m_s0 said:
On the other hand, Whitta's track record is downright horrifying to me.
Two whole films is not quite enough of a track record, particularly when one of them is known as decent and the other was probably terrible because it was a Jaden Smith vehicle.
DuracellEnergizer said:
One has to wonder how a superlaser fired from a battle station the size of the moon has such a narrow beam, though. You'd think such a beam would be thick enough to envelop and pass right through a conventionally-sized ship regardless of its overall intensity.
JEDIT: I think I just figured out what my problem with the Death Star II's beam blowing ships out of the sky is.
Turn down the power, the beam is narrower.
Over all, beautiful as expected. Two criticisms:
- Are the asteroids made of gunpowder?
- I'm not totally sold on that canyon. The bits closest to the camera look a bit plastic.
TheBoost said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
Klasodeth said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Tyrphanax said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
I believe the official explanation is that the second Death Star had a variable energy output so they could dial it down to destroy a ship, or dial it up to destroy a planet.
Something about that explanation just never sat right with me.
Why not? It doesn't make sense to use the full power of the superlaser just to blow up something as tiny as a capital ship. Reducing the power level in exchange for a faster rate of fire not only makes sense, but would also help explain why the Death Star in Star Wars spent 30 minutes traveling around Yavin to to get in range of the Rebel base instead of blowing up Yavin and then blowing up the Rebel base two minutes later.
Why not? Well because the only "official" explanation would be whatever is in the movie in the first place and not some fan-boy EU crap. The emperor says it's "fully armed and operational," and nobody says anything different. What you say makes 100% sense, but once the ship explodes the beam would have gone through. Visually it would be a much more dramatic demonstration of the beam's supposed power.
The official explanation IS the movie.
The Death Star can blow up a planet. It can also blow up a ship. This is totally clear in the film. It requires no further exposition in the film, nor any outside discussion.
YOU made up a rule "once the ship explodes the beam would have gone through" that doesn't fit with what's in the film. The film is not in error.
This is the correct answer. The DSII is depicted as having variable-strength firepower. That's not a crazy concept.
THE HIDDEN PLANET
?
by "Jim Hensony" I think he means "cartoony". The cartoony aliens are one of the many things I don't like about ROTJ.
spectraljulian said:
Tobar said:
I love that they're going more practical with the creature effects. HOWEVER, that alien looks a little too Jim Henson-y.
I'd tend to agree, but if he's got as much screen time as Wyoslea, Muftak, or Momaw Nadon, he'll be just fine. And with proper color palette, lighting, etc, he'll probably look better.
Even Nien Numb was okay.
Just when you thought the SE couldn't get weirder.
doubleofive said:
They could do like they did with the Star Trek Blu-ray's pair fans with people involved in the production of other parts.
I will put my name in the hat.
They could do like they did with the Into Darkness Blu-ray and leave assembling a bonus disc to the fans?
Tyrphanax said:
Does this count?
Yes, but I'll transcribe so we can all read it.
JJ Abrams said:
DIADEST O+ST AuO OEEW-------
WIAT AN HONDR IT IS, To VORK
BESIDE 4U OF YDI, ON STAR WARS -EP VII-
I O4^Π TAAU< YDU EΛDVb4, FOR ALL UOPK
PAS7 4UD FU7UPE. LE7'S TAKE GOoOD C7REm,
OF NOT JVST OURSELUES, BUT EAC+ DTHER.
AMAZUG, BUT TRUE: TE+E WORLD AWAITS THIS FILM.
LE7'S GIUE 'EM SDME7HWG GPEA7. YO JJ
I wouldn't want Ady's ESB:R thread to get bogged down by this topic, so here's the thread. It's in this forum, because it's not limited to fan edit purposes, and it's not limited to Original vs SE.
So, where in ROTJ are there mistakes?
We should probably start a "Spot the errors: ROTJ!" thread
JEDIT: I did: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Spot-the-errors-ROTJ/topic/16648/
Doc Sportello said:
STAR WARS: EPISODE II
THE MISSING PLANET
That is a really good title
That might be the best post in here
Oh, yeah, definitely a different take. But it's still Luke, and I think Obi's just behind his head.
TV's Frink said:
timdiggerm said:
I couldn't see the image until I right clicked it, chose "View image", found myself at some other site, and then hit back. The reason you (and no one else) can see the image on the forum is because you have it cached. No one can see that image until they go to the site that hosts it.
FTFY
I meant to say "anyone else who can see it", which, thanks to having it in my cache now, includes me.
But seriously, fail.
Hey, no one had spotted the matte misalign on the Falcon @ Bespin until this week.
Wazzles said:
doubleofive said:
Alright, help me out guys.
It was brought to my attention that 3PO was in a different position during the wipe, but now taking a closer look, everyone is different. Was this a different take they used in the SE and put the original foreground over top? Was the foreground a composite element originally?It looks like Luke is played by an entirely different person. On top he has no beard, but he does on the bottom- and it doesn't look like he's Obi Wan.
The second image has darker contrast, making his jaw shadow darker, making it look slightly more like a beard.
I couldn't see the image until I right clicked it, chose "View image", found myself at some other site, and then hit back. The reason you (and anyone else) can see the image on the forum is because you have it cached. No one can see that image until they go to the site that hosts it.
Many forums have the ability to mark a section of text as a spoiler, such that the text is blacked-out until you mouseover.
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/The-Marvel-Cinematic-Universe/topic/16560/page/6/
Why is he sad? He's Batman.
Yeah, 4K has become standard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution#Digital_cinema
Because I prefer to take in the total forum culture, not just the parts I like.
Also I generally like your posts.
I just want to point out that the more popular idea, where Obi-wan leaves Ani in the lava and we never see Ani again, provides the user with convincing reasons as to why Obi-wan lies to Luke in ANH: "Oh, this guy named Vader, who I'd love to see dead, because he's the villain of this film, HE killed your father, definitely not me the only guy around who can set you on the right path. Definitely wasn't me! It was that bad guy!"
So, you'd be losing that.
fishmanlee said:
Well, the whole thing was inspired by the LOTR EE DVD's so I am trying to emulate them as close as possible, while adapting the format to being Star Wars-y.
The only reason the LOTR EEs were split was because of length. The EE Blu-rays are not split. The intermission in those films was a matter of necessity, and not an artistic choice. When you make a Star Wars EE Blu-Ray, are you going to put a slight green color over the whole film?
