logo Sign In

ANH screening with modelmaker Lorne Peterson...WHY ARE THEY SCREENING THE SE?? — Page 2

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
... his work is still there in the SEs. He wasn't slighted in any way, and the presence of CG does not take away from his work on the film.
Those sound dangerously like unqualified statements of fact, Mr. Tonic. Now, it wouldn't be fair if we let you get away with that, now would it? You don't let us away with it, do you?
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Post link
Okay I'm listening. Lay it on me.

Tell me all about his work that was slighted and dig something up where he is saying he is less than happy about the SE's.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Darth_Evil
I know I would not even do this event if they were screening the SE. I've made some home movies using stop motion, and if tomorrow someone came in and redid half of it with CGI, then asked me to talk about the film in front of a crowd, but only screen the CGI version, like hell I'd do it. Get it Gomer? There's no earthly way he can be happy about this, and if he is, then he's nuts. But there's no way of knowing, so its a total moot point anyway.


He may or may not be happy, but it sounds like to me that he was bought off. He has a book to sell. In order to sell it, he needs Lucasfilm's permission to publish stuff they have the copyright on for Star Wars, and he has a foreword by Lucas. So he had to accept everything with a happy smile on his face, or Lucas wouldn't of given him the rights in the first place. So no matter what he personally thinks of it, I'd be very suprised if he said anything against the CGI.
Author
Time
Post link
So I guess you guys will assume he "really" thinks the SE's are an abomination, because thats how some of you feel about it?
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
Why don't you provide us with the crushingly convincing proof that Mr. Peterson is happy with the SEs and everything that was changed in the effects?
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Post link
If you look at my original post, I was responding to a comment that zombie84 made.

I am guessing the reason is because Lucasfilm has recalled all prints of the original 1977 ANH and does not lend out the OOT anymore--only the SE prints may be screened. I remember a similar incident where a university wanted to screen the film as part of its 1970's cinema classics class and only were offered the 1997 SE. The OOT dies a little once more.


Zombie84 took this move by Lucas/McCallum and whoever as an attempt at further pushing aside the OOT. The logic was "If they don't have the guts to do a screening that doesn't have the OOT with L. Peterson's full magnitude of model work, then they are making a terrible choice."

I was only presenting the September OOT DVD release as the only available option if that is possibly going to be done. It's a stretch, as several of you have mentioned, because they are only on DVD and they would be using a normal DVD projector in a theatre. I agree with you fully on this. That is my point.

But many of you seem to think there is another option for them to choose. What else are they supposed to be screening that isn't the Special Editions? Those are the only apparent strips on a common theatre reel . . .Just like auraloffalwaffle said.



Why hello there
Author
Time
Post link
I know he is happy the 2006 DVD's have the O-OT on them, but I haven't seen anything where he has talked about how his work was disrespected by the SE versions.

I'm only asking you guys to lay it on me, because I assume I must be missing something he had said, or something basic about his work that was altered for the SE's.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
So I guess you guys will assume he "really" thinks the SE's are an abomination, because thats how some of you feel about it?

This is not about whether the SE's are great or not, or an improvement or not. The simple fact is that the SE's replaced the work (models) of some artists with the work (CGI) of other artists, without the original artists having any control over the alteration of their work. If one was screening a film to highlight the model work of a particular man, it would make sense to have available the version that features more of this work than the other.

It is an issue such as this that is at the core of the desire to see the OOT preserved in the best possible fashion. Personally, I don't really care what Lorne thinks about it because he wasn't the only one who worked on the models for the film.

Pink Floyd -- First in Space

Author
Time
Post link
No, as usual, Mr. Tonic, you mistake our discussions here for some sort of grounded, legitamate, court-admissable testimony, in the case Go-Mer-Tonic vs. Anyone Who Speaks Ill Of Anything Even Remotely Pertaining To Star Wars (TM).

Why should we have any evidence to show you? We're just talking about a subject and throwing in our 2 cents' worth.

If you have anything to prove us wrong, then I'm sure we'd all like to see it. But I don't think you need to protect Mr. Luca$h's good name. He has enough lawyers already.

EDIT: AS FAR AS I KNOW!!

Phew! I've gotta be more careful...
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Post link
First this model shop book and then the "making of" book due out next year. I really hope this is it and we can finally get the OOT remastered. 2007 can be a glorious year for Star Wars if Lucas wishes it to be.
Author
Time
Post link
You guys don't need proof.

Feel free to assume the worst possible scenario if that's what makes you happy.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
I may buy the 2007 saga set if I have enough money stored up to spend on whimsical stuff. At any rate, I am really looking forward to seeing what happens.
Why hello there
Author
Time
Post link
You'd think they could at least get the year and running time correct if they're going to state at the end that it's "the special edition released in 1997."

reminds me of the AFI 100 movies special from '98 when they got to #15, Star Wars (1977), and used footage from the SE.
Author
Time
Post link
Is anyone on this board near Santa Monica? This is a great opportunity for a little protest outside the theater. Nothing scary- just some fans in costumes with signs.

