![]() |
Makes me wonder how many people stuck with their original response.
|
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
Makes me wonder how many people stuck with their original response.
No interest in non-anamorphic, and for the most part I prefer the 2004 releases anyway (greedo and jabba scenes in ANH and Hayden in ROTJ aside). |
Nope. Hoping for anamporphic originals in the 30th ann. set next year.
|
Nope...Just no reason to at this point.
|
had my GF get them for me for my BDay and while they are not the best of quality, my HP plasma has a fake 16:9 setting for non-anamorphic and it looks fine. Better than the boots I made of the films a few years ago. Good enough for me until and if something comes out better next year.
|
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
Makes me wonder how many people stuck with their original response.
|
Nope....no need for them since I already have the OT box-set. The new "old" editions don't entice me either.
|
I voted yes and just got back from CC with mine!
|
I know I'm going to get absolutely slammed for this, but what is the difference between anamorphic widescreen and just 16X9 widescreen? I know there's different aspect ratio's for widescreen, depending on how they were shot, and I'm assuming with a widescreen HDTV some aspect ratios fit it perfectly and some will still have black bars on the top and bottom. Does anamorphic widescreen fit the picture to the screen? Is it similar to stretching an SD program on a HD TV? I just haven't gotten too much into HD because I know the more I learn and research the more I want to spend the money I don't have. TIA
|
Originally Posted by GradVT06
I know I'm going to get absolutely slammed for this, but what is the difference between anamorphic widescreen and just 16X9 widescreen? I know there's different aspect ratio's for widescreen, depending on how they were shot, and I'm assuming with a widescreen HDTV some aspect ratios fit it perfectly and some will still have black bars on the top and bottom. Does anamorphic widescreen fit the picture to the screen? Is it similar to stretching an SD program on a HD TV? I just haven't gotten too much into HD because I know the more I learn and research the more I want to spend the money I don't have. TIA
|
I only bought ANH. I feel it suffers the most from the special editions. I dont mind the changes in ESB. Tempted to buy ROTJ but I can suffer through the horrible musical at Jabba's palace, do miss the yub yub song... If these are released anamorphic next year I wont feel so bad since I only bought one, and have the nice CC litho.
|
Originally Posted by PixyJunket
The simple answer is that non-anamorphic transfers are a lower resolution and have to be "zoomed" (with varying results based on the DVD player and/or TV) to fill up a widescreen TV. The quality difference is supposed to be pretty big, which makes it a deal-breaker for those with 16:9 TVs.
So apparently this is in fact a big difference since so many people will refuse to buy it. Is the difference something's noticable in animated of CG films, like Cars? Since it's lower resolution, why wouldn't all widescreen DVDs be anamorphic? |
Originally Posted by GradVT06
So apparently this is in fact a big difference since so many people will refuse to buy it. Is the difference something's noticable in animated of CG films, like Cars?
Since it's lower resolution, why wouldn't all widescreen DVDs be anamorphic? |
I have more of an issue with them being old transfers than them not being anamorphic. Anamorphic enhancement just adds 33% more vertical resolution, which does make a noticeable difference, but telecine technology has come so far over the years that a new non-anamorphic transfer would look a lot better than these.
I might still buy them, but I'm going to wait and see if there are any big sales around Black Friday before I decide. |
Missed this poll before, but would've voted No. Once it was confirmed they were non-anamorphic, I decided not to buy.
|
Originally Posted by GradVT06
Since it's lower resolution, why wouldn't all widescreen DVDs be anamorphic?
Nowadays, almost all WS DVDs are anamorphic, which is why people are so upset about this release. Lucasfilm decided to use a non-anamorphic master made for laserdisc back in 1993 instead of re-transfering the film in a higher resolution. |
I voted no and I'm sticking to it. These were pretty much the reason I got into DVD, and had these been released back in 97-98, I would have bought them in a heartbeat.
But this is the year 2006, damn near 2007. And George Lucas, the technology trendsetter, is still stuck in 1997. When he joins the rest of us, I'll have no qualms about buying. |
I bought these based on watching the 1995 THX Laserdisc of Star Wars on my 50" Sony SXRD. I was happy enough with the picture quality and chances are these dvds are going to look much better than that. In addition, it saves me the trouble of hooking up my LD player and having to flip/change discs during the film.
Bottom line: I'll take non-anamorphic versions of the unaltered films any day over state of the art transfers of the SEs. |
Just picked em up. Sold the laserdisc player years ago. Don't use VHS. So these are the best official releases of the original versions. If the box set comes out next year, I will consider upgrading but it better come with the original Biggs scenes or something, otherwise I'm done.
|
Saw them at walmart for $9, so i pulled the trigger. All 3 for $27, then sold my old set for $30. Works for me. Letterbox sucks, but it doesnt look as bad as i thought it would be, on my plasma. The video quality just reminds me of being young again, watching it on a worn out vhs :)
|
I picked up Episode IV. I doubt I will get the others.
|
I was in Best Buy today thinking long and hard about buying the nice collectible tin box set. However, I didn't, a couple of reasons why is A) Not a huge Star Wars fan B) Love the films be it directors cut or theatrical, and don't really care either way C) I rarely spin my Star Wars trilogy box set anymore D) These are non-anamorphic letterbox transfers and the difference would equate to owning a cool tin case, new cover art, and 3 new dvds with the theatrical versions. So, I would pay $60+ for 3 new dvds when I rarely spin the Star Wars box set anymore E) Why pay $60+ on dvds I won't watch immediately or perhaps at all.
So I passed, I left and didn't buy the box set. Considering all that, I think I may have made the right choice. Though, that tin Best Buy exclusive box set is quite a looker. I think I will pass. :( |
Voted yes, and bought them.
|
Nope. The tin would be nice, but I like the SE versions. And since these are not anamorphic than no. Especially after just getting my Toshiba HD-DVD player. Will just use the money to buy more HD-DVD's. :D
|
I have it in the VHS boxset, so I will wait for the HD Version of SW OT.
I love the Video Qaulity of the DVD set George put out almost 2 years ago, this will hold me over until I buy HD-DVD and GL gives us the OT on HD - that will be fun! If I was rich, I would buy the New/Old DVD for the "DVD Case Art", that is what the DVD set from 2 years ago should of had. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:51 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.