ImperialFighter

Okay, here it is then, the second unconvincing 'prop' seen during the marvellous AT-AT GROUND BATTLE that niggles me no end every time I see it. 

Seen here with Luke's foot on it, it's the one that is meant to represent the uppermost narrow end of one of the the almost 'plectrum'-shaped 'moving sections' that joins the very top of the AT-AT's rear left leg onto the side of it's body -

I already brought this particular badboy up a good while ago Adywan, and you mentioned at the time that it would probably have to just be left as it is, and that it wasn't really something that had ever really bothered you too much.  I understand that, and know that the shots are probably beyond salvage throughout the scene anyway.  The only reason I'm bringing it up again, is that since then, I've thought about a little something else that you might consider on....

Firstly, to briefly recap -  as most will know, the end shape of this uppermost AT-AT leg-piece 'full-scale prop' unfortunately looks nothing like the end shape on the leg-pieces that are on the actual miniature AT-AT's themselves.  And again, this 'prop' seems to 'wobble' about just a little too much, even to tie in with some of the 'shakier' stop-motion on show....  I don't know why this turned out so different from the look of the miniatures, but I'd be interested if anyone knows the reason (I'd like to think there is a good reason, rather than carelessness).  It certainly always makes for jarring continuity, when I see it. 

Anyway, after Luke has 'rappelled' upwards towards the section in question under the AT-AT's belly, the 2 other shots below give a reasonable view of how the end shapes should actually look like, to match the 'prop' to the miniatures -  

So then, it turns out that the ends of these 'leg pieces' look 'chunkier' on the miniatures, compared to the 'prop', as the ones on the miniatures have an 'outer ring' which has a shallow 'hollow' centre, where a small protruding detail sticks out from the middle.  In the shallow 'hollow', there seems to be just 3 small holes around the protruding detail.  You get the idea.  Unfortunately, there are also questions about scale and proportions too on the 'full-size prop' that Luke is beside.  It seems that the 'adjoining' leg pieces under the belly of the miniature AT-AT's are seen to be quite close to each other in a lot of shots such as the ones above, whereas Luke seems to have a lot of space to manoeuvre beside that single 'prop' piece....

So at the end of the day it is unlikely that much can be done.  However, a couple of little things that I would really like to see done to these shots, would be a little less 'wobble' if that is at all possible.  Again, things look fine in these still screenshots, but the actual 'movement' onscreen looks too unconvincing in a few places (to me anyway).  That could definately improve matters, but I don't know if that can be achieved in any of the shots.  Too bad if not. 

Another thing I would REALLY like to see is the slight, momentary glimpse of an added opposite 'adjoining' FRONT, RIGHT 'leg piece' section coming into view on the LEFT-hand space of the frame, when Luke is first seen reaching for his Lightsaber as he twists on reaching the underbelly.  On studying the movements during that shot, there does seem to be an ideal moment to add this in, as the 'framing' of the whole scene moves to the LEFT, then moves back to the RIGHT a little again, at one point (as if it has lurched forward during it's 'walking' forwards), just before  Luke swipes the underbelly with his now fully ignited Lightsaber.  The added glimpse of the new piece on the left-hand side would move back out of the frame, just before Luke swipes upwards.  This is just another little thing that could help matters greatly,  matters, and would tie in with the 'closeness' of the miniature's 'leg pieces' better.   I'd really like to see this if you agree.

The last little thing that occurred to me recently about why I disliked the dreadfully different 'prop' so much, is realising that because I know it is so different in it's shaped outline, compared to the shape of the the miniature versions, that my eye is always drawn to it.  But then I realised that I could just about put up with that wrong shape if it was made 'plainer', more 'invisible' in the scene....by getting rid of the also absolutely wrong 'detailing' that stands out on it, making you 'study' the piece!  Remember the 3 holes that surrounded the protruding bit inside the shallow 'hollowed'-out circle?  Well this 'prop' is covered in lots of distractingly wrong detail (which is nowhere close) and which is actually sticking-out around the protruding central bit on the 'prop', rather than being the 3 indented 'holes' that are seen on the miniature's detail.  My eye is drawn to them constantly, and if they weren't there at all, the whole 'prop' would seem 'simpler', yet more 'chunky', and certainly be 'more in the background' if you know what I'm getting at.  See what you think, but I am sure that this thing would be far better if all of these things were erased off it! 

