Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Fan-created Star Wars Spinoff in The Works

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the better-then-crazy-lucas dept.

Lazarian writes "According to an article from the Edmonton Sun, director Mark Twitchell from the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology has begun filming Star Wars: Secrets of the Rebellion, a non-profit venture expected to be released in 2008. From the article: "The 27-year-old Edmonton director begins shooting a feature-length independent Star Wars spin-off film at NAIT Saturday, and has amassed $60,000 to bring his dream to life. "I'm the only guy crazy enough to do this, because I'm not allowed to turn a profit. The film is for hardcore fans who miss the character development of the original trilogy.""

196 comments

  1. Too bad IMPS died. by the+linux+geek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I actually really enjoyed chapter one of IMPS: The Relentless (impstherelentless.com) but it seems to have died. It's a pity; that was probably the best SW fanfilm out now.

    1. Re:Too bad IMPS died. by XFilesFMDS1013 · · Score: 1

      Completely agree. I wish that they'd at least update the news, even if it was just to say "We're still here". The last post being about 5 months old.

    2. Re:Too bad IMPS died. by peragrin · · Score: 1

      considering the post before that is from 7/25/2005 they have a few more months before I will give up hope.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    3. Re:Too bad IMPS died. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn... think they could at least pause maybe a little bit between sentences so that the dialogue at least seems natural in that film? It really gets annoying fast.

      Freakin' amateurs.

    4. Re:Too bad IMPS died. by kimvette · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are you saying that today's "news" doesn't give you a new hope?

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  2. Democracy does work! by andrewman327 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This has the most potential of any story I've read on /. in a while. Like many geeks, I was terribley disapointed by the three prequels. One of my bigger complaints is the heavy handed use of digital effects. Considering this film's budget, I doubt that that will be a problem.

    --
    Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    1. Re:Democracy does work! by OldBus · · Score: 1

      According to the article they will be filming against green screens. I guess it will be a low budget made in a way similar to Sky Captain - cheap (but hopefully reasonable) effects rather than an expensive set

    2. Re:Democracy does work! by andrewman327 · · Score: 1

      Still, Sky Captain's graphics bothered me a lot less than Star Wars Episode 3. Maybe it is the fact that green screen movies are more consistent. Having an actor dressed as a robot standing next to a computer generated robot designed to look like him just irritates me.

      --
      Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    3. Re:Democracy does work! by slackmaster2000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would think the opposite. It must be cheaper now to do things with computers than to do them the old fashioned way. Granted this movie won't have the excessive high dollar effects of the prequels, but I'd bet that it's going to be mostly computer animation, and the cheap variety.

      Computer animation in movies is really something that I've come to despise. To me it looks considerably worse than old fashioned special effects, especially in lower budget horror and sci fi films, which are my favorite genres (or they were before everything started looking like a video game intro). That's not to say that they can't be done well, it just doesn't happen too often. I'd take the old effects in The Thing or Alien over most new films relying mostly on computer effects.

    4. Re:Democracy does work! by slaughterhause · · Score: 0
      One of my bigger complaints is the heavy handed use of digital effects.
      Agreed.

      Like the computer-generated "figure" they got to be Anakin/Darth Vader -- why not use a real freaking actor who might have a personality?

      Spend some money for the real thing next time, Lucas.
    5. Re:Democracy does work! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Insightful
      One of my bigger complaints is the heavy handed use of digital effects. Considering this film's budget, I doubt that that will be a problem.


      If this is anything like the fan videos that have come before it, it will probably have incredibly high production values (e.g. CGI effects, space ships, awesome compositing work, and realistic weapons), but will suffer from poor audio and acting.

      For example, I was just watching the latest Star Trek: Exeter the other day. While the acting is not the worst (that title goes to a good-looking Star Wars fan film I saw a while back), it often suffers from the "spitting out the lines"-itis. Instead of training the actors and/or editing for proper timing, the actors are allowed to speak their lines one after another without any sort of pausing. The result is that they come across as emotionless actors speaking lines.

      Now Shatner did have a propensity for overacting. (It's my... ship... my... ship!) However, he was at least acting. By not taking the time to slow down and deliver the lines, the actors never manage any real emotional expression. Which makes their lines that much harder to follow.

      I say, "that much harder", because the voice audio is usually terrible in these amatuer productions. They need to either get a good mic *really* close to the actors, or they need to re-dub the audio in post-production. A combination of both wouldn't be such a bad idea. It would also help to try and clean up the audio that they do record. Try to remove any background noise or echoing (it's *really* hard to get perfectly clean audio without a sound booth) and boost the volume to be louder than the incessant background effects.

      Exeter has one more annoyance that's actually quite unique to the production. They allow the actors to make nervous movements. While it's not that big of a deal for someone to rock a chair in real life, it's incredibly distracting in a movie. Hopefully they'll realize this and make their actors sit still for their lines.

      That's my opinion, anyway. I imagine that someone trained in the field could provide more precise advice.

      FWIW, I think it's amazing what fan films have been doing these days. If we wait a few more years, we may find that what used to be Internet fan films will become the Internet television of tomorrow. I just hope someone reboots Blake's 7. It would be a wonderful show to see back on the air. :-)
      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    6. Re:Democracy does work! by andrewman327 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I agree. Sound is commonly overlooked in these productions. In real productions, there is a camera man and a sound guy. Even on Dirty Jobs, there is a man with a microphone chasing the host through slimy sewers and such. I think if these volunteer producers were to learn more about sound they would be able to fix most of their problems. I had the chance to record in Gary Frey's studio in Chicagoland and realized that not all sound studios have to be professionally built with six figure budgets. You can use items from around the house to dampen sound. Make sure that there are no parallel surfaces and buy a nice mic. Some film makers would spend $2000 on a camera but would never think of buying a $100+ mic.

      --
      Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    7. Re:Democracy does work! by dswensen · · Score: 1

      I agree that some costume and makeup work looks better the old-fashioned way, but I won't miss stop-motion or motion control.

      Directors tend to overuse CGI because it's easier these days, and I have an appreciation for practical effects, but I've seen a lot of great use of the technology. Despite it being very fashionable to bash it, I think special effects have never looked better, for the most part.

    8. Re:Democracy does work! by stormy_petral · · Score: 1

      One thing I learned in the 100+ hours of Lord of the Rings Trilogy EE DVD bonus features is that a vast percentage of dialogue needs to be redubbed because clean dialogue is nearly impossible on a live set.

    9. Re:Democracy does work! by Meneguzzi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If I may add my two cents to the discussion (bearing in mind I have no experience in movie production whatsoever), I see two possible good outcomes to this project:
      The first one would be if novice (but formally trained) actors would volunteer to take part on this project to try and project themselves into the entertainment industry. I think that this is much more likely on a Star Wars fan movie than for a Star Trek one, since SW has much more popular appeal I dont't see that as an impossibility (BTW, I'm a fan of Star Trek, but as I understand it, its fan base is much more restricted).
      The second scenario is the project to work even with untrained actors. There are movies that actually worked that way, for example City of God, and it might even work with Star Wars as well.

      --
      www.meneguzzi.eu/felipe
    10. Re:Democracy does work! by suffe · · Score: 2, Funny

      CGi in horror movies are like big breast implants on a woman. Pretty to look at, but they ain't fooling no one.

      --

      Karma: 2.71828182846 (Mostly due to small, fun pills)
    11. Re:Democracy does work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Bad acting? Heck, Lucas couldn't even seem to find good actors. Hayden Christensen might very well be the worst actor... next to Keanu. I have this theory that Hayden's the apprentice, and Keanu's the bad acting master.

    12. Re:Democracy does work! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow. Starship Exeter is astonishingly faithful to the original. The same wooden acting, the same forced accents, and even the captain groping female members of the cast. It made me feel quite nostalgic.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    13. Re:Democracy does work! by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      If the shooting I've been at so far is any indication, the sound is going to be mostly redubbed. We do have a mike boom on, and there have been some good bits so far, but everyone is so committed to the quality that the audio won't escape notice. Some of the closed sets will probably use the original audio, but places like the greenscreen stage we're shooting on right now will be redone.

      That said, I'll make sure to bring that up with Mark tonight. Congratulations, you just positively affected the outcome of an entire movie. :)

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    14. Re:Democracy does work! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1
      Congratulations, you just positively affected the outcome of an entire movie. :)

      Sweet! I'm glad to have been of service. :)
      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    15. Re:Democracy does work! by Cervantes · · Score: 1
      Congratulations, you just positively affected the outcome of an entire movie. :)

      Sweet! I'm glad to have been of service. :)


      Also, you can now claim to have "given great input into the best Star Wars fan film of all time". Looks good on a resume, and it's a great line for picking up chicks.

      But I don't think I can get you in the credits. :P Sorry. :)
      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    16. Re:Democracy does work! by Cervantes · · Score: 1
      Granted this movie won't have the excessive high dollar effects of the prequels, but I'd bet that it's going to be mostly computer animation, and the cheap variety.


