Community
Search
HD Talk The place to discuss Blu-ray, 4K and all other forms and formats of HD and HDTV.

Star Wars

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-21-11, 01:14 PM
  #626  
DVD Talk Reviewer
 
Boba Fett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,283
Received 38 Likes on 30 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by LosingMyMind
Given the recent revelation that Liam Neeson will be voicing Qui-Gon on The Clone Wars, many fans are speculating that he'll also be providing some new voice work for Revenge of the Sith. Particularly this scene:
I remember hearing he wanted to do a voice over for ROTS but scheduling never panned out.
Old 01-21-11, 02:31 PM
  #627  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Michael Corvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 62,509
Received 909 Likes on 644 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by LosingMyMind
Given the recent revelation that Liam Neeson will be voicing Qui-Gon on The Clone Wars, many fans are speculating that he'll also be providing some new voice work for Revenge of the Sith. Particularly this scene
I'm torn. Sounds like a decent addition at first, but it borders on explaining too much (midichlorians anyone?).
Old 01-21-11, 02:52 PM
  #628  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Drop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Edison, NJ
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
re: Star Wars

Do midichlorians really explain too much? I never understood the hate for them. Midichlorians are not the force they are merely a vessel that allows organic material to use the force. They explain why living creatures and not robots can use it. They also give an idea of force potential but do not guarantee force ability. They are necessary for life, about as crucial as blood is in many life forms.

That Qui-Gon scene doesn't explain much that isn't known. The idea of compassion is something the PT dealt with and it was one of QG's major hangups with the Jedi. The lack of compassion is one of the many things that led to the fall of the Jedi. If anything it might be redundant, but I don't like that Yoda is only seen telling Obi-Wan about Qui-Gon.
Old 01-22-11, 12:42 AM
  #629  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hollywood Ca
Posts: 2,471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by Guru Askew
All we know is "September" so Amazon is simply playing it safe by picking the last Tuesday of the month, I wouldn't take that as an official release date. Sending their standard "your item will arrive sooner than anticipated" email in the even that it comes out on the 20th, the 13th or the 6th is better than sending a delay email.
Sorry but I respectfully disagree. If they were simply doing what you said they would have left the date sit as we will notify when the date of release is availble like they still have on several titles i have had on pre order for awhile.
Old 01-22-11, 12:53 AM
  #630  
DVD Talk Legend
 
calhoun07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,401
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by Drop
Do midichlorians really explain too much?
They are about as lame as trying to scientifically prove how much a soul weighs.
Old 01-22-11, 06:33 AM
  #631  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,650
Received 32 Likes on 29 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by Drop
Do midichlorians really explain too much? .
Midiclorians are a perfect example of why the PT shouldn't have been made, because sometimes more information isn't necessarily better for a particular subject.

The great thing about the OT is there is alot of stuff that is very vague, and each viewer can interpret anything they way they see it. Lucas didn't need to give Vader, Luke or the Emperor a 'midiclorian number' to show how powerful they were, as the viewer was able to figure it out. For instance, we all see how powerful Luke had become by Return of Jedi compared to Star Wars and Empire. And we could see that the Emperor was probably the most powerful by him electrocuting Luke at the end of Jedi.

The PT has other examples of explaining something that the viewer didn't need more information on: Lucas should have left out Chewbacca, as now we all know they have 'good relations' with Yoda. He should have left out Boba Fett, as his character was mystery in the OT. Thank God Han Solo doesn't appear in the PT as a kid or something, as Lucas probably would have made him the nephew of Count Dooku or QuiGon!
Old 01-22-11, 08:51 AM
  #632  
Moderator
 
Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 33,630
Received 16 Likes on 12 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by Takeshi357
Gee, now I wonder why no one's bitching about those? Oh yeah, because they cared enough to also include the original theatrical cuts.

Dunno about Legend tho. You mean that Tom Cruise flick?



No, I won't!

yes, the current deluxe edition (DVD) contains both the US theatrical versioin and the director's cut. Universal even commissioned a hidef transfer of the US version which HDNet Movies aired awhile back, so when and if the movie is released on bluray both cuts of the film would and should be included.
Old 01-22-11, 03:03 PM
  #633  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
MTRodaba2468's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Western Kentucky
Posts: 2,576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by GenPion
George has always claimed to be someone who cares about film preservation but when it comes to his own body of work I just don't believe it anymore.
I always found that ironic. He supposedly supports film preservation, yet out of the six he's directed, the only film that has seen the original theatrical version released on DVD is Star Wars, and only in a non-anamorphic laserdisc port.

