DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   HD Talk (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/hd-talk-55/)
-   -   Star Wars (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/hd-talk/577990-star-wars.html)

Schloob1 02-19-13 04:36 PM

re: Star Wars
 
Happened upon this today when looking at the actual artist's video. Had to post here at the mention of the Star War's blu ray.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJlbP...ture=endscreen

The Valeyard 02-28-13 09:47 PM

re: Star Wars
 

STAR WARS BLU-RAY TRILOGIES TO BE RELEASED IN LIMITED EDITION STEELBOOK PACKAGING

Since their release in 2011, the Star Wars trilogy collections have become two of the bestselling Blu-ray Disc catalog releases of all time. Lucasfilm and Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment announced today that these beloved Star Wars sets, presenting the classic films in stunning HD, will be re-released in limited edition steelbook packaging at select retailers in the UK, Australia, Japan, and Spain. There is no US release currently planned.

Release dates for the steelbook sets will be announced shortly.
http://i1109.photobucket.com/albums/...ps668259c8.jpg

http://i1109.photobucket.com/albums/...psa740ec58.jpg

Starwars.com

Gizmo 02-28-13 09:59 PM

re: Star Wars
 
:lol:

BuckNaked2k 02-28-13 10:21 PM

re: Star Wars
 
They can release it with a free gold-plated Rolls Royce, and I still won't buy it.

Quack 02-28-13 10:38 PM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by BuckNaked2k (Post 11597456)
They can release it with a free gold-plated Rolls Royce, and I still won't buy it.

:up: x2

MTRodaba2468 03-01-13 01:43 AM

re: Star Wars
 
As much as I love steelbooks, pass. I already have the Complete Saga set, and unless they're rereleased with something more notable than the packaging (the unaltered original trilogy, for example), I don't plan on rebuying.

obidawsn 03-01-13 08:16 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by MTRodaba2468 (Post 11597545)
As much as I love steelbooks, pass. I already have the Complete Saga set, and unless they're rereleased with something more notable than the packaging (the unaltered original trilogy, for example), I don't plan on rebuying.

I still dont' see why the original version can't happen. Despite Lucas' insistence that there isn't a print, we all know there is one. Now that Disney has bought Lucasfilm, we had hope again, but were told that Fox still owns the distribution rights. But as we saw with the 3D versions, since Disney owns the movie rights they can control what gets distributed and not. I am sure that if Disney wanted to release the original versions, they could easily go to Fox and say they want to release it and Fox would jump on it. It's a win-win. Fox could still distribute it, but Disney would still make the money. It's just a matter of whether or not Disney would allow for another studio to distribute it. But it would be a smart move.

Jay G. 03-01-13 08:46 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by obidawsn (Post 11597676)
I still dont' see why the original version can't happen. Despite Lucas' insistence that there isn't a print, we all know there is one.

I don't think that Lucas has ever said that there isn't a print of the original versions available. He said the original negative doesn't exist (since he spliced in the SE revisions, at least the 97 ones), which is true (at least as a complete negative, the removed elements still likely exist). He also said he didn't feel like spending the money restoring what he felt were inferior versions. But he never said it was impossible.


Originally Posted by obidawsn (Post 11597676)
Now that Disney has bought Lucasfilm, we had hope again, but were told that Fox still owns the distribution rights. But as we saw with the 3D versions, since Disney owns the movie rights they can control what gets distributed and not. I am sure that if Disney wanted to release the original versions, they could easily go to Fox and say they want to release it and Fox would jump on it. It's a win-win. Fox could still distribute it, but Disney would still make the money. It's just a matter of whether or not Disney would allow for another studio to distribute it. But it would be a smart move.

It's not that Fox has distribution rights, but those distribution rights mean they get a significant chunk of the revenue earned by any such releases. Fox owns distribution rights for Star Wars in perpetuity, but only has the rights to the other films until 2020. Disney could restore and release the original versions now and let Fox take a cut of all 3 films, or they could wait until 2020 when the distribution rights to ESB and ROTJ revert back to them and they get all the revenue from those two titles. Disney may also be working behind the scenes right now to work out some deal regarding Star Wars, like they did with Paramount with The Avengers.

Gizmo 03-01-13 09:02 AM

re: Star Wars
 
Right, because in 2020 Disc and Home Media sales will be booming.

Jay G. 03-01-13 09:33 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by GizmoDVD (Post 11597737)
Right, because in 2020 Disc and Home Media sales will be booming.

