So it is 2011 version degraded to DVD format. I don't get the benefit of that. If it was 2004 version upgraded to 1080p I might have even considered buying it.
doubleofive said:
I think the point of brining up the TFN posts is that these are the same people who despise us for not including the PT in our vision of the "saga" doing the exact same thing for movies that don't even exist yet.
This.
Since you are close you could go to Slovenia. You have everything within ~100km.
The tragedy of Anakin Skywalker (as PT portrays it) is that he in fact wasn't a good person before he became Vader, but rather a disgusting, short-tempered, whiny, ungrateful, hypocritical moron. :)
Clearly OT storyline has a completely different focus and structure as PT. The two trilogies aren't one story at all. OT is a story about Luke and PT is back-story to OT. PT is exactly what its name says it is - a prequel trilogy, and therefore it should be watched after OT (or preferably not at all).
TV's Frink said:
You deserve it, and not just for that thread.
I thank you for this recognition.
TV's Frink said:
Massive overreaction ahoy!
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Curious/topic/15972/
It wasn't an overreaction. I have been seeing you post that kind of off-topic posts on numerous threads. It accumulated for a while now so I finally decided to tell you to stop doing it.
Clearly you are not achieving what you were trying to achieve (i.e. look funny/smart). All you do is being disrespectful to people and annoying of course. :D
Anchorhead said:
From the article:
Lucas ...having set out 'guidelines' for the new film.
When Disney gives someone $4 billion for their product, they take over deciding how that product is handled. All this blather about Lucas being very involved, consulting, talking to the director and writer, etc, etc is just damage control for the TFNers, who have already decided their world has come to an end.
Well 2 out of 4 of those billions were shares of Disney itself which made him (I think) second biggest shareholder.
Anyway I don't see who exactly from Disney was actually "taking over" the new Star Wars project (as you suggest). As far as I know Disney just left it to old LucasFilm producers.
I don't think Lucas is actively involved to a degree he was in OT. But I am quite certain Arndt didn't just start writing screenplay without any basis. And it seems most reasonably that they worked on those story treatments that Lucas wrote. I could be wrong but we are just speculating here anyway.
ray_afraid said:
imperialscum said:
ray_afraid said:
I don't think Frink was trying to be rude
Some of us who have been around enough know exactly what he was trying to be...
I've been here almost 5 years. You've been here a few months (under this name).
Even if I joined the forums today I would immediately recognise that...
...he was trying to be funny (he failed of course but that's not the point). In doing so he was indeed very disrespectful/rude to the OP. And I am not talking about "bi" thing. I am talking about the context of the post. The OP politely asked for help and Frink threw in some off-topic nonsense.
(had to post it again since you tried to ignore the part that actually matters)
ray_afraid said:
I don't think Frink was trying to be rude
Some of us who have been around long enough know exactly what he was trying to be... he was trying to funny (he failed of course but that's not the point). In doing so he was indeed very disrespectful/rude to the OP. And I am not talking about "bi" thing. I am talking about the context of the post. The OP politely asked for help and Frink threw in some off-topic nonsense.
TV's Frink said:
My post is not off-topic or disrespectful given the vagueness of the thread title.
Perhaps you should check out the forum ignore feature.
That is no excuse at all. The thread title indicates the OP is curious about something and in his first sentence of his post he clearly explains what that curiously is.
In my entire "internet career" no one has ever managed to get on my ignore list and I don't think you will have the honour to be the first one. :P
TV's Frink said:
Offensive? Lol.
It's not my fault some people don't know how to make a descriptive thread title.
Although the offensiveness of the message itself may be arguable, the context of your post was clearly disrespectful to say the least. Nevertheless, it is your fault posting off-topic nonsense which goes against the forums rules.
TV's Frink said:
Are you Bi-Curious?
Could moderators already do something about this guy? In every other thread he comes up with off-topic (sometimes even offensive) posts of this kind. I am sure this breaks forum rule number 3, considering how frequent these posts are.
Okay back to topic. I am a bit confused with this. It doesn't clearly state on the official website whether this is 2011 versions available on both Blu-ray and DVD, or is it 2004 and 2011 versions both available in 1080p format?
