Darth Lucas said:
Also, I think it would be beneficial so this thread is not further delayed for Ady to possibly start a "Revisited Prequel Ideas Thread" of some kind.
It already exists.
they decided that the best
of varying degree, so once
RicOlie_2 said:
Wh s ths thrd stll lv?
Bcs kp pstng n t.
If it's going to happen, they'd better do it soon when demand is still high. It's almost been 20 years since the SEs came out, and younger people don't care about the OOT for the most part.
TV's Frink said:
Possessed said:
TV's Frnk sd:
DmncCbb sd:
F ds sht
Ths
fxd
???
'm srr, thr r n cnsnnts n tht pst.
I took a look at it earlier today, and I experienced some odd video distortion at the end. Anyone else have this issue?
unamochilla2 said:
generalfrevious said:
Now I might have said I liked TPM for three years before I realized it sucked; now that I think about it, what I really meant to say was that it took me three years to realize that Padme was Queen Amidala all along.
Otherwise I believe I was in denial about the badness of Episode I for a while; even when I first saw it I found Anakin to be annoying, Jar Jar Binks to be out of place, and the whole film did not feel like Star Wars. What really disappointed me about the PT was that once Qui-Gon died he was almost never mentioned again. I was hoping he would be the Obi-Wan of the new trilogy and that he would come back as a force ghost in Episodes II & III. The good news is that it took me a lot less time to shake off the next two movies.
I'm surprised Lucas didn't do that considering he was trying to "rhyme" certain PT aspects with OT.
I don't think Liam Neeson wanted to come back. Otherwise, that would've happened.
"W" s nt vwl.
RicOlie_2 said:
Because the site was down?
Thanks, Frink Jr.
So, any explanation as to why I couldn't get on the site for the past three days?
Bt prnns smtms s nl vwls!
A shame, I love film. I went to see a 70mm showing of Interstellar recently, and it's hard to go back to the sterile digital movies of today.
It appears as if that list wasn't too far off from the truth. Guys, meet the next director of Star Trek... JUSTIN LIN!!
Well, Star Trek isn't ever coming back, I guess I should try to accept that now.
While we're gushing over your work, allow me to add to it.
Before I heard about the Despecialized Edition, my love for Star Wars was long gone. When I saw A New Hope, I knew the CGI ships and Jabba were out of place for a 70s movie, but I had no idea that changes were made later (so, not quite that bright, but at least I knew something was weird here). Now, your work has allowed me to enjoy these movies again, without being taken out by all the weird changes.
And, just like the original Star Wars films inspired filmmakers, your project has made me passionate for film restoration/preservation, and over the past year-ish I've learned so much about it. I'm just so amazed and shocked at just how willy-nilly we treat our cultural heritage. Thanks for opening my eyes.
Gah! This crypticness is driving me crazy. What is it?!
SilverWook said:
Will be interesting to see what they air in the future!
Let's see if they use the BD transfer or an untouched film print. This shall be interesting.
Harmy said:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Star-Wars-Trilogy-Despecialized-Edition/1470169959925877
Neat! I've just liked and shared this, I hope it'll be kept updated. What made you do this now, if I might ask? I always got the idea that you wanted to bring this issue to light, but didn't really want too much publicity on your project (for obvious reasons).
I'm glad you did this, though. More people need to know about your work.
Handman said:
So, I know it's been awhile since you last posted your work-in-progress "Introducing the Despecialized Edition", Harmy, but I do have some feedback on one thing that irks me.
When the narrator begins talking about the National Film Registry, he says, "But it was here that a problem would occur." This phrasing irks me, because it suggests that the main problem we have is that the NFR doesn't have an archival print. The problem occurred with the introduction of the 1997 SE, not the fact that the NFR doesn't have an archival print. This line could be removed entirely and get the same point across.
Thoughts?
As an English teacher, Harmy, you understand what I'm trying to get across, right? Let me know if I'm being bothersome, I know that other people try to push really stupid ideas around here.
First, ask them your real question. That would probably have a better chance at getting a response from them.
What do you guys think of this?
Star Trek: 50 Years of Humanism: http://youtu.be/Qe7axuTmoUg
Well, they had to plaster Hayden's head on top somehow!
So I'm assuming that the discussions on these projects, like the Alice in Wonderland 35mm, are much more active over there than here? That's one I've been interested in.
Somehow he'd make it look wierd.
It worked.