DominicCobb

Possessed said:

You’re Right hot topic has sort of ran it’s course.

I don’t like hot pockets.

Lean Pockets are better.

http://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-mysteries-getting-to-the-bottom-of-max-rebo

suspiciouscoffee said:

By the late 2020’s when the SequelSequel Trilogy starts they’ll have written WilliamsBot: an algorithm to simulate John Williams music.

I believe it’s spelled “Giacchino.”

oojason said:

‘First Look at deleted scenes for Star Wars: The Last Jedi’…

http://ew.com/movies/2018/03/02/first-look-deleted-scenes-star-wars-the-last-jedi/

 

So far all my guesses are correct except one - “Luke Has a Moment,” funny thing is though a scene of Luke mourning Han was my first thought when I read that scene title, but I couldn’t think of anywhere it’d fit in the film. Turns out that’s basically why it was cut.

Avengers moved up a week. I’d imagine a reason would be to give this some more room.

It’s been discussed here many times before… but this is still a good read: https://uproxx.com/movies/what-was-lukes-plan-star-wars-return-of-the-jedi/2/

Guess mine. Winner gets a cookie.

Seems a certain character might finally be coming back…

https://twitter.com/chris_ryall/status/968715931311583234?ref_src=twcamp^share|twsrc^m5|twgr^email|twcon^7046|twterm^3

moviefreakedmind said:

I’m shocked that anyone has watched Nacho Libre since it was in theaters. I didn’t realize anyone remembered it.

This was my thought about RV when I saw it mentioned here.

TPM and AOTC are much more straightforward narratives with a lot less going on. ROTS has a whole section of the movie devoted to what’s basically various simultaneous chess matches going on on Coruscant. Most of these scenes in this section have little direct connective tissue to other scenes, which makes them really easy to move around. AOTC is also this in the middle, but obviously to a lesser extent. Moving stuff in ROTS can significantly change the meaning of scenes through context, whereas only the love plot in AOTC is really affected in meaning by restructuring.

Very interesting to think about them all from a more general fan editing perspective. It’s kind of funny to think that TPM is probably the most fan edited movie ever, because I think it’s the least improvable of the three.

I had it like Hal for the longest time, but ultimately I’m leaning more towards keeping the war room scene intact. Basically because I want everything Palpatine and Anakin to say about the Jedi to be true - from a certain point of view of course - and in this scene (and not in the earlier one) they talk about taking control of the Senate. This, coupled with removing Mace’s line about “the Senate will decide your fate,” seems to cement that the Jedi are legitimately staging a coup of sorts.

The unfortunate thing is the deleted scene is the only one where they explicitly state that removing means arresting. Obviously you still get the scene where Mace tells Palpatine he’s under arrest, but this is after he’s already found out that Palps is a Sith lord.

I really wish it was possible to keep both scenes intact, but it’s just hard to ignore the repeated dialogue. As is I have the deleted scene ending after Obi-wan says the proof will come when Grievous is gone. I’m on the verge of just cutting the scene altogether, but I like that it sets up more solidly that the Jedi are suspicious of Palpatine and that shit will get real in some way when Grievous is dead. Who knows though if that’s really enough to justify such a short scene though. Tricky.

Mrebo said:

DominicCobb said:

Mrebo said:

Everything is political nowadays, including every movie.

Not just nowadays. Art is inherently political.

But nowadays everything is political. My Grandpa had a “Dogs Playing Poker” print. I’m not denying it was political even back in the day. But more things are political now, beyond art.

We are a hyper-aware society.

Mrebo said:

Everything is political nowadays, including every movie.

Not just nowadays. Art is inherently political.

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Mrebo said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Mrebo said:

Everything is political nowadays, including every movie. Especially Adam Sandler movies. Corporations are increasingly eager to stake out positions aligned with liberal politics. So be it. If it means conservative-corporate alliance is fractured, then it’s win-win.

