Sign In

MonkeyLizard10

User Group
Members
Join date
16-Sep-2019
Last activity
20-Jun-2022
Posts
64

Post History

Post
#1487270
Topic
my memory isn't that bad, is it? (in SW '77 - Luke misses with the grappling hook?)
Time

OT-Fan said:

surroundsound99 said:

I wonder if you’re thinking of a trailer for the movie? Sometimes they put things in trailers but not the movie. For example when a Tie Fighter rises up to confront Jyn and has her in its sights as she’s on the parapet outside of a tower on Scarif.

Or maybe you’re thinking of the fact that it takes Luke a (seemingly) long time to uncoil the rope?

I’m quite sure the answer to the first item is no. All of the (known) trailers are available and none contain this. I certainly agree that trailers often contain additional footage or alternate takes. I’m also quite sure I never saw a trailer for Star Wars before seeing it the first time. I had never been to that theater or any other where Star Wars was first shown, and had only ever been to the movies 2 or 3 times before that. I heard about it by word of mouth, and was invited to go with neighbors to see it.

Again, watch the specific shots I pointed out at 1:49 and 1:55 very carefully. They give the clues to what should be between them. Then listen to the music very carefully. I believe the music very clearly tells the story as well. I believe the changes (inserts) were frame for frame replacements (141 replacing 141), so there was no change to the music or timing necessary.

I have carefully listened and compared the audio recording of the 70mm presentation at New Jersey’s Triplex Paramus during its initial run (link below). I’m quite sure that the frames with Luke’s missed attempt were not present here. The audio well matches the blaster shots in the inserts that replaced it, with no sound that would match a missed grappling attempt (or reeling the line back into the belt). This is why I think if anything, the alteration was made before the eight first-run 70mm prints were struck, leaving only the thirty-five first-run 35mm prints as possibly containing the full missed attempt shot.

http://www.wideanglecloseup.com/starwarsaudio.html (The chasm scene is near the end of Part2.)

Again, I certainly consider it possible that the combination of the music for the scene combined with what is seen around these 5 7/8 seconds is so suggestive that it has lead many of us to believe that Luke missed, even though we never saw it that way. However, I think it is more likely that some of us actually saw it, and even more likely it was that way when Williams scored it.

One problem with this is that the one and only time I recall ever seeing the missed attempt was day 1 at the Paramus theater 70mm. From what I’ve heard they replaced their original print soon and I think that guy who recorded the audio recorded their replacement print which would almost surely have been from the redone batches for the ‘wide’ 70mm release.

FWIW, way back in 1977 as a little kid I wrote a note about what happened to the Luke miss when I saw the movie (a zillion) more times later that year. So it was a fresh memory back then, not something remembered years or decades later. I could swear I didn’t read the novelization until later on, probably later that year or something. I had actually only learned to read less than a year earlier than the movie. I’m not sure when I got the Star Wars Storybook but I’d think likely after my first non-70mm showing. The whole scene seemed more dramatic and tense with the Stormtroopers taking a few more seconds to prop up the door and Leia more worried. If it wasn’t real, somehow I would’ve had to have and read the book earlier and then had some sort of crazy dream where I visualized what I read and then that replaced my original memory right before we then saw it in 35mm when that came out a few weeks later or whatever it was. I thought in the earliet days of Usenet that I saw some who saw the initial 70mm print shown at Paramus also recall the missed attempt. I need to see if I can dig up old Amiga files and see what my version different notes that I posted were back then and what I captured of what others said back then.

OT-Fan said:

For me it’s more that I remember the distinct impression that something had changed the first time I saw it in general release in 1978. I remember at that time questioning whether I really remembered Luke missing the previous 6 or 7 times I saw the movie (first run)? Of course at that time I was under the impression that movies were carved in stone and never changed once they were released. As I previously described I don’t believe there was any difference in the length of the scene. A change in the length would require alteration to the music. I simply believe that 141 frames that may have originally shown Luke missing in the 35 first run 35mm prints, were replaced with a different 141 frames that don’t show Luke missing in all other prints. No change in time or music.

Although look at how messed up the music is in the ESB SE when they redid the whole “Bring my shuttle!” scene. It’s kinda all chopped and ruined up in the SE. I don’t know. I have to see the scene again, but could they also maybe have kept the music the same though and sliced a bit out before the throws or after and had it still work at all?

