The Bizzle

User Group: Members
Join date: 21-Aug-2004
Last activity: 14-Feb-2009
Posts: 529

Post History

Post: #151173
Topic: Could it be....? (2004 OT SE repackaged re-release to come out on December 6, 2005)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/151173/action/topic#151173
Time: 29-Oct-2005 1:54 AM

No. It's just a repackage of the 2004 set with new box art and no bonus disc.

Post: #151076
Topic: "Like all creative minds, they need to be slapped down!"
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/151076/action/topic#151076
Time: 28-Oct-2005 2:56 PM

No, not really. Graham Yost came up with the story idea after watching a Kurosawa flick, as he says. He got the structure and the characters in place. Fox liked the script, and gave it to Whedon to doctor up. Whedon redid a large amount of the dialog and changed the Alan Ruck character from being an ass into a dorky tourist, and made Annie less comedic. The script then went to arbitration and Yost got the credit after some backroom politicking (according to Whedon) although Speed, at one point, in anticipation of how they THOUGHT the arbitration would go, had a poster crediting Joss Whedon alone with the screenplay. But the Writers Guild, upon learning that Whedon basically, when it came down to it, only did a dialog polish and a few character tweaks, decided the script was still mostly Yost's.

Carrie Fisher did nothing on Speed.

Post: #150862
Topic: first "NOOOOO!" and now...
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/150862/action/topic#150862
Time: 27-Oct-2005 4:50 PM

I think that's a dude.

Post: #150017
Topic: Original Trilogy.com in the Press
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/150017/action/topic#150017
Time: 24-Oct-2005 11:14 AM

illegal to break the copyright protection on a DVD, but it's also legal to make back up copies.

I'm pretty sure it doesn't--because in order to make a back-up copy of your DVD, you have to break the copyright protection. I remember a couple years ago reading many a heated debate at the Home Theater Forum about how stupid it was that this government wouldnt' allow the consumers to protect their purchase by keeping a copy of their DVD for their OWN purpose. The only reason the cleanfilms people are getting around it is because it "protects the children" and that's about it. It's hypocritical politics exploiting a loophole. However, I doubt that line of reasoning would work when it comes to "I wanted original model and matte work in Star Wars." if push came to shove.

But yeah, it's not ever going to get that far, so you don't need a legal fund. And if it did get that far, the legal fund would be useless, because it's LUCASFILM.

Post: #149954
Topic: Original Trilogy.com in the Press
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149954/action/topic#149954
Time: 24-Oct-2005 12:07 AM

Well, legally, after the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (or whatever it's called) if there's any bit of an actual DVD rip in your edit at all, it's illegal. and even under the old rules, you can back up your OWN copy, but distributing that copy, even not-for-profit, is illegal. Even if you own the original, proving that you backed it up yourself would become a sticking point.

That pretty much covers most everything here. But like it's been said--Lucasfilm recognizes a)these aren't any financial threat, at least not here, where they're NOT being sold (hopefully that's still true, I heard word that people here via PM have been selling trilogy sets for 20 bucks, which I KNOW is more than the cost of 3 blank DVD's, some cases and covers) and they're not eating into profits, since Lucasfilm has ceased to sell the versions being captured from Laserdisc and b) it'd be silly to spend time and money going after people who will, if this becomes public, have a HUGE groundswell of support from most other onlookers. It's just not worth the effort.

But legally, there's not much ground to stand on, if they wanted to press the issue. Luckily, they don't.

Post: #149952
Topic: If George had only changed Special effects for the SE and DVD, would people have complained as much?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149952/action/topic#149952
Time: 24-Oct-2005 12:02 AM

well, behind the scenes footage isnt' all inclusive.

going from memory JUST on AOTC:

Jedi Council
Palpatine's Office
Padme's Bedroom
Padme's Antechamber
Padme's Fireplace
Kamino landing platform
Coruscant Landing platform
Dex's Diner
Coruscant Nightclub
Wedding Veranda (not a set but a location shot)
Naboo meadow (Location shot)
Naboo Royal Palace (Location Shot, Caserta Palace)
Yoda's meditation chamber
Lars Homestead

I'm sure there's a couple more, but that's a HIGH number of locations. For Episode III, this goes up even more. Not counting miniatures used as background plates, like parts of the Arena Battle.