Umm… so NOT offering special discounts to NRA members is “staking out a position aligned with liberal politics”? I might buy that if they WERE offering discounts to, say, Planned Parenthood workers, or PETA members. Is that the case?

That doesn’t follow. It’s al about the reason why NRA member benefits were ended. This is clearly about politics.

Couldn’t an equivalent argument be made that the existence of NRA benefits in the first place was what was political, and that eliminating them was Delta’s way of backing out of the politics?

This makes more sense to me. I was honestly surprised to see so many companies offered discounts to NRA members. Like, why? (I mean beyond the obvious)

I thought they struck a nice balance.

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

Anchorhead said:

DrDre said:

Anchorhead said:
That’s incorrect.
https://youtu.be/sx15aXjcDZg

http://www.moongadget.com/origins/index.html

I really don’t see how being influenced by a dozen old movies is in any way comparable to blantantly recycling story elements, structure, and visuals from the same movie series.

It’s not, nor was I addressing that issue. I was responding specifically to Collipso saying “Neither Star Wars nor Empire ripped off any movie whatsoever”. In fact, it ripped off several films. For the record; I’m not bothered by that. Not now, not in 1977.

Neither am I 😉.

Regarding your claim that TFA recycled elements from the OT; I can’t imagine there is anyone on here who doesn’t see that to be the case. There are all sorts of parallels between the OT and the ST. The differences seem to be more about the level at which people are bothered by them.

I would be fine if that were the case, but I don’t believe it is. Some posters here conflate recycling Star Wars tropes with being influenced by other film makers, and works of fiction, thus arguing in a sense, that the current creators are more or less doing what Lucas did in 1977. Lucas’ Star Wars wasn’t original in their view, because he was obviously influenced by many sources while making the first film, and it’s sequels. The current creators are doing the same thing, they argue, but they just happened to be influenced by Star Wars movies. My argument is Lucas didn’t invent most of the ingredients, but he did invent a new and original recipe, and one that has resulted in some very tasty meals, while the current creators deliberately stuck to Lucas’ old recipe, and added a few twists to disguise the fact that they couldn’t come up with a new recipe. The meal might still be edible, but it’s just so similar to Lucas’ recipe in many respects, while altering a few key aspects of Lucas’ recipe for the worse, that I can’t shake the notion, that I’ve tasted far better versions of it in the past.

I think Lucas was more than simply “influenced.” I don’t have a problem with not calling the original Star Wars original because I don’t think that’s a bad thing. It’s still my favorite film after all.

I’d just argue that no SW film since the first has had the same “new and original recipe,” including ESB and ROTJ. Their “recipes” are firmly rooted in what was done in the previous film(s). Same with the ST, only there’ve been more previous films. Are the tropes that the ST is pulling from SW tropes? Absolutely, you’ve nailed that that’s how I see it. And again, to me that just makes sense, it seems a natural extension of the franchise at this point in time (it only seems fitting for these films to be influenced by what came before, just like Lucas, only now what’s come before are SW movies - films which have had an enormous impact on cinema in general and this genre of storytelling specifically).

I forgot to respond to this one. The difference between the ST, and the OT sequels, and the PT is, that Lucas’ sequels progressed the story in new directions. Sure all his films used Star Wars tropes, but the ST is unique in the sense, that it essentially retells the same story we’ve seen before, where a small rebel force fights a tyrannical regime led by an evil Force user. We have another Jedi student turning on his master, and being instrumental in the destruction of the Jedi Order. We have another young person living on a desert planet, who turns out to be the new hope, and then I’ve not even touched on recycling the concept of a super weapon, a walker assault on a white planet, a confrontation in a throne room, etc, etc.

