I've been speaking to the guy who has the full 12 minute footage. He is going to upload the full version soon. He originally posted this to youtube as a teaser, which is the reason for all the fast forwarding.
yeh, that's the guy who swiped it. I didn't see the other thread. oops
Has anyone seen this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5Zg-UBTr1U
Now this is just a sampler of the 12 minute reel this guy has. I have just been speaking to him and he is going to upload the full 12 minute version. Looks like it's mainly the cut Biggs scenes, but there is some cool behind the scenes footage i've never seen before, including footage of Marcia lucas on location.
As soon as he has uploaded the full version i will post the link here
he isn't just inside the door when he lets the jets off. He is quite a way inside the corridor. But, if you look at the shot when he lets off the jets of smoke, the first few frames has him coming to a halt. We also don't see him for a few shots after he opens the door. He may just have popped outside to check if the coast is clear. lol. Then heads back inside to provide cover for the team. This could easily have happened in the moments that we don't see him.
doubleofive said:
I believe you will be alone in your preference of the wrong angle, helmet-missing Vader hologram. There's a modified screenshot on FB. You should be able to find it on the link in my sig.lastjedi said:
if the vadar hologram on the top is the new one then i like it.if it's the bottom one thats the new one then i don't.i think the top one looks better.
Here is the slightly modified version:
bttfbrasilfan said:
The new Vader hologram is amazing! Congrats, Ady.
But, still, I think he is looking "fat". I have a little suggestion :
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/29456
The original was shot at the incorrect angle. The new one was shot at the correct angle to the holo-plate, so he would appear shorter/ fatter due to the perspective. Plus there is a lot of vader missing in the original due to bad matting.
The new Vader hologram.....
Their facebook page has to be the saddest thing ever. They have just 1 like.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Digital-Fanedits-The-Art-and-Science-of-Change/500181123370538?fref=ts
So how the hell can the edit be too big for downloading? If they're only going be streaming a DVD res video then why not release that? Or is it Anti-Matter's ego that has become too big? ;)
Warbler said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
Yes they are choosing to wear it, but the reality is that some of them are being denied choice,
not in the US. They are free to wear them or not wear them.
Warbler said:
Hey, it's me. said:
Punishments like beatings and 'stuff like that' are illegal in the good ol' US of A? They're illegal in most countries but doesn't stop them happening behind closed doors.
I when it happens behind closed doors, I would suggest that victims leave that house and go to the police.
In reply to these two statements, i have to add another quote from you...
Warbler said:
and you are an idiot.
;)
I wished i lived in WarblerWorld, where everything seems to be so cut and dry, but unfortunately i live in the real world where things aren't as simple.
That's one thing that really annoys me. this government is fine with giving Scotland the vote to leave the UK but we are not allowed a vote to see if we want to stay in the EU.
And we can't go abroad and claim their benefits because the EU made sure that it's the Uk that foots the bill for any benefits, unless they give up their Uk citizenship. Bloody ex pats get the winter fuel payments when they live in a hot country. And the Eu won't let us put a stop to that.
I don't believe that you should be allowed to go to any country to sponge off their system. You should have to prove that you would be a benefit to their society, not just to sponge off their benefits system.
And you can't go to Poland and get any medical procedure done for free, unlike here, so the door doesn't really swing both ways.
The EU only benefits those in power. The sooner we are no longer part of it, the better.
CP3S said:
LOL. You're a trip.
Anyway, no, America and the U.K. don't seek out immigrants, but they provide a process for those interested to become part of a selection process, they they select from that pool. So yeah, in a manner of speaking, we do "swoop in and take them".
I think this is where the confusion may lie to what's actually happening and the problems that this country is having with immigration. The selection process only applies to people who want to emigrate to here from none EU countries. Anyone inside these EU countries can just walk in and start claiming state benefits and there is nothing we can do about it. The EU commission keep stopping any attempt made by the UK to change the benefits policies. And this is causing the problems here.
