I’m interested in seeing what you do with Anakin’s turn.
If I may offer a suggestion, I’d be totally cool if you borrowed one of my ideas that I have planned for my edit, where Anakin partially turns to the dark side out of a desire for immortality for himself (alongside his wife).
May as well add Hal9000’s other edits, since you already have TPM and ROTJ
Mk_9000 do you have Caleb Gammon’s AOTC edit?
Honestly I unironically support edits that add even more alien presence to Star Wars. I think it’s cool. This is a galaxy full of different sentient alien species, they shouldn’t be regarded as looney tunes characters.
I don’t agree that ROTJ is the “first Prequel”. It’s different from the other two OT movies, but not any more then ANH and ESB are different, and it’s closer to those then the Prequels. It’s character-focused rather than plot-focused, the plot isn’t as convoluted as the Prequels, it’s methodically yet effectively paced (IMO), the visuals are far more prettier, and the writing is clear and well-articulated where it needs to be and subtle where it needs to be, unlike the Prequels where it’s often either muddy and messy or on-the-nose.
I find it interesting that Hal said that, since he didn’t make an edit of it in the same vein as his Prequels.
. . . Is this the part where I tell you Vader never kills any of his own men in my cut. . . 😉
Well that’s certainly an… interesting choice. I disagree with it (a lot) but I’m not gonna be rude about it, since I have respect for you as an editor, you know what you’re talking about and you have an admirable goal.
I KNEW SOMEONE WOULD CATCH THAT SHOT SWITCHEROO!!! The basic logic is this. I want that scene to focus on the Empire’s unpreparedness to face the Rebel Fleet, and the coming showdown with the Emperor, which means that Vader’s inherent awesomeness needs to take a back seat for that specific scene. In other scenes like the scene where the shuttle Tyderium “sneaks” past the Imperial Fleet, I recut that sequence entirely from Vader’s perspective, to focus on how perceptive he is in the Force, and in all of the fights scenes I made Vader infinitely more lethal, because the original fight choreography was. . . well. . . lacking in that department.
So the basic answer to your question is that in all my scene cuts I try to realign the “focus” to the primary point of that scene, which sometimes means cutting one of the greatest Vader shots of all time, and switching it with a lamer shot of him rushing down the gangway to emphasis the Empire’s growing weakness. (Essentially it’s visually showing the dramatic power shift that’s happened since Vader blasted his way onto the Blockade Runner in IV. The Rebels are no longer a couple X-Wings and a lucky torpedo, that Fleet massing near Sullust is now a force to be reckoned with.) It’s okay I know the sin I committed is unforgivable. 😃
Personally, I think that ROTJ is still supposed to make you feel very threatened by the Empire, so I never felt any sort of incongruity. The idea is that, because the DSII lacks the weaknesses of the first one, if it’s completed, the Rebellion is doomed. The Battle of Endor will decide their fate, and they’re still the underdogs. Throughout the battle it’s very clear that they’re outmatched, and it’s only due to the courageousness and tenacity of our heroes that they make it out alive. At the same time, I understand the perspective of wanting to emphasize the growth of the Rebels.
I’m interested in seeing your reedit of the ROTJ duel.
On a completely different note, is your YouTube name “Lord Vader Tyrannus”? If so, I stumbled on your “Ornithocheirus ASMR” video and laughed sooooo hard! I miss Walking with Dinosaurs sooooo much!!! The newer series just didn’t hit the same way.
It is. I like to have my username consistent on every site, but unfortunately I can’t change my username here.
I’m glad you enjoyed that, it’s a funny little video I made, I love chaotic absurdism. I love Walking with Dinosaurs so much, it’s my favorite piece of media after the Original Star Wars Trilogy.
I made a two part video essay about WWD. And a video essay about ROTJ (also had to be split in two). If you’re interested.
Hey y’all! In response to a question posed on Adywan’s RotJ Thread about how easy/hard it is for Luke to start on Dagobah, and then go to Tatooine, I posted a link to my version of the opening of RotJ. It seems like some of y’all wanna talk about it, so I’m reposting it here so we don’t derail Ady’s Thread.
Link: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EleIyLvBBrk-D8zN9zy23NJhEeg6FMcs?usp=sharing
Enjoy!
-JoE
Why delete Vader’s line, “Perhaps I can find new ways to motivate them”? It’s a great way of showing his ruthlessness towards his own men.
