theprequelsrule

I hope I'm not repeating myself, but IMO there is a significant decline in quality in Zahn's post-Vision of the Future works. Survivor's Quest was still pretty good, but Outbound Flight and Allegiance were poor.

I think Zahn's strength is in portraying our heroes in the post-Return of the Jedi years, although he never really completely solves the Han Has Nothing To Do After Empire Strikes Back syndrome (HHNTDAESBS)

He also falls too much in love with his own creations (I rolled my eyes at how perfect Thrawn and Jade are portrayed in later works).

Of course these days he has to write with all the other terrible EU in mind. And the Prequel nonsense of course.

The Star Wars cultural phenomena continues to kill Star Wars.

georgec said:

I don't watch CW and have never been interested, but I read this in an EW article:

 

Well, mostly. Filoni acknowledges that the order to resurrect the Sith Lord came from George Lucas himself, who became more interested in his Phantom Menace creation while developing Savage Opress for the last season of The Clone Wars

 

Why am I not surprised? Just plain hilarious at this point. Obviously Georgie boy wants to increase fan interest in Darth Maul to boost ticket sales for the 3D release of TPM.

The guy is such a hack.

Lol @ "Savage Opress"! Just terrible

OOT

Thrawn Trilogy, Hand of Thrawn series (bilogy, dulogy?)

aspects of the X-Wing novel series (it always bothered me how the taking of Coruscant by the Rebels was portrayed).

Tales of the Jedi

Dark Empire (a guilty pleasure)

Crimson Empire (Kir Kanos is what the fanboys think Boba Fett is)

Kotor 1 & 2

X-Wing, TIE Fighter, X-Wing Alliance video games

Do these all fit together nicely? Not really.

I'm just beaten down by it all. The fan restorations, for some reason, don't bring me any solace. I guess I'm really disappointed in Lucas - a man I admired so much in the past. His contempt for the OOT seems like borderline insanity.

Edited my original post

With further changes to the films on Blu-ray, and news about the lack of the OOT in the LOC, I've really been feeling bummed out towards Star Wars these days. In fact, I don't think I've ever felt more loathing towards the whole Star Wars phenomena than I do now. Anyone else feel the same?

eiyosus said:

Actually, my favorite scene in the entire PT, hands down, is the deleted scene of the little girls playing with R2.  The only damn scene in three movies with any heart, and it gets cut.

The deleted scenes with Padme's family are like the deleted scenes with Biggs and the Tosche Station gang - they help flush out a character a little more. In Star Wars we don't really need them; the Binary Sunset scene and prior dinner scene are all we need to understand Luke's frustrations and motivations. But in Clones such scenes are badly needed.

darth_ender said:

"Where are you going?"

"To find my mother."

This scene is obviously designed to parallel Luke's "I guess I'm going nowhere," but Hayden really sounds uncharacteristically exceptionally whiny here, exceeding all expectations.  It loses what emotion the scene had managed to accrue.  And why didn't Beru ask the question since we were going for a parallel?

Fixed.

A few years back Mike Verta commented on his own forum that Williams is not on good terms with the Star Wars phenomenon after his experiences working on the prequels.

No surprise really; Lucas has alienated a lot people who helped him make the OT so great. It actually started back in the early 80s. Marcia and Gary Kurtz being the first.

Tyrphanax said:

CWBorne said:

The friendly conversation between Obi-Wan and Anakin in episode three after they land the ship on Coruscant. For that scene, everything works, the acting, the dialogue, even a little of bit of the direction. Its one of the few scenes that actually feels like a real conversation between two genuine and likable people. Its actually one of the few times any of the films feels like it has room to breath rather than getting the plot moving or continuing the ham fisted character arcs. Had we gotten more of this between the two, I probably would have enjoyed the films more. 

I agree with this. I always loved that scene. It felt like it was plucked from a better movie.

This scene frustrates me because it comes very close to being good, yet the delivery of the lines are still somewhat awkward and stilted. It's like the actors were slowly remembering how to act after having their ability destroyed by Lucas' "direction"!

