So what's the official best version of Star Wars 1-6?>1993 Star Wars Trilogy: The Definitive Collection Laserdiscs >1997 Special Editions released on Laserdisc and VHS on August 26, 1997>2004 Star Wars Trilogy DVD set>2006 Star Wars Trilogy - Limited Edition "Unaltered" DVD>2011 Blu-ray>4K Ultra HD disc releases
>>220353329Not the special editions that's for fucking sure. Good Christ they're sitting on a gold mine by not releasing a ORIGINAL edition BD set. It wouldn't even have to be all that good a transfer just having it would placate people.
despite what people say, i do like the blu ray versions better. i think its just nicer to look at. but its not the TROO way to watch it.
>>220353418That and i dont want to give disney any of my money. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ld5bzOENlLs
>>220353440>>220353418 The choice to go digital for AToC was truly bold and revolutionary and follows the entire spirit of the OT in pushing the envelope of filming and special effects, but at the same time it was also a very bad idea because the quality was so bad back then, and there is no way to re-master it, or really upscale it
>>220353329Just get the 4K77, 4K80 etc. They go all the way to prequels now. Stop obsessing about "officiality".
>>220355019>They go all the way to prequels nowWut? How and why?
>>220353329You obviously watch 4-5-6 specialized and throw the rest in the sewer since it's not SW
>>2203551393-4-5 are the good ones. Last time I watched ROTJ, I really struggled with all the crap it contains.
>>220353329Go with 4K 35mm scans across the board.
It's George's call, not yours. Would you tell a book author when his draft is done? No, so why do it here?
I'm absolutely sick off people pretending that 6 is some high art piece of cinema. It's literally just a cut and paste of the first movie. I'm sick of this "oh but the Luke vs Vader fight" again utter trash compared to Empire. The top 3 are 4,5 and 3. Anything else is utter dog shite.
>>220353329>>4K Ultra HD disc releasesthese, which are also available on blu-ray and dvd
>>220355121Because the original theatrical cut of TPM was released only on VHS. DVD version had the CGI Yoda and added scenes. 35mm film was scanned for 4K99.AOTC had three different theatrical formats; film, digital and IMAX. All three had different runtimes. The version released on home video and dvd was the "final cut", so AOTC has four official different cuts. 35mm film was scanned for 4K02. Also an IMAX reconstruction using the 35mm and Blu-ray was done.ROTS had no changes but a 35mm film was scanned for 4K05. AOTC and TPM were shot digitally, yes, but digital projection in cinemas didn't become a norm until 2010s. All digitally shot movies of 2000s were printed on 35mm for mass distribution. Fun fact: TPM that was still shot on film had a very small DCP distribution, being probably the first film to be distributed digitally.I gotta say AOTC and TPM look better in the 35mm scans than in the uhd blu-rays. The film grain hides some of the now outdated cgi animation.
>>220355752>AOTC and TPM were shot digitally, yes,AOTC and ROTS, sorry typo!
>>220355752QRD on the differences between 1-6 in every version?
>>220355764Too much to type. Just google.
>>220353329From those options, the 1993 Laserdiscs.But just pirate the unaltered HD version, seriously.
>>220355280>It's George's call, not yoursit's useless, we're talking about people who waste their time on fan edits. it's like those women that write fan fiction
>>220353329I know you said official, but the only answer is still the "Despecialized" versions floating around the internet
The original version of ANH is shit and some the special effects are terrible. The Special Editions are far superior. Deal with it.
>>220355019How? I've never seen a magnet link.
>>220356253Either register at the 4K77 forum and follow download instructions There are torrents also. look from 1337x or bt4gprxpic related for example
>>220353329>Star Wars Trilogy: The Definitive Collection LaserdiscsI happen to have these, with Empire and Return still sealed. But no Laserdisc player. Sad.
>>220356164Despecialized are outdated and only in 720p. 4K77/80/83 are the way to go, or alternatively tye D+77/80/83, which utilises the Disney+ uhd transfer and mixes in the 35mm 4K77/80/83 material when needed.
>>220353329the oldest ones you can find probably. in the newer realeses they add a bunch of new edits and computer graphics that stand out and look cartoony and different compared to things around
>>220355287Being better than the prequels isn’t being “a high art piece.” It’s just not being abject shit
MUHCLUNKEY
>>220355280This guy gargles George's testicles and tongue-polishes his poohole
>>220355280I'd tell him his old draft was better, if that was the case.
>>220355280tenth post best post/threadCringe retarded faggots in this thread shilling their pathetic little Frankensteinian low quality inferior edits. Embarrassing. Star Wars fans are completely braindead subhumans.
