posted
A good review. It sums up my thoughts exactly, with one exception: it assumes that everyone reading it has already bought the 2004 set. I didn't, and so this new release is worth a bit more. Kinda, sorta, in the way that I'm not buying something I've already paid for.
You know, in a way, you've really got to admire George Lucas. How many times has he managed to convince fans to buy the exact same damn thing? Three, four, five times?
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: Oh god, not that damn "close the blast doors" myth again.
Couldn't help myself. Sorry. But I was sure I remembered hearing it...
-------------------- It's life Jim, but not as we know it...
Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
Da_bang80
A few sectors short of an Empire
Member # 528
posted
I remember hearing it as well, not sure which version though.
-------------------- Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change. The courage to change the things I cannot accept. And the wisdom to hide the bodies of all the people I had to kill today because they pissed me off.
As for future release of the originals, my guess is that they won't be coming to DVD again. I do suspect that we may see a more enthusiastic transfer to HD-DVD and/or Blu-Ray in coming years, but probably not for awhile. Likely citing less than 100% attendance for fans (who already have the 2004 release in addition to several others) purchasing this present set.
As an owner of the 2004 release and the definitive edition LD box-set, I'm not going to get these. I plan to make DVDs from my LDs. I'm just waiting to see if I can figure out some way to stretch the vertical signal in an analogue way so as to fake an anamorphic aspect ratio which I would then digitize. Now if you'll excuse me, I must go and play with my dollies.
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
There's some sort of big box set planned for next year (1977 - 2007), actually, supposedly, but I'm not sure about the format.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, despite my assertions I would not buy this, I broke down and picked up Star Wars (IV) at Wal-mart. I brought it home to compare to �Dr. Gonzo�s� anamorphic laserdisc transfers, and here are some observations:
I viewed this on my 65� Mitsubishi HDTV, and did comparisons using both my Toshiba HD-A1 HD-DVD player and my Malata DVP-520 DVD Player (via component video connections in each case.)
The picture quality is definitely an improvement over the laserdisc transfers. The picture has more clarity, and the colors are a tad more vivid. Still, this transfer has its problems, largely because it is non-anamorphic. �Stair-stepping� and a certain amount of pixilation are visible on many images, and are easily apparent in several scenes; especially so on a large screen.
As reported on OriginalTrilogy.com, I can confirm that there is grain present, which may simply be nothing more than traditional film grain. This is not visible on the laserdisc transfers, which admittedly is much softer with less detail.
Also as reported, the subtitles (when Greedo speaks) are cut off at the bottom on a widescreen TV when one zooms the picture to frame it correctly.
The disc is dual layered.
I made a discovery that I have not yet seen on any of the internet forums that I frequent. The disc is not correctly �tagged� as a widescreen film.
I own a Malata DVD player that will automatically frame non-anamorphic DVDs on my 16:9 TV if the disc is tagged properly. Even though a disc may be 4:3 non �anamorphic, most letterboxed DVDs are still tagged as containing a widescreen film (The Abyss is a good example). When this is the case, my Malata automatically zooms and frames the picture accordingly for 16:9 TVs, without me having to manually zoom the picture.
This DVD is NOT tagged correctly, and as such, I had to scale the picture manually.
It�s really a shame that Lucasfilm treated this release with so little regard. The Original Trilogy really deserves better than this.
-------------------- “My experience with Rick Berman is, you know, he does not understand what he's doing, he does not understand science fiction.” -- Andrew Probert
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
"I own a Malata DVD player that will automatically frame non-anamorphic DVDs on my 16:9 TV if the disc is tagged properly. Even though a disc may be 4:3 non �anamorphic, most letterboxed DVDs are still tagged as containing a widescreen film (The Abyss is a good example). When this is the case, my Malata automatically zooms and frames the picture accordingly for 16:9 TVs, without me having to manually zoom the picture.
"This DVD is NOT tagged correctly, and as such, I had to scale the picture manually."
Not that this makes it any better, of course, but that could be because of the subtitle problem you mentioned.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Not sure what you mean by this. The subtitles have nothing to do with the DVD being incorrectly tagged as containing 4:3 material.
The issue with the subtitles is just a case of circumstance. To zoom in and frame the picture correctly on a 16:9 TV, the subtitles simply get cut off. This would happen whether you use a TV�s zoom function, or in my case, even when you scale the picture digitally on a DVD player.
The subtitle issue would have been resolved, by default, if the disc had been anamorphic.
-------------------- “My experience with Rick Berman is, you know, he does not understand what he's doing, he does not understand science fiction.” -- Andrew Probert
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
What I'm saying is that, if they had tagged it properly, your DVD player would have rescaled the image, and cut off the subtitles. Perhaps they intentionally tagged it the way they did to prevent that from happening.
Like I said, that doesn't make it any better though. Obviously, the proper solution would be to not type the subtitles onto a part of the frame that shouldn't even really be there in the first place.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I feel I can confidently say that is not the case. Even assuming some schmuck authored the disc with that in mind, then clearly that person does not understand the purpose for the tag. It�s simple; a non-anamorphic DVD containing widescreen material should get the widescreen tag. Period.
Besides, even with non-anamorphic widescreen DVDs that are tagged properly, subtitles almost always get cut off. The tag merely allows certain devices (such as my Malata) to automatically frame the film properly for a 16:9 display.
-------------------- “My experience with Rick Berman is, you know, he does not understand what he's doing, he does not understand science fiction.” -- Andrew Probert
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: There's some sort of big box set planned for next year (1977 - 2007), actually, supposedly, but I'm not sure about the format.
I believe it will be a box set that contains all six films and supposedly these films will be the final versions of the movies to be released(yeah, sure). It will also contain oodles of bonus material including tv specials(Star Wars Holiday Special perhaps?). It might seem a worthy buy if the films in their original forms are also included(as even the prequels received changes).
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
The Holiday special is dead to Lucas. I don't think it will get anywhere near an offical DVD.
That said, I do have an old VHS copy of it. I started watching it 9 years ago, and got maybe halfway through it. I never finished watching it.
Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
