CapableMetal

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

and let me know if could be a good choice for OUT ruLes 2.0 -> by the way, the processing time was incredibly high! 0.05 to 0.09FPS!!! Many hundred (up to one thousand) hour to process the whole movie? NO WAY!

Wow, what processing is happening in your script? Could you post an example? That's certainly very slow, and I'm curious as to how you're applying filters.

My advice is to keep it simple. I've watched the SET sample you posted before and its not as clean as I expected, there seems to be a lot of noise in the picture and I'm unsure as to what has caused it. What format do you capture to?

It also suffers from the 'tiled' effect that is inherent to the PAL SE laserdiscs (a crude description, but I don't know what else to call it), its visible in your sample mostly as faint vertical lines, but appears as little tiles if you purposely boost the brightness too high on a raw capture; I usually use DeGrainMedian as a noise filter and it tends to fix this.

So, I must find a way to accelerate the dub time - my PC will be friedafter 40 days! - I thought to save the unprocessed upscaled version in lagarith, then let the script use this last file, instead of doing all in real time (load captures, median/average, upscale the result, then sharpen/denoise)...

Would doing that not take the same/similar amount of time, but using two scripts?

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

Must be tested further, but maybe this is the way to go...

Definitely too green, but you're getting the idea. You also need to be careful to select those shots that are pink, eg: a normal shot between two 'pink' shots would appear too green. Some shots aren't as pink as others either.

About CLD-600: its image is definitely too soft... is it its own fault, or is it the Pioneer DVD recorder's comb filter - which, by the way, has the detail setting at max?

It may quite possibly be the player, although I haven't had any experience with it. A quick Google search to a popular Laserdisc archiving web site shows it as a lower-end model, which may be why the image is so soft.

I'd stick with the D925, its supposedly one of the best PAL decks there is.

Test 2 is definitely the best of those in terms of colour, although it does look a bit desaturated, which may explain the difference. I'm wondering about the picture quality, how does it look on the D925? These CLD-600 shots look a bit soft and fuzzy.

Also, what differences are there between test 1 and test 2 that has resulted in different colours?

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

Are you going to remove the awful pink tint from certain scenes on Tatooine? I've never seen a '97 release that doesn't have it.

Let's test! Tell me which scene is the worst, in your opinion, and I'll capture it this very night - until midnight, of course, I have /still) a day job!

You can't miss them. Its present on certain shots on Tatooine, but the biggest examples are the CG 'enhanced' shots on the entrance to Mos Eisley, for example (from the UK PAL laserdisc set):

And a shot that I have attempted colour-correction for purpose of comparison:

Its inconsistent from shot to shot, though. Some shots (such as the shots when they park up outside the cantina) don't suffer from this, but then shots afterwards do. Just aim for any CG-altered shot in the first half of the film and it'll probably be pink, even if only a small amount.

It's looking good!

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

what is that gibberish on GKAR's picture, bottom right?!?

Yeah, there is a lot of that going on throughout, kind of ruins the experience for me. Even after running deblock/dithering filters in AviSynth it still looks poor in places.

OK, I admit SET lacks details also if its picture is enhanced, but, as explained before, it *could* be because the laserdisc player used for the captures is not the best OR the very unit I used is faulty; because the spatial alignment is not that perfect; because there are only two captures instead of three... I'm trying to find some other excuses, but maybe the missing details are due only to the fact that those laserdiscs could resolve about 544x340=184960pixels, where GKAR has 704x416=292864pixels... so GKAR DVD has about 50% more resolution than the SE laserdiscs... I'll find out the truth!

I think that's your reason right there. The broadcast versions are all anamorphic, so have much more vertical resolution than the letterboxed laserdiscs. I'd much rather watch with a 'clean' picture missing some very fine detail than one that has it but is covered with digital artifacts!

But, as you could see, no blockiness, no compression artifacts, better colors... hope to find a better capture method, to improve resolution.