      (note: I'm in the movie)

      I don't think you have to worry about that. Firstly, the use of CGI is being very carefully undertaken... nothing overboard, nothing excessive, and nothing "we're too lazy to do this right, so let's just CGI it".
      Secondly, the CGI that is being used is FREAKISHLY top-rate. One of the ship models has 3x the polygons that the ILM model used, and it shows. All the stills and models I've seen so far are top, top quality. Frankly, if they're used right, I expect this movie to look better than EpIII. Maybe not as frantic and flashy on the screen... but when a ship flies around, you'll feel it's a real ship, not one just out of the bubble-wrap and still smelling like NewStarDestroyer air freshener.
      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    17. Re:Democracy does work! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1
      But I don't think I can get you in the credits.

      I'll settle for the film having top-notch audio. Thanks for trying, though. :P
      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    18. Re:Democracy does work! by Cervantes · · Score: 1
      According to the article they will be filming against green screens. I guess it will be a low budget made in a way similar to Sky Captain - cheap (but hopefully reasonable) effects rather than an expensive set


      (note: I'm in the movie)

      Not everything is being greenscreened, but for the parts that are, it's (so far) to fill in background that we just couldn't do normally. For instance, the Cantina... yes, we could theoretically make a full set and paint everything and go crazy... but when we have a full CGI of the entire interior, it just makes more sense to make the bar, and the background (tables, extras, etc) and then greenscreen the rest. All the costuming is authentic. It's not a crazy expensive set, but it's not cheap duct tape either... so far, it's a very reasonable mix of CGI, well made costumes, and very good slight of hand.

      Also, the Millenium Falcon is too, at least the cockpit is a full-size model with no CGI. It's also freaking heavy. We had to lift it onto some trolleys over the weekend, and I still hurt.
      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    19. Re:Democracy does work! by drsquare · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, being part of a film with a poor script, atrocious sound and poor acting could actually damage an actor's career.

    20. Re:Democracy does work! by Diag · · Score: 1

      Lucas couldn't even seem to find good actors.

      That's the one thing he has been incredibly consistent with for the last 30-odd years.

      Except maybe Harrison Ford, although the character Ford is best known for since Star Wars is a bit like "Han Solo as archaeologist" :P

      --
      Serving Suggestion: Defrost
  3. Do not want by birder · · Score: 4, Funny

    Do not want.

    1. Re:Do not want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Do+ not+want!

    2. Re:Do not want by alamandrax · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Tell me realy quick like.

      Is jar jar going to be in this one too?

      --
      'tis but a scratch.
  4. not the typical nerd by the_tsi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Mark Twitchell isn't a typical Star Wars fan. Rather than collect countless plastic toys or blog online with closet sci-fi nerds, he indulges his hobby in its "purest" form: film."

    uh huh. Are we ignoring the past twenty years of film school students, the vast majority of whom all envision themselves as the next george lucas and at some point in high school or college made a film that references/parodies/extends star wars in some way? Gimme a break, there's nothing special about this dork... if anything he's jumping on a trend after it's already been destroyed by the new trilogy. Great news team, Edmonton Sun.

    1. Re:not the typical nerd by gmletzkojr · · Score: 1

      Of course we need to remember those who have already extended and enhanced the Star Wars universe. Who can forget this visonary film maker?

      --
      I for one welcome our new [insert main topic] overlords.
    2. Re:not the typical nerd by AlwaysHappy · · Score: 0

      While I have not RTFA, unless there is more to that quote, maybe something like, "which makes him better than anyone else who has done this before" I don't see what you're so angry about. They simply point out that, like all those people you've mentioned, he's going a step beyond what your average fan might do. Unless all Star Wars fans create $60,000, feature length, fan films. I know I couldn't do something like this, so yeah this dork is kind of special.

    3. Re:not the typical nerd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, not as special as you might think (unless you're talking about the short-bus variety). There are at least two other previous, i'm sure equally terrible, fan made features already.

  5. Obligatory ... by Stavr0 · · Score: 5, Funny
    The film will delve into the the downfall of the Jedi, the theft of the Death Star blueprints, and the Empire's efforts to reclaim them.

    Many Bothans will die to bring us this information.

    1. Re:Obligatory ... by Mayhem178 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      downfall of the Jedi, the theft of the Death Star blueprints, and the Empire's efforts to reclaim them.

      There's 18 years seperating the first event and the second/third event in that list. That's a lot of time to span. Plus, you have to consider that that timespan has already been spoken for in the upcoming Star Wars television series.

      --

      "You will pay for your lack of vision..." - Emperor Palpatine to Ray Charles

    2. Re:Obligatory ... by Dark+Screen · · Score: 1

      They better . . .

  6. For the fans? by Otter+Escaping+North · · Score: 5, Funny

    "I'm the only guy crazy enough to do this, because I'm not allowed to turn a profit. The film is for hardcore fans who miss the character development of the original trilogy."

    I don't think this guy understands Star Wars at all...

    --
    Running Windows^H^H^H^H^H^H^H OSX and Linux in the home. (I don't have time for Solitaire any more.)
    1. Re:For the fans? by Cervantes · · Score: 2, Funny



      "I'm the only guy crazy enough to do this, because I'm not allowed to turn a profit. The film is for hardcore fans who miss the character development of the original trilogy."

      I don't think this guy understands Star Wars at all...


      Like any fan film, we have to make some deviations from the original...

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  7. One in a long long line... by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 4, Informative

    This certainly seems to have more potential than most, but just in case one or two people on the Internet don't already know this isn't entirely a new idea. People have actually been doing Star Wars fan films for quite some time.

    --
    Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
    1. Re:One in a long long line... by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      And of course, Star Wars itself was not entriely a new idea, either.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    2. Re:One in a long long line... by alamandrax · · Score: 1

      don't forget this either.

      --
      'tis but a scratch.
    3. Re:One in a long long line... by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      (note: I'm in the movie)
      That's very true, but this is most definitely the biggest, and most ambitious. This isn't a few guys going around with a camcorder, or even several friends with a few good props. This is soundstages, greenrooms, huge sets, bona-fide hollywood propmakers and actors...

      I have full respect for all the fan films that are out there, and I've enjoyed them. This isn't meant as an insult. It's simply that this movie is larger in scale than anything that has been done before.

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  8. press release by konigstein · · Score: 1

    A press release by George Lucas on the indy films stated simply: "Mark.... I >AM your father!"

    --
    This space intentionally left blank
  9. Life Sucking Lawyers by jo42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What do George's Lawyers have to say to this wee bit 'o news?

    1. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      One would hope that GL harkens back to his days as a struggling independent film-maker and gives the guy a pass. However, he is now cast in the role of studio exec and he may not be happy to hear of such a thing, especially where he receives no cut.

      Always in motion is the future.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    2. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ever since the original trilogy, George Lucas has always been quietly supportive of non-commercial fan-created Star Wars stuff, even before the Internet and its resulting explosion of SW fanfic and things. I seem to remember he even judged one or two fan film competitions. I think that stance is one of the wisest moves he's ever made as grand poobah of a cultural icon.

      --
      Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
    3. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      It's a trap!

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    4. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      Did you even read the paragraph, let alone the article? Where do you think the condition of 'no-profit' came from?

    5. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by WPIDalamar · · Score: 0, Troll

      I'm allowed to steal music as long as I don't turn a profit.
      I'm allowed to kill people as long as I don't turn a profit.

      Saying things doesn't make them true. I think what we're interested in is does the guy have permission. The "lucas approved storyline" thing vaguely implies permission to make a movie, but is there actual permission?

    6. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by Karma+Farmer · · Score: 1
      Did you even read the paragraph, let alone the article? Where do you think the condition of 'no-profit' came from?
      It came straight from the mouth of a guy with no legal training, and apparently without enough money or sense to ask a competent lawyer.

      I can't blame the guy though. He wants very badly to make a star wars film, and he's left with a terrible dilema. He can either spend money on a lawyer and almost certainly be told that his idea opens him to untold liability, or he can go ahead and make the film without consulting a lawyer, and plead ignorance of the law.
    7. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by LurkerXXX · · Score: 2, Informative
      Umm, who said anything about pirating music? And where the hell does killing come in? What a troll.

      Lucas has for years said fan movies of Star Wars are OK as long as they don't turn a profit. This doesn't imply any other autors/screenwriters/directors think it's ok to make rip-offs of their movies. It's something Lucas has specifically said he's OK with. That's why it's ok with Lucas' laywers.

      This isn't saying it's OK to make any ripoffs of any Spielberg, Woody Allen, etc, etc, movies. Just Lucas, and Star Wars specifically. Get it?

    8. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by WPIDalamar · · Score: 1

      I never understood the hostility of people when they post on the internet, that reply being a prime example.

      I gave two examples of doing something illegal because I said it was ok. That's what this guy is doing... he's doing something illegal because he says it's ok.

      Making a movie based off of Star Wars is illegal unless permission is granted by Lucas Films (I assume they're the copyright holder?)

      No where in the article was a reference to Lucas Films saying it was allowed.

      And nowhere in your link was a reference to Lucas Films saying it was ok, you just linked to a third party that said that Lucas OK's it and should put it under a certain license.

      So we still have yet to see any permission granted. So no, I don't get it.

    9. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1
      I never understood the surprise of people at hostility to an obvious Troll.

      The grandparent post was about Lucas' lawyers giving permission for fan films. You came back equating that to endorsing music pirating, or killing being fine. That, my friend, is a troll.

      If you are too lazy to google for yourself, you could easily go to www.starwars.com and see for yourself. Notice the "Lucas Online" at the bottom? That site is owned by Lucas. Also, notice what is right above that notice at the bottom? "Star Wars Fan Films, 2006 finalists, vote now."

