Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Lucas strives for lower quality...again.

This is topic Lucas strives for lower quality...again. in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000832

Posted by Dwayne Caldwell (Member # 417) on 04-05-2000, 03:55 AM:

Lucas is such a hypocrite. The man is pushing to make digital the mainstream filmmaking tool, but he won't release his precious Star Wars Episode One on DVD. And it's a shame too, because had the movie been released in the DVD format, I might have bought it just to have the option of programming out all the Jar Jar and Anakin scenes. Why he would make it available only in the lower quality VHS format is beyond me. Maybe his plan is to release it in VHS so that we may all flock to buy it and then re-release it on DVD several months from now forcing those that were stupid enough to buy the movie to upgrade thus doubling his money. If that's the case, why doesn't he just re-release the film in theatres like he's done with all his other Star Wars films? Oh I forgot! He's done that already with Phantom Menace. Well then maybe this is his way of maintaining his control over us all.

------------------
The man with the magic hands.

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 04-05-2000, 07:40 AM:

I keep hearing the same statements and I don't understand the logic:

"Episode One really sucks and I'm mad I can't buy it on DVD."

"I'll only buy DVDs now and I won't buy VHS. So why is George Lucas forcing me to buy the movie twice by insisting that there will only be one DVD version some time in the future? I'd rather have a movie-only DVD version now and then I'll buy the collectors edition DVD later. So why is he forcing me to buy it twice with just one DVD?"

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-05-2000, 08:37 AM:

It just goes to show that the phrase that Roger Ebert coined "Propellerhead George Lucas" really is true.
Mark

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 04-05-2000, 09:44 AM:

Last night I saw the TV ad for Phantom Menace. Did anybody else notice that the scenes showed on TV seemed to look better on video?

When I watched it in the theatre it looked good but many of the scenes had a "cartoon-y" look and feel to them. The scenes showed on TV didn't. Maybe it has something to do with there being "too much information" in the film? Since video has low resolution compared to film, a lot of that excess information is lost or cancelled out?

Then again, I might be dreaming...

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-05-2000, 03:25 PM:

I'm sure it's all a carefully laid out plan to sucking every possible dollar out of the video release. Soon the DVD will come out, then it will go through the pay per view and cable and network tv just in time for George to "find" another minute or two of cgi scenes to make a "special edition" and it will go on and on. Just like the original, rather than doing it right the first time, people will own multiple copies of the same film through different video releases, giving the illusion that the film is far more profitable than it really was.

My 2 cents.

Posted by Trevor Bailey (Member # 75) on 04-05-2000, 04:19 PM:

For those of you who really want to feel the pain:

A projectionist I know is buying a special Laserdisc edition imported from Japan. I think he said it was around $150. He said he needed it to hold him over until the DVD release. BTW, he's going to buy the VHS to watch until he receives his LD.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 04-05-2000, 04:33 PM:

I understand that Lucas isn't going to release ANY of the Star Wars movies on DVD until ALL 6 movies are done. Therefore, there will be no Star Wars on DVD until the year 2006 or something like that.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 04-05-2000, 06:07 PM:

Yes, you can buy the LaserDisc from Japan and it does have a Dolby Digital soundtrack on it. I wouldn't buy it. What I would buy is a LaserDisc with JUST the pod race scene in CAV presented in Dolby Digital and then again in DTS (all on the same side of the same disc). DTS's home format is (so far) the best sound format for movies because of its minimal compression. It beats any theatrical sound format in quality, but many would be hard pressed to find any difference.

Posted by Stephen Winner (Member # 8) on 04-05-2000, 08:55 PM:

We couldn't show "Phantom Menace" at our theater because we weren't THX certified! What a rip! Most of the suburban houses had THX theaters, but were showing the movie in their non-THX theaters. Lucas just doesn't care about picture quality!

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 04-05-2000, 11:20 PM:

Georgeypoo is only doing that so he can sell more THX systems. To be honest, there really isn't a reason to buy the system anymore. If you want to achieve high quality sound and picture, you certainly don't NEED THX for any reason at all. Georgeypoo knows this.

He was just giving you a reason to need it.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 04-06-2000, 12:29 AM:

The nice thing about owning your own movie theatre is; Never watching a film on TV again!

