Mr. Bungle

Serling1979 said:

Harmy said:

Actually, I think that the comparison of BD to LD is quite accurate in the sense that BD is to DVD what LD was to VHS (here's hoping that BD will become somewhat more mainstream though).

 

I think this is the reason why BD will ultimately fail. There is nothing wrong with BD but there is nothing exceptionally new about it either. It's like a DVD but with higher resolution and while HD-TVs have become more common so have upscaling algorithms. Do I shell out another $20 to get the movie on Blu-ray or do I use my DVD? It's like the Star Trek rule, every movie with an odd number, or every other Bond being terrible (though Timothy Dalton was just mis-cast). It's just that DVD was such a revolution that BD didn't have enough new stuff to offer. Whatever the next home video medium will be, it will rock in terms of sales but BD, while still a good medium, is bound to crash.

Why it will fail? It's already a proven success. The unfortunate success of the Star Wars BDs is evidence of that. It's a higher-end format that has been embraced by some consumers, not all. It's unfair to compare it to DVD, which is the greatest format success story ever. It's a premium format that was released in harsh economic times, and it isn't the jump in quality as DVD was to VHS.

As for the next home video medium, I think Blu-ray may be the last as far as "hard" formats go. However, on a mass scale, it's still the best as what it does, and it should be around for several more years.

fishmanlee said:

Just to let you know, If Spielberg had not suggested a re-edit, there would be no need to replace the music sooooo....

What is the story about Spielberg suggesting a re-edit?

SilverWook said:

Mr. Bungle said:

Baronlando said:

Looking at the charts, boy they aren't kidding when they say blu-ray sales are still relatively soft. Not for Star Wars, just in general. (The headline isn't is as great if you say "In it's first week Star Wars sells a fraction as many copies as the dvd of Beverly Hills Chihuahua!")

Yeah, and there's a significant portion of people who 1) don't own a Blu-ray player, 2) don't own an HD set, 3) already have the DVD set and are fine with that, 4) are kind of strapped these days. Regardless, there's a huge spin here in selling this as some massive success story. Yeah, it's definitely great news for a format that some people have stupidly compared to laserdisc and declared DOA. But people in general don't buy movies the like they did 5 - 10 years ago.

 

As Laserdisc had a healthy 20+ year run as a niche format, (and pioneered many things we now take for granted with DVD and Blu Ray today) that's actually a backhanded compliment in my book. ;)

Oh, I wasn't trying to knock laserdisc. I was a proud owner and supporter for many years. But it was a format that never properly marketed, and people could never seem to get over the awkward size. Totally ignorant, but that and the much higher price for them really hurt its chances.

Baronlando said:

Looking at the charts, boy they aren't kidding when they say blu-ray sales are still relatively soft. Not for Star Wars, just in general. (The headline isn't is as great if you say "In it's first week Star Wars sells a fraction as many copies as the dvd of Beverly Hills Chihuahua!")

Yeah, and there's a significant portion of people who 1) don't own a Blu-ray player, 2) don't own an HD set, 3) already have the DVD set and are fine with that, 4) are kind of strapped these days. Regardless, there's a huge spin here in selling this as some massive success story. Yeah, it's definitely great news for a format that some people have stupidly compared to laserdisc and declared DOA. But people in general don't buy movies the like they did 5 - 10 years ago.

Harmy said:

Wow, guys, I'm surprised at this uproar about the sales. Did you seriously expect anything else? I mean, it's STAR WARS on Blu-Ray ;-)

But seriously, the average Joe doesn't care or even know, because they don't go the the internet to read about SW. They see the adverts in the shop and think: Hey! Great, SW on BD, that's something I've gotta have in my collection!

And then they watch the films 1-6 and hear Vader say "Nooooo" and think "hey, has that always been there?... Ah, whatever..."

And of course, 99% of the issues that we said would be there, are there and the people who said that those issues won't be there and the LFL will fix them (thus totally acknowledging the existence of such issues and as they expected that they must be fixed their gravity) and yet still, even when these issues were confirmed, they went and bought the set and wrote shamelessly gushing reviews on it. So how can we win by reasoning and using logical arguments, when the other side is so clearly determined to close their eyes?