      Shock. Horror, he actually is encouraging fan films. Not that you couldn't have quickly googled that yourself. No. It's much more fun to equate a reference to his allowing it as endorsing pirating or killing.

      So no, I don't get it.



      You are a troll. Troll's never seem to get it.

    10. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      If he is expecting a cut and the movie loses money, does he have to give the guys a refund?

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    11. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      Or he can be a Star Wars fan, and have had the sense to go to Starwars.com and seen that Lucas set up an area on his own website for Fan Films. Not only that, the area for the best of them is listed as "George Lucas selects & Audience Choice". No lawyers are needed. Lucas likes fan films.

    12. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by kinglink · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. These guys are continuing the mythos. The same mythos collected in the books Lucas gets money from, the toys that these guys might buy for the movie. The costumes they wear if bought from a store. The DVDs of the original movies, the comic book, the official script. All will be gotten by these guys for reference material.

      Basically Lucas has done what everyone else seems afraid to do. Trust in the consumer to be honest with him when buying official Star wars products. He doesn't mind if people do homages to his work, and from the sound of it he probably enjoys it, especially considering how much he has allowed the EU (basically all the books and comics not written for a movie) to grow and just blow out of proportion.

    13. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by zeke2.0 · · Score: 1

      Yes, and unfortunately the ones profiting from it are the ones illegally selling dvds at various conventions. Star Wars revelations was going for 10 bucks a pop and the guy selling it was pretty angry when I told him that was illegal. So..I took a copy and dared him to call the police. He shut up and took the stuff down, hehehe. True story. So if you see some schmuck illegally selling fan films, just help yourself and dare them to call the police. Really. You're not stealing when you do that.

    14. Re:Life Sucking Lawyers by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

      Hah, awesome move! Speaking on behalf of fan art creators (as someone who once had to deal with badges featuring my own fan art being sold on ebay,) many thanks for sticking it to the bastard.

      --
      Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
  10. Isn't this piracy? by Suzumushi · · Score: 1
    Based on the strict copyright laws in place on DVD's and any supposed "intellectual property" (an oxy-moron if ever there was one), how is this possible? Simply making the project non-profit excapes culpability for trademark and copyright infringement? If that's the case, then all my DVD copies are for non-profit purposes.

    Of course the real reason that the project can't be for profit, is that the fan made movie would gross more than all three of the latest prequels combined revenues no doubt, proving that Hollywood and Lucas has it's head up it's ass. Not to mention destroying the self perpetuating system of Hollywood producers and studios that stifle creativity from outside or unfamiliar sources.

    1. Re:Isn't this piracy? by vertinox · · Score: 1

      Based on the strict copyright laws in place on DVD's and any supposed "intellectual property" (an oxy-moron if ever there was one), how is this possible?

      1. Maybe he asked.
      2. George Lucas is pretty benevolent about people creating direvatives of the Star Wars universe as long as it stands within official cannon. (see reason 1)

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    2. Re:Isn't this piracy? by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

      Based on the strict copyright laws in place on DVD's and any supposed "intellectual property" (an oxy-moron if ever there was one), how is this possible? Simply making the project non-profit excapes culpability for trademark and copyright infringement?

      Sigh. You're new to this whole thing aren't you? It's pretty obvious from the rest of your post that you're not really into this Star Wars thing are you? Basically, that powers that control the Star Wars (this means George Lucas) and Star Trek franchises (this means Paramount) have a deal that they don't sue fan films as long as the people who make them don't make a dime on them. That's the deal. You don't like it? You don't make a film. I am amazed that they even allow these films at all under these conditions as I think 10 years ago nobody would have agreed to let fans make such films under any conditions.

      Of course the real reason that the project can't be for profit, is that the fan made movie would gross more than all three of the latest prequels combined revenues no doubt, proving that Hollywood and Lucas has it's head up it's ass.

      Well, you've obviously never watched these films. Star Wars: Revelations, which is arguably the best of the Star Wars fan films, has very good special effects (thanks to CGI) and mostly lousy acting. There are several Star Trek ones too. The best known are probably Hidden Frontier (http://www.hiddenfrontier.com) and New Voyages (http://www.newvoyages.com). Hidden Frontier is about 6-7 years old now. It uses green screens to get the "realistic" (relatively speaking) backgrounds on the show and make it look Star Trek-ish, but the acting is very poor. The only guy on the show who really can act is Larry LaVerne, who according to IMDB got a handful of brief roles on some TV shows in the past. Some, but not all, of his co-workers have improved over the years (the lady who plays Captain Shelby comes to mind), but if these guys were working for pay, they would starve! New Voyages has probably the best acting of the bunch with most, but not all, of the cast being competent. The guy who plays McCoy is an exception, but he's still better than many of the Hidden Frontier crew. Even the people associated with all of these shows say that while they are fun to do, nobody has yet "crossed over" and gotten real work in Hollywood. Star Wars: Revelations was made mostly to try to break the effects people into Hollywood rather than intending to turn the actors into working Hollywood actors and I honestly don't know if those guys got work or not. Nobody who has acted on these fan films has gotten a break from them.

      I suppose they do serve a purpose as it's a way for fans starved for more Star Wars and Star Trek to get more entertainment, although not professional grade, from those franchises. I'm not a lawyer, but to be fair I think that Lucas and Paramount have done the best they can and honestly, if some of these things were official productions, they might be detrimental to the franchises. New Voyages is the only fan production I've seen that even comes close to professional standards and even their pilot episode was not really any better than other fan films, although their next episode was excellent.

    3. Re:Isn't this piracy? by zeke2.0 · · Score: 1

      New Voyages has a complete recreation of the bridge set used in The Original Series, plus professionally designed lighting...it's being used by actual Trek Alumni to make a Trek based film called 'Of Gods and Generals' staring people from the original cast and some of the movies. Being directed by the guy who played Tuvoc on Voyager. The set is located in Upstate NY. In Las Vegas, there is the set being built for the Star Ship Excalibur fan film that starts shooting in Sep. They are trying to recreate all the sets used in the original series. Pretty ambitious. Andd the building they are using is supposed to be torn down at the end of this year or early next. As far as legal/illegal. Those making the films are at the largess of the copyright owners who can shut down any one of them if they want to. Thats why most go out of their way to give 'notice' of official copyright holders and make it clear they are not for profit enterprises. Mmost have formed Not for profit companies, which also allow them to accept money and labor and equipment without breaking the law. Besides, CBS/Paramount can't buy this sort of media coverage if they wanted to. Just the next step in community theater IMHO.

  11. Pink-5 by why-is-it · · Score: 1

    The linked article is pretty content-lite, but I hope he produces something interesting and has a good time doing so.

    I have been a big fan of Pink Five for some time now. It's always been funny, but the production values have been getting significantly better as the story continues.

    Although it is an apples-organges comparison, I find it interesting that fans with no budget can create movies that are more interesting and entertaining than George Lucas (Ep 1-) can with his billions!

    Maybe passion is more important than the size of your wallet?

    --
    *** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
  12. Film's budget break-down by StefanJ · · Score: 5, Funny

    Catering (five boxes Little Debbies', two liters Mountian Dew): $7.00

    Transportation: $52

    Equipment: $3,401

    Special effects: $2,900

    Insurance: $1,200

    Legal fees in anticipation of lawsuit from Lucasfilm: $52,000

    1. Re:Film's budget break-down by JFMulder · · Score: 4, Funny

      The face on George Lucas when he sees the film and sees that it's better than what he wrote : priceless.

    2. Re:Film's budget break-down by ZenKen · · Score: 1

      Making a movie about something you love: priceless.

    3. Re:Film's budget break-down by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      I've seen a lot of crappy fan fiction in my day, usually set in forests. I'm not holding my breath that this will be better.

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    4. Re:Film's budget break-down by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      I meant the script. I mean, how worse can it really get than the prequels? Obviously the acting is going to suffer and the CG won't be as good, but anyone with good story-telling skills could write something decent in the SW universe.

    5. Re:Film's budget break-down by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      I was going to counter with KJA, but then I realzied you said "anyone with good story-telling skills". I agree with you.

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    6. Re:Film's budget break-down by dswensen · · Score: 1

      Well, you'd better get started. I'll be expecting to see your work up on the big screen in five years.

    7. Re: Film's budget break-down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The requisite corrections to the parent poster:

      1. Catering will be provided by Tim Horton's in the form of Coffee and Doughnuts. Any sandwiches or specialty coffee will be at the expense of the cast/crew, because they are deemed overpriced and therefore luxary items. Any non-canadians complaints about the coffee's poor flavour or long line-ups will not be tolerated. That is just the way it is, live with it. Yes there may be a coffee shop across the street with better tasting product and a shorter line-up for the same price, but it's not the Canadian thing to do. Let me just also dispell the common myth that Tim Hortons puts tobacco in their coffee. I *know* what tobacco tases like in coffee -- I tried it at home to make sure. Tim Hortons coffee tastes worse than that.
      Bonus: I've never seen a Little Debbies in Canada, and our Mountain Dew is useless because it contains no caffiene.

