• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    111
    ·
    8 months ago

    Lucas won’t even let you see the original Star Wars without his CGI additions. Lucas has lied to deflect from being criticized for his decisions.

    Harmy and the 4k77 project have illegally done what Lucas refuses to do.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      8 months ago

      I thought he manually edited the masters, so the original Star Wars without CGI additions no longer exists.

      I do love the Harmy Despecialized editions. Also check out the Anti-Cheese edits of the prequels.

        • DeathbringerThoctar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’m not sure “we’ve all worked though” it, but I’m glad I’m not the only one with this perspective. I tried to explain “rage watching” the prequels to a non Star Wars fan not long ago and they looked at me like I had 3 heads.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        You can destroy the negatives with extra processing but you can’t destroy the prints. Lucas has original prints and if he didn’t he had the millions to acquire them. If fans did it, Lucas could have.

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          The rumor I heard decades ago (so a mountain-sized grain of salt) was that he didn’t want to admit he fucked up the originals when making the specialized editions, and just acted like he didn’t want to release remastered theatrical versions. He was also fiercely defensive of the specialized versions, saying that they were closer to his “vision” than the originals.

          Master negatives can create higher resolutions than what you get from the prints. The fan-made versions did a ton of upscaling from the best quality digital versions they could find.

          • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            8 months ago

            The negative is 35mm like the print. There is technically a generational loss between negative and print but that’s far far below the resolution of a 480p DVD when Lucas claimed he couldn’t release the original. 35mm film print is higher resolution than 4k. The 4k77 version does not use upscaling.

            • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              Lucas had just re-released the Specialized editions in the theaters, and they did very well. There’s no way they go through the effort of remastering the originals without releasing them to theaters.

            • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              There is the negative that was in the cameras when it was originally filmed. Prints are made from those original negatives of which there are many.

      • Gabu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Also check out the Anti-Cheese edits of the prequels.

        Why would you want that? People nowadays have no appreciation for theatre…

    • ki77erb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’ve always loved the Harmy version but recently I watched 4K77 without noise reduction. My god… so much grain!

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        I loooved the grain. It made me feel like I was a kid again watching it for the first time in the theatre.

      • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        In hindsight, all of media used to have this “meh, close enough” attitude about it: Vinyl LPs, audiotape, broadcast TV, film, iffy projectors at the local theater, AM radio, it all had limitations well within the range of human perception. Plus, everything the consumer got was a lossy copy of something else. Everything had noise, and everything cost some amount of fidelity no matter what you did. In light of this, “authenticity” is really a No True Scotsman argument, where we argue forever about intent, the optimal fidelity for the time, and what one would have experienced.

        Come to think of it, an easy approximation for a time machine is to buy some aviator frames, smear some Vasaline on the lenses, and stuff your ears with some cotton.

        • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          In light of this, “authenticity” is really a No True Scotsman argument,

          4k77 isn’t a no true Scotsman because it is a scan of a print that was played in theaters. If you digitally scanned a photo of the Mona Lisa, it would be a more authentic copy than a Photoshopped version that removed the brush strokes and replaced the blurred background with new high detailed images.

          smear some Vasaline on the lenses, and stuff your ears with some cotton.

          Had you watched movies in theaters before 2013? Film projectors were fine. The sound quality was fine. A movie filmed and projected in 35mm film was higher quality than the 1080p digital version of Phantom that was in theaters in 1999.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        It likely was. That and the ego of someone who wanted to be Steve Wozniak but was really a Steve Jobs.

        • ours@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          Steve Jobs which coincidentally owned Pixar for a while after it spun off/kicked out of ILM which was owned by Lucas.

          It’s a weird Small World.