Star Wars Episode II DVD Release on Nov. 12

Nerftoe writes "The DVD and home video of hit movie "Star Wars: Episode II -- Attack of the Clones" will land on retail shelves on Nov. 12, the movie's backers at Lucasfilm Ltd. and Twentieth Century Fox said on Thursday. Lucasfilm and Fox have put together a two-disc DVD set that features six hours of additional material including a documentary about the movie made by Lucas and the movie's other filmmakers and eight scenes that never made it into the movie."

Comments

Cool!

[Vodalian]

I think I'll actually buy this one, haven't bought Episode One yet.

Gotta go out and see what stores are allowing early purchase/reserve copies!

And he thought he could hold out on us

[Britano]

Looks like george saw the light and decided that DVDs will make more moey now than later. Even though he decided this a long time ago, its still good for the fans and good for his wallet. What caused him to be so slow in the first place?

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Fluid Truth]

I thought it was just eps 4-6 that weren't going to be released for a while. The best reason I heard (not necessarily the most plausible, though ;-) was that he wanted to make the DVDs "special" and he didn't have the time to do them "right" for quite some time. So, instead of putting out one version now, then adding a few things on and putting out a special version, then putting everything in and calling it a Collector's Edition, he's waiting until the Collector's Edition is the only one.

If it's true, I see nothing wrong with it.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[NanoGator]

The only way he can prevent the DVD from being pirated to death is if it includes tons and tons and tons of stuff on it. There's still value in buying the disc if it has extras that people don't pirate. (Take notes, MPAA)

I think he wants to be able to provide all that with Eps 4-6. It'd take time, and he's focused (well in a PHB sorta way) on Eps 1-3.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Anonvmous Coward]

He's probably waiting until Episode 3 is done so that digitally correct the inconsistencies he's creating in 4-6.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Dr.Dubious DDQ]

The only way he can prevent the DVD from being pirated to death is if it includes tons and tons and tons of stuff on it.

And/Or charge a reasonable price for it. I'm thinking some of the DVD distributors are starting to clue into this - I've been seeing a few (obviously less famous [They put "Caveman" out on DVD????]) DVD's showingup for $7.99-$9.99 at the local superhypermegamart. That's NEW, not "previously viewed". Heck, that price range seemed just fine for "previously viewed" VHS's a few years ago...

When the price of a typical DVD (new) has dropped down to ~$10 or so (currently seems to be $15-20US for most of them right now) the only people who'll be left pirating will be unemployed small children abusing their parents' broadband connection.

Combined with your point, I'd say that what little real "piracy" there is of DVD's right now (far less than the MPAA claims, I suspect) will dwindle to near nothing in the next couple of years.

Unless, of course, cheap set-top "DivX;)" (or Ogg-Theora?) boxes with TV-out start showing up on the market...and maybe even then.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Archfeld]

If only we could find some way to provide some stats to prove this. I agree with you but as long as the MPAA can produce billion dollar figures out of their A$$, who's gonna get media coverage and political lovin ?

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[neurojab]

-or-

They could sell the DVD at rental prices. That would prevent the lazy among us (myself included) from downloading it, and get a very high sell-through rate. High volumes like that would make them more money than they otherwise would with low volumes and high prices. Even though it's not a great movie, I'd likely buy the DVD if it was that cheap.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[hyperizer]

And I suppose if they lowered car prices people would stop stealing cars too ;-)

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[inkswamp]

There are times when I think I'm one of the only Star Wars fans out there who isn't stuck in permanent bitch mode.

He's probably waiting until Episode 3 is done so that digitally correct the inconsistencies he's creating in 4-6.

Hmm... you must have the finished script for episode III, so you're absolutely certain that what we view as "inconsistencies" are in fact that. I've seen lists of so-called inconsistencies on the web and very few seem like things that can't be plausibly explained in the length of one more film and certainly nothing that will destroy the whole series.

And anyway, if we're going to lynch George Lucas for it, let's make sure we save enough rope for Tolkien. We'll have to dig him up to do it of course, but remember, he backtracked and fixed problems with his stories too (stories that are being cited as examples of perfection in this very discussion), including a well known revision to The Hobbit to make the Golem scenes work with his later plans.

Artists do these kinds of things. At the very least, reserve your judgment until you've seen all three of the new films.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Fat Casper]

So, instead of putting out one version now, then adding a few things on and putting out a special version, then putting everything in and calling it a Collector's Edition, he's waiting until the Collector's Edition is the only one.

No, Lucas is too smart a businessman to not want that. By your math, he'd be able to sell 3 DVD copies of each of 4-6. Me, I don't see anything special about "special." Just put the damn movie on a disc. I don't want trailers, interviews or games.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

I've had a pet theory for a while, and I'm surprised that nobody else has mentioned it.

I think Lucas is waiting for HD-DVD.

I, for one, would love to see the original trilogy become the reference standard HD-DVDs in 2006 or so. Originals, special editions, I couldn't care less as long as it's 1080/24p with 6-channel sound.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Saeger]

Well, see, that's called a bad analogy. :)

--

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

I'd say that what little real "piracy" there is of DVD's right now (far less than the MPAA claims, I suspect) will dwindle to near nothing in the next couple of years.

Ever been to Malaysia? You can buy new-looking DVDs on street corners for $1 or $2 each. They look totally genuine from the outside, unless you look closely to see that the box art was printed on a color copier or laser printer. Once you open the box, you see that the disc's label isn't silkscreened, but rather printed on a stick-on label on the front of the disc. And pretty much every movie is a 2-disc set, evidently because it's more expensive to burn 2-layer discs.

The movies look pristine, though. These aren't shot-with-a-camcorder movies. They're duplicates of official releases.

And in Asia they're literally everywhere. DVDs, VCDs (those are incredibly popular), VHS, CD. They're everywhere.

I think piracy is just as rampant as the MPAA says it is.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[The_Shadows]

Tell me that you realize how absolutely that contradicts what we've been taught about economics?

If Lucas released, say, a Collectors Edition on DVD it would sell many, many copies.

If he then proceeded to release the Definitive Collectors Edition, some people would buy it even if they owned the CE. More money.

If he then released the Platinum Edition, some of the fans who bought the other versions would go, and like good little sheep, buy the new edition as well. More money.

Just ponder to yourself, how many fans own the original trilogy on VHS, the THX enhanced version, and the Special Edition? Or how about any of the above two? I would not doubt that there's quite a few people. Lucas woud be a fool to throw extra money away. He may not know how to make a good movie anymore, but he certainly knows how to make a buck.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Flamerule]

"the Golem scenes"? LOL. Damn, I just spent 5 minutes trying to figure out what you meant there, when it hit me...

Anyway, some pretty interesting info on the aforementioned scene with Gollum can be found here.

As far as inconsistencies are concerned, I think we should remember when talking about Tolkien that he always concerned himself to be a historian, telling the tale of the War of the Ring, and earlier, The Hobbit. There are several points in LotR that when Tolkien was questioned on, he was "uncertain" as to what exactly, was going on, until he took some time to do more "research." Example: it was unclear for a long time whether the Glorfindel that helps Aragorn and the hobbits at the end of Book I, in The Fellowship of the Ring, was indeed the same Glorfindel that fled the fall of the City of Gondolin in the First Age. Tolkien's notes (those published after his death in The History of Middle-earth) seemed to indicate that he had decided the characters were one and the same. However, it is certain he conceived of the characters separately, and he simply accidentally reused the name.

My point, then, seems to be that a good strategy for a writer is to claim he's merely interpreting ancient history, from dusty old notes, so no wonder if occasionally a few errors pop up in one's writing.... It worked for Tolkien -- when was the last time you saw anyone criticizing his works on the basis of internal inconsistencies? (not that there are many of them)

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Jardine]

I think piracy is just as rampant as the MPAA says it is.

In Malaysia, yes. It's a different culture there. You won't find those duplicates in stores here. If you do, the store will be shut down quickly. There, it's not a big deal.

People in the western world tend to buy from large stores like Walmart, Best Buy, or (in Canada) Futureshop. The guy on the street is selling the movie for $2, Walmart is selling it for say $12. Is that $10 worth the risks to the average consumer?

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Ryosen]

Guilty.

Damn you! ;)

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Ryosen]

There is no question that the piracy problem is epidemic in Asian countries. And yet, why is it that it's in the U.S. of A. that our civil liberties are being stripped away and the consumer continuously being raped when it's quite clear that the bigger problems exist outside of America's borders?

Perhaps the almighty US Dollar doesn't buy as much government overseas as it does domestically?

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

You know, this is totally off topic, but it really pisses me off when people jump from the problem of DVD piracy to "our civil liberties are being stripped away!"

Which liberties are in danger, exactly? The liberty to copy DVDs? You never had that liberty, so quite grousing about "losing" it.

I've said this before; my opinion on this subject is no secret. I'm in favor of strong copy protection on media like DVDs and CDs. Vehemently in favor of it. If some jerk hadn't decided to crack CSS-- or, more importantly, if CSS hadn't been so easily cracked (thank you very much, Xing)-- we probably wouldn't have gotten a questionable piece of legislation like the DMCA. Reverse engineering and encryption circumvention is illegal now because people keep doing it! If they would stop, or at least if they weren't so successful at it, the law wouldn't be necessary.

The left-leaning parts of the Slashdot community* often argue in favor of strong crypto, but against copy protection. The irony of this amuses me. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. I have the right to encrypt my data to protect it from theft or from prying eyes. Guess what? Movie studios also have the right to encrypt their data for the same purposes.

Now, I know, I just know, that somebody's gonna get up here and make a stink about how they want to make "backup copies" of their CDs and DVDs. You know what? I don't have a "backup copy" of my car. If I wreck my car, I have to either fix it, or if that's not possible, I have to replace it. I don't get a free backup car to keep in my garage just in case I get into a fender-bender. The idea that you should be entitled to make a "backup copy" of a CD or a DVD is just bogus. Take care of your things. If you break them, you can replace them or go without.

I say bring on the absurdly strongly encrypted HD-DVDs. Hell, if the Free Software guys really want to put their money** where their mouths are, they can start a GNU/CSS project or something. Let's put all those big, pro-crypto brains to work on an actual practical application of crypto technology and see where that takes us.

In short: civil liberties, my ass.

* Some would say that I repeat myself here.
** Please ignore the inherent contradiction. It's just a figure of speech.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Ryosen]

I can certainly see how you might have misconstrued my comment. Allow me to clarify. I am in no way advocating piracy of any form and that includes the duplication of DVDs, CDs, et. al. What I am referring to is the deludge of "legislation" that groups like the RIAA and MPAA are currently trying to pass. Most disgusting of all are those suggestions that American Liberties be compromised in the name of "National Security."

What do I mean by American Liberties? Certainly the doctrine of Fair Use come to mind. Not the freedom to arbitrarily (nee illegally) copy protected works, but the right to time/space shift those works of which a copy is legitimately owned. I don't give a crap if I'm not allowed to download an MP3 of a song that I haven't bought. But, if I buy a CD, there is absolutely no reason why I shouldn't be allowed to make a tape/mp3 of it. This argument, of course, has been beaten to death in these forums so there's no real use in dredging it up here.

Of course, this bit of consumer-level bitching is somewhat trite when compared to the threatened legislation that is before Congress today. Of the biggest note is the notion of a Federally mandated implementation of DRM in all electronic media devices of which computers are included. While at first this seems like a good idea (hell, why shouldn't artists' works be protected?), it is the implication of what these laws mean that cause concern. Of biggest note is the (valid) suggestion that software would be protected under DRM - the installation of which would be managed by the operating system. I have a couple of problems with this and it has nothing to do with the fact that I won't be able to pirate the latest copy of Warcraft III.

As has been discussed here in the past, Microsoft owns the patent on the implementation of DRM as an integrated part of an operating system. Now, nothing against Microsoft, but if DRM becomes mandated by the goverment, that means that all operating systems will have to comply. Do you really think that Microsoft, a company known for its fierce competitive practices, is going to license its patent to competing platforms? As a software developer who's livlihood depends on the Solaris platform (among others), I have a legitimate concern. To say nothing of all of the Linux distros. But let's say, for the sake of friendly argument, that Microsoft (or any other company for that matter) did not enforce it's patent. There's the issue of licensing.

The license for a DRM control mechanism will have to be managed by a central body. It only makes sense that the party be the holder of the technology - again, it's Microsoft, but it could be anyone. Since the laws will mandate that you must conform to the DRM licensing scheme, it follows that any software that you develop must have a license. Thus, you must acquire that license from the controlling party. That puts the controlling party in a position of unbridled power in determining what software can be released to the public. This might be Office applications, games, MP3 players, graphic packages, database systems, operating systems. Returning to the fact that the most likely party to hold this position of centralized control is, in fact, Microsoft, that means that they alone would have say over what software gets released to the market. How likely are they going to be to approve a competeing product? But let's cast the conspiracy theories aside for a moment, shall we? There's a much bigger issue at stake.

What about the companies that do custom development for their own internal use? These companies would still be required to comply with the DRM licensing schemes currently being considered before Congress. That means that, potentially, for every installation of a client application, a license must be purchased. Thus, not only must a company pay for the operating system, the application server, the DBMS - all of which are fair, legitimate expenses - and not only must the company cover the cost of the design, development, implementation and deployment of their application, they would also have to incur the cost of a DRM license for each and every deployment. Now, some folks might say "Screw the big companies, they have millions upon millions of dollars to dump on IT projects. The cold reality is that is simply not true. Worse, it does not take into account the tens of thousands of companies that don't have large IT budgets. For a developer like myself, these often make up a substantial portion of my clients.

So, what we are left with is an overly (and arbitrarily) restrictive environment in which companies can no longer afford or justify the cost of software application development putting people like myself out of work. "Too bad", some might say. "Survival of the fittest" some say. "You shouldn't have copied that floppy", some say. That's a crock of sh|t. In the end, this amounts to nothing more than corporate welfare. Companies cannot or will not assume the burden of protecting themselves and so they turn to the government for interdiction. This wouldn't be so bad if it were a case of the government saying "gee, there seems to be a real problem here, perhaps we should do something about it." No, instead it's the lobbying companies (such as the RIAA) who have realised (and this is the important part) it is far cheaper to purchase the favor of a few senators than to incur the cost of protecting your own property.

Am I opposed to laws that say I cannot steal? Of course not. That's a ludicrous accusation. What I am opposed to is the rights of citizens/consumers/ME being stripped in the name of entities (which happens to be media corporations this time around). What I am opposed to is the oppression, nay, elimination of such "inalienable" rights as the freedom of speech, in order to protect said entities. You don't need to look any farther than the 2600 case to understand what I am referring to. Of course, there is also the issue of people not being able to speak negatively about companies, or to be allowed to explain security-related deficiencies that stand as real, legitimate threats to the citizenry. Stand behind the DCMA all you want, but when a security exploit has the ability to compromise public systems, to make the discovery and subsequent publication of those issues, whose sole purpose exist in the hopes of eliminating them, illegal, well, we really have our priorities screwed up.

This isn't about the liberty to copy a DVD. It's much bigger and infinately more important than that.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

I don't give a crap if I'm not allowed to download an MP3 of a song that I haven't bought. But, if I buy a CD, there is absolutely no reason why I shouldn't be allowed to make a tape/mp3 of it.

Well, now, that depends, doesn't it? Copying the CD to a CDR, bit-for-bit, would be one thing, but making a tape or MP3s from it is something entirely different. Making a tape or an MP3 of a CD is more than just "time/space shifting" (which is a whole different argument). When you make a tape or an MP3 of a CD, you're actually creating a derived work from that CD. It's different from making a copy. Copyright law, on its face, forbids you from making a derived work without permission of the original work's copyright holder. So I think you're on shakier legal ground there than you realize.

The rest of your post is well-written and thoughtful, but it all starts with "legislated DRM is bad" and goes on from there. You're basically making a slippery slope argument, and I don't buy it. Basically, everything would have to go wrong in order for your scenario to come to pass, and I don't think that's likely.

There is just one little point, though, that I disagree with.

Stand behind the DCMA all you want, but when a security exploit has the ability to compromise public systems, to make the discovery and subsequent publication of those issues, whose sole purpose exist in the hopes of eliminating them, illegal, well, we really have our priorities screwed up.

Sounds like you're talking about this week's news of HP using the DMCA to squash news of a security problem in one of the OS's. That little item was reported often, and gotten fundamentally wrong almost as often. The person with whom HP has a complaint was doing more than just discussing the security flaw. He was actually distributing a piece of software that could be used to exploit that flaw. There's a line between talking about security flaws and actually taking advantage of them, and that guy crossed it. DMCA or no DMCA, I think it's reasonable that he should be prevented from distributing his program.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[ceejayoz]

Episode I had some pretty sweet extras - stuff on how they did the fight scenes, how they did some of the special effects - a lot of it was very interesting (and more interesting than EpI!!!)

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Saeger]

I don't get a free backup car to keep in my garage just in case I get into a fender-bender.

And what would you say if it was indeed possible to make molecular-level backup scans of the physical objects you owned? This will be possible by the end of the century.

Would you still be vehemently in favor of not allowing me to keep my molecules/bits in working order? Or would you rather have me on the consumer treadmill by forcing me to buy my Ford (or Beatles album) over and over and over when not even necessary?

--

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[truthgun]

No you can't make a backup copy of your car, but that's what car insurance is for.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Anonvmous Coward]

"Hmm... you must have the finished script for episode III, so you're absolutely certain that what we view as "inconsistencies" are in fact that."

It's not necessary to read the script to arrive at that conclusion. At BEST Lucas might be able to fix some of it up. But let's be realistic: Watch Eps 4-6, then watch Ep 1. If R2D2 wasn't in it, you'd have little to no reason to know you were watching Star Wars.

Let's face facts, Lucas doesn't understand Star Wars' appeal. If he did, we'd have fun movies intead of padded demoonstrations of what ILM is capable of.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[inkswamp]

It's not necessary to read the script to arrive at that conclusion.

I would disagree. At the very least, save any sweeping judgments about inconsistencies until the final movie is out. There are lots of interesting threads that look like they will be difficult to resolve, but give Lucas a chance to do so first.

If you think I'm being a shameless apologist, please don't. I have a strong interest in how Lucas is going to bring the new films together with the old. In fact, here's a list I found a week ago when looking up info on exactly that.

If he did, we'd have fun movies

I had an absolute blast watching both episodes I and II. What's funny to me is that a lot of the criticisms being levelled at the new films also frequently apply to the old. I think the audience has changed more than the George Lucas' approach the films.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[inkswamp]

"the Golem scenes"? LOL.

LOL! That was dumb. Okay, I think that link to the AD&D archive from this week has me stuck mentally in the Monster Manual. Sorry for the confusion. :^)

My point, then, seems to be that a good strategy for a writer is to claim he's merely interpreting ancient history, from dusty old notes, so no wonder if occasionally a few errors pop up in one's writing....

It's still the same thing. A revision is a revision is a revision. The thing is, I don't really have much problem with storytellers (in any medium) going back to revise stories a bit, particularly if they are telling an epic tale like SW or LOTR. It does puzzle me when fans can't seem to get over it.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[RickHunter]

Copyright law, on its face, forbids you from making a derived work without permission of the original work's copyright holder.

WRONG! Copyright law does not forbid you from doing anything in the privacy of your own home. I can take the Episode II DVD, rip it to DivX;), replace the dialog with that from my (legally purchased) Monty Python set, and then re-encode it as Quicktime and run it backwards. There's nothing George Lucas or anyone else can do to stop me.

What is illegal is doing that and then distributing the derived works. Or selling my original copy and keeping the "derived works" - I have to destroy them or include them in the transferred property.

As for abuses of DRM law, how's this? A 16-year-old in Norway gets arrested and all electronic equipment in his parents' home siezed. Why? Because the MPAA told Norwegian law authorities that he'd written "illegal software". What had he really written? Software to decode a DVD for playback. I believe that he is now a legal adult under Norwegian law, and has since had Norwegian law authorities try to arrest him several times, under the laws for arresting an adult, for this same "infraction".

A man travelling to America to give a presentation at a technical conference is arrested. Why? He made a program to decode the encryption on Adobe's E-Books. Why? His company made software - required by Russian law - to enable the blind to read E-Books.

A technical magazine gets taken to court for having links to pages containing the "illegal software" written by that kid in Norway. And looses.

A professor doing research into audio encoding and watermarking discovers a way to break the industry's new "protection" scheme. He plans to present information about his research (which has interesting implications) at a technical conference. The industry threatens him with action under the DMCA, then "backs down". Not only do the courts decide that the industry's threat was perfectly valid, but the conference organizers refuse to let him on-stage for fear of legal action. He is unable to get his paper published, again, for fear of legal action.

An established, well-known programmer employed by an American company is afraid to set foot on American soil. Why? Because his work on a certant piece "fringe software", "widely known" to be used for "piracy" and publication of documents describing vulnerabilities in that software could get him arrested. Despite the cries of paranoia by the online community, several lawyers both in America and his home country confirm his suspicions.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[sbaker]

> The liberty to copy DVDs? You never had that liberty...

Yes, you did - it falls under 'fair use' provisions. This includes
your rights to make a backup, your right to use small clips for the
purposes of criticism or satire, ...lots of reasons.

> I'm in favor of strong copy protection on media like DVDs and CDs. ...
> If some jerk hadn't decided to crack CSS...we probably wouldn't
> have gotten a questionable piece of legislation like the DMCA.

You completely miss the point.

You can copy a DVD without DeCSS - it's just a bunch of files on
a DVD-ROM. If you want to make an illegal copy that'll play on a
DVD player then you certainly *don't* want to un-encrypt it!

However, if you have legally purchased an original DVD and you'd like to
play it on your PC (running Linux say) - then you need to be able to
decrypt it. That's what DeCSS is for - and when I use it this way, I
wasn't breaking any laws....until DMCA came along.

DMCA made illegal the simple process of watching a DVD that I'd legally
purchased and had absolutely zero effect on the ability of people to
pirate DVD's. Even if it did have something to say about illegal
copying of DVD's, it was a completely unnecessary law because that was
ALREADY illegal.

> Now, I know, I just know, that somebody's gonna get up here and make a stink > about how they want to make "backup copies" of their CDs and DVDs.

No, I don't. I just want to play my DVD on my DVD drive without being forced
into using a Microsoft operating system to do it.

> You know what? I don't have a "backup copy" of my car.

But when you buy a car, you *own* it...all of it.

When you "buy" a DVD, you bought the physical media (cost about 50cents)
*and* the rights to use the information it contains (cost about $18) when
the physical media craps out, why should I lose all the information on it?

I think the right to backup copyrighted media *is* valid - although I
don't choose to do so myself.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Jeff DeMaagd]

There are a great many pet theories about why Lucas is putting off the original trilogy so long.

Waiting for HD-DVD might work, but he just may be waiting for a more "secure" format to come along. Any high-definition movie disc standard has a strong chance of being tightly encrypted and would likely use the encrypted digital-out DVI standard.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

And what would you say if it was indeed possible to make molecular-level backup scans of the physical objects you owned? This will be possible by the end of the century.

What would I say? I'd say you're being silly. You can't make judgments of policy based on fantasy. There's no evidence-- scientific, anecdotal, circumstantial, or otherwise-- to lead to the conclusion that such a system or process will ever exist. So the whole question is pointless.

However, just for fun, I'll go along with you.

You can't create a car out of nothing. So what you're talking about is just a different form of manufacturing; it's not an issue of copying at all. If you want to manufacture your own car to match the precise specifications of the car you bought, that's your own business.

Copying a CD or DVD isn't manufacturing. It's either copying, in the case of a bit-for-bit duplicate, or it's creating a derived work, in the case of making a tape or some MP3s or a VCD or whatever else.

Copying is expressly prohibited by the Copyright Act. You can't reproduce a work unless granted express permission, or unless you hold the copyright. Period.

The Copyright Act also grants the copyright holder exclusive right to make a derivative work from the original.

So making a copy of a CD, or making MP3s out of a CD, is expressly prohibited under the Copyright Act.

"But what about Fair Use?" you say? Fair use is not spelled out in any legislation, but has been created by the judiciary out of the body of case law pertaining to copyright disputes. There are four accepted criteria for determining if a use of a copyrighted work is fair, or if it's a violation.

1. the purpose and character of the use (i.e., was it done to teach kids, or for personal use, or to make money?)

2. the nature of the copyrighted work

3. the amount of the copyrighted work used as a proportion of the whole

4. the effect of the use on the value of the work, or the potential market for the work.

So when you make an MP3 of a song, you're creating a derivative work for personal use (1 point for fair use) from a rightfully protected work (1 point for violation). You're taking the entire song (2 points for violation). If you took a small piece of the song, that would count toward the use being fair. If you took a large part of the song, that would count for violation, but only a little bit. Taking the whole song is clearly on the side of violation. But you're not intending to distribute the MP3 to anybody else (1 point for fair use).

It's a close call, but "space-shifting" a CD into MP3s is probably not protected by fair use. Of course, nobody will care unless an example of such a practice becomes actionable. I doubt that anybody's going to sue you because you dumped a CD into your iPod. But there's no legal justification for opposing copy-protected CDs, either, because preventing digital copying won't prevent the fair use of the works.

So yeah, I'm still "vehemently in favor of not allowing [you] to keep [your] molecules/bits in working order?" Because the method that you propose to use for doing so is harmless enough, but it's expressly forbidden by the Copyright Act, and it's not protected by the doctrine of fair use. In this case, the benefits of copy protected media (reduced shrinkage due to piracy, meaning reduced costs to the public, and also greater availability of goods to the public) outweigh.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

No you can't make a backup copy of your car, but that's what car insurance is for.

So if I started offering DVD insurance, you guys would all stop complaining about how the MPAA tries to take away your civil liberties?

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Ryosen]

making a tape or MP3s from it is something entirely different

It's apparent that you don't understand the Audio Home Recording Act 1992. I suggest you read it. It quite clearly supports a consumer's right to move a recorded work to another medium for personal use. Otherwise you wouldn't be allowed to video tape a television program or make a tape recording of an album to listen to in your car. These uses were part of the reason that the amendment of Title 17 (aka Copyright Act of 1976) came to be. They are quite clearly extendible to the mp3 recording for personal use. What is not covered is the distribution of the derived work which is not in debate here.

With reference to your comment about the abusive use of the DMCA to suppress the disemination of security vulnerabilities within commerical operating systems, the HP incident that you cited is but only one small example. A more likely example would be Microsoft's attempts to prevent security groups from publicly announcing vulnerabilities so as to avoid any further publicity embarrassments.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

WRONG! Copyright law does not forbid you from doing anything in the privacy of your own home. [...] What is illegal is doing that and then distributing the derived works.

:sigh:

Title 17, section 106, says, in whole (emphasis mine):

Subject to sections 107 through 121, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:

(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;

(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;

(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

(4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly;

(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and

(6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

So you see, it's against the law for you to do any of those things without permission. It's a oft-repeated falsehood that copyright violation only occurs if you distribute the work. Distributing the work alters the degree to which the injured party is entitled to seek damages, but that's all.

Now, there are specific and well-defined exceptions to the exclusivity of the rights of the copyright holder. For example, in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios the Supreme Court upheld the District Court's decision that time-shifting in the privacy of the home is legitimate fair use.

The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 amended Title 17 to state (paraphrasing here) that no copyright violation action could be brought against any individual for the noncommercial in-home use of digital or analog recording equipment. So in that specific circumstance, you're right. You can make copies of music for noncommercial purposes, using audio recording equipment, in the privacy of your home.

But in RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia Systems, Inc., however, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals made two very interesting findings. First, they found that a computer, and by extension a computer-based portable MP3 player, is not an audio recording device, and as such is not covered by the 1992 amendment to Title 17. However, they also found that the use of a portable MP3 player to make personal copies of rightfully purchased music "is paradigmatic noncommercial personal use entirely consistent with the purposes of the Act."

So the specific instance of making copies of rightfully purchased music CDs to a portable MP3 player is allowed. But that doesn't extend to "you can do anything you want in your own home." In particular, it has nothing to say about your example of turning a DVD into a digital movie file on your computer. Furthermore, altering the movie in the way you describe would clearly be in violation.

Of course, it's unlikely that you'll ever get caught if you keep it in you own home. But it's still technically illegal.

(You can-- and, evidently, should-- read Title 17 for yourself at http://www.copyright.gov/title17/.)

Now that that's out of the way, I'll address your examples of what you call "abuses of DRM law." I'm not going to address them individually, because they're all examples of the same basic principle.

Copyright protection circumvention is against the law. In other words, if a publisher takes measures to prevent the copying or other unauthorized use of their works, and an individual or group comes up with a system or device for circumventing those measures of prevention, then you've broken the law. If you share that system or device, then you've broken the law.

That's the law of the land. It was passed by Congress and rightfully signed by the President. If you don't like it, that's fine, but by definition, enforcing the law is not abuse of it.

If you stand up and say, "There are four ways to decode a DVD without a licensed DVD player," you haven't broken any laws. If you say, "Here's how you decode a DVD without a licensed DVD player," you may have broken the law, depending on how much detail you provide. And if you say, "Here's my program for decoding a DVD without a licensed DVD player," you have definitely broken the law. Furthermore, if somebody else says, "Here's his program for decoding a DVD without a licensed DVD player," that party has also broken the law, because they're also distributing your system or device.

It's another common misconception (we're surrounded by those this morning, aren't we?) that the DMCA makes it illegal to talk about flaws in encryption systems. That's not true. The DMCA makes it illegal to actually circumvent encryption systems, or to distribute systems or devices for circumventing encryption systems. They're very different things.

By analogy, it's illegal to break into a person's home. It's not, however, illegal to talk about breaking into a person's home. But in most jurisdictions, it's illegal to sell or distribute, or possibly possess, devices used to break into people's homes. You can talk about locks, you can talk about security systems, but you can't sell lockpicks. (Again, in most jurisdictions.)

And here's the most important thing: it's illegal to break into someone's home even if you only did so to demonstrate that their home can be broken into. You can tell somebody that their home is vulnerable. You can even tell them how, exactly, it's vulnerable. But if you get fed up with their reluctance to put double locks on their doors and decide to break in just to prove your point, then you've gone too far.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

However, if you have legally purchased an original DVD and you'd like to play it on your PC (running Linux say) - then you need to be able to decrypt it. That's what DeCSS is for - and when I use it this way, I wasn't breaking any laws....until DMCA came along.

Gee, sbaker, what part of "licensed" is unclear to you? If there's no licensed DVD player software for your operating system, then there's no licensed DVD player software for your operating system. That doesn't make it okay for you to crack the encryption scheme and do what you will with the data on the disc. Legitimately licensed DVD players-- both hardware and software-- are widely available. The correct-- and legal-- course of action in your case is to play your DVD on any licensed DVD player. Period. If you don't have one, get one. If you don't want to get one, then don't play the DVD.

I really don't understand what's unclear about "you aren't allowed."

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

Any high-definition movie disc standard has a strong chance of being tightly encrypted and would likely use the encrypted digital-out DVI standard.

Agree on the encryption point, disagree on the DVI point. I would be amazed if HD-DVD players only included a digital video output. There's way too much gear out there-- including my HDTV-- that accepts analog component YUV video, and component output components (sorry) are very cheap to build and buy.

I wouldn't be surprised if you could buy DVD players with DVI outputs as an option, but I'd be astounded if they were the only outputs.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

It's apparent that you don't understand the Audio Home Recording Act 1992.

I do. Do you? In the case of RIAA v. Diamond, 1999, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that computers, and by extension MP3 players, are not audio recording equipment, and are therefore not covered by the 1992 amendments to Title 17. The AHRA doesn't apply to questions of computer-based recording or encoding.

Otherwise you wouldn't be allowed to video tape a television program....

You're thinking of Sony v. Universal, 1983. In that case, the Supreme Court upheld that in-home time-shifting of television broadcasts is legitimate fair use. But that's very different from making MP3s from CDs.

They are quite clearly extendible to the mp3 recording for personal use.

Except the court doesn't agree. Again, see RIAA v. Diamond.

A more likely example would be Microsoft's attempts to prevent security groups from publicly announcing vulnerabilities so as to avoid any further publicity embarrassments.

Saying, "There's a security vulnerability in SurfOS 1.0," is okay. You can even get fairly specific. Saying, "Here's how you exploit a security vulnerability in SurfOS 1.0," is not. Saying, "Here's a copy of my program to exploit the security vulnerability in SurfOS 1.0," is also not okay.

As long as you stay on this side of that line, you're in the clear. But if you cross it, have your lawyer on speed-dial.

Now, that said, anybody can threaten anybody else with a lawsuit, with or without merit. Threatening somebody with a lawsuit isn't against the law, nor should it be. If you decide, for whatever reason, to back down because of the a baseless threat, then that's not a sign of a bad law. It's a sign that you had the wrong attorney.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Anonvmous Coward]

"What's funny to me is that a lot of the criticisms being levelled at the new films also frequently apply to the old. I think the audience has changed more than the George Lucas' approach the films."

I doubt it. I just watched the original 3. I had lots of fun watching those. I watched AOTC and about fell asleep.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Saeger]

There's no evidence-- scientific, anecdotal, circumstantial, or otherwise-- to lead to the conclusion that such a system or process will ever exist.

Have you been hiding under a rock? Molecular Nanotechnology is absolutely possible--look in the mirror for example. Unlike anti-gravity or cold fusion, we know that molecular manufacturing is possible, because every plant and animal on Earth is a working proof of the physics. It's only a matter of time before we unlock the "magic".

But since you're humoring this idea in the rest of your post...

If you want to manufacture your own car to match the precise specifications of the car you bought, that's your own business.

Are you sure that's what you meant to say? I've got quite a lot of "dirt" under my property that can be reassembled into the form of a truck (proprietary design or open)--not an infinite supply like with bits, but an abundant supply of molecular feedstock nonetheless, which can also be infinitely recycled because atoms don't wear out.

If I can make a copy of my car for fractions of pennies on the dollar, then so can Ford, but Ford is going to be in a similar position as the copyright cartel companies if they attempt to use weak copy-prevention technology in combination with bad law in order to keep the profit margins they're used to. Right now an instance of a car is expensive for good reason, and the margin is justified, and this pays for the engineers, and designers, marketing, and bean counters, etc...

So basically, I have a problem with artificial scarcity in a world of abundance, whereas you don't. You would like to be my master. I wonder what you do for a living that you're so eager to see fair use killed off...

--

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Saeger]

I really don't understand what's unclear about "you aren't allowed."

An authoritarian who's unable to understand why rule-breakers break rules? *gasp* :)

--

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Saeger]

Saying, "Here's how you exploit a security vulnerability in SurfOS 1.0," is not [okay].

Wow. You really are an authoritarian ass.

Security through obscurity doesn't work, and vague statements of insecurity certainly won't motivate a company to fix anything.

--

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[Ryosen]

found that computers, and by extension MP3 players, are not audio recording equipment

Bad example. You can record television programs using your computer. By your example, that would make VCRs ineligible to be considered recording devices "by extension." A computer is a multi-purpose device, one of whose abilities is to act as an MP3 player. However, MP3 players are not the exclusive domain of the computer. I have both a portable MP3 player (that more closely resembles a CD player than a computer) and a component player (my DVD player), neither of which are computers. An MP3 player, and by extension, cassette recorders are protected under the Audio Home Recording Act.

Saying, "Here's how you exploit a security vulnerability in SurfOS 1.0," is not [ok].

Again, I don't agree with that statement. If anything, it is dangerously false. As the owner of several systems, it is imperitive to my my survival to know if, when, and how those systems are at risk. Furthermore, it is essential that I be able to test those systems for potential failures and take any neccessary corrective actions. Leaving it up to a company (MS, HP, whoever) to fix the problem knowing that their priorities might differ vastly from my own, is dangerous. If anything, it could be argued that the publication of those exploits is what gets them fixed in the first place. There is entirely too much complacency among companies to say "well, people aren't likely to think of trying to create a buffer overflow in program XYZ, so we'll just let it slide. Maybe we'll fix it in the next release. If it's profitable." Publication of these system problems allows those of us affected by them an opportunity to protect ourselves. It also puts the necessary presure on the manufacturers to fix them.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[inkswamp]

I doubt it. I just watched the original 3. I had lots of fun watching those. I watched AOTC and about fell asleep.

Different tastes, I guess.

I won't argue that the new films are better than the originals, but rather that they aren't as bad as some fans make them out to be. I recently watched Star Wars (i.e. episode IV) with my 6-year-old daughter. She really enjoyed it, but I was constantly struck by how much of the film's weaknesses I was unable to judge (and thus ignore) back in my younger days -- acting, pacing, plot holes, bad special effects (oh, yes, IV has a ton of grimace-inducing effects.) This doesn't ruin the film for me, but it makes me wonder what percentage of the fans out there now just can't slip back into that frame of mind, and thus the criticisms about the new films (much of which apply to the original films.) You sort of have to let go. Remember that Lucas has stated that he set out only to make the ultimate matinee fodder, not to produce the Great Sci-Fi Epic. My daughter loved the film and can't wait to see the other two. I can't wait to watch them with her. It's fun, and I bet she'll love the new films just as much.

--Rick

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[theefer]

$10 one DVD ?

OMG, in Switzerland it's $30 (new movies) ! Now if they still don't understand why we all like DivX ...

But the "plenty of stuff = additionnal value" idea is really a good point, though they often use it to justify a even higher price ...

Oh and nobody would mind if they stopped the multiple-super-extra-version stuff (I don't want to buy three times the same movie to have 3 minutes extra footage).

I think that, above all, it's a matter of respecting the customers and providing them with what they want "and more". Stop thinking about how you'll fool the customers to make more money.

Just give them what they want, they'll buy it, you'll get the money. It's just that simple.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[foobar104]

Unlike anti-gravity or cold fusion, we know that molecular manufacturing is possible, because every plant and animal on Earth is a working proof of the physics.

So you think that soon you'll be able to "grow" a car? Truly amazing. What a time to be alive.

Except, of course, for the fact that that's absurd. Organic chemistry is fundamentally different from inorganic chemistry. It's a long way from a pancreas to an assembly line. Creating proteins in catalyzed chemical reactions is one thing, but assembling components on a macroscopic scale is something else entirely.

But let's start simple. Show me a self-sustaining molecular-scale process that can produce, say, a six-inch cube of manganese. That should be pretty easy, right? After all, plants and animals have been doing "molecular manufacturing" for hundreds of millions of years.

No offense, friend, but you seem to have left most of the science out of your science fiction.

Are you sure that's what you meant to say? I've got quite a lot of "dirt" under my property that can be reassembled into the form of a truck (proprietary design or open)--not an infinite supply like with bits, but an abundant supply of molecular feedstock nonetheless, which can also be infinitely recycled because atoms don't wear out.

Okay, again with the high school chemistry. What you're talking about has a name: it's called alchemy. And it's impossible. You can't just turn an atom of silicon into an atom of iridium, at least not on a large scale.

So without magical alchemy at your disposal, you'll have to use plain old mining. Of the dirt under your house, the vast majority of it is what's called "soil solids." These solids are made up, chemically, of 50% oxygen, 30% silicon, 7% aluminum, and a measly 3% iron. The other 10% is made up of organic matter (carbon and nitrogen, mostly) and nearly everything else. Literally. All the elements from hydrogen to uranium-- the naturally occurring elements, in other words-- can be found in plain old topsoil, albeit only in trace amounts.

The vast majority of the mass of your car is steel (i.e., iron) and aluminum. So if you wanted to make a car out of the stuff under your house, you'd have to dig up enough iron and aluminum to roughly equal the mass of your car. According to the Alcoa people, the average car's frame contains 1/7th of a ton of aluminum. (Actually, they said that one ton of aluminum can make seven cars. Flip it on its head to get tons per car.) So let's figure that you need 1/7th car's worth of aluminum and 6/7ths car's worth of iron.

Assuming that you can get the necessary aluminum and iron from the same load of dirt, that comes to approximately 57 tons of dirt.

Compacted dirt weighs 110 pounds per cubic foot. So 57 tons of dirt would occupy a volume of about 1,030 cubic feet. That's a cube a little over ten feet on each side. In other words, big. Very big.

Once you've gotten that out of the ground, you still haven't tackled the problem of how to get the iron (which is probably all tied up in iron oxide) and aluminum (ditto) out. I'm going to assume that you'll resort to "nanotechnology" or "molecular manufacturing" at this point and hand-wave that problem away.

As I said before, if you want to try to manufacture a car out of the stuff under your house, be my guest.

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[rakslice]

I don't really get it... As high-speed internet connections become more popular and capacity increases, there's really nowhere to go but up. Another $5-$10 price drop may moderate that, but I don't think it will do much. Although piracy will always be more widespread among those with less disposable income and more free time on their hands, with the current state of affairs you really only need to spend a minute or two doing a search with your favourite p2p client and it will take care of the rest; not exactly a big time expenditure, even if you throw in a $0.75 CD blank and 10 minutes for burning.

I don't think the lack of a set-top DivX player is holding back piracy much... First of all, some will still prefer the picture quality of their monitor to the advantages of screen size and comfortable seating available in their living rooms. But, more importantly, VCD/SVCD-capable DVD players are already filling that role to a small degree; what will happen when DVD[-+]R drives and media become more affordable, and burning your DVD rentals is just a click of the mouse away?

Re:And he thought he could hold out on us

[IndependentVik]

Intellectual property is to porperty as fools gold is to real gold
(borrowed from a sig seen on slashdot).

Of course your source was slashdot. Why else would "property" be spelled wrong? :)

w00t

[Golantig]

This rivals the LotR 4 disc set ;)

Re:w00t

[quintessent]

In quantity...

So

[Anonymous Coward]

I assume this means that the original and Empire Strikes Back are already out on DVD? What - no? Fuckin' Lucas put down the doughnuts and put out your *good* movies!

Re:So

[Anonvmous Coward]

Well.. he is putting the DVD's out in order. 1... 2... 3...

Re:So

[nenolod]

They are available, just not widely. You gotta shop around man...

Re:So

[AKA da JET]

They are just laser disc rips tho. And from what I hear the quality of those bootlegs are so-so. I would rather have a legal copy made available.

Re:So

[dorsey]

Hell, I just bought the laserdiscs. Problem solved.

Hurray! Audio comentary!

[Ted_Green]

It can't be as bad as its wooden actors.

The missing parts

[Daimaou]

I don't know why they'll bother adding to the DVD all the edited Meesa... yousa...nonsense parts. Nobody will watch them anyway.

Let's hope it's not....

[bucklesl]

eight scenes of Jar Jar that never made it into the movie

shudder

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[WEFUNK]

eight scenes of Jar Jar that never made it into the movie

Or worse, seven of Jar Jar plus one boy band scene.

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[Lord_Slepnir]

eight scenes of Jar Jar that never made it into the movie

Look on the bright side....some of those can be death scenes of Jar Jar

Scene 1: Anakin and Obi-Wan fighting Druku, Anakin has just gotten his arm chopped off. Suddenly, by the launch bay doors, a shadow appears...and out comes Jar Jar. He exclaims "NOOOSA yousa cannot hurt massa Anakin". Druku then throws his lightsabre at Jar Jar, severing both of his ears. As Jar Jar bends to pick them up, Druku picks him up by his neck and brings him 20 feet into the air. Jar Jar is then flipped and dropped head first. His brains form an elequant star pattern.

Scene 2: The Gungans have joined the clone army in the final battle scene, with Jar Jar at their head. His mount trips, and he goes flying forward, and accidently falls in the middle of a wagon of catapult ammo. As he clambers up, he trips over the back, causing it to break. Hits the dirt hard, and when he looks up, the Boombas have fallen out and are rolling at him. One hits his head, and it explodes, causing an elequent star pattern in the dirt.

Can you think of more? Post them!

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[daeley]

Hey, you made a cool portmanteau! Eloquent + elegant = elequent. :)

Scene 3: Jar Jar sees Anakin diving out of the air car and stands up in his own car to watch... leaning too far over, of course, briefly catching his foot in the seat belt, then plummeting several hundred feet to become a vaguely Gungan-shaped, somewhat star-patterned hole in the street.

Scene 4: The other ambassador from Naboo, irate and distraught, pushes Jar Jar over the side of their floating senate car when the latter proposes Chancellor Palpatine be given emergency powers. Jar Jar lands, breaking his back, on top of the Wookie delegation, which proceed to break the rest of him. Half of him (Jar) winds up next to the ET cameo. The other half (the other Jar) is shipped to the Geonosian arena for immediate consumption by the reek, acklay, and nexu.

One can but dream.

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[_Sprocket_]

Or worse, seven of Jar Jar plus one boy band scene.

...or even worse... Jar Jar SINGING with the boy band in the boy band scene.

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[Rone]

Look on the bright side....some of those can be death scenes of Jar Jar

Why settle for death when we have far worse torments at our disposal?

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[theDigitizer]

Scene 5: Jar Jar is walking in the Jedi Temple along side Obi-Wan when Obi-Wan goes to ask Yoda for advice. Jar Jar trips upon entering the room, and impales himself on ten different young padawan's mini-lightsabers, forming an eloquent pattern forever more in the star room.

Scene 6: Jar Jar comes with Obi-Wan to Tarsis, where he immediately slain using an eloquent star-shaped spinning blade, upon Obi-Wan and his' capture for being confused with the Genosian's mortal natural enemy, the high jumping womprat.

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[sharkey]

Scene 3: The Naboo delegation requests protection from the Jedi council. As they turn to leave, Jar-Jar pinches Padme's ass, thinking no one notices. Then, Mace Windu yells, "Doan' be disrepecting tha ho, muthafucka!" and whips out his lightsaber. He lops off Jar-Jar's head, making him spill his bowl of hot grits, while Padme, petrified with shock, watches.

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[Tablizer]

The other half (the other Jar) is shipped to the Geonosian arena for immediate consumption by the reek, acklay, and nexu.

This inspires a variation. Jar Jar's head gets switched with C3PO's (instead of a battle drone). The Jar Headed C3PO thinks he is being attacked by a fungus and zaps himself in the head with a laser pistal. Of course the Jar body is still walking around, but who cares about that half. It will just wonder around and dehydrate into a prune-sized lump eventually.

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[ChaoticSilly]

The next scene is my favorite... Windu angrily muttering "Say meesa again. I dare you! Say meesa ONE MORE FSCKING TIME!"

uh, sorry, wrong movie

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[handsomepete]

"Hey, you made a cool portmanteau!"

Somewhere, some lover of puns is trying desperately to post a Natalie Portman joke in response to this. Unfortunately, I have stolen his/her thunder.

Finish this statement:
Yes, you'd make a cool Portman too if...

Re:Let's hope it's not....

[daeley]

Bwa ha ha, yes.... :)

Other films

[truesaer]

I know there will be lots of bitching about the original three star wars movies not being released yet. And I agree with that, but I want to bitch a little about the indiana jones trilogy not being released on DVD. Its really dissapointing not to be able to get those, and it seems like it wont be on Lucas' radar for quite a while.

Re:Other films

[kjd]

Ouch. I wasn't even aware these weren't available on DVD. I was planning on purchasing this series specifically because Episodes IV-VI aren't available.

Re:Other films

[daeley]

Last I read, Eps. IV-VI DVDs will not be released until after Ep. III is out. Bummer.

I for one can't wait to have a marathon of I-VI and see the entire story arc.

Re:Other films

[Kalak451]

I believe that i read on the coax section of aintitcool that the indy jones movies will be out on DVD by xmas 2003. Still a while, but at least they are being worked on.

Re:Other films

[jchristopher]

Do a search for Indy on eBay. From what I've heard, the laserdisc rips aren't bad. (widescreen, 5.1, etc.)

MORE scenes?

[sulli]

Can we have fewer scenes - Phantom Edit II? Get rid of all that sappy shit and a real movie emerges.

Re:MORE scenes?

[glwtta]

Can we have fewer scenes - Phantom Edit II? Get rid of all that sappy shit and a real movie emerges.

bash$ emerge --update media-video/star-wars

nope, didn't work

DVD's for all

[MrWinkey]

The only question is now how long before Indiana Jones and the rest of the Star Wars films are released on DVD.
Yippie!

IV-VI

[kjd]

Great, when can I get Episodes IV-VI on DVD? I'm considering not purchasing them when they come out, in protest of the unnecessary wait.

Re:IV-VI

[AKA da JET]

"I'm considering not purchasing them when they come out, in protest of the unnecessary wait."
I could imagine you in a long line at an amusment park. You wait 2 hours just to ride the latest and greatest coster, and when you get to the gate, you march out in protest saying the wait was too long. Sounds kinda stupid, doesn't it?

BTW, I'm not saying that you're stupid. I just don't see the point of even anticipating it if you are just going to protest against it. :P

I'd buy the DVD...

[Anonvmous Coward]

... if they'd make a version that's MST'd.

Re:I'd buy the DVD...

[Anonvmous Coward]

LOL! I just bought the MST3k version of that a few days ago.

More footage??!?

[NanoGator]

I don't want more footage, I want LESS! That movie was like 2 and a half hours long.

Re:More footage??!?

[NanoGator]

Im sorry, when did I say 2.5 minutes? That over-simplification was so extreme that I'd normally believe you're a woman.

Why would you want to make AOTC longer?!!!!!

[1qaz2wsx]

Why on earth would you want to make AOTC longer? Six hours of extra footage? I would have been happy to pay extra to have the horrible dialog removed!

Re:Why would you want to make AOTC longer?!!!!!

[PastorOfMuppets]

I would have been happy to pay extra to have the horrible dialog removed! So, you want it to be a silent film? ;)

*cough*

[x mani x]

In other news :), the Lord of the Rings DVD is coming out on tuesday (or monday midnight for some stores).

Initial reviews are saying that it basically kicks all ass, and will be the new reference DVD for home theater-philes. And mind you this isn't the upcoming 4-disc extended version.

Star what? Attack of the what? :)

-Mani

Re:*cough*

[Dizzo]

Star what? Attack of the what?

Star WARS: Attack of the CLONES.

Sheesh, where have you been?

Re:*cough*

[JoeBlows]

don't bother...november will have a special edition with a half hour of scenes added to the movie.

Re:*cough*

[Nameles]

That just came out? I've had it for a while...

Re:*cough*

[The_Shadows]

Well screw you. :)

I'm not buying it twice and I want the extra scenes, which means I'm waiting until November. Hmmmm.... maybe I'll make subtle hints at it for my birthday present.

Came to me on my birthday it did! Yes! Precious! My Precious!

Re:*cough*

[FrostedWheat]

the Lord of the Rings DVD is coming out on tuesday (or monday midnight for some stores)

Or Saturday for some internet DVD shops! The postman just dropped my copy thru the letterbox! Now that's service

<PLUG>www.blackstar.co.uk</PLUG>

Re:*cough*

[protohiro1]

Finaly I can watch it as it was meant to be seen...in two parts. That movie is just too long for one sitting.

Re:*cough*

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Star WARS: Attack of the CLONES.

I like to think of it as Attack of the Gungans.

Sheesh, where have you been?

Some people wish to pretend they've never seen or heard of the movie. I don't entirely blame them.

Re:*cough*

[Caliper Remote]

Begun, this flame-war has.

Re:*cough*

[Strog]

Don't watch it at my place. I have a 7-disc changer do we can watch all 4 discs and a couple other movies after that.

trying to compete

[nirvdrum]

I'm sure I'm not the first to say it, but I can't help but think this DVD release date is trying to compete with the LoTR release . . .

Re:trying to compete

[jonabbey]

Well, if so, they'll do well by it. It seems unlikely that as many people would go out and buy a second copy of FoTR (for how much?) as would buy AoTC for the first time.

I, of course, will be so there, though.

Re:trying to compete

[bje2]

the "special edition" of LOTR with all the cut footage, etc, comes out Nov. 12th, the same day as AOTC...

Extra Scenes

[Shadow Wrought]

Maybe they are the scenes the animators would have liked to have inserted. So whilst Anakin is doing his seducing, a whole swarm of battledroids tops the nearest crest and blows the crapola out of their picnic. Lord know I was waiting for that one while sitting in the theatre;-)

Deleted Scenes

[bdesham]

...six hours of additional material including ... eight scenes that never made it into the movie.

Well, here's hoping for the bedroom scene on the night of Anakin and Padmé's wedding!

Re:Deleted Scenes

[Lord_Slepnir]

*Insert Dirty Lightsabre Jokes Here*

Re:Deleted Scenes

[ottffssent]

You're all crazy. She's only attractive when you don't have to look at her face or listen to her talk. And he's just creepy.

50 versions

[RangerSpeedBumpp]

I saw a talk by John Knoll a month ago at the Visual Effects Society in Marin. He pointed out that ILM continued to work on EP2 even after the movie was out in theaters. George continued to send new cuts out the door as new prints were being made. At the time there were 45-50 versions of Star Wars in theaters. Undoubtedly, the version that you get on DVD will be different than those versions. I don't see any major changes, but they'll probably add later versions of shots and some slightly different timing.

This isn't actually a new thing. Kubrick showed a different cut of 2001 in New York than he did in LA when the movie premiered. And of course George continues to revise episodes 4/5/6. The scary thing is that George is considering usign all-digital cinema to dist 'patches' to films. After the film has been running in theaters for several weeks, he can remotely add new sequences and then announce 'all new footage' so that Star Wars fans will have to come back for another viewing.

Re:50 versions

[figjamjam]

I heard that the entire story line was different from the first to the 50th.

Instead of a clone army of soldiers, it was originally supposed to have been a clone army of lawyers. And they were used to attack Count Douku(sp?) and the Trade federation with patten infringements and anti competitive law suits.

I think the clone army of soldiers works better. Don't you? ;-))

Re:50 versions

[sulli]

so that's why I liked it more the second time! (though it was also analog - I really didn't like digital)

ps Hey Soren! - andrew

Re:50 versions

[cei]

The DVD is pretty close to the digital cinema edit, but has 2 or 3 additional lines of dialog in one scene. I'm not aware of any other significant changes.

Re:50 versions

[Blondie-Wan]

I saw a talk by John Knoll a month ago at the Visual Effects Society in Marin. He pointed out that ILM continued to work on EP2 even after the movie was out in theaters. George continued to send new cuts out the door as new prints were being made. At the time there were 45-50 versions of Star Wars in theaters. Undoubtedly, the version that you get on DVD will be different than those versions. I don't see any major changes, but they'll probably add later versions of shots and some slightly different timing.

This isn't actually a new thing. Kubrick showed a different cut of 2001 in New York than he did in LA when the movie premiered. And of course George continues to revise episodes 4/5/6. The scary thing is that George is considering usign all-digital cinema to dist 'patches' to films. After the film has been running in theaters for several weeks, he can remotely add new sequences and then announce 'all new footage' so that Star Wars fans will have to come back for another viewing.

Indeed, Lucas himself has done the exact same thing with the original Star Wars films, as I've previously pointed out. There were three different versions of what was then called simply Star Wars playing simultaneously in its original '77 release, there were four versions of Star Wars - The Empire Strikes Back for a short while in '80, and even two (minutely) different versions of Star Wars - Return of the Jedi offered in '83, and A New Hope in particular continued to undergo transformations until all three got substantially revised for the '97 "Special Editions" (details in my earlier post linked above).

The only difference between what he did with his films then and your ideas about what he might do now is that in the late '70s / early '80s he didn't make a big noise about there being different versions of one of the films playing at a given time. Of course, it's also true he's changed a bit since then, and as unfortunate as it might be I can certainly see different versions in release simultaneously being advertised now as a way to get the fans to go more times (though it's interesting that it apparently didn't happen here, if there were really upwards of forty different "distros" of Star Wars - Attack of the Clones out simultaneously at some times within the past few months - could Lucas & LFL actually be exercising some restraint??? :O )...

News just in!

[BSDGeek]

George Lucas has released the super-extra-special-fantastic-knockyoursocksoff- edition of the Original Trilogy! This includes 1 new scene of Han Solo running down a corridor!

Re:Lightsabers

[Quantum Singularity]

OOPS! Sorry! The site's at parksabers.com . I forgot...

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:So now the MPAA is good?

[Dionysus]

Only on Fridays. It's bad again on Mondays, sometimes on Wednesdays.

hypocritical star wars fans

[dustinc20]

one more complaint about jar-jar and Im done with ya'll. you so called fans idolize the first 3 original movies yet will hate the next 3? in my opinion, the originals were good, but not great. the story is beyond great, but they were movies taken from books and are always going to be sub-par to reading the book. every one of them has characters we dont like in the movie, but for some reason its easier to hate the new ones because they werent around when you were kids. today, a lot of *kids* like jar-jar as much as when you were kids liking chewee (spelling?). get over it, no one forced you to go see it, you knew it was going to be flashy and with much CG. friggin hypocrites

Re:hypocritical star wars fans

[_Sprocket_]

I have 3 theories -

1) This is the output of a script that is fed various anti-fanboi posts and strings togeather clippings to generate new posts.

2) Its one of those odd humor pieces that pokes fun at Star Wars fans, their critics, and ignorant youth.

3) Its actually a post by an ignorant youth.

In any case, its funny. The only thing left is to figure out if one should be applauding the mastery or be amazed by the stupidity.

Other movies by Peter Jackson

[SethJohnson]

If you liked LOTR, be sure to also buy the DVD of the director's (Peter Jackson) earlier work, "Bad Taste". I am certain this film was what convinced producers to back him on the LOTR project.

Re:Other movies by Peter Jackson

[Pike65]

I remember when I first heard that some guy called Peter Jackson was directing LOTR I recognised the name somewhere.

Ever seen Braindead? When I realised I almost choked on my toast . . .

One feature I wish was included..

[Uncle Ira]

Would be an isolted score/sound effects track. Lucas says he made the Star Wars films in the style of silent movies where the score and the visuals worked together. I was surprised (and a little disappointed) that the DVD for TPM did not include an isolated score. I would have preferred that to a 2ch dolby pro-logic audio track.?

And if you're going to have an isolated score, may as well follow the example of the folks at Pixar and make it a combination score/soundFX track. The two really do work together so well that it would be nice to have them highlighted with their own audio track.

Oh well. Maybe in 2006 on the Super Special Deluxe edition box set rerelease...

Re:One feature I wish was included..

[MediaBoy77]

Damn, that would be great! Then we wouldn't have to suffer through the dialogue!

I'm personally waiting for the Hindi EP2 DVD to be released... that way I can watch it in a language I don't understand, and not be distracted by the dreadful screenplay.

Re:One feature I wish was included..

[cei]

Monsters, Inc. has a 5.1 FX only mix and A Bug's Life has a 5.1 FX mix and a 2.0 score track. I haven't seen one that has both music and FX mixed though, myself.

Re:One feature I wish was included..

[Uncle Ira]

The DVDs for Toy Stories 1 and 2 in the "Ultimate Toybox" boxed set have combined Score/FX tracks in 5.1 DD. You should check them out if you have the chance- you really gain a new appreciation for how well the score and sound FX for a film can complement each other when the right people are involved.

Best Part Of Phantom Menace DVD Was The "Making Of

[meehawl]

That was the only redeeming feature of the DVD. It's still staggering that so many talented people could work so well, for so long, and with such great dedication (as demonstrated during the deocumentary) and still produce such a turgid movie.

NSYNC in the extra footage?

[stupkid]

One can only hope that the NSYNC clips will be included. HA!

"Technical" information in the "making of" footage

[Dr.Dubious DDQ]

Hopefully, they'll include some technical information about the gadgetry and animatronics they used. I, for one, am eager to find out what they used to build the robots that played Obi-wan, Anakin, Padme, and the rest... :-)

Secret Version

[ProofOfConcept]

so does it include the good version we all know lucas kept for himself?

What the hell are you talking about?

[Pope]

None of the Star Wars movies are based on books.

And learn how to use the goddamn shift key!

Re:What the hell are you talking about?

[dustinc20]

your telling me there arent star wars books? and no, I dont like the shift key

Re:What the hell are you talking about?

[Brynath]

The books were written after/during the creation of the movies.

Re:What the hell are you talking about?

[Drakin]

The original publication of the Star Wars novel, entitled Star Wars: From the Adventures of Luke Skywalker, Published in December 1976 preceeds the movie, and if one reads the blurb on the back it states "Soon to be a spectacular motion picture|! From Twentieth-Century Fox!" which implies that the movie is based on the book... most times the books say "Based on the screen play "Blah blah" by "whoever".

That's what's implied... but we all know that star wars was originally written as a screen play and Alan Dean foaster ghost wote the novel.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Asian Piracy! Yeah!

[mrbrown1602]

Now I don't condone piracy, but the pirates in Mayalsia and China have been providing Episode II and the original Trilogy on DVD for a while now... and amazingly, it's high quality stuff too!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Heck with that...

[Faust7]

I wanna know when they're releasing the next Transformers DVD boxed set.

Here Here

[N8F8]

That scene was absulutely painful. I could hardly believe that even novice actors wouln't have pointed out the horrible dialogue to the director.

Re:Here Here

[JoeBlows]

you seem to have cared...I was looking at her nips.

Re:Here Here

[ceejayoz]

Hey... if that's what George would have said in the same situation, then it's realistic, isn't it? He is an awkward teenager stumbling over his feelings, after all... :-)

Spielberg's a master of his art

[Rachel Ellis]

Star Wars films are pure classics; Spielberg is a god!

Re:Spielberg's a master of his art

[shaldannon]

and except for the ET's that were inserted into a brief clip of Episode I, Spielberg has nothing at all to do with Star Wars.... and those were inserted by George Lucas as a tribute to Spielberg. Lucas, who (maybe you forgot) created the Star Wars universe and associated movies from which have spun numerous books/imitations/comics/art/role-playing and computer games/etc.

You need to goo back and take Star Wars 097 to refresh yourself on its creation, origins, and philosophy.

Episode II DVD checklist

[dexter riley]

Let's see what we get for our money...

Manic flying car scene? The Fifth Element.
Sterile white futuristic laboratory setting? 2001: A Space Odyssey.
...with strange lanky aliens? AI: Artificial Intelligence.
Ewan McGregor wandering through strange alien environments (i.e. Scotland)? Trainspotting.
Samuel Jackson kicking ass and taking names? Pulp Fiction.
Scenic alpine picnic? The Sound of Music.
Bounty hunters and high-speed asteroid chases? Cowboy Bebop.
A wisecracking, yet loveable pair of robots? Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie.
The protagonist loses his hand? The Evil Dead.

Sorry, Mr. Lucas, but I already have all these DVDs.

Re:Episode II DVD checklist

[chazzf]

And your point is?

I loved Evil Dead, although the scene you refer to was in Evil Dead 2, but you should remember that Luke lost his hand in the Empire Strikes Back, five years before Raimi made Dead 2.

All art imitates/copies. It's a natural thing to do. The Fifth Element owes a *lot* to Metropolis, Dune, and the long-standing visuals of Coruscant made long before Episode I.

Your post smacks of one searching desperatly for a stick with which to beat the movie, and I have to wonder why. The movie is the cinematic creation of George Lucas. No one made you see it. If you went and didn't like it, so what? I don't think the trailers were misleading.

Personally, I liked Episode II and found the underlying political undertones interesting. The notion that the Senate is being controlled by moneyed interests ought to play well here, and please note that Lucas had that idea some twenty years ago, so it's not like he's trying to pander to anyone.

Especially not do-nothing grumblers like the loud vocal minority on this site who think much is owed them.

~Chazzf

Re:Episode II DVD checklist

[dexter riley]

You're right. I desperately want a stick so I can hit George Lucas until he gives me my $7 back!

I have to remember...pretty trailer != good movie. I keep forgetting that, no matter how often George Lucas keeps reminding me.

Re:Episode II DVD checklist

[glwtta]

Your post smacks of one searching desperatly for a stick with which to beat the movie, and I have to wonder why.

Me too - awful writing, non-existent plot, atroceous acting, annoying characters, horrible looking CGI, worst dialogue anyone's seen in a long time, etc. You don't really have to search for things to bash the movie for.

Re:Episode II DVD checklist

[shaldannon]

If it weren't for the CGI ref I'd think you were talking about Austin Powers....

Re:Episode II DVD checklist

[ceejayoz]

All art imitates/copies. It's a natural thing to do. The Fifth Element owes a *lot* to Metropolis, Dune, and the long-standing visuals of Coruscant made long before Episode I.

And Coruscant is a copy of Isaac Asimov's planet "Trantor" in the Foundation series.

Re:Episode II DVD checklist

[protohiro1]

Does it make you feel good to dish out ehe hate? Its really easy to criticise things. I want to see your cg...what does it look like? It must be pretty damn good.

Re:Episode II DVD checklist

[protohiro1]

Apologies for above flame. It was a moment of passion, it won't happen again.

Re:Episode II DVD checklist

[ceejayoz]

So what? Why does that mean that Lucas can't use the same idea?

Not at all! Did I say that? Nope. I was just reinforcing the point made in the parent post, which said "All art imitates/copies. It's a natural thing to do. The Fifth Element owes a *lot* to Metropolis, Dune, and the long-standing visuals of Coruscant made long before Episode I."

Re:Episode II DVD checklist

[glwtta]

I am neither a director (who is the person against whom my "hate" is directed), nor am I a graphic artist, so I am not in a position to set an example of good CG. Then again, I do not try to charge people $10 to go see what I create.

My skills notwithstanding, what exactly is the problem? This very bad movie (not my fault, that Lucas blew $300 mil to make a very bad movie) contains some bad CG (again not my fault). There are movies that have some really good CG, and the bar for very high-budget, intensly hyped movies has been set much higher than what we saw in Episode II. I think I am understandibly upset that I've spent money (even if not all that much) and expended time to see people do their job badly.

Re:Episode II DVD checklist

[displaytest]

Yeah, but Austin Powers is _supposed_ to be funny.

Poll request

[lightspawn]

Given region codes, macrovision, and the MPAA's attitude to customers (should we go over the HDTV fiasco again?) would you like slashdot to keep covering mainstream (MPAA) DVD releases?

Re:Poll request

[dgp]

I agree. how do I find out about indie releases? Is anyone making movies worth watching that are distributed electronically and have a licences that allows unlimited redistribution? Im thinking a donation system could work - it seems to be working for trillian. (http://trillian.cc)

Re:Poll request

[protohiro1]

If you want to make "indy" movies you can, but they are always going to be indy movies. Epics like LoTR, which I think 95% of geeks like to see, just cost too damn much and take WAY more than two weekends a month.

Blah

[malIgna]

Somehow, Star Wars news doesn't excite me anymore.

78 days and counting

[wormbin]

I was so disgusted by Episode I that I made a vow to never see Episode II. I know, a single ticket probably won't make any difference but I just can't bring myself to give more money to Lucas' crap factory.

The funny thing is that my friends think that since I am such an uber-geek that I will eventually have to see the movie--either purposly or accidentally. They've actually started a betting pool to see how long it will be before I see it.

horray!

[lab16]

I can finally get the movie in good quality
off of Kazaa!

Starwars.com's Official Link has more stuff.

[antdude]

http://starwars.com/episode-ii/news/2002/08/news20 020801.html. It has pictures of both DVD and VHS boxes.

hey cool that's my birthday

[lingqi]

there has *got* to be some vibe going on here.
maybe i should apply for a cameo in star wars 3.

maybe even score something with Natalie Portman...

(yeah i know, very off topic but just *had* to... sorry ladies)

Re:hey cool that's my birthday

[Pupp3tM]

Damn...and I thought I was the only one. We own.

Re:hey cool that's my birthday

[ceejayoz]

Ask Lucas to add in something about Luke and Leia actually being illegitimate kids from a one-night stand... ooh... maybe that's what turns Anakin to the dark side!

Thank you for telling me

[jsse]

til then I always thought the Start Wars II and LoRs DVDs in my possession are original.....they have Dolby Digital 5.1, scense selection, extras and credits...

and Simplified Chinese sub-title selection...oops, you mean these aren't original? :/

Why hasn't this happened with CDs?

[John Harrison]

They seem more expensive than ever, don't they? We know they don't cost anything to duplicate. Albums of older artists (Beatles) cost as much as new junk, so not ALL of it is going into production costs and marketing, so why do they cost more than they used to? Has the price gone up faster or slower than inflation? In the early 90s albums cost $13-$14, now they retail for $18.

Re:Best Part Of Phantom Menace DVD Was The "Making

[Kayax]

No no, the best part of PM was the hidden outtake sequence. (see the 3rd paragraph on that page) Some of them are hilarious. Sadly it only lasts for about 2 minutes.

Good News/Bad News

[Brian Knotts]

The good news is that Star Wars IV will finally be relased on DVD.

The bad news is that all Imperial troops will be replaced with ewoks, and all light sabres and other weapons replaced with walkie-talkies.

Fever scenes and a better story

[johns713]

I agree. At this point the only thing I want to see is Episode III. And I want it to be dark. When I say dark I mean light sabers swishing in the darkness, screams from small women, children and guys named Jar Jar. I want to see a villain that is so scary that even Mike Tyson is scared to face the guy without ear muffs.

Forget the love story stuff, the only love'n I want to see in Episode III are tears of joy being stripped away as a loved one is ripped from some hero's arms resulting in inflammable pain. I want to see the Empires enemies crushed and driven before them, great suffering and the lamentations of women.

Now only if they could get they guy from Episode V to direct.

[OT] Your .sig

[Black Parrot]

> "I can operate and function as effectively as any member of Congress from behind bars." Jim Traficant

Jay Leno suggested that his first priority will be to introduce some new anti-sodomy legislation.

Oh right....

[BLAG-blast]

Yeah, that's right, they release another star wars thing, I remember ep1, but I thought we where still waiting ep2 to come out. But come to think about it, I've seen ep2... hmmmm, it's beer:30.

What the...

[The Cat]

An MS Visual Studio Ad???????????????

on Slashdot?????????????

o.O

(where's Rod Serling?)

Re:What the...

[mobets]

I saw it too, then I noticed that it was from doubleclick. That's ok w/ me because I block their cookies, and I know slashdot has to pay the bills somehow.

Re:What the...

[The Cat]

Offtopic? Ok.

So long Slashdot. Thanks for all the mod points.

(-8 karma in two days... ridiculous)

SIX HOURS?????

[athlon02]

I like Star Wars and I know there are tons of people more gung ho about it than me, but *SIX HOURS* of additional footage? YIKES!

Re:SIX HOURS?????

[Winterblink]

The last thing I want to see is Lucas micromanaging every aspect of production for six hours. I still say the best DVD so far for additional materials was the T2:Ultimate Edition. It had that HUGE library detailing the production of the entire film from the initial concept to post theatrical release, going into meticulous detail along the way with supplemental pictures and featurettes. That's one of the few times I've actually gone through a DVD's supplemental content and wasn't bored to tears.

Re:SIX HOURS?????

[cei]

Van Ling who produced the T2: Ultimate DVD and the Abyss Special Edition DVD also produced the Ep I and Ep II DVDs.

Re:So now the MPAA is good?

[FunkSoulBrother]

Martin: How about this, guys? Bart can have it Mondays and Thursdays, Milhouse will get it Tuesdays and Fridays, and yours truly will take it Wednesdays and Saturdays.
Bart: Perfect!
Milhouse: Wait a minute! What about Sundays?
Bart: Yeah, what about Sundays?
Martin: Well, Sunday possession will be determined by a random number generator. I will take the digits 1 through 3, Milhouse will have 4 through 6, and Bart will have 7 through 9.
Bart: Perfect!
Milhouse: Wait a minute! What about 0?
Bart: Yeah, what about 0?
Milhouse: Yeah.
Martin: Well, in the unlikely event of a 0, possession will be determined by Rock Scissors Paper competition, best 3 out of 5. How's that?

Begging.

[DarkHelmet]

features six hours of additional material

I wonder if they have Lucas on film begging Speilburg to come on to help with Episode 3.

Naw, he's too busy starring with Tom Cruise in the new Austin Powers movie.

Re:Who would fly on it?

[Eccles]

Can we have fewer scenes - Phantom Edit II? Get rid of all that sappy shit and a real movie emerges.

One possibility would be to create a format and an app that will customize the playing of a DVD, playing it in a user-specified edit.

They can fit it all on one DVD...

[Vegan Pagan]

...after applying Attack of the Edit.

Attack of the What?

[Have Blue]

Lucas should have named the movie "Attack of the Clone Room" just so he can totally confuse people who like Star Wars, Halo, and acronyms.

Outtakes they probably won't show.

[sbaker]

I bet they don't include any of the hilarious out-takes that the Star Wars graphics team showed at SigGraph last week. Things like:

Aniken leaping on his speeder bike (live action) - then being swapped out for a 3D graphic 'stunt double'. When the graphic Aniken zooms off on the bike, a small error in the cloth simulation leaves him naked while his cloak flutters gently (and realistically) to the ground.

So they fixed that problem - but for some reason there is a sign error on the slipstream airflow over the clothing - so his robes flip forward over his head - and he's *still* naked on a speederbike.

Or the shot of Yoda where for some unaccountable reason his clothes appear to be attacking him while he's trying to look fierce for Duku's benefit...

Or the shot of JarJar when an slight oversight caused the cloth simulation on his robes not to be run at all - so his robes are puffed up like a balloon. It looks like he's wearing a crinolin hoop-skirt.

Or the half dozen outtakes of the shot where the big guy in the diner (with four arms) is simultaneously hugging ObiWan and pulling up his pants - but the cloth simulation isn't coping well with the contact forces from his hands or his butt - so his trousers fall down in take after take after take...

Or the animation done by one of the ILM team who is now working on the Incredible Hulk movie - she is doing *ripping* cloth (huh! I wonder why? :-) but since they can't show the 3D Hulk model in public yet, they re-used an existing model. Hence the shot of Yoda ripping his clothes off. Heck, he's green - what more do you want?

Or - well, you get the idea. I guess you had to be there. :-)

November 12th

[sigsegv]

Man, that's the same day LOTH:FOTR Platinum Series Extended Edition comes out. 11/12 is turning out to be a big day for DVD releases.

-sig

Re:November 12th

[Winterblink]

If you think that's bad, Band of Brothers is being released the previous week. Click here for info. Looks to be a pricey one, at $120 US, but from what I hear it will be well worth it. I haven't seen it myself, but that set looks AMAZING with the metal case and all. It'll go nicely by my Akira limited edition tin. :D

Re:Lightsabers

[Dynedain]

Um..... yeah.... this was a slashdot article only a month and a half ago. We remember

That's ok, but a more important question...

[dnorman]

... is "Did they include the 8 scenes that should have been left out of the theatrical release?"

OK. There may well have been more than 8 scenes that should have been left on the cutting room floor, but the point remains. Crap movie + 8 scenes == crap movie (but longer).

Can't wait for the Special Edition... Hey! I just figured out how to properly render a rastafarian bunny and a flying midget arab trader! Let's rerelease the movie!

Lucas can't direct himself out of a paper bag.

[slonlow]

The real question is who gives a crap about Lucases' hamhanded "prequels". They both are terrible movies and are case studies of how little computer generated effects add to shabby plotting, storytelling and characterizations. Really, of the three originals, only the second has any interest or artistic merit outside of the aging geek world and nostalgic loyalties. The first seems almost 50's naive (and poorly acted) in its black and white archetypes. The third degenerates with farting and burping jokes and culminates in a teddy bear rumpus.

Let's be clear about the two prequals: CGI is never a replacement for a real plot, or real acting or well designed and shot action. Lucas seems to have an uncanny ability in being able to turn the best actors into foam-core cutouts with lines that convince me that Lucas is autistic and or tone deaf.

I think Anthony Lane (funny dude) of the New Yorker had it right in his review of Titanic a couple of years ago. To paraphrase, he said that CGI used in Titanic was humanized, secondary to the script, characters, relations and plot. I had the same feeling coming out of "Minority Report". The special effects were being driven by a solid and brain twisting whodunit framework. Two years ago, I exhilarated was by the paradigm shifting Matrix, which beats the pants off anything Lucas has directed. The Matrix changed the way geeks and movie buffs expected to experience Sci-fi, much as Blade Runner and further back, Metropolis, did before it.

Lucases' movies and this DVD are just joyless corporate exercises in brand extension and cash flow.

More dueling, I hope

[wmspringer]

I'm hoping to extra footage includes more lightsaber dueling; I was dissapointed at how quickly Yoda's duel was over at the end. That muppet can move! I wonder how much the LotR Deluxe DVD is gonna cost...it's got some cards from the game I'd love to get ;-) Haven't actually seen LotR yet though.

I'd forgotten...

[InfiniteVoid]

That Eppisode II had been released to theaters. I was never a fan of S.W. and after seeing Ep. 1 had _NO_ inclination to see Ep. 2.

Why do people keep buying this stuff?

Re:I'd forgotten...

[Winterblink]

I actually enjoyed Episode 2 FAR more than Episode 1. 2 was kind of like Empire from the original trilogy.. a lot darker, a lot more plot, and lot more interesting. Just my opinion of course. :P

Re:I'd forgotten...

[ceejayoz]

I must agree... doesn't compare to the warm fuzzies I get from the original trilogy, but EpII was by far better than EpI.

Please don't buy this horrible movie!

[Benwick]

There is only one word for Episode II, and that is "incompetent". It applies to the writing, the acting, the editing, the sound, even the score. Don't line George Lucas' pockets with money swindled by his amazing force. You're only proving that the force *does* work wonders on the weak minded. This movie made Ishtar look like Casablanca, if anyone has any idea what I'm talking about. It made Snow Dogs look like the Empire Strikes Back.

There are many better films--and you can find better stills of Natalie Portman on the internet.

Everyone who was involved in this movie should be fired, and then shot. I finally saw it last night at a theater that was showing it for free--and with pitchers of beer--and I *still* regret it.

Oh well. Wasted words, as always.

Re:Please don't buy this horrible movie!

[glwtta]

whew! way to save that one - Lucas almost made some money off this movie, but I think you caught it in time.

(it is just inexcusable shit, though, that's true)

Re:Please don't buy this horrible movie!

[protohiro1]

I have to say that I am sort of irritated by those who think that films they didn't like are some sort of moral affront. Is it that serious that someone spent their money making a movie they wanted to? Other people spent a lot less money seeing it, and a lot of them got their money's worth.

It is easy to cast your judgment on this film, as if the fact that you didn't enjoy it means that it has violated some sort of holy commandment. Incompetence is also a very harsh word. Movies are VERY difficult to make, and the people who made this one are VERY competent. Maybe it didn't turn out right, but it isn't because the people (real, actual people, who really did actually work hard) are worthy of capital punishment for failing to please you.

Re:You choad!

[C0LDFusion]

That's the Japanese pronunciation. "Druku-sama!"

Four words is too many for ya

[Benwick]

You're overstating your case, Cicero. No need to freak out. It doesn't take a film snob to know when a movie is lousy. You obviously have no idea what I think and you jumped to a conclusion well beyond the scope of my original message, which I'll admit wasn't exactly the kind of thing that gets published in a serious venue. If we all "minded our own affairs" Slashdot would be a lot less fun.

I don't think you can take the high ground if, when I say "x sucks" you tell me that I suck. I mean, it's equally stupid, right? No better, no worse.

All I can say for certain is that I have seen lots and lots of bad movies, and I consider Episode II to be among the very worst movies I have ever seen. Empire was good, though. I liked Robocop. Can you honestly say you felt the faintest sense of romantic spark between the lovers in this flick? It was like watching a ping pong paddle fall in love with a vacuum cleaner. Now that I would pay to see.

Oh, and, word of advice (just to see if I can best you at the challenge of being a dick), if you want to impress the film snobs, Citizen Kane is completely passe. Try Satyricon, Gotterdammerung, Alphaville... Next time you need to critique somebody's snobbish attitude, don't flash something so trite :) Although Citizen Kane is a good enough movie, it's no Robocop.

Re:Four words is too many for ya

[Benwick]

I only meant trite in terms of the choice, not in terms of the movie itself... Citizen Kane is too easy is all I meant. Cheers to the other stuff.

Re:"Technical" information in the "making of" foot

[DrEldarion]

I've seen some of the technical information on those robots. Apparently the lower half of the robot who played Padme was made entirely of hot grits.

-- Dr. Eldarion --

puzzling gap

[Tablizer]

And maybe some hints as to why the senator/princess didn't give a shct that her fiance just admitted to slaughtering a bunch of children in a mad rage?

Re:puzzling gap

[the_verb]

Reminds me of the night a friend and I watched EpII. "Genocide!" she says loud enough for the theater to hear, "The way to every woman's heart!"

I choked on popcorn laughing. That Anakin... what a friendly guy!

--the verb

It's even better for the UK...

[Lardmonster]

According to Auntie Beeb, the UK gets it on November 11th. Strange - we usually get releases about a month after everywhere else! Woo!

Re:It's even better for the UK...

[cei]

The UK edition doesn't have the 26 frames of head-butt in the Jango/Obi-Wan fight sequence. Naturally, they can release it a day earlier... ;^)

Padme likes Bad Boys

[Orion Blastar]

how else is she going to marry a guy who admitted to slaughtering a bunch of Sand-Children and talks about a Dictatorship being a cool idea? Like many women, she is attracted to jerks. This jerk, apparently, becomes Darth Vader later on.

Dorks

[rblancarte]

You are all dorks. It's just Star Wars, not the fucking Bible.

Does it have a Jar Jar elimination mode?

[nenolod]

Can you get the movie without the annoying J. J. Binks?

Sh*t in a box

[Aqua OS X]

Damn, I knew -someone- would find a way to sell sh*t in a box someday. Go figure, it's go'na be George Lucas. ;)

(I guess this post will drop my good Slashdot karma down a peg.)

This is our chance

[BobSutan]

Okay folks. This is our chance to really hit them where it hurts. Most people in the industry like us that happen to have a clue also happen to like Star Wars. When all of us boycott the DVD release and everyone wonders why its sales are so shitty, they won't have any other explanation besides us not buying into A. the horrible practices of the **AA, B. the kickbacks, er, I mean donations to our congresscriters, and C. laws that restrict technology instead of punishing those that use it for illicit purposes.

Re:This is our chance

[WebMasterJoe]

When all of us boycott the DVD release and everyone wonders why its sales are so shitty, they won't have any other explanation

Nice idea, but if you were able to pull off at least a partial boycott, they wouldn't think it was because of their own bad practices. They'd point to pirating to explain their poor sales, just like the RIAA blamed pirating for a year of bad music, unreasonable prices, and a major terrorist attack (and, to be fair, pirating, but that has yet to prove to be positive or negative for sales).

Re:Fanatics

[Treeluvinhippy]

You are all fanatics. It's just the bible, not fucking Star Wars.

Great

[fizban]

...features six hours of additional material including a documentary about the movie made by Lucas and the movie's other filmmakers...

Excellent! I look forward with anticipation to the 6 hours of "The Jar Jar Justification," "The Birth of Jar Jar" and "Hey Jar, wassa happenin? Yousa wanna doa interviewsa?"

Sadly (?), I preferred Harry Potter

[tuxedobob]

Actually, I for one thought Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone was more enjoyable than The Phantom Menace. I bought the former, not the latter. Quidditch (sp?) and authentic accents beat out podracing and affected accents.

As for Episode 2, it was rather mediocre. If the scene with Senator ex-Queen Amidala Portman had been longer and had better lighting, maybe even less leather, it might have made up for Hyperactive Bouncing Superball Yoda.

Did he?

[Snaller]

, and please note that Lucas had that idea some twenty years ago, so it's not like he's trying to pander to anyone.

Did he? Seems there have been enough revealed to suggest that he is making it up as he goes...

I agree

[Conrad_Bombora]

Funny, thinking about it I have to agree with you on that. I never read the books and the only resign I saw Harry potter was because my girlfriend wanted to see it. I thought it would have been another movie to put me to sleep, like Moolin Rouge so I had 3 gin & tonics before the show. But to my surprise it was pretty good, much better then star wars episode 1 and a little better then episode 2.
I give episode 2 more credit because it had Boba Fet in it even though he was only 11 or something. Anything with Boba Fet in it is cool by default. So in other words if Boba Fet was in Harry Potter it would be the greatest movie of all time.

But is one of those scenes

[jasonditz]

The one where Eric Raymond whips out his lightsabre and starts killing Tusken Raiders in Mos Redmond?

A question? "the bane of are geekyness"

[Conrad_Bombora]

Ok people how many of you watch all this extra 5hit?
Or more to the point how many people out there buy movies and never watch them?
I know I do, and it's ridiculous if you think about it. I have DVDs that are still in there plastic and I'll probably never watch them.
I think the only resign why I buy them is for the geek factor like Logan's Run for instance "oh wow look Logan's Run's on DVD with extra footage I better get this!"
I'm never-guna watch Logan's Run again, but there it is, I'm looking at it right now and you know what?...
it's still in it's plastic next to other DVD's in the same condition.

I get the feeling I'm not the only one who does this.

Don't buy it!

[unoengborg]

As long as MPAA supports DRM like MS-Palladium
I'm not going to buy DVDs or go to the movies.
I urge others to do the same. It's easier for
most people to live without film, than it is
for movie studios to live without customers.

Digital Rights Management software is a threat
to democracy. Not because they prevent you from
pirate DVDs but because it builds an infrastructure
to control information. And free flow of information
is the air democracy breathes