It's been a while, my friend, but I think I remember you as well.

I'm not. While I can fully acknowledge how bad many of the changes are and would rather watch the old versions with all the blobs and black lines around the ships (Fact from my childhood: those are the shields or force fields, if you will).

I can still watch Return of the Jedi with Sebulba among the weird 80's era seeming rejected Jim Henson production Jabba monsters (which are obviously completely cooler and more realistic than that video game-looking bug thing).

See, there hasn't been near enough damage done to the core movies. They are completely unharmed, in fact. It's all cosmetic and what's going on inside is what counts. They're still the movies through and through.

And this is perfectly in sync with my own thinking, I'm not massively in love with the changes we've seen but I love this series enough to forgive the bits we've seen. No I dont love the Noooooo's and could do without the other stuff but it's still Star Wars in about as good a picture as I'm gonna get. If it's half as good as the LOTR set that my girlfriend doesn't know I bought then I cant honestly wait.

I actually pity you ... that an acknowledgment of your hatred/burnout/revulsion of Star Wars is somehow liberating for you. Damn. It's pathetic. Get over it. And get some goddamn therapy already.

Yeah, I rememeber JediNet and SWF too. Good times.

I must admit, I've never felt so strongly as I do now that the orignal versions of these films must/should t be preserved. And believe me, that in itself provides a veritable minefield, because I grew up with the mono mix versions that were broadcast on UK TV back in the day, so even the different klaxons on the Tantive and Aunt Beru's stereo mix voice make me think WTF?

Anything pre-Special Edition would do though. I've never ever felt that things like garbage mattes and other products of the time in which these movies were made were "problems" that needed "fixing".
I mean, there are things in Citizen Kane you could "fix", but who on earth would want to fuck with history in that way?

But, yeah, getting back to the point. Even despite all the crap - I still own and regularly watch the HDTV rips because, the bits that are pretty much as they were, look great. But for me, seeing the those films look this good and having to suffer the shit additions makes me want the respectful release the originals deserve even more.

I was merely sharing the fact that the situation had even reached MSN.

A little harsh, no? Which of us, exactly, is need of therapy? (And that demonstrative smiley-face-into-the-wall thing? What are we, in eighth grade here?)

My point was that it feels damned good to be able to say "You know what? I'm not happy with what I see, and as a result, I'm not going to spend $100 on it. Yes, I've bought every previous version, like a sad, addicted sack, but I'm not buying this one. The rest of you saps who are bitching and yet still buying? Have fun." It seems that the web has become replete over the last couple of days with thousands who share this sentiment of mine...

And, "get over it"? Believe me, buddy. I've spent a grand total of about 30 mins reviewing the changes and comments on this board, and then deciding not to purchase these. That's about how much energy I've devoted to this. In total. I don't take it seriously at all anymore. Star Wars doesn't dominate my thoughts or my time in any way. I'd consider myself pathetic if I'd spent every day of the last five years, (or more), discussing the Prequels ad nauseum on Internet message boards. My life, thankfully, has been focused on many other things.

(The "burn out" you mention, and which I mentioned previously, was the result of being immersed in this shit for nearly 10 years as the administrator of a large SW fan site. Yes, it was great fun for a long time, but it got to be a chore. A chore that my friend and I felt chained to toward the end. Nearly total immersion every day. It became an obligation.

As a result, it was clear that the time had come to step away. Once EP3 was released, and we posted a couple of reviews, we did exactly that. We pulled the plug on the site, wished everyone well, and got on with our lives. When you get burned out on something, that's what you do.

For the average non-committed fan, who can choose to take it or leave it for days or weeks at a time, it's a completely different experience. And thankfully, I've been able to experience SW like that for the last 5 years. It's been great.)

