TheBoost

Bingowings said:

All this talk of TIE colour is making this thread sound like Savile Row.

 Honestly, I never noticed the ever shifting TIE colors.

Then again, I never knew Threepio had one silver leg until I saw the Special Edition in theaters, because the VHS tapes I grew up with had somewhat muted colors.

I am glad the Executor is remaining blue, since that makes it look so epic.

Vaderisnothayden said:

rcb said:

whether you like george or not, he knows SW best.

No, I think the special editions and the prequels prove that that is emphatically not the case.

 

Or perhaps "If you're willing to kill a bunch of kids rather that let totally natural things like death happen, you really need to work on letting go."

Love didn't drive Anakin to kill those kids. Possessivness, greed, fear, and anger did. You know... the Dark Side.

 

Yeah, love did make him to kill those kids. Love for Padme made him join the dark side to save her and that led to him killing the kids. Message of the film: Love makes you kill kiddies. Screwed up film.

 If he did it for love he would have been willing to go away with Padme when she asked, or at least no Force-choke her out at the smallest provacation. But he gave into fear (of losing her) which led to anger and suffering. He started down the path of the darkside and dominate his destiny it did. Love didn't matter to him once he gave into the darkside, only power.

Love didn't lead to any of those things. Greed and possesiveness and desire for control did. Do you turn on "Cops" and see some wife-beater and say "Love leads to wifebeating, what a screwed up message."

Ziz said:

Well, in order to restore the Sandstorm scene, it has to be made available TO restore.  All we have of it right now are still shots and a small MOV of 2 or 3 seconds of the characters walking towards the Falcon.  Nothing substantial.

 Yeah, but cant we take those, link them together with CGI, steal some dialoge from the redundant scene with Han on the radio to Luke, rescore it with AcidMusic and make it work?

(optimistic sarcasm... ... unless someone could actually do that :) )

This is probably well beyond the scope of any re-edit, but it bothers me that the main thing the Jedi have against the Emperor is that he's a Sith lord.

General Greivous dies, then the Jedi go full battle ready to arrest the man. Is being a Sith lord technicaly illegal? They have no proof or evidence that he's done anything wrong. The man doesn't even have a single session of the Senate to renounce his emergency powers. It just seemed really rushed.

Honestly, I don't mind TPM, although about 60% less Jar Jar would be nice.

AOTC is just unpleasent to watch. I hate Annakin the entire time, and they never actually solve the mystery Obi-Wan is investigating.

Chewy72 said:

The problem is that CGI just looks fake in the movies today, for me IMO.  I agree that stop motion models is very time consuming, and probably more costly, but that is the reason the OOT movies hold up so well years later, is they still look real.  I look at the golden years for action/scifi movies of the late 70's/early 80's and these movies just hold up so much better then most movies today.  Plus because of the limited technology, the director was forced to focus on a good, interesting story, and good character development, which is pretty much gone from the summer blockbuster today, as they are mostly mindless CGI-fest movies with zero story and ridicolous one dimensional characters.

 

Pardon a small point of clarification. I admire the stop-motion work on the OT, but also want to give some love to the excellent use of puppets (Rancor, space worm, Wampa, Yoda, Jabba). That would also be CGI today, much to the detriment of the films IMHO.
 

Not that I disagree with you, it's just that for some reason, puppets get no love.

Vaderisnothayden said:

TheBoost said:

Well, Anakin WAS willing to kill a bunch of little kids if it offered him a chance to keep the love he felt he needed.

 

 Which is the bad message of the film -a message of "Love is bad, it makes you kill kiddies."

Or perhaps "If you're willing to kill a bunch of kids rather that let totally natural things like death happen, you really need to work on letting go."

Love didn't drive Anakin to kill those kids. Possessivness, greed, fear, and anger did. You know... the Dark Side.

<quote> Interesting, because my experience has been quite the opposite.  Ever since childhood, I figured it was the probe because of the exact same explosion being used.  I always felt dread at Luke wanting to check out the meteor, knowing that the probe would recognize him and start shooting.  Thankfully he was distracted and pulled in the opposite direction by the Wampa.

This is the kind of thing Revisited should fix / change definitavely.  If Lucas can't be bothered to clarify anything, Ady can. </quote>

 I wish we could get Kershner of Lucas to tell us what was intended (although Lucas would probably just lie about it).

