re: Star Wars
 

Fantasia and some of the shorts have had scenes/shots removed due to racist stereotypes appearing in them. It's the same reason why Disney doesn't release Song of the South, since that entire film is deemed racist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasi...#Controversies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_of...#Controversies

For Lion King and Beauty and the Beast, the IMAX releases introduced additonal musical sequences, and some revised animation. I know for Beauty and the Beast, the new song "Human Again" shows the castle being cleaned up, so subsequent shots of the castle were revised to make the castle look tidier. For the Blu-ray release, the seamless branching cuts out the new song, but still uses the revised backgrounds for later shots for the "theatrical" cut of the film. This seems more like lazy mastering than any real attempt at burying the original version of the film:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beauty_...nd_re-releases

As for the color-correcting, it's always hard to say whether or not previous home video releases had the correct color, and the newer transfers are altered in order to simply "pop," or are perhaps closer to the original intended version. Here's a post discussing some of these revisions (interestingly also on a Star Wars blu-ray thread):
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/thread...7#post-9243527

re: Star Wars
 

Really? That acronym is more clever than explanatory.

re: Star Wars
 

Unfortunately, that would most likely only provide an approximation of the original versions. There are so many minor changes, including all of the recomped effects, that I just can't see them going back and reverting. Most people probably wouldn't notice, and some might prefer the cleaned up effects, but it still wouldn't be the "original" versions.

This does bring up an interesting discussion though. What version would Disney focus on if a restoration was done? As of right now, the o-neg reflects the '97 versions. In order to restore the '04 or '11 versions, which contain tons of major and minor changes from the '97 versions, lots of extra work would have to be done. All of those changes were done digitally at 1080p. Can you really imagine Disney tasking someone with re-doing the Ewok eye blinks in 4k? Another wrinkle is the fact that the '97 SE changes were all originally done in 2k, so scanning that negative in 4k/8k may present problems for those particular scenes.

Who knows, when all is said and done, the easiest course of action may actually be to go back to the original separation masters (if they're intact) and start from scratch.

re: Star Wars
 

I've mentioned this many times, but several archival quality Technicolor processed prints of the original '77 Star Wars exist and could be scanned in lieu of an unaltered negative. Or the scenes that are altered in the '97 version could be replaced with scans from the Technicolor prints.

There are also archival quality 70mm prints of Empire and Jedi floating around.

re: Star Wars
 

I think the best course of action is not to release the OOT with flaws and all, but a hybrid cut with all the new effects found on the Blu Ray. If those effects, like the lightsabers at the end or ROTJ overlapping, need to be tweeked again to make it perfect, that's fine. But, you use the OOT as a guide when assembling these cuts. Meaning Han shoots first, no Jabba the Hut scene in ANH, extra scenery shots like Mos Eisley etc.etc. It'll probably be the most economical route that would update effects to current standards without the added horse shit.

re: Star Wars
 

This. Plus, you have to be crazy to believe that Lucasfilm doesn't have a few pristine original prints in the vault, despite what Lucas & Co. have said in the past.

re: Star Wars
 

Has this been confirmed?

re: Star Wars
 

There are Technicolor IB prints out there still, but my understanding is that there's only like 3-5 known complete copies left in existence. And if internet rumors are to be believed, George Lucas (or Lucasfilm) does NOT have one of them. There are plenty of Kodak prints still kicking around, but those have not aged well at all.

Either way, IB prints would still be less than ideal for a restoration. They are good color references, but from what I understand, they are difficult to duplicate well. That's not to say it couldn't be done, just that the result may be sub-par unless the utmost care and attention went into the process. If the separation masters still exist in usable form, those would be a much better resource.

re: Star Wars
 

No. I do not want the effects updated to "current standards." I want the original models and practical effects that countless artists and craftsmen slaved for months and years to create, not some CGI bullshit that a Lucasfilm intern cranked out after diddling around in Maya for a couple days.

If they're going to restore the movies, they should do it right so that they're preserved for posterity as they were originally created.

re: Star Wars
 

The North Carolina School of the Arts has a Technicolor copy that is in excellent condition.

I should know, I've seen it.

re: Star Wars
 

Duly noted?

