Star Wars on Blu-ray in 2011

[Uxi]

This statement is wrong--beyond just my opinion--and it has nothing to do with Vader's new "No." Biggest release? Most popular release? Unequivocally, yes. A solid argument can be made for LoTR: Extended was a superior release; the same can be said for The Ten Commandments. Smaller-set wise, Apocalypse Now and Citizen Kane both had higher-quality releases this year.

The supplemental material has a limited viewing life. When it comes down to video quality, the Saga falls far short.

The people moaning about FOTR EE's green tint would probably disagree. I'm not much of an extras guy any more for precisely the reason you mention (limited viewing/reviewing), though.

To say the set falls short in the video quality isn't something your own posted review (or any other credible review out there) has claimed. Have you even seen the set yourself, yet? Even your own link to highdefdigest gives the set an aggregate of 4/5. IMO, it vastly overstates the problems on TPM and AOTC and overrates TESB a bit) but it does hit the mark on ROTS. HDD is notorious DNR haters, though and they almost always overemphasize it. There is a LOT of fine detail in TPM, for example, it's just not in the faces. Say what you want about the pacing / appropriateness of the podracing sequence, for example, but it looks good and is home theater demo material. Count the threads in the texture on Mace's robes, for another example. There are certain issues with some of the releases but excepting TPM, none of these have ever been known as slouches in the picture quality category, though there were certain color timing issues, which as noted to FOTR EE, isn't an exclusive phenomenon. In any case, none of the above cover almost 13 and a half hours of primary viewing material covering different epochs in film-making while attempting a unified look. The saga set not only contains reference and near reference video quality but has reference audio throughout, which is just as important to the high def experience.

No matter what happens, if GL releases the theatrical print or not, I'm never going to be able to relive those moments... but I can be there with my kid as he discovers SW for the first time.

Watching these movies with your kids really gives fresh perspective on these movies! Especially hearing them laugh at Jar Jar.

[Duke Togo]

I think Duketogo noted this when AOTC first came out, but watching Hayden confess to Natalie what he had just done, having murdered that lot of Tusken Raiders and their families, complete with rising Empire music in the background as Hayden revealed his capacity to feel jealousy and hatred, was very powerful stuff-I'd say one of the best, most defining moments in the saga. It's good to see this again...

Damn, that's a hell of a memory, and yes, that was me. That and the "I hate you!" moment between Anakin and Obi-Wan are the only two moments I thought Hayden nailed 100%. Of course, what's ridiculous about that scene between Anakin and Padme is that after he's made this confession about mass murder to her, the atrocity barely registers in her face or actions.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Duke Togo

[Duke Togo]

To say the set falls short in the video quality isn't something your own posted review (or any other credible review out there) has claimed.

You must be reading different reviews than I. Put in Blade Runner. Put in The Godfather. Put in 2001. Those are transfers worthy of the names of the films that they are of. The fact that one of the seminal films in motion picture history doesn't have a top grade video transfer is disgraceful. I am very picky when it comes to my Blu purchases, and I'll pass over films I love if I don't feel the transfer is up to snuff (I'm looking at you, Gladiator).

[myk]

Damn, that's a hell of a memory, and yes, that was me. That and the "I hate you!" moment between Anakin and Obi-Wan are the only two moments I thought Hayden nailed 100%. Of course, what's ridiculous about that scene between Anakin and Padme is that after he's made this confession about mass murder to her, the atrocity barely registers in her face or actions.

"Oh Anakin (with a warm smile), to be angry is to be human..." Ha, I've heard of supportive women but this is ridiculous...

[Uxi]

You must be reading different reviews than I. Put in Blade Runner. Put in The Godfather. Put in 2001. Those are transfers worthy of the names of the films that they are of. The fact that one of the seminal films in motion picture history doesn't have a top grade video transfer is disgraceful. I am very picky when it comes to my Blu purchases, and I'll pass over films I love if I don't feel the transfer is up to snuff (I'm looking at you, Gladiator).

Which reviews and which specific movies? I posted two and you posted one that bear out more what I'm saying. TPM is never going to have a release as good as ROTS. It's complaints are overstated, though. There is DNR and human faces appear to be a bit waxy. To say there's not any detail or to blanket the whole film with it just isn't being accurate. Look at the textures on Padme's costumes. Or Darth Maul's face. Or his horns. The pod-race might be a bit soft but it's colors still pop and there is loads of high def detail.

