I noticed some confusion among members here on a few matters.
I'll keep this post brief.
First off this DVD release is absolutely a limited release - not only is it limited edition, it's been sent out in limited runs. That means retailers are only allowed to buy a "quota" given to them from Fox.
~ paragraph omitted. we don't encourage bootlegging
Daniel
Mybe so, but the DVD set can be found everywhere. My grocery store is selling them, for crying out loud.
i believe what he means is that they will only be out for a limited time, and of course your grocery store sells them, they wouldn't wanna miss out on the exta buck
What I mean is they're not only a limited release, but it's sent to retailers in limited runs. That effectively means EzyDVD was only allowed to buy a certain quota - 10,000 maybe (I believe that is about their quota too). Once they've sold-out (or nearly sold their quota) they'll ask Fox for more, and they'll be given a second quota.
As for bootlegs, I'm a bit disappointed Lynk Former chose to edit my message, but allows the other ones talking about bootlegs on eBay to remain. I was trying to help people out by showing them there is an alternative to eBay prices - pay less than half and you do get better quality. I have 3 different sets, currently, two of the best available sets, and a third inferior one. I'm following development on new sets that are currently being created at the forums I linked to - which I won't link to now because it was edited before and I wouldn't want to "break the same rule again"
What we see on eBay is generally people selling DrGonzo's version (anamorphic NTSC, "stereo", commentary track, chapter selections - identical to the chapter markers on the definitive edition laser discs, easter eggs and a supplemental material disc that is not always included by those who duplicate and eBay them).
It's a good set, one of the best - but it's not the best. For a start it's a lot blurrier than TR-47's which hasn't been stretched and is non-anamorphic (same as the source material), it only has dolby digital stereo sound from the matrixed prologic track; rather than a PCM of it (4 channel surround sound). I guess you could argue "you can't expect all that from bootlegs anyway".
But then that poses the question as to the purpose of the bootleg. In my mind it is to preserve the film as best a is possible, from the source material (in this case laserdiscs).
To the mods: Bootlegging something that hasn't been commercially available for 9 years, is hardly the same a pirating something available today. George Lucas release movies this year, but he did not release the original star wars trilogy. Let me explain. In the movie "Red Dragon" there is 1 scene from "Silence of the Lambs" that was used in it (because it couldn't be filmed for Red Dragon).
Everything else is new content. Does this make the movie "Silence of the Lambs" because one scene from "Silence of the Lambs" was used in it? Of course not! Does it make it "Manhunter" the original 1986 movie? No, it's a remake.
Same thing with the Star Was Trilogy 2004 Special Edition. It is to the original trilogy as much of a remake as Red Dragon, or The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The fact that it has certain scenes in it from another movie, doesn't change the fundamental fact that they are completely different, separate movies. Apples to Oranges as Lucas himself would say.
I know you're probably thinking "but 80% of the movie is the same". I have seen the movies. 80% is not the same at all. For a start they have completely new soundtracks. There are so many changes I couldn't begin to explain them all. For a scene to be "new" in my mind, it either has to be non-original sound and/or picture. I'd say at least 50% of the sound in the trilogy has been altered. Add to that the special effects, colour level manipulation, digital alterations and alike - and I'd say your movie about 30% "original". The other 70% has changed.
So this release has unoriginal content in them in them for at least 70% of the time. Ergo, they may as well be remakes, they are completely different movies.
Cleaning up the quality of the film hardly constitutes a remake! Especially when they hardly reshoot anything! If it were a "new film" as you suggest, they would have to mostly go back and start over. They may have altered a lot of it, but those changes were not taking out the old and replaceing them, so even if 70% of it is changed, at least 90% of it is not new!
Cleaning the film is not altering it. That was undertaken by an Australian company and they did their job well. So well in fact Lucas was surprised they managed to finish on time; but the cells were in such bad shape that they'd still be working on them if Lucas had let them.
Colour boosting is altering the material. We're not talking about just casually adjusting the contrast and colour levels, but actually going and changing certain parts of the colour. Even the opening crawls are new (in every movie since the special edition). Changing the audio is hugely changing the movie. Replacing actors with new ones is new material, inserting special effects is new material - and you probably have no idea just how many new effects are in the movies. Greedo, Shaw (Anakin), Stormtroopers, Space Shots, Aliens, Locations... here I'll show you some screenshots...
http://s02.imagehost.org/0420/original.jpg)
http://s02.imagehost.org/0420/new.jpg)
Spot the difference.
