Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Original Star Wars on DVD... Sorta

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wed Sep 13, 2006 07:31 AM
from the well-thats-just-a-let-down dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Original Star Wars is available on DVD. Sure it's more moola in Lucas's pocketsess (Gollum accent). But he did finally release the original version for a limited time. But which Original Star Wars, I bet Episode IV is in the opening titles. " Also apparently the original versions are basically non-anamorphic transfers from the laser discs. So basically, they look terrible.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Original Star Wars on DVD... Sorta | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 455 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Greedo didn't do it! (Score:5, Funny)

    by plover (150551) * on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:33AM (#16095333)
    (http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Thursday April 12 2007, @09:41AM)
    Han posted first!

    Sorry, I couldn't help myself :-)

  • darnit (Score:4, Funny)

    by yoduh (548937) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:34AM (#16095342)
    So its the same as the last DVD release but one of the bonus features is a crappy version of the very original?

    I have every VHS and DVD version of the movies and can usually point out most of the differences. But, I am getting better.... I no longer live in my parents basement :)

    ----------
    You know what else grinds my gears? When I can't find the droids that I am looking for.
    • Re:darnit (Score:5, Funny)

      by ZSpade (812879) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:41AM (#16095376)
      (http://www.spadez.net/ws)
      A move to the attic isn't what they meant by "It's time to move up in life.", Yoduh.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:darnit (Score:5, Funny)

      by mccalli (323026) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:51AM (#16095415)
      (http://www.eruvia.org/)
      I have every VHS and DVD version of the movies and can usually point out most of the differences. But, I am getting better.... I no longer live in my parents basement :)

      "That's good. You've taken your first step into a larger world"

      Cheers, Ian
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:darnit by Goldberg's Pants (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @02:18PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:darnit by BobNET (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @11:11AM
    • Re:darnit by Blakey Rat (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @01:42PM
    • Re:darnit by yoduh (Score:3) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:07AM
      • Re:darnit by jank1887 (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:29AM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Will we ever get what we really want? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Cerberus7 (66071) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:36AM (#16095348)
    Honestly? Will the original Trilogy ever be released in a non-craptastic form? Perhaps we will have to wait for the Blue-Ray HD-DVD battle to be resolved. This particular release leaves me feeling underwhelmed, and my pocketbook will stay closed.
  • George Lucas' Fear of Failure (Score:5, Insightful)

    Well, there wasn't much to the 'article' in this one except a bunch of odd links on www.starwars.com. But I noticed that CBS's Early Show was covering this [cbsnews.com] and states:
    Like it or not, this is probably all you can expect if you're clamoring for new "Star Wars" material. Lucas has vowed not to make any new movies for the series.

    "I said it might be amusing to come back with Harrison and Carrie when they're 70-years old and make a movie, but I forgot that I'd be 70-years-old, too," Lucas said, referring to people who ask him about more sequels.

    Lucas has talked about doing 3D version of all these films, for theaters. They would be released one-a-year. There is also talk of a 2007 "ultimate set" with all six films and new bonus material. There have also been rumors of a TV series, books, cartoons, and video games.
    What, will the 3D releases offer you another chance to alter them? Was your 'original vision' to have Jabba the Hutt slither out on people's laps?

    Oh, an ultimate set? You don't have enough of my money?

    Seriously, I wish Lucas would understand that we would rather see completely new material from him than to see him repackage and alter what we have and do love from him. I would rather see him release 9 mediocre or bad movies than to have him edit, 3D-ify and edit again episodes IV, V & VI.

    Damnit Lucas, let the studio technicians re-master the movie (they went to school for it, they know what they're doing) and give us more original content! Look at all the famous directors you've studied. Did Akira Kirosawa edit and re-release Shichinin No Samurai or Rashômon over and over and over again? No, he continued to make more movies, some very very good and some mediocre.
  • Horrible Transfer (Score:3, Insightful)

    by night_flyer (453866) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:37AM (#16095354)
    (http://www.gargoyleslanding.com/)
    I was looking at the comments section at Amazon, and that is the biggest grip, Im going to hold onto my 60.00 and wait for them to show up at the pawn shop if this is the case.