ROTS gets numerous reference quality reviews and TESB is usually right behind it. ANH and ROTJ usually review slightly behind between 80%-85% on most scales (4 to 4.5 on 5-star scales). Even TPM doesn't approach the original Gladiator release level of problems and you're going to be very hard pressed to find a review that says it does. Even if it did that would be one movie out of the 6.

"Oh Anakin (with a warm smile), to be angry is to be human..." Ha, I've heard of supportive women but this is ridiculous...

I dunno, do you think Eva asked Adolf how his day went?

Edited September 20, 2011 by Uxi

[Duke Togo]

TPM is never going to have a release as good as ROTS.

This is totally incorrect. TPM was shot on film, while RotS was filmed on HD cameras and is capped at 1k resolution--it will never have a higher resolution than 1080p. A clean print of TPM will look superior to RoTS on a theater screen.

I've read probably 4 reviews of the Saga which I would call "reliable," and they all generally say the same thing. What you consider acceptable for image quality is not what I consider it to be; anything less than a stellar transfer for these films is a disgrace. Also, in my opinion, anything that is done to the image that does not involve cleaning it up, correcting damage, or correcting color, is unnecessary and unwanted. However, I don't have a problem when technology is used to "clean up" special effects or errors in consistency or continuity (lips synced to audio, reversed shots, etc). Removing a visible wire on a suspended object or fixing an ADR issue with what is seen on the screen can be done seamlessly without affecting the integrity of the film.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Duke Togo

[eugimon]

This is totally incorrect. TPM was shot on film, while RotS was filmed on HD cameras and is capped at 1k resolution--it will never have a higher resolution than 1080p. A clean print of TPM will look superior to RoTS on a theater screen.

I've read probably 4 reviews of the Saga which I would call "reliable," and they all generally say the same thing . In my opinion, anything that is done to the image that does not involve cleaning it up, correcting damage, or correcting color, is unnecessary and unwanted. However, I don't have a problem when technology is used to "clean up" special effects or errors in consistency or continuity (lips synced to audio, reversed shots, etc). Removing a visible wire on a suspended object or fixing an ADR issue with what is seen on the screen can be done seamlessly without affecting the integrity of the film.

TPM was shot on both 35mm and digital film. Mostly on film, yes, but it's still a hybrid production.

[Keith]

Whatever dude, enjoy your DVD's which will look worse no matter what. Meanwhile, up through ep IV, and the BR set is still full of win.

[Uxi]

He's using 720p fancut rips IIRC. Which still don't look near as good as the BD set. And sound... well let's just say the audio is most definitely inferior.

[Duke Togo]

He's using 720p fancut rips IIRC. Which still don't look near as good as the BD set. And sound... well let's just say the audio is most definitely inferior.

BD on top, Harmy's edition on the bottom (DVD-9 upscaled). No, these pictures are not mine, they are as found on the origintaltrilogy.com forum; yes, obviously, there is image compression involved.

I'm more than content with my copies. I don't currently have the sound system to fully appreciate the audio in the BD set (which I do understand to be excellent), so I am not losing out.

[Keith]

He's using 720p fancut rips IIRC. Which still don't look near as good as the BD set. And sound... well let's just say the audio is most definitely inferior.

Whiel I find the concept interesting, how do fancut's become something "more" valid when they go against the intentions of the series creator? I'm not gonna deny that I was straddling the hater line myself for a whille (until Sith came out), but really, this is becoming more of an issue of "i like it this way better" than "this sucks." Do I think Lucas should put out un-edited HD cuts? Oh hell yeah. Will I begrudge him for not? Nope. What's out is still awesome, just a bit different. I can see the DNR issue being an issue for some, but after Menace, it's barely noticable.

I've come to look at the whole situation as this. Lucas doesn't like people telling him how his movies should be, he likes making them how he wants them to be. And currently, he wants them to be one uniform 6 part story. There was a lot of effort made to tie the prequels in wiht the original movies, and for the most part, he succeeded where he really shouldn't have been able to in creating foreshadowing references. And really, every SW picture has had someone yelloing "NOOOO," so I can see why Jedi was altered a bit to wrap up that particular trend. It makes sense in the 6 part context.

