skyjedi2005 said:
Were Lucas to release a restored version of the oot on blu ray, or in the cinemas would the divided fanbase be reconciled.
Would George be forgiven for the special editions and prequels ?
Yes, immediately.
TV's Frink said:
I stand corrected. (NSFW language)
AWESOME!!! I love the part when he discusses Han telling Chewie he has to look after Leia.
Bingowings said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
Bingowings said:
Racial epithets are only bigoted when they are attached to a history of repression.
So when American kids would tell "Polack jokes", that wasn't bigoted?
Poland is a country not a race and it has many ethnic groups and a long history of being repressed.
So I'm confused. If an epithet is racial, it is only bigotted if it is attached to a history of repression, but if an epithet is nationalistic in nature, is it bigoted or not? And if it can only be bigoted if there is oppression, does that oppression have to come from the country of the person telling the epithet, or could it come from someone from another country? The reason I ask, is that I have been unable to find a definition from any dictionary that links and restricts bigotry specifically to repression.
Bingowings said:
Racial epithets are only bigoted when they are attached to a history of repression.
So when American kids would tell "Polack jokes", that wasn't bigoted?
We met a bunch of wookies on the holiday special. Chewie was the cleanest of the bunch. And there, Leia was all into "Life Day" and sang the keynote song. Maybe she went through sensitivity training after saving the galaxy.
TV's Frink said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
Unfortunately, I'm not the owner of the disc. Someone on the forum loaned it to me a couple of years ago, and I can't remember who.
Sounds like you are the owner now ;-)
Hehe, guess that sounded funny. I actually already returned it, of course.
zombie84 said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
I never said it was racist. I said if the movie was made today that the line wouldn't have been included, because these days it doesn't matter if something is racist -- if soemone might perceive it to be, that alone makes it not worth the risk. That is a window into the world we live in at this point in time.
Are you kidding me? The man who invented Jar Jar Binks, Watto and gave some aliens the voice of Charlie Chan wouldn't have included a line of genuine humour if he thoughts there was a slim chance some might read it as racist?
There is a big difference... SW was a "normal" movie in that it was made by a team of individuals, not a bunch of yes-men. SW is a window into the time in which it was made. The prequels are a window into the mind of an out-of-touch wacko.
I'd capture the laserdisc of Dracula, starring Frank Langella. The DVD release has reduced colors. My laserdisc capture from my crappy Pioneer deck - while successfully bringing out the color palette - left a lot of detail to be desired.
Unfortunately, I'm not the owner of the disc. Someone on the forum loaned it to me a couple of years ago, and I can't remember who.
I never said it was racist. I said if the movie was made today that the line wouldn't have been included, because these days it doesn't matter if something is racist -- if soemone might perceive it to be, that alone makes it not worth the risk. That is a window into the world we live in at this point in time.
My point was not to pass judgement on what is or isn't racist, or what is or isn't appropriate, or what lines should or should not be in a movie. Only that the lines that ARE in movies, and/or the events that happen in movies, reflect the time in which they are made. Which is why it is so important that a version of the movie exists in which Han shoots first.
The whole "walking carpet" thing is an excellent example of why films are important cultural artifacts, and windows into the time they were created. There is no way that line would be in SW if the movie were made today, for the reasons described in this thread. But those were different times, and such comments weren't considered questionable then. This, George, is one reason why we preserve them.
I'm surprised Lucas didn't remove/change the line for the same reason he made Han shoot second.
And to answer the original question... in my opinion, SW was the better movie.
I think it was deliberate because it would have been just as easy, and just as inexpensive, to make it anamorphic. It's basically setting one flag. I can't believe it didn't occur to people at LFL so I have to assume it was intentional
The reason that I put my .02 worth occasionally on sites like blu-ray.com, is not so that GL reads it, but so that the myriads of other people who don't even know there is this issue, read it. Far more people read blu-ray.com than read ot.com. And I figure that for each one of us, there are thousands that would agree if they knew about it. I've even met a sound engineer at skywalker sound that didn't know this controversy existed.
miker71 said:
It's not sad, it's business.
What's sad is that the world as an adult is not as you imagine it to be as a 7 year old boy.
Not sure I understand your point. Many of us believe that Lucas not releasing the OT in decent form is a bad business decision, and is purely being done out of some sort of personal thing. And as a 7-year-old boy, I don't think I would have cared if a theatrical version of a movie was being released or not.
I'm currently heading to Europe on a 3-week vacation. Progress has been slow since I'm pretty much scrapping the idea of using the blending script. But when I get back, I'll get back on it!
They asked me to submit something, which I did. But I'm guessing it was too boring to be of use.
Gorgeous.
Alexrd said:
I guess ken works for Lucasfilm after all...
