RoccondilRinon

Well, even while funds are dry for the model work he's doing, work appears to continue apace on the digital side of things. He posted a screenshot of the actual editing workspace a while ago and said it was about 50% complete then. I forget whether he was including the model shots in that figure, and I'm not sure how many more additions he's planned by then, but he still has nearly 17 months to meet a 2010 release date, or over nine months to meet the 30th anniversary. If I had money to bet, I'd bet on the latter — the only reason this project seems to drag out is that we're eagerly anticipating its awesomeness.

No pressure, Ady. We love you, and we wouldn't want a release date any sooner than "when it's done".

Permission to shout BRAVO at an annoyingly loud volume, sir? :p

Although... what changes?

Having the lightsabres monochrome, or only two colours, works if we are keeping the Jedi the morally questionable force that they are in the official prequels. If an edit is trying to make them more clearly good, it makes sense to give them different colours — it'd be difficult to pull off, but in this scenario I'd be in favour of every Jedi having a different colour, whether it be just varying hues of blue and green or running the gamut from yellow to purple. I don't think that'd be any harder on the eyes than a sea of blue or blue/green, and it ties in with the idea that Jedi all make their own sabres.

How can you have a black LIGHTsabre?

I did like the idea that worked until AOTC which was blue = apprentice, green = master and red = Sith. White = training fits, and I personally don't mind Windu's purple sabre, especially when Dooku has a gold one in MagnoliaFan's AOTC, because they denote Windu's near-darkside fighting style (purple = red + blue) and Dooku's ambiguous character (yellow = red + green).

All-blue until ROTJ also works, but my preference is for six colours:

White = training.

Blue = Knight.

Green = Master.

Red = Sith.

Yellow = ambiguous or maverick characters, such as Dooku and potentially Qui-Gon.

Purple = badasses (Windu) — especially works if Windu is also portrayed as a maverick and/or overly suspicious of Anakin (someone raised a parallel to Snape in Harry Potter). The only other character I think could pull off a purple one is the Emperor (if he should have one at all); that means that we get a purple-on-purple duel and it could mean purple comes across as a "boss" colour but it reinforces the "not so different" aspect.

Of course not, and let's.

So... ANH:R, anyone?

*crickets chirping*

Anyone?

:-p

For my own part, I apologise for bothering anyone.

I never said he's "nothing more" than a troll, and it certainly seems he has the ability to contribute here. But he has not apologised for most of his trolling; what apology we got was only for bringing up FE.org. I'm not being oversensitive about Ady's edit. Stubborn, perhaps, but no more than I always am.

Venal, you can vouch for his character; that's not what I have a problem with.

EDIT:

I'll accept Ghostface's apology, but so far I don't see it.

Vouch away, but pardon my skepticism when what you say is at odds with what we've seen.

He apologised for his irrelevant comments re fanedit.org. He failed to answer or apologise for the rest of his trolling (I've already explained why it isn't mere criticism, as it is neither constructive nor accurate). I'm perfectly happy to accept such an apology, but you can't speak for him.

We're not prone to praising something somewhere and hanging shit on it somewhere else.

Fact remains, I see no apology. I'm perfectly willing to move on, but I don't let lies stand uncorrected.

Really? Because if you asked me, based solely on my impressions from his contributions here (and Ady's comments on same), the first three words I'd use to describe his behaviour would be irrational, unfair and above all dishonest.

He claims he apologised for bringing up fanedit.org. He's not apologised for the remainder of his trolling; all he's done is attempt to twist his own words to paint himself in a better light, but it's already been established, thanks to Adywan, that he's prone to say something one day and deny it the next.

Name dropper. :-p

GROUP HUG!

Post deleted.

Don't let Ghostface fool you. As I said, we're (mostly) not a bunch of yes-men. Have a read of the thread (if you have the time) — or ask someone about the Great Flipper Debate. There's a difference between the sort of criticisms and debates we tend to have and the unhelpful bashing and belittling we've seen of late.

As for other good edits, I liked MagnoliaFan's take on Episodes I and II, and InfoDroid has done some interesting work on Indiana Jones. I'm working on a film noir take on The Matrix, or will be when I don't have to spend the time on study and music.

If someone's a whiny bitch, I'm going to criticise them for it.

Apology accepted. I didn't see it, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it was deleted along with the rest of that fiasco.

Points 3 to 7 stand. Plenty enough to label you a troll.

Let's see.

1. Complaining about irrelevant issues (fanedit.org, with whom we are not affiliated in any way). Check.

2. Being a whiny bitch (about your supposedly deleted review on fanedit.org). Check.

3. Being factually incorrect (fanedit.org didn't delete your review after all; Adywan's project, whatever you might think of it, was not a simple or easy one). Check.

I could go on and on. And I will.

4. Ignoring what others say to you (the Purist version of ANH:R lacks many of the changes about which you've been complaining, yet you continue to complain about them rather than just get the Purist edit). Check.

5. Trying to justify your complaining (your comments may come under the heading of criticism, but there is no way they are constructive in the slightest). Check.

6. Not actually reading the thread to which you're replying (most of us aren't yes-men; almost all of us could name something about Revisited that we didn't like and if you read any decent amount of the thread you would know this). Check.

7. Being sarcastic ("dares to offer a counterpoint to blind praise") and antagonistic (your vague talk of piracy, as though we're tantamount to thieves). Check.

...get the picture?

Read the next line in his post, troll.

What Richard said. Can't promise but I'll definitely try.

He specified in his original post: between 20 July and 30 August 2009. It's on this same page.

Sheesh. I know we're used to telling newbies to RTFT but BBDV, how long have you been around here?

Probably a wise suggestion, 005.

Meh. McGregor didn't do a perfect job either — compare his "hello there" to Guinness'.