logo Sign In

Mielr

User Group
Members
Join date
15-Jun-2006
Last activity
27-Dec-2024
Posts
2,805

Post History

Post
#289751
Topic
What is the most distressing aspect of the PT?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/289751/action/topic#289751
Time
Originally posted by: skyjedi2005
that it sucked that is the most distressing aspect.
Beat me to it!

Also, the way the PT spoils so many of the plot twists in the OT.

Originally posted by: bkev
That is why episode 1 is the best of the prequels. (you can kill me later.)

No, I think you're right about that. I've gone back and forth over which one of the prequels was the least horrible. I used to think it was ROTS, but now that I've had time to think about it, TPM may be the least sucky (still sucky, though)...and it has Liam Neeson, which is in its favor.
Post
#289281
Topic
Time to get assertive
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/289281/action/topic#289281
Time
Originally posted by: generalfrevious

Makes you want to not go on living


Well....I wouldn't go that far.

GL hasn't destroyed the OOT (he's known for being compulsive about keeping every scrap of film).

I don't think writing letters at this point will do any good. Besides, last year we set up a thread to orgainize a write-in to one news organization a week, and only about 5 people on this board participated.

If GL decides to release the OOT, it will be sometime in the future, and will probably be bundled with the SEs on HD-DVD or blu-ray. Hopefully, Guy Caballero is right, and he'll release the OOT as an incentive for buying the HD-discs because the market has been so over-saturated with variations of the SEs for the last 10 years (including the SEs in hi-def on TV).

Stay positive.

Post
#289163
Topic
Intriguing new info on Original Trilogy and Prequel Trilogy deleted scenes gleaned from CELEBRATION IV.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/289163/action/topic#289163
Time
Originally posted by: Jambe Davdar
Originally posted by: Guy Caballero
Yeah, that was interesting how they found that alternate footage of Guinness. Although apparently the negative for the Jabba scene was never found and they had to use a dupe in 97. I wonder why that was missing. I seem to remember something like it was loaned out to the people making the "star wars to jedi" special in '83 (which had clips from it in its original form) and they lost it? Or am I making that up?


I certainly heard that as one of the reasons why the English version of Lapti-nek was lost.

I heard that was how Jabba's sail barge music from JEDI was lost, which was why it was never featured on any soundtrack.

I don't recall the ROTS teaser trailer with the alternate Guinness footage. I'll have to check that out.
Post
#289139
Topic
Making of Star Wars (New Book) Discussion
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/289139/action/topic#289139
Time
It doesn't surprise me that there's more documentation for ESB and JEDI, after all, they really didn't have knowledge of what a phenomenon SW would end up being, so they didn't document the behind-the-scenes stuff like they did for the other films. Plus, everything seemed to be so hectic and chaotic with the making of the first film, I guess it just wasn't a priority to document everything when they were in fear of Fox pulling the plug at any time.

That's interesting that there are no photos of the creation of the Vader costume.....the photos in the book of the various 3P0 masks are facinating.

I really do hope Rinzler does companion books for ESB and JEDI.
Post
#288994
Topic
Making of Star Wars (New Book) Discussion
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/288994/action/topic#288994
Time
This weekend I finally had time to sit down and dive into this massive book. It truly is a must-have for any serious Star Wars fan. There are so many photos I've never seen before- and I have a very respectable collection of SW books. I've only read a few sections of the text, but so far I've loved reading the anecdotes and minutia of the day-to-day filming. The best part about the book is that there appears to be no mention of the PTs or SEs - not even a hint or a footnote. It's nice to have one SW item that doesn't any PT or SE baggage attached (a rarity in recent years).