      2. If you require a ride to and from the studio, it will be in the director's 1985 Pontiac Perisian. Special arrangments will be fulfilled by the *marginally* more reliable Edmonton Transit System. Those wishing to take their own vehicle should be aware that the first "lost in the traffic circle" excuse will be given a 4 hour grace period. This is because it is very plausible that, for someone from anywhere else in western Canada, that traffic circle is in fact the first they have ever encountered. No compensation will be given for car repairs required as a result of excessive yet unavoidable travel through Edmonton pot-holes.

      3. Equipment can be borrowed from the film department at minimal charge.

      4. Special effects are free here, we have students that want a $60,000 project to put on their resume. Apart from their student loan amounts from the 2 years of school, that's the most money the've ever seen.

      5. Our insurance costs three times whatever you think it costs. If an accident occurrs, triple that again -- you'll pay the damages out of pocket or they'll recover it over 10 years of rate hikes.

      6. Since George Lucas won't do it, and we don't bother to sue random people/business here, the last part of the budget is non-existent. And this point is the reason I'm posting coward today.

    8. Re:Film's budget break-down by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      See, attempt at sarcasm just falls flat. I mean, if I had said "anyone can write a good Star Wars script" or "anyone can write better than Lucas" your comment would be acceptable, but I mentionned "anyone with decent writing skills", which clearly is not the majority of the people, and certainly not me. Thanks for trying.

      Besides. you don't have to be a painter to recognize a good painting, but you certainly need to be one to make a good one. And George Lucas didn't make a nice painting in a very long while.

    9. Re:Film's budget break-down by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      The face on George Lucas when he sees the film and sees that it's better than what he wrote : priceless.
      I'm in the movie, and I can honestly say... get a motherfreakin camera, cuz Mr Lucas is gonna have some drool on his chin.

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  13. Commander Rob!!! by tod_baudais · · Score: 2, Funny

    60K!!! We did these Star Trek fan films on $200!!! Weeee!

    http://www.commanderrob.com/

    Admittedly, the acting quality from the action figures is a little...um...stiff.

    Tod.

    1. Re:Commander Rob!!! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      After watching the first *cough* "film", I thought you guys MUST have taken a few liberties in order to lampoon the guy. Imagine my amazement when I read the script and found such choice lines as "(raises arms) Hooray!" in it. "Commander Rob" must be happy as a clam-who-just-lost-his-pearl over these films.

      Once again, I'm amazed at how much stranger truth is over fiction.

      BTW, any chance you could publish more scripts? It's amusing to see how close the films are to the source material. :P

      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    2. Re:Commander Rob!!! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1
      any chance you could publish more scripts?

      To answer my own question, "Commander Rob" has posted another of his scripts here:

      http://commanderriker.bravehost.com/movie_scripts. html

      The choice bit:

      SHOT: Archer is packing a shuttle craft with technology.

      Commander Rob: I can't let you do this Archer. The risk to the timeline is too great!

      Archer: I have to, I can't let Earth be destroyed.

      Archer reaches for his phaser in slowmotion. Rob reaches for his in slowmotion. Archers beam shoots wide of Rob, and Rob's beam shoots wide of archer. It looks like they both missed. But the camera focuses on Rob's phaser blast as he hit the airlock button. The airlock starts opening.

      Archer: What have you done!??

      Rob: I've saved the time line.

      Archer is sucked out into space.

      Rob goes back and hangs out with Deanna, he is depressed because he had to kill Captain Archer.

      Rob: I can't believe I had to do that.

      Deanna: Don't worry, you did the right thing. You saved us all. Besides I know how I can make you feel better.


      So, Commander Rob killed a key historical figure to "save" the timeline?

      ...

      BWHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA! Priceless, absolutely priceless. :P
      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    3. Re:Commander Rob!!! by Diag · · Score: 1
      Rob goes back and hangs out with Deanna, he is depressed because he had to kill Captain Archer.
      Rob: I can't believe I had to do that.
      Deanna: Don't worry, you did the right thing. You saved us all. Besides I know how I can make you feel better.
      Now THAT's writing! Get this man a job at Paramount.

      --
      Serving Suggestion: Defrost
  14. Still illegal... by stubear · · Score: 1

    Profit only helps better quantify the damage to the intellectual property. What part of derivative works does this guy not understand?

  15. Geek Dreams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "I'm the only guy crazy enough to do this, because I'm not allowed to turn a profit. The film is for hardcore fans who miss the character development of the original trilogy."

    Hey sweet, free XXX Star Wars porn! This is as good as it gets, everyone.

    (However, someone should tell him that porn and character development don't really mix...)

  16. Star Wars Kid by thegoofy · · Score: 1

    I just hope he casts the Star Wars Kid in some role.

    1. Re:Star Wars Kid by Aladrin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why? That kid won his frivolous lawsuit and already has all the money/fame he deserves. Before he won it, there was still the chance he's see sense and drop it and I was for giving him a role in an official Star Wars movie. Now, forget it. He lost his chance for something real, instead of just being a jerk.

      Yeah, I get that he was humiliated in front of all of mankind. I also get that he used the school's very expensive equipment wrecklessly and without permission. Maybe the school should now sue him for that $60k he just won in his lawsuit.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    2. Re:Star Wars Kid by jbarket · · Score: 1

      Not to mention he cried through his 15 minutes of fame.

      He had all the ability in the world to spin things in his favor, if not only in the eyes of fellow geeks, but still. I hope he uses some of that money to buy some thicker skin.

      --

      -----
      jonathan barket
  17. 99% of all Star Wars Fanfilms suck by mrshowtime · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think most Star Wars Fan films do try and not suck, but mostly all of them end up becoming a lightsaber/cgi fest with no story or plot. Ironically, much the same could be said about the "new" trilogy. The only good fanfilm I have seen that is coming out is http://www.tydirium.tv/ they actually built a huge Star Destroyer model and had real sets.

    --
    "Jeremy, you need to get to an internet cafe and cut and paste some appropriate sentiments about me from the world wide
    1. Re:99% of all Star Wars Fanfilms suck by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      And 99% of Hollywood films suck. Coincidence?

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    2. Re:99% of all Star Wars Fanfilms suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you counting the "Troopers" film as a fan film? It's the only Star Wars I liked at all (both fan based and Lucas based included).

    3. Re:99% of all Star Wars Fanfilms suck by mrshowtime · · Score: 1

      troops invented the genre pretty much and is still funny today.

      --
      "Jeremy, you need to get to an internet cafe and cut and paste some appropriate sentiments about me from the world wide
    4. Re:99% of all Star Wars Fanfilms suck by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      (note: I'm in the film)

      Actually, there has been great care taken with a long and well storyboarded plot, good character development, and suchlike. Much more thought ahas been given to "What can we do to write a good story" than "What can we do to have a 54-minute lightsaber battle".

      Also, we really built most of the Cantina, there is a full-size Falcon cockpit, and many other full sets. While we do have to CGI a lot of parts (such as the rest of the bar), it isn't going to turn into 30 seconds of indoor scene, followed by 74 straight minutes of X-Wing fights. (See: Episode 3 minutes 1 through 39 for examples)

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  18. And I'm supposed to believe... by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

    And I'm supposed to believe he can find better actors, can direct better and will write a better story than we already have. All for $60,000?

    I expect terrible actors, terrible direction and even worse dialogue. All compounded with: bad FX, worse audio and a poor cinematography.

    Yeah... this sounds like it's going to save Star Wars.

    1. Re:And I'm supposed to believe... by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "And I'm supposed to believe he can find better actors, can direct better and will write a better story than we already have."

      Would be difficult to do worse than 'Phantom Menace'. Though, to be fair, it's not the actor's fault that they suck ass in the movie.

      "I expect terrible actors, terrible direction and even worse dialogue."

      If they can write worse dialog than George Lucas, they deserve an award.

    2. Re:And I'm supposed to believe... by Lazarian · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Yeah... this sounds like it's going to save Star Wars.

      It's not supposed to save anything. It's a fan-made film. For fans.

    3. Re:And I'm supposed to believe... by DAharon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It isn't as if the original Star Wars was a multi-million dollar production. Lucas was able to get by with a rather small budget. And let's not forget, good writing doesn't cost millions. Good direction doesn't cost millions. Young people with the hunger and the talent to make something good aren't limited by money. Other than the original Star Wars, Rocky comes to mind. There are many more examples out there.

    4. Re:And I'm supposed to believe... by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1
      It isn't as if the original Star Wars was a multi-million dollar production. Lucas was able to get by with a rather small budget.

      Really?

      Produced with a budget of $11 million, the film was released on May 25, 1977... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_IV :_A_New_Hope)

      I don't know what the average movie budget was back then, but it looks like $11 million then, adjusted for inflation, would be equivalent to about $35 million today. So Lucas had somewhere in the neighborhood of 500-600 times the budget that this film has.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
  19. Who will they find... by Chatmag · · Score: 1, Funny

    thatcantalk

    like

    James T.

    Kirk?

    --
    Pete Carr Owner Chatmag.com
    1. Re:Who will they find... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Umm, no one because it's a Star Wars movie?

    2. Re:Who will they find... by Psmylie · · Score: 1
      That's Star Wars, not Star Trek.

      However, if they want to guarantee a success, they could always have someone dressed as a Wookiee beat the crap out of someone dressed as a Vulcan. I can think of lots of fans (of both series, actually) that would enjoy watching that. Including me :)

      --

      psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

  20. SFX and quality by CrazedWalrus · · Score: 1

    I tend to agree. Since Jurassic Park wowed audiences, filmmakers seem to haved deferred to SFX to carry the movie, instead of good acting and original storyline. Look at the immense popularity of the first SW movies, and consider that they were made on much lower budgets (even counting inflation) and primitive SFX.