Post
#1333920
Topic
The Force Awakens: 1.78:1 scenes in 2D? - with recreation of IMAX scene (Released)
Time

canofhumdingers said:

I like the way Nolan handled the shifting aspect ratios of his films for the blu ray releases. It was the closest he could get to replicating the IMAX theatrical experience on current home theater tech.

HOWEVER, I think ALL of these blu rays should’ve included the full frame IMAX footage as bonus features.

I’ve been incredibly fortunate to see all four of these films at a 15/70 presentation (even got to see TDK twice thanks to a revival screening!) and there is nothing else like it in the world. Interstellar on IMAX was possibly the single greatest theatrical presentation I’ve ever experienced. The escape from Jakku on 15/70 was mind blowing. It was so visceral and nearly overwhelming. You felt like you were right there, in that chase. And you DEFINATELY lose something in the cropped scope version.

agreed

Post
#1333915
Topic
The Force Awakens: 1.78:1 scenes in 2D? - with recreation of IMAX scene (Released)
Time

Mavimao said:

PS: Did anyone see the Dark Knight in 15/70 IMAX? I didn’t care too much for the film, but the EXPERIENCE was out of this world. The detail was jaw-dropping.

no, but I saw Dark Knight Rises in 15/70 IMAX, it was insane, so sharp, you felt like you were right there on the streets of NYC looking around, incredible

Post
#1333914
Topic
The Force Awakens: 1.78:1 scenes in 2D? - with recreation of IMAX scene (Released)
Time

Papai2013 said:

I think What Abrams could have done is include the full uncropped 1.44:1 sequence as a bonus feature in the Extras section of the Blu Ray (in addition to the shifting ratio on the 3D BD). In that way we could see both the standard 2.39:1 version of the film as well as the original IMAX framed sequence as it was shot. 2.39:1 to 1.78:1 is not bad but we are still missing a lot of image vertically from the original IMAX framing.

From the IMAX stills I have seen, the 1.44:1 framing is beautiful and has that sense of vertigo and immersion, but a 1.78:1 crop will lose all that feeling.

yeah complete agree
it’s so frustrating to not at least get them as an extra!
and a branching option would be nice, you could chose to see it all 2.40:1, switching to 1.78:1 or switching to 1.44:1

that scene was astonishing seeing it on a giant IMAX laser screen!

Post
#1304283
Topic
The Big List of Changes to the Star Wars films
Time

Force-Abel said:

MonkeyLizard10 said:

mykyta-R4 said:

MonkeyLizard10 said:

In ESB when Han says “Then I’ll see you in hell.” that line used to be “Then I’ll see you in HELLLLL!!!” with the “hell” part really screamed and loud, later on they seemed to mute that down a lot.

Is this true, a fact?

Well at the least it is true that I heard it in theater way back with the “hell” sounding a lot louder. I suppose there is always some chance it could just be that some theaters had speakers that had some sort of spikes that matched his voice and the way he said that and it made it sound more boosted, although that seems far less likely and reasonable of an explanation than that they just dampened it down a bit to not stress a semi-swear word as much or something.

This seems a little anecdotal to be included as a change here? Maybe it is more likely to be an issue with the theater you were viewing the film at, with nobody else apparently having this experience?

My little town cinema struggled with some TLJ scenes - there was pixelation during key scenes with explosions. At the larger cinemas there were no such pixelation problems.

Well this was film, no digital projection issues and such, 70mm with 6 track mag sound at the famous Stanley Warner, within a few days of ESB being first released. I don’t recall noting that part being different when I later saw at it at some different 35mm theaters either although those had much worse sound quality. All I really recall is wondering why that part sounded so muted when they first put it on TV and later on home video.

Maybe nobody paid enough attention? Maybe others have noticed it? Maybe a single word changing in volume a lot didn’t catch attention as most were looking for changed diaglogue and major changes??

Post
#1300321
Topic
The Big List of Changes to the Star Wars films
Time

mykyta-R4 said:

MonkeyLizard10 said:

In ESB when Han says “Then I’ll see you in hell.” that line used to be “Then I’ll see you in HELLLLL!!!” with the “hell” part really screamed and loud, later on they seemed to mute that down a lot.

Is this true, a fact?

Well at the least it is true that I heard it in theater way back with the “hell” sounding a lot louder. I suppose there is always some chance it could just be that some theaters had speakers that had some sort of spikes that matched his voice and the way he said that and it made it sound more boosted, although that seems far less likely and reasonable of an explanation than that they just dampened it down a bit to not stress a semi-swear word as much or something.