Originally Posted by Darthruckus66
How many people here have read the original novels. If you had you would know those scenes were always meant to be there. And what about Lord of the Rings and Avatar. If the Peter Jackson and James Cameron decided to only release the extended version in the future would you gripe about that. Personally like the new "versions" although I do think there is room for the originals. At least it's better than colorizing old black and white movies.
I would be upset about that. I am strongly of the opinion that nowadays, films should get a "definitive" release when they are released on the video market. Meaning that if there's more than one cut of the film, they should all be made available. Ridley Scott seems to understand this. The Blade Runner set is a perfect example of how to treat a classic film with numerous versions. While not quite as consistent about it, Spielberg seems to as well, based on Close Encounters's Blu-Ray release, along with the fact that he was the one pushing for the original theatrical cut of E.T. to be included in the 2-Disc SE, not just the box set (which was Universal's original plan).

Hell, I'm actually annoyed at Jackson's insistence of releasing the LOTR films in multiple sets rather than one giant, comprehensive box set (it looks like we may FINALLY get that when the Hobbit films are released, but even then, I won't hold my breath).

Granted, I don't hate the prequels or the Special Editions like some people do; I can enjoy them for what they are (although I will always maintain that the original theatrical cuts of the original trilogy will always be ranked much higher), and I'll certainly grab the Blu-Ray set, but saying that they're better than colorizing old films, while that may be true, is a backhanded compliment.

Originally Posted by Michael Corvin
I'm torn. Sounds like a decent addition at first, but it borders on explaining too much (midichlorians anyone?).
I agree. It seems like it would be cool to watch at first, but the scene between Yoda and Obi-Wan at the end of the movie already explains what we need to know. Qui-Gonn has reached a new level as a Jedi, and has become even more powerful. Obi-Wan and Yoda will now attempt to learn how to achieve what he had in death, and we see the successful results in the original films. That's all that's needed. It seems like that scene would just be beating us over the head with exposition that's either not needed at all, or something that the audience can figure out for themselves.

Originally Posted by Drop
Do midichlorians really explain too much? I never understood the hate for them. Midichlorians are not the force they are merely a vessel that allows organic material to use the force. They explain why living creatures and not robots can use it. They also give an idea of force potential but do not guarantee force ability. They are necessary for life, about as crucial as blood is in many life forms.

That Qui-Gon scene doesn't explain much that isn't known. The idea of compassion is something the PT dealt with and it was one of QG's major hangups with the Jedi. The lack of compassion is one of the many things that led to the fall of the Jedi. If anything it might be redundant, but I don't like that Yoda is only seen telling Obi-Wan about Qui-Gon.
Again, I would say that the midichlorians would fall under the category of exposition that's not needed at all. The nature of the Force was never explained in the original films, and it didn't need to be. It still worked, even though we were never told or shown the mechanics of how or why the Force could be used by certain individuals. The issue isn't that they used midichlorians to explain it, the issue is that it was explained at all. Any explanation for it would have come across as corny.
Old 01-22-11, 03:16 PM
  #634  
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The lonely depths of my mind
Posts: 3,863
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by BIGBUTTER
What a bunch of sour Whiney old Women. You freaks will never be happy. GROW UP. Myself with a few million others will be lined up on release day to get this,

So what if you aren't getting the original without the extra stuff. You already have them on DVD and VHS and bottom line you will buy this anyways. Yes George changed them. BIG DEAL. He expanded on the Star Wars universe and thats all good to me.


So be happy about the Blu-Ray release and look forward to what ever else is coming in the future. It's STAR WARS and there is so much more coming!
No, I WON'T buy this. With money being as tight as it is, when I buy a blu-ray it will often be the last time that I get a movie. So, I want the real, true version of a movie, the version that I saw in the theater. The people that saw the true version of Star Wars in the theater will not buy this abomination. The people that saw the original versions on VHS in the early 80s will not buy this abomination. The only people that will buy this crap are kids that grew up on flashy, overdone special effects that are only there to cover up the fact that there isn't really any story.
Old 01-22-11, 03:17 PM
  #635  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by MTRodaba2468
I always found that ironic. He supposedly supports film preservation, yet out of the six he's directed, the only film that has seen the original theatrical version released on DVD is Star Wars, and only in a non-anamorphic laserdisc port.
Huh? The whole OT was released in those limited edition DVDs, all in non-anamorphic laserdisc ports. And while I remember that TPM had a few things added for DVD, I don't remember AOTC or ROTS having anything changed.
Old 01-22-11, 03:45 PM
  #636  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
MTRodaba2468's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Western Kentucky
Posts: 2,576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by Suprmallet
Huh? The whole OT was released in those limited edition DVDs, all in non-anamorphic laserdisc ports. And while I remember that TPM had a few things added for DVD, I don't remember AOTC or ROTS having anything changed.
I was only referring to the films Lucas himself directed, which excludes Empire or Jedi. The six films that he has directed are THX 1138, American Graffiti, Star Wars, The Phantom Menace, Attack Of The Clones, and Revenge Of The Sith. THX 1138 is only available in a Director's Cut which features numerous CGI embellishments. American Graffiti is also a director's cut, adding in a couple of minutes of scenes that were originally cut (and while looking it up to double check, he apparently did alter one shot digitally, changing a cloudy sky to an orange sunset). AOTC's DVD is a release of the Digital Theatrical version, which had some differences from the widespread theatrical release that most people saw in theaters. And admittedly, ROTS's changes are just minor editorial changes that most hardcore fans probably wouldn't even notice. Just mainly snipping a second or two off a scene, or changing a wipe to a straight cut. I'll grant you that it's not nearly along the same lines as what he's done to his other films; I'll concede that it's pretty much negligible in comparison. However, it's been stated that he's doing further alterations to the prequels as well, so we still won't even get the theatrical version of the prequels on Blu-Ray, and these are the ones that were made with the technology to "showcase his vision" in the first place.