My only complaint about the book is that it's difficult to read without getting a crick in your neck. It's heavy, and I found it difficult to hold and to find a comfortable position to examine the book as thoroughly as I'd like (I guess that's where having the softcover edition would be and advantage).
Post
#288821
Topic
So, um... no new DVD's announced this year?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/288821/action/topic#288821
Time
Originally posted by: SilverWook
Mielr, did your niece buy a EDTV by accident?(Extended Definition, which isn't true HD and looks like crap in every store model I've seen.) Most current HDTV sets should be able to upscale DVD nicely. Having a progressive player hooked up properly helps too. Most cable systems are using overcompressed crappy signals to begin with.
Originally posted by: canofhumdingers
Actually, EDTV means "enhanced" definition. Also, as many have pointed out before, almost all tvs look like crap when you pull them out of the box. They have to be properly calibrated. Perhaps that's the problem with this LCD? (FWIW, i've never seen an LCD tv that i thought looked very good, picture quality wise.)

No, she's got an HDTV. I don't think her DVD player upscales (but I'm not sure about that), but standard cable broadcasts look pretty bad.

Originally posted by: lordjedi
Mielr, tell your niece to get the HD channels. The difference is like night and day. On a bad day, yeah, the over compressed stuff looks nasty, but most of the time it looks beautiful. I've found that it's more the SD channels that get over compressed and look like hell than it is the HD channels.

SD channels still look bad on a 50" HDTV CRT (that's what I have) if you're closer than 10 ft. From 20 ft away they look alright (my couch is 20 ft away, across the room), but HD still looks a ton better.

As it stands, she's getting free cable (due to a cable company screw-up) so I don't think she wants to make any waves right now, but I told her that she could probably pull in some HD channels with an antenna.

Her TV also needs to be properly calibrated, I'm sure.

So, SD sources still look bad on a HD-CRT? I was going to try and get one of those 34" Sony HD-CRTs before they're gone for good, because I'd heard they were better for standard cable/DVDs. I may not bother now if all of my DVDs are going to look like crap on that, too. I have no plans for buying a blu-ray player anytime soon.


Post
#288769
Topic
So, um... no new DVD's announced this year?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/288769/action/topic#288769
Time
So, I guess it's a question of- would you rather be distracted by the inferior quality of the GOUT DVDs, or would you rather be distracted by the alterations in the SE DVDs?

In my case, there's no contest. I much prefer watching the GOUT DVDs over the SEs. I don't care how much better the quality of the SE DVDs are, I refuse to watch all of the CGI crap added to the SEs- it distracts me much more than the non-anamorphic quality of the GOUT. Everytime I see Greedo shooting first, or that dinosaur thing obscuring a droid, or the rings around the death stars, or the little shop of horrors head coming out of the sarlaac pit, or Hayden Christiansen in place of Sebastian Shaw- my heart sinks.

FWIW, my niece just got a 32" widescreen LCD and everything looks awful on it. She doesn't have any HD signals yet, and so far all standard def programming looks horrible. That's why, if I can still find one, I'm going to buy a tube-based HDTV. They're much more forgiving when it comes to standard-def material (ie- all DVDs and SD cable).
Post
#288618
Topic
So, um... no new DVD's announced this year?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/288618/action/topic#288618
Time
Originally posted by: CO

With all due respect Sunday, I don't think you understand what the point of this website is. The point is to get the OOT on DVD in the quality that every DVD that is out on the market these days.

Right, I think sometimes some of us lose sight of that. That's why I originally came to this site anyway- to sign the petition to get the OOT released on DVD. Of course, I was hoping that the movies would at the very least be anamorphic, if not given the whole remastered/restored treatment.

It's good to remember exactly why this site was created:
CLICK

Unfortunately, the original mission statement is no longer there. Jay should put it back up.
Post
#288585
Topic
What did the Prequel Trilogy need?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/288585/action/topic#288585
Time
Originally posted by: CO
I always thought that Lucas could have played the PT as a real backstory, narrated by Luke Skywalker (Mark Hammil) as he tells the events of the PT to his son post ROTJ.

The problem with the PT is it just doesn't work in order 1-6 for so many reasons. The focus on Anakin for the first three movies is gone by Episode IV. The special effects are SOOO different in both trilogies, and the whole tone of each trilogy doesn't jive as one continuous story.