Aside from that, Lightsabers are fixed, detail is freakin' awesome all aroundj, and the sound mixes are worth the price of admission alone.

Going by that screen shot comparision, the upscale also looks overcropped.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Keith

[Duke Togo]

Whiel I find the concept interesting, how do fancut's become something "more" valid when they go against the intentions of the series creator?

It's not a fan cut; its considered to be a restoration/preservation. A fan cut would be something like the famous "Phantom Editor" cuts of Episodes I & II.

BTW, I prefer (and promote) those fan cuts of I & II because I find the movies to be unwatchable otherwise. You can call me a hypocrite if you like, but I see a difference between ruining a classic and dressing up a turd.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Duke Togo

[Keith]

From my perspective, it's the fancutters who are evil. You need to learn to let go of your anger. lol.

[Duke Togo]

Going by that screen shot comparision, the upscale also looks overcropped.

Not sure why it is that way, I just popped up the scene and mine is not cropped like that one is. Looks like the image I snagged off the forums has a slight crop on the bottom. Odd.

From my perspective, it's the fancutters who are evil. You need to learn to let go of your anger. lol.

Bad movies are bad movies, Keith. I wouldn't even bother if they didn't have Star Wars in the title.

[Uxi]

Heh, Duke, you were supposed to respond with "then you are lost!"

I'd put the BD's against the fancuts in any pepsi challenge. Screenshot remotes are one thing. Against the living moving high def picture... that's another. What are you using for a display, Duke? How big, what resolution, and how far do you sit from it?

[Duke Togo]

Heh, Duke, you were supposed to respond with "then you are lost!"

I'd put the BD's against the fancuts in any pepsi challenge.

My bad, dawg, my bad. And yes, I am well aware the BD's will have better picture quality than Harmy's release of the OT. I'm not blind, nor am I stupid. But considering I get to watch the films as they were intended to be seen, I'm pretty happy with the picture quality. They're far superior to the letterboxed GOUT DVDs.

[Warmaker]

From my perspective, it's the fancutters who are evil. You need to learn to let go of your anger. lol.

Really?

The fancutters? The ones trying to preserve the original vision of a classic, well loved movie?... without even profiting from it?

Or the guy twisting that said movie into something else entirely with bad, out of place edits & splice-ins?

[eugimon]

Really?

The fancutters? The ones trying to preserve the original vision of a classic, well loved movie?... without even profiting from it?

Or the guy twisting that said movie into something else entirely with bad, out of place edits & splice-ins?

the guy who made it? the guy who used his own money to make it, just so he could do what he wanted to do with it?

Really?

[Duke Togo]

the guy who made it? the guy who used his own money to make it, just so he could do what he wanted to do with it?

Really?

Technically speaking, he neither wrote or directed TESB or RotJ. What he's done with them is no different than a studio stepping in and re-cutting or otherwise altering a film to their liking, over the objections of the director.

[eugimon]

Technically speaking, he neither wrote or directed TESB or RotJ. What he's done with them is no different than a studio stepping in and re-cutting or otherwise altering a film to their liking, over the objections of the director.

You mean the director he hired? And he wrote the story for both and hired a script writer to polish it.

What he's done is no different from him stepping on set and telling the people he hired to do what he wants because... because he hired them for the movie he was making with his money.

[Duke Togo]

You mean the director he hired? And he wrote the story for both and hired a script writer to polish it.

Studio's don't hire directors? He's no better than a Studio suit altering someone else's work. And "he wrote the story for both and hired a script writer to polish it" could not be more wrong. Lucas wrote a "treatment," which was handed off to a screenwriter(s), who actually wrote it. JRR Tolkien had more to do with the LotR movie trilogy script than Lucas did with TESB and RotJ, and he had been dead for 25 years.

[eugimon]

Studio's don't hire directors? He's no better than a Studio suit altering someone else's work. And "he wrote the story for both and hired a script writer to polish it" could not be more wrong. Lucas wrote a "treatment," which was handed off to a screenwriter(s), who actually wrote it. JRR Tolkien had more to do with the LotR movie trilogy script than Lucas did with TESB and RotJ, and he had been dead for 25 years.

Are you joking? GL has the story credit to Empire and he's listed for the screenplay along with Kasdan for RotJ.