*Please only post if you hate the prequels*

I would have to say the initial, short, lighsabre duel between Darth Maul and Qui Gon on Tatooine was my favourite. It was intense, not over-choreographed, and the first time we had seen a lightsabre duel in a Star Wars movie in 16 years.

TheBoost said:

LexX said:

I've always wondered about Ben's line "Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?". How does that fit into the scenario? Is Han the fool who's following a fool (Ben)? If so, why? He doesn't follow him at all.

 I love that line.

I've always figured Ben is predicting (correctly) that Han is still going to do what Ben says regardless of calling him an old fool.

It is a quote from Twelfth Night. The character (Malvolio) who said it was played by Alec Guinness in the 1969 TV adaption.

*satisfied sigh* Another prequel bashing thread? Sign me up!

TPM is certainly the best of the prequels from a certain point of view (real film, actual sets etc. etc.), but it has the worse pacing of any of the three, Jar Jar Binks in a major role, Jake Lloyd, Chinese people Neimodians, terrible art designs (that, admittedly, looked good on paper), and a shit colour palate.

But what makes TPM more worthy of respect than the other prequels is that, warts and all (and there are a lot of warts), it seems to have been following a genuine artistic vision. George is famous for having said "I don't care if I make a piece of art or a piece of shit". Well, with TPM he made a piece of shit. He was confident the movie would make a lot of money, so he could make the film he wanted.

AOTC and ROTS seem to have been made to try and get fans back; they attempt to look more "Star Wars" (include prequel-era version of stormtroopers, Boba Fett etc.) although they actual feel less "Star Wars" than TPM due to excessive and poor use of CGI. I really think George was worried about the box office after all the negative reaction to TPM.

skyjedi2005 said:

Beyond Lucas horrible scripts and directing, David Tatterstall's boring ho hum cinematography, i think the absolute worst actually is Ben Burtt editing and too much sound effects and not enough John Williams.

Burtt instead of being a collaborator as in the original trilogy is largely solely responsible for the final mixes.

Ben Burtt has definitely followed his master to the darkside. "I am genius, therefore my work is paramount!"

Bingowings said:

I think what hurt ROTJ most was the, "knock it out quick, it'll do" attitude of Lucas which percolates through the whole piece.

The story is practically a cut an paste rehash of elements from the previous two stories.

The director was Medvedev to Lucas' Putin.

The sets were largely a collage of bits left over from the other films and photographed with very little sense of cinema (compare Jerjerrod's control room to Tarkin's in ANH, there are 1970's Doctor Who sets that look practically the same, no wonder most of the footage ended up on the cutting room floor).

In terms of characterisation ESB was a big step up from ANH because it had to be.

The audience had already entered the world and fallen in love with the core characters so the next film couldn't just coast along on the same level.

Lucas had the good sense to get a director in who could not only handle/control actors but also listened when they had good ideas which gave them a sense of personal investment in their roles.

Mark pretty much kept that going in ROTJ but almost everyone else seemed to be in it to close that paragraph of their resume/CV.

This is why to me Jedi hurts more than the PT.

I can choose to ignore it the PT but if I want closure from ESB's storylines I have to sit through ROTJ so it becomes as much of a contractual obligation to myself as it was to the people who made it.

At least the characters were still charming and likable, and the action sequences made sense, were well edited, and actually exciting. Compare that to the unlikable characters, boring and over the top action sequences, and crummy CGI of the prequels.

I can understand why a person might prefer Empire to the Original (a blasphemy to be sure, but understandable), but I cannot for the life of me put myself in the head space of people who prefer any of the prequels to Jedi. Jedi is vastly superior to those films in every way that a film can be evaluated; acting, dramatic effect, special effects, pacing, editing etc. etc.

TV's Frink said:

Loosely related to this thread (which I'm really starting to enjoy, btw):

The dvdactive review of Jedi on Blu was just posted.

Although often seen as the ‘lame duck’ of the original trilogy, I'm actually quite fond of Return of the Jedi. It’s easily the most action-packed of the original films, with an exciting opening act and a multi-layered finale that delivers both action and drama. The special effects work is superior to anything seen in the previous films, we are (properly) introduced to a variety of new and interesting characters (including Jabba and the Emperor), and it serves as a satisfying resolution to the events of the preceding movies. So why does it have such a bad reputation?