Lucas could start TPM with Luke talking to his son some 20 years after ROTJ as an 'Obiwan' type role. It could flashback to him throughout the trilogy as he explains certain key plot points that Lucas is trying to convey, such as why Anakin chose to be Darth Vader. How fuckin cool would it have been for Mark Hammill to say, "And now this is the point where your grandfather was lost to the darkside!"


I agree, and I think that would have been a good idea- having Mark Hamill being part of it again. Mark Hamill said years ago that he had agreed to appear in one of the prequels, if GL decided to make all nine of them, and he said that he would probably appear on another plane of existance (in ghost form, I gather) in episodes 7-9. But, if he had appeared as you suggested, that would have kept the order of the movies with SW as the first and ROTS as the last, which I agree works better.

I'm sure MH would have loved being asked to participate. I get the feeling now that he's a bit miffed at GL for various reasons, as he seems to be distancing himself from all things SW recently.

I also still think that a great opportunity was missed to deepen the relationship between Anakin, Ben & Padme, by not having Anakin and Ben both in love with Padme. If Padme had chosen Anakin over Ben, she would have more dramatically chosen the path that leads to her death. It would also explain more deeply the affection Ben had for Luke and Leia, being Padme's children.

But then, there were so many missed opportunities with the PT. Too many to count really.



Post
#288032
Topic
Happy 30th Anniversary, Star Wars!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/288032/action/topic#288032
Time
Originally posted by: ESHBG
Originally posted by: Mielr
Happy 30th Birthday Star Wars, and Happy 29th Birthday to my Star Wars-fan-Nephew, Jordan!

It's my 29th b-day also so party in my honor too, Mielr!

30 years of SW and the most technical thing we have of the originals as of now is the 1993 Letterbox versions.
Well then happy belated-birthday to you as well! Hope you had a good one.

I picked up some Star Wars stamps yesterday- the P.O. was nearly sold out. They only had the multi-stamp sheets, the Yoda stamps will be out in the fall. It's too bad there was so little fanfare about the 30th anniversary. I was expecting more. Aside from Craig Furguson mentioning it in his monologue night before last, and an "on this day...in 1977" blurb on Fox News' Studio B, I didn't see any reference to it on TV.
Post
#285850
Topic
Info: awaiting a curious eBay purchase - super8 StarWars reel
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/285850/action/topic#285850
Time
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi
Those would be awesome finds, indeed.

Not meaning to hijack this thread, but anyone know anything about these 70mm film cell sets? On the face of it, this seems like a cool thing. These would probably be great shots to scan in.

I know that the X0 team has been using them for color reference.

I've been collecting them since they came out in 1995. They are one of the coolest pre-SE collector's items ever made, IMO. I have some from each film- mostly from SW, quite a few from ESB and only several of them from ROTJ which didn't seem to have as long of a run. The packaging differed for each film. The ROTJ ones came in nice stand-up display boxes. I have close to 100 altogether, mostly obtained from eBay, and I once bought a set of them from a former Lucasfilm employee. Ebay is tricky because the sellers don't always attempt to photograph the cel itself (or will use a stock photo), and you end up buying 'mystery' cels which you may or may not end up liking. I'm pretty picky, so I prefer to buy cels from sellers who put good clear photos up.
Post
#283953
Topic
Splinter Of The Mind's Eye - review and thoughts.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/283953/action/topic#283953
Time
I have an old paperback copy of this book. I read it many years ago when I was in my early teens and I do remember liking it, but I don't remember a lot about the plot. I think I'd like to re-read it now and see if I still enjoy it as an adult.

I was originally intrigued with the book because it fell between SW and ESB (and I liked the cover illustration of Luke and Leia looking up at Vader), and I definitely think that most non-EU fans would enjoy it. I'm not an EU person myself- the only other EU book I've ever read is The Truce At Bakura (which I bought it because it was on sale and I liked the cover) and I didn't care for it that much.

