Star Wars on Blu-ray in 2011

[Uxi]

The only people not sold on Blu-ray are those with small TV's. Once you get to 50"+ screens, you must have Blu-ray. Digital just doesn't compare at high resolution, especially when you add the audio (lossless) component, which is just as important to home theater as the picture (though often subtler).

I am hoping for CGI Yoda in Ep1 and wouldn't really mind replacing the muppet at least partially in Ep5 (so he can crawl up Luke's back, eyelids, etc).

[EXO]

I love how people don't read posts and defend against an imaginary argument. Oh web. How you never let me down...

[BeyondTheGrave]

As George has said many times before, the original theatrical versions aren't going to be released any time soon.

The argument I heard was it would cost too much. Which is total BS.

[Keith]

Sure there's been plenty of "time" to transfer the original versions into HD. And sure, there were no less than releases of the previous DVD set (4 disc LE Widescreen, 4 disc LE Pan & Scan, 3 disc regular Wide & 3 disc regular Pan & Scan, 3 individual 2 disc editions with matted widescreen original versions, plus the single releases of I-III. So if it were truly a money issue, Lucas would have more than made enough back on the DVD's alone to cover it. Fact is, he doesn't like them anymore, so he's not going to release them in anything remotely resembling anamorphic widescreen. Sucks to be us.

The good news, these new blurays are going to cost an average of $15 each, with the complete collection giving 3 bonus feature disc's for virtually free on top of that. And as much as I love the SW DVD's, they can sure as hell look better in HD, and very likely will. THX looked pretty good remastered, & American Graffiti will be out in June.

[Chewie]

The OT on the discs will be the 97' SE.

[big F]

Looks like disc 7,8 and 9 will be of most interest to me.

[Wanzerfan]

As George has said many times before, the original theatrical versions aren't going to be released any time soon. Which specific special edition version it's going to be though, I have no idea.

The argument I heard was it would cost too much. Which is total BS.

I think what ol' George is meaning it would be too expensive to restore the original theatrical masters. But I do agree with you BeyondTheGrave, George does have more than enough money to get the job done, it's just most likely he doesn't want to bother with it.

[kanedaestes]

While it may be expensive it is cheaper than rereleasing the entire saga in 3D so George is full of BS

[Keith]

While it may be expensive it is cheaper than rereleasing the entire saga in 3D so George is full of BS

lol.

[Hikuro]

personally I'm just not interested in watching a series of nearly 3 hour movies a pop made back in 77-2005. They were never intended to go HD and last time I bought a fairly old film on Bluray I felt let down, the quality just wasn't as high as I had expected it to be. Maybe Episodes 1-3 will pull it off, but 4-6 will I think let me down.

But I already got the 6 episodes, I'm content with that.

[Dynaman]

last time I bought a fairly old film on Bluray I felt let down, the quality just wasn't as high as I had expected it to be.

That would be the fault of whoever did the restore of the film, nothing to do with the age of the film in particular. Best example I can think of is the latest version of Metropolis - earlier restoration jobs were very bad in comparison, now the film on DVD is very crisp. If anyone is going to put the proper resources into the restore of a movie it will be George with Star Wars. (although he may decide to change even more along the way...)

Personally I have no plans of picking these up though, I already own SW on DVD and things just don't look that much better between DVD/BD from the 10 feet away that I watch TV from.

[Uxi]

While it may be expensive it is cheaper than rereleasing the entire saga in 3D so George is full of BS

Do you think an unaltered original trilogy would sell more than a 3D release? Most people don't care and will buy whatever is released first. Which is a bigger niche? Unaltered raped childhoods or 3D afficionados? I wouldn't buy either, myself.

[Keith]

personally I'm just not interested in watching a series of nearly 3 hour movies a pop made back in 77-2005. They were never intended to go HD and last time I bought a fairly old film on Bluray I felt let down, the quality just wasn't as high as I had expected it to be. Maybe Episodes 1-3 will pull it off, but 4-6 will I think let me down.

But I already got the 6 episodes, I'm content with that.

That's more to do with the effort that goes into remastering than the age of the movie.

