Mielr said:
"You know you just look like a stupid bitch for disabling comments on your Han Shot First video. How about you grow up you little faggot and learn how to handle words like a man. You had no legit reason to ban people from commenting on your video, you were just being an annoying bitch. Grow up kid."
Mielr - just to clarify, you're female right?
http://www.badassdigest.com/2011/03/30/cinemacon-2011-james-cameron-george-lucas-and-jeffrey-katzenberg-discuss-the-future-of-movies
CinemaCon 2011: James Cameron, George Lucas, and Jeffrey Katzenberg Discuss the Future of MoviesWow, my fingers have never typed as fast as they did to capture the notes for this panel. But how could they stop when it was James Cameron, George Lucas, and Jeffrey Katzenberg discussing the past, present and future of the movies? Each one a heavyweight in the movie industry’s technological evolution: Cameron, who pioneered modern 3D filmmaking with Avatar; Lucas, who pushed exhibitors to raise their audio/visual standards with THX; and Katzenberg, the man who ushered in the 3D era of the animation.
The three were on stage at CinemaCon today as part of the Digital Filmmakers Forum and spoke in detail about what to expect in the next five years. Also, Lucas dropped a small hint about Episode VII with a little cajoling by Katzenberg. I’ll get out of the way of these guys and let you geek out for yourself:
The Importance of Digital Technology
George Lucas: All of art is technology, whether it’s learning to draw on a wall with charcoal or using the printing press.
Take for instance in graphic arts, the move from fresco painting, where you’re inside a building with a giant crew and need to work quickly before the paint dries. Each person has their specialty, one guy is responsible for only making blue paint who learned it from his father and his father before that. You have to organize them, which makes it complicated when you’re dealing with creativity.
Then oil paints came along, freeing the artist. He could go outside by himself and decide to paint the sun. And if he didn’t like it, he could change it. This freed artists creatively and this is what digital does.
James Cameron: Digital technology gives you the ability to create worlds. We’re at a point where if we can imagine it then we can create it using the photo-realistic CG tools that are available now.
Then there’s the digital exhibition side which maintains that quality. Titanic played so long that our film prints fell apart, we only left theatres because of that. We only did a new round of 100 prints as the older film prints began to literally fall out of the projector. There’s a limit to how long a film print can be played and I know what it is, it’s 16 weeks. A good problem to have.
A major catalyst in making digital exhibition more ubiquitous was 3D. It’s what drove and is currently driving the digital rollout. But for the next two Avatar movies I want to display a higher framerate, 48 or 60 frames per second. Don’t think “oh, no” we have to spend more in upgrades since it’s a small cost once you’re in the digital realm. The expensive part is already done. Plu the faster framerate shows you a different movie, it takes the glass out of the window and puts you in reality.
We have to constantly fight against other distribution methods like premium VOD and streaming and to do this we have to be great showmen. We need to have great sound and a great image.
Jeffrey Katzenberg: Digital evolution in animation has actually been a revolution. From when John Lasseter delivered that first full-length CG animated movie in 1994 (Toy Story) to where we are 16 years later, digital tools have more then transformed the experience, it transformed the art of how it’s made.
We’re constantly trying to push the technology. Currently, we have 250 engineers working purely in R&D to make sure our animators have the best tools, so that each time you watch our movie it’s a new “wowie!” But we’re just building knowledge, we’re still so early in the process.
Lucas: Where we are in the stage of digital is like being in 1900 during the chemical research phase of film. We’re just touching the surface. And once you go digital, spending the money to get in the game, everything after that is infinitely cheaper.
You can go millions of miles with very little bit of gas, you can modify and move inexpensively.
Katzenberg: When I saw Polar Express in 2004, that was the first time I ever had an experience like that in a theatre. It exhilarated me like no movie has done before. It pulled me in emotionally and physically. I came out of the theatre thinking we need to do this right now.