Here's the sort of thing I mean -

 That's all for now.  Plenty more AT-AT madness to come in the coming days though.  :)

Aw man, really Monroville?  Personally, I always liked the overall colour/'movement' of the original Rebel trooper binocular graphic better than the plain original Luke binocular graphic.  I'd be sorry to see the effect either side go, and hope Adywan feels the same.

As far as the 'double circular' look to the front of the binoculars themselves, that didn't actually faze me too much in the past, as the end eyepiece that they looked through (as evident in the shot below) is somewhat 'rectangular' anyway, and I just used to accept that the Rebel trooper's 'rectangular' graphic was because it was just on a totally different 'setting', or was a 'modified' one compared to Luke's.  :) 

I have to say that in hindsight, that the 'double circle' graphic is far preferable over both the displays now, but I'd sure miss that colour/'movement' thing either side.

AuggieBenDoggie said:

 I do have a little request on the hoth battle. Could you give the smaller guns on the side of the head of the AT-AT's a little action. They never fire the whole time if I recall.

Just to say at this point, I now know that they definately do have several scenes where they are utilised throughout the battle for sure....and they aren't green either!  More on them soon.  :) 

Okay, here is the first part of a few 'AT-AT GROUND BATTLE'-related things I've been meaning to comment on for a while now Adywan, for you to consider (or shoot down, lol)....  It might take a little while to read through the two or three posts I'll need to eventually split them into, but here goes. (and many thanks to doubleofive who once again generously took the time to give me the exact numerous screenshots I wanted.) 

Firstly, can I say that while I wasn't quite sure about your change to the the AT-AT 'reveal' graphic at first, I've really come round to the look of it now, and realise that the consistency with the view from out of the identical Rebel binoculars will be a very good thing....

....however, although I know you confirmed that the 'red rectangle' would also be added to Luke's graphic too, I hope the same goes for the 'green and moving sections' that are seen either side of your new one.  These are my favourite elements from the original one, and they really add interest to the 'double-circle' version.  Nice work once again.

Although not straightforward, there are 2 things during the AT-AT battle that I'd personally most like to see improved in some way, if you would consider it, so I'll start with them, and offer a couple of possible ways to perhaps do that.  They both happen to involve the 'full-scale props' that were used....

This is my first offender -  it's not a long shot, but it's always been a frustrating one for me.  It's the AT-AT 'foot' that is hit by the tow cable that just seems to 'dangle' around momentarily in mid-air and 'wobbles' slightly, and isn't at all consistent with the movement of the miniature AT-AT 'feet' shots before and after it....

Now while it looks fine here in this still screengrab, the actual 'movement' onscreen is very poor.  From scrutinising the footage of the shot just afterwards where the snowspeeder has started to wrap the tow cable around the legs, it seems to have attached to the REAR, LEFT foot, before going around the back of the AT-AT.  This seems to tie-in with this 'prop' foot, which is shown with it's outer side to us.  Sadly, going by the angle of the 'prop' in the shot, and the distance we are away from it, we should probably have seen the opposing REAR, RIGHT leg/foot somewhere on the right of the frame, too....  I'd also suggest that the actual 'portion' of the 'prop' foot that is shown is actually not very well framed to begin with, and that some of the miniature 'close-ups' showed far better sections, such as the 'toes'.  I reckon some of the actual detailing is a little suspect too. 

Here's a very rough reminder of how it currently fits in sequence at some point in-between these other more convincing before and after miniature 'feet' shots, albiet without the brief 'intercutting' shots of the snowspeeder pilots which help to distract from any continuity problems in the look, colour, or backgrounds, when watching the movie -

If you plan to keep this shot mainly as it is, then perhaps you'd consider even trying to remove the 'wobble' of the 'prop'?  I doubt that the flimsy tow cable hitting the gigantic AT-AT's supposedly solid leg would affect it like that.  Also, perhaps you could study the look of of the REAR, LEFT foot on the miniature that precedes it (if you agree that this is the 'foot' in question), and better match some of it's details onto the 'prop', such as those involving the 'circle' areas?  And even the glimpse of a more prominent, more horizontal 'toe' added to the bottom right-hand side would be a welcome addition to help the poor framing a tad, and match how the preceding miniature one looked.