Post
#1300318
Topic
The Little Mermaid (1989) - 35 mm (Released)
Time

I’ve seen a bit of a full US 1997 trailer reel and some frame cuts from a 1997/1998 trailer, probably also US, all the latter and so far the bit of the former seem duller than my 1990 stuff, I could see them being perhaps describes as grayish and a touch subdued in some ways at times as you saw, nothing at all like my 1990 stuff which just pops like mad, but still more color than the new scan samples here.

Post
#1298848
Topic
The Little Mermaid (1989) - 35 mm (Released)
Time

Well, I found out how to decode more symbols and it seems that my TLM stuff from 1990 was actually on Eastman stock manufactured in France so it seems likely it’s to do with original trailers/release print for France in 1990 most likely.

I also got a bit of Labrynth from same person and it is on Eastman stock from 1986 also made in France so probably from France 1986 original trailer/release print.

Post
#1298477
Topic
The Little Mermaid (1989) - 35 mm (Released)
Time

Just went back and looked at the stretch that had the talk about Oscar wins and can’t believe I had missed it, but I just realized that one stretch has a different stock and it’s not from the same set as all my other stretches. I guess it was late at night, noticed the fading in text about Oscars and only paid attention to that. This one little stretch actually has cyan analog audio track backing, digital and a more recent film stock, so it has nothing at all to do with all the rest of the pieces I have, the ones printed on 1990 film, which all have the same look, all have black backed analog sound, no digital and whichever ones do have the date code symbols all have ones that decode to 1990.

Now I wonder if maybe they are actually not various bits from an original 1990 print (either a late in the game US one or a UK one) and not a trailer. They are not remotely grayish or under-saturated as you say the 1990 trailers that you saw were and it seems to have scenes from across the entire movie, more than I might expect trailers to cover (although trailers have been known to basically cover and spoil almost every main scene or briefly glance at them all).

On youtube, so far, I only see a single trailer posted for the original release, but since the 1997/1998 re-release had at least 4 different trailers, there were probably more than one for the original release. FWIW, while some scenes I have are in the 1989 trailer, I also have quite a few that are not in either the 1989 or single 1997 trailer on youtube. Of course if they are bits from an actual release print, you wonder what the heck happened to the rest of the print. All my little stretches probably don’t total beyond 3 minutes together. Full film is a heck of a lot of frames. I suppose over 20 years maybe it could have been slowly cut up and sold off in scattered sets of chunks?? But you’d think first reel by reel, but this would’ve have the reels kept together. So maybe it is some mix of all the 1989 trailers or something.

If it is release print bits it would have to be, I guess, either some late in the game US release print that got printed on super fresh stock made near the start of the year or a UK print.

Post
#1298476
Topic
Info: Recommended Editions of Disney Animated (and Partially Animated) Features
Time

Thanks.

Ah, so was it a mistake in the original cartoon then? and not a mistake in some early maybe mid to late 1980s restoration carried forward then?

The one other different I noted was the frame I saw had the owl with white instead of yellow eyes. But perhaps that is also some original mistake only apparent in a few frames?

Post
#1298272
Topic
Info: Recommended Editions of Disney Animated (and Partially Animated) Features
Time

one curious thing regarding Sleeping Beauty is that the home releases, for the frame where all the birds and animals are sitting on the tree branch as she looks on with her basket also resting on the branch seems to have the leftmost bird blue and then next one green but I see on a photo of a print (not sure when it is from, but it looks to be not more recent than mid-70s) that it seems to have a the leftmost bird green and then the next one blue, the opposite of the home releases. Now it is faded, and that leftmost one really looks more like olive yellow, i wouldn’t think it’s so faded as to make blue end up looking more like green and green like blue, although I suppose, maybe it’s possible, but it seems unlikely.

Post
#1298086
Topic
What Special Edition changes (if any) did people like?
Time

Rodney-2187 said:

When I watch the despecialized I don’t see anything at all wrong. I never would have changed a thing. If Lucas were a better filmmaker he would have concentrated on making more movies instead of fiddling with the past. He wasn’t even confident enough to write the prequels without R2 and 3PO wedged in and ruining continuity.

wedged in? R2D2 and C3PO were always supposed to be in the prequels, even back in the 70s
in fact, it was said 4 decades ago that R2D2 and C3PO were supposed to be the only characters to appear in and survive the entire 9 (12, etc.) main sage films.