Then there’s the fact that both the good guys and the bad guys look very much like they did in the OT, and use very similar equipment. Sure, some new characters and elements were added, but overall the basic story premise and the aesthetics are the same. A few changes in characters and structure are not going to change that. There were a ton of possibilities in coming up with completely new stories, characters, and visuals that did not involve recycling large parts the OT, while still incorporating Star Wars tropes like the Force, lightsabers, space battles, and what not. However, the current creators chose to take the safe route, and rather than take the franchise in a new direction narratively and visually, gave us a loosely based remake of the OT, and worst of all, they chose to diminish the accomplishments of the classic characters to achieve this end. That is what makes the ST far less original to me than any of the previous films made by Lucas.

Now, does this mean the ST cannot be entertaining, or competently made? Of course not! There’s much to enjoy, the story is compelling, the action is great, the special effects are great, the acting is generally good. IMO they are above average blockbusters. However, as sequels to the OT, they are a disappointment to me, and in the face of rethreading rebels vs Empire, a new hope vs fallen Jedi, and all the other elements I’ve mentioned, any argument that tries to pass off the ST as being on a similar level of creativity and originality as Lucas’ films simply falls flat on it’s face in my view.

Sorry, I’m going to have to drop this. My new rule is if I’ve said it before I won’t say it again. And there isn’t really anything I’d say in response to this that I haven’t already said a number of times (too many times) before.

Fine by me. I didn’t agree with what you said before, and if you’re just going to repeat those flawed arguments (imo), it’s a pretty pointless exercise.

Same.

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

Anchorhead said:

DrDre said:

Anchorhead said:
That’s incorrect.
https://youtu.be/sx15aXjcDZg

http://www.moongadget.com/origins/index.html

I really don’t see how being influenced by a dozen old movies is in any way comparable to blantantly recycling story elements, structure, and visuals from the same movie series.

It’s not, nor was I addressing that issue. I was responding specifically to Collipso saying “Neither Star Wars nor Empire ripped off any movie whatsoever”. In fact, it ripped off several films. For the record; I’m not bothered by that. Not now, not in 1977.

Neither am I 😉.

Regarding your claim that TFA recycled elements from the OT; I can’t imagine there is anyone on here who doesn’t see that to be the case. There are all sorts of parallels between the OT and the ST. The differences seem to be more about the level at which people are bothered by them.

I would be fine if that were the case, but I don’t believe it is. Some posters here conflate recycling Star Wars tropes with being influenced by other film makers, and works of fiction, thus arguing in a sense, that the current creators are more or less doing what Lucas did in 1977. Lucas’ Star Wars wasn’t original in their view, because he was obviously influenced by many sources while making the first film, and it’s sequels. The current creators are doing the same thing, they argue, but they just happened to be influenced by Star Wars movies. My argument is Lucas didn’t invent most of the ingredients, but he did invent a new and original recipe, and one that has resulted in some very tasty meals, while the current creators deliberately stuck to Lucas’ old recipe, and added a few twists to disguise the fact that they couldn’t come up with a new recipe. The meal might still be edible, but it’s just so similar to Lucas’ recipe in many respects, while altering a few key aspects of Lucas’ recipe for the worse, that I can’t shake the notion, that I’ve tasted far better versions of it in the past.

I think Lucas was more than simply “influenced.” I don’t have a problem with not calling the original Star Wars original because I don’t think that’s a bad thing. It’s still my favorite film after all.

I’d just argue that no SW film since the first has had the same “new and original recipe,” including ESB and ROTJ. Their “recipes” are firmly rooted in what was done in the previous film(s). Same with the ST, only there’ve been more previous films. Are the tropes that the ST is pulling from SW tropes? Absolutely, you’ve nailed that that’s how I see it. And again, to me that just makes sense, it seems a natural extension of the franchise at this point in time (it only seems fitting for these films to be influenced by what came before, just like Lucas, only now what’s come before are SW movies - films which have had an enormous impact on cinema in general and this genre of storytelling specifically).