As for what Studios do or don't do. that's entirely up to the contract they sign with the director. In the case of SW, the IP is owned by GL, he wrote the stories. He fronted the money, he even went against SAG to make sure he could do what he wanted to do with the movies from start to finish.

If your argument is that Richard Marquand has as much of a say in RotJ as George Lucas, than you're really clutching at straws. But of course that's not what you're saying. You're saying that a bunch of 30 year olds who watched these movies 3 decades ago has more of a say in how the movies are treated than the guy who made them.

That's a pretty silly standpoint.

[Duke Togo]

Are you joking? GL has the story credit to Empire and he's listed for the screenplay along with Kasdan for RotJ.

Kasdan did a majority of the work on the RotJ script, but it is my understanding that the total product is the work of 4 people.

As for what Studios do or don't do. that's entirely up to the contract they sign with the director. In the case of SW, the IP is owned by GL, he wrote the stories. He fronted the money, he even went against SAG to make sure he could do what he wanted to do with the movies from start to finish.

You mean the Director's Guild? And that is a gross oversimplification of why he went against the DGA.

If your argument is that Richard Marquand has as much of a say in RotJ as George Lucas, than you're really clutching at straws. But of course that's not what you're saying. You're saying that a bunch of 30 year olds who watched these movies 3 decades ago has more of a say in how the movies are treated than the guy who made them.

I don't have to say it, Lucas said it himself 23 years ago:

People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians, and if the laws of the United States continue to condone this behavior, history will surely classify us as a barbaric society.

In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be "replaced" by new altered negatives. This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten.

Attention should be paid to this question of our soul, and not simply to accounting procedures. Attention should be paid to the interest of those who are yet unborn, who should be able to see this generation as it saw itself, and the past generation as it saw itself.

[Kanedas Bike]

nope, he's never seen any of the movies. And we're watching them in order (ep 1-6) and not in order that they were filmed. So he totally didn't see it coming and got broadsided.

So...uh, yeah sorry for the reply 1 page later, but that's exactly what I meant. Your son watched Episodes I and II and had become attached to Anakin as one of, if not the main, protagonist. So to see the transformation in Ep III for the first time yeah he's gonna feel like all kinds of crap.

To hear about someone's first Star Wars experience being with the prequels is an interesting side note to the current debate between you/us old-timers about the original trilogy, the changes and the worthiness of the multiple releases and formats.

I wonder if he'll feel as passionately about Star Wars as we do when he gets older.

-b.

[Duke Togo]

I wonder if he'll feel as passionately about Star Wars as we do when he gets older.

I've seen plenty of kids who absolutely love Star Wars in the past decade, but we're a while away from knowing whether or not it will stick with them. To some degree I feel part of being a fan was being around when all of this was fresh and new, and being caught up with the Star Wars craze that swept the planet. It's like being marinated in it, and that "taste" will always be there.

[Uxi]

Really?

The fancutters? The ones trying to preserve the original vision of a classic, well loved movie?... without even profiting from it?

Or the guy twisting that said movie into something else entirely with bad, out of place edits & splice-ins?

Yes the guy who actually owns it versus the people who think they do because they grew up with it and that entitles them to some sort of say.

[Kanedas Bike]

I've seen plenty of kids who absolutely love Star Wars in the past decade, but we're a while away from knowing whether or not it will stick with them. To some degree I feel part of being a fan was being around when all of this was fresh and new, and being caught up with the Star Wars craze that swept the planet. It's like being marinated in it, and that "taste" will always be there.

Very true. SW is still something of a phenomenon but not in quite the same way. quite

-b.

Edited September 21, 2011 by Kanedas Bike

[Duke Togo]

Yes the guy who actually owns it versus the people who think they do because they grew up with it and that entitles them to some sort of say.

When you get down to it, to each their own. I'll enjoy the films the way I want, and you can enjoy them the way you want.

This really is getting away from the discussion on the quality of the video transfers of the Saga.

[Keith]

Regarding the iight to edit, I caught the Biography on Lucas the other week, and he pretty neatly wraps a bow on the whole issue. He wanted to make a movie that he wanted to watch, that would also inspire others to make similar movies that he'd also want to watch. Mark Hammil's take? He caught on early that Luke Skywalker was actually George Lucas, and the whole scenario was Lucas's fantasy world to play in. Boiled down to that, it's not suprising that he keeps tweaking things to his whim, its his adventure story that he's sharring, not anyone elses.