Post
#1298084
Topic
What Special Edition changes (if any) did people like?
Time

suspiciouscoffee said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Perhaps he raised the question because the prequels turned Darth from a cool name into a lame title.

Why not both? I say we need a sith named Darth Darth.

Funny side notes, doing genealogy, I found that in a certain country, in some parishes, the scribes wrote a local girls name in the books as “Darth” (which is also contrary to all the claims that the word “Darth” has never appeared before and was made up for Star Wars) coming from Darthe or Darte which is Dorothy in English so Darth Vader is really Dorothy Vader 😃. Also amazingly I found farms called Jawa, Tatoone, Tosche, Jaku! Part of me almost wonders if someone he didn’t once see an old church book from this place, although it seems hard to imagine.

I even have a female direct ancestor whose name was written out as Darth in baptism record!

And talking about Darth Darth… that reminds me of the 80s and Mr. Mister which reminds me that I also found in those church books a few Mr. Misters listed.

Post
#1298066
Topic
Info: Recommended Editions of Disney Animated (and Partially Animated) Features
Time

Molly said:

The Little Mermaid had the priest’s knee, Aladdin had some minor tweaks to some of the CG, and I think some of the earlier movies had some paint or some cuts?

Also some bits of paint clean-up and such at the least starting in 1997. Possibly more. In 1997 they scanned it all into computers, every frame, and then touched up paint crawl and dirt. Did the colors also get changed during that process? Maybe, not sure.

Each home release has somewhat different colors. 1989/1990 and 1997/1998 trailers seem to have a bit different colors for what that is worth.

Post
#1297885
Topic
Estimating the original colors of the original Star Wars trilogy
Time

looking at the first post
looks pretty good, although I feel they have come out a bit too dark shadow heavy and probably mostly a trace too warm and I have a feeling the DS walls were made a touch too neutral (contrary to all the early claims I saw about how they messed up the colors for home releases and ruined the pure gray, the walls were never pure grey as seen in theaters)

Post
#1297884
Topic
Estimating the original colors of the original Star Wars trilogy
Time

camroncamera said:

DrDre, I don’t think I’ve read you mentioning it… have you heard of the Digital ROC color-restoration processing plug-in by Kodak subsidiary Applied Science Fiction?
http://www.asf.com/products/plugins/rocpro/pluginROCPRO/
I don’t know that the product has been updated for many years. My Nikon film scanner came bundled with a version, but it only works during the scanning of film. Worked fairly well. Reminds me of your work on restoring color to red-faded motion picture film scans.

ah damn, they just discontinued them and no longer allow downloads after June 2019! just missed this, darn

Post
#1297881
Topic
The Phantom Menace - Theatrical version scanned in 4K (a WIP)
Time

yeah, i won’t bother to respond (although there is tons to say about the incredible amounts of things RLM video misinterprets, gets logically wrong, gets wrong since he doesn’t know enough about American cinema history, etc.) since will just turn into another bash fest, something I try to avoid (mostly by to largely ignoring all SW forums for years) and don’t want send this nice restoration thread down that path, I was actually going to say we better quit this before you already said it just above

back to restoration talk!

Post
#1297802
Topic
What Special Edition changes (if any) did people like?
Time

[adywan said:]It’s pure bull that the additions were part of Lucas’ original vision and that technical limitations at the time stopped him from doing the thing he wanted. You only have to look at most of the additions/ alterations to see that this isn’t true

you go far to extreme in the other direction

plenty of the stuff he had wanted at the time, but had either no money or tech or both for it at the time, and you can find writings of his from back in the time of the OT where he mentions stuff, it’s not at all all pure bull

that said, plenty of stuff he did think up later as well

And to say that if you complain about the SE then you should also hate every directors cut is ridiculous. For one the SE’s stopped being called that and replaced the originals as the only version.  With directors cuts you usually get the original along with it or available as a separate release. Not so with the OT.  If Lucas had just kept them as special editions and not tried to bury the originals, then you can bet the hatred towards those films wouldn’t be half as bad as it is now. You could just ignore them. As it stands now you are either stuck with crappy DVDs of a non-anamorphic laserdisc master or fan made preservations/ recreations . The more Lucas refused to release the originals, restored in HD, the more the hatred towards the SE’s grew

I certainly don’t like that the OOT got hidden away.