The Next Five Years
Lucas: The big transformation has happened which was sound. That type of change won’t come for another 30, 40, 50 years. In digital, the things we are doing are just little incremental tweaks that make it better. The “real event” has already happened.
Like many theatregoers, I love the movie theatre. I make my movies for the movie theatre, I don’t mind other platforms, but you have to see it in the movie theatre to experience it how I want you to experience it. Theatres represent a social art that you can’t get that on an iPhone or on a computer. People go to a huge venue to share that experience together. They get to dress up, show off to other people, laugh, cry together. Movie theatres will never ever go away.
Katzenberg: In animation the next level is the next level of computing: scalable multi-core processing. What it means is that the power or the microchip is about to take a quantum leap and Moore’s Law goes out the window. Our artists can create and see their work in real-time. Right now, they get a couple seconds of animation rendered at low resolution and it gives them an idea of what it’s going to look like. Then 8 or 12 hours later after going through a render farm they get to see it finalized. They make little tweaks and go through the whole process again.
In this next generation they will see their work as they’re making it. Before it’s as if they were painting blind, but are now able to see what they’re painting. The process will change the quality of what we’re able to do.
Avatar set the high bar for a whole new level of imagination, thats about to happen to us in animation.
3D Filmmaking
Cameron: I can spend two hours busting myths. Like the myth that you have to shoot differently. The answer is yes and no.
I didn’t shoot differently when I made Avatar. I knew it would be seen in 3D and 2D, plus 3D at home was still a ways away. If you wanted to, you can shoot differently to absolutely optimize the experience and once we have 3D ubiquity then I think we can go that direction, but the point is you don’t have to. An over-the-shoulder shot is still an over-the-should shot. A close-up is still a close-up.
Then the myth of not being able to cut as quickly in a 3D movie. Last time I checked Avatar was an action movie and there’s a lot of quick cutting. Is there a tiny bit of knowledge required? Yes, but that’s what the Cinematographer and Editors are for.
Make sure you hire a team that understands stereo, but that should all be transparent. Still make the movie as you would make it with the 3D team as yes people. I didn’t change the way I shot. I had to comfort myself that I wouldn’t change and the movie wouldn’t suffer, it would be value added. Once 3D takes away from your normal process then you should rethink shooting in 3D.
Lucas: Last time I was here I was pushing digital, I wasn’t thinking about 3D. But Zemeckis and Cameron were big 3D guys and we talked about ShoWest. I thought it would be a great way to push digital and 3D since 3D needs that.
So I converted part of Star Wars into digital 3D. What I found is that it really does create a 3D space. We could never get Yoda to look right in that digital space in 2D. Once you saw him 3D it became real. The blue cats [in Avatar] are real.
In an over-the-shoulder shot you believe theres another side to it. When we converted Star Wars, it wasn’t a 3D movie, it was a movie in 3D. It puts you behind the proscenium.
Digital is like the invention of sound, 3D is like the invention of color. Sound changed everything in movies while color made it better. Just like
when you see a 2D movie you’ll feel like you’re watching a black-and-white film. Ultimately everything will completely be in 3D.3D Conversion Process for Titanic and Star Wars
Lucas: I’ve already gotten a lot of flack for changing the movie, but I’m interested in the concept of 3D that goes behind the proscenium. I’d love to see Jurassic Park in 3D. Who wouldn’t?
With the conversion tests we’ve done it hasn’t changed anything. But 3D is not a technical problem it’s a creative problem. We need to have people that are making informed decisions. It’s an artform and the shots are only as good as the people doing the shot. We’ve done the best conversion we could do since we began eight years ago. The crew knows every single shot so we have a certain advantage.
Cameron: I’m going to slam 3D conversion right now. You can’t convert in six weeks, that’s not 3D, it’s 2.2D. It’s false stereo. Because when it was being converted it was people looking at a screen, there’s no data stream captured when the shot was done to tell you the true spatial relationship. A guy at workstation can say this guy is big and this guy is little so I’ll put him in the background.