Are you going to remove the awful pink tint from certain scenes on Tatooine? I've never seen a '97 release that doesn't have it.

I'm thinking about TPM [ruLes] using the (second) best laserdisc ever made, and two different copies of the laserdisc.

That would be excellent, the laserdisc has the theatrical cut, I believe, and we have the DTS audio for that also, but only a digital broadcast to sync it to.

BTW, my DTS syncs are almost prepared for you, I'll PM you when they're available.

Perfect, thanks a lot! Your work is precious for my project, really!

My pleasure, of course. Seeing as you're using PAL sources it should be easy to make your SET ruLes project conform to the 'standards' we have set in the other thread, which is basically just reel change frame numbers, and will mean any audio you create can be used for other projects (my audio has been to conformed to the numbers there), and other audio could be applied to your video (such as other language tracks) in future.

I'm also happy to lend any other assistance should you need it on the audio front ;)

Does this mean you aren't going to finish capturing the OUT?

BTW, my DTS syncs are almost prepared for you, I'll PM you when they're available.

Jetrell Fo said:

CapableMetal said:

Jetrell Fo said:

Anyways, the x264 format, this is a compressed format like DiVX or xVid?  I haven't seen this version anywhere ..... any chance you can point folks to it for download and comparison?

x264 is a very popular library used for compressing to the MPEG-4 AVC format found on Blu-Ray and AVC discs, and a lot of steaming internet media found around these days. Most (if not all?) of the top freeware video encoders tend to use it for AVC encoding, so chances are most people who have encoded anything to AVC have used it, even if they haven't necessarily heard of it.

Bummer.........it doesn't sound like a very effective codec for projects like these.

When encoding for Blu-Ray, AVCHD, or PC containers like MKV or MP4, its really the best solution. Its just an encoder, it doesn't decode any video at all, and its also not a format as it adheres to the H.264/AVC specification.

Its the codec I'd choose for a final encode for everything but MPEG-2.

Jetrell Fo said:

Anyways, the x264 format, this is a compressed format like DiVX or xVid?  I haven't seen this version anywhere ..... any chance you can point folks to it for download and comparison?

x264 is a very popular library used for compressing to the MPEG-4 AVC format found on Blu-Ray and AVC discs, and a lot of steaming internet media found around these days. Most (if not all?) of the top freeware video encoders tend to use it for AVC encoding, so chances are most people who have encoded anything to AVC have used it, even if they haven't necessarily heard of it.

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

Just for curiosity, stating that "Star Wars" begins at frame 711, what is the number of the missing frame?

I'll let you know when I find out (again) as it was several months ago. I may have posted it earlier in this thread, I cannot remember.

The DVB broadcasts are certainly more detailed than any laserdisc releases, but that means that the DVNR smearing is more apparent. Of course, it can vary from version to version, but only with experimentation can we find a nice compromise ;)

Please follow my thoughts:

all of those DVB were broadcasted years ago, almost surely before 2004/5, because George "changed his mind again" and then after 2004/5 only the third version was available (also for broadcasting use). The compression techniques were not refined as today; also, the experience was shorter.

And, who can be sure that these DVB programs were recorded directly in digital domain? As satellite internal tuners were not so easy to find, probably who recorded them used a digital satellite receiver, and used a PC or a DVD recorder to capture the movies; in both cases, the original signal was digital, then converted in analog and then reconverted again from analog to digital by the PC or DVD recorder... I say so, because I did quite the same; I recorded an aerial DVB broadcast with my DVD recorder in 2005, which was connected by a SCART cable to the DVB receiver!

Actually, I think the likelihood of this is higher than you may think. DVB tuner cards (satellite or digital terrestrial) usually record the data directly to a container format on the hard drive, and have done since they have been available, AFAIK. I have owned a few cards that have been able to do this as far back as 10 years ago, and I'm sure they existed before then, judging by how many DVB file manipulation tools I used to see on a certain video capture specialist site back circa 2000(ish).