My overall point is that, even if it's a change as minor as snipping a second off of a shot, Lucas can't help but tinker with his work.
Old 01-22-11, 03:49 PM
  #637  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,238
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by Suprmallet
Huh? The whole OT was released in those limited edition DVDs, all in non-anamorphic laserdisc ports. And while I remember that TPM had a few things added for DVD, I don't remember AOTC or ROTS having anything changed.
AOTC was presented in two different versions theatrically. One version for standard projectors and one for digital. The digital version was the one that was released on DVD. Changes can be viewed here:
http://www.dvdactive.com/editorial/a...part-four.html
ROTS just had an optical wipe switched.
Old 01-22-11, 10:22 PM
  #638  
Cool New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Springfield, IL
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re: Star Wars

And they are also rereleasing them in 3D?
Old 01-23-11, 11:14 AM
  #639  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by AmityBoatTours
Sorry but I respectfully disagree. If they were simply doing what you said they would have left the date sit as we will notify when the date of release is availble like they still have on several titles i have had on pre order for awhile.
They can't offer Release Date Delivery without a release date either, yet another reason to just play it safe with the latest possible guess and then move it up when necessary.

Again, all we officially know is "September" and Amazon.com is playing it safe by guessing the last of the 4 Tuesday of the month.
Old 01-23-11, 11:22 AM
  #640  
DVD Talk Legend
 
whotony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: ^ Kristen Bell
Posts: 22,998
Received 576 Likes on 420 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by Guru Askew
All we know is "September" so Amazon is simply playing it safe by picking the last Tuesday of the month, I wouldn't take that as an official release date. Sending their standard "your item will arrive sooner than anticipated" email in the even that it comes out on the 20th, the 13th or the 6th is better than sending a delay email.
Originally Posted by AmityBoatTours
Sorry but I respectfully disagree. If they were simply doing what you said they would have left the date sit as we will notify when the date of release is availble like they still have on several titles i have had on pre order for awhile.
Originally Posted by Guru Askew
They can't offer Release Date Delivery without a release date either, yet another reason to just play it safe with the latest possible guess and then move it up when necessary.

Again, all we officially know is "September" and Amazon.com is playing it safe by guessing the last of the 4 Tuesday of the month.

Is there nothing that can't be argued about with Star Wars, including the release date of the blu ray set.

Ridiculous.
Old 01-23-11, 11:35 AM
  #641  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,238
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by whotony
Is there nothing that can't be argued about with Star Wars, including the release date of the blu ray set.

Ridiculous.
Yeah, wtf. It's a matter of weeks. Who cares.
Old 01-23-11, 11:57 AM
  #642  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Central Jersey
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by LosingMyMind
AOTC was presented in two different versions theatrically. One version for standard projectors and one for digital. The digital version was the one that was released on DVD. Changes can be viewed here:
http://www.dvdactive.com/editorial/a...part-four.html
The theatrical digital version only changed one shot (the hand shot at the end). All of the other changes were made for the dvd release so there are technically 3 versions so far. I'm sure the Blu Ray will be a 4th version.
Old 01-23-11, 12:07 PM
  #643  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,238
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by DarthMarino
The theatrical digital version only changed one shot (the hand shot at the end). All of the other changes were made for the dvd release so there are technically 3 versions so far. I'm sure the Blu Ray will be a 4th version.
Oh yeah. I never got a chance to see the digital version.

