doubleofive said:
And I looked and looked for way to quickly export all of the descriptions and pictures to a spreadsheet, but it was beyond my skills.
I just did it with a script, and sent the file to Harmy.
PS : thank you for this amazing work!
Still just one PM. (Thank you ZigZig!!!)
Here’s the description I wrote up of what I need done, jst so people have an idea what they’d be volunteering for:Open the Despecialized v3.0 tasksheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NwFnvrRp3CnyDOdr9W1__8PLBGwH8WOKkl8mjke8LQs/edit#gid=0
Open Doublefives gallery: https://doubleofive.wordpress.com/swsevc/
Open the NTSC GOUT (or Despecialized or something else synced to it) and open the BD version.For each shot in 005’s gallery, right-click the image and "copy image address"
Then go to the tasksheet, double-click on the placeholder image and replace the adress in the pop-up box with the address of the 005 image.Then copy the scrpiption from 005’s gallery and paste it in the description column.
Next find the shot in both the GOUT and the BD and put in the time codes - these are just for me to find the shots more easily on the timeline, so they don’t need to be super precise.
Leave all the drop-down options on the default of “To Do” or “Not Ready” - I will handle those when I start working on the shots.
Important notes: 005’s galleries aren’t always in perfect chronological order, so you may stumble across a shot, that is supposed to belong between two shots you’ve already put in the sheet. This is why I made the shot naming convention with hundred increments, so that when from example you’ve already done shots SW-R1-S00400 and SW-R1-S00500 and you find a shot that is supposed to go between them, you can right click the line number of SW-R1-S00400 and click “Insert one below” and then copy the line above to it and edit it and name the shot SW-R1-S00410.
Also, sometimes, when a change has occurred across an entire scene, like the lightsaber recompositing, for example, it is only represented in the gallery by a few examples but I need each individual shot to be on the spreadsheet.
That’s pretty much it. Please let me know, if you have any questions.
Thank you for these very clear explanations. I’ll begin this evening after work hours!
JEDIT: I just wrote a little script to make the whole first part of the job done in a few minutes :
I’m now in a meeting, but I’ll launch it before tonight, so that the spreadsheet will contain all the informations taken from 005.
Every post is so dense, there’s so much going on.
Hard to be less dense with such a crucial question …
Anyway, Star Wars and Harry Potter share the same villain: Snoke aka Voldemort.
This movie is the worst.
FTFY 😉
OK, I’ll wind my neck in.
the biggest franchise of the last 100 years is probably McDonald’s.
This one, I guess : https://www.ebay.com/itm/STAR-WARS-TRILOGY-IV-V-VI-Rare-VCD-VIDEO-CDs-Mint-Condition/312037072212?hash=item48a6dbdd54:g:jIIAAOSwi0xaS5-t
I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt that you’re not just here to advertise the virtues of paying scumbags for burned discs.
I must say that I had the same thoughts …
Obviously 😉
Is it just me or is Gollum from LOTR and The Hobbit the most realistic CG character?
+1
As for any ethical issue, Cushing’s estate gave it’s blessing.
OK, so there is no legal issue. But I am not sure that an estate’s blessing is enough to eliminate any ethical issue.
Not sure that this question needs its own thread, but anyway, I need to complain!
He is completely missed, it looks like a character of Tomb Raider, I do not believe for a second. Each of his appearances made me leave the film.
And I’m not talking about ethical issues related to this …
eBay is free of Despecialized as far as I can tell
Unfortunately, it is not…
Joyeux Noël !
Main differences between theatrical TPM and Blu-Ray TPM are :
I’m currently working on TPM.
And Poita will scan a 35mm.
Update on my ranking post TLJ viewing:
- SW, TESB & ROTJ (original theatricals and DSEs)
- TFA (theatrical, likely to be replaced by Hal’s fanedit)
- R1 (theatrical)
- ROTS (Kerr Fanedit “Dark Force Rising”)
- TPM (Anti-cheese Fanedit)
- AOTC (Anti-cheese Fanedit)
- TLJ
.Val
I continue to be amazed that some people HATED this movie so much that they could actually put it last, behind three terribly made movies.
Unfortunately such is the case Frink 😕 If it wasn’t a Star Wars movie I would say it is well made with good production value and an ok story, probably a 7/10 for me. Seeing that it is episode 8 though, I can’t decide on a rating due actually liking parts but hating it as a whole and what it does to SW itself. I don’t hate the PTs which is why they sit above TLJ.
I am considering a second TLJ viewing to give it a chance in changing my mind on some of the matters and see if being less of a shock 2nd time round helps me to appreciate anything more, but I honestly don’t foresee it changing my opinion much.
