logo Sign In

Mike O

User Group
Members
Join date
20-Jun-2006
Last activity
12-Jul-2025
Posts
2,347

Post History

Post
#253300
Topic
Any trasnfans around? Just curious. (Transformers thread)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253300/action/topic#253300
Time
Originally posted by: Jedi Master
Hot Rod was pretty cool, but maybe he'll be in a future movie. After all, he wasn't a first generation character. If it does well, I'm sure they'll make a sequel, without a doubt.

You know the creator of the show personally, Nanner Split? Cool!

For anyone who's interested, here's alink to the website for the movie's 20th Anniversary Special Edition DVD. It'll be a 2-disc set with the original widescreen version and the full frame version. It's scheduled for a November 7<i><u>th</u></i> release.


Hopefully it will be the definative version so many have longed for, and hopefully they can do the same with the upcoming T.V. series DVDs. God willing. Fingers crossed and praying. That'd be just prime.

I took a screenwriting course out at the University of Southern California this past year, and my professor was Ron Friedman, the guy that created the TV show and wrote the 1980's movie.


No $!@#? Awesome! He nice? He wrote the G.I. Joe movie too, by the way (can Marvel please get some more trade paperbacks whole of the original Larry Hama run out? PLEASE!)

We got to watch it in class one day and we gave him a standing ovation.


Damn straight . One shall stand, one shall fall.
Post
#253223
Topic
Here's my stance
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253223/action/topic#253223
Time
Originally posted by: Darth_Evil
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Because that's apparently the way it is around here lately. Only George is the devil. Everybody else has "legitimate" reasons or "inoffensive" changes that "actually improve" the movie, while George's changes are horrible and wrong because of our subjective stance and love for Star Wars.

Just wait. Within five minutes, somebody's going to post something in Spielberg's defense about E.T., which is always the same defense. For the last time, people, if you're against changes being made in movies (or any type of art) be consistent! You can't just say one man's changes suck simply because you think they suck. A change is a change is a change, and if you don't like one of them based on that principle, you can't seriously be in favor of others.


Yes, the changes in E.T. sucked. Sucked hard. But Spielberg did give fans an extremely good version of the original on DVD, so in my book, he gets a pass on that one. Close Encounters, I really don't know what to say about, having never seen the film, but if he hasn't ever released the theatrical version, he certainly should.

I don't think that Lucas is the only one at fault for changing his films. Why I think he's worse then all the others is that he does it once every few years, and then feeds us bullshit about "it was always this way" and then releases them on DVD a million fricking times. When he finally did release the original theatrical versions, he did it in a low quality way as a "Fuck you" to OOT fans. Lucas is much worse then Spielberg in my book, even though they both change thier films. Spielberg does respect his fans, and if he ever does release the original version of CE3K, you can bet your ass it'll be high quality.

In the end, yes, changes are changes, but I'm really okay with directors altering thier films, as long as they release the original version in a high quality way, and don't disrespect the fans constantly. It gets ridiculous when directors constantly alter thier films like Lucas and then double dip like crazy. Peter Jackson altered LOTR for DVD with the Extended Edition, but released both versions in high quality and let the public decide which version to watch. In my opinion, his changes (additions) were vast improvments. If the Star Wars special editions had actually enhanced the films, I'd watch those, but yes, I'd still want the original unaltured versions preserved.

I'm not saying that only George is the devil for changing his films, but he is to an extent for the way he treats the films and his fans.


Well, in some cases, the changes made actually improve something (Blade Runner, pssoibly the Donner Cut, LOTR), to say nothing of the fact that those changes were made from already existing elements and not added later on. But you are 100% correct, if they don't make the original availaible, then they are just as liable fro criticism as George. But as long as I have the original version in high-quality, then I don't care. Once I get a high quality OOT DVD release, what difference does it make? Sure Lucas's changes would be stupid in my mind, but I'd have what wanted.
Post
#253217
Topic
Here's my stance
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253217/action/topic#253217
Time
Originally posted by: Anchorhead
Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen

But how can we give Steven Spielberg a pass when we want to hang George Lucas in efigy?

I don't give him a pass. In E.T., he edited out the police officers' guns and replaced them with walkie-talkies. That's as bad as some of Lucas' changes. It's also not nearly as realistic as it used to be. If there's ever a time when a being from another planet is messing around with our children - the cops will be armed with guns - not talking to each other on two-way radios. It weakened that scene.


