ImperialFighter

Those look REALLY neat Darth Solo!  Any chance of showing a more 'straight-on' look at your bottom set on here sometime? -  http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-DVD-Covers/topic/741/

And just a thought, but might the spine pics on the red and green cases look better if they matched those colours too?

Monroville said:

I think it's fine as-is.  If anything I could see maybe 2 or 3 SDs far in front of the Executor and it's 2 escorts (say add one to the left and center that are the same size or even a bit smaller than the one way out in front directly to the right of Hoth), and show them moving to the left, top and right (spreading out, forming the outer part of the net).  If there was any problem I have with that shot, it's that I'm left saying: "where's the fleet?"

I would at least move that SD beside the Executor's right and move it little bit more to the right (or top) and put some space between the two.  Right now it looks like the driver could easily make a slight left turn and wreck right into the SSD conning tower.

I too remember thinking ages ago that this was a shot where adywan could potentially end up choosing to show more Stardestroyers, making the fleet seem larger.

However, I now reckon the existing layout works fine just as it is, as going by the 'camera-pan' to the left that we see of the fleet here, any 'other' Stardestroyers (the number is unclear) could just be off-screen a little to the side/behind the Executor at this point, and unseen by our point-of-view....allowing you to imagine your own preference about overall numbers and how 'spread out' the fleet could be, if you see what I mean -

Can't say I agree with the idea of moving the Executor's accompanying right-hand SD further up either, as it's on the same trajectory as the Executor, and very unlikely to deviate.  You could just as easily say that the one on the left could crash into it too if it's course was deliberately changed, if that's the case.

This shot comes immediately after the Rebel General has just been told that the fleet is *coming out'* of hyperspace (and I agree with a lot of Rogue Leader's assesment on the previous page), and Vader orders Piett to 'deploy the fleet so that nothing gets off the system' *after* this shot....implying that the SDs may only start to 'spread outwards' afterwards, as they move closer to the planet....which certainly ties in with the eventual SD positioning that adywan has shown much closer to the planet a little later on. 

I also remember that adywan reckoned that the Executor would 'hang back' a bit from the main 'blockading' fleet, and Hoth is certainly a good distance away at this point, compared to his later shot where he now shows additional standard Stardestroyers around the planet.  So unlike the standard SDs, I now imagine that the Executor didn't end up travelling too much nearer to Hoth after we see it in this 'approach' shot.

And after having another look at the tight point-of-views seen during all the existing 'blockade' shots that follow after this 'approach' shot....I'm now also content that we might not necessarily be able to see the Executor in any of them.  If it ends up added somewhere in the distance during any of them, fair enough, but the original shots work fine without it anyway I reckon.

I'm very pleased with what adywan has tweaked though.  :) 

By the way, my heart nearly stopped for a moment yesterday, as it seemed plausible that the clumsy dopes that broke ady's workdesk *might* have re-wired things badly too....  Whew!

Stunning new shots there adywan!

The starfield....the grey TIEs (with red lights)....the great colour of the Executor....the various engine glows and glow reflections (and Jeyl's nice spot already replaced with the fixed version!)....the Hoth planet....

It's like 'Preview Thursday' all over again, except it 'aint Thursday.

Amazing stuff.

Oops.  Haven't double-posted since ages....till now

Move along.

doubleofive said:

TV's Frink said:

Awesome thread idea, vfp.  Which reminds me, why not add common abbreviations for people's user names?

I call ImperialFighter "ImpFight" sometimes, or at least I want to.

Just make it 'Imp' and save on the typing....

You've earned the right.  :)

savmagoett said:

If you leave aside Mark Hamill and his prop antenna you'll see that the backgrounds in all these shots are not different mattes but a model, the same in each shot, filmed differently, you can see it especially in these shots where the perspective is actually changing within the shot, as the camera is panning (note that Luke here is a stop motion animated miniature included in the model)

All miniatures eh?  Interesting.  I always thought that some of the City 'underside' elements were mattes.  Perhaps the colouration of the 2004 release has given me that impression over the last few years.  I also didn't know that a 'stop-motion' Luke miniature was included in a couple of those shots.

Sure will be interesting to see if adywan decides to do anything with the various inconsistencies here.

