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

This is topic Star Wars 3-D: On Schedule? in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=001827

Posted by Tom Tomlinson (Member # 703) on 02-06-2007, 12:13 PM:

I remember the anouncement for the 30th anniversary and that "A New hope" would be re-released. Memorial Day is over 3 months away but I haven't read anything online lately about it. Am I being premature? I'm curious if it would have to go up against Pirates 3.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-06-2007, 01:43 PM:

If I was Lucas I'd be afraid, very afraid to go up against Pirates and all the other blockbusters that are opening in May. This is one of the strongest May lineups in history and he'd be better advised to spring the Star Wars 3-D in August, when the kids are looking for something to see. After all, the last reissues of SW IV, V and VI happened in the off season (January), so why not do a similar thing with this one?

The gross potential is just not that blockbusterish for a 30 year old movie even if it is in 3D.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-06-2007, 03:30 PM:

I agree that a traditionally slow time of year would be best for the release. The special editions of Star Wars were released in that manner. Universal did the same thing for the 20th anniversary release of E.T.: The Extraterrestrial, pushing it out into theaters in late March of 2002. The original release was in June of 1982.

I'm also wondering if perhaps the arduous process of converting 30 year old 2D film images into 3D is turning out to be more time consuming than originally planned. Certainly ILM must have some new state of the art custom software to help, but the process still must be very far from anything resembling "easy" or "quick."

Either the technical process is proving to be very challenging, or there may be the possibility George Lucas wants the whole original trilogy redone in 3D.

There's also the somewhat slight possibility the whole endeavor could be scrapped as well. I wasn't really sold with the results of the faux-3D work on Superman Returns. However, the original film elements for Star Wars may yield more sharp detail that can be isolated and manipulated into 3D space (as compared to the 1080p-based video imagery of the Superman installment).

It will be good if the 3D 30th Anniversary release of Star Wars can happen in August. I just wonder if the release will make it to theaters during this calendar year.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 02-06-2007, 07:59 PM:

There was an article in Time or some other news magazine a few months back where they said that EPISODE I was the one they were working on now. So it looks like they'll be releasing them in story order, which is cool.

But Lucasfilm has said that it's taking longer than they thought it would, and even last summer, they were implying that they'd wait until there were more 3D screens out there.

But the other thing that makes me curious is that they've said that some sort of secret event is in the works for the weekend before Memorial Day that's going to take place in LA. Since their big convention is the week after that, I've been guessing that the mystery event will be some sort of screening. Who knows?

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 02-06-2007, 08:17 PM:

Is the third dimension going to be stuff like TIE fighters coming out the screen or is it giving depth to the environment?

Lucas should leave the films alone. People just want to see the original Star Wars. Would rather money was spent on some new 70mm prints.

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 02-07-2007, 12:37 AM:

quote: Caleb Johnstone-Cowan
Lucas should leave the films alone. People just want to see the original Star Wars.

I agree 100% [beer]

I think the disastrous special edition should have told him that. Leave the old movie alone. If you want to make us fans happy, put out some 70mm prints. The wheel has been invented, now leave it alone.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 02-07-2007, 03:14 AM:

Unfortunatly, looking at the old prints, the quality of the special effects is not as good as we like to remember, there are so many shades of black ect, special effects just dont hold up anymore in my opinion

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-07-2007, 08:09 AM:

Cameron, They were OF THEIR TIME and that is indeed good enough. Believe it or not...it was NEVER the special effects that made the Star Wars movies...they augmented the movies...the STAR WARS movies were fun, that is what made them.

I would love to change the copyright laws such that if a work is remade, that the original version would fall into public domain with perhaps a 5-year grace period from the orignal issuance. It would put a stop to this revisionists BS.

Steve

[ 02-07-2007, 04:59 PM: Message edited by: Steve Guttag ]

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 02-07-2007, 01:11 PM:

The special effects were incredible for the 70's. They were in fact ground breaking. But as Steve pointed out, Star Wars (at least the original trilogy) was never about the special effects, it was all about the story and the characters. The special effects made a great story, even better. With the last 3 movies, George put the special effects first and foremost, leaving the characters to entertain us between special effect shots.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-07-2007, 03:19 PM:

Any S.W. film after the first three are a load of [bs]

anyway.

Mark

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 02-07-2007, 06:54 PM:

There have been films with better acting, dialogue, story, special effects and cinematography but Star Wars is still something that will remain special to many people for a very long time, as long as Lucas doesn't screw around with the re-releases!

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 02-07-2007, 07:07 PM:

quote:
Any S.W. film after the first three are a load of [bs] anyway.

Personally I found the re releases of the first 3 brought them down to the same level, the extended special effects sequences boged down the pacing. Although it did reduce the 2nd and 3rd's feeling of being a big budget muppet movies.

quote: Steve Guttag
They were OF THEIR TIME and that is indeed good enough. Believe it or not..