Yes, but Spielberg allowed people to watch a high-quality version of the original. That's the difference. Hypocritial, though, after having made Saving Private Ryan.
Post
#253199
Topic
Here's my stance
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253199/action/topic#253199
Time
Originally posted by: casualimp
I just wanted to apologise for the trolling post. It was immature of me, but was also the first one I have done. I love the OT and was quick to sign the petition when it was still up. In all honesty, I wanted to time to see how quickly Gomer would answer. I'm confident we'll get an OT release to our liking someday, I'm just fearing this board it turning more towards fanatic than fan.


So is that your opinion or isn't it? You're entitled to it, just understand how much the OOT and how important it is for some people. No one is saying that Lucas can't do this, just that we want to watch the original is high quality. Is it our right? Sort of, there are all kinds of arguments. But get a high quality OOT release would solve the whole thing. You pose a good point. I'm not saying that the trilogy is mine. But I do think that the people who want to preserve it have a valid point.
Post
#253191
Topic
Here's my stance
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253191/action/topic#253191
Time
Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen
Originally posted by: Fang Zei
why does the OT defy comparison to any other revised work? ...
Close Encounters: Columbia released a "Special Edition" not too long after the film's original 1977 release. I think this was 1980 or so. Correct me if I'm wrong

You are correct about the year. But let's look into a better analogy than Lucas vs. Tolkien ... i.e., Lucas vs. Spielberg.

Something very close to the original 1977 version of Star Wars was just released on DVD. It has audio that is not original in some respects, and it's not up to modern standards of picture quality or animorphic presentation. Lucas has a "special edition" of this film which he prefers and has released the original version in less than optimal condition.

Spielberg has NEVER released the original 1977 version of Close Encounters on any sort of home video. Not VHS, not laserdisc*, and not DVD. (*The Criterion laserdisc that claimed to be 1977 original was not). Spielberg has said he disliked the 1980 "special edition" of CE3K, which was a compromise with Columbia Studios, and that his preferred version is a "directors cut" released in the late 90's. To my knowledge, he has never said he doesn't want the original to exist ... but it simply does not exist. Two very important scenes have not been seen by the public since 1978, when the original went out of theatrical release.

I don't know if the footage has been lost or what. But how can we give Steven Spielberg a pass when we want to hang George Lucas in efigy? Lucas' quote about the original Star Wars and O.T. is repulsive, but his actions in releasing even a substandard version of the O.T. and his 1977 masterpiece are immeasurably better than ZERO release of Spielberg's 1977 masterpiece.


I trust we are comparing apples and apples now, and there will be no more red herrings about books vs. films when it comes to artistic revisionism.

So what about it? Spielberg and Lucas. How come Steven gets no flak, while George should be "hit by a car?"



.


Maybe because at the very least, Spielberg has many a masteroice to his name, whereas Lucas has made since then 1977 of merit. You're absolutely right; Spielberg shouldn't get a pass. But he also doesn't insult the fans and I think that if someone volunteered to restore it like Robert A. Harris did with the OOT, Steve would allow it (thoug I could of course be wrong). Plus, the OT was changed 20 years later and has unprecedented meaning to countless people. Close Encounters was altered shortly after its release, and not that many people saw the original. Do any of these things excuse Speilberg? ABSOLUTELY NOT. But the circumstances are a bit different. I at least understand and respect Speilberg's motive, even if I don't agree with it. Lucas has been undergoing flak for a long time and still turning a blind eye. With Lucas, we can unequivally prove that the OOT can be restored. Maybe the Close Encounters scences really don't exist. Again, THIS DOES NOT EXCUSE HIM. But its easier to see his point of view, and he isn't changing something that someone else directed. Should he be criticized for not making the original available? ABSOLUTELY. Should he release it? ABSOLUTELY. But lets work on Lucas first . CEO3K might get a future release and be fixed. Sure, it'd fight for it. But lets save the OOT too.
Post
#253175
Topic
Try to take it easy with the Lucas bashing.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253175/action/topic#253175
Time
Originally posted by: Jedi Master
I don't have a widescreen TV, so I'm almost totally satisfied with the DVD release. I just wish the original theatrical trailers would have been included instead of the 2004 DVD version of the movies.

Which is fine, but some people aren't. As soon as a proper version comes out, though, everybody will be happy. Until then, the battle will continue.

Hmm, seems we've taken to bashing each other. We accomplished the original mission of the site guys, I doubt GL can totally satisfy every fan. I think this is as good as we're going to get for some time to come. Remember that people do read this forum. They won't be impressed if we bash each other instead of Lucasfilm. I for one plan on buying the new DVD release of the OOT.


