digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Side-by-Side Comparison Shots of Changes Made to The Empire Strikes Back

starwars.com — Cool gallery of images comparing the 1980 version of the movie to the 2004 DVD release. This was probably the safest of the movies to show comparisons as people are still sore over Greedo shooting first.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -47/+18Proof positive that had Lucas not wasted 3 decades re-making the first 3 movies he could've finished all 9 and we wouldn't know the difference.

    Seriously, most of those changes are beyond the average viewer's perception. And as for removing original actors and replacing them...I think history may not view this kindly. I know I would hate to have been an original part of an historic event and then be "replaced" by a more current version of my character...

    Lucas is totally OCD.
    • themastersb, on 10/12/2007, -14/+7What has changed? It is now called Episode V.
    • mywhitenoise, on 10/12/2007, -3/+30what the hell are you talking about, are you blind!?

      The overall quality is miles ahead of the original.
    • matija, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12actually they did it for New Hope too:

      http://www.starwars.com/episode-iv/release/video/f20060825/20060825_picview/pictureviewer.html?imgNum=1&world=episode-iv
    • JeffH, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20He's talking about things like The Emperor being replaced completely for the new versions. It's a kick in the balls to be a part of a movie that will be remembered for ages, only to be replaced for the sake of trying to make it look prettier.

      Part of the appeal of Star Wars to me, someone who didn't see it until long after it was originally released was the semi-cheesy special effects. Trying to ovehaul that just to appeal to the new crowd is just....dumb in my eyes. If George Lucas really wanted all his movie to be of similar quality, maybe he should've stopped dicking around all through the 80s and 90s.
    • mb3581, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11For the most part, the new versions do look better, but there were also several old shots that looked better. I do agree about the emporer though, if they can retouch everything else, I'm sure they could have made the original emporer stand out a little more. The thing that gets me though, Lucas acts like he is ashamed of the original theatrical releases. He claimed that they destroyed all the original copies so they could not be rereleased on DVD. These movies made Lucas what he is today, he should be proud of that. It just kind of a kick in the teeth that he was reluctant to give his fans what they wanted. I just wish that Episodes I, II, and III were done in the same gritty style as the originals. I could have done without some of the cheesy effects. It kind of took away from the epic story line. I just hope that someone eventually does decide to make the last 3, but Lucas already said that he would not. But whoever does decide to will have some mighty big shoes to fill. My 2 cents
    • ilyag, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Not replacing the Emperor would've been idiotic, since Ian McDiarmid was willing and able to film scenes for this DVD release. This is the only movie in the whole saga where the Emperor doesn't look like the Emperor. The only way you'd convince someone new to these films that they are the same character as seen in all the other films (minus Episode IV, where the Emperor doesn't make an appearance) is by taking them out of the fantasy world of the movies and telling them about the Hollywood casting process and other technical *****.

      Would you honestly rather do that to somebody than just let them enjoy the film and see with their own eyes that it's the same dude in all the films?
    • twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Part of what made the original versions great, just like the orignal King Kong, etc. is the fact that despite the fact that the technology to create the effects had advanced the movie was taken in context of the period it was made. No one watched the original King Kong expecting to see 1980's quality special effects. The movie was great because they didn't have CG and still made it happen. Remaking the movie in 2005 didn't make it better. Re-working all the effects doesn't make Star Wars any more significant that it was.

      Changing characters out like the Emperor or the orignial Jaba scenes in order to fit a revisionist view really says that Lucas has a very low opinion of the average viewers ability to understand the dynamic of time in relation to making his movies.

      No one expects that 30 years later the actor playing the emperor would be the same, or even alive. The same for Alec Guiness and Mark Hamill. Hamill looked 15 in the original movie, but now he looks like an old, haggy Farah Fawcett. Shouldn't he be replaced too?

      I think that overall, he should've left the original movies the way they were and let them stand on their own merit. He should've spent more time polishing the writing and continuity issues, stopped trying to sell stupid Ewok toys and made the last 3 (I, II, & III) better, and spent the left over time making VII, VIII & IX.
  • newbill123, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17I think many of the comments on the site about the changes are designed to be as jargon laden and uninteresting as possible.