    BTW - Hemos, I'm normally not the grammar Nazi type, but "from the better-then-crazy-lucas dept."? Can we at least get it right on the front page? Now cue someone pointing out some bad grammar in my post.

    1. Re:SFX and quality by andrewman327 · · Score: 3, Funny
      "filmmakers seem to haved deferred to SFX to carry the movie"


      Found it!

      --
      Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    2. Re:SFX and quality by ArmyOfFun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think reliance on SFX instead of plot/characters is anything new. Before CG, they just used lots of fireballs and before that it was lots of guns firing blanks.

      The problem is that CG still (typically) doesn't look as good as using scale models, puppets and costumes. The ships in the original trilogy look realistic. The new movie's ships look like cartoons; effectively, that's what they are. Another example, loook at the difference between Chewbacca in the original and JarJar in the new movies. Again, one looks real, the other looks like a cartoon. (Or compare the original Jabba with the CG Jabba). Or...

      It's not that CG is better than the old ways of doing things, it's just more cost effective to use CG instead of scale models and puppets. To me though, most CG looks like ass, and I think SFX have taken quite a few steps back with their over reliance on CG.

    3. Re:SFX and quality by CrazedWalrus · · Score: 1

      Dammit! I was even trying to be extra careful with that post. Good catch. :-)

    4. Re:SFX and quality by ahsile · · Score: 1

      Jabba (New) vs Jabba (Old)

      Excellent point. Especially when you compare the relative size of the same character in the versions of the film. New Jabba looks quite small compared to the monstrous, disgusting, and obese figure we were introduced to in Return of the Jedi. The cartooniness is repulsive (moreso than Jabba himself).

      --


      Find Nearby Indie Events
    5. Re:SFX and quality by cyborg_zx · · Score: 1

      Jabba's size has nothing to do with the CGI and everything to do with the film. The original scene was filmed with a stand in actor since Jabba was not yet created. Basically in order to include the original scene in the extended releases Jabba had to be smaller to accomodate the original actor's movements.

    6. Re:SFX and quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Der. Nobody here didn't know that already. It doesn't matter. The "new" Jabba is still smaller than the "old" Jabba and that's a problem. Nobody cares about Lucas' ego and his insistence on using that ridiculous scrapped footage.

    7. Re:SFX and quality by cyborg_zx · · Score: 1

      The "new" Jabba is still smaller than the "old" Jabba and that's a problem.

      Why? Because Jabba has, and will always be, exactly the same throughout the eons of time from the big bang forward? Irrespective of whether of not Lucas should have used that scene having a character change drastically is only a problem if you expect the Universe to be static.

    8. Re:SFX and quality by ultranova · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem is that CG still (typically) doesn't look as good as using scale models, puppets and costumes.

      It's exactly the other way around. CGI looks too good. A real warship has some paint peeled off, there's some rust around, someone's coffee's been spilled on the gunner seat, there's dried muddy footprints going around the place and duct tape holding together some odd device, some doors make a screeching noise when they move no matter what you do...

      A CGI ship looks like it came straight from the shipyard. No, scratch that, it looks exactly like the engineer dreamed it would - like no real ship ever can. It's geometrically perfect. It has clearly never seen a battle - heck, it has clearly never been used at all. Sure, you can add dirt and defects, but they all make the model more complicated, and no matter what you do, you'll never quite catch the infinite complexity of real-world defects.

      That's how you can tell a computer-generated image from a real human. Does it have visible skin pores, some of them clearly abnormally large ? Odd decolorations of skin ? Dirt beneath its fingernails ? Visible blood vessels ? Split hairs ? Old scars ? Some fat that jiggles where solid muscle should be ? Barely visible limp ? If not, it's not a human being.

      Computer generated images are perfect, and in reality nothing is perfect. That infinite depth of imperfection, which makes real beings so interesting, is simply impossible to model with a computer with current techniques. A polygon-based human is never going to pass for a real one, no matter how much effort you pour into it; there's always going to be a feeling of something being not quite right with it.

      Another example, loook at the difference between Chewbacca in the original and JarJar in the new movies. Again, one looks real, the other looks like a cartoon.

      Actually, Jar Jar is quite convincing, simply because it's not human and doesn't try to be. Pity that Jar Jar was written to be a clown with no history or personality either; with some real character Jar would actually have made a pretty good character despite the unrealness - or maybe because of it; Star Wars is, after all, at least as much fantasy as it is sci-fi.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    9. Re:SFX and quality by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Why? Because Jabba has, and will always be, exactly the same throughout the eons of time from the big bang forward?

      Yes. It is one of the fundamental laws of physics - "The size of Jabba is invariant over time" - and is also the very reason why Big Bang happened: a universe smaller than Jabba couldn't contain Jabba, so it had to expand. If that expanding would ever stop, the universe would begin to collapse, and eventually be smaller than Jabba; that's what kept the expansion going (but just barely at the speed neccessary to prevent the collapse). By killing Jabba, princess Leia destroyed the very force keeping the universe from collapsing and has therefore doomed us all.

      Yes, kids, the universe is going to collapse, we're all going to die, and it's all princess Leia's fault.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    10. Re:SFX and quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, seriously. That's one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. Seems a little strange for an 800 year old being to go from slithering around to fat, huge, and pretty much sedentary in such a short amount of time.

    11. Re:SFX and quality by cyborg_zx · · Score: 1

      Hey, I see Americans who seem to have managed it by age 7.

    12. Re:SFX and quality by Slider451 · · Score: 1

      Bah! It was Star Wars itself that introduced the concept of distressed vehicles and equipment, and the awesome whining and straining sound effects. Before that every spaceship was perfect. Take Star Trek and Space:1999 (please!). If you can design an elaborate ship with CG, you can design it to look like a smelly 400 lb guy spent a few parsecs in the cockpit.

      --
      Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
    13. Re:SFX and quality by Schemat1c · · Score: 1

      Look at the immense popularity of the first SW movies, and consider that they were made on much lower budgets (even counting inflation) and primitive SFX.

      I don't think the original effects were primitive at all. With the technology available at the time the amount of creativity that went into every aspect of the movie was incredible. Every single little detail of the film had some genius figuring out a way to make it appear as real as possible.

      As an example, my ex-father-in-law worked for a landscaping company. One day a guy from Skywalker Ranch came out and ordered a few pounds of every type of gravel and sand they had. When he delivered it the guy let him see what it was for. They had a large room with a movie screen on the wall and the entire floor was covered with sectioned squares that they filled with the different types of material. The entire purpose of the room was just to make different sound effects of people walking.

      It was this attention to every little detail that I believe made Lucas Films what it was. Now it seems to have devolved into just another digital effects sweatshop.

      --

      "Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everybody agrees that it is old enough to know better." - Unknown
    14. Re:SFX and quality by Tekzel · · Score: 2, Funny
      "filmmakers seem to haved deferred to SFX to carry the movie"

      Found it!


      BZZZT, sorry but that was the wrong answer, please play again. The question was, where is the GRAMMATICAL error in my post, not where is the TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR. Bob, is there a consolation prize for our player?

      (The poster DID specify grammar error! I love these games, it makes me a better speller and writer! :)
    15. Re:SFX and quality by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      If you can design an elaborate ship with CG, you can design it to look like a smelly 400 lb guy spent a few parsecs in the cockpit.

      I shiver at the thought of the prop cockpit, and the method actor who reads this and insists his cockpit be properly "distressed".

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    16. Re:SFX and quality by ArmyOfFun · · Score: 1
      It's exactly the other way around. CGI looks too good.
      By "good" I meant realistic or believable, not "good" as in perfectly proportioned and defect free.

      Actually, Jar Jar is quite convincing, simply because it's not human and doesn't try to be.
      Just because something is alien, it doesn't get a free pass. I still think he looked like a cartoon. I had no problem with the aliens who were made of real-life costumes. I think a big part of the CG "cartoon" look, is a problem with light. The space vehicles are too reflective, as is Jar Jar's skin. Models and costumes obviously reflect light exactly as they should.

      Gollum is an example of some forward progress. Like you said, probably because they did such a good job making his skin and hair more "flawed" than most other CG characters. Gollum still falls short, as there were some moments where I was reminded he was CG (the scene where he's playing in the water before being captured by Faramir). So, I'm not convinced making Gollum a CG character was the right move.
    17. Re:SFX and quality by akarnid · · Score: 1

      If I had mod points I'd mod ya up. But since they expired yesterday, I'm just gonna nod with ya.

    18. Re:SFX and quality by bahamat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That isn't true. Take for example Battlestar Galactica. The ships in BSG look like they've gotten the shit kicked out of them on more than one occasion, and they're all done in CGI. Scale models can look just as pristine as CGI. It's all about the level of detail the producer deems necessary. Ron Moore gives a shit about his product and George Lucas obviously doesn't. That's all there is to it.

    19. Re:SFX and quality by geminidomino · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, kids, the universe is going to collapse, we're all going to die, and it's all princess Leia's fault.

      All is forgivable to the goddess of the metal bikini, heathen.

