corellian77

How did I miss this thread?  Thanks for bumping it greenpenguino.

ChainsawAsh said:

• Dune, done properly.  The David Lynch version looked the part (mostly), but failed in the script department, whereas the SciFi channel version got the script mostly right, but suffered from horrible set/costume design and acting.

Totally agree.  I love Lynch's visual style--it's totally what I imagined when reading Dune.  I didn't end up watching more than 10 minutes of the SciFi channel's version though.  I couldn't get past the terrible set design.

RedFive said:

I've been waiting for something more to come from this since I first saw it a couple years ago.  It's so awesome, whatever it is.

What's In The Box?

That was awesome :)  It completely felt like a live action, first person RPG.

* * *

Films I'd love to see made:

1. The Starlost

Based on a screenplay by Harlan Ellison (later adapted to the novel Phoenix Without Ashes), it's a story about an Amish guy named Devon who one day discovers a mysterious door.  He enters it and finds himself in the corridors of a gigantic spaceship.  He quickly learns that he's aboard the "Earthship Ark", and that the world he knew is just one of dozens of biospheres on board, each preserving a different culture from a now-dead planet Earth.  He also finds out that some catastrophic event occurred years earlier, killing the crew, and that the now-unmanned ship is on a collision course with a star.  With the help of two other people from his village, he goes from biosphere to biosphere, seeking help from the inhabitants while trying to warn them of the impending destruction of the ship.

The screenplay ended up being adapted for TV, and 16 episodes aired here in Canada in the early 70s.  However, the end result was pretty poor, even by 1970s standards, and the show was soon cancelled.  However, ever since learning about this, I always thought the premise was amazing and, if well-produced, could make for an awesome movie franchise or modern day TV series.

2. The Odyssey

Due to my man-crush on Sean Bean, I've always thought a follow-up film to Wolfgang Petersen's Troy would have been cool.  I really liked Bean's portrayal of Odysseus, and I thought an entire film chronicling his adventures home would have made for a pretty enjoyable film.

The same article which I quoted above states that, had Henson built the puppet, he would have more accurately been classified as a "creature."

My copy was taped from First Choice Super Channel (now The Movie Network) in Canada in 1982.  It's presented in 4:3 P&S, and was (apparently) the world television premiere of Star Wars.  I don't see it listed at the link... I'll try to send you a screen cap at some point this weekend.

TV's Frink said:

Did Yoda ever appear on The Muppet Show??? ;-)

I think he went on record as saying he would have liked to, but his involvement in the Broadway musical "Yoda and the Technicolor Gimer Stick" prevented him from doing so at the time.

Actually, it appears I'm mistaken.  He's not a muppet after all (from muppet.wikia.com):

"A popular misconception is that Yoda is a Muppet, based on the involvement of Oz, the character's existence as a puppet, vocal similarity to Grover, and a false assumption that The Jim Henson Company... built the character... The puppet was originally designed and built by Stuart Freeborn for LucasFilm and Industrial Light & Magic."

SilverWook said:

I think it's been documented that Yoda's original latex skin rotted away years ago.

There was a photo of an ILM storage area in Smithsonian Magazine in the 90's and a half rotted Yoda skin could be seen lying on a work table. Kind of a gruesome sight!

I believe you're correct.  If memory serves, there's a photo in my Lucasfilm Archives book that shows the original muppet, and the latex was in pretty bad shape at the time the photograph was taken.

doubleofive said:

 

I am so disappointed. Don't expect me to ever watch your projects ever again!

MY BURN MARK!!!!

;-)

Personally, I grew up watching a taped-from-TV copy of Star Wars, and (I'm 99.9% certain of this) there was no burn mark in it.  So, to be able to watch a version of SW with no additional "quirks" than those I'm used to seeing would be good news for me.

Harmy said:

Yeah, it's kind of funny that we're having this heated debate about something that covers about 2% of two frames :-)

In the "No" camp's defense, though, it is very visible.  I think, for me, I was looking at this project as the unofficial 'official' release of Star Wars... the pristine version of the film which, while not commercially available, met commercial blu-ray standards.  As such, I didn't expect there to be incidental artifacts left in.  If such a thing were present on a commercial blu-ray, I'd be pretty surprised it made it past quality control, and no way would I assume it was intentionally left in.

This is apparently becoming quite a heated debate.  I stepped outside and saw people picketing in the streets.

I guess the issue really comes down to the reason for restoring Star Wars to its theatrical form in the first place: is it to make it look as good as it was intended to look to audiences in '77, or is it to mimic the theatre-viewing experience as much as possible?  I always felt it was the former, but if it is the latter, then I guess the burn mark (along with any other visual element introduced to the negatives after the film was completed)  would stay.

Harmy said:

The thing is, even though it may have happened by accident, that accident is a part of the history of the film, since this particular damage was most likely on the original negative, so it's not that easy. It's like 99,9% of dirt in Puggo Grande is specific to that print but these burnmarks are something that all the prints had in common.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I definitely will restore them, I'm just trying to explain why I'm even considering it.