There’s no killer app that can convert something to 3D. It’s still about workstations and working for long periouds of time, hopefully with the filmmaker right there.
I can remember the Titanic set so I have insight about the space. We have scanned images of the performers from back then when it was used for face replacement FX. And since we have those scans of them, we can create continuous depth. But it can’t be done quickly.
It’s the bad 3D conversion which is eroding the artform. You can add all the bells and whistles you want, but you can’t add conversion to the post-production process. Unless if you have eight months which isn’t as cheap as just shooting natively in 3D.
Katzenberg: I don’t think its a question of tools, it’s the talent in control of the tools. 3D done to date that’s lowered the high bar has not had artists on the tools. It’s disappointing and devalues an amazing opportunity for all of us, which is why I’ve been too crticial perhaps. This is just the beginning and anybody that tries to cash in with the quick score will ruin it for the rest of us. It’s a travesty for us to take this amazing opportunity and offer something so important by taking the low road.
Lucas: The audience is listenting, to quote the famous line. Films that have been converted badly don’t go unnoticed.
Katzenberg: Will Episode VII be shot in 3D?
Lucas: Yes. By then it will be done as a hologram.
Final Thoughts on the Future of Cinema
Katzenberg: Above and beyond what you heard here, it’s the quality of the experience. The single greatest opportunity for exhibition is to acually bring together the ability to see a movie and eat a meal. It’s the next blockbuster thing that cannot be replicated in the home.
As George said, people want to go out and have a social experience. Here’s a way to keep theatres around forever.
Cameron: George and Jeff have been very eloquent about the social experience. There’s a sacredness to the theatre, that as a fillmmaker drove me to 3D. Once I saw digital 3D about 10-years ago, I thought: “that’s reality.” I’ve never shot on film again.
It was a 10-year journey of working on it, and the driver of that was the theatrical experience. We’ve taken hits from VHS and TV and we’ve rebounded, but we’ve rebounded with more confidence that we can put on a better show. Avatar is the highest-grossing movie of all-time, but it’s also one of the most pirated films in history. Then, why did it still make so much money?
Because of a cult-like need to watch it in theatre. If you didn’t, then you weren’t part of the conversation. It was the peer-to-peer social acceptance and ostracization that made it a huge success. Ticket sales for the 3D version of Avatar was about 50% of all ticket sales and by the end at was 80%. There was a need to have the 3D experience.
Lucas: Look, I’m bringing out Star Wars for the third time. Newsweek asked: “does he have no shame?”
Well we’re into the third generation that are under 12 who haven’t seen Star Wars. And I’m betting that people who have seen it many times will still join this new generation to see it again if it’s in a social experience.
Katzenberg: In 2005, when, along with Robert Zemeckis, we presented 3D to you guys, there weren’t even a 100 movie theatres in the world with 3D. In 2007 there were 707. By the end of this year there will be 35,000 theatres with 3D capabilities and we owe you a lot of thanks in your support and belief. We made it with a hope you would get there.
So for us and for filmmakers and for Hollywood, all we can say is “thank you.” Thank you in believing in us and belieivng in 3D.
Wait the DVD9 is now available - how did I miss that?
Harmy, a PM would be appreciated (or you know the drill) ;)
Is Marcia Lucas' name still Marcia Lucas?
Well I had to differentiate it from the perfume. Because the "Eau de Cologne" Wars would just be silly.
http://www.cracked.com/article_19043_6-classic-series-you-didnt-know-were-made-up-fly.html
Obviously not everyone believes Lucas' revisionism. Small Zombie/Kaminski reference included.
