DominicCobb

ChainsawAsh said:

I’ve long held the belief that Lucas’ real passion for filmmaking was in editing. Just look at how excited he is in the TPM doc about how digital tools let him blend together a performance by actor A from one take and a performance by actor B from another take in the same shot.

Lucas is a great big-picture idea guy, an average writer and director, and a fantastic editor. I also think he would have personally edited every Star Wars movie if his duties as producer and director didn’t make that pretty much impossible.

Yeah exactly. He’s got some quotes where he says as much.

Also, regarding the Oscar for best editing that the original film won, technically Lucas deserved that award as well, as he did in fact physically edit a section of the film (the tie fighter attack).

MikeWW said:

SilverWook said:

I thought it was documented that a British editor did the first rough cut?

In any case, the Oscars Marcia Lucas, Richard Chew, and Paul Hirsch received for editing Star Wars speaks for itself.

The way I know the story is that a British editor (not sure how he became involved) did a cut without Lucas really watching (I think he was busy), Lucas sees it and hates it, scraps it and starts over with new picks, who each take a chunk of the movie under his supervision and in collaboration with him.

Yes, that’s correct.

If Star Wars was “saved in editing,” which I don’t think it’s fair to say it was, then it was saved in editing by, primarily, Lucas himself.

Lucas is obviously a man of many talents and from the start of his career always seemed more interested in visuals, sounds, and editing, rather than actors. And it’s not surprising to me that he stopped directing after the health problems he faced on Star Wars, though I don’t know why he never did get back around to making that experimental stuff. Who knows, probably the becoming a business man and parent just took priority.

Just the other day I was reading the Lucas biography, Skywalking, and was thinking, not for the first time, what a shame it is that Lucas’s vision for Lucasfilm and Skywalker Ranch - a collective for filmmakers to work together to create original films outside of the studio system - never came to pass. And as much as I’ve liked what’s been done with the Star Wars franchise under Disney, I’ve thought it’s unfortunate that they moved even further from that vision.

Of course, I’ve always hoped that Kathleen Kennedy would someday seek out potential opportunities for LFL beyond Star Wars and Indy. Well, seems today is that day, with “Children of Blood and Bone”:
https://deadline.com/2019/08/children-of-blood-and-bone-movie-lucasfilm-kathy-kennedy-kay-oyegun-rick-famuyiwa-fox-disney-1202662804/

Hopefully we’ll see more stuff like this in the future.

StarkillerAG said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Yeah, I’m not seeing any rough rotoscoping in the trooper shot myself.

Maybe it’s just me, but the background is at a lower resolution than the trooper, and the lighting doesn’t match.

I’m not sure if either of those statements are true.

Probably expensive because that’s just the MSRP. Wouldn’t get my hopes up. Either way we’ll find out within a couple months, but they’re almost definitely the same stuff we already have, just being pushed out again ahead of the new movie (whereas a 4K release wouldn’t need a new movie out to sell well, so it’ll wait until next year).

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

On the other hand, to me the whole trilogy has been about how there’s no way to definitively end tyranny, and how the dark side will always come back and you have to be prepared to stop it even in the face of knowing stopping it might not be permanent. To that end, I’ll be kinda upset if they “definitively” end the war, as I don’t think that’s be a very satisfying end to this story.

I think a good story should have a beginning and an end. A new story can unfold, but imo it should not be about Empire vs rebels, or a Jedi apprentice betraying his or her master. Been there, done that…twice… If you can’t tell an original story with new characters, who are put in new situations, better not tell a story at all, I think, or risk turning the franchise into a cliché. To paraphrase Bilbo Baggins, the Skywalker Saga already feels like butter scraped over too much bread for me.

To me, you can end a story without having a definitive end to everything going on. A lot of great, conclusive endings still have some elements of ambiguity and suggestion that things will continue beyond the final page. Star Wars hasn’t been a true fairytale since at least 1980, so I don’t think a perfect little all encompassing ending with a bow and cherry on top is fitting, especially after the last two episodes. Hell, even the original film still had Vader getting away as the heroes celebrated. It’s part of the serial tradition.

Personally I’d be disappointed if we get a definitive ending to the conflict, but I’d be equally disappointed if we got an Episode X somewhere down the line (for fear of what is there left to say?). I’d rather imagine the episodes continue but we don’t see them, because the saga’s story has been fully told.