*****SPOILERS******
Two things from SOTME that stand out in my mind is the sexual tension between Luke and Leia (har!), in particular a scene where Luke is trying to decide if he should kiss Leia on the lips while she's sleeping, and if I remember correctly, there's one scene when Luke slaps Leia in the face to make it appear that he is angry with her (for the benefit of some stormtroopers, I believe) except that Leia is totally taken by surprise and isn't too pleased with Luke afterwards.


Post
#283624
Topic
Darabount rips Lucas over Indy IV script
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/283624/action/topic#283624
Time
This doesn't surprise me at all (the part about GL being stubborn, anyway. A fellow film-maker ripping GL a new one is kind of surprising).

Frankly, I wasn't exactly looking forward to another Indiana Jones movie anyway- Harrison is too old, it's been too long since the last one, and George Lucas has lost whatever shred of objectivity he once had.

Perhaps GL will ditch Spielberg and direct the film himself! He will have to creatively come up with new and exciting ways to work tons of CGI into a film that will probably be set in the 1950's.

"INDIANA JONES IV: THE LAST TEMPLE OF THE PHANTOM MENACE CRUSADE"
(or, "How to ruin TWO film franchises in less than ten years!")

Thanks, I'll pass.
Post
#283622
Topic
Star Wars Insider - R.I.P.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/283622/action/topic#283622
Time
The magazine has changed publishers like 5 times since I started subscribing about 12 years ago. Regardless of who the publisher is, being force-fed SE propaganda every time I open a new issue annoys me to no end. But, I guess that's the way things are going to be for old-school SW fans from now on- the OT is nothing but a mere footnote in history.

On the bright side, at least they're not bundling the magazine subscription with the Hyperspace membership anymore.
Post
#282438
Topic
Star Wars Fans Are Cool Regardless Of Age...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/282438/action/topic#282438
Time
Well, not under 30, but under 25 maybe.

My nephew, who is 7 years younger than me, was a Star Wars fan before I was and actually is the one who got me into Star Wars. He was born on May 25th (yes, the same day SW was released), but he was born in 1978, so he'll be 29 next month. I know he saw ESB theatrically in 1980 and he became a Darth Vader fanatic at the tender age of two. We went to see ROTJ for his 5th birthday in '83.

I don't "disregard" any Star Wars fan, but I have to say that I generally give more credence to fans who are old enough to have seen the OT on the big screen (I guess that includes anyone who saw the limited OT theatrical screenings in 1987), and who's first Star Wars exposure WASN'T the SE or the PT.

I guess it's sort of like the difference between Beatles fans who were alive during the late 1960s Beatlemania & listened to the original albums on vinyl, and those who've only just recently discovered the Beatles on CD (I sort of fall in-between the two categories).

Some experiences are just "you kinda had to be there to understand" moments.



Post
#282302
Topic
"The Story of Star Wars" Narrator passes away...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/282302/action/topic#282302
Time
Yes, I still own that record. A lot of people (including me) had a false memory of him reading of the "a long time ago..." line in the actual movie!

Sorry to hear about his passing.

Originally posted by: SKot
What I don't get though is this: if he narrated The Story of Star Wars, how is it that he has an English accent there? He doesn't seem to be British. So did he adapt a faux-British accent for that reading? And if so, why?

According to the CNN story, he was from New Jersey.
I don't think he used a British accent, he just had a very refined, well-educated American accent (much like James Earl Jones').
Post
#270785
Topic
The OT on HBO HD this month, unfortunately it is the SE
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/270785/action/topic#270785
Time
Anyone who has seen a Star Wars film in a movie theater has seen it in "hi-def". Some of us are luckier than others and saw the OOT versions in a theater, and some even luckier bastards saw them in 70mm as well!

So frankly, seeing the SEs in HDTV doesn't really excite me too much, although I guess it's nice for those who like the SEs (in whatever revised form they currently exist) or have never seen any of the OT films in a theater.


On a somewhat related note, I got my copy of SWI today, and it mentioned a new book about the making of the original Star Wars coming out in April. It looks like it might be an interesting book and I'm hoping it won't contain any hints of 'revisionist history'.