Quote:

Originally Posted by milo bloom

Theforce.net has finally commented on this, and they're printing comments that have been emailed into them. 1/3 are the usual sycophants saying Lucas can do no wrong, and another 1/3 are the ones that can't get it thru their thick skulls that anamorphic DVDs are *not* altering the film.

The 1/3 (likely less) of us that are simply asking for a quality presentation of three films we cherish and love, are being drowned out by all the noise. I fear we're simply being out-shouted here, and nothing's going to change.

I wouldn't use Theforce.net as a random sample of fans. I post there everyday, and I am a minority opinion there. About 90% of the fans are prequel gushers, and couldn't give a rats ass about the O-OT. They also have a thread there, "Is ANH meh?" And many of the respondents agreed it was meh! There is also a thread called, "The Phantom Masterpiece." I will never judge an opinion of a SW website that has TPM as a masterpiece, and ANH as meh.

Most fans who post there who are O-OT fans were run off that site years ago, and the only reason I stay around is the bashers sanctuary, which is always funny how they rip the PT, and just to give voice to the other side, so they don't think their little world that EVERY fan thinks The Phantom Menace is a masterpiece.

Go to www.originaltrilogy.com. 99% of the fans there are fighting for the O-OT on DVD. Everyone of them is writing letters to Lucasfilm, and emailing them constantly. I still think there is a chance they may change their mind and give the O-OT the DVD treatment it deserves.

As many fans dislike Lucas now, I think there are many on the bubble that if they get a great release will love the man the same way they did from 77-83. But if this is non-anamorphic, then I think Lucas will have lost all those fans forever, cause to me that is giving them the middle finger when on the 2004 SE DVDs, the O-OT scenes are Anamorphic in the Empire of Dreams Documentary. That proves that these films exist in anamorphic widescreen, and it is Lucas that is being petty.

the Phantom....masterpiece...?

And about the whole anamorphic thing, i'd be pretty funny if it wasn't anamorphic. Sure, Lucas might be caving and releasing something he didn't want released, but he's doing it his way. Talk about petty.

I'm on that site for years and I haven't written to anyone yet or made a phone call. To be honest, I don't think it's going to matter and don't see it as that big of a deal. I'm just not buying it. Simple as that.

The day I start a letter-writing campaign about Star Wars being 16x9 on DVD when I haven't even done that in support of my own personal rights (or lack thereof) is the day I realize I've lost my mind.

Personally, I have always found the majority of A New Hope quite boring, but I would never call Phantom Menace a masterpiece. Parts of it are more exciting visually, but still...

You confused me by quoting that post only to half-way through the Jim Ward address. Here I thought that was SIGNED by Jim Ward, SrVP. Very confusing when read that way.

someone should start a poll of who will actually be buying the new(old) release. anamorphic or not, i think many who are complaining now will still buy it. no matter what!

it is arguably the greatest trilogy in movie history and this time it will be unaltered, unadulterated, un-fooled around with. it wasn't anamorphic in theaters back in 77, 80, 83 was it? so who cares, it is the original gems and isn't that what counts?????

No I honestly 100% will not buy it. I like the 2004 editions. Paying that kind of money to upgrade when all I am getting is non-anamorphic laserdisc transfers simply isn't worth my hard earned money. Esspecially when you consider all the great new Blu-Ray discs and high definition video games coming out this fall I have much better places to spend my money.

I already said this several pages back.

Isn't that one of the signs of the apocalypse? Having the same thought as Scott1598?

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=466359

i won't buy it if its made from the laserdisc masters, let alone, non-anamorphic, because i already have those transfers on laserdisc complete with commentary and a wealth of other bonus features that will likely be absent from the DVD release.

I for one will be celebrating and welcoming our devil overlord Luca$
who's birthday we will be celebrating on 06/06/06, and will help to bring the next 1,000 on to his rule. All the Star Wars haters will be sacrificed and the virgins/believers will be spared.

hey- that's not fair you cockthreader! i should at least get a by-line.

