This user has been banned.
Jedi Temple34 said:
As to is Underworld (2003) on bluray its only the directors cut edition and that wins an epic fail for bluray!
No, that's not an epic fail for Blu-Ray. That's an epic fail for the studio that released the film.
Yes, you are being very pedantic, and you keep acting as if his opinion is empirically wrong. That bothers me.
I'm going to stop speaking for Anchorhead at this point, and let him speak for himself.
He has no interest in the movie, because the story is better served in the audio drama (in his opinion), therefore he no longer has interest in the film version of the story.
That doesn't mean he doesn't like the movie.
Yeah, I'm disappointed that the theatrical cut isn't available on Blu-Ray.
Which reminds me - I know the Superman II "Donner Cut" is available on BR, but is the theatrical ("Lester") cut? I don't think it is ...
So he likes the Han Solo books and the radio drama better than the first film. Why does that have to mean he doesn't like the film?
--edit--
Now you're just being pedantic.
Warbler said:
Anchorhead said:
Warbler said:
So you like the three Brian Daley Han Solo books better than the OOT?
Yes. I just don't have any interest anymore in Lucas Star Wars.
"OOT" and "Lucas Star Wars" includes the first movie. That statement would say that you like that Han Solo books over the first movie and that you have no interest in the first movie anymore
I'm pretty sure that's exactly what he's saying. I just don't understand why you seem to be so upset by this.
Warbler said:
1. this site's mean objective, and one many members on here agree with is to get the OOT released on DVD and now Blu Ray. It not just to get the original Star Wars released.
This is true, but why does that mean Anchorhead has to like ESB and ROTJ? The movie he loves isn't on DVD or Blu-Ray, either.
Warbler said:
2. I could find you multiple posts where people claim the ESB is their favorite Star Wars film. They actually prefer it to the first movie.
I say again, why does this mean Anchorhead has to agree?
Warbler said:
3. the story wasn't over at the end of the first movie. Vader was still alive, the war between Empire and rebellion wasn't over. Luke had yet to fulfill his promise to become a Jedi. What is wrong with wrapping all that up?
Nothing is wrong with it. It's just that Anchorhead disagrees with the way in which it was wrapped up.
Besides, just because everything wasn't "wrapped up" neatly by the end of the first film doesn't mean it didn't work brilliantly as a stand-alone film. Despite what George says, when he wrote the first film, he never intended to make sequels. I've read the original treatment and script, the stuff about him taking out the middle part and making a trilogy out of it is B.S. - he wrote Star Wars, that was it. He later decided to make sequels, and leave room for movies set before the original, as well.
Warbler said:
4. When this first started it seemed like Anchorhead had a problem with the whole OOT, not just ESB and ROTJ. He even said he'd prefer the Han Solo books over it. Why piss on the first movie?
I believe he feels that the way the "saga" has continued from 1980 to today has tainted his opinion of the original film, and that because of this, he now prefers the radio drama and the Han Solo books to the films themselves.
Why does this bother you on such a personal level?
I remember that the sounds of Krypton falling to pieces when Jor-El is launching baby Supes into space are very different in the remix. More high-end, tinkly glass-breaking sounds in the remix, whereas it's more mid-range, crunchy type sounds in the original mix.
Oh, I am totally saving that gif!
New addition to my ignore list:
Jedi Temple34!
(betcha didn't see that one coming!)
Warbler said:
Anchorhead said:
but you claim to no longer like the first trilogy.
Have we met before? - I haven't been a fan of anything other than the 1977 story for about 20 years.
but the 1977 is a part of the OOT. or maybe what you meant to say was that you didn't like the rest of the OOT other than the first movie?
But it wasn't part of any trilogy for the first 3 years of its existence. It was just Star Wars, and that was it. That's what Anchorhead is a fan of, so to him, it's not a part of any "trilogy" - it's just a very good movie. (not to put words in your mouth, Anchorhead)
Warb, to you, the three films of the original trilogy are one and inseparable. That's not the case for Anchorhead.
See, the way he sees Star Wars is the way I see Indiana Jones - I'm really only a fan of Raiders of the Lost Ark. To my mind, the other movies are vastly inferior. The way I look at it, Lucas and Spielberg made a fantastic film, then decided to make a spinoff trilogy featuring one of the main characters, and said spinoff trilogy wasn't as good.
I have Temple, Crusade, and Skull on my hard drive - they're not terrible movies, but I don't have the desire to watch them often enough to own the discs. I own Raiders on DVD, and it's also on my hard drive. I even made a copy with no menu, a new disc label, and a new cover so I wouldn't have to look at that fucking new title that places it in the same series as the other three films.
