Meanwhile, somewhere in Hollywood

I do like their use of wide-angle shots. The bigger question for me is how the mythology works out. We need a good story, dammit.

Incidentally, Steve Jobs is shot on three different films stocks, which lends an artistic element to the film. Given that you tend to take a big interest in film stock, that may or may not be a reason to see it on the big screen.

Steve Jobs sunk like a rock, so I will have to end up watching it on video. Speaking of stocks, though, have you seen Wes Anderson's The Grand Budapest Hotel? Anderson and cinematographer Robert Yeoman shot it in three different aspect ratios, each period-specific. (The film cuts back and forth between three different eras.) The older war-era material is shot Academy aperture at 1.37:1; the Fifties-era material is shot in full 2.35:1 scope, since that was its heyday; and the modern stuff is shot at 1.85:1. The effect worked better theatrically, where it played with a common height and just got wider. On video, the height also shifts, so it is not quite the same effect. Still pretty interesting, though.

The more recent trailers for The Force Awakens are starting to make me wonder if Abrams & Co. are focusing too much on nostalgia. One of the problems with the prequel trilogy (well, one problem among many others) was that it strayed too far from the established look of the series. Wanting to do something new is certainly admirable, but they overdid it so much that it never looked or felt like "Star Wars." The glossy Flash Gordon appearance of everything failed to evoke the lived-in look of the originals -- and the argument that Lucas wanted to show that things had decayed over time is weak, since any given era is always a combination of the old & the new. That is a big mistake that period movies make when not only are all of the cars pristine, but they are nearly always from the same year that the movie is set in, when of course there would have been a combination of old & new, pristine & worn.

Abrams is trying hard to win back the fans that abandoned the series due to disappointment with the prequels, but he may be trying too hard. So much of what is in the current trailers is blatantly trying to evoke things from the original trilogy. If that is all that the movies have to offer, then he will have over-corrected and created a different problem than Lucas did. On the other hand, he (and the marketing department) may simply be doing something clever by showing so much familiar-looking material in the trailers to rope in those Star Wars apostates (like me,) while the movie itself will spring a whole bunch of new material on us. We will know a month from now!

That was exactly my concern eight posts back: that there is too much focus on nostalgia. After seeing the latest Bond, it is a natural concern to have. But, as you say, I guess we will see.

I never got around to seeing The Grand Budapest Hotel. I know it is supposed to be excellent, but the trailers never really did it for me. I really have to be in the mood for the type of humour that movie seems to be using.

You have to be in the right mood to watch any Wes Anderson movie. If you are in the wrong frame of mind, you will be irritated more than amused.


Your previous objections to the nostalgia in The Force Awakens read like it was more focused on plot elements. I was talking more about visual cues. For the movie to really succeed and last, it needs to balance the older elements with the newer ones without tipping too much one way or the other. The trailers right now seem to tip more towards the older elements. We shall see what happens in the final film. By the way, one of your plot objections does not seem quite to be the case, though I will not spoil it by telling you which one. On the other hand, there is one repeated element that you did not mention which is my single biggest concern with the new film. In the words of the bowl of petunias, my only reaction was, "Oh no, not again."

We finally got full internet access at home, rather than just tethering to my cell phone with a data cap, so I just downloaded Harmy's "Despecialized" versions of the original trilogy. I have only been able to watch pieces of them on my computer for the time being, as I needed to order some recordable Blu-Ray discs (and for Jedi, dual-layered recordable DVDs) in order to burn them. (Not one place locally sells BD-Rs!) Those should arrive from Amazon today, and I will burn and watch the movies this weekend (well, at least the first one.) Just looking at scenes on my computer screen has already restored some of my Star Wars fandom that has long since been lost. I have not watched the movies at all since the release of the 2003 DVD boxed set, so it has been a long time. At that point, I pretty much turned my back on the Special Editions and the whole franchise, until I could see the theatrical versions again. They did include the bonus DVDs with the theatrical versions in the 2006 DVD re-release, but those were just taken from the original 1993 laserdisc master, and I already have those laserdiscs. On the other hand, there is no way to connect analogue outputs from a laserdisc player into modern digital TVs, so I have not even been able to watch those. So, I just gave up on the whole thing. But watching some clips of things the way that they used to be, warts and all, brought back too many fond memories to stay cynical about it. Looking forward to watching the whole things!