[eugimon]

Kasdan did a majority of the work on the RotJ script, but it is my understanding that the total product is the work of 4 people.

Yes, the writing credit is shared on his movies. Lucas himself says that his talents as a writer are few. But that doesn't change the fact that the story originated with him and he had/has the final say on the product.

Even if Lucas didn't write every word of the script... it's not to say that Kasdan and Kershner sat down and decided to make a sequel and took it to GL for approval. That might give your argument some weight. It was George who decided to do a sequel, he approached the people he wanted, it was and remains his work.

You mean the Director's Guild? And that is a gross oversimplification of why he went against the DGA.

Yeah, sorry. Whether it's an over simplification or not. George didn't want to have to follow certain rules in the way he presented SW, so he did it himself. Obviously this is a guy who wants to exert control on his product.

I don't have to say it, Lucas said it himself 23 years ago:

And that's great. I don't know the context of that quote and what it applies to. What I do know is that SW is George's creation. And just because his work has become a piece of modern pop culture, doesn't give the fans or society at large, creative control over what he created.

George isn't take Blade Runner and sticking storm troopers in it. He's not taking Ran and giving them lightsabers. He's taking his own work, work he wholly owns and created and is doing what he wants to it. That's his right.

Don't like it? Don't buy it. But there's no ethical argument that you can make that says when someone creates and owns something, the rights to modify that product belong to the masses.

and Kanedas Bike, I may have missed SW when it came out in the theaters but I saw Empire and Jedi in the theaters and watched my VHS copy until the tape broke. I'm very much an old timer. I'm not saying I like all the changes. Would I prefer the option of watching the original theatrical release over the SE? Maybe... I do like some of the changes. I like the surround sound. I like how Cloud City actually looks like it's in the clouds. I like the CG Yoda in Menace. I don't care for the new dragon call. I don't like the new Vader Noooo. But ultimately, they're not my movies and George didn't ask me what I thought.

If it were just me. I wouldn't buy these movies. I bought them for my kid so we could watch them together. And the fact that he's laughing at Jar Jar, falling in love with R2D2, heart broken over Anakin's fall to the dark side, at the edge of his seat during the Death Star trench run... well, that's enough for me.

[Duke Togo]

He's not taking Ran and giving them lightsabers.

Lightsabers make everything better, don't you know this?

As far as context goes, here ya go: George Lucas' 1988 Congressional Testimony

But ultimately, they're not my movies and George didn't ask me what I thought.

Sure he did, when he made them available for purchase.

[mikeszekely]

But the arguments always seem to break into two camps. One side wants the movies as they remember them from the theater, and complains that Lucas is raping their childhood with every edit he makes. The other side shrugs, accepts Lucas' right to make whatever tweaks to the art that he created, and is content to buy whatever version is available because hey, it's Star Wars.

Why can't there be a middle ground, though? I accept Lucas' ownership and am largely ambivalent to whatever changes Lucas wants to make... I'll go so far as to say that I think some are for the better, like using Hayden Christensen for Anakin's ghost in RotJ. But given how many other films are released with both a theatrical cut and a second extended/unrated/Director's cut, is it really that unreasonable to suggest that Lucas should have included both the Special Editions and the original releases in the Blu-ray box?

[eugimon]

But the arguments always seem to break into two camps. One side wants the movies as they remember them from the theater, and complains that Lucas is raping their childhood with every edit he makes. The other side shrugs, accepts Lucas' right to make whatever tweaks to the art that he created, and is content to buy whatever version is available because hey, it's Star Wars.

Why can't there be a middle ground, though? I accept Lucas' ownership and am largely ambivalent to whatever changes Lucas wants to make... I'll go so far as to say that I think some are for the better, like using Hayden Christensen for Anakin's ghost in RotJ. But given how many other films are released with both a theatrical cut and a second extended/unrated/Director's cut, is it really that unreasonable to suggest that Lucas should have included both the Special Editions and the original releases in the Blu-ray box?

No, it's not unreasonable. And I appreciate directors like Ridley Scott who do put out multiple cuts, even cuts he doesn't like, just because he wants to give fans what they want.

But at the end of the day, no one tells George what to do. That's his right for putting up his own money and not using the studio system.

