Star Wars: Original/Prequel Trilogies & General Thread

[Manny Karp]

Some fans have gone to a painstaking level to create HD "despecialized" versions online.

These are really extraordinary looking, particularly the first two films. Anyone who is a fan of these films should seek these versions out.

[bearcuborg]

In addition, the folks at Collider Jedi Council introduced me to the "anti cheese" cuts of the prequels; they can be found on Youtube and they're actually pretty good.

[aox]

In addition, the folks at Collider Jedi Council introduced me to the "anti cheese" cuts of the prequels; they can be found on Youtube and they're actually pretty good.

I browsed through an edit i the past year that broke all three prequel films down to 2 1/2 hours. I was kind of impressed at how cohesive it seemed.

[bearcuborg]

It always struck me as unnecessary, the prequels...you know? The character of Anakin wasn't quite fleshed out in a way that made the endeavor worthwhile. Because of that, I thought Sith was the worse by far, since it centered around Anakin and had little, to no revelation. Even the title is fucked up...what exactly happened to the Sith?

The things that worked best for me were Dooku, Maul and Grievous. I loved the underwater world in Phantom, the brief glimpse of Courosent (spelling?), Kamino, and as usual the cool aliens, sounds, and names that the Lucas group gave us. Even the Jango Fett story was cool. Where they fall flat is the clumsy explanation of the force, the overwhelming CGI, and the awful dialogue. God...what I wouldn't give if Lucas had brought Kasdan back, and hired better directors...

[jindianajonz]

I thought Sith was the worse by far, since it centered around Anakin and had little, to no revelation. Even the title is fucked up...what exactly happened to the Sith?

Well, they did wipe out their long time foes, the Jedi. If that doesn't count as the Sith getting revenge, what does?

[bearcuborg]

I thought Sith was the worse by far, since it centered around Anakin and had little, to no revelation. Even the title is fucked up...what exactly happened to the Sith?

Well, they did wipe out their long time foes, the Jedi. If that doesn't count as the Sith getting revenge, what does?

That was never really explained. And it happened a long time ago...it generated as much emotion/understanding from the audience as did Vader killing kids. Excuse me, younglings.

[Trees]

I just don't think the prequels were necessary at all. What matters are Vader's actions starting around the time he encounters his son. The story is about his redemption. The details of how he became evil are not necessary.

[aox]

I was born in 1980 and saw all three films around 1984 and onward. I think I first heard the tale of how Darth Vader got his suit in the late 1980s and was always really captivated with the "legend" of the volcano fight. Combine that with the curiosity of what the Clone Wars were that Kenobi describes in A New Hope and I was obsessed with Lucas making the prequels since the late 1980s. Even though, I assumed he would never make them. In my example, the prequels may not have been "necessary", but it was a dream come true to my teenage self when I learned that we were actually going to see all of that.

[bearcuborg]

I just don't think the prequels were necessary at all. What matters are Vader's actions starting around the time he encounters his son. The story is about his redemption. The details of how he became evil are not necessary.

They reminded me of The Godfather lll, but in reverse. Yeah, Michael loses everything and dies alone. The last shot of Godfather ll says exactly that, with a hell of a lot more power and finesse than any moment of the last film.

[hearthesilence]

Figured this would happen eventually-surprised it didn't happen sooner: http://moviemezzanine.com/the-fans-who-saved-star-wars/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Trees]

Isn't Disney planning to release the original version?

[captveg]

They'd be fools not to. The now have a notable lack of Episode 8 in theaters to celebrate the original film's 40th anniversary in May 2017. I don't think the Blu-ray release of Rogue One will quite be enough.

[whaleallright]

To my knowledge, Fox has the distro rights to the first six films until ca. 2020 and to the 1977 film in perpetuity, so any re-release of the "original" film would have to be a collaboration between Lucasfilm/Disney and Fox. Not that such things are unprecedented. But the number of major stakeholders would probably make the project even more expensive than it would be otherwise.

There are a surprising number of original 35mm prints of Star Wars out there in decent condition, including several IB Technicolor prints from the UK run. I find the idea of distributing a variety of essentially unretouched scans of original prints very appealing, although any official HD "restoration" of the original trilogy would probably not settle for recreating the 1977 theatrical experience. It would more likely be some compromise between the "original" versions and the sort of accoutrements that home-video enthusiasts have come to expect, like a Dolby surround mix, DNR, etc.-- a kind of idealized "original trilogy."

[captveg]

Considering the OT/PT Blu-rays were re-issued in October I'm confident that all the details on how much Fox gets of any potential future release has long been sorted out by this point.

And I think it's safe to say that the 1981 crawl with the E4: ANH moniker and a modern home theater sound design for all three OT films would end up being what gets released.

[Zot!]

Considering the OT/PT Blu-rays were re-issued in October I'm confident that all the details on how much Fox gets of any potential future release has long been sorted out by this point.