    The changes make Hoth look like a wonderful Aspen ski resort rather than a realistic, grungy, make-shift hiding place. The opening up and wall removal of all of the sets in "Cloud City" makes the whole place seem frail and delicate rather than a point of safety before the big revelation, and afterward, the openness takes away that claustrophobic feeling.

    While "reducing the harsh matte edge and preserving the color of the photographic element" may be an accurate technical description, such statements don't say that it no longer feels like Luke is falling into a bottomless, pit of hell.

    By far, The Empire Strikes Back benefits tremendously from the feeling of hopeless unending darkness surrounding you. Does recoloring R2-D2 so that you can really see his blue panels in the space scenes help this? Maybe in Star Wars or Jedi, yes. In Empire, it takes away just a bit more of that darkness that eats at you through the movie. Oh well.
    • hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"makes the whole place seem frail and delicate"
      Funny, I thought it made it seem a place where you could be open as opposed to the oppression of the Empire. Odd how different philosophies can lead to different conclusions.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nox_%28Stargate%29
    • Drood, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The Episode IV comparison (or "Star Wars" as it was known back in the day... *sigh*) didn't annoy me too much. Yeah, Greedo shoots etc... And that tedious and pointless Jabba scene was added... But mostly the changes aren't too egregious.

      Empire however... It highlights what a total hack George Lucas is. The absolutely needless changes to Bespin (the one that changed an indoor scene to outdoor... Retarded.) The artificial zooms. Cleaning up the effects is one thing. But needlessly changing things that add absolutely zero to the film... Idiotic.

      By far the dumbest are the ones near the end, where they had to flip the film, so all the imperial rank gubbins wound up on the wrong side... You know what DECENT film makers do? HAVE REVERSE COSTUMES MADE!!! If ***** Billy Crystal can do it on "61*" (Anthony Michael Hall is right-handed, playing Whitey Ford, who was left-handed, so they created a reverse uniform and flipped the film) a driver of Lucas' alleged calibre should have been able too. Apparently Lucas never learned the vital lesson that if you suck, you surround yourself with talented people to make up for it. All they had to do was MOVE THE RANK INSIGNIA to the other side.

      So this means either A) Lucas has such disdain for his audience that he couldn't be bothered, or B) It never even occured to him that flipping the footage would cause this.

      Under case A, it proves he's a wanker. Under case B, it proves he's an idiot.

      I'm happy with either explanation.

      I am in no way a Star Wars fanboy. The last time Lucas got a dime from me was when the remastered VHS versions came out. (Though they'll technically be getting money from me next week. Not for the ***** overpriced DVD rerelease, but for Lego Star Wars II).
  • mister_llah, on 10/12/2007, -6/+28What I don't understand is WHY it is NOT okay for Han to shoot first... yet it's perfectly fine for Leia to kiss her brother.
  • BadassCheese, on 10/12/2007, -28/+7I could not give less of *****. Mod me down, but who really cares that much about this? Really? I have more important things to do, watch paint dry.
    • bigozzy, on 10/12/2007, -20/+4My feelings exactly ...
    • PepperMinty, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2Your name.
    • altosaxon, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9What is with you people who want to comment and then want to be dugg down so that nobody can read your comment? What are you affraid of? That people you have never met will not agree with your opinion?
  • porplem, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6The colors are prettier.
  • Roger, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Well the image quality looks alot better. That alone makes it worth getting the 2004 version. Just too bad he had to change the storyline too.
  • allatti2d, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3My favorites are 119-122.

