logo Sign In

ANH screening with modelmaker Lorne Peterson...WHY ARE THEY SCREENING THE SE?? — Page 6

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I think that if Lucas was "detatched" and if he wasn't worried about making good movies, the prequels wouldn't have been very good.

Explain that.


The prequels sucked hard.

Explain that.
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
Lucas freely admitted circa 1979 that the primary purpose of the Star Wars sequels was to finance Skywalker Ranch and Lucasfilm. In fact, he talked about this openly and frequently, i guess because at that time he was a hailed auteur and had no need to hide any pretentiousness. Now however, with all the criticism he has recieved since, he has to pretend its for some glorious artistic statement, this whole "Tragedy of Darth Vader" thing, with an equally self-inflated title like that. Of course there is a high degree of sincerity in the prequels--there can't not be, given all the time and effort spent on it. But even now, Lucas still admits that one of the reasons he returned to Star Wars in 1994 was to re-claim the position of wealth--the wealth of the OT--that had been snatched away from him after his 1983 divorce.

"Then i decided one of the reasons i would go back to the star wars films [the prequels] was that they would make me financially secure," Lucas said to Charlie Rose in 2004. As for being detached, he is indeed, but i don't think at all to the degree his critics surmise. To be sure, he does indeed enjoy making the prequels and put all of his genuine effort into it, but he still works as a businessman and has the detached demeanor of a producer or executive, both of which are his primary roles in Lucasfilm and on the prequel films themselves. Thus, he is equally concerned with efficiency, cost-savings and getting stuff "good enough," as opposed to "good," which was the reason for the split between Kershner and Lucas and between Kurtz and Lucas. Now, with the prequels there is no one to keep him in check--the films are very efficiently and cheapl made, amazingly so, but the quality is kind of "meh," because theres no one there to give the artistic side the same amount of emphasis--and no one talented enough, for that matter.
Author
Time
The prequels were one gigantic missed opportunity, plain and simple. Return of the Jedi was arguably the beginning of the end. Lucas started taking more control, he had no counter, but at least he got another director to make it. How could sitting in the director's chair after 22 years actually be a good thing? It was Star Wars, and I think at the end of the day Phantom Menace will hold a place in my memory for at least being that movie we'd been waiting sooooo long for, but didn't quite live up to the level of the original trilogy. Duel of the Fates showing up on the simpsons 7 years later shows just how well people remember it, but yes, it was the highest grossing prequel simply because it was the first and there is no denying that. TPM and ROTS are passable but it's that useless middle act that pulls everything down. When I saw AOTC with my friends on opening day, and granted I'd been spoiled to death on the story, we were laughing a lot because it was the only way to alleviate how bad it really was. My friend sitting next to me even quoted Anakin's "but the women...and the children too" a few seconds ahead of him saying it because it was that predictable. The action scenes were ok, but it was distracting beyond belief to hear Johnny Williams' music from TPM being blatantly re-used in the Geonosis arena. It really is hard to argue for Lucas's desire to see everything finished when he goes about it in a borderline irresponsible way. The Empire of Strikes Back went down in history as one of the greatest independant film productions because it was a collaboration, not some kind of auteurism from Lucas.

As for this argument that there are more photographic miniatures in the PT than in the OT, fine, I'm sure there could be but it's not the tool that matters, it's the craft. Maddox did have a good point, the effects cease to be special when they're used in every single shot of the fraggin' movie. Lucas has deleted some of Peterson's work from the OT while only keeping his stuff from the PT. Replacing opticals with cgi would be considered good if they didn't look like they were made 20 years after the shots that were left in.
Author
Time
Tiptup,

I can explain it by the fact that he was financing The Empire Strikes Back with his own money and the fact that Kurtz was going way over budget. Empire had more riding on it than just continuing the story. He wanted to make a great film first, but he had plans for the profit that Empire was to generate. He is an artist but he's a businessman. And for me, he never sacrificed one for the other. From where I stand, he's done a perfect balance when it comes to the Star Wars brand.

"the films are very efficiently and cheapl made, amazingly so, but the quality is kind of "meh," because theres no one there to give the artistic side the same amount of emphasis--and no one talented enough, for that matter. "

OPINION....