Absolutely agree with you there! When I saw it first release it was fantastic ! My earlier comments were based on my surprise when I saw a brand new 35mm print in 1994, I agree in principle with George Lucus that the restoration was a good idea, The way he did it was not. The film's special effects should simply have been cleaned up, not extended.

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 02-07-2007, 11:41 PM:

While I agree that the special effects were not only good for their time, but more precisely, epic, they could use some modern touch-ups. "Special Edition" should have sufficed with that. Being simply a facelift, and cleanup. For example, fixing the transparancy issues during the cockpit shots. Leave the story, and scene cuts and all alone. Don't revise it.
If you can do that then leave it as is. War of the Worlds has what today would be laughable special effects, but were top of the line in it's day. Even with that, it's still a quite enjoyable movie. Talk about a movie that could use a touch-up. Replace those glass domes, with something more forcefield-ish, but for god sakes, don't replace the fighting machines with CGI ones.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 02-07-2007, 11:56 PM:

This is Lucas' movie, and he should be able to do whatever he wants to it. What he wants is for all six of the movies to work as a seamless cohesive whole. Right now, they don't. But the revisions make them work better than they would have originally. Despite what he's said, I think more changes will be made and eventually the movies will be seamless.

That being said, I still think that the originals should exist as a historical document, and I have major issues with changes being made to EMPIRE and JEDI without director approval (which proves rather challenging in JEDI's case).

And for those who don't like the movies being converted to 3D, well, that's why God created the eye patch.

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 02-08-2007, 12:42 AM:

Then you'd look like a pirate, which only means you shouldn't be watching Star Wars at all. Instead you should be watching Pirates 3, since it seems they'll be out at the same time.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 02-08-2007, 01:24 AM:

If I were to go see PIRATES 3, I'd wan't two eye patches.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-08-2007, 01:30 AM:

quote: Mike Schindler
Despite what he's said, I think more changes will be made and eventually the movies will be seamless.

Maybe he should just remake IV, V and VI with the standards of excellence that I, II and III have. Then they can all be the same level of crappiness.

quote: Mike Schindler
wan't

Speaking of excellence. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 02-08-2007, 01:38 AM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
Maybe he should just remake IV, V and VI with the standards of excellence that I, II and III have.

I've thought that too. It might not be a bad idea.

quote: Mike Blakesley
Speaking of excellence.

You know, I saw that when I reread my post before posting, and thought, "Wait. That looks wrong. No, wait. It's right." I have no idea why. Oh well.

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 02-08-2007, 02:24 AM:

quote: Mike Schindler
This is Lucas' movie, and he should be able to do whatever he wants to it.

The he should have kept it for himself to enjoy. He really crapped it up.

quote: Charles Greenlee
For example, fixing the transparancy issues during the cockpit shots.

These are the types of improvements that I welcome. Even though I'm a huge fan of the original trilogy, and LOVE any extra footage of the trilogy that I could find, I would NOT want it incorporated into the movie. Release the special edition on DVD with an extra disc containing the extra footage...but dont incorporate it. I disagree with the exclusion of the "original" anakin at the end of Jedi as well...not needed, not wanted. I have the special edition, but I do not watch it. I have copies of the ORIGINAL edition that I treasure much much more. Grainy, crappy sound, untouched beauty. I would welcome a DVD remaster or HD version of it, but until then, this is as good as the movies will get for me.

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 02-08-2007, 02:41 AM:

quote: Frank Dubrois
Release the special edition on DVD with an extra disc containing the extra footage...but dont incorporate it.

Or release the special edition DVD with 2 playing modes. 1 with the added footage, and 1 with it "on the side" That way you can play your touched up, original edition, with it's original cuts and flow, or you can watch it as Lucas "intended it from the beginning" I have a DVD that you can watch the theatrical version, or the director's cut, by selecting it in the menu. I'm not sure how that works, but it doesn't have 2 copies of the movie, just 1. Somehow it either edits out the extra footage on playback by skipping it, or edits in the added footage. But either way, a Special edition DVD set that worked similar would be nice. Then the Deathstar could look really nifty with it's CGI explosions, but still maintain the enjoyablilty of the original.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 02-08-2007, 09:55 AM:

quote: Frank Dubrois
The he should have kept it for himself to enjoy.

Why? What if you were to make a movie, but then revise it years later, changing what you didn't like? Wouldn't you want people to see it? And seeing as how it's your movie, shouldn't you have the right to do that?

If filmmakers start catering to the lowest common denominator, we're gonna get a lot of the same old shit over and over again. If I were a filmmaker, I'd rather make a movie that some people loved and some people hated than one that everybody likes a little bit.