Well said and agreed. While i still like to collect OT stuff, my "burnout" is definitely focused on the movies. We've been dealing with the fuckups since 1997, and that takes it's toll. The last official release I bought was in 2006 to get the OUT. Now, I have spools full of enriching entertainment that I didn't have to pay Lucas for, the latest being Harmy's Despecialized OT in AVCHD format. It is fantastic, and the "go to" set of discs to watch the OT in 720p.

To put it simply, I will never sink another dollar into official Star Wars home video releases until I get what I want. Since that ain't gonna happen, I'll keep watching the fan made reconstructions. They obviously are treated with the care that George and Co. will never apply.

I too had a great feeling when I cancelled my pre-order. Maybe when it gets tossed in the "piece of shit we can't sell" bin for $10 or something, then I'll buy it for the bonuses.

Hey I'm a longtime reader, but first time poster. I just wanted to give a big thanks to you guys for saving me from making a huge mistake. I've had my blu-ray set preordered since January 7th. When I first played the "supposed" sound recordings of the new changes to the blu-ray set, I had a good laugh and thought aloud to myself "NO WAYY in hell".

I was certain that it was some troll trying to pull a practical joke here with some bad fan-edit. It sounds soo out of place. Now that these changes are confirmed, I now officially realize that George Lucas has lost his mind. For the first time in 25 years I will NO LONGER be supporting this or any future Star Wars items from Lucasfilm, including the 3d films which certainly will have more stupid additions.


The new changes are bad enough, but the dealbreaker for me is still not fixing the screwed up lightsaber and explosion colors they botched in the dvd transfer. To me they are more obvious and distracting. After hearing 7 years of fan complaints and even after strongly implying themselves that the lightsaber problems are corrected, they remain virtually untouched.

There is NO excuse for that. Lucas talks about superficial consistencies between the two trilogies, so why is he oblivious to the fact that the evil red sith Lightsabers seen in the prequels, change to bubblegum pink in the OT?? But thankfully they can find time to add new cgi eyelids to ewoks. 72

hours ago I never would have even considered cancelling my pre-order, but I did so yesterday afternoon... and to be honest I feel pretty good about it too. After defending George Lucas for years, as well as the prequels, special editions, and the Clone Wars movie, this is end of it for me... I'm done. Thank you for saving me $90 bucks.

me too those were some worn out videos around here! i used to get home from school and pop in anh everyday! all this "open the blast doors" and the echo in the chasm was just plain weird! but its what started me on my quest to find alternate versions

another sound fix on the blu's in the chasm/swing scene leia's gun is now a blaster sound instead of the weird and badly edited handgun noise that has popped up on some mixes

Just out of curiosity, I have always wondered this but never actually got round to bringing it up with anyone - I could swear my original version of TESB recorded from ITV (I think it was the first time it was screened in the UK, whenever that was) had some scenes missing. Artoo searching for Luke with his sensorscope in particular I seem to recall not being included, there may have been others.

Sadly, I recorded over the tape the next time TESB was broadcast as the reception was pretty poor first time around, so I only have my recollections to go on. Have I just imagined this entire thing, or is this actually a well-known cut?

And while we are on the subject of the mono mix, I made my own reconstruction using the OUT rip and the audio from my worn out old tape a while back. It sort of does the trick, but does anyone know of the best source for the mono mix audio? I've got planty of fan edits knocking about, but don't seem to have ever found one that uses the mono version...

The first Star Wars movie I ever watched was Return of the Jedi, recorded off television, circa '89? The main titles were squashed to fit on the square television screens. It was missing some parts such as Leia and Wicket that I eventually saw in my first FOX Video VHS copy. You know, the one with this great introduction on all the tapes. I miss that intro (any fan editors that can place this in front of the Blu-ray versions for me, please contact me).

We also had From Star Wars to Jedi from that release, which isn't included on Blu-ray.

I had a rare NTSC (not sped-up) pressing of the Malaysian VCDs with Mandarin subtitles and packaged in a sturdier box. Despite the subtitles, the video and sound were superior to the PAL versions that were more commonly sold on eBay.