Every day, I hate you more and more :p. Don't some private collectors allegedly own copies? I think Lucasfilm once blocked a non SE-screening. And then of course there's the famous Library of Congress debacle.

It sounds like negatives of this have had a sordid history.

Whoa! It's like he's my sock! Anyway, 100% agreement: the 2008 release was the final insult. If you can't do something correctly, don'tdo it at all.

Didn't Lucas attempt to destroy most pre-Special Edition prints?

I've heard that some of their restorations are pretty stunning.

Where would they make a DI of the OOT footage if not from the negatives? I guess you could use the SE footage for the scenes which haven't been altered and then do restoration work on the OOT footage. I'd rather have the negatives properly kept, but if there's a 4K+ OOT DI, I guess we'd be in no position to complain.

Isn't that a slightly different situations since the FX for TOS were done on video?

Even in my wildest dreams, this doesn't exist.

With possible exception of a ticket to Episode VII and hating myself forever, I am never buying another Star Wars product until the OOT comes out. Though I question if the demand for the OOT is enough to justify the price.

It's a question, then, from how much they'd profit from the OOT, isn't it?

Lucasfilm's hideous non-anamorphic releases presented the films which "don't exist anymore" as bonus material too. I'm skeptical of "bonus material."

re: Star Wars
 

Have you checked out some of the fan cuts that incorporates the blu rays and OOT? You'll be surprised how well they work. It's just an idea in case the OOT really is "lost".

re: Star Wars
 

Harmy is our friend.

re: Star Wars
 

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/05/...yvod-and-more/

Couple of rumors - original editions on bluray (plausible) and the prequels being retconned (not so plausible).

re: Star Wars
 

This is why I will always be in favor of Disney buying Lucasfilm. Regardless of how much they milk this franchise (and possibly ruin it even more), the one positive thing they will eventually do that Lucas would never do is release the OOT in its proper form.

If Lucas still owned Lucasfilm, I believe he would have went to his grave and never released the OOT just to spite the fans. And if you ever read Katie Lucas (his daughter) on Twitter, she was just as combative with the OOT fans when the BluRay's were released in 2011. That led me to believe if his kids inherited the business, they would never release the OOT either.

Disney will eventually release it, we just have to be patient. Heck, we waited this long! :lol:

re: Star Wars
 

Just imagine 20 years from now all the kids who grew up on the prequels and the Clone Wars raising hell on the internet and screaming about how Kathleen Kennedy raped their childhood.

re: Star Wars
 

It would be pretty hilarious if the prequels got officially retconned, but that's not going to happen. I do however like the idea of the new movies at least ignoring ridiculous nonsense from the prequels.

re: Star Wars
 

Yeah, the prequels being retconned doesn't seem likely, the recent "what is canon" announcement was pretty clear about the *six* films being the main body of canon.

However! I have long maintained that all three prequels (and to some extent, Return of the Jedi) would benefit greatly from being given another pass through the editing bay to trim some of the fat and give them a little more snap. Maybe add in a little more Darth Maul footage, restore the scenes to ROTS of the origins of the Rebellion..., that kind of thing.

I wonder if Disney would go that far?


But the Blurays of the OOT is just too obvious. (And my wife will certainly be happy, the only reason I'm hanging onto my laserdisc player and my LD collection is for the OT, and she will be glad to see that beast go).

re: Star Wars
 

I don't think the prequels are going anywhere officially, but I would hope/expect that going forward they are not referenced at all in the new movies (and marketing). It's going to be great seeing the OT taking center stage again in the lead up to Ep7. A blu-ray release of some kind makes too much sense next year...hopefully they'll include the films and extras everyone wanted 3yrs ago!

re: Star Wars
 

Like pouring gasoline on a fire. Though I'm kind of skeptical about what Bill Hint says anyway.

re: Star Wars
 

Odd you should mention this, as I was just watching my Blu-ray copies of THE X-FILES, which came out last year.

re: Star Wars
 

Bought the set in 2011 and don't care about the originals being altered. Unlike some, my childhood was not ruined because of it and I am able to properly function day to day.

re: Star Wars
 

Would you buy a new Blu-ray that had the unaltered versions on it though?