But what we're doing here is still important. We still did some good in the world, because maybe there was ten thousand people, or even just a few hundred, who were able to make an actually informed decision about the Blus thanks to our efforts. Of course it won't hurt the sales, if they go into millions, but it's still worth it! And we have to keep it up!

 

Well stated, Harmy.

And I have to say, your Despecialized Edition has given me some kind of temporary solace during these "dark times", and they'll certainly tide me over.  I'll keep up my end of not buying this bedazzled crap set, and I'll continue to hold out hope that this madness will end someday and that someone (be it Lucas or someone else) will do a nice 4k or 8K remaster of the original films. And won't that be a great day.

Lastly, yeah, it sold well. But look at this from 2004. $84M in a week? How about $100M in A DAY.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/23/news/midcaps/starwars/index.htm

While the new set has sold well, it's significantly lower than seven years ago. I do believe there is a significant backlash, and certainly more people holding out (or at least off). I would imagine this set would've sold a lot more if it was done properly.

CO said:

After seeing the first weekend sales of the BluRay, it just shows me that Lucas could care less if we are still fans of the movies.  The one thing you to concede about SW is that it continues to build fans with each generation.

Now I do not condone Lucas actions towards the originals, but why should he give a shit about the originals when this boxset sold well enough to keep the Lucasfilm gravy train rolling?

I have always said as long as a SW release is popular, Lucas will never change.  The SE in theaters made loads of money, the PT movies made loads of money, the 2004 SE DVD's made loads of money, and now the 2011 Blurays will make loads of money.

There is no way Lucas needs to give in about the OOT, because there is enough fans who enjoy the SE or don't care about the changes that offset us. 

Sorry guys, but I put my hands up at this point, and these sales figures show that we are not winning the battle.  Lucas can do whatever he wants, and I can't come up with a reason in HIS mind that he should remaster the OOT.

Not so sure. The OOT is his only "special feature" left. The current Blu-ray set has a treasure chest of deleted scenes (albeit looking like dogshit). Whatever he releases next on whatever format, it needs to have an extra incentive to buy it. The OOT is that incentive.

I'm confident that it'll happen at some point. I may be old and grey, but it'll happen.

Erikstormtrooper said:

SilverWook said:

I'd wager most consumers aren't even aware of any controversy. Not everyone is as plugged into things as we are. The situation would be the same no matter what movie was involved.

Whether or not most viewers of the Blu Rays notice things have been changed again, only time will tell.

A few months ago I was visiting with my parents, and they asked me if I was excited about the Star Wars movies coming to BD. I said I wasn't really interested since the original theatrical versions weren't included. My own father (who's heard me rant about Star Wars for years) had no idea what I was talking about. A coworker, who claims to be a big Star Wars fan, didn't know about the issue either.

I'd wager that most casual fans of Star Wars don't really know about the changes and the controversy. Sad.

And I think that's what Mr Lucas is counting on. The sheep don't care. Not offense to your folks, of course. ;)

hairy_hen said:

I dunno.  While I personally would never have been that rude if I were actually trying to communicate with her, the 'hypocritical, insufferable cunt' remark made me laugh quite a bit, because it's not so far from the truth.

The 'raped my childhood' type of comments are a pretty poor choice of words, of course, but it does seem like the defenders are the ones who are actually using them the most.

I agree that it's a poor choice. And while I'm not defending its usage, I'm not offended by it, either. As for Ms. Lucas, this is the same woman whom on her Twitter account says she "embraces vulgarity" (or something to that extent). Not that people should stoop to her level, but during this whole episode, she's proven herself to be a bona fide hypocritical blueberry alien.

I've also said this before: you can find much, MUCH worse said about Lucas if you go to any Star Wars/Lucas-related talkback on aintitcool.com. 

TV's Frink said:

Mr. Bungle said:

TV's Frink said:

Mr. Bungle said:

Johnboy3434 said:

SilverWook said:

On the flip side of the same coin, wasn't she also posting tweets that could be interpreted as baiting angry fanboys?