The point is though, that they are still of the exact same thing. It is still the same model, they did not go out and rebuild it to shoot it again. They may have changed a large numer of cells, but they changed them only slightly (percentage wise). Changing the actors, that part I will concede, but it is not sufficient for me to accept the claims you are making.
Look at the screenshots I posted again. It's clear that only one very small part of it may be the same. The star field is different. The floor and all the walls are different. The hatch is different. And the model is not the same. Look at the height thickness, and the black round spots, etc. Look at the pilot part - and plenty of other details of the model are completely different and prove it to be replaced.
Shok_tinoktin is correct in saying this was not a new movie, or a rebuilding of the old one, i think the best way to describe it overall is an enhancement, of both the visual and audio materials, not different, just improved
Originally posted by Puphlicus
Look at the screenshots I posted again. It's clear that only one very small part of it may be the same. The star field is different. The floor and all the walls are different. The hatch is different. And the model is not the same. Look at the height thickness, and the black round spots, etc. Look at the pilot part - and plenty of other details of the model are completely different and prove it to be replaced.
I did look at your screenshots again. What I saw was, the Millenium Falcon, two rows of 5 stormtroopers each running up to it. Some form of deep pit. A big opening in the background. You see where I'm going with this. It may be a little easier on the eyes, but it is still the same set, the same ship, the same ten guys in suits, etc.
they simply added stars and a little more detail to some things, tis all, everything else is the same
Regardless of your feelings on bootlegging, the rules are such that we don't encourage the practice.
What people do on their own time with a search engine or through people they know is none of our affair.
Certainly buying laserdiscs or vhs tapes off ebay or some movie store and then mastering your own custom dvd cuts is not illegal (shouldn't be, anyway) and that's perfectly fine to talk about here.
Just don't post sites that bootleg stuff and don't try to shill it here and you should be okay.
The bottom line is we don't want to get in trouble with Lucas for promoting something like this.
Originally posted by Puphlicus
Cleaning the film is not altering it. That was undertaken by an Australian company and they did their job well. So well in fact Lucas was surprised they managed to finish on time; but the cells were in such bad shape that they'd still be working on them if Lucas had let them.
Colour boosting is altering the material. We're not talking about just casually adjusting the contrast and colour levels, but actually going and changing certain parts of the colour. Even the opening crawls are new (in every movie since the special edition). Changing the audio is hugely changing the movie. Replacing actors with new ones is new material, inserting special effects is new material - and you probably have no idea just how many new effects are in the movies. Greedo, Shaw (Anakin), Stormtroopers, Space Shots, Aliens, Locations... here I'll show you some screenshots...
http://s02.imagehost.org/0420/original.jpg)
http://s02.imagehost.org/0420/new.jpg)
Spot the difference.
Okay there are obviously differences there. The righthand wall is different (not just the lights added) and the reflections it casts on the floor. The lefthand upper section is different (new lights for example). The inside of that elevator shaft is different. On the ground there is a new "arrow stripe" on the ground under the Falcon (right side). The rest is pretty much just cleaned up and brightened.
Thanks for pointing this out, I'll have to add that to my list of DVD changes when I get a chance.
but would you consider it to be a remade movie?
Me?
I wouldn't consider it a re-made movie, just an edited version, like a new cut of the same movie.
Example, there are numerous movies with "director's cuts" that have new or modified scenes that drastically change character motivations, actions, history, flow and story narrative. A movie like ET that has a couple of digital changes made to it, likewise.
While few movies have the level of changes made to them that Star Wars has had, I'd still class it in the same category.
I wouldn't put it on par of the shot-for-shot remake of Psycho, or the remake of King Kong.
Are the LOTR Extended DVD Editions, "the same movies"?
Back to Star Wars DVD:
Despite some cosmetic changes to certain scenes and a few soundtrack modifications, it's still the same movie, just a different cut.
I mean Lucas was tweaking the movies all the way back in the 80's, adding a new title to Star Wars, added one or two scenes and changing/adding new dialouge (dubbing over Beru's lines one of the most radical examples).
I too would like the originals (cleaned up visually and aurally, but with no CGI changes or added/changed scenes) on DVD, but like I've said before, it's Lucas's stubbornness that's keeping that from happening. Hopefully he'll change his mind.