    Is Lucas trying to make a point?
    • yes by workbench (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:44AM
      • Re:yes by night_flyer (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:45AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Horrible Transfer by bluntastic (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:52AM
    • No point but profit by MrTester (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @11:10AM
    • Re:Horrible Transfer by TavisJohn (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @11:12AM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Reminds me of.. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ka D'Argo (857749) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:39AM (#16095365)
    (http://hangarbay.niteshdw.com/)
    a line from the Comedians of Comedy documentary


    "Yea I saw Phantom Menance and Attack of the Shit. It was like your uncle sticking his weiner in your mouth. Not like when you were a kid but grown up. You don't expect it either, your uncle's your favorite person, got you high, bought you your first beer, hate your mom hate your dad but your uncle is cool.

    You're at your parents for christmas, everyone's in bed, you're watching Letterman and you look over and see your uncle trying to put his weiner in your mouth. That's what Phantom Menace was like.

    I'm not even gonna see the third one (ROTS). It'll just be me walking into an empty theater and there will be Lucas ready to rape me some more. And I'll just do it to get it over with.

    Then he'll put on a Greedo mask and call it the Special Edition."

  • Slashdot just can't be pleased by Pigeon451 (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:40AM
  • by ZorbaTHut (126196) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:45AM (#16095388)
    (http://www.mandible-games.com/)
    They'll try again in a year.

    And again a year after that.

    And again a year after that.
  • I'll Wait by artson (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:46AM
    • by Mr Z (6791) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:09AM (#16095502)
      (http://sdk-1600.spatula-city.org/ | Last Journal: Monday October 01, @05:36PM)

      First: Here's a shot-by-shot comparison of the newly released footage to recent home releases. [starwars.com]

      Next, here's a simple explanation of what "anamorphic" is all about. It originally comes from the cinema. An anamorphic lens stretches or shrinks the image along one axis. In the movies, they use it to shrink the image horizontally when they film it, and stretch it back when they project it. This is what allows theaters to fit a widescreen image on square cells on the film. Anamorphic DVDs work similarly.

      See, the aspect ratio (ratio of width to height) of the Star Wars theatrical release is somewhat larger than TV's traditional aspect ratio of 4:3. Annoyingly, the video format that DVDs use is hard-coded to a range of fixed resolutions, all of which have 4 times as many pixels across as they have vertically. (Ok, I'm oversimplifying slightly, but not critically.) To fit content wider than 4:3 onto a 4:3 format, you have 3 choices:

      • Shrink the image uniformally so that it fits width-wise. This gives unused areas at the top and bottom of the image. The resulting output is referred to as "letterboxed."
      • Crop away the sides, adjusting camera shots to bring in the most interesting aspects of the scene. This is referred to as "pan-and-scan."
      • Shrink the image horizontally so that it fits width-wise but fills the screen top-to-bottom. This uses all the available pixels but gives you the complete image. This is referred to as "anamorphic."

      To display an anamorphic DVD on a regular-screen TV, the DVD player will still need to shrink the image top-to-bottom, otherwise everything will look tall and thin. On such a TV, an anamorphic DVD will not look much different than a letterboxed DVD. On a wide-screen TV, though, the DVD player can stretch the image side-to-side to fill the entire width of the display. This provides a direct benefit over simply enlarging a letterboxed DVD image: You gain vertical resolution.

      --Joe
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:I'll Wait by Carrot007 (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:47AM
      • Re:I'll Wait by artson (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @12:35PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Bugger. (Score:5, Funny)

    by tygerstripes (832644) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:48AM (#16095404)
    These are not the DVDs I'm looking for...
    • Re:Bugger. by Omicron32 (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @10:08AM
      • Re:Bugger. by tygerstripes (Score:3) Wednesday September 13 2006, @10:51AM
        • Re:Bugger. by gEvil (beta) (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @10:52AM
    • Re:Bugger. by artemis67 (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @11:16AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • quality (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mzs (595629) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:52AM (#16095416)
    My wife just bought these yesterday. She put in the original version of Jedi for my daughter. A bit later my daughter came to my wife saying that something did not look right. Then my wife put in the new version, no complaints. I am hoping that it was something simple like the aspect ratio was not right on the TV, but if not it does not bode well if a 4 year old complains about the picture.