A couple of the broadcast versions I'd heard were sourced from the professional digital tapes used by the broadcasters, although I have no source for this information to hand, nor information on which ones (I think Flunk may have been one).

In any event, you are right when you say that all DVB versions have been compressed with MPEG2 in some way at some point, which will inevitably create some sort of artifacting, and that the time they were produced will have an impact on the overall quality. The laserdisc versions don't suffer from these digital artifacts, as you said, but the best laserdiscs are lacking the image detail of the best DVB captures (ignoring digital artifacts).

Let's see together some interesting facts, according to myspleen torrent:

the ANH DVD, from GKar set, which is supposedly the best of the DVB broadcasting, has three soundtracks, one German DD 5.1, one English DD 5.1, and one English 2.0; as I have not the DVD myself, I have to guess how much space those soundtracks take.

I'm not sure there is a 'best' of the DVB broadcasts. There has certainly been a lot of debate on the subject in the past! Each has their own weaknesses, Flunk, for example, is on an 8GB DVD but suffers from crushed blacks and has been sharpened up. G'Kar looks really washed out in colours (but does seem to have all the frames present) and has burnt-in subtitles, as does Reivax (which is missing loads of frames), and TB is less detailed than G'Kar overall but is often considered the most consistent.

I don't say the laserdisc, as an analog medium, is better than digital; I state that, following my thought exposed before, and my brief experience with the OUT ruLes project, it *may* be better to start with uncompressed material taken directly from laserdisc captures, using good hardwares and sources, medianed and averaged, than using compressed, low bitrate material recorded who knows how. This is only my personal opinion, that's it.

I understand what you're saying and I do agree with you.

However, its also important to realise that the DVB broadcasts are anamorphic and therefore have much better vertical resolution than any letterboxed laserdiscs, even the PAL ones. I think its a matter of whether you prefer detail with digital flaws, or less detail with a filtered analogue image. I don't mean this in an "digital is better than analogue" sense, just in a sense of knowing what is already out there.

I'd be very happy to see a nice laserdisc rip (like your OUT ruLes project, or Lee Thorogood's SE laserdisc captures) provided the colour was accurate and the smearing was cleaned up.

I must add, just for the sake of completion, that I could use my Pioneer HLD-X9 to capture not only from one NTSC US boxset, but from two different copies of it! And I could use also another MUSE player! ...If only I have learned to do proper IVTC... (xx_)

Look up the AviSynth function SelectEvery() for that. Its not too hard to learn, especially as I think the pulldown pattern per-side is always the same on the NTSC SE discs. Just SeparateFields() and find the pattern, do a SelectEvery() function set which frames to keep and Weave() back together. I will be happy to explain this in more detail in a PM should you wish.

I have your same UK PAL and US NTSC sets (actually two of the last), plus the german and french PAL boxsets (the last one in english).

Excellent! How do the French and German sets compare to the UK set? Is the video the same?

New year, new captures! Just wait some days.

No rush with the Special Editions, of course. I'm too keen to see your OUT ruLes transfers of TESB and ROTJ ;)

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

Could you confirm that your 1997 SE PAL capture is in sync from the first frame to the last with the DTS track? Or I must insert some missing frame somewhere?

I have captured the PAL laserdiscs for ANH and they have 1 frame missing from the 'standardised' figures on here, at the end in the victory celebration, I think. Inserting a null frame would solve it, although its so near the end of the film a 1 frame discrepancy should be unnoticeable.

But, at the end, the question is: should I start a "Special Edition Trilogy restored using Laserdisc editions"? Is there someone in 2013 that will be interested in that kind of project, still based on laserdisc captures, when there are many other projects around based on DVB digital recording? I think that laserdisc has still to show (to someone of) us its potential - OUT ruLes is a demonstration; also if not on par with the best digital editions on the market, nowadays with free software, it is possible to "squeeze" all the video information it has "hidden" into its analog pits, and after a bit (more than a bit, indeed...) of processing, the result is not that bad!

