Original Star Wars trilogy on DVD this fall

[Lurker 5]

From Lucasfilm...

I wanted you to know how much we appreciate the passion and enthusiasm you have for Star Wars, and thank you for sharing your concerns about our upcoming DVD release.

The DVDs being released in September will contain two versions of Star Wars: Episodes IV, V and VI – the Special Editions (which represent George’s vision of the movies) and the first versions, which will be included as bonus material. We hoped that releasing those “original” movies on a bonus disc would be a way to have some additional fun with the debut of the movies as individual DVDs. We certainly did not want it to become a source of concern or frustration for any of our fans.

As you may know, an enormous amount of effort was put into digitally restoring the negatives for the Special Editions. In one scene alone, nearly 1 million pieces of dirt had to be removed, and the Special Editions were created through a frame-by-frame digital restoration. The negatives of the movies were permanently altered for the creation of the Special Editions, and existing prints of the first versions are in poor condition.

So many fans have requested the original movies, we wanted to find a way to bring them to you. But since these movies do not represent George's artistic vision, we could not put the extraordinary time and resources into this project as we did with the Special Editions. The 1993 Laserdisc masters represented the best source for providing the original versions as DVD bonus material. Although these are non-anamorphic versions, they do preserve the original widescreen composition of the movies.

We want you to be aware that we have no plans – now or in the future – to restore the earlier versions.

We hope you will understand our decision and, again, want to let you know how much we appreciate your interest and enthusiasm.

Sincerely,

Lynne Hale

publicity@lucasfilm.com

Neil

[Ollie 1,059]

That statement is just plain sad.

[diskobolus 3]

Well. That sucks.

[deleted account 108]

I'm still amazed there's any kind of official release at all.

Consider this: "Q: Why did you rework the original trilogy into the special-edition versions in the late 1990s?

LUCAS: To me, the special edition ones are the films I wanted to make. Anybody that makes films knows the film is never finished. It's abandoned or it's ripped out of your hands, and it's thrown into the marketplace, never finished. It's a very rare experience where you find a filmmaker who says, "That's exactly what I wanted. I got everything I needed. I made it just perfect. I'm going to put it out there." And even most artists, most painters, even composers would want to come back and redo their work now. They've got a new perspective on it, they've got more resources, they have better technology, and they can fix or finish the things that were never done. ... I wanted to actually finish the film the way it was meant to be when I was originally doing it. At the beginning, people went, "Don't you like it?" I said, "Well, the film only came out to be 25 or 30 percent of what I wanted it to be." They said, "What are you talking about?" So finally, I stopped saying that, but if you read any interviews for about an eight- or nine-year period there, it was all about how disappointed I was and how unhappy I was and what a dismal experience it was. You know, it's too bad you need to get kind of half a job done and never get to finish it. So this was my chance to finish it.

Q: Why not release both the originals and special editions on DVD?

LUCAS: The special edition, that's the one I wanted out there. The other movie, it's on VHS, if anybody wants it. ... I'm not going to spend the, we're talking millions of dollars here, the money and the time to refurbish that, because to me, it doesn't really exist anymore. It's like this is the movie I wanted it to be, and I'm sorry you saw half a completed film and fell in love with it. But I want it to be the way I want it to be. I'm the one who has to take responsibility for it. I'm the one who has to have everybody throw rocks at me all the time, so at least if they're going to throw rocks at me, they're going to throw rocks at me for something I love rather than something I think is not very good, or at least something I think is not finished."

[Henry B 50]

And even most artists, most painters, even composers would want to come back and redo their work now. They've got a new perspective on it, they've got more resources, they have better technology, and they can fix or finish the things that were never done.

I've tried to "re-compose" one particular work of mine three or four times. The original was written when I was just starting composing; hence, it was very simplistic in melody and chord progression. I was just getting used to some new audio software, and I didn't know how to mix it well, how to use the strings properly, and I couldn't get past eight instrument tracks (so I loaded four string sections, a glockenspiel, a harp, a piano, and a horn). In my latest version, I went back and did the piece with a reasonable sound mix, a full woodwind section, tied notes, legato passages, better mixes, better string writing (e.g. chords broken up between instruments, not all on cellos), and in general, a much greater knowledge of music.

The original is the best because my heart went into it. The situation is the same for Star Wars (the first film, at least), but Lucas refuses to remember. All he thinks about are the outdated special effects.

[A24 4,333]

He's a bad director.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

He's a bad director.

At last, it has been said.

[gkgyver 1,645]

It has been said numerous times, but at least now it's accepted.

and I'm sorry you saw half a completed film and fell in love with it.

If the revised versions are indeed Lucas' visions, why was the scene between Han and Greedo changed? Was that something you couldn't have done with 1977's technology?

I'm sorry, but anyone who thinks releasing the original theatrical versions would be "just fun" and a "bonus" for fans must ineviatably have lost any touch with reality.