I never heard that line right as a kid. I didn't know what a "clone" was at that age. I thought it was the "Cologne" wars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cologne
Semi-update?
http://starwarsblog.starwars.com/index.php/2011/01/11/another-1978-father-spoiler-discovered/
Another 1978 “Father” Spoiler Discovered January 11, 2011
As an addendum to our original post about the “Vader is Luke’s father” spoiler appearing in the April 1978 issue of Little Shoppe of Horrors, Star Wars author Ryder Windham recently sent us a heads-up on another instance of this spoiler showing up in early 1978:
“Earlier today, I found myself perusing the first issue of Future magazine, cover date April 1978,” says Windham. “The issue has a ‘Databank’ feature for ‘News Items from the World of the Present’ on pages 6-7, and includes this entry for Star Wars…”
“In the realm of the Wars, George Lucas has approached all of the original film’s principals, including Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Peter Cushing, Alec Guinness, Dave Prowse, Peter Mayhew, Anthony Daniels and Kenny Baker. Noted SF author Leigh Brackett has been approached with the task of writing the screenplay for the big-budgeted sequel. One of the key elements in the second script may be the origin of the Dark Lord, Darth Vader. One version of his life being considered for the forthcoming production will reveal a young, handsome Darth turning rogue Jedi, killing Luke Skywalker’s father and being pushed into a pool of molten lava by avenging angel Ben Kenobi. Darth is so badly scarred that he dons his black armor forever. It serves as a combination exoskeleton and walking iron lung. The second version portrays Darth as being, in reality, Luke Skywalker’s father. After a psychological trauma, Luke’s father succumbs to the darker nature of The Force and allows all that is good within him to die. And rising from the ashes of his soul is Darth, the arch-foe of all that is righteous. Whatever Vader’s fate in the as-yet-embryonic script, the film began pre-production in London in January.”
The first scenario mentioned – the one where Vader is pushed into molten lava by Kenobi – was likely lifted from a Rolling Stone interview with George Lucas in 1977. The source for the second scenario – the father one – is uncertain, unless the reporter was within earshot of Prowse’s comments recorded at the October 1977 Horror Elite Convention (and referenced in our original post).
In any case, that cat was out of the bag by April ’78, although it fortunately didn’t get picked up by the mainstream media, allowing the Dark Lord’s identity — as Kenobi says — to remain safely anonymous until 1980.
Baronlando said:
Apparently Lucas and Christopher Nolan were on a panel last night about important film milestones at the DGA, followed by a screening of Star Wars. Wonder if the issue came up, or if they just showed the CGI version at an event about historical milestones without a trace of irony.
http://www.pajiba.com/film_reviews/george-lucas-and-christopher-nolan-remember-star-wars-episode-iv-a-new-hope-review.php
Some info and typical Lucas revisionism:
the Director’s Guild of America held a screening of Lucas’s A New Hope (yes, for all of you wondering, it was the 2004 director’s cut) with a special, hour-long Q&A with Lucas and Christopher Nolan.
Lucas, as he told Nolan, originally envisioned one film: a bad guy is confronted by his son and earns redemption in the third act. Then, when the script reached 250 pages and Lucas was confronted by a modest budget (initially $8 million dollars which grew to $14), he figured he’d spin the three-act story into three separate films, just like the old Flash Gordon serials.
Jon Favreau was there: http://twitter.com/Jon_Favreau/status/39197449889390592
Saw Chris Nolan do a great Q&A with George Lucas tonite at the DGA theater followed by a screening of Star Wars.
As was Jeff Goldsmith editor of Creative Screenwriting magazine. One of his tweets: http://twitter.com/yogoldsmith/status/39136768368443392
Overheard @ SW Party: Guy asked Lucas what version is being shown- original? Lucas: There is no original. (Was gone b4 1st 70s rerelease)
Whoa. Whoa. Pretty incendiary remark.
It was a large screening so hopefullythere will more reports on the Q&A soon enough.
Btw I am in love with the artical,it is so excellent~~
Good thread. I chuckled when I read who Bacon was cast as last year. I'd never heard of the character prior.
Now I know if someone proposed the question that is asked in the title my response would be a cynical "Oh to reap the mountains of money from further home cinema releases, merchandising, EU titles blah blah blah to feed George's insatiable hunger for blah blah blah...."
But seriously?
