Slashdot Mirror
Lucas To Redo Star Wars In 3-D
Warlock7 writes "You might have thought that it was going to all be over on May 19 with the release of Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. Well, not so fast. It seems that George Lucas is planning to re-re-release the Star Wars films in a new 3-D format. There are also several other directors that are interested in this new technology and they are trying to get theaters to install new technology to allow the showing of their films in the new 3-D format [req free reg]."
What does Lucas do anyway, just wake up every now and then and think "in what new ways can I rape the fond memories of a younger generation"?
This guy's gone totally batshit insane. I think the best thing anyone could do for the franchise at this point is put the man in a damned straighjacket and throw him off the brooklyn bridge with a lead weight in a backpack on his back.
I can respect that some people may have liked the first two pieces (even if it wasn't my cup of tea, so to speak), and this third one might be okay, but this is a little ridiculous.
PLEASE GEORGE JUST STOP. It was a great idea the first time through with episodes 4-6, and I understand that you had to round it out with the first three parts of the series, but you're just hurting us now. Please.... please stop hurting us.
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
"You might have thought that it was going to all be over on May 15 with the release of Episode III: Revenge of the Sith."
I don't know anybody that is foolish enough to believe that this was over. As long as there is an interest and the opportunity to make some money, it isn't going to be over. Many folks thought that Star Wars would end in the 70s. It is still around decades later and still making a profit. You don't get rid of a profitable interest.
If the entertainment factor is there, I'll go see more. Will the market of 'Star Wars Enthusiasts' allow more movies to be made? Will we see different plots in the future? Will we see more 'enhanced' versions? I'd think probably. They may suck, but I would bet that we are not done with 'Star Wars' for quite a while. I hope that what comes out is good.
When are we going to get sick of it?
It could be worse, it could be Monday.
Solo won't shoot at all.
He'll have a badly redubbed over diplomatic way out of it...
Naaah. This'll be a good thing, if Lucas doesn't mess with his own work again.
This DVD set will be called "Star Wars: The Expensive Edition".
Four words: Jar-Jar in 3D
"Oh the humanity!"
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The whole "Episode IV" thing didn't even come about until the theatrical re-release of Star Wars about 18 months after the initial one.
Lucas likes to pretend he's had this grand vision all along from day one, but the plot inconsistancies and herky-jerky flow of the story looks more like incoherent post-facto ramblings than it does "planned".
In this version, Alderaan shoots first!
I am a viral sig. Please help me spread.
Hire a production crew who grew up during the original Star Wars era. Get a director like Peter Jackson, who has shown that he understands how to use great effects, tell a story on a grand scale, stay faithful to the original spirit and respect the fans. Have this production company make episodes 7,8 and 9 that were planned long ago. Now that might kick ass.
From TFA:
"It's really a beautiful system, and one of the reasons I'm promoting it today is I'm extremely anxious to reissue that old group of films I did so long ago in a galaxy far away," Lucas said.
Well, you know, it has been almost eight years since the original trilogy was rereleased in theaters, and six months since the DVDs came out. Of course Lucas is anxious to reissue the movies - the public has pretty much forgotten about them in this fast-paced world. Lucas needs to bring the movies back to the forefront of the public consciousness, because they haven't been there in months.
Seriously, though, does Lucas think he's kidding anybody anymore? It's so obvious that his vision isn't artistic, it's financial. He sees a way to keep making a mint with a minimum of effort, and every new film-oriented technology allows him to release Star Wars according to his "original vision," which was somehow compromised in every previous release.
This sig has been stolen. Return it to its original user for a reward.
It's like they're following me...
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Anyone have any information on how these 3d films are different from past attempts at 3d? Do you still wear glasses?
:) )
Most likely, you'd still wear glasses, yes. Let's remember the two aspects to 3-D photography: 1) getting 3-D information in the first place (usually with multiple cameras), and 2) delivering that data to the eyes (usually by somehow targeting each eye with a different image).
