logo Sign In

auximenies

User Group
Members
Join date
23-Aug-2006
Last activity
25-May-2017
Posts
328

Post History

Post
#261528
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
...and try to imagine shit happening OFF CAMERA....

That's we we're doing. Gomer imagines that off-camera during those 20 years together Palpy never brought up the Rule of Two to Vader. Others (myself included) imagine that during those 20 off-camera years some discussion of the Rule took place.

I am also asserting that Anakin (pre-Vader) was aware of the Rule of Two, based on occurrences in the PT.
Post
#261514
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Time
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
The rule of 2 seems fine to me. I'm assuming the Emperor didn't quite bring it up yet.
AFTER 20 YEARS?!!!!


Not to mention that it is doubtful that Anakin would not be aware of the Rule of Two prior to becoming DV. Weren't the Jedi actively seeking out the Sith? Therefore it would stand to reason that all Jedi would be told "Oh, btw, always are there 2, a master and...". So Anakin knows.

So now are we to assume the Emperor never mentioned it hoping DV had no awareness of it? So never in DV's training/learning did they discuss the Sith lineage and how it always progressed in pairs? And DV never brought it up because he was playing dumb in order to somehow trick the Emperor? PUH-lease.
Post
#261486
Topic
***//BUILDING EMPIRE\\: PAL & NTSC DVD - NEW EDITION NOW ONLINE! ***
Time
Originally posted by: Jambe Davdar
Grateful if you could all do me a favour and bombard ebay with emails about this seller!

He's selling 'Building Empire' and as we know, it's just not right!

Thanks
JD


Geez, and he's got your name right there on the image! Have you reported it to eBay yourself? I know in general they don't give a rip as long as they're making money, but who knows. Actually, this seems like something LFL could flag. I imagine they are part of the VeRO program.
Post
#261350
Topic
Ideas: James Bond re-edit suggestions...
Time
Originally posted by: coconuts86
I just had a fantastic idea - why not re-edit OHMSS as a prequel to the Dalton-Brosnan entries?
<snip>
The reason of even thinking about this is because of the obvious fact that Bond's wife is been referenced in LTK and TWINE. And slightly in TND.


The wife is also referenced in The Spy Who Loved Me when Agent XXX meets Bond at a bar. So moving OHMSS to a post-Moore position doesn't work.
Post
#261328
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Time
Originally posted by: see you auntie
And this from the same movie just 30 minutes earlier:
That is the system and I'm sure Skywalker is with them.........


Heh. Forgot about that. Which leaves this...

B. Because he was playing coy and had never let Palpy in on the little secret that he had knocked up Padme.

...as the reason Vader asks "How is that possible?". And going along with Gomer on this, let's then presume that

"He didn't exactly want Palpatine to know he was already looking for him, because then Palpatine would question his loyalty."

Yet he announces on the Star Destroyer that he's sure Skywalker is there on Hoth? If you're trying to keep something from the Emperor, it's doubtful that you'd speak of it so casually in the presence of Imperial officers.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
He's just playing dumb to the Emperor that whole conversation. They both pretend that three of them could be a happy Sith family, but they both intend to replace the other with Luke.

Why would they pretend that if a rule of 2 exists? And if they are thinking about rescinding the Rule of Two, would this not be discussed (as CO pointed out)? Especially because this was a prevalent idea in the PT. After all this 6-episode saga is supposed to be a cohesive piece, is it not?


BTW, it seems to me to be pretty dumb (from the writer/creator's perspective) to limit the Sith to 2 lords. Why limit yourself (as a writer)? For no good reason that I can see. Was GL trying to rationalize why the Emperor wanted Luke to kill Vader in ROTJ? That's easily explained. He wanted Luke to kill Vader and take his place not because of any rule of 2 nonsense, but because such an act would propel him to the dark side. And what about Vader wanting Luke to join him and do away with the Emperor? Simple. Vader wanted to be top dog, and therefore the Emperor had to be eliminated. No "rule of 2" necessary.

Quite simply, the notion of the rule of two in the PT contradicts --or at least muddles-- a plot point in the OT. And even though GL made a change to ESB, he didn't correct the mistake. For the 2007 box the following dialog change should be made for ESB:

Emperor: We have a new enemy. The young rebel who destroyed the Death Star. I have no doubt, this boy is the offspring of Anakin Skywalker.

Darth Vader: How is that possible?

Emperor: Search your feelings Lord Vader, you will know it to be true. He could destroy us.

Darth Vader: He's just a boy, Obi-Wan can no longer help him.

Emperor: The Force is strong with him. The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi.

Darth Vader: If he could be turned, he would become a powerful ally.

Emperor: Yes.... but what of the Rule of Two?