And the replacement of low-angle shot of Vader walking down the shuttle is really odd to me. That is one of the most badass shots of Vader, powerful and menacing. It’s one of the reasons his entrance in ROTJ is my favorite. Why replace it with the boring long shot from the ESB SE?
What’s the difference between balanced and unbalanced pacing?
As I mentioned to you via PM, I especially love what you did with the Probe Droid scene on Hoth; I will definitely use that for my own edit! 😃
I take it you’re doing edits for the entire saga?
The casting.
Hayden Christensten looks like a young Darth Vader. He has the body language down.
Also Natalie Portman.
I respect the approach. I personally think that Han being immature and pushy is an intentional character trait (and is why I think it’s 100% in-character for him to act the way he does in ROTJ; he was always insecure, that bravado was his way of hiding it) which fits the flawed hero he is, but I also understand if one prefers to make him more mature.
Do you do anything about the Luke-Leia kiss in ESB? ESB is my favorite movie of all-time and I don’t hold it against the film because of a retcon, but that hasn’t aged well.
Have you considered adding the original hyperspace effect briefly seen when the Falcon arrives on Alderaan to the Falcon interior after the DS escape rather then a modern one?
Andor is a well-made show, but what it misses is the mythic, pulpy quality of Star Wars.
You wouldn’t make an adaptation of a Greek myth without any of the Gods, or an episode of The Twilight Zone with no sci-fi/supernatural elements (yes, the first episode still counts. At the time it was made, traveling to the moon was science-fiction; it premiered 10 years before the moon landing).
Even Mando S1 and some of S2 captured this pretty well, having that mythic old western feel (tho I despise how it’s now become a vessel for this new “Filoni-verse” and is now shot like a car commercial).
For anyone who wants to add Mustafar but make it look appropriate for a 70s/80s film, planet Vulcan from Star Trek the Motion Picture, as well as the destruction of the Genesis planet in Star Trek 3 are good sources.
For anyone who wants to add Mustafar but make it look appropriate for a 70s/80s film, planet Vulcan from Star Trek the Motion Picture, as well as the destruction of the Genesis planet in Star Trek 3 are good sources.
Yeah, it’s an all time great line. I just didn’t want Luke to roll around on the floor like a goober, lol! In all fairness, even I wouldn’t say my version is “better” so to speak. It’s playing by a completely different set of rules than the original cut. Personally, I like my Darth Vader as lethal as possible, and I tried to make Luke a little more naturally gifted (which in turn makes Vader more intimidating). More than anything I wanted see if the new cutting techniques Ben Burtt and his team used for the Prequel Duels would work, and I was shocked at how well they did!
Respect for the goal of making Darth Vader more lethal and intimidating and Luke more gifted. I want Vader and Luke to be that way. I just think the original version gets that across just as well.
I smashed the three duel sections together, and the color is the ungraded HDR footage, but it should still give you a pretty good idea of what it looks like.
This was an interesting watch. I prefer the original version, a lot more was cut then I like (the 3rd “act” of the duel is actually my favorite; “It is useless to resist” is an all-time shot), but the edit isn’t bad.
If you’d like to see my prequelized version of the Empire Duel, that’s ready to go if you’re interested.
I’m interested.
Could I see your edit of the ANH duel?
I could go down a slippery slope of asking to see every one, so I’ll just limit myself to the one I’m most interested in.
I’ve heard several stories about how the reason for the Death Star II in ROTJ is because Lucas originally wanted to save the Death Star for last, but didn’t think he’d be able to make more then one movie.
That just leaves me to wonder: what would it even be like if he had stuck with that plan, saving the Death Star for the 3rd film in the trilogy, and thus ANH was without the Death Star? A huge chunk of the plot revolves around it. It almost seems impossible to imagine the film without it. In that case, what was he thinking the movie would be about?
Basically, in the Gospels, Jesus’ disciples think he is going to violently overthrow the oppressive Roman Empire and lead them to freedom. Instead, Jesus allows himself to be sacrificially killed in order to restore Mankind’s relationship with God, Nature, and other Human Beings by defeating Sin, Death, and Evil on the cross. In STAR WARS, the Jedi in the Prequels and the Rebel Alliance in the OT try to defeat evil politically and through warfare, but the real victory comes when Luke and Anakin both sacrifice themselves to defeat the Emperor.