As a production company what is their purpose? I'm not talking about ILM or Skywalker Sound or other separate post-production facilities. Lucasfilm don't produce anything that doesn't have a Star Wars logo on it. I can't imagine they did much on Crystal Skulls that Paramount couldn't or didn't do other than make sure the Lucasfilm name came up first and then sit back and watch the money flood in.
We've all accepted the fact that George isn't going to go off and direct his small experimental films. He hasn't lent his name or financial support to anything since Radioland Murders in 1994 other than the upcoming Tuskegee Airmen film "Red Tails" which was been in production for forever.
Speaking of which what's the point of that project anyway. It's been a film that George's wanted to make for a long time (one he probably put on the back-burner to go forward with the prequels) then he only goes on to produce it, hires a (very capable) director and then after principle photography is over the project sits unfinished because George is not happy with it and personally directs all the re-shoots himself because the director he hired (Anthony Hemingway) is no longer "available" to finish the film. Talk about back seat directing, sound familiar the corpse of Richard Maquand?
If George wanted to direct Red Tails fucking take the job and direct it.
Err back to my original point why does Lucasfilm exist? At least when they were producing shit like Howard the Duck they were at least producing and still some what relevant. Now they just seem like a production line of Star Wars glut.
With all their available resources they should be that film making utopia were some upstart could come get their little film financed and produced away from the Hollywood bogey-man. Well in actual fact those film makers are doing a better job financing their films in Hollywood. The chance may be slim to none but it's better than zero.
I think Lucas may have forgotten where he came from. He wouldn't be anything if it wasn't for Francis Ford Coppola mentoring him in his formative years but I hardly see George taking on such a role. Who's he mentoring - Rick McCallum's waistline. I hear they're doing away with the digital Jabba in Star Wars and just rotoscoping in Rick for the Blu-ray.
I think I've said my piece. It really is a shame that Lucasfilm isn't this boutique film production house, an alternate to the big Hollywood studio system. Based on Lucas' own past desires for something of the sort I don't see any reason why it couldn't be that way.
edit: Oh sorry, that just looks like a wall of text, tl;dr
^^^ Well duh on my part. Also Vader.
But then again I typed before thinking, in hindsight I guess the discussion was about character history explored in the series (which I've not seen) not the prequels. And I don't think Chewbacca has been in the series and obviously Vader hasn't.
Alexrd said:
TheBoost said:
Alexrd said:
I'm interested. This a character they could greatly explore in the series.
But every character from the OT that's been 'explored' has become lamer because of it.
Such as...?
Yoda
Chewbacca
And errr....... Tarkin.
I'll preface this by saying that I obtained the PDE's out of a curiosity to see Harmy's outstanding work. They could never be my go to version of the trilogy because they still contain SE additions that personally annoy me greatly. This is not a slight against Harmy I'm fully aware of the point of these projects. I do just fine with Adywan and Harmy's theatrical reconstructions of ESB and ROTJ.
Simply, I enjoy watching the progress as Harmy de-specialises the films and uploads his work to youtube. It's a fun little insight and I'm sure I'll acquire the new version whenever it's completed out of curiosity to see it in its entirety and its improvement over its predecessor.
Basically what I'm saying is that I'm not the target audience for this project other than the work in progress nature of it.
In saying that this topic: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Question-about-Star-Wars-Languages/topic/12468/post/472162/#TopicPost472162
reminded me of this:
Would this be possible, Harmy, to de-specialise in HD? I recall the '04 shot existed in the first PDE and I'd imagine you could whip up something better to replace it. Not an outright request just a curiousness to see if it's something you could accomplish easily.
I also remember the trash compactor creature still blinks but when I brought it up you stated you liked it, so I won't bring that up again ;)
More so related to the Secret History of Star Wars but I was too lazy to find that thread:
http://www.toplessrobot.com/2011/02/the_10_greatest_non-fiction_star_wars_books.php
xhonzi said:
Wait, have you seen Inception?