On the other hand, to me the whole trilogy has been about how there’s no way to definitively end tyranny, and how the dark side will always come back and you have to be prepared to stop it even in the face of knowing stopping it might not be permanent. To that end, I’ll be kinda upset if they “definitively” end the war, as I don’t think that’s be a very satisfying end to this story.

nl0428 said:

I do hope that heated arguments on both this thread and the entire fan base will eventually die by this December, or at least in the next few years. I just would like to have fun with both the franchise and the fandom without being yelled at or harassed for my thoughts and appreciations.

Oh you think it’s bad now, things are gonna go nuclear come December. On the one hand you have all the fans who are primed to hate it no matter what, on the other you have fans with high expectations for the film that could never be met. It won’t be pretty.

crissrudd4554 said:

Joe Dante even Tweeted about the film being aired in the wrong aspect ratio!

https://twitter.com/joe_dante/status/1156729611796926464?s=20

Steven Soderbergh too.

ATMachine said:

I’m sad that the dice are now metallic and not properly fuzzy.

“Now”?

Mocata said:

They should have deleted it and just included his name during the Imperial trainee scene. Which I guess goes for a lot of these weird annoying moments… they shelved half the movie but didn’t have any idea what actually worked.

I don’t think they really shelved all that much (just reshot).

Edit: was his father also just called Han?

I think the implication is that Han does have a last name, but didn’t want to keep it because daddy issues.

OutboundFlight said:

I hope for them to reveal Snoke is Palpatine.

That would be dumb as hell.

MikeWW said:

DominicCobb said:

MikeWW said:

DrDre said:

MikeWW said:

DrDre said:

ChainsawAsh said:

MikeWW said:

SilverWook said:

Disregarding the TCW series, we didn’t get much in the prequels, and he was in Episode III for barely a few minutes before being de-handed and de-headed. If Sir Christopher Lee had not been cast, Dooku would be forgettable.

I don’t believe that you believe that Dooku and Snoke are equivelant.
Dooku is a character with a smaller role than Snoke, yet we learn more about him.

Dooku and Snoke are 100% comparable. And in 5 years you’ll probably be able to say the same thing about Snoke thanks to books and comics and TV shows - which is exactly how we know anything worthwhile about Dooku.

The thing is, that I wasn’t the biggest fan of Dooku either for exactly the same reasons. You introduce a disposable villain in one movie, and dispatch him in the next with little character development, as was the case for Darth Maul. It was a waste of a very talented actor to be honest, and his portrayal of Dooku contrasted starkly with his presence in LOTR at that time. However, I agree with MikeWW, that more context was provided for Dooku than for Snoke, which makes Snoke a more problematic character for me.

I hate to look a gift post in the mouth but I don’t Lee’s performance in SW was worse than his Saruman, if that’s what you’re implying.

I’m not saying Lee’s performance was worse (he was good in pretty much anything). I’m saying he was given far less to work with to the point that the Dooku character was a waste of his potential, a potential that was on full display in LOTR.

I just looked at it as two different sizes of roles. Dooku was more of a Tarkin type role to me.
Smallish but fun and relevant.

AOTC is all about Dooku. From the start of the movie it’s “Dooku this” or “Dooku that.” He is the character that has the final confrontation with our heroes, and survives to the next film. He is a far more prominent character than Tarkin, which is one of the reasons why his poor characterization is so harmful to the overall quality of AOTC.

I disagree on two counts. He’s not really the centerpiece of 2 anymore than the commander of the Death Star is for 4,

Okay, so the primary threat in each movie is the Death Star, and the Separatist alliance. So if you look at mere rank, the two are on equal footing. But the key distinction, is that while Tarkin is in charge of the Death Star, he’s not the face of it. Whenever the threat of the Separatists is considered, it always essentially referred to as Dooku’s Separatist movement.

Now there’s also the henchmen to consider. Unlike Vader, Jango Fett is dispatched before the final, climactic showdown. Which means that, while in ANH you have Vader in his TIE about to shoot down Luke, in AOTC it is just Dooku who is fighting Anakin, Obi-wan, and Yoda. So again, Dooku and Tarkin aren’t exactly comparable.

and also, again, his characterization is way more substantial than Snoke, the dead guy responsible for the plot of the entire sequel trilogy.

