The original original trilogy will NOT be on the Blu Ray set, Lucas himself admitted it this past week:

You have to go through and do a whole restoration on it, and you have to do that digitally," he said. "It's a very, very expensive process to do it. So when we did the transfer to digital, we only transferred really the upgraded version.... [it's] kind of an oxymoron because the quality of the original is not very good."

I'm not convinced Lucas is being entirely forthcoming about his plans with this statement. There are only a few minutes of film that differ between the original and special edition release that would need to be cleaned up and transferred for Blu-ray. It sounds more like Lucas is putting additional dollars into supplemental materials now and will revisit the "original" trilogy a few years down the road - say 2015 or so - to re-energize the franchise/brand after making loads of cash off the first Blu-ray set.

So, unlike the upcoming Blu-ray release of the Alien Anthology, which will include the original theatrical version and the special edition cuts of all four Alien films, when Star Wars comes to Blu-ray you'll get the altered, second-rate special editions and the lackluster prequels. But hey, you're not actually surprised by this surely - you know how this shit works by now, right? ...Right?

Oh, and finally - Mark Hamill has claimed that he never filmed the deleted scene recently released, but that much of it is put together by stand-ins and CGI add-ons.

Im a huge fan but I really don't need another box set of special edition yada yada yada. Lucas has more than enough money, Ill gladly download the extras however.

[Edited 8/17/10 14:48pm]

[Edited 8/17/10 14:48pm]

no orginal versions and you have to buy all 6? I will skip this.

Xibalba said:

The original original trilogy will NOT be on the Blu Ray set, Lucas himself admitted it this past week:

You have to go through and do a whole restoration on it, and you have to do that digitally," he said. "It's a very, very expensive process to do it. So when we did the transfer to digital, we only transferred really the upgraded version.... [it's] kind of an oxymoron because the quality of the original is not very good."

I'm not convinced Lucas is being entirely forthcoming about his plans with this statement. There are only a few minutes of film that differ between the original and special edition release that would need to be cleaned up and transferred for Blu-ray. It sounds more like Lucas is putting additional dollars into supplemental materials now and will revisit the "original" trilogy a few years down the road - say 2015 or so - to re-energize the franchise/brand after making loads of cash off the first Blu-ray set.

So, unlike the upcoming Blu-ray release of the Alien Anthology, which will include the original theatrical version and the special edition cuts of all four Alien films, when Star Wars comes to Blu-ray you'll get the altered, second-rate special editions and the lackluster prequels. But hey, you're not actually surprised by this surely - you know how this shit works by now, right? ...Right?

Oh, and finally - Mark Hamill has claimed that he never filmed the deleted scene recently released, but that much of it is put together by stand-ins and CGI add-ons.

A laugh is right.. it's just a drop in the bucket for him to pay to get the originals restored. And they already did for the THX laserdiscs back in the day. He a lie. Aways has been.

I do not think that is even mark in that clip. looks cgi or something. I do not think that shot was ever filmed. Looks stupid.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I do not think that is even mark in that clip. looks cgi or something. I do not think that shot was ever filmed. Looks stupid.

The cave and lightsabre scene were in the novel back in 1983... I read it.

ufoclub said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I do not think that is even mark in that clip. looks cgi or something. I do not think that shot was ever filmed. Looks stupid.

The cave and lightsabre scene were in the novel back in 1983... I read it.

Yep. Doesn't look stupid at all, looks like ......well, a deleted scene.

sextonseven said:

I don't mind the special editions, it's just two things that bug the crap out of me - and I can almost guarantee you that the second will still be missed for this release too.

1) The reinstated Jabba the Hutt scene on Tattooine in A New Hope. Great idea, but it does not work - obviously! I can't believe Lucas actually sanctioned it. 'Good enough' were not words I thought Lucas used. I'm praying they go back in and tidy it up, it's truly cringe-worthy.

2) Hans vest/no vest continuity error in the carbonite freezing chamber scene in The Empire Strikes Back - with all that CGI and "attention to detail" you would have thought someone would have picked up on it by now....

Xibalba said:

ufoclub said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I do not think that is even mark in that clip. looks cgi or something. I do not think that shot was ever filmed. Looks stupid.

The cave and lightsabre scene were in the novel back in 1983... I read it.