But on the other hand, maybe you'd even consider this, which has the potential to improve things much more dramatically, if you like the idea -  totally removing that 'prop' shot altogether, and replacing it with a brief 'flipped' version (but with a slightly different background) of existing footage of 'walking legs/feet' from the sequence where Luke is seen running underneath an AT-AT, which comes a good 4 minutes or so later on during the battle'!  

In the intervening 4 minutes or so, there's been a lot of action going on, due to numerous different scenes and cuts, with plenty of other AT-AT leg/foot shots to distract and mix things up from the 'memory' of the one that has gone before....so that by the time we get to the actual original, 'unflipped' scene with the 'walking legs/feet', you wouldn't really register that this brief AT-AT shot is the same one.  Luke would be need to be erased , and some difference made to the background, and a new tow cable would have to be added shown 'attaching' to the REAR, LEFT foot seen in the middle of the frame, and maybe colour-matched slightly (but as I said, there's intercutting pilot shots which make that less necessary).  It's just a thought, and the footage is just a tad longer than the 'prop' shot that it would replace, I checked.  So getting a length of shot that covers the same length as the 'prop' shot is no problem. 

And here's a very rough example of how including the 'flipped' shot would then look now, compared to the existing sequence shown above, although a watch of the actual moving footage will be needed to really get an idea of how it would turn out (remember, there would be no Luke in the scene, and there would be an added new tow cable 'attaching' to the back leg/foot, and intercutting between the different AT-AT shots with pilot shots) -

Okay, that's the first thing out of the way, don't know what you'll make of it, but I'll get to the other ones as soon as I can. 

Good point.  Maybe they're green.  ;)

C3PX said:

I really don't see him as an angry person, nor much indication of anger in his posts.

I've always enjoyed reading skyjedi2005's more, er... 'outstandingly indignant' opinions on certain things on this site, and have found myself to be in complete agreement with a lot of them!  As well as these more entertaining comments, he has also provided some very good ideas and informative stuff along the way too.

In fact, his contributions are some of my favourites, and I look forward to more from him.  :) 

Just a last comment on the whole Yoda thing from me.  I remember when I first read that a 'younger' Yoda design was going to be making an appearance in the then upcoming 'The Phantom Menace' prequel, thinking this would be a fantastic thing, considering he'd been such a great character.  I then remember wondering how he would turn out...and remember coming across this shot of the new Yoda sculpt, which I thought looked rather neat and badass -   http://www.dinocafe.com/gaz/Yoda.jpg

Then I eventually saw the version that ended up in the movie...and wondered what the hell happened to the look of the sculpt I'd previously seen! -   http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/4928/tpm-yoda4.jpg

At least the follow-up CGI design looks like it could probably age into the original classic look, thankfully.

And Adywan's tweaked Yoda looks to be the best of all.  Speaking of 'badass' Yodas, check these out, lol. -

http://www.alexandgregory.com/images/Darth%20yoda.jpg

http://www.owensworld.com/funnyimages/files/1167_yoda_big.jpg

doubleofive said:

 As for Yoda's wobbly ears, I also recall them specifically mentioning in the AoftC bonus features that they tried to replicate it in the CG model.  So by that logic, its officially not a limitation of the puppet, but a character trait of Yoda.

Ah, that's good then.  I guess I didn't recall that detail on the prequel one, as I'd 'switched off' a bit after The Phantom Menace...  Sure hope George puts out the CGI replacement instead of the puppet on the inevitable next re-release of TPM, before Ady gets round to that one though!

Monroville said:

Even, then, it is not natural that a living thing has wobbly ears, being that I do not know any human or mammal whose ears wobble when they move.

 I guess creatures like Yoda could evolve differently in galaxies far, far, away...  ;)

But seriously, I know what you mean with the slight 'vibration' thing, but considering what Adywan's now done with his latest tweaks, I personally think this is no biggie anymore.  It's perhaps a pity that this hadn't been implemented into the CGI Yoda ears in the prequels, even, to tie it in with the wonderful OT version better.   

