NeverarGreat

Go watch The Adventures of Robin Hood and then tell me that older films had less color.

SilverWook said:

I think CGI may have finally come of age. I got emotionally invested in a trigger happy raccoon and a talking tree this summer.

Have you seen Gravity? That was one where my brothers and I both left the theater wondering what was CGI and what was real sets. That's never happened to us before.

RicOlie_2 said:

I need to see Spaceballs again sometime....

 Close your eyes and the feeling will pass.

It would be a shame if there isn't a ST '13, if only because the cast has the potential to be great. Give them something to work with, and I bet they could best most of the original timeline films.

Most of the color looks very good to me, however it seems like there is not much variation in the blues, and they've been pushed to an almost turquoise color. This is most apparent in the engine glows, but it can also be seen in R2's panels. There is usually some red in R2's panels, though in the original Star Wars the color can change somewhat based on the lighting. I don't recall them ever being quite that green though.

MaximRecoil said:

NeverarGreat said:

In many accounts of Near Death Experiences or OBEs, deceased loved ones are often seen as in the prime of their life, even if the OBE-er couldn't ever recall seeing them that way. So actually, having a young Anakin Skywalker ghost makes more sense than seeing the image of an old man who could have only appeared that way if he was not horribly mutilated decades ago. Of course, that would mean that the ghost of Obi-wan would need to be played by Ewan McGregor, and they would need to make a CGI version of Yoda of him in his vigorous tadpole years.

Those sort of anecdotes vary wildly, and of course there isn't any proof that the stories are true. However, mythology and religion are both well-documented with regard to the claims, and the hope to be "made whole" again in the afterlife is pretty much universal among people who believe in an afterlife.

In any event, the specific requirements of the movie need to be taken into account as well, i.e., the audience needs to recognize the ghostly characters, so it follows that the same actors who portrayed the characters in their natural life would portray them in their afterlife appearance.

Agree with all the above. My point was that I would find younger ghosted forms reasonable in theory, but I certainly wouldn't want it to be in the movie for the reasons you say. And obviously because the originals shouldn't be changed.

I think that people's perception of CGI does change over time. When My dad and I went to see The Two Towers, he came out of that movie thinking that Gollum was a real guy with makeup. I could have been fooled as well, except that I knew he was a digital effect going in. Now I look at Gollum and see the signs of a digital creation, but that's because I've seen so much of it that I have greater awareness for that sort of thing.

It's not that people aren't good at recognizing trickery, it's that we often don't know where to look to find it, at least upon first viewing. To make another Two Towers example, I had watched that movie probably a dozen times before I realized that in Theoden's final cavalry charge down the causeway, the horsemen in the back of the procession are flailing their swords at imaginary orcs. Now I cannot unsee that, if only because I now know where to look to see the seams showing.

Yeahhhh, I'm just messin with ya. ;)

Harmy said:

Well, I was one of those people, as I said above but I already knew the story from a book before seeing the movies, so it wasn't like I was missing the information.

It wouldn't need to be a long book. Here's the cliffs notes version:

Luke trains with Obi-wan's old master, and Vader tells Luke that they are both Skywalkers. Oh, and Luke loses a hand.

There are several here who first saw ROTJ before ESB, and it seems like a really strange jump. You go from seeing Han being applauded in Star Wars to "we need to rescue him from carbonite!" in Jedi. Though upon second thought, we already know that Jabba wants him dead, so it's not really that confusing. The biggest thing would be the "I am your father", which is a really strange thing to have happen off screen. Though the series started with Episode 4, so it may have been an interesting experiment to continually skip episodes.

In fact, there's not that much which has been missed. All that happens in Empire which is important in ROTJ is the introduction of Yoda and Luke's training, Luke considering that Vader could be his father, and that's it. Even Han's belief that Leia loves Luke is more understandable without the intervening installment, as well as Yoda's insistence that Luke confront Vader, as if Luke hasn't done that yet. Lando's arc contributes little to the overall story, and it may even be more understandable that ROTJ Lando, who seems to know Han and rescued him from captivity, is now a general, rather than ESB Lando, who previously betrayed a leader of the rebellion. An interesting thought experiment indeed.

MaximRecoil said:

Easterhay said:

Spare a thought for my boy. Since watching ROTJ the other day and questioning why Anakin's spirit was wearing clothes he never wore in life, last night he saw a picture from the original ROTJ with Sebastian Shaw as the ghost.

Questions such as "Why has he got hair? Where are his scars? Why has he got both arms? Why has he got both legs?" What could I do but shrug and say - once again - "They messed up."

They didn't "mess up". It is pretty standard in mythology and religion that people are "made whole" in the afterlife. The only precedent I know of for the idea of people retaining infirmities and/or wounds in the afterlife is from works of fiction in the "horror" or "thriller" genre.