There’s more information, but that doesn’t mean the characterization is necessarily better. Knowing where a character comes from does not necessarily make them a good character (consider an obvious example on the flip side, the Joker). Snoke plays a fairly straightforward role in the two films he’s in. There are question marks about where he came from and why he’s doing what he’s doing, but ultimately we do know who he is in the sense that we know what his goals are and we know his resolve, so when you factor in how little screen time he has, do we really need to know more about him? He’s incited the plot, sure, but Kylo Ren is the actual central villain of both films.

In AOTC, Dooku is the central villain (not the big bad, who in that film only really gets one scene). While we know about where Dooku came from, there are question marks when it comes to things that are more relevant to his characterization in the narrative of the film. AOTC masks this for most of its runtime by having a central mystery that the plot revolves around, but the problem is that the whole thing ultimately unravels in a way that doesn’t make sense.

Fang Zei said:

crissrudd4554 said:

Has that actually been done before???

I don’t know if an outlet as big-name as CNN has ever used unaltered footage before, Harmy or otherwise.

The Story of Film: An Odyssey used unaltered footage, which would’ve been GOUT-sourced since it was finished in 2011.

The timing of this is rather interesting, coming so soon after the Academy 70mm screening and, as mentioned above, with ANH airing on TCM tonight. It’s worth noting that CNN and TCM are, if I’m not mistaken, both part of the Turner media empire that currently has the broadcast rights to all the Star Wars movies.

I’m not exactly expecting TCM to just throw on the Harmy version, nor am I getting my hopes up that this will be some surprise debut of an officially restored ‘77 Star Wars (but wouldn’t that be nice). TCM does like to show movies uncut and in their original ratio, though. So it will probably be the blu-ray master “as is” without any edits or commercial breaks.

I couldn’t help but notice that the framing of the CNN and Despecialized shots don’t perfectly match. Assuming they are in fact from the same source, I guess CNN simply pushed in on the framing a little bit?

TCM featured the film as part of their film fest in Hollywood this year. It was the special edition, so don’t get your hopes up.

MikeWW said:

DrDre said:

MikeWW said:

DrDre said:

ChainsawAsh said:

MikeWW said:

SilverWook said:

Disregarding the TCW series, we didn’t get much in the prequels, and he was in Episode III for barely a few minutes before being de-handed and de-headed. If Sir Christopher Lee had not been cast, Dooku would be forgettable.

I don’t believe that you believe that Dooku and Snoke are equivelant.
Dooku is a character with a smaller role than Snoke, yet we learn more about him.

Dooku and Snoke are 100% comparable. And in 5 years you’ll probably be able to say the same thing about Snoke thanks to books and comics and TV shows - which is exactly how we know anything worthwhile about Dooku.

The thing is, that I wasn’t the biggest fan of Dooku either for exactly the same reasons. You introduce a disposable villain in one movie, and dispatch him in the next with little character development, as was the case for Darth Maul. It was a waste of a very talented actor to be honest, and his portrayal of Dooku contrasted starkly with his presence in LOTR at that time. However, I agree with MikeWW, that more context was provided for Dooku than for Snoke, which makes Snoke a more problematic character for me.

I hate to look a gift post in the mouth but I don’t Lee’s performance in SW was worse than his Saruman, if that’s what you’re implying.

I’m not saying Lee’s performance was worse (he was good in pretty much anything). I’m saying he was given far less to work with to the point that the Dooku character was a waste of his potential, a potential that was on full display in LOTR.

I just looked at it as two different sizes of roles. Dooku was more of a Tarkin type role to me.
Smallish but fun and relevant.

AOTC is all about Dooku. From the start of the movie it’s “Dooku this” or “Dooku that.” He is the character that has the final confrontation with our heroes, and survives to the next film. He is a far more prominent character than Tarkin, which is one of the reasons why his poor characterization is so harmful to the overall quality of AOTC.

MikeWW said:

DominicCobb said:

The sequel trilogy being about legacy, it is interesting to have the characters be left to interpret for themselves the actions of those who preceded them.

The problem being that the original trilogy already set up the fact that force ghosts interact with the living when they feel a need to.
Hell even TLJ had Yoda.