    It's really subtle... when I go back and watch some great movies from the 70s and 80s, I wish they could be updated. It makes a surprising difference.
    • soweareaboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Too blue! Seems like they traded all the color, depth and grain of the film stock for a blue cast video look. And the color in the explosions is blown out and oversaturated! Matte integration is miles better but the color range sucks!
  • Xinareiaz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Its so much....blue!
  • kowcop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3though the new images seem a lot crisper and of prettier colours, they are not a hundred times better than the original version from 25 years ago. Ahh well, another investment into the George Lucas star wars fund.
  • ImTheDarkcyde, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1some kind fellows at YTMND have been putting these (original trillogy comparison shots) into a slideshow, i havn't got any links handy, but i suggest looking for them
  • sjbdallas, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Dig me down all you want but I don't have any problems at all with the changes. It's more realistic and doesn't change the story from what I can see. I understand there are purists out there that always want things to stay in some original form but it's not like Lucas went in and added a Jar Jar relative, or changed dialog that we all know doesn't track to Ep1 thru 3 (like when obi wan has no idea who c3po, r2d2, and chewbacca are) or digitally redid the obi-wan vader light saber duel since there's really no excuse for that to be so lame (after seeing yoda jump around, obi wan's age shouldn't matter).
    Bottom line is that the whole thing is subtly improved across the board. If you don't like it then keep watching your pioneer laserdiscs of the originals and let the rest of us enjoy the DVDs.
    • martin993, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I agree. I wasn't born when the original versions were in the cinemas so I'm not quite as precious about the whole thing. I love the upgrade in quality. Even the Greedo thing doesn't bother me.

      Star Wars isn't really about the characters so much for me. They're like toys. Flashy, expensive toys that make cool noises. The prequels, like the originals, had some horrific acting and half-arsed scriptwriting but I didn't care because they made all the sufficient noises and flashed all the essential lights. It's just a bit of fun. If they want to make it all prettier then that's fine. I think the DVDs are a huge improvement and the idea of watching a dirtier, grainier, rougher version of the same films doesn't appeal to me now because the whole nostalgia thing is wasted on me.
  • halldan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"More snowspeeder opacity and edge-fixing thanks to digital compositing." - the first half of the pictures

    "Garbage matte artifacting around (insert anything here) has been cleaned up." - the second half

    the same points could have been made in about 15 pictures rather than 150
  • subscribtion, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2That's why on September 12th an unedited version of the OT is being released on DVD, and I'm gonna be the first to get it. Muhahahha!
    • sancho, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Crappy Laserdisc transfers with no anamorphic widescreen and no cleaning whatsoever. No thanks.
  • JeffH, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7It looks like they took the whole movie and put a blue tint over it -_-

    Since when does blue = image quality?
    • imtigger2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3The blue is a cold color and works perfectly for the snow. I thought it was a perfect touch, it makes the scenes on the planet seem much colder.
  • mos6507, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Seems like a waste to get anything like SW on DVD when we're on the cusp of the switch to HD. I think we all want to know what's going to happen with Star Wars on the HD formats.

  • goblindegook, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23Huh. Check this out, they removed the window frame but didn't erase the reflection:

    http://www.starwars.com/episode-v/release/video/f20060901/20060901_picview/pictureviewer.html?imgNum=106&world=episode-v
    • imtigger2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Nice spotting! :)
    • skyhighrockets, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I noticed that too, in the one before it, they changed the view out the window as well, to match the shots when they're landing.

      They also made a drastic change of backdrop in this one:
      http://www.starwars.com/episode-v/release/video/f20060901/20060901_picview/pictureviewer.html?imgNum=119&world=episode-v
    • MemeWarrior, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Those Cloud City shots are what I absolutely despise the most about the special editions. As a digital artist I can respect the amount of work that went into some of those shots, but they just don't work and Lucas should have realized that. You can't really appreciate how horrible the shot that skyhighrockets pointed out is in the single frame, but when you see it in full motion you can tell it's just really bad composite work. I'm sure the people working on that shot tried their best to get the lighting on the actors to match the new background, but there is only so much manipulation you can do. And not removing the reflections from the old scenery is just plain sloppy work! They should have pulled those shots and left them as they were and no one would have been the wiser.
    • mongrel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Hehe, great catch! Now Lucas' people are going to read this and re-release a special 2007 edition, in which Lucas will talk about how ashamed he was of the 2004 version; thanks!!
  • bpinard, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1grain removal and contrast enhancements


    some tinting thrown in too

    :)
  • bluedefender8, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Um, did anyone else notice that the 6th picture, they both say 2004?
    • bradchoate, on 04/11/2008, -0/+1Right-- both of those images are from the 2004 release. Since the scene was extended, it has no comparable frame from the original release. So instead of showing a big "X" in the top half of the page, they decided to show two frames from the new release.
    • anagoge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Read the captions.
    • cesclaveria, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1did u read the captions at the bottom? "New shots of the wampa were created"
    • D3koy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Lol, little typo by starwars.com...or was it???
  • imtigger2, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7You purists crack me up. If want the full VHS craptastic experience, then keep the dust off your ***** VCR and watch the old releases and quit your bitching! If you want the grain on DVD, get a DVD burner and make some copies already.

