious on the Special Edition. I had hoped that these little problems would have been fixed as part of the restoration. There are also problems created by the restoration itself, such as incorrectly coloured lightsabers and contrast issues. The image is just too dark. I don’t want to ramble on about the Special Edition for too long as that’s not the point of this review, but one can’t help but wonder what might have been if Lowry Digital had been afforded the time required to complete a thorough restoration.
Audio
The original version of Star Wars carries a Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround soundtrack. It’s interesting to note that there have been a number of different mixes over the years—be it Mono, Stereo or six channel Dolby—each with their own idiosyncrasies, raging from different sound effects, to dialogue, and even voice actors. The mix that is included here omits several lines of dialogue found in later incarnations of the film, as well as including a few different sound effects and lines of dialogue delivered by different actors. Disparities such as these raise some interesting questions, such as just who is the ‘real’ Aunt Beru? The woman who voiced her in the Stereo mix, or the Mono mix?
1977
2004
These questions aside, the track itself is actually pretty good. Dialogue is clear for the most part, although there are one or two lines that are noticeably inferior to the rest. This is most likely the difference between dialogue recorded on the set and ADR recorded at a later date, but I never really found it that distracting. There is also a strong presence from the frontal array throughout the film, and although it lacks the fidelity of a modern soundtrack, the various futuristic sound effects all come through loud and clear. Of course the track lacks the discrete surround of the Special Edition, but the Mono surround channel does a pretty good job of immersing the viewer in the action all the same. Although primarily utilised to emphasise John Williams’ Oscar-winning score, you’ll often hear spaceships flying overhead, blaster bolts whistling by, or some other little effect that adds to the atmosphere. For example, during the Battle of Yavin the surround channel is used to effectively transport the viewer inside the pilots’ cockpits. Bass is perhaps a little lacking when compared to the sort of modern mixes we’re all used to, but that’s not really a ‘fault’ per se. When it comes to the audio elements of this release Lucasfilm have pretty much hit the nail on the head. We asked for the original mix, and this is what we got (or as near to it as is realistically possible).
As for the 2004 Special Edition, oh where to begin… This version features a Dolby Digital 5.1 EX soundtrack that has been the subject of much Internet discussion, although the mainstream press seems to have overlooked any apparent flaws in the presentation. Well we’re not a mainstream publication, and you can rest assured that I have not been bribed with trips to the Ranch or anything else that might compromise my integrity. With that in mind, let me just say this: there are serious issues with the Dolby Digital 5.1 track found on this disc.
1977
2004
Firstly, there are innumerable scenes where the quality and consistency of the dialogue varies from moment to moment. Characters can be having perfectly audible conversations, only for the next line out of their mouths to sound like they are speaking through a towel while gargling with razor blades. Ok, so perhaps that’s a little bit of an exaggeration, but the inconsistent quality and levels of the dialogue are terribly distracting. One extremely obvious instance occurs when Tarkin says to Leia ‘You would prefer another target? A military target?’ in a crystal clear voice, only for his next line of ‘Then name the system’ to sound like it was recorded on a bargain-basement Dictaphone. Of course this is a problem that also affected the original release, but it is far more noticeable in the Special Edition. One would think that—with all the technology at their disposal—Lucasfilm could have done something to address the issue for their ‘bells ‘n’ whistles’ edition .
Furthermore, there is at least one instance when the Academy Award-winning score is completely drowned out by the effects. Unfortunately this occurs during the climactic battle of Yavin, as the Rebel X-Wing fighters dive towards the Death Star. This was originally underscored by a triumphant rendition of John Williams’ Force theme, but now you almost have to press your ear against the speaker to hear it. Worse still is the reversal of the score in the rear surrounds. What this means is that instruments—such as brass—that play in the front right hand speaker, play in the rear left, and so on. This just doesn’t sound ‘right’, and makes the score difficult to localise—you could achieve the same effect by wiring your speakers up incorrectly.
1977
2004
Lucasfilm were quick to issue a statement dismissing these problems as ‘creative decisions’, but the very fact that the French Dolby Surround track carries the Force theme in all its glory makes a mockery of that statement. I’ve no doubt that these ‘creative decisions’ will be quietly fixed for a future release, but until then we’re stuck with a half-arsed attempt. It’s very disappointing.
Extras
Before I examine the bonus material, I’d just like to take the time to comment on the menus. As some of you will know, Van Ling is the man responsible for the overall look of the 2004 Special Edition DVDs, as well as the three prequels. He has created a unified look, with each disc presenting a choice of three distinct menu themes built around a different location from the Star Wars universe. For the 2004 edition of A New Hope viewers are presented with gorgeous animated menus that feature footage from Tatooine, the Death Star and Yavin IV. Each of the sub-menus expands upon the theme of the main menu, creating a truly immersive experience. The menus for the bonus disc are extremely primitive by comparison, although there is a brief animation when the disc first loads. A group of hand-drawn X-Wing fighters fly into view before a static shot of the one-sheet ‘B’ poster artwork appears. There is no other animation, but each menu screen is accompanied by music from the film. Although not as impressive as the Special Edition menus, it was more than I expected. Ironically, the menus for both versions are anamorphic…
1977
2004
Of course the main reason to buy this set is disc two itself, as this is where you’ll find the unaltered theatrical release of Star Wars (sadly reduced to nothing more than ‘bonus material’). The disc also includes a demo for the Xbox version of Lego Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy, which is a fun little game that significantly expands upon its predecessor. It’s worth noting that, yet again, Lucasfilm has included an Xbox dashboard update on the DVD. This was also present on the bonus disc for the 2004 Special Editions, and caused outrage among Xbox users who claimed that it was ‘malware’. I can’t personally confirm or deny any of this, but I thought it was worth mentioning all the same. A trailer for the game is also included, just to further whet your appetite.
Disc one features the same supplementary material as was present when it arrived in boxed set form. What this means is a commentary track from Lucas, Ben Burtt, Denis Muren and Carrie Fisher. It’s the same old track, with Lucas dispassionately droning on about this and that, most of which seems to be unrelated to what’s occurring on screen. There’s very little insight into the creative process, and I have a strong suspicion that the track was completed before many of the 2004 Special Edition ‘tweaks’ were implemented, as Lucas often seems to refer to unaltered scenes. Burtt may be a legendary sound designer (his editing skills aren’t quite in the same league), but personally I find the man’s voice annoying. Carrie Fisher’s role seems to be to add some levity to the otherwise stodgy track, a role that she fulfils with mixed results. The only other material on the disc comes in the form of links to both the standard and DVD-specific Star Wars websites. At the time of writing, I couldn’t get dvd.starwars.com to work with any of the nine discs in my collection…
1977
2004
Overall
For once, I’m not really sure what to say. On one hand this release isn’t as horrific as I had feared, but neither is it as good as it should be. In fact, one has to wonder exactly who it is aimed at. If we are to believe Lucasfilm, and this set really is for the ‘casual’ Star Wars fan (if such a person exists), the huge emphasis on the unaltered original trilogy aspect doesn’t make much sense. Surely a ‘casual’ fan won’t care if Han shoots first, or if Jabba the Hutt remains on the cutting room floor? However, if this disc was really intended to placate the hoards of rabid geeks that frequent Star Wars message boards claiming that George Lucas raped their childhoods, why do such a half-arsed job? There are better fan-made bootlegs out there, assembled by people who appear to have more admiration and respect for the film than its creator. Personally, I think this disc is intended as nothing more than a way to raise the profile of the original trilogy tie-ins, be they toys or video games, while selling off the surplus stock of discs left over from the ill-fated 2005 re-release.
Technically I guess I should be judging this release on the merits of both versions of the film, 1977 and 2004. However, as Lucasfilm has pushed the ‘original trilogy’ angle to such an extent, I have decided to base my final score solely on the second disc in the set. It is, after all, the only real reason to buy this release over and above one of the earlier boxed sets, especially when you factor the retail prices into the equation. You might think I’m being a little tough on Lucasfilm, but if they want to sell us a product using such a highly focussed marketing campaign then they deserve to be criticised based on the quality of that specific aspect of the product. If you really want to read a detailed review of the 2004 Special Edition, it has been ably covered by my colleague Bryan Rickert.
1977
2004
It’s a pity that George Lucas appears hold the original version of the film that made his career in such contempt. Perhaps one day we will see a completely restored and remastered release, in much the same way that other genre classics such as Alien, Back to the Future and Blade Runner have been cleaned up and reissued, but until then people have to make a choice between this official set and one of the many available bootlegs. On balance I would probably have to give this release the nod, primarily because it’s legal and has a slightly better transfer than the majority of the fan-made, Laserdisc-ripped bootlegs (although that’s not particularly high praise). However, when you know that there are versions of this film floating around with commentary tracks, isolated scores, Easter eggs and more, Lucasfilm’s offering doesn’t look quite as attractive. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the coming months witnessed the arrival of bootlegs based on this transfer, but with the supplemental material to back them up…
Whatever the shortcomings of the technical aspects of the release, being able to sit down and view the original version of one of my childhood favourites proved to be an extremely enjoyable experience. It had been a long time since I’d watched one of the original films in its entirety, and I have to say it was all the better for the absence of computer-generated imagery and redundant scenes that served only to slow the pace of the film. I didn’t care that the effects were old and ‘creaky’, or that I could see the matte lines around TIE-Fighters, I was just happy to watch the film I grew up with. When I last watched the Special Edition I felt that it dragged, but the two-hour running time flew by without the unnecessary additions. Should you go out and buy this release if you already own the boxed set? Can you really bring yourself to dig deep into your pockets and hand over your hard-earned to George Lucas one more time? Well, I guess that really depends on just how much you love the original, unaltered version of Star Wars. I’ll just say this: Jabba the Hutt is nowhere to be seen, and Han blows Greedo’s sorry arse away before he even has time to miss at point-blank range…
Review by Chris Gould
Advertisements
Existing Posts
I wasn’t really impressed for a DVD lacking possible Dolby 4.1 since the 70mm print used two sub bass tracks playing the same content played over stage channels 2 and 4 to reinforce the low end parts of the mix when called for.
The DVD could have been given a bit more effort rather than a rush it out to make the STAR WARS CASH COW even fatter than it already is! Lucas just got sloppy and sheer greedy at this point! I took the DVD so called limited edition back and got it changed for another DVD because the price was a sheer disgrace.
I do have the box-set edition released 2004 and laserdiscs. Its odd now the limited edition is so cheap at HMV less than or under £8.00 hmm should I, or should I ask the audience or just wait and hope, that there’s a less than a 50% chance the original mix soundtrack elements for the 70mm version ever shows up on Bluray NOT!