I do have the DVD releases of the old versions, but I rarely watch them anymore. They just look like shit. Compressed into a slab in the middle of useless black space, intended to be viewed on dated smaller screens and not very film-like. These are modern times. I want super resolution and all the grain, not digital artifacting and awful DNR.

I found a trick by accident not sure if it would help or not though re: mono mix the first ever uk widescreen vhs release had 2 different soundtracks on it!

I had a stereo vcr that could flick through stereo, left, right and mono tracks stereo had the chasm echo mono didnt of cause at the time iirc 1992 i had no idea about different sound mixes but i might be worth a try now to see what exact versions they are actually are!

Its the version pictured here: swonvideo.com vvhs1992anh.htm

Ahh, interesting. Thanks, I'll check that out.

Just joined & this is my 1st post so here goes.

I remember way back in the day when I queued to see Star Wars in 1977. I was 8 years old. Then when it was first shown on UK TV & watching it over & over again on video after my Dad had recorded it for me. I can understand Lucasfilm's ideas to present the movies in Hi Def & I have no problem with that whatsoever.

The problem I have is that the originals were something very special. Mos Eisley looked like a barren wasteland/shanty town. After the Special Editions, that was lost. God only knows how bad Jabba looked in Docking Bay 94...I took my kids to see that & was horrified to see how shocking the cg looked.

On a plus point the new shots of the X-Wings looked amazing. I read somewhere once that Lucas wanted to show the landing of the At-At’s on Hoth. That probably would have been a cool inclusion to Empire seen as though it could have all been done in cg ( Snowtroopers done like the Clones in the prequels) - but that's just my idea - I'm sure lots of people wont agree.

I honestly don't think there will ever be a happy medium with all 6 Star Wars movies - some love Jar Jar - most hate him. I hope my point is being made clear here: The Star Wars community has evolved throughout the years, but one thing remains rock solid, everyone here loves Star Wars.

Maybe Lucasfilm should release the original untouched versions on Blu Ray so that all the fans can have a definitive version they love to watch. I will be buying the 9 disc set because my kids love Star Wars just as much as I do. I know already, some parts I will love - other parts I will cringe at only time will tell.

pjvader’s note about the widescreen version of Star Wars is correct, I have the 3 video’s. Unfortunately I don't have a VRC anymore so they are just stored for prosperity. Those were one of the 1st Widescreen movies to be released in the UK at the time, along with Die Hard & Alien ... ah happy days!!!

Are you a lawyer? I'm not asking this condescendingly as I'm torn between efforting a lesson in copyright law to one person on a board of movie fans or simply not giving a shit. I'm leaning towards the latter.

The short answer is that it doesn't matter. Spaceballs isn't a derivative work of Star Wars. Period. The point about "if LFL could have showed it was..." is completely irrelevant cause its not. If I could prove I invented the Facebook, I'd be a billionaire but I didn't so I can't and I'm not.



The fact that Brooks agrees not to sell merchandise has close to no bearing on whether or not he infringed LFL's copyrights: that analysis is completely independent and would show Brooks did not infringe. Plaintiff's counsel would never, ever use that fact as dispositive. It would hardly be relevant unless he was able to show Spaceballs was a derivative work, and he wouldn't.

I don't know what planet you are from but these were not new ideas in the 1980s. Their application to the media of the day, sure, but it's not like we created new law to deal with any of this. These principles have existed since the the Statute of Anne and doctrines of fair use, parody, etc. were in the common law for over a century. Last I checked, the US was a common law system. There was no Spaceballs case so who's to say that Brooks wouldn't have tried a parody-like defense (spoiler: he wouldn't even have to because Mel, unlike 2 Live Crew, didn't infringe any of LFL's copyrights)? The Copyright Act 1976 codified a lot of the common law of the previous century, including the fair use test, which Spaceballs would have relied on.



That's not a moral rights issue. That's a derivative work.

