Humby said:
Clive Revill was the original emperor in ESB (along with prosthetics and some superimposed monkey features).
Clive Revill provided the voice but it was makeup artist Rick Baker's then wife Elaine Baker who portrayed him with these prosthetics:
I wonder why the first set of figures I posted pictures of are recommended from ages 4 and up and the second set are from 18 and up... ;)
SilverWook said:
Corpsey finally got a action figure this year. What's next? Extra crispy Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru with battle damaged homestead playset?
AntcuFaalb said:
You_Too said:
AntcuFaalb said:
IIRC, this shot is absurdly dirty in GOUT.
It's so bad that I chose to use it for teaching myself PFClean.
The second wide shot of Luke with the saber is. It just has to be from a different print.
I agree. I remember reading that LFL replaced some of the more-F'ed-up DC shots with ones new(er) transfers for the 1995 THX release. Maybe this shot is one of them?
It's not foreign dirt on the print in this case, what you're seeing in this shot is dirt built into the elements of the original optical effects work. Black splotches everywhere... it's present in other composites as well but not as extreme as in this shot. The landspeeder pass by shot in Mos Eisley is another sequence that contains much built in dirt.
Thanks for the info, TServo! Hadn't noticed that the transition from '81 crawl to '77 flyover was a dissolve as well. There is panning in it alright, see the wipe to the Jawa canyon for one example but just like you said it's not as frequent as in other pan & scan transfers.
Home Video:
'82 - '92: No "burn" marks, cloudy x-wing take off composite
'92 - '95: "Burn" marks, cloudless x-wing take off composite
However all theatrical sources that has surfaced so far, does have the "burn" marks, cloudless composite or not.
I think it's quite sloppy that they didn't rectify this issue after the first batch of prints went out...
Asteroid-Man said:
It was such a shame. Anyone know why Fox place such restrictions on ROTJ? I know some of it was to make it more kid-friendly, but why cut down on budget when the film was going to gross millions more then the proposed budget?
Fox have nothing to do with it as it was financed by Lucasfilm. I think the cheapness of the film is mostly down to the getting it over with attitude that permeates most of the film, the heart and soul isn't there to 100% any longer. It recycles footage from both Star Wars and ESB, sometimes even dialogue when they couldn't bother to come up with something new.
none said:
Is there any sense of quality loss in the ITV end credit dissolve? Would this have been something LFL would supply, or to fit timing, ITV would have snipped the film and created their own dissolve?
Seems to be on par with the generation loss seen in the original, hard to see with the already bad source really. I assume this have to be the doings of the TV-station but it is the weird way they choose to do it. Attach the '81 crawl in the middle of the opening scene and create a dissolve to the revised credits instead of making the edit point on the last group shot.
none said:
I'm assuming ITV would have done their own conversion, figuring out which shots to pan/scan and which to squeeze. Are there many squeezed shots besides the credits?
Other than the added ANH-crawl and end credits there's no other squeezed footage.
If you compare with the original where the credit card appears in frame, it isn't centered because the way they choose to frame the scene isn't centered, which means no theatrical prints had this dissolve variation.
BmB said:
But it does, what I wrote and what you wrote is exactly equivalent, only in so many words.
Care to elaborate how your; "if you kill Vader then you become Vader" is exactly equivalent to how I described the scene?
Face your fear instead of trying to fight it was the lesson yes but I cannot see that the mere act of defeating Vader in battle is necessarily the path to the dark side as you suggest. It was a trial where he had to learn to control his fear.
BmB said:
I wish people would stop acting as if they disagree when really they don't.
Sorry, but I personally don't think that sequence equals exactly what you described, from a certain point of view maybe. I find that there's alot more going on in that sequence than what you choose to describe, especially in the context it was made.
AntcuFaalb said:
Anyway, do you have any idea why these changes are present? Also, are they changes? Errors? Recompositing?
