flametitan

SilverWook said:

flametitan said:

SilverWook said:

Making movies is always a strange process, and those involved doesn’t always see that a scene is going to be out of step with the tone/pace of the rest of the film. And George does have a quirky sense of humor. Maybe there were supposed to be civilian contractors aboard? (Which is another can of worms.) Chewie doesn’t even hide his gun.

I want Frink to put that in his next edit. 😃

I want to see Frink Dub over Chewie with that Cockney accent.

Too late. He already dubbed him with REDACTED for ROTR. 😉

Fine…

Cockney Ewoks?

SilverWook said:

Making movies is always a strange process, and those involved doesn’t always see that a scene is going to be out of step with the tone/pace of the rest of the film. And George does have a quirky sense of humor. Maybe there were supposed to be civilian contractors aboard? (Which is another can of worms.) Chewie doesn’t even hide his gun.

I want Frink to put that in his next edit. 😃

I want to see Frink Dub over Chewie with that Cockney accent.

Tyrphanax said:

Yeah, it happens right before they overlook the Falcon (“You came in that thing?!”) (which is why they’re looking worriedly behind them as the scene starts).

They basically hide their guns to sneak past these two officers. Meanwhile the entire station is on alert so it doesn’t make any sense. Best that it’s gone.

I don’t mind the banter in the OT, but this scene seems like it would’ve been a bit too on the nose for humour.

Although it makes me wonder what Star Wars would look like if it were edited ever so slightly differently.

Supposedly a deleted scene. Probably for the best it went away.

suspiciouscoffee said:

On my quest to find a comedic response, I stumbled upon… whatever this is. I’d heard of this before, but never seen the horrors.

I’ve seen it before. I think they put all the jokes they could make into the trailer, and doubt a full series would have been all that good.

For better or worse I doubt Disney would ever let something like that exist again.

I’m sure this is not a new question, but What do Vader and Palps do in their free time?

I sent off my registration information. I can imagine the backlog of accounts, though.

ray_afraid said:

flametitan said:

WHY is there a trench leading straight to it that enables your enemy to remain hidden from most of the blaster fire and possibly even hidden from view of the fighters defending the ship?

I figure the trench makes it even easier to confine and blast anybody trying to attack. It’s also an obstacle that makes getting to the one weakness more challenging.
It could also be used as a utility road used by maintenance that leads to other points for quick fixin’.

I don’t know if that’d work as well as not having a trench. The turrets formerly in the trench are still there, while the even surface would have more guns to aim at people going for the exhaust port.

Wazzles said:

flametitan said:

I know AoTC and ROTS have a hard time restoring the film versions of their theatrical release…

Not ROTS. The only difference between the theatrical and DVD is a cut vs. a wipe. The DVD version was shown in HD so it is available, and the BD has the proper wipe, so a reconstruction would be very simple.

Huh. I thought there were some dialogue changes in RotS like there apparently was in AotC. My mistake.

Is there an in universe (so I’m not talking about emulating Dam Busters) reason for the trenches on the Death Star? I was thinking about it and I realized the trench was a bigger flaw in design than the Exhaust Port. The Exhaust Port was a known factor. Darth Vader knew about it, it was ray shielded, the whole shebang.

But WHY is there a trench leading straight to it that enables your enemy to remain hidden from most of the blaster fire and possibly even hidden from view of the fighters defending the ship?

The only answer I’ve come up with is that the trench is part of a Giant radiator needed to expel heat from the Death Star.

I know AoTC and ROTS have a hard time restoring the film versions of their theatrical release, as there’s never been a Home release of them (they’re all based on the digital versions), and I haven’t heard of anyone acquiring a print to make use of for restoration work.

I think there’s been attempts to restore The Phantom Menace, but I can’t remember the name of the project. Sorry if this wasn’t too helpful, but I figured even a vague answer would be better than nothing.

Another on the private topic conversation. I might not contribute much to these threads, if anything at all, but I love these behind the scenes looks at fan projects.

And while I’m not privy to what happened, there’s very few things this could mean.

Tobar said:

Don’t we have a copy of the original mono mix that disproves that?

I know there’s a VHS rip with the mono mix, but I forget when exactly that was dated.

As for 35mm scans, I don’t know how well we can date them. We can definitely say when one was before the '81 rerelease, but I don’t know if we can definitively say when a 35 mm was printed.

I don’t really see anything that actually going to space adds without spending ridiculous amounts of money on a filming set that’s actually in space (and thereby getting our actors to act in space).

If you just need a backdrop from real space, it’s easy enough to just go through the NASA image archive and find something you like, then mix it in a bit with research on how star-fields and the atmosphere interact if you’re near a planet.

The helmet seems right for the way he’s holding his head. Remember the '77 helmet was much like this one; The only reason you didn’t see something so prominent was because Prowse only kept his head so high for seconds at most.

TV’s Frink said:

What the heck is a tad boy?

Probably an 18 year old male human. Mostly a man, but just a tad bit of a boy still.

ZkinandBonez said:

NeverarGreat said:

I’m confused about that last photo. It’s obviously hyperspace, but it looks like it’s being projected and then filmed. I guess this is to more accurately capture the light effects on the subject, which presumably is behind that plastic barrier. Interesting in any case.

It’s the same effect as shown here.

They seem to have borrowed some tricks from Interstellar, in which they projected the star field, planets, etc. outside the “spaceship” rather than use green-screen.

I remember hearing somebody (was it on one of the DeSpec commentaries?) say they were originally going to do that in Star Wars for when the Falcon was in the tractor beam, but they found it easier to just bluescreen it so that they could make a matte that responds to the characters, rather than the characters responding to the scene.

Interesting how the times changed.

Side me also with the people not interested in a DNR version. The grain is not our enemy.

TV’s Frink said:

I had no idea there is a toy hall of fame.

The swing is a toy?

I didn’t either, until it popped up on /r/dnd with the poster asking us to vote there.

Unsurprisingly, we gave it more traffic than it’d get in probably over a year.

They have a pretty broad definition of toy, there. I think carboard box and bubble wrap, if they weren’t inductees, they were at least nominees.

EDIT: link, for those curious: http://www.toyhalloffame.org/

Toy hall of fame results are in, if anyone cares. Dungeons & Dragons, Little People, and the Swing.

(D&D probably won because reddit learned about this vote)

I think I’d personally stick with the technicolor colours, or the happy compromise colours. Both look great.

Bingowings said:

Sometimes. Favourite movies are like best friends. Why have one?

I can agree with this sentiment.

They’re up there, but that may only be because I’m a philistine who doesn’t watch a lot of movies to begin with.

I do like the Aesthetic of Star Wars, though.

NeverarGreat said:

Are we looking at the same thing? I took a screenshot of one of the videos in question and compared it to the blu-ray:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/189547
It only required a small color adjustment to closely approximate the Blu-ray, and the cropping/warping is identical. The Blu-ray also has more detail, probably because it isn’t compressed for the internet.

It’s the Blu-ray with a small paint job.

The question still remains: Why? Why would they go through the effort of getting the colours ever so slightly different from the Blu-Ray? Would it simply come from the rendering process used?