    20. Re:SFX and quality by Grab · · Score: 1

      That's not original though - that's standard foley work and has been since Foley invented the concept. It was well-established before Lucas could read and write, never mind hold a camera. Check the LotR making-of stuff, and they're still doing the same today.

      Grab.

  21. from the if-then-better-than dept. by Speare · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I know that in this day and age, it's too much to ask for the editors of a for-profit site to be competent in English, even if that's their native language. Even Associated Press articles have gotten past proofreaders with the occasional homonym slip.

    The word of the day is than .

    The word 'than' is used as a part of a comparison. Examples: it's better than nothing; it's less than thrilling; six is greater than four.

    The word 'then' is used as a conjunction. Two common cases are if-then or to establish a sequence. Examples: if he enters the biathlon then he may compete; this biathlon starts with a biking component, then ends with a running component.

    I have always boggled at how geeks must always structure and type things accurately to get computers to understand them, but then completely fail to express themselves as accurately in any other form of communication.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:from the if-then-better-than dept. by logophage · · Score: 1
      I have always boggled at how geeks must always structure and type things accurately to get computers to understand them, but then completely fail to express themselves as accurately in any other form of communication.
      The difference is that progammers depend on the compiler/interpreter to enforce syntax and grammar correctness. Oh, wait...
    2. Re:from the if-then-better-than dept. by glwtta · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the advise, hopefully it will have some real affect. Its no wander we see allot of these errors - people are loosing all respect for they're own language.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    3. Re:from the if-then-better-than dept. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, the problem is worse then I thought.

    4. Re:from the if-then-better-than dept. by Tlosk · · Score: 1

      Most people don't care, a few do.

      In order to enforce arbitrary rules you need a cudgel of some sort, whining is the equivalent of a mosquito bite, annoying but easily forgotten.

      To say that "than" means only this, and "then" means only that is arbitrary, you can just as easily say that both spellings may connote either meaning and that their interchangability simply reflects the increasing overlap in their everyday pronunciation.

      Flexible languages live, prosper and assimilate. Rigid, inflexible languages become musty and decrepit, rarely the victor its adherents always deem it should be in the violent intersection of competing cultures.

    5. Re:from the if-then-better-than dept. by darkgreen · · Score: 1

      Oh, know.

      that was panefull. Your never going too learn good speach like that. Were did you go to school?

      --
      You don't need Geeksintraining if you're on Slashdot.
    6. Re:from the if-then-better-than dept. by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      I seriously hope that was a joke.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    7. Re:from the if-then-better-than dept. by Diag · · Score: 1

      I generally don't care or whine, but it certainly has an impact on my impression of the person speaking that way. If someone doesn't know the difference between "then" and "than", then I'll wonder about their intelligence level, since they haven't worked out something I've understood inherently since I was very young (unless English is not their first language, of course).

      Having said that, a man who says "nucular" rather than "nuclear" is now the supposed "leader of the free world", so what would I know?

      --
      Serving Suggestion: Defrost
  22. But how does he decide who shoots first? by bepolite · · Score: 2, Funny

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Shot_First

    --
    Always be polite.
  23. ugh... by TrippTDF · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My problem with the fan films is fans thinking they can act, and they can't.

    Lucas had shitty, crappy dialogue in the new trilogy, and that held a lot of the actors back... Natalie Portman and Ewan MccGreggor have done impressive stuff in the past, and the reason they looked so bad in these movies was due to the poor script, the actors did what they could with what they were given.

    Now, when these indie SW films seem to get fans to play the parts. Even if you have a good script, these people have no idea what they are doing, and it shows. The same way that Lucas can make his actors look bad with a bad script, bad actors can make a good script look bad.

    Here's to hoping he ropes in real actors, even if they don't give to shits about SW than using a bunch of fanboys who they they know what they are doing.

    1. Re:ugh... by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 2, Funny
      Here's to hoping he ropes in real actors, even if they don't give to shits about SW than using a bunch of fanboys who they they know what they are doing.
      I have a bad feeling about this...
    2. Re:ugh... by AcidLacedPenguiN · · Score: 1

      It's as if millions of voices crying out at once... then silence.

      --
      disclaimer: I've been known to store numbers in my ass for which to dig out when quantities are required.
    3. Re:ugh... by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      Reacting and interacting.

      Actors don't just spend 1.5 hours working with each other they spend months and years learning each other's personalities so that they can interact like they know each other.

      Reacting to each other well and modifying your lines and character to match what's going on seperates the real actors... from star trek fans who've watched the movie 100 times all want the facial expression of Boba Fette and have no self image and wierd tension even with their friends and co-stars.

      The directors in these movies are usually thinking more about the production than ensuring that the actors really get to know each other.

    4. Re:ugh... by technococcus · · Score: 1

      I love how everyone knocks the new trilogy because it's soooo cool to do so.

      Go watch the old stuff again with a critical eye instead of a nostalgic one. The dialogue? Terrible. It was just as contrived and "ooh, so space-age" neologismed as the newer dialogue. In fact, I think that's part of its charm! Would Star Wars be Star Wars without "scruffy lookin' nerf-herder" or "Oota-goota, Solo?" or "Aren't you a little short for a stormtrooper?" Come on, guys, quit bashing just because it's the "in" thing to do.

      God, what a bunch of conformists.

    5. Re:ugh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You liked the originals? God, what a conformist you are.

      Oh, you liked the new ones too? Then, yes, you are a free-thinking iconoclastic rebel.

      Or a lover of crap. To wit:

      "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"
      "She's lost the will to live."
      "I don't like the sand."
      "death-sticks"
      "chance-cube"

      Sorry, no redeeming qualities.

    6. Re:ugh... by Cervantes · · Score: 0, Troll

      (note: I'm in the movie)

      Mark did indeed manage to rope in real actors. Not only are there professionals (a lot of Canadian indie, some C-list), there are lots of acting students, and lots of people who love Star Wars enough to make it real. Hans Solo, for instance, is done by Iowa Jimmy, who has pretty much been in love with the movie since it came out. He's a teacher, and his entire classroom is like a Star Wars museum. He's done Cons and ... well, hell, he's done everything. So in this case, we could have picked an 'actor' to do the role... but no one could bring as much to it as Jim does.

      Summary: Don't worry about the acting. Everyone is great, and the director (who's already won some indie awards for his past work) most certainly doesn't take crap shots. You screw up, you do it over. And over. And over. Until everyone is happy.

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    7. Re:ugh... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Hans Solo, for instance, is done by Iowa Jimmy, who has pretty much been in love with the movie since it came out

      *Shoots first*

      *Shoots 63 more times for good measure*

  24. Why all the bashing by lecanucker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To heck with whatever copyright laws he may be breaking - Let's see how he does. The chances are nobody will ever hear of this movie again, and that it will crash and burn miserably. But George Lucas couldn't sell the original to studios and it turned out to be not bad for everyone. Let em play with his money. He could spend $60,000 on a car, but then he couldn't superimpose his face over Lukes as the deathstar blows up. I don't see how it could be much worse than the prequels.

    --
    What we gonna do today Brain?
  25. misses the character development of original?? by LOTHAR,+of+the+Hill · · Score: 0

    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahaha

  26. A picture is worth a thousand words by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

    clicky (13KB)

    1. Re:A picture is worth a thousand words by corbettw · · Score: 1

      WTF? That's the image that showed up when I followed your link.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    2. Re:A picture is worth a thousand words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copy & paste the url to another browser window.

    3. Re:A picture is worth a thousand words by vadim_t · · Score: 1

      Server must be configured to deliver a different image if you try to load it with a referer that's not from the sites. People sometimes do that when you annoy them by linking to their images from your site or a forum signature.

      Just open a new window, so that there's no referer, and paste the URL into the address bar.

    4. Re:A picture is worth a thousand words by mobby_6kl · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry about that, as the others already said, the server checks the referrer. I have referrer logging disabled in Opera so it didn't happen to me. Here it is rehosted on imageshack

  27. More Obligatories by hellfire · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Making films ain't like dustin' crops boy!"

    "It's as if a thousand Lucas lawyers suddenly cried out, and then were silent."

    "That's no Lucas bomb, it's a fan flick!"

    "He better get those Mt. Dew Bottles to editing by tomorrow morning, or there'll be hell to pay."

    And finally, said the director of the fan film to Lucas: "Would someone get this walking carpet out of my way."

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

    1. Re:More Obligatories by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      More accurately, in response to any new Star Wars thing:

      "NOOOO!!!!!!"

      (I had more O's and more !'s, but the /. lameness filter intercepted my post and prevented it. Sadly, the irony didn't reach Mr. Lucas FIRST.)

      --
      -Styopa
  28. Cast by dafz1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    There are some "Official" Star Wars actors in the movie.

    Included in the cast:

    Zach Jensen: Jedi Master Kit Fisto (Episode 2)

    AND

    Jeremy Bulloch: BOBA FETT!!!! Ok...he won't play Boba Fett in this movie.

    1. Re:Cast by Cervantes · · Score: 0, Troll

      (note: I'm in the movie)
      Don't forget, Chewbacca is in this one too... at least, the guy who does Chewie for all the Cons and promo shots and the red carpet at the EpIII screening. He's a nice guy, consumate professional, and he's bringing a great presence to the movie. It's awesome to get on set and have Chewie walk in and start roaring.