For those of you paying attention:

"A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted." § 101

If Lucasfilm wanted to, they could crack down on every fan film that uses any of Lucas's copyrighted material. They don't do it because, to their credit, they don't want to piss off the fans (a lot of the more famous fan films request licenses by the way). I suppose they do this enough in other ways.

Harry Potter fans aren't as lucky. JK Rowling has pursued actions against fans for a whole bunch of stuff. Most notably, the Harry Potter Lexicon (I don't think it pissed her off that much until it went to print for sale).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._and_J._K._Rowling_vs._RDR_Books

The question then becomes:

"If the US recognized moral rights to copyrighted works, would fan films violate George Lucas' moral rights?" First of all, the fan film infringes by virtue of it being a derivative work. It doesn't matter whether or not the fan film has violated any moral rights - the original author can already claim for infringement. Second, an author can only exercise moral rights in a derivative work if it represents a "derogatory treatment" of the work.

Just because LFL doesn't like a fan film's content doesn't mean it's "derogatory" either. There's a burden to meet here and it usually involves something particularly nasty or objectionable. So the answer, for the most part, is no: a fan film does not violate George Lucas' moral rights.

Not the right place for this discussion. Back to bitching about the blu-rays.

As a Star Wars fan to which the movies aren't the only thing being that important I don't mind the bluray versions that much, have seen the movies 40+, maybe even 50+ times. Too me personally I can dream all the scenes - no matter what happens. I'll remember Darth Vader as the Iconic Bad guy he always was, no matter what happens with these Bluray versions.

I can only say "Love it or Leave it". The reason why I'm saying this is because of the huge negative impact it has. These are just movies - some people make it seem like their whole lives have been damaged because of these Bluray versions. If and when you have seen these movies for the 50th time, should it really matter if a few scenes have been negatively changed?

I would buy the bluray versions for the screen quality - not solely for the story. Because I have seen it that many times before anyway - the changes would even add some freshness. The weird changes might even add some humor- in a full room with friends and family.

The sharpness of the screen is really what counts. The younger audiences don't look upon movies the same way we did back in the seventies and eighties like we did - because there are different - more mediums of entertainment nowadays. With the 3d versions on the way, there might be even more changes, the only thing I'm curious about now - what happens next?

not sure if its been mentioned but:

Vader's lenses are now not see through in 1977 (at least in the shots I've checked so far).

Are the blobs around the ships still there in the first shot of the star destroyer and fighters pursuing the Falcon...after Luke says he's keeping the X-Wing on manual control?

Also, when are the Indys coming to Blu-ray??

Yup - I can confirm this. I was going to chime in on it but you beat me to it.

Other scene that was cut was from "General, there's a fleet of Stardestroyers coming out of hyperspace..." up to and including the wide shot of the Executor plus accompanying star destroyers approaching Hoth.

I used to watch my recorded VHS of ESB religiously and the first time I got hold of an official widescreen VHS of ESB in the early 90's and saw those reinstated scenes I was like "BWAH???!!! WTF IS THIS??!" And as amazing as I found this new discovery, no one else shared my enthusiasm.

The lenses are still see-through on my copy of the MKV.



They are still there, and more noticeable in HD.

Not a lawyer and thanks for taking the time. I come from the arty farty side, i've made various projects which tend to be 100% recycled, so i've learned about certain cases and certain aspects of law. I'm currently defending a 100% recycled DVD project with the US Copyright Office, as they won't accept it until I get permissions, but with 700+ sources I do not have the time to get into that. I don't understand why the Copyright Office is doing the job of companies legal departments. That's generally where i'm coming from.

