Official Star Wars Thread

GeorgeC · Post by **GeorgeC** » April 3rd, 2008, 1:17 am

In some ways, those individual releases were better.

There's nothing in the way of the extras on the DVD sets that's worth writing home about. My other big beef with the sets is the cheap packaging and the fact that we get the series in BROADCAST order instead of PRODUCTION ORDER.

Batman: The Animated Series actually benefits from being shown in broadcast order. You get the "bad stuff" interspersed with good episodes instead of being forced to sit through a string of mediocre episodes before seeing the good stuff. Unfortunately, WB went production order with its season set releases of Batman:TAS.

Star Trek, on the other hand, is better seen in production order. The series develops more organically --- especially the relationships between Kirk, Spock, and McCoy --- and it makes more sense to see the pilot episodes at the start of the series rather than in haphazard, nonchronological order.

Again, Paramount DIDN'T do things that way and re-released the show in the season sets in broadcast order instead of production order like the individual DVD releases.

P.S. -- The next DVD release of the TOS is the second season of the Remastered edition. It's DVD-only since Paramount cancelled the HD-DVD release and isn't ready to put remastered Trek out on Blu-Ray any time this year. It does seem, however, that Paramount IS planning on re-releasing the first six Trek films in Blu-Ray format by the time the re-imagined theatrical film (Trek XI) hits theaters.

Post by **droosan** » April 3rd, 2008, 2:57 am

Here's hoping that someone at Paramount will find a way to 'shoehorn' the original 1979 cut of Star Trek: The Motion Picture into that set.

I was working at Foundation Imaging when the "Director's Cut" was being produced there, and I actively avoided working on it, because I couldn't stand the fact that it was even being done. (which is the same way I feel about the 'remastered' Star Trek:TOS). On the positive side, thanks to that project being in the studio, I was able to examine the gigantic shooting model of the Enterprise 1701-A from this --><-- close! (it was loaned to Foundation by ILM, for the model-makers' reference).

The 1979 film has a 'bad' reputation .. for being slow, ponderous, etc .. but the fact remains that it was my introduction to the world of Star Trek (for some reason, even at age 9, and being a newly-minted Star Wars geek, I had never seen the live-action or cartoon versions which preceded "The Motion Picture").

Thus, when I watch ST:TMP .. I am doing so for its 'nostalgic' value, moreso than its 'aesthetic' value; I want to see the movie that I saw as a kid.

Luckily, I still have the original cut of TMP on laserdisc, so I can do that. But I would 'upgrade' to DVD or Blu-Ray without hesitation, if the original cut were available there.

-----------

Oddly enough, I've noticed that when HBO (or any other cable channel) screens ST:TMP, it is the original 1979 cut. Unlike Star Wars, for which they'll now only air the "Special Editions").

========

@ GeorgeC: at least the various DVD releases of TOS are in some sort of 'order'..!

I recall that the laserdisc collection paired episodes seemingly at 'random' (sometimes, not even from the same season). It was the main reason that I'd never bothered to pick up more than a couple of volumes of TOS on LD. (though, the ~$40 price tag 'per-disc' didn't help its case much, either)

Post by **spaz** » April 8th, 2008, 1:13 am

ok gang, i know i'm a little late on the topic... 3 years or so, but , i finally saw revenge of the sith or seth or whoever the hell it is. what the hell was that ?. all i can say is "money does not buy happiness". apart from the fact that the color lookup tables as converted from the sony p24 were nothing short of a video game, the animation was a tragedy. natellie portman or whoever it was, was like watching Michael J Foxes younger sister in Family Ties. not so long ago i saw Empire. i still say the puppeted Yoda was a billion times better than the video game Yoda i witnessed today. there is no substitute for craftsmanship. i toss my hand of dirt on the grave of ILM.

spaz

Post by **eddievalient** » April 8th, 2008, 2:07 am

???????

Um....okay......where did that come from?

Post by **vveksuvarna** » April 10th, 2008, 1:04 am

im confuzed ! why revenge of the sith...

ITS TIME FOR CLONE WARS !

Post by **Ben** » April 10th, 2008, 7:29 am

Spaz just caught up with Sith, that's all. And those were his thoughts on it.

Can't say I disagree...