If you want to see what I mean by how much a "new cut" can change a film, take a look at a couple of DVD's (I realize these won't be popular choices):
This is Spinal Tap (on the DVD there is a really long, about as long as the regular movie series of alternate takes of scenes including some deleted stuff, very different).
Highlander: Endgame (the DVD itself is a different cut of the movie than what some of us were unlucky enough to see in theaters, and there is a third alternate cut in raw form on the DVD as a "bonus" insight into the process of creating the film).
So no, it's not the same movie, but it's not a full remake either.
Some would say that removing the film grain is a major blasphemy and ruins the entire film.
I'd ask you, if you have a colorized version of a black & white movie, would you consider that a remake or an edited version? Because in that case you have 100% of the visual film changed from what it was originally.
I agree, colorization is a travesty (intersting process, but I want the originals in all cases) of course.
In another case we have Silent Movies. Silent movies aren't really silent, they just lack spoken dialouge (well, for the most part, the first "talkie" the Jazz Singer has only snippets of dialouge in connection with songs, the majority of the film is still done in Silent style with those dialouge text plates in between lip movement with no words coming out and a music score). Silent Films originally were shown on a screen with the audience watching while a live music performance was going on. This usually was a person playing an organ, piano or other music. Sometimes they had instruments ready to make sound effects (not unlike foley editors or radio). While many films had pre-created packets for theaters to use with pre-arranged sheet music, etc, some theaters had stuff that was impromptu for the evening, meaning every performance would be unique.
Nowadays we are used to getting the VHS tape, DVD or whatnot and that's it. So silent movies that have been put on DVD are being restored (played at the proper speed, cleaned up if possible and with added tints as the originals had) but the question is of the soundtracks. Usually these are re-created, sometimes with music from the period, othertimes with modern music that is just geared towards the "feeling" of the picture.
But this does change drastically from what the original experience must have been like.
I agree that the originals should be preserved, but I also admit that the lines between what constitute the original and what constitutes "too much change" is being blurred by technology and changing venues of these forms of entertainment.
For the first time the Star Wars Trilogy has been "made" for DVD, rather than for the theaters. Remember the Special Editions were in theaters first. Nobody has seen the 2004 Editions outside of a DVD playing TV, portable player or computer.
Btw, are you sure about all this "limited" stuff?
Because I've seen it marketed like that in UK ads and such, but here in the US there's no indication given (at least not to the customers).
Most DVD's they sell them pretty much forever unless the distributor goes bankrupt or a new edition is coming out.
Could this mean that Lucas has a new version planned already?
And I don't mean the rumored HD-DVD/Blu-Ray "30th Anniversary" set in 2007. Because if there is only one Star Wars DVD set (note the format) then there is only one Star Wars DVD set. Why stop selling it after a couple of years? I can still buy DVD's from 1997 made by other companies, after all... unless they've been replaced by new editions, in which case they are super hard to find.
Originally posted by Puphlicus
In the movie "Red Dragon" there is 1 scene from "Silence of the Lambs" that was used in it (because it couldn't be filmed for Red Dragon).
Everything else is new content. Does this make the movie "Silence of the Lambs" because one scene from "Silence of the Lambs" was used in it? Of course not! Does it make it "Manhunter" the original 1986 movie? No, it's a remake. red dragon is a prequel, an entirely different movie, NOT a remake. A remake is the same movie, reshot, with new actors. the OT DVD's are not remakes, but rather remasters.
also, laserdiscs are still for sale at many stores. and we don't support the selling of LD rips, this is bootlegging which is illegal.
Originally posted by Shok_Tinoktin
I did look at your screenshots again. What I saw was, the Millenium Falcon, two rows of 5 stormtroopers each running up to it. Some form of deep pit. A big opening in the background. You see where I'm going with this. It may be a little easier on the eyes, but it is still the same set, the same ship, the same ten guys in suits, etc. Alright, here it is in a later shot, this time you will more clearly see that the Millennium Falcon has indeed been replaced. In fact lines have been added to the opening (the border) in this shot too (Leia is looking through some sort of concrete hole). The only part of the shot I showed earlier that may be the same is the stormtropers, everything else has been digitally replaced.
http://s02.imagehost.org/0445/comp2.jpgOriginally) posted by Kurgan
Certainly buying laserdiscs or vhs tapes off ebay or some movie store and then mastering your own custom dvd cuts is not illegal (shouldn't be, anyway) and that's perfectly fine to talk about here.