By the way Monroville, you had some interesting comments on the whole Tauntaun eyes / ears / nose thing there, but unlike the production photo shown above, the actual footage only seems to have the briefest, moving glimpses of the likes of the nostrils, so it's none too obvious.  And although a lot of it is a moot point now, I liked reading some of your recent AT-AT battle 'what if' ideas too.

Anyway, the main thing I want to say is -  THE YODA 'PUPPET' BLINKS AT LAST!!

Wonderful, and more than once at that, during the latest clip.  Thankyou very much Adywan, as this has been a great start to the New Year where your project is concerned.  The subtlety of where you positioned them is perfect, and doesn't detract from the look of the excellent OT Yoda one bit. 

There's just one other place I'd have liked to have seen just one more in your scene, and that is at some point during when he walks sideways to our viewpoint, as he says "...for 800 years have I trained Jedi...my own council will I keep on who is to be trained."   However, this has turned out more than I could have wished for, and I imagine that there will be other subtle ones in some of his others scenes too, in future.  :)   Excellent stuff.  

Don't know how others here will feel about this, but I was impressed by the recent overhaul of the Fanedit.org homepage.  It now sports a more classy look to it, with a new logo typeface that presents an improved impact when you first visit there now.

It's just a thought, but what do others here feel about a similar enhancement to this beloved site's homepage too?  Perhaps with an enlarged OriginalTrilogy.com logo (whether redesigned or not) and bigger Star Wars character headshots also, for more of an impact when reaching this site?  It could be an opportunity to amend some of the initial information on the homepage too, if it's deemed necessary.

Any thoughts either way?

I sense great anger in you...

This has been an informative and entertaining page.  Thanks skyjedi2005 and the rest of you guys.  :)

I treasure my 4 disc anthology boxset.  Oh, and JEDI ROCKS! still doesn't...

As a huge fan of soundtrack music (well, the good 'uns anyway), I hope I can catch the forthcoming Star Wars Saga concert this year.  Just a pity it's not the actual London Symphony Orchestra involved...  Should still be epic stuff.

For myself, it was the realisation that where the original trilogy had been epic but 'child-like', the prequels were overblown and needlessly too 'childish' in places.

That, and the suspect new designs in certain areas...and the eye-rolling line delivery in places...

Still, cannot wait to see what Adywan will do with them eventually!  A new hope indeed...  :)

That is very good news to hear, congratulations. 

And so is the news that you are getting nearer to the end of your project.  It will be worth whatever the wait, I'm sure. 

A Happy New Year to you also.

adywan said:

 The At-At's were only sent down to knock out the shield generator. They weren't sent to wipe out the rebels at all. The original assault was from the Stardestroyers and was supposed to be a surprise attack. The Empire is quite cocky about their superiority over the rebels so i really don't think they would have sent a whole attack force down there just to destroy a shield. The Stardestroyers became a blockade and they were confident that they could stop all the escaping rebel ships.

Thanks for your latest interesting comments.  Once again, you've given a very logical reasoning to these particular sequence of events.  Good stuff.  5 AT-AT's (and possibly the AT-ST still) it is then, but with extra 'oomph'.

Sorry to hear that the odd Yoda eyeblink doesn't seem to be working out, but never mind.

And hopefully you can get as talented a collaborator as Will Martin was.  Fingers crossed.

adywan said:

i just want to wish everyone on here a Happy New Year.

So what do we all wish for in 2009?

I guess what we all want is the OUT released on Blu-ray & DVD fully restored with no horrible colour corrections.

What we will probably get is another rehash DVD box set release of the SE & GOUT. But i guess we can be hopeful

 

HAPPY NEW YEAR !!!

I'll echo that, and drink to that...again!

Actually, what I'm most looking forward to, that's Star Wars-related, is your current EMPIRE:R project.  :)

Oh, and I'd really like to catch that big John Williams / Star Wars concert this year.  Pity it's not the actual London Symphony Orchestra though... 

OzoneSherrif said:

hard for me to believe that someone could survive a dunk in lava. instant melt

The (dark side of the) Force was strong with him at this point.  ;)

Some fine subtle work on Yoda's mouth movements there.  :) 

While the original puppet is mainly excellent in it's overall facial movements, and doesn't need any radical adjustments, it would be really neat to see just even one (or two) blink(s) throughout the likes of these long close-up scenes with him, to give even more life to the 'puppet' eyes, and tie-in with the multi-blinking cgi versions even more.  Your Cantina characters were nicely subtle, and the effect dramatically improved things.

