logo Sign In

ricarleite

User Group
Members
Join date
9-Apr-2004
Last activity
21-Aug-2020
Posts
6,592

Post History

Post
#167716
Topic
The Things We Hate And Love Thread .
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/167716/action/topic#167716
Time
MWThomas please DO behave. No one personally acused your of anything, and you should refrain from doing so. If you cannot continue a discussion in a polite, educated way, we'd have to ask you not to proceed.

I'll ignore your last post, which I strongly advise you to edit, and reply to the whole thing:

Yes, it is true that people that shouldn't be at E3 actually go there, but there's no way to avoid influential people to get their wishes. The whole porpouse of E3 is to promote viodegame through the industry and media, and not to entertain the general audience. THERE ARE plenty of gaming conventions open to the public.
Post
#167686
Topic
The Things We Hate And Love Thread .
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/167686/action/topic#167686
Time
Originally posted by: MWThomas
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Excuse me? Have you seen how crowded E3 is even with industry-only admittance? Letting the public in would simply NOT work. The LA convention center doesn't have unlimited space.


It's not a problem for the Tokyo Game Show. That is not a valid excuse.


The E3 is not for general public viewing, even though about 20% of the attendance is made of non-industry related people (invited guests, influential people from other industries, people who got contacts and managed to get in). Allowing anyone to get in would not generate only crowd the whole convention center, but would miss the whole point of the E3, it's supposed to be an industry showcase, not an entertainment spot for videogame fans. I am pretty sure there are other gaming conventions on the USA in which general audience is admitted.
Post
#167133
Topic
Movies you enjoy even though you know they're bad
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/167133/action/topic#167133
Time
Originally posted by: Invader Jenny
These movies either really suck, or are just really lame - yet I still love them. A lot.

Balto
The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie
The PowerPuff Girl Movie
Minority Report
The Big Red One: The Reconstruction (I know that the only reason I love this movie is because Mark Hamill is in it.)
Pearl Harbor
Space Camp (I once watched this movie 5 times in one day)
Twister


I don't consider Twister and Minority Report bad films.
Post
#167132
Topic
HAPPY NEW YEAR !!!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/167132/action/topic#167132
Time
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
12-21-12 (Mayan (Aztec?) prediction of Worldend)


Neither mayan or aztec civilizations used the gregorian calendar, which has been altered and revised well after they were gone. So I don't think so. Unless you mean possible descendents of these people, which would also be kinda difficult and improbable.
Post
#166993
Topic
General Star Wars Caption This
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/166993/action/topic#166993
Time
http://www.jedi-academy.com/film/the_gift.jpg

"This is the weapon of a Jedi knight."

*VOOM*

"Not as clumsy or... Hey wait a minute, did I tell you that you could turn that thing on? Turn it off now, you're gonna waste battery power! Damn little brat can't let you have anything! Give me back that! Now, I WAS going to give your that lightsaber but aparently you don't know how to handle things, I didn't give you permission to turn that thing on, it's dangerous, you could have killed both of us, or poked an eye out! Ooohh... just... forget about the whole thing, take your droids and go back to your home! Now!"
Post
#166662
Topic
EU books: A funny Lucas contradiction
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/166662/action/topic#166662
Time
Hmn, that's right. It wasn't supposed to be raining on Coruscant. Or maybe it should. On huge airplane hangars, when they get closed for a long period of time during hot days, the humidity on the air can cause rains when it gets colder.

What I couldn't understand is why they would leave a heavily burned dying man with no arms or legs OUT ON THE RAIN, while taking him to the operating table. Now I'm no doctor, but I belive you SHOULD sedate and cover a person under that condition, not leave him screaming in pain under the rain, right?
Post
#166661
Topic
Questions about AOTC
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/166661/action/topic#166661
Time
I kind of had two theories: that Syfo-Dyas was an infiltrated sith on the Jedi order, and when he was no longer necessary, Palpatine got rid of him, OR: Dooku was in Kamino saying he was Syfo-Dyas, and then killed Syfo-Dyas some time later, or maybe he was killed by Palpatine by surprise... Why GL didn't make this point clearer, God only knows. If you ask GL about it, he'll probably say "Syfo who?"
Post
#166660
Topic
Modified from its original version
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/166660/action/topic#166660
Time
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Yeah, ric, I read that little tidbit about a month ago, but it does remind me of my first Star Wars viewing experience, which made me more than a little confused. I was nine when I got the Faces set, and I didn't know the difference between widescreen and fullscreen, what have you. So I popped the tape in, and I watched that cool advertisement that I watch every time I watch the movies ending with telling us that it's the original version... one last time. And then, after the interview, it goes to the, "The following film has been modified from its original version..." and I was really quite confused by that.


That's because of the pan-scan. So, for what I understand, if you change the screen ratio or if you colorize a film, you gotta show up a disclaimer saying so. But the SEs are different movies, so they wouldn't show this. Pretty much like the 1980 version of Close Encounters didn't. I do belive that the altered cut of "Touch of Evil" (closer to Orson Welles original plans) did have a disclaimer, but that was a decision of the distributor, not really necessary.

OK, so it's settled then.
Post
#166368
Topic
Modified from its original version
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/166368/action/topic#166368
Time
Originally posted by: Marvolo
So that is why Fullscreen movies say that "this film has been modified from its original formate to fit your screen."


Exactly, that's what I thought. Perhaps the SEs are considered to be different movies. Or maybe he dosen't apply to those rules, if he dosen't have credits on the begining of his films (which is not required anymore anyway), he also won't have any disclaimers at all - which is probably the most logical explanation.

So, let's think for a moment here. Had not the Director's Guild complained with GL about the lack of credits on the begining of Star Wars, he would have not quit the guild. So we would have a ROTJ directed by Spielberg, Gary Oldman as Grievious... And quite possibly a guild complaining about Lucas changes and demanding a disclaimer on the film, which GL would probably not accept (as those are HIS movies), and a legal battle with begin. This would get media attention and people's sympathie for the O-OT pretty much the same way it happened with the New Coke. So, logically, we would have the O-OT released, if it wasn't for some damn little credits!
Post
#166323
Topic
Modified from its original version
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/166323/action/topic#166323
Time
Now, this might have been discussed before, but it's worth mentioning. I was watching Citizen Kane today, great film, and decided to take a look at the IMDB trivia for this film. Now, one piece of trivia caught my attention:


Ted Turner announced that this film was going to be colorized. However, there was such a public outcry that the work was never done. Turner later claimed that the announcement was only tongue-in-cheek. Nonetheless, the controversy over the potential alteration of this film was one of the catalysts that eventually led to the movie industry requirement that all future video and TV releases of films that have been altered in any way - including the standard conversion from widescreen to "pan and scan" - must carry a disclaimer indicating the film has been "modified from its original version."


Now, I don't remember seeing any notice anywhere on the 1997 films or the 2004 DVDs, be it at the film itself, the credits, or at the package or publicity. Now, this could be pretty much because GL is working by himlsef and did quit the Directors Guild and probably dosen't need to follow these requirements, but still...