The General HD Releases Thread!

[bradavon]

Yeah but Lucas did say the original movies would never be made available after the (pre Special Edition) 1995 VHS's came out...then they came out in 2006 on DVD as extras...

Fair point but those releases did take zero work. They didn't even bother to make them anamorphic.

That isn't even possible on BD. The frame is 1920x1080 no matter what the aspect ratio of the film is. Anamorphic transfers don't exist on BD like they did with DVD. There just isn't any need for them.

You can window box on BD though. Which I think is what Grim meant. It would look hideous though, given that letterbox is designed to be viewed in a 4:3 display.

[luckystars]

You can window box on BD though. Which I think is what Grim meant. It would look hideous though, given that letterbox is designed to be viewed in a 4:3 display.

Huh.

[bradavon]

Huh.

Letterbox is designed for 4:3 first and foremost (as is the case with all the star wars original trilogy widescreen releases). You take a widescreen aspect ratio film and stick it in a 4:3 aspect ratio, hence the phrase letterbox because it looks like one. The viewer can then choose to stretch it to fit their widescreen TV.

Taking this into account, it is identical to displaying any 4:3 film (e.g - Casablanca Blu-ray) in a HD 1920x1080 aspect ratio (which is always a 16:9 aspect ratio). You window box it. In this case it would again be designed to be displayed in a 4:3 shape but with black bars on all sides.

You cannot put an anamorphic picture on to a Blu-ray but you can (from a technical stand point) put a letterbox picture (the black bars at the top/bottom are physically part of the picture). It would look hideous though.

All DVD content is stored in a 4:3 shape. Whether it's anamorphic, 4:3 or letterbox. It's the DVD Player/TV that reformats a widescreen anamorphic picture to the correct shape. Technically when you watch an anamorphic widescreen DVD, it is a 4:3 picture being stretched horizontally back to the correct aspect ratio. This is why anamorphic looks better because the entire 4:3 screen area is utilized. Letterbox films, the black bars waste resolution but an anamorphic film, it's the DVD Player that adds in the black bars (when it's viewed on a 4:3 TV).

4:3 TVs don't exist in High Definition and thus the physically stored aspect ratio is always 16:9. There is simply no need for the anamorphic process. Anamorphic is a 4:3 process designed to increase resolution but not hinder 4:3 playback too.

[bradavon]

Confirmation the theatrical cuts won't be included:

Mr. Lucas said the versions of the first three “Star Wars” films – “Star Wars,” “The Empire Strikes Back” and “Return of the Jedi” – included in the Blu-ray boxed set will be the special-edition releases that were shown theatrically in 1997 and digitally restored for a 2004 standard-definition DVD boxed set.

Perhaps bracing for the reactions of fans who decried some of the changes made to the special-edition films – like, say, an exchange of gunfire between Han Solo and a certain green-skinned bounty hunter – Mr. Lucas said that to release the original versions of these films on Blu-ray was “kind of an oxymoron because the quality of the original is not very good.”

“You have to go through and do a whole restoration on it, and you have to do that digitally,” he added. “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.”

Source: http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/ ... next-year/

[luckystars]

Huh.

Letterbox is designed for 4:3 first and foremost (as is the case with all the star wars original trilogy widescreen releases). You take a widescreen aspect ratio film and stick it in a 4:3 aspect ratio, hence the phrase letterbox because it looks like one. The viewer can then choose to stretch it to fit their widescreen TV.

Taking this into account, it is identical to displaying any 4:3 film (e.g - Casablanca Blu-ray) in a HD 1920x1080 aspect ratio (which is always a 16:9 aspect ratio). You window box it. In this case it would again be designed to be displayed in a 4:3 shape but with black bars on all sides.

You cannot put an anamorphic picture on to a Blu-ray but you can (from a technical stand point) put a letterbox picture (the black bars at the top/bottom are physically part of the picture). It would look hideous though.

All DVD content is stored in a 4:3 shape. Whether it's anamorphic, 4:3 or letterbox. It's the DVD Player/TV that reformats a widescreen anamorphic picture to the correct shape. Technically when you watch an anamorphic widescreen DVD, it is a 4:3 picture being stretched horizontally back to the correct aspect ratio. This is why anamorphic looks better because the entire 4:3 screen area is utilized. Letterbox films, the black bars waste resolution but an anamorphic film, it's the DVD Player that adds in the black bars (when it's viewed on a 4:3 TV).

4:3 TVs don't exist in High Definition and thus the physically stored aspect ratio is always 16:9. There is simply no need for the anamorphic process. Anamorphic is a 4:3 process designed to increase resolution but not hinder 4:3 playback too.

No I meant "huh" just don't get what you're trying to say regarding Star Wars. I highly doubt Grim was suggesting a windowboxed presentation - what would ever be the point of such a thing? They would simply upscale the SD transfer and crop the top and bottom (black picture anyway) off. Entirely feasible as it's done all the time adding SD extras to Blu Ray.