And loving the 'Adywanified' colour of things as usual.

Monroville said:

ChainsawAsh said:

I think the most that needs to be done is adding in a couple shots of AT-STs going ahead of the AT-ATs to take care of the Rebels in trenches.  I've always wondered why they didn't do that - send the smaller AT-STs ahead to make way for the big AT-ATs.

SImple: budget. George and company no doubt wanted to do more, but being 1980 and the limits on technology and what money they had to spend, could only offer what we see.  That doesn't mean anybody should overload the film with anything, but let's all remember the whole point of the SEs to begin with was Lucas' attempt to bring them "up to date".

 

 On the other hand, those suggested foremost AT-ST's still weren't added to the later SE versions.  Perhaps because that was never an option, because they would detract from the reveal of the wonderful scale of the more gigantic AT-AT designs?  ...and because the AT-AT's themselves were not exactly thought to have needed the smaller AT-ST's to clear a way for them, since they were considered to be mostly impervious to the Rebel's firepower, and pretty overpowering themselves.

Darth Mallwalker said:

ImperialFighter said:

 someone to DL some copies in the U.K. 

 

Language barrier I guess, but I'm not sure what you mean by "DL" ?

It's a single layer disc.

And anyone, UK or not, can download the copy Moth3r posted. I've now finished DL'ing it -- caligula still want a copy ?

Ah, I've misunderstood.  I thought Jambe meant he was looking for someone to do some Dual Layer copies of a PAL version of this to PIF onwards to members in the U.K., when he asked for someone to circulate copies here.  

I also didn't realise this is only a single layer release.  Thanks for confirming that.

ImperialFighter said:

 First, an admission! -  In hindsight, my wish above to still have Adywan's enhanced reveal shot of nine AT-AT's on show at the beginning was just plain wrong!....because the shot does not fit in as comfortably as I first thought, after all.  

On checking out the whole scene a couple of times since then, it actually doesn't make sense to include it anymore, if Ady has indeed decided not to include any extra additional AT-AT's throughout the whole battle now.  The fact is that we only see two AT-AT's destroyed, and only see three (including General Veer's one) survive the snowspeeder / Luke Skywalker onslaught throughout, with what does indeed seem like only a sum total of five AT-AT's (not counting the AT-ST) onscreen during the scenes on show. 

Therefore, I now hope Ady just uses the original, unenhanced shot of only five AT-AT's coming over the ridge at the start, if he is leaving the actual numbers during the battle as they are. (I've really come round to the removal of the 'red' window glow now, as it seems be too big for the narrow slit of the front AT-AT it was placed on anyway!)  

Personally, I'm more than okay with his latest decision not to add more AT-AT's, as the actual imagery already looks great in the main, and it's a huge ask to expect the work that extra numbers would involve at the end of the day.  Anyway, as Luke comments at one point "That armour's too strong for blasters"-  which indicates the AT-AT's are thought to be mostly impervious to the likes of Rebel snowspeeder fire-power, so the Empire could be confident that five of them (plus an AT-ST) is more than sufficient to reach the Power Generator. 

And on the other hand, more could have been planned (or have been in transit) to be sent down also, in an unseen-by-us 'follow-up wave' to support this first batch at the end of the day, since General Veers tells Vader's hologram "Yes Lord Vader, I've reached the main Power Generators.  The Shield will be down in moments, you may start your landing." 

We didn't see if he came in another AT-AT or 'something else' at the end of the day, since the ground battle cuts to different scenes involving our heroes in-between when that line is said, and when the eventual storming of the Rebel base by Vader and some Imperial Snowtroopers is shown. 

For anyone concerned that there would have been more AT-AT numbers dropped down, it is possible that they arrived from a different direction / or directions to the oncoming 5 AT-AT's we see onscreen.  The Rebel base is actually quite big and cavernous overall, with various potential escape routes, so 'another wave / or other waves' from the many Stardestroyers could conceivably have been dropped 'beyond' the Energy Shield to approach the base from another direction / or other directions too, and we just weren't shown that one / or those ones! 

