rpvee said:
It's just that having Cutter pretty much say "Well look at this, the original film has bad cuts too, so mine are ok" is really annoying... it shouldn't be ok. But whatever, I've stated my points.

isn't this bad faith ?

read all the post please !

I have never say that my cut are good because there is bad cuts in the original too !!! you focus on little things in my edit, and I show you there is also this kind of mystake in the original movie...is this really hard to understand ?

you just taking what you want in my words...not really try to understand the meaning.

I already know all the problems in this little sequence, I don't need you for that. You just want to prove that my cut is really bad...but you don't really want to see the good aspect of it.

you said : I noticed other errors I should've picked up on, such as Palpatine's face transforming for no reason.

everything is explain in the video...changeling etc of course I can't shoot new sequences with Ian macdiarmid ! I really don't understand your approach poiting this kind of things...do you really think you are the only one to see that ?

you are not a fair person...I take much time to explain everything about my approach, my choice etc and you come back again and again to the same points : " it's too rough (...) having Cutter pretty much say "Well look at this, the original film has bad cuts too, so mine are ok" is really annoying"

what's the problem with you ?

I have already replied to this in the post 99 :

rpvee said:

But just saying "Well the original has worse cuts!" does not make your cuts better.

I only say that to show you that it's not dramatical, it doesn't destroy the film...on the contrary, the stuff I removed ruin the movie

vaderios said

The way that makes the changes and for me it works and they dont look like rough cuts of nonsense with no sound fades and missing frames then i think he succeeded ;)

thanks for your support