8mm Forum: Star Wars....

This is topic Star Wars.... in forum 8mm films for sale/trade/wanted at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=003886

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on November 20, 2012, 11:40 PM:

Here we go!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/STAR-WARS-SUPER-8-/261131490909?pt=US_Film&hash=item3ccca6565d

(Not mine BTW)

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on November 21, 2012, 04:34 AM:

This is going to be very interesting. I say it goes for 900.00. [Wink]

Posted by Mark L Barton (Member # 1512) on November 21, 2012, 05:24 AM:

Well I would have bid but seems the seller only ships within the US, us poor ol' Brits lose out. Bottom lip quivers........

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on November 21, 2012, 06:53 AM:

It said International Email for Rates so I think the seller will ship outside the US. Lucky you ! [Smile]

Posted by Mark L Barton (Member # 1512) on November 21, 2012, 07:53 AM:

Yippee!! Didnt see that bit. This poor ol ' Brit is now smiling, and checking the exchange rate!

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on November 21, 2012, 10:24 AM:

And its ironic since it was printed by Derann which was in England. So if you win the film...it would be coming home! You should celebrate with champagne!

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 21, 2012, 12:47 PM:

I'll almost cheer if it actually goes for 48! (cuz I already sold my extra print for 1,000, snicker!!) [Smile]

It is one of the relatively few Super 8 titles that not only retains it's original buying price, but far exceeds it!

That, and the wonderful nolstalgia of just seeing it on that big screen, from actual film!

Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on November 21, 2012, 12:51 PM:

Exchange rates are good for England. It's about $1.50 to 1 British pound. Says it was only screened once and the boxes look brand new. It's funny I have a cold so I decided to watch a film and I watched my print last night.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on November 21, 2012, 01:45 PM:

I suppose $900 would be a 'bargain' if it has been screened once and is as good as new, although it would be interesting to know why it was only screened once as I expect most owners would screen it at least every 5 years!

I suppose Mr Lucas did sellers a favour due to all the controversy regarding the later version, as the authentic original must be a more desirable item for some.

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on November 21, 2012, 02:50 PM:

I think the seller only used it once. It came from a smoke free personal colllection. So no one knows how many times the original purchaser screened it as it was already pre-screened (used) when the seller received it.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on November 22, 2012, 07:49 AM:

Even as a lifelong non-smoker, I'd be surprised if anyone wanting a film would be put off by it coming from a home containing a smoker!

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 22, 2012, 09:21 AM:

Yeah, that seems kind of silly to me. I mean, what ... if your a smoker, your prints are goingto have a nasty haze on them for eternity?

Or, will you get a faint "whiff" of smoke on the print when it arrives?

Quite silly ....

Now, if it was a pinting, that would be different, as i have seen the damage a smokey envioroment can do to a painting, but film?!

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on November 22, 2012, 09:33 AM:

I have to say that coming from a "smoke free" home line use to make me laugh. Until the time I received a laptop from Ebay that was so literally covered in fine smoke residue that no matter how much I cleaned it , it made whatever room it was placed in smell like the "smoking room". It was horrible. I then sent it to Apple and the technician told me that they had to replace the bottom case because there was smoke residue INSIDE the laptop as well! Thoroughly disgusting. And I received a book once that was just as bad. I now understand the "smoke free" selling point!

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on November 22, 2012, 09:35 AM:

But trust me, I am not a smoker so smoke smell is very disturbing to me.

I once bought a projector and from the projector, I knew the previous owner was a heavy smoker. The projector has very strong smell and it did not disappear for very long time! Even I think it stays forever only I get used to it now. [Wink]

[ November 22, 2012, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: Winbert Hutahaean ]

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on November 22, 2012, 10:28 AM:

This all stems I suppose from some government think tank where
they try to make the smoker the "bad guy", I personally don't
smoke, but if the print I wanted had been kept in a chimney,it
would not deter me in the slightest.