The DVB broadcasts are certainly more detailed than any laserdisc releases, but that means that the DVNR smearing is more apparent. Of course, it can vary from version to version, but only with experimentation can we find a nice compromise ;)

I'd be interested in seeing some test captures of any SE sets you have, particularly in high-motion scenes so compare to what I have already. Any SE source, of course, needs some colour correction due to that horrendous pink tint on certain shots, particularly the Mos Eisley effects shots.

I have the UK PAL and US NTSC sets.

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

@CapableMetal:

You are right; after the post #210 I realized that the DTS files were @24fps, so I converted it in post #212.

It will be great to have 6 separate WAV files, one for each channel, all of them for each movie, that start at frame 0 and continue for all the movie lenght, converted from 44100hz to 48048hz with the best frequency converter you have and THEN modified in the header to be 48000hz... in that case, I don't need the video sync!

I'll convert them from my master files for you to whatever format you want, including any DTS format. All the resampling stages have already been done, they are 48KHz @ 23.976fps.

If you're going to make your video into AVCHD format, can you can use the DTS audio format or are you thinking of encoding them to AC3?

For the audio to synchronise, you need to make your video conform to the numbers in this post.

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

After discovering the fantastic world of myspleen, my creativity awakes suddenly and said "I want to do more..." (regarding my next project, "SET ruLes")... so, I downloaded the 1997 SE DTS audio tracks, and began to experiment with them...

The first, simple thing I've done, is this: I took the first ANH reel WAV PCM 44.1khz 16bit files - six discrete channels - then merged them into a single WAV PCM converted to 48khz 16bit, and finally reconverted them to DTS 5.1 48khz 16bit 1536kbps.

The result track seems almost the same of the original PCM WAVs (say, 99%?) accordit to the Audacity comparison "by eye" I made, apart a little volume reduction of the LFE (I think less than 2dB) due to the audio converter.

So, here you are the file -  sendspace (warning: 218MB); is there someone who'd like to test it on his DTS audio system, and tell me what does he think (especially if the channel positions are right - this is my main concern)?

The original file must be at 24fps, where the NTSC 1997 version should be at 23.976fps, so take it in account if you mux the track with your video... at the end of the reel, the audio would be desynchronized for 28 frames, a little bit than a second.

A lot of this has been covered in some detail both earlier in this thread and also in this thread. We have confirmed that the files are 24fps, and I have already syncronised the whole SE trilogy to a 24fps source and converted them to 23.976 with as little processing as possible (by manipulating playback sample rates to match the frame rates before resampling the audio to 48KHz). The audio as is presented in the torrent on MySpleen is a bit rough around the edges as it is, and the LFE is far from perfect as there is no discreet LFE channel on the DTS discs, I produced it very quickly from a low-pass filter by following the DTS theater spec to know how to reproduce it, but I'm convinced those results are inferior for home systems; I've developed my own preset for a more suitable LFE for my own syncs that sounds great on my THX system.

My syncronised files will be made available to you should you wish to use them, they have all be adjusted manually, using no time stretching tools or programs other than Sound Forge and Adobe Audition so each step of the process has been accounted for. Call me a purist and a control freak, but I've grown to dislike automated conversion software! The methods that I have used are the result of discussion with other forum members in the audio thread I've linked to above, check it out for an interesting read!

If this resulting file is right, I could use the DTS soundtrack for my next project... yes, I know that one of the [OUT ruLes] project statement said no digital source could be used, but, hey, rules are made to be broken! (^_^) and, by the way, those DTS tracks were meant to be used only in theaters, and not released for home use, so the rule is only half broken... well, the solution is ready: as this will be the [SET ruLes] project, the only thing I have to do is change that rule, is that simple... (!**3)

I have been trying to capture some laserdiscs for this very purpose although I'm hold because I'm having to shop around for a new IPS monitor for colour-correction as my old one was too small and so ended up on my old retro-gaming system! I've no doubt you could achieve captures that are superior to anything I can produce due to your range of players.

