NeverarGreat

You managed to fool me.

For a second.

Seriously though, great thread.

(Here follows an account of the great civil war, later known as the Clone Wars, from the eyes of Beru Whitesun and Owen Lars, who, having no personal stake in the war, were nevertheless swept up in a life and death struggle across the stars. Their tale will not disprove the account of Anakin Skywalker, the dark and mysterious figure who claimed to Owen and Beru to be merely a navigator on a Spice Freighter while in hiding on Tatooine. However, this tale will expose the conditions on the ground for a galaxy at war, the plight of the poor and underprivileged, those with no allegiance and no home. It will reveal the true origin of Anakin and his abilities, and the curse that drove generations to despair. Finally, it will tell of the onetime greatness of the Old Republic, before it was destroyed from within, and its resurrection in the birth of the Rebel Alliance. But the story, to state it simply, is about a boy, a girl, and a universe.)

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away....

STARS OF WAR

After a thousand years of peace, a confederacy of rebel star systems is breaking away from the great GALACTIC REPUBLIC, forcing an entire galaxy to the brink of war....

Back in the old days, there was more time spent immersing an audience in the movie world before the primary action began, now audiences are used to immediate and unrelenting action from start to finish.

When movies were filmed with technicolor cameras, they had an entirely different look and feel than movies today. This is because of the increased lighting, the different choices with regards to costume and staging, as well as the technicolor technology itself, which made for a bright, highly contrasting picture compared with the more muted hues of today's movies.

Special effects back then often warranted scenes being built around them, whereas today cgi is placed into the frame wherever it is deemed necessary.

And of course, in 77 a portal opened in space-time which allowed untold magic to escape into our realm, resulting in Star Wars, The Thing, Blade Runner, ET, The Dark Crystal, Alien, Back to the Future, The Princess Bride, and many other movies which were obviously Truth given Form, before the portal was closed in the late eighties.

At this point, I'd say the difference between them is negligible.

Hey, McFlabbergasty, I found this thread last year but then forgot that it was you when you posted the Star Wars Sequel story in the Script Rewriting thread. So...yeah.

I believe that everyone is precisely where they need to be. This is not because of some religious woo woo, it is simply that a person fears only that which they don't understand, and that which they don't understand they cannot control. This is a much more powerful force than people expect. Thus people find themselves constantly mired in fearful situations that seem beyond their control. If you feel like you are in a bad place in your life, know that it is simply because this situation is the one that you most need to learn from right now. You resist it intensely, but this is because you secretly fear it. How do you escape? You must find a way to understand it, by reading, by finding someone who has sailed those waters, by simple experience, whatever.

The upshot of all of this is that  every situation you find yourself in that you dislike is one that you can learn from. Whenever you are faced with an unpleasant something or other, whether it be the prospect of planning for the future, getting out of bed, getting a job, managing your finances, heating healthy, etc, know that it is only your level of understanding that keeps you from playing these games well. For that is what they are; games.

It can seem overwhelming at first, but do one thing at a time, and eventually you will begin to enjoy these games, if you are playing them correctly.

I've rewritten this post three times already, so it is what it is. Anyway, remember to be thankful for the horrible things in life, because these are the only things that will trip you up (and really, there aren't all that many of them, they're just all crowding around you waiting for their chance to teach you something).

I just bumped this thread...does that count?

Star Trek, while it has its emotional side, is a thought experiment. We journey several centuries into the future to consider how different (or how similar) humanity is at that time. We hope to be like these people, men and women of science and enlightenment going out to take our place among the stars.

Star Wars to me is mythological. It doesn't show humans as they might be, but humans as they have been and as they remain on a primal, subconscious level. It shows how humans are still deeply affected by magical thinking and desperately wish to see the world in terms of good vs evil.

I like both visions, but I think that the OT of Star Wars has more Truth to it than any Star Trek movie or episode I've seen, excepting perhaps First Contact.

As for Carrie not looking like she's in her 20s anymore; well, what did you expect? Her appearance changes dramatically even from Star Wars to Jedi.

I highly doubt that they will be going for "beautiful princess Leia" at this point. Rather, if they take the EU into account, this is a woman who has been at war, with the galaxy and with her own government, for thirty odd years. She's had three children with a man who was not known for his stable, fatherly influence, and has undergone the rigors of becoming a Jedi, something that loses many people their limbs, and often their lives. The face that has seen all that would be a tad careworn to say the least.