The main reason that the concept of an afterlife has had such a long-term and widespead appeal is the hope that things will be better there, which obviously includes getting back lost limbs or otherwise rectifying other forms of disfigurement/impairment/infirmities. Who would dream up an afterlife for "good" or "redeemed" people where things suck just as bad as they did during the natural life, you know, other than people like Stephen King? That would be great for people who e.g. died in a fire or a high-speed car accident; they'd get to spend eternity looking like a charred corpse or a piece of hamburger.

Easterhay said:

45-ish with no hair, no arms or legs. Just a floating torso, really.

See above.

Also, why should he look "45-ish"? I never got the impression from SW, TESB, or ROTJ that he was supposed to be a generation younger than Obi-Wan Kenobi. Kenobi described him as having been a "good friend", and people's good friends tend to be in the same age range as they are. Darth Vader does say to Obi-Wan Kenobi, "Your powers are weak, old man," but "old man" is often used ironically/sarcastically, and if I had a dollar for every time I've heard an old man call another old man "old man", I'd be rich.

In many accounts of Near Death Experiences or OBEs, deceased loved ones are often seen as in the prime of their life, even if the OBE-er couldn't ever recall seeing them that way. So actually, having a young Anakin Skywalker ghost makes more sense than seeing the image of an old man who could have only appeared that way if he was not horribly mutilated decades ago. Of course, that would mean that the ghost of Obi-wan would need to be played by Ewan McGregor, and they would need to make a CGI version of Yoda of him in his vigorous tadpole years.

*Shudder*

Jonno said:

I hope you don't mind my giving this a shot, PDB, but that Ripley shot was bothering me and I thought I might have a go at diagnosing the problem.

I hauled out Premiere's channel mixer (a filter that's probably been there since version 1!) to see if I could deal with the red a bit, and the results are surprisingly effective.

Here are the settings I used; a boost of the red channel, and restoration of some greens back to reds and blues:

I'm sure there are tools that can achieve this with a great deal more finesse (a visual histogram would solve a lot of guesswork) but it's good to see that the colour information can be recovered.

Edit: forgot to mention, I also tweaked the levels to bring them more in line with the contrasty look of the 35mm. I guess that's another personal taste thing - I can see why some would prefer to keep as much detail as possible, but it's another area where the BD (having been scanned from the o-neg if I'm not mistaken) differs from the original look.

If you really want to get the most out of the channel mixer, I'd suggest layering the same video on top of itself and changing the brightness/contrast/gamma of each to allow fine tuning the shadows, midtones, and highlights. If you have access to Premiere Pro, using the channel mixer with a curves adjustment should allow you to manipulate the color almost to its maximum extent, and this is much simpler and faster as well.

RicOlie_2 said:

Doesn't Anakin help an injured Sandperson, or something like that, in that book? If I recall correctly, Jar Jar is less annoying--but still annoying.

 Apparently so, though I don't remember it:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_I:_The_Phantom_Menace_%28novel%29

I don't remember much else of the book past the opening, but I do remember that it made more sense than the film.

SilverWook said:

That might have have been a better introduction to him than we ultimately got. Wonder if Brooks worked from an earlier draft of the script?

I don't think so. Here's what I could find on the "revised rough draft" of the Phantom Menace, simply called "The Beginning": http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/thebeginning.html

This opening scene is a fleshed out version of Anakin's near-fatal podrace crash which was only referenced in the script/film. It made for a more immediately engaging start to the book (which you should totally read on Amazon). I still remember that opening, it's so much better than the film.

SilverWook said:

How does the novel compare to the movie? Is Jar Jar tolerable?

I don't remember much, having not read it since I was fifteen, but I do remember it introduced Anakin right out of the gate in a podrace with Sebulba. There was a bit more explanation of character motivation as well. The best part was that while reading it, I wasn't aware of any bad acting or cringe-worthy accents, so for that alone it's better than the film.

TV's Frink said:

darklordoftech said:

TV's Frink said:

Why is this thread still going?

because this website was created in order to get the OOT released, and this thread is about the OOT getting released.

 It's about a rumor that it's getting released. 

Don't you sometimes feel like posting in a thread even if you have nothing to say? ;)

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

I enjoy watching the prequels as eye-candy, but they aren't really movies.  They're more like sappy video games.  Perhaps they could have been made into movies with:

• different story
• different script
• different director
• different cast
• different effects

I almost added "more CPY", but that goes without saying.  The music I might actually keep.

Seriously, the one thing about the PT that made me really sad, was the Yoda lightsaber fight.  That pretty much destroyed his character.  After ESB, I pictured Yoda fighting with the force as his ally, with great efficiency and grace.  A slight move or gesture here and there, bending the force to tie the opponent in knots.  What a missed opportunity.  Instead they stick his tail in a light socket and have him leaping around like a maniac, totally out of character and with virtually no hint of the force.  It was painful to watch.

Or better yet, George should have stuck to his original idea wherein Yoda was a spiritual guru and would never use the Force for combat.

SilverWook said:

Would anyone at ILM have saved the original CGI files from 1997?