There is great discussion about frame accuracy earlier in this thread and if you could capture and produce video tracks that conform to these numbers (reel change points, etc) I will gladly provide my synchronised theatrical DTS, Laserdisc 5.1 and 2.0 files to you for a release (yes, I've been very busy and done all of them to conform to the 'standards' set in this thread). PM me again if you're interested and we can work something out.

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

To myspleen users: please don't forget to seed as long as you can... (° * ,)

To everyone: MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!

 

Not a problem, my netbook seems to exist purely for seeding to MySpleen these days... ;)

Season's greetings to you all!

Moth3r said:

Jetrell Fo said:

Yes....I believe the LFE for DTS audio is supposed to be extracted from the rears.

Why do you believe this? Are there specs somewhere you've read (and remember that, AFAIK, theater DTS has totally different specs to home DTS).

While a low-pass filter would give you a LFE track, I have a feeling that there's more to it than that.

If the LFE track is matrix-encoded into the rears, similar to how a Dolby Surround track contains a surround channel matrix-encoded into the front channels, then you would need to run the audio through a theater DTS decoder to extract the intended LFE.

Its all in the theatrical DTS white paper, I think, although I don't have the link to it. The DTS 6D decoder does a low-pass filter at 80Hz on the surround channels and that is what produces the LFE. The way I extracted it was to put the two surround channels into a stereo file, low pass filter then do a channel conversion to mono with each at 50% vol. so its not too loud. It produces a decent LFE channel that way, although I tend to roll the frequencies above 60Hz off to 80Hz and shelf it there, it gives a 'cleaner' LFE channel.

EDIT: Audacity should be able to do this.

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

CapableMetal, don't worry, I didn't take it as a negative critic, but a comment about the sound you have the right to do.

No problem, you have the right to ignore my suggestions, hehe. At the end of the day this is your project, you go with what you feel is right and I'll enjoy the results ;)

I also thought to compress the tracks at 640kbps, but I know there are few DVD players that "don't like" AC3 tracks at that bitrate... maybe the next time I'll convert them so, but for the moment, 448kbps is the right compromise - in a dual layer DVD, thay take about 1.8GB, and leave just the empty space for a decent video compression for AVCHD...

If I remember correctly, which I sometimes don't, 640kbps AC3's will only work with AVCHD/Blu-Rays. The DVD specification only allows up to 448kbps audio. That said, AVCHD discs don't work on regular DVD players anyway, but 448kbps will work on either, so I'd agree you've made the right choice there, giving more space for the video. ;)

For the DVD, I don't know if I must use the tracks as they are, or use a lower bitrate to leave more space for the MPEG2 video - but maybe compressing at 7400kbps, the quality of MPEG2 @ 720x432 will be the same than I used for the AVC @1280x544, if not better, don't you think?

On paper, no. AVC is a newer, more complicated and efficient compression algorithm than MPEG2 (which wasn't the most efficient video compression when it was introduced!). An AVC file should always look better than an MPEG2 file encoded at the same bitrate.

That said, you're working with a letterboxed laserdisc rip that is lower resolution than an either an anamorphically squashed to 4:3 MPEG2 or a 720p (after you've added the borders) AVC file. I guess it depends on what filtering you've done and what image quality you've ended up with. Maybe its best to do some sample compressions of high-motion/low-motion clips and compare the results and see which you think is best.

I'll watch your results whichever you decide to go with!

I viewed briefly the test video done yesterday, and - as I suspected - some dropouts are still present... next version, I'll capture any laserdisc two more times with different laserdisc players (I have only the benefit of choice); then use the TOOT to eliminate dropouts... maybe as I have four captures, I could do this right now: stating that a,b,c,d are the four aligned captures, I could TOOT a,b,c, then TOOT b,c,d, then TOOT a,b,d, THEN a,c,d, and use them as the four starting point for median and average instead the pure captures...

