Star Wars DVD change?

[Terrell]

Model effects vs cgi- or enhanced sunsets, etc.

Um, I don't know exactly what you saw, but 98% of the original film is still in there. Most of the model shots are still there. Even part of the stuff that was added to Mos Eisly was models.

A crummy cgi Ronto walking past the camera in a classic scene is very pointless

There was also a stupidly placed yellow droid passing through the scene as well. I don't remember anyone complaining about that.

As usual ckolchak, we disagree. Then again we could probably argue for 6 months and I doubt we'd agree on anything relative to Star Wars. When I see the SEs, they still feel like Star Wars to me. Maybe they don't for you.

is his interest really in telling the story or is it now to just give himself, and the new generation of ADD moivegoers shiny new $#it to look at?

Well, his interest is in storytelling, but it's also to complete his vision for a 6 film saga. That's why he's trying to update the look of the films to try and bring them at least a little bit in line with the prequels. You may not like that, but that's the intent. It's not to piss off fanboys and it's not being done to give people more shit to see.

You'd think it would have been easier for him to make the prequels fit with what was established in the OT instead of revising the OT to fit with the PT.

Then he'd be slammed for making a new movie that looks like it was made 25 years ago. The prequels are entirely different stories in different settings. There really is not way to make them look alike, he just rehashes the locations and characters exactly as they were in the original trilogy.

We're really beating this poor horse senseless.

[Terrell]

No they won't as they NO LONGER EXIST.

I hope you don't believe that. I guarantee you that Lucas has copies of the original trilogy sitting in the Lucasfilm archives.

[Terrell]

Pics removed as a courtesy to Jay!

[Dazed]

my main gripe was the terrible Jabba in Star Wars. Oh God what were they thinking!!! Hopefully that will be fixed properly (or removed) in the special-special edition.

I also hated Lukes Girly Scream. I didnt mind Greedo shooting first, its just that it was done with lame visual fx (the laser almost came out the side of the gun from what i remember).

Of course the Death Star Explosion with the very old flame ring stolen form ILMs work on Star Trek VI (i think) was also a bit lame but oh well.........

I think the originals will be released eventually. Lucas is a good business man and wont pass up an oppurtunity to make money. Of course we may have to wait many years for it (HD-DVD anyone ? )

[Terrell]

my main gripe was the terrible Jabba in Star Wars. Oh God what were they thinking!!! Hopefully that will be fixed properly (or removed) in the special-special edition.

I do believe the scene will stay in the film, but I also believe that ILM is completely replacing that Jabba from the SE with a newer Jabba that looks like the one from TPM.

Something like this.

http://www.theforce.net/multimedia/a.../Wdscrn055.jpg

I didnt mind Greedo shooting first, its just that it was done with lame visual fx

I don't think Lucas will restore this scene back to the original, which is what I wish he'd do. But I do believe the Han/Greedo scene will be fixed so that at least it looks a whole lot better than it does in the SE. There was a test footage video of that scene which had been changed to look much better. Whether it was legit or not, I have no idea.

I personally believe if there is one or two changes that he'll restore back, it will be the Luke scream and the Vader line change in ESB.

[ckolchak]

Originally posted by Dazed
my main gripe was the terrible Jabba in Star Wars. Oh God what were they thinking!!! Hopefully that will be fixed properly (or removed) in the special-special edition.

no offense, but to me that is a very superficial complaint.
you don't like it because it looks dodgy, but otherwise you don't mind that that the scene and dialouge contained in the scene are totally redundant- not to mention that it climaxes with a very silly mstk3-worthy money shot of Boba Fett? (just short of waving and saying "here i am kids").

actually this scene doesn't bug me much at all, because good cgi or crapy cgi, i can easily chapter skip it and never have to have it interupt my veiwing experience greatly.

not so with things like the Rontos and hovering probe droids (although these are really just an annoyance in the once sequence i mentioned- when they are going door to door and there is other physical movement in the scene my reaction is "its not the original version of the scene...but eh, whatever").