Perhaps, but I can't help but side with her when she tirades about the ridiculousness of the phrase "raped my childhood". While you could argue about whether or not the phrase is technically correct, the inescapable fact is that the word "rape" has heavy baggage tacked onto it. To use it in reference to something as trivial as a movie is nothing short of irresponsible.

Meh. When I was growing up, I recall Celtics' radio announcer Johnny Most screaming "Bird was raped!", implying that Larry Bird was fouled and there was no call. Was I supposed to take that literally?

Is the phrase "my childhood was raped" too much? Of course. But does it really belittle people who have been raped? Was someone who was raped actually offended by a geek saying "George Lucas raped my childhood"? There's sensitivity, and then there's needless sensitivity.

 

Have you ever been raped?  Do you know anyone who has been raped?  If not, then you have no way to know the answer to your questions.

They were rhetorical questions.

Thanks for either missing or ignoring the point completely.

What Miker71 said.

Anyway, "this bickering is pointless!"

TV's Frink said:

Mr. Bungle said:

Johnboy3434 said:

SilverWook said:

On the flip side of the same coin, wasn't she also posting tweets that could be interpreted as baiting angry fanboys?

Perhaps, but I can't help but side with her when she tirades about the ridiculousness of the phrase "raped my childhood". While you could argue about whether or not the phrase is technically correct, the inescapable fact is that the word "rape" has heavy baggage tacked onto it. To use it in reference to something as trivial as a movie is nothing short of irresponsible.

Meh. When I was growing up, I recall Celtics' radio announcer Johnny Most screaming "Bird was raped!", implying that Larry Bird was fouled and there was no call. Was I supposed to take that literally?

Is the phrase "my childhood was raped" too much? Of course. But does it really belittle people who have been raped? Was someone who was raped actually offended by a geek saying "George Lucas raped my childhood"? There's sensitivity, and then there's needless sensitivity.

 

Have you ever been raped?  Do you know anyone who has been raped?  If not, then you have no way to know the answer to your questions.

They were rhetorical questions.

twister111 said:

 

SilverWook said:

Johnboy3434 said:
Also, I just read about the Twitter debacle with Katie Lucas. I won't hold a single word against her, because anyone who would take their grievances to her is an asshole to begin with. If people came on my Facebook talking shit about my old man, I'd treat them like dirt too.

On the flip side of the same coin, wasn't she also posting tweets that could be interpreted as baiting angry fanboys?

The thing about Katie Lucas' twitter is that she seems to want to use it for both promoting Lucasfilm and, Star Wars. Yet also have the freedom of a personal account where she can pretend to be an anon and, just backlash against people.

Recent Examples:

KRLgrrl tweeted:

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/116588177812238336
Just FYI-- putting CGI in a movie, adding a line, or making an ewok blink does not qualify as sexual abuse, and referring to it as such

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/116588318640177152
makes you a heartless bastard. I dare you to look a victim of sexual abuse in the eye and say that George Lucas raped your childhood.

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/116588607095046146
Hate the movies, be mad about them, cry about them-but don't equate them with being sexually violated,

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/116588742332006402
because thats not even in the realm of what happened to you. Its not cute, its not 'new' anymore, it doesn't make you look more clever

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/116588901283540992
it makes you look STUPID. USE THE FUCKING DICTIONARY. RAPE IS NOT WHAT A MOVIE DID TO YOUR CHILDHOOD. End of story.

McSquiggins tweeted:

KRLgrrl tweeted:

McSquiggins tweeted:

KRLgrrl tweets:
http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/116616805140799488

@trooperchick use the common sense your parents gave you. there is a difference between sexual abuse and changes to a movie.

http://twitter.com/#!/McSquiggins/status/116617929201688576
@KRLgrrl Apparently you don't understand what a "figure of speech" is. Let me help you out.

http://twitter.com/#!/McSquiggins/status/116618315828441089
@KRLgrrl In the phrase, "George Lucas' daughter seems like a hypocritical, insufferable cunt", the word "cunt" is a figure of speech.

http://twitter.com/#!/McSquiggins/status/116618439300358145
@KRLgrrl I don't actually think you're a walking, typing vagina. See how that works?