What kind of drop-outs are you experiencing?

I ask because I usually lose 1 or 2 frames from each capture I do, and they don't get reported as dropped frames. I wonder if you're having a similar problem?

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

I'm not converting simple stereo files, but Dolby Surround encoded stereo files... I could also convert them to stereo AC3, but as AC3 is not perfect as someone still say ("don't worry, a simple stereo track, Dolby Surround encoded, at 192kbps will be THE SAME as the PCM tracks..." - sure... as I am Napoleon the Emperor, and I'm NOT him!) so I prefer a better 5.1 AC3 @448kbps than a simpler stereo @192kbps... maybe I'm mad, but I leave this kind of track just for commentary. I want to add that, if someone will be interested in my project (apart me, of course) maybe I'll release a BD-25 version with all the PCM tracks (just re-encoded at 48khz to be standard), stereo 16bit... only those ones weight about 6GB (including the italian track too).

I have eac3to, but maybe I'm too lazy to work with it... ;-)

I agree with you completely about AC3 vs PCM and higher bitrate vs lower, I'm a big supporter of lossless audio, I'm sorry if I came across as too critical, I'm just curious.

You could encode to a 2 channel AC3 with the Dolby Surround/ProLogic matrix set, preserving the original format of the audio, and there's nothing to stop you encoding at a higher bitrate than 192kbps, in fact AVCHD allows you to push it all the way up to 640kbps if you really wanted to ;)

I'm very keen to see the results of this project, your screenshots/videos look great!

I'm enjoying watching your progress with this project and its looking excellent, but I'm curious as to why you're converting stereo files to 5.1? Most 5.1 systems have the option to up-mix stereo tracks on-the-fly during playback, so you may just be using up space unnecessarily on the disc.

Also, if you haven't tried it yet, eac3to is a command-line tool that can slow down those PAL tracks that have the 4% speedup (I've never tried it on pitch-corrected PAL tracks, so I don't know if it will do those without changing pitch), and it can output to AC3.

Jetrell Fo said:

Brute Force was tried and failed. The actual encryption algorithm was found to be weak so figuring out encryption key was easy. A singular .exe program was compiled for the specific discs of audio as each set probably has their own separate encryption key so it's a 1 shot deal.

The lucky part ..... the encryption didn't change throughout the soundtrack, other wise I'd only have a piece of the puzzle.

At this point, I now have PCM audio from the encrypted .aue files. This has been a cool journey but it's not over. We obviously are going to do other testing to see what can be done, if anything, to create something more universal for this subject matter.

Thanks to my partner Maxim in this. He was nothing but cordial, understanding, helpful, and 100% gracious.

The cool thing about this .exe program is that I can use it to convert the .aud files straight to 5 channel PCM so I'm going through the discs I do have and redoing the reels.  They will still have to go through some processing but I'd think this is a better way to go to keep the quality.

Interesting stuff! I read somewhere that the encryption would let you play the first 2 minutes or so with the in_aptx plugin (as you would an AUD) and then you would get garbled noise afterwards. You say the encryption has been cracked with a custom executable, so was achieved without the use of the 6D and ripped straight to PCM? Are these PCM files in the format of a single 5-channel PCM file for each reel? If so, are the channels in the correct places?

Sorry for all the questions, but this is all very impressive and exciting! Very well done to you and your partner!

That's excellent news! Any word on how/when we can get these files?

You_Too said:

SS4DarthPayne said:

CapableMetal said:

Thanks for clarifying that. h264 can be a real pest to edit because it has so much lag, probably due to its complexity, its generally a good idea to convert to a 'friendly' format first; Lagarith lossless AVI's are good because they're nice and quick. ;)

Related to this, doesn't converting to something lossless lead to HUGE file sizes? Or way back when I was trying to do such a thing, was I doing it wrong? Sorry I'm pretty new at all this

It does. That's why I chose mpeg2. I only needed to see the frame differences, and a lossless file of ANH 2004 SE in DVD resolution would be about 14gb or something.

