adywan

Marty.McFly said:

Wow!

Did you build the Fine Molds model to replace the original (flipped) ship? Or is it a digital painting? Or a 3D model?

Impressive build/weathering or texturing/lighting. Either way absolutely gorgeous!

 I used a photo of the model ( pretty sure it was the one posted above) and merged it with the original

Already taken care of :)

Seems like it wasn't on any of the home video releases. But they used the stereo mix which also had the " this is it" line missing when Zev is killed. It was definitely there when i saw it at the cinema and it's there on the "story of".." LP, which also has the alternate " you were lucky to get out of there", and it is also there in Puggo's 8mm version, so these things are just in the different mixes, but weren't actually special edition changes.

It isn't a SE change. It has been there since day one. It's just that the stereo mix omitted it . Check the story of ESB LP and it's there. I'm pretty sure it is also on one of the home releases, pre special edition, but i can't remember which one.

euroherbal said:

Sorry if this subject has been already addressed, but is Artoo's akward movement falling into the hole after repairing the Falcon's hyperdrive going to be fixed? It always stuck out like a sore thumb to me...

 Yes, this has been fixed. The problem with this shot is that it was sped up and there is no motion blur ( well not as much motion blur as there should be). So i added motion blur, along with other little enhancements, and it looks a lot more natural now

...is this just fantasy?

kk650 said:

 The edge of the window in the Star Wars frame is in shadow so it is not noticable and is therefore not an issue. The edge of the window in ESB is very much lit up, very noticable and therefore an issue.

 So, most of the other cropped shots should not have been an issue when, in many, the frame is either lit as darkly as it was in ANH or is completely unseen? I probably should have explained that i was talking about ALL the cropped shots and not just the one image i posted when i said about the fourth wall argument and it being invalid. I wasn't actually trying to be an ass or anything like that. (click on the images to view them larger)

kk650 said:

brash_stryker said:

kk650 said:

GL agrees with me, hence the cropping, we agree to disagree, there's not much left to be said.

So would JarJar Binks. What's your point? The fact you're using such logic on THIS FORUM of all places carries no weight at all. This forum only exists because of George's misguided choices.

What you've said here has exactly proven my point. Essentially what you're saying is because GL agrees, you disagree, without weighing the merit of the change he's made. I know for a fact that there are others on this forum that are able to see beyong this viewpoint but I suspect that many will not be able to be found here in this thread, where every change is treated is sceptisism at best and disdain at worst.

Just because this forum was formed in response to GL and his SE changes doesn't mean that we can't move beyond seeing things so black and white, whatever changes GL does is wrong, how it originally was is right etc. etc.  I want to believe that people here are openminded enough to move beyond that frame of mind and give him credit for some of the changes which are improvements IMHO.

 Which, if you read one of my earlier posts, is EXACTLY what people are doing in here. If i was of the mindset that everything George is doing is wrong THEN WHY WOULD I BE KEEPING A LOT OF THE CHANGES HE MADE? If i was of the closed mindset that everything in the original was better, then why would i be even doing these edits? Wouldn't i just stick to doing a preservation of the theatrical versions and make NO changes to it?

kk650 said:

adywan said:

kk650 said:

I'm not referring to that frame but the very first one you put in the screencap comparison, where you see all the characters front on and the edge of the window is on the top left corner of the frame, as i'm sure you know. Setting up straw men by connecting my breaking the wall argument to the incorrect frame doesn't really help your argument all that much. You think that that the frame i'm actually refering to doesn't look like a set, I do, GL agrees with me, hence the cropping, we agree to disagree, there's not much left to be said.

When you start using grand statements like 'the fourth wall argument is invalid' then you clearly believe your opinion is fact and irreputable for some reason. Only someone with a very large ego acts like that. And again in your reply you again prove my point when you say you are 'pointing out that what you were saying about the framing/ window frame, camera position etc was in fact incorrect.' when that is again simply your opinion with no facts to back it. You clearly have a very big ego to be making statements like that all the time. I'm surprised your head doesn't explode its gotten so large.

I'll leave you to make your grandiose statements of fact and rule your own little fiefdom in peace. I've got my own releases to get back to.

 I know that wasn't the shot you were talking about. I posted that shot to show the exact frame you are seeing from a different angle because it seemed like you were thinking that the frame in the uncropped shot from the front viewing was actually one of the front circular cockpit windows and not the inside frame which made it look like you were seeing it from outside the cockpit instead of inside . like how it really is..