    I think the changes are pretty frickin' cool and I can definately appreciate the work that went into enhancing these classic films for a new generation. My nephews LOVE the Star Wars series and it cracks me up hearing these 3 and 5 year old kids getting excited about a 1977 film. :)
    • bonked, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6It is just a slap in the face to all of the brilliant folks at ILM that their original work can never be seen in digital quality - that is what most of us don't like. Also, how hypocritical is it that George says things like this:

      ----
      "I am very concerned about our national heritage, and I am very concerned that the films that I watched when I was young and the films that I watched throughout my life are preserved, so that my children can see them." -- George Lucas, speaking out against the colorization of black and white films

      ----
      (From a May 2004 Article in IMDB)
      George Lucas, a longtime foe of "colorized" movies, has sharply criticized
      Columbia TriStar Home Entertainment's decision to release two Three Stooges
      DVDs today (Tuesday) that will allow viewers to watch them in either their
      original black-and-white or digitally colored versions. In an interview with
      the Associated Press, Lucas said, that the Stooges' slapstick comedy belongs in
      a black-and-white universe. "Would color distract from their comedy and make it
      not as funny anymore?" Lucas said. "Maybe just the fact that they're in black
      and white makes it funny, because their humor is dated. But by putting it in
      black and white, it puts it in a context where you can appreciate it for what
      it was. But you try to make it in full living color and try to compare it to a
      Jim Carrey movie, then it's hard for young people to understand. ... It's not
      fair to the artist."
      ---

      You see, the original trilogy redefined special effects in the movie industry - and those original effects should have been preserved for future generations to see and be able to compare where we were (technologically and culturally) and where we are now. He can release as many different variations as he would like (they are his) but it is rude to the fans to ignore their request to be able to have the original preserved in a digital format.
  • lilgryph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I have no beef with cleaning up matte-ing, adjusting color, and making some compositing effects overall better through digital means. That's great. The technology wasn't available in the 80's, so now Lucas can do what he wants.

    The only things that bug me are the changing of sets, characters, and addition of needless things. All of that is what made Star Wars Star Wars.. Now that Lucas is going in and changing things so everyone's memories are invalid, it's kindof a kick in the nuts. Making the image look better is fine by me, in fact, I'd do the same. But taking things away and adding something else is just a mean trick on the fans.
    • MemeWarrior, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I totally agree with you. I'm all for advancements in technology improving the quality of film, but trying to change history is just going too far. I'm glad Lucas finally reversed his decision on that one. We'll be getting our original theatrical releases on DVD soon, and I for one can't wait.
    • sydlexius, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Also, don't forget that George Lucas only wrote and directed for "A New Hope". He only executive produced (read: fronted the money, though he likely was more involved than that) the latter two movies in the OT. So for him to assert the level of creative control now that he lacked back then is a bit hypocritical, not to mention an insult to the original director, DP, and screenplay writers.

      With all that said, the cleanup work was very well done. Arguably, "Empire" had the least offensive changes done (with the possible exception of the emperor swap for DVD release).

      On a different subject, I'm bothered that with the upcoming DVD release being the LD rip, they didn't even bother to give us the DD/THX mix! Man he just loves to annoy the original fanbase!
    • bonked, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You're Wrong -

      Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)

      George Lucas (story)
      Lawrence Kasdan (screenplay) and
      George Lucas (screenplay)
      -------------

      Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)

      Writing credits
      George Lucas (story)
      Leigh Brackett (screenplay) and
      Lawrence Kasdan (screenplay)
      ----

      Note that the almost universally acclaimed "best" Star Wars film is the only one George didn't get a screenplay credit on. But I will agree, the movies become worse the more George touches the production process.