Haha, now THAT's funny!
I'm being ignored... no idea why.
I'm with DJ, the response here is a bit over the top. Some of the artwork isn't bad (the construction of Vader's mask out of OT scenes is actually clever), and the set contains a few minor new things. That's exactly what we were expecting, right? I'm still not going to buy it, but I'm not going to moan about it either. The work going on here is more interesting than what is coming out of LFL, anyways.
I enjoyed the movie when it came out, and I occasionally enjoy it now. The lightsaber battle at the end, and the accompanying choral music, is exciting and well choreographed. It is nostalgic to see Tatooine. The villain has cool makeup.
However, I have never thought it was a good movie. It baffles me that someone who isn't already a Star Wars fan would want to see it more than once for the eye candy. The characters in it are utterly wooden and lifeless. Much of the movie is a bureaucratic bore, and everyone in it looks depressed. It not only has zero character development, it may be the only movie I have ever seen that makes no apparent attempt at character development. The only character in the movie with any personality, emotion, or development whatsoever is Jar Jar, which is pretty sad.
And when comparing against the performances of Alec Guinness, Peter Cushing and Harrison Ford, and contrasting the main non-human characters R2D2 and C3PO vs. Jar Jar, TPM becomes quite a reach to even compare against the OT by any serious moviemaking standards. I would even go so far as to say that TPM has hurt the general public's image of Star Wars, by moving the franchise from the realm of moviedom to the realm of computer-based kiddie fare. The AFI might put Star Wars in their top-20 films of all time, but to most people you say Star Wars and they think light futurama video game pablum, and we have the PT, especially TPM, to thank for that.
That perception could be one of the reasons that more people aren't upset by the lack of restoration of the OT. Something like TPM, most people wouldn't care if its theatrical release is preserved or not. They'd say, "it's just a movie". But I'm not sure many people who blurt that out if the topic were preserving "Citizen Kane", or "Casablanca". Nor should they about "Star Wars", and yet they do. And that too is something for which we can thank the PT, particularly TPM. Most people no longer awe at Star Wars, they chuckle at it... because Star Wars is no longer a great movie, it's a pod race. That's why I appreciate this board, because it is populated by people that for the most part appreciate what made the OT (at least SW and ESB) among the greatest movies ever made and want them preserved as are all other similarly great movies.
I didn't say I dislike it, I said it sucks.
What makes RLM's reviews so good is not their level of research, but their ability to clearly express moviemaking fundamentals to the layman - and why TPM fails in those fundamentals so thoroughly.
I consider myself one of those laymen - although I know something about the mechanics of film and video preservation, I know essentially nothing about the art of moviemaking. I and many others left the theater after seeing TPM in a bit of a daze, having been bombarded with incredible effects yet also knowing that what we just saw sucked but being unable to pinpoint why. For years after seeing the film, if asked to defend why I thought it sucked, I had difficulty elucidating a specific reason. Why? Because yes good movies connect with us and poor movies don't, but just like in any art there are time-tested ways of achieving this that artists know and use, and/or fail to use, and that most of us laymen are oblivious to. What makes effective moviemaking is just as oblivious to most of us as is what makes a great piece of classical music exhilarate us. Yes there are intangibles, but there is also craft.
RLM's review broke it down so clearly that as I watched it, I felt like a veil had been lifted. Not only as to what it was that made TPM so disturbingly weak despite the visual cornucopia, but also by educating me on the fundamental craft of moviemaking and how it so applies to nearly every movie since the dawn of film. It is education masquerading as humor, and in my opinion as a professional educator, succeeds brilliantly. I probably learned more about the elements of good moviemaking in that one review then I ever had learned before.
Monolithium said:
zombie84 said:
Please send these people to savestarwars.com.I've tried. But they look at the excellent work you've done along the same lines as RedLetterMedia. As just another whiny fanboy trying to dilute The Bearded One's Masterful Original Vision.
I too have tried. Logic has no effect. To quote inspector Dreyfus, "reason and sanity are things of the past; madness reigns."
It looks fantastic, although the cloud detail below the planet seems less detailed than the GOUT version. Is that intentional?
Darth Bizarro said:
TV's Frink said:
skyjedi2005 said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
Personally, I don't think the prequels are salvagable in any form, as prequels
or episodes 1-3.
Tell you what...you stop repeating yourself, I'll stop complaining about it.
Can't we all just accept the fact that some of us like the prequels and some of us don't.
Of course. Just because I periodically express that I think the prequels make Plan 9 From Outer Space look like Citizen Kane (ok, I'll admit that was a bit of hyperbole), doesn't mean I'm throwing poopie at someone. It isn't aimed at any person, so there's no need to take it personally. It's just an opinion about some movies.