This user has been banned.
I'm glad this turned out well. It's also nice that the original-version topic can still stir up a crowd. Especially since 2006, it seemed like LFL adopted the policy to just willfully ignore it and hope it would go away.
Count Dushku said:
http://g4tv.com/videos/45623/Inside-ILMs-FX-at-Skywalker-Ranch/
Here's the link.
That's an interesting clip of Lucas. Wonder if that's the angle they're going to go with when they start the promotional push for a 3D re-release involving 3 less- than-beloved movies. See it in 3D because that's how it always should have been and now it won't look so fake.
I'm for this, it can't hurt. But I'm a little fuzzy on where everything is going on these days at Lucasfilm and who the important people are. Are they at the ranch or the big Presidio thing, Jim Ward is gone, who is his new equivalent, etc.. I would assume wherever the offices for the Clone Wars cartoon are is the place with the most activity right now. I agree it's important not to appear like a whiner or a crackpot. Hopefully, if the letters/postcards are short, polite and spell checked it won't seem too Zodiac.
It will not disappear. It's in every store in the world right now, and the original T2/Abyss/Aliens haven't disappeared either.
So it's the imax ratio, eh? It played both ways but I guess they have to pick one or the other. The blu of Dark Knight also followed their imax version, (where the ratio switched back and forth). I think Cameron was hoping there'd be more big IMAX screens by now.
Unrated/Extended cuts is a whole new annoying thing, but I guess it's a tacky fact of life now. If you live in the US and want to go to the store and buy a blu-ray of the theatrical Watchmen or Miami Vice (Michael Mann is pretty guilty of going all Lucas on everything) or several others you're just out of luck. At least with Cameron you always have a choice. I'm more worried about other movies fate on blu, like the original version of Apocalypse Now or The Warriors.
The theatrical version is coming out on home video this week. An extended version is gonna play in 3D theaters for a limited run later this year. It has like 6 minutes of stuff that wasn't finished in december (or was cut for time, not sure which).
Gaffer Tape said: Is the extended version of Avatar replacing the theatrical version? Yes.
It is? Where? When?
Extended cuts that coexist with the originals, and are an alternate version of the movie without running time constraints, are a pretty different thing. (that's why there isn't one for Titanic or T1 but there is for Abyss/T2/Aliens)
Yeah, but it's not even good business. It's not like a plain vanilla 3 disc OT set is gonna sell worse than those 3 elaborate Young Indy box sets.
Cameron said it to entertainment weekly a few days ago.
Sometimes you really need to be like a Manhunter-style profiler of wackos to figure out what goes on in Lucas' mind. He sees Cameron and Ridley Scott, etc. doing extended or alternate versions that co-exist with the originals, it hasn't hurt their finances or their reputations the slightest bit. What IS it that makes a guy actively seek bad PR?
James Cameron said:
when George went back and put new creatures into the original Star Wars, I find that disturbing. It’s a revision of history. That bothers me.
If he doesn't listen to Cameron, he probably won't listen to us.
I love when we get those EPK videos in tastefully decorated Ranch rooms where Lucas/Mccallum go on about the artistic integrity of upgrading the effects, as if it's not just a Coke Zero gimmick. 1997 Jabba was THE poster boy for how awesome the modern technology was going to make this new version in all the hype for the special edition. They were so proud of that thing...and a few years later it has to be replaced like a defective muffler.
zombie84 said:
It's more about PR. But Lucasfilm can afford to have bad PR because it doesn't impact sales, its more about whether the people in charge are comfortable with this.
On the plus side, I am enjoying all the bad lucas PR these days.
zombie84 said:
I doubt it will be that expensive. It will probably be under $100, probably in the $89 range.
I dunno, it costs 80 bucks just to buy both of those crappy red/blue trilogy boxes at best buy right now.
I'm sure it will be big either way, but the only thing that gives me any hope is this is getting into new territory, isn't it? It'll be the most expensive mainstream piece of merchandise LFL has ever sold, maybe 120 bucks a pop or more. It really doesn't take a lot of holdouts around the world before they start leaving millions of dollars at the table. It's getting into the neighborhood where Lucas actually pays attention, it's the neighborhood that got Jar Jar Binks got demoted from main character status.
Has the state-of-the art in seamless branching gotten any farther along these days? Normally I would have said it was impossible to have both versions on one disc (assuming they get the colors right), but the blu of Close Encounters has 3 versions with a LOT of big and small differences spread across the three different cuts, and that came out 3 years ago.
A six movie set released by Fox, it's gonna be expensive. I wonder how many people would consider the lack of OOT a dealbreaker. I wonder if LFL is doing that market research right now.
Well, here's hoping that Lucasfilm is finally able to rise to the high standards of the blu-ray of Role Models and include both versions of the movie in equal quality.
That was quite good. Hope the dude who made it is alright.
The comic is pretty awesome. I'm looking forward to the space battle. (if I had a nickel for every page margin I defaced with tie fighters, I'd have at least fifty bucks)
True, anything's possible, I suppose. I was just assuming the article was accurate (about it being green in 1983). But in this tv spot from '83 you can see it's red even back then
TV's Frink said:Just to clarify - that's bad, right?
It is since I quit drinkin'. (don't judge me)
If it was just the current 2004 version of the movies in HD, then there's no way I'd get them. They look like a heavily made-up tranny anyway and all that extra stuff ends up on youtube. If it was a more classy special edition version, (like Blade Runner '07 or that third version of Close Encounters that attempted to strike a better balance between tacky revisionism and fine-tuning) I'd get 'em.
The "what has changed" article on the official site a few years back broke it down exactly which shots were re-composited. I don't know if that was written with any inside knowledge or if the guy was just eyeballing it. (there seems to be a shot in Jedi that was subtly altered for some prints way back in '83, just not on the GOUT source)
Yes I know, I was agreeing with some of the others who thought it's gonna dilute things (in the doc and in the response to it).