      They even had a gag reel type interview when Episode One was coming out where they interviewed folks from the original and new triologies - they asked them what George was like as a director, and then each of them (Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Natalie Portman, Carrie Fisher... etc, etc, etc) said "He is so motivating - He says things like 'That was good, now do it better'" and they delievered it all deadpan. There was a lot of truth to that, George does a piss poor job as a director during filming, he may be a genius in post and pre-production, but directing actors he allows some very, very wooden performances to end up on the final print.
  • andy370, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Garbage matte artifacting around all the ships has been cleaned up." = Ships flying around in the void of space, devoid of stars.
    Who knows where the galaxy went? Far far away perhaps.
  • noeljohnhoward, on 10/12/2007, -12/+3WHAT MOVIE IS THIS


    this looks ***** awesome

    does any1 know when it will be released?!?

    whoa man this is some cutting edge *****.,

    a little bit like star trek tho eh?


    _hadrow
  • D3koy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3And a new level of Geekiness attained by over 400 Digg users...myself included
  • JMJimmy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I knew I liked the 1980s version better.

    Sure things are clearer, brighter, etc in the 2004 but that was half the fun - it was gritty, and believeable (life is rarely "clean")
    • martin993, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Gritty and believable"? Not a quote you'd expect to see on the poster for The Empire Strikes Back.
  • robsonde, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1so insted of looking at 150+ images....
    90% of what they did was getting a better print and doing good colour grading to it.
    a few shot in that 150+ list have a few real CG tweaks but most of all itS the colour grading.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_grading
  • serithchylde, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Changing the Emperor was one of the best parts of the changes in this movie. Adding extra lines to the Emperor scene was also pretty cool. Showing that the Emperor has known for a while that this kid was Vaders.

    As for the droid inconsistencies. Well, there's no reason for Lars to think that this protocol droid and R2 unit were the ones his half brother were carting around. It was clearly stated in EPIII that C-3PO had a memory wipe, so he would not have remembered Tatooine. Perhaps Obi-Wan did recognize Chewbacca, but if you remember Obi-Wan wasn't ever at Kashyykk during the war, and why would he give up anything? Including knowing who the droids were. He was correct in stating that he doesn't recall owning any droids. As they weren't his.

    Sorry, I live a breath too much SW, thats what I get for being a child when these movies were originally released. I for one, will NOT be at the store purchasing the Laserdisc copies of the movies on DVD. I still don't own 1 through 3, as I am awaiting the trilogy pack. Don't know if that will happen though. So I may just finally break down and purchase them.
  • ultragames, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0Most people on here dont seem to get this, but the actor who played the emporer in SW I II and III, Ian McDiarmid, played the emporer in IV V and VI. So why talk about how horrible it was to remove the old emporer, when all they did was reshoot the same actor. (Though you could argue that the actor who gave the emporer his voice is getting screwed.) Much like how they changed the ghost of Anakin Skywalker, i think it adds needed links to the first 3 movies.
  • skunkman62, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3HAN SHOT FIRST!!1!
  • remysharp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Looks like a ton of colour treatment - don't fancy that job.

    Darn - makes me want to watch Star Wars again...no, no, must do work :-)
  • crashingechelon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Seeing all these makes we want to get that DVD release next month. Even though i have the originals on video in full screen and wide screen, it would be nice to have the DVD that I wouldnt have to worry about wearing out.

    Also on the Ep4 changes, my typography teacher would have beat them with a blunt object for leaving all those type widows.
  • serithchylde, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The Emperor in V was a woman with a bad makeup job and then voice over.
  • bobfuller30004, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Garbage Mattes - I'd like to know why they didn't fix *all* the garbage matte problems. Some scenes in Empire still have blatant issues.
  • dslartoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually the Emperor in V was a woman whose face had been digitally "combined" with the eyes of a monkey (I guess that was to give it that wrinkled look they wanted). :)

    (I wonder what useful information is missing from my brain because the space is being taken up by this bit of trivia).
  • Bulldog1369, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0the retouching of the film was for money and thats it they were fine the way they were
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.