logo Sign In

STAR WARS: EP V "REVISITED EDITION"ADYWAN - 12GB 1080p MP4 VERSION AVAILABLE NOW — Page 671

Author
Time

@ABC: impressive, most impressive :)

@Angel: I like it but maybe place it upper, don't make it too intrusive…

@Bingowings: I though about the same thing ;)

Author
Time

I too prefer the open version, I never thought Luke was walking in a street between buildings. It's just a big corridor :)

Children in the backseat of a car can cause accidents, but accidents in the backseat of a car can cause children.

Author
Time

I'm not sure this hasn't already been pointed out, but the Falcon's rescue has some continuity problems.

n°1: in that shot the Falcon is coming to visual contact with Luke hanging the antenna:

but in the next shot the Falcon seem to be further away from Luke than the previous shot!:

n°2: during the rescuing TIEs are coming from the opposite side of the undercity, in front of the Falcon (TIE's are in the central view-port):

after retrieving Luke the falcon just flies away without any sign of turn around or crossing the path of TIEs and then is followed by the TIEs

Possible fix:

we could size up the Falcon arrival in this shot (as we wouldn't see anything if Luke was further away in the "visual contact" shot):

and make her turnaround to escape the TIEs and go back where she came from (Crossing the TIEs path seems more unlikely to me) something like that:

I'm not used to mockups, so it's a little rough, but you get the idea ;)

Author
Time

Oh… yes, you're right… she does move away from the TIEs by the right?!?!

:/

I must be tired… :p

Author
Time
 (Edited)

 

angle

Ok, I think I understand the problem of the angles of the bottom of the Cloud City.  It is all about camera angle.  In the top shot, the Falcon is traveling perpendicular to the core of the city, which is on the left as seen from the cockpit.  

The shot of Luke hanging from the vane and the Falcon approaching is filmed as from the center of the city, or with the center of the city behind the camera.  Because of this, the city doesn't slope down from the left or the right, but appears to be sloping up farther in the distance.

I made up one of my rare mock-ups do demonstrate the camera angles.  Granted, I don't think the placement of the models (both the TIE's and the Falcon) is consistent in all of the shots, but I think the sloping of the city is correct and a slope doesn't need to be added to the shots on the vane.

Thanks to savmagoett for the stills.   And the top mock-up has Luke and the Falcon in each other's spots, but it is the camera angles that I am concerned with.

Author
Time

RE: the rooftop. It was for demonstration purposes for the ones who asked a more closed space.

Back to the exteriors now consider this as a proposition and not something final ofc :P

-Angel

–>Artwork<–**

Author
Time

I prefer the original architecture, the designs have that nice retro-futuristic feel to them. Nice mockup though :)

Children in the backseat of a car can cause accidents, but accidents in the backseat of a car can cause children.

Author
Time

savmagoett said:

Oh… yes, you're right… she does move away from the TIEs by the right?!?!

:/

I must be tired… :p

It's a cockpit shot, which is probably why you don't remember it.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

It's not that I don't remember, I just reviewed all this scene : /
but I see what you mean, we don't get to see the Falcon turning, it's more subtle, and so I skipped it
, my vision must have been clouded by the dark side of the force ; )

Author
Time
 (Edited)

ImperialFighter said:

15.  And as far as this shot of the approaching TIEs....well, they could be coming from anywhere that's in a generally opposite direction to where the Falcon approached Luke.

Here's the start of it....

16.  And here's the middle of it....

17.  And here's the end of it....

Although the shot above is not a static shot of the underside in this instance, the long 'stem' can still be easily imagined to be offscreen somewhere due to the huge area that makes up the size of the City's underside.  Like the previous shots, this one only covers a small portion of it surface, and so can tie in with that notion without any problems....

18.  And the same goes for this next shot too.  The Falcon only begins to move off from it's 'hovering' position at this point, after saving Luke, and seeing the approaching TIEs.  It begins to veer to the right, and the long 'stem' that is presumed to be offscreen on the left of the Falcon would remain unseen.  Here's the start of the shot....

19.  And here's the end of it....

20.  So the Falcon continues to turn around to the right, and we still only see a fraction of the overall surface of underneath the City....so the 'stem' would still be somewhere offscreen on the left of the frame.  Here's the start of the shot....

21.  And here's the end of it....

And although there is some 'camera-movement' during this shot above, it only moves to the right as well as pulling back slightly....so the long 'stem' on the left of the frame would still remain offscreen.