"Thus, he is equally concerned with efficiency, cost-savings and getting stuff "good enough," as opposed to "good," which was the reason for the split between Kershner and Lucas and between Kurtz and Lucas."

Aren't all filmmakers concerned with being effecient and saving costs, while trying to maintain one's vision"? It seems when it comes to Lucas, he can't be in that category. He's in the "he's too cheap to make his films better" eventhough there are maybe a few filmmakers on the planet right now who's films look just as good as Lucas'. Say what you will about him, but there are only a handful of filmmakers right now that can make Lucas' visual eye. The rest don't even come close. And it's very apparent in the Prequels and the Originals....

"Furthermore, the lack of any original creations by Lucas since the 80's leads me to believe he is currently a hack, and not an artist."

And this is a stupid statement. Just because you haven't seen much from him doesn't make him a hack. We have no idea what Lucas does on the Ranch. I've read online from a source that has been very close to Lucasfilm and the folks there (during the Prequels and beyond) that Lucas has indeed shot a documentary and another feature film (all on digital of course) and just refuses to release them. Others inside the company and friends want him to release them but he refuses. You can blow off this statement if you want but from whom I heard it from and this person's track record during the spoiler years of the Prequels, I have no reason to doubt this person's claims.

Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
A person doesn't give up directing for 22 years only to come back to it. Lucas's decisions since the mid-90's have been foolish. He'd been coasting on the success of Star Wars, but realized he had to revamp it to keep it all profitable. It's not like he needed to do the SE, the man was in the billion dollar range by then. At least he's given vast amounts of his money to some noble causes, but the irony is killing me.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Jumpman
Tiptup,

I can explain it by the fact that he was financing The Empire Strikes Back with his own money and the fact that Kurtz was going way over budget. Empire had more riding on it than just continuing the story. He wanted to make a great film first, but he had plans for the profit that Empire was to generate. He is an artist but he's a businessman. And for me, he never sacrificed one for the other. From where I stand, he's done a perfect balance when it comes to the Star Wars brand.


His plans for using Star Wars as a money-making machine actually proves that he was more detached from the artistic side than he was with the first film. There was a recent interview posted here (done before Empire was released) where George specifically said he wasn't all that interested in making Star Wars movies and simply wanted a way to make his film pursuits become fincacially secure. Detached.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Tiptup,

Wouldn't you use Star Wars as a money making machine if numerous companies depended on the brand to survive? Sure, Lucas' companies do have other sources of income, but not as much as when Star Wars is front and center.

And the notion that he scarfices his art for money is subjective considering differences of opinion when it comes to the Prequels, which is what this thread, again, is all about....the opinions of the Prequels...
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Sorry to derail this argument, but can someone tell me where to obtain a copy of the Empire Strikes Back script that Leigh Bracket wrote?


Author
Time
Originally posted by: Marvolo
Sorry to derail this argument, but can someone tell me where to obtain a copy of the Empire Strikes Back script that Leigh Bracket wrote?


It is unavailable, unfortunately. I had heard that it is available to read at some national archive in the US somewhere, though.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Jumpman
Tiptup,

Wouldn't you use Star Wars as a money making machine if numerous companies depended on the brand to survive?


No, not if Star Wars was no longer particularly interesting to me. I would pass control of the franchise onto other artists and see what they want to do with it. (Or, better yet, I would invent new films and new ideas to hopefully make money with.) I doubt I would analyze every detail of the franchise according to what makes more money or less money. I'd value the art first.

Oh, and just to be clear, I don’t fault a man for altering his art in light of a pursuit of money (even if I would try to do otherwise). If you want to know why I'm displeased with Lucas, Jumpman, it’s not because of how he’s changed Star Wars (though I do find that sad). For years George promoted himself as a genius whose singular, intentional vision is what bestowed Star Wars upon the world and I believed that bullshit. I thought George was one of the greatest artists of our modern time.