When the EU doors opened Britain became flooded with Millions of Eastern Europeans. At this time banks had started making it harder for anyone to get a mortgage and , with house prices souring, it became almost impossible for anyone on an average wage to buy their own house. Private renting also became problematic due to souring rental prices. When someone on minimum wage was earning the same or even Less than landlords were charging for a months rent for a 3 bedroom house, their only chance was social housing. But we were so short of social houses, thanks mainly to Margaret Thatchers scheme to allow people to buy their own council houses at greatly reduced prices. But NONE of this money raised went back into the system to build more houses, like was originally promised. Now, the waiting list to actually get one of these houses is horrendous. The chances are that you'll not get one.
Now, to try and combat this problem the government introduced Tax Credits. This entitled you to help with your rent if you worked. If you were on benefits then your rent would be paid. So people were having to look for private renting because there were no social houses left. But here's where the problem started. You would find a suitable house in your area but the benefits office would refuse to pay your rent because they deemed the rent to be too high. So, again, you were stuck. Thanks to the inflated rental prices.
Now, a little way down the line, we get the mass immigration happen. And guess what??? They were immediately given benefits and housing. They were put to the top of the social housing list. Councils and housing associations were told that they had to find a certain percentage of housing for these immigrants. Suddenly we see people being evicted from their houses for being slightly behind on their rent. Also, people who were near the top of the list, suddenly found themselves a lot further down.
When it started coming out about how many of these immigrants had been housed in luxury housing, multi million pound houses where the tax payer was footing the rental bill, this is where the unrest started happening. When UK citizens were refused housing benefit because the powers that be deemed the prices "too high", for then to allow the immigrants to rent more expensive properties was a huge slap in the face for the UK citizens.
You get all these do gooders over here that say that immigration is not a problem and that we should allow them to integrate with our society, but you usually find out that these same people live in areas unaffected by the recent mass immigration and have no clue about the fact that you'll find that it is in fact the immigrants that refuse to integrate with our society.
Here's examples of what's really happening here;
Government funded day centres set up so Mothers can meet started barring UK citizens claiming they were set up so that immigrant mothers can meet up, even when they were not set up for that reason. Not exactly integrating.
Companies started refusing to employ UK workers and instead were only employing mainly Easter European workers. Walk into a Job centre now and you can see jobs advertised ONLY in a foreign language with no English translation available. UK jobs advertised solely in the EU countries BEFORE they are advertised in this country. Now this is when unemployment is at a record high. The Government want to make it so an employer can sack anyone for no reason without having to worry about that worker taking them to a tribunal, all under the guise of cutting red tape and helping businesses grow. This is only going to make the problem worse. They brainwash the masses to believe that only reason why these companies are employing solely immigrants is that the UK are workshy and didn't want the jobs i the first place. That is complete bullshit. Yes, you have that part of society that refuse to work because they get more on benefits, but that does not reflect the whole of the British workforce.
There was a company where i use to live that was the one place where school leavers in the area were guaranteed a job when they left school. This stopped dead when the flood of Eastern Europeans came over. Now it employs solely immigrants. There isn't a single British person working there apart fro in management. But here's where it takes a different turn. The managers there were told that they had to learn Polish or they would lose their jobs. They protested and said that it should be the workers that were made to learn English and NOT the other way around. When the workers were told this they flatly refused and placed the "racist" card. Guess what, the managers who refused to learn Polish were sacked. That is disgusting. So much for integration. Why should UK people be forced to integrate when the immigrants refuse?
There are a lot of things going on over here that just go unreported. People just haven't got a clue about what's really happening unless they are in an area that has been affected.
There are a HUGE number of these immigrants that come here for the benefits system. At a time when the government are cutting peoples benefits left right and centre, at a a time when disabled people are having their benefits stopped because an outsourced company was put in charge to assess disabled benefit claims assess that these people are fit for work, when they clearly were not. Now the government have introduced the bedroom tax for anyone who receives benefits and live in a house that has a spare bedroom(s). These same people where there are no smaller houses for them to move into so they are stuck.
Funnily enough this does not affect immigrants. Not exactly fair now is it?
The government want to change the benefits system to stop the "benefit tourists" but the EU courts stop them at every turn.
Is it fare that Uk citizens are being refused benefits or any help at all, when they have worked and paid into the system with their taxes and national insurance contributions, while any none Uk citizens can come here and are given benefits and even help so they can claim everything that may be entitled to (something UK citizens are not)
Is it fare that they can claim benefits for their families that don't even live in this country?
