millenniumfalcon.com
http://www.millenniumfalcon.com/phpbb/

Another Star Wars Trilogy DVD Screwup
http://www.millenniumfalcon.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3911		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Ayatollah Krispies [ April 10th 2005 11:18 pm ]
Post subject: 
So...is it only inside the Falcon's cockpit that the cropping is different? Was it like this onscreen? I mean, it is possible that it was deliberate, right?
Author:  BrokenWings [ April 10th 2005 11:30 pm ]
Post subject: 
As you can see from my join date, I'm a new member, but nonetheless, I'm a HUGE Star Wars fan. Now I have to ask; What in the hell is the deal with all of nit-picking around here? I don't see why the zoomed in shot of the cockpit (and other similar things) is such a big deal(?) The new verison looks better than the older one to me.
Author:  Ayatollah Krispies [ April 10th 2005 11:32 pm ]
Post subject: 
It would matter if it were a DVD screwup...if you worry about such things, I guess. If you don't, there's not much point taking part in this thread to begin with.

But if it's been there since the ESB SE hit screens in 1997, then I'd guess it was a deliberate zoom to heighten the claustrophobic feel of the Falcon's cockpit. It's not like anything is really lost. I consider the change in color balance to be far more noticeable.
Author:  BrokenWings [ April 11th 2005 12:04 am ]
Post subject: 
Both, I just generally think the '04 shot looks tighter, cleaner, and...better.
Author:  Bandersnatch [ April 11th 2005 5:43 am ]
Post subject: 
This was discussed at the Home Theater Forum back in '97:

It's just a slight compromise in the way the films were formatted for home video. People have this misconception that every movie that you see in widescreen on DVD or laserdisc is the perfect presentation and exactly duplicates down to the centimeter what it looked like on the big screen.
That's not always true. Some film directors have agreed on a happy medium, wherein the picture is shown as acurately as possible while not going overboard with letterboxing the image.

Look at the scene in ANH:SE when R2 and 3PO are outside the cantina, and 3PO says "I don't like the looks of this." In the cinema, we clearly saw a stormtropper climbing off a dewback on the left side of the screen. On the 1997 SE widescreen laserdisc, only the dewback could be seen. The trooper had been cropped off. But now on the DVD, you can see him again. So, the Star Wars DVDs are actually more widescreen, if you will, than the 97 widescreen release.

Transferring widescreen films to home video is a constant process of adjustment. Look at the first LD or DVD releases of Heat. The black bar at the bottom of the screen is incredibly thick, and I have yet to hear any Michael Mann fans bitch about it.

:monocle:
Author:  RabbitAllen [ April 11th 2005 9:31 am ]
Post subject: 
I like the way the 2004 one looks, the color and lighting and stuff, cept for cutting off the top of chewie's head. and i haven't seen the new ones yet. The last ones i saw were the 97, i think, ones. I had the whole collectors edition, gold case trilogy but my ex-best friend and ex-roomate took em to the pawn shop. now all i got are the 95 darth vader cover new hope, and the 83 Return of the Jedi.
Author:  Gregory DG [ April 11th 2005 11:04 am ]
Post subject: 
This tiny bit of cropping is no big deal. Nothing could be as bad as the original VHS Pan&Scan versions.

Besides, this cropping looks to have made Harrison look bigger in the frame. Which is always a good thing.
Author:  JoeinAr [ April 11th 2005 2:48 pm ]
Post subject: 
Neil S. Bulk wrote:
Brokenwings, are you talking about color or composition?

I like the color on the 1993 transfer better. As you can see, the 2004 has a much more blue cast to it (look at the lights). I'm pretty sure that blue cast was not in the original. If anyone is seeing the movie this week (it's playing in LA) feel free to correct me on that memory.

In terms of composition, it may not effect much, but apparently when it was filmed the director and the DP thought you should see all of those details to tell the story.