And I think it's safe to say that the 1981 crawl with the E4: ANH moniker and a modern home theater sound design for all three OT films would end up being what gets released.

I think that's all that anyone is hoping for. Though by this point I may have burnt out on caring, and certainly won't be on my list to Santa Claus.

[connor]

Just watched the "Silver Screen" edition -- the scan of a 35mm Eastman Kodak print of Star Wars. Curious to hear what you more A/V minded folks think. It's a totally different experience from the blu ray: it's very much a grainy, 1970s film -- closer to watching Altman than what I think of when I think "a George Lucas movie." The colors are comparably washed out, very thick grain over the image particularly in the desert sequences. Which, honestly, is probably what it looked like in 1977. Clearly, Lucas boosted the colors on the blu ray version to make it match up better with the prequels.

The same preservationists have uploaded a video clip showing their work on a restoration of an IB Technicolor print of Star Wars. And *that* is truly incredible looking. The Special Editions apparently used this version for color reference but from what I'm reading, the only people in 1977 who would have seen it that way were folks who just happened to go to a handful of theaters in the UK for a few weeks.

[Trees]

I kind of wish there could be a "common-sense version" put out for the original trilogy -- keeping some of the visual effects upgrades but leaving out nonsensical changes like Han shooting first, Jabba in "A New Hope", the cutaway of the snow monster with his arm off, etc. Maybe someone like JJ Abrams, who showed pretty good judgment in "The Force Awakens", could supervise?

I'm sure Lucas would be triggered, though! Haha.

[connor]

The one and only Special Edition change that did anything for the movie was adding that scene with Biggs right before the Death Star assault. It's only a few seconds but it: 1. gives a greater scope to the universe, the idea that there's this secret rebellion a whole generation finds themselves thrown into 2. Biggs's death becomes something other than "another pilot dude bites the dust"

[Trees]

While I understand and agree with your point about Biggs to a certain extent, I personally would probably keep him on the cutting-room floor, along with Jabba. I would however keep in some of the new visual effect shots of the dog fights around the Death Star, which are visually spectacular.

The Biggs scene does bring up an interesting point: To make a superior release of the Star Wars OT now will not be cut and dry, will not be easy. There has been so much tinkering (some for good, some for the worse), that it would take some hard choices to make something acceptable to the majority of fans.

I am reminded of the "Blade Runner" Final Cut. While I really like that version, the one thing that ticks me off is the dark ending with the bird flying up. They "corrected" the blue sky that was a happy accident of shooting late into the morning on the final day of production. Logically yes, the shot looks too bright and too blue but for me, it seemed like a glimmer of hope.... about the only glimmer of hope in the whole film. When they replaced that shot with a dark night shot, gone was the sense of hope.

[captveg]

Yeah, a "final cut" that removed the stupid stuff but kept the good stuff would be nice. But I think the problem is that there's no consensus of what is stupid and what is good! (Personally, I do like the Biggs scene, though I don't see it as vital).

Which leaves the original theatrical version and/or the 1981 re-release with tweaked opening crawl. This version should be easy enough to include with a branching version of the opening crawl for those who want it without the "Episode IV: A New Hope" changes.

[beamish13]

I am reminded of the "Blade Runner" Final Cut. While I really like that version, the one thing that ticks me off is the dark ending with the bird flying up. They "corrected" the blue sky that was a happy accident of shooting late into the morning on the final day of production. Logically yes, the shot looks too bright and too blue but for me, it seemed like a glimmer of hope.... about the only glimmer of hope in the whole film. When they replaced that shot with a dark night shot, gone was the sense of hope.

I agree 100% with this-doves won't fly when it's raining, which is why they ended up with that terrific shot. I've never seen it as being a "mistake", and I always assumed it was an aesthetic decision that was meant to illustrate the replicants finding a kind of absolution.

[beamish13]

This version should be easy enough to include with a branching version of the opening crawl for those who want it without the "Episode IV: A New Hope" changes.

Why the hell don't Blu-Ray's utilize the branching feature more? This would solve controversies like Criterion's decision to use the shorter cut of In the Realm of the Senses

[captveg]

The simple answer is $$. It can be a major multiplier in authoring costs. (The more programming there is, the more programming problems can be introduced, the more QC costs, etc.) It is far, far less expensive to just put the full version of each variation of the film on the disc in its entirety.

That being said, a single branching moment such as what I suggested above would be relatively simple. Warner's Little Shop of Horrors is a good example - it simply branches once to change the ending. Even scenes that are in both after that point are simply encoded each time for their respective chunk of alternate video.

[guidedbyvoices]

This version should be easy enough to include with a branching version of the opening crawl for those who want it without the "Episode IV: A New Hope" changes.

Why the hell don't Blu-Ray's utilize the branching feature more? This would solve controversies like Criterion's decision to use the shorter cut of In the Realm of the Senses

Does the Night and the City Blu Ray use branching for the two versions of the film? Or does it use two full separate versions of the film?

[cdnchris]

They're two separate files on the disc.