I don’t want STAR WARS in its 7th remix state because that is what would happen a 7.1 I can almost smell it right now…wow what purpose would that serve? Why not just shove a lightsaber up are asses George! We would, we respectfully like to have the originals, and please no sly re-mixing its all ole hat now, I’m far too trained ear to spot a FAKE 5.1 mix!
The DVD could have been given a bit more effort rather than a rush it out to make the STAR WARS CASH COW even fatter than it already is! Lucas just got sloppy and sheer greedy at this point! I took the DVD so called limited edition back and got it changed for another DVD because the price was a sheer disgrace.
I do have the box-set edition released 2004 and laserdiscs. Its odd now the limited edition is so cheap at HMV less than or under £8.00 hmm should I, or should I ask the audience or just wait and hope, that there’s a less than a 50% chance the original mix soundtrack elements for the 70mm version ever shows up on Bluray NOT!
I don’t want STAR WARS in its 7th remix state because that is what would happen a 7.1 I can almost smell it right now…wow what purpose would that serve? Why not just shove a lightsaber up are asses George! We would, we respectfully like to have the originals, and please no sly re-mixing its all ole hat now, I’m far too trained ear to spot a FAKE 5.1 mix!
Why is it, that no matter how much I like Star Wars, that after reading mind-rotting comments from fans, across multiple forums, that I feel like burning everything I own,related to these films? I would throw my Executor set, if it wasn't so damn heavy...
personally.... I can't wait for the editions where lucas has all the backgrounds completely erased, and redone up in CG, so that way episodes IV-VI will look just as awkward as I-III.
;-)
btw- does anyone have the best buy exclusive tin box? is the packaging inside any different? thanks again.
;-)
btw- does anyone have the best buy exclusive tin box? is the packaging inside any different? thanks again.
Chear Matt. Just to help Lucas out,I think I'll get them. We don't want him struggling financially now do we?
Am I the only one who think this is the funniest read ever? I mean the conversation, not the review (although the comment about the original versions having anamorphic menus is kinda funny).
As what comes to Lucas' treatment of the original versions, I think there is a difference between artistic integrity and just being a stubborn ass. Take Brazil for example, I bet Terry Gilliam hates the TV version with his guts but it was included in the Criterion box set anyway. And it wasn't even done with his permission. (the cut I mean, not it's inclusion in the box set)
As what comes to Lucas' treatment of the original versions, I think there is a difference between artistic integrity and just being a stubborn ass. Take Brazil for example, I bet Terry Gilliam hates the TV version with his guts but it was included in the Criterion box set anyway. And it wasn't even done with his permission. (the cut I mean, not it's inclusion in the box set)
Ticktock, you're boring me now. I can't be arsed to respond to yet another one of your posts at length, and we're going around in circles. It's clear to me that we're never going to agree, so leave it at that.
DickGould3 wrote: I agree with ticktock... It seems like the mod of this site is taking things way too personally. Star Wars seems to evoke these kinds of emotions from fans. I guess it's just another part of the puzzle.
Very funny Dick - banned
Register again and you'll be reported to your ISP.
Very funny Dick - banned
Register again and you'll be reported to your ISP.
I agree with ticktock... It seems like the mod of this site is taking things way too personally. Star Wars seems to evoke these kinds of emotions from fans. I guess it's just another part of the puzzle.
Just a couple of clarifications:
Chris Gould wrote:
Around about when you posted this:
'And then you say this: "We have come to expect more than non-anamorphic transfers from Laserdisc masters in the year 2006" But don't you get it?! That's not what people are asking for, they're asking for a nostalgic, non-tampered with original edition - that's the whole point! So where does that end? Do you want the original without creative changes? Technical changes? Audio and digital changes? What? Where does it end!'
You are equating 16:9 enhancement with creative/technical changes. If these discs were anamorphic the only difference would be that they'd have 25% more resolution.
Look at the pronouns - did I ever say "I" anywhere in there? Or did I say "people"? In none of my posts did I ever refer to my personal preferences, I was just stating that there are actually some people that feel that way, just the same as there are some people who feel as you do, thus there will always be a large contingent of people unsatisfied with any release...PERIOD! I never stated my opinion on the matter as I don't really have one, but there are PEOPLE (again, not me) that feel the opposite of you.
[quote=Chris Gould wrote]
If you go back and read your first post it reads very much like you're bashing me as a 'fanboy' because I state that a non-anamorphic release isn't good enough. That coupled with your other comments about 'whining' Star Wars fans was enough to convince me that you'd only posted to star an argument. As I said in my previous post, perhaps if you'd used the plural rather than the singular I wouldn't have come to that conclusion.
[quote]
I did go back and read and I clearly printed "THE INTERNET FANBOY," not "CHRIS GOULD THE INTERNET FANBOY". If I were speaking about you or directly to you I would have addressed you seeing as you're a mod on this site, but since I wasn't I used a very vague abstraction that, for some reason, you took as a personal attack...
[quote=Chris Gould wrote]
Don't give me all that 'you curse so you're immature' b*****ks. One has nothing to do with the other. The statements I made are accurate within the context of the discussion. [quote]
Again, you're attributing words to me that I never said (something it seems like you do often on here). I never said that if you curse you're immature; hell, I curse all the time! It's when you curse AT people and in the form of personal attacks that make it immature. And I don't see how you can say it's "in context" to curse at or call people names just because they don't agree with you...what kind of world do you live in where that's acceptable?
Chris Gould wrote:
Around about when you posted this:
'And then you say this: "We have come to expect more than non-anamorphic transfers from Laserdisc masters in the year 2006" But don't you get it?! That's not what people are asking for, they're asking for a nostalgic, non-tampered with original edition - that's the whole point! So where does that end? Do you want the original without creative changes? Technical changes? Audio and digital changes? What? Where does it end!'
You are equating 16:9 enhancement with creative/technical changes. If these discs were anamorphic the only difference would be that they'd have 25% more resolution.
Look at the pronouns - did I ever say "I" anywhere in there? Or did I say "people"? In none of my posts did I ever refer to my personal preferences, I was just stating that there are actually some people that feel that way, just the same as there are some people who feel as you do, thus there will always be a large contingent of people unsatisfied with any release...PERIOD! I never stated my opinion on the matter as I don't really have one, but there are PEOPLE (again, not me) that feel the opposite of you.
[quote=Chris Gould wrote]
If you go back and read your first post it reads very much like you're bashing me as a 'fanboy' because I state that a non-anamorphic release isn't good enough. That coupled with your other comments about 'whining' Star Wars fans was enough to convince me that you'd only posted to star an argument. As I said in my previous post, perhaps if you'd used the plural rather than the singular I wouldn't have come to that conclusion.
[quote]
I did go back and read and I clearly printed "THE INTERNET FANBOY," not "CHRIS GOULD THE INTERNET FANBOY". If I were speaking about you or directly to you I would have addressed you seeing as you're a mod on this site, but since I wasn't I used a very vague abstraction that, for some reason, you took as a personal attack...
[quote=Chris Gould wrote]
Don't give me all that 'you curse so you're immature' b*****ks. One has nothing to do with the other. The statements I made are accurate within the context of the discussion. [quote]
Again, you're attributing words to me that I never said (something it seems like you do often on here). I never said that if you curse you're immature; hell, I curse all the time! It's when you curse AT people and in the form of personal attacks that make it immature. And I don't see how you can say it's "in context" to curse at or call people names just because they don't agree with you...what kind of world do you live in where that's acceptable?
ticktock wrote: I AM a teacher and a coach and I DO call my students by their last name as a sign of RESPECT (in Japan, the most honorific of cultures, to call an acquaintance by anything else is dishonorable).
Well I'm clearly not Japanese, and if the details you used to register on this site are accurate, I'm guessing you're not either. In the UK (and the US as well I'd imagine), being directly addressed by your surname is rather rude. I know quite a few people who don't like it.
Quote: And most importantly - when did I ever say this:
"You're trying to claim that restoring the films to their original condition and giving them anamorphic enhancement is tantamount to altering them."
Around about when you posted this:
'And then you say this: "We have come to expect more than non-anamorphic transfers from Laserdisc masters in the year 2006" But don't you get it?! That's not what people are asking for, they're asking for a nostalgic, non-tampered with original edition - that's the whole point! So where does that end? Do you want the original without creative changes? Technical changes? Audio and digital changes? What? Where does it end!'
You are equating 16:9 enhancement with creative/technical changes. If these discs were anamorphic the only difference would be that they'd have 25% more resolution.
Quote: Please, if you're a mod and you don't abuse your powers, go back to all my posts and find where I even remotely state something like that...
I just did. You wrote it, I didn't put words in your mouth.
Quote: And another correction on your part: exactly when did I "single you out"???? In my initial post I did not even mention you, I spoke about the STAR WARS FANBOY...
If you go back and read your first post it reads very much like you're bashing me as a 'fanboy' because I state that a non-anamorphic release isn't good enough. That coupled with your other comments about 'whining' Star Wars fans was enough to convince me that you'd only posted to star an argument. As I said in my previous post, perhaps if you'd used the plural rather than the singular I wouldn't have come to that conclusion.
Quote: Statements like "You are wrong," and "your pig-headedness" as well as you cursing at me just tells me that I'm not conversing with anyone of the maturity level that I thought...
Don't give me all that 'you curse so you're immature' b*****ks. One has nothing to do with the other. The statements I made are accurate within the context of the discussion.
But like you said, enough of this. It could drag on forever. I guess it's entirely possible that this is another one of those times on the Internet where one misunderstanding leads to another; that you really didn't mean to cause offence with your fist post, and I overreacted. Guess we'll never know for sure.
Well I'm clearly not Japanese, and if the details you used to register on this site are accurate, I'm guessing you're not either. In the UK (and the US as well I'd imagine), being directly addressed by your surname is rather rude. I know quite a few people who don't like it.
Quote: And most importantly - when did I ever say this:
"You're trying to claim that restoring the films to their original condition and giving them anamorphic enhancement is tantamount to altering them."
Around about when you posted this:
'And then you say this: "We have come to expect more than non-anamorphic transfers from Laserdisc masters in the year 2006" But don't you get it?! That's not what people are asking for, they're asking for a nostalgic, non-tampered with original edition - that's the whole point! So where does that end? Do you want the original without creative changes? Technical changes? Audio and digital changes? What? Where does it end!'