I just wait for theatrical re-release. If it never comes back to the theatres, then I can probably go to my grave without watching it again. Its just entertainment.

I don't have a collector’s mentality. I don't need to own my own copy of a film. I just watch them as circumstance permits.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-06-2000, 08:34 AM:

Ian, I'm sorry you only get to see films by circumstance....thats really a shame. Certainly watching a film on screen is the best way to see it however, my Mistubishi HDTV, gives things a real run for the money. Especially on film broadcasts. Give a few years and AMC and Turner will be broadcasting HDTV all day long! HBO does now. Its really amazing with DVD's since the normal NTSC mode is line doubled. With this, Dolby DIgital, and DTS at home what more can one want? I've been the film collector route a number of times and have had 70mm systems at home, it was a lot of fun, but impractical and I'm now in a position to watch all those old glorious classics that have great stereo sound tracks that are impossible to collect. Sure I catch them in a theater when ever I can, but then, I live in Salt Lake City and that does not happen too often here, It didn't in Chicago either for that matter. Gee, I'm even hearing them better than they ever were herd in the past too. I'm very content to watch via either method. I still feel that film is the only way to exibit in the theater, and that Digital projection is impractical on a large scale for at least the next 10 years.
Mark

Posted by Jim Bedford (Member # 4) on 04-06-2000, 08:40 AM:

I'm with Ian. I have watched exactly zero films on video in the last year and proud of it! Why have a tiny picture of the Universe when you can have the whole Universe. BTW, what is DVD, "Dumbing Video Down?"

This constant dissing of Lucas and Spielberg reminds me of how the simple Greeks and Romans in the BC era attributed all of the evils that beset them, i.e., sickness, plague, storms, hangnails, video, etc., to their Gods. Quit the grizzling and second-guessing or buy their companies and make decisions you think are better. It's obvious that these guys have no clue what they are doing and everything they do is simply aimed at pissing people off. This is why they are so unsuccessful and we're in the booth.

Posted by Stephen Winner (Member # 8) on 04-06-2000, 08:49 AM:

At least Spielberg still supports film-based movie making! Unlike Lucasarts & Disney!

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-06-2000, 09:01 AM:

The ever-improving quality of home video display makes it all the more important to "raise the bar" on theatrical film presentation quality. The TI website makes it clear that they hope to leverage the prestige of DLP Cinema (TM) technology to sell DLP in "all the markets in which we participate", (e.g., home video). The same technology being promoted for use in digital cinema, will quickly find it's way into the home. Theatres must continue to offer better quality and value than home viewing. All of us need to make film presentation as good as it can be, so theatres remain the best and most preferred way to see a movie.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-06-2000, 10:49 AM:

Agreed to all of John's comments, although I will add that there is, or at least should be, more to a theatrical presentation than "just" picture quality.

I have a 35mm setup in my basement and can get better image quality than many commercial theatres. That said, I'd still rather go "out" to see a film than see it at home. There's something about being in a large room with a good audience (the type that are engaged in the film) that can never be duplicated with any type of home setup (DLP, 35mm, etc.).

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-06-2000, 11:29 AM:

No disagreement, Scott.

To me, enjoying a movie at a theatre ideally includes the quality of the sound, the sightlines, proper masking, curtains (remember them?), the comfort of the seats, and even the smell of freshly popped popcorn. Laughing or crying together with several hundred other people with a well-told (and perfectly presented) story makes going to a movie theatre special. That special experience can quickly be ruined by a rude or uncaring theatre employee, an unfocused, dim, or poorly framed projector, or poor quality sound.

Theatres should not lose sight of the fact that their primary business is presenting movies to an audience in the best possible way. If I want to enjoy a movie, I'll go to the best theatre showing the film, based on my experiences at the theatres in town.

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 04-06-2000, 11:57 AM:

The collective experience of enjoying a movie in an audience... That is, and will always be, the thing that seperates theatres from all other entertainment choices.