The government use the same old excuse that immigration can only benefit this country and the economy. Bullshit. When so many of them send a huge portion back home, that money is NOT being ploughed back into our economy.
People are being brainwashed into thinking its a good idea. It's not.
If i emigrated to another country then i would expect myself to learn their language and integrate into their culture and follow their laws. So why should i expect and different from anyone that wants to live here?
But when they refuse to integrate into our culture, then why should we be forced to integrate their culture into ours? It's not being a "bigot" or a "racist" to speak out about these things.
So why are we refusing entry to people outside of the EU that could actually benefit this country? There are NO criminal checks done on any of the immigrants coming from within the EU countries. When they commit serious crimes we are then unable to deport them back to their country because "their human rights" would be violated. What about the human rights of their victims? We have the hate preachers over here that are living in luxury on state benefits, while spewing their bile and hatred towards all none Muslims. These same people are linked directly to the extremists that have carried out terrorist attacks upon this country. They are allowed to preach on the streets with nothing done to them. But dare you say anything against them and you can be arrested.
A recent case happened in my old town of Shrewsbury. There is the old Registrar office that was being sold off. Now this is an old historic building. Groups applied to turn this building into things like cancer support centres but were flatly refused with the powers that be claiming that it would create too much of a disturbance to local residents thanks to parking problems. Now this building is worth around £600,000. Then it was announced that it had been sold for just £225,000 to a Muslim group that were now going to set up a prayer centre. So why all of a sudden is the parking issues no longer a problem? There have been a lot of protests there due to this. But every opposition to it has been labelled "racist". And, funnily enough, the residents there no longer have a say in the matter.
A petition and a facebook group were set up against the proposed plan. But facebook removed the page claiming it was set up solely to create racial hatred, which it was not, and the petition was ignored. Now people have been arrested over racial remarks made on this page. Two white males were arrested for remarks made. But why was the Muslim guy who posted on the same page, to which these remarks were made, not arrested? Here is what he posted which started it all:
"All you white bastards need to get over yourselves. Islam is taking over. There is no denying it. Embrace Islam or face slaughter. "
Now, at first, this was claimed to be someone with a fake account stirring up trouble. But no. It was a real person. A Muslim that lives in the town. But he was not arrested and the police said they would be taking no action against him. This is what is stirring racial hatred. Why is it acceptable to one person to bring colour into an argument in a defamatory manner, while it is unacceptable for another? Surely it shouldn't matter what colour you are, if you make a remark about the colour of another then that is indeed racism. It shouldn't be just a white person that can be branded and judged as being a racist. You should be treated equally no matter what colour you are. But until the powers that be understand and accept that, racial tensions will only continue to rise.
The UK is not against immigration. But we are against those who come here just for our benefit system.
I wonder how many of these people that come here would stay if all these benefits were not available for them? And by benefits i mean not just the money, but the instant housing and all the other benefits involved. We are only a small island and we are at bursting point. Now there are two more countries joining the EU and guess where they want to head in their millions?
On the whole light source direction thing...... I guess everyone has forgot the shot of the belly of the Executor where the light source is completely different compared to the following shot? ;) And throughout the whole film the light sources are different between shots. For one example, when the stardestroyer is chasing after the falcon after it leaves Hoth.
doubleofive said:
It's more that Uncle Owen wore the same clothes (because its supposed to be Tatooine garb). Was he cosplaying as a Jedi, in a post-prequel universe?Hey, it's me. said:
doubleofive said:
I still can't get over the fact that the Jedi uniforms in the prequels are what Obi-wan wears in A New Hope because its what Obi-wan wears, but no one noticed that everyone on Tattooine wears the same clothes and it wouldn't make sense for a Jedi in hiding to dress like a Jedi.
I don't know but seeing as though he was in hiding, I don't think mingling with the locals was on his agenda. Maybe when he ventured into Mos Eisley to get supplies he didnt wear his robe. Shrug.
Well don't forget, Owen was Obi-Wan's brother. It's mentioned in the novel so i wonder if that part of the conversation was actually filmed? Would be interesting if the rest of the conversation, including the bit about Luke's Mother, ever surfaced.