But my statement WAS indeed fact. I showed you that you see exactly the same sections of the cockpit inside the frame of the picture. It wasn't merely my opinion, but i backed the statement up with hard facts. I showed you a comparison between the ANH cockpit and the ESB cockpit and they were the same apart from the inner scale.

Funny how, when people disagree with someone, they can only come back with personal insults.

Bingowings said:

Aren't people supposed to have huge chocolate egos this time of year? 

 Yeh, i have a Cadbury's Cream Ego ;)

No personal insults, your ego is fact as you're so fond of stating, it is there for all to see, the posts are yours and the tone of those replies and this reply speak for itself, the disdain you show for opinions you don't share, as if your opinion is somehow worth more than others. Disagree with me if you want but do so respecting the opinions of others. Is that so hard for you? It seems so. Try a little humility for a change, you might find it refreshing and good for the soul to boot.

Why you bring up a totally different frame to the one I say is breaking the fourth wall is beyond me. You have no argument against my breaking the fourth wall argument, you just keep changing subject/setting up straw men. If that's the best you can do then there's no point continuing this. Do what you want to do and good luck.

 I think i pretty much explained why i posted that shot in the comment you quoted above. It had nothing to do with me not respecting your opinion. It just seemed like you were mistaken about some details , that's all. But when you fail to even bother to reply about what i have said about that window frame or other things i have mentioned, and instead just like to throw insults,  then how do you think i'm going to respond to you?

kk650 said:

I'm not referring to that frame but the very first one you put in the screencap comparison, where you see all the characters front on and the edge of the window is on the top left corner of the frame, as i'm sure you know. Setting up straw men by connecting my breaking the wall argument to the incorrect frame doesn't really help your argument all that much. You think that that the frame i'm actually refering to doesn't look like a set, I do, GL agrees with me, hence the cropping, we agree to disagree, there's not much left to be said.

When you start using grand statements like 'the fourth wall argument is invalid' then you clearly believe your opinion is fact and irreputable for some reason. Only someone with a very large ego acts like that. And again in your reply you again prove my point when you say you are 'pointing out that what you were saying about the framing/ window frame, camera position etc was in fact incorrect.' when that is again simply your opinion with no facts to back it. You clearly have a very big ego to be making statements like that all the time. I'm surprised your head doesn't explode its gotten so large.

I'll leave you to make your grandiose statements of fact and rule your own little fiefdom in peace. I've got my own releases to get back to.

 I know that wasn't the shot you were talking about. I posted that shot to show the exact frame you are seeing from a different angle because it seemed like you were thinking that the frame in the uncropped shot from the front viewing was actually one of the front circular cockpit windows and not the inside frame which made it look like you were seeing it from outside the cockpit instead of inside . like how it really is..

But my statement WAS indeed fact. I showed you that you see exactly the same sections of the cockpit inside the frame of the picture. It wasn't merely my opinion, but i backed the statement up with hard facts. I showed you a comparison between the ANH cockpit and the ESB cockpit and they were the same apart from the inner scale.

Funny how, when people disagree with someone, they can only come back with personal insults.

Bingowings said:

Aren't people supposed to have huge chocolate egos this time of year? 

 Yeh, i have a Cadbury's Cream Ego ;)

You seem to have us all wrong. You say that there is no open-mindedness towards any of the changes in here, so i wonder just how much you have actually read of what has been discussed in here? There are, and have been., MANY of the SE changes that i have said were better and have kept in my edits and the ones i have discarded, i have given valid reasons why they would be removed. 

You say i should be more respectful, yet you are the one that is telling everyone here that we are close minded about George's changes and YOUR opinions. If i was so close minded i would have scrapped every single SE change, not bothered even starting these threads and done it 100% my own way. Disagreeing with someone's opinions does not mean i should have more respect or that i have an ego problem.

kk650 said:

brash_stryker said:

People only see a difference with crampedness when comparing cropped with uncropped. This notion that ESB has ALWAYS looked like the camera is shooting from outside the ship, baffles me. As far as I'm aware, you don't see anything in frame that indicates there ought to be the window "spokes" in frame too, therefore our view is certainly inside the glass (or transparisteel).

The only way that might not work for you is if you fixate on a bulky videocamera not fitting inside the window, and in that case, YOU'RE the one breaking the fourth wall by even thinking about equipment and film crew being present, rather than just getting caught up in the fantasy. In fiction, we are disembodied spectators.

