Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Star Wars 3-D: On Schedule?

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Ground Level » Star Wars 3-D: On Schedule? (Page 3)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4

Author

Topic: Star Wars 3-D: On Schedule?

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 02-09-2007 07:27 PM

An artificially up-rezzed, blown up, DMR-ed to IMAX movie isn't real IMAX. Considering a lot of the CGI stuff added to the Star Wars movies is probably no better than 2K, there's really little reason to make any blow-up IMAX prints.

I think an old fashioned 5/70mm print would make more sense for big screen projection.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 02-09-2007 11:28 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
Actually I DO think that the piracy thing is blown WAY out of proportion, now that you mention it.

You're right. Maybe this is a better example: Why not follow Soderbergh and release movies simultaneously in theaters and on home video?

quote: Frank Dubrois
You mean like George denies the Star Wars Holiday Special? Its out there, its been made, and its trading on ebay, but he refuses to release it because HE doesnt like it. Why not put it out there on DVD and see who buys it?

I totally agree. What pisses me off even more is his refusal to release the complete series of DROIDS and EWOKS cartoons. Those were actually good.

quote: Frank Dubrois
Why not put out both versions, and see what people REALLY like?

He's not trying to please the masses. He has a "vision" that he wants to share, and people will either like it or they won't. It's not about proving him or right or wrong.

| IP: Logged

Frank Dubrois
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 896
From: Cleveland, OH
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 02-10-2007 12:49 AM

quote: Mike Schindler
He's not trying to please the masses. He has a "vision" that he wants to share, and people will either like it or they won't. It's not about proving him or right or wrong.

Usually pleasing the masses is how one succeeds in the movie business. Nobody goes out to make a film to please himself, if so, he fails as a director. George has the unique ability NOW to do whatever the hell he wants to, however, I think it shows a great lack of respect for the fans (the people that MADE him who he is and made his movies popular) for him to do what he does. In other words, his opinion is "Screw you fans, I'm gonna do what I want to do, and I don't care if you like it or not!" Great attitude, now lets see a new director break into the business with THAT attitude.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 02-10-2007 08:17 AM

quote: Frank Dubrois
In other words, his opinion is "Screw you fans, I'm gonna do what I want to do, and I don't care if you like it or not!" Great attitude, now lets see a new director break into the business with THAT attitude.

You're right that it is hard to break into the business with that attitude. But I would say that if you don't have that attitude, your movie will probably suck. Filmmakers need to believe in their films wholeheartedly.

Paul Thomas Anderson says that he realizes that at the end of the day, he needs to watch his own movies more than anyone else. So when it comes to making choices, he needs to go with what he thinks is right, and not concern himself with what anyone else thinks. That seems to work, since all of his movies are brilliant.

| IP: Logged

Frank Dubrois
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 896
From: Cleveland, OH
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 02-10-2007 02:11 PM

Yes, but going with that logic...and knowing what a success the original trilogy was, why screw with it? It was a slam dunk hit. No one said "It's a good movie, but it needs....something else." Why hasn't 2001 been updated with CGI? The space ship and station look so 60's...I mean come on. People all over will argue that 2001 is a CLASSIC, I argue the same for Star Wars. George should have done exactly the same as what they did to 2001, NOTHING, their both classics in their own right.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 02-10-2007 04:26 PM

quote: Frank Dubrois
Yes, but going with that logic...and knowing what a success the original trilogy was, why screw with it? It was a slam dunk hit.

He doesn't care. He's trying to make the best movie he can, regardless of what people say.

quote: Frank Dubrois
No one said "It's a good movie, but it needs....something else."

He did, and that's the only person that matters. And seriously, if you look back at old interviews, he's been complaining about how bad the effects were since the beginning.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 02-10-2007 06:32 PM

If you really look back over his interviews since 1977...you can debunk most of what he says now...especially his orignal story line.

Go back 20 years in your own life...rarely do your views or "vision" remain constant...I find it complete BS that the current forms are what his original vision was. His vision for Star Wars was from the mid 1970s with that technology.

As I said...my way of dealing with revisionist thinking is with copyright. Copyright is government regulated and really and is a reflection of the society to protect an author. If a film maker, artist or what have you wants to change a copyrighted piece after a reasonable amount of time, then they surrender their original copyright in favor of the new one. The old work falls into public domain. This allows for final edits after a film's release for some tweaks...perhaps even a "Director's Cut" vs a Studio's cut were the motives are different...but after say 5-years...thats it...it is locked in stone if you want society to protect your work. Movies mark their time and should stay that way.