I want to make it clear that I'm not saying the SE's are better or worse than the originals. That's a whole other debate. What I'm saying is it's Lucas' movie, and he should have final cut. And we should respect that, even if it makes the movie suck.

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 02-08-2007, 07:03 PM:

quote: Mike Schindler
it's Lucas' movie, and he should have final cut. And we should respect that, even if it makes the movie suck.

Why would anyone respect the fact that he wants to make it suck? I don't think he set out with that intention, but I think we all have to remember...Michael Jacksons nose. You HAVE to know when to quit. George doesn't seem to know when to say when. The original is what it is....perfection in its own right. It did what it was supposed to do. it entertained millions of people. Even if he didnt update or change anything, the original trilogy would STILL be entertaining millions of people. Taking a classic movie and changing it is wrong. Maybe its the fact that he calls THAT version his original vision and scrapped the original that really gets me pissed off, I don't know, but anyway you look at it, the SE version doesn't jive with me.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-08-2007, 07:29 PM:

As I said Mike...I have no problem with George changing his films...he should just have to surrender the copyrights on the previous version(s). Afterall...if the changes are for the better, what is the worry? [Wink]

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 02-08-2007, 08:19 PM:

quote: Frank Dubrois
Why would anyone respect the fact that he wants to make it suck?

He doesn't want to make it suck. I think his reasons for making the changes are legitimate. And if you ask him, he'll say that he's doing this to make it suck less.

quote: Frank Dubrois
George doesn't seem to know when to say when.

And we do? Filmmaking is not a democracy, or at least it shouldn't be. It's his movie, not ours. We're merely observers. And, if after all is said and done the new versions do suck, it's our right to bitch and moan. But we shouldn't deny their existence.

quote: Frank Dubrois
The original is what it is....perfection in its own right. It did what it was supposed to do. it entertained millions of people. Even if he didnt update or change anything, the original trilogy would STILL be entertaining millions of people.

You may be right or wrong, and it's something which would be fun to discuss. Personally, I think that Lucas is looking to do more than entertain, and by modifying the original movies, he makes them work in a different context, which is ultimately more important to him than their entertainment value. But agree or disagree, it's his choice. Not ours.

quote: Steve Guttag
As I said Mike...I have no problem with George changing his films...he should just have to surrender the copyrights on the previous version(s). Afterall...if the changes are for the better, what is the worry?

By that rationale, I guess the film industry should not give piracy even the slightest thought, since what we have to offer in theaters is far superior.

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 02-08-2007, 09:29 PM:

I have always been of the opinion that once the movie has played for money, it should be locked.

I did the previews of Fatal Attraction and saw the best version and not the version where Glen Close pops up out of tub, which was a direct steal from Diabolique(sp).

Suppose Da Vinci comes back and want to redo the Mona Lisa. At some point the art belongs to the public, no?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-09-2007, 08:30 AM:

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

As a general rule, if you offer a product that people want, they WILL pay for it from you. There are those that will steal...but they will steal from anyone and anything.

Posted by Tom Tomlinson (Member # 703) on 02-09-2007, 10:31 AM:

It appears the process has been put on the backburner.

X-CLUSIVE: Interview with In-Three VP, Dimensionalization® & 3D Digital Cinema

http://x-realms.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=9443&st=0

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 02-09-2007, 01:42 PM:

quote: Mike Schindler
if after all is said and done the new versions do suck, it's our right to bitch and moan. But we shouldn't deny their existence.

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? This is where I lost all respect for George..in the beginning, he never gave us the choice of whaich trilogy to love, the original or his SE. He told us, Here is MY vision of the film and you better get used to it because its the only version you'll ever see again. Why not put out both versions, and see what people REALLY like? One word. EGO. If people didn't buy the SE version, it would have crushed his fragile ego. If you were to put up both version (both remastered, anamorphic, digital sound) side by side, I would bet the original version would outsell the SE version 4 to 1. Since George basically transferred the laserdisc to DVD or VHS to DVD and threw it out there for us to gobble up, we'll never know for sure. George, thanks for nothing pal [fu]

Posted by Dan Suomi (Member # 2585) on 02-09-2007, 03:44 PM:

quote: Mike Schindler
But Lucasfilm has said that it's taking longer than they thought it would, and even last summer, they were implying that they'd wait until there were more 3D screens out there.

If Lucas would release them in IMAX 3D then they would have plenty of screens, not to mention a ton more business.

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 02-09-2007, 04:05 PM:

I'd probably go see it in IMAX

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 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.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 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.

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 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.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 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.

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 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.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 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.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 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.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 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.

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 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]

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 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.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 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.

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 02-11-2007, 09:00 PM:

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

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 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.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 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 ]

Posted by Dan Suomi (Member # 2585) on 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?