If you have never seen it, here is a brief documentary from Harmy where he explains the sources that he used and how he put the "Despecialized" versions together. It was an incredibly elaborate labor of love:

Your second paragraph is purposeful vague to the point that I'm not following! But since that was intended so as to not reveal spoilers, I won't ask for further explanation. I do follow what you're saying with visual cues, and I agree with your points.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts once you have a chance to watch the despecialized versions. And particularly if they're worth picking up.

By the way, Seajunior is getting a BB-8 in three weeks. I'll let you know how it works out.

Damn, I want me that BB-8. Make sure that you get some video of it in action.

Combining my vague statements with an obscure reference to The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy probably added to your confusion.

I have watched the Despecialized Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back already, and plan to watch Return of the Jedi tomorrow. And seeing them in versions that are reasonably close to the originals for the first time in probably fifteen years, I can happily announce that the magic is still there. I highly recommend downloading them. They are only 720p, but that was a necessary compromise resolution considering that while they are working primarily off of the 1080p BD master, the laserdisc master that they use for so much material is not even really 480i, let alone 480p, as it was letterboxed rather than anamorphic. The parts of the image which have been replaced are definitely significantly less sharp than even the 720p, let alone the 1080p. They use the original audio mixes -- the Star Wars files contain the original Dolby Stereo, mono, and 70mm six track mixes, all of which are slightly different. It means that you do give up the dynamics and resolution of the newer audio mixes, but it also means that you get the original effects instead of the replaced ones; it is nice to hear the original version of things like Obi-Wan's faked roar to scare off the sandpeople, rather than the strange one that they added to the newer mixes. Regardless, even though I finally bought the Blu-Rays so that I could ethically download Harmy's versions, I will probably never watch the Special Editions again. I can think of nothing in any of them that I miss.

It is pretty challenging to download them, so i can point you in the right direction if you are interested (including a very helpful YouTube video that mostly did the trick for me, though I had to do one significant thing differently after trial and error.) Burning discs is also a bit tricky. The first two movies are available in both full MKV files and more compressed ACVHD versions. The latter can be burned to a dual-layer DVD and played in any Blu-Ray player. The upside is that they have full menu support and are in a ISO format that just needs to be dragged and dropped into a program like ImageBurn and you are done. But they are more compressed, and only use Dolby Digital audio. The MKVs can be played in any Blu-Ray player which offers MKV support, but with a bit more work you can create an image file out of them and burn them as a regular Blu-Ray disc. You get no menus that way, but otherwise it works fine and should play in any Blu-Ray player. That took a bit of work to find the solutions and I can point you in the right direction on that as well.


By the way: go see Creed.

I tried watching Hitchhiker's, but couldn't get past the second episode, so most references will be lost on me.

I take it you've seen The Force Awakens now? As with SPECTRE, I'm probably a couple of weeks away.

The Despecialized set sounds interesting. I might look into it more in the next week or two when I have more time.

Creed: Yes, I know.

That was your problem: you tried WATCHING Hitchhiker's Guide. The only proper version is the original BBC radio serial. I have listened to that more times than I can count, but was unable to get past the first episode of the TV serial, let alone the second. Not only is the humor of Douglas Adams a purely verbal sort of humor which translates poorly to a visual medium, but the TV version was simply poorly made. Sadly, the radio version is out-of-print right now, and even used copies on CD go for $300 and up. Not sure if it is available streaming anywhere, but it is well worth hunting down if it is.

Any luck with The Force Awakens yet? It is well worth a lengthy discussion. No way whatsoever to do that without spoilers. All that I can say in a vague way is that it does have some weaknesses that bothered me, at least on a first viewing. With reflection, however, those weaknesses may have been strengths in that they were what could be called a "necessary evil." In other words, while I may have preferred it if the movie did some things differently, I am leaning towards thinking that it had to be this way, with good cause. Part of that is based on an offhand remark that Eve made after we saw it, which made me rethink my objections somewhat.

But, even if those objections are valid, it is still a worthy trip.

I'm good to discuss when you are. I will definitely need to watch a second time. I suppose my biggest gripe is calling it Episode 7 when it felt more like a remake than a continuation of the story. In other words, I would have enjoyed it more if it had simply been called Star Wars. My other gripe was in a villain that didn't seem quite evil enough (queue Dr. Evil ad lib) or powerful enough, and a hero that found a whole other level of talent in the third act with zero training. Still, the film felt real once again, and grounded in ways that Episodes 1 through 3 failed to achieve.

Well, that is the strange dichotomy with the film: its biggest weakness may well be its biggest strength.  It really did play as more of a reboot than a true sequel, and hit far too many story beats from the first film.  That did bother me while I was watching it -- I should say, that did bother me while I was enjoying it, because it was indeed enjoyable despite that problem. But I am becoming increasingly convinced that the echoes/repetition/stealing (whatever you want to call it) from the first film was a necessary evil.  And what turned me around was what Eve said after it was over.  She is hardly an avid Star Wars fan, and to the best of my recollection she has not seen any of the original films since we have been married; that is over fifteen years.  I did take her to each of the prequels, and she while she did not respond negatively to them, on the other hand I doubt that she could recall much of anything that happened in them.  For her, they were likely more forgettable than bad.  But she reacted strongly to The Force Awakens, laughing, cheering, and even crying; when the credits were rolling, she leaned over to me and said, "Now that was everything that I loved about Star Wars."  So if the film clicked so much with even a casual fan like her, the approach that they took may well have been the best thing.  I think that Ta-Nehisi Coates at The Atlantic said it best when discussing how some people think that the movie is getting too much of a break from critics:

"Over at Vox, David Roberts is right in sync with the idea that The Force Awakens is getting an easy ride. I think this assessment doesn’t spend enough time considering three very important phrases. Those phrases are: Episode I, Episode II and Episode III."

http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2015/12/star-wars-and-the-benefit-of-low-expectations/421593/

And that is it in a nutshell.  The prequels certainly have their supporters, but there is absolutely no doubt that they left a bad taste in the mouths of far too large a percentage of Star Wars fans.  Making this sequel as much of a reboot/remake as a true sequel succeeded in capturing the flavor of the originals in a way that gained back all of the good will that had been lost.  People have gotten excited over Star Wars again, after all these years, in a way that the prequels failed to do.  Essentially, the whole movie is a palette cleanser.  And it worked well in doing that.

The ending was particularly interesting, though, in that it clearly sets up that the sequel will go a completely different direction.  The fact that they hired an independent maverick like Rian Johnson to write & direct Episode VIII certainly supports that notion. So, they make a first film that deliberately echoes the original films as much as possible in order to wipe out the stench of the prequels, and that frees them up to make their own story in the sequel, with the fans following along willingly.  Whether or not that is what I would have personally preferred, it is hard to argue against that it was probably the best possible approach.

Best is always subjective. It was at least handled in a good way. What I found interesting is that while the story arc was largely A New Hope -- echoed even in lead protagonist's name (Ray, as in ray of hope), the team had no qualms in pulling the best parts from each of the films of the original trilogy and putting it together as Episode VII, for a satisfying trip down memory lane, with enough tidbits of a new story to do as you say: head off in a new direction with the sequels.

And for Disney, one must not dismiss the genius of the business idea behind all of this. A satisfying movie means satisfied fans, and that means increased sales with merchandising. Heck, Disneyland is even building a Star Wars themed land. We're fortunate that Abrams at least cares about making movies and servicing the fans of the original trilogy with a quality film in Episode VII.

I'm interested to compare more directly A New Hope with the The Force Awakens. While the former will always be held more fondly in my heart, I suspect the latter is the better movie (better directing, better acting). Alec Guinness and Harrison Ford aside, the original cast hadn't found their stride in A New Hope. Mark Hamill's constant whining is particularly grating, as an obvious example.

Well, of course, I was not using the word "best" as a way of measuring subjective quality, but instead narrowly applying it to the success of the approach that they took with the story and filmmaking.  The goal with this film was never to make the objectively best movie possible, in the absence of all other considerations.  It was to relaunch the franchise and breathe new life into the somewhat moribund fandom.  If the early teasers and other promotional materials had not struck just that right note, I do not think that the movie would have exploded quite the way that it did.  It was going to be a smash hit no matter what, but had they gone a completely different direction, it would not have been as, well, smashing.  While I still may have preferred something different, I do not think that it would have worked out as well as it did. So yes, from a standpoint of relaunching the franchise, I do think that they ultimately took the best possible approach.  

Personally, I would have loved an adaptation of Timothy's Zahn's Heir to the Empire trilogy, although the time frame would have been wrong (the original actors are too old now.)  Grand Admiral Thrawn is the only villain in the (now defunct) expanded universe who was every bit the equal of any of the villains in the original trilogy.  But that was just plain never going to happen, nor would those films have been anywhere near as successful as The Force Awakens has been.


Regarding the acting, when you look back at the first Star Wars, you are of course looking at George Lucas behind the camera, who is not just terrible with actors, but he can actively make good actors look bad.  (I still maintain that he is the only person alive who could get a bad performance out of Natalie Portman.)  Guinness was an old enough salt to hold his own, but I think that even Harrison Ford suffered a bit under Lucas relative to how he blossomed under Kershner.

From what I've read, Disney has dismissed anything outside of the films as being canon. And the prequel trilogy is being conveniently forgotten. Given that, it's doubtful that any of the books will be adapted anytime soon. To that end, people can also dismiss the talk of Jar Jar being a Sith!

Good point about Lucas. However, while Hamill is a sci-fi icon, has he ever been anything more than a mediocre actor (his voice work for BTAS excluded, as that was excellent)? Granted, I haven't followed all of his films, so I may be missing something.

Well, that was my point in saying that adapting books like the Thrawn trilogy was never going to happen. Disney did indeed "kill off" the entire old extended universe and declare it to be non-canon.


Did you see this?

http://io9.gizmodo.com/francis-ford-coppola-wonders-if-star-wars-was-really-wo-1756961201

Short but interesting. And quite the debate in the comments section too. Some people are pointing to Raiders of the Lost Ark, as an example of something more, but I thought that was only written by Lucas (not that that isn't admirable). I could have sworn that Spielberg was directing and Marshall producing, and I think it is that team that made that movie such a success (plus the actors). I will have to look that up, but I'd bet money on it.

Sadly, I'm not sure I'm really that fussed. Lucas gave us some brilliant ideas, and got very rich off those ideas. Then he went down a rabbit hole. Some might suggest that that's indicative of his personality. If it wasn't Star Wars, it would have been something else.

Yes, people commonly get confused about movies any time George Lucas's name is attached as a producer -- or Steven Spielberg's name as well, ironically enough in this case. The reality is that after Star Wars, Lucas directed nothing until Episode One -- over twenty years. He had his name attached to many projects during that time such as the Raiders movies, but in each case he was nothing more than a producer, and more often just an executive producer, meaning he was rarely even on the set, and certainly not involved in the day-to-day production in any capacity. But because he is a "big name," people see him associated and assume that the movies are his. The same is no less true of Spielberg, because despite the fact that he never quit directing his own projects, he executive produced many others that people treat like they are "Steven Spielberg films." Goonies, Gremlins, and many others. But a movie like Gremlins is every inch a Joe Dante movie, not a Spielberg movie.

By the way, a group calling themselves "Team Negative" have released a new version of the first Star Wars, at 1080p, sourced from a decent quality low-fade original LPP print. (Actually primarily sourced from one Spanish language print, with the titles and the Greedo scene added from a poorer quality English language print, since the titles, including the subtitles, were burned into the prints.) They had previous restored just the Artoo & Jawa scene, which Harmy used in his Despecialized version. But they finally finished the whole movie. They built their own homemade flatbed scanner and did a frame-by-frame restoration over a period of eight years. I have it, and it looks amazingly good. It is definitely sourced from a print and has more grain and other defects, but unlike Harmy's compromise 720p version, it is full 1080p, without any of the inserted upscaled SD elements. So it does not look as good as much of Harmy's version, but it is more seamless. Harmy is going to use their work as a source for the next Despecialized version of Star Wars, which means that he can dispense with the upscaled versions entirely, and primarily use the Blu-Ray as a source and only inserting footage from the Team Negative version where he has to do so. So the next Despecialized version of the first film will be as close to perfect as is humanly possible outside of an official release.

http://io9.gizmodo.com/an-original-film-print-of-star-wars-has-been-restored-a-1759904328

Certainly sounds interesting. I really wish the powers that be would get off the high horse and give us an official release of the original theatrical movie. Even if it was just an alternate version on the disc would be fine with me. It baffles me that that hasn't been done and it's now left to a handful of dedicated fans to go to all of this work. I don't get it.

It is all thanks to Uncle George digging in his heels about it. I think that it is pure egotism -- he is so unwilling to accept the fact that many people prefer the original versions that he is refusing to give them what they want just to spite them. And he likely had something about that in the terms of his sale to Disney, or else we would already have newly restored Blu-rays in our hands. Disney will never turn down the opportunity to make a buck, and whatever millions that they would have to spend for proper restorations would be returned many times over. Unless, of course, they are really at work on restorations behind the scenes -- there have been rumors to that effect -- but I am skeptical about that.

On the other hand, neither Lucasfilm nor Disney have put any real effort into legally blocking people like Harmy and Team Negative. They certainly know that these fan restorations are going on, and that people are downloading them. So maybe they are indeed just tolerating it while they are at work on their own versions. I still doubt it.

The model for that kind of thing has been the MST3K community. They actively share episodes of the series with each other as long as they are unavailable commercially, but as soon as there is an offical release of an episode, they withdraw the fan versions. And that has been that way with the blessings of Best Brains, who realize that the fan sharing has been keeping interest in the series alive while the torturous process of straightening out the rights to the episodes goes on. (In the case of that show in particular, the problem is that Best Brains has the rights to the show itself, and they had broadcast licences to play the movies that they did, but those rights do not extend to home video. So in order for an episode to be released on DVD, it has to get clearance for the original movie.)

Similar to your reference to MST3K (I had to look up what that meant, by the way -- and I've never seen an episode), Lucasfilm and Disney are likely choosing to look the other way. There are times when it is important to protect copyright. While this is clearly an infringement, it is not being done to make a profit. It is simply the result of a labour of love by fans to see the original in the best format possible. It would do more damage than good if Lucasfilm and Disney chose to defend their legal right, and I'm sure the PR and legal folks know that.

Nevertheless, they should give us an official release. Just make it an alternate version on the disc. Let fans choose which version they watch.

There are superb models of how to do it right, of course.  For example, the stellar multi-disc version of Blade Runner, which offers no less than five different cuts of the film: the original theatrical version, the international version, the 1991 so-called "director's cut" version, the pre-release version, and a newer true director's cut.   And in that case, I do actually prefer the most recent final "director's cut" version; however, I would be upset if that was the only one available.  The latest Close Encounters of the Third Kind release is also stellar; it offers three different cuts: the original version, the Special Edition, and a newer "final director's cut."  And again, I actually prefer the newest version as it uses the added footage from the Special Edition, but deletes the unnecessary visit inside the mothership at the end.  But I would also be upset if that was the only version available.  For good or for ill, I always want an unaltered original theatrical version, along with any newer versions.  

I did also pick up the relatively new Scream Factory version of Army of Darkness, and it is pretty impressive as well.  For all of the myriad of releases of that film on video, this one finally gets it right.  It has the original theatrical version, the international theatrical version, the director's cut, and even the television version.  Plus, deleted scenes.  So you pretty much have access to all of the available footage for the movie; even the television cut has a couple of scenes added to make up for the loss of running time due to editing for content.  So you can choose which one you prefer, but you do not have to give up the parts of the movie that you like from the other versions -- in the case of that film, there truly is no perfect cut.  They all have strengths and weaknesses.


I am looking forward to grabbing the Blu-Ray of The Force Awakens tomorrow.  I never did get a chance to watch it a second time in the theatre, so I am curious how I will feel about it on a second viewing.

Oh, and speaking of controversial opinions, did you get a chance to see Batman v Superman yet?  If you have not, all that I will say is that the negative reviews (and fan reaction) are completely blown out of proportion.  It has far more flaws than Man of Steel did, and I still prefer that movie, but overall, despite the issues, I was quite satisfied, especially with how the whole thing played out at the end.

I saw The Force Awakens twice in the theatre and I actually preferred it on second viewing because I wasn't as critical about it being a remake. With that less serious attitude, I had more fun with the movie. I also picked it up on Blu-ray, but I haven't watched it at home yet.

I agree that Batman v Superman is not nearly as bad as people make out. Neither is Ben Affleck. I actually thought he did a good job and is more in line with Batman from the earlier seasons of BTAS. He even looks like the square-jawed Bruce Wayne from the comics. That said, I would have still preferred Bale. And while the movie wasn't that bad, it wasn't the best. It will be interesting to see where they take the Justice League storyline. As an aside, I also didn't mind Eisenberg as Luther. Because I'm not a huge fan of the DC universe outside of Batman, I suppose it didn't bother me the same way it did others. I was fine with the fresh take on that character.

And what the hell is Affleck on? I was shocked by how much he had blown up his physique. He always been fairly lean, but not built like he was in Batman v Superman.

On the other end of the spectrum, while I enjoyed and had a fun time with Deadpool, I didn't think it as good as reviewers were making out. Have you seen that film yet?

I missed Deadpool in the theatres and will have to wait for Blu-ray. But I will pick that one up sight unseen, so I will get to it pretty quickly. I did go to Civil War on Friday, and that was definitely pretty awesome. I am not sure if it surpasses The Winter Soldier in my view, but then again I have only seen it the one time, so we will see how I feel after a second viewing. Did you get a chance to catch it last weekend?

No, not yet. Seajunior has abandoned me and now goes with his friends. But that's as it should be, I suppose. He's growing up. So, still on my list.

Well, hopefully you moped out on your own and got to see Civil War. I actually liked Batman v Superman and thought that some of the negative reactions towards it were way, way over-the-top, but there is simply no question that anything that BvS did, Civil War did better.

I do not think that we touched on this yet, but what did you think of the Rogue One teaser? I have to admit that it pushed every single button with me, and I am looking forward to it. For all of the criticisms of The Force Awakens aping too much from the first Star Wars, since Rogue One is actually set just before that film, it legitimately can make just as many callbacks as it wants to. And it grabbed me right from the opening shot walking into the entry of the base on Yavin IV. Sold, right then and there. Plus, I have great faith in Gareth Edwards. His sensibilities are a much better fit for the Star Wars universe than those of J.J. Abrams. The obvious risk is that they are telling a story where we know how it ends, or at least that the rebels will succeed in some form or another. Technically, this is a prequel, and we know how those turned out in the past. But I am on board with it anyway.

To be honest, that is the first time I've seen that trailer. Hard to really judge from a two-minute trailer, and given that I've read literally nothing about this upcoming film. I like that it doesn't at all seem silly and actually presents itself as a rather serious war film. Will definitely be checking it out.