[kanedaestes]

Do you think an unaltered original trilogy would sell more than a 3D release? Most people don't care and will buy whatever is released first. Which is a bigger niche? Unaltered raped childhoods or 3D afficionados? I wouldn't buy either, myself.

Depends on how you see it. There are far too many that would much rather have the original release. Also 3D only really seems to do well in theaters, 3D movies I don't believe sell well on the home market as most people don't care for it or have the TVs for it so they are stuck with the classic style Red/Blue glasses which suck to watch anything with. And since the Blu-Ray release is coming much sooner than any of the 3D films it would have been smarter if you are going to dig into people's pocket to release this set with the original films, then a newer 3D set with whatever version he wants. But in all fairness I have my DVD of the original films so I am happy with that and don't really care much about this set or the 3D films.

[Keith]

Bottom line, we all know that the original versions are perfectly feasable to use, hell, they even accidentlaly used the wrong cut of the scene where R2 gets stuck in the swam on Degoba for the new versions. Bottom line is, George doesn't want to include them. It's his movie, and at this point, I just want SW in HD. Those who want to pass, do so, but do so knowing that there will probably never be an anamorphic version of the original films (note: I am purposely trying to reverse jinx this into coming into reality so we can have them).

3D is crap, but it sells at least in theatre's. I don't think there have been enough home releases of the current 3D gen, let alone the fact that they still can't decide on one 3D format, so I don't see that taking off too well.

[David Hingtgen]

They were never intended to go HD and last time I bought a fairly old film on Bluray I felt let down, the quality just wasn't as high as I had expected it to be.

Even old cinema film from the 30's can be 4000p or higher, far beyond current 1080p.

A lot of it depends on preservation--if it's a minor film that literally sat in a closet for 30 years and was produced on cheap film to begin with---it may be hard to ever get quality out of it as it's physically degraded over time (actual film never really stops developing, or something like that--you can never wash out ALL the chemicals). But any "first class" film properly cared for that was produced with 35mm Technicolor or something----it should still retain "beyond HD" clarity even today. And of course, if the original camera itself was cheap or they simply upscaled a DVD and sold it as Blu-Ray--you just won't get quality. But an "old classic" that is re-scanned from the master, should be FAR beyond a DVD's clarity.

The biggest issue of "old stuff in HD" is with syndicated TV shows---many were basically produced on little better than VHS, and there is no higher-quality master. You'll never get HD from tape.

[kanedaestes]

A good example of what David said, Blade Runner on Blu-Ray. Awesome film that was done properly on Blu-Ray.

[BeyondTheGrave]

Or Casablanca

[VT 1010]

In addition to a good source, another issue is the mastering. Even though you may only be viewing a film at 1080p, you need to scan the film at a much higher resolution for improved detail and clarity. This is most noticeable when it comes to grain. Excluding cheap film, many older movies have grain that's actually a very fine grain; however, when scanned at a lower resolution it has a tendency to exhibit aliasing. This aliasing has a tendency to make grain seem thick and almost clumpy. When the scan is done at a resolution of 2K or higher, it makes the grain seem small and simultaneously increases fine detail.

This is one of the reasons why some recent remasters (like Alien, Blade Runner, the Godfather, and such) look so much better than the older masters. And this is just for 35mm--hell, even stuff shot on 16mm (the Evil Dead) can look amazing (I can only wonder what properly done 65 and 70mm can look like). I think Aliens is another a great example too, considering how awful the filmstock was.

An older, well-mastered film on Blu-ray is truly a thing of beauty.

[macross_fan99]

I refuse to buy any Star Wars movies until they actually release the original theatrical versions again. I had them on VHS but watching VHS on a LCD is almost impossible due to the bad picture quality.

Maybe once he dies we'll finally get them.

[Chewie]

Original theatrical versions won't happen with GL still alive, and there will probably be some kind of contract signed, dated, witnessed, sculpted, copied and verified by God stating that it will never happen even after he's gone.

He's already said multiple times that the SE and any current versions are closer to his "original vision."

I never bought anything but Episode 2 on dvd and the latest sets came out after bluray so it was only a matter of time. I'm excited and the CE will be a welcome edition to my collection. Regardless of what versions they are.

