Baronlando

This user has been banned.

User Group: Banned Members
Join date: 16-Oct-2007
Last activity: 19-Oct-2015
Posts: 1,464

Post History

Post: #318202
Topic: Oh yeah!!! Lucas...clueless as ever.
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318202/action/topic#318202
Time: 19-May-2008 1:15 AM

"Sentry ships" don't need to be scrambled. There's 3 or 4 Tie fighters on patrol near the death star in every establishing shot up to that point. The Falcon was bound to run into them.

Post: #318173
Topic: What Special Edition changes (if any) did people like?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318173/action/topic#318173
Time: 18-May-2008 1:33 PM

Star Wars
1.Wedge's improved rescue of Luke during the dogfight

2.the improved award ceremony shot (with the painted rebels replaced)

Empire-uh..
Jedi-well..

that's all. 3 shots.

Post: #318172
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318172/action/topic#318172
Time: 18-May-2008 1:28 PM — Edited 18-May-2008 1:29 PM

It's not a huge deal of course, but it does give a possible indication of how much weird random tinkering might be going on behind the scenes at the ranch.

Post: #318151
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318151/action/topic#318151
Time: 18-May-2008 3:27 AM — Edited 18-May-2008 3:29 AM

no it's the dvd, don't know why it looks that way. It's on again tomorrow if anyone has SCIFI in HD, (I don't ) to get a really good look at it.

Post: #318145
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318145/action/topic#318145
Time: 18-May-2008 3:20 AM

the old shot is from my dvd.

Post: #318142
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318142/action/topic#318142
Time: 18-May-2008 3:11 AM — Edited 18-May-2008 3:15 AM

I think that worked...(see above post)

Post: #318137
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318137/action/topic#318137
Time: 18-May-2008 2:42 AM — Edited 18-May-2008 3:02 AM

I grabbed pictures of the new Raiders cliff shot, now I just have to figure out how the fudge to post pictures. hang on..

shit. stupid watery 8 dollar beer...damn computers, unabomber was right....before/after:

http://img211.imageshack.us/my.php?image=indzl6.jpg

http://img211.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ind2ro3.jpg

Post: #318016
Topic: Oh yeah!!! Lucas...clueless as ever.
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318016/action/topic#318016
Time: 16-May-2008 8:27 PM

I can see it happening. Like Jurassic Park III, Spielberg hands the directing over to somebody else, they crank it out for 2010. Harrison does his bit in 5 weeks. Lucas could even resurrect the "RAIDERS OF THE..." title

Post: #317921
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317921/action/topic#317921
Time: 15-May-2008 7:34 PM

One glimmer of hope, I believe the potential cost of digitally restoring the original version is going down, so what was deemed too expensive in 2006 might fit the bottom line better in 2009 or 10. (hell, it's about 6 minutes of actual frickin' film that needs it!)

Post: #317740
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317740/action/topic#317740
Time: 14-May-2008 1:20 AM

It sure looked like a different shot to me (but it's not on the new dvds). Nobody's recorded it so far, no one expected it or noticed. But they're showing it again on scifi this weekend. the forums of theraider.net are discussing it.

Post: #317736
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317736/action/topic#317736
Time: 13-May-2008 11:50 PM

speaking of Indy, apparently when they showed Raiders on USA over the weekend, it had a new cgi shot of the nazis going over the cliff.

Post: #317664
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317664/action/topic#317664
Time: 12-May-2008 11:45 PM

I thought it was because it sounded like invader. He likes those threatening words for villains like insidious, maul, grievous etc.

Post: #317634
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317634/action/topic#317634
Time: 12-May-2008 6:50 PM

ah, my mistake.
I pretty much agree with what you're saying, but on the other hand, it seems like what you're describing feels SO far away, (a big, wide market for a Blu-Ray set that costs 200 dollars) it's just hard for me to imagine they wouldn't want to sell...something in the meantime. (not necessarily the OOT, but I really can't think of anything else. Indy, I guess, but don't they have to share a big pile of that dough with Spielberg and Paramount?)

Post: #317627
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317627/action/topic#317627
Time: 12-May-2008 6:13 PM

"You have to stop deluding yourself"? I was just suggesting a way to release the thing, no lecture is necessary.

Post: #317613
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317613/action/topic#317613
Time: 12-May-2008 3:55 PM

It just seems to me they could have it all. Release the original versions on dvd and blu-ray NOW (call it the "Star Wars archive" or whatever). Then the final version saga set when more people can swing a 200 dollar blu-ray purchase. The people who want that full saga are going to buy it either way. Why not make a few bucks (and do the right thing) in the meantime?