/thread
Harmy said:
Oh, yeah, for the SE, the original Dewback in the background was removed and instead two obviously CG ones were added. I tried rontoscoping in the GOUT one but the difference in quality was too big, so I reconstructed the original one in HD using a production photo and I had to track the motion of the camera frame by frame. And also, about two seconds of that shot were cut off at the beginning of it, so I had to deal with that too by several times repeating the few frames before the stormtrooper moves.
Harmy said:
Thanks, it was a lot less simple than it looks though...
You're not wrong :)
Harmy said:
Oh, and here's a new version of the "look sir, droids" clip. I remade the wipe and adjusted the Dewback to fit in better and start moving at the correct time (although that is still not quite perfect but I don't think it will get any better).
Looks good Harmy, impressive stuff. Simple but effective.
I'm not a big fan of the Sandcrawler but whatever. To reiterate what Harmy has said before these are not theatrical reconstructions and he only wants to use HD elements. Hence the use of the new Sandcrawler shot.
Harmy, whats going on with that Dewback in the background? I can't quite remember the SE shot but was that one slightly animated for the SE (as once it was completely stationary) or was that the Dewback you removed that I'm remembering?
doubleofive said:
This thread used to make me happy...
Rian Johnson is awesome.
It's interesting that the press release only mentions Selina Kyle, of course Catwoman (even if not mentioned by name) will show up at one point. Actually that would be pretty cool if they don't call her Catwoman at all. Selina Kyle by day mysterious unnamed burglar by night?
The industry speculation or "rumors" going around when various actresses were reading with Bale were that Nolan was casting two roles for two different actresses. 1. The love interest in a Vicki Vale/Rachel Dawes sense and 2. The other was the villain Catwoman/Talia Al Ghul.
I much preferred the Catwoman angle to Talia. First I don't know much about her and with Liam Neeson's character not around, who cares?
Also who remembers the Halle Berry film? From what I can recall no one saw it. I sure didn't.
If anyone wants to quickly read their contributions, click on this: http://starwarz.com/starkiller/2010/03/star-wars-the-adventures-of-luke-starkiller-revised-fourth-draft/
And then in your browser do a word search for *
Yes I think Tobar is cheating also ;)
Re: Tom Hardy
This is Tom Hardy. The film is Bronson. It and he is insane.
Of course he is in Inception which is kind of his break out hollywood role. And Nolan loves repeat business with his actors.
Hardy also has a supporting role as the chemist in the Mathew Vaughn directed Daniel Craig starring Layer Cake. Love that movie. And Hardy also played Handsome Bob in the substandard Guy Ritchie movie Rocknrolla. That's everything I've seen him in.
And as for Hathaway she's pretty decent. I'm not a huge fan of hers but I don't dislike her either. A few too many fanboys derided Nolan for casting "ugly" female leads in Holmes and Gyllenhaal, what will they make of Hathaway? He's certainly not unattractive but she does have an odd look with that huge grin in a Julia Roberts clone sort of way.
But I trust Nolan's casting. She's properly the actress out of all the reported women who read for the role, even if I'd prefer to see Eva Green or Gemma Arterton in a catsuit. Although Miss Hathaway in Brokeback Mountain in that one scene was pretty awesome.
Woah that's awesome none. Much appreciated.
So it's fairly well known to nerds in the know that Lucas' friends and colleagues Gloria Katz and Willard Huyck did an uncredited dialogue polish on the final draft of Star Wars prior to the film going into production.
I'm not familiar with the many drafts of SW, shooting scripts and what has been made available for the public to read.
Can anyone here give me a bit of detail in regards to this? What was the draft they contributed to (obviously the final one)? Are there versions available that can be read pre and post Katz and Huyck polish?
I do know that SW evolved a lot from drafts to screen and I'm curious as to what the difference is between Lucas' final draft, the script that was given to crew and actors in pre-production, to what was shot on the day. If it's very little or simply that material has not been made available I won't bother looking any further.
