timdiggerm said:

Akwat Kbrana said:

it's important to remember that no film was ever designed to be watched frame-by-frame.

You do realize this is originaltrilogy.com, don't you?

Very amusing. I assume you're referring to our proclivity on this forum toward obsessing over minute details in individual movie stills? If so, it's worth noting that your observation actually reinforces my point. Take a stroll through Ady's ESB:R thread, and you'll see that the Empire Strikes Back (which most people, myself included, consider to be the apex of the Star Wars saga) evidences tons of technical flaws when watched frame-by-frame. So just because there's a continuity or visual effects defect in a given scene, that particular aspect of the film itself shouldn't be considered inherently flawed unless the defect can be seen in motion. Because that's how films are designed to be watched. If the PT is flawed because technical flaws can be seen when watched frame-by-frame, then the OT is similarly flawed. (Geeze, I can't believe I'm actually defending the bloody PT. Hope nobody confuses me for a TFN gusher.)

Of course, your comment was probably tongue-in-cheek to begin with, thus rendering my lengthy and unnecessarily convoluted response, rather stuffy. Sorry 'bout that.

Anchorhead: There are two problems with that movie still. First, Christopher Lee's head has been poorly composited over his stunt double (neither the levels nor the proportions are correct). Second, the lightsaber has been poorly rotoscoped: from the glow, it appears actually to end right where the ship begins. So, it would be only a foot or two long.