lordjedi

User Group: Members
Join date: 8-Jun-2005
Last activity: 9-Apr-2015
Posts: 1,640

Post History

Post: #250026
Topic: "..secret to the future is quantity," Lucas said
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/250026/action/topic#250026
Time: 6-Oct-2006 1:50 PM

Originally posted by: Jumpman
What I don't like about the article, eventhough he's probably going to be right, is the move to VOD and downloadable media. It seems he's very high on that and the industry seems to be wanting that as well, even with birth of HD media. And most of that has to do with controlling the product because of piracy. I can understand that but I just prefer to get the hard media every Tuesday that we're accustom too. I don't want there to be a day were I have to wait 30 minutes to an hour to download a film on to a hard drive....and I haven't even talked about the quality issues with going this route.

As long as the media companies keep getting their hands into it, VOD and downloadable media isn't going to go anywhere. People have been talking about VOD for 10 years now and it's just now starting to show up. It's still very limited right now and usually only available for things like TV shows and a few limited movies that still have to be paid for. Downloadable media has the problem that people don't want to watch a video on their computer and they don't want to wait 2 hours for a movie to download (it's quicker to run to the store or rental place). They want to watch the newest release, now, with little to no restriction. No "watch it within 72 hours", "you can only watch it once", or "you must use media player x in order to view this". This is why Netflix has been so successful. They send you a movie, you watch it when you want and as many times as you want, and then you send it back when you're done. If Netflix is ever able to get into the broadband business and get movies to you over your cable or satellite, it's game over for the media companies. And that's why it won't happen anytime soon.

VOD and downloadable media are a long way off. Everytime a new one comes up that seems promising (downloadable DVDs anyone?) some type of restriction keeps people from wanting to use it (you can't copy them and other things). Trust me, if you have kids, the ability to copy a DVD is a must. Personally, I'd be willing to pay between $3 and $5 for a DVD I can download, burn to a disc, and watch anywhere. I might even be willing to go as high as $10. I most certainly will not pay $20 for downloadable content. It isn't costing the studio any money to package it or ship it to stores, so I see no reason why I should still have to pay top dollar for it. Maybe if it included a coupon for a free copy of the movie from the store, but that's about it. Most of the downloadable content is protected anyway, so you'd be paying $20 for less rights then if you go to the store and buy it there. Sorry, not going to do it.

Post: #249792
Topic: "..secret to the future is quantity," Lucas said
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/249792/action/topic#249792
Time: 5-Oct-2006 2:32 PM

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I'm not saying it would break Lucas to do it, it's just he doesn't want to. The original versions are discarded rough drafts to him at this point, and the only reason he put this out was because everyone seemed to want it so much.

Exactly Gomer. This was a movie that changed cinema. It had an enormous effect on the industry and on a lot of people. Now GL wants to get rid of it because in his mind, it was never really completed. Tell that to everyone that worked on it and to the people whose lives were completely changed by it.

Of course, it took him 20 years to decide it was just a rough draft. Thankfully, not every director treats their original movie like it was just a rough draft (E.T. anyone?).

Post: #249758
Topic: "..secret to the future is quantity," Lucas said
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/249758/action/topic#249758
Time: 5-Oct-2006 1:05 PM

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I know that it's the industry standard, but at the same time, he isn't willing to spend the kind of money it would take to restore one of his weathered prints, so he instead took the best home video master he had on hand to re-create the original movies. He didn't want to re-release the O-OT AT ALL.

Gimme a break. The amount it would cost him to restore one of his prints is nothing compared to the amount of money he'd make on the DVD release. You act like he's barely surviving and that he needs each release just to break even.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-TonicAgain, I think most of the people who really wanted the O-OT on DVD will agree that this is better than not getting it at all.

No, my bootlegs are better than not getting anything at all. I know a lot of people that didn't pick up this release because they figured "Why bother? I've got a bootleg. There's no reason to pick up this release".

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-TonicSure it's not the best it could be, but it's better than any previous home video release of the O-OT, including the laserdisc this master was created for in the first place.