Any recompositing are changes done to the film. The composite is part of the effect or basically you can say the composite is the effect. Whenever they recomposite, the timings and/or positions of elements become slightly different compared to the original compositing. Probably because they didn't even try to recreate them down to every little detail, the differences in timings and positions are mostly visible when comparing against the original compositing anyway, so I guess that's not on their priority list, sometimes they probably wanted it slightly different as well. Their primary reason for recomping is mostly to get rid of generation loss the optical compositing cause, built in dirt and matte lines. And back in the 90's when they first did it, it was also due to the many faded opticals that was on the unstable CRI-stock (Color Reversal Internegative).
The problem this cause is that many of these original effects were specifically done to look their best with this generation loss in mind. Filmmakers even took the generational loss that occurs in the steps from negative to print into account when creating sets and props etc. Seen on new hi-res transfers made straight from the negative, it tends to look fake in some instances.
Ha ha thanks. Online translators, but sometimes it just doesn't work very well for me. :)
AntcuFaalb said:
I always thought it was about Luke discovering that Vader is his father.
I like BmB's interpretation.
I guess you can read into it that it's also a premonition of that as well but ultimately it's a test in Yodas training which Luke fails. The scene is simple but yet brilliantly done in showing us what dangers lies ahead if Luke isn't careful.
Luke: "What's in there?"
Yoda: "Only what you take with you."
He fails the test because he brings his own fear with him, and Vader symbolizes his fears. It shows us Luke isn't ready to face Vader at this stage, when he sees himself in Vader's mask it tells us what he might become=turn to the dark side. He is also the one who first drew his sword, he takes his weapons with him. It's foreshadowing, he is basically his own enemy. Fear but I guess anger, revenge and impatience can also be atributed to his shortcomings.
"Yes, to Obi-Wan you listen, remember your failure at the cave." Yoda tells Luke when he decides to rush off to save his friends.
The scene is kinda pointless to describe, when it's a nightmarish metaphorical sequence we all understand but it sounds ridiculous when you try to put it into words, especially with my broken english.
BmB said:
But that scene in ESB is just a simplistic, if you kill Vader then you become Vader.
If that is what you think that little scene was about I suggest you rewatch it.
The Lowry Digital transfers come close.
BmB said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
and the emperor's plan to turn Luke makes little sense (particularly since he is telling Luke his plan).
I think it makes sense. The point isn't to make Luke join him willingly, the point is to make him really angry and desperate so that he will kill Vader. And then he will be on the dark side whether he wants to or not.
Yes, I guess it makes sense as there's no temptation and no seduction, the force seems to operate on a light switch. Just get him angry and he has joined the dark side. I expected more than this simplification of the force after ESB. To me, even the little foreshadowing scene in the cave sequence in ESB had more depth than all these throne room scenes together.
This had all worked much, much better if we had actually seen any traces of conflict within Luke, but as it stands he enters the picture as the white knight already and is dead set against killing Vader, he only senses good within his father, instead Vader/Anakin is the one that is conflicted. I did enjoy these scenes but I do think they seem much better to some than they actually are because everything else we are shown is quite mediocre. The space battle is pretty, I give you that.
Jaitea said:
SilverWook said:
Tyrphanax said:
Indeed, but there is a plethora of EU stuff dealing with them chasing Boba around the galaxy.
The Marvel comic extended the pursuit for obvious reasons, but they did manage a flashback story or two with Han.
Hmm, I faintly remember all that....but really that was them just selling comics for the 3 year gap....dunno, I just fill in the gaps myself
J
Agree, I'm sure you can explain every doubt in the storytelling by pointing towards EU material, but the fact that we even question these things in the first place is a big flaw in the filmmaking IMO. ROTJ doesn't sit well with many as a follow up to ESB for a reason, I could live with these sort of flaws if everything else in the movie was well done, making Leia Luke's sister has to be the biggest joke of the script but there's a drop in quality in every stage of the production from; script, directing, acting, editing, cinematography and effects that just reeks of getting it over with. I recall a continuity error with Artoo in the ewok village when Luke is using the force in order to set free our heroes, where Artoo goes from tied up to untied to tied up again, nothing really unusual but in a big film like this you expect more attention to detail, especially when the scene deals with our heroes being tied up.