Just don't post sites that bootleg stuff and don't try to shill it here and you should be okay.Yes it is illegal, both here in Australia and there in the US. In fact if my memory serves me correctly you yanks aren't even entitled to back up software anymore.
And yes I'm sure about it being limited. Lucas will stop production soon, probably before Christmas. Since it's been so successful he can afford to do it. It will keep demand up.Originally posted by InsaneSith
red dragon is a prequel, an entirely different movie, NOT a remake.Red Dragon is the second movie made based on the book Red Dragon by Thomas Harris. Ergo it is a remake, and an incredibly poor one when compared to the original movie (Manhunter). Though it can be argued Manhunter has "less in common with the book" - I find that it held the spirit of the book together better. They both changed the ending, (so did the other two movies Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal). Manhunter isn't as dumbed-down as Red Dragon is either. And Cox's portrayal of Lecter is way closer to Harris' character than Hopkins'.
the point is still, the Falcon is still in the exact same spot, the cell is set up the exact same way. It is by no reasonable definition a remake!
interesting that the stormtroopers have moved, although, i presume the excuse for that is different frames... :rollseyes"
seriously though, people have a point when they say visually enhanced is not a remake, but a remastering. In fact, movies that are now put on dvd from original film say "digitally remastered", not "this is a new movie"
On the front of the DVD box set box(the outmost box that holds the other boxes) it says in the bottom right hand corner "digitally mastered-- for superior sound and picture quality"
i think that said it all
lol, "Superior Sound" :D
Yeah, sorry, while I like alot of the enhancements done to the DVD versions (especially toning down the responce time of Han's blaster bolt - which killed Greedo - considerably (if you don't know it, I don't think you will notice the head bob Han makes as easily as you did back in the re-release in -97), although I would have prefered the original gunning-him-down-without-any-hesitation version :rolleyes: ) the sound on this DVD version, atleast in ANH, - and it's especially noticable in the opening scene - does not have the same punch as it used to be. There's not the same large roar from the Tantive passing infront of the camera with the Devastator in hot pursuit, and the first turbo laser hit is a fart in comparisson to what it used to be.
In short, the opening scene has lost some of it's awe factor (but it's still awe inspiring to see the Devastator just keep going and going and going :D )
plus some of the dialogue sounds very unnatural, it has kind of a wierd effect to it. Still, the quality of the DVD overall is astounding.
it seemed like the yoda/obiwan scene on dagobah, when luke leaves, like the spotlight was brightened, also there were parts that looked completely digitized. on the bright side, the eiopes and other CG things seemed more integrated and real than in SE
Isn't that getting a little off topic, considering there are other threads for discussing the DVD changes?
we got off topic a long time ago when bootlegs were brought up, it went downhill from there, and the title of this thread in very generic
Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch
we got off topic a long time ago when bootlegs were brought up, it went downhill from there, and the title of this thread in very generic
That was the original topic! Just read the ommission in the first post. What I meant was, something off topic but unique to this thread is still valuable, rediscussing what is available elsewhere is a little ridiculous.
Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch
seriously though, people have a point when they say visually enhanced is not a remake, but a remastering. In fact, movies that are now put on dvd from original film say "digitally remastered", not "this is a new movie"I don't think you understand what digital mastering is. This is not an instance of digital mastering. The floor has been digitally replaced, the walls and star field have been digitally replaced, the hatch has been digitally replaced, and the falcon has been digitally replaced. All with new material.
You know what? I was wrong. They ARE the same movie, this proves it:
http://s02.imagehost.org/0469/comp3.jpg)
Just like the shots with the falcon, there may be new material, and the scene may *look* a bit different, but when it all boils down to it they're essentially the same scene.
Originally posted by Puphlicus
I don't think you understand what digital mastering is. This is not an instance of digital mastering. The floor has been digitally replaced, the walls and star field have been digitally replaced, the hatch has been digitally replaced, and the falcon has been digitally replaced. All with new material.
But it is a digital version of the same things in the same place, that is the difference!
Dude, it doesn't even look the same. It's new material either way. It's not the same model. look at my new comparisons just above.
In the comparison above, the cinematography was different; and although they were subtle differences, they were designed to have a slightly different feel. In the Falcon comparison, they were designed to have a slightly different look, but were meant to feel the exact same way.