Anakin’s ghost appearing in the end of RotJ locks in what you do with a Skywalker descendant who is worshipping Vader.

It’s entirely unclear what the rules for force ghosts are. Is it even possible for them to interact with those they didn’t know in life?

Also funny that you mention “legacy”, since that comic series DID have both Luke and Anakin’s force ghosts talk to an edgy Skywalker descendant.

Okay?

What’s unclear with Dooku are his motivations. He reveals Sidious’s plot to Kenobi, but then we learn he’s actually working for Sidious, so why did he reveal the plan? For the majority of AOTC we are lead to believe that he is seeking civil war against the Republic (for independence I guess? Unclear the Separatist motivations), and then we find out he’s enacting out Sidious’s orders. So we are I guess left to believe it’s just galaxy domination/Sith at last getting revenge? Which is fine, but it’s messy and muddled for him.

For Snoke, first of all he’s not the primary villain of either film he’s in, second, his plan is clear from the start - eliminate the Jedi and destroy the Republic.

The sequel trilogy being about legacy, it is interesting to have the characters be left to interpret for themselves the actions of those who preceded them.

NeverarGreat said:

What bothers me about the name, upon reflection, is that the now-cannon explanation basically establishes that Solo in the Star Wars universe actually means “alone” instead of being merely a series of sounds/letters which in English has an extra meaning.

I mean, realistically these characters wouldn’t be speaking English, but instead some alien dialect which is portrayed as English for the purposes of movie. Now for this to work, Han’s last name must translate to ‘lone wolf’ or something in that alien dialect and sound like an English word which has a similar meaning.

How very confusing.

Hopefully if Solo 2 ever gets made they can get to the bottom of this.

Seriously though, there’s no ‘realistically,’ as realistically the GFFA does not exist in our galaxy, so it’s not necessarily necessary to assume that the language they’re speaking isn’t in fact, exactly the same as English. Not to mention, if we go down a ‘realistically’ rabbit hole, wouldn’t realistically a lot of the names be different? What are the chances that “Ben” and “Luke” are sounds that happen to be first names in both English and this imaginary dialect? Why couldn’t the names be ‘translated’ just like the other words?

TPM didn’t have that many reshoots so that’s probably why.

MikeWW said:

DominicCobb said:

MikeWW said:

Reminder that Rey has CTE. Her parents dumped her on Jakku at 5/6/7 years old yet she doesn’t know who they are.

Except she does know who they are.

Clearly not, since those people in the flashback flew away, they didn’t die in a pauper’s grave in the Jakku desert.

You don’t know that.

MikeWW said:

Reminder that Rey has CTE. Her parents dumped her on Jakku at 5/6/7 years old yet she doesn’t know who they are.

Except she does know who they are.

dgraham414 said:

[DominicCobb said:](post/id/1289603
I honestly don’t understand why Lucas never directed animated movies. Seems like it would have been a bit more fitting.

I mean he did. Strange Magic? The film that Disney kinda buried. It’s a shame really I wish it had a Blu-Ray release

He didn’t direct that movie.

ChainsawAsh said:

I seem to remember George talking in the TPM doc about how excited he was about digital editing because he could do exactly that kind of thing as much as he wanted and didn’t need to get things perfect within one take.

I honestly don’t understand why Lucas never directed animated movies. Seems like it would have been a bit more fitting.

SomethingStarWarsRelated said:

Alright, I can’t really post a vid of gif of this right now, but not long ago I discovered something in AOTC. In the transport scene with Anakin and Padme headed for Naboo. Watch the background of aliens as R2 enters the shot and gives Padme something and she says “thank you, R2”. At first, the background is almost completely static, but then R2 leaves and someone passes in front of the camera (indicating an edit). The background aliens start moving and then almost immediately the shot goes in reverse with the aliens going back into their startup positions. You can then tell, for whatever reason, they didn’t have enough footage to play with for that shot. It also makes me wonder how they did this shot because I thought this was filmed on a set with no green screen. Maybe they roto-ed those aliens into the background…

There’s a lot more effects shots in these movies than we realize. Most scenes have had split screens done (to manipulate actors timing and pull from multiple takes within a single shot), not to mention who knows what other sort of shenanigans. That shot has definitely been altered a good bit.