      I'm looking forward to meeting Jeremy and Zach too. This is gonna be so awesome.

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  29. They should release this film as OPEN SOURCE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so that The Community can improve it and work out all the bugs and make a superior movie compared to a single directors $$$ vision

  30. More info... by Lazarian · · Score: 1
    They have a website up.

    http://www.xpressentertainment.ca/index.php

  31. As bad as Hollywood. by milatchi · · Score: 1

    Maybe he should create his own SciFi/Fantasy story instead of remaking, rehashing, extending, or copying someone else's.

    --
    Slashdot = -1 Redundant, Asperger, kdawson FUD, Libertarian, and Linux
    1. Re:As bad as Hollywood. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. With blackjack. And hookers.

    2. Re:As bad as Hollywood. by trytoguess · · Score: 1

      As bad as the comic book industry is probably more accurate considering how much is "rehashing, extending, or copying". Nevertheless there are some good stories in that medium.

    3. Re:As bad as Hollywood. by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      If anyone says "In fact, forget the movie", I'll shoot them.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    4. Re:As bad as Hollywood. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, forget the movie

  32. Fanmade movies tend to not know their limitations by doublethekillerdelet · · Score: 1

    The film is for hardcore fans who miss the character development of the original trilogy.

    Erm, the "hardcore fan" is willing to watch anything; Even if the main characters would be played by stop-motion turds with little lightsabers; They'd watch -and- analyse the intriguing plot afterwards... for weeks.

    Only a hardcore fan is willing to watch these fanmade movies; I am hard trying -not- to be a troll, but are there any fanmade StarWars-movies that -are- worth watching?
    The few I've seen (of course) lack the visual quality of the original, but instead of confining themselves to areas where there isn't as much CGI needed, they always cram in a few (crappy looking) scenes, that for me, ruin the movie.

    When will those directors of fanmade movies just realise their weaker points, and instead -really- focus on plot/actors

  33. You aren't the first by LuminaireX · · Score: 4, Informative

    "I'm the only guy crazy enough to do this, because I'm not allowed to turn a profit."

    Actually, you're not the first and only guy, and I doubt you'll be the last. Come on, this was only a year ago! Star Wars Revelations

    If I'm not mistaken, that one sucked too

    1. Re:You aren't the first by Cervantes · · Score: 0, Troll

      (note: I'm in the movie)

      He's the only guy crazy enough to put together $60,000 and take 2 years of his life to make the biggest and most ambitious Star Wars fan movie ever made, knowing from the start that he can't make a dime off of it. I think there's a slight difference.

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  34. Delve into the downfall of the Jedi? by jpellino · · Score: 1

    How much more elucidation is needed? Didn't we see all but a couple (and and the infants) slaughtered in about a long lunch break's time?

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  35. Jar Jar by Chineseyes · · Score: 0

    The film is for hardcore fans who miss the character development of the original trilogy
    Yes because I've personally always wanted a history of how Jar Jar Binks developed into such an annoying character.

    --
    I think the invisible hand of the market has its middle finger extended

    --A wise old fart named SC0RN
  36. Between Eps III and IV? by Motterman · · Score: 1

    Isn't that when the new Star Wars television series is supposed to take place?

    1. Re:Between Eps III and IV? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the new Star Wars television series
       
      Oh God, please please please tell me you're making this up. Not a series! No! I'M IN HELL!

    2. Re:Between Eps III and IV? by Motterman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category= 3&id=35849&type=0 Rick McCallum, George Lucas' longtime Star Wars producing partner, told SCI FI Wire that future projects are a ways off, including a live-action TV show that is at least a year and a half away. "Star Wars TV series, probably not for a couple of years," McCallum said in an interview at the Saturn Awards in Universal City, Calif., on May 2. "George is starting to start the basic concept of it. ... We're interviewing writers. We're seeing a lot of people. But I'd say it's not going to be happening for another at least 18 months." McCallum also denied rumors that the new series would focus on members of the Skywalker family, but repeated that the show will take place in the timeframe between Episode III and IV. "All-new characters," he added. "That missing 20-year period when Luke is growing up. ... Think bounty hunter. That's all I can tell you. There's nobody else that you'll know [in it]. At the moment. You know, it's still [in] really, really early stages. He hasn't really sat down to think about which direction [he's going]."

  37. Meesa Dying! by Lazarian · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    From the FAQ"s on the website:

    We find out whatever happened to Jar Jar Binks.

    Please, PLEASE let it be something involving horrible, unrelenting agony.

    1. Re:Meesa Dying! by MrNiceguy_KS · · Score: 1
      We find out whatever happened to Jar Jar Binks.

      Please, PLEASE let it be something involving horrible, unrelenting agony.

      I'm guessing he gets tossed in the Sarlaac.

      Which then gags, and spits him back out.

      --
      Redundancy is good And also good.
    2. Re:Meesa Dying! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watching anything with Jar Jar Binks involves horrible, unrelenting agony by definition ;)

    3. Re:Meesa Dying! by Cervantes · · Score: 2, Informative
      From the FAQ"s on the website:

      We find out whatever happened to Jar Jar Binks.

      Please, PLEASE let it be something involving horrible, unrelenting agony.


      I'm in the movie, and I don't know if I should say... but I don't think I'll get in trouble if I tell you that your concerns will be assuaged in a manner involving deep space and a fortuitous high-speed collision with a starship.
      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  38. Leigh Brackett's Other Work by sesshomaru · · Score: 3, Informative
    I think it's sad that no one ever pays attention to any of Leigh Brackett's other work. Sure, Empire Strikes Back was a fine film with crackling dialogue, but I can vaugely remember some of her other Space Operas from when I was a kid (mostly short stories). (Time to buy some books, I guess.)

    I'd really like to see Space Opera make a comeback, but it seems unlikely with the failure of Serenity at the box office.

    --
    "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    1. Re:Leigh Brackett's Other Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Star Wars Episode 3 (meh), Chronicles of Riddick (crap), Fifth Element (well, weird is interesting)... there are quite a few, depending on how strictly you define it. For instance Event Horizon (generic) could count, though it's more of a horror. And the new Battlestar Galactica (oh. so. slow.) series is quite the success.
      I don't think Serenity (Buffy in space) made any difference one way or another, I'll bet anything you like there'll be another along in a year or two.

      Films never do it that well, anyway. I'd rather read Excession for the 10th time than watch even the best space opera film (probably Lynch's Dune, IMHO).

    2. Re:Leigh Brackett's Other Work by Wylfing · · Score: 1

      I'd really like to see Space Opera make a comeback, but it seems unlikely with the failure of Serenity at the box office.

      Whoa there! The financials for Serenity are hard to judge unless you look closely. Even though the box office take for Serenity seemed lackluster, a little inspection of the numbers reveals a different story. First, it wasn't taken seriously by the studio, who released the film in about half as many theaters as it could have -- something like 1500 theaters in the U.S. The Jodi Foster flick, Flightplan, which came out at the same time, was released in 3500 theaters. Oh, and guess what, Flightplan made twice as much money. Go figure.

      Second, films with "hot" actors rarely do better than Serenity did. Miami Vice is doing roughly the same kind of box office take as Serenity ($25 million versus $20 million on the opening weekend), but -- guess what -- Vice was released in 3000 theaters. So that actually means it's only doing about 2/3 as well as Serenity. Not to mention that it cost three times as much to make Miami Vice ($135 million versus $40 million).

      --
      Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.
  39. Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Examples: if he enters the biathlon then he may compete; this biathlon starts with a biking component, then ends with a running component.
    Actually the word of the day is duathlon. Tomorrow's word of the day is biathlon.
  40. Re:Commander Rob!!! Episode III is coming! by tod_baudais · · Score: 1

    Here's some pictures from Episode III that we just finished filming yesterday.

    http://homepage.mac.com/tod_baudais/PhotoAlbum37.h tml

  41. Re:Fanmade movies tend to not know their limitatio by durnurd · · Score: 1

    Weeks? Try 25 years! They're still analyzing the original trilogy to this day! I suppose I should say "We" instead of "They"... yes, I'm one of... them!

    --
    --Edward Dassmesser
  42. Star Wars answer to Star Trek: Hidden Frontier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Spinoff fan series stink. They inevitably become fanboy wankfests designed to inflate the egos and fulfill the fantasies of whoever's producing the drivel.

    Case in point: Star Trek: Hidden Frontier http://www.hiddenfrontier.com/ where the main character is gay and has a Klingon boyfriend with a "gentleness" fetish.

    GARBAGE!

    1. Re:Star Wars answer to Star Trek: Hidden Frontier by Cervantes · · Score: 1
      Spinoff fan series stink. They inevitably become fanboy wankfests designed to inflate the egos and fulfill the fantasies of whoever's producing the drivel.

      Case in point: Star Trek: Hidden Frontier http://www.hiddenfrontier.com/ where the main character is gay and has a Klingon boyfriend with a "gentleness" fetish.

      GARBAGE!