There have been many theories put forward to explain Jedi’s supposed inferiority, raging from directorial interference to lack of interest by the actors. The story goes that George Lucas was not happy with director Richard Marquand’s performance, and that Lucas himself actually directed much of the film. There has also been a fair bit made of Harrison Ford’s reluctance to be involved with the project, and some feel that he all-but phoned in his performance. Others are against the inclusion of the second Death Star, citing it as nothing more than a rehash of the first movie’s plot (ex-producer Gary Kurtz is among the detractors). However, perhaps the biggest criticism is of the furry little Ewoks, the presence of which is seen by many as nothing more than a marketing gimmick to sell toys to kids, rather than a genuine plot device.

However, while I can see where people are coming from with these comments, I don’t necessarily agree with all of them. I do agree that there’s a bit of a slump in the middle of the film, but I think it  is made all the more obvious because of the tremendous amount of action that surrounds it. I also agree with the comments about Ford, at least to a certain extent, as he’s nowhere near his wise-cracking best. Still, much of this can be explained by the hardships he endures and his character arc - he’s gone from rogue smuggler to self-sacrificing hero. Other than that, I think the film hangs together rather well. There’s plenty of character progression, the performances are no less ‘hammy’ than the previous films, and our own history has taught us that it is possible for a technologically inferior people to overcome a technologically superior force.

This is basically my view of ROTJ. The performances of Ford and Fisher are what really hurt this film, not the Ewoks. Fortunately the script really pushed them into the background compared to Luke, so they don't hurt the film too much

What has become clear to me is that Han and Leia have nothing to do after the first film. The love story in Empire is in there in order to keep them interesting. By essentially resolving it at the end of Empire ("I love you"..."I Know") they are left with nothing in Jedi. Yeah, in Jedi there is the subtext that with having real friends for the first time ("Now I owe you one"), Han is ready to sacrifice for the greater good - but really he already had made this turn at the climax of Star Wars. The first film has a self-contained character arc for both Luke and Han.

zombie84 said:

Its the copyright ones.

Fun fact: apparently, they were moved to storage and their status was changed to protected in order to save them because of savestarwars.com. The people at LoC are SW fans and are trying to do their best with what they have to work with, it seems.

Well done Zombie!

mverta said:

There are varying levels/versions of restoration which are performed. Certainly there is a "warts and all" version with very little touched.  But in general, the grading of Legacy is determined, essentially, by balancing two factors: 1) the original color timing of Technicolor prints and 2) knowing the absolute color values of props, costumes, and set pieces.

If, for example, Darth Vader's helmet appears alternately green-ish, blue-ish, and red-ish during a scene, only one of them is correct (not really, but you get the idea).  Legacy matches them all to each other, and then matches that group to the original Technicolor timing which most closely matches the actual prop, and other items in the scene. Usually, you'll find that is 90% of such shots in the film, which indicates that with some exceptions, no particularly stylized grading was done to Star Wars.  Most things were shot and timed fairly neutrally, plus whatever bias the stock naturally has.

 

The Death Star coloring is due partly to some of the set pieces actually being different colors, and lots just appearing that way because of inconsistencies in timing, and transfer anomalies over the years.  Fortunately, I know which is which :)  So I'm not making the slightly blue ones and green ones match, but all the blue ones match each other, and all the green ones match each other.

 

As for your absolute sense of color: don't trust it.  Humans have an absolutely terrible memory for absolute color, and our perception system auto white-balances.  This is why it's so dangerous to go "by eye" though we often have little choice.

 

_Mike

Thank you very much for the info! I look forward to seeing some screenshots of your results once you have your new site up and running.

I am so happy to hear so many of you will be buying 3D TVs. That will hopefully drive the price of non-3D TVs down to a level I am willing to pay for it!

mverta said:

Indeed I have.  Many times, back in the day...

 

_Mike

Well, I'm jealous. I only have vague recollections of seeing the original Star Wars in theatres.

Is the 70mm technicolor your primary guide to how Legacy should look? IIRC, you mentioned that during the standard def restoration you usually referenced the laser discs.

I am curious if you kept the inconsistent colouring of the Death Star walls (sometimes grey, sometimes green-grey) that the 70mm technicolor seems to show.