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 02-13-2007, 09:11 PM:

quote: Steve Guttag
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.

Exactly......and when I was sitting in the theatre watching the film I wasn't going man this movie would look a whole lot better if it had this or that in it or if they used something that wasn't invented yet.

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 02-13-2007, 11:15 PM:

Schindlers list said

quote: Mike Schindler
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 ]

So why did you watch and record eps 4 and 5? Those were altered too.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 02-14-2007, 09:45 AM:

Mike, I don't have a problem with movies being altered. I have a problem with movies being altered without director consent. Episode IV obviously had director consent.

Episode V was directed by Irvin Kershner. His take on the SE is essentially that the alterations don't matter. Some are good, some are pointless. But in the end, it's the same damn movie. What does matter to him is the restoration work which has been done to the film. He thinks that the SE is better because it looks and sounds better. So that's the version to watch, as far as I'm concerned.

But with Episode VI, Marquand died a decade before any changes were made, so he obviously couldn't approve them. So I watch the theatrical version.

It's worth noting that Episodes I and II have also been altered. The only one which has never been touched is Episode III.

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 02-14-2007, 10:56 AM:

Yeah but they're altered from the directors original vision! [Razz]

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 02-14-2007, 11:32 AM:

Who cares? To me, the most interesting part of the filmmaking process is editing. As I see it, the editor's job is to tell the director that his original vision sucks, and find a way to make it suck less. So, if anything, I would encourage directors to alter movies from their original visions, because 9 times out of 10, it makes for a better movie.

On the flip side, I can totally understand someone not wanting to do that years later. I probably wouldn't.

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 02-16-2007, 12:26 AM:

quote: Mike Schindler
As I see it, the editor's job is to tell the director that his original vision sucks, and find a way to make it suck less

The editors for the orginal Star Wars didn't tell George crap...They tried to edit the original Star Wars their way, and George canned their asses. Probably one of his better decisions based on how well the movie turned out.

If the editors WERE that good at their job (making a movie suck less) then they should move on to direct movies rather than just edit someone elses work.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-16-2007, 10:16 AM:

quote: Frank Dubrois
If the editors WERE that good at their job (making a movie suck less) then they should move on to direct movies rather than just edit someone elses work.

Directing and Editing are two entirely different disciplines, and often demand two entirely different kinds of people for the best results.

Editing is not some "rank" of progression on a ladder up to a "general's rank" of directing.

It is exceedingly rare that any film director can also sit down and do a credible job of cutting the movie as well. One, the director won't have the objective point of view in being able to get rid of certain footage that doesn't matter. Two, editing is a very specialized job requiring very specialized skills and knowledge. Three, and most important, the director often isn't going to have the time to cut his own movie. He's going to be way too busy doing other stuff. Filmmaking is a very collaborative process. The best directors try to surround themselves with very good people to which he can delegate authority and workload.

Certain filmmakers try to do "everything." Sometimes it may work, but other times the quality of the product may be watered down.

Peter Hyams isn't the greatest director, but he certainly isn't the greatest cinematographer in the world either. Yet he usually insists on doing both DP and directing jobs on his films. IMHO, the image quality suffers for it. Many of his movies look very washed out.

Robert Rodriquez seems to prefer directing and editing his movies. He often even comes up with the music score as well. Unfortunately, I think his own music just seems unremarkable compared to people that only create music for a living. If Quentin Tarantino tried doing his own music on Kill Bill rather than letting RZA come up with some much better stuff I think it really would have harmed the overall quality of the two movies.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 02-16-2007, 10:47 AM:

quote: Frank Dubrois
The editors for the orginal Star Wars didn't tell George crap...They tried to edit the original Star Wars their way, and George canned their asses.

I'd never heard this before. Do you have any details? Who were they?

I did read a story in a Star Wars magazine a long time ago about an assembly of the footage that was cut during filming to give Lucas a sense of what he had and what he needed. The journalist was invited to watch the only remaining black and white copy of the cut, and he reported on what the differences were like. But as far as I know, Lucas had always intended to start again from scratch with his team.

quote: Bobby Henderson
Robert Rodriquez seems to prefer directing and editing his movies. He often even comes up with the music score as well. Unfortunately, I think his own music just seems unremarkable compared to people that only create music for a living.

I agree wholeheartedly with almost everything you said, but I like Rodriguez' music quite a bit. And you have to give him credit as one of the truly great director/editors of all time.

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 02-18-2007, 01:35 AM:

quote: Mike Schindler
I'd never heard this before. Do you have any details? Who were they?

I don't remember who he canned, but he ended up bringing in his wife and some asian guy I think. If you have Empire of Dreams, he talks about it in there. The original editors insisted on putting the movie together one way and refused to bend. Empire of Dreams is a great documentary, look into it.