[Ollie 1,059]

Silly me, I always thought the Special Editions were test runs for ILM and Lucas to see if the could pull off the CGI for the prequels.

I guess when you have millions you can turn your back on what made you successful. I'm sure the Academy must be scratching their head wondering why they nominated a half ass completed film for all those awards.

[jasonblueeyes 0]

He's a bad director.

He Became a bad director. American Graffitti is a Great piece of directing.

Well it is. :roll:

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

So is Star Wars.

- Marc, who thinks Lucas' last great project was Raiders of the Lost Ark.

[jasonblueeyes 0]

One wonders what he would have done with/to Apocalypse Now.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

If the revised versions are indeed Lucas' visions, why was the scene between Han and Greedo changed? Was that something you couldn't have done with 1977's technology?

maybe his 'vision' changed over the years. :cry:

[Danielle 0]

If the revised versions are indeed Lucas' visions, why was the scene between Han and Greedo changed? Was that something you couldn't have done with 1977's technology?

Yes, the ever changing vision: In 1977, Han shot first. In 1997, Greedo shot first. In 2004, nobody's got a freakin' clue what's going on in that scene. If this represents a pure creative vision, then Lucas needs his eyes examined.

[A24 4,333]

- Marc, who thinks Lucas' last great project was Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Would've been nothing without Steven.

BTW, isn't Raiders Of The Lost Ark a bit dated by now? I know the other two are. Who knows of such things? I would check it out myself but since the DVD is not in my possession ...

[Jeshopk 8]

Raiders is not dated. Unless you consider "The Mummy" the pinnacle of modern movie making.

[A24 4,333]

Raiders is not dated.

What makes you the expert? I mean, you think Return Of The Jedi looks incredibly good.

The Mummy? No, thanks.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

As far as I'm aware, there's nothing in Raiders of the Los Ark that cries out "early 1980's!"

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

- Marc, who thinks Lucas' last great project was Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Would've been nothing without Steven.

True.

BTW, isn't Raiders Of The Lost Ark a bit dated by now? I know the other two are. Who knows of such things? I would check it out myself but since the DVD is not in my possession ...

It may not look like a 2006 movie, but it's as great now as it ever was.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Marc speaks the truth.

If anything, the special effects look more realistic then the shiny "photorealistic" effects we are used to today.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

Raiders didnt have much in the way of special effects iirce save for the opening of the ark at the end which was spruced up a bit on DVD I think.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Did they remove some of the wires for the ghosts?

Neil...Marc?

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Not that I'm aware of. You can still see the bars holding the puppets.

They did remove the famous python reflection, though, and I've read somewhere a safety bar was removed from the scene where Indy is chased by the giant boulder, but I can't confirm that. They also supposedly removed an arrow bouncing off Indy in ToD, but again, I can't confirm that one.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

BTW, isn't Raiders Of The Lost Ark a bit dated by now? I know the other two are. Who knows of such things? I would check it out myself but since the DVD is not in my possession ...

It may not look like a 2006 movie, but it's as great now as it ever was.

As close as a movie statement will ever get to scientific truth.

[Ollie 1,059]

All 3 films still hold up although the LC is the weakest of the three.

[Lurker 5]

Raiders didnt have much in the way of special effects iirc...

Raiders has quite a few effects shots. They're so masterfully executed you don't even realize it, the sign of a great special effect

Neil

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Indy being great has more to do with SS, than it ever did with GL.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

http://videobusiness.com/article/CA6337246...text=john+singh

[Lurker 5]

http://videobusiness.com/article/CA6337246.html?text=john+singh

Old news.

Neil

[Kendal_Ozzel 36]

Upping this thread...

Check out this wonderfully misleading new menu screen (in anamorphic widescreen, no less) from Star Wars.

:roll:

[ymenard 54]

How can anybody say that Raiders of the Lost Ark is dated? He's obviously not a fan of cinema...

[robthehand 3]

How can anybody say that Raiders of the Lost Ark is dated?  He's obviously not a fan of cinema...

Did I miss something? Who said that, where?

Raiders was clearly not made on August 22 2006, but I wouldn't call it dated at all.

[Trent B 337]

Just for the record I perfer the S.E.'s over the Unaltered versions. All though I will admit there are a few things here and there from the S.E.'s I do not particularly like. I will actually be buying this set regardless of it being non-anamorphic because I want to retire my VCR and the crappy VHS sets since I hate VHS a lot now.

Also to every fan made transfer of these movies I have had non them worked properly at all. They all became heavily pixelated at points during the movies then eventually locked up, no matter what player I tried it on.

If you don't like the fact that I'm buying this set then tough crap.

[robthehand 3]

Nah, one more won't make any difference. On Amazon, the new DVDs are ranked as #93, #102 and #107 for SW, TESB and ROTJ, respectively. So much for the 2 1/2 out of 5 average review...

Hehe, just noticed this review:

But people... This is what you asked for! Sure, they could have taken the time to remaster them and make them "Anamorphic" but then if they had, these would no longer be the "original versions" and would not be the way fans originaly viewed them! Some people are just never happy no matter what...