So America are now prepared to arm the Syrian Rebels because they say that the president has used chemical weapons. I'd be very wary of this. It was a very small amount used. Doesn't this ring alarm bells with anyone? Top experts have warned that these weapons were used by the rebels (the UN's investigator Carla del Ponte informed them about this after her investigation), in order to get the support of other nations and they were not used by Assad. But what's more worrying is that it is known that Al Qaeda is fighting alongside the rebels (same thing as what was happening in Lybia). So, if America start providing this military support, they are in danger of arming those they are supposed to be fighting against.
There are some terrible things happening over there, but is it all that we are being told it is? Rebels executed a 15 year old boy in front of his parents because they claimed he used the profit Muhammad's name in an offensive manner. And we've seen the pictures of the rebels eating one of the government soldiers hearts. Is this really the type of people that we should be helping? Also videos of Rebels training to use chemical weapons surfaced.
I'm hoping the Uk stays well out of this but the chances of that happening are slim to none. Shouldn't we be listening to those independent investigators instead of brushing their reports to one side without any evidence to refute their reports?
And, before any one suggests that this is another Anti-American post by a Brit, it isn't. I'm curious to know what you guys over there think about all this.
The Executor model used for filming was grey. It was re-timed blue in post. They only built one large scale tower for ESB. So, if it was supposed to be just your regular stardestroyer then why did they re-time the colour of it to blue if it wasn't supposed to be the Executor? It makes no sense whatsoever. ?
Some more evidence. This time from a bootleg betamax 1980 telecine. Yes, the colours of this are nowhere near perfect, but you can still get a good idea of what colour the original tower was when seen in theatres.
Here we have it coming into view. You can see that the other stardestroyer is clearly a standard because it is white.
A few more frames on and yes, that is definitely blue.
Next we see the standard stardestroyer and you can tell its supposed to be white even with the red shift. Now look at that TIE. Blue, which we know they are in this film.
now cut to the reveal shot of the Executor and it's almost the same blue same blue as the tower we first saw.
TV's Frink said:
adywan said:
TV's Frink said:
"Sounds like" is not the same as "is."
well those two statements are exactly the same.
C3 said he sounded like a racist from the Southern US. Not the same as calling him a racist.
sorry, i misunderstood what you meant. I thought you were talking about the two statements i posted. My bad :)
TV's Frink said:
"Sounds like" is not the same as "is."
well those two statements are exactly the same.
It's a very worrying trend at the moment to label anyone a racist when they speak out about certain cultures or the immigration problem and what is happening in this country. You can no longer speak out about anything without the "bigot" or "racist" label being thrown at you.
Two examples:
1) I find the Burka to be offensive. They shouldn't be allowed to wear it because it can cause offense.
2) i find you wearing that cross around your neck offensive. You should be made to take it off because it could cause offence
Both exactly the same type of comments. But if you say #1 then you're branded a bigot and a racist. Say #2 and that person could be forced to remove their cross, yet the person who said it has none of those labels attached to them. People have even been sacked because they refused to remove a cross on a necklace.
CP3S said:
Yes he is. That is what I mean, the two English guys continually make themselves sound like racist hillbillies from the sticks.
Hey, i'm English. i hope you're not lumping me in with that analogy. ;)
So i shouldn't return it to it's original colouring because everyone thinks it should be a different colour? Am i on the right site? Have i slipped into a mirror universe? lol
Bingowings said:
It's the shark's fin.
Thank you. You got it right there.
Of course it's supposed to be the Executor. It was coloured blue in 1980 and again in 1997. That was their whole intention all along. You also have to remember that the executor model was more grey and it was coloured blue in post (check out the SE shot of the executor during the bespin escape where they forgot to reapply the colouring and it's almost white). It makes perfect sense to me that it would be the Executor. the stardestroyers are all small in the first shot then this huge tower comes into shot, then we see this large shadow covering the standard stardestroyer. Its all building up scale from shot to shot until the final reveal. The large tower, the shadow eclipsing the stardestroyer, the belly then the reveal. Without that first large tower there is no sense that it is a large ship causing the shadow until we see the belly. It could have just been anything. That is what an establishing shot is for.