>>220357129>Star Wars fans are completely braindead subhumans.You're a prime example
The theatrical cuts of the original trilogy and throw everything else in the garbage
>>220353329Damn prequeltrannies are getting raped in their bussies today for some reason. Backlash from the slop Darth Maul show?
>>220357144I would never call myself a Star Wars fan. Fuck that. I appreciate George Lucas as a filmmaker and an innovator and I admire his works. But I am not and never will be a FANATIC of STAR WARS FRANCHISE. Star Wars fans are fucking subhuman morons, braindead manchildren that don't know anything about film or history or art, they know nothing of the thing that they claim to like. In fact, the more you dig into it, Star Wars "fans" hate the actual Star Wars movies and despise Lucas. Death to Star Wars fans.
>>220353329Please stop posting Star Wars threads.
>>220355752CG Yoda was Blu-Ray
>>220357207>I would never call myself a Star Wars fan.Same. I liked the og movies in their og version, and that's it.The rest is dogshit
>>220357129True. But don't forget that the 4K versions are his final cuts. That set has the best cover though
>>220357207OG trilogy SW is really good, especially ESB. Just from a film perspective alone, even if you aren't a SW or Sci-Fi fan.
This is what the laserdisc looks like.https://youtu.be/HHvq377vDf4
>>220358989Ah, so it was. The DVD edition only added scenes so it was 3 minutes longer than the theatrical cut.
>>220359603Tag and Bing really put a different spin on things
I've watched these movies enough....and now I have to go back and autisitically compare all these different versions.
>>220357129>low quality inferior editsThe 4K77/80/83 are far from low quality, idiot.
I like the changes they made, except when they made solo shoot second. my favorite one is when they added this rock to make it look like R2D2 is actually hiding instead of just sitting in a open cave by adding the rock in front to obscure him slightly. boomer star wars fans literally cry piss shit and complain about anything.
>>220360264i like how the digital rocks make it look impossible for the robot to enter or escape the cave at all
>>220360946>THIS DESTROYS MY IMMERSION BECUASE HE CANT WALK THROUGH THAT HOLE.
>>220360946how? where is it established that the cave is completely closed from the sides? or that the rocks on either side are at the same distance?it's like the idiots that cry over the new jabba's palace gate when the reality is that it's never seen from the inside how big it actually is
>>220359825They are low quality. They inherit all the flaws from multiple generational copies, and they are nothing but glorified fan edits
>>2203610464k77, etc, are transfers from film reels.
>>220361074and still they feel look worse than the full restoration and reimaging job that lucas studio's did for its 2011 re-release.
>>220361127No, they look like they did in the theater. Which is all anyone ever wanted.
>>220361148says you.
>>220361074>transfers from film reelsfilm reels are not the source. they are prints made from a copy of a copy of a copy. they are at least three generations removed from the source.
>Just as long as I have my 1 to 1 restored original trilogy, then my life will be completeVS>Just as long as i have my ultra realized vision of George Lucas 6 film collection, then my life will be complete.
>>220361417and still closer than the special editions
>>220361127The DVD master (which the 2011 Blu-ray is based on) came from a proper telecine scan of the original negative which then received a proper restoration at the time. It's higher quality and closer to the source than all these pretentious fan edits put together.The official 4K versions are even better.
>>220361529No, it's not. The Special Editions are sourced from the original negative.Cope and seethe
>>220361529Special editions were scanned at a fucking professional studio from the original negatives. Fucking retarded monkey. Kill Star Wars fans.
>>220361127Sure looks bad. Not.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1b47UP6ZGI
>>220361748it does. the color grade on the 2011 makes everything more vibrant and pop. why would space look like a dusty brown old western film? George was right you guys do suck.
>>220361417>>220361537Then a nigga like you shouldn't cry about D+77 which uses primarily the 2020 UHD Blu.>The 2160p UHD BluRay was used as the primary source for this project.>My DNR of 4k77 shots are used to restore original shots where needed. For many shots I went back to the RAW anamorphic scan used to make 4K77. >A shot from another Technicolorprint was used as well.>A few shots were provided by SkyDude for this project. Thank You.That is the best version for company bootlickers like you until next year when the official 4K restoration of the original theatrical cut of ANH is released.
>>220361873i'm going to laugh pretty hard when they just screen 4k77
>>220353511It would look like shit regardless. Resolution isn't the problem with AotC or RotS.
>>220357129>>220357207Go ogle teenage boys, Rick.
>You like the 2011 Blu-Ray release better after seeing the side by sides, more than anything other release, don't you anon.
I think the best part of being a 2011 Star Wars Blu-Ray fan is that they dont offer that version on Disney Plus and you will have to suffer knowing that this version is only available by purchasing it or pirating it.