You are equating 16:9 enhancement with creative/technical changes. If these discs were anamorphic the only difference would be that they'd have 25% more resolution.
Quote: Please, if you're a mod and you don't abuse your powers, go back to all my posts and find where I even remotely state something like that...
I just did. You wrote it, I didn't put words in your mouth.
Quote: And another correction on your part: exactly when did I "single you out"???? In my initial post I did not even mention you, I spoke about the STAR WARS FANBOY...
If you go back and read your first post it reads very much like you're bashing me as a 'fanboy' because I state that a non-anamorphic release isn't good enough. That coupled with your other comments about 'whining' Star Wars fans was enough to convince me that you'd only posted to star an argument. As I said in my previous post, perhaps if you'd used the plural rather than the singular I wouldn't have come to that conclusion.
Quote: Statements like "You are wrong," and "your pig-headedness" as well as you cursing at me just tells me that I'm not conversing with anyone of the maturity level that I thought...
Don't give me all that 'you curse so you're immature' b*****ks. One has nothing to do with the other. The statements I made are accurate within the context of the discussion.
But like you said, enough of this. It could drag on forever. I guess it's entirely possible that this is another one of those times on the Internet where one misunderstanding leads to another; that you really didn't mean to cause offence with your fist post, and I overreacted. Guess we'll never know for sure.
We are being given the chance to see the original trilogy on DVD. I for one am greatful. The limited release factor gives incentive to those who do not believe the originals will be featured in the big 30th Anniversary boxset. Everybody knows the 30th Ann set will have even more alterations and things that will upset certain people. I look forward to every new Star Wars DVD release and view Lucas's changes like a man's personal evolution as a film maker. Don't get me wrong Lucas is a business man and knows where his bread is buttered. I truly think that these current DVD releases are like Lucas saying: "I'm giving fans what they have been crying for since the begining of the DVD format." If you stop and consider when the DVD format was "new" anamorphic widescreen was not the standard and therefore it is entirely reasonable for Lucas to be giving us these editions preserving the classic look and standard of DVDs we would have gotten had they been released in 1997. It's the equivalent of say Criterion releasing the Star Wars Trilogy on DVD. A lot of times Criterion simply ported over their laserdisc transfers directly to DVD and look at how Criterion holds some of the most sought after movie titles. Another way this is rationalized is when you have the original trilogy packaged with the 2004 releases. The Alien movies have done it. If you look at The Alien Quadrilogy you have your choice of either the original theatrical releases or the SE. My point is that Lucas will continue to alter his movies until he feels he has fully realized his vision. Nobody can fault him for that because that is something few people get to do in life. Lucas should be commended for has passion and be praised for striving to bring us the full picture. The originals will never be forgotten but I do not see the changes in Star Wars as negative disrespect for the theatrical releases, but rather as more pieces to the ever evolving puzzle that is Star Wars. Someday Lucas will accomplish his goal in this lifetime and people will still complain. I for one will continue to purchase the various releases until the circle is finally complete.
Chris Gould wrote: ticktock wrote: Um, sorry but if you didn't want to be called that name then maybe you shouldn't have put it as your screen name? I have no problem calling you something else if you prefer, but threatening to ban someone that referred to you by your screen name and who had no prior knowledge of what you prefer to be called is an extreme misuse of power...that'd be like me threatening you for calling me "tock" even though you didn't know I don't like to be called that...
...and sorry if I just don't sway my opinion to your side because "everyone else disagrees" with me (I'm not that fickle), especially seeing as that's all of five people since I posted.
So, let me get this straight: your stance as a mod is that everyone has to agree with you and that if the majority rules then one side is right and the other is wrong? Last I checked this was a public forum where people discuss and *gasp* actually respectfully disagree with each other?! And I have disrespected no one; if I did so with you then you have my rationale above.
Don't be so f**king obtuse. You know full well that I post using my real name, rather than hiding behind some Internet pseudonym. Referring to me by surname only is extremely presumptuous and more than a little rude. I can't imagine you go around referring to everyone you meet by their surnames. Are you a f**king headmaster? And don't start with all that disingenuous 'I'm sorry' when you clearly aren't. If you're going to have a pop at me at least have the conviction to follow it through.
My stance as a mod is that if you come onto the board spouting ill-informed c**p about the people who want anamorphic enhancement, you can't very well complain when those same people call you for talking s**te. You say that your post was a generalisation (although you used the singular 'fanboy', rather than the plural), but not one person before you actually commented on wanting 5.1 sound or anything else that would constitute an alteration to the film. Ordinarily things aren't black and white, and 'respectful' discussion is encouraged (not that your initial post was respectful to other Star Wars fans), but in this case you are wrong. You're trying to claim that restoring the films to their original condition and giving them anamorphic enhancement is tantamount to altering them. It's not, and only your pig-headedness is preventing you from seeing that after a number of people have pointed it out to you.
I also find it interesting that you'd single me out when someone else in this thread flat-out called you an idiot way before I got involved.
Okay, someone needs a timeout. Seriously, though, I AM a teacher and a coach and I DO call my students by their last name as a sign of RESPECT (in Japan, the most honorific of cultures, to call an acquaintance by anything else is dishonorable). So, yeah, sorry if you took offense to being called by your last name, but keep in mind that you're in the minority about that. Secondly, you say that I very well know that you don't like to be called GOULD, but if you took the time to check you'd see I have all of 22 posts - I'm not exactly a site regualar.
And most importantly - when did I ever say this:
"You're trying to claim that restoring the films to their original condition and giving them anamorphic enhancement is tantamount to altering them."
Please, if you're a mod and you don't abuse your powers, go back to all my posts and find where I even remotely state something like that...what I was saying is that there ARE lots of people who believe that very statement (again, NOT ME) and that in the end no one is going to be happy with this release. That's all. Never did I once say that giving them anamorphic enhancement is altering them or anything the like. So instead of coming out with the attacks you could take the time to not put words in other people's mouth.
And another correction on your part: exactly when did I "single you out"???? In my initial post I did not even mention you, I spoke about the STAR WARS FANBOY...if you are one then that's something I did not know. And maybe I decided to enter into a discourse with you and not the one who called me an "idiot" because maybe I'm smart enough to know that one conversation would have been nothing but attacks and slander whereas the other might actually provide a good debate...looks like I'm starting to go wrong on the former because you seem to be no better than the other poster. Statements like "You are wrong," and "your pig-headedness" as well as you cursing at me just tells me that I'm not conversing with anyone of the maturity level that I thought...
Now I'll end this right now, but I still don't believe that I'm "wrong" seeing as I never stated my position to begin with! Like I said I'm happy with my '95 VHS releases and my '04 DVD's...I could care less one way or the other about anamorphic vs. nonanamorphic for this release as I'm NOT GETTING IT!
...and sorry if I just don't sway my opinion to your side because "everyone else disagrees" with me (I'm not that fickle), especially seeing as that's all of five people since I posted.
So, let me get this straight: your stance as a mod is that everyone has to agree with you and that if the majority rules then one side is right and the other is wrong? Last I checked this was a public forum where people discuss and *gasp* actually respectfully disagree with each other?! And I have disrespected no one; if I did so with you then you have my rationale above.
Don't be so f**king obtuse. You know full well that I post using my real name, rather than hiding behind some Internet pseudonym. Referring to me by surname only is extremely presumptuous and more than a little rude. I can't imagine you go around referring to everyone you meet by their surnames. Are you a f**king headmaster? And don't start with all that disingenuous 'I'm sorry' when you clearly aren't. If you're going to have a pop at me at least have the conviction to follow it through.
My stance as a mod is that if you come onto the board spouting ill-informed c**p about the people who want anamorphic enhancement, you can't very well complain when those same people call you for talking s**te. You say that your post was a generalisation (although you used the singular 'fanboy', rather than the plural), but not one person before you actually commented on wanting 5.1 sound or anything else that would constitute an alteration to the film. Ordinarily things aren't black and white, and 'respectful' discussion is encouraged (not that your initial post was respectful to other Star Wars fans), but in this case you are wrong. You're trying to claim that restoring the films to their original condition and giving them anamorphic enhancement is tantamount to altering them. It's not, and only your pig-headedness is preventing you from seeing that after a number of people have pointed it out to you.
I also find it interesting that you'd single me out when someone else in this thread flat-out called you an idiot way before I got involved.
Okay, someone needs a timeout. Seriously, though, I AM a teacher and a coach and I DO call my students by their last name as a sign of RESPECT (in Japan, the most honorific of cultures, to call an acquaintance by anything else is dishonorable). So, yeah, sorry if you took offense to being called by your last name, but keep in mind that you're in the minority about that. Secondly, you say that I very well know that you don't like to be called GOULD, but if you took the time to check you'd see I have all of 22 posts - I'm not exactly a site regualar.
And most importantly - when did I ever say this:
"You're trying to claim that restoring the films to their original condition and giving them anamorphic enhancement is tantamount to altering them."
Please, if you're a mod and you don't abuse your powers, go back to all my posts and find where I even remotely state something like that...what I was saying is that there ARE lots of people who believe that very statement (again, NOT ME) and that in the end no one is going to be happy with this release. That's all. Never did I once say that giving them anamorphic enhancement is altering them or anything the like. So instead of coming out with the attacks you could take the time to not put words in other people's mouth.
And another correction on your part: exactly when did I "single you out"???? In my initial post I did not even mention you, I spoke about the STAR WARS FANBOY...if you are one then that's something I did not know. And maybe I decided to enter into a discourse with you and not the one who called me an "idiot" because maybe I'm smart enough to know that one conversation would have been nothing but attacks and slander whereas the other might actually provide a good debate...looks like I'm starting to go wrong on the former because you seem to be no better than the other poster. Statements like "You are wrong," and "your pig-headedness" as well as you cursing at me just tells me that I'm not conversing with anyone of the maturity level that I thought...
Now I'll end this right now, but I still don't believe that I'm "wrong" seeing as I never stated my position to begin with! Like I said I'm happy with my '95 VHS releases and my '04 DVD's...I could care less one way or the other about anamorphic vs. nonanamorphic for this release as I'm NOT GETTING IT!
---You do not have the "originals" if you have the silver VHS set - that is the 1997 Special Edition VHS set----
OOOOOOH! Why do people tell me what I have not got when I obviously know what I have got!
They are the ORIGINAL versions thank you very much. I'm not an idiot!
These were out before the 'new' versions even existed. They are 1994 releases.
'Digitally Re-Mastered, hi-fi stereo, Widescreen releases of the original versions.
