The Original Star Wars Trilogy

[majorloser]

Yes, I'm talking about the original versions that were released in the theaters back in 1977, 1980 and 1983. Not the "enhanced" versions that were released to DVD.

All three will be released on September 12th as limited editions. They will include two discs with the original and enhanced editions.

Star Wars the way I remember. Without all the extra CG

 

[highfihoney]

To this day i think seeing the 1st star war's in the theater when it was first released was the most fun ive ever had in a movie theater

Man......you had to post the date's too,kinda makes me feel like a geezer

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

Just remember they will be unrestored and not anamorphically enhanced.

 

[Nick250]

Just remember they will be unrestored and not anamorphically enhanced.

In theory is this good or bad? I have the restored versions.

Nick

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

Bad if you have a 16x9 TV. Regular TV owners won't know the difference.

 

[captain_tinker]

Yes, I'm talking about the original versions that were released in the theaters back in 1977, 1980 and 1983. Not the "enhanced" versions that were released to DVD.

All three will be released on September 12th as limited editions. They will include two discs with the original and enhanced editions.

Star Wars the way I remember. Without all the extra CG

So you mean that the set will have both the original untouched footage, just as we saw in the theaters, as well as the newer ones that have the added CG and stuff? That actually sounds like a nice deal. A few years ago, I bought the first trilogy on VHS, but unfortunately at the time you could only get the redone versions. They are actually pretty good though, for VHS anyway. I put my receiver in DTS Neo 6 cinema mode, and it sounds great!

Though, at that point, they hadn't put dang Hayden Christiansen in next to Yoda and Ben at the end of Return of the Jedi. I will refuse to buy any version of the film that puts him in that scene. He doesn't belong there. (can you tell I don't like his acting, nor his character? hehe) Anyway, I would much rather have the complete original, unretouched etc. That should bring back the memories of being at the drive in theater with my mom and dad as a kid. Just as long as my sister isn't anywhere nearby screaming "Chewie!!! My Chewie!!!"

-capT


EDIT: Update, I just realized, duh... I can go to starwars.com and check out the official word on the subject. So here it is:

http://www.starwars.com/episode-iv/release/video/news20060503.html

 

[Rob Babcock]

Sadly, I will probably pass on buying Star Wars. I don't really want the vandalized previous edition but I don't want to waste my money on the nonanamorphic set that's just in stereo. Pity, I loved the films but Lucas seems to live only to screw his fans.

 

[The Hun]

Sadly, I will probably pass on buying Star Wars. I don't really want the vandalized previous edition but I don't want to waste my money on the nonanamorphic set that's just in stereo. Pity, I loved the films but Lucas seems to live only to screw his fans.

I don't think so, his fans already have the new version which they preffer more or less.His critics on the other hand want's the original, which George wasn't happy with, so he releases, a substandard[ for today's standards] transfer to tick 'em off even further. Just my theory.

 

[outsider]

I just finished watching A New Hope.
My only complaint is the graininess of the transfer. Surely they could have taken some time to clean that up. Obviously quality was not a concern here.

Other than that, 2.0 audio is fine, but sounds a little dated.

Overall, I really wish directors would leave their works alone. So what if they're dated?

 

[Rob Babcock]

They used an inferior print to create these DVDs. And I think it's inexcusable that they weren't anamorphic! If his goal was to come as close to the original theatrical release there's no justification for making them 4:3 letterboxed!

 

[Jack Hammer]

They used an inferior print to create these DVDs. And I think it's inexcusable that they weren't anamorphic! If his goal was to come as close to the original theatrical release there's no justification for making them 4:3 letterboxed!

The way I figure it, he did it intentionally so in three years he can re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-release the theatrical version of the movies, but in letterbox. Then, in another three years he will re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-release them again, in letterbox, but now with a 5.1 soundtrack. Then three years after that...
...Just imagine if he had created the Wizard of Oz, he could have already kept this going for almost 70 years now.

Jack

 

[Rob Babcock]

Let's hope he doesn't buy the rights!

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

I'm waiting for the 1997 THX remastered original series.

That would make or break either new HD format.

 

[jonnythan]

The "original trilogy" DVDs are transfers *from the old retail laserdiscs* because Lucas claims he *taped over the originals*.

No joke.

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

The "original trilogy" DVDs are transfers *from the old retail laserdiscs* because Lucas claims he *taped over the originals*.

Taped over what? There are several 35mm theatrical prints in private collections.

 

[jonnythan]

Taped over what? There are several 35mm theatrical prints in private collections.

Tell them that.

IMO there's no excuse for releasing the original trilogy as a *non-anamorphic laserdisc copy*. It's obscene. It's Lucas being a petulant child. Star Wars fans have been asking for it since DVD was released but Lucas insists on messing with it, changing things, adding things, etc. He finally can say "I gave them what they want" but it's intentionally degraded.

@#^!%!#

 

[outsider]

They used an inferior print to create these DVDs. And I think it's inexcusable that they weren't anamorphic! If his goal was to come as close to the original theatrical release there's no justification for making them 4:3 letterboxed!

I think his goal was to never, ever release the theatrical versions of Ep. IV, V, and VI. Most likely what went through his mind, if anything, was something like, "well, if they want inferior, I'll give them inferior."

What I think may be likely is that Lucas himself has hidden all decent copies of the theatrical versions so that the only copies to be found were inferior.

 

[davo]

I dont know why people get all nostalgic about 'original re-release' products, saying it is the way it should be viewed. If George Lucas had the CGI capabilities then as what he has know, what do you think he would have prefered to use???

 

[jonnythan]

I dont know why people get all nostalgic about 'original re-release' products, saying it is the way it should be viewed. If George Lucas had the CGI capabilities then as what he has know, what do you think he would have prefered to use???

Let me put it this way:

We just want to see what we saw in 1977.

The movie shown in theatres in 1977 changed the way movies are made. It was revolutionary. It was an enormous cultural experience.

We just want to be able to see the same movie millions saw in the theaters in 1977 in high quality at home. That's all.

When I go buy The Godfather, or Citizen Kane, or E.T., part of the experience and significance of the movie is seeing the movie as it originally was. By watching some altered version of the original movie, it loses its sense of place and importance in the history of filmmaking.

 

[Jack Hammer]

Let me put it this way:

We just want to see what we saw in 1977.

The movie shown in theatres in 1977 changed the way movies are made. It was revolutionary. It was an enormous cultural experience.

We just want to be able to see the same movie millions saw in the theaters in 1977 in high quality at home. That's all.

When I go buy The Godfather, or Citizen Kane, or E.T., part of the experience and significance of the movie is seeing the movie as it originally was. By watching some altered version of the original movie, it loses its sense of place and importance in the history of filmmaking.

Well put.

I took a film class a few years ago and they had us watch movies that though they were lame by todays standards, they had been responsible for changing the way films were made and were considered revolutionary in their day.

The difference between the Star Wars "updates" and many other movies "directors cuts" is that a movie, like the Blade Runner, uses scenes that were filmed in the original production year then dropped in editing from the original release. Whereas what was done with Star Wars was completely new scenes were created for the movie 20 years after its original production and release and these were then added to the movie so as to keep it more modern. They even went so far as to digitally change characters' appearances and delete some of the original actors from the movie and replace them with actors from the modern sequels.