    When I came home from work, I noticed that the new version was very dark. I turned-up the brightness for the kids. I wish I knew why that was.

    How is the quality of the bootleg DVD rips of the original trilogy from LD? How does it compare to these? Wouldn't it be a shame if the bootlegs looked better. Anyway for me quality better than my old VHS versions will be acceptable, but why could it not have been at least an anamorphic rip of the original trilogy on these new discs?
    • Re:quality by gEvil (beta) (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:00AM
      • A New Hope by bitrot42 (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:34AM
    • Re:quality by grub (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:00AM
    • Re:quality by elrous0 (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:24AM
      • Re:quality by aonaran (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:59AM
        • Re:quality by elrous0 (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @02:01PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:quality by nephridium (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:21AM
    • Re:quality by zerosix (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:15AM
    • Re:quality by mgblst (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:49AM
    • Re:quality by aussersterne (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:53AM
    • Re:quality by AaronLawrence (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @12:42PM
    • Re:quality by davros74 (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @01:25PM
      • Re:quality by acroyear (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @03:40PM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • I'll Bite (Score:4, Insightful)

    by blueZhift (652272) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:57AM (#16095438)
    (http://bluezhift.proliphus.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday January 31 2007, @10:25AM)
    Meh. I've read the complaints, but I'm tired of waiting. Getting 2-DVD sets for $20USD a pop is a good deal, and I put my VCR (original trilogy on VHS) away a long time ago. So I'm going to go ahead and pick them up. If a remastered version of the original ever comes out, I'll probably pick it up. But life is too short to wait around for perfection.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • I've got a bad feeling about this... by cyber1kenobi (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:58AM
  • Bad bet by wick3t (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:02AM
    • Re:Bad bet by scharkalvin (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:18AM
      • Re:Bad bet by WMD_88 (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @01:46PM
    • Re:Bad bet by groovelator (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:23AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • So... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Black Parrot (19622) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:02AM (#16095464)
    They're not really the originals and they look terrible, but otherwise they're fine?
    • Re:So... by brotheralien (Score:3) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:48AM
    • Re:So... by mgblst (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:53AM
  • I like the new DVDs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by arcticstoat (993717) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:03AM (#16095467)
    (http://www.custompc.co.uk/)
    I bit the bullet and bought the DVDs. Much as I'm loathe to give bullfrog-face Lucas any more of my money (having seen that he spends it on making rubbish like Jar Jar Binks), I decided that the Special Editions just irritated me too much, and I wanted to watch Star Wars without shouting at the TV. Quality-wise, I think they're actually pretty good. They're not the digitally remastered versions, but they still look very clean, and they're also in widescreen. These DVDs offer a much clearer picture than any old VHS tape will, although the compression is a little more obvious than on the Special Editions. The quality isn't anywhere near as bad as some whingers would have you believe anyway. At the end of the day, I'm glad I bought them. They might not be cleaned up, but if they'd never been digitally remastered before then you wouldn't be complaining about that anyway. I think of them as a piece of history i.e. the way the films looked originally, and should really look now. Now that I have the originals, I'm going to blissfully pretend that George Lucas died in 1984, and that the Special Editions and Episodes I, II and III never happened. This makes me happy.
  • So is this the "correct version"? by 91degrees (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:05AM
  • Poster didn't check out the article properly :-) by Archibald Buttle (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:07AM
  • You know you'll buy it. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Helmholtz Coil (581131) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:07AM (#16095489)
    (http://stresscrack.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday August 16, @07:17AM)

    A friend of mine that's a rabid Star Wars fan was grousing about this yesterday, even as he talked about when he'd pick them up.