I did not ask to be TOLD what I do not have, when I KNOW what I have.
I simply asked if the non-anamorphic, not re-mastered DVD's were actually no better than the remastered, widescreen VHS if there was someone here who had seen the DVD's but also owned these VHS releases as they are pretty nice transfers and the DVD's would have to be 'zoomed' the same as the VHS.
OOOOOOH! Why do people tell me what I have not got when I obviously know what I have got!
They are the ORIGINAL versions thank you very much. I'm not an idiot!
These were out before the 'new' versions even existed. They are 1994 releases.
'Digitally Re-Mastered, hi-fi stereo, Widescreen releases of the original versions.
I did not ask to be TOLD what I do not have, when I KNOW what I have.
I simply asked if the non-anamorphic, not re-mastered DVD's were actually no better than the remastered, widescreen VHS if there was someone here who had seen the DVD's but also owned these VHS releases as they are pretty nice transfers and the DVD's would have to be 'zoomed' the same as the VHS.
Sam wrote: Does anyone have any idea why they changed Aunt Beru voice? Also Chris does the disc contain the Mono mix or are you refering to the original release?
The new disc only contains a 2.0 surround audio track, and from what I can tell is the same audio track used for the '93 LD release, which was an all-new mix at the time. Star Wars has had a number of differnet sound mixes since its release and all with their own slight differences; the one used for the '93 LDs is different from the previous 2.0 surround audio on LD and VHS editions prior to 1993. The mono one Chris referred to hasn't ever been available on home video that I'm aware of.
As to why Aunt Beru's voice has changed over the years who really knows. I'm fairly sure that her dialogue was dubbed in the original release of the film back in 1977 too as that was the case with many of the other actors, such as the bartender at the cantina.
The new disc only contains a 2.0 surround audio track, and from what I can tell is the same audio track used for the '93 LD release, which was an all-new mix at the time. Star Wars has had a number of differnet sound mixes since its release and all with their own slight differences; the one used for the '93 LDs is different from the previous 2.0 surround audio on LD and VHS editions prior to 1993. The mono one Chris referred to hasn't ever been available on home video that I'm aware of.
As to why Aunt Beru's voice has changed over the years who really knows. I'm fairly sure that her dialogue was dubbed in the original release of the film back in 1977 too as that was the case with many of the other actors, such as the bartender at the cantina.
Does anyone have any idea why they changed Aunt Beru voice? Also Chris does the disc contain the Mono mix or are you refering to the original release?
Dave Brock wrote: Question....Answer it seriously please.
I have the original versions on remastered widescreen VHS (the 'silver' titles releases) and seeing as I am not really that bothered about extras or the '2004' versions and seeing that the prints used are non-anamorphic and not remastered...SHOULD I SIMPLY STICK WITH MY VHS?
Have they got a superior transfer to the DVd versions, and if not is the difference worth it?
Thanks.
Well, I guess if you don't mind the 2004 versions then no, but if you want a decent copy of the unaltered originals for whatever reason then yes. The just released discs have pretty much the best picture quality I've seen as far as the unaltered films go, and as you well know there are plenty of advantages to the DVD format over VHS other than just picture quality.
I have the original versions on remastered widescreen VHS (the 'silver' titles releases) and seeing as I am not really that bothered about extras or the '2004' versions and seeing that the prints used are non-anamorphic and not remastered...SHOULD I SIMPLY STICK WITH MY VHS?
Have they got a superior transfer to the DVd versions, and if not is the difference worth it?
Thanks.
Well, I guess if you don't mind the 2004 versions then no, but if you want a decent copy of the unaltered originals for whatever reason then yes. The just released discs have pretty much the best picture quality I've seen as far as the unaltered films go, and as you well know there are plenty of advantages to the DVD format over VHS other than just picture quality.
Lucas should just release a Star Wars editor edition where we can cut them how we want them ourselves!!! Then we'll all be happy!!!
ticktock wrote: Um, sorry but if you didn't want to be called that name then maybe you shouldn't have put it as your screen name? I have no problem calling you something else if you prefer, but threatening to ban someone that referred to you by your screen name and who had no prior knowledge of what you prefer to be called is an extreme misuse of power...that'd be like me threatening you for calling me "tock" even though you didn't know I don't like to be called that...
...and sorry if I just don't sway my opinion to your side because "everyone else disagrees" with me (I'm not that fickle), especially seeing as that's all of five people since I posted.
So, let me get this straight: your stance as a mod is that everyone has to agree with you and that if the majority rules then one side is right and the other is wrong? Last I checked this was a public forum where people discuss and *gasp* actually respectfully disagree with each other?! And I have disrespected no one; if I did so with you then you have my rationale above.
Don't be so f**king obtuse. You know full well that I post using my real name, rather than hiding behind some Internet pseudonym. Referring to me by surname only is extremely presumptuous and more than a little rude. I can't imagine you go around referring to everyone you meet by their surnames. Are you a f**king headmaster? And don't start with all that disingenuous 'I'm sorry' when you clearly aren't. If you're going to have a pop at me at least have the conviction to follow it through.
My stance as a mod is that if you come onto the board spouting ill-informed c**p about the people who want anamorphic enhancement, you can't very well complain when those same people call you for talking s**te. You say that your post was a generalisation (although you used the singular 'fanboy', rather than the plural), but not one person before you actually commented on wanting 5.1 sound or anything else that would constitute an alteration to the film. Ordinarily things aren't black and white, and 'respectful' discussion is encouraged (not that your initial post was respectful to other Star Wars fans), but in this case you are wrong. You're trying to claim that restoring the films to their original condition and giving them anamorphic enhancement is tantamount to altering them. It's not, and only your pig-headedness is preventing you from seeing that after a number of people have pointed it out to you.
I also find it interesting that you'd single me out when someone else in this thread flat-out called you an idiot way before I got involved.
...and sorry if I just don't sway my opinion to your side because "everyone else disagrees" with me (I'm not that fickle), especially seeing as that's all of five people since I posted.
So, let me get this straight: your stance as a mod is that everyone has to agree with you and that if the majority rules then one side is right and the other is wrong? Last I checked this was a public forum where people discuss and *gasp* actually respectfully disagree with each other?! And I have disrespected no one; if I did so with you then you have my rationale above.
Don't be so f**king obtuse. You know full well that I post using my real name, rather than hiding behind some Internet pseudonym. Referring to me by surname only is extremely presumptuous and more than a little rude. I can't imagine you go around referring to everyone you meet by their surnames. Are you a f**king headmaster? And don't start with all that disingenuous 'I'm sorry' when you clearly aren't. If you're going to have a pop at me at least have the conviction to follow it through.
My stance as a mod is that if you come onto the board spouting ill-informed c**p about the people who want anamorphic enhancement, you can't very well complain when those same people call you for talking s**te. You say that your post was a generalisation (although you used the singular 'fanboy', rather than the plural), but not one person before you actually commented on wanting 5.1 sound or anything else that would constitute an alteration to the film. Ordinarily things aren't black and white, and 'respectful' discussion is encouraged (not that your initial post was respectful to other Star Wars fans), but in this case you are wrong. You're trying to claim that restoring the films to their original condition and giving them anamorphic enhancement is tantamount to altering them. It's not, and only your pig-headedness is preventing you from seeing that after a number of people have pointed it out to you.
I also find it interesting that you'd single me out when someone else in this thread flat-out called you an idiot way before I got involved.
You do not have the "originals" if you have the silver VHS set - that is the 1997 Special Edition VHS set (the DVD set that came out in 2004 is the 1997 Special Edition plus some additional changes). If you have the original, unaltered VHS set then they would be from the initial VHS release or the remastered 1995 VHS release (the box set is black for this one).
Dave Brock wrote: Question....Answer it seriously please.
I have the original versions on remastered widescreen VHS (the 'silver' titles releases) and seeing as I am not really that bothered about extras or the '2004' versions and seeing that the prints used are non-anamorphic and not remastered...SHOULD I SIMPLY STICK WITH MY VHS?
Have they got a superior transfer to the DVd versions, and if not is the difference worth it?
Thanks.
Dave Brock wrote: Question....Answer it seriously please.
I have the original versions on remastered widescreen VHS (the 'silver' titles releases) and seeing as I am not really that bothered about extras or the '2004' versions and seeing that the prints used are non-anamorphic and not remastered...SHOULD I SIMPLY STICK WITH MY VHS?
Have they got a superior transfer to the DVd versions, and if not is the difference worth it?
Thanks.
I'm not sure about the UK, but those Silver titles were Special Edition releases here. Does Greedo shoot first on your VHS Dave? I'm going to wait and see what happens next year for the 30th Ann. of the first film before I bother buying the series again (I've said before that the changes really don't bother me that much, other than the sarlac pit monster). If you've got original, widescreen versions there Dave, I'd stick with them.
Chris Gould wrote: Ticktock, I let it slide the first time, but if you refer to me as Gould once more I'll ban your arse. If you want to come onto this site and post comments, have a bit of respect for the people who take the time to actually bring you the content in the first place. You're clearly on a hiding to nothing as everyone else has disagreed with you, so I'd just leave it if I were you.
Um, sorry but if you didn't want to be called that name then maybe you shouldn't have put it as your screen name? I have no problem calling you something else if you prefer, but threatening to ban someone that referred to you by your screen name and who had no prior knowledge of what you prefer to be called is an extreme misuse of power...that'd be like me threatening you for calling me "tock" even though you didn't know I don't like to be called that...
...and sorry if I just don't sway my opinion to your side because "everyone else disagrees" with me (I'm not that fickle), especially seeing as that's all of five people since I posted.
So, let me get this straight: your stance as a mod is that everyone has to agree with you and that if the majority rules then one side is right and the other is wrong? Last I checked this was a public forum where people discuss and *gasp* actually respectfully disagree with each other?! And I have disrespected no one; if I did so with you then you have my rationale above.
Um, sorry but if you didn't want to be called that name then maybe you shouldn't have put it as your screen name? I have no problem calling you something else if you prefer, but threatening to ban someone that referred to you by your screen name and who had no prior knowledge of what you prefer to be called is an extreme misuse of power...that'd be like me threatening you for calling me "tock" even though you didn't know I don't like to be called that...
...and sorry if I just don't sway my opinion to your side because "everyone else disagrees" with me (I'm not that fickle), especially seeing as that's all of five people since I posted.
So, let me get this straight: your stance as a mod is that everyone has to agree with you and that if the majority rules then one side is right and the other is wrong? Last I checked this was a public forum where people discuss and *gasp* actually respectfully disagree with each other?! And I have disrespected no one; if I did so with you then you have my rationale above.
