There is no way in hell I'd buy the tin if they used that. Reminds me of those awful TV box sets (Lost, Scrubs) that do that. I hate layering discs.

If that really is how the discs are going to be housed inside the tin, I think it makes my decision easier. The tin is certainly a nice touch, but I want the individual cases.

And after watching the end of Jedi again last night, with the re-edited celebration on Endor and the new music, I'm more than ready for the original.

--THX

I am so torn right now. The tin is a nice exclusive but I wouldn't mind having matching cases with the prequels.

I just wish someone would buy a copy at one of these Best Buys that is breaking the street date and confirm for us how the discs are housed. I've been asking for several days now.

The tin ends up being $9 more than buying the regular cases.

Someone in the Street Break thread said that they were 13.00 each at Walmart.

Walmart prices vary among their locations.

Oh. If I can't find them at that price, then I'll just go for the tin.

Exactly what I was going to post. The Walmarts in my area always suck when it comes to price. When I see one person posting they fina a certain dvd for 12 bucks it is usually a good 4 to 5 bucks more at all of mine. I have never seen a Walmart in my area beat CC or BB on price (for new releases).

Speaking of...I have been trying to decide where to buy these and all of the ads stating "Low Price" are pissing me off. Why can;t they just give the goddamn price? I guess it prevents me from pricematching them at another store but I am not going to waste $15 in gas going from store to store to find the best price.

I did run by Best Buy today to see if the tin was out but they were not. The current boxset without the bonus dvd was regularly priced at $37.99 which is $12.66 per movie. I doubt the new releases are going to be that cheap anywhere. I want to get the best price but I don't want to wait and see these things disappear. How limited will these actually be is the question?!?!

Because they can't. Many major DVD releases have what is called a Minimum Advertised Price (MAP), which the distributor imposes on the retailers. The retailers are not allowed to advertise the DVD for lower than the MAP, which for something like this release is probably $19.99.

edit: The MAP for these releases is $19.95, as evidenced by this trade advertisement

So the retailers simply print the ads without the price, although they'll often try to suggest the price by pairing it up with some other release that doesn't have a MAP and has the same sale price.

Circuit City is selling them for 15.00...

http://entertainment.circuitcity.com...om=NewReleases
http://entertainment.circuitcity.com...=FOX2236385DVD
http://entertainment.circuitcity.com...=FOX2236395DVD

The extra 6 means extra evil! :)

Nah, they're everywhere.

Looks like Circuit City is where I will be going. I'm just too worried the tin won't hold the original keepcases.

Is Blockbuster stocking them? I could have sworn I saw them on the rental site.

That’s a different matter. You are speaking of films that have yet to be released, whereas the Star Wars films have been replaced with newer versions.

In regards to scenes that did not make the final cut; those scenes were never released theatrically. The final cut of the Star Wars films were produced, marketed, shown in theaters, and later sold on video. It was those films that were nominated for and won Academy Awards.

I find it an insult, not that Lucas has chosen to make continuous changes, but that he has previously made a concerted effort to replace and eliminate the original films. We are not talking about a building. We are talking about film. And film can be easily preserved, as it should, for the sake of posterity.

Yes, I do concede that he (or perhaps more specifically, Lucasfilm) has finally released the films on DVD, but I find it sickening that he won’t even bother to simply give them an anamorphic release, something that is considering an industry standard at present.

And while I am fully aware of the “work-for-hire” concept, I still refuse to bury my head in the sand and ignore the fact that several individuals contributed their talents, imagination, and hard work in order to produce these films.

So the director and editor don't have to respect the contributions of any of the workers on a film while still in the editing room until a cut is made and released, and then their contributions become above reproach?

So how about other films that were released theatrically, on video, and then later changed? Was Ridley scott insulting the people who worked on the happy ending for Blade Runner when he cut it from the film 10 years later? Was Terry Gilliam insulting the people who worked on Brazil when he cut down the European Cut, which had already been released theatrically, for US release. Was Gilliam insulting Jonathan Pryce when he removed one of the funniest lines of the film for his Final Director's Cut of Brazil, made years after all the other versions had been on video?

The original films are being preserved. Lucasfilm said they have several prints of the original versions. The National Film Registry owns a print of each film, as do several other private collectors. So the films are being preserved, and they're being made widely available, just not in the form or quality that many people here want.

I took Lucas at his word--no original versions--and bought bootlegs of the unaltered trilogy very early on when DVDs first started.

They weren't anamorphic anyway, I think--I've still only got an 4x3 SDTV setup--so I'll gladly replace those bootlegs with these "bonus" discs. I'm happy to go legit.

However, when I finally *do* get a better TV system, I may feel the need to replace his discs with better anamorphic versions, and if Lucas doesn't care to offer them, I'll get them from the fans.

If I had a better entertainment system today, and had previously bought versions of all these movies, I'd probably pass on these editions and go with bootlegs of better quality with a relatively clear conscience.

At that juncture, it is not a matter of respect or disrespect. The movie is a work-in-progress, and generally speaking, everyone involved in the filmmaking process is aware that edits, rewrites, and changes occur before the final product is released.