There are a few other ways to do 2, mostly relying on odd tricks like image "jiggling" (which works, sort of, but isn't that great). Generally, 3-D relies on parallax comparisons made possible by each eye seeing a slightly different image. In order to do that, we need some way to target each eye with a unique image. Some "autostereoscopic" methods use wire or lenticular screens (you see that sometimes in 3-D movie posters). Most systems use glasses. Originally they used red/blue glasses, but that didn't scale well with color films. Then the industry moved on to polarized filters, but that required the viewer hold his head pretty close to straight (if you tilted your head too far to one side, the images would blur and then swap). Polarizing lenses with circular polarization helped minimize some of that. Current "state of the art" uses high-speed LCD shutters in glasses synchronized to the film projector or TV, which shows the right image first (with the left eye blocked by a shutter), then the left image (swapping the shutter to the right eye).
There's also "one lens" systems that rely on an odd optical trick I can't even begin to explain (been a while since college physics), but it has the effect of making objects in motion *in one direction* appear closer to the viewer, while objects at rest or moving the opposite direction appear farther away. This has been used in "3-D Roller Coaster!" videos hawked in mail-order catalogs, and I think was even used to promote a Rose Bowl parade some years back.
Anyway, that's all just the delivery problem. The tougher side is the content problem. Lucas only filmed his movies with a single lens, so there's no parallax information that can be used to provide 3-D images. If the films were *completely* computer generated (like, say, The Incredibles), then it'd just be a matter of rendering it once, then telling the computer "shift the camera left 3 inches" and render again. (has pixar actually done this? it'd be cool.
So with only one image to choose from, how do you "create" depth information? One way that I've seen in the past is to use motion and/or focus artifacts to "guess" at 3-D location in the frame. That is, if something moves in front of another thing, then it's reasonable to assume it should be shown forward in the frame. Or if something's slightly off focus (foreground or background), then you can also assume it's in a different depth plane, and shift it accordingly. I actually saw "Lost In Space" processed with something like this technology, and while it was interesting, it basically sucked.
Why? For one thing, no matter how smart, the extrapolated depth cues are always just guesses. Unless you work the film manually, scene-by-scene (and even frame-by-frame), there will be problems with consistency with the derived depth information. Also, with a two-camera system, each "eye" not only sees slightly different images, but they see images with slightly different *content*. That is, it's not enough to simply shift an X-wing left or right, but one eye needs to see a little something more where the X-Wing was moved out of. Automated processes (in the past) couldn't do this.
Now it's possible that with advances in technology, it's finally possible to consistently guess at object depths, and to fabricate reasonable hidden information. As I said, it's not worked well in the past, but in the past, it's been attempted by hucksters and snake-oil salesmen and sold to gullible third-tier theme park movie houses (I saw the aforementioned Lost in Space about two miles from Walt Disney World,
Not to mension Lucas didn't write the screenplays for Episodes 5 and 6, which are, by any reasonable standard, the crown jewels of the franchise.
Look up the original scripts for "Star Wars", it's pretty god-awful stuff. You can see some of the "ideas" there leaked into the later movies, but Star Wars was Fox's last ditch effort. Their shareholders were unloading ownership, because Star Wars was going to be the studio's last hurrah before they folded.
But it wasn't.
Lucas is not a visionary, not a brilliant writer or storyteller. He made some interesting but amateurish films in the 70's, and then struck gold once by pilfering the work of other directors and various uncreditted sci-fi authors, and piecing together an action-adventure movie. "Space opera" indeed.
The man is so incredibly uncreative, we don't have the proverbial walls closing in on the hero, we have REAL WALLS closing in the hero. We don't have Pitfall Harry swinging over the alligator pit on a rope while he's saving the girl, that ACTUALLY happens in the film. The only thing that DOESN'T happen is that Leia isn't tied up and placed on a set of train tracks by a moustached villain.
Lucas's ideas are so pedestrian, so cliched, so utterly devoid of originality or creativity. The GOOD GUYS WEAR WHITE (Luke), and the BAD GUYS WEAR BLACK (Vader). (Yeah I know, the stormtroopers break the rule, but I'll bet you dollars to donuts that they're only white so Vader stood out on film).
The fact that, other than Star Wars, every creative act he's been involved in has been an unmitigated piece of crap sort of supports this.
I love Star Wars too and I didn't even really HATE the two new films but George Lucas is not some genius storyteller.
The only thing I really respect about the man is that he refuses to get involved in the Hollywood labor unions, because he doesn't like having to put a bunch of credits and credentials BEFORE his movie.
"The only thing that DOESN'T happen is that Leia isn't tied up and placed on a set of train tracks by a moustached villain."
Thanks for the idea, I'll go put this into Revenge of the Sith right now!
-George