Ryan McAvoy said:
If you don't like B&W you don't like film.
I don't like B&W and yet that doesn't mean I don't like the films shot in B&W. B&W wasn't some kind of artistic feature at the time. It was a limitation which deprived the films of an important dimension. Every sane person should realise that. But you still get some guys shooting in B&W today, thinking it will make their work look more "artistic" (yes that is primarily aimed at Spielberg). Don't get me wrong, I think Schindler's List is exceptionally great film but being shot in B&W only makes it less great (it lost an important dimension because the stupid decision).
And I just get pissed at people who inherently oppose colourisation of B&W films when no one is trying to erase the original versions.
Well I was already certain Lucas wrote the story. I mean Arndt was already writing the screenplay while director wasn't even chosen yet. And I doubt that they would just let Arndt write a screenplay while making up the story as well.
The question is whether Lucas and Arndt were having any conferences or he just received the story treatment and worked on the screenplay with no additional input from Lucas.
Heilemann said:
it's noteworthy just how many of the then abandoned concepts that Lucas went back to and put into the prequels.
Haha, it could be that Lucas essentially made the prequels by combining all the crap and bad ideas that was deemed bad and discarded during OT.
pittrek said:
I know I repeat myself but does anybody know what exactly does digital release mean?
You can buy it on Kindle. It is a book in digital format, so you can read it on computer.
Sometimes I just don't know whether I should take you seriously or not. :)
Bingowings said:
I think the boy read the actors well enough, the actors were just acting weirdly (thanks to the director probably).
As I said, the kid didn't get the scene because it is a little more complex. The kid obviously read the actor's expression but failed to comprehend that the main source of the guy's fear was coming from somewhere else (i.e. Emperor).
The entire purpose of the scene was to warm up the audience for meeting the Emperor (to build up his reputation, to preliminary establish his creepiness etc).
I mean I understand that the kid didn't get the scene... but it seems you didn't get it either it. :)
Bingowings said:
He is clearly sacred of Vader, I remember the last time I saw it in a picture palace and some little kid near me said something along the lines of' "Look he is sacred of Darth Vader...Why?" and his dad (presumably) whispered, "yes Vader is scary even to the other bad guys".
Obviously the kid didn't get the scene. He probably didn't even get what exactly the dialogue was about.
Bingowings said:
imperialscum said:
Bingowings said:
I know Michael Pennington can act but he is comically awful in ROTJ (he looked like he was going to pee his pants all the time Vader was onscreen).
That's not awful, that was exactly what he had to act. The whole purpose of Vader's arrival was to "put him back on schedule" and Vader had a particular reputation by that time. The point of the first scene is to establish Emperor's reputation through Vader's reputation. Pennington did a great job in that scene. He acted a bit unconcerned when only Vader was in the picture, but when Vader mentioned Emperor he did almost pee himself.
The officer class have always been disdainful or cautious around Vader but never comedicaly cowardly.
That is just false. He isn't sacred of Vader. You just didn't read what I wrote? I pointed out that he did not seem to be concerned, intimidated or scared when it was just about Vader, despite the reputation Vader had. On the other hand, he only freaked out when Vader mentioned Emperor.
That is how it was supposed to be and that is how it is in the film. Unless you watched some other film. :)
Laserschwert said:
So, did anybody get that enhance digital version of the book? What exactly is it now?
To my information it is released later than the printed version.
Bingowings said:
I know Michael Pennington can act but he is comically awful in ROTJ (he looked like he was going to pee his pants all the time Vader was onscreen).
That's not awful, that was exactly what he had to act. The whole purpose of Vader's arrival was to "put him back on schedule" and Vader had a particular reputation by that time. The point of the first scene is to establish Emperor's reputation through Vader's reputation. Pennington did a great job in that scene. He acted a bit unconcerned when only Vader was in the picture, but when Vader mentioned Emperor he did almost pee himself.
Bingowings said:
I have never had any problem with the way the prequels look. I would even say they are visually good.
And I have never really understood fans complaining about CGI. CGI isn't inherently bad. It can be a very useful tool.
What makes me dislike the prequels is the way they have written and portrayed the main character - Anakin, along with other badly written dialogue.