The original mission was to get a DVD release, not an LD transfer. No, he can't satisfy everyone, but he can satisy a vast majority with a proper OOT DVD release. And hopefully he will someday. And I'd be amazed if anyone at LFL reads here.
Post
#253173
Topic
Hyperspace: Yep, I Think that Something is DEFINITELY up for '07!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253173/action/topic#253173
Time
Originally posted by: SW
I belive GL will bring the OOT out next year . He has too its his only hope lolz and last chance . Now why would he bring out the SE thats dumb .

1 box set 6 films = 60 pounds wow

I hope so. It's his ego vs. his desire to make money. But who knows? We'll see it again at some point. The thought that it would after Lucas is gone is so morbid to me. I hope that the DVD come out without involving the death of a human being. I'll just pray. It's all thats left for me to do. And hope that Lucas will give me what I want before the end of time. I just hope and pray. Maybe, just maybe.

Which brings us to the once again catch 22. Lucas wants to see if the OUT DVD's sell. If they don't, then there's no reason to include them in the rumored archival edition of the saga. If of course they do sell well, then he'll more than likely include an anamorphic and restored transfer within the archival edition box set, proving once AGAIN that a year can't go by where Luca$ needs to rape the fans wallets. I think I'm just going to got to San Francisco and blow up LFL. All empires fall eventually.


Sounds way too good to be true, but I wish. It'd make sense.
Post
#251673
Topic
The Spider-Man 3 thread
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251673/action/topic#251673
Time
Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones
Originally posted by: Mike O
Yeah, a little more sarcasm from Spider-Man would be nice. They tend to overplay the woe-is-me thing.


True, but the guy's life does kinda suck.


Which is why he's sarcastic - using sarcasm as a defense mechanism against all the things in his life that suck.

A Spider-Man's Dawson's Creek... that thought disgusts me.

Bryce Dallas Howard looks awful with blonde hair.


Peter's Creek. That ought to be on the same night as Harry Potter and the Azkaban Redemption. I wonder if there is anyone who actually found that amusing?
Post
#251571
Topic
The Spider-Man 3 thread
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251571/action/topic#251571
Time
Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
No doubts there, though I do question the wisdom of bringing in Gwen Stacy into the new movie after he apparently got together with MJ in SM2.


Yeah, I don't get them using Gwen Stacy either.


Yes, well, my concern is that the relationships will be Spider-Man in Dawson's Creek.
Post
#251569
Topic
The Lord of the Rings (Films vs. the Books)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251569/action/topic#251569
Time
Of course! I thought they were great movies! I even loved many of the changes when they perfectly upheld the spirit of the books (which was often rare unfortunately).

Good to know. I thought that you thought that they were meritless and pointless.

Book-accurate movies of LOTR would have been a) far more successful; b) amazingly superior. Criticizing a film adaptation because it is different from the books can often make a lot of sense in many situations.


That's a bit general. You could be right, I just think that the issue is more complex than that.
Post
#251364
Topic
The Lord of the Rings (Films vs. the Books)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251364/action/topic#251364
Time
He wanted to do it because he likes mindless action and because he had the elf actors on hand and wanted to give them more screen time.

I don't ever remember be so exhilarated by an action sequence. And I really, really doubt that that was the reason. I really, really, really, really doubt it. Not saying that I agree with the change. I just don't think that was why.

Concepts that didn’t even exist in the slightest way until Jackson stuck them in. I can’t forgive that.

Like?

Criticizing a film adaptation because it's different from the book is senseless.


True, but it is difficult to find that middle ground.

Jackson has a simple mind


Umm, I don't think that that is entirely true.
Post
#251363
Topic
The Lord of the Rings (Films vs. the Books)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251363/action/topic#251363
Time
Many of Jackson's amendments to the way the tale unfolded were brilliant, and wise filmmaking, and excellent story adaptation. But there were some major klunkers.

Agreed. Separating them can be difficult, though.

His decision to present events in chron order, through cross-cutting, was a lazy and standardized choice that neglected the tale's true effect of chronology-shifting. It was not simply Tolkien's device of convenience ... it was the way in which the story must be told if you are telling the story of The Lord of the Rings. Much in the way that a remake of Memento told in forward order would not be telling the same story at all, erasing the chron-shifting of LotR negates many of Tolkien's most important story points.


Yes, but the pacing of a film is compleyely different from a book. I disagree with the way that many scenes were handled, but I think that the overall idea was simply find a way to pace things.

Oh, and while I'm at it ... changing Faramir's character to a charlatan was up there in the big, big goofs.


Mmm, yessss....but.....I also think that in doing so, it made Faramir's arc more dramatic because he overcame so many obstacles, his father and the Ring, most notably.