Post: #149932
Topic: "Like all creative minds, they need to be slapped down!"
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149932/action/topic#149932
Time: 23-Oct-2005 10:52 PM

Hey, he's gonna put those feelings out there so vehemently, he can defend them as such

Such is how discussions go. I never said his feelings weren't understandable, either. Actually, the only thing I didn't understand is how he can dig quality entertainment like Firefly and still think Alien Resurrection is a good movie, but he's definitely not alone in that regard. He's got like, 6 other people with him, I think.

Diff'rent strokes and all.

it's all gravy, MeBe, although I'm sure he appreciates the head-pat.

Besides which, at least we have common ground in that we both really like Firefly and Serenity

Post: #149946
Topic: Spike TV buys Saga tv rights
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149946/action/topic#149946
Time: 23-Oct-2005 5:55 PM

That WOULD be a cool ass stunt. And yunno, if they broadcast em in Pan n Scan, it'd be the ULTIMATE nostalgia trip. I swear to God I'd buy some jammies just so I could wear em and watch Star Wars on TV like I did when I was 6 or 7

Post: #149852
Topic: "Like all creative minds, they need to be slapped down!"
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149852/action/topic#149852
Time: 23-Oct-2005 5:33 PM

fanboy isn't a negative term, dude. it just means you like a lot of sci-fi/comics/geek stuff. That's all it means.

And there was always great stuff to discover out there. It shouldn't have taken Serenity for you to discover that.

Anyway, Alien Resurrection was god-awful, X-Men wasn't really whedon, just a few of his lines, one of which was again, god-awful, and yeah, Firefly was mistreated, but it's got to factor in at some point that people simply don't want to play around in that universe. It got 11 episodes and the ratings kept going down. It got a movie, and nobody came. It's a nice treat for those of us willing to take the plunge, but the bottom line is that people simply don't want to watch the characters in that universe. It's not appealing to the mainstream, for whatever reason. And you know what? Neither does Whedon. He's effectively marginalized himself very well. He's a sci-fi Kevin Smith.

Yes, he's a better writer than Lucas, but so is 80 percent of Hollywood. But snarky dialog doesn't make you the savior of sci-fi

Whedon writes GREAT soap opera, I'll give him that

That said, if you just wanted to say "I like Joss Whedon a whole bunch" you should have just posted that. Because that really doesn't have anything to do with what you seemed to start this thread saying. Well, that and you couldn't tell when Whedon was goofing.

Post: #149842
Topic: If George had only changed Special effects for the SE and DVD, would people have complained as much?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149842/action/topic#149842
Time: 23-Oct-2005 4:22 PM

Actually, no, most of the sets were a combination of green-screen backgrounds and regular constructed sets. Not much different from the OT, except now instead of painting a big sheet of glass, they matte stuff in using a computer. The methods were pretty close to the same.

Post: #149841
Topic: "Like all creative minds, they need to be slapped down!"
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149841/action/topic#149841
Time: 23-Oct-2005 4:19 PM

Joss Whedon said this on the commentary to the pilot episode of Firefly.

And he was being facetiously snarky. It's what Whedon does. And if you think Whedon and Minear don't also make shit up as they go, you're deluding yourself. Their outlines for future seasons were just as nebulous as Lucas' were.

Trying to supplant Lucas with Whedon seems to be the new Fanboy Funtime Activity, and it's not sticking. And I say that as someone who thought Serenity was one of the best movies this year. The space battle in Serenity was BETTER than Revenge of the Sith's. But Whedon's got plenty of his own creative fuckups on his resume. Fuckups that he wouldn't listen to other people on. The difference between Whedon and Lucas is that Lucas actually takes ownership over those, acknowledges that people don't like them and says "Well, it's what I wanted to do."