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/116619274990260226
@McSquiggins oh that was helpful. but i actually do think you're a talentless prick.

http://twitter.com/#!/McSquiggins/status/116619724070207488
@KRLgrrl Talentless? Probably. But not all of us can ride our father's coattails to fame and fortune.

KRLgrrl tweeted:

McSquiggins tweeted:

KRLgrrl tweeted:

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/116619801245384705
@McSquiggins oh, and for the record, so does everybody else. hence, the 7 followers.

http://twitter.com/#!/McSquiggins/status/116620175415050240
@KRLgrrl OH SNAP! I wish my daddy was famous too so I could have more followers. :'(

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/116619977653628928
@McSquiggins go shove your 'insufferable cunt' up your own insufferable cunt, you coward.

KRLgrrl tweeted:

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/114821509855453184
Do we have any predictions for this season of Clone Wars?

KRLgrrl tweeted:

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/114823821151830016
Prediction: It's going to be awesome.

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/114824254968709121
And i can tell you this, it IS going to be awesome! More than awesome! One of my favorite seasons to date #spoileralert

http://twitter.com/#!/KRLgrrl/status/114824580480253953
I have four episodes this season that will be airing later in the season! I'm so excited for you guys to see them!

-------------

Yes what McSquiggins posted is completely unacceptable. However, she is the one that decided to not only bait things with obvious hot topic tweets. She also decided to escalate things referring to him as a "talentless prick" and, taking a stab at him for his follower count. Recently, I lost about 10 followers when, I was mainly just trying to friendly communicate with my followers. It doesn't make one a "talentless prick" for having a low follower count any more then her 2,082 followers automatically make her talented. While I don't begrudge her using her account to promote her work. It does make it more representative of what LFL allows for public representation. If it weren't for the fact that her dad is the boss she'd probably be fired by now. Regardless of public opinion escalating things and, defending her father's work are two different things. While I do feel sad that people decide to trash talk George Lucas via her accounts mentions. She's not faultless in this either.

 

HILARIOUS. Why she gets into it with people like that, I'll never understand. It's tempting and forgivable the first couple times, but she seems to do it a lot. My opinion is that she is baiting and antagonizing to boot. That makes her pretty unsympathetic in my book.

Adium said:

 

Looks like that boycott called by hardcore fans didn’t amount to much. Nor were buyers perturbed by some very controversial changes in the 9-disc Blu-ray release of Star Wars: The Complete Saga with 40 hours of extras. Instead, the Complete Saga on Blu-ray release broke global sales records with 1 million units sold and $84 million filling cash registers. It quickly becomes the #1 pre-order and #1 catalog title since the launch of the high-definition format. Needless to say, Lucasfilm Ltd and Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment are high-fiving today’s announcement that Star Wars is the bestselling catalog Blu-ray Disc of all time, including 515,000 units sold in North America in its first week alone. This worldwide consumer spend included $38 million in North America – unprecedented for a 9-disc Blu-ray collection at a premium price:

 

 

http://www.deadline.com/2011/09/star-wars-complete-saga-on-blu-ray-breaks-global-sales-records/

 

I, for one, am SHOCKED.

They're high-fiving at LFL. "Yipeee!"

Johnboy3434 said:

SilverWook said:

On the flip side of the same coin, wasn't she also posting tweets that could be interpreted as baiting angry fanboys?

Perhaps, but I can't help but side with her when she tirades about the ridiculousness of the phrase "raped my childhood". While you could argue about whether or not the phrase is technically correct, the inescapable fact is that the word "rape" has heavy baggage tacked onto it. To use it in reference to something as trivial as a movie is nothing short of irresponsible.

Meh. When I was growing up, I recall Celtics' radio announcer Johnny Most screaming "Bird was raped!", implying that Larry Bird was fouled and there was no call. Was I supposed to take that literally?

Is the phrase "my childhood was raped" too much? Of course. But does it really belittle people who have been raped? Was someone who was raped actually offended by a geek saying "George Lucas raped my childhood"? There's sensitivity, and then there's needless sensitivity. And it doesn't have to have sexual connotation.

Third definition: an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of a countryside.

