NeverarGreat

in the bottom of a

There's so much that we assume influenced ol' George when making Star Wars, sometimes it seems like he'd have to be the most well read/watched person on the planet. Chances are, a large part of the supposed 'influences' are just coincidences.

Tack said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Hal 9000 said:

That's why I had a sinking feeling for a lot of part three: so much of the stuff I didn't like was integral to the story. Stuff like Bard's son acting as his bow, Thorin dying on ice away from the rest of the action after a drag out fight with Bolg Azog, etc. I was feeling pretty good after part one which had most of its junk fairly segregated from the good/important parts.

 How the heck did that work?

 He set the arrow on the kid's shoulders and then launched it at Smaug from there. It was a little less goofy on screen.

I really liked that part, despite its goofiness. And though the fight between Thorin and Azog is painfully bossfight-ish, there may be a way to get rid of Azog completely from the movie: The movie could be from the point of view of Bilbo, who gets knocked out during the battle and misses the fight. He recovers afterwards and finds Thorin dying on the battlefield. It's more similar to the book in that way.

Three people with stormtrooper avatars posting in the same thread. What is this, a convention?

Wind Tunnel-esqe

Poor sad broken link^

I'll try to imagine it.

Well, I mostly just posted so that there was some activity on this thread. I'm finding myself excited for this movie, probably more than I should be.

I guess it does increase the illusion of detail.

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-creator/

Apparently George Lucas doesn't know the plot of TFA. I guess the outline he hashed out was more of a 'collection of vague ideas' which Abrams may have discarded.

I absolutely adore that song.

Great heart wipe too.

Harmy said:

I find this idea of trying to simulate a CRT display equal parts ridiculous and fascinating, so I decided to take a stab at it myself :-D

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0dtCY1O9WXzVmNKRU1TbWprWEk/view?usp=sharing

 It's almost as if I have my face too close to the television!

I thought I saw it jump the second time I watched it, but upon rewatching I can't see it. It's all good.

Since there were only a handful of them ever assembled, I'd say that you couldn't put a price on that.

imperialscum said:

moviefreakedmind said:

No, I'm confused as to whether you think that the original line was delivered too angrily or not. You seem to imply that the original line was delivered angrily, which I guess it was, but no more angrily than any other Vader line in the series (like "I find your lack of faith disturbing")

All other lines were delivered without any anger... with a sole exception "Tear this ship apart".

And this the best example of Vader... cool, intelligent, witty, sarcastic.

Of course this is speaking in general. As for why anger ESPECIALLY does not fit in that particular section of the film, please refer to this post and this post.

That's what makes the character of Vader so good; his mask hides much of his emotion, leaving that to the imagination. I imagined Vader being in an almost constant state of anger in ESB. For example, his delivery of "You have failed me for the last time" contains a slight pause between the last two words, like he's struggling to keep a steady voice through mounting rage. Likewise, not choking every officer on the bridge in the final scene may have been because he was too furious even to exact punishment, he simply retired to his meditation pod to scream his lungs out ;)

Only a few of the frames are from the SE, and these are labeled Episode 4 instead of Star Wars 1977. They are also clearly printed on a different stock.

Looks legit. As far as I can tell, it's the same kind of stock that Mikeaz123's film was printed on, and that was confirmed to be Technicolor. His film had the words 'EASTMAN' and 'SAFETY' printed on them, and these frames also have these labels.

You_Too said:

That frame is mirrored but anyway, in the GOUT source there sure is glue marks at the bottom because I remember fixing that frame because it had been "cleaned up" by their DVNR in 1993 leaving some extra aliasing where the glue marks were.

By the way, after some more analyzing of some frames from the Reliance clip, I'm starting to believe it's a new scan or something we haven't seen before. Not only is it less cropped on all sides, (especially left, right and bottom) but it's also less "eaten up" by DVNR which can even be seen through vimeo's compression. Look at Obi-Wan's lightsaber core here: http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/109157

I'm starting to think Disney is working from new scans or something, but making their own special edition. The new lightsaber glow looks very photoshop-ish to me.

 That's my conclusion as well:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/4K-restoration-on-Star-Wars/topic/16857/page/14/

grainger said:

CO said:

While the duel is action packed, and John Williams music is great, it pretty much sums up what is wrong with the PT:  There is nothing more to it then that.  What makes a great duel from the OT was the action AND the dialogue, and Duel of Fates lacks any dialogue.  In a sense, Lucas chose style over substance for the PT again.

To be fair, the force fields did show us a little about the Jedi characters - Qui Gon's patience vs Obi Wan's impetuousness, so there was an attempt to have some depth in the fight.

However, the scene didn't tell us anything meaningful about the conflict itself - both sides just agreed to fight each other because they were "the enemy". There was nothing personal at stake, and we knew absolutely nothing about Darth Maul - he was just a costume.

 This is it exactly. I remember reading a synopsis of the first draft to TPM, where the generator room was actually the planetary shield generator. If Maul was guarding the generator and the Jedi were fighting for control of it to stop more Federation craft from landing, it would have integrated into the movie far more. But the battle itself would have remained impersonal.

Obi-wan's lightsaber effect was clearly unfinished in the trailer, so I doubt that the trailer actually used the elements from the re-release, probably just took bits from earlier trailers.

The Deathly Hallows always struck me as a kind of Pirates of the Caribbean At World's End type plot contrivance, where a certain number of random objects has some special significance not at all foreshadowed in previous installments. I distinctly remember Ron explaining that invisibility cloaks were very rare, thus saying that there were more of them than one. For all her careful plotting, this was a bizarre departure for Rowling. I wouldn't mind seeing this trinity de-emphasized.

Darth Id said:

NeverarGreat said:

Lynch's Dune was a good movie. Perhaps not great, and it doesn't do Dune justice, but I'm glad that it exists. 

To put this necro'd thread on topic, I'd rather have too little exposition than too much. I'd say 2001, A Space Odyssey comes dangerously close to having too little exposition, whereas Interstellar has far too much.

 I'm gonna go with...uproariously terrible on the whole Dune issue.  And certainly not light on the exposition, to forgive an on-topic connection.  IIRC, the "film" opened with about 6 1/2 minutes of uninterrupted spoken-word doggerel re "THE SPICE," etc., while the screen just alternated back and forth between shots of two static planets.

I'm not sure how to feel about that exposition dump. Star Wars had one in text form, so if Dune went the same way, would it be viewed as harshly? Dune in book form prefaced most chapters with quotes by the Princess Irulian, so having her preface the movie doesn't seem out of place. However I don't think that it needed to go on for so long. Just a little about Arrakis and the spice, then cut to Caladan.

Lynch's Dune was a good movie. Perhaps not great, and it doesn't do Dune justice, but I'm glad that it exists. 

To put this necro'd thread on topic, I'd rather have too little exposition than too much. I'd say 2001, A Space Odyssey comes dangerously close to having too little exposition, whereas Interstellar has far too much.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHfhorJnAEI

It's now possible to recover sound in a video by analyzing the movement of objects within the video. I hope somebody uses this for old silent movies, just for fun. Also, for Star Wars, it may be possible to recover some of Prowse's original dialogue on set. That's neat.

Harmy said:

Or maybe just mo-cap?

 Most likely