There's still broadcast rights, along with iTunes, Amazon, even streaming like Netflix. They'll make money distributing it somehow.

milo bloom 03-01-13 10:30 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by Jay G. (Post 11597714)
I don't think that Lucas has ever said that there isn't a print of the original versions available. He said the original negative doesn't exist (since he spliced in the SE revisions, at least the 97 ones), which is true (at least as a complete negative, the removed elements still likely exist). He also said he didn't feel like spending the money restoring what he felt were inferior versions. But he never said it was impossible.

I'd have to do some digging, but I'm fairly certain Lucas has made statements over the years that were very carefully parsed to imply that the "original negatives" were unavailable and therefore so was a new release of the originals. It was apparently worded that way, and successfully so, to convince the fans (most of whom don't really understand how film works) that this meant the originals were unavailable.

I mean, I was part of the forums at Theforce.net when those laserdisc transfer DVDs were released, and you would have thought those people were trying out for the Cirque du Soleil, the way they were twisting and contorting themselves to defend Lucas' decision, steadfast in the belief that films made prior to 1997 simply couldn't be transferred to higher definition formats.



.....

As for the re-releases, I noticed at Target yesterday that they've price-dropped the three Bluray sets a few dollars. Still way too much, the 9 disc set is still like $87.99. I found a copy used for $53 last summer and I still wish I could have found it for less.

.....


And I think GizmoDVD has a good point: if Disney wants to recoup their investment, I can see them getting a new Blu and DVD release out sooner rather than later. We can only hope they feel the cost of restoring the originals will be worth it to them. The current Blus and DVDs apparently sold well enough without them, but then again there's the "Malibu Stacy - now with hat" effect to consider.

Chrisedge 03-01-13 10:48 AM

re: Star Wars
 
There are plenty of us folks that refuse to buy anything else from Star Wars until they release G.O.U.T. I have Harmys versions in HD and they are more than decent enough for me, until Disney releases the original. I have NO issues buying any altered versions that include the original. In fact I would love a set that has all the different versions. Maybe a BD with one disc of the original, and then one with a SE with all the dfifferent versions available via seamless branching.

milo bloom 03-01-13 10:53 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by Chrisedge (Post 11597863)
There are plenty of us folks that refuse to buy anything else from Star Wars until they release G.O.U.T. I have Harmys versions in HD and they are more than decent enough for me, until Disney releases the original. I have NO issues buying any altered versions that include the original. In fact I would love a set that has all the different versions. Maybe a BD with one disc of the original, and then one with a SE with all the dfifferent versions available via seamless branching.

I'm with you. I bought the 2004 box, and the big Blu box (used, like I said), but I would gladly re-buy something for the originals.

Even back in 2006 when they announced the originals to be released, I was fully prepared to rebuy the SE versions to get them until I learned of their sub par quality.

Heck, I'd even drop a few bucks (just a few...) on a set of the 97 theatrical versions. I think they have a place in history, for better or for worse.

Jay G. 03-01-13 10:59 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by milo bloom (Post 11597841)
I'd have to do some digging, but I'm fairly certain Lucas has made statements over the years that were very carefully parsed to imply that the "original negatives" were unavailable and therefore so was a new release of the originals. It was apparently worded that way, and successfully so, to convince the fans (most of whom don't really understand how film works) that this meant the originals were unavailable.

Lucas has made misleading statements, but he's never said that restoring the original versions was outright impossible, or that no prints or other elements of the original versions exist.


Originally Posted by milo bloom (Post 11597841)
And I think GizmoDVD has a good point: if Disney wants to recoup their investment, I can see them getting a new Blu and DVD release out sooner rather than later...

From the official announcements made so far by Disney, it's pretty clear that they feel that the best way to recoup their investment is in producing new films, both the new trilogy and spin-off movies. Those clamoring for the unaltered trilogy, myself included, are a small but vocal minority. Now, Disney would likely make a profit restoring and releasing the unaltered films, but it'd be a relatively small amount, maybe a few million, as opposed to the hundreds of millions the new films have the potential to make.

Something else to consider when thinking about release date for the unlatered trilogy: Disney is planning on releasing E7 in 2015, with the sequels released in 2 year intervals, so likely 2017 for E8, and 2019 for E9. So Disney could then plan and release a new "complete saga" set in 2020, when most of the films have reverted back to them.

