CT Will Disney Re-Release Theatrical Cut Of The Original Trilogy?

Does anyone know what the current status is on the likelihood of the release of the theatrical version of the OT?

 

Right, or maybe the 4K thing Edwards saw is an old SE project, but they wouldn't even have to do a 4K restoration to release the original trilogy too.

There is no official news. It's all just speculation I'm afraid.

 

So the long wait continues.

 

I'm still hoping that the wait will end this year.

 

We will get the OOT someday, the demand is there. Just head on over to Ebay and look how much the OOT DVD's from 2006 go for. Most of the auctions I've seen go for at least $60.

 

I just hope that someday is soon. I haven't seen the OOT in over a decade. Plus, I want to see them on Blu-ray.

 

I think that it'll happen this year, and will probably be announced either in April or May.

 

I could definitely see an announcement at Celebration in April, or on May 4th to celebrate Star Wars Day.

 

I feel like this is a bit of an overexaggeration. Of all the complaints I hear about Star Wars, the OOT rarely comes up (I'm talking in real life, not the internet).

 

Yeah, the OOT would be pretty good money as far as blu ray goes, but to treat it like releasing the OOT would double Disney's stock price is an exaggeration. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that it would be huge in terms of a home media release though. The 2006 DVD of the OOT was announced in May.

 

So glad i own the 2006 Best Buy Collectible Tin Release AND the Walmart Edition of ESB with the Marvel Comic... both factory sealed and wrapped! I refuse to open those puppies as i dont see the unaltered trilogy getting released any time before 2020. and even then they dont own the distribution rights to ANH. and i woulndt be surprised if Lucas had a clause in his contract anyways. Doubt we see it any time soon so ill be holding onto those bad boys for good time.

"delusions of grandeur"

 

Check out the ranking order in your signature. You're perfectly within your right to like the films however you want, but you may be the victim of self-selecting bias. Other circles of people seem to be very interested in the OOT.

 

He's been bashing Kurtz as long as I can remember. Always calls him a failed producer. The man only produced two of the greatest films ever made.

Meanwhile his boy Rick McCallum produced three of the most ridiculed films ever made.

 

Qui-Riv-Brid wrote

So you aren't attached to the actual originals then? Because they are not the same thing. As we know many people were praising the DE of ANH for years and then they found out that it was not correct because the print color was different when projected.

So if that didn't come up then people would have been very happy (and were already) watching the wrong color timing as long as it looked something more like what they thought it would be.

I'm very attached to the original versions, but IMHO correct color timing and correct contrast and brightness levels (which the current releases on DVD and Blu-ray do not have!) should be in the interest of every OT fan, regardless whether it's the theatrical or Special Edition.

Preparing a first time showing for the son of my friend, I gave all my old laserdiscs a spin. Looking at the (natural) color, contrast and brightness levels of the laserdiscs on my home theater screen was a rather shocking experience, almost felt like looking at completely different films.

In contrast what we get on DVD and Blu-ray are dull, dead or exaggerated colors with an unnatural feel. IMHO, the next release should go with a split-screen comparison for marketing purposes so fans and audiences can actually see the difference...eBay would be flooded with the current DVDs and Blu-rays as a result...

 

The prequels came after the Special Editions, so I think they were made to mesh with them, not the theatrical cuts. Also, changes to happen over time, and the Powers That Be discover ideas they like better. It happens.

(To be fair, I think the prequels/theatrical cuts of the originals fit together better then, say the X-Men movies).

Depends.

Let's see here's a few:

- ANH: While the CGI is a little rubbery, Jabba looks a lot more like the ROTJ puppet.

- ESB: Boba Fett's voice was redubbed by Temura Morrison, matching the way that all Jango Fett clones are voiced in the franchise. The Slave I's sound effects were also altered to be consistent with AOTC.

ROTJ: Unmasked Vader's eyes were recolored to match Hayden Christensen's and his eybrows were removed, to keep continuity with ROTS. Coruscant now has the prequel's senate building and the Jedi Temple/Imperial Palace in the skyline. Naboo being added to the planet montage also ties an important prequel world to the originals.

I'm not a big fan of the Force ghost change, although I do respect what they were trying to do.