Neil


I guess that would account for the electric blue that R2D2 is now.
I'm all for the changes Lucas makes as long as he would just release a perfect little film called Star Wars, nothing else, no numbers, no A New Hope, no Jabba sequence or all the little extras, just the film that change the way I look at movies forever.
Author:  Trallis [ April 11th 2005 6:13 pm ]
Post subject: 
a) how did you even notice that

b) why would you go so far as to call it mediocrity? just cause its different doesnt mean they settled for mediocrity. its barely any different besides the much better color
Author:  Bandersnatch [ April 11th 2005 6:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
My LD of the 1997 release looks very blue. The DVDs from last year look beautiful. No blue hue whatsoever.
Author:  Jason@Star-Wars.net [ April 11th 2005 10:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
Fun fact:

Making of Revenge of the Sith (page 179) "In C Theatre, Lucas watches reels five and six of the Empire Strikes Back, the images flickering across the glasses of the man who made them twenty-four years ago. Though satisfied with the color timing, he mentions that a shot on Bespin will to be reworked for a future re-release."

If this was posted some place already, you should delete the original post, because my post is superior.
Author:  Mentasm [ April 12th 2005 6:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
This sort of re-framing is commonplace when it comes to DVD releases. Technically the aspect ratio hasn't been altered - it's still the approximate 'scope ratio of 2.40:1 - but a conscious decision has been made to re-frame the shot. I think it works quite well, and helps to focus the viewer's attention on Han. There was a lot of dead air in the old composition. There's a good article on the Se7en SE about just this sort of thing (re-framing and colour correction).

Anyway, here's a cap from the '97 Special Edition that confirms it to be a DVD alteration.

Image

It's worth noting that the SE also has a blue tint to it, although it's not as obvious as the DVD release. Still, I can live with minor things like this because they are creative decisions, unlike the real problems with the set (a green lightsaber in ANH for example).
Author:  Fixer [ April 13th 2005 8:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
Here's looking forward to the inevitable 2007 30th anniversary set:

Image

Much better! :heavymetal:
Author:  Obi [ April 13th 2005 8:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
this from a guy who has a trekkie avatar. who really cares anyway? as long as ESB's Luke / Darth Vader bombshell scene remains the same I could care how good the dvd transfer is. besides, the 50th anniversary hologram editions will get it right.
Author:  Mentasm [ April 15th 2005 1:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
First you say you don't see a difference, then you say you do. Which is it? here's obviously some cropping, but it tightens the composition of the shot.
Author:  Zéyann [ April 15th 2005 3:15 pm ]
Post subject: 
bleh who cares. it doesn't take away the overall experience does it? no, it doesn't.
Author:  JoeinAr [ April 16th 2005 3:46 pm ]
Post subject: 
ObiTrice wrote:
this from a guy who has a trekkie avatar. who really cares anyway? as long as ESB's Luke / Darth Vader bombshell scene remains the same I could care how good the dvd transfer is. besides, the 50th anniversary hologram editions will get it right.


from someone who has an m&m avatar, I'll go with Neil, and for the record his avatar is one of the most beautiful posters ever, far better than the stupid Struzan posters we get today, they just scream originality. :bankheadbounce2: :mfyd:

just say no to rap.
Author:  Obi [ April 16th 2005 7:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
jawssucks wrote:
from someone who has an m&m avatar, I'll go with Neil, and for the record his avatar is one of the most beautiful posters ever, far better than the stupid Struzan posters we get today, they just scream originality. :bankhead bounce 2: The Sequel MFYD:

just say no to rap.

too bad the film in neil's avatar sucked balls too. And i don't see why having an eminem avatar has to do with anything. Just because Jaws 2 sucked doesn't mean your post is crap. Oh wait, its crap anyways.
Author:  Zéyann [ April 19th 2005 1:41 am ]
Post subject: 
do you really, desperatly want to see those extra millimeters of frame missing around it?
Author:  Bandersnatch [ April 19th 2005 9:10 am ]
Post subject: 
Neil S. Bulk wrote:
...You can write a profound, well thought out post creating a very good topic... and it will all be disregarded...


Yeah, I know what you mean. I posted this: http://www.millenniumfalcon.com/phpbb/v ... 6394#76394

...and people decided to ignore me and continue this pissing contest.

:monocle:
Author:  Bandersnatch [ April 19th 2005 10:55 am ]
Post subject: 
Neil S. Bulk wrote:
No one ignored you...

Neil


I was being a smartass. I pointed out that the re-framing is intentional, as Fatboy and others have pointed out.

You also bitching about the framing of the old DVD of Kurosawa's RAN?

No?

Then shut the fuck up already.

:monocle:
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/