The edge of the window frame on the top left corner of the uncropped ESB frame does draw attention to itself IMHO, it implies a window that the camera is shooting through, hence subconsiously reminding the viewer that its a set and they're watching a film. I don't get that feeling when looking at the cockpit frame from Star Wars.

Nobody ever tries to break their own fourth wall, not unless they're specifically focusing on the edges of frames and looking for mistakes the filmmakers made, but if you leave an uncropped shot like the one from ESB that looks like a set, subconciously people are picking up on that. Will it be enough to break the illusion? Probably not, but I believe it will lessen their appreciation of that film, even if they themselves don't realise it. Is that a worthwhile sacrifice to make for a little more information on the sides and slightly more detail? Everybody will have their own opinion on that but for me, maintaining the illusion is the most important thing of all, extra information on the sides be damned. GL seems to agree with me on that.

 What? Are you thinking that the window frame we see on the edge of the frame is an outer frame from the front? That is the INSIDE frame we are seeing, not a frame from the outside. This is the frame section we are seeing in both shots and NOT one of the forward frames:



You seem to be  seeing things that are not there. I've proved that the camera position and the framing is EXACTLY the same in both the uncropped ESB shot and the ANH shot, yet you still claim it looks like it is being filmed from outside the window in ESB, but not in ANH?

kk650 said:

I'm afraid i'm going to have to agree to disagree about the curved frame of the window being more visible in the ANH shot, to my eyes it is clearly more visible on the uncropped ESB shot, hence why I believe the cropped framing is better. The breaking the fourth wall argument is in MY OPINION very much valid and you thinking that it is invalid is YOUR OPINION, not absolute fact like you seem to believe from your statement.

Your work on Star Wars Revisited was well done but you might want to reign in the ego a touch and show a little more respect for the opinions of others, your opinion is worth no more than anybody elses.

 So, even though it proves that the framing is the same, my refusal to go with YOUR opinion means i have an ego and should show more respect? It seems to be more the other way around about the ego. YOU can't accept the fact that you are wrong about the frame. It IS your opinion that it breaks the fourth wall compared to ANH. But it is FACT that they are both exactly the same so the fourth wall cannot be being broken. If more of the windows were being shown in ESB, then i could possibly agree with you. But there is NO difference apart from the scale of the cockpit.

You are entitled to your opinion and all i was doing was pointing out that what you were saying about the framing/ window frame, camera position etc was in fact incorrect. That does NOT mean that i have an ego problem.

kk650 said:

I see where a lot of you are coming from, seeing all that extra information on the sides and detail is very cool but in the context of maintaining the film's visual narrative and visual consistency between the size of the Star Wars cockpit and the Empire Strikes Back cockpit, I think GL did the right thing by cropping the ESB cockpit frames to make the cockpit feel cramped like it was in Star Wars.

 Well Han did modify the falcon between ANH & ESB ( Adding the extra landing gears etc) so it's feasible to think he would have made modifications to the cockpit to make it less cramped ;)

Bingowings said:

I do hope Ady will be as OCD when it comes to making the Executor bridge in ROTJ look as good as the one in ESB (what is it with 80's sequels and buggering up hand-me-down sets?).

 Well, that's the real trick, isn't it. ;) But that bridge is going to be almost impossible to get it to match the better ESB one, thanks mainly to this guy stuck down the bottom, here....

kk650 said:

adywan said:

Oh, and i really can't see how it even remotely looks like the camera is shooting out of the window when it is in exactly the same position as it was in ANH. Compare these two pics and you can see that there is no difference apart from the scale of the cockpit and the top and bottom frame cropping.

Funny how NO ONE had a problem with the framing of these shots until AFTER George cropped them. I never heard a single comment about how the camera position broke the fourth wall or anything like that. You forget that, in ANH, not much really happened in the cockpit. The original set  was fine for the small amount of movement needed for that film.  When it came to ESB, more action was happening inside the cockpit so it needed to be a bit more spacious to allow the actors to move around more.

There is a clear difference between those two shots, the shot from Empire Strikes Back is clearly wider than the one from Star Wars due to the larger cockpit, leading to far more lens distortion, especially in the corners of the uncropped ESB frame, more than is acceptable IMHO. The main problem though with the uncropped ESB frame is the curved window frame in the top left corner that is not there in the Star Wars frame, making it look like the camera is shooting through a window into a set from the outside rather than the Star Wars frame where the camera looks like its inside the cockpit with the characters.

No one had a problem with the framing when the film came out theatrically because they were too busy enjoying an amazing film to notice window frames in the corners of wide shots. The uncropped ESB shot clearly looks more like a set than the Star Wars one though, the cropped ESB one does not so it is an improvement in my book.

