Slashdot Mirror
Topher Grace Screens Star Wars Prequel Re-edit
silentbrad writes "/Film (as well as IGN and A.V. Club) reports about Topher Grace's fan re-edit of the Star Wars prequel trilogy into a single, 85-minute film titled Star Wars: Episode III.5: The Editor Strikes Back.' Quoting /Film: 'His idea was to edit the Star Wars prequels into one movie, as they would provide him a lot of footage to work with. He used footage from all three prequels, a couple cuts from the original trilogy, some music from The Clone Wars television series, and even a dialogue bit from Anthony Daniels' (C-3PO) audio book recordings. He even created a new opening text crawl to set up his version of the story.' It continues with what stayed and what was cut. It's just too bad it was a one-time-only screening."
He also seems to want to favor storytelling over merchandising, which is a strange and unusual concept.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Separate, boring they are.
Together, one good movie it would be.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Video or it didn't happen.
Without Being Prevented From Doing So By Lucas
would have been the name of the Star Wars movie about an alternate reality where the prequels were substantially better.
The enemies of Democracy are
Interesting concept... could never happen for legal reasons... but I'd be intrigued if people could "cut n' paste" scenes from OTHER films into a meaningfull order to make it look like another star wars film.
For example- Take Ford from the Tom Clancy Films- and Indiana Jones; cut and paste them together- with a few special affects and make it look like episode 7.
C3P0 could be in episode 7- just rip scenes of Rex from "Yo Gabba Gabba". Mark Hamil has been in so many block buster films since Star Wars- should be easy to get footage of him to use.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Can we get a link to where we can watch Episode III.5?
AccountKiller
NnoooooOOooooooOooooooOOoooooooooo!
The goal wasn't to make the prequels not suck. He's learning about editing film, and used the prequels as a medium to do so (and probably make a great test case to show both the potential and limitations of post-production editing).
Calculus and science are great, but I don't think everyone should do that and nobody should do art. Once you accept that the entire concept of movies aren't pointless, then learning about editing is a useful skill.
The enemies of Democracy are
Yeah, an 11 gallon drum of crud and a dropper full of water -- a significantly higher concentration of water.
P.S. don't mistake "better" for "good". :)
The enemies of Democracy are
Sure you can... ... although admittedly Episode 4 would be a little strange without the Luke character appearing in it at all.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
He can't release it or George will sue him into oblivion. We'll never get to see it. So why even tell us it exists?
Someone needs to edit down Robert Rodriguez's movie, Machete. The original concept was great. When he unnecessarily extended the story to fit all the Hollywood celebrities on screen, the movie goes downhill. Booth was a terrific character. When he dies, the movie should end. Fin.
Oh, but keep that scene in there where Danny Trejo is in the swimming pool with the topless women.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Listening to this guy describe how he would change the first prequel is really interesting... it would actually make for a pretty decent movie.
I'd love see his take on the subsequent two movies.
This 12 minute video is totally worth your time:
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2012/02/how-to-fix-the-phantom-menace-in-12-minutes/
- Spryguy
There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
The goal wasn't to make the prequels not suck. He's learning about editing film, and used the prequels as a medium to do so (and probably make a great test case to show both the potential and limitations of post-production editing).
Calculus and science are great, but I don't think everyone should do that and nobody should do art. Once you accept that the entire concept of movies aren't pointless, then learning about editing is a useful skill.
Please.
He watched some film student sit at a Mac cutting shit together in Final Cut Pro.
Red Forman's son on That '70s Show.
Mr. Grace should be able to "release" his version, not directly, but by describing what sections of each source were used. For instance, something like this made up example: "Scene 1, five segments, 5 minutes 10 seconds. First Segment: Episode I Blu-ray, begin 1 hour 1 minute and 11 seconds, end 1 hour 3 minutes 52 seconds. Second Segment: Episode II Collector's Edition Blu-ray Deleted Scenes, "Meditation", begin 32 seconds, end 1 minute 2 seconds." etc etc.
The editing done by Topher Grace is typically referred to as "Polishing A Turd".
Sounds like the perfect man. Do you have any other praise, or can you just pass me contact details?
Have you considered learning calculus?
Have you considered learning editing? Topher Grace has.
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
Should do that with Matrix 2 and 3. Separate, boring they are. Together, one good movie it would be.
That's because they *are* a single overlong movie split into two parts in all but name. Even moreso than the explicitly split "Kill Bill" (where you could enjoy each of the parts in its own right due to its more scene-based nature).
More's the pity because, although it clearly wasn't as good as the original, The Matrix Reloaded was still quite good in its own way (if a bit too long)... but clearly a "part 1" that requires you to watch "part 2" to be complete.... except that "part 2" (i.e. Revolutions) was just lousy, and would have been too long at anything over an hour. I'd personally trim Reloaded and hack all but the essentials from Revolutions.
