A Quivering Mass of Star Wars

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A Quivering Mass of Star Wars

Posted by Hemos on Thursday May 27, 1999 @05:04AM from the how-rich-is-lucas dept.

A number of people wrote in with the CNN report about the film reel that had been stolen, is now returned. As well, you can take the Jedi Eliteness test, to see how elite you are-Elyjah also sent us the Star Wars Cantina. Copacabana has never been the same.

30 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Re:Here's a poll... by Anonymous Coward · 1999-05-27 04:33 · Score: 0

I would say about 40,000 times hotter.
Natalie Portman in ESB Gold Bikini thing (yowza) by Anonymous Coward · 1999-05-27 06:02 · Score: 0

Now that would beat Carrier Fisher!
Don't you mean Larry Wall? by Anonymous Coward · 1999-05-28 02:41 · Score: 0

I think you do.
Is it really worth $60,000? by Anonymous Coward · 1999-05-27 05:56 · Score: 1

How do you get a value of $60,000? First of
all, movie reels are never sold to theaters- they are rented and must be returned after playing! So
is the reel actually valuable in and of itself, if not played?
I'd believe that the physical film cost a few hundred or a thousand, but anything over that would have to be due only to the content of the movie itself. So these turkeys stole the PHYSICAL movie, but they just tossed it in the woods! Can they be accused of stealing the INFORMATIONAL component of the reel- undoubtedly, the major portion of the price- if they didn't even have the equipment or the inclination to read it?
Of course, the theater will get stuck with a $60,000 bill- or will they? LucasFilm will want it returned anyway, even damaged- and would they actually get it returned without some sort of compensation? So they'd have to give the theater at least some of this $60,000.
Does LucasFilm eat the $60,000 then? Of course not! They don't rent out a single less reel as a result of this.
So the only purpose of throwing numbers like that around is to come up with some phony legal reason for punishing some dumbasses. Fine to lie in order to do that- so long as we don't actually believe it! Personally, it bothers me, I think laws should be more honest.
1. Re:Is it really worth $60,000? by fishbowl · 1999-05-27 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  Your post sounds like you assume the studio gets it's film processing for free, or that it is processed in facilities owned by the studios (and thus disappeared into the budget) but that's not
  how it works. Those prints are paid for, and they
  are rather expensive.
  
  A six-reel production release with a digitally
  mastered soundtrack costs a fortune.
  Agreements and antitrust compliance between studios and processing labs (and all kinds of
  other business relationships) create serious
  requirements for independent parties to be involved in the production of a movie (and be
  compensated over the table for their services).
  
  That's why you always see "Color by DeLuxe" or
  whatever, in the credits.
  
  If you want a price list, how 'bout
  
  http://www.deluxe-ent.com/hollywood/prices/plab. html
  
  The minimum charge per foot, on prints from DeLuxe, is $61.00. Possibly, Lucas gets a discount. Maybe not. It's the distributor's
  problem. This is for 35mm. Perhaps it does not
  surprise you that there are so few 70mm and Imax
  releases!!
  
  Wish I could remember the feet per reel, or the
  number of frames per foot...
  
  --
  -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
2. Re:Is it really worth $60,000? by MLamar · 1999-05-27 20:23 · Score: 1
  
  If I remember correctly from my projectionist days, 35mm film has 24 frames/second. The frames are physically about 1" in length, and a single shipping reel holds up to 20 minutes of film. So we get 2 ft * 60 sec * 20 min = 2400 ft * $61/ft for a total of $146,400 for Deluxe's lab to process 20 minutes of film.
Weird Al? by Mike+Hicks · 1999-05-27 00:58 · Score: 1

Hmm.. That Cantina song sounds like it was done by Weird Al (but maybe it just sounds that way.. I can't seem to find any reference to the song on CDNow..)
"Coca Cabana" by abischof · 1999-05-27 00:16 · Score: 0

>Coca Cobana has never been the same.
FWIW, the actual song title is Copa Cabana.
Alex Bischoff
---

--
Alex Bischoff
HTML/CSS coder for hire
Re:It was returned, albeit somewhat damaged... by substrate · 1999-05-27 09:04 · Score: 2

Actually, I just read the write up in the newspaper. The $60K figure that has been bandied about is what the owners of the theater (a small 140 seat theater) estimated as their losses. The cost for a print of the movie is $2500. This sounds a bit low, it may well be $2500 per reel. I'll pretend that the Eau Claire Leader-Telegram is occasionally factually correct.

At this point they're charged being charged with relatively minor crimes and are all ready talking plea bargaining.
It was returned, albeit somewhat damaged... by substrate · 1999-05-27 00:27 · Score: 4

The film that was returned was useless, damaged beyond repair (I live in the same neck of the woods as where it happened) the local news said last night. In the news report they said that a couple reals were returned but one was retrieved from a field someplace. Their lawyer said it was just a prank that went awry. Maybe a bit of jail time will help them figure out a better prank next time...
1. Re:It was returned, albeit somewhat damaged... by slouie · 1999-05-27 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  Theft and destruction of a $60,000 object? Oh yeah, that's a felony. These guys are going to suffer for a while, if not in jail, then paying back Lucasfilm for the price of the movie.
  
  -S. Louie
  
  --
  
  "I may be Love's bitch, but at least I'm man enough to admit it."
Re:If you hate JarJar Binks... by Mark+Storer · 1999-05-27 04:26 · Score: 1

too bad about the background image thing. Great idea though, close to the hearts and minds of slashdotters everywhere.