I read it too (before the move came out). I do not think that shot existed in 83.

ernestsewell said:

ufoclub said:

The cave and lightsabre scene were in the novel back in 1983... I read it.

Yep. Doesn't look stupid at all, looks like ......well, a deleted scene.

Looks stupid from the aspect that I would not have fit in into the movie. R2 having Luke's saber was meant to be a surprise! And it was green (something that may have changed late in post as it was BLUE in the early trailers.

That doesn't even look like mark to me. his face seems weird (could be that it was shot off a screen) and his hands seem off.

Now I get that most of the time deleted scenes are deleted for a reason. This one (if filmed at the time) was cut for dramatic reasons. (and maybe due to having to change the blade color to green). Some *like the formation of the rebellion in ROTSITH seems to have been cut for pacing, a mistake (in that case lucas went for pointless action and not political intrigue).

Xibalba said:

I don't mind the special editions, it's just two things that bug the crap out of me - and I can almost guarantee you that the second will still be missed for this release too.

1) The reinstated Jabba the Hutt scene on Tattooine in A New Hope. Great idea, but it does not work - obviously! I can't believe Lucas actually sanctioned it. 'Good enough' were not words I thought Lucas used. I'm praying they go back in and tidy it up, it's truly cringe-worthy.

he did redo Jabba dhjkfor the DVD release. still looks like crap! I would almost prefer a holo of jabba be used.

2) Hans vest/no vest continuity error in the carbonite freezing chamber scene in The Empire Strikes Back - with all that CGI and "attention to detail" you would have thought someone would have picked up on it by now....

I thought they fixed that too in the DVD version?

purpledoveuk said:

Xibalba said:

I don't mind the special editions, it's just two things that bug the crap out of me - and I can almost guarantee you that the second will still be missed for this release too.

1) The reinstated Jabba the Hutt scene on Tattooine in A New Hope. Great idea, but it does not work - obviously! I can't believe Lucas actually sanctioned it. 'Good enough' were not words I thought Lucas used. I'm praying they go back in and tidy it up, it's truly cringe-worthy.

2) Hans vest/no vest continuity error in the carbonite freezing chamber scene in The Empire Strikes Back - with all that CGI and "attention to detail" you would have thought someone would have picked up on it by now....

That and obi wans lightsaber still being just a stick in some shots on the death star

yeah some of the shots where the saber was pointing towards the camera had some issues. In ANH it was a sick with some reflective stuff on it. I know they worked on some of those in the SEs and DVD versions but I am not sure they fixed all of them.

But in ESB at one point DV is standing holding his saber and you can see the sick used before he ignites his saber.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

One thing that always irked me about the lightsabres is that they don't actually emit any light on the objects around them in many shots where they should!

sextonseven said:

ufoclub said:

Yeah it wouldn't be bad if Prince and Warners finally put out his entire catalog remastered but edited to censor cussing or morally questionable content. Prince fans need to get a grip. It doesn't ruin the history of the music to change it!

Are you really equating the changes to that? Did Lucas ruin your childhood?

Would Prince ruin your teenagehood if he did that? No, just like Lucas wouldn't ruin my childhood, he's only ruining his movies in the present.

ufoclub said:

sextonseven said:

Are you really equating the changes to that? Did Lucas ruin your childhood?

Would Prince ruin your teenagehood if he did that? No, just like Lucas wouldn't ruin my childhood, he's only ruining his movies in the present.

That isn't the same. A better analogy to your Prince scenario would be if Lucas removed every light saber from his films because he was against violence.

So you agree with me that the people saying these few altered minutes have ruined their childhood are being overly dramatic.

And I think "ruining" is way too strong a word here.

sextonseven said:

purpledoveuk said:

"Raped my childhood" was a phrase heard alot at the time the new Star Wars films came out

I can understand being disappointed with the altered scenes. Nothing at all wrong with that and refusing to buy the new editions. But to go so far as to say some of these expressions... Again, get a grip.

sextonseven said:

ufoclub said:

Would Prince ruin your teenagehood if he did that? No, just like Lucas wouldn't ruin my childhood, he's only ruining his movies in the present.

That isn't the same. A better analogy to your Prince scenario would be if Lucas removed every light saber from his films because he was against violence.

So you agree with me that the people saying these few altered minutes have ruined their childhood are being overly dramatic.