If it was meant to be the Executor in 1980, then that is how it will be in this version.
darth_ender said:
I never said Afghans or Iraqis have themselves to blame, and only those who fail to see individuals but rather a group as a whole would assume that's what is going on. I said Al-qaeda in Iraq is to blame.
The funny thing is about all this is that Al qaeda had no presence in Iraq until AFTER the US/UK invasion. Once Sadam was gone they took hold.
Warbler, you still cite the fact that Sadam was supposed to have WMD's as an excuse for the invasion or that he probably had them but got rid of them before the invasion. I do see this from so many as an excuse for the war even to this day, but we now know different. MI6 & the CIA were informed well before the invasion that Iraq had no WMD's but chose to ignore it. . Even the whole document that was used to justify the threat of Saddam turned out to be false:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Dossier
There was no threat from Saddam. It was for Oil and nothing more. the plan was already put into place to get rid of Saddam and get their hands on the oil BEFORE the attacks on 9/11, but it could not be justified and would have been illegal. The Bush. Blair administration used 9/11 as an excuse to invade Iraq. I find that far more disgusting and insulting to the relatives of those who died in the attacks and their memories.
Our countries had no reason to invade Iraq. Just because someone is a "bad man" cannot be used to justify killing thousands of innocent people. There are people far worse than Saddam ever was in power around the globe, but strangely enough you don't see us invading there. But i guess that people forget that it was the USA that supplied Saddam with billions of dollars worth of arms in the 1980s. I guess Bush sr couldn't have thought he was such a bad man when he was an ally against Iran then?
It was nothing more that to get their hands on the OIL. Nothing to do with terror attacks or any threat. With all the GENUINE documents that have come to light since, thanks in part to wikileaks starting the ball rolling, how anybody can think that the Iraq invasion was for any other reason than oil eludes me. And all this is NOT conspiracy theories but FACT.
Some interesting reading
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/secret-memos-expose-link-between-oil-firms-and-invasion-of-iraq-2269610.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/9936180/Iraq-anniversary-war-intelligence-was-a-lie-BBC-Panorama-documentary-to-say.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/18/panorama-iraq-fresh-wmd-claims
http://www.globalresearch.ca/iraq-a-war-of-aggression-no-wmds-no-connection-to-al-qaeda/5327548
I don't think you're going to get it. Well this actually shows just how faded the GOUT is in removing any blues (especially when everyone thinks that Hoth should be completely white with NO blue at all) and how bad the colour grading in the Blu-rays /DVDs is too compared to the original. .
In the first shot of the Imperial fleet we see the distant stardestroyers and then the tower fills the screen.
Well here it is in the GOUT
And here it is in the Blu-Ray
So here it is the exact same colour as the other stardestroyers, yet they all now have a strange tint to them. hmmm. . You've got to love those Blu-Ray colours.
And here it is in the clip i posted (hasn't changed in any of the version i posted)
But wait..... That isn't supposed to be your ordinary stardestroyer though is it? Is that why it is Blue in the theatrical version AND the special edition versions?
Puggos 16mm
1997 Special Edition
Yep, that's actually the Executor. Its the first time we get a glimpse of it.
It always was blue. So now you can see just how wrong we perceive the colouring of the originals, because we are so use to the faded versions. I deliberately changed this tower to the same grey as the rest of the ships and no one mentioned it.
Its such a shame that we no longer seem to know what colour these films were and that these films probably have never had a decent release with their correct colour timing intact. And this has been made even worse thanks to the DVD's / Blu-Rays. You can see with the Blu-Ray screenshot, with all the ships now having that strange tint but yet none of them looking any different in tone, just how messed up the colouring of that transfer is. And Lucasfilm are still maintaining that there is nothing wrong with the colouring. So why, when it's the correct blue colouring in the 1997 Special editions, can the Executor now look the same as all the other ships in this shot? It also changes shade throughout this whole sequence. Sad times indeed.
Here is the REAL screenshot from the Revisited version.
Now, in the past, there was mention (not sure if it was here) about how the ships are placed in the opening shot compared to when we see them later and that it is a continuity error. Well, it isn't . Now that we know this tower belongs to the Executor we can see that these ships are high above the ship and would actually be out of frame in any of the other shots (going by the trajectory of the Executor)