I'd love to go to this book-signing and ask Mr. Peterson a few questions about his models vs. cgi, but unfortunately, I'm on the east coast.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
80% of the models have been deleted?

Man you guys are so angry you don't even need real reasons anymore. You guys see a news bit about SW, and make up crap until it's further proof that Lucas sucks.

Most of Lorne Peterson's stuff is still in there actually.

I'm sure Lorne Peterson didn't have a problem with Lucas making Star Wars better.



Go-mer, how many model shots remain in the battle of Yavin? I can count them on one hand. The vast majority of ILM's work was for that scene, and even in other instances (ie Millenium Falcon) the models have been replaced. The only major model sequences left is the Blockade Runner and the "here they come" sequence, which are both very simply and brief.
Author
Time
Post link
I'm not comparing right now, but if I recall, the only model shots that I can think of are those that take place in the trench when the camera tracks the ships across a horizontal plane. That, and the three TIEs trailing Luke and the other pilots in the trench.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Maybe if Lorne Peterson was actually upset about the SE's I could see the outrage. But his work is still there in the SE's.

He wasn't slighted in any way, and the presence of CG does not take away from his work on the film.

Glad you are back Darth_Evil.


Nice to see you too.

How can you say that replacing his shots with CG does not take away from his work? Of course it does. If tommorrow, someone went into Lord of the Rings and rewrote a few passages, does that take away from Tolkein's work? Gaffer Tape is right about it only being in a few scenarios, but even one would be an insult to most people, I think. But like I said earlier, we don't know how he feels. But it is safe to bank that he didn't like his work being replaced by CGI. I'd have to agree with Number20 on this. This is probably him trying to sell his book, and not wanting to affend Lucas.

Watch DarthEvil's Who Framed Darth Vader? video on YouTube!

You can also access the entire Horriffic Violence Theater Series from my Channel Page.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Darth_Evil
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Maybe if Lorne Peterson was actually upset about the SE's I could see the outrage. But his work is still there in the SE's.

He wasn't slighted in any way, and the presence of CG does not take away from his work on the film.

Glad you are back Darth_Evil.


Nice to see you too.

How can you say that replacing his shots with CG does not take away from his work? Of course it does. If tommorrow, someone went into Lord of the Rings and rewrote a few passages, does that take away from Tolkein's work? Gaffer Tape is right about it only being in a few scenarios, but even one would be an insult to most people, I think. But like I said earlier, we don't know how he feels. But it is safe to bank that he didn't like his work being replaced by CGI. I'd have to agree with Number20 on this. This is probably him trying to sell his book, and not wanting to affend Lucas.



The main reason he is going is to promote it book, and to speak about the models he did to the fans. Yes.

I don't think his reasons for going revolve around the screening of Episode IV. That simply doesn't make sense. Peterson has to at least be a proud man, and he deserves to be, regardless of whether they are showing his models off in the movie or not. The book will say enough about all the hard work he did, no doubt.

Why hello there
Author
Time
Post link
Whoever is going with this "80%" figure should come up with a source (i.e. link) proving it... until then, you're talking out of 80% of your patoot.



"Among many things I have to be thankful for are you, the fans. I know that some of you haven't liked every single thing that I've done with the saga, and that you have a strong sense of ownership over all things Star Wars. But take that passion and devotion and channel it into a creative project of your own."
-George Lucas
Author
Time
Post link
From what I can recall, the CG used to replace the models was created by scanning in the original models.

Some of the shots, like the original version of the falcon taking off from mos eisley, or the rebels taking off from the battle of Yavin are not fantastic.

Furthermore, even with the advent of CG, Lucas has continually employed more modelwork in each one of the prequels than the entire classic trilogy combined.

I think a lot of you see this as a CG vs Models battle, when really they use both techniques extensively, and one doesn't replace the other.

I just don't get it. Plenty of things that artists came up with for SW was abandoned entirely before the final cut, yet just because you happened to see this stuff released originally, suddenly it's a huge insult to the artist for the director to make artistic decisions?
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Maybe if Lorne Peterson was actually upset about the SE's I could see the outrage. But his work is still there in the SE's.

He wasn't slighted in any way, and the presence of CG does not take away from his work on the film.

Glad you are back Darth_Evil.


Some of his work is still I highly doubt that all of it is. We don't know if he's upset or not. So assumptions both sides are making are unsubstantiated.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Okay I'm listening. Lay it on me.

Tell me all about his work that was slighted and dig something up where he is saying he is less than happy about the SE's.


Dig up something that prove the contrary. Like a I said, we don't know either way.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Post link
So then why assume?
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
I just don't get it. Plenty of things that artists came up with for SW was abandoned entirely before the final cut, yet just because you happened to see this stuff released originally, suddenly it's a huge insult to the artist for the director to make artistic decisions?

They knew that their work would not be included in the first place. That is different from having it replaced. But as I said, as we do not know anything about Peterson, this discussion is pointless.

Is anyone on this board near Santa Monica? This is a great opportunity for a little protest outside the theater. Nothing scary- just some fans in costumes with signs.


That'd be great, sans the the costumes. Civil proesting. Not that it would make a difference.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death