Okay, so the cockpit has to be wider in ESB to allow for more movement, fair enough, but then adjustments/compromises have to be made with framing to avoid showing the edges of the cockpit window and risking breaking the fourth wall. Either they forgot to do that for the theatrical release or GL changed his mind decades later. In either case it is an improvement in my book, one of numerous improvements GL made with the Special Editions IMHO.

 You can clearly see the curved frame of the window in the left & right corners in the ANH shot. It actually shows a little more of in in the ANH shot than it does in the ESB one. It shows that, even though the ESB cockpit is wider, the camera shows the exact same framing as it does in ANH. It shows BOTH the left and right curved frames of the windows in BOTH ANH & ESB. It doesn't matter if the ESB set was larger, the framing is exactly the same ( with ANH showing just slightly more of the window frames than in ESB). So the fourth wall argument is invalid. No re-framing was needed when you see the exact same amount of the cockpit in both films.

They also cropped the film from a 2k source. So there is a very noticeable drop in quality between the cropped shots and original shots.

If the cropping had anything to do with making the camera look like it's not being shot through the window, then why the hell crop shots like this:

yet a few moments later he leaves this shot uncropped..

And why crop this shot at all?

Oh, and i really can't see how it even remotely looks like the camera is shooting out of the window when it is in exactly the same position as it was in ANH. Compare these two pics and you can see that there is no difference apart from the scale of the cockpit and the top and bottom frame cropping.

Funny how NO ONE had a problem with the framing of these shots until AFTER George cropped them. I never heard a single comment about how the camera position broke the fourth wall or anything like that. You forget that, in ANH, not much really happened in the cockpit. The original set  was fine for the small amount of movement needed for that film.  When it came to ESB, more action was happening inside the cockpit so it needed to be a bit more spacious to allow the actors to move around more.

Yes, i had a 1080p scan from a 35mm source. It was a pretty beat up print and badly faded, but did the trick in the end. I have been able to do all of the cropped shots. All i have heard about the cropping is that George preferred the tight framing done in ANH for the cockpits. How true that rumour is, is anyone's guess.

Something that really bugged me about the DVD/Blu-Ray releases of the Original Trilogy ( apart from the messed up colour pallet of course) was the re-framing/ cropping of all the wide shots inside the Millennium Falcon's cockpit. This was something that started to appear in a few shots in the 1997 SE's, but was further changed upon the release of the DVD's. Almost every wide shot inside the cockpit was heavily cropped.

Now many may not have even noticed this, but to me and many others, it stuck out like a sore thumb. Well, not any more......

I have been able to restore these shots to their original framing in glorious HD. Luckily i didn't have to use those low quality Bonus DVDs that were released in 2006, or any of the other various home video releases, to restore the framing. (proof in my next comment below)

So.... Click on the link to go to the comparison page...

Main image is the Official Blu-Ray and place the cursor over the image to see the restored version.

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/70730

And the comparison between the GOUT and Revisited:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/70735

OBI-WAN37 said:

There isn't really that much that needs to be avoided in the prequels at all. We need to avoid avoiding them, which doesn't seem to be happening with the crew behind the movies so far, which is just a HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE.....

Several new Death Stars are built

....HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE injustice.

 And thanks God for that. My hopes for the new films is that they ignore the prequels completely. Disney/ Lucasfilm seem to be starting down that route already. Cancelling the PT era show, moving away from heavy reliance on CG and digital filming, merchandise more concentrated on the OT era, etc etc. Lucas had a hard-on for the prequels and that all we got; prequels crap this and prequel crap that. The only saving grace was the Clone Wars cartoon series which, thankfully, was run by others and NOT George (even though you could see when he was heavily involved with certain stories)

The OT is almost universally loved by SW fans; the Prequels almost universally hated by SW fans. There is no injustice that they would move away from those films. None at all. To have the new films anything like the prequels or to be influenced by them would be suicide for the franchise. Disney/ Lucasfilm NEED to make a good film if they have any hope of recouping their investment. Another film like the prequels is going to lose even more fans. But even the hardened prequelites/ Lucaslovers/ are threatening to ignore the films just because they may change the EU or ignore the prequels or just for the fact that it isn't going to be a George Lucas film. And, to be honest, i say good riddance.