Of course Star Wars is a myth, and therefore falls under very supernatural logic. I’m very much in agreement that Star Wars needs to be treated more like a myth then pure sci-fi.
There are plenty of times in the Bible where good things happen violently. There’s more violence in the Bible then most stories. The Hebrew God is very violent, and it’s always portrayed as righteous.
Jesus’ sacrifice is entirely about giving people who have sinned a path to heaven, nothing to do with the fall of the Roman Empire.
The two demon space Nazis didn’t stop being demon space Nazis because Luke preached love. He tries with Vader and fails.
Christian mythology isn’t the only one Star Wars is based on. There’s also lots of classical mythology infused into it. And the Greek and Roman gods were anything but pacifists. Heracles (the demigod Son of Zeus, the King of the Gods) proved himself as a hero through violent trials.
I’d even argue Star Wars’ equivalent to demigods (the Skywalkers) harkens a lot more to Heracles then Jesus, with the exception of the Chosen One thing.
The OT is still about restoring man and defeating sin (though replace relationship with God with the Force), but it doesn’t wholesale reject violence. And violence can be committed out of loving sacrifice. They’re not mutually exclusive.
Luke wins when he defeats Vader, but refuses to give into the dark side.
The Rebellion ultimate wins when Anakin kills the Emperor. It’s a loving self-sacrifice, but still a violent solution, and it saves the galaxy.
Does Luke’s decision to lay down his weapon make sense? No.
I wasn’t criticizing the story, I was pointing out that Luke made a mistake. Which is good writing, it’s consistent with the portrayal of his character.
It wasn’t smart of him to let his guard down in front of the Emperor. If it wasn’t for what was practically a miracle (a genocidal tyrant deciding to be selfless for his son), the Rebellion would’ve lost.
Neither did his decision not to kill the Ewoks that captured him and Han a few scenes prior.
Because he knew he had to win the Ewoks to his side if they were to beat the Empire. He realized there was a higher purpose for them and gained their trust.
Starting a war with the Ewoks whilst already fighting the Empire would be terrible.
Both of those irrational decisions lead to the Force being brought back into balance, whereas Anakin’s rational decision to try to save Padme from death, led him down a dark path.
That was not a rational decision. He made that decision out of power-hunger, a desire to cheat death.
And the way it’s portrayed in the Prequels makes him look like a moron. He trusts a guy who admits to lying to him his whole life based on some legend that he has no evidence of.
Meanwhile, when Vader tried to convert Luke, not only did he actually tell him the truth (that he can sense through the Force is true), but Luke actually has reason to believe Vader will hold up his end of the deal.
The way to solve this, I think, is to portray it as dark side addiction more broadly (like Luke), and emphasize that the Sith have always been searching for the secret to cheat death.
Anakin would find ancient Sith holocrons and scrolls describing their goal of immortality (for both himself and his loved ones). Intrigued, he starts experimenting with the dark side, and becomes addicted to it.
He knows the dark side is the only path to what he wants, it’s about subverting nature, while the light side is about respecting it (being a Force ghost isn’t what they want, as they “release” themselves, essentially becoming pure agents of the Force).
Also, Palpatine would outright say, “I want the power as much as you do. Join me and we’ll find it together.”
There several parallels to Frankenstein and the other Gothic monsters, as well as Doctor Faustus. The dark side is the Devil’s work.
Anakin is both Victor Frankenstein and his Creature: in becoming Darth Vader, he becomes his own monster out of his selfish ambition to cheat death. And like Victor, its done out of ego and greed.
Even Vader’s “If you only knew the power of the dark side!” line is a parallel to the Invisible Man’s power-hungry rant to Flora from the 1933 classic.
In this way Obi-Wan’s destruction of Darth Maul wasn’t wrong, but it didn’t lead to the Force being brought back into balance, rather it continued the cycle of violence.
It didn’t bring balance to the Force because Maul wasn’t behind everything, Palpatine was.
It also didn’t continue anything. There’s 10 years of peace after. It actually put a setback in Sidious’ plans, only remedied because a Jedi with Separatist sentiments decided to become evil.
The Biblical/Christian narrative logic is that the restoration of loving relationships between God, Man, and Nature, and the destruction of violent cycles doesn’t come through victory in battle or politics, but through loving sacrifice. That is why the “victory” in Lord of the Rings comes through Frodo’s sacrifice, not Aragorn’s victory in battle.