Then, as time went by, I began to see how much the prequels sucked and I began to question the image I had acquired of Lucas. Then George began to ignore the original versions of the OT to the point where I could only conclude that he desired to erase them, and I became perplexed by George's motives. And, lastly, the 2004 DVDs are released with outright offensive changes and I lost all of my previous respect for the man. So, now with great reason to be skeptical, I went back and researched his true role in the original Star Wars and discovered that, aside from some generic concepts he was able to use in fresh ways, Star Wars owed most of its artistic achievement to all of the other people that George worked with (people like Ralph McQuarrie). George Lucas, at most, helped organize everything brilliantly according to the groundwork he devised. That’s hardly a single-handed achievement, and if the man is going to lift his image so high, then he deserves a rough landing when people discover the truth.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
The topic of this thread becomes all the more interesting when you consider that ILM recently sold off their model division. What ever happenned to the George Lucas of the OT? The one who went out to change the industry and give other film makers a chance? The flipside of the coin is that Lucas always talks about how he just knew Star Wars was going to flop, but he was going to get his movies made. That's another huge root of the problem, to him it's all about him. There's just too much evidence here. The Empire Strikes Back had the least involvement from Lucas and yet it's considered every bit as good if not better than Star Wars, a film that's undeniably considered a classic. He took more control over Return of the Jedi, and while at least he got a director and put star wars to rest with the trilogy completed, it's clearly the beginning of so much hypocrisy in him. He complained that he didn't have enough money while he was directing Star Wars, and yet now that he's in the position of executive producer himself he's overly concerned with saving money. Whatever happenned to that energy he had on Star Wars and Empire? Tightly bookending the production of Jedi with Indiana Jones movies probably didn't help much, but again this is all about taking control of things. The real problem with that is, and this is a question I pose, can you go too far in the name of "having control over things?"

Some people have argued that our problem as O-OT fans is that we seek collective ownership of Star Wars, but this is a drastic oversimplification of the problem. We look at it as a work of art, an opinion obviously not shared by its financier who seems determined to make whatever changes he wants just so he can make things conveniently sync up with the movies he made from '97 to '05. This is not responsible film making, folks, not by any measure. What we seek to do is not to give ourselves "ownership" of the art that is the O-OT, it is to take away this "ownership" from the financier. If Lucas is making all of these changes 20 and then 27 years later, couldn't it be argued that Lucas obviously took no pride in his work just as easily as it could be argued that the changes are "good?" There's the shame factor, but I'm not even going into that since this is turning into a basher rant.

Dean Devlin, the producer of Independance Day, said in regards to visual effects that "it's not the tool, it's the craft." Lucas, by even thinking that alteration and deletion of the groundbreaking visual effects work in Star Wars was a good thing, seems to have forgotten that people fell in love with the craft, not the technology. Yes, the dykstraflex was an innovative and groundbreaking technology in '76, but the effects done for the SE are in no way groundbreaking. If Lucas is so proud of what he's done, why did he feel the need to alter the original films for "a whole new generation?" If Star Wars is the classic film that it is, why was Lucas so concerned with updating it? If he makes it a different movie (which even from a legal standpoint he did, just read the copyright info in the end credits), how can people also be experiencing it "again?"

"I fear that my children will not be able to experience the movies that I grew up with." Thanks George, we do also. Last time I checked, it was 2006, not 1996, and a good deal of people have widescreen displays. All movies that were shot in anything wider that 1.78:1 are expected, not hoped to be, but expected to be recieving an anamorphic video transfer. Even the worst movies recieve anamorphic video on dvd. Lucas, you've released the OOT on dvd, yes, but our reactions and indeed the changes made to the homepage should tell you it's clearly not what we were asking for at all. If I ever have a kid, and he or she needs to do nothing besides load a dvd into the tray, why should he or she have to do anything more than that just so the picture will properly fill up the screen and even then at only sub-par resolution? I sure hope that Lucas's own kids don't buy into this "the artist's work is never finished" crap, but a lot of things point to that being the case, unfortunately.

Peterson is good to be writing a book entirely about models, especially in this day and age of IL(M). It's just too bad that LFL sees this as an opportunity to screen the "classic movie that started it all with Peterson's models and is also part of George's vision." George can call that "respect" if he wishes, but he shouldn't deny everyone the actual accomplishment that the O-OT is. He can have things both ways as long as he follows through on the oh so simple request we've made, and he might as well go all out for 2007 and just make whatever changes he damn well pleases. I mean, jeez, it's his movie, right?
Author
Time
I don't see the problem, his models are still in the SE versions of these movies, and the latest SW movies used more models per movie than the classic trilogy films combined.