On the other hand, after General Veers line, Vader and his troops could simply just have arrived in 'something else' from the same direction as the 5 onscreen AT-AT's, during the time when our attention was following the in-between scenes where we followed our heroe's progress before the base was stormed....  Take your pick.  Either way, I hope that helps. 

Regardless, there's no doubt that Adywan will add a lot of little bells and whistles and improvements throughout the existing footage, which will indeed add to the overall 'intensity' of the battle, and that it will end up looking better.  :)

As far as extra AT-ST's go, if he wants to do that, then fine, but the one we see doesn't appear until a good bit later in the battle anyway, suggesting that it might have just been 'dropped off' further back than the rest, and has only caught up now with it's faster moving steps...  Just another thought.  

Hope everyone had a good time last night.  :)

I just wanted to elaborate on a couple of things I wrote in yesterday's post on the previous page.  It only occurred to me just afterwards, but I'd hit the booze by then...  Thankfully, I'm pretty hangover-free today after it all, so thought I'd add those extra thoughts to my post.

I've highlighted the relevant new additions above in bold.  See what you think.

ImperialFighter said:

adywan said: 

Getting back to ESB, i have been looking at the new Hoth battle footage and i'm really not too sure if adding more AT-AT's is the way to go. I've been thinking and i think that the original amount is perfect. Having just a few AT-At's kick the rebels ass really shows the might of the empire. Adding more in was really just a bit of fanwank really if you think about it. Its something that goes under the category "adding it because we can". It really adds nothing. I will be making the battle more intense but not with extra AT-ATs.

However, although the Hoth ground battle is already great in many ways admittedly, I cannot wait for any little enhancements along the way that you are doing (i.e.- the improved laserblasts, firing Rebel turrets etc.).  There will be other changes no doubt, but having more actual AT-AT's on show is not such a big thing if you decide against it.  Just a thought though, does this mean that you are still initially showing the few extra ones in the initial shot as they come over the ridge, that you already completed?  I hope so, as I think that extra number that you show at the beginning, can easily tie-in with the rest of the existing AT-AT footage as is, quite comfortably.  

Just a quick check-in before some serious Hogmanay shenanigans kick in here...  :)

First, an admission! -  In hindsight, my wish above (in bold) to still have Adywan's enhanced reveal shot of nine AT-AT's on show at the beginning was just plain wrong!....because the shot does not fit in as comfortably as I first thought, after all.  

On checking out the whole scene a couple of times since then, it actually doesn't make sense to include it anymore, if Ady has indeed decided not to include any extra additional AT-AT's throughout the whole battle now.  The fact is that we only see two AT-AT's destroyed, and only see three (including General Veer's one) survive the snowspeeder / Luke Skywalker onslaught throughout, with what does indeed seem like only a sum total of five AT-AT's (not counting the AT-ST) onscreen during the scenes on show. 

Therefore, I now hope Ady just uses the original, unenhanced shot of only five AT-AT's coming over the ridge at the start, if he is leaving the actual numbers during the battle as they are. (I've really come round to the removal of the 'red' window glow now, as it seems be too big for the narrow slit of the front AT-AT it was placed on anyway!)  

Personally, I'm more than okay with his latest decision not to add more AT-AT's, as the actual imagery already looks great in the main, and it's a huge ask to expect the work that extra numbers would involve at the end of the day.  Anyway, as Luke comments at one point "That armour's too strong for blasters"-  which indicates the AT-AT's are thought to be mostly impervious to the likes of Rebel snowspeeder fire-power, so the Empire could be confident that five of them (plus an AT-ST) is more than sufficient to reach the Power Generator. 

And on the other hand, more could have been planned (or have been in transit) to be sent down also, in an unseen-by-us 'follow-up wave' to support this first batch at the end of the day, since General Veers tells Vader's hologram "Yes Lord Vader, I've reached the main Power Generators.  The Shield will be down in moments, you may start your landing." 

We didn't see if he came in another AT-AT or 'something else' at the end of the day, since the ground battle cuts to different scenes involving our heroes in-between when that line is said, and when the eventual storming of the Rebel base by Vader and some Imperial Snowtroopers is shown. 

