logo Sign In

Fang Zei

User Group
Members
Join date
14-Oct-2006
Last activity
26-Jun-2025
Posts
2,779

Post History

Post
#260671
Topic
ANH screening with modelmaker Lorne Peterson...WHY ARE THEY SCREENING THE SE??
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260671/action/topic#260671
Time
What probably annoys me the most is that you don't see other classic movies getting altered when a sequel/prequel/whatever comes along 20 years later, and if they are, you don't see the original version getting the shaft. Even with the dvd of Star Trek: The Motion Picture they went through the trouble of including everything that was deleted in the process of "enhancing" the effects. The only other time I've heard of something like that was the Close Encounters laserdisk, and that was on these boards! Now, granted, we don't have the OU of Close Encounters on dvd, but that's something I'm willing to let slide because while the original was released in '77, the special edition was a mere 3 years later and the newer effects don't exactly scream "3 years later," whatever that would mean. I don't think there's anything from post-1980 in terms of effects in the director's cut dvd, although obviously the cut of the movie is different. Look at Star Wars, they put back the Biggs scene at the end. For all we know, that could've been in an earlier edit of the movie exactly as it is in the SE. Something tells me we wouldn't have had a problem with that scene back in there, although admittedly that scene would've made a lot more sense if they'd have put back the Tatooine scenes. A director's cut is one thing, but what Lucas has been doing can only be called revisionism and what's worst is that he's doing it to movies simply because they're legally his. Tell me just how his altering of Richard Marquand et al's movie is any different than the altering of the Three Stooges's movies that he so vehemently spoke out against. It's hypocrisy. Lucas paid for the movie, wrote the story, etc. That doesn't give him the right to change things, but all I keep hearing is the apologetic "he can, so he should."
Post
#260563
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260563/action/topic#260563
Time
Originally posted by: Guy Caballero
Even in 1983 there was still a guild hassle about opening credits? Geez, when did they stop with that? Other movies from that era also had no opening credits (Tron, 1941, even Godfather and West Side Story didn't either, and that was before) how did they handle it?

Something I've wondered myself, as this still happens today.

Originally posted by: zombie84
As for Marquand, his being british had nothing to do with guild trouble--theres plenty of american directors who aren't part of the DGA, for example Irvin Kershner. Kershner didn't want to do ROTJ anyway because he resented Lucas and Lucas never asked him because he resented Kirshner. Lucas was forced to use non-union directors because he chose to not comply with union rules by including head credits, which really is not an unreasonable demand from the union. Of course, they socked it to him with a ridiculous fine (i guess because they felt that Lucas had made so much money without proper credit sequence to the cast and crew who made it all possible--again, probably bad for the film but really not too unreasonable a dispute from the union's perspective, whose job is to protect its workers with things like proper credit).



True, and Lynch and Cronenberg passing on the project was probably due more to them wanting to try other things. I remember reading somewhere that Lynch didn't want to have to play in someone else's universe, or something like that.
Post
#260548
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260548/action/topic#260548
Time
Yea I remember now, on the Leonard Maltin interviews he says he might direct one of the prequels but will probably get other people to do the others. I would've been happier to see him out of the director's chair completely and make for a more aesthetically pleasing saga with only episode IV under his direction. Of course, the interview was a couple years before the SE's were released (although they are mentioned in the interview) and that was really the ditch Lucas dug for himself and the OT.

CO, now that you mention it, TPM was arguably the dirt he used to bury it.
Post
#260535
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260535/action/topic#260535
Time
According to Empire of Dreams, Lucas had no choice but to get a non-American director for Return of the Jedi due to his departure from the Director's Guild of America. They had excessively fined him for The Empire Strikes Back's absence of any opening credits, and because he didn't want Irvin Kershner paying those DGA fines himself, he covered for him. He knew it would only happen again if he got an American to make ROTJ, and was so impressed by "Eye of the Needle" that he asked Marquand to direct.