Whedon, on the other hand, blames EVERYONE ELSE BUT HIMSELF instead. "Alien Resurrection" failed because of the director, they mangled his script (no they didn't.) Halle Berry's crap lines in X-Men weren't his fault, they were Halle Berry's for delivering them poorly (no, it was a crap line.) Firefly failed because Fox didn't know how to handle it (They knew the ratings were dropping every show and even at their best they were barely reaching a 3) Lucas' first work was THX 1138. Whedon's was assistant to the head writer on Roseanne. C'mon.

I love Firefly, I own it, and I can't wait to own Serenity, but trying to prop up Whedon as "The New Lucas" when Whedon's got just as many black marks against him (And nowhere NEAR as many successes--Angel is no Indiana Jones) is pretty thin, and the remark we're jumping from was a smartass half-joke in the first place. I don't think you're actually learning anything about the creative process, X1, I think you're just jumping from one writer/director to another to shower your fandom on, that's all. Nothing's actually changing. And the instant Whedon does something you don't like with Firefly/Serenity, you'll say the exact same things you just said about Lucas

And I've talked about it before, but the perception that McCallum was always this big yes-man seems to have been created, wholecloth, by the fans, and looking at the behind the scenes stuff--I don't see why that is. McCallum is a great promoter, but you see him behind the scenes on Episode I and he's worried a lot. you see him after that first cut and he's depressed as shit. You read the making of Episode III, all he's doing is GOING CRAZY trying to get George to focus and make the story better.

Post: #149778
Topic: Original Trilogy.com in the Press
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149778/action/topic#149778
Time: 23-Oct-2005 3:05 AM

And thanks for reminding everyone.

Actually, I had actually forgotten that he did that. Jeez.

Post: #149738
Topic: Original Trilogy.com in the Press
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149738/action/topic#149738
Time: 22-Oct-2005 11:16 PM

LOL. Vision isn't a true=false statement. You can not LIKE the vision, but it doesn't make a vision RIGHT or WRONG. That doesn't even enter into it, man.

He created it, he gets to run with the ball. I'm not happy with everything he's done either, but he's not WRONG in creating it. That's silly.

Post: #149502
Topic: Original Trilogy.com in the Press
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149502/action/topic#149502
Time: 21-Oct-2005 4:36 PM

True. Like Moth3r said, I think the only real negative towards you guys is in the main question he posed: With so many transfers with their own quirks, foibles, and edits, is there even such a thing as a definitive version of Star Wars at this point? With all these different fan edits and transfers, are the kids with their computers and capture cards really all that different from Lucas and his ILM with their 4 or 5 different versions of the movies themselves?

I guess it's up to you whether that's percieved negatively or not, but I don't think it is.

Post: #149495
Topic: Original Trilogy.com in the Press
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149495/action/topic#149495
Time: 21-Oct-2005 4:05 PM

It won't. Lucasfilm knows you guys are here, if they were gonna do something, they'd have done it by now. Which is probably why the guys gave their real names in that interview

Zion: Why were you surprised they didn't go after you? this tugs at the 'grassroots appeal' strings that newspapers prefer over geek ridicule. The two major hammering points in the media regarding Star Wars are dorks standing in line and Lucas "ruining his movies." that the geeks are now FIXING the movies is a story that naturally tilts the angle in the geeks favor

Although the article does bring up a pretty good point that the glut of transfers might be confusing people. Then again, it's hard to make the case that LESS people should be transferring, when so many of you guys are doing REALLY great jobs.

Post: #149239
Topic: Will GL start a trend of other classic films being changed?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149239/action/topic#149239
Time: 20-Oct-2005 6:25 AM

It's alright man, it's just I figure every now and again, in this forum, it gets a little too chicken little in here and I like to temper it with reality.

it's still not a trend

But has Lucas run the ball farthest on his revisions than other people? I can see why people would think so. I don't necessarily agree, but once again, I don't think people really paid any sort of serious attention until it happened to Star Wars, that and internet forums dedicated to Star Wars seem to have created this echo chamber in regards to it. That's a pretty big difference.