I agree that they don't need Harrison, unless his character changes as entirely as Leia's should. I don't want to see the same characters doing the same things. They are beyond that at this point.

If the child of Han and Leia was in his/her mid twenties, the story could pick up pretty much where RotJ left off, assuming that the child was already a good pilot and a fully trained Jedi. That way we wouldn't have to retread the "seduction of the Dark Side" story, and have it focus on something bigger than that. For example, if he/she had gained so much power that he/she had godlike abilities, the story could be about the struggle to use them responsibly and for the good of the galaxy instead of using them to save friends. Or it could do what the prequels tried to do, such as make a political thriller with the goal being an ethical galactic government. Or it could introduce an enemy that simply cannot be defeated through the exploitation of an easily accessible structural weakness.

As for the cast of characters, there are literally dozens of well known archetypes that haven't been used in Star Wars. Heck, we haven't even had a scientist as a major character in Star Wars, and Star Wars is SCIENCE fantasy. We could have a noble character who has a tortured and hidden past, a teacher who knows the history of the Old Republic and who teaches our hero about how to structure a lasting democracy, a mechanical being who nevertheless uses the Force, an archaeologist who discovers the buried secrets of the first Jedi, or even a Celestial, a being who isn't particularly interested in the wars of the galaxy yet has terrible power. New characters shouldn't be a problem. I'd say the worst option would be to simply recycle what has already been done simply because people liked it thirty years ago.

They look really professional. Just one thing stands out to me, and that is the lack of a break in the Star Wars opening crawl. Is there a reason that the first two paragraphs are together?

darth_ender said:

I'm reading the ROTJ novel, and I have to say that I find the whole slave Leia bit pretty disturbing.  I mean, the film and book really don't say much about it, and I know it's a kids movie, and furthermore I understand that GL was probably looking for an excuse to please his adolescent male fans by getting Carrie Fisher in a bikini, but...in reality she would have been horribly traumatized by this experience.  If the Star Wars universe were real, I imagine that Leia would have been horribly sexually assaulted, probably numerous times, prior to her escape.  These are evil, horrible monsters that clearly have little respect for the rights of others, and the only females you see in the group are slave dancers.  In the book Jabba actually kisses/licks Leia and later forces her to drink out of his goblet ("Soon you will learn to appreciate me.").  I know it's a kid's movie, but as an adult this part actually strikes me as pretty dark.

Sorry, not trying to be gross.  It's just a random thought that entered my head.

This is why I find Kevin Smith's opinion on this matter so skeevy.

On a related note, I wonder if George had a reason for doing this other than fanservice. Could it be that he was making a subtle point about the seductive power of evil, and that the following revelation about Leia was meant to reveal to Luke (and the audience) just how twisted this kind of seduction really was? Or am I giving him too much credit?

Interpreting the obelisk symbol, 2001 was about the evolutionary educational possibilities of the cinema.

Interpreting the "payload" symbol (among many others), Sunshine was about conception.

Interpreting the trailer, Star Wars was really about a boy, a girl, and a universe.

The Special Editions and the Prequel trilogy were really a brilliant, decade-long quest to turn experiencing the true Star Wars movies into a legend, an experience unattainable by an entire generation, thus allowing for a glorious golden age of filmic ecstasy when they are finally released to thunderous fanfare, cementing their place in history and leading the world into an age of peace and prosperity that will last a thousand years.

And Gremlins was about Gremlins.

It's not the job of a fantasy movie to answer questions.

I want the sequels to mystify me, to leave me in a state of wonder at the universe of possible answers.

analog said:

NeverarGreat said:

Harmy said:

@NeverarGreat: So, I take it you did not look at the comparison gallery, containing like 350 screenshots from v2.1?

Where is that?

Page 328 - this post: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Harmys-STAR-WARS-Despecialized-Edition-HD-REMASTERED-v21-AVCHD-is-now-out/post/627643/#TopicPost627643

This link: http://uloz.to/xCAaaEE/compar-gallery-rar

 

Thanks!

Harmy said:

@NeverarGreat: So, I take it you did not look at the comparison gallery, containing like 350 screenshots from v2.1?