If you go down that line of reasoning, isn't it like saying, "Well, Star Wars went from film, to laserdisc, then was ported over to DVD, and along the way a number of visual artifacts (DVNR, jaggies, etc.) were introduced, but hey, all that preserves the history of what this movie went through, so it stays?"

Does Mike Verta have any comment on this particular issue?  What's his sources reveal regarding the mark?

Add another vote for "no burn mark."

I understand where you're coming from, Harmy--trying to get SW as close to theatrical accuracy as possible.  However, I think there's an important distinction to be made between the finished, deliberate product and the incidental state of the product upon viewing.  Things like wobbly subtitles or other composited effects "errors" were due to technical limitations of the time period--people would have signed off on such things and given it a seal of approval, thinking, "Yeah, this is as good as this particular thing is going to get."

Conversely, something like the burn mark is obviously the result of some accident, and not an intentional part of the film.  As such, I for one don't think it should remain in the preservation.  It's the same thing as the notion you were playing around with earlier regarding the artificial addition of such things as dust and hairs to the film.  Although doing so may have given the film a more theatre-like feel, it wouldn't really be preserving the film per se, since you'd be introducing elements that were not intended to be there by those responsible for making the film.

... just my 2 cents.

Edit: I see Cobra Kai was quicker (and more succinct) in making the same argument :)

Music aside, I know the following suggestion would involve video editing, which I know isn't your forte, Frink, but if you could make Jango's head slooooowly slide out of his helmet with kind of a "schlucking" sound and fall to the ground in this scene, I think the comedic effect would be well worth the effort:

I think I might have seen this gag on Robot Chicken or Family Guy (or some such similar show), but I can't find it now.

Edit: maybe add the sad trombone sound effect when the head hits the ground.

^ The sax one is quite good :)  I think a different, badly-played instrument before every Ridiculous Edit would be funny.

Other versions for your consideration:

Bagpipes - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVvRugXkPek

Synthesia - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWbH99Sfrs8

Kazoo - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOIX3eLucY4

Vocals (I think this was a contender for TRM) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3aYKEgcPGg&feature=related

Vocals ("Panda Show Mix") - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ur8ANfjnB58&feature=related

Club mix - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJnEfNly3ls&feature=related

8-bit - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLivP3rj0zY&feature=related

Clarinet - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3TllrtkVXc&feature=related

Sorry, just to clarify: is that burn mark going to be in SW DeEd?

pmc2 said:

Please, could you upload the three covers of SW despecialized version?

 

If you're referring to these, Harmy just posted a link to them recently in the Star Wars Despecialized thread:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Harmys-STAR-WARS-Despecialized-Edition-HD-AVCHD-DVD9-and-NTSC-DVD5-AVAILABLE-see-1st-post/post/561548/#TopicPost561548

Mrebo said:

TV's Frink said:

Hal 9000 said:

How about this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGwwJEE7k48

:P

Someone hasn't watched TRM yet...

I've been suffering in silence. Can't understand how to make JDownloader work :/

I'm going by memory here, so I apologize for any incorrect instructions:

1. Highlight and copy all the download links onto the clipboard.

2. Open JDownloader. Go to the "link grabber" tab.

3. Once there you should see all the links you copied earlier already listed in the window (you may need to click the + sign to see the expanded list). If not, click on the "add URL" button and paste the links in now.

4. Now click on the ">" (play) button. This should automatically bring you to the download window (the first tab).

5. That's it--sit back and wait while JDownloader does its thing.

Oh, what a tangled web of love you're weaving there Frink :)

Love the last couple of clips Frink! My wife asked me what I was watching that was making me laugh so much. (She also wanted to know what that constant squeaking sound was :)

Yet another example of a likely undetectable change, but one which brings this project one step closer to theatrical accuracy.  I love that you're finding and fixing stuff like this Harmy.  Thanks.

i551 said:

Hmm.  I had been referring to the wide shot of the hangar.  In quicktime, it seems to go from this to this, though I've no idea why.  I've just discovered that it doesn't seem to do it in any other player though, so I suppose it's nothing.  My mistake.

Weird, the same thing happened to me upon first viewing (I believe in Quicktime), however I've since played the clip in QT, VLC, and Media Player and it isn't doing it anymore.

The OP reminded me of a scene in an episode of Family Ties:

Steven: Nick, when did you first become interested in art?

Nick: I don't know.

Steven: Could you expand on that?

Nick: IIIIIIII DDDOOOOOOOONNN'T KKNNNNOOOOOOOOOWWWWW.

Steven: I see...

Mallory: Dad, don't interrupt him!

Steven: I'm sorry, Nick.  What were you going to say after 'IIIIIIII DDDOOOOOOOONNN'T KKNNNNOOOOOOOOOWWWWW?'

Nick: IIIIIII  DDDOOOOOOONNN'T REEEEEMMMEEEMMMMBBBBERRRR.

And, finally, non-mom related but funny:

doubleofive said:

 

Akwat Kbrana said:

That's nothing compared to what lies within your mom!

*zing!*

I was hoping for "Your mom lies within each of us."

 

That sounds uncomfortable.

Love the latest clip Frink.  I lol'ed a few times:

-- "Shall I take their coats?"

-- "Do it!"

-- "Perhaps Master Windu?"

-- "No.  $#@& no."

:)