Fa sheez

Post: #149150
Topic: Will GL start a trend of other classic films being changed?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149150/action/topic#149150
Time: 19-Oct-2005 6:58 PM

Quote
Yes, it's a trend.

No, it's not. Trends eventually die out. This has been going on since art existed. The only difference is you didn't notice until it happened to Star Wars.

Quote
It's not the same as The Exorcist restoring a couple mins

Yes, it is. You're trying to argue semantics and it doesn't fit. It's the same as Close Encounters, it's the same as Lord of the Rings (The book, mind you, not the movies), there's hundreds upon hundreds of examples of this very thing happening all throughout history. That's not a trend. It ceases to be a trend once it lasts a few decades. this has lasted a few CENTURIES. Artists have always gone back and altered their work from a different perspective. And artisans have always gnashed their teeth over it, some of them, at least. But it's nothing new, and Lucas, as I said, isn't popularizing it any. If any, the fact this board exists shows he's almost shining a VERY harsh light on it that doesn't make it look as alluring as it has to many an artist that has come before him.

The growing activity (which is a negligible claim, actually) comes more from the technology making it possible than it does Lucas actually doing it. It was harder to make those sorts of changes and revisions before--but it's not like it wasn't done, either.

Again, this line of argument is typically only good for the sky is falling scenarios played for cynical punchlines and that's about it. They're amusing to read, though

But giving it any more weight than that is being shortsighted. Especially since the practice you're decrying is the practice this board gets MOST of it's attention from now--the act of revising art to make it better fit someone's vision. We've got 3 different "Fan edit" boards now. A big difference here is that the ARTISANS are doing the revising along with the ARTISTS. You can't decry this "trend" on one hand and then support it a couple forums down

Well, you can, but it sort of weakens your argument.

Post: #149046
Topic: Will GL start a trend of other classic films being changed?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149046/action/topic#149046
Time: 19-Oct-2005 2:17 PM

You don't pay too much attention to film and film history if you think this is a "trend" much less one started by Lucas.

There's a reason the imdb has an "alternate version" feature as part of their standard menu. Other directors, writers, musicians have made a habit of revisiting their works PLENTY of time. Not just hacks, or cheapo burnouts like Sharon Osbourne. People like BEETHOVEN, or TOLKIEN, Da VINCI, even. To think this is a Lucas innovation is ridiculously shortsighted. Sure, it's fun to create a bunch of "The sky is falling" scenarios just for shits n' giggles, but that's about all this is good for--artistic revisions are not a Lucas innovation, nor did he really popularize it. If anything, he DEMONIZED it

This isn't a trend. This is just how art has gone over the years. It's just as malleable now as it was then. The difference is that we didn't have the internet then.

Post: #149038
Topic: Anyone knows why I can't register to theforce.net forums?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/149038/action/topic#149038
Time: 19-Oct-2005 1:47 PM

Quote
Originally posted by: Jay
Are you a fanboy? I think they have some new algorithm that checks to see if you're a fanboy before you can join.

You got that backwards. Their algorithm ensures that ONLY slobbering fanboys sign up. If you haven't been approved, chances are you're a semi-rational human being who deserves better than that hellhole.

I mean, why even try? You have THIS place. Trust me, it's better.

Post: #148583
Topic: Interested in everyones opinion when ROTS DVD Comes after Nov 1
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/148583/action/topic#148583
Time: 18-Oct-2005 1:09 AM

They were told to children to scare them - morality lessons and so forth.

Very true, but I don't see how this doesn't also apply to Star Wars. Lucas said they were not only entertainments, but lessons for kids, the kind of stark black and white type of morality plays that kids weren't getting then, with everything noirish and in shades of gray. I think kids SHOULD be scared that the kid they identified with (Anakin) ended up burning up next to a lava river--that's what happens to bad kids who ignore their teachers and get impatient. Those tales were told to scare children, yes, but they were also told to entertain as well. It wasn't exclusive--the learning sticks better if you entertain them. Grimm and Aesop knew that very well.