Question....Answer it seriously please.
I have the original versions on remastered widescreen VHS (the 'silver' titles releases) and seeing as I am not really that bothered about extras or the '2004' versions and seeing that the prints used are non-anamorphic and not remastered...SHOULD I SIMPLY STICK WITH MY VHS?
Have they got a superior transfer to the DVd versions, and if not is the difference worth it?
Thanks.
I have the original versions on remastered widescreen VHS (the 'silver' titles releases) and seeing as I am not really that bothered about extras or the '2004' versions and seeing that the prints used are non-anamorphic and not remastered...SHOULD I SIMPLY STICK WITH MY VHS?
Have they got a superior transfer to the DVd versions, and if not is the difference worth it?
Thanks.
hey guys.... I was just wondering if anyone out there managed to pick up the "tin box" collectable set from Best Buy? the picture of it on the website looks super slim, and I was wondering it actually has the same cases (as the individual releases) all stuffed into that tiny box... or if it had a completely different kind of packaging inside? thanks in advance.
Ticktock, I let it slide the first time, but if you refer to me as Gould once more I'll ban your arse. If you want to come onto this site and post comments, have a bit of respect for the people who take the time to actually bring you the content in the first place. You're clearly on a hiding to nothing as everyone else has disagreed with you, so I'd just leave it if I were you.
Anamorphic DVDs and films shot with anamorphic lenses are two different things. They use a similar principle but are quite different. Any widescreen film, anamorphic, flat or otherwise, can and should be presented with anamorphic enchancement on DVD - especially in 2006, where 4:3 TVs are hard to find and hi-def TVs are on the increase. It's interesting that since this Star Wars farce began, people have been cropping up on forums such as Home Theatre defending Lucas by stating that to release the original trilogy in anamorphic DVDs would make the films different to the originals. Rubbish!
Regarding sound, a 5.1 track for the original release can be done for all three films using the six-track stereo masters from the 70mm prints.
It's a real shame that Lucas continues to treat such great films like he was a stern parent desperate to make his children conform.
Regarding sound, a 5.1 track for the original release can be done for all three films using the six-track stereo masters from the 70mm prints.
It's a real shame that Lucas continues to treat such great films like he was a stern parent desperate to make his children conform.
But your contention makes no sense at all. Having the films Animorphic is not altering them AT ALL. It's just allowing them to be seen correctly on a 16:9 screen.
Just Passing wrote: ticktock wrote: And then you say this: "We have come to expect more than non-anamorphic transfers from Laserdisc masters in the year 2006" But don't you get it?! That's not what people are asking for, they're asking for a nostalgic, non-tampered with original edition - that's the whole point! So where does that end? Do you want the original without creative changes? Technical changes? Audio and digital changes? What? Where does it end!
Had to register when I saw this comment!
Dammit ticktock you are absolutely right. Star Wars should be letterbox. The way it was meant to be. And I support you in this.
In fact, I'll give you some advice. You're movie watching experience should no longer be soiled by interference from third parties. The next time you are in a cinema, and the curtain goes up, and you see a 2.35:1 ratio film begin to play, get up, walk to the projection booth, and demand, demand I say, that the projectionist replace the anamorphic lens with a normal spherical one.
How dare they distort these films by stretching them anamorphically. They've been doing it for years you know. When Star Wars first was exhibited in a movie theatre, they put it through that anamorphic nonsense. It should be in a 4:3 frame, and who cares if everything looks skinny. That's the way it's printed on the film, that's the way it should be projected dammit!
It gets worse you know. Those Back To The Future discs, the anamorphic ones. They shouldn't be anamorphic. Those were shot in a 1.85:1 ratio, letterbox, and projected that way in cinemas. They used a normal spherical lens, but when it came to the DVD, they went and fouled up the authentic experience by mastering the discs with anamorphic images. They're all raping our childhoods I tell you.
God I hope the sarcasm got through. The number of times people take me seriously when I rant like this...
...hey, I'm not saying that's how I feel, I'm just saying those are actual complaints that I've heard (go to the message boards on THEFORCE.NET if you don't believe me). My whole point was that no one is going to be completely satisfied; on one side you have those that want a complete transfer of the '77 prints in non-animorphic and with mono sound, and then you have those like GOULD that want an anamorphic, remastered release...you're not going to please everyone and that's my whole contention.
Had to register when I saw this comment!
Dammit ticktock you are absolutely right. Star Wars should be letterbox. The way it was meant to be. And I support you in this.
In fact, I'll give you some advice. You're movie watching experience should no longer be soiled by interference from third parties. The next time you are in a cinema, and the curtain goes up, and you see a 2.35:1 ratio film begin to play, get up, walk to the projection booth, and demand, demand I say, that the projectionist replace the anamorphic lens with a normal spherical one.
How dare they distort these films by stretching them anamorphically. They've been doing it for years you know. When Star Wars first was exhibited in a movie theatre, they put it through that anamorphic nonsense. It should be in a 4:3 frame, and who cares if everything looks skinny. That's the way it's printed on the film, that's the way it should be projected dammit!
It gets worse you know. Those Back To The Future discs, the anamorphic ones. They shouldn't be anamorphic. Those were shot in a 1.85:1 ratio, letterbox, and projected that way in cinemas. They used a normal spherical lens, but when it came to the DVD, they went and fouled up the authentic experience by mastering the discs with anamorphic images. They're all raping our childhoods I tell you.
God I hope the sarcasm got through. The number of times people take me seriously when I rant like this...
...hey, I'm not saying that's how I feel, I'm just saying those are actual complaints that I've heard (go to the message boards on THEFORCE.NET if you don't believe me). My whole point was that no one is going to be completely satisfied; on one side you have those that want a complete transfer of the '77 prints in non-animorphic and with mono sound, and then you have those like GOULD that want an anamorphic, remastered release...you're not going to please everyone and that's my whole contention.
ticktock wrote: And then you say this: "We have come to expect more than non-anamorphic transfers from Laserdisc masters in the year 2006" But don't you get it?! That's not what people are asking for, they're asking for a nostalgic, non-tampered with original edition - that's the whole point! So where does that end? Do you want the original without creative changes? Technical changes? Audio and digital changes? What? Where does it end!
Had to register when I saw this comment!
Dammit ticktock you are absolutely right. Star Wars should be letterbox. The way it was meant to be. And I support you in this.
In fact, I'll give you some advice. You're movie watching experience should no longer be soiled by interference from third parties. The next time you are in a cinema, and the curtain goes up, and you see a 2.35:1 ratio film begin to play, get up, walk to the projection booth, and demand, demand I say, that the projectionist replace the anamorphic lens with a normal spherical one.
How dare they distort these films by stretching them anamorphically. They've been doing it for years you know. When Star Wars first was exhibited in a movie theatre, they put it through that anamorphic nonsense. It should be in a 4:3 frame, and who cares if everything looks skinny. That's the way it's printed on the film, that's the way it should be projected dammit!
It gets worse you know. Those Back To The Future discs, the anamorphic ones. They shouldn't be anamorphic. Those were shot in a 1.85:1 ratio, letterbox, and projected that way in cinemas. They used a normal spherical lens, but when it came to the DVD, they went and fouled up the authentic experience by mastering the discs with anamorphic images. They're all raping our childhoods I tell you.
God I hope the sarcasm got through. The number of times people take me seriously when I rant like this...
Had to register when I saw this comment!
Dammit ticktock you are absolutely right. Star Wars should be letterbox. The way it was meant to be. And I support you in this.
In fact, I'll give you some advice. You're movie watching experience should no longer be soiled by interference from third parties. The next time you are in a cinema, and the curtain goes up, and you see a 2.35:1 ratio film begin to play, get up, walk to the projection booth, and demand, demand I say, that the projectionist replace the anamorphic lens with a normal spherical one.
How dare they distort these films by stretching them anamorphically. They've been doing it for years you know. When Star Wars first was exhibited in a movie theatre, they put it through that anamorphic nonsense. It should be in a 4:3 frame, and who cares if everything looks skinny. That's the way it's printed on the film, that's the way it should be projected dammit!
It gets worse you know. Those Back To The Future discs, the anamorphic ones. They shouldn't be anamorphic. Those were shot in a 1.85:1 ratio, letterbox, and projected that way in cinemas. They used a normal spherical lens, but when it came to the DVD, they went and fouled up the authentic experience by mastering the discs with anamorphic images. They're all raping our childhoods I tell you.
God I hope the sarcasm got through. The number of times people take me seriously when I rant like this...
You lot should be grateful they didn't use a THX-approved VHS copy captured on a VCR with dodgy tracking. Anamorphic transfers are reserved for BloodRayne, Robocop 3, Battlefield Earth, Ultraviolet and such like...
First off, you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to basic DVD production or film restoration/preservation and obviously are too thick or just too bullheaded to listen to what a few have been trying to explain to you. Secondly, I'm not here to give a financial history of Star Wars or to point out the legal differences between the original versions and the special editions or a crash course in divorce law for that matter; do a little research and maybe what I'm talking about will become clear to you.
And then you say this: "We have come to expect more than non-anamorphic transfers from Laserdisc masters in the year 2006" But don't you get it?! That's not what people are asking for, they're asking for a nostalgic, non-tampered with original edition - that's the whole point! So where does that end? Do you want the original without creative changes? Technical changes? Audio and digital changes? What? Where does it end!
Matt wrote: ticktock wrote: His heart lies with the SPECIAL EDITIONS and as such he's not going to get solidly behind this project.
The main reason for the special editions to even exist is a completely legal matter involving money. You can go ahead and believe the spin machine and all the talk about how the special editons are definitive to him or whatever, but it's not the real reason behind the original versions not getting their own proper release.
...then what is? Because if it WERE money then wouldn't it make sense that he DID go balls-to-the-wall and remaster the orginal edition instead of just throwing the '93 LD's out there?
Matt wrote: ticktock wrote: His heart lies with the SPECIAL EDITIONS and as such he's not going to get solidly behind this project.
The main reason for the special editions to even exist is a completely legal matter involving money. You can go ahead and believe the spin machine and all the talk about how the special editons are definitive to him or whatever, but it's not the real reason behind the original versions not getting their own proper release.
...then what is? Because if it WERE money then wouldn't it make sense that he DID go balls-to-the-wall and remaster the orginal edition instead of just throwing the '93 LD's out there?
ticktock wrote: His heart lies with the SPECIAL EDITIONS and as such he's not going to get solidly behind this project.