--
--Mark
The "3L33tn3ZZ" Test by Anonymous+Commando · 1999-05-27 05:37 · Score: 2

If you replace "Elite" with "3L33T", the test makes perfect sense.
________________________

--
Corporate Jenga: You take a blockhead from the bottom and you put him on top...
1. Re:The "3L33tn3ZZ" Test by bafful · 1999-05-27 07:09 · Score: 0
  
  Only "3L33T" people use JavaScript anyway...
Re:That's "Copacabana" by eponymous+cohort · 1999-05-27 03:09 · Score: 2

I've been hearing it for over a year on a Boston radio station, I'm glad I can finally have my very own copy.

--
Of all the comments I've ever posted, this is definately one of them
Here's a poll... by Stiletto · 1999-05-27 02:19 · Score: 0

Natalie Portman is X times more sexy a Star Wars girl than Carrie Fisher. My vote is for around 7.
1. Re:Here's a poll... by Stavr0 · 1999-05-28 01:19 · Score: 1
  
  Natalie Portman?
  "Schwiiiiinggg!!! I will make her mine. Oh yes, I will make her mine." -- Anakin's World
  - - -
2. Re:Here's a poll... by BLiP2 · 1999-05-27 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  I agree.
  
  However, Lucas' hair fetish is borderline phsycotic this time. ;)(But thats what makes star wars so great, those little quarks).
  
  Although, in fairness to Fisher, some on the stlye might be lost in the 20+ years.
  
  --
  Vote Technocratic! Government by killer robots!
Re:That's "Copacabana" by Robotech_Master · 1999-05-27 01:27 · Score: 0

What do you mean, off-topic??

Did whoever marked this down even bother to look at the "Star Wars Cantina" link in the article?

For crying out loud...

--
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
No CDNow...no CD by Robotech_Master · 1999-05-27 03:52 · Score: 1

If you'll check the website, you'll see not only is the song by Mark Jonathan Davis, but due to legal matters he can't put the song out on CD lest Barry Manilow's lawyers start breathing down his neck.

You can still get it as an MP3, though (though not on the page cited in the Slashdot reference; you have to go to the other Star Wars Cantina page to get it.)

--
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
That's "Copacabana" by Robotech_Master · 1999-05-27 00:39 · Score: 2

I meant to mention this song myself, but never got around to it.

The interesting thing is that it's been getting play on my local radio station, Alice 95.5 FM, lately. When I called them to ask who it was and on what album I could find it, they said it was "Barely Manilow" (which it isn't--as near as I can tell, "Barely Manilow" is the name of a font on some fonts download webpages) and that they got it off the Internet.

I had thought they meant they ordered the CD off the Internet...but then, after a little websearching, I found the page and noticed that, due to legal matters, they can only make it available as an MP3 and such--it's not on an album.

Which means that my local radio station downloaded an MP3 for the purpose of playing it over the air. Shhhh, don't tell the RIAA!

--
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
Re:The "Eliteness" Test by Old+Ben · 1999-05-27 01:22 · Score: 1

Yes, and the question about how many stormtroopers have you shot? There should be a choice for "none", as Jedi do not use weapons as clumsy or random as a gun. (It's in ANH, I believe)
Re:The "Eliteness" Test by Yosemite+Sue · 1999-05-27 01:42 · Score: 1

I think Yoda would be very disappointed!

I agree with Jerf - in fact, even the wording of most of the "correct answers" does not seem very Jedi-like. Would it have been THAT difficult to make a "test" that really made you think about the Jedi philosophy - or, barring that, some SW trivia?

Hmmm ... that gives me an idea ... ;-)

YS

--
"Arrr! The laws of science be a harsh mistress." -- Bender
Cantina MP3 here: by ToyKeeper · 1999-05-27 04:12 · Score: 3

For the mp3... http://web.wwa.com/~xene/cantina.mp3 (4.2MB, 192Kb/s)
WAV version: http://members.aol.com/manitsas2/cantina.wav (8-bit mono, 1.93MB)
:)
The "Eliteness" Test by Jerf · 1999-05-27 00:26 · Score: 1

Bah! You have to select the last option for all of them to be "100% Elite". What kind of Jedi says "since when did I need advice on battling evil?"

More training the author requires. Yes, more.
- Yoda
If you hate JarJar Binks... by Superfreak · 1999-05-27 03:16 · Score: 1

I submitted this to /. a couple days ago...must not have made the cut:

The JarJar Binks Dancing Death Page!

The first page is the heaviest - the rest load faster... and yes, I need a hobby...
1. Re:If you hate JarJar Binks... by MuppetBoy · 1999-05-27 10:24 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, I am troubled by the Jar Jar character more than annoyed. It seems to me that Jar Jar is almost certainly based on racist stereotypes of Jamaican blacks. I thought it might just be me, so I asked a couple of friends, and they said they had been thinking the same thing. It's really kindof sickening if you pay attention. Especially considering that our kids are watching this stuff and internalizing it.
I have heard a lot of people say Jamaican... by Superfreak · 1999-05-27 21:35 · Score: 1

But I heard Uncle Tom's Cabin kinda stuff...the good old stereotype - blackface in early Hollywood, Steppenfetchit kind of language. Yes. Very Very disturbing...
Re:Weird Al? not even close by moving+target · 1999-05-27 01:24 · Score: 1

check out the background page

The song was written, produced, and performed by Mark Jonathan Davis (swc@ideatownusa.com)

--
(mother(you) -> hamster) and (smelt(father) = smelt(elderberries))
Re:Natalie Portman in ESB Gold Bikini thing (yowza by BLiP2 · 1999-05-27 07:13 · Score: 1

AAAAAHHH!!

It's RoTJ, not ESB.

0 ~
U

--
Vote Technocratic! Government by killer robots!