    I told him the SW fans' motto should be "I may have to buy it, but I don't have to like it." :)
  • Not THAT bad (Score:5, Informative)

    by iamjoltman (883526) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:07AM (#16095492)
    I just wanted to clarify something. They aren't transfers from LaserDisc, they are transfers from a 1993 LaserDisc master. Big difference there. And I think crappy is a bit harsh. Do they look as good as they could? No. Are they anamorphic? No. But are they better than the LaserDisc-ripped bootlegs? At the time, I think the answer is yes. Granted, once the X0 Project [x0project.com] gets completed, there might be some competition there. But for now, I think this is the best you're gonna see the legitimate non-SE original trilogy. (In other words, that doesn't include some where people integrated the 2004 DVDs with LaserDisc rips, while that's better quality, it's still not the same as a legitimate release)
  • Any word on the Christmas Special? by Hao Wu (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:08AM
  • Terrible? (Score:5, Informative)

    Also apparently the original versions are basically non-anamorphic transfers from the laser discs. So basically, they look terrible.
    It's true they're non-anamporphic transfers from the Laserdiscs, but over at the forums on OriginalTrilogy.com [originaltrilogy.com] a number of people have bought them and say that actually, they're pretty good. These are people who have more or less every bootleg transfer on the Internet and still have their original laserdiscs, high-end setups, etc. And many are reporting that while yes, their video quality can't really hold a candle to the quality of the 2004 versions of the movies, they do blow away every previous LD bootleg transfer, look better than the Laserdiscs (not too surprising) and actually hold up well when zoomed in (as you would need to do on a widescreen set). I don't own the discs nor do I have a high-end setup so I can't really vouch for any of this.
  • Enough already (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Mayhem178 (920970) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:20AM (#16095569)
    You people will always find something to complain about when it comes to George Lucas, won't you? If he discovered perfectly preserved original prints of the first trilogy, decided to release them in theatres again, got John Williams to play the Star Wars soundtrack live at each theatre with the London Symphony Orchestra, AND paid for everyone's first ticket to see them, you'd blame him for your popcorn being stale.

    I applaud Lucas in his devotion to his creation that millions love. It's an icon of our time.

    If you don't like the movies or the editing that has been done to them, that's fine. Don't buy them. It's that simple.
  • "They look terrible"? by fruey (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:24AM
  • Transferring VHS to DVD? by soboroff (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:25AM
  • What do you want? by zosa (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:26AM
  • I liked them by fr0dicus (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:27AM
  • Definitive Version? by Rik Sweeney (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:29AM
  • Yeah .. I bet you have ... by darkuni (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:29AM
  • Woah, hold on there buddy! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by isecore (132059) <isecore@@@isecore...net> on Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:29AM (#16095639)
    (http://www.isecore.net/)
    So basically, they look terrible.

    Now, I'm no expert but wasn't that the whole point with releasing the originals on DVD?

    *ducks and waits for a +flamebait to hit him*
  • Lucas and Microsoft (Score:4, Funny)

    by blacknblu (988181) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:30AM (#16095643)
    (http://www.kcmetroweb.com/)
    So, is this the equivalent to Star Wars Service Pack III? Even Microsoft stops updating it's OS after a certain number of years.
  • So what? by teflaime (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:30AM
  • by JakiChan (141719) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:42AM (#16095717)
    They make it sound like it was unavoidable to destroy the original footage. Somehow I doubt that.

    Wouldn't the first step in making the "special editions" be to digitize and clean up the original film? And who in their right mind would destroy that data? It can't take up too many drives.

    So to me it means one of two things:

    1. In his hatred of his original work, Lucas ordered the data deleted, which is pretty stupid (since keeping it around would be cheap).

    2. He *has* a very nice cleaned up original version sitting on the Lucas SAN somewhere but refused to allow that to be released.