Frodo beats Sauron because he pushes Gollum off a cliff. Nobody could resist the strength of the ring that close to the volcano. Gollum basically accidentally saved Middle Earth.
And Aragon’s violent solution was necessary, otherwise Sauron’s minions would’ve murdered Frodo and Sam the second they entered Mordor. Just like the events of ROTJ couldn’t have happened without the Battle of Yavin or Endor.
Aragorn was going into to battle knowing he could potentially die. He was, for all intents and purposes, lovingly sacrificing himself. He was fighting for love of the people of Middle Earth, for Frodo, not out of hatred for Sauron. It’s honorable.
I feel like ppl way extrapolate the slavery thing as presented in the Prequels. They assume that it’s the same thing as American slavery bc most of us have been primed to think that way.
In the films themselves, it’s obviously still inhumane and cruel to own someone, but Anakin wasn’t physically abused. It even portrays his relationship with his owner as somewhat comedic (which is… an odd creative choice, to say the least). It’s not even mentioned in the other two movies as a source of pain or trauma, only losing his mother.
It’s not meant to be any worse then Luke’s upbringing (he had it rough too, living on a harsh desert planet).
Which is why I’m of the belief that slavery shouldn’t have been invoked in the first place. He should’ve just been a moisture farmer, like Luke.
Part of the OT’s narrative is that Luke is just as likely to then to the dark side as Anakin was.
It’s not taking a circumstances view, but placing the responsibility of their fates entirely on their own choices.
Also, it doesn’t come across that deep. Just cheesy romantic dialogue. And while that can work, it doesn’t, in that instance.
Goodness Gracious, that’s a lot of questions, lol! I’ll do my best to address them all, but if I miss one gimme a shout.
My apologies. I get carried away sometimes.
- How did you bring the Prequel Duels into alignment with the Duels in the OT? - There’s two pronged answer to that. On the technical side the OT Duels are cut on the wrong frames which makes them feel slow. If you use the same cutting techniques that Ben Burtt used in the Prequels, they can hit with the same speed/force (except the famous SC38, but I came up with an unorthodox way to fix that problem).
On the other hand, the Prequel Duels suffer from sequencing issues (that’s why they feel “overstimulating and hollow” as you correctly pointed out), but if you resequence them to match the sequencing of the OT Duels, they also line up nicely. That’s exactly what I did to make the Grievous Duel more engaging.
I’m glad. I’m quite interested in seeing the results.
For the record, I’m not of the opinion that the OT duels are too slow, tho I find the ANH one a little clunky. I think the Vader and Luke duels are perfect the way they are, but I’m still interested in seeing your versions.
- How did you address the “power levels” of the duelists across the SAGA? - I made a single story decision, and then recut all the duels to serve that decision. Basically, there’s a story problem when it comes to the duels. The visual symbolism is telling one story, and the dialogue is telling another. The dialogue says that Luke must train hard enough to tear down Darth Vader in a death match, whereas the visuals say he must stay his hand to break the cycle of violence.
Watch the Visuals: Maul cut’s down Qui-Gon, so Obi-Wan retaliates by cutting Maul in Half. Dooku cuts off Anakin’s arm, so Anakin cuts off his hands and kills him. Obi-Wan de-limbs Anakin, so Anakin kills Obi-Wan out of revenge. Vader cuts off Luke’s hand, so Luke cuts off Vader’s hand, BUT!!! in that moment Luke stops and looks at his own hand. The reason he does that is because he finally understood the meaning of his vision in the Cave of Evil. If he cuts off Vader’s head, he becomes Darth Vader, and the cycle of violence and revenge continues. That is why Luke throws away his lightsaber and says he’s a Jedi like his father before him. The Jedi in the Prequels had become like the Sith, engaged in the never-ending cycle of revenge. That circle must be broken for balance to return to the Force. Obi-Wan’s sacrifice in A New Hope is actually his most important lesson to Luke. He is showing Luke the way to bring balance: lower your guard and sacrifice yourself. If you recut the OT so that Obi-Wan and Yoda tell Luke he must “face” Vader but cut all mentions of them telling Luke to kill him, the whole SAGA suddenly makes thematic sense.
But the dialogue isn’t ever explicitly telling Luke to kill Vader.
While the trilogy builds up to Luke being skilled enough to fight Vader, it’s not saying he should murder his father in rage.
It’s telling him to face and defeat him, but warning him that he might have to kill him out of duty, if he has to. Whatever it takes to render him a non-threat to the galaxy’s freedom.