It's a very tired film, Han Solo turned into a clown, his constant winking at the camera to make sure you're aware that it's only a movie and this is just for fun and not to be taken seriously. The stormtroopers running around yelling freeze, they would be equally intimidating with water pistols in their hands. The previous two films never took themselves too seriously, but the up front jokiness in what are meant to be the epic last struggle for the rebellion have scenes like this in it:
IIRC a few moments later you have him shrugging at the camera and basically say sorry to the Imperials when the ewoks turns up. It's campyness with a fun Tarzan yell thrown in. There's no real threat involved, only guys who pretends playing war in the woods. If this is all made in an attempt to counterbalance the tone in those scenes in the throne room I don't know but it doesn't work for me, Star Wars and ESB knew when it should be serious and not so serious.
Jaitea said:
ESB was 1980.....ROJ was '83.....um....3years ;)
No, I think it makes sense that Luke returned to Yoda between ESB & ROJ....the way he asks Yoda, "Is Darth Vader my father?" sounds to me like he had asked Yoda before, but now was pressurising him on the subject now that Yoda was on his death bed
Luke says to Artoo when heading towards Dagobah "I have a promise to keep to an old friend". No, this is clearly meant to be his first visit since he left in ESB. They might have spoken over the phone in the last few months though. ;)
SilverWook said:
Has there ever been an official answer to how much time passes between ESB and Jedi?
Don't know but I think it's here more films would have helped to better convey what his encounter with Vader actually did to him psychologically, I get that he wasn't mentally prepared to face Vader in ESB, but the fact that he enters ROTJ as the white knight already is what really makes it hard to buy for me. Luke isn't as conflicted about his father as he ought to be.
Yes, I agree that it's not a real contradiction, and you can rationalize that his confrontation with Vader in ESB is what now have ironically made him ready for the task, that it is entirely an emotional thing but it feels very cheap and doesn't ring true for me, especially with Yoda's convenient death and Leia being the other. Both Ben and Yoda made a pretty big deal out of him leaving before finishing his training in the last film, (even if it only was to raise the stakes for the audience) he only survived out of sheer luck. But now you can face him again, and only then you become a Jedi. A feeling that more time had passed would certainly helped.
Ben: "That boy is our last hope."
Yoda: "No, there is another." - which turns out to be the friend Luke rushing off to save, the same person Yoda earlier suggests Luke should sacrifice for the greater good.
Luke: "And sacrifice Han and Leia."
Yoda: "If you honor what they fight for, yes."
Davnes007 said:
Bingowings said:
...
Luke returns to complete his training (we are lead to believe this is the first time he has seen Yoda since rushing off to 'save' his friends, therefore he has had days of training not years).
...
I was under the impression that Luke's training (and Han/Leia/3P0/Chewie's journey in the MF) had been several months long.
"Bespin...it's pretty far, but I think we can make it"
-Han Solo, TESB
I think what Bingowings is getting at, is that the major plot of ROTJ is that Luke needs to confront Vader in order to become a Jedi, that's what both Yoda and Ben tells him now. But in ESB they both warned him and insisted that he shouldn't rush off to face Vader because his training wasn't complete. When he return to Dagobah in ROTJ his training is suddenly complete because the script says so. "All other planned films are in the trash can, wrap it up guys!"
ESB - Don't rush off to face Vader, you need to finish your training first, he choose to face vader...
ROTJ - Luke: "I have returned to complete my training." Yoda: "Your training is complete, you need to face Vader."
Easterhay said:
Well, I really enjoy the film and have never had any big issues with it at all. I don't believe I'm lying to myself in that; it's a shame that you don't seem to be able to simply accept it and instead seem to feel the need to grandstand. It's only a difference of opinion; I'm not hurting anyone by liking the movie.
Yeah, that was a bit much of me to say really, I cannot dictate what you feel about it, sorry about that. Jedi simply never worked for me and I was still a naive kid back then and it was never about the usual complaints of ewoks being in it either. But for every year that went by the problems I had with it had mushroomed until I found out that I am better of ending on a good note rather than a sour note whenever I get the urge to watch the SW-films, that's why I don't find any problem to stop watching with ESB.