Where is that?

I was finding the 2.1 playback rather washed out, so I adjusted the video playback settings of VLC, and that made a great deal of difference. Everything is much more saturated and excellent.

Harmy, you may want to provide some screenshots with the movie or in the first post to allow people who are new to this process (such as myself) to get the most out of all of your hard work.

Harmy said:

@Neverar: Those are photos taken from a screen, I was referencing an actual professional scan of two different IB Technicolor prints and a scan of some scenes from an LPP print. It doesn't match perfectly but it's pretty darn close.

I see. Or rather, I don't see. But those photos of the 2.1 above look very different than what I see on the screen, so perhaps it just needs a saturation boost on a screen or projector for the colors to come out.

I wish we had access to those references though! ;)

I just scanned through the 2.1 movie, and many parts look very good. The sunset in particular looks better than I've ever seen it look before.

There are some color problems that I noticed. In the dinner scene, the colors look off. Compare the colors of the flowers and foliage behind Owen to the still of the Senator Technicolor print. The greens are less bright, the purple in the flowers is too gray. It may just be my screen, but the reds (especially the skin tones) look too dark or gray, and the image often has a cyan push. This is very noticeable in the Death Star council room and in some shots in the escape from Tatooine, and the searching of the Falcon on the Death Star, to name a few. The faces have a green cast, which makes them look rather sickly. It may be that the original had a lot of cyan, but in the Senator print, especially in the "the Force will be with you" image of Ben, his face has a lot of red, which is missing from 2.1.

I wish I had a properly calibrated monitor to view these colors, but if a side by side comparison of two sources on the same screen shows different results, then I must assume that there is a very real difference between the two sources, or that VLC is not handling the video correctly.

TV's Frink said:

Also, in your first post you said you hate the menus.  That's what I was responding to.

Oh I see. Well, now that you ask, I actually almost dislike the menus more than the poor handling of the movie. Almost. Menus for me are supposed to guide someone quickly to the option that they want in a DVD, and do so without using spoilerish video and still images from the movie. I understand that most people have seen the movie, but that does not excuse the fact that the menus pull from most of the movie for their images and video. Add to that that when trying to get from one group of chapters to another there is an unnecessary change in location or poorly rendered bit of CGI, and you have an irritating and in-your-face interface.

Whew. I think I'm done.

Nope, just remembered the point of the topic. The fact that there are better colors in the menus than on the DVD rubs salt in the wound.

There. Now I'm done. :)

TV's Frink said:

I fail to see what is wrong with the DVD menus.

That's my point, the problem is that they're much better than the movie. I was just wondering why.

I was searching where to find this information elsewhere on the forums before I posted this thread, but afterwards I found the info buried in the cinematography thread. So apparently this has been discussed, but it sure would be nice to have these things more easily searchable to limit repeat information. However, my question wasn't really answered in that thread either.

That would seem to imply that those who made the menus thought that their menu version would be at least close to the final version, or that the movie actually looked, at some time during the recoloring, like they were portraying it.

It's not as if they just pulled the 97 special edition coloring, as that is much more orange. It seems strange to me to use a coloring which is very different from practically every release and then release something that is again wildly different than that.

So here's something I noticed recently. On the DVD, one of the interactive menus (god how I hate them) shows the binary sunset:

This has of course been digitally chopped and manipulated, but parts of it bear strong resemblance to Mike Verta's tech scan. It is very different from the GOUT, and even from the ACTUAL DVD IT CLAIMS TO REPRESENT!

It even shows the picture of the menu on the back of the box, as if they were embarrassed to actually show what the scene looked like:

It would seem that Lucasfilm knew precisely the quality of the product they were producing. I am guessing that the menus of the other movies, and the other menus for this one contain elements that are better than in their respective movie versions.

Does anyone know why this disparity between the menus and the movie happened?

This was actually one of the more annoying changes for me as well. The biggest problem is as you said, it slows down the action, and cuts the music in an odd way. I didn't think that much about the trauma that Vader was going through, so either line worked for me, though I like the shorter one better.

gulducati is not as forgiving as I am.

I'd label it under a prequel rewrite/script adjustment, but I understand your distinction about re-editing vs scriptwriting. It's just sad to see the scriptwriting section get so little attention.