I don't see how Lucas is slighting the work of the model maker.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Fang Zei
The topic of this thread becomes all the more interesting when you consider that ILM recently sold off their model division. What ever happenned to the George Lucas of the OT? The one who went out to change the industry and give other film makers a chance? The flipside of the coin is that Lucas always talks about how he just knew Star Wars was going to flop, but he was going to get his movies made. That's another huge root of the problem, to him it's all about him. There's just too much evidence here. The Empire Strikes Back had the least involvement from Lucas and yet it's considered every bit as good if not better than Star Wars, a film that's undeniably considered a classic. He took more control over Return of the Jedi, and while at least he got a director and put star wars to rest with the trilogy completed, it's clearly the beginning of so much hypocrisy in him. He complained that he didn't have enough money while he was directing Star Wars, and yet now that he's in the position of executive producer himself he's overly concerned with saving money. Whatever happenned to that energy he had on Star Wars and Empire? Tightly bookending the production of Jedi with Indiana Jones movies probably didn't help much, but again this is all about taking control of things. The real problem with that is, and this is a question I pose, can you go too far in the name of "having control over things?"

Some people have argued that our problem as O-OT fans is that we seek collective ownership of Star Wars, but this is a drastic oversimplification of the problem. We look at it as a work of art, an opinion obviously not shared by its financier who seems determined to make whatever changes he wants just so he can make things conveniently sync up with the movies he made from '97 to '05. This is not responsible film making, folks, not by any measure. What we seek to do is not to give ourselves "ownership" of the art that is the O-OT, it is to take away this "ownership" from the financier. If Lucas is making all of these changes 20 and then 27 years later, couldn't it be argued that Lucas obviously took no pride in his work just as easily as it could be argued that the changes are "good?" There's the shame factor, but I'm not even going into that since this is turning into a basher rant.

Dean Devlin, the producer of Independance Day, said in regards to visual effects that "it's not the tool, it's the craft." Lucas, by even thinking that alteration and deletion of the groundbreaking visual effects work in Star Wars was a good thing, seems to have forgotten that people fell in love with the craft, not the technology. Yes, the dykstraflex was an innovative and groundbreaking technology in '76, but the effects done for the SE are in no way groundbreaking. If Lucas is so proud of what he's done, why did he feel the need to alter the original films for "a whole new generation?" If Star Wars is the classic film that it is, why was Lucas so concerned with updating it? If he makes it a different movie (which even from a legal standpoint he did, just read the copyright info in the end credits), how can people also be experiencing it "again?"

"I fear that my children will not be able to experience the movies that I grew up with." Thanks George, we do also. Last time I checked, it was 2006, not 1996, and a good deal of people have widescreen displays. All movies that were shot in anything wider that 1.78:1 are expected, not hoped to be, but expected to be recieving an anamorphic video transfer. Even the worst movies recieve anamorphic video on dvd. Lucas, you've released the OOT on dvd, yes, but our reactions and indeed the changes made to the homepage should tell you it's clearly not what we were asking for at all. If I ever have a kid, and he or she needs to do nothing besides load a dvd into the tray, why should he or she have to do anything more than that just so the picture will properly fill up the screen and even then at only sub-par resolution? I sure hope that Lucas's own kids don't buy into this "the artist's work is never finished" crap, but a lot of things point to that being the case, unfortunately.

Peterson is good to be writing a book entirely about models, especially in this day and age of IL(M). It's just too bad that LFL sees this as an opportunity to screen the "classic movie that started it all with Peterson's models and is also part of George's vision." George can call that "respect" if he wishes, but he shouldn't deny everyone the actual accomplishment that the O-OT is. He can have things both ways as long as he follows through on the oh so simple request we've made, and he might as well go all out for 2007 and just make whatever changes he damn well pleases. I mean, jeez, it's his movie, right?



Still sounds like you think this movie is yours… which you ineffectively veiled by describing the accusation as a “drastic oversimplification.” Nevertheless, this fact can’t help itself from rearing its ugly head throughout this entire post.