Luke is Vader’s blood, thus he’s their only hope of defeating him (besides Leia, but she hasn’t even started her training yet).
The Jedi aren’t counting on Vader being conflicted (as is what happens), nor do they want Luke to give into a dark side power boost, so even sending Luke to fight Vader is risky, because normally, in the ROTJ-era, they’re equals in terms of power and skill (which is essentially peak Force-user).
But again, Luke’s their best chance. As such, he needs to go in with full conviction.
Obi-Wan and Yoda don’t believe there’s any good in Vader. Of course they don’t, Vader is a cold-blooded monster, at this point.
What they didn’t know is that he still had a genuine soft spot for his son, beyond wanting him for power.
But even so, Anakin doesn’t resurface until after two movies of psychologically and physically abusing his son to try and make him his tool. Vader even sadistically gloats about turning his sister after killing him if he refuses, and watches him get excruciatingly electrocuted for over a minute.
Vader’s stance is “Join me or die” (at least, that’s what he says, and thus, it must be accounted for). Luke has to be comfortable with fighting for his life and the freedom of the galaxy.
Luke can’t kill him out of revenge (the dark side, thus going down the path of an addiction to this dark magic that’s incredibly hard to let go of), but must be willing to out of duty, compassion for the people of the galaxy (the light side), if he must.
Vader and the Emperor are space Nazis. Fascists’ endgame is always violence. If a supernaturally powerful space Nazi is trying to kill you because you won’t join him, you can’t just let him. Otherwise, you’ve let fascism win. This is why Anakin killing Palpatine out of love for his son is framed as heroic.
And while Luke makes the right choice to not give into revenge, he still makes a mistake in completely letting his guard down, he leaving himself vulnerable to the Emperor’s lightning, which is exactly what Yoda and Obi-Wan warned him about. While this is remedied by the return of Anakin, that wasn’t the smartest thing to do.
Obi-Wan surrendered to Vader because he knows he can’t beat him, and Luke was gonna rush up to help him. The galaxy’s hope would’ve gotten himself killed too soon. Ben surrendered to teach Luke to let go and protect him and his friends, so they could escape.
Obi-Wan killing Maul isn’t wrong. He did it in self-defense. He was in a life-and-death situation and did his duty. There is no negative consequence to this kill, nor does Obi-Wan have any arc about revenge.
- Did you cut any Vader scenes out of Empire Strikes Back? - Yes. Several. But cutting out those scenes, massively improves the Vader scenes that remain, so you ironically end up with more iconic Vader scenes instead of less. I’m not gonna tell you which Vader scenes I cut here, cause you’ll have to wait for the episode where I address that part of the recut 😉.
Every Vader scene in the OT is already iconic to me, so I disagree, but again, I’m curious as to what you did and your reasoning for it.
- Grievous can feel pain in his robot arms, why did you goof that up in your recent episode? - First, you’re absolutely right that cyborgs (like Luke Skywalker) can feel pain in their artificial limbs. Second, I cut most of the “Droid Pain” out of my version of the SAGA (Threepio doesn’t bonk his head on Bespin, the Droid Torture Scene has been cut from Return of the Jedi, The Battle Droids don’t scream when they’re killed, ect. . .) My thinking is that Droids can “express” pain as part of their self-preservation programming, but do not “feel pain” the way a human or a cyborg would. When it comes to General Grievous, I’m sure he “feels pain” in his organic bits, but I cannot imagine there would be a tactical advantage to him “feeling pain” in his limbs. In Grievous’ fighting style his “limbs” are used like “tools” (think the Buzz-Saw-Arm-Move). If one arm goes down, the other three need to keep spinning to finish the kill shot. If you’ve ever watched Robot Wars, the robot that generally wins isn’t the one that doesn’t get hit, but rather the one that follows through with it’s own hit as it’s being hit. In my view pain receptors would get in the way of that particular fighting style, so I recut the scene as if Grievous had 4 “weapons”, not 4 “hands”. Does that make sense?
I’m a little confused on the “express” pain but can’t “feel” it. Expression is making one’s feelings explicit. You can’t express something you can’t feel. Feelings are how we get information about what’s happening to our body.
Regardless, I see what you’re going for with Grievous. I only wonder if him basically having CIPA is worth the trade-off. But you do you.
Lando probably found some other way. There are more then one ways to get into acquaintance with a mob boss.