SilverWook said:

Johnboy3434 said:

Also, I just read about the Twitter debacle with Katie Lucas. I won't hold a single word against her, because anyone who would take their grievances to her is an asshole to begin with. If people came on my Facebook talking shit about my old man, I'd treat them like dirt too.

On the flip side of the same coin, wasn't she also posting tweets that could be interpreted as baiting angry fanboys?

It was something like "The haters hate, and then they go buy it." So it was a taunt of sorts. Whatever. She is captured on film forever as a big blueberry alien.

http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/0/03/Chi_Eekway.jpg

 

overall, Im worried about Ford.  In interviews and talk shows he really seems slow, sad and a little spaced out.  He's very old now and will probably retire in few years but hope he's ok health wise.   maybe he can get a great role like jeff bridges did and win oscar. 

Ford's fine. He's just a huge stoner. Dude is constantly high as a kite and totally aloof. It's nothing more than that.

Hoth-Nudist said:

walking_carpet said:

Hoth-Nudist said:

xhonzi said:

Hoth-Nudist said:

He should have hired an actress that knew and loved SW, an actress that wanted to throw herself into the role with passion. 

This never seems to be the case.  Look at all of the comic book movies being made where the director has the passion for the character and the actors have to google the name as soon as they get the part.

A good actor/actress will read the script, research the role and mentally prepare himself/herself for the performance.  Thats Luca$s' fault for hiring Natalie, and Natalie's for not being professional.

 

Hey Hoth-Nudist - i remember you from when I was lurking in TFN's basher's sanctuary many years ago :) hope to see if binary_sunset posts here! 

To you last point - The problem with this is that there was no role to research.  Even if Natalie asked lucas a bunch of questions, she wouldn't get any answers (kinda like what terence stamp tried for Valorum).  By the time of AOTC, it was obvious to anyone with an IQ above room temperature that padme's only purpose in the PT was so someone can give birth to luke and leia.  She exists because she has a uterus.

Everything else - being a queen, senator, marrying anakin, etc - was pitifully contrived in order to create something that resembled a character in the most superficial sense.  And what was once a touching moment in ROTJ is now a hysterical plot hole.

I believe that the real reason why lucas is one of the most secretive filmmakers is not because he wants to protect the storylines, but rather he did not want anyone to know that there was no multi-episode saga and everything was made up.

I also find natalie to be a grossly overrated actress and not the wunderkind everyone has made her out to be.  But one thing i respected about her was she seemed pretty choosy in her roles (at least when she was younger).  it wouldn't surprise me that her attitude was the result of realizing how pathetic her non-character was and being completely appalled about it.

Hey Walking_carpet!  Glad ur here dude!  Im so glad to be away from TF.net.  This site allows free speech! LOL!  I havnt heard from Binary in years, but hope he'll find his way here.

I think u make a good point.  IMO I think Portman should've studied and honed in Carrie Fisher's performances in the OOT.  They were close to the same age for their respective trilogies.  Portman's research was basically renting and watching the OOT on a weekend.  Im right there with you on feeling that Natalie is grossly overrated.  IMO the movie "brothers" with Tobey Mcguire and Jake Gyllenhaal(sp) is her best performance, but yet again was outshined by her costars.

I remember both of you guys from the old TFN days. I had to get off that board, though. The mindless gushing over there now is unbearable.

I'm surprised the hate Portman gets. I agree that she really faxed in her performances in TPM and AOTC (thought she did the best she could in ROTS). Have you ever seen CLOSER? She was great in that. And I loved BLACK SWAN. 

ROFLRICK said:

"You're a Gungan, aren't you?"

And, as Queen of the planet, I have no idea about the species sharing it with me...

I loves me The Phantom Menace, but this always bothered me. Oh, and:

"The day started pretty okey-day with brisky mornin' munchin', then boomdegasser, crash into the boss's headlibber, then banished."

I think. Anyone want to check my copy here?

No, I think you, ahem, nailed it.

As far as "the negotiations were short", I'm not sure it was intended as a "haw haw" Kenobi *joke*. Just sort of that Obi-Wan light-hearted lines. I never minded it. I think McGregor as Obi-Wan is one of the highlights of the PT. His "Why do I have the feeling we've picked up another pathetic life form?" got chuckles. It's also an odd line as it's Lucas basically acknowledging the alien sidekick sucks.

zombie84 said:

It's in The Making of ROTS, along with a synopsis of the rough draft he is in, bringing Yoda intel about the location of Grievous.