By removing GL from the position of artist to simply the “financier” of the movies you’ve “cleverly” taken ownership from him and placed it somewhere else… which around here could be Kurtz, Kirshner, Marquand, Bracket, etc…it’s an attempt to make yourself sound like a champion for everyone else who worked on the movies… (who have now apparently has been ripped of by GL with the creation of the SE) This championing has even seeped into the fans themselves, who by purchasing tickets and plastic shaped like R2-D2 now own a part of these movies as well.

Only on a Star Wars message board can the creator of the movies themselves be turned into the guy who signed the checks.


"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
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I don't see the problem, his models are still in the SE versions of these movies, and the latest SW movies used more models per movie than the classic trilogy films combined.

I don't see how Lucas is slighting the work of the model maker.


Ignoring the huge amount of models used in the PT is a pastime for some folks.
"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
Originally posted by: JediRandy

Ignoring the huge amount of models used in the PT is a pastime for some folks.


They are kind of boring.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Once again you find loopholes, Gomer and Randy. Not once did I say anything about the usage of models in the PT, so nice job trying to distract me. You are also making a very broad statement by saying Peterson's work is "still there." Some of it is still there, but not all of it. Had this been a book talking about optical effects, there's no way the person writing it would stand for something like this screening as all of the optical effects have either been recomposited digitally or deleted altogether. Randy, if you re-read my post you'll find that I am arguing for the versions that George had made and put out in theaters from the late 70's to the early 80's to be given the treatment they deserve. When I say "deserve," I mean for the sake of history and posterity. Yes, he is the creator of Star Wars but he is also the financier. Other people helped him to create the movies. I just don't understand why you feel the need to defend his ownership of it. It's not like we want to change it, we just want it as it was.....as it was for 14 whole years. Lucas's statement about us falling in love with a half-finished film is just plain insulting. If what he said is true, why do so many of us not like what Lucas did for the SE? And again, I was never arguing against his "vision." He can change it all he wants as long as he gives the original versions the same respect.

Originally posted by: JediRandy
Still sounds like you think this movie is yours… which you ineffectively veiled by describing the accusation as a “drastic oversimplification.” Nevertheless, this fact can’t help itself from rearing its ugly head throughout this entire post.

By removing GL from the position of artist to simply the “financier” of the movies you’ve “cleverly” taken ownership from him and placed it somewhere else… which around here could be Kurtz, Kirshner, Marquand, Bracket, etc…it’s an attempt to make yourself sound like a champion for everyone else who worked on the movies… (who have now apparently has been ripped of by GL with the creation of the SE) This championing has even seeped into the fans themselves, who by purchasing tickets and plastic shaped like R2-D2 now own a part of these movies as well.

Only on a Star Wars message board can the creator of the movies themselves be turned into the guy who signed the checks.


If you choose to read things into it, that's your choice. It may sound that way to you but that's not what I was trying to say.

Also, your choice of words makes it sound as if those people you mentioned only care about money. Did it occur to you that maybe they were upset over the changes made to films they themselves helped to create?
Author
Time
Maybe Lorne Peterson doesn't see digital enhancement as an insult to modelmakers.

Maybe he is mature enough to realize that it's just another tool to make movie magic with, and doesn't concern himself with this idea that some effects are insulting to other kinds of effects.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: JediRandy

Ignoring the huge amount of models used in the PT is a pastime for some folks.

They are kind of boring.

Especially when you can't tell the difference between models and CG models.



Originally posted by: Fang Zei
Once again you find loopholes, Gomer and Randy. Not once did I say anything about the usage of models in the PT, so nice job trying to distract me. You are also making a very broad statement by saying Peterson's work is "still there." Some of it is still there, but not all of it. Had this been a book talking about optical effects, there's no way the person writing it would stand for something like this screening as all of the optical effects have either been recomposited digitally or deleted altogether. Randy, if you re-read my post you'll find that I am arguing for the versions that George had made and put out in theaters from the late 70's to the early 80's to be given the treatment they deserve. When I say "deserve," I mean for the sake of history and posterity. Yes, he is the creator of Star Wars but he is also the financier. Other people helped him to create the movies. I just don't understand why you feel the need to defend his ownership of it. It's not like we want to change it, we just want it as it was.....as it was for 14 whole years. Lucas's statement about us falling in love with a half-finished film is just plain insulting. If what he said is true, why do so many of us not like what Lucas did for the SE? And again, I was never arguing against his "vision." He can change it all he wants as long as he gives the original versions the same respect.