[ckolchak]

Let me do a bit of comparison of the SEs and the originals using the Jay Pennington site.

SE version:


Original version:


I see this as a good change. The additions are seamless and the scene isn't hurt by this change. Not to mention it looks a whole lot better.

i already said i could live with this.
the only problem i have with it is that the films exist like music in my head.
they are like songs i've heard hundreds of time-this scen was originally a very quick, abrubt bit- the stormtroopers head pops up very quickly (without any grandiose establishing panning) you are fed info quickly, and it therefore had a kinetic energy coming in between the other scenes that bookend it.
it's little scenes like that and the way they are cut into the whole that make me believe this should have been the film in 1977 to win the award for best editing.

...oh wait...that original cut did win, didn't it. (but that was edited by Marcia who is someone, by most accounts, he pretty much despises now...hmm...that's the way to show her George!
i honestly think the contributions of people like Marcia to the film are why George reportedly can't stand to watch the original version- or make it available for public consumption- this film was beloved and created the empire that he controls today-why on earth should he feel so antagonsitic to it otherwise?
sorry--huge tangent there )

ok, if i rachet down my disgust and pyschoanalysis for a second-
the new version is just as if someone went back and added a few bars to one of my favorite songs...it throws something off .
yes 98% of the song is still the same (there's just more good music now!)
like i said- while i felt the precise pace of the film where this scene is in the original
was very interesting and that the slowing of the pace here to indulge in eye candy is not what i prefer- i could 'get over it'.
it is ultimately 'not a huge deal'.

let's just be clear about something-
the scene exists in the movie to impart imformation- that the empire now has evidence that droids were in the escape pod and this is what they will now concentrate their search on.
the scene was never concieved as primarily a sequence where they could show cool looking alien creatures.
they were subverted to the background
because they were non essential elements in the scene.
they were originally just backdrop-
they have been moved to to a foreground focus now .
this is a material change in the pacing of the sequence(s) albeit a relativley minor one

SE version:


Original version:


Again, SE version is much better.

i have absolutely 100% no problem with this whatsoever.
this is a fine alteration that does absolutely nothing to disrupt the flow or pace of the story/film

SE version:


Originals:


Again, SE is better.

this to me is just unneccessary, but it's nothing to get worked up over.
the orginal spare set worked fine for me and imparted a feeling that this guy Ben was someone leading a very spartan, almost monastic existence.
the added nonesense in the SE shot looks cooler and more palatial...but whatever.
again it doesn't materially affect the forward pace of the film

SE version:


Original:


Again, there's not enough here that destroys that shot, as you say. The SE looks much better, and the rhonto in the background doesn't draw your attention away, unless you have the shortest attention span in the world.

i have the biggest problems with the SEs in regards to many of the Mos Eisly sequences.
i actually do find a moving, yowling 40 foot cool looking dinosaur in the background of the shot to be an unneccessary distraction.
if it had been there all along and was taking out for the same reason i just gave, i would most likely cry foul as well.
i am one of many fans that is old enough to draw from many many memories of theatrical exhibitions of these films and this is a distraction to the recreation of the threatrical experience that is the reason i have spent so much on HT gear and film on various media.
that said- what does having the Ronto in that particular shot add to the shot?
something cool to look at?
spice for the set dressing?

the thing is- a good artist is one who knows which details are unnecessary and would benefit the whole by being subverted and which would benefit the whole by being embellished.
embellishing the background in this case does not enhance the narrative function of the scene/shot.
sorry.
we just have to strongly disagree here.

SE version:


Original:


Ditto!!!

the new shot is beautiful and doesn't really bother me.
the focus/purpose of the shot is unchanged- to show the sandcrawler is leaving one area and heading for another
i have absolutely no problem with it.