I'm confused how you can classify a fan film as a derivative work but not Spaceballs. The wiki entry on derivative work continues from your provided definition with:

So I think you are saying that Spaceballs isn't a Derivative Work (capitalize because it's a legal definition), because nothing substantial like actual movie frames, sound effects (copyrighted material) etc are reused. It's just ideas and concepts that are lifted and reformed for the parody. Yet people may consider West Side Story a derivative work (common usage, lowercase) of Romeo & Juliet, as they have a common story, which is not copyrightable. So since a fan edit, might use the lightsaber in a few shots and a robed figure, that would be enough for the legal Derivative Work to get certified?


This is something I wasn't aware of. My response to this is many people say 'Blazing Saddles' could not be made today because it would be objectionable, so if I wanted to stretch my previous argument out, I could go this route. Would you say that if Moral Rights were entered into US Copyright policies that LFL's case against the Star Ballz would have gone the other way?


Flux, not that they were up in the air never having been decided upon, but flux as each case when decided sets a new precedent. The 2 Live Crew case moved things one way, other copyright cases (Biz Markie/Gilbert O'Sullivan) ended the era of sampling as the 80s knew it, this kind of flux. If the idea of Derivative Work was questioned and expanded (to include concepts) in the same manner as sampling was in those two cases,... yes this is far fetched.



Which parts/shots have you noticed this being fixed in?
I've been considering the idea of in using the difference layer option on the BR & HD to identify modified shots. Where elements are the same, it'll go black, not black means there's a change. The idea would then to get some program to examine the video and identify sections which aren't completely black. So for instance the Blinking wicket shot shows off just the eye change:



noneinc.com SWDIF_BRHD-Ewok.png

I truly don't want to defend Vaders "Nooo" in ROTJ and i'm still thinking that it was not necessary but to me it seems that Lucas wants to mirror the scene with Anakin, Mace and Palpatine in ROTS here.

When you think about it the situation is exactly the same. The moment where Anakin choses the dark side/makes the pact with the devil and rescues Palpatine from being killed by Mace he screams "Nooooo". Thats the very moment where he choses the path of the dark side. Now in ROTJ when he choses to go back to the light/saves Luke from being killed by the Emporer he again screams "nooooo" as for "thats enough" if you will.

Many fans have said that they think that it should mirror the scene with Vader in the suit at the end of ROTS but i don't think so.

I think Lucas's intention is quit clear here becauce those two scenes are almost identical. Like i said it was not needed and the execution is not that great but at least i can see now what Lucas was going for there.

Just my 2 cents.

Well, you can take those two cents back. I will never accept the change to the scene and I will never watch it that way. I WILL however watch the original, effective, powerful scene the way it's supposed to be seen. George Lucas, and any explanations as to why he did this or that, can all go to hell.

I love the rage going on. Please post more for my amusement.

From Peecher's book...



It's a shame that back then Lucas understood the concept of less is more, and the value of what was left to be played out inside the character's heads... Honestly, this obsession with "mirroring" is lame. It is only a credible movie making tool when it is used very subtly, IMHO.

I mean, Luke is a Jedi, Palpatine is trying to turn him to the dark side - FFS, the exact same thing is happening to Luke as happened to Anakin, there is no need for any more clumsy motifs - WE GET IT.
Some of the other stuff works (just about), such as the Invisible Hand set riffing on the Emperor's throne room set as Anakin falls victim to the same invitation to give in to his anger and finish his victim that Luke will later reject.

But all this change says is that Vader was born with a "Noooooooooo" and Anakin reborn with a (the exact same) "Noooooooooo". It's not elegant, neat, deep or necessary.
Jesus, if there was anymore mirroring (read, unnecessary repetition) in the saga, the next release will see the Death Star replaced by a giant disco ball.

You need to understand what a copyright is first before you can comment on what is and isn't a derivative work. Copyrights do not protect ideas; they protect expressions. When I copyright "Star Wars" I DO NOT have any rights to the ideas of "laser swords," "mystical energy fields," "little green elf men," girl with buns as a hairdo," or "sweeping space saga." What I get is protection of the original work "Star Wars": including story, dialogue, and to a certain degree created words.