It's funny we can watch the same shots and get totally different meanings. I bet someone could make a psychological test out of the opening to ESB.

I don't think it's possible, but I'd love to see the deleted 'sandstorm' scene reinserted. It's redundant, so the conversation in Luke's X-wing would need to go, but I just think it sounds cool (I also grew up in a town with frequent sandstorms so maybe that's why).

To me much of what is cool about the OT is all the interesting places they go, and a sandstorm is a pretty nifty setpiece.

professa adyfan said:

i don't need an explanation

because what luke saw was just a meteor

star wars movies do not jump around in time like that

i'm just saying the fact that the probe droid doesn't approach luke and the wampa adds to the case of it not being just a few hundred yards away at that time - and it is conspicuously absent through the whole of the rescue of luke and han. if it had been around it would have recorded the transmissions broadcast from zev and the other rogues (commander skywalker do you copy? captain solo do you copy?) and transmitted them to the empire rather than just an image of a power generator. it didn't do it coz it wasn't in that area at the time.

what are the chances of it landing within spitting distance of vaders number one target when it would have had a vast (maybe planetwide)area to cover

 I agree with everything said here. In fact, it never even occured to me that it MIGHT not have been a meteor Luke saw. Gen. Reiken even says 'sure are a lot of meteors around here.'

darthmunky said:

Well it's not really EU that he lives. George wanted him to crawl outta that thing in the movie, so I think it should show that. He is one of the most popular Star Wars characters of all time & I just think many fans would be greatly dissapointed if he was simply removed from the whole movie. Maybe he could just be removed from the sail barge scene if at all. I just hope he's shown escaping it but that would mean he would have to fall into it a better way as well. That's just how I feel & think most others feel about this character. Don't take me for a Boba fett fanboy though, lol.

I Am a Boba Fett fanboy!!! I was Boba Fett for Hallowen from 1984-1988 (and my costume was hommade!). But I'm happy with his roles in the movie, which is that of a minor villain who does what's needed to advance the story, looks cool, and dies quickly (hmmmm... a lot like Darth Maul). 

I for one don't buy Lucas's "I meant for Fett to live" line anymore that I buy his "I always meant for the six films to be about Darth Vader" line. He's a visionary filmmaker, but something of a fibber.

darthmunky said:

Yeah but he's alive in all the stories taking place after Return of the Jedi. It just doesnt make sence for him to die. He has a much bigger role outside of the movies, which is still important.

Whether anyone included EU stuff in their edit or not aside, I was always perplexed at the "Fett love" in the EU. All Boba Fett ever had in the movies was a little mystique. We never even see him fight. Just from the films we can see he's a crafty bounty hunter who dies in the first fight he's in.

When he falls into the Sarlacc, I never wondered "where did this mysterious figure come from? Could his father/clone template actually have been the greatest bounty hunter in the galaxy and the genetic model for an army?" He was a minor villain who died in a minor way. 

Lucas's decision to delve into Fett's backstory in the PT seemed so odd, because from the movie's there's no reason to assume it's a particuarly interesting origin.

I think the EU obsession with him stems from that he is a complete blank slate in the films. His convoluted and often contradictory backstory only makes him less mysterious and less interesting.

darthmunky said:

Some ROTJ Suggestions:

- Remove the part where it shows the fat guy crying about the rancor dying.

- Boba Fett's "death": I don't think he should have such a stupid death. Especially with that horrible scream he let's out. But, I also really disagree that he be removed from the film entirely. Boba Fett does not die in the Sarlaac pit. On the commentary for ROTJ, George Lucas states that he was going to add a scene of Fett escaping the pit but didn't have the time or something. So HE IS meant to get out of there. So, you could show him climbing out or even see him fly by on his jetpack as Luke and the gang are leaving.

I personally always loved the bit when the Rancor keeper cries.

And as for George Lucas saying this or that 20 years after the fact, the man is notorious for fibbing about what he 'meant' to do.

The simple fact is, Boba Fett is not that important to the movies. He looks cool, outsmarts Han once, and keeps his mouth shut enough to appear mysterious. Otherwise, he does nothing. His surviving would make no sense in the movie. It would just be EU fanwank.

Well, Anakin WAS willing to kill a bunch of little kids if it offered him a chance to keep the love he felt he needed.