And please tell me that the sand on Tatooine is yellow again!

mverta said:

Legacy isn't about you or me; it's not about what we have or don't have.  It's about honoring Star Wars and preserving history.  It's done for Star Wars' sake; for history's sake.  That should be a unifying cause.  But when it really comes down to it, a lot of so-called fans don't actually care about protecting Star Wars in any meaningful way.  They just want the film for themselves, and if they can't have it, they throw a tantrum.  They don't rejoice in the fact that such a beautiful piece of work is safe.  All they really want to know is what they get or don't get out of the deal. And the irony is, that is the exact attitude which keeps them from having what they want, ultimately.

 

If someone came to you with the materials to do a Star Wars restoration beyond anyone's wildest dreams, on the condition that you may never share it publicly, what would you do? And if they came to you precisely because of your commitment to keeping it private; to the film itself; to history itself; because of your trustworthiness... what would you do?  Turn down the opportunity, or worse, betray that trust and guarantee no future prospects?  Doubtful.  You'd probably do what I did, which is enjoy the rewards of honor and principle, and let the future - the completely unknown future, by the way - play out as it will.  

 

I document the process for education, entertainment, and celebration of Star Wars.  And while this concept seems foreign to some people, it can be gratifying to watch good work happen even if you have nothing directly to gain from it.  If you head over to scifi-meshes.com you will see talented 3D artists building amazingly accurate models of Star Wars ships (among other things) which nobody in the end will have any access to.  Nobody "gets" anything out of the deal, beyond enjoying the show, celebrating the craft, and learning a lot along the way.  For those for whom this concept is foreign and valueless: tough shit.  There are plenty of good restorations out there, anyway, so stop whining.

 

It's not my first rodeo.  When I was hired by Lucasfilm to do a new CG R2-D2, I went absolutely nuts with accuracy and detail - measuring, photographing, and documenting original units in the Lucasfilm Archives, and recreating every nuance possible in my CG model.  It took, ultimately, 4 years to do.  In the end, while it makes its appearance wherever it needs to, nobody "gets anything" for that, either. But I'm proud of the work, grateful to have been given the opportunity, and honored to have made any contribution to the world of Star Wars.  That has always been enough for me.

 

_Mike

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well said. Your passion for Star Wars is very inspiring Mike. I for one make due with my 2006 DVD versions and have no intention of getting any of the various preservation's, but am happy to know that somewhere, someone will have preserved the Star Wars of my childhood.

I had a question, if I may. Have you ever had an opportunity to see the 70mm technicolor version of Star Wars?

georgec said:

Happy birthday Col. Christopher Blair!

+1. And in regards to his career - my Aunt saw him in The Elephant Man and said he was terrific. The force will be with him...always.

Most of the art design was good...but not great. And I second the notion that the AOTC art design was very compelling. Sadly, the way it was realized on screen just sucked.

Harmy said:

Yeah. Dad came in yesterday and he couldn't get over the fact that I moved a chair right in front of the TV to watch a Blu-Ray. He was like: Are you nuts?

And you just can't explain to him how great it is to see all this detail and see it big. LOL, he even complains about the screen in the cinema in our town being too big and how he has to turn his head (and it's quite a small screen, too)...

Sounds like your father and I would get along. I have watched blu-rays on a large HDTV with HDMI etc., etc., etc. and I still have not felt compelled to start spending my hard earned cash replacing my DVD collection. It does not help that most blu-ray transfers seem to look terrible due to shoddy transfers. The Bonds films in particular look awful to me.

The big selling point for me on DVDs was always that they last much longer compared to VHS (the tape gets eaten by a crap VCR etc.) - so they were a wise investment. Blu-ray seems to appeal to, well, either consumer whores or videophiles. I mean, so what that you can now see the sweat on someones face clearer? Jeez, the things people will make out to be so great to justify all the money they just gave to The Man! It is definitely  a cultural imperative at work rather than any rational decision making. But it's your money, so spend it as you please.

Now, if anybody needs me I'll be down at the rippers getting a few lap dances from the money I saved from not buying blu-ray tech. I have my priorities in order.