[ymenard 54]

oh just wanted to mention that I hate people who say that a movie is "dated"...it's aggravating, it shows they dislike cinema they just want easy ADD-influenced entertainment and flashy images

Raiders is one of the few purely intemporal movies I've seen.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

oh just wanted to mention that I hate people who say that a movie is "dated"...it's aggravating, it shows they dislike cinema they just want easy ADD-influenced entertainment and flashy images  

Nu-uh.

A movie can be dated, but it can still be good.

[GoodMusician 56]

The only thing that really dated ANH for me were the hanger scenes on Yavin... granted they were heavily rushed and hindered by budget cuts... but that was it for me...

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

In all honesty, the FX work on the Battle of Yavin does look dated to me at some points (by which I mean a tad shabby). But it doesn't matter, because the movie is good enough for me to not care.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

What moments exactly?

Screenshots please!

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Eh.

A lot of these things are when you see the miniature explosions, or big black matte lines. And often it sort of falls apart right before a cut.

But does it really matter? No, because the sound, the editing, the suspense, and the music all work to support the scene, and it's still all very exciting.

Not to mention that there's some stuff that still looks completely bitchin'.

[ymenard 54]

For me "dated" is perogative, like you can't watch it anymore with the same emotions brought on to you. It was good before now it's not. Meh. Jason and the Argonauts doesn't change a thing now that CGI is everywhere. It's still cinema, it's still magic.

You don't have that mentality in other form of art, it's shameful the mass often use it to "put down" an older movie as if it doesn't have it's place anymore.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

It's a misused term. King Kong is dated, because it uses techniques that have become outdated or obsolete in the form they were used back then. But it's still excellent.

Taxi Driver is very much a seventies film, but it's still a great piece of filmmaking.

Team America: World Police (which I watched last week, so I'll throw it in here, too) is dated because it uses weapons of mass destruction and Hans Blix for a bunch of scenes. But it's still funny as hell.

[Kendal_Ozzel 36]

I agree with ymenard's sentiment, but I think Marc is right about the term "dated." I don't really see "dated" as a bad thing; it's an inevitability every time you make a film. You watch The Poseidon Adventure, and that groovy dancing they do is certainly dated. However, I don't see that as "bad," but others do. Others like the aforementioned ADD movie-goers and the studios that cater them by making Poseidon (a decision I'm sure they're now regretting, but that's beside the point).

[robthehand 3]

I don't think I've ever used dated unless I mean it in a bad way. Like Marc said, the original King Kong is dated, but no worse because of it. I'd say the same for the classic Star Trek and Doctor Who - lots of things are clearly products of the time in which they were made, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's at all bad.

Something like Knight Rider (the series), however, is dated in a bad way - IMO it's totally unwatchable. Actually, was it ever good?

[Ollie 1,059]

I used to watch Knight Rider when it was on TV and I liked it. Of course I was a young teenager at the time and everything was cool.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

David Hasselhof is the Shatner of the 80's!

[Ollie 1,059]

Uh no.................

Shatner's in a league of his own.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

You really think Hasselhoff could play a character called "The Big Giant Head" and get away with it?

Mmmno.

[gkgyver 1,645]

Hey, no bad word about Knight Rider! I just bought season one and it's great! Although I don't want to count how often one- liners are repeated ... especially KITT's "I've heard that before".

[Trent B 337]

From thedigitalbits.

Also today... a follow-up on something we've been telling you to expect for quite while now. 2007, as you may well be aware, is the 30th anniversary of the original Star Wars' debut in theaters. You'd have to be stupid not to know that Lucasfilm is going to have big DVD release plans with which to celebrate the anniversary, and we've been telling you that was the case for many months now.  

Indeed, during our last visit to the Ranch for the DVD release of Episode III, producer Rick McCallum confirmed that a box set of all six films was going to happen eventually, and animation director Rob Coleman even let it slip that the puppet Yoda from Episode I had already been replaced with a new CG Yoda to match Episodes II & III for the "future" release. T-Bone over at Star Wars Universe recently speculated about this box set, and we've been quietly checking in with our industry sources on it as well.  

Well, we've confirmed it: There IS a big, ultimate, 6-film Star Wars anniversary DVD box set planned for 2007. There will be more changes to the films, and there will be LOTS of new, never-before-seen special features - all the good stuff that was held back by Lucasfilm from the original Trilogy DVD release a few years ago. Think deleted scenes and more.  

We don't know if good, genuinely-REMASTERED versions of the original theatrical editions of the films will be included or not (though how you could call the set "ultimate" without them, we don't know).  

We don't expect high-definition versions yet, as those formats are just too new. We don't have ANY other details for you yet, so please don't ask. But as you consider whether or not to purchase the "limited edition" DVDs due on 9/12... we thought you should know that more IS absolutely on the way next year. 'Nuff said for now.