SE version:


Original:


Again, the SE version doesn't hurt the original, and it looks a whole lot better.

i miss the planet.
i thought it was a very unique, very iconic image. the new cgi fighter move wonderfully, but i wish they had keep that wonderfully oppressive image of the planet.
a minor annoyance though.
i could also make the argument that the planet in that position represented clearly an obstacle- it is a visual indication of how blocked the base is and what an obstacle it is that the death star will have to negotiate before it can destroy the base.
i'm very surprised that he wouldn't have included it in the shot .

Last one!

SE:


Original:


Again, the scene is basically the same. Now it only looks a whole lot better. I believe this is Lucas' intention, at least on most of the changes. To update the look without hurting the films. The only problem with that is he made some stupid changes along the way that did hurt those particular scenes.

again, not a big problem for me here.
in fact it's really no problem for me.
the vibrancy and vividness of the new cgi is nice to look at and -again- does not detract or throw off from what the original intent of the shot was.
the purpose of the original was to present a kinetic shot of the tie fighter engaging the x-wing.
this to me represents a very benign alteration.
and there are many more just like this that i am perfectly fine with.

i just can't warm up to alterations that affect and butcher musical cues, and elaborate and unnecessary details that compete for attention with the main focus of a scene or slag the kinetic pace of the film.

[RockStrongo]

I can breathe easier now that I know many of you are satisfied with the changes in the SE. Whew!

I still feel remorse though for those of you who love the originals and hate the SEs. There will be a small hole in my cinematic heart for all of you.

What a load of crap! They are damn movies.

[bboisvert]

Originally posted by RockStrongo
What a load of crap! They are damn movies.

And this is a Internet discussion board to talk about damn movies. What's your point?

[Josh H]

Originally posted by bboisvert
And this is a Internet discussion board to talk about damn movies. What's your point?

Actually, to be technical, this is a discussion board to talk about DVDs. Movie discussions belong in Movie Talk. This board is for talking about specs, release dates, re-releases, sales figures and other things specific to DVDs rather than films.

But I have no idea what his point was.

[Mike Lowrey]

Originally posted by Josh Hinkle
Actually, to be technical, this is a discussion board to talk about DVDs. Movie discussions belong in Movie Talk. This board is for talking about specs, release dates, re-releases, sales figures and other things specific to DVDs rather than films.

Yes, and we're talking about what changes, if any, are going to be on this DVD release, hence the location in DVD Talk

Since we haven't seen these versions yet, how can this discussion be conducted in Movie Talk.

[Josh H]

I was just being a smart ass, not saying there was anything wrong with this discussion.

[Terrell]

i miss the planet.

Well, since we're basically going around in circles, and haven't found much common ground, I'll just comment on this.

The planet is still there. It's been pushed back a bit and clouds have been added to the sky, but it's there. I believe when the ships fly up, the camera pans upwards a bit, and you can see more of the planet. Just thought I'd throw that out.

[flyboy]

Well I just hope Jar Jar gets put in the OT!

and no the planet is no longer there...just watched the vhs tape of the se

[Terrell]

You have to have the widescreen VHS tape to see the planet. It's not visible in the pan & scam version. The planet is there in the upper right hand corner. It's been pushed back and it doesn't come as far down in the shot as it does in the original. It's behind the clouds.

[ckolchak]

Originally posted by Terrell
It's been pushed back and it doesn't come as far down in the shot as it does in the original. It's behind the clouds.

almost as if Goerge looked at the original version of the shot and was ashamed at how radical it looked compositionally.

this huge orange wedge lording over this muted jungle backdrop.
taking it out of context now and just comparing the two pics, yes the SE is the prettier of the two, but its pretty in a sort of bland and vapid way- there are plenty of shots in the prequels that look almost exactly like that (Naboos pillowy clouds and lush vegitation) and this shot looks like it could have been culled from any of those same sequences.
in a way, yes, that fulfills Lucas's mission statement to try to resurface the OT to match the PT-
But- you could also argue that he is losing a lot of scope with that new shot as well.
especially with the way that sequence appears to have been color timed-
everything is prettier- but safely homogenized and pastueurized.

little of the virve left of the young, experimental artist.