Originally posted by: JediRandy
Still sounds like you think this movie is yours… which you ineffectively veiled by describing the accusation as a “drastic oversimplification.” Nevertheless, this fact can’t help itself from rearing its ugly head throughout this entire post.

By removing GL from the position of artist to simply the “financier” of the movies you’ve “cleverly” taken ownership from him and placed it somewhere else… which around here could be Kurtz, Kirshner, Marquand, Bracket, etc…it’s an attempt to make yourself sound like a champion for everyone else who worked on the movies… (who have now apparently has been ripped of by GL with the creation of the SE) This championing has even seeped into the fans themselves, who by purchasing tickets and plastic shaped like R2-D2 now own a part of these movies as well.

Only on a Star Wars message board can the creator of the movies themselves be turned into the guy who signed the checks.


If you choose to read things into it, that's your choice. It may sound that way to you but that's not what I was trying to say.

Also, your choice of words makes it sound as if those people you mentioned only care about money. Did it occur to you that maybe they were upset over the changes made to films they themselves helped to create?


The OOT is on DVD and, if it's as in demand as it's made out to be around SW message boards, it'll be available once again with the proper aspect ratios, etc... if LFL has proved anything its that they'll release anything as long as there is a demand for it.

If my reply implied money, it wasn't my intention.... as for as your thoughts that people who worked on the flicks are pissed off about the SE... I still haven't seen a single source backing up this theory. The only people "insulted" are fanboys grasping for more basher propaganda.
"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
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Maybe Lorne Peterson doesn't see digital enhancement as an insult to modelmakers.

Maybe he is mature enough to realize that it's just another tool to make movie magic with, and doesn't concern himself with this idea that some effects are insulting to other kinds of effects.


Read my above post.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Fang Zei
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Maybe Lorne Peterson doesn't see digital enhancement as an insult to modelmakers.

Maybe he is mature enough to realize that it's just another tool to make movie magic with, and doesn't concern himself with this idea that some effects are insulting to other kinds of effects.


Read my above post.


Wow... earlier 80% of the models were deleted now "all of the optical effects have either been recomposited digitally or deleted altogether."


"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
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Maybe Lorne Peterson doesn't see digital enhancement as an insult to modelmakers.

Maybe he is mature enough to realize that it's just another tool to make movie magic with, and doesn't concern himself with this idea that some effects are insulting to other kinds of effects.


I think it's foolish of us to focus on one too strongly, because we don't knnow.

“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
Originally posted by: JediRandyThe OOT is on DVD and, if it's as in demand as it's made out to be around SW message boards, it'll be available once again with the proper aspect ratios, etc... if LFL has proved anything its that they'll release anything as long as there is a demand for it.


If the OOT comes out restored, then all will be fine . I hope that you are correct, though I wonder when? Really, that's all I want. I certainly don't hate Lucas. I'm sure he's a very nice man, and I wish him a long, happy, healthy life. I just want the OOT on a high-quality DVD so that I can watch it myself. That's all. Please don't attack me .

“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
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Wow... earlier 80% of the models were deleted now "all of the optical effects have either been recomposited digitally or deleted altogether."


How does one contradict the other?

One is talking about shots that feature the models in any way. Many of the shots that were originally models are now entirely cg. That's where the 80% figure comes from and that wasn't even something I myself said. The latter statement that you quoted was said by me, and yes, if you look at THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE's shot by shot comparisons, you'll see that I am correct.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Fang Zei
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Wow... earlier 80% of the models were deleted now "all of the optical effects have either been recomposited digitally or deleted altogether."


How does one contradict the other?

One is talking about shots that feature the models in any way. Many of the shots that were originally models are now entirely cg. That's where the 80% figure comes from and that wasn't even something I myself said. The latter statement that you quoted was said by me, and yes, if you look at THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE's shot by shot comparisons, you'll see that I am correct.


I'd love to see that.... provide a link, please.

And Mike O, I'm not attacking anyone... I'm just debating. I'd love a good version as well.
"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