Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[Beast]

Originally Posted by frogmort

That is an awesome pic!
I found a much higher quality one here:

http://starspage.net/blog/wp-content...tos-Actors.jpg

Very nice.... very nice.... Nubian! I was trying to find a better version of that picture. Thanks.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by svenge

There's no hard "proof", but between Rotten Tomatoes ratings, IMDB ratings, and the mountains of anecdotal data on the Internet, I'd say it's still a safe assumption.

Ratings (or reviews) have nothing to do with "want" and there is no link between the two. Look at the ratings for AOTC...hell, look at Roger Eberts devastating review. That didn't change how many people "wanted" to see it. Look how poorly the ratings are for the Saw sequels, and yet look how many people "want" to keep seeing them, making the franchise wildly successful.

Originally Posted by svenge

You're overlooking the underlying reason for choosing the release order. Why would Lucasfilm start with the least popular and worst-reviewed film to start with? Episodes II and III would be easier to convert since they were shot digitally, and Episodes IV-VI would make the most money by themselves. As such, the most logical conclusion is because far fewer people would pay to see Episode I without the threat of having no OT-3D releases if it doesn't make enough money.

Because that is the Episode order that Lucas has stated in interviews that he thinks they should be watched (before discussions of 3D ever occurred). And again, there are many, many fans of the PT to justify starting with Episode "1". (btw, I'm not saying that's my preference - I prefer the OT myself - I'm just saying there is an audience out there that likes the PT, whether you like it or not).

And as a footnote, your comment about Episodes II and III being easier to convert to 3D because they were shot digitally is a misperception. Whether you shoot with a digital camera or a film camera, the image is still 2D (and flat). The Z space still needs to be defined/created for both regardless of digital or celluloid.

[Yeast]

Originally Posted by Beast

Not true at all.

Pretty sure it is true. there were also outtakes from that motorbike show ob-wan did wher he talks about how much Jar Jar embarrased him. i read that he had to apologize to Lucas.

[AlexSing]

Originally Posted by Beast

Not true at all.

Can I ask how you are aware of the details within the contracts between the actors and Lucasfilm?

[42041]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

Ratings (or reviews) have nothing to do with "want" and there is no link between the two. Look at the ratings for AOTC...hell, look at Roger Eberts devastating review. That didn't change how many people "wanted" to see it. Look how poorly the ratings are for the Saw sequels, and yet look how many people "want" to keep seeing them, making the franchise wildly successful

few films enjoy the level of manic pre-release hype the prequels did. what remains to be seen is where people still care enough to go watch them...

[svenge]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

Ratings (or reviews) have nothing to do with "want" and there is no link between the two. Look at the ratings for AOTC...hell, look at Roger Eberts devastating review. That didn't change how many people "wanted" to see it. Look how poorly the ratings are for the Saw sequels, and yet look how many people "want" to keep seeing them, making the franchise wildly successful.

The "Saw" movies didn't cost that much to make (the latest cost $17m), and as such its relatively small fan base more than paid the bills. Also, first-run movies (even sequels) will always get viewers curious to see a new story, but a re-release of TPM (even in 3D) is already a known quantity in terms of plot, reducing the curiousity factor down to the 3D effects.

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

And as a footnote, your comment about Episodes II and III being easier to convert to 3D because they were shot digitally is a misperception. Whether you shoot with a digital camera or a film camera, the image is still 2D (and flat). The Z space still needs to be defined/created for both regardless of digital or celluloid.

In this case I believe it accurate since an exceedingly high amount of the film was shot on green-screen and digitally composited later. The delineation of layers to add Z-space to is much easier since the actors and sets were never physically together.

[Yeast]

Originally Posted by AlexSing

Can I ask how you are aware of the details within the contracts between the actors and Lucasfilm?

I read about it in a magazine when III opened over here.

[AlexSing]

Originally Posted by Yeast

I read about it in a magazine when III opened over here.

I was asking Beast who bluntly told you out of hand that you were wrong

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Yeast

Pretty sure it is true.

It's not.

there were also outtakes from that motorbike show ob-wan did wher he talks about how much Jar Jar embarrased him.

Obi-Wan Kenobi is a fictional character. If you mean the actor Ewan McGregor, as far as I can tell it never happened.
Besides... The English crews on the original Star Wars film thought the movie they were making was rubbish.

i read that he had to apologize to Lucas.

You need to stop reading the supermarket tabloids. It's not healthy.