Darth Vader: Well, we can ignore it, right? I mean, who is there but us? Let's make our own Sith rules. The first one we'll call "The Rule of Three". Whatta you think?

Emperor: Yes. Young Skywalker would be a great asset. Can he be turned?

Darth Vader: Well, I'm not exactly aware of any of his anxieties or dreams or self doubts, but I can probably get into his head. He will join us or die Master.
Post
#261228
Topic
ANH screening with modelmaker Lorne Peterson...WHY ARE THEY SCREENING THE SE??
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Originally posted by: zombie84
Randy its true that every single optical effect was recomposited digitally in 1997. They did this to eliminate matte lines and dupe grain. They accomplished it by digging up the original bluescreen elements and plates, scanning both and then re-comping them. Its even detailed in the recent "what has changed" feature on the official site. Every single special effect has been digitally altered.

How does this relate to replacing models with CGI? Can you remove Mat lines from around a model without replacing them?

(which is what I thought we've been talking about all along)


He was explaining to you how something that you thought was a contradiction...

Originally posted by: JediRandy
Wow... earlier 80% of the models were deleted now "all of the optical effects have either been recomposited digitally or deleted altogether."


...was actually two different things. Recomposited digitally does not equal deletion.
Post
#261226
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
The main reason they changed the Emperor hologram in ESB was to tie it into ROTJ.
Again, I've asked about the dialog. Was it changed because of anything in SW or ROTJ? No.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
The prequels were made to also fit with the ROTJ emperor. I don't see anything about this alteration to ESB that accomodates -anything- introduced by the PT.

Vader: How is that possible?

Why would he ask that?
A. Because he thought he had killed Padme prior to her giving birth.
or
B. Because he was playing coy and had never let Palpy in on the little secret that he had knocked up Padme.

Both of these are story ideas from the PT.
Post
#261195
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic

Original Scene:
Emperor: We have a new enemy. Luke Skywalker.
Darth Vader: Yes, my master.
Emperor: He could destroy us.

New Special Edition 2004 scene:
Emperor: We have a new enemy. The young rebel who destroyed the Death Star. I have no doubt, this boy is the offspring of Anakin Skywalker.
Darth Vader: How is that possible?
Emperor: Search your feelings Lord Vader, you will know it to be true. He could destroy us.

Why was the dialog changed? To tie it in to creative decisions made in the PT*. No other reason.

*such as the notion that a Jedi shall know no love or the decision to write a story in which Darth Vader believes he has killed Padme, presumably before childbirth.
Post
#261176
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Changing the monkey woman to Ian McDairmid was done to fix a mistake in the classic trilogy.

And what about the dialog change? What did that have to do with the fact that Ian McDiarmid was cast as the Emperor for ROTJ? Nothing. It was changed in response to creative decisions made in the PT, which Gaf and others consider to be a mistake.
Post
#261161
Topic
The SW Novel - Alan Dean Foster
Time
I thought I'd revisit this thread since I am currently reading the novel.
Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen
Hmm, I was hoping to hear that George at least okay'd the novel before it was published...
Presumably someone okay'd it. If not GL himself then Kurtz maybe? Of course today LFL has a division that is responsible for checking out all the novels to make sure they comply, but back then...?

I'm wondering what other materials besides the script were at ADF's disposal. Many of his descriptions are dead-on and do not come from the script. Did he have still photos of the production? Dailies? And if he had no input from GL, how did he flesh out some of the more esoteric ideas that the script doesn't go into? Was a consultant available to him? Or did GL give him more than just a script? Outlines of various themes and a bit of backstory, perhaps? These would be interesting questions to ask ADF.

Looking at the different scripts it's clear that ADF wrote from the 15-Mar-1976 version. It's also clear that the 15-Jan-1976 version as published in 1979's Art of SW is closest to the finished film, if not simply a transcript of the finished project. Without question the 15-Mar-1976 version was written before the supposed 15-Jan-1976 version. So is this the first documented instance of GL revisionist history? (cue Gomer to provide a defense)

Originally posted by: C3PX
What is odd to me is as to why the novel is credited to George Lucas and not Alan D. Foster. Foster was a much better known author than Georgie, as George only has one novel credited to him and he didn't even write the thing.

If you consider that it came out before the movie, it makes sense that George's name is on it. If it were me I'd want my name on the first (I assume) publicly available SW story. Also, the film might be misconstrued as GL's adaptation of ADF's novel, as people may ignore the "based on a story by GL" tag.

Originally posted by: C3PX
I am surprised even today that the reprints of the novel are credited to George.

This surprises me too. The reasons I gave above for GL's name appearing on it are no longer relevant today. So I think ADF's name should be on it now.
Post
#261154
Topic
Episode II: Shroud of the Dark Side (the TM edit) (Released)
Time
Originally posted by: Trooperman
I'm worried that 108 minutes is too short for a Star Wars movie.