I forgot to respond to this one. The difference between the ST, and the OT sequels, and the PT is, that Lucas’ sequels progressed the story in new directions. Sure all his films used Star Wars tropes, but the ST is unique in the sense, that it essentially retells the same story we’ve seen before, where a small rebel force fights a tyrannical regime led by an evil Force user. We have another Jedi student turning on his master, and being instrumental in the destruction of the Jedi Order. We have another young person living on a desert planet, who turns out to be the new hope, and then I’ve not even touched on recycling the concept of a super weapon, a walker assault on a white planet, a confrontation in a throne room, etc, etc.

Then there’s the fact that both the good guys and the bad guys look very much like they did in the OT, and use very similar equipment. Sure, some new characters and elements were added, but overall the basic story premise and the aesthetics are the same. A few changes in characters and structure are not going to change that. There were a ton of possibilities in coming up with completely new stories, characters, and visuals that did not involve recycling large parts the OT, while still incorporating Star Wars tropes like the Force, lightsabers, space battles, and what not. However, the current creators chose to take the safe route, and rather than take the franchise in a new direction narratively and visually, gave us a loosely based remake of the OT, and worst of all, they chose to diminish the accomplishments of the classic characters to achieve this end. That is what makes the ST far less original to me than any of the previous films made by Lucas.

Now, does this mean the ST cannot be entertaining, or competently made? Of course not! There’s much to enjoy, the story is compelling, the action is great, the special effects are great, the acting is generally good. IMO they are above average blockbusters. However, as sequels to the OT, they are a disappointment to me, and in the face of rethreading rebels vs Empire, a new hope vs fallen Jedi, and all the other elements I’ve mentioned, any argument that tries to pass off the ST as being on a similar level of creativity and originality as Lucas’ films simply falls flat on it’s face in my view.

Sorry, I’m going to have to drop this. My new rule is if I’ve said it before I won’t say it again. And there isn’t really anything I’d say in response to this that I haven’t already said a number of times (too many times) before.

Mrebo said:

DominicCobb said:

All movies are political.

Depends what definition you have in mind.

True, and some are more political than others.

Black Panther would be one that is more political than others.

suspiciouscoffee said:

Could an apolitical movie still be political in its antipathy toward political discourse as a whole?

Yep exactly.

All movies are political.

Mrebo said:

DominicCobb said:

Mrebo said:

DominicCobb said:

Mrebo said:

No need to quibble over the precise level of distraction. Maybe less than Leia being blonde and more than her brunette hair being slightly darker. I still don’t see the validity of the reason for the aesthetic choice that is noticeable.

They probably figured most people wouldn’t care, which is almost certainly true.

As the creature designer said: “I remember saying to Rian [Johnson] that if we were going to do it, we couldn’t make him too much of a ghost because it would deny everybody the joy of seeing him solid and real.”

Sounds like they thought people would care. If you mean they thought most people would like it or at least not be bothered by it, that is clear. If most people didn’t care, as you suggest, then it wasn’t a terribly successful choice. A lot of things in the movie are like that. This was quite a minor thing.

My post was in response to your question of why risk a noticeable/distracting change. Because most people wouldn’t care that it’s different.

You answer a question I’m not asking. I commented that I found it distracting but that wasn’t a question.

It seemed like you were wondering why they did it if it was distracting.

Why choose make the change in the first place? A lot of reasons that are more important than whether or not it’s distracting to an extremely small subset of the audience.

Well the creature designer says a ghostly Yoda “would deny everybody the joy of seeing him solid and real.”

As I said, I don’t see the merit there. I guess you do?

Not a major thing but I thought the creative choice was an odd one and a more ghostly Yoda would not have taken joy away nor did a more solid Yoda add positively to the experience.

It’s the most substantial scene a force ghost has ever been in. It’s not just about the joy of seeing Yoda tangibly again. It’s about imbuing the character and the emotions of the scene with more tangibility. He still looks ghostly. Again, for an extremely small number of the audience, he’s not ghostly enough and that’s distracting. But for most of the audience, the thinking here is a more solid Yoda would add more weight to the scene. Makes perfect sense to me.