Doubtful. Though I do remember them saying that they were able to use the same Boss Nass model from TPM in ROTS. But it's a difference of using seven year old modeling files vs eighteen year old files in this case.

Bingowings said:

Octorox said:

If the prequel films didn't show the transformation from Anakin Skywalker to Darth Vader I would have no interest in watching them. To me, the idea of preserving the twist is crazy, people watched the prequels in the first place because they wanted to see how this happened.

Some people may have.

Other people may have watched them to see more three new Star Wars films, with interesting characters and plot driven exciting action scenes set during the fall of the Old Republic.

To be honest for me the mistake of the PT was concentrating too much on Obi-Wan and Anakin. We know their story already. They should have invented new characters for us to care about as the main characters and have Ben and Anakin in the background.

It's hard to care about Mace Windu when he spends most of the time sitting on a loo shaped chair frowning.

Thank you! That's the problem with prequels; there is no reason to show events which have already been told. I would add that the way to make a story work in a world where the future is known is to redirect the emphasis away from changing the galaxy. The thrust of history in the galaxy will not change, yet how an individual reacts to this inevitable history is what is really interesting. This is another area where the prequels went wrong, but people don't bring it up much. The Clone Wars are totally pointless to the audience because no matter what happens, the Old Republic is still doomed.

Walking around campus today, heard "Hooked on a Feeling" emanating from a passing car. Oh yeah...

Bingowings said:

I'm taking Ben at his word which naturally generates problems with his track record. His. "the guardians of peace and justice" blurb carries over to TPM's crawl so clearly Lucas didn't intend them to be a couple of hundred people.

He could be puffing up the order. "Morgan Cartewell is the guardian of oral hygiene in the universe" (that sort of thing) but unlike Luke's family relationships Ben hasn't got a reason to exaggerate or fib and his claims seem to backed up by what the Rebel and Imperial leaders say so yeah...that implies a large body of people doing stuff in a very open way...to me.

I find this discussion fascinating because it brings out the imagined universes people create around these films. I agree that there are more Jedi Knights than just a couple hundred, but then again, it would be very difficult to exterminate an entire religious order if it was immersed within the galactic population and consisted of millions of individuals. Keep in mind that even though we assume that the Star Wars galaxy is much like our own, the Milky Way is very large for a galaxy. In fact, a galaxy can have as few as a thousand stars:

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/space/stories/just-how-big-is-the-smallest-galaxy-in-the-universe

If only one in five of these stars could have a habitable planet (as recent estimates claim), then this galaxy wouldn't need more than a few thousand Jedi to intensely police these two hundred worlds. Of course, the Star Wars galaxy has always been depicted as having spiral arms and a "bright center", implying that it is larger than this diminutive galaxy, but I don't think that it's a stretch to assume that the number of inhabited worlds is no more than a few thousand. Otherwise, the Empire's search of planets using "thousands of probe droids" would be absurd, and this sets a realistic upper limit on the number of stars in the galaxy. It certainly wouldn't make sense for the Empire to be searching the Milky Ways' 100 billion stars with a few thousand probe droids, especially if a ship can easily traipse across such a galaxy in a short amount of time.

Tyrphanax said:

Tobar said:

New Trailer:

Automata

This looks really cool, actually. And I don't really like movies!

 And yet you frequently post on a movie fansite.

Very good work!

Faces Star Wars VHS (I distinctly remember Ben's original hut, and the washed out color of the Tatooine sequences)

Faces Empire VHS (Could not watch the Dagobah cave fight, as it was too scary for this five or six year old)

Faces Jedi VHS (My favorite of the Star Wars movies at the time, as it had the coolest battle at the end)

Fullscreen TPM VHS (I can't actually remember whether I saw this or AOTC in the theater, so I'm going to go with a tentative no. I did buy the hardcover novelization however, and the Lego Naboo fighter, and I remember the glut of action figures. It all felt very cool at the time)

Fullscreen AOTC VHS (Again, not sure about whether I saw this in the theater, but I remember that I did not think much of this movie when it came out. I bought the VHS, but only watched it twice or so before ignoring it completely)

ROTS in theater. (This is the first I remember seeing in the theater, and I went with some friends who were still ardent PT fans. I liked the idea that Palpatine played on Anakin's feelings that the Jedi were corrupt bastards, but Anakin's fall still made no sense)

I'd just as soon see them recast Han, Luke, and Leia than see them recast Indiana Jones. I'm fine with different interpretations of a character such as Robin Hood for example, because it is a character who was first created in a non-film media. All film interpretations of such a character are just that: interpretations.

One does not simply re-write the Lord of the Rings or 1984. Abridge them, sure. Translate them, adapt them for television or film, of course. But a reimagining of a property within the same media will not place it on the same level as the original.

When somebody points out that it was done successfully with Star Trek and James Bond, I wonder whether it is done for any reason other than brand recognition. There is no reason why the position of 007 cannot be filled by someone other than James Bond, or having the Enterprise commanded by someone other than James T Kirk. I guess people just like the name 'James' too much to let it go.