That's not hard to do though. Most of the home video releases were VHS and even the laserdiscs weren't going to look as good as the master.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-TonicAlso, when I was talking about "crappy presentation" I wasn't tring to even get into the quality of any given movie in it's own right, merely the crappy presnetation a film based presentation provides. Unless you see it the first time it was unspooled (and usually only theater employees see the first unspooling) it will have dirt, scratches, and image instability.

Unless you see it in a digital theater. Then, it doesn't matter how many times it's been viewed. A crappy movie is still a crappy movie with a digital presentation. The difference is, it doesn't get any crappier with time

Post: #249754
Topic: your buying the PT all over again in Blue ray !!!!!!!!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/249754/action/topic#249754
Time: 5-Oct-2006 12:56 PM

First, there is at least one person around here that does have a hi-def DVD player (I don't remember if they picked up a Blu-ray or HD-DVD). So right there, your argument falls flat.

Second, damn man, learn some english and grammar. That was painful to read.

Post: #249748
Topic: "..secret to the future is quantity," Lucas said
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/249748/action/topic#249748
Time: 5-Oct-2006 12:38 PM

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
His home video releases have -always- set the industry standard for quality.

Until now.

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-TonicThe only reason he released a non anamorphic bonus feature was because -we- asked him to.

So all of us here can take the credit for soiling his good name. He fought us for a long time on the idea, but then finally relented.

At our request.

Nobody asked for a non anamorphic transfer. We asked for the OOT on DVD. If we knew we had to be that specific about a DVD release in 2006, I'm sure we would've specified. That still doesn't excuse the crappy picture quality. No, this is another case of Lucas just being lazy. It's not 1993 anymore. Technology moves on (Lucas knows this). It's time for Lucas to do the same.

Post: #249745
Topic: "..secret to the future is quantity," Lucas said
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/249745/action/topic#249745
Time: 5-Oct-2006 12:35 PM

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
He has a point, people are getting tired of paying top dollar for crappy presentation and candy and popcorn marked up 300-400% or whatever ridiculous percentage it is now (I haven't bought concessions at a theater in years). Why do that when you can just watch it in better quality on your home theater with reasonably priced snacks, and if you want to smoke, it's up to you. If you want to pause while you hit the can, you can do that.

If that's the case, then can you explain why Jackass 2 made $20 million dollars during it's opening weekend while every other movie did far worse?

This article really has nothing to do with telling studios they shouldn't make big budget movies anymore. Let me break it down for you.

"Since no one would pay to see anything I make that doesn't have the Star Wars label on it, and I'm not making anymore of those, I'm going to get into TV, where I can make shows with a far smaller budget, but are still just as crappy."

That's about what that article amounts to.

The rest of your statement is spot on, but it's not the quality of the movie that keeps people away (not always anyway). People are willing to pay for crap (see Jackass 2 above). The theater experience isn't going away. Lucas just knows that he won't be able to make money with anything other than Star Wars, so he's going to get out. I say good riddance.

Post: #249627
Topic: I've given this a lot of thought, and I've decided this makes no sense. (Qui-Gon and Anakin's ghosts.)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/249627/action/topic#249627
Time: 4-Oct-2006 8:57 PM

Your explanation kind of falls in line with what the comic of ROTS did. In the comic, Yoda tells Obi-Wan that they can learn the trick, but that only a Jedi can learn it. A Sith can never learn it. Upon reading that and then seeing the movie, I was just a little more pissed since there's no way Anakin could have ever learned it. Now I suppose if we take your explanation Gomer, then yeah, OB and Yoda could've taught Anakin at the last minute. Or we could all just accept the real truth:

George screwed up and came up with these other things to explain it. There's nothing complicated or thought provoking about it. It was, quite simply, a screw up.

Post: #249624
Topic: Idea: an X 3 edit...
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/249624/action/topic#249624
Time: 4-Oct-2006 8:43 PM

Originally posted by: Spence101287
how would you make cyclops not die? just never show him going to alkalie lake? perhaps he just leaves the school and never comes back?

but then there's a little bit of a logic gap. if they found jean, somebody would tell cyclops and he would return.

