Star Wars HD marathon going on right about...now
by Richard Lawler 
posted Nov 10th 2006 at 11:52PM
Cinemax is bringing home all six Star Wars movies in high definition back-to-back-to-back-to-back-to-back-to-back, starting at midnight tonight. If you miss one don't worry, they will be repeating and also are available in many areas in HD on video-on-demand. Otherwise, this is the first time to catch all three original flicks formatted for your HDTV, if you'd like to avoid Jar-Jar Binks in 1080i, take a nap and catch Episode IV: A New Hope at 7:10 AM on Saturday.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
FrankTheCrank @ Nov 11th 2006 12:31AM
I'm actually watching this as I'm writing my comments and something doesn't seem right with this. First off, it's doesn't look like it's full widescreen...or 2.35:1. Is it just me? Also, it doesn't look as clear as it should? I was expecting a much cleaner, sharper image for HD. The stuff on Discovery HD looks sharper than this.
Oh well...I don't give a crap about episode 1-3, I'm looking forward to 4-6.
May the Force be with you...
Darren @ Nov 11th 2006 12:55AM
I'll admit, it doesn't look exactly pristine here either.
FrankTheCrank @ Nov 11th 2006 8:37AM
Just a follow up...
I watched about 40 minutes of the first movie...that was about as much as I could stomach JarJar. Yuck!
Anyways...I hit the sack, woke up this morning in time for Episode 4, or as most everybody likes to call it, "Star Wars". I ran though my HD DVR, thank you Charter, and quickly browsed Attack of the Clones...Episode II. Looked much better. Sharper than the first episode. What's up with this?
Also, it does look to be 2.35:1. I guess I'm so used to seeing larger black lines when watching the Star Wars movies that I thought they clipped the sides. Gotta love 16:9.
Sounds good too. I haven't compared it to DVD, I will be testing that out later.
One last thing, get ready to purchase the entire series, all six movies, in a box set next Christmas. HD format. Mark my words. What do you guys think it will cost? 6x25$? $149? $99?
Richard Lawler @ Nov 11th 2006 1:24PM
I gotta agree frank, episode 1 looked horrible. it didn't look more than DVD quality, it was just missing that HD sharpness and 3d pop. however, I'm watching return of the jedi right now and it looks GREAT. the special effects aren't quite as impressive as the first time I saw them (spaceships explode and immediately disappear, etc.) but the quality is high.
Ryan @ Nov 11th 2006 4:31PM
For those not watching it in HD or at all. Here's some pixs I took of TPM off my HDTV. Of course it won't do it justice, but just to give an idea. Darth Maul especially, looks too sharp. So much in fact that the makeup stands out more.
http://tinyurl.com/yaskvm
EatingPie @ Nov 12th 2006 12:52AM
DO NOT JUDGE BY THE PHANTOM MENACE! (Sorry, needed to yell.)
TPM's a terrible DVD, and the HD image isn't up to par either. In particular the color saturation is off (washed out) and there's lots of visible grain, particularly in background scenes. This does NOT reflect on the HD version; it's the same issues as the (terrible!) DVD -- points to the master.
Episode 2 is better than the original HBO non-OAR airing. Episode 3 is the same and looks great, with intermittent Macro. Episodes 4,5,6 are all astounding. Lucas did a marvelous job restoring these for the DVD/HD master (same as for these CMAX versions). There is still some MINOR macro here and there, but less than Episode 3. Only HDNet could have done a better job. This is a great broadcast and lots of fun!
I'm very happy with the quality. Awesome!
-Pie
George @ Nov 12th 2006 9:10AM
I think you guys are forgetting that the first three movies were shot more than TWENTY YEARS AGO! lol They don't look like they're in HD because they AREN'T in HD, because HD DIDN'T EXIST when they were shot. This is a great example of how "upconverting" SD media is different than actual HD media. If it isn't shot in HD, it will never look as good as real HD, because HD's resolution is higher than 35mm film. That's why special cameras are needed to film it.
Jason @ Nov 12th 2006 9:57AM
George,
Your comment is so beyond false it isn't funny. Film resolution is much higher than the current HD spec. Films shot 20 years ago generally don't look as good because of the quality of the aging film print. 20 years gathers dust and scratches.
-Jay
Om @ Nov 12th 2006 5:24PM
Yeap George. Your a knob.
Film these days in the world of digital film scanning is generally accepted to contain approx 4000pixels horizontally. That pretty much obliterates current HD hands down. Jason is right in terms of why older films may look slightly "worse" than current HD captured epics like Clones or Sith. But believe me the resolution in most 35mm films and more recently 16mm film is all there ready to be cracked open whenever the producer decides to go out to HD. If you still question the raw power and potential of film go check out an IMAX film.
Go back to your desk and try again young man.
Om
Matias Korhonen @ Nov 12th 2006 11:18AM
I have to say that I agree with you there. In fact most movies are still shot on 35mm. It's only in the last couple of years that major films have been shot entirely using digital equipment (28 Days Later was one).
If I remember correctly a 20 megapixel (still) camera has about the same resolution as a proper 35mm film. I couldn't come across any figures for movie film.
Wayne @ Nov 17th 2006 8:17AM
Wasn't Episode II the first movie that Lucas filmed completely with digital cameras? That could explain the difference between TPM and AoTC.