Now that I think about it, Lucas's departure from the DGA might have a lot to do with why he decided to direct the prequels himself.
Post
#260532
Topic
Has technology accelerated that much?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260532/action/topic#260532
Time
ok, so I've got a few random questions:

1. People keep saying that Lucas had all of the film copies of the originals recalled and destroyed. Did Lucas himself ever say that or is it merely speculation that turned into rumor?

2. For the YCM restoration, existing positive elements had to be used to replace pieces of neg that had been severely damaged beyond any hope of restoration. Just where did those positive elements come from and what exact form were they in (35mm? 70mm? etc)? Also, what form is the original negative in?

3. If certain bits and pieces of what we're seeing in the 2004 dvd are from a positive and not the original negative, what hope does this give us for possibly seeing an OOT release that is mastered from a positive?

While I'm at it, I'm going to throw in a quote from Kevin Burns at one of the press junkets for the 2004 dvd. Burns was responsible for the "Empire of Dreams: The Story of the Star Wars Trilogy" documentary. Anyway, here's the quote:

"just a brief mention at the end (of the documentary)...we certainly acknowledged the special editions and how George went back....you really see it was a series of compromises in making the first movie...things he saw in his head that he couldn't realize given the budget and limited amount of time....the special edition and the dvd comes closest because-again-the artist's work is never finished....as the technology runs apace, and GL has invented most of the technology that has been responsible for these SE's....the technology has come close to but still not matched his vision for what he wanted the planets and the spaceships and the battle scenes to look like...it was important for us to put audiences back in that theater seat in 1977....we did get papal dispensation to use footage from the pre-SE release...you see the opening title sequence as it looked in 1977....that was exciting for us because it does bring you back..."

and this is what I really wanted to highlight:

"I will say what was shocking-and this speaks to the whole issue of the restoration- those brief scenes that we used from the pre-SE, in our mind's eye they looked a lot better than they do when you go back and revisit them and you do see how the qualityof the print, the quality of the negative really doesn't hold up the way you think it might....so you kind of understand why things have been revised and digitally restored."

Has there been any speculation on where Burns was getting the footage from? Was it a print, a negative or something else entirely?

Since the doc itself is 16:9 enhanced, has anyone been able to figure out whether or not it's from the same master tapes used to make the GOUT?

Most importantly, do you think that when Burns says "quality" that he simply means the age of the special effects and not the actual quality of the print/negative itself? LFL's official statement was that they are in "bad condition." Is anyone willing to bet it's nothing that couldn't be restored with today's technology?
Post
#260522
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260522/action/topic#260522
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
He is only against people other than the creator's altering the 3 Stooges.

If they were around and wanted to colorize it themselves, he wouldn't have any problem with it.

Oh, you mean just like we're against Lucas for altering the originals just because he produced them and directed one of them? Your argument is null anyway, Gomer, and here's why. Whenever someone works on a movie in any capacity, they expect to be recognized for their work that ends up on screen. When Lucas in his infinite wisdom replaced Latpi Nek with Jedi Rocks, he also removed Annie Arbogast from the credits because her work had now been erased. In an even sloppier move, he deleted Clive Revill from The Empire Strikes Back and neglected to alter the end credits to reflect this. At least he had the sense to stamp "1997" and "2004" on the special edition and dvd releases, respectively. That way, people watching it in the future will know that it is not the original movies they are watching, but an alteration of the originals. This is why it's more important than ever that we get a truly archival release with both the original and altered versions both in good quality.

I really hope those rumors about Lucas altering the movies just so his ex-wife wouldn't get any more royalties aren't true, because if they are it means George really is the bad guy a lot of us have made him out to be.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
He’s speaking out against the movie COMPANY posthumously altering the 3 Stooges material… last I checked Luca$ isn’t dead (contrary to some fans wishes) and Fox isn’t inserting Jar Jar into the cantina scene.

