Solid Snake

wait..what? Someone find me a pic w/ that shit on his face.

PopcornTreeCt

I have to agree with this logic. It would be nice if they went back and fixed it.

whotony

I've seen that too. I think it's just bad cgi work that was attempting to add a shadow to the face.

Wasn't it fixed in the most recent version?

CertifiedTHX

Wow....

Okay, what's wrong with more changes? Are we now arguing to maintain the much maligned versions from 2004?

I said nothing about updating classic films, nor do I advocate that. I simply said that I look forward to what Lucas does with the original Star Wars films. We all know he'll probably tweak them more for the Blu-ray release. I'm just accepting that without looking to tar and feather him for doing it.

For the record, I think Lucas should learn from Steven Spielberg and Ridley Scott and include the original versions, the 1997 versions, the 2004 versions, and then whatever versions he currently has planned. The original versions of any film should always be preserved and made available.

--THX

LosingMyMind

Michael Corvin

Exactly. If he considers the original films workprints, that's fine, toss them on the discs and label them as such. He gets his way, and so do the fans.

Fok

Yep I agree, also he should fix Lukes green lightsaber in Ep 4 when he's training on the Falcon.

Spottedfeather

I just don't see why Lucas has to be such a jerk about this. Peter Jackson is putting out both the theatrical editions and extended editions (eventually) of Lord Of The Rings. Why cant Lucas do the same ? He'd make twice as much money if he put them out separately. It's nonsense that he says the original versions of the films don't exist anymore and he have to spend way too much to restore them. He already restored them when he made the special edition versions. He HAD to restore them to add the crappy effects and make all the horrible changes.

CertifiedTHX

The theatrical versions and the extended versions of The Lord of the Rings are both presented as accepted visions of the same work. Lucas doesn't accept the original cuts of Star Wars. He released them, but he was never happy with them. The only "real" versions to him are the Special Editions.

--THX

Anubis2005X

Incredible that the 2004 DVDs were basically the 3rd versions of the films, and yet there were so many issues with lightsaber special effects. WTF...

Jay G.

A counter to that would then be Blade Runner, where Ridley Scott presented 5 versions of the film in HD on the Blu-ray and HD DVD box sets, even though the "Final Cut" is his definitive version. The "Director's Cut" was replaced by the Final Cut, the two theatrical cuts he's disowned, and the workprint cut was never intended to be seen by a mass audience, yet he had them all included in the set.

Scott did the same thing with Legend on DVD.

Terry Gilliam even approved the TV "Love Conquers All" cut of Brazil on the Criterion Collection DVD set.

Finally, Lucas himself apparently doesn't hate the original cuts that bad, since he exploited a decades-old laserdisc transfer of them to use as a "bonus feature" on one of the Star Wars DVD releases. So the idea that it's ok that he not release the original cuts because he doesn't personally like them anymore (and he did at one point approve of all 3 original versions) doesn't really hold water.

Jay G.

He didn't restore the whole film, just the parts he wasn't going to change. Read this article for more info:
http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html

Basically, they recomposited the opticals from the original elements, instead of restoring the original negative of these opticals, then spliced the new composites in, permanently losing a few frames in the process for each splice.

Some digtially-enhanced shots were scanned from interpositives, leaving these negative parts of the original negative unrestored, and spliced into the negative when finished.

So there's no fully-restored original version, and the existing negative is a hybrid of different sources.

Now the article goes into ways in which the original version of the films could still be restored, but the work hasn't already been done, at least not completely.

TerryAlexFan

Anyone think this will come with digital copies?

Spottedfeather

The original version wouldn't even need to be restored. I'd settle for just anamorphic. As long as they'd fill a widescreen frame, I'd be happy. Guess real Star Wars fans are stuck with the "bonus" versions that came out a few years ago.

AnonomusBob15

fuck that. No way would I buy a non-anamorphic title that late in the game. I just made my own copy, and stuck them in with my trilogy set. that was just a huge insult all around.

eat it, lucas.

DarthMarino

It's already been confirmed that digital copies will not be included.

al_bundy

if you haven't figured it out by now GL is a money making machine. release the same product with small changes and "bonus" features every few years to keep people buying the same movies over and over again.

release cleaned up versions of the original trilogy in the late 1990's, then the version with the new special effects, then the new trilogy, then stagger the VHS and DVD releases to get people to buy the same movie twice.

i bet the blu ray release will be a regular release this year, a 3d release next year or the year after next and the same people will buy it all over again. then a super duper special edition with a digital copy included for those who haven't figured out how to rip it themselves

Mabuse

I'm not saying you're wrong, but Disney rereleases Bambi, Snow White, etc every 7-10 years without changing anything and those films remain cash machines.

I just hope eventually he'll see the business potential for restored "original versions" of each film. Call it Vintage Star Wars: the way they originally screened or something like that.

LosingMyMind

If that happens, so be it. We're not being forced to buy any of these sets.

Spottedfeather

Of course there aren't going to be digital copies. No one ever uses them.

Travis McClain

I download 'em. It's not my preferred method of watching a movie, but I appreciate being able to...you know what? I'm not defending myself on this anymore. Digital Copies are just coasters the rest of you throw away, I get it already.

TomOpus

I've used a few of them. So, again, you're wrong

Spottedfeather

Why, when you can just watch the actual movie dvd ? It just doesn't make sense to watch a movie on a tiny iPod screen.

Travis McClain

Oh, fine! I'll do this once more...

First of all, it's none of anyone's business why anyone would choose a given format.

Secondly, as I've tried to point out countless times on this forum whenever Digital Copies come up, you're not restricted to watching on your iPod screen. You can play a DC on whatever computer you downloaded it to. My laptop has an HDMI output, so I can connect it to any HDTV and watch that way if I'm so inclined. And iPods can also be connected to TVs for playback purpose.

Solid Snake

alright, tiger.