If you want to remake something, remake it...make it new work, not an alteration of existing work. I don't like remakes, as a general rule, but I have less problem with them since both forms are available.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-10-2007 07:08 PM

quote: Mike Schindler
He's trying to make the best movie he can, regardless of what people say.

He's no dummy. He knows that any press is good press, and he also knows that if he changes so much as one scene in a STAR WARS movie, the masses will flock to buy (or see) it....even if they know they're going to hate what he's done.

| IP: Logged

Mike Heenan
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1896
From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 02-10-2007 08:22 PM

The originals are available in several forms (vhs, laserdisc, DVD and 35mm prints), so to me he can do whatever he wants to alter them, they're his babies. He pwns the fanboys! [Big Grin]

| IP: Logged

Frank Dubrois
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 896
From: Cleveland, OH
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 02-11-2007 01:19 AM

George Lucas said, "A special effect without a story, is a pretty boring thing" This was said back around 1980 or so. Look at his latest 3 creations...He completely made nothing but a bunch of special effects with a few dashes of story line in there so he could call it a movie. George changes what he beleives as long as theirs cash in it. Thats not wrong, but how much does he need?? Why ruin the original Trilogy with some "new" vision he just thought up? Let it alone George...it was fine the way it was.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 02-11-2007 04:17 AM

quote: Mike Blakesley
He knows that any press is good press, and he also knows that if he changes so much as one scene in a STAR WARS movie, the masses will flock to buy (or see) it....even if they know they're going to hate what he's done.

If that's the case, then why did Lucasfilm refuse to discuss any changes that may or may not have been made for the DVDs? Besides, he knew everyone would buy the movie, changes or not, since it was coming to DVD for the first time. Wouldn't it have been good business sense to not make any changes?

He's been changing these movies since Day One. Even STAR WARS and EMPIRE quietly changed during their early theatrical days. Maybe he's doing it for money, maybe he's not. But to me, there's enough evidence to suggest that he's not, and I'm gonna take his word at face value.

There's a lot of shit that Lucas does that pisses me off. If I were Irvin Kershner, I'd be like, "Dude! What the frack?" Also, I agree with what you guys are saying about movies being representative of their time. If I made a movie, and what was released theatrically was my cut, I wouldn't change it, even if I realized years later that I could make it better. And finally, I'm not giving George Lucas preferential treatment here. This philosophy applies across the board. I have very strict rules about what versions of a movie I watch in an effort to see as close to the director's preferred version as possible. That's why I didn't record JEDI in HD along with the other 5. I watch the 4:3 transfer of the theatrical cut, just like all of you.

And I do think he should keep the original theatrical versions in print so that people can look at the films from a historical perspective.

| IP: Logged

Mike Heenan
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1896
From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 02-11-2007 09:00 PM

You can see the original, "unaltered" trilogy on DVD right now...

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 02-12-2007 12:07 PM

quote: Mike Schindler
That's why I didn't record JEDI in HD along with the other 5. I watch the 4:3 transfer of the theatrical cut, just like all of you.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 02-12-2007 01:08 PM

Mark, JEDI was directed by Richard Marquand, who died 20 years ago, before any changes were made to that movie. Therefore, Lucas has no right to tamper with JEDI, because there's no way he can get Marquand's approval. So, I choose to watch the original theatrical version of that movie.

EDIT: Looking back at my earlier post, I realized that my wording was kinda vague. Just to clarify, Cinemax aired all 6 movies in HD a few months ago, and like many people, I took the opportunity to record them so that I wouldn't have to watch them on DVD anymore. But since they were the 2004 versions, I skipped JEDI, because I have very little interest in that version's existence.

[ 02-12-2007, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: Mike Schindler ]

| IP: Logged

Dan Suomi
Film Handler

Posts: 53
From: Aurora/Oswego, IL
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 02-13-2007 05:27 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
An artificially up-rezzed, blown up, DMR-ed to IMAX movie isn't real IMAX. Considering a lot of the CGI stuff added to the Star Wars movies is probably no better than 2K, there's really little reason to make any blow-up IMAX prints.

It's not a matter if it is considered IMAX or not just because the film did not originate in 65 mm film stock. Who the hell cares!! It would just be awesome to have it done, plus there is a big reason to put it in IMAX. The 3D is 1000X better than that stupid real D 3d crap. Have you ever even seen an IMAX DMR 3D or 2D show?

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.