So in 1977, Star Wars appeared as a tiny window surrounded by black bars?

Please, please, please, please, please try to understand what we're talking about here before you say anything. *Any* film can made into an anamorphic DVD. It does not matter the year of release, you can feed a film into the encoder machine (I have no idea what it's called, maybe a telecine?) and encode it into a 16x9 transfer. (anything narrower than 1.50 will of course start to lose resolution, but the point is, it can be done).

I could go into my DVDAF collection and list dozens (or more) of film titles made at the same time or before Star Wars, that are presented on DVD with a 16x9 transfer. It is simply a way of encoding more resolution (from the film source) on a DVD, it does not alter the film in any way whatsoever.


We are simply asking that Lucasfilm take the extra step to ensure these are presented in the highest possible level of quality. Old laserdisc transfers are not it.

Please stop muddying the issue, we're not asking for the world, merely for Lucasfilm to adhere to the same standard as every other studio these days.

no, i just didn't think anamorphic was even a word back then.

and thus it isn't presented how it was when it was first released was what i was saying so Please, please, please, please, please understand what i actually wrote in my post. i know anything can be made anamorphic and would love it if it were, thus giving me higher resolution and better picture, but that isn't how i saw it in 1977 with my dad so why would i care if it wasn't transformed for this release. why cry over spilt milk and take what you can get...true masterpieces in their originally shown theatrical form!
thank you and good night!

Looks like I would LOOOOVE it there.

And then I'll hug and kiss some poisonous snakes!


Now THAT's sarcasm!

Yeah, I emailed Dustin Saturday that I was surprised they had not posted anything on Rebelsum about it yet. He emailed back asking if I meant about the DVDs in general or this news. I told him I meant this news and Sunday his article was up.

Coincidence?

Actually, aside from the 70mm showings, Star Wars was probably shown with an anamorphic lens on the projector. Ever seen a 2.35:1 film or trailer in the theater and the image is all squished before the projectionist puts on the scope lens?

Anyway thats not what we're really talking about here and our use of the term anamorphic is obviously in the home video realm, the arena in which you didn't see Star Wars the first time in 1977 either. What we want is the highest quality possible image for DVD and eventually a High Def disc format for the original version of the trilogy. Anamorphic encoding achieves this. You won't even notice it. It will look widescreen to you if you have a 4x3 TV.

And by the way if you are still deadset against anamorphic encoding for whatever reasons, I believe it's not in the high res HD DVD or Blu Ray spec.

How much you want to bet that Greedo's and Jabba's subtitles appear in the bottom black bar?

You have no bloody idea what your talking about, the anamorphic process for DVDs is simply capturing more of the resolution of the film for use on the DVD. An anamorphic transfer is *closer* to what you saw back then, as it's presenting more resolution. There is *no* change to the film. I'd like to be able to watch these with my Dad on my 16x9 display, without having to zoom an old laserdisc transfer. If you're just trying to defend Lucas that's one thing, but you are deliberately not understanding a technical process that does not change the film, but gets us closer and closer to the staggering level of resolution available on film stock. A properly done 16x9 DVD doesn't have a tenth of the resolution of film, and a non-anamorphic has even less, do you see what I'm getting at?

Not an expert on this, but I think that these pictures (and all 2.35:1 pictures) were shot with an anamorphic lens.

All anamorphic does for DVD is make the player generate the "black bars" rather than wasting the resolution on dead black space. It doesn't alter the film in any way.

Doesn't that depend on the screen dimentions?

Someone was asking how long anamorphic has been a word. I don't know, but I do know that the Dutch painter Vermeer used the technique in certain hidden deatils in some paintings.

Anyway, don't be too hard on Scott yet. There's a lot of misunderstanding (in 2006!) on other boards too. Especially AICN . . . ugh. Let him get his brain wrapped around the concept.

Well maybe I won't be buying these after all.

Do you know what anamorphic enhancement actually means? I think not, from the above.

You didn't see it on DVD in '77 either. Or sitting on your couch. But none of that has to do with making the DVD 16x9 enhanced.