    Either way it blows....
  • What is the best bang for my buck? by Jargon Scott (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:54AM
    • Uh... by Sikkukut (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:03AM
  • mine came with comics! by MrP-(at work) (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:56AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • "Episode IV Title" bullshit by void bear(void) (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @08:59AM
  • Lego version by CyberSnyder (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:02AM
  • Watching Episode IV right now (Score:4, Informative)

    by Beebos (564067) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:10AM (#16095890)
    As I had not bought any previous DVD version, I bought the Widesreen Limited Edition of Episode IV yesterday. Upon seeing this discussion, I popped in the original version so that you could have the opinion of someone who had actually seen it. I am not a video buff, so I don't know all the jargon, but I am a photographer and have spent a lot of time looking at images. I'm using a 27" Trinitron CRT, so those of you with fancy, schmancy plasma screen may may have a different experience.

    Overall, I would NOT say that it looks terrible, though if you want to find things to complain about you can. A couple scenes look somewhat muddy. Some scenes have some dust specks here and there, a few scenes have quite a bit of dust, others have none. But all in all the contrast, brightness and color are pretty good. If you sit up close you can see a fair amount of film grain, but sitting 10 feet back you cannot. What does seem to be missing is what I'll call the "ghost boxes" around the ships in the space scenes.

    It does appear to be the original version. The title screen only says, "Star Wars", no "Episode IV: A New Hope" Han shoots first. There are no really bad CG characters added. The Death Star explosion is not enhanced. I'm not enough of a Star Wars nerd to know what else to look for.

    I suppose it depends on what you are looking for. If you want to be a video geek and complain how its not that great, you can do that. If you want to have fun and remember how you felt as a 12 year old boy in 1977 seeing something that was completely unlike anything you had ever seen before, this is the way to do it. It still brought a tear to my eye when Han zooms in at the last minute and saves Luke.

    Do I think Lucas is a prick for not at least cleaning up the dust specks and giving us the option of 5.1 sound? Yes, yes I do.

    So there you are Slashdoters. I hope you are all happy that I ruined my first screening of Star Wars in 10 years looking for things not to like and jumping around looking for "enhancements".
  • Just do what I did. by PhilippeTheGreat (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:14AM
  • Laserdisc Interpolation... by QJimbo (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:19AM
  • Check the Library of Congress by r_jensen11 (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:25AM
  • I'm a bad boy and I'm fine with that. by localman (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:31AM
  • by Petersko (564140) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:53AM (#16096177)
    These days computer users take a few things for granted. For instance, if a mistake is made, there should be ways to correct it.

    Before the days of the iconic trash can and/or recycle bin, we lived in fear of accidentally deleting an important file. But now, first you are asked, "Are you sure you would like to delete this file?" And if you lose your brain momentarily and say "yes" when you should have said "no", you can pull it right back out of the trash.

    Basic user interface design.

    Now lets pretend we're designing the control centre for an industrial facility that has to sit in the middle of a lava flow for some reason.

    Where exactly would you put the "destroy this facility" button? I mean, if you had the audacity to create one in the first place. Most people would avoid designing a control so sensitive as to turn "stable" into "complete structural failure".

    If you're Lucas, apparently you put it right smack in the middle of the console, so that when two people are fighting, they can bump into it and send the structure to a fiery death.

    No, "Are you sure you would like to destroy this facility?" At the very least if they really wanted to complete the destruction they should have had to empty their trash icon.

    I can accept a lot of things, but seriously... for a guy who embraces technology at the expense of storytelling and style, Lucas makes some surprisingly poor choices for script devices.
  • Open Source Special Pre-Special Edition? by nephridium (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @09:54AM
  • "Pimpin" A Documentary by George Lucas by Intangible Fact (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @10:06AM
  • it's a dirty job but somebody's gotta do it by mihalis (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @11:05AM
  • by dswensen (252552) * on Wednesday September 13 2006, @11:08AM (#16096578)
    (http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday April 26 2006, @05:27PM)
    The release of these DVDs firmly establishes that you cannot please Star Wars fanboys.

    Demand for the release of the original, unaltered trilogy on DVD has come up in the form of a great and plaintive whine in every single Star Wars-related story on Slashdot since probably around 1999. Now, here they are, and what are the "fans" doing? Complaining.