      I'm in the movie, and I can say, don't worry. The script is well balanced, and doesn't twist the SW universe into something it's not just so the production team can get their jollies. Besides, there are too many Star Wars Geeks on this movie... we'd kick Mark in the nuts if he tried. :)

      PS: Mark... if you're reading this... uh... please don't cut me over this. :)
      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    2. Re:Star Wars answer to Star Trek: Hidden Frontier by vimh42 · · Score: 1

      I read the synopsis and Hans involvement seems a bit odd. He would have had a bit more of a clue as to what was going on if he had been involved with a Jedi prior to A New Hope. The tie in (no pun intended) meeting up with the Imperials works out but his interaction with the Jedi seems a stretch. Han was borded and he dumped the spice for Kessel. That's why Jabba was pissed. And why would Han and Choowie be sitting in a bar on Tatooine if they were on the run from Imperials at that point? The script seems to be getting some twisting. I look forward to seeing how this turns out.

  43. Original Trilogy character development? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was character development in the original trilogy? Wow. I guess I blinked or looked away during those scenes.

    Seriously though, I've yet to see a "serious" (i.e. not like Troops or Pink Five) fan film yet which wasn't a piece of Mary Sue fanfic wank.

  44. I'm confused.... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Funny

    Help me Slashdot, I'm confused...

    Am I supposed to hate this because it is "new" Star Wars and will have lots of CGI, or am I supposed to love it because it is a fan film and not Lucas?? Tell me what to think!

    Please hurry, I want to make up my mind before I see it...

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"
  45. Shit... by CaseM · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I think George Lucas gonna sue somebody!

    1. Re:Shit... by CaseM · · Score: 1

      Boo...someone needs their Jay & the Silent Bob detector fixed.

  46. Why not make a mashup with original footage? by DJ_Perl · · Score: 1

    You'd distribute the mashup, alongwith a special player application. The viewer would be required to have a Star Wars DVD. The mashup file would use frames from the original DVD by reference. The player would composite the two video sources ( the mashup, and the DVD ). This is much like the Video Internet.

    --
    -- Subvert the dominant paradigm. Repeat as desired. http://ownlifeful.com/
  47. Inn Awther Werds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A purrsun who onlie nos whun wai 2 spell ah wurd expressis a sevear lak uv creativitie.

  48. This will be a SW fan film with better acting. by latent_biologist · · Score: 1

    I find most of what makes a crap-tastic fanfilm is the sub-par acting. Granted, noone's winning any best actor Oscars in any real SW film, but most geeks just can't act. The difference here I think is that Mark's getting real actors for this project. Combined with some fairly decent special effects, this should make for an enjoyable fan film.

    Now, for the disclaimer - I'm friends with some of the folks with leading roles in this film. That said, the guy playing Han Solo probably does Solo better than Harrison Ford did. If you've seen "that Han Solo guy" at a con in the last 6 years, it was probably him. Plus he can act. He's been in a few independent films, including the lead role in University Heights; in which he totally stole the show.

    The Chewbacca is probably the best fan-created costume out there. The guy playing chewie did almost the whole costume himself & is a super-stickler for detail. Hell, he can even vocalize a pretty decent wookie growl.

  49. Fan Films are Inherent by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    People have actually been doing Star Wars fan films for quite some time. [theforce.net]

    I would have to say fan-films are inherent. When I was about 6 (1979) I absconded with my mother's 110 camera and setup my Star Wars action figures and X-Wing fighter on the floor and shot a 'film'. I understood the 'sequence-of-still-images' part, but not the frame rate.

    Clearly I hadn't heard about fanfilms at that time, I just had the urge to make one. People are always emulating things they enjoy. Sad to say, the project was abandoned when my mother came back from the photo lab the next time.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  50. Making a movie for profit? by beaverfever · · Score: 1

    "I'm the only guy crazy enough to do this, because I'm not allowed to turn a profit."

    Crazy? I don't think so. It is well known that even if you make a successful movie, you don't make a movie to make a profit.

    --
    RTFM; please, I beg you.
  51. DUDE!!!! by Cervantes · · Score: 1

    I am so hyped to read this, because I'm in the movie!!!11one!! It's freakin awesome... we just shot the Cantina scene, it kicks ass... there's just too much to say. Mark is doing a great job, the cast is great, the sets are awesome... and the story is damn good too. I don't think anyone is going to be disappointed.

    The best part is that everyone involved in the project is such a huge geek, and Star Wars fan, that everything just comes together perfectly.

    Everyone needs to go Slashdot XPress Entertainment. That's Marks' production company that's making the movie. There is a forums there too, and we have about a thousand pictures from the first 2 days of shooting that are soon to get put up there.

    Awesome hero costumes, all the extras look great, and there are some extremely hot girls (heck, all of them are!). Perfect start to a movie, IMHO.

    Also, I need help... I'm changing my sig, how does this sound?

    I win this argument by default. I'M IN MOTHERF*CKING STAR WARS, BITCH!

    --
    If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    1. Re:DUDE!!!! by engagebot · · Score: 1

      Sorry to break it to you, but you're not in a star wars movie... You're in a fan-film. Welcome to several years ago.

      --
      Han shot first.
  52. audio by The+Queen · · Score: 1

    Having just worked on an independent TV series I have to agree about the audio. We just screened a rough cut of episode one this weekend and that was the one glaring thing about it. I don't know much about the editing software being used, and whether that will be enough to compensate, but all we had on set were the huge phallic mics attached to the cameras. Maybe next season we can afford a sound guy and a boom. *crosses fingers*

    --

    The House Between - Original Sci-Fi Series
  53. Just to clarify by rk · · Score: 3, Funny

    Because I'm not quite sure yet: Are you in this movie? ;-)

    1. Re:Just to clarify by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      Damn you slashdotters and your information mining techniques!! You found me out!! My secret is in the open!!

      Hehe, yeah, I know, I suck. I'm just really pumped. Sorry guys/gals. :)

      (PS: +1 funny)

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  54. You have to have different expectations by hellfire · · Score: 1

    If you go to the local community theater and pay $10 for a ticket, you get what you pay for. If someone flubs their lines, you shouldn't scream and shout in the theater that they suck. Acting on stage is democratic and has all levels of performance.

    If you pay $300 for a broadway ticket and the actor on stage can't remember half their lines, storm out of the theater in the dark and demand a refund.

    The film can't legally turn a profit, so therefore he can't charge much for this, if anything at all. You get what you pay for.

    I, for one, appreciate fan films for what they are, fans who are enthusiastic about a topic who just want to express themselves. You can't hold them to the same standard... unless you were going for the "I'm a typically slashdot culture snob." In that case, way to go you nailed it.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

  55. Run-on sentence by linuxrocks123 · · Score: 1

    > In order to enforce arbitrary rules you need a cudgel of some sort, whining is the equivalent of a mosquito bite, annoying but easily forgotten.

    s. b.

    > In order to enforce arbitrary rules you need a cudgel of some sort. Whining is the equivalent of a mosquito bite, annoying but easily forgotten.

    Please learn to express yourself more intelligently.

    --
    vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
  56. a good chance for trying open source graphics soft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After Elephant's dream, this could be another good chance to use open source software on a movie project, and cheaper for them, too.

  57. This movie will be great by tazrules · · Score: 1

    Everybody who I've heard bash this movie doesn't have a clue, I'm in the movie and helping on set. Jimmy does a great job at Han Solo, he's been a die hard Solo fan since he was 6. He has Han Solo's act down to a tee. Grant is Chewbacca, he performed at the red carpet opening to Revenge of the Sith , and hes performed for George Lucas rersonally, he has Chewbaccas growl to a tee. They will be bringing in a boba fett performer in the next week or so, the whole cast is great, everybody just clicked together ther is great chemistry ion the set, this will be the best fan film made, period.

  58. Matrix XP. by argent · · Score: 1

    On the other hand there's stuff like Matrix XP that's better than the "real" sequels. Google for it, and bear in mind that it was done before Matrix Reloaded/Rebooted/Revolutions/whatever...

  59. IMPS _are_ showing signs of life by Bromskloss · · Score: 1

    The last message on their mailing list actually arrived 2006-06-08. Their project seems to be slow-going, but they said in March that Chapter 2 was in post production. I'm still hoping.

    --
    Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
  60. Is this Lucas type storyline or for real? by brainplay · · Score: 1

    Two big questions here. First, is this going to be a kiddie show thats strokes the Rebel Alliance or is this going to be a harder "yeah good guys will die" kind of movie? Second, are the "elite" stormtroopers going to be as sucky as possible to allow the "good guys" to get away with pure crap as usual?

    Seriously though, as much as I looove Star Wars GL really pushed the edges or reality but oversimplifying the enemy into bumbling goofs who just happened to have defeated an intergalatic federation (no ST pun there..well maybe) and controlled the galaxy for the past 18yrs with an iron fist. COMBAT trained pilots with thousands of hours of flight time making easy targets of themselves (try and get me to believe Luke's combat flight training wasn't him playing their modern day BF2), armor that is only for show (ewoks..damn ewoks), and military trained riflmen how can't hit a human target at 10ft. Blaaaaah!

    A struggling alliance against an empire that actually has teeth and can use them makes for better entertainment than the typical "you charge that stormtrooper platoon and wipe them out with this chopstick while I stand out in the open and use my powers of Lucas cheats and a paperclip to make them miss me".

    Sorry dude Lucas forgot that the 12yr target audience (and his current biggest fans) all grew up and are in their 20's-40's. Its bad enough that the EU stuff is butchered by crappy writing. Try doing this to a more adult audience....pleeeeease.

    --
    It is often ironic that those that define others as lemmings are often themselves lemmings dancing to the latest fad.