Naboo and Yavin are seemingly interchangeable visual locations now (with each new move, the universe in these films contracts a little more).
i'll be surprised (actually not) if he wouldn't think to go in and re-color time the Yavin exteriors to give at least some greater distinction from Naboo.




like i said, compositionally, that old shot is radical- especially try to place that in the context of when the film first came out-
where could anyone remember having seen something like that before- its almost right up there with the Star Destroyer opening.

shame to see it lost forever on decaying, 240-400 lines of resolution, formats.

[flyboy]

Originally posted by Terrell
You have to have the widescreen VHS tape to see the planet. It's not visible in the pan & scam version. The planet is there in the upper right hand corner. It's been pushed back and it doesn't come as far down in the shot as it does in the original. It's behind the clouds.

OMG...I WOULD NOT EVEN BE ON THIS BOARD IF I HAD ANY FOOLSCREEN MOVIES (DVD OR VHS) THAT WERE MADE AFTER 1955!! I must be blind as I saw no planet on the widescreen versions...if that little bit of light pink is a planet..well it sure does not look like one.

[tenaciousdave]

They changed Star Wars?

[Terrell]

especially with the way that sequence appears to have been color timed-

Well, the SEs have a slighty, yet inaccurate blue tinge to the entire film. From what I've seen of the new DVD trailer, that's been corrected.

But- you could also argue that he is losing a lot of scope with that new shot as well.

Yes, and many other redone shots add more scope than what was originally there. It's a tit for that thing. For example, the newly recomposed and redone shot as the fleet passes the red planet, gives the shot a bigger scope than the original shot.

like i said, compositionally, that old shot is radical- especially try to place that in the context of when the film first came out-
where could anyone remember having seen something like that before- its almost right up there with the Star Destroyer opening.

ckolchak, let's not start with the hyperbole. That shot is not all that radical. It's a simple shot. Effective, yes I'd say the original shot is effective. But the new shot is just as effective, and the redone takeoff is far more effective in the SE. The Star Destroyer opening is far more radical.

I must be blind as I saw no planet on the widescreen versions

Then you just missed it. The fleet flies right by it in the next shot.

[Spiky]

Originally posted by Terrell
I don't agree at all. They are the same films. One is just tweaked. The tone and character of the SEs are the same as the originals. They still look, sound, and feel like the original Star Wars films.

Hey, man. Pass some of that around! Whatever it is that makes you say they are different and the same in the same thread must be pretty decent. Or are you just incapable of staying on track? Lucas certainly is, look at the incontinuity of Ep 1. I'd LOVE to see an SE version of this with new scenes and dialog. Maybe put it into the Star Wars universe instead of the kiddy-happy-land universe in which it currently resides.

In the SE, and more in the SE SE, there are minor alterations which are actually useful, there are new scenes, there are things added, deleted, actors changed, character traits changed, the whole style of Mos Eisley is changed, etc. We'll have to wait and see if the SE SE is much different from the SE, but you must admit this is getting over the top. Maybe he should've just remade the entire trilogy with entirely new films and new actors. Or just started over with a new tale and dropped this one.

[emhello]

Is it true that Jar Jar has a cameo in the new SE version of ROTJ?

[Mike Lowrey]

Originally posted by flyboy
OMG...I WOULD NOT EVEN BE ON THIS BOARD IF I HAD ANY FOOLSCREEN MOVIES (DVD OR VHS) THAT WERE MADE AFTER 1955!! I must be blind as I saw no planet on the widescreen versions...if that little bit of light pink is a planet..well it sure does not look like one.

Oh Jesus Christ! If that "pink" think isn't a planet, then WHAT is it? This is the most ridiculous interpretation of that scene I've ever heard.

"Uh, I don't see a planet..."

Sorry to get a little personal, but OPEN YOUR EYES!