It's pretty obvious your gonna cling to your story, so lets just end this thread.
Originally posted by Puphlicus
Yes it is illegal, both here in Australia and there in the US. In fact if my memory serves me correctly you yanks aren't even entitled to back up software anymore.
Well, consult your local copyright laws, that's all I can say. I'm no legal expert, so you make your own decisions.
It was first legal to backup your own stuff (under fair use provisions of copyright law), then the DMCA came in and made it sound like you couldn't (if it meant breaking any sort of encryption protection), then this was revised/amended so you could copy your own stuff even if it meant breaking encryption (such as DVD encryption).
I hear the DMCA is "revised" every year (or is it every other year?), so I guess that could change (hopefully not against the consumer).
Unless this has changed yet again, you can copy your own stuff, you just can't sell the copies (or distribute them without a liscense), you have to sell the original. You only get copying rights for stuff you own.
As to the rules here, well, a lot of us (on staff) are from the US, but not everyone. Our rules (I'm talking on the forums and in the chat) against "warez" cover offering downloads of copyrighted stuff that you aren't entitled to distribute, links to sites that provide such material, and say auctions or ads for illegally copied materials. We generall discourage the discussion of "cd cracks" for similar reasons. It does enter a fuzzy gray area after awhile, but generally people don't talk about it so it doesn't come up. If you spot a violation that's going unnoticed, let us know, and we'll look into it.
Its not our job to enforce the laws of the governments of the entire world, but we don't wish to encourage illegal activity either (of course each member is responsible for his or her own actions while here).
And yes I'm sure about it being limited. Lucas will stop production soon, probably before Christmas.
That's news to me, where did you hear this? It'd just be nice for some confirmation. That sucks if it's true. That means it only had a run of 3 months max, that's pretty dang short!
As to whether this is a "remake" or a "restoration/remastering" that is a philosophical question I suppose.
How much of a movie can you change before it becomes "a new movie."
Or is the very act of removing it from its original medium (film) and placing it on a different format (digital video disc) and watching it outside its original venue (a movie theater; a home computer or television set) maybe no longer the same experience, and perhaps no longer the same "movie."
Putting that aside, I'd say it's more akin to viewing an "alternate cut" of a movie, than a completely different one. The sets, actors, director, etc are the same, just elements have been added and some removed, and some touched up.
Lucas has been tweaking his films in little ways for years (post-prescreening and 1981 changes to Star Wars, 1992-95 "THX Enhanced" alternate dialouge for the trilogy), it was only in 1997 that we suddenly got a big bunch of added scenes and a couple of changed scenes. The new changes/additions on the DVD pale in comparison to the number that we got back in 1997 though.
I talked extensivly with an EzyDVD manager (in person).
So the store manager told you. Ok.
I wonder if there will be an official announcement?
I know it would be weird if it were limited release in Australia and the UK but nowhere else, but it's odd that nobody in North America seems to know that. Just saying...
If you're right, does this mean that there will be no home versions of Classic Star Wars available again until 2007?
That of course is assuming that they either sell off or pull from shelves any remaining stock by Christmas (which wouldn't be too hard I suppose, to sell them off I mean, considering their popularity).
I just figure if they don't say anything they're going to have a lot of angry customers come Christmas time, who wanted to buy it but can't. As Han Solo would say, he'd be "throwing away a fortune."
Originally posted by Puphlicus
I don't think you understand what digital mastering is. This is not an instance of digital mastering. The floor has been digitally replaced, the walls and star field have been digitally replaced, the hatch has been digitally replaced, and the falcon has been digitally replaced. All with new material. no, it's all the same stuff, just sharpened and cleared up, look at the A New Hope artbook sometime. It's all there. It's the same model it's the same star backdrop, it's the same everything, just cleaned up and sharpened. You notice in the first picture everything is blurry as hell? Also back then the film didn't pick up every detail, now we pick up every bit of detail, quality of film my friend. I suggest you get the Star Wars artbooks that come with pictures of frames and the final designs, the painted backdrops, and all that stuff. It's a remaster, not a remake.
also what I remember of Manhunter they left out a lot of the original story.
according to filmographical terms, a remake is a movie entirely re-shot, new cast, all that fun stuff.
cleaning things up however is only a remaster, adding a few things does not constitute the term remake.
