I'm just curious in what the odds are of a corresponding DVD set of the "Star Wars" Trilogy on DVD when the BluRay release comes out? I mean far be it for Lucasfilm to pass up on making money, and it would be nice to finally see a *good* release on of The Trilogy on DVD--you know with remastered, anamorphic transfers of the un-digitally molested versions, and at least *most* of the special features that the BluRay will get.

For those wondering why I want a DVD set over a BluRay. As my signature says, I'm no hurry to switch over to BluRay yet and fork out thousands of dollars for a format that won't be around for very long anyway (and with a limited amount of catalog titles). DVD has done just fine by me. Besides, do older movies look any better on Blu than they do on DVD really?

Anyone of the same thinking?

BR player - $70 and will play all your DVDs, better, on any TV
BRs - often cheaper than same DVDs

Where is this thousands of dollars of which you speak?

The Hi Def TV, dude.

You don't need that to enjoy BRs.

BluRays can play on a Standard Def TV?

Yep, as I said in the first reply.

It has to have the right connection of course. And it won't play in HD obviously. But it will look slightly better than DVDs due to less compression or some other complicated thing that I know little about. You may not notice the difference, but it certanly won't be worse than DVD.

I've played BRs on a couple standard TVs and they played fine and looked great.

Well, that's pretty sweet! Huh, you learn something new everyday!

Even if you don't want to spend "thousands" of dollars on whatever you think you need to spend thousands of dollars on (because, quite seriously, high def TVs broke the thousand dollar mark years ago) Blu-Ray is beneficial for the following reasons:

Better colors/contrast. Even on older movies that don't look that great at first, the colors on Blu-Ray are much more pronounced than on standard DVD and the contrast levels are better, making for a much better picture. It's more subtle on a regular TV set but certainly better on a high def TV. Upconversion can look nice so you don't have to replace every DVD you own, but for titles you watch frequently you are going to want the best quality available.

Uncompressed sound. DVDs compress the sound and you lose out on the highs and ends of the audio. Blu-Ray is uncompressed sound, so it's certainly the best audio available. Even if you don't want to buy a new TV, you are going to notice the audio difference.

Scratch resistant. Not scratch proof but resistant. It would take some effort to ruin a disc.

Bigger space, more features. Face it, the studios are going to utilize the extra space on a Blu-Ray disc for event titles. And Star Wars will be no exception. So don't end up being on the board whining about how DVD consumers get screwed on certain bonus features. Spring $75.00 wallet and get a Blu-Ray player already.


People whine that Blu-Ray discs cost more. Yes and no. Yes, sometimes they can, but no, not always..I often find the Blu-Ray equivalents cheaper than DVDs. For example, I picked up quite a few Blu-Rays around Christmas time that were the same editions as the two disc special editions on DVD and the Blu-Rays were half the price of the DVD editions.

I'm curious why people always think that. It's not as if they shot theatrical movies on VHS tape in the 70's or something. Given the proper mastering, old movies can look just as good as, or even better than, new movies. Film has always been 'hi-def', it's just television technology that's changed to allow us to see them that way at home for the first time.

oops dupe

Don't be too shocked. It's amazing how many people don't realize that you can watch them on standard def. Just like widescreen DVDs... For years people complained they didn't have a widescreen TV to watch them. It makes me wonder what people did back in the days of widescreen VHS.

So I guess the original question is being pushed aside in favor of another blu ray rocks thread? I don't really care, just wish the thread would get renamed to something more appropriate.

Well it's just a damn stupid question. How are we supposed to know what Lucas will do in 2 years?

Okay, can't argue with that!

So much for Star Wars ...

Great job, OP! Nice bait and switch.

There are some BluRay players that only come packed with standard connecting cables [RCA composite, Red White Yellow] that wouldn't even achieve HD resolution on any set.

Really annoys those HDTV owners.

I've considered a BR player for my standard definition television which has component Inputs. I know my picture would look just that much better although NOT HD.

In regards to Star Wars...

There is always going to be new and exciting things to find on these films and actually, any film released, its just a matter of worthiness of including these new "extras."

MTV aired a special blowout of the Star Wars films (prior to losing them to Spike) and these commercial breaks were bookended with extra vignettes. Much of the footage and interviews are not found on any of the the DVD releases so will these be on the Blu-ray release? Maybe, maybe not.

Back to Star Wars, though... I'd say that it is pretty likely that Lucas would release a new set on DVD to compliment the Blu-Ray release, this is Lucas that we're talking about, of course. Don't be shocked if they favor BR in regards to features, however.

I guess I should of said, "do you *think* there will be a...". Jeez. The question is meant as a hypothetical.

Well, in that case I think there will be another release. God forbid a chance to squeeze a few more bucks out of folks be passed up. I think the more interesting question is if they'll pull a Warners and purposely gimp the picture on the DVD.

That is the way it should be.

I heard that the DVD re-re-re-re-lease that tags along with the BR release will be called the Jar Jar Binks edition

He will do whatever makes him money. So I think if he feels he can turn a profit on putting a new expanded DVD set out he will do it.

I think I'm either missing your point, or you didn't quite follow my original point. I was referring to Warners questionable practice of releasing substandard transfers on standard def. I wasn't meaning substandard in relation to blu, but rather substandard in relation to just a basic transfer. A cynical person might suggest that they are purposely making the picture look like a pile of crap in order to make the blu look that much better.

This habit of Warners has been remarked on a number of times before.