>>220362017>Go ogle>googleman fuck you
>>220361873>Then a nigga like you shouldn't cry about D+77 which uses primarily the 2020 UHD Blucry? I laugh at fanedits. I own the movies the way the filmmaker wants them. I'm not an entitled child that seethes at the filmmaker that created these movies for daring to revisit his creations as much as he wants, or goes out of his way to make or download subpar, glorified fanedits pretending to be something else.
>>220353329There were laserdiscs before the Definitive Collection. The DC's audio is cobbled together from multiple different previous versions.
>>220362529Still not quite grasping how a direct transfer from theatrical film reels is "a fan edit." i do like how proud you are about getting fucked though.
>>220355752>Because the original theatrical cut of TPM was released only on VHSI have it on laserdisc.
>>220355752>ROTS had no changes but a 35mm film was scanned for 4K05.It definitely did have changes. The one that comes directly to mind is a different cut and wipe when they're leaving Mustafar. But there are more if you have the autism to compare a theater camrip (Backstroke of the West, kek) to official home versions.
>>220356475It's a fuck huge heavy boxed set with a big hardcover book.. There was no shrinkwrap on each individual movie, just the outer box You have something from earlier.
>>220357151Which theatrical cuts? There were Day 1 cuts that were different than what the wide releases a few weeks later that most of the world got.
>>220360264Jesus, that is one of the worst changes. So fucking stupid.
>>220362825Any of them? The differences pale in comparison to what followed. This isn't much of a gotcha.
>>220362920It wasn't supposed to be a gotcha, you cunty twat.
>>220363144you're pretty desperate for the last word bro
>>220360997>THE ORIGINAL DESTROYS MY IMMERSION BECAUSE HE ISN'T HIDDEN WELL ENOUGH
>>220362088>>220362136What so good about this version compare to the others?
>>220364405>>220361748Watch this. the 2011 version color's are more vibrant and pop. as well as all the lighting including the little buttons are more distinct because there isnt a brown filter of the top that kind of make them fade into the background.as well as R2D2 blue bing brilliant and shiny, while the white being too white, giving a futuristic look to it. as well as just in general all the whites being white, blacks being black, colors standing out on their own. just look at it, every other version has a shit brown filter over the top of them. watch it and figure out what you like about life yourself.
>>220355280George is very autistic and honestly has no idea why people loved Star Wars. I realized this when he said Star Wars was about Vietnam. A high IQ individual would realize this is definitely the case but if he actually thinks the normies who saw that shit in 1977 picked up on the Vietnam subtext he’s autistic af. Normies loved Star Wars because it was a good guy adventure movie after a decade of nihilistic movies like the Godfather, Taxi Driver, etc. If that shit was more blatantly a Vietnam parallel (like if that one deleted scene was kept in) it would’ve never achieved the same success it did.That’s why there’s so much disconnect between normies, Lucas, and the prequels. Lucas was trying to do some high IQ societal and political philosophical shit while normies just wanted slop.
>>220360264anyone that does anything less than hate the jabba scene deserves to be tortured to death
>>220364618The prequels are slop.
>>220355280George sold the franchise to Yidsney, it's their call actually.
>>220362529You're a bootlicker.
Is the theatrical cut on blu ray or 4k at all or is it just the special edition?
>>220365310its still just all special edition. even specialer editions at that.
>>220353329not worth watching, true slop and not even any good craftsmanship like a spielberg or zemeckis picture
>>220365351Figures. I've been on the hunt for the Limited Edition DVDs at second hand stores for a while but there's nothing but a mountain of special editions
>>220356603I'm old an was unaware, thank you sempai. I will search for these
>>2203533291997 Special Edition is considered patrician by /tv/, it's on this chart.
>>220366110Star.Wars.IV.A.New.Hope.(1997).SE.35mm.DE.v2.ENG.UHD.mkvThe.Empire.Strikes.Back.(1997).35mm.ENGCrawl.1080pHD.SE.v1.0.mkvROTJ 35mm 4K97-VI Grindhouse 1080p\Jedi SE HD.mkv
>>220353378>Not the special editions that's for fucking sureyou're wrong>>220353329>>1997 Special Editions released on Laserdisc and VHS on August 26, 1997this one is literally the OG version but simply cleaned upthat's why it's impossible to get
>>220362529/thread
>>220353511>and there is no way to re-master it, or really upscale it>>220355752>The film grain hides some of the now outdated cgi animationEven if ILM still had the original assets and compositing source, increasing the resolution all-around wouldn't fix the fact that the human actors are filmed on shitty soundstages with lighting that barely matches the CG sets, they stick out horribly as a result and clash when they have to interact with the greenscreen. If anything, better CG would make the human aspect stick-out even worse