I think someone mentioned doing exactly that in the another thread. I could deal with the small plothole of him not returning once Jean has been found. Everytime I think of X-Men 3, I'm reminded of a comic that shows an ass floating around in the air and shitting on cyclops before he disappears. The comic was hilarious and captures that part of X 3 perfectly.

Post: #249583
Topic: "Star Wars: Bounty Hunter - Beyond The Game" a Galactus & MoveAlong Production
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/249583/action/topic#249583
Time: 4-Oct-2006 5:32 PM

Once I get my copy, I can PiF to some folks in the states as well. I should be able to help seed it on the spleen too.

Post: #247606
Topic: Weird Al's latest video (on topic)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247606/action/topic#247606
Time: 24-Sep-2006 2:51 AM

Originally posted by: none
That "Cherry" line is one of the problems of the vid, if they were cherry, they'd be in the package... Why's he playing the turntables when talking about an MC? and why is the pac-man not yellow? Anyone know what those formulas are? and posting "you suck" to wikipedia is a sign he's no nerd.

I thought they were in the package. Oh well. The pac-man isn't yellow because it's a reference to the original song, so it's done with the same colors. I can't remember exactly what the formulas are. He posted "you suck" to the Wikipedia page of, I believe, his record label for some reason. Check out the Wikipedia entry for the song, it has all the details to answer your questions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_And_Nerdy

Post: #247517
Topic: Weird Al's latest video (on topic)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247517/action/topic#247517
Time: 23-Sep-2006 5:54 PM

Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
That's what I thought he said. But what does that mean?

Cherry is just another term for mint condition. Cherry is usually used to refer to cars that are in excellent condition.

Post: #246965
Topic: Weird Al's latest video (on topic)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246965/action/topic#246965
Time: 21-Sep-2006 6:23 PM

A friend of mine was asking me about this song last night at dinner. How appropriate that I see that video on YouTube now. This song is awesome. I can't wait for the full album!

"I'm just to white and nerdy"

Post: #245925
Topic: "Star Wars: Bounty Hunter - Beyond The Game" a Galactus & MoveAlong Production
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245925/action/topic#245925
Time: 19-Sep-2006 2:27 PM

This looks awesome! I can't wait to see the finished product

Post: #245892
Topic: Waiting for Episode VII during the lean years (1984-1998)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245892/action/topic#245892
Time: 19-Sep-2006 12:49 PM

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
His tinkering with the classic trilogy wasn't just to tie things up to the prequels (all I can think of is Hayden at the end of Jedi) most of the other things he has done (like replacing the monkey woman with the real Emperor) was done to make the classic trilogy match up to -itself-.

How about adding "Weesa free!" to the end of ROTJ so you essentially hear Jar Jar in the OT as well.

Post: #245714
Topic: Do you REALLY think there will be remastered versions of the OOT or whatever? I don't.
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245714/action/topic#245714
Time: 18-Sep-2006 9:01 PM

There's a Wikipedia listing for Back to the Future as well. If you've got the box set with Doc, Marty, and the car on the cover (what I've got), then your set is likely misframed. The first set that was released without the misframing was just the car on the box.

The 800 number was awesome though. They didn't ask me for anything except an address where they could send the envelope to. And I got a live person at 11pm (I think they were in India though).

Post: #245567
Topic: Waiting for Episode VII during the lean years (1984-1998)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245567/action/topic#245567
Time: 18-Sep-2006 5:10 PM

Originally posted by: JediRandy
The OT is looked at through the Rosiest of Rose-Tinted glasses.

I don't think that's true at all. I think the difference is that while the dialog and acting was bad in the OT, it's worlds better than the acting in the PT. I remember an interview or commentary in the past few years where Harrison Ford was filming a scene in ESB and the director said it was great and he said "Was the effect great or was I great?" He was not happy unless the acting was great. Unlike today where Lucas just figured he'd fix everything in post. And that's coming from a man that once said "A special effect without a story is just a special effect".