Interesting James Cameron interview where he discusses his thoughts on 2D-3D 'conversion', and what's on the November 'Special Edition' release of 'AVATAR', among other things - http://www.collider.com/2010/03/24/james-cameron-interview-avatar-blu-ray-also-talks-titanic-3d-and-avatar-2/

Yes, that's exactly right where the 2 shots you've shown are concerned, corellian77.  The matte of the City's 'underside' is identical , but Luke has shifted to the right in your bottom shot.  And the clouds are strangely identical too of course, but that's for another day....

But just to clarify, the thing I was referring to at the end of my post, was that the 'vanes' in this shot do not tie-in with the other mattes, where Luke's position is in relation to them -

ImperialFighter said:

15.  And as far as this shot of the approaching TIEs....well, they could be coming from anywhere that's in a generally opposite direction to where the Falcon approached Luke.

Here's the start of it....

16.  And here's the middle of it....

17.  And here's the end of it....

Although the shot above is not a static shot of the underside in this instance, the long 'stem' can still be easily imagined to be offscreen somewhere due to the huge area that makes up the size of the City's underside.  Like the previous shots, this one only covers a small portion of it surface, and so can tie in with that notion without any problems....

18.  And the same goes for this next shot too.  The Falcon only begins to move off from it's 'hovering' position at this point, after saving Luke, and seeing the approaching TIEs.  It begins to veer to the right, and the long 'stem' that is presumed to be offscreen on the left of the Falcon would remain unseen.  Here's the start of the shot....

19.  And here's the end of it....

20.  So the Falcon continues to turn around to the right, and we still only see a fraction of the overall surface of underneath the City....so the 'stem' would still be somewhere offscreen on the left of the frame.  Here's the start of the shot....

21.  And here's the end of it....

And although there is some 'camera-movement' during this shot above, it only moves to the right as well as pulling back slightly....so the long 'stem' on the left of the frame would still remain offscreen.

22.  Our final look at 'Cloud City' is where the Falcon is now roughly heading back the way it came, to escape the on-coming TIEs seen in shots 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19.  Now we can see the 'stem' again....  :)

So if Adywan doesn't do anything to the existing City underside angles, then they already work for me anyway, I'm glad to say.

 

You'd need to watch the scene in motion, but I reckon it would be neat to see a hint of the TIEs somewhere behind the Falcon in shots 20 and 21 too, as it seems that they have caught up too suddenly in the shots that come afterwards.

This was my take on it, that I described in my recent long post on page 664 savmagoett - http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/STAR-WARS-EP-V-AVAILABLE-NOW/post/403952/#TopicPost403952

Although as far as *where exactly* any additional chasing TIEs should be positioned in the Falcon shot I've shown in shots 20 and 21....well, that's turned out not to be as straightforward as I thought it might be....  However, having really studied a few shots before and after it, I've come to a conclusion.  Need to organise a couple of screenshots for this first, but I'll get to it.

Good call on the Falcon being the wrong distance from Luke though, which you just beat me to last night.  Glad to see that adywan is already going to fix that too.  :)

Another thing that I noticed in those shots of Luke getting rescued by the Falcon was this -

There are initially a few static matte shots identical to this one below (all shown in my page 664 post), where Luke is on the left of the frame, and the angle of the underside and the positions of the 'vanes' are exactly the same....

....until we eventually come to this one below, where Luke is more to the right of the frame, even though the rest of the matte is still identical.  Also note that there are 2 lights constantly on, close to his position in them all....

 ....but they disappear during the 'hovering Falcon' shot that comes soon after....

....then re-appear in this differently angled matte that comes shortly afterwards....

....which makes it seem like these 2 lights are missing from the 'hovering Falcon' shot....or so I thought.... 

....because if you compare the 'hovering Falcon' shot to the others closely, it seems that the positions of the various 'vanes' around Luke in it are in totally different places in relation to him, compared to all the other mattes....  No biggie, as we cut away to cockpit shots in-between all these anyway, which makes things less noticeable.   Just sayin'.

There's a couple of relevant things here concerning vaderios recent 'underside' mock-ups, that I'd like to go into too, shortly.  But again, I'll need to organise screenshots.

Yes, that would be a good way to start the next instalment to keep track of things.  Good luck with that as It's bound to turn into as big a monster as 'Empire:R' has!  :)

This one I'm doing is just a basic 'catch-up' to keep me right.

GoodMusician, sorry for any inconvenience as I hadn't thought of that!  oops.