For anyone concerned that there would have been more AT-AT numbers dropped down, it is possible that they arrived from a different direction to the oncoming 5 AT-AT's we see onscreen.  The Rebel base is actually quite big and cavernous overall, with various potential escape routes, so 'another / or other waves' from the many Stardestroyers could conceivably have been dropped 'beyond' the Energy Shield to approach the base from another direction / or other directions too, and we just weren't shown that one / or those ones! 

On the other hand, after General Veers line, Vader and his troops could simply just have arrived in 'something else' from the same direction as the 5 onscreen AT-AT's, when our attention was following the in-between scenes where we followed our heroe's progress, before the base was stormed....  Take your pick.  Either way, I hope that helps.

Regardless, there's no doubt that Adywan will add a lot of little bells and whistles and improvements throughout the existing footage, which will indeed add to the overall 'intensity' of the battle, and that it will end up looking better.  :)

As far as extra AT-ST's go, if he wants to do that, then fine, but the one we see doesn't appear until a good bit later in the battle anyway, suggesting that it might have just been 'dropped off' further back than the rest, and has only caught up now with it's faster moving steps...  Just another thought. 

As far as those interior shots of the AT-AT drivers go, I'm now 100% sure that they are all meant to be inside General Veers AT-AT!  They are certainly edited together that way, being immediately cut next to close-ups of General Veers.  If there had been some kind of shot between the differing helmet colours, then it could be argued that they are meant to be different AT-AT interiors, but the way things stand, they only come across as being General Veer's drivers to me, whether that was the intention or not....  Still would love consistency with all-RED markings, but will just be happy with any consistency if Adywan decides to take the easier route of just removing them.

It only remains for me to wish you all a very Happy Year again, and 'may yer lum aye reek' as we say here in Scotland.  Slange!  :)

Yes doubleofive, he was criminally mis-used overall in JEDI.  It will be interesting to see what everyone says about Boba's inclusion or otherwise when it comes nearer the time, and especially interesting to see what Adywan eventually decides on.

I can go either way with it at this point, but if he's totally removed, it would mean losing some neat footage of Boba's abilities where his jetpack and attachments are concerned.

Time will tell.

In the meantime, let me wish you and everyone else a very Happy New Year.  I look forward to many other good suggestions here in the future. :)

adywan said: 

Getting back to ESB, i have been looking at the new Hoth battle footage and i'm really not too sure if adding more AT-AT's is the way to go. I've been thinking and i think that the original amount is perfect. Having just a few AT-At's kick the rebels ass really shows the might of the empire. Adding more in was really just a bit of fanwank really if you think about it. Its something that goes under the category "adding it because we can". It really adds nothing. I will be making the battle more intense but not with extra AT-ATs.

As in your previous ANH:R, whatever you decide to add, or not add, is up to you, and I bow to your chosen path regardless.  Hell, anything ontop of your great re-colouration is a bonus for us anyway!

All I know is that I am a huge fan of the likes of your added ANH:R Death Star 'reveal' additions / End Battle additions which made an already great film even better.

However, although the Hoth ground battle is already great in many ways admittedly, I cannot wait for any little enhancements along the way that you are doing (i.e.- the improved laserblasts, firing Rebel turrets etc.).  There will be other changes no doubt, but having more actual AT-AT's on show is not such a big thing if you decide against it.  Just a thought though, does this mean that you are still initially showing the few extra ones in the initial shot as they come over the ridge, that you already completed?  I hope so, as I think that extra number that you show at the beginning, can easily tie-in with the rest of the existing AT-AT footage as is, quite comfortably.

Anyway, I hope to suggest a couple of things that could improve the existing footage in a few days time, that doesn't require any additional added AT-AT's.  In the meantime, let me wish you all a very Happy New Year.  Be back after the hangover!  :)   

Sevb32 said:

I think we need to think twice about changing those AT-AT driver's hemets, look at this http://web.ukonline.co.uk/bingo275/original%20atat%20helmet.htm

StarWarsHelmets.com eh?  Nice little site there Sevb32.

I always used to think that all those 'interior' shots of the AT-AT drivers were meant to be inside the General Veers AT-AT, and thought that the 'missing' red stripes on the helmets were a continuity mistake.

If they are indeed meant to show seperate interiors / AT-AT drivers, then my previous hope for red stripes to be added also is not in any way necessary now...just still preferable to me.