It's all academic as Lucas seems to have confirmed it wont happen anyway. The deleted scenes are a very exciting prospect though!!!

[bradavon]

No I meant "huh" just don't get what you're trying to say regarding Star Wars.

I answered that above . Star Wars Original Trilogy has only ever been released in letterbox.

They would simply upscale the SD transfer and crop the top and bottom (black picture anyway) off.

That would be worse. You'd have a picture designed for letterbox stretched vertically and still window boxed (i.e - black bars left/right). A letterbox transfer is composed for a 4:3 aspect ratio. That would work on DVD because the DVD Player/TV can then stretch it horizontally, to reframe it for a widescreen TV (but it would be unwatchable and uncompatible with a 4:3 TV). That's not possible in the HD world.

Given that a letterbox image is designed for 4:3 you have to window box it (when preparing it for use on HD equipment), the same goes with a 4:3 movie such as Casablanca because no matter what you're displaying, it displays in a 16:9 frame.

Entirely feasible as it's done all the time adding SD extras to Blu Ray.

Few extras are letterbox. They tend to be 4:3 or 16:9. The 4:3 ones are window boxed and the 16:9 ones are already in the correct aspect ratio, and just require upscaling (which given that they're SD is done by the TV/BD Player).

It's all academic as Lucas seems to have confirmed it wont happen anyway.

It is.

[Markgway]

“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.”

1. Geroge Lucas is a billionaire.
2. MGM managed to convert 20 James Bond movies to digital and then HD.
Not 3 mind you, but 20.
3. George Lucas has a remarkable contempt for his fans.
4. George Lucas will make a shitload from these Blu Rays regardless.
He wants your money not your respect.

[gasteropod]

He's a fucking prick.

[bradavon]

Whilst I completely agree. We do harp on about the "director's vision" a lot on these forums and the 2004 special editions are his director's cuts (assuming he hasn't tinkered again). It's just many prefer the theatrical cuts.

There will be no The Last of the Mohicans Theatrical Cut BD for example, just a new Definitive Director's Cut. How it differs from the current Director's Cut is currently unknown. There is also no Alexander Director's Cut or Theatrical Cut on BD, just the Final Cut.

The difference of course being, that some of the Star Wars changes are very jarring. True, Lucas certainly has a lot of contempt for his fans. He wouldn't be where he is today without the original Star Wars cuts.

If they do only make this available in a 6 movie box set, I'm not sure what I'll do. The Phantom Menace is utter trash and Attack of the Clones only watchable. I don't own the Matrix sequels, so why should I be forced to own The Phantom Menace? I'd probably wait for the box set to come down in price. It's less jarring that way. Hopefully by then, I can get just the original 3 films. As happened with The Matrix, single film releases came later.

[gasteropod]

He lost his director's vision a long time ago, just look at all the crazy little insignificant things added and then taken away in each new iteration of the 'special editions', e.g.

The line "He's ON Your Tail" was added for the 1997 version but removed again for the 2004 version.

Insane, he's lost the plot, I think he probably never really recovered from his nervous breakdown in the '80s lol

[bradavon]

Michael Mann and Ridley Scott have constantly tinkered with some of their films too.

He wants your money not your respect.

Which actually makes it odder. He'd make a shed load of cash more, if he remastered them too.

[Markgway]

Lucas is artistically bankrupt.
He has nothing but Star Wars and so endlessly arses about with them to justify his laughable status as a relevant filmmaker.
Lucas cares about Lucas not about Star Wars fans.

Friedkin has started to go down the same road...

Mann's constant revisionist tinkering with Mohicans is a mystery as he's the only one mentioned still making successful movies. Move on, Mann. It was good enough the first time.

[bradavon]

Ridley Scott makes successful moves too.

It did get insanely lucky. He's only directed THX 1138, American Graffiti and 4 of the Star Wars films. That's it. Looking through IMDB it's all Star Wars and Indiana Jones.

Is THX 1138 any good? It looks good but completely unoriginal (maybe it was back then).

[luckystars]

I still don't get your arguement Brad. Why would you want to preserve the letterbox aspect by windowboxing the whole lot? I'm talking about blu ray companies upscaling SD material. They often take a 4:3 image and crop the top and bottom to make it 16:9. Why could this not apply to the letterboxed Star Wars? No need for windowbox.

[saltysam]

Cameron has been tinkering with Aliens,removed all the grain apparently:

During an interview to promote the Avatar theatrical re-release, director James Cameron also mentioned that he had just done "a complete remaster of Aliens" (included in the Alien Anthology scheduled for Blu-ray release on October 26), working with the same colorist with whom he had worked on Avatar. In what is sure to ignite some controversy, Cameron said he had completely removed all noise and grain from the extended version of the film.