    Sure, Lucas could have remastered the OT's picture and sound, made it anamorphic, and left out all the Special Edition changes. But then you would just have fanboys complaining that that constitutes an alteration. I know, you think that sounds outlandish, but I guarantee you it's not. Star Wars has become less about enjoying the films than complaining about the films, at least around here.

    I think the only way the whiny fans will ever be pleased is when the technology finally emerges to Choose Your Own Star Wars Edition, where you pick from a digital menu which alterations you want. "OK, I want the non-Special Edition, with remastered picture and sound, Han shoots first, lightsabers are colored, old sandcrawler but new dewbacks, I want the new space battles... hmm, the Death Star explosion: ring or no ring?"

    I'm kidding, of course. That won't actually solve anything, the whiners will just complain that they're once again being "forced" to buy another edition. George Lucas wants me to pay for entertainment. I have no free will and have to pay for every edition whether I like it or not. Boo hoo. :(

    The unaltered OT is out on DVD. You got your wish. Now, for Christ's sake, quit your bitching. Instead of continuing to moan about what you didn't get, count your lucky stars that we live in an economy that can support your having so many choices in your entertainment. And recognize that it is a choice. You great big giant babies.

    Ahh, okay, I feel better. Have a great day.
  • The Sad Truth (Score:3, Funny)

    by vga_init (589198) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @11:29AM (#16096786)
    (http://rankandfile.homelinux.net/ | Last Journal: Friday January 23 2004, @02:58PM)

    Penny Arcade tells it like it is. [penny-arcade.com].

  • I got them last weekend by T.E.D. (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @11:41AM
  • To say it with a Lucas movie quote... by d3m0nCr4t (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @11:49AM
  • by Darth Liberus (874275) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @12:01PM (#16097129)
    Those flat colors.... that film grain... the cheesy special effects... Lucas really should've cleaned it up with a computer or something.
  • future submission - Star Wars Restored by obtuse (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @12:10PM
  • Comments from someone who has a clue by joe_n_bloe (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @12:15PM
    • And about x0 by joe_n_bloe (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @12:21PM
  • Wha? by indytx (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @12:19PM
  • While George is being so kind... by HardSide (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @12:43PM
  • Following in the footsteps of the pirates by Robotech_Master (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @01:41PM
  • Can't you feel the love? sheesh by sorphin (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @02:30PM
  • Unhappy Fans by ianmalcm (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @02:43PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • My Anonymous Two Bits by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @02:53PM
  • Looking terrible by xihr (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @03:25PM
  • Forget it by ^_^x (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @05:09PM
  • Interesting quote from the man on IMDB by qzulla (Score:1) Wednesday September 13 2006, @05:09PM
  • I wish... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Trogre (513942) on Wednesday September 13 2006, @07:05PM (#16100445)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    I bought the OT DVD set when it came out in 2004, and would have considered buying these ones too if:

    1) They fixed the plethora of problems introduced by doing a rushed DVD transfer by Lowry Digital. Examples that stand out include forgetting to take lightsabre colours into account when colour-correcting scenes and flipping music channels. From what I gather Lowry had 30 days per movie.

    2) They included the classic trilogy, obtained from film material from the 1997 film restoration of the OT for the DVD transfer. It seems they underwent a major film restoration process to get the best possible source material for the Special Edition. Surely they preserved that before Lucas started scribbling on it with new effects.

    So as it stands I won't be buying these. They've done nothing to fix the Special Edition, and the Classic Edition looks no better than on Laserdisc.

  • "Episode IV A New Hope" is NOT in the main cpu... by thx01138 (Score:2) Thursday September 14 2006, @10:03AM
  • Transfer from Laserdisc & Anamorphic Widescree by Sir Duck (Score:1) Thursday September 14 2006, @10:09PM
  • Finally Out by muindaur (Score:1) Tuesday September 19 2006, @09:08PM
  • Re:Confused by Bassman59 (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @02:42PM
  • People are dumb by Bassman59 (Score:2) Wednesday September 13 2006, @02:50PM
  • 18 replies beneath your current threshold.