Post: #245564
Topic: Waiting for Episode VII during the lean years (1984-1998)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245564/action/topic#245564
Time: 18-Sep-2006 5:04 PM

Didn't Siskel and Ebert originally give Star Wars a really bad review? Then, once it was breaking records, they gave ESB a glowing review. And I think today they say Star Wars was a wonderful movie.

Post: #245450
Topic: Lord of the Rings - TTT - The Re-Edited Re-Edit Book Cut! (Released)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245450/action/topic#245450
Time: 18-Sep-2006 12:59 PM

Originally posted by: Lord Phillock
wow... well did any of you like the Ringwraith "Darkening"?...

I did! I just finished watching this over the weekend. I thought the darkening definitely added to the mood of the scene. I noticed that there's just a hint of Gollum's song when they're making the trip to Cirith Ungol. Was that done intentionally? I was expecting it to build and start playing, but then I realized that wouldn't make sense at that point. It seemed to end a little abruptly at the end (Gollum's song), but that might just be because I was expecting the whole song and it transitioned to the regular music. Is the rest of Gollum's flashback going to be in ROTK? I kind of miss seeing the rest of it.

I can't wait to see your version of ROTK!

Post: #245363
Topic: Do you REALLY think there will be remastered versions of the OOT or whatever? I don't.
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245363/action/topic#245363
Time: 18-Sep-2006 2:41 AM

Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape

Originally posted by: Knightmessenger

Back to the Future trilogy (1985, 89, 90) listen to the Q & A audio on film one near the end, it's asked if any visibly wires were erased.

Which is what I love about that set. No attempt to digitally alter anything. Wires are all there. Original miniatures are still used. "To Be Continued..." taken out. Trailer for Part III in there. There is nothing about that set that isn't perfect! And there is nothing about that set that reeks of revisionist history. Those are the movies. The end. And when Universal misframed them, they didn't claim it was a deliberate creative decision. They did a free recall and replacement. It might have been a bit expensive and troublesome for them, but it sure made me respect them a lot more than I respect Lucas and Fox.

WOW! I had no idea about this until just now. I just checked my discs and they're apparently misframed (I have the box set from 2002). I called the number just now and imagine my surprise when someone answered. They took down all my information and are sending me the return envelope. That's awesome!

Post: #245027
Topic: The Official Release VS. EditDroid
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245027/action/topic#245027
Time: 16-Sep-2006 8:51 PM

Has anyone thought about combining Moth3r's transfer with the opening crawl from the EditDroid disk? The opening crawl might need some color correction, but at least then you'd get the best of both worlds. The original crawl on a much better transfer.

Post: #245022
Topic: Limited Edition Packaging Scans
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/245022/action/topic#245022
Time: 16-Sep-2006 8:35 PM

Originally posted by: Raul2106
Obviously Lucasfilm felt that the original trilogy did not warrent ANY enhancement.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! If that were the case, we wouldn't have the 2004 DVDs at all. They were tinkered with and enhanced to meet Lucas' "grand vision", so apparently someone felt they DID warrant an enhancement. He should've taken a page from Spielberg's book and released both the "Special Edition" and the Original Version at the same time in the same box, just like Spielberg did with ET.

Originally posted by: Raul2106 Lucas didn't touch it because he knew that SOME would consider anamorphic enhancement and print clean up as an alteration.

No, Lucas didn't touch it because to him, that movie no longer exists.

Originally posted by: Raul2106I don't blame him because everybody is a critic and wants things their own specific way. At least by releasing it as is he cannot be bashed because he didn't present the original versions. Oh wait a second... THIS IS A STAR WARS FORUM so no matter what he does people are going to bash him to hell for one reason or another.

And this is where you lose all credibility whatsoever.

Post: #244793
Topic: Stormtrooper with 4 eyes ::( or Stormtrooper showing terrible IVTC/telecine artefacts
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244793/action/topic#244793
Time: 15-Sep-2006 9:07 PM

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Finally when he did release the classic trilogy in 2004, he said the reason he changed his mind was because his advisers were telling him that due to rampant DVD piracy and newer formats on the horizon, there might not even be a DVD market by the time he's ready.