COLOSSAL difference…if the 3 stooges were alive and wanted to reshoot a scene, I'm betting GL wouldn't give a shit....


That's the difference you can't seem to grasp.


The difference you can't seem to grasp is that, first of all, the three stooges would want their work to be remembered, oh I dunno, as it actually was when they made it and everyone saw it and fell in love with it!!!! They would be self-respecting and not stoop to the level that GL has. How is GL not posthumously altering, for example, Richard Marquand's work? Did he just sit down and make the entire trilogy all by himself? He is the COMPANY!
Post
#260508
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260508/action/topic#260508
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
So just because it was seen publically makes it "finished"? The second that movie played on a screen its done and no longer available to be worked on further? Bullshit. Your arguement is the same crap that people drop when they act like the movies are "theirs".

Furthermore, ESB and ROTJ (and the PT) are distributed by Fox.... Fox is paying for that and still give a solid date that they want/need the movie for distrobution... GL funding the making of the films means nothing to Fox. Fox is still putting money into the movies.


I'm not arguing this point at all. What I am saying is that Lucas, because 20th Century Fox signed off all rights to any possible sequels to him, chose to produce the sequels that he did with every intention of getting Fox to release them when it did. Nobody was holding a gun to Lucas's head saying that he even had to make any more movies in the first place. He could've done whatever he wanted for the rest of his career and no one would be able to make another Star Wars movie except with his blessing.

If he's going to speak out on a movie company altering a production by The Three Stooges just because that movie company owns the rights to it, he should practice what he preaches and stop being such a hypocrite.
Post
#260491
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260491/action/topic#260491
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
We owned whatever it was be bought. If we bought a ticket to a screening we saw a screening, if we buy it on DVD, we get to keep that DVD.


The only reason I even wanted the 2004 dvd was because of all the extra features and the digital restoration of the movies, not the content of the SE's themselves. Also, Lucas plainly stated that the original versions no longer exist. He lied.
Post
#260489
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260489/action/topic#260489
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Wrong... it's released because the studio says it to be released, not because it's "finished".... it's finished when the person who created it says it's finished... whenever that is, be it the next day or 30 years later.


First of all, your argument doesn't really apply to the Star Wars movies. Maybe the original film from 1977, but in that case Lucas was still the director and knew the special effects we see in the SE were not even remotely possible at the time. The motion control system developed by John Dykstra was revolutionary, and those extra six months the production was afforded to complete special effects with said motion control system turned into a small miracle. What does Lucas do? He treats it like it means nothing by replacing many of the shots with cgi, barely half-decent cgi for 1997, I might add.

As for the sequels, guess what? Lucas had complete control in every sense over those productions. No one said he "had" to release them in 1980 and 1983, respectively. Did he advertise those movies as "must see half-finished movies?" No, he simply claimed that the movies he knew everyone was dying to see during that time were merely half finished, it just didn't occur to him to tell anyone until 2004.

No self-respecting artist publicly exhibits their work for the first time and then comes back to it year's later claiming that it was "half-finished," and I mean no artist.

So please don't spew that hogwash about "the studio saying it was finished." If that were true than what would you call what millions of people saw back on May 21st, 1980?
Post
#260481
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260481/action/topic#260481
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
So he owns it in any way you could imagine.


This is not that slippery of a slope to walk, Gomer. Lucas's legal ownership of the movies in no way entitles him to alter them and treat them the way he has. Once a movie is released, it is finished. If we're talking about scenes that were shot, finished in every way, even included in the original edit of the movie, but were not included in the theatrical release, that's still a much different situation than Lucas and the SE's and nowhere near as bad.

The special effects added for the SE do scream "20 years later" in regards to the original effects. You still don't seem to realize that, prove to me otherwise.

The way in which the original theatrical vesions have been treated are unjust to our culture. You still don't seem to get that either, prove to me otherwise.
Post
#260478
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260478/action/topic#260478
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Did you see Empire of Dreams?