22.  Our final look at 'Cloud City' is where the Falcon is now roughly heading back the way it came, to escape the on-coming TIEs seen in shots 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19.  Now we can see the 'stem' again....  :)

So if Adywan doesn't do anything to the existing City underside angles, then they already work for me anyway, I'm glad to say.

 

You'd need to watch the scene in motion, but I reckon it would be neat to see a hint of the TIEs somewhere behind the Falcon in shots 20 and 21 too, as it seems that they have caught up too suddenly in the shots that come afterwards.

This was my take on it, that I described in my recent long post on page 664 savmagoett - http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/STAR-WARS-EP-V-AVAILABLE-NOW/post/403952/#TopicPost403952

Although as far as *where exactly* any additional chasing TIEs should be positioned in the Falcon shot I've shown in shots 20 and 21....well, that's turned out not to be as straightforward as I thought it might be....  However, having really studied a few shots before and after it, I've come to a conclusion.  Need to organise a couple of screenshots for this first, but I'll get to it.

Good call on the Falcon being the wrong distance from Luke though, which you just beat me to last night.  Glad to see that adywan is already going to fix that too.  :)

Another thing that I noticed in those shots of Luke getting rescued by the Falcon was this -

There are initially a few static matte shots identical to this one below (all shown in my page 664 post), where Luke is on the left of the frame, and the angle of the underside and the positions of the 'vanes' are exactly the same....

....until we eventually come to this one below, where Luke is more to the right of the frame, even though the rest of the matte is still identical.  Also note that there are 2 lights constantly on, close to his position in them all....

 ....but they disappear during the 'hovering Falcon' shot that comes soon after....

....then re-appear in this differently angled matte that comes shortly afterwards....

....which makes it seem like these 2 lights are missing from the 'hovering Falcon' shot....or so I thought.... 

....because if you compare the 'hovering Falcon' shot to the others closely, it seems that the positions of the various 'vanes' around Luke in it are in totally different places in relation to him, compared to all the other mattes....  No biggie, as we cut away to cockpit shots in-between all these anyway, which makes things less noticeable.   Just sayin'.

There's a couple of relevant things here concerning vaderios recent 'underside' mock-ups, that I'd like to go into too, shortly.  But again, I'll need to organise screenshots.

Author
Time

Holy Frak the Beatles split up!

(only joking asterisk)

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

Holy Frak the Beatles split up!

(only joking asterisk)

I should have probably assumed it's a well-known review around these parts, but it's new to me! :)

It really highlighted the difficulty Adywan is going to have trying to salvage a good story from the prequels. The section where fans try to describe the characters in TPM was particularly embarrassing.

Author
Time

ImperialFighter said:

 

Not sure if this is what you were trying to point out at the end of your post IF (when mentioning the vanes), but it looks as though the vane Luke is hanging from changes position between these shots relative to all the other vanes.  Whereas all the other vanes seem to be static between these shots, the one Luke's on moves.  The difference in position can't be attributed to the camera moving, as all the other vanes appear in the same position in each frame.

Sorry if I'm just repeating what you said, but it's a noticeable error, so I wanted to be clear about it.

“It’s a lot of fun… it’s a lot of fun to watch Star Wars.” – Bill Moyers

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Yes, that's exactly right where the 2 shots you've shown are concerned, corellian77.  The matte of the City's 'underside' is identical , but Luke has shifted to the right in your bottom shot.  And the clouds are strangely identical too of course, but that's for another day....

But just to clarify, the thing I was referring to at the end of my post, was that the 'vanes' in this shot do not tie-in with the other mattes, where Luke's position is in relation to them -

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

corellian77 said:

ImperialFighter said:

 

Not sure if this is what you were trying to point out at the end of your post IF (when mentioning the vanes), but it looks as though the vane Luke is hanging from changes position between these shots relative to all the other vanes.  Whereas all the other vanes seem to be static between these shots, the one Luke's on moves.  The difference in position can't be attributed to the camera moving, as all the other vanes appear in the same position in each frame.

Sorry if I'm just repeating what you said, but it's a noticeable error, so I wanted to be clear about it.

 This is one of those differences between the 35mm version and the 70mm version.  The earlier 70mm version has Luke just falling off the vane and out of frame.  We assume that Luke landed on the Falcon, but aren't sure, especially when Leia calls back from the cockpit to see if they have him.