Even then it wouldn't solve the "resolution" of Revolutions which felt less like a satisfying "tying things up" ending and more like an intentionally incomplete and half-baked non-resolution designed to provide a point to expand the franchise (*) from. Ironically, we *haven't* really seen much Matrix-related stuff in the 8+ years since then (I'm sure they've done backstory comics and such guff for the fanboys, but I'm talking about mass market on the same scale as the movies themselves). Is this because it really was intended as the final movie, or because Revolutions' reception was so poor that it seriously damaged the prospects of more Matrix material?
To be honest, part of the problem may always have been that- although "The Matrix" looks on the surface like it should be one of those films that would work well as a franchise (due to the questions and possibilities it throws up and the expanded world it suggests)... it isn't. What worked about the first movie was wrapped up by the end. You can't redo the sense of wonder and discovery that drove the first movie, and once Neo has made that journey he's no longer really the confused and bemused everyman cipher (that Reeves' criticised acting style actually worked really well for), but a knowledgeable Superman in a much larger world (Zion) of characters with bad dialogue we really don't care about.
(*) Ugh, anyone notice how common that word has become in the past decade? We're all using terminology that makes us sound like a mixture of fanboy and corporate studio types. Though of course it's true- such things *are* moneymaking franchises, but it doesn't say much for artistic integrity, nor for us in that we accept and use the term.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
Film editing is a profession that requires both talent and experience. He's developing his abilities towards that goal, and if he can 'polish the turd', so to speak, he'll be able to demonstrate his talent. He could end up doing what he wants for a living.
Basically what I'm trying to say we all know you're not curing cancer, getting us into space, or solving world hunger, so just sit down and shut up.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Past decade?
Franchise has been around longer than that. JMS started Babylon 5 in 1992 by (1) announcing on the early internet (usenet) that the project was being filmed and (2) saying he would not turn it into a never-ending franchise like Star Trek. That word already had negative connotations 20+ years ago.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
It would have tobecome a narrative: "Luke wants to train to be a pilot" , "I know. I told him he has to help with the farm ... what a whiney little bitch". Then when they die it's now narrated through c3p0, with Stewies voice. "hey ahhtwo, did you hear what that Luke fellow is up to? Learning the force can you believe it. He's getting pretty good too. I'll be he fights that vader guy soon enough."
Not a single damn actor in that movie did well. After watching the prequels I had to go peruse some of Natalie Portman's other films. Because I had thought she was a good actor, but was starting to doubt it. Turns out that yes, indeed, she has acting chops. But there's only so much an actor can do with a terrible script, nothing but a green screen to act against, and a director who isn't happy until the actor does exactly what he wants and what he wants is retarded.
Same with Ewan McGregor. To a lesser extent Liam Neeson, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee, but that's because they had less screentime to erase memories of other things they've done.
So, I don't recall seeing Hayden Christiansen in anything else, but my default assumption is that he can probably act but looked horrible in those movies just like everyone else did.
The enemies of Democracy are
Not a single damn actor in that movie did well. After watching the prequels I had to go peruse some of Natalie Portman's other films. Because I had thought she was a good actor, but was starting to doubt it. Turns out that yes, indeed, she has acting chops. But there's only so much an actor can do with a terrible script, nothing but a green screen to act against, and a director who isn't happy until the actor does exactly what he wants and what he wants is retarded.
Same with Ewan McGregor. To a lesser extent Liam Neeson, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee, but that's because they had less screentime to erase memories of other things they've done.
So, I don't recall seeing Hayden Christiansen in anything else, but my default assumption is that he can probably act but looked horrible in those movies just like everyone else did.
You're right, in general everyone did badly. I have seen examples of good acting against a green screen, so I don't think that's the reason. (Or at least, the whole reason.) I think "what the director wants is retarded" is closer to the mark.
I saw Hayden in "Jumper", a movie that didn't totally suck, and he was a bit stiff in that, but not nearly as bad as he was in the SW movies. This could be because he had a better director.
A good director can drag good performances out of a bad actor. (Example, Barry Lyndon (1975)) A bad director can drag bad performance out of nearly anyone.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Standard disclaimer, I am not a lawyer, etc.
CleanFlicks edited the movies and sold the edited copies, which was illegal. ClearPlay does something closer to what we're describing (use special DVD player that you can upload a description of an edited movie to, and have the player apply the edits to an unmodified movie), and it's survived the lawsuits brought against it. Even then, posting a description of the edits is not illegal if it contains no copyrighted material from the original movie, which should be possible.
There's already been a court case about this, and the company which was doing it lost. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CleanFlicks
If you RTFA, they were actually making the edit and supplying the edited version. So completely different to a bare edit list.