Post by **spaz** » April 10th, 2008, 1:09 pm

cheers Ben. sorry for all the "sith" crap. i was afraid of this very thing happening to VFX films after we did Jurassic, which was the beginning of the end it seemed. i know this sounds backwards, but think of Spielbergs traditional story telling methodology. he typically does in depth character development, and before cg, would "shoot around" effects or characters which didn't work, Jaws, ET. when we started producing tests of cg creatures for Jurassic, everyone freaked out. when incorporating them into the movie (you have to remember that Jurassic was supposed to be all stop mo) their screen time could sustain 8-10 second shots of full on characters walking. not just "bits". he seemed to deviate from that "traditional story telling methodology" that he is so good at. guys like Jim Cameron by contrast understands completely how to incorporate advanced effects into his stories. he was responsible for the cg revolution in film. he came to us with the concept of the psuedopod in the Abyss , and the concept of the t1000 for T2. i built the rex the same way i built the t1000. by contrast, when you look at sith, here is an example of how "over teching" a film swamps any potential for a story. my comment about yoda ; cg vs practical, meant that, by painting yoda in a new medium, it did not improve it. frank oz's puppeteering at least makes use of the viewers imagination.

spaz

Post by **Ben** » April 10th, 2008, 3:49 pm

I don't think Sith (you can re-arrange the letters in that name to get what I thought of the film!) even had a "story"!

It was merely a number of plot points that needed to be addressed. It was like watching a flow chart of things that needed to be covered rather than an actual progressive narrative.

We need Obi Wan and Anakin to be friends at the start. Check. We need them to start hating each other. We need a fight here. Yoda has to leave. Padme needs to give birth but not care about her children. She names them randomly. Anakin has to "die" in a volcanic location. He has to become Darth Vader. Palpatine needs to become a scarred and disfigured Emperor. The droids need to have their memories wiped - WHY? Because we can't actually have these first three c**p films match up with the originals, can we?

Basically, Lucas was making it all up as he went along. Luke and Leia were never brother and sister in Star Wars. Vader was never their dad in Empire, until Kasdan came in and rewrote the second draft. Those films were never supposed to be parts IV, V and VI. You can NOT watch the series I, II, III, IV, V, VI...in order - it doesn't work.

If you do, the "surprise twist" at the end of Empire, for one, becomes one long "so what? I knew that two/three movies ago".

Lame isn't the word. As for the technology...the mere fact that Lucas was coming from where he was with that story and characters, coupled with what ILM were actually capable of, should have been the best thing ever. That the new three were not is down to bad storytelling and an over-reliance (not to mention over-abundance) on gimmicky VFX.

Post by **ShyViolet** » April 10th, 2008, 11:39 pm

Agree with all of the above....also, it always struck me as significant that Lucas has said in interviews that he considers the actual scriptwriting of a film to be the most boring and tedious part of filmaking: "like doing a term paper."
Yeah, when you watch Sith (and ESPECIALLY Phantom Menace) that about sums it up.

Post by **spaz** » April 11th, 2008, 1:37 am

Lucas is actually a very nice normal American guy who loves hamburgers and fries. the problem is , that his "regular guy" film ambition ignited an apparent religion and attracted a staff of deacons composed of hermaphroditic failed ice-cream salesman. Lucasfilm/ILM was born of mavericks. the mavericks didn't believe in ice-cream salesman. but the ice-cream overwhelmed the mavericks by proving their numbers greater. they betrayed the innovators and killed them. they ended up driving out the remaining innovators and mavericks with their phony smiles. now they are left without innovation and a lot of ice-cream.

Post by **Ben** » April 11th, 2008, 12:38 pm

"hermaphroditic failed ice-cream salesman"

Okay, you <I>really</I> need to go into this aspect more...

Post by **spaz** » May 7th, 2008, 5:08 pm

ok, either i've been sleeping for a decade or 2 or i could have just swore that i saw a version of Star Wars that looks like it was done in Lego ?.

Post by **Ben** » May 7th, 2008, 7:27 pm

I'm guessing you mean the new Clone Wars thing? Yes, it does look like Lego!

As a TV show, I can see that it's as good as it can get on that kind of budget. As a theatrical release, it's a cheap way of ripping the audience off with sub-standard assembly line product that has the Star Wars name slapped on it.

Post by **Christian** » May 8th, 2008, 1:50 am

Wouldn't it be interesting to see Brad Bird direct a Star Wars movie (live action or CGI)?

Post by **Meg** » May 8th, 2008, 7:13 am

Christian, I think it would be interesting to see Brad Bird direct ANYTHING.

Ben - you made some very good points, but I think Spaz might have been referring to this:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/LEGO_Sta ... _the_Brick

Official Star Wars Thread

star wars : revenge of the sith

cologne wars