To make the scene more clear, George had the scene tweaked and added the Falcon's sensor dish to the shot.  To make room for this addition in this  shot, they had to re-matte Luke on the vane.

See evidence below from the Puggo Edition thread:

The Starkiller said:


...

GOUT DVD:
http://starkiller72.googlepages.com/DISH1_GOUT.jpg

Same frame from the '85 Laser:
http://starkiller72.googlepages.com/DISH1_1985LD.jpg

And the same frame from the Super 8:
http://starkiller72.googlepages.com/DISH1_S8.jpg

Again, this corresponds to the 70mm cut.

I believe this is the first confirmed visual evidence of alternate footage existing within one of the films!

Author
Time

 

ImperialFighter said:

Good call on the Falcon being the wrong distance from Luke though, which you just beat me to last night.  Glad to see that adywan is already going to fix that too.  :)

Anytime ;) hope you did not go into much work…

Young Imp, only when you'll be at peace with yourself, you will hear the force talk trough you, then you'll be able to see more clearly. Let me share my extraordinary wisdom with you.
got to get my pride back after my recent humiliation :p

If you leave aside Mark Hamill and his prop antenna you'll see that the backgrounds in all these shots are not different mattes but a model, the same in each shot, filmed differently, you can see it especially in these shots where the perspective is actually changing within the shot, as the camera is panning (note that Luke here is a stop motion animated miniature included in the model):

and this shot also shows it is a model:

Unfortunately there are a few shots that were similar so they did not re-shoot the model as often as they should. That's why you noticed some discrepancies.

For the sake of clarity I'll be naming this view with Luke on the left near the left Light "the reference shot":

....this differently angled matte that comes shortly afterwards....

In fact it is the same view of the model used in the reference shot, with a little more of the top. It's Luke who's misplaced here (if we take the reference shot as the good one).
(@Sluggo: this is also true in all the versions you just showed)
This can be improved by changing the background to have the left light near Luke. I could make a mockup if needed.

....it seems like these 2 lights are missing from the shot where the Falcon 'hovers' underneath Luke....or so I thought.... 

As for the missing lights, it's just that they go of frame it that shot because the camera needed to be lower to take the Falcon, and so (this time anyway) they lowered the filming of the model to have the correct perspective.

There are initially a few static matte shots identical to this one below (all shown in my page 664 post), where Luke is on the left of the frame, and the angle of the underside and the positions of the 'vanes' are exactly the same....

....until we eventually come to this one below, where there is now a  differently angled matte of the underside, and Luke is more to the right of the frame. 

Yes Luke is changing position in this shot too, while the background is still the same reference shot.
Obviously the goal here was to make room for the arrival of the Falcon, it makes sense from a filmaker's pov. So, let's get nit picky and change the undercity perspective for continuity sake. Here's a little mockup:

Author
Time
 (Edited)

savmagoett said:

If you leave aside Mark Hamill and his prop antenna you'll see that the backgrounds in all these shots are not different mattes but a model, the same in each shot, filmed differently, you can see it especially in these shots where the perspective is actually changing within the shot, as the camera is panning (note that Luke here is a stop motion animated miniature included in the model)

All miniatures eh?  Interesting.  I always thought that some of the City 'underside' elements were mattes.  Perhaps the colouration of the 2004 release has given me that impression over the last few years.  I also didn't know that a 'stop-motion' Luke miniature was included in a couple of those shots.

Sure will be interesting to see if adywan decides to do anything with the various inconsistencies here.

Author
Time

In fact I've just found out that this is described in page 78 of "365 days" the book of John knoll, which the nice hatch set behind the scene picture Ady posted is from, I just didn't remembered:

"Build on stage 2, the underside of Cloud City existed in two forms: a full-sized set of the antenna and hatch (Ady's picture), and a forced-perspective-arc model used for vista views. A number of the shots of the underside were taken with moving cameras, so a miniature was chosen over a matte painting to enable true perspective shifting."

Sometimes we just reinvent the wheel :/

BTW this book is a must have, lots of great behind the scene pictures…

Author
Time

Any chance this will be released in time for the 30th anniversary on May 21st?

Author
Time

Kurgan said:

Any chance this will be released in time for the 30th anniversary on May 21st?

Adywan said:
Well May 2010 is out of the question for a release date now.

–>Artwork<–**