I will say no more on this other than motion picture marketing has long used the term restoration as a conflation for revision, and in the case of Star Wars there has been more revision than any other example.
[...]
Had the film remained like this il primo restauro degli anni 90, we would have a restored version of Star Wars, perfectly matching the original release but with pristine quality, even to the point where it was better than what could have been possible back then (as with the higher quality optical transitions). However, this was only part of the process of making what was eventually called "The Special Edition." ILM was working on many dozens of new shots, and an even larger amount of enhanced shots, using digital effects to re-do, expand, re-edit*and otherwise alter many scenes in the film. When these were completed, they*apparently were*printed onto film and re-cut into the negative, replacing the original negs, which were undoubtedly put back into storage.*As a result, the negative for Star Wars is filled with CGI-laden modern alterations. When Lucas says that the original version physically does not exist, this is what he really means--the negative is conformed to the Special Edition. Of course, it would be very easy to simply put the original pieces back and conform it to the original version, or use the separation masters and IPs, or*simply scan the old pieces for a digital restoration, but I digress.
Riassumendo: questo primo e ottimo restauro, pur soffrendo di limiti tecnici dovuti alla mancanza degli strumenti digitali è stato subito "rovinato" da Lucas con le aggiunte che sappiamo.
[...]
Passiamo al ritorno negli anni duemila, qui Lucas usa tecnologie già obsolete -scanning a risoluzione del *****- e ammazza quello che non aveva ancora toccato.
The second caveat that resulted from scanning the O-neg is one that was irrespective of the output resolution, and this was that they were once again working from a copy of the film without color-correction, since the meticulous work YCM Labs did existed only on the SE's Interpositive (again, the O-neg can't have its physical image corrected, it has to be produced on a copy). Perhaps because of the fact that Lucas had lost all of his color-work, he embarked on a new principle--instead of faithfully reproducing the look of the original release and photography, as had been the case on the previous re-release, it could be digitally manipulated to have a slicker look that matched the high-saturation, high-contrast look of the three prequels.
The 2004 SE (it has never been marketed as a Special Edition, though there really is no other label to describe it) had its color correction guided and supervised by George Lucas himself. [38] Screening the film at Skywalker Ranch, Lucas went through the film with members from ILM, who would be color-timing the digitized film themselves*at Lucas'*approval. [39]
This is one of the most controversial aspects of the release. While the revised film obviously is meant to have a deliberate look, what was released is a sloppy mess, in technical terms; blacks are crushed, colors bleed and pop distractingly, video noise is visible because of the oversaturation, skin tones are inconsistent and often very pink, scenes have weird casts to them (i.e. the Millennium Falcon scenes look very green), everything is much too dull and dim, contrast is not nominal, and many of the lightsaber effects are the wrong color (pink for Vader, green for Luke).
The coloring is not even consistent with the prequels in some instances, whereas the originals were--for instance, the original blockade runner scene was meant to be Kubrick-esque bright*white, while on the 2004 release it is a dull blue, yet strangely inRevenge of the Sith it is the bright white it is supposed to be. Lowry is often mistakenly pointed at as the culprits of these highly noticeable flaws, but in fact it is Lucas himself.
However, even clues in the current master indicate Lucas used poor judgment in 2004 and may re-tweak the image. The blockade runner's cool blue tone stands in stark contrast to Revenge of the Sith, released a year later, which reverts back to the original white tone, indicating a nullification of the 2004 decision.*And while Lowry acknowledges that the 2004 master was acceptable only as a standard-def project, Lucas has indicated that that master is to be the "for all time" version.
Riassunto: Lucas fa un casino, i materiali di base usati sono quelli giusti. Anche gli errori più plateali non vengono riconosciuti a causa delle megalomania.
[...]
Dunque cosa si può fare adesso o si sarebbe già potuto fare prima?
I would be willing to bet a good amount of money that in some years in the future efforts were made to somehow save the original version of Star Wars--from Lucas himself, it may seem, as his Special Edition would have to be somehow worked around in gathering original elements.
*In Star Wars' case, using scans of the separation masters is perfectly viable, and though IPs and Technicolor prints are not ideal for masters they could be usable if cleaned up digitally. Perhaps the easiest option would be to simply follow the 1997 restoration pattern but in the digital realm:*scan the negative in 8K, then scan the stored pre-SE shots or re-comp them, and fill in any damaged areas with IPs or separation masters, reconstructing the original cut, then digitally remove dirt and damage, and finally use a Technicolor print as a color reference for the Digital Intermediate created. Such a product would be theatrically viable, as pristine as when it had been shot,*and 100% faithful in image and color to the original release.
[...]
It will remain to be seen if the negative to Star Wars is in a salvageable state by the time this happens or if it has become a brittle relic, faded to black and white. It wouldn't be the first time the negative of a famous film has been lost--Criterion's restoration of Seven Samurai, for instance, does not work from a negative, nor did the gorgeous 35mm print of Rashomon that toured theatres this year. With fine-grain masters, IPs, and Separation masters available, the negative need not be the only source for a new master.
[...]
Robert Harris, the man who had hand-restored Vertigo and Lawrence of Arabia, and later The Godfather,*went on record saying he knew there were pristine 35mm elements available for use, and offered his services*to restore the film[63]. Lucasfilm did not respond. The efforts of fans and professionals like these will probably result in the aforementioned restoration at some point, if only for the callousness of making money, but it seems that day is not today.
The story of Star Wars' negative is both the story of advancing technology and the story of Lucas' ego. Showing how fragile negative film can be, how all sorts of old-fashioned tricks and the most advanced of analog technology was used to photo-chemically restore the elements, which were then embellished by select digital pieces in the infant technology,*like some kind of emerging cyborg; by 2004, the film had been entirely consumed by digital technology, existing only as a digital negative. At the same time, a crusade of revisionism took over, moving from a project to preserve Star Wars so that future generations could see it, to an enhanced anniversary celebration for the fans that Lucas could use as an excuse to play with emerging digital technology, to finally a consummation of his prequel storyline and a nail in the coffin for the original version that so many had loved and that had given him his empire in the first place, while the quality of the negative itself seemed perpetually sliding downward in resolution.
Riassunto: Lucas ha fatto il peggio possibile ad ogni passaggio e mette a rischio la sopravvivenza nel futuro di Star Wars a causa del suo ego, neppure del suo portafogli.