I just reckoned this seemed like a logical place to do this, seeing as this thread had started to do this kind of thing a while back.  If you wish, I can re-do it from scratch on a different thread of my own, then delete what I've put up so far (to avoid confusion).  No worries, and let me know what you think.

none, I think I see what you're saying, but I wanted to lay this out starting with the way adywan's 'official' changes list was written, except with 'consecutive' numbering instead.  This then dictates the way I want to add further suggestions, as I've decided that continuing with 'consecutive' numbers will be the easiest way for me to keep track of things, when scrolling up and down.

Each time I add on a new batch of additional past suggestions, I'll continue to include the same 'subheadings' seen on adywan's initial list, and group the new additions under them accordingly....so that there's some kind of easy-to-see 'context' that indicates what part of the movie they refer to, every time I include more.

Baronlando said:

How does everything end up being about Revisited? Fanedits are not the issue dude!

Seriously, I'm well aware that there's a bigger picture that will hopefully be put across properly in this documentary, such as the desire for the OOT to be released in a proper, respectful manner in a digital format, before whatever remains of the negatives degrades beyond repair.

Which was the other point I covered in my previous post.  While the adywan thing may end up a negative issue for me if it's handled in a certain way, the point about a decent OOT release being strongly wanted is *the* issue I hope this documentary gets right.

Lol, it's more to do with the 'post limitation' thing that gave me problems with my initial posts doubleofive.  As I've no idea when each individual post might cut off (some seemed shorter than others), I decided to take no chances where 'continuous' space was concerned.  :)

Jay recently mentioned that he'll be looking into the 'editing' feature at some point though.

Although life/P.C. hiccups have got in the way of adding more since my original posts, I hope to update here soon.  I'll give a heads-up on the main thread, come the time.

zombie84 said:

It's not about proving to the world that such and such fix is justified for such and such reasons because its inconsistent in a later shot, or whatever. The fact we are doing it in the first place is the real significance, and that's what the filmmaker is drawing attention to, as he should be.

Sure, but 'context' is everything, and whether anyone agrees with every single change in adywan's personal 'Revisited' take, or not, the fact remains that the overall impact of his alternative 'SE' amounts to much, much more than the particular instance highlighted in that interview. 

Guess I just think it comes off as a little dismissive-sounding that out of all the many impressive enhancements done by adywan, that it's the removal of a few 'critters' in that particular shot that was the thing that ended up being emphasised by these guys....rather than his overall, numerous, more-important efforts that made 'Revisited' such a hit in the first place, compared to the current SE.

But at the end of the day, that's me speaking as a huge fan of adywan's undoubted creativity, and only wishing to see his work properly acknowledged.  As others have said, we'll just need to wait and see how it 'comes across' in the actual footage....  I may yet be pleasantly surprised.

Also, I was hoping this particular documentary would take the opportunity to 'encourage' GL to finally release the Original Trilogy in a properly remastered, and respectful way, just as it should have been long ago. 

My own take about the GOUT versions that were belatedly/grudgingly released on dvd, is that they were a very poor product coming from a company that I'd always admired, and that previously prided itself on the highest quality presentation and cutting edge technology possible.  This particular 'laserdisc'-quality presentation would have been welcomed years before....but at the point it was eventually released, it was a very sub-par product compared to far lesser titles being given the gold-star treatment on dvd by then. 

I reckon the enhanced SE's are all well and good, but they are totally different entitys to the smash-hit originals that were originally put together, and should be treated as such.  If GL wishes to retrospectively give the impression that the much-loved originals of my youth (and actual cinematic history) were nothing more than mere 'unfinished works-in-progress' at that point, then that's up to him.  But I certainly don't agree with him.

So it will also be a pleasant surprise if this documentary actually focuses a little on this aspect, rather than being merely another Jar Jar/Prequels bash-fest.  Fingers crossed.

What may be 'nit-picking' to some, is much-appreciated 'care and attention to detail' to others.  How about this example.  Here's adywan's original preview of this scene -

....and this is his latest version -

....where we now have a balcony 'railing'! 

A trivial thing in the scheme of things, but yet another neat, subtle addition from adywan.  Nice work.  :)

50th post

Reserved for future updates.

49th post

Reserved for future updates.

48th post

Reserved for future updates.

47th post

Reserved for future updates.

46th post

Reserved for future updates.

45th post

Reserved for future updates.

44th post

Reserved for future updates.

43rd post

Reserved for future updates.

42nd post

Reserved for future updates.

41st post

Reserved for future updates.