Actually there's been 4 versions so far. You're forgetting the IMAX version

Last edited by LosingMyMind; 01-23-11 at 12:19 PM.
Old 01-23-11, 04:17 PM
  #644  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: behind the eight ball
Posts: 19,956
Received 226 Likes on 146 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by LosingMyMind
Actually there's been 4 versions so far. You're forgetting the IMAX version
And it was essentially pan-and-scan. I really don't think we want to go there.
Old 01-23-11, 04:26 PM
  #645  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by LosingMyMind
Yeah, wtf. It's a matter of weeks. Who cares.
That's basically my whole point, you have people in here going "OMG Amazon sez its comin out on the 27th lulz" and all I've pointed out is that:

A) no official release date is announced

B) there are perfectly good reasons why Amazon would guess a placeholder date

C) we could even get it earlier.

On the other hand you have this "I respectfully disagree" dork who is stubbornly clinging to this tentative date like it's gospel for no reason I can recognize. I dunno, maybe he already ordered a case of Doritos, a case of Mountain Dew and some pizzas from Pizza Hut to be delivered that week so he won't have to leave the house.
Old 01-23-11, 11:08 PM
  #646  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 20,767
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 7 Posts
re: Star Wars

Curious if there'll be more deleted scenes for the prequels. I was looking at the prequel dvd bonus discs, and the extras are decent - trailers, docs, etc. I didn't like any of TPM deleted scenes (really hated the greedo scuffle). AOTC and ROTS have some OK deleted scenes, but hate the AOTC padme before the senate and ROTS Shaak TI and Grievous.



Anyone see the news about Lucas thinking the world would end in 2012? Yeah, sure, we know he was just kidding.
Old 01-24-11, 11:08 AM
  #647  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Drop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Edison, NJ
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by MTRodaba2468
Again, I would say that the midichlorians would fall under the category of exposition that's not needed at all. The nature of the Force was never explained in the original films, and it didn't need to be. It still worked, even though we were never told or shown the mechanics of how or why the Force could be used by certain individuals. The issue isn't that they used midichlorians to explain it, the issue is that it was explained at all. Any explanation for it would have come across as corny.
Midichlorians weren't just about exposition though. They are about symbiosis which was a major theme of the film.

We learn nothing of the nature of the force thanks to midichlorians. All we learn is that they are necessary. Which could be the same as saying, which I've mentioned before, human blood is necessary. Without blood a human cannot live and therefor cannot use the force. They explain about as much this quote from Obi-Wan: "The Force is what gives a Jedi his power. It's an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us, penetrates us, and binds the galaxy together." All midichlorians do is give a name to one component, one of those living things.

The midichlorians don't even explain force power, they only suggest it. The Jedi are pretty easy to dismiss Anakin in TPM in spite of knowing his count is greater than Yoda's. Anakin even shows frustration with his own abilities because he feels he should be stronger. I don't think Anakin of the prequels would've been much of a match for Yoda.

The impression I get from midichlorians is that they are there to show non-Jedi the force potential of an individual. A mother has a baby. The Jedi seem eager to identify force potential and train beings at an incredibly early age. The fastest and easiest way to tell a parent is to check the child's count. Jedi can feel that potential, they don't need it, but the regular people who don't interact much with Jedi can't understand that.

I just have a hard time finding much issue with midichlorians. I feel people really exaggerate their influence.
Old 01-24-11, 01:25 PM
  #648  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Boston
Posts: 11,759
Received 254 Likes on 180 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by Drop
Midichlorians are not the force they are merely a vessel that allows organic material to use the force. They explain why living creatures and not robots can use it.
Except for Gen. Grievous, of course. D'oh! Plot hole...
Old 01-24-11, 01:34 PM
  #649  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Travis McClain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Western Hemisphere
Posts: 7,758
Received 176 Likes on 116 Posts
re: Star Wars

Originally Posted by Josh Z
Except for Gen. Grievous, of course. D'oh! Plot hole...
I was never given to understand that Grievous was a user of the Force. Lightsabers, yes, but not the Force. And even if he were supposed to be Force-sensitive, that could be explained away by the fact his robot body still housed his organic components.

Regarding the larger issue of midichlorians, the issue really becomes that they introduce a physiological aspect to religion. Can you imagine being told you don't have the right blood cell count to be a Catholic? It's really rather bizarre, and wholly unnecessary as the litmus test for being taken in as a Jedi still comes down to a given individual being "special." Why define that so clearly?

The argument I would make if I were defending it is that the prequel Jedi were meant to be seen as misguided and arrogant. The emphasis on this kind of screening process could be taken as merely a pretext for exclusionary practices. We know Yoda and Mace Windu resisted Anakin; perhaps other council members went along more from the habit of denying x amount of applicants to maintain their own prestige?

But then I get into the largest problem I have with the prequels: Lucas raises interesting questions in the three movies, but outsources the answers to non-canonical Expanded Universe works and our own abilities to fill in the gaps for ourselves.
Old 01-24-11, 01:40 PM
  #650  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re: Star Wars

Grievous wasn't completely robot though. He had a heart (of gold?)


Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.