AntcuFaalb said:
I'm something else entirely. I know and acknowledge that ROTJ is objectively worse than SW and TESB, but it's still my favorite regardless.
I agree with all of your points and I therefore know that my favorite of the three is the worst of the three, but still... nostalgia is a drug... and I love me some Yub Nub. :-)
Lapti Nek!
Yeah, yet another combination. I think we all can relate to that, some films we have a really strong nostalgic attachment to and we simply like them because of that. And hate is too strong of a word for it, maybe back in those days I hated it somewhat because it disappointed me so much, SW meant so much to me back then. But this is a 30 year old goddamn movie, if I hadn't gotten over it by now I would be a really pathetic guy. I actually rewatched it not that long ago when doing some sub work and I found some aspects of it enjoyable. Maybe I'm beginning to soften up to it. ;)
Easterhay said:
Basically reading posts from people like you.
Oh, how sweet. I didn't know film preservation was seen as something controversial outside this forum. If you tell the others that this preservation thing isn't so dangerous it might become something big.
Easterhay said:
But the audience did get a sequel to TESB. The tone was different, yes, but no more or less than the change in tone from ANH to TESB.
Yes, it was a sequel in the technical sense but IMO and by many others who had invested their time in the gripping tour de force of ESB, it was only a mediocre wrap up much like Bingowings described it, an obligation. The drop in quality is epic, if you don't see it I think you're just lying to yourself and I believe many do because it's technically ESB part 2 of 2. If you weren't happy about how ESB turned out most people just settled with the first film and were fine with it, ESB is open ended, hence a more complex situation if you liked it, where most people choose to accept ROTJ just because of the fact that it ends the story no matter how bad that ending may be.
And there is of course those who genuinely love it and think it's a good film or just don't look at the situation as melodramatic as I describe it and can just enjoy the film from time to time for what it is even though they hold it below the others. I'm sorry if I am talking bad about your darling, it's only my opinion and the way I see it.
It's all about the execution, I don't think anyone expected the third one would be as compelling and dark as ESB but at least that it would feel like a natural conclusion to the bold narrative we were presented with in the previous film, all interesting plotting in ESB was thrown out the window just to get it over with.
Easterhay said:
ROTJ has a job to do, which is to tie up the loose ends and bring closure to the story.
That doesn't necessarily mean you cannot do it in a good and compelling way. The job it has to do is also to entertain us along the way otherwise the plotting just becomes a cheap trick.
Easterhay said:
It also serves to remind us that Star Wars is kids' fare.
Why does it have to remind us of that, can it not just be a sincere kids movie and tell us a good story that appeal to adults at the same time? just like the previous two films did. A good story is a good story, you never grow to old to appreciate good storytelling even if the subject is fantasy. Does a "kids movie" automatically mean no quality control needed in your world.
And if you need to remind the audience that this is kids' fare doesn't that raise an alarm that something went slightly wrong in the previous picture? (which I btw still believe to be a kids film) "What's the kind of film we are doing here? right we need to remind them this isn't a continuation of ESB..." "insert a burp joke or some slapstick humor."
Easterhay said:
That job done, we can now go back to having fun and if one word can sum up ROTJ then "fun" would be it.
Did you never have fun when watching SW or ESB?
I guess the big surprise is not that the second sequel was an average movie (how often does a sequel match the quality of the previous ones) but more that ESB was so f***ing good, perhaps that's the whole problem.
It would be fantastic if you are willing to share your recording with the community here, questionable quality or not. If you aren't able to upload it yourself, I am also willing to help out, domestic mail would be a lot easier and faster after all. Do you remember exactly what year it was recorded? And are you perhaps able to post a screenshot or two from it, the frame in this post for example: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/1983-UK-TVS-Star-Wars-premiere-anybody-still-have-a-recording/post/607849/#TopicPost607849
Thanks!
Easterhay said:
Basically, I was very dimissive of the movement to get the original films released in their original format - which makes my registering on this site pretty stupid, really.
Can you tell me where the hell such dismissiveness for film preservation came from in the first place?! A view like that is so out there and so completely foreign to me that I feel that I need to ask.