I do agree that your childhood is in the past, so it can't be ruined! But I do agree that messing with major character moments like Han Solo being a sleazy bootlegger that wold shoot under the table is like Prince censoring cuss words if he released remasters. No different.

Star Wars was a lot more than a movie when it came out in 1977, it was talked about on the news, the lines, the fandom, the offshoot interest in ancillary materials... it was all new. It influenced designers (who now design your appliances and cars, etc), filmmakers, film business, etc.

So, going back and changing it is really weird.

ufoclub said:

sextonseven said:

That isn't the same. A better analogy to your Prince scenario would be if Lucas removed every light saber from his films because he was against violence.

So you agree with me that the people saying these few altered minutes have ruined their childhood are being overly dramatic.

I do agree that your childhood is in the past, so it can't be ruined! But I do agree that messing with major character moments like Han Solo being a sleazy bootlegger that wold shoot under the table is like Prince censoring cuss words if he released remasters. No different.

Star Wars was a lot more than a movie when it came out in 1977, it was talked about on the news, the lines, the fandom, the offshoot interest in ancillary materials... it was all new. It influenced designers (who now design your appliances and cars, etc), filmmakers, film business, etc.

So, going back and changing it is really weird.

It would be the equivalent of Prince changing one song. Not every song.

And I'm older than you so I do indeed remember the whole Star Wars phenomenon when it was happening.

sextonseven said:

ufoclub said:

I do agree that your childhood is in the past, so it can't be ruined! But I do agree that messing with major character moments like Han Solo being a sleazy bootlegger that wold shoot under the table is like Prince censoring cuss words if he released remasters. No different.

Star Wars was a lot more than a movie when it came out in 1977, it was talked about on the news, the lines, the fandom, the offshoot interest in ancillary materials... it was all new. It influenced designers (who now design your appliances and cars, etc), filmmakers, film business, etc.

So, going back and changing it is really weird.

It would be the equivalent of Prince changing one song. Not every song.

And I'm older than you so I do indeed remember the whole Star Wars phenomenon when it was happening.

How old are you? I think culturally speaking just the first Star Wars is still bigger then Prince's entire catalog, so I disagree on the point that it would be just one song. And with my crowd of filmmakers it really is just that first movie that is respected as a cultural force (or instigator of new techniques, aethetic, and pop culture).

ufoclub said:

sextonseven said:

It would be the equivalent of Prince changing one song. Not every song.

And I'm older than you so I do indeed remember the whole Star Wars phenomenon when it was happening.

How old are you? I think culturally speaking just the first Star Wars is still bigger then Prince's entire catalog, so I disagree on the point that it would be just one song. And with my crowd of filmmakers it really is just that first movie that is respected as a cultural force (or instigator of new techniques, aethetic, and pop culture).

I was talking about the changes to the first trilogy of films, not just Star Wars, but if you want to go there instead, okay. And let's move the Prince analogy off the table in favor of a more impactful singular piece of work analagous to Star Wars like say, Michael Jackson's Thriller album. Now if you were to say the Greedo scene in particular was like MJ removing Eddie Van Halen's guitar solo from "Beat It" on an SACD release, you might be onto something there. I'd agree that would be a bad decision, even go so far as to say removing the solo would "ruin" the specific song. But the whole album though? It may make that edition of Thriller inferior to the original, but I don't think the entire album is ruined the same way I don't think the Star Wars rerelease is a total wreck because of a few minutes that are different.

I'm 41.

sextonseven said:

ufoclub said:

How old are you? I think culturally speaking just the first Star Wars is still bigger then Prince's entire catalog, so I disagree on the point that it would be just one song. And with my crowd of filmmakers it really is just that first movie that is respected as a cultural force (or instigator of new techniques, aethetic, and pop culture).

I was talking about the changes to the first trilogy of films, not just Star Wars, but if you want to go there instead, okay. And let's move the Prince analogy off the table in favor of a more impactful singular piece of work analagous to Star Wars like say, Michael Jackson's Thriller album. Now if you were to say the Greedo scene in particular was like MJ removing Eddie Van Halen's guitar solo from "Beat It" on an SACD release, you might be onto something there. I'd agree that would be a bad decision, even go so far as to say removing the solo would "ruin" the specific song. But the whole album though? It may make that edition of Thriller inferior to the original, but I don't think the entire album is ruined the same way I don't think the Star Wars rerelease is a total wreck because of a few minutes that are different.