And this conversation, at least this last part, is due only to the idea that the "fan edits" are the "good" guys and that Lucas is the "bad" guy for not giving fans what they want. Just because fans aren't getting what they want, doesn't give someone else to alter material that they don't own... whether or not they're making making money off of it, isn't the point. They don't own the material, they don't have a right to change it.

[Uxi]

Just finished ROTJ and my first marathon viewing of the Saga complete I-VI. Definitely a new experience for the Saga on BD.

I take serious issue with some of the pro reviews I've read out there. You can see plenty of pores on faces throughout, most notably on Mark Hamil and Ian McDiarmid's makeup. Harrison Ford's face is especially noteworthy on Endor after the Death Star explosion. Also VERY high detail in the makeup of Sebastian Shaw. There is definitely no waxy face here, other than Carrie Fisher's makeup. I never did notice the blood on Han's fingers after Leia gets shot, either. The blinking Ewoks are pretty cool. Very natural and well executed, especially on the baby Ewoks when 3PO is telling his story. Did they do the whole eyes or was the lighting refined for the Blu-ray? I don't recall seeing the pupils before, either. Most noticeable on Wicket but also on the Chief and a couple others. Similarly, I also noticed much more detail when Vader is looking for Luke under the stairwell. My initial impression was brightness/gamma/lighting but it could just be excellent shadow detail. Audio wise, it's a great mix. Best use of surrounds since TPM. I heards animals, speeder bikes, Ewoks, and blasters. The Battle of Endor. Is. Awesome. Both video and audio.

WRT the most infamous change, the "noooo" my initial impression actually watching it in the movie wasn't nearly as negative to when I saw it on youtube when the news broke. I was almost in favor of it at the time. Once the credits finished, I was back to wishing he would leave it out, but now I'm back to being conflicted. I really didn't mind it... if I haven't mentioned it before, Vader's "moment of truth" is my single most favorite moment in the entire saga. I've watched it at least hundreds of times at the movies, on VHS, cable/sat/tv, DVD, and now Blu-ray... I would have been really interested in my reaction if I hadn't heard all the angst on the interwebs about it... I remember initially being confused when the SE first came out and was about to start humming the yub yub song and the new Williams score started. I now love that so much better than the yub-yub and think this may have the potential to get there, as well. It wasn't poorly executed as Hayden Christensen ghost looking down and then in a seemingly different direction from Alec Guinness and the Yoda Muppet... I'll give it some more thought and probably watch just that chapter again in the next day or two.

I don't know the context of that quote and what it applies to. What I do know is that SW is George's creation. And just because his work has become a piece of modern pop culture, doesn't give the fans or society at large, creative control over what he created.

The context was the colorization of black & white films by the studios long after their creator(s) were long dead. The more appropriate analogy seems to be classical artists, who would work on their sculptures and paintings and frescoes for years and decades at a time. Lucas isn't done with it. I understand the tribalism of the fans who think their emotional investment should translate to some sort of say in the original theatrical cuts being out there***: it's also there to a degree in professional sports like football and basketball teams, in pseudo-sports like 'pro' wrestling, and even in politics with most of the party line types. Understanding it only reinforces my belief that it should be opposed, if not derided for what it is.

EDIT: *** Correction... the original theatrical cuts are still out there. As I posted many moons ago, probably in one of the many debates with Hurin: former Federal agents fired for excessive force aren't going to round up the collections of people that already own them. What these fans have is a sense of entitlement to the original cuts being re-released and upgraded in every new format and the economics of it be damned. George Lucas owes it to them and should pay for their satisfaction or be slandered and vilified, regardless if he looks physically uncomfortable when seen at screenings of the original cuts. And if they don't get what they want, they feel free to edit and distribute on their own. Now, I'm a proponent of Fair Use and I don't really oppose people making their own edits for their own enjoyment, regardless of what the MPAA says. When they distribute, for profit or not, is where my support turns to opposition. So yeah, if a fan is disgruntled about the changes, feel free to purchase a new or used non-anamorphic DVD, laserdisc, VHS copy, etc or learn to rip, cut, and edit yourself if you don't want to be a criminal.

Edited September 21, 2011 by Uxi

[Keith]

These posters embody what SW used to be. But that's not SW is anymore. It definately feels different, and some are having a hard time embracing that change.

Edited September 21, 2011 by Keith