Lucas was a defendant in a landmark Canadian case regarding creation of the word "Ewok." (Dean Preston v. 20th Century Fox) I was a true superstar in class that day. Anyway, the original author also has the right to create derivative works. A derivative work is a work BASED ON a pre-existing work. Liability for infringement will exist when the later work uses a SUBSTANTIAL amount of PROTECTED EXPRESSION taken from the earlier work.


So why is Spaceballs not a derivative work? Because it doesn't include any of LFL's copyright-protected elements. It doesn't follow the story of Star Wars, it doesn't use any notable dialogue ("May the Schwartz Be With You" is not copyright infringement - to infringe copyright you MUST COPY THE EXPRESSION, NOT THE IDEA), and it doesn't use any of LFL's created words. Star Wars and Spaceballs ARE NOT SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR (a LEGAL TEST, not your common sense one). There's more to this analysis but I'm not being paid to explain this to you.




First of all, don't be a putz and announce when you're capitalizing definitions like you're submitting this to a court. You're on an internet message board.

Second, I didn't mention anything of movie frames or sound effects. Why you would take what I wrote to mean that is beyond me. It's not a derivative work because of what I wrote above.

Wrong again: Romeo & Juliet WAS copyrightable. A Copyright only exists for the life of the author plus 50 years (this varies in different jurisdictions). Its copyright has lapsed so it's open to the public. No different than Snow White, Peter Pan, etc. West Side story is an example of what happens when the original work's copyright has lapsed.

A fan "edit" (I take this to mean "The Phantom Edit" or custom Star Wars cuts) might infringe Lucas' moral rights to Star Wars. Fan Films that use copyrighted words, lightsaber effects and music are much more likely to be held as derivative works.



No. An opinion of what is objectionable (comedy wise) is not a legal test. If the US started recognizing moral rights, you would see a marginal effect (or nil) on Hollywood parodies; primarily because it's against public policy to restrict the creation of parodies. Wes Craven/Mirimax isn't about to sue the Scary Movie franchise. Lucas couldn't use a moral rights claim because - for the 11th time - Spaceballs isn't a derivative work.

Lucasfilm has been known to protect the word 'droid' and it's in the Spaceballs script.


Being outside the law profession, things seem quite grey. Which is why my thoughts come out outlandish.


On topic, some folks over at OT.com also have a thread for SE changes. (including the forthcoming blu-rays, but not as quickly as you all will spot them.) Multiple forums all seem to have this kind of thread, not sure how to get everyone working together on the comprehensive list.

originaltrilogy.com /Complete-Comparison-of-Special-Edition-Visual-Changes/

The things people notice and the lists posted so far will help the fan editors who will attempt to despecialize or reuse this material. Many thanks.

Droid is not a copyrightable word. It's trademarked by LFL. Big, BIG difference.

Forget the fact that it's mentioned in the Spaceballs script twice and does not have a substantial impact, Brooks mentioning the TM "droid" in Spaceballs would not have blocked its inclusion in the film. I'm not going into a TM discussion now, but believe me when I say Copyrights and Trademarks have next to nothing in common.



What IS the law and what lay people THINK is the law are two completely different worlds. The law often isn't a place for common sense; it's an arena for cold logic.

is that why you're such a dick?

No, that's because of Asperger's.

Meanwhile, if you have the DVD or BluRay of the movie Dark City, listen to the director's commentary during the closing credits. Unbelievable the hoops they had to jump through with Lucasfilm lawyers regarding using the word "Dark" or god forbid, "Empire," in the title or description...

I remember that the name of the movie was supposed to be called "Dark Empire" or something like that and LFL threw a fit because they had licensed the name "EMPIRE" for ESB. It's a case of LFL needing to justify the cost of their legal department I'm sure. Nobody would confuse Dark Empire with ESB as these movies were released 15 years apart.