Post: #317536
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317536/action/topic#317536
Time: 11-May-2008 10:12 PM — Edited 11-May-2008 10:17 PM

zombie, do you have any insight into how the new Close Encounters transfer was created? Same year, same unstable 70s stock, multiple releases/sources. I'm just curious, and it's semi- relevant, I guess..(it has a very filmlike, non-Lowry-smoothed appearance)

Post: #317490
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317490/action/topic#317490
Time: 10-May-2008 10:00 PM

I guess that means that shots that were replaced wholesale, like most of the death star battle, (as opposed to existing old shots that had new creatures and shit pasted into them) were never scanned into anything and were simply removed from the negative rolls, never to return. So the question is, where are those shots? Were they put in a box somewhere or, yikes, could they have been destroyed? Kubrick used to have stuff destroyed all the time, Lucas mindset circa 1997, scares me...

Post: #317455
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317455/action/topic#317455
Time: 10-May-2008 2:30 PM

I'm just surprised there isn't a larger P.R. concern from Lucas. This makes his company look bad. Now more than ever he's trying to project the image of a state-of-the-art, cutting edge operation, but they can't put out a product equal to a catalog release of Blade Runner or Close Encounters. They just look lame by comparison. And it reflects poorly on the boss when he can't be bothered to do what his peers (Ridley Scott, Spielberg, Cameron, Peter Jackson etc.) have no problem with.

Post: #317333
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317333/action/topic#317333
Time: 7-May-2008 9:54 PM

Just to make this all more annoying, more and more I'm encountering this mistaken idea out there that old movies would NOT benefit from Hd/blu-ray, so why should they bother buying. Lucas has a golden opportunity here, more than any other single person (or film) on earth, to educate a LOT of people by restoring the 1977 movie and letting people see the difference between the 1993 transfer and today. Wouldn't this benefit the larger film preservation cause?

Post: #317245
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317245/action/topic#317245
Time: 6-May-2008 12:53 PM

I had this notion that LFL might do the OOT right this year, if only to broadly promote the clone wars and the videogame, and make this "new wave Star Wars" more all-inclusive to everybody, the focus seems very narrow now, mainly kids. And kids have a LOT competing for the attention. (Plus, Indiana Jones is such an exercise in stroking the nostalgia of 30 somethings, a restored 77-80-83 trilogy with a bunch of old school packaging would fit right in with that)

Post: #316564
Topic: What order would you show the Star Wars movies to your kids?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316564/action/topic#316564
Time: 24-Apr-2008 11:44 PM

The original 77/80/83 versions. Followed by the prequels, the way MILLIONS of people saw them. This revisionist "tragedy of darth vader" saga thing can suck it.

Post: #316432
Topic: Why is the GOUT not anamorphic?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316432/action/topic#316432
Time: 22-Apr-2008 8:34 PM

It was neither, just cheapness. Like sub-porno cheapness. (they did a new transfer for Debbie does Dallas. Uh, so I heard.)

Post: #316348
Topic: Star Wars - The Vintage Edit (* unfinished project *)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316348/action/topic#316348
Time: 21-Apr-2008 8:35 PM

I agree with zombie, this thing is bitchin'. Good luck.

Post: #316347
Topic: State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316347/action/topic#316347
Time: 21-Apr-2008 8:26 PM

The recent release of Close Encounters made me cheer up a little because it proved very publicly once and for all that a restoration was and is WAY more feasible than what LFL was portraying in 06. Hit movie, same age, lots of opticals, 3 rereleases, multiple versions, altered after the fact etc.

Post: #316208
Topic: opinions - how the release of the original to theatres was different than the new three films.
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316208/action/topic#316208
Time: 19-Apr-2008 1:03 AM

One notable aspect of "then vs. now" that doesn't get mentioned a lot is there wasn't nearly the emphasis on "franchise/saga building" that there is now. This isn't just limited to Star Wars. Unlike the prequels (and even the newly altered 6-part saga, where new "connections" are prized by fans and the movies have had their original look altered/homogenized for consistency), the 3 original trilogy movies were allowed to each have their own style and feel. 3 different directors, multiple writers (plus extra little writing contributions by the Huycks, Harrison Ford, Kershner and even Marquand) and 3 different cinematographers. Everyone has such a hard-on for continuity and consistency now, but back then it was ok, even desirable, for each movie to be more of its own thing. The Indy trilogy is like this too.