Mrebo said:

DominicCobb said:

Mrebo said:

No need to quibble over the precise level of distraction. Maybe less than Leia being blonde and more than her brunette hair being slightly darker. I still don’t see the validity of the reason for the aesthetic choice that is noticeable.

They probably figured most people wouldn’t care, which is almost certainly true.

As the creature designer said: “I remember saying to Rian [Johnson] that if we were going to do it, we couldn’t make him too much of a ghost because it would deny everybody the joy of seeing him solid and real.”

Sounds like they thought people would care. If you mean they thought most people would like it or at least not be bothered by it, that is clear. If most people didn’t care, as you suggest, then it wasn’t a terribly successful choice. A lot of things in the movie are like that. This was quite a minor thing.

My post was in response to your question of why risk a noticeable/distracting change. Because most people wouldn’t care that it’s different. Why choose make the change in the first place? A lot of reasons that are more important than whether or not it’s distracting to an extremely small subset of the audience.

darthrush said:

Octorox said:

MalàStrana said:

Octorox said:
-A Plot to Destroy the Jedi?

I agree there is a repetitive aspect to this scene with the “situation room during Grievous meeting with Obi” scene, but there is also a more layered concern about Palpatine. This scene, placed after the - long - overture was very good to set the mood of an uprising coup d’état from Palpatine. I think you should have inserted it (but I assume you’ll do that for your “real” edit of Episode III).

Yeah, I like this scene too, but I felt that with the war room scene unedited, it didn’t really work, and since this is supposed to be purely an extended edition, I didn’t want to do that. It will probably be in my full fan edit of episode III.

I’m hoping in your fanedit you pick to keep either the deleted scene (Plot to Destroy the Jedi) or the war room theatrical scene. Either one or the other because in L8wtrs he keeps both and the repetitive dialogue is so obvious that I feel it really detracts from the experience whereas in Hal’s he inserted the deleted scene and removed the war room scene which did not have any issues of repetitive dialogue and it improved upon the theatrical. Not saying if you should include the deleted scene over the war room scene but I think it would be best to decide on which one to keep rather than doing both.

Sorry for being off topic from the thread but wanted to throw in my 2 cents 😃

Late reply, but working on my ROTS edit, I’ve decided to use both scenes (for a lot of reasons), and I’ve managed to cut it down to the point where there is only one repeated line (“the dark side of the Force surrounds the Chancellor”), which I’ve justified to myself as the first time Mace is saying his thoughts only to Yoda and Obi-wan, the second time he’s revealing it to the council. I think it works, but honestly not 100%. I think I’ll need to watch my edit all the way through to determine.

MalàStrana said:

DominicCobb said:

Octorox said:

MalàStrana said:

thebluefrog said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uu2edqdbiI

The unfinished “Amendments to the constitution / Palpatine’s Machinations” scene is actually usable now that these guys showed how it could be edited.

Maybe even darkening the shadows would help.

Oh brillant scene it is ! Does it exist in better quality that could match the other deleted sequences (it’s from the bluray set, so might be ?) ? If so I would love to see it integrated in an extended cut 😃

I like that scene as well. The quality is okay. The main thing that keeps me from using it is that the masking of actors in front of the Coruscant skyline is really atrocious. I did include a scene in my Episode II edit with some poor masking but this is even worse imo.

I feel like you could probably find away to cut around the offending aspects. What you’d need though is the scene to be upscaled like the DVD ones.

So Dom actually did it for his cut 😉

Ha, you’re right. It was something on my mind for awhile. What I realized was that it wasn’t just poor masking in some of the shots that was a problem, it was actually that the background was actually a different image in the deleted scene vs the theatrical. My solution was basically to use none of the deleted footage (save for Anakin’s mouth), only the audio.

The other thing with that scene is you run the risk of redundant dialogue (Palpatine says a few of the same lines in a later scene). So you have to cut around to make it work.