We do a lot of stuff with brands - the MPAA (got your back, DP), Universal, WB - and most of the complaints they file against filmmakers/studios are delay tactics more than they are offensive - there are tons of cross-licenses in the business with reference to names and designs and sounds, etc.

The brands we deal with that WILL fight you until your family tree is fucked for centuries are clothing companies, mostly because you must vigorously defend your TMs to protect their integrity.

Dark City was 98. LFL had the comic, 'Dark Empire' published 91-92 and the second part 94-95. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Empire)

Unfortunately Star Wars fans now have something in common with Oakland Raiders fans. We won't get a decent product until the owner dies.

More screens from Jedi here.

The shot of Luke after he cuts off Vader's hand still looks bad. Another imperfection preserved.

I made this analogy in another thread.

Agreed. Nice avatar, btw.

Not sure about Canada, but pretty sure you two are arguing semantics for no real reason. Spaceballs gets a pass, even if there was an argument to be made about being a derivitive work, because it's clealy parody which is protected. Fan films have no intent to parody, so no protection. That's how you get "Star Wars: A Porn Parody" popping up - using characters and situations created by George Lucas in a parodic way.

Another thing I noticed while watching the Star Wars 1080p MKV. Leia's hologram looks "prequel blue" in wide shots, and the usual white with her skin tone in the closeups.

What an angsty, tear-ridden, side-splitting and informative read this thread is! Two thumbs, way up.


Highlights for me:

• Treadwells use of the term "CGI and audio vandalism" or some such thing.

• New-ish MFers coming out to say they've got poop in the eye over said aformentioned vandalism, and the subsequent bra-burning liberation felt by others in casting off the "Star Wars Money Grab" yoke.

• Some real discussion over the changes, the quality and placement of new or altered material. I didn't feel like hunting all over the internet to find out what's different. Thanks to all for posting for lazy bastards like me.

• The drama-fest of discussing 'dollar politics' in relation to a single release from a sketchy billionaire who will do what he wants no matter what. Wtf, over-annalyze much? You people are lucky you have a Ben Franklin to play with. Keep arguing though, it's enlighteneing in a way.


In the end, will TroyObliX buy this release? Sure. But I STILL haven't bought a blu-ray player, and I'm due in bankruptcy court at the end of the week. So Fuck you.

Sorry, I just wanted to add to the angsty bits. To all of those folks posting in this thread who "didnt like the drama" or "felt bad" about the responses you recieved to your posts, please stop by the 'reservation' section of this board. We are throwing a 'love-in' for new members. It will make you feel better.

Just watched the full clip inside the Falcon with Luke practising his saber skills with the remote. Im sorry to say im not impressed - where the blade enters the hilt of the saber, there is now black marks clearly seen & when Luke moves about sometimes the blade is not in line with the hilt - at least the saber has lost its minty green colour!

Anyone else confirm this as well?

Eh - apart from the minty-fresh blade, hasn't it always been like that?

Yes, it's a scene that basically has not been changed outside of the colors, contrast etc., though it was apparently recomped in '97. But it still looked the same. I had no clue until watching the DVD extras, but much of this scene was apparently filmed with Luke holding a prop as opposed to a rotoscoped blade?

Point taken on the saber - it has been a while since I watched it - checked it out on dvd & its the same.

Just had my Blu Ray set delivered today from Play.com -gonna check as much of the bonus material as I can later.

Just flicking through the parts where the changes have been confirmed on this forum. Find it hard to believe the continuity error with the scene where R2 hides in the small cave after the Tusken attack on Luke. What was Lucas thinking?.

One minute the rock is there, then when R2 emerges the rock has totally gon - can't forgive that one in afraid.

matt wood talks blu-ray changes.

[flash width=640 height=385]http://www.youtube.com/v/W9SSh63Ot0E?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0&hd=1[/flash]

Can someone provide me with hopefully a YouTube link to the section of R2 hiding behind the rocks then again with it being gone as he comes out of hiding?