And I just realized that this totally turned into a rant about how much I love Raiders and don't like the other three, when I'm trying to defend Anchorhead, so I'll just stop right there.
Gaffer Tape said:
You don't happen to know where I can find some of those comparisons, can you? And are you saying you have the 4-Disc set but not the proper audio?
I used to, but I no longer have the disc itself (I just have an MKV rip of the theatrical cut from said disc).
The first pressings of the 4-disc set had the 5.1 remix (as intended), but the 2.0 stereo - which was meant to be the original mix - was just a fold-down of the same 5.1 mix. When fans bitched to WB about it, they instituted an exchange program, with the fold-down replaced with the original stereo mix.
And I don't remember where these comparisons were, but I'll look around and let you know if I find them.
It seems highly likely to me that IMDb is wrong. I mean, they moderate a bit more than Wikipedia, but that's not to say their information is always accurate.
Crygor64 said:
I am a complete purist. I think the very idea of adding new scenes, new effects, etc makes you just as bad as George Lucas. It also undermines the very reason they created this forum.
*George must sit back and laugh when he sees the most popular topic on this forum isn't the petition, but rather a fan edit that is basically "the extra special edition."
*(assuming he's actually seen this forum)
Then stick with the GOUT, projects based on improving the GOUT, or Japanese Special Collection laserdisc preservations. Why even post in this thread?
Yeah, if anyone has the original stereo audio for the theatrical cut, synced to the theatrical cut on the 4-disc DVD, I'd love to have it. Even ripped from the replacement DVDs that Warner made. I've never heard the original mix, except for a couple comparisons between the original and the extended cut's mix (and that alone proved to me that there's no contest, the original mix is substantially better).
It doesn't matter, as it has been pointed out that there is no PAL DVD of the "purist" version.
Yeah, there's so much detail lost in the blacks in the 2004 DVDs that no amount of color correction will get them back to the way they should be. Ady did the very best he could with what he had.
TV's Frink said:
This is made even better by the fact that my dog is a boxer.
I'm still being ignored by him. I guess he considers me to be one of your "followers," Frink.
Gaffer Tape said:
ChainsawAsh said:
Nobody calls me chicken. Nobody.
Geez, what a half-par nerd you are. Everybody knows Marty never said anything like that in the first film.
Oh, I know (that's part of why I'm not a huge fan of 2 and 3, that "chicken" thing is ridiculous), I just did a very quick Google Image search and that's the first one I found that had just Marty in it.
Nobody calls me chicken. Nobody.
Ah, I see. My mistake.
Warbler said:
I think being extremely left is as bad as extremely right. Neither side is right all the time....
...I think a lot of people become anti-American for the wrong reasons. They do it to get back at their pro-American parents that they do not like. They do it as a means of rebelling, teenagers like to rebel. Comedians do it because America is an easy punch line. Finally some become anti-American because its a cool thing to do. "look at me, I'm going against America! I'm not deceived like everyone else, I'm cool"....
...No, you don't have to be pro-American just because you were born here, but it would be nice of you to appreciate the fact that you have the freedom to be anti-American. Not every country around world lets you be anti-that-country....
You raise some very valid points here. I agree with most of this, especially the extreme-leftism often being just as bad as extreme-rightism. (That one doesn't sound quite right, for some reason ... rightism?)
I also agree that many people who would describe themselves as "anti-America" are only doing it to rebel, or to seem "cool."
I would like to point out that I'm not "anti-America," per se. Rather, I just really, really hate the path I see this country taking, and I also don't see any way to reverse it. And it really bothers me that a lot of the self-described "conservatives" that I interact with on a daily basis have the attitude that anyone who is anti-America should be shot (not as big an exaggeration as you might think).
It also bugs me quite a bit that these same "conservatives" who said bashing the President was un-American back when GWB was in office are now saying that supporting Obama is un-American, simply because they disagree.
Anyway, this is all getting into a lot of issues that I don't particularly like to discuss, as it's inevitably a heated discussion with a lot of passion on all sides, and it's almost impossible to look at another's point of view objectively. So this will (probably) be my last word on the subject.
Oh, and Warb:
Thanks for being calm and rational about all of this - if only we had more conservatives like you in this country.
Three, so this thread can die out like the ANH:R one, and we can move on to discussing problems with ROTJ for a few months before that thread devolves into ... whatever this is.
Nanner Split said:
ChainsawAsh, I think we're the same person.
So I take it I finally get the time machine to work? How long does it take?
No, wait, don't answer. I shouldn't know too much about my own future, yadda yadda, et cetera.