Posted by Matt Villagomez (Member # 2919) on November 24, 2012, 12:19 AM:

I put my bid in. I'd be very surprised if I win.

Posted by Ferran Gimenez (Member # 1069) on November 24, 2012, 01:05 AM:

305 $ now... and going up.

Posted by Ronald Kwiatkowski (Member # 3349) on November 24, 2012, 06:54 AM:

That's entertainment... [Big Grin]

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 24, 2012, 01:40 PM:

... and the skies the limit. Still, a decent buy at the moment (at 400.00) but then ...

What wonderful events may occur in the last minutes? [Big Grin]

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on November 24, 2012, 07:40 PM:

Ok... Who just outbid me?? [Smile]

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 892) on November 24, 2012, 08:15 PM:

Bwa ha ha ha ha ha!

(Nope, it wasn't me.)

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on November 25, 2012, 02:00 PM:

Where's the Force now Al?

Wasn't me either.

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on November 25, 2012, 05:01 PM:

If I can't get it for $68 than I don't want it! [Smile]

Interesting thing about the seller is that I emailed her and asked how the picture quality was and she wrote back "I have no way of showing these films plus i'm not into film".
And that explains the "No Reserve" for such a premium title.

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on November 25, 2012, 05:48 PM:

Alan,bang in your bid and I wish you the very best of luck. I can
never understand why this film commands such big money.
There's one on ebay now "The Shape of Things to Come" which
has some outlandish price, and the film is a poverty row job.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 25, 2012, 06:23 PM:

Hugh ...

If you can't understand why this film commands such lofty prices, then you are not one with the force.

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on November 25, 2012, 06:47 PM:

That's true Osi,though I can see the point of the dark side. I had
a lot of sympathy for Darth.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 26, 2012, 01:26 PM:

Yeah, me too, he was pretty much screwed.

Posted by Chris Fries (Member # 2719) on November 27, 2012, 11:07 PM:

The final price was very close to Pat's prediction. It sold for $965. I bet the seller was pretty happy with that considering they opened the auction at $17.

Posted by Ronald Kwiatkowski (Member # 3349) on November 28, 2012, 01:57 AM:

Wouldn't it be cheaper to produce a new episode? On Super 8? [Big Grin]

I definitely share the fascination, but I doubt I will ever pay such a sum for 105 mins of film, unless the print has "turning into gold"-syndrome... [Smile]

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on November 28, 2012, 03:11 AM:

Well I was close. It went for 965.00 what a bargain [Big Grin]

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on November 28, 2012, 05:19 AM:

Well done Pat, do you do the horses at all?

Posted by Vidar Olavesen (Member # 3354) on November 28, 2012, 05:55 AM:

Anyone from here who bought it? If I had the money, I'd bid 1010, but at the moment, it's not easy (new projectors and Christmas)

Lucky winner though, it's one of the films I'd really like to have

Posted by Mike Peckham (Member # 16) on November 28, 2012, 07:20 AM:

My copy is still for sale, if anyone wants to make me an offer on it. It's in similar condition to the one just sold and I also still have the original boxes, spools and artwork, although it has been mounted on 2 x 1200ft reels.

UK sales preferred due to the cost of shipping, though that's not set in stone.

pm me if you're interested.

Mike [Cool]

Posted by Vidar Olavesen (Member # 3354) on November 28, 2012, 07:27 AM:

If only I could reach out and pick up some money :-/

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on November 28, 2012, 07:42 AM:

I'll never part with immaculate first-run stereo copy...

but then again, I just had to buy a new car...

No, no, I just can't... [Big Grin]

Posted by Mike Peckham (Member # 16) on November 28, 2012, 10:19 AM:

quote:
I'll never part with immaculate first-run stereo copy...

I'm pretty certain mine is a first-run copy too. How could I confirm that?

