imperialscum

Anchorhead said:

imperialscum said:

To me it seems somehow hard to consider Zahn's trilogy and discard EBS and ROTJ.

I don't disregard (or discard) the second two films.  I just don't own or watch them.  Yes, Zahn's EU fits with those as well.  However, they don't dwell on them.  I'm perfectly fine with an occasional reference or name check.

I see. So you do like/play any of the EU games? Such as Jedi Knight 2 and Jedi Academy (post-SW) or KOTOR series (pre-SW)?

But doesn't Zahn's trilogy storyline has lots of connections to storylines of ESB and ROTJ? It has been long ago since I read it, but I had the feeling that it is somehow closer to ESB and ROTJ than it is to SW(77). To me it seems somehow hard to consider Zahn's trilogy and discard EBS and ROTJ.

I don't think there were any "original plans". Lucas just came up with the storyline for each individual film. I mean there are some rumours that Lucas had some long term "plans" (like from Kurtz who I lately don't find a reliable source at all) but I think that is all bullshit.

darth_ender said:

imperialscum said:

darth_ender said:

Mr. Scum has a bit of an abrasive personality.

And yes, I'm pretty sure he's unaware that he's talking to a mod.

In my entire history on these boards I haven't said anything offensive (in terms of common sense at least). I admit that I may not use the utmost polite manner but rather more direct one which I don't think classifies as any kind of forum rule breaking.

And why should one increase his usual level of politeness when addressing the mod? That implies hypocrisy. I respect everyone equally.

No offence intended of course.

Yeah, I admit I probably shouldn't have said that.  You really aren't too bad.  Like you said, sometimes you fail to use tact, but that's certainly not a capital crime.  You're a good guy.  Forgive me for saying that.

It is okay. Don't worry about it. :)

Well better a discussion about old stuff than a dead forum I guess.

Anchorhead said:

When I asked if we'd been introduced, I was addressing the fact that you obviously didn't realize I'm a different type of Star Wars fan. I own and watch (every decade or so) only one of the films.   My area of interest is EU.

In answer to your earlier question; I never bothered with the last two films. Not even remotely interested. 

Oh okay, that makes sense now. :)

What EU are you primarily interested in? Books? Video games?

darth_ender said:

Mr. Scum has a bit of an abrasive personality.

And yes, I'm pretty sure he's unaware that he's talking to a mod.

In my entire history on these boards I haven't said anything offensive (in terms of common sense at least). I admit that I may not use the utmost polite manner but rather more direct one which I don't think classifies as any kind of forum rule breaking.

And why should one increase his usual level of politeness when addressing the mod? That implies hypocrisy. I respect everyone equally.

No offence intended of course.

Anchorhead said:

I saw the first one only. 

Do you mean you haven't seen ep2 and ep3 at all or just not in a theatre?

Anchorhead said:

skyjedi2005 said:

This is not the sequel trilogy Lucas would have given us ...

Which is exactly why I'll be seeing it. 

Like you didn't see the prequels...

Well they used the scans from 1997 for both DVD and Blu-Ray release (that is scans with added changes). I guarantee you that they didn't scan and restore it again in 2011. And if you look at the picture quality of Blu-Ray release you can get the idea that the scans were high quality. :)

Baronlando said:

imperialscum said:

Come on, don't be ridiculous. It is not like there is a lot of cloudy days in North Africa at that time either. And the sky can be just "as blue" here as in California.

They actually had a bad luck getting storms while filming (as stated in Empire of Dreams by Watts)

Jesus Christ, take it up with Lucas and everyone who worked on the fucking movie. 

Clam down. I wasn't trying to offend you. I was just saying that North Africa isn't really known for cloudy weather and that (according to Watts) they didn't search for clouds. :)

Baronlando said:

imperialscum said:

Ryan McAvoy said:

Just needs a few touches probably.

I think the shot would gain immensely by just adding a clear blue sky. Maybe a dune sea in the background would help (since Luke's uncle states he lives in a dune sea).

But as I said, I love the SE version which does exactly that.

Except the sky in North Africa was rarely  that clear california blue, they didnt want that, that was one of the whole reasons they went there, Lucas has spoken of the unique color over there, they could have just shot it on the way to Vegas. (Of course this is before the latest color seems to be trying to turn the movie into fuckin STAR WARS TOKYO DRIFT )

Come on, don't be ridiculous. It is not like there is a lot of cloudy days in North Africa at that time either. And the sky can be just "as blue" here as in California.

They actually had a bad luck getting storms while filming (as stated in Empire of Dreams by Watts)

msycamore said:

imperialscum said:

When they applied the changes for the 1997 SE, then they actually reduced the size/resolution to fit Laserdisc.

??

If you digitalise 35mm film stock the average resolution will be higher than the 1080p HD. So the digitalised source material has considerably high resolution. When you want to put the digitalised and altered material to Laserdiscs (or DVD, or even Blur-Ray in some cases) you actually have to reduce the resolution of the source format.