.Val
+1
- TLJ (I’m so disappointed, it is not a bad movie, it’s just not a Star Wars movie)
But… you’ve already seen it 3 times?
I booked my tickets 2 months ago…
3D IMAX, 2D and french version
Now that I’ve seen TLJ (3 times), I can update my personal ranking:
(everything else : SWHS, Clone Wars, Rebels…)
oops, not the right topic.
Deleted.
@DrDre : I fully share your opinion, thank you for putting very accurate words on how I feel about TLJ.
As there is now a thread for reviews and opinions, I post here my previous message from “Episode VIII Discussion SPOILER THREAD” - sorry for this double post.
After three visions, this is what I can say :
This film is, with regard to the form as the content, a rupture with the previous films:
-With regard to the contents:
o all stories tell and show that you have to be free from the past:
-Forgetting the Jedi and their order
-Questioning the authority and the established order
-Breaking what is built
O All “historical” characters are challenged
-They are turned into derisory
-They die
-Their authority is challenged
-They refuse to remain heroes and want to pass the hand, or be forgotten, or both
o The very notion of filiation is treated in this way
-The answer to the origins of Rey (who are his parents) goes in this direction
-Kylo explains his whole approach by the need to free himself from his father, and no longer seeks to be a new Vader
-With regard to the form
o all the visual and narrative codes of the “Star Wars visual grammar” are defeated or rejected
- There is no longer slide transitions between the plans (except for 2 ou 3 plans)
- There are flashbacks
- The story resumes where it had stopped (there is no longer a temporal ellipse narrated in the introductory text)
- The texts of the posters were in red
- The film is much longer than usual (152 minutes)
O Several plans are humorous (eg: close-up on a iron) or dreamlike (ex: Flying Leia, this dreamlike plan is for me the biggest failure of this film)
O Several plans contain “human” references (e.g. champagne bottles at the casino, piano music at the casino, irons)
o We multiply the plot arcs (where, previously, there were one or two stories to follow, there is now much more that intermingle)
Unfortunately, if it is good to destroy everything, then we have to propose something new. And here, in my opinion, there is a problem. The director does not innovate at all, on the contrary: he multiplies the common visual effects (eg: jumps in space of a cohort of ships that recalls Battlestar Galactica 2004, slow-accelerated in a “Matrix” way, fields-contrefields filled with Philosophical Dialogues in a “Star Trek” way, humorous shots just like “Space Balls” or punchlines similar to the “Guardians of the Galaxy”…)
But nothing new, original or proprietary in all this. We are clearly no longer in a Star Wars visual grammar, but in a good SF film fairly anonymous on the form.
There remains an interesting and well conducted story (despite a few lengths that we would gladly avoid) that shows, repeatedly during 2H32, operations that are doomed to failure. Failures whom, paradoxically, the accumulation will lead to a victory: all the acts of rebellion fail miserably one after the other (loss of the Bombers then of the entire fleet, inability to escape from the tracking, operation “find the hacker” which is sold by a fiasco, operation “hacking” in the Imperial ship that also fails, final battle on Crait which is sold by a breakaway, failing to have been able to destroy the enemy cannon …)
But the film shows that the approach of rebellion as such is more important than the result obtained. It is this approach, this mindset, that will allow to swarm with a new generation. In short: the mindset is more important than the result. We are in an anti-Sartre story: We are not the sum of our actions, but the sum of our intentions.
Finally, the interest in this film lies in the close relationship between form and substance: The director himself probably fails to propose anything new, but his approach of rupture (of rebellion) is nonetheless interesting, laudable and probably beneficial in the long term for the Star Wars franchise, just as in the story he tells us.
For the rest, I enjoyed the dialogues, the first half hour, some visually impressive shots (eg: some use of light speed at the end of the film), and the direction of actors.
In short, it is and upsetting film: neither any good, nor any bad, but disappointing in its way to destroy everything without being truly able to propose something new. I sometimes felt that the director was a little too ambitious: if Denis Villeneuve managed to reinvent Blade Runner without saying that he was, Rian Johnson fails to reinvent Star Wars while, for two and a half hours, he tells us he will do it.
SilverWook said:
And did I see a Hardware Wars reference, or was I dreaming?
If you’re talking about the iron, it is a reference or a coincidence, but it is (IMHO) a huge mistake.
Several plans contain “human” references (e.g. Arabic numerals on the gauge of Poe’s ship and on the gateways of the imperial vessel; champagne bottles at the casino, piano music at the casino, irons)
SW has always used Arabic numerals.
OK! Maybe this time it was too much for me…
PS: was it replaced by Aurebesh alphabet in the SE ?
.