But yeah, I've always thought Rock-A-Bye-Baby was sort of macabre, but then again, that's the sort of neurotic thing only adults really worry about. Kids seem to handle those kinds of suggested horrors a lot better than adults do.

But R-Rated Star Wars is an oxymoron, to me.

Post: #148575
Topic: RotS: Secret Keeper Edition (* unfinished project *)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/148575/action/topic#148575
Time: 18-Oct-2005 12:28 AM

As I do yours.

It's all gravy, man.

Post: #148463
Topic: RotS: Secret Keeper Edition (* unfinished project *)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/148463/action/topic#148463
Time: 17-Oct-2005 5:27 PM

...except that Obi-Wan & Yoda make no mention of them in Episodes IV to VI.

So? That isn't confusing. There is nothing confusing about the explanation and introduction of midichlorians. The concept is pretty well explained. Lots of stuff in Star Wars is introduced and then not talked about again. They're plot threads, and flavoring details. I'm not saying the concept was necessary or even very flavorful--but it's not confusing.

I'm not a fan of rationalizations. I don't believe anyone would say "She died when I was very young" referring to childbirth.

I don't believe people can levitate things with their mind, either, but in a movie as fantastical as Star Wars, things like that are pretty easily figured out. And by the way, fan edits are essentially 2 hour long rationalizations on DVD, man

There's all kinds of charges you can level at the prequels, I just don't think "Confusing" is one of them. I think trying to edit out all mentions of Darth Vader in Episode III will make the movie confusing, actually.

Ell ,the edits seem clean enough, but it's kinda hard to evaluate WITHOUT that music being fixed.

Post: #148417
Topic: RotS: Secret Keeper Edition (* unfinished project *)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/148417/action/topic#148417
Time: 17-Oct-2005 12:52 PM

Midichlorians?

Like I said--they make sense (perfect sense) even if it's flat, ultimately uneccessary storytelling. There's nothing at all confusing about them. And the Leia's mom speech in ROTJ (which isn't a prequel) makes just as much sense now as it did then, you know the rationalization for it just as well as I do, since it's been going around for the past 4 or 5 years on messageboards: The Force.

It's not that I'm not open to the idea. I was--when it first popped up about 4 or 5 years ago when people realized how this Prequel Trilogy was going to end. And back then, people were trying to figure out if you could "preserve the secret" for future generations, and it was then where all these story problems (including the Episode IV revelation) popped up. The number of problems is pretty much insurmountable. Ell's sort of on the closest track to being right, but really, the ONLY way to finish traveling down that path is to somehow show Obi-Wan teaching a padawan NAMED Darth Vader at one point. You'd have to shoot and cut in a little kid and fake some voice-over stuff to do it. And even then, it's still just spackle, because the fact there's a Darth Sidious, a Darth Tyranus, a Darth Vader and a Darth Maul sorta ruins that the jedi would let a kid named "Darth" anything into the temple, much less let Obi Wan train him.

Post: #148344
Topic: Interested in everyones opinion when ROTS DVD Comes after Nov 1
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/148344/action/topic#148344
Time: 17-Oct-2005 2:08 AM

I think it's a mean looking puppy-dog, not a badger. mean looking puppy-dog I thought was sort of apt considering my post history here

Post: #148343
Topic: RotS: Secret Keeper Edition (* unfinished project *)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/148343/action/topic#148343
Time: 17-Oct-2005 2:07 AM

I give 7 year olds more credit than that

The prequels don't make sense as they are now

Oh, they make sense. it may be a haphazard, dramatically flat sense most of the time, but there's no real confusion. At least no more than the original trilogy. As a matter of fact, the biggest "Whahuh??" sequence in Star Wars is the rescue of Han from Jabba. What the hell IS Luke's plan there? There is none. Trying to make logistical sense out of that plan is pointless

Even if it's not perfect, Ell and others will no doubt enjoy watching it.

If only that kind of accepting, almost apologetic mindset was applied to people who watched the prequels, right?