I totally forgot about how Kid Solo almost made his way in there to join Kid Boba and Kid Vader. Wow. I wonder who talked George out of that "awesome storyline."

And aside from Lucas finally getting to show the Wookiee planet of Kashyyyk, there's really no point of having Chewbacca in the movie aside from giving the audience that little wink. Obi-Wan is never there to make that little connection to seeing him in the Mos Eisley cantina, so who cares.

zombie84 said:

Cuchulainn said:

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Although in a sense, I suppose the "nooo!" makes him seem more like creepy Anakin from the episodes 2 and 3, the whiny one who always wants his way. Maybe that's why some of the gushers like it.

Are there seriously people who think this was a good idea?

They reside at theforce.net boards. I have witnessed this myself in the last few days. It's hard to imagine what they wouldn't tolerate but I also think most of them are to a degree just saying that to convince themselves, if you gave them the choice I don't doubt almost every person would pick the silent version of that scene.

I think you found the same kind of apologists on TheForce.net for the Hayden/Anakin ghost on the 2004 DVDs. There was a lot of rationalizing then of why Lucas decided to do that. 

For some reason, I find the "nooooooo" harder to defend. Maybe because I've maxed out on these absurd changes.

Cuchulainn said:

yotsuya said:

All this over one page in the back?

There are 10 other pictures that you aren't even talking about. While I would agree the quality is lacking, the OT cast gets their due. Each film gets an iconic shot. ANH gets that same image (although a painted version). Plus the cover features the Lars Homestead with Anakin and Luke. The location is far more iconic of ANH than any of the PT.

Plus, the two covers for the two trilogies both feature OT characters; Vader and Yoda.

And you don't even mention the image of Anakin and Luke in the middle of the booklet. It reminds me very much of the early art for ANH (see the novel cover). I can't find an online image of that picture, but the rest I found here http://halcyonrealms.com/film/star-wars-the-complete-saga-blu-ray/

Sorry, but I think that artwork is shit.

+1.

It's absolute garbage. As much as people complained about the bad photoshopping on the DVD cases, these pieces of art look like the work of an eight-year-old, propped up on the family fridge. The portraits are embarrassingly bad.  And the one of Han and the Ewoks is woefully awful.

zombie84 said:

TV's Frink said:

WhatsMyName said:

So what everyone think of the ROTJ line at the end where vader saves luke?

Find me one person that likes it, so I can SHUN them.

Go to theforce.net boards. There's tons over there.

Yes. Here's a gushing example.

Friday when it came out I went ahead and bought my first Blu Ray player and the boxset.

I was all set to watch the whole saga over Saturday and Sunday, but after seeing The Phantom Menace, I found myself with the desire to go out and find some live music and dance.

The movie was fantastic in it's high definition glory, with the cooler looking Yoda, so it's not like I was disappointed or anything.

I guess I just feel like spreading it out and savoring each movie on it's own terms.

I'm going to probably do a movie each weekend until I'm through it.

I feel like I've been waiting for this version my whole life, and I don't want it's revelation to be over so quickly.

[hurls]

This might clear things up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRrb5xpEpcw

Bingowings said:

It would only ruin the film if the original version no longer exists... oh... Opps!

Lets face it, blu-Ray leads to 3D leads to 3D blu-Ray leads to more and more greenbacks.

Agreed, but I'm not sure anyone's going to give a shit about buying the SW movies on 3D Blu-ray unless Lucas attaches the UOT to the set.

The  UOT is the only real ace left in Lucas's home video deck of cards.

MagnoliaFan said:

It kind of kills me how little effort they put into cleaning these up.
This is just two shots, but I threw this together in about 2 hours.
Imagine how much better it could look if they threw in half the effort with George's resources.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq5nxaUebIA

Wow. That is both astounding and disturbing. Thanks for posting it.

EyeShotFirst said:

You guys have got to see this comedy gold edit of the deleted scenes.\

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rajCyWb9BFA

HILARIOUS!