Mike

Ps: the copy that was the subject of this thread was won by a forum member. But I shall let him reveal his own identity if he so wishes [Wink]

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on November 28, 2012, 11:26 AM:

Well, Mike, this was a troubled release and was withdrawn prematurally due to negative wear.

The neg Derann used wasn't in the best state to start with but had the advantage of being printed wet gate back in 1989.

I bought mine at the BFCC when it was first released, but even then I had trouble with one reel which displayed a lot of sparkle. I spoke with Derek and he assured me it was a "lab fault", not negative dirt and sure enough a replacement was 100% better.

Still, I wonder how many settled for that "sparkle" as just neg dirt. So even a first run may not be perfect.

Subseqeunt runs were apparently worse to the point of snow-storm and even first runs suffered from excessive grain.

First runs also have the advantage of Kodak pre-stripe which makes for a decent stereo track. This was during the transition period from Kodak pre to Dreann's own stripe and some versions do have Derann stripe. I'm not criticising Derann's efforts in any way, but Kodak pre was usually, how shall I put it... more stable.

But! Congratulations to the winner of this print. Despite the technical issues, I'm sure you'll love running that original version on good old film!

Do let us know how the print is, just out of curiosity...like I say, I'm sure it won't detract from your enjoyment, just interesting to compare different prints.

Posted by Mike Peckham (Member # 16) on November 28, 2012, 04:57 PM:

Thanks Rob, that's very interesting. From what you say, I would think that mine must be a first run print. It seems to be on pre-striped Kodak stock and there's no negative damage. It's not snowy but it is grainy, which I think they all were?

I'll try and upload some screen shots.

Mike

[ November 30, 2012, 02:45 AM: Message edited by: Mike Peckham ]

Posted by Mike Peckham (Member # 16) on November 30, 2012, 02:46 AM:

Bump: Managed to upload some shots after a couple of failed attempts. [Smile]

Mike

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on November 30, 2012, 04:04 AM:

Awesome print!

May the force be with you!

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 30, 2012, 12:39 PM:

It really is a lovely print. I know there are skeptics, when you compare it to some of Derann's other prints that they did, but that Super 8 print looks absolutely gorgeous on the big screen and, in my opinion, far outweighs even a Blu-ray presentation ... (and we have the Blu-ray 6 film trilogy)

Why?

I watch the Blu-ray, and even though it is sharper and in some ways more colorful, to me, it's also lost a lot of life in transition to digital. It's feels cold to me. I really don't get the feeling of sitting in the movie theater like I do with the super 8 print screened.

People hooked on digital will never get that argument, mores the pity.

Posted by Laksmi Breathwaite (Member # 2320) on December 09, 2012, 10:06 PM:

HEY any body got a print for sale? I'll make payments [Smile]

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on December 09, 2012, 10:28 PM:

quote:
HEY any body got a print for sale? I'll make payments

For how much? [Razz]

I got this very title this year from a forum member much far from the last auction's price. I must thank Frank for selling his to me [Wink]

Posted by Laksmi Breathwaite (Member # 2320) on December 13, 2012, 04:47 PM:

Send me a email of what you want for it? My email is laksminirsingha@gmail.com

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on December 13, 2012, 05:03 PM:

quote:
HEY any body got a print for sale? I'll make payments [Smile]

He keeps his payments on time. I recently sold Laksmi a print and he made all his payments as he said he would. Plus I had all ready send him the print. Very trustworthy.

PatD

Posted by Laksmi Breathwaite (Member # 2320) on December 13, 2012, 05:17 PM:

Thanks for the character reference Pat.

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on December 15, 2012, 04:32 AM:

I think we all know that Pat,both you fellas' are 100% genuine.

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on December 15, 2012, 07:38 AM:

Thanks Hugh [Smile]

Posted by Ronald Kwiatkowski (Member # 3349) on December 15, 2012, 08:03 AM:

I have to say, I much admire the respectable way of everybody in this forum. It does feel like a big family, and the threads are always a pleasure to read. Just sayin'... [Cool]

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2