------------------
Better Projection Pays!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-06-2000, 04:27 PM:

Of course the theater is WHERE they should be seen, but where are you going to see, and hear the wonderful stereo tracks of films like The Music Man, West Side Story, Sound of Music and the like? If a person appreciates a films content then the format its viewed in shouldn't really matter too much. Those type of film showings just don't happen on a regular basis in any large city, perhaps with the exception of the L.A. area cause the prints simply just don't exist anymore for general distribution. I had some wonderful films in my collection and it was fun, but not practical in the long run. Geez, I was a month away from needing a warehouse for crying out loud!
Mark

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 04-06-2000, 06:09 PM:

Randy, the reason that the video version of SW1 looks much more professional than the on screen presentation is this...

The film is 95% digital. When transferred to film it will have the look of a digitally produced film, although somewhat lifelike. However the video presentation is taken directly from the computer file output to the video masters for duplication. This way the video presentation looks much more realistic and lifelike, because it is coming from the source itself. This process was done with "A Bugs Life". For the pan and scan versions (a letterbox version is available) they simply told the computer what parts to cut out, avoiding the pan and scan look when the video camera moves from left to right... damn I hate that....

... Stuttering stanley, stuttering stanley, stuttering stanley, STUTTERING STANLEY.... AUGH I CANT TAKE IT ANYMORE.... If i have to hear that scene from sixth sense anymore..... auuuugh....

------------------
"If it's not worth doing, I have allready been there and done it"

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 04-06-2000, 06:11 PM:

And Mark.. you have HDTV? I am lucky to afford actualy tv.... Will you be my new daddy?

------------------
"If it's not worth doing, I have allready been there and done it"

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 04-07-2000, 03:52 PM:

I thought the reason SWEP1 looked better in video had SOMETHING to do with that. I just didn't quite know what.

I read about how they did the video transfer of Bug's Life. That was cool. I especially liked the part where they couldn't just tell the computer to crop the picture. I believe they had to re-compose some of the scenes to make all the characters fit on the screen.

Do you think they did any of that with Star Wars?

Posted by Martin Frandsen (Member # 74) on 04-08-2000, 12:48 PM:

Im sure George Lucas will release Episode 1 on dvd in the near future at least rumors are that he will release the 'Indiana Jones' trilogy in 2001. Check this out, it looks like the covers for the dvd's are already made

------------------
It's the new small talk. You do it so awfully well! - My Fair Lady

Posted by timothy johnson (Member # 83) on 04-08-2000, 01:36 PM:

suckers! don't buy anymore DVD's,. High Def. DVD's are just around the corner, you are going to go out and re-purchase all those DVDs you are buying now, don't let the big corporate machine take your money, HIGH DEF is awesome,so just wait a few more years. I bet your still trying to sell those laser discs.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 04-08-2000, 03:43 PM:

I thought that the Indy Jones trilogy was already out on DVD?

Hi def DVD? Hell, they can't even get normal def DVD right. Just look at all of those artifacts! Everybody else might not be able to see all of the digital gobbledygook, but being a film man -- I SURE CAN! I hear Hi-Def DVD still has more compression than normal def MiniDV (a consumer videotape format). How pathetic. Oh, I can't wait! DVD -- Oooooooooooooo!

I do like LaserDiscs, though. I'll take them off of your hands.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-08-2000, 04:35 PM:

No Dave, I won't be your new daddy! But you are welcome over any time to watch a film. I'd like to hear what your feelings are after viewing on the set.
Mark

Posted by Carl Welles (Member # 59) on 04-09-2000, 06:13 AM:

I can't believe anyone here is actually considering buying this movie that had hands down the most annoying character ever to graze the silver screen.

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 04-09-2000, 08:57 PM:

Randy, I am sure they did some recomping in the purely digital scenes for the pan and scan version.

And I wonder if there is any way to COMPLETELY obliterate the jar jar binks and family scenes out... just recomp his unholy carcass out of there.... put in an ACTUAL black guy, like shaft.... I can see it now....

"You go on obiwan... these cats are goin down!"....

Actually its not far from true... you know that master Mace Windu (who comes up with these names?) himself... sam jackson, is playing Shaft this summer....

------------------
"If it's not worth doing, I have allready been there and done it"

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 04-10-2000, 11:16 PM:

Take out Jar-Jar and add in some more of Samuel Jackson...

"Give me my light saber. It's the one that has, 'BAD M**** F*****' written on it!"