I'm 41.

No certainly the whole movie is ruined by one scene, but there are so many little touches in the revamped Star Wars that are poor in taste and ruin the whole effect for me, including the iconic explosion at the end has a huge ring drawn around it. Now this was an explosion that back then was something new to see, for as a kid, that explosion is an example of a signature moment that differentiate Star Wars from things that were on TV or that came before.

things like changing the matte painting shot of Kenobi's house to a more conventional and artificially composed design are porr in taste, the same could be said for making the twilight sky when the sandcrawler is frist shown more pictureseque... it's ruining little things that seemed naturalistic and hip to the 70's movement of more realism in movies. I think that sometimes the creator of something has no idea what little elements that maybe by chance added up to an effective piece of art. I shudder whenever Prince talked about simply rerecording songs to gain back ownership of recordings... things happen that are not in the artist's control or intention and they are an integral part of wha tmakes something good.

There all kinds of littlew touches in the revamped Star Wars that make it have a different mood to me, not as good as the original. It doesn't ruin it completely, but it does make it less special for me. And that's like making a valued sports car less special by putting on a cheap bumper sticker. It kind of does ruin the whole thing in a way.

ufoclub said:

sextonseven said:

I was talking about the changes to the first trilogy of films, not just Star Wars, but if you want to go there instead, okay. And let's move the Prince analogy off the table in favor of a more impactful singular piece of work analagous to Star Wars like say, Michael Jackson's Thriller album. Now if you were to say the Greedo scene in particular was like MJ removing Eddie Van Halen's guitar solo from "Beat It" on an SACD release, you might be onto something there. I'd agree that would be a bad decision, even go so far as to say removing the solo would "ruin" the specific song. But the whole album though? It may make that edition of Thriller inferior to the original, but I don't think the entire album is ruined the same way I don't think the Star Wars rerelease is a total wreck because of a few minutes that are different.

I'm 41.

No certainly the whole movie is ruined by one scene, but there are so many little touches in the revamped Star Wars that are poor in taste and ruin the whole effect for me, including the iconic explosion at the end has a huge ring drawn around it. Now this was an explosion that back then was something new to see, for as a kid, that explosion is an example of a signature moment that differentiate Star Wars from things that were on TV or that came before.

things like changing the matte painting shot of Kenobi's house to a more conventional and artificially composed design are porr in taste, the same could be said for making the twilight sky when the sandcrawler is frist shown more pictureseque... it's ruining little things that seemed naturalistic and hip to the 70's movement of more realism in movies. I think that sometimes the creator of something has no idea what little elements that maybe by chance added up to an effective piece of art. I shudder whenever Prince talked about simply rerecording songs to gain back ownership of recordings... things happen that are not in the artist's control or intention and they are an integral part of wha tmakes something good.

There all kinds of littlew touches in the revamped Star Wars that make it have a different mood to me, not as good as the original. It doesn't ruin it completely, but it does make it less special for me. And that's like making a valued sports car less special by putting on a cheap bumper sticker. It kind of does ruin the whole thing in a way.

Well that's the difference between us in that I have not seen the original film so many times as to remember all the subtler changes like the ones you mentioned. I think having such an intimate knowledge of the film puts you in the (very vocal) minority and Lucas has, perhaps unfairly, ignored fans like you by making improvements (according to him) to his work to appeal to a bigger audience with its alterations and modern effects, etc. Because you know this blu-ray box set is still going to sell. A lot.

purpledoveuk said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

yeah some of the shots where the saber was pointing towards the camera had some issues. In ANH it was a sick with some reflective stuff on it. I know they worked on some of those in the SEs and DVD versions but I am not sure they fixed all of them.

But in ESB at one point DV is standing holding his saber and you can see the sick used before he ignites his saber.

Yeah it's the same sort of thing with Obi WANs. You'd also think he'd have spotted the continuity errors between the original and prequel trilogy and, when making episodes 1-3 patched them up...Leia can't possibly remember her real mum. And im fuming they've removed the booby- exposure from Jedi

Yeah Liea's statement was too specific to be ignored. But I think george said something that she has force powers.

OnlyNDaUsa said: