Star Wars Special Edition
Lee Seitz
In article <5d527m$q...@fly.HiWAAY.net>,
Christopher M. Palmer <pal...@HiWAAY.net> wrote:
>My biggest (and geekiest) nitpick was that they spent all of this time
>adding scenes, but the didn't fix some continuity and effects problems.
I agree. I was hoping they'd fix some of their errors.
>The four I noticed primarily were:
>
> 1) when the red R2 unit blows its top, there is a cut back to
> R2-D2, still standing beside the red R2 unit. This would have
> been a simple edit or digital touchup.
I had forgotten about this error, but noticed (and then remembered) it
again when I saw it Friday night.
> 2) when the little mouse alien reaches for a drink in the cantina,
> you can see straight through his mask through the eyeholes.
I figured this would have been one of the simplest errors to fix.
>SPOILERS - Don't read these if you want to be surprised by the new scenes
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>Best restored scenes:
>
>The reunion between Luke and Biggs before the last battle. Not only do we
>get continuity restored ("Who the hell is Biggs?") but we also find out
>why the rebels give Luke an X-Wing when he hasn't flown anything in the
>whole movie and no one there knows him. Great scene.
Again, I agree. This is one change I hadn't read about beforehand, so
I was very pleasantly surprised by it. Too bad they didn't put any
of the Biggs-on-Tatooine scenes back in.
>My least favorite changes:
>
>I *hate* the changes to the Greedo sequence. They change the tone of
>Han's voice and have him shoot Greedo in self defence. Greedo now shoots
>first. It is just too PC now. I preferred Han gunning him down coldly --
>it gave his character more of an edge. Now he is more of a wimp.
I'm getting tired of agreeing with you. 8) I really didn't see the
point of letting Greedo fire first. The thing that bothered me the
most is that, due to technical restrictions, Han doesn't react at all
to Greedo's shot. Most people would involuntarily jump a bit or
something if a gunshot hit right beside them.
>In many ways, the old street scenes in Mos Eisley and the shot of Ben's
>house was more realistic. IMO, they could have added their creatures and
>ship flyovers without adding the overhead shots wich make the town look
>more like Baghdad and less like a sleazy little desert town.
Finally, I disagree. I really liked the new Mos Eisley scenes.
Particularly the critters as they drive in to town (Hey, do you
suppose those were womprats?) and the ships in the air above the city
in the initial aerial shot.
--
Lee K. Seitz * lks...@hiwaay.net * http://fly.hiwaay.net/~lkseitz/
Classic Video Games Nexus Maintainer (fly.hiwaay.net/~lkseitz/cvg/nexus/)
Dare to be stupid. Do the Donkey Kong. O- Finger for Geek Code.
Live long and prosper. May the Force be with you. Up, up, and away!
John Cooper
Christopher M. Palmer wrote:
>
> My biggest (and geekiest) nitpick was that they spent all of this time
> adding scenes, but the didn't fix some continuity and effects problems.
While you're picking nits, I'll add a few of my own.
1. When the Sand Person (my, that sounds so PC) raises up over Luke,
it's obviously a tape loop.
2. On the MF when Luke is battling the remote, the scene jumps when he
turns off his lightsaber (like his hands weren't quite in the right
place after they took the extended lightsaber away). If they can make
LBJ and Nixon talk to Forrest Gump, they ought to be able to fix his
hands.
Just my $0.02 worth.
John Cooper
jbco...@aol.com
--
Buyer to optician: "Do you make aspheric optics?"
Optician to buyer: "All the time."
Christopher M. Palmer
OK, I thought that I would put in my $0.02 worth.
Saturday night was at least my 20th time of seeing the film in a theater,
in addition to seeing it dozens of times on video and on TV. Even without
the new footage, I still noticed a few things that I had never noticed
before.
For the most part, the new footage and effects are great (with a few
exceptions -- see the spoilers below). I would heartily recommend that
anyone with any vague interest in Star Wars see it, again or for the first
time, at a theater. It is amazing how much difference a big screen makes.
Saturday night at the 7:30 showing at the Hollywood 16, the front left
channel on the DTS sound kept cutting out. Picture quality was good (not
a uniform focus). The print quality, however, was excellent.
One of the strange things about the film is that, prior to the THX release
on video late last year, the film had acquired a 70's look. Not just in
hairstyles and stuff, but the actual film quality had began to look like a
Starsky and Hutch rerun. It turns out that this was just film degradation
and not a technical or stylistic defect -- with the cleanup up prints, the
film looks contemporary.
My biggest (and geekiest) nitpick was that they spent all of this time
adding scenes, but the didn't fix some continuity and effects problems.
The four I noticed primarily were:
1) when the red R2 unit blows its top, there is a cut back to
R2-D2, still standing beside the red R2 unit. This would have
been a simple edit or digital touchup.
2) when the little mouse alien reaches for a drink in the cantina,
you can see straight through his mask through the eyeholes.
3) they didn't fix the lightsabres. When Obi-Wan's lightsabre is
seen end on, it doesn't have a "glow". When Vader is see from
a distance, his sabre is white, not red.
4) during the Death Star battle, in the trench, there are shots
from Vader's POV right behind the rebel ships, immediately
followed by shots of the rebel ships with no TIE fighters
behind them.
I would have fixed these scenes instead of adding some of the new ones,
but (obviously), I'm not George Lucas.
I've seen the movie so many times, picking out the new footage was easy.
However, the new footage is integrated well and doesn't just jump out at
you. I had a hard time distinguishing old and new shots in the Death Star
battle.
SPOILERS - Don't read these if you want to be surprised by the new scenes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Best new scenes (IMO)
Most of the Mos Eisley street scenes are really cool. I like the dewbacks
and the Rontos. Check out the CGI stormtroopers, they look really good.
When the rebels leave Yavin, you now see the X-Wings and Y-Wings taking
off. Likewise, when the Millenium Falcon arrives at Yavin, the guy on the
tower now has something to point his gizmo at.
The scene with Han running into the huge roomfull of Stormtrooopers is
really good.
Best restored scenes:
The reunion between Luke and Biggs before the last battle. Not only do we
get continuity restored ("Who the hell is Biggs?") but we also find out
why the rebels give Luke an X-Wing when he hasn't flown anything in the
whole movie and no one there knows him. Great scene.
The Jabba sequence is good. Redundent, but good. I like the part when
Han steps on his tail.
My least favorite changes:
I *hate* the changes to the Greedo sequence. They change the tone of
Han's voice and have him shoot Greedo in self defence. Greedo now shoots
first. It is just too PC now. I preferred Han gunning him down coldly --
it gave his character more of an edge. Now he is more of a wimp.
In many ways, the old street scenes in Mos Eisley and the shot of Ben's
house was more realistic. IMO, they could have added their creatures and
ship flyovers without adding the overhead shots wich make the town look
more like Baghdad and less like a sleazy little desert town.
And my final gripe, I would have changed the computer displays. Poorly
drawn 1976 vector graphics look really out of place.
Still, I enjoyed it very much (and I'll try to go see it again).
Huntsville Times
SPOILERS BELOW! DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN "STAR WARS: SPECIAL EDITION"!
Christopher M. Palmer wrote:
>
> OK, I thought that I would put in my $0.02 worth.
>
> My biggest (and geekiest) nitpick was that they spent all of this time
> adding scenes, but the didn't fix some continuity and effects problems.
> The four I noticed primarily were:
>
> 1) when the red R2 unit blows its top, there is a cut back to
> R2-D2, still standing beside the red R2 unit. This would have
> been a simple edit or digital touchup.
> 2) when the little mouse alien reaches for a drink in the cantina,
> you can see straight through his mask through the eyeholes.
One could argue that Lucas left certain mistakes in the movie to preserve its campy
charm for people who like finding mistakes. Some fans would actually be slightly
disappointed if they could no longer make smart-aleck comments like, "Hey! Luke just
said 'Carrie' instead of 'Leia'!"
> I *hate* the changes to the Greedo sequence. They change the tone of
> Han's voice and have him shoot Greedo in self defence. Greedo now shoots
> first. It is just too PC now. I preferred Han gunning him down coldly --
> it gave his character more of an edge. Now he is more of a wimp.
I liked the original version of the scene, too. But I don't at all think Han is wimpy in
the new version. He still talks tough to an armed man, while casually slipping his gun
out of the holdster. And -- if you've never seen the original version -- the new version
might be more suspenseful now that Greedo fires first. Han's life is in more jeopardy.
Yet he stays just as calm and cool as if Greedo had never shot. Han just gets up, and
tips the bartender for the "mess."
>
> In many ways, the old street scenes in Mos Eisley and the shot of Ben's
> house was more realistic. IMO, they could have added their creatures and
> ship flyovers without adding the overhead shots wich make the town look
> more like Baghdad and less like a sleazy little desert town.
The new shots of Mos Eisley and Ben's house are far more detailed and interesting than
the original shots. I admit that the new overhead shot of Mos Eisley looks an awful lot
like Agrabah from Walt Disney's "Aladdin," but Tatooine IS a desert planet. The climate
and local building materials might influence similar architectural choices.
>
> And my final gripe, I would have changed the computer displays. Poorly
> drawn 1976 vector graphics look really out of place.
Not really. Remember, the moral of "Star Wars" is that humanity and spirituality are
more important than technology. Luke must turn off his targeting computer and use the
Force in order to destroy the Death Star. Drawing added attention to the computer
graphics would distract people from Lucas' theme.
I think the audience is meant to think the cruddy vector graphics are ineffective and
that the Force and instinct are more useful.
Notice that through most of the movie the fate of the galaxy lies in a machine: R2D2.
The stolen Death Star plans are the only thing that can save the Rebellion. And yet who
guards those plans? A mechanical fire hydrant! A beeping trashcan that can't even defend
itself against a band of hooded midgets!
And who accompanies this ineffective hero? A second robot who gets in R2's way, insults
him, and tries to keep him from his mission.
All that was symbolic of the fact that we really can't put our trust in machines. The
point is driven home even more when R2D2 accompanies Luke to the Death Star battle, and
gets toasted by Darth Vader. Luke learns he has to depend on himself and on divine
intervention to survive.
Even the Death Star itself is a symbol of technology that can't match humanity. Luke
destroys it with his instincts. As Darth Vader said early in the movie, "The power to
destroy a planet is insignificant compared to the power of the Force."
Huntsville Times
Lee Seitz wrote:
> I really liked the new Mos Eisley scenes.
> Particularly the critters as they drive in to town (Hey, do you
> suppose those were womprats?)
I asked myself the same question. I'm not sure that they're two meters wide/long though,
as Luke describes right before attacking the Death Star. But the creatures are very big
in comparison to Luke's landspeeder. So maybe they are wamprats/womprats (sp?).