The filmmaker said: "It's spectacular. We went in and completely de-noised it, de-grained it, up-rezzed, color-corrected every frame, and it looks amazing. It looks better that it looked in the theaters originally. Because it was shot on a high-speed negative that was a new negative that didn't pan out too well and got replaced the following year. So it's pretty grainy. We got rid of all the grain. It's sharper and clearer and more beautiful than it's ever looked. And we did that to the long version, to the 'director's cut' or the extended play."

[Marshall]

We went in and completely de-noised it, de-grained it, up-rezzed, color-corrected every frame, and it looks amazing. It looks better that it looked in the theaters originally.

Cool! It should look about the same as a 1996 episode of THE YOUNG AND THE RESTLESS.

[gasteropod]

This one might not be a disaster, we'll have to see how it turns out.

[bradavon]

I still don't get your arguement Brad. Why would you want to preserve the letterbox aspect by windowboxing the whole lot?

Because you're suggesting distorting the aspect ratio. Whereas my suggestion would preserve this. Given that the existing SD DVD Star Wars Original Trilogy are only letterbox.

They often take a 4:3 image and crop the top and bottom to make it 16:9. Why could take not apply so the letterboxed Star Wars? On need for windowbox.

Any examples? You'd prefer a cropped and stretched Star Wars over a window boxed one? Anyway, it's a moot debate.

[Markgway]

Ridley Scott makes successful moves too.

Oh, forgot about him.

Yeah, he can't leave Blade Runner alone.
Not that I was ever a fan.
But at least you can get ALL the known versions on DVD and BD.
So fair play to that.

It did get insanely lucky. He's only directed THX 1138, American Graffiti and 4 of the Star Wars films. That's it. Looking through IMDB it's all Star Wars and Indiana Jones.

...and let's be honest Indy was mostly Spielberg. Lucas just came up with the basic stories.

[Markgway]

Cameron has been tinkering with Aliens,removed all the grain apparently: During an interview to promote the Avatar theatrical re-release, director James Cameron also mentioned that he had just done "a complete remaster of Aliens" (included in the Alien Anthology scheduled for Blu-ray release on October 26), working with the same colorist with whom he had worked on Avatar. In what is sure to ignite some controversy, Cameron said he had completely removed all noise and grain from the extended version of the film. The filmmaker said: "It's spectacular. We went in and completely de-noised it, de-grained it, up-rezzed, color-corrected every frame, and it looks amazing. It looks better that it looked in the theaters originally. Because it was shot on a high-speed negative that was a new negative that didn't pan out too well and got replaced the following year. So it's pretty grainy. We got rid of all the grain. It's sharper and clearer and more beautiful than it's ever looked. And we did that to the long version, to the 'director's cut' or the extended play."

Will reserve judgement...

Seems that he's left the theatrical cut alone. So that will please us purists.

[bradavon]

Re: Aliens. Firstly it's good a new master has been created because the existing one is old. Some really grainy films need MINOR applying but annoyingly it seems they can either leave all the noise there or DNR it to hell.

Are there any examples of DNRed discs that are also director approved? Predator obviously isn't and Gladiator isn't either. Not that's conclusive obviously. I'm not expecting this to look anywhere near as bad as Predator but it's certainly a worry.

Any source links Salty?

Yeah, he can't leave Blade Runner alone.

He has now though. I suspect Lucas hasn't finished with Star Wars. To be fair, he's only personally altered Blade Runner twice and for me anyway the Director's Cut/Final cut work as well as each other. Although I prefer the Final Cut. It's clear now, the Director's Cut was rushed.

...and let's be honest Indy was mostly Spielberg. Lucas just came up with the basic stories.

Exactly. He's an old school Bret Ratner . At least he's making movies though.

Seems that he's left the theatrical cut alone. So that will please us purists.

Which is odd because it will surely look really different and mean they cannot use seamless branching. Does this mean the Extended Cut is the Director's Cut?

I always thought T2 and Aliens, the theatrical cut was the director's cut.

[gasteropod]

Ridley Scott was asked to do the Final Cut.

[bradavon]

Ridley Scott was asked to do the Final Cut.

He could've said "I'm happy with the Director's Cut" and it was certainly his choice to add the new CGI changes. He was also asked to do Alien: Director's Cut and despite claims that it was Fox who put that together, the DVD says otherwise.

[bradavon]

Here's the source video:

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=68820

Cameron discuses Aliens at 5:42mins.

[luckystars]

I still don't get your arguement Brad. Why would you want to preserve the letterbox aspect by windowboxing the whole lot?

Because you're suggesting distorting the aspect ratio. Whereas my suggestion would preserve this. Given that the existing SD DVD Star Wars Original Trilogy are only letterbox.

They often take a 4:3 image and crop the top and bottom to make it 16:9. Why could take not apply so the letterboxed Star Wars? On need for windowbox.

Any examples? You'd prefer a cropped and stretched Star Wars over a window boxed one? Anyway, it's a moot debate.

I'm not suggesting distortion, cropping or stretching of the picture information. Only snipping of part of the black bars