[svenge]

Originally Posted by Beast

You need to stop reading the supermarket tabloids. It's not healthy.

They're better-written than the prequels...

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by svenge

They're better-written than the prequels...

More popular than the prequels? Sure. Better written than the prequels? I seriously doubt it and I'm one of those that considers TPM to be the serious weak link in the saga.

[Yeast]

Originally Posted by Beast

It's not.

Obi-Wan Kenobi is a fictional character. If you mean the actor Ewan McGregor, as far as I can tell it never happened.
Besides... The English crews on the original Star Wars film thought the movie they were making was rubbish.

You need to stop reading the supermarket tabloids. It's not healthy.

the story that was printed was that they tried to photograph one of the actors with a Jar Jar cardboard standup and he/she refused. then the article said they cheked with a publicist and they were not allowed because of a publicity contract. think it was Japan Today. might still have it.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by 42041

few films enjoy the level of manic pre-release hype the prequels did. what remains to be seen is where people still care enough to go watch them...

Agreed. Sometimes though I still think kids under 20 years old, who grew up with the prequels and think the OT is "old and boring," are not considered when discussing the prequels.

Originally Posted by svenge

The "Saw" movies didn't cost that much to make (the latest cost $17m), and as such its relatively small fan base more than paid the bills. Also, first-run movies (even sequels) will always get viewers curious to see a new story, but a re-release of TPM (even in 3D) is already a known quantity in terms of story.

I'm not sure what your point is here. I was replying to your statement that ratings were somehow synonymous to what people want to see. The Saw movies have low ratings. People still want to see them. I'm not sure what the budget has to do with that.

Originally Posted by svenge

In this case I believe it accurate since an exceedingly high amount of the film was shot on green-screen and digitally composited later. The delineation of layers to add Z-space to is much easier since the actors and sets were never physically together.

Assuming the movies still exist in layered form. I suppose it's possible.

[AltaDef]

Originally Posted by Yeast

the story that was printed was that they tried to photograph one of the actors with a Jar Jar cardboard standup and he/she refused. then the article said they cheked with a publicist and they were not allowed because of a publicity contract. think it was Japan Today. might still have it.

For the love of God, change your profile pic.

[svenge]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

Agreed. Sometimes though I still think kids under 20 years old, who grew up with the prequels and think the OT is "old and boring," are not considered when discussing the prequels.

It makes me sad that those people are even allowed to operate a video device. Do they watch the PT films on one of these?

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

I'm not sure what your point is here. I was replying to your statement that ratings were somehow synonymous to what people want to see. The Saw movies have low ratings. People still want to see them. I'm not sure what the budget has to do with that.

Horror films play by different rules than romantic comedies and action-adventure films. They are largely reviewer-proof, their budgets are smaller, and their potential audience is smaller. While the Saw films were blockbusters in terms of profit margin, their raw box office numbers were merely average as compared to other films oriented to a more general audience. In short, comparisons should be made only between films in the same broad genre.

[AlexSing]

Originally Posted by Beast

It's not.

Obi-Wan Kenobi is a fictional character. If you mean the actor Ewan McGregor, as far as I can tell it never happened.
Besides... The English crews on the original Star Wars film thought the movie they were making was rubbish.

You need to stop reading the supermarket tabloids. It's not healthy.

Beast, how do you know the details of the actor's individual contracts with Lucasfilm?

[georgec]

Haha I did a basic search and found this. Amusing.

http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/02/18...nks-albatross/''

edit - for those who can't view, the MTV interviewer asks Ewan if it's okay to do a Jar Jar impression during an interview for The Ghostwriter. He does the impression, Ewan laughs, the interviewer asks if he's horrified, Ewan laughs it off and says it's a good impression, and they laugh more awkwardly. Not an impressive clip but it's kind of funny watching his reaction to the Jar Jar impression.

[Yeast]

Originally Posted by georgec

Haha I did a basic search and found this. Amusing.

http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/02/18...nks-albatross/''

I can't see this where I am for some reason. sounds like it is funny. i wonder if that guy actually read the script before signing to do TPM?

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by Yeast

I can't see this where I am for some reason. sounds like it is funny. i wonder if that guy actually read the script before signing to do TPM?

Thank you sir! Much better avatar, and it still kind of fits. Jabba looks like he probably has a yeast infection, or two.

[Yeast]

Originally Posted by Beast

Obi-Wan Kenobi is a fictional character.

???????????????????????