They don't have the power to "pull it off the shelf" - the most they can do is limit the release. This is what they did with the 1997 SE VHS, and the 2001 re-release. Now what you would normally want to do if you know it is a limited release is "stock-up" so you have toons of sets and will have them available longer than anyone else. Lucas decided to send them out in limited runs instead, which prevents this.
InsaneSith - it's not the same at all.
http://s02.imagehost.org/0445/comp2.jpg)
Look at the falcon. Look at the front of it, at the radar dish, etc.
Look at the hatch/shaft - look at the light's arrangement. Now look to the left of the stormtroopers, at where the reflection of the window fades out. ALL DIFFERENT.
Now if you'll go back to the first comparison:
http://s02.imagehost.org/0470/comp12.jpg)
I'll be move obvious the falcon has been replaced. look at the shadow on the front right/hand side, and the radar disc/shadow. Further you can see the walls, floor and starfield have all been replaced. Look at how the window is higher on the left hand side now, as I said - all completely replaced.
I guess only Lucas has the power to do this, most other DVD's you can still buy them in stores, years later. Heck you can still buy the Prequel DVD's now and they've been out for years.
Or is Lucas really saying that this is a "limited edition set" in the sense that from now on they'll be selling the discs individually, like the prequel discs are now?
Because other than the fourth disc, all this set is is a cardboard box containing the three keep cases for a low price.
It just seems odd that the one and only time DVD owners could ever have a crack at Star Wars is a three month period from September 21st - December 25th 2004, yet VHS, LaserDisc and VCD owners have had multiple releases over a decade.
With a normal DVD movie, it stays on store shelves basically forever, unless the company runs out of money to produce more or a new version comes out, leading the first version to be discontinued (or some time in the future if/when the format goes completely belly-up and is no longer marketable).
Oh, and InsaneSith you obviously haven't read the book. The book is about Dolarhyde and Graham. Manhunter is about Graham and to a lesser extent Dolarhyde.
The Remake (Red Dragon 2002) is about Graham and Lecter and to a lesser extent Dolarhyde. How you can argue that is more true to the original story baffles me. It's true, for instance that the Lounds character in the remake is much closer to the description in the book than Manhunter's Lounds. But Manhunter has Graham closer to book, and Lecter closer to the book.
There are some things left out in Manhunter that are included in the remake, but most of it is stuff about Dolarhyde since the movie was more interested in following Graham. The remake may well have Dolarhyde's house burn down like it does in the book - but why bother when you're going to change the ending anyway?
Manhunter starts the same way as the book, with Graham and Crawford, the photos etc. The remake starts with 10 minutes of Hannibal Lecter (I might add that there's only 10 minutes TOTAL of Lecter in Manhunter, which is about what he gets in the book as a minor character). The scene the remake starts with is mentioned in the book to some extent, but it still does not justify its insertion.
In fact it changes the whole dynamics of the movie to have that scene at the beginning of the movie. In the book Molly doesn't want Will to take the job, because of what it did to him with Lecter. Now you find out about it in pockets. Like that, a bit later you find out he caught Lecter, and then you find out how and that he went insane.
Now Manhunter expresses this true to the book. Molly doesn't want Will to go. You find out he caught Lecter, and then he explains how it effected him by a scene with his son - all true to the book, and character development for Will - correct.
The remake takes away all that, and gives the character development to Lecter - supposedly a minor character who isn't really important.
Originally posted by Puphlicus
InsaneSith - it's not the same at all.
http://s02.imagehost.org/0445/comp2.jpg)
Look at the falcon. Look at the front of it, at the radar dish, etc.
Look at the hatch/shaft - look at the light's arrangement. Now look to the left of the stormtroopers, at where the reflection of the window fades out. ALL DIFFERENT.
Now if you'll go back to the first comparison:
http://s02.imagehost.org/0470/comp12.jpg)
I'll be move obvious the falcon has been replaced. look at the shadow on the front right/hand side, and the radar disc/shadow. Further you can see the walls, floor and starfield have all been replaced. Look at how the window is higher on the left hand side now, as I said - all completely replaced.
yeah, looking at those pictures its obvious that alot of stuff has been replaced. But Im fine with it, I mean, its still the same movie, with the same scenes, same dialog, same everything, just the scenes have been made better, It's still the movies we love, and I don't understand why you want to make it such a big deal.