The main reason for the special editions to even exist is a completely legal matter involving money. You can go ahead and believe the spin machine and all the talk about how the special editons are definitive to him or whatever, but it's not the real reason behind the original versions not getting their own proper release.
The main reason for the special editions to even exist is a completely legal matter involving money. You can go ahead and believe the spin machine and all the talk about how the special editons are definitive to him or whatever, but it's not the real reason behind the original versions not getting their own proper release.
Chris Gould wrote: I really couldn't be arsed Tom. Some people just can't seem to get their head around the fact that this is a DVD review website, and as such we review things from both a technical standpoint and a fan perspective. We have come to expect more than non-anamorphic transfers from Laserdisc masters in the year 2006. It seems ticktock is happy with that, but there are a lot of people who are not. They are the people Lucasfilm have been targeting with their ad campaign, not the casual Star Wars fan (who by ticktock's own admission 'couldn't give a rat's ass' ), and they are the people this review is aimed at.
I gave this set quite a favourable review in the end, in spite of its failings. I think the points I made were valid, and I would have made them if this had been a sub-par release of any classic film (not that I'd have to, because no one else would do it nowadays). Clinging to the notion that Lucasfilm didn't bother to remaster the film because they didn't think they could please all of the fans is incredibly naive. They didn't bother to remaster it because it was a last-minute inclusion, designed to make yet another release of the '04 editions more attractive and reclaim some of the profits 'lost' to bootleggers. If that's what they want to do, fair enough, but it angers me when people come along with a hostile attitude and proceed to call us 'fanboys' because we're not satisfied with it.
The only thing I'm saying is that if they made the OT cuts to your specifications there will still be a ton of people that aren't happy...the same for, say, someone that wants a direct transfer from the '77 cut, then YOU and those that feel as you do won't be happy...what I'm saying is that no matter what there are going to be people not pleased.
Seriously, think about this: who is going to buy this DVD set? I mean most people bought it in '04 and are content with what they have, and those that have held out from buying are holding out mainly for the "Super-special edition" box set that's coming in the future, leaving only the 25yr - 40yr old SW purist as a possible consumer. My feeling is this: Lucas really didn't want this version to see the light of day again but the demographic I just noted is VERY vocal and VERY demanding, leaving Lucas to throw out the '93 LD edition as kind of like, "Okay here you go, you've got three months to get it and I don't want to hear about it again!" His heart lies with the SPECIAL EDITIONS and as such he's not going to get solidly behind this project.
So seeing as, A) There is a relatively small demographic of possible consumers for this project, and B) This was a project that Lucas wasn't behind creatively or emotionally, and C) There is 0% possibility of pleasing this very nitpicky demographic...so you can see why we're getting what we're getting. I just don't see what the big deal is.
I gave this set quite a favourable review in the end, in spite of its failings. I think the points I made were valid, and I would have made them if this had been a sub-par release of any classic film (not that I'd have to, because no one else would do it nowadays). Clinging to the notion that Lucasfilm didn't bother to remaster the film because they didn't think they could please all of the fans is incredibly naive. They didn't bother to remaster it because it was a last-minute inclusion, designed to make yet another release of the '04 editions more attractive and reclaim some of the profits 'lost' to bootleggers. If that's what they want to do, fair enough, but it angers me when people come along with a hostile attitude and proceed to call us 'fanboys' because we're not satisfied with it.
The only thing I'm saying is that if they made the OT cuts to your specifications there will still be a ton of people that aren't happy...the same for, say, someone that wants a direct transfer from the '77 cut, then YOU and those that feel as you do won't be happy...what I'm saying is that no matter what there are going to be people not pleased.
Seriously, think about this: who is going to buy this DVD set? I mean most people bought it in '04 and are content with what they have, and those that have held out from buying are holding out mainly for the "Super-special edition" box set that's coming in the future, leaving only the 25yr - 40yr old SW purist as a possible consumer. My feeling is this: Lucas really didn't want this version to see the light of day again but the demographic I just noted is VERY vocal and VERY demanding, leaving Lucas to throw out the '93 LD edition as kind of like, "Okay here you go, you've got three months to get it and I don't want to hear about it again!" His heart lies with the SPECIAL EDITIONS and as such he's not going to get solidly behind this project.
So seeing as, A) There is a relatively small demographic of possible consumers for this project, and B) This was a project that Lucas wasn't behind creatively or emotionally, and C) There is 0% possibility of pleasing this very nitpicky demographic...so you can see why we're getting what we're getting. I just don't see what the big deal is.
moviewizguy wrote: I have a question: What is the difference with the 2004 version and this new version?
If you're meaning the 2004 DVD release and this one as it pertains to the updated version of Star Wars on the first disc, then no they are identical.
If you're meaning the 2004 DVD release and this one as it pertains to the updated version of Star Wars on the first disc, then no they are identical.
If that's actually a serious question, you can read my article on the very subject here.
I have a question: What is the difference with the 2004 version and this new version?
to heck with video quailty, if its watchable (which it is very very much so) I dont care, I'mjust glad to finally own a copy of the star wars grew up with, not this CRUD lucas presented to us last time!!! I wanna see vintage SW with no digital stuff!
I really couldn't be arsed Tom. Some people just can't seem to get their head around the fact that this is a DVD review website, and as such we review things from both a technical standpoint and a fan perspective. We have come to expect more than non-anamorphic transfers from Laserdisc masters in the year 2006. It seems ticktock is happy with that, but there are a lot of people who are not. They are the people Lucasfilm have been targeting with their ad campaign, not the casual Star Wars fan (who by ticktock's own admission 'couldn't give a rat's ass' ), and they are the people this review is aimed at.
I gave this set quite a favourable review in the end, in spite of its failings. I think the points I made were valid, and I would have made them if this had been a sub-par release of any classic film (not that I'd have to, because no one else would do it nowadays). Clinging to the notion that Lucasfilm didn't bother to remaster the film because they didn't think they could please all of the fans is incredibly naive. They didn't bother to remaster it because it was a last-minute inclusion, designed to make yet another release of the '04 editions more attractive and reclaim some of the profits 'lost' to bootleggers. If that's what they want to do, fair enough, but it angers me when people come along with a hostile attitude and proceed to call us 'fanboys' because we're not satisfied with it.
I gave this set quite a favourable review in the end, in spite of its failings. I think the points I made were valid, and I would have made them if this had been a sub-par release of any classic film (not that I'd have to, because no one else would do it nowadays). Clinging to the notion that Lucasfilm didn't bother to remaster the film because they didn't think they could please all of the fans is incredibly naive. They didn't bother to remaster it because it was a last-minute inclusion, designed to make yet another release of the '04 editions more attractive and reclaim some of the profits 'lost' to bootleggers. If that's what they want to do, fair enough, but it angers me when people come along with a hostile attitude and proceed to call us 'fanboys' because we're not satisfied with it.
Uh Oh, Chris has been called 'Gould' again - brace yourselves people
...er, GOULD did I ever say I was speaking to you specifically? Last I recalled this "ignaramus" didn't, as I used the generalized term "internet fanboy". The complaints I've listed are all complaints that I've heard before, and that's expected seeing as it is STAR WARS, but when is enough enough? And if you took the time out to read my ENTIRE post you would have seen that I referred to the product as not just a 70's product, but a 90's one seeing as it is based on the LD...
...and I'm sorry but what I said is true - there is no product out there that is scrutinized and complained about more than STAR WARS. You GOT a remastered version with the '04 DVD release so complaining that you're not getting one here is just overkill...yeah, you have to put up with the altered scenes and digital effects but don't complain as if there isn't a cleaned up version out there. If Lucasfilm acted on everyone's requests we'd have literally hundreds of different versions out there - I've read people that won't take less than a totally remastered cut, and then people that want a transfer straight from the '77 prints with pockmarks and all; then there's people that want it with a 5.1 mix and then people that want it in mono; then there's people that want it anamorphic and those that don't...do you see where I'm going? Lucasfilm is in a Catch-22 here because there'll always be a large portion of fans that will be unsatisfied regardless...
...oh, and one more thing: just think about who is really going to be buying this product - %97 of people out there could give a rat's @ss about whether or not Han shot first or not and are a-okay with the DVD's they have now, so really these DVD's have a very small market for potential buyers: not just fanboys but the fanboys that have a problem with the SE's, and the small minority that didn't pick the DVD's up already. So what you want is for Lucasfilm to go back and remaster the film again (let's not forget they did it for the '95 VHS release)???? From a practical business perspective that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, so LUCASFILM is really doing the smartest thing. Thinking they'd go balls-to-the-wall for such a miniscule demographic is really an absurd notion...like I said I'm a huge fanboy myself but I'm not going to double dip (I'm happy with the unaltered '95 VHS release)
...and I'm sorry but what I said is true - there is no product out there that is scrutinized and complained about more than STAR WARS. You GOT a remastered version with the '04 DVD release so complaining that you're not getting one here is just overkill...yeah, you have to put up with the altered scenes and digital effects but don't complain as if there isn't a cleaned up version out there. If Lucasfilm acted on everyone's requests we'd have literally hundreds of different versions out there - I've read people that won't take less than a totally remastered cut, and then people that want a transfer straight from the '77 prints with pockmarks and all; then there's people that want it with a 5.1 mix and then people that want it in mono; then there's people that want it anamorphic and those that don't...do you see where I'm going? Lucasfilm is in a Catch-22 here because there'll always be a large portion of fans that will be unsatisfied regardless...
...oh, and one more thing: just think about who is really going to be buying this product - %97 of people out there could give a rat's @ss about whether or not Han shot first or not and are a-okay with the DVD's they have now, so really these DVD's have a very small market for potential buyers: not just fanboys but the fanboys that have a problem with the SE's, and the small minority that didn't pick the DVD's up already. So what you want is for Lucasfilm to go back and remaster the film again (let's not forget they did it for the '95 VHS release)???? From a practical business perspective that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, so LUCASFILM is really doing the smartest thing. Thinking they'd go balls-to-the-wall for such a miniscule demographic is really an absurd notion...like I said I'm a huge fanboy myself but I'm not going to double dip (I'm happy with the unaltered '95 VHS release)
I have them on Laserdisc. I am sure Next year we will get some better DVD picture! It will be the 30th Anniversary! Lucas is already counting his money!
ticktock wrote: ...you know, there is no bigger SW fan than I am (I have a complete room dedicated to my Star Wars toys, er, memorabilia) but nothing drives me insane more than the internet fanboy that is never pleased. First you whine and complain that you want the original unaltered versions on DVD, and when you get them you complain and complain some more because they are not to your exact specifications...if I were Lucas I'd be resentful towards some of the fans as well because he can never seem to win. "Give us the unaltered, original films!" you cry, but then when they come out: "We want it remastered! We want it anamorphic! We want 5.1 digital mix!" Look, you wanted a 70's quality product in terms of technology and that's what you're getting...hell you could even argue you're getting even more seeing as they're the 1993 LD editions.