However the original ESB Emperor looked nothing like the character as he appeared anywhere else, with a very different voice. That fix made him a consistent character in all his appearances. (Also, his ROTS and RTOJ looks are essentially the same.)

The Mos Eiesly footage is okay (IMHO). I can take or leave Jedi Rocks and the new Sarlacc (although the latter makes a more interesting set piece).

The new Battle of Yavin is a more exciting action scene and the footage fits the dialogue better. None of those changes helped or hindered continuity, but not all the changes did. Some were unneeded (and were either good or bad), but there were others that fixed special effect problems inherent in the originals.

Not really.

 

John Dykstra Interview Circa July 1977
http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/John-Dykstra-Interview-Circa-July-1977/id/12285

See also period interviews on
http://www.theasc.com/magazine/starwars/index.html

 

it's entertaining at least. Kurtz a failed producer. HA. now that's a good one there.

 

I was thinking about the 4K restoration and it occurred to me to wonder at what def Lucas rendered his FX in the SE? If it's at a lower def than 4K won't the FX have to be upscaled? It brings to mind the Directors Edition of Star Trek: The Motion Picture where the new CGI FX were only rendered at 480p so no true Blu Ray of that version can be released, which is a damn shame as its superior to the original IMO. So, does anyone know or care to speculate on the implications?

 

IIRC, the CGI in the SE was originally just done in 2K as that was state-of-the-art, and no one back in 1997 even had a clue that 4K might be coming one day (add to this the limitations of digital storage back in 1997).

I still find it hard to believe that *apparently* the SE CGI has been redone in 4K, I would have liked to believe they just take the negatives of the theatrical version (all VFX shot on film with 4K resolution potential) and be done with it.

 

The CG is part of the picture, just like miniatures and matte paintings. You don't question at what resolution those were made or shot either. Many non-CG elements had low resolution. That's how they'll remain.

Most CG special effects are done at 2K. Only recently a few movies have done them at 4K.

 

On the 4K Special Editions: The good news is that this is the end of the awful masters we've had since 2004 and Disney will be forced to get Fox out of the way. The bad news is that we really want the OOT.

On the "meshing with the prequels" changes:

- Hayden replacing Shaw and Morrison replacing Wingreen: Why not replace Guiness with McGregor, replace the ESB and ROTJ Yoda puppet with a CGI Yoda, and blacken Vader's red eyes while you're at it?

- Removal of Anakin's eyebrows and making Anakin's eyes blue: Did/does anybody actually care about Anakin's eyebrows or eye color?

- The Emperor's hologram: The original is as inconsistent with ROTJ as it is with the prequels.

 

There is no "correct" version. There is only the version that one prefers. As we see there are plenty of versions around and a restored version would still not be the "correct" version as in original theatrical anymore than other vintage releases are.

If they are for you then they are. I'm fine with either since I don't buy into this "correct" ie the way it first came out or the way it was first seen.

If it had been done the SE away originally on release and then had been changed later then the same people would be arguing for the first version because that is the "correct" version. Take anything and reverse the order then the argument totally changes.

If Luke had screamed while in TESB and that had been taken out then people would want that in. If Vader had said No first in ROTJ then it was taken out they would want that back in for no other reason than that is the way it first was.

Where are the complaints about TFA or R1 not looking like they were color timed in the 70's instead they have "dull, dead or exaggerated colors with an unnatural feel" comparing how movies today are first shot then how they look after grading is pretty much the same. They simply couldn't do as much in post at that time. Not much at all in comparison to now.

 

Qui-Riv-Brid

There is this saying "In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king." I intend no pun but unless you have truly and consciously seen the differences in color timing of the current releases watched next to one of the original laserdiscs you are essentially arguing from a position that's rather "ignorance is bliss".

 

I'm all for history over world building. I don't much care to watch the films in their altered state after all these years. I'd much rather reacquaint myself with nostalgic merchandise pertaining to the original films, such as listening to the soundtracks and reading old magazine articles. If the original versions of the films were to be released in HD, I'd watch them sparingly and savour the moment which befits the way I appreciate things. Star Wars is memory - I don't want it to be continuously reinforced and updated, it loses its charm that way. The alternative is a mentality I don't understand.

 

I guess I find that the updates make for a more coherent experience when putting all the movies together. I'm not watching the stuff for the history, I'm watching it for the story.