The prequels were nowhere near as successful as the OT was. Forget what the top whatever lists say, they don't take into consideration how much ticket costs have risen ( well one site does). How many people actually went to see those movies. AOTC is almost out of the top 100 with ROTS not too far behind it. TPM is the only one even close to the OT in the charts and that was probably down to the fact that it was an new Star Wars film after all those years without anything. Only a handful of die hard SW fans went to see AOTC & ROTS more than once.

The prequels are like that relative who the family hates. You know they are a part of the family but you know it's best to avoid them like the plague

Passwording the file so even the creator of the damn edit can't even get it just stinks. Why come back here to announce it's out but fail to give anyone the password?

treenahasthaal said:

Hi, The BBC does have this in it's archives.

I recently found out that contributors for programmes can apply for and purchase DVDs of shows they contributed too. As I was one of the kids who wrote in asking a question of Mark I was able to buy a DVD of the show for £108... it is worth every penny!

The show was recorded and aired on the 20th of May 1980 "Empire" Day and Mark talks about "Revenge of the Jedi." 

I remember watching Blue Peter and have no recollection of Revenge of the Jedi being mentioned. Also, if I remember correctly, Ask Aspel was shown first. But it was 34 years ago.... 

Unfortunately, I am not allowed to copy, share or even lend it out!

 he he, i know who you are. lol. Welcome to OT.com :)

Why am i getting this feeling of deja vu?

OBI-WAN37 said:

Anchorhead said:

OBI-WAN37 said:

 Indeed. I'll be a martyr.

 That's one word for it.

 Yes, and awesome martyr are two words for it.

 Here's another word for it:

http://www.urbandictionary.com

OBI-WAN37 said:

There are more miniatures and models in each Star Wars prequels than entire OT. The whole "there's too much CGI" is not true. I've seen people comment on TFN saying they prefer the original trilogy but still know there are more models and miniatures in the PT.

 Oh no, this same old tired argument again. I really wish the Prequelites would at least do a little research before they start spouting this same crap over and over again to try and make the prequels sound great and that it wasn't overused CG

While it maybe true that there were more models/ miniatures built for the prequels. But "built" and "screen used" are two completely different things. There is also a huge difference between using a miniature for a set piece/ location and actually building a set or filming at a real location.

The OT was shot using real full sets. Filmed at locations. And NOT against a greenscreen or just a partial set that would need all the blanks filling in later. In the OT, for vehicles/ ships etc either a full scale set was built or for action sequences a miniature was built and filmed. For the PT, ONLY Phantom menace used models for these things. AOTC & ROTS, every vehicle/ ship was created in a computer. In fact whole sequences were created with 90%-100% CG.  These same scenes could have easily have used models and costumed actors. But no, they decided to create it in a computer. I'm surprised that AOTC and ROTS didn't get a nomination in the best animated feature category. For example.....

The only thing that existed in the real world was the ground. Everything else was created in a computer.

Just click on that picture and look at it in full-rez. It looks like a bloody cartoon. That shot is 100% CG and it shows. At least have the foreground characters be real costumed actors to add a little realism into the shot

Again, 100% CG. They even had models of the Trade Federation ships from TPM but went the digital route instead.

So the complaints about the overuse of CG is well justified.

So DeAgostini have started a new magazine collection where, each week, you get parts to build a studio scale replica of the Millennium Falcon. It's going to be 1:1 scale with the studio 32" version that was used in ESB. But with over 100 issued, that's going to cost over £900 to build this bad boy. Plus, the photos it shows of the finished model it even  admits was finished off my a professional model maker, so i wonder what the un-modded version will end up looking like?

It seems a shame that they are going to include all the interiors, yet it doesn't look like the boarding ramp can be opened or that the landing gears are going to be included.

http://www.buildmillenniumfalcon.com/#magazine

iamweasel said:

I believe the original movies will never be available in larger formats. If they do, it wouldn't be worth to have them. To have good 4k/3D movies, you have to make the movie in these formats. And the original trilogy wasn't made that way.

 

 The original unaltered trilogy was filmed on 35mm film which means it CAN be be rescanned and released in perfect 4k and even higher.

It's funny that the unaltered versions are the only Star Wars films that can ever be released in true 4k. The special editions and TPM, although these were shot on 35mm film, the effects work was only done @ 2k. TPM only has a digital master which was used for the blu-rays and was digitized at  2k. The other 2 prequels were shot on digital and are stuck at 1080p/2k forever. So much for George pushing technology. He has doomed his "perfect vision" to what will become an obsolete format, while the versions he wanted to bury are the only ones that survive the next generation.