I am not an expert in film stock, but why not at least do it with 70mm?

Wexter said:

imperialscum said:

It just amazes me seeing people say that OOT should be restored. I takes just a little computer knowledge to see that it is already restored. When they digitalised and cleaned the film stock for the purpose of 1997 SE (which in average yields higher resolution than 1080p Blu-Ray), they without doubt first copied that data of hi-res digitalised theatrical version on at least several hard disks before started altering one of the copies. When they applied the changes for the 1997 SE, then they actually reduced the size/resolution to fit Laserdisc.

If you ask me, the theatrical versions are already digitalised and cleaned up somewhere in LucasFilm archives. That is unless Lucas specifically ordered to destroy the source data.

The official story is that the source data has been altered with all of George's new visions, so...

If this is actually true, it would mean the people who made those decisions are unprofessional idiots, but it is not implausible. 

Well that just cannot be true. If they didn't make multiple copies of source data (to have backup in case something goes wrong) that wouldn't mean they were unprofessional, that would mean they were complete idiots. And it is highly unlikely a complete idiot can learn how to do digital editing in the first place.

It just amazes me seeing people say that OOT should be restored. I takes just a little computer knowledge to see that it is already restored. When they digitalised and cleaned the film stock for the purpose of 1997 SE (which in average yields higher resolution than 1080p Blu-Ray), they without doubt first copied that data of hi-res digitalised theatrical version on at least several hard disks before started altering one of the copies. When they applied the changes for the 1997 SE, then they actually reduced the size/resolution to fit Laserdisc.

If you ask me, the theatrical versions are already digitalised and cleaned up somewhere in LucasFilm archives. That is unless Lucas specifically ordered to destroy the source data.

SilverWook said:

Tatooine isn't a nice place to live, and the cinematography, intentionally or not reflects that.

Visually ugly and inhospitable are two different things. If you watch some quality BBC documentary showing beautiful shots of desert you can clearly see and get the feeling that the environment is inhospitable and harsh to life, but at the same time you can still enjoy the nice scenery. And since we are talking about fantasy film here this should be even more so. Unfortunately the original shots fail to provide that.

Yet with scenes of Hoth, Dagobah and Tatooine (in ROTJ) they succeeded in that. So without any shame I can say I am very glad Lucas updated Tatooine shots in ANH.

Ryan McAvoy said:

Just needs a few touches probably.

I think the shot would gain immensely by just adding a clear blue sky. Maybe a dune sea in the background would help (since Luke's uncle states he lives in a dune sea).

But as I said, I love the SE version which does exactly that.

Jaitea said:

Theres a reason why that shot of Ben's hut was filmed at such a low angle:

J

Thanks for these. I didn't know it was so close to the sea.

Well the last photo actually looks far better than the original shot in the film (except for the trash).

Bingowings said:

The newer version is a pretty picture but it doesn't feel realistic.

Well that is the problem I have with most of the original Tatooine shots. They look "ugly realistic" when they could be "beautiful realistic". The particular shot we are talking about is very dull. There is nothing in the scene but the speeder prop. And the skies in the background look absolutely awful (they caught some very ugly tone). That pretty much applies for many of other original shots.

It is just sad because the desert can be visually very beautiful place and yet they somehow filmed the worst of it. I understand they had drastic budget constraints and stormy weather. So yes, I love the visual updates in SE. They make the whole thing more beautiful and magical to me.

Bingowings said:

imperialscum said:

Depends on what you personally consider "cheaper"... One notable example is the new Ben's hut (probably one of my favourite changes in ANH).

Personally I prefer the original shot that made it look like they had a real building and a real vehicle (which the did) which matches the beautifully photographed interior set (which it does) to the new shot which looks like a toy diorama.

We have a very different taste when it comes visual aspects I guess.

Side note: I believe the speeder in original shot was actually inserted through SFX.

Ryan McAvoy said:

^ Link blocked

Yes I know, sorry. I am unable to find an alternative link. It is basically the shot of Luke's speeder approaching Mos Eisley. You can find it somewhere in here: http://www.dvdactive.com/editorial/articles/star-wars-the-changes-part-one.html

Depends on what you personally consider "cheaper". For me, much of the updated Tatooine shots now look much more magical and feel like it is actually "a galaxy far far away" than it did in original shots. One notable example is the new Ben's hut (probably one of my favourite changes in ANH).

And here is one of the original shots. Mind that it is not the speeder and its shadow (ie special effects), but the surrounding itself that makes it look bad to me.

Bingowings said:

This just feels more real (even with the paining)

Than this :

Well these two shots both contain paintings. And to me they both look great.

This may be a bit off-topic, but the augmented ANH hangar from SE (the picture above) looks way better than the original version.

I am not a fan of his lighting in ANH (too bright in my opinion). I like Peter Suschitzky's and Alan Hume's work on ESB and ROTJ better (it is much darker).

Especially throne room lighting in ROTJ is amazing compared to ANH.

Well one of few shots I really like in ANH is this shot of conference room.