But yes, I would concede that once the film is released to the public, then that version of the film should be preserved through the ages in its original form, as much as for the sake of posterity as for the respect of those that contributed to the film.

I have always said that there is a difference in a director or producer recutting a movie using footage and material that was filmed at the time the movie in question was produced, versus inserting or replacing material with newly filmed and created footage, as Lucas has done. But in some of the cases you cite, yes, I might consider some of those changes an insult, depending on the situation of each. However, I would familiarize myself with said films before making any judgments.

Yet in that statement, you essentially concede that a market exists for quality releases of these films. As said before, I am certainly a believer in Capitalism, and as such, it is Lucas’ legal right to do with his films as he see fit. But as a consumer in a Democratic Republic, I have every right to request, what goods and/or services that I wish to purchase.

But looking at the “Big Picture” of the Original Star Wars Trilogy, the films hold not only a nostalgic place in the hearts of so many, but also an important place in regards to cinematic history. For these reasons, the original films should be given better treatment than what has been done thus far.

As far as this whole "This is an insult to all the gaffers and grips on the film" stuff, give me a break. Yes, film is a collaboration, but there is a reason we have directors--to make these kind of decisions. This reminds me of that awful anti-piracy ad where the set painter is talking about how he won't get paid if we pirate movies.

Does it have to just be preserved though, or does it have to be re-released at regular intervals?

So you would call something like the Director's Cut of Star Trek: TMP an insult, since it used newly created effects to finish the film as was originally intended, but were unable to do so at the time? It's better respect to the people who worked on that film to keep it in the unfinished state it was released in?

Ah, so here you're admitting it's more the context of the changes, than just changes in and of themselves, that determine whether a new edit would "insult" the contributors to a film.

There's a market for nearly everything. There's a market for a quality release of the very first rough edit of Star Wars among its fans, included all the scenes that would be subsequently excised before release. That doesn't mean there's a sizable market, or that a studio absolutely has to pander to it. It'd be nice if they did, of course, and this release is at least a step in the right direction, especially considering Lucas's previous statement on the likelyhood of a OUT DVD release.

You have a right to request of course, but that request doesn't have to be honored or even acknoledged. Hopefully in a free market, the demand for the OUT on DVD would persuade Lucasfilm to want to release it. It apparently has, although not enough for them to put serious work on it.

This is the important part, and I agree here. For cultural and historical reasons the OUT should be preserved and made available. However, I still disagree that the new versions are an "insult" to the people who worked on the film. That just seems like trying to vilify Lucas in ways nobody would ever consider doing to another director.

Of course, that ending was extra footage taken from the Shining - so nobody that worked on Blade Runner was insulted by the deletion of that footage. In fact, maybe the original collaborators were upset with the theaterical ending -- probably because they didn't know it was going to end like that.

Great! Stick the Ark in a government warehouse somewhere where it will be lost again. Film preservation, without being made widely available, is nothing more than an academic argument or a zen koan.

When did they say that? The last I heard, Lucasfilm had bought up all the original prints off the collector's market that they could get their hands on to destroy them. Indeed, the reason these DVDs are being transferred from the old laserdisc master is because Lucasfilm claims that they don't have any surviving film copies. The original negatives have been permanently altered with the "Special Edition" changes.

No thanks to Lucasfilm, who tried to foist on them the 1997 SEs.

Yet by Commander Dan's logic, anything changed in a film after it was released theatrically and on video is an insult to those who made the original footage. So Ridley was insulting the people who had worked on the Shining for that footage by removing it, according to his logic.

Also, only the hellicopter footage was from The Shining. The original ending did contain shots of Ford and Young, which were removed, "insulting" those who had shot it.

Finally, the original cut contains voice-over which was removed for the DC, so again Ridley was "insulting" those who had recorded and mixed in that VO by removing it.

Again, the OUT is being made widely available. It comes out tomorrow in a widely available 2-disc edition. It's not in the quality some may want, but there are those that lived through the 80s only having it available on P&S VHS copies.

And, again, there are thousands of film that are being preserved in studio archives that aren't available on DVD yet in any form, even sub-par. Preservation of these films is still important though, since these films may be released at a later date, either widely or not.

This new DVD release of the OUT is nothing about preservation and all about presentation. It's not being presented in the best possible way, and that's upsetting to some, including me.

Why not keep this thread on the subject of the dvds that are being released, rather than re-starting this tired "North-Going Zax & South-Going Zax" debate about artist's rights.

The original negatives were altered, but that doesn't eliminate the interpositives and other prints that may exist for the orginal films at Lucasfilm.

From
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showpost.php?p=7025852
They say they have prints, but claim they're in too poor of a condition for a quick and easy transfer, and Lucas wouldn't allow a full restoration, or probably any type of new transfer.

From
http://www.movieweb.com/dvd/news/32/5232.php
Notice that he's not saying they don't exist in terms of material or prints, in fact, the way he phrases it suggests that they still exist, he just doesn't want to do anything with them, since to him they don't exist as real versions worthy of a new transfer or restoration.