As for 3D not being popular in the home market, that's entirely untrue. Sales are incredibly high and are set to double this year. And that's not just 3D "capable" tvs, that's actual tvs with glasses and everything.

[Keith]

I seem to remember this same exact debate coming up when the DVD's were announced. And from what I recall, very few of the naysayers actually skipped those. I can understand those who haven't upgraded to HD wanting to wait, but having just watched the DVD's upscaled last year, there's clearly a lot of room for improvement on them.

[big F]

I'd sooner they just release on blu ray the versions as is and not spend cash making an uber cherry on top with whipped cream version, to sell 2 years from now.

Go spend the cash on film 7,8 and 9 that's what the fans really want afterall.

Take what you have learnt from the cash cow that is eps 1-6 and get going with the rest of it.

Before any more of the actors involved in are dead, CGI actors are so expensive to do right.

Edited May 9, 2011 by big F

[BeyondTheGrave]

I just watched the Jedi rocks video. And now I'm angry and need a baseball bat to hurt something.

[Agent ONE]

Any solution with moving parts, is inferior to one with NO moving parts.

Arguing this would be moronic. Moving parts break.

[taksraven]

Maybe once he dies we'll finally get them.

I think that's what it is. Little inheritance nest egg. Just like Kubrick with Clockwork Orange.

[EXO]

I'm telling you man. The real genius/skinny Lucas is in the basement and those kids... those kids dress up as "Look As". It explains that huge neck. That's they're big fat heads stuck in the neck. They make all the big decisions like 3D, prequels, and Jar Jar...

*wraps aluminum around head*

Theys coming for is all!!!

[Keith]

I'm telling you man. The real genius/skinny Lucas is in the basement and those kids... those kids dress up as "Look As". It explains that huge neck. That's they're big fat heads stuck in the neck. They make all the big decisions like 3D, prequels, and Jar Jar...

*wraps aluminum around head*

Theys coming for is all!!!

No, that's equal parts wrong and mean. The truth is Lucas is actually the Gungan king in disguise, which explains that huge neck. Also, Jake Lloyd is a clone of George Lucas.

Edited May 25, 2011 by Keith

[Keith]

They've announced the official art & packaging for the blurays. Can't say I'm happy, it's going to mimic the Alien Anthology cardboard book with page sleeves. Did anyone here pick up the Alien Anthology, and if so, have you had any problem with disc scuffing? Right now I'm debating on cancelling & just getting the two individual releases, since those will come in 3 disc BD cases, the only downside would be the loss of all the bonus content.

Edited July 22, 2011 by Keith

[eugimon]

I got the aliens box set, no problems with the discs.

The cardboard has a high gloss finish. There's no reason why it should damage the discs unless you're really trying to.

[Keith]

I got the aliens box set, no problems with the discs.

The cardboard has a high gloss finish. There's no reason why it should damage the discs unless you're really trying to.

I just wish they had gone with something more...sturdy. Or at the least popped hubs on those pages.

[UN Spacy]

[eugimon]

I just wish they had gone with something more...sturdy. Or at the least popped hubs on those pages.

I definitely agree with that. I'm always going to prefer sturdier cases over cardboard but I have the BSG set and the aliens set and I haven't had any issues with either.

[Keith]

I definitely agree with that. I'm always going to prefer sturdier cases over cardboard but I have the BSG set and the aliens set and I haven't had any issues with either.

Unfortunately you missed your change to exchange that box last year.

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/High_Def_Deals/Universal/Universals_Battlestar_Galactica_Blu-ray_Packaging_Exchange_Expiring_Soon/4576

[TheLoneWolf]

I just wish they had gone with something more...sturdy. Or at the least popped hubs on those pages.

The cardboard pages in the Aliens box set are extremely durable, the only way you'd be able to bend or break them is if your forcibly tried to. When you think about it, they're far more durable than the small plastic hubs/spindles that BD and DVD discs clip on to. If the Star Wars box set uses the same cardboard stock as the Aliens box set (and it looks like it does), then you'll be pleasantly surprised.