Don't sweat it. Some movies are 1.5 hours and they're able to tell whatever story they're telling. I understand you're saying "for a Star Wars movie", but that shouldn't matter if you've tightened it up.

I've got two different Ep.2 fan edits that I have yet to sit through. Maybe knowing that this one won't be lengthy will allow me to take the time to watch it!

Post
#261025
Topic
STAR WARS: EP IV 2004 <strong>REVISITED</strong> ADYWAN *<em>1080p HD VERSION NOW IN PRODUCTION</em>
Time
Pardon the double post but something else came to mind....

Adywan, in the disco-themed preview clip you omitted the shot of Ponda Baba's severed arm. I believe this was done intentially to avoid showing the bloody arm which contradicts the cauterization that is typical of a lightsaber wound throughout the saga. Would it be possible to simply show the arm without panning over to see the bloody end of it? That way Luke's visual reaction (his look downward) has a tangible object.
Post
#260997
Topic
STAR WARS: EP IV 2004 <strong>REVISITED</strong> ADYWAN *<em>1080p HD VERSION NOW IN PRODUCTION</em>
Time
Originally posted by: DarthBalls1138
I don't remember seeing this mentioned and I thot I'd ask, are you removing the incestual bits of the movie?

What is there in SW that is incestuous? Leia giving Luck a quick peck "for luck"? No. Big. Deal. Now, maybe one could take issue with the kiss in TESB. But this never bothered me, perhaps because I know the actors aren't related so it isn't truly "gross". I dunno.

To adywan: I checked over a few of your lists of changes and didn't anything about this: When Obi-Wan raises his saber to concede to Vader, the long shot lacks his face peaking out from his hood, which it what it was doing in the close-up. Will this be fixed? I must say my greatest disappointment upon first seeing the SE was that this shot still looked bad to me.
Post
#260397
Topic
Star Wars: REBORN - The Complete Saga (* unfinished project *)
Time
Originally posted by: InfoDroid
3) The third idea was ( and I know it's been done already, but) to make it look like Kenner action figure packaging, or I really loved those bubblegum card covers Coov came up with a while ago. THOSE were awesome. Something nostalgic that brings you back to having Star Wars in your life as a kid.

I didn't find these in the Coov folder here: http://kevin.alfahosting.org/test/index.php

Are these online anywhere? Thanks.

Post
#260394
Topic
Favorite Nintendo Game
Time
Originally posted by: Nanner SplitHas anyone mentioned Balloon Fight yet?

No. So is that one of your favorites? I never played it too much because I got Joust and thought the NES version played very similarly to the arcade version. Sometimes the knock-offs were more fun than the originals. Is that the case with Balloon Fight vs. Joust?

Post
#260387
Topic
Hey guys, Remember when Star wars had writing like this?
Time
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: auximenies
I can't say that I ever enjoyed the PT, but prior to seeing TPM I was VERY excited about a new SW movie. There was no reason for me to decide ahead of time that I wouldn't like it. SW defined my youth, and the fact that Episode I was actually being made was like a dream come true.

The only thing that my dislike for the PT has to do with my love for the OT is this: I like good movies. The OT were good movies. The PT were not. These opinions were formed AFTER seeing the films, not prior to.

Yeah, perhaps you came at the films in a more unbaised position. The vast majority of people did I would assume. Most people who went to see the prequels were fans of good movies in general and were simply hoping to be entertained. They didn't live and breath Star Wars like some of us fans did. When they saw the films they found them to be inferior movies in general sense. They took their kids to see the films, but, other than that, they had no great desire to see them. The prequels are as laughable to this crowd as a crappy, kiddie cartoon from the 80s.

Anyways, despite the fact that I suppose there were some hardcore-Star-Wars fans that disliked the prequels because they weren't like the original Star Wars movies, I simply wanted to say that I had the exact opposite reaction. I would believe most fans were loyal enough to have the same reaction I did. They were wowed by the fact that they could see new Star Wars films after many long years and came in with the bias of actually wanting to enjoy them.

I think you missed my point. I came at them (or, TPM actually) with a biased position. I was planning on enjoying TPM because it was a SW film and I was looking forward to it very much. The difference between me and you was that it didn't take me multiple viewings to realize that I didn't like it. But our points are the same, and contrary to Gomer's assertion. We weren't pre-disposed to disliking TPM. We were pre-disposed to liking it.
Post
#260239
Topic
Favorite Nintendo Game
Time
Tecmo Super Bowl for the 8-bit NES. Tecmo Bowl was great fun, but TSB took it to the next level while still maintaining everything that made the original fun.

For me, the sports games always had the best longevity because you didn't "solve" them or complete them. As long as you had a friend around, they were always fun.

Edit: Wow. I used the word "fun" three times.