Look, it all boils down to this: STOP FREAKING COMPLAINING!
Did you even read the review, you ignoramus? Where did I say I wanted 5.1 sound? Nowhere. I am more than happy with the original audio. Remastering and providing anamorphic enhancement is standard practise in the industry. Just look at the other films I mentioned in the review for examples of features that have been restored but not revised. And how do you figure we're getting a '70s quality product' when these are based on masters made in the early 90s? Christ some people are thick.
Look, it all boils down to this: STOP FREAKING COMPLAINING!
Did you even read the review, you ignoramus? Where did I say I wanted 5.1 sound? Nowhere. I am more than happy with the original audio. Remastering and providing anamorphic enhancement is standard practise in the industry. Just look at the other films I mentioned in the review for examples of features that have been restored but not revised. And how do you figure we're getting a '70s quality product' when these are based on masters made in the early 90s? Christ some people are thick.
Chris Gould wrote: Ironically, the menus for both versions are anamorphic…
HAHAHAHAH. Classic Chris... that quote basically sums up why I cannot possibly feed any money into these releases.
HAHAHAHAH. Classic Chris... that quote basically sums up why I cannot possibly feed any money into these releases.
ticktock wrote: ...you know, there is no bigger SW fan than I am (I have a complete room dedicated to my Star Wars toys, er, memorabilia) but nothing drives me insane more than the internet fanboy that is never pleased. First you whine and complain that you want the original unaltered versions on DVD, and when you get them you complain and complain some more because they are not to your exact specifications...if I were Lucas I'd be resentful towards some of the fans as well because he can never seem to win. "Give us the unaltered, original films!" you cry, but then when they come out: "We want it remastered! We want it anamorphic! We want 5.1 digital mix!" Look, you wanted a 70's quality product in terms of technology and that's what you're getting...hell you could even argue you're getting even more seeing as they're the 1993 LD editions.
Look, it all boils down to this: STOP FREAKING COMPLAINING!
I'm usually not this blunt, but you're an idiot.
Look, it all boils down to this: STOP FREAKING COMPLAINING!
I'm usually not this blunt, but you're an idiot.
...you know, there is no bigger SW fan than I am (I have a complete room dedicated to my Star Wars toys, er, memorabilia) but nothing drives me insane more than the internet fanboy that is never pleased. First you whine and complain that you want the original unaltered versions on DVD, and when you get them you complain and complain some more because they are not to your exact specifications...if I were Lucas I'd be resentful towards some of the fans as well because he can never seem to win. "Give us the unaltered, original films!" you cry, but then when they come out: "We want it remastered! We want it anamorphic! We want 5.1 digital mix!" Look, you wanted a 70's quality product in terms of technology and that's what you're getting...hell you could even argue you're getting even more seeing as they're the 1993 LD editions.
Look, it all boils down to this: STOP FREAKING COMPLAINING!
Look, it all boils down to this: STOP FREAKING COMPLAINING!
All George had to do was go in his film vault, blow the dust off the original prints and release those - I find it very hard to believe they are gone and it's what his fans want....
just ranting...
just ranting...
The only thing that gives me pause is the fear that if I wait I'll have to buy the worthless prequels to get these films, if they ever correctly remaster them.
That's a thought I don't look foward to.
That's a thought I don't look foward to.
While I would love to get the original versions on DVD, I won't support this half-assed release by Lucasfilm. It's been said (most notably by Robert A. Harris) that a complete remaster of the original versions is possible, but Lucas just won't put out the money to do it. So instead we get recycled LD masters from 1993.
I bought the 2004 box set to tide me over until the originals are released; but this is NOT that release. Until a fully restored version comes about, I'll stick with what I have. This is coming from someone not rabid mad about the changes, either. There are a couple I don't like, some I do, but most I could take or leave. Still, I would prefer a 1977 version restored to it's original quality.
Let's just hope they get it right in time for the Blu-Ray release.
I bought the 2004 box set to tide me over until the originals are released; but this is NOT that release. Until a fully restored version comes about, I'll stick with what I have. This is coming from someone not rabid mad about the changes, either. There are a couple I don't like, some I do, but most I could take or leave. Still, I would prefer a 1977 version restored to it's original quality.
Let's just hope they get it right in time for the Blu-Ray release.
rebel-scum wrote: Got mine for 9 quid each today. Not saying where, hee, hee...
Why, you've got them now, so it's not like you'll miss out?
Bradavon wrote: No offence Chris but I think your love of the original cuts is hinder your opinion of the 2004 DVDs. The Original Cut DVDs looks an awful.
I must have missed the bit where I said they looked great... They are pretty decent for non-anamorphic NTSC, but obviously not as detailed as the 2004 release. However, I stand by my comments that the colour is better. The completely f**ked up that aspect of the 2004 releases, probably because they colour timed them before the restoration.
I think I was very objective with this release. I gave it 5/10 for video because it looked a lot better than I had expected it to, and I gave a similar score to the non-anamorphic PAL release of The Thing. I was going to give it 4/10, but it didn't look anywhere near as bad as I thought it would on my set-up. I take all factors into consideration when reviewing, and considering these came from thirteen year old Laserdisc masters, they could be a lot worse. Of course, they could also be a lot better.
Why, you've got them now, so it's not like you'll miss out?
Bradavon wrote: No offence Chris but I think your love of the original cuts is hinder your opinion of the 2004 DVDs. The Original Cut DVDs looks an awful.
I must have missed the bit where I said they looked great... They are pretty decent for non-anamorphic NTSC, but obviously not as detailed as the 2004 release. However, I stand by my comments that the colour is better. The completely f**ked up that aspect of the 2004 releases, probably because they colour timed them before the restoration.
I think I was very objective with this release. I gave it 5/10 for video because it looked a lot better than I had expected it to, and I gave a similar score to the non-anamorphic PAL release of The Thing. I was going to give it 4/10, but it didn't look anywhere near as bad as I thought it would on my set-up. I take all factors into consideration when reviewing, and considering these came from thirteen year old Laserdisc masters, they could be a lot worse. Of course, they could also be a lot better.
I was so chuffed to hear the Original Cuts where coming up until I heard they've be non-anamorphic and form the Laserdisc print. Thanks for the review as it has proven to me they look a disaster.
No offence Chris but I think your love of the original cuts is hinder your opinion of the 2004 DVDs. The Original Cut DVDs looks an awful.
Put another way: Why would I pay full price for bootlegs? When I already own the original cuts on bootleg DVDs for considerably less money? Sure I would if they were better quality but this is not the case.
I just know if I bought these I could never actually watch them when you compare how dreadful they look in comparison. It would be like by an album on cassette or a VHS copy of Star Wars.
Quote: that the 2004 DVD Special Editions represented his vision of the Star Wars trilogy.
I no longer believe for a second the 2004 versions are Lucas' Director's Cut. He has changed them so many times over the years. I wouldn't be at all surprised the HD versions will be changed again. Technology will have moved on again by then.
Quote: However, when you know that there are versions of this film floating around with commentary tracks, isolated scores, Easter eggs and more, Lucasfilm’s offering doesn’t look quite as attractive.
Exactly. My bootlegs have rare interview and behind the scenes footage that will never be shown again.
No offence Chris but I think your love of the original cuts is hinder your opinion of the 2004 DVDs. The Original Cut DVDs looks an awful.
Put another way: Why would I pay full price for bootlegs? When I already own the original cuts on bootleg DVDs for considerably less money? Sure I would if they were better quality but this is not the case.
I just know if I bought these I could never actually watch them when you compare how dreadful they look in comparison. It would be like by an album on cassette or a VHS copy of Star Wars.
Quote: that the 2004 DVD Special Editions represented his vision of the Star Wars trilogy.
I no longer believe for a second the 2004 versions are Lucas' Director's Cut. He has changed them so many times over the years. I wouldn't be at all surprised the HD versions will be changed again. Technology will have moved on again by then.
Quote: However, when you know that there are versions of this film floating around with commentary tracks, isolated scores, Easter eggs and more, Lucasfilm’s offering doesn’t look quite as attractive.
Exactly. My bootlegs have rare interview and behind the scenes footage that will never be shown again.
Thank God I bought the "silver" trilogy back when I found it as a bargain in eBAY !
Got mine for 9 quid each today. Not saying where, hee, hee...
I think I might prefer the non-anamorphic transfer according to this review. It seems to omit all the flaws of the 2004 one. The color and contrast seems better and more true to movie, ect. If it was only anamorphic. But, oh well. I guess watching it all zoomed in (on a 34" WS TV) will kind of make it feel 'vintage' or something.
Hopefully the 2007 boxset will have an acceptable version of the new edits of the movies. Correct contrast levels, explosions that don't look black and white, correctly-colored lightsabers. That would be really nice.
Hopefully the 2007 boxset will have an acceptable version of the new edits of the movies. Correct contrast levels, explosions that don't look black and white, correctly-colored lightsabers. That would be really nice.
Well, David's explanation was somewhat correct, but not entirely. There's no vertical stretching of the image with non-anamorphic material. I'm sitting looking at the non-anamorphic The Empire Strikes Back on my TV in 16:9 mode, and the image is stretched horizontally, that is all. I have to manually set the TV to 'cinema' mode to stretch it vertically - that's the whole point of 'cinema' modes.
With anamorphic video, the image is squeezed horizontally while retaining its full vertical resolution. A portion of the black bars are part of the image if it's wider than 1.781, with the rest being created digitally by the player. Rather than go on about it, I'll just link to this page, as he details it very well.
With anamorphic video, the image is squeezed horizontally while retaining its full vertical resolution. A portion of the black bars are part of the image if it's wider than 1.781, with the rest being created digitally by the player. Rather than go on about it, I'll just link to this page, as he details it very well.
I have a 16x9, but my tv has a feature that switches the aspect ratio of the TV to 4x3 without an picture lose or decline in picture quality, but I'll be buying all 3 films although not all at the same time as my money is currently a little bit low.
