Harmy

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Star-Wars-Trilogy-Despecialized-Edition/1470169959925877

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Star-Wars-Trilogy-Despecialized-Edition/1470169959925877

After a bit of a hiatus, I finally started working on ROTJ v2.0. Here's a first look :-)

Well, I feel this phrasing is perfectly ok, because while yes, the preservation of the original isn't our only goal - we of course want it to be released to the public - I feel it conveys nicely how important the issue is and how barbaric is the behaviour of trying to suppress the original so far as to not even give a copy to an official state-operated preservation organisation.

And the problem didn't by any means occur with the introduction of the SE in 1997 - did any sort of problem occur with the introduction of the Extended Editions of LOTR or the  Final Cut of Blade Runner?

@Dennis: Well, I meant you could just PM me the links and I'd add them to the main teh thread under the heading of "other language options" but you can of course start your own thread as well, if you want :-)

@Yirmeyahu: I'm taking care of the animation and stuff myself. I would however love for someone to do the menu (as in create the buttons and stuff) and disc authoring for me - it's way over my head and I don't really feel like learning it all.

Yeah - it may be a good idea to add a separate piece to tehparadox with "other language options" in it, where I could put links to alternate audio tracks, which won't be a part of the final release itself.

Oh, actually, I use AC3, not AAC. Also, CatBus is right, I'd like to use only one dubs per language (except English of course) and I always want to go with the most original one - like the new BD dub in my language is superior in most ways - far better audio quality, better translation, better pronunciation of the SW words and stuff but it holds no emotional value for me, so I'm still using the old VHS dubs.

But it's great if you want to provide your edits for people to mux in themselves. 

Personally, in this case, I don't really care about how faithful the movie was to the book but the fact that some movies are way worse doesn't mean that these are not bad movies. Sure they have good aspects but to me, they are just boring as hell - especially the last two.

Like, there certainly are many films worse than the SW prequels but that doesn't make them any less bad.

Or just get rid of Star Wars from the others completely and make the titles as big as SW on the first one.

Hopefully, yeah.

Interesting. What are the other two?

Contact CatBus, he's our chief foreign language archivist and he'll make sure, that it can be included in any future releases.

For uloz google one of the checksums and see the pastebin link.

Same here.

Right? I absolutely don't understand why they would do this. Even the orks shouldn't have been CGI but it's still kind of understandable but this was just too much.

So, I saw the new Hobbit movie on Friday and now I finally got over the shock of how awful it was enough to write something about it.

!WARNING - minor spoilers ahead!

First of all, let me say that after the first two films I went into this one with super low expectations and yet it still managed to disappoint me bitterly - I just couldn't believe how boring it was.

As expected, three quarters of the film are comprised of megalomanic battle shots of immense armies of generic CGI figures and since the previous films didn't manage to build any kind of real affection or even sympathy in me for any of the sides fighting in the battle, I didn't care at all about who'd win and who'd lose.

The only character I was at least a little bit emotionally invested in was Bilbo, who however gets so little screen-time that the title of the film isn't even justified. There is no clear protagonist in this movie - you may think it's Thorin but he didn't manage to win my sympathies in the previous films and while he does have a last minute change of heart towards the end of this one, he spends most of it acting like a first class a-hole and actually in a way, the closest thing to a protagonist this movie has is the character of Bard, who at least has a righteous claim in this battle and tries to resolve things peacefully but is denied by Thorin, which sort of makes Thorin one of the many villains of this movie rather than the hero.

Perhaps the best that can be said about the movie is that it has quite a few moments that made me chuckle, some of them even intentionally. The moments which were supposed to be the most emotional and sad were conveyed with such pathos that they were actually rather humorous and the fights between the "heroes" and the main villains once again looked like a video-game and totally ignored the laws of physics and because I either didn't really care about the people in those fights or I knew they would survive, the stakes were almost as low as in the battles of the faceless CGI fighters.


The cherry on the top of the sh*t-pile was when I noticed that the dwarf Dain (Thorin's cousin) inexplicably seemed to be CGI and looked like the characters from the CGI animated Beowulf movie - that was the moment I seriously considered walking out of the theater.

All-in-all it was the weakest of the three Hobbit films and that is saying something. I have been watching the extensive extras from the extended edition of Desolation of Smaug over the last week and it makes me kind of sad to see how much work and love and care was poured into these films - especially into designing the world - only to end up with something which is beautifully designed and crafted but painfully mediocre in all its other aspects. In my book Peter Jackson can go ishkh khakfe andu null.

RU.08 said:

Harmy said:

BTW. how do you make a question mark with your Shift key broken?

 hold Alt press 6, 3.

 Oh, sorry, the question was actually aimed at jedimasterobiwan, because he surely knows, since he does use question marks, while his Shift key is clearly broken ;-) 

There are quite a few edits of the prequels which attempt to fix those things and they may still fit with the animated shows but Revisited certainly won't be one of them.

BTW. how do you make a question mark with your Shift key broken?

Yes, with AnyDVD HD (you need the absolute latest beta version for GotG) I can play the 3D BD in MPC-HC in 2D and even in 3D with Stereoscopic Player (I don't have a 3D monitor though, so I can only watch 3D in anaglyph, so that kind of sucks).

Yeah, my parents' TV is a Samsung and it can play MKV from a USB drive but it often doesn't support the audio codecs.

So, I just bought the Czech BD 3D set and can confirm, that the 2D disc has the tint too :-(

Luckily, I watch most of my BDs through my computer, so I can watch the 3D disc in 2D or adjust the colors of the 2D BD on the run.

Oh, ok, I checked and the theatrical BD actually has the original version, so all is good - I agree, that the extended version is definitely fair game for changes and improvements.

It's clearly either a very warm back-light or a badly set camera - you can see the perforated stripes on the sides are yellow too and those are clear, so should be white :-)

And that's only from a print, I imagine an IP or the composite used in the original negative (if still usable) could yield far better results!

Revisionism is becoming a complete norm - I've just been watching the Hobbit TDoS EE BD extras and they said that in the DVD and BD release of the first Hobbit, they re-did some shots of Smaug in the prologue to match the TDoS version of him.

And to comment on topic - and I said this countless times before - in a case of a semi-special edition, who will decide what's still ok and what isn't - for someone the line could be drawn at matte-lines, to someone else it may be the windows in Cloud City and to yet another person a digital Dewback may be preferable to a stiff rubber figurine. Whereas for a restoration with the clear goal of trying to get as close to the way the movie looked on opening day, the path is perfectly clear and isn't really up for debate.