It does lead to huge file sizes but the result you get is generally faster and more compatible than MPEG2 (which is very compatible itself, but slower to edit with, at least on all of my systems). I have 6.5TB of storage so space is admittedly not much of an issue. It all depends on what you're trying to do, if you're looking at frame differences then MPEG2 is a perfectly acceptable choice. I've done similar things with h264 encoded videos on occasion, its just slow at seeking frames. For capturing or editing, however, I never stray from lossless codecs; files aren't as big as uncompressed AVI, and you aren't compressing to a lossy format (such as capturing straight to MPEG2) before filtering/editing.

You_Too said:

You_Too said:

Ok here's something I don't understand.

DJ gave me the 2004 SE NTSC version of ANH, so we could use it as a reference to synch to. The SW title card appears at 719, not 711.

I just wanted to correct what I said here. It seems that this was caused by some kind of lag when decoding the h264 file I got from DJ.

To make it synch better when running stacked vertically on top of the 97 SE I had to convert it to mpeg2, and suddenly the title card did appear at 711.

Thanks for clarifying that. h264 can be a real pest to edit because it has so much lag, probably due to its complexity, its generally a good idea to convert to a 'friendly' format first; Lagarith lossless AVI's are good because they're nice and quick. ;)

Do you have an estimations as to how much it's going to cost to get all of the necessary pieces? I see why you're opting for a plain dish over the detailed one... wow.

EDIT: Oops, sorry! Missed your £600-700 estimation.

Nice idea. I was going to get one of those sets a while back to build with my girlfriend, but the massive price tags of over £1500 (at the time) put us off. It will be interesting to see how you progress with this!

Father Skywalker said:

CapableMetal said:

Father Skywalker said:

stop nitpicking over some silly stupid line of dialogue like "I don't like sand", and judge Hayden Christensen (aka Hay Chris) as an actor overall. I thought he was so godlike, just pure plain kickass and awesome!!!!!!

Why??? The Mustafar dialogue with his wife padme amidala was not only good, it was great!!!!!!!

As an actor overall (regarding other things he's in), I cannot judge because I've avoided his films like gonorrhea. However this is a Star Wars forum, so I'll keep my opinions to his 'acting' in the prequels: It's crap.

Watching his 'romance' scenes with Padme is like watching two slightly animate fence posts pretending (very badly) to love each other. There is little chemistry between them and everything seems forced. Both actors in the scene were terrible.

what about on the mustafar scene with them????

That's what I was talking about. It goes from being wooden to be over-acted, to being wooden. Maybe its the script, maybe its the poor development of their relationship from earlier in the PT, maybe its the lack of direction or the fact that Hayden Christensen is a poor actor in these movies (although its likely a combination of all of those things). It all seems forced, which ultimately stops me from finding it powerful or moving, as with so much of the PT.

I'm absolutely amazed to see that they had chemistry between takes because it didn't translate well across to the final films for some reason.

Father Skywalker said:

stop nitpicking over some silly stupid line of dialogue like "I don't like sand", and judge Hayden Christensen (aka Hay Chris) as an actor overall. I thought he was so godlike, just pure plain kickass and awesome!!!!!!

Why??? The Mustafar dialogue with his wife padme amidala was not only good, it was great!!!!!!!

As an actor overall (regarding other things he's in), I cannot judge because I've avoided his films like gonorrhea. However this is a Star Wars forum, so I'll keep my opinions to his 'acting' in the prequels: It's crap.

Watching his 'romance' scenes with Padme is like watching two slightly animate fence posts pretending (very badly) to love each other. There is little chemistry between them and everything seems forced. Both actors in the scene were terrible.