Samuel wrote: Sorry to be such an idiot but could someone briefly explain the difference between anamorphic and non-anamorphic. I believe anamorphic to be "enhanced for widescreen TVs", so if the aspect ratio is the same, what difference does anamorphic make? I have a Sony widescreen TV, with Smart, Wide, Zoom modes, all my DVDs get played in wide (perhaps they are all anamorphic) and some get played in Smart (perhaps they are non-anamorphic)?
Well, Chris Gould's explanation was somewhat correct, but not entirely.
Basically here's what happens with a 16:9 widescreen set. A widescreen set automatically stretches a picture horizontally to fill in the area of the screen that is wider than t=your standard 4:3 screen. However, with a non-enhanced, non-anamorphic source, this would also stretch the image vertically. Meaning that things would look thin vertically, but fat horizontally.
By anamorphically enhancing the image, the image is pre-stretched vertically, thus when the widescreen display stretches the image horizontally, the vertical ratio is displayed correctly.
Technically speaking, what anamorphic enhancement does is it actually uses visual information in the vertical plane rather than using black bars. See, in a non-anamorphic transfer, the black bars are actually a part of the image. In an anamorphic transfer, the black bars are actually generated by the player, thus preventing any loss of resolution.
For 4:3 TVs, this enhancement is negligable, but some 4:3 TVs have 16:9 enhancement modes which squeeze down that vertical enhancement to display in its correct ratio, beit 1.78, 1.85, 2.35, or greater. However there is some issue with this as the 16:9 enhance modes automatically squeeze down to 1.78 which may not work right with 1.66 sources.
Well, Chris Gould's explanation was somewhat correct, but not entirely.
Basically here's what happens with a 16:9 widescreen set. A widescreen set automatically stretches a picture horizontally to fill in the area of the screen that is wider than t=your standard 4:3 screen. However, with a non-enhanced, non-anamorphic source, this would also stretch the image vertically. Meaning that things would look thin vertically, but fat horizontally.
By anamorphically enhancing the image, the image is pre-stretched vertically, thus when the widescreen display stretches the image horizontally, the vertical ratio is displayed correctly.
Technically speaking, what anamorphic enhancement does is it actually uses visual information in the vertical plane rather than using black bars. See, in a non-anamorphic transfer, the black bars are actually a part of the image. In an anamorphic transfer, the black bars are actually generated by the player, thus preventing any loss of resolution.
For 4:3 TVs, this enhancement is negligable, but some 4:3 TVs have 16:9 enhancement modes which squeeze down that vertical enhancement to display in its correct ratio, beit 1.78, 1.85, 2.35, or greater. However there is some issue with this as the 16:9 enhance modes automatically squeeze down to 1.78 which may not work right with 1.66 sources.
If I was filthy rich like Lucas$ the guys making decisions to release this movie on DVD again then I'd gladly get this but as it stands I'm poor so I'll just save my money for the blue ray release. if there is going to be a blue ray release for star wars
Thanks for the review, Chris.
I am still gonna resist the urge to get these and wait, with the hope something better will come along next year for the 30th anniversary. But I gotta tell ya, this review only served to make that decision more tough.
I only hope that I don't reget it and have to shell out big money to get these on eBay next year.
I am still gonna resist the urge to get these and wait, with the hope something better will come along next year for the 30th anniversary. But I gotta tell ya, this review only served to make that decision more tough.
I only hope that I don't reget it and have to shell out big money to get these on eBay next year.
Great review, well done. I will be buying these when they are out here on Monday because I am a completist but I am intrigued to see for myself how good / bad they look as the original lds did look good (for their time) even when blown up to the size of a cinema screen (which we did a few years back. That is despite owning the 2004 dvds as well as various vhs and laser disc editions (including the good Japanese 2000 release).
I'm a big Star Wars fan but I think I'll just keep my previous Dvd editions, it just doesn't seem worth it to buy these and give in to Lucas. He'll release the original movies again someday if he did it once.
Basically when DVDs are encoded as anamorphic, the image is squashed horizontally so it uses all of the available lines of resolution. The image is then stretched out for playback. If it's non-anamorphic the image is just encoded in the 4:3 frame, which means a lot of the resolution is lost to the black boarders. There are a number of articles on the site that explain this graphically.
Sorry to be such an idiot but could someone briefly explain the difference between anamorphic and non-anamorphic. I believe anamorphic to be "enhanced for widescreen TVs", so if the aspect ratio is the same, what difference does anamorphic make? I have a Sony widescreen TV, with Smart, Wide, Zoom modes, all my DVDs get played in wide (perhaps they are all anamorphic) and some get played in Smart (perhaps they are non-anamorphic)?
Gabe Powers wrote: Did you notice any new changes to the 2004 version? And is the video quality better than the other release (2004) or have they used the same print?
They're identical mate. I'm assuming that they are repackaged '05 discs, as they have FBI logos on them that weren't on the original '04 discs.
And to Director7, I really didn't see the point of captioning the images. They are presented in chronological order, I refer to the two versions in that order in the review, and the differences in quality are obvious. The level of detail in the second caps is far greater than the first.
They're identical mate. I'm assuming that they are repackaged '05 discs, as they have FBI logos on them that weren't on the original '04 discs.
And to Director7, I really didn't see the point of captioning the images. They are presented in chronological order, I refer to the two versions in that order in the review, and the differences in quality are obvious. The level of detail in the second caps is far greater than the first.
Excellent review, Chris. Look forward to the last two.
Hi Chris. Great review! I'm so glad you mentioned " the ‘real’ Aunt Beru " I have an old "taped of the telle" version where Beru has a more natural voice, other than that wooden "I think so" She sounds almost Russian!! Also at the end the voices from the cocpit of the X-Wings there was no "Clutter" is this the case with these ones??
I'll wait for the Super Box set.
I'm not gonna be a mug on this one. I haven't bought any of them yet and I have no intention to until Lucas brings out 'The Big Box' which I'm banking will be out next year considering it'll be the 30th anniversary of A New Hope. I'm a fan but I want one box that's got everything and that's it.
We have all three of the Original Trilogy on NTSC LaserDisc, and are lovely things to behold, so it's not worth us buying them. Still we are thinking of transferring them to DVD anyway. We also have the Japanese LaserDisc of Episode 1, featuring a soundtrack that cleans the floor with almost every single DVD that has come since - It's also in EX, and it contains the unaltered version of the pod-race.
I'm getting them w/o a doubt!!!
I had to force myself from buying these. As a DVD collector I am drawn to them, but realistically they are stupid. If I wan't to watch the originals I can just go to me friend's house who has them all on LaserDisc. I'll wait, future releases of the originals are bound to happen now that this is out.
I still don't know whether I want these. If they dropped to 9.99 apiece, perhaps...
Ive got 4 different editions of each film of the trilogy. The fan edit editions ( Including the commentary edition of Star Wars ) that includes ALL the cast from various interviews . I WANT to buy these... but the 3rd and 4th season of Wildboyz comes out the same day......A man's gotta have priorities.
Director7 wrote: GREAT review, I never get tired of reading these. But you know what frustrates me. I hate how you assume that I know what picture is what!
I see 2 pictures and don't know which is before or after and it NEVER says it anywhere!?! WHat's up with that. It should say, Top - 2004 release
Bottom - Original
Or something like that.
"Star Wars It is a period of civil war..."
"Star Wars Episode IV A NEW HOPE it is a period of civil war..."
Plus picture quality and known changes (lightsabers, etc.)
It's: 1977 (top)
2004 (bottom)
I see 2 pictures and don't know which is before or after and it NEVER says it anywhere!?! WHat's up with that. It should say, Top - 2004 release
Bottom - Original
Or something like that.
"Star Wars It is a period of civil war..."
"Star Wars Episode IV A NEW HOPE it is a period of civil war..."
Plus picture quality and known changes (lightsabers, etc.)
It's: 1977 (top)
2004 (bottom)
Did you notice any new changes to the 2004 version? And is the video quality better than the other release (2004) or have they used the same print?
GREAT review, I never get tired of reading these. But you know what frustrates me. I hate how you assume that I know what picture is what!
I see 2 pictures and don't know which is before or after and it NEVER says it anywhere!?! WHat's up with that. It should say, Top - 2004 release
Bottom - Original
Or something like that.
I see 2 pictures and don't know which is before or after and it NEVER says it anywhere!?! WHat's up with that. It should say, Top - 2004 release
Bottom - Original
Or something like that.
Empire has been updated with new caps, the other two are in progress. New content will be added to all three as and when time allows. I have two more reviews to complete as well, and this one took longer than expected!
Hmmm, actually doesn't look SO bad afterall (after my initial reactions from the Official site's "Comparison" screencaps), I thought it'd be absolutely terrible. Great review! Can we expect updates on the "Changes" series? Oh and one more thing, how long does the Star Destroyer fly by at the beginning?
and I still can't decide..buy this editions, buy the 2004 box set, or maybe wait for the BIG BOx aniversery Edition with all 6 ????
damn I'm getting the whole set of the limited editions for sure outta my first pay check lol. + city of god + v for vendetta.
Some material may not be suitable for children
Disc Details
Release Date:
12th September 2006
Discs:
2
Disc Type:
Single side, dual layer
RCE:
No
Video:
NTSC
Aspect:
2.35:1
Anamorphic:
Yes
Colour:
Yes
Audio:
Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround English, Dolby Digital 5.1 EX English
Subtitles:
English, French, Spanish
Extras:
Audio Commentary, Lego Start Wars II Xbox Demo, Lego Start Wars II Trailer, DVD-Rom Content
Easter Egg:
Yes
Feature Details
Director:
George Lucas
Cast:
Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Sir Alec Guinness, Peter Cushing, David Prowse, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, Peter Mayhew
Genre:
Action, Adventure, Fantasy and Sci-Fi
Length:
123 minutes
Ratings
Amazon.com
FOLLOW DVDACTIVE
Follow our updates
OTHER INTERESTING STUFF
Past Reviews
Twilight Time Blu-ray
US - BD
Cradle 2 The Grave
UK - DVD R2
Horror Express
US - BD
North by Northwest
US - DVD R1
Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The (2003)
AU - DVD R4
Thrilling Reviews
Source Code
UK - BD RB
Cop Land
US - BD RA
Severin Films 'House' Double Feature
US - BD RA
Law Abiding Citizen
UK - BD RB
Lady Vengeance
US - DVD R1
Hot Interviews
Most Talked About
Prisoners
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
World's End, The
US - BD RA
Lionsgate/Miramax Steelbooks
US - BD RA
Riddick
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Machete Kills
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