So he released the films as they were at the time while work continued on them for the upcoming rumored 2007 set.

Sure they aren't finished, but then neither were the original versions.

Most film makers just leave their films at "well that's how it turned out".

Lucas is one of the very few who put a ton of money into making these movies the best he could make them (in his opinion of course).

Right. Because everyone is going to suddenly get new players and television sets overnight. BR and HD may be the new format, but you can bet your ass that they won't catch on until sometime next year at the earliest. And that's assuming dual format players come out that can play both. Remember what happened with DVD+/-R? It didn't catch on either until manufacturers started making dual format drives. Then, practically overnight, prices dropped on the burners and media became affordable.

Here's something else to think about though. Wasn't Lucas, like Spielberg, originally backing the Divx format? That's the reason he didn't release them on DVD to begin with. He, just like Spielberg, wanted to be able to charge people everytime they watch his movie. It's a continuous revenue stream and he wouldn't even have to keep tinkering with them. Once Divx died, the pay per use format went away.

Most film makers don't just leave it as "well, that's how it turned out". To quote Quentin Tarantino "I didn't release a 'special edition' because I made the film I wanted to the first time. (my emphasis added)

I don't believe for a second that it had anything to do with piracy. He released the movies on VHS (can we say two VCRs?), laserdisc, and VCD. When it finally came time to put them on DVD he wanted nothing to do with it. Oh sure, he says it was because of piracy, but give me a break. The piracy market isn't hurting him or Hollywood nearly as badly as they claim.

When the movie was scanned and cleaned up for the 97 release, anyone, anyone with an ounce of intelligence would be smart enough to make a backup copy of the movie before making any changes.

He can lie to us all he wants. Some of us have had enough and just aren't buying the lie anymore.

Post: #244789
Topic: POLL: So Who Bought Them & Who Didn't? (the 2006 GOUT DVD release)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244789/action/topic#244789
Time: 15-Sep-2006 8:42 PM

I haven't bought them and I won't. If Lucas wants me to buy them, he'll do a proper release. Until then, I'll stick with my bootlegs.

Post: #244712
Topic: First Impressions of the OOT ...
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244712/action/topic#244712
Time: 15-Sep-2006 4:37 PM

Originally posted by: WaragainsttheCouncil
Lucas is dead set on convincing consumers his new visions are the best. He needs to silence his critics ahead of his big 2007 release - and of course, make money in the process. What better way than to let "the average consumer" compare, although unfairly, the two versions? At least, in his mind. Though, I feel this will backfire - as even a low-quality O-OT is superior to the digitized technical DVD disaster.

No, what he needs to do if he really wants to make "his complete vision" is redo the whole damn thing. Throw the PT and the OT in the trash and start over from scratch. Write a complete story that doesn't have to match anything that already exists. He's got the money, tools, and technology. He can go out and hire some new actors and completely redo the whole thing the way he wants to do it now. Then we can see how well it really sells.

Everything for the past 20 years has been riding on the success of the OT. I'd love to see how "his vision" really sells when he doesn't have to worry about writing to an existing story. He could even call it Star Wars if he wants to, he owns all the copyrights. Of course, that would negate his plans to "move on" to other things, but so does a Star Wars TV show, IMO.

Post: #244551
Topic: First Impressions of the OOT ...
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244551/action/topic#244551
Time: 15-Sep-2006 1:08 AM

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
The garbage mattes were there in the theater, but you would have been hard pressed to notice them. On home video they artificially brightened things up a bit, which made those mattes plain as day. Even with the previous to DVD home video releases you could get rid of the garbage mattesd with the right contrast/brightness setting. Most of them are still there on the 2004 SE, but they are just not artificially brightened so they don't show up quite as easily as they did on previous home video releases.

Out of all the home video releases I own, I never noticed garbage mattes until I saw the laserdiscs. I had no idea what they were called at the time, so myself and friends coined the term "blue screen boxes". I figured they were artifacts from the blue screen. Heck, when we first saw them, all we noticed was some weird blue thing following the TIEs and changing shape rapidly. It wasn't until we looked closer that we realized what it was. Of course now I always see them.