Doctorossi 03-01-13 11:11 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by Jay G. (Post 11597883)
he's never said that restoring the original versions was outright impossible

His statements are moot because we know that it's not impossible, whatever he says.

stvn1974 03-01-13 11:12 AM

re: Star Wars
 
I watched Star Wars (the first film, not that A New Hope shit) on VHS last night and every time there was a scene where Lucas had added some cartoon bullshit to the special edition it took me out of the scene the same way as if it was there. It would pop into my mind and ruined the experience just the same. I think I might just face that Star Wars is forever ruined for me and move on.

milo bloom 03-01-13 11:24 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by Jay G. (Post 11597883)
Lucas has made misleading statements, but he's never said that restoring the original versions was outright impossible, or that no prints or other elements of the original versions exist.




Originally Posted by Doctorossi (Post 11597906)
His statements are moot because we know that it's not impossible, whatever he says.

My point was that those statements were *so* egregiously misleading, that he's been able to create a cultural awareness that the originals are lost, no matter how untruthy that fact may be.




Originally Posted by Jay G. (Post 11597883)

From the official announcements made so far by Disney, it's pretty clear that they feel that the best way to recoup their investment is in producing new films, both the new trilogy and spin-off movies. Those clamoring for the unaltered trilogy, myself included, are a small but vocal minority. Now, Disney would likely make a profit restoring and releasing the unaltered films, but it'd be a relatively small amount, maybe a few million, as opposed to the hundreds of millions the new films have the potential to make.

Something else to consider when thinking about release date for the unlatered trilogy: Disney is planning on releasing E7 in 2015, with the sequels released in 2 year intervals, so likely 2017 for E8, and 2019 for E9. So Disney could then plan and release a new "complete saga" set in 2020, when most of the films have reverted back to them.

Agreed, but it's just hard to think that Disney wouldn't do *something* to start the revenue stream up before the new movies.

Maxflier 03-01-13 11:46 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by Jay G. (Post 11597714)
Disney could restore and release the original versions now and let Fox take a cut of all 3 films, or they could wait until 2020 when the distribution rights to ESB and ROTJ revert back to them and they get all the revenue from those two titles.

Why not do both? If any title could get away with being double dipped, it's this one.

Josh-da-man 03-01-13 11:53 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by Jay G. (Post 11597883)
Lucas has made misleading statements, but he's never said that restoring the original versions was outright impossible, or that no prints or other elements of the original versions exist.

I think he did, a long time ago. I think that the story at the time was that, since the original negatives were used to create the '97 SEs, it would be impossible to restore the original versions.

But I can't be arsed to look up an actual quote from the man himself.

Josh Z 03-01-13 12:01 PM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by Jay G. (Post 11597714)
It's not that Fox has distribution rights, but those distribution rights mean they get a significant chunk of the revenue earned by any such releases.

I don't think it's that significant, actually. IIRC, Lucas was a hard-ass in negotiating the distribution agreements. Fox gets a much smaller percentage of the revenue from Star Wars than it does from any other typical movie the studio might distribute.

However, because it's Star Wars, that still adds up to a lot of money on all sides.

BuckNaked2k 03-01-13 12:08 PM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by Jay G. (Post 11597883)
Those clamoring for the unaltered trilogy, myself included, are a small but vocal minority.

Sad, but true.


Originally Posted by stvn1974 (Post 11597907)
I think I might just face that Star Wars is forever ruined for me and move on.

I feel the same way. I have the bonus discs from the '06 DVDs, and I'm pretty much resigned that that's it for me.

HopToIt 04-10-13 10:58 PM

re: Star Wars
 
Studios will disappoint. The only DVD/Blu-ray obsessions I can ever entertain into the future are new releases of Evil Dead series and Repo Man.

I understand how the high-quality unaltered trilogy would serve as a comfort to an aging 20th century generation living through increasingly alien times, but this here 21st millennium isn't kind to warm and fuzzy memories from the past.

The only place to put any faith is with the fans. Adywan revisited cuts are the way to go for now, but inevitably there will be high-quality unaltered fanedits to come.

BuckNaked2k 04-11-13 08:44 AM

re: Star Wars
 
^ Check out Harmy's remastered v2.1 :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

HopToIt 04-11-13 08:56 AM

re: Star Wars
 

Originally Posted by BuckNaked2k (Post 11648638)
^ Check out Harmy's remastered v2.1 :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Who needs Hollywood? That's what I'm talking about!

EddieMoney 04-11-13 09:24 AM

re: Star Wars
 
Still hanging onto my CED videodiscs.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:36 AM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.