Yes, so Lucas had to be on the set supervising things. This is a lot different than what you said about Marquand having little to do with the movie. Lucas even says on the audio commentary that he was very impressed by Marquand's directorial skills and that he had a very good time working with him.
Post
#260466
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260466/action/topic#260466
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Originally posted by: Guy Caballero
Look, I like the jagoff prequels, but this is Original Trilogy.com I just want a copy of it that looks as good as Cannonball Run 2. For the love of fuck, Gomer, Randy, Internet Police, can you leave me alone? Please? I'm begging you.


Honestly, how long can you talk about aspect ratios and subtitles being in the wrong place? It's got to get old sometime, isn't a little back-and-forth a bit more interesting?


Point taken, Randy, but you can't tell me that the treatment the OOT is recieving is fair. As long as you're for a remastering of the OOT, something that did not happen for the 9/12 release, then you have a place here. I'd think the same would go for everyone else on these boards.
Post
#260455
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260455/action/topic#260455
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
When Lucas hires and pays for all the talent that "helped" him realize his vision, then it's his "work" to edit in any way he sees fit.

It's too bad Marquand isn't still around, but from most accounts he had very little to do with ROTJ.


It's his in a legal sense only, which is what I was saying. The work that everyone else did during pre-production, production and post-production is their's, not his. According to you, Marquand had little to do with ROTJ. Maybe Lucas should've thought of that before he blatantly gave him the director's credit when Lucas himself was producing the movie. Talk about re-negging on a decision...
Post
#260337
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260337/action/topic#260337
Time
At least when Spielberg first put close encounters on dvd he just said "this is it, I'm done." Warner Brothers has put the '91 director's cut of Blade Runner on dvd in good quality and are going to be doing the same for the theatrical version next year. Lucas, on the other hand, did nothing more than what the loyal preservationists have been doing for the past several years when he clearly could and should have done better. Instead, he's just going to keep illogically revising his own movies.
Post
#260332
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260332/action/topic#260332
Time
Yet another series of films got a nice archival treatment recently, the exorcist. All of the movies, all the versions presented in good quality. I hope Star Wars doesn't end up as the only great widescreen movie to recieve really sup-par treatment.

Zombie, I agree with you on the viewing of the saga. Either watch it I-VI or just IV-VI and nothing else.
Post
#260328
Topic
Has technology accelerated that much?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260328/action/topic#260328
Time
The tv is a regular 4:3 crt, not projection or anything like that. It has both component and composite inputs and I have both cables for the ps2, but I can't remember now if it was still connected via regular composite when I did that test or not. Next time I'm back at home (where the tv is) I'll have to try it again with both cables.

by the way, canofhumdingers, I heard somewhere that the newer slimline model outputs progressive dvd but the older models can't at all. Is this true?
Post
#260296
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260296/action/topic#260296
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Originally posted by: Fang Zei
Originally posted by: JediRandy
the OOT was just reased on DVD...


as bonus material in non-anamorphic video to the 2004 SEs which Lucas is still trying to sell to us, this time individually.


been waiting for line to show up.


If future generations end up watching it on a 16:9 display, Greedo's subtitles will be cut off because the disc is non-anamorphic. Did you ever consider that?
Post
#260290
Topic
Has technology accelerated that much?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/260290/action/topic#260290
Time
My ps2 is the 39001 model and I have a standard 4:3 television. A while back, just for kicks, I tried first setting the ps2 itself to 16:9 and then playing an anamorphic dvd, the 2004 ANH disc if you must know. The picture looked exactly the same, proper aspect ratio and everything. Then I tried going into the dvd display setup and changing the aspect that way. I couldn't change it to anything besides 4:3!

Does the ps2 just automatically detect what kind of television it's hooked up to and not let you change the setting? I didn't think something like that was possible.