The sky in the scene has been digitally altered to give it a more atmospheric look. Therefore the planet, as Terrell has said, has been pushed back in the scene. Being that shot is a daytime scene, it's a wonder you could see it anyway, but since Yavin is a big gas giant, it could possibly show through the daytime sky.

[Rivero]

Originally posted by emhello
Is it true that Jar Jar has a cameo in the new SE version of ROTJ?

Unfortunately, yes.

[ckolchak]

Originally posted by Terrell



Yes, and many other redone shots add more scope than what was originally there. It's a tit for that thing. For example, the newly recomposed and redone shot as the fleet passes the red planet, gives the shot a bigger scope than the original shot.

by scope, i meant that each location (and, actually, each film) has it's own unique, idiosyncratic flavor.
take the first two films in their original theatrical versions
what were the main sets/locations
- Tatooine
- Death Star interior
- Yavin
- Hoth
- Dogobah
- cloud city

each of these places is physically unique, has a predominant color scheme that is unique (although both Cloud city and Hoth share a tendency towards whites), and create the impression of scope thru the nature of how varied they are.
the universe begins to contract with Jedi
(we are back to tatooine, a death Star, Dagobah, and the only new setting is a national park *yawn* not very exotic)-
in the prequels we get Courescant and Naboo, but we also return to Tatooine (twice).
subverting the looming planet further further robs Yavin of its character
and in its place we get the pretty Naboo background plate #5™.
disappointing.

ckolchak, let's not start with the hyperbole. That shot is not all that radical. It's a simple shot. Effective, yes I'd say the original shot is effective. But the new shot is just as effective, and the redone takeoff is far more effective in the SE. The Star Destroyer opening is far more radical.

radical in the sense that
1) the planet occupies around 10% of the screen real estate, and yet thru the choice of hue and the intensity of that hue, and it's placement within the frame, it becomes very oppressive.
the urgency of the thin verticle of the lookout breaking up this dynamic of almost two horizontal planes perfectly gets across the situation compositionally
( Horizontal planes are used in compositions to indicate a feeling of repose or calm, verticles impart a strength, more dynamacism, etc.)
i'm not a science whiz, but i'm sure having something with that large a mass that close, would make most of the activity just about impossible, and from a "let's try to be a little more realistic" standpoint, it was probably smart to subvert it- but this is pure fantasy.

i feel like i'm in the twilight zone with this guy.
on the one hand he labors to integrate superflous and distracting detail into shots that should be pure and not cluttered so that the subtle information they convey is not inhibited, and yet in a basic establishing shot he actively subverts an iconic and unique element in favor of something more common and bland (but pretty).
in the context of the entire series now, the relatively clear, cloudless atmosphere of Yavin is more unique.
even in the Tatooine scenes he's gone in and brightented it up with fluffy Bob Ross clouds.

Then you just missed it. The fleet flies right by it in the next shot.

nice shot, but not the same as getting hit with that oppressive image of the planet in the establishing shot of the fighters taking off.

[Mike Lowrey]

Originally posted by ckolchak



radical in the sense that
1) the planet occupies around 10% of the screen real estate, and yet thru the choice of hue and the intensity of that hue, and it's informal compsotion within the frame, it becomes very oppressive.
i'm not a science whiz, but i'm sure having something with that large a mass that close, would make most of the activity just about impossible, and from a "let's try to be a little more realistic" standpoint, it was probably smart to move it- but this is pure fantasy.

i feel like i'm in the twilight zone with this guy.
on the one hand he labors to integrate superflous and distracting detail into a shots that should be pure and clean so that the subtle information they convey is not inhibited, and yet in a basic establishing shot he actively subverts an iconic and unique element in favor of something more common and bland (but pretty).
the relatively clear, cloudless atmosphere of Yavin is unique.
even in the Tatooine scenes he's he's brightented it up with fluffy Bob Ross clouds.

whatever.
skim milk is still sold in the same section as whole milk so its still qualitativly the same.

Umm, in English dude. I can't make heads or tails of your cinematography mumbo jumbo.