Post
#1297801
Topic
What Special Edition changes (if any) did people like?
Time

joefavs said:

^eeeeh, I dunno. I guess if they’d done it before his characterization went completely off the rails it could have been cool, but the original Emperor hologram has always been one of my absolute favorite parts of the saga. Continuity be damned, it’s so pleasingly spooky.

yeah the original emperor there was pretty cool

Post
#1297800
Topic
What Special Edition changes (if any) did people like?
Time

slask said:

fandom’s vision is not lazy, it’s stuck in time, and that’s worse.

some truth to that

some went nuts because the prequels dared to show crowded cities
what? what? all this nonsense, cars, taxis, ships all over by the dozens? just a bunch of fake show off garbage!

but really, come on… the entire galaxy is supposed to be nothing be barren wastes just because that is all we ever got to see in 4-6???

I guess Times Square in NYC is fake? It’s just a bunch of phony, over-crowded, CGI show off nonsense???

Post
#1297798
Topic
What Special Edition changes (if any) did people like?
Time

Easterhay said:

Quicker to list the changes I don’t like.  They’re all in ESB.

The dialogue change from “Bring my shuttle” to “Alert my start destroyer to prepare for my arrival, and have my smoking jacket and slippers ready.  Oh, and put the kettle on for I should like a cup of hot chocolate, too.”  And the butchering of the subsequent chase scene.  All unecessary and I’d love to see them removed.

Other than that, I’m fine with everything.

ugh I hated that whole change, they cut the single most fiercely deliver line by Vader in the entire series! and totally cut up the pacing and music

i’d call that the single worst change

I don’t like Greedo shooting first or both shooting at the same time. Makes no sense! I mean Han is jsut supposed to sit there and let Greedo kill him? Greedo is supposed to miss from 2’ away?

I sort of miss the original x-wings in the Death Star battle.

The expolding DS didn’t really need the ring added.

I’m actually fine with Hayden ghost though.

Wasn’t crazy about the new Jabba palace song.

I don’t mind the somewhat busier Mos Eisley. It was always supposed to busy and bustling from day 1, Lucas just ran out of money. All the talk that Star Wars has to be half empty, nothing going on locations doesn’t really make any sense.

I’m fine with WOlfman gone from cantina.

The new windows and such for Cloud City are fine.

I don’t mind the Jabba seen in ANH, although it’s not really needed. Perhaps it does make ROTJ less suspenseful for first time viewers.

I love that they sort of brought back the close the blast doors stuff, but they still don’t have it like it originally was, which was best of all.

The new celebrations at the end of ROTJ are cool.

Bantha herds were a nice addition

etc.

Plenty of stuff was fine. But I do wish they had always given us the original cut as well. Sometimes you jsut want to get the full nostalgic pull of the original version. Sometimes you want to see the new stuff. Let us see it both ways whenver we chose.

Post
#1297797
Topic
What Special Edition changes (if any) did people like?
Time

JacDan said:

None of them really. A couple of Death Star battle shots from Ep. IV but the quality of those shots were so inconsistent with the original footage that it was more annoying to watch than anything else. Also scenes in Ep. IV that SHOULD’VE been changed weren’t, e.g., Ties chasing Rebs in the trenches. One moment Ties but no Rebs, next moment Ties fire and Rebs just ahead explode to kingdom come. I also hate the remastered look of the SEs. They look nothing like the films from their runs during the late 70s - early 80s. The contrast levels are nice but overall it’s just so damn revisionist.

When R2D2 goes through the Jawa canyon it looks really dark in recent releases. In early home releases that looked almost like day time. I forget, when did the home releases change that? If it was with the SE, then the SE actually get that MUCH, MUCH more accurate. Back in the theatrical release, it did look really dark when he went through that canyon and did not look vritually like day time as it had on TV and so many home releases for years.

Perhaps they already fixed that before the SE though, maybe for some earlier THX release or something?

Post
#1297796
Topic
What Special Edition changes (if any) did people like?
Time

bactaOT said:

I really dislike the added Jabba scene in the SE, and not only for the obvious and poorly executed CGI either.

In my opinion Han would have managed to get off Tatooine WAY before Jabba even got the chance to catch up with him.

In fact, I don’t think Han would be careless enough to leave any trails to allow Jabba to discover where the Falcon was docked.
Han was better than that!

Just another thing to mess up Han’s character, and is right up there with the ‘Greedo shoots’ scene for me!

Well, the problem is the scene was originally made back when the rest of Star Wars was originally made. You make it sound it’s something Lucas thought up years later. He just didn’t have time to add in an effect to replace the stand in actor back in the 70s so the scene got cut.