|
The premise of Solo, ie wacky heist movie, is fine. The problem is they had to squeeze in all these cute little explanations to some small insignificant detail from the OT, like the dice, the ships accent, while also weaving in the dumb "birth of the rebellion"/darth maul mastermind story.
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2019 23:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 19:23 |
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:Nobody wanted Solo, but if you asked people to describe what they wanted, you would get a fair number of responses to the effect of a story about Han becoming an experienced space traveler, his history with Lando and Chewbacca, and so forth, and making that movie to spec results in Solo. Except literally nobody wanted any of that. RLM's predictions video is hilarious because they described the most trite plot possible and pretty much got it bang on. McCloud posted:The premise of Solo, ie wacky heist movie, is fine. I'd kill to see the original cut of both Solo and Rogue One before the butchering reshoots. The original directors seem really well suited to a wacky heist movie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2019 23:57
|
|
|
Hot take: I enjoyed Solo: A Star Wars Story. If I was a kid, it would basically be my Ewok Caravan of Courage or Battle for Endor. Movies I liked but don't expect anyone else to.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 00:06
|
|
|
I'm an alternative universe only A New Hope ever released and then Star Wars fell out of popularity. People remember it as that quirky film from 1977 but no sequels ever get made and it doesn't turn into this massive religion that it is now. I wish I lived in that universe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 01:55
|
|
|
I'm just grateful that the biggest nerd franchise was made by an independent hippie dippie progressive and not a fascist-loving weirdo like Heinlein or whoever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:I'm just grateful that the biggest nerd franchise was made by an independent hippie dippie progressive and not a fascist-loving weirdo like Heinlein or whoever. Do you not know who Isaac Perlmutter is ?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 02:09
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:I'm an alternative universe only A New Hope ever released and then Star Wars fell out of popularity. People remember it as that quirky film from 1977 but no sequels ever get made and it doesn't turn into this massive religion that it is now. I wish I lived in that universe. i wonder if that wouldn't have happened if star wars toys hadn't been so outrageously profitable over the years
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
Star Wars made enough movie for a sequel irregardless of toys.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 02:23
|
|
|
AndyElusive posted:Hot take: I enjoyed Solo: A Star Wars Story. The Ewok movies are extremely good though. Solo is astonishingly badly edited even for the Disney films. (The only one that’s at all passable is Rogue One, and even it gets spotty at points.) It really puts the Marcia Lucas urban legend to rest: fans don’t give a poo poo about editing at all, if this stuff is considered acceptable. I’m finding all kinds of crazy poo poo. Like, I don’t have a clip on hand, but check the scene where FN meets Rey and pretends to be a Resistance Guy. The dialogue goes: Rey: So, you're with the Resistance? FN: Obviously. Yes I am. I’m with the Resistance, yeah. I am with the Resistance. The ”yes I am” is an insanely off line reading that they looped in while FN’s mouth is briefly obscured by Rey’s staff. It’s so bad - and it shows just how much fuckery is going on, since this scene was already a reshoot. Did you know Niima Outpost operates according to Pac-Man logic, so if characters walk far enough to the west, they reappear at the east? It’s like the goddamn Overlook Hotel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:It really puts the Marcia Lucas urban legend to rest
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 23:12
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:You don’t have to throw Marcia Lucas under the bus to support your larger point. By all accounts, Marcia had a huge impact on the original Star Wars. Obviously the editor of Star Wars had an impact on Star Wars. The urban legend is that Star Wars was absolute garbage until Maria Lucas stepped in and fixed it with editing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
I don't know what you're trying to refute, SMG. It's possible for Star Wars to have been a film that was a mess before Marcia Lucas's editing and the sequel trilogy to be well-liked despite bad editing. Is there someone arguing that editing is the be-all and end-all of why people do it do not like a film?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Is there someone arguing that editing is the be-all and end-all of why people do it do not like a film? Not currently but it's an argument that's come up in the endless Star Wars discussion thread in years past. See also: "the OT was the product of multiple people working in collaboration whereas the PT was produced solely by George Lucas and that's why the PT is bad." Schwarzwald fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Mar 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 00:08
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:Not currently but it's an argument that's come up in the endless Star Wars discussion thread in years past. Fair, I guess. I'm curious what SMG's own point is too, though. I took the scene that SMG was criticizing as Finn confronting a new idea and very rapidly internalizing it, with the awkwardness that involves. When I go back and rewatch, I can't help but see the stitching SMG describes, but the performance still works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 00:12
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Obviously the editor of Star Wars had an impact on Star Wars. But the woman by George Lucas’s account alone came up with the idea of killing Ben Kenobi, made a narratively more exciting finale through editing, was a driving force for keeping a stable set according to Hamill, and was instrumental in fixing an original cut that Lucas was unhappy with shouldn’t be described as an urban legend.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 00:14
|
|
|
If Cease embraces that meme then we'll know he isn't CnutI said come in! posted:I'm an alternative universe only A New Hope ever released and then Star Wars fell out of popularity. People remember it as that quirky film from 1977 but no sequels ever get made and it doesn't turn into this massive religion that it is now. I wish I lived in that universe. The Last Starfighter universe Anyways Solo isn't really any worse than TFA or TLJ, they're all a few good scene/ideas in largely bad stories. The discussion of them is at least entertaining, re: they're inadvertent confirmation that Luke et al are bad centrists doomed to failure lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 00:20
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The Ewok movies are extremely good though. Really, SMG? This is news to me and I love them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 01:00
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Fair, I guess. I'm curious what SMG's own point is too, though. Nearly all of Boyega’s dialogue in the Jakku section of the film was reshot, badly ADR’d, or just outright muted. When FN wakes up after the TIE fighter crash, for example, Boyega clearly says something before unhooking his parachute - but the audio was changed to grunting sounds. This occurs rather frequently: FN is silently yelling things throughout the chase with the stormtroopers, while being hit in the face by Rey... This has a significant impact on characterization, because altering or removing dialogue doesn’t change the shots themselves - and the shots taken from the original version of the film convey an entirely different narrative. Niima Outpost is consequently among the worst sequences in a numbered Star Wars film, if not the worst overall.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 09:20
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Nearly all of Boyega’s dialogue in the Jakku section of the film was reshot, badly ADR’d, or just outright muted. I got that much. I'm unclear how this connects with Marcia Lucas, though. Like, you said this: SuperMechagodzilla posted:It really puts the Marcia Lucas urban legend to rest: fans don’t give a poo poo about editing at all, if this stuff is considered acceptable. There's stuff from the late re-edits of Star Wars that was obviously out of place to me even as a kid, like the timer that is completely wrong. Sometimes good editing is making the best of a flawed previous version, I would think. Maybe we have different ideas of what a bad edit is? Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 09:27 on Mar 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 09:23
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:I got that much. I'm unclear how this connects with Marcia Lucas, though. Like, you said this: The assertion is that (as with the repeated claims that practical effects are ‘made of CGI’) fans have little or no idea what editing actually is. Editing isn’t “making the best of a previous flawed version”, for example.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 09:47
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The assertion is that (as with the repeated claims that practical effects are ‘made of CGI’) fans have little or no idea what editing actually is. oh it's just you being smug and changing the subject, boring
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 09:50
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:oh it's just you being smug and changing the subject, boring It’s not interesting to insist that you don’t care about editing, as part of a conversation about editing, in a cinema discussion forum.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 10:11
|
|
|
Editing can be a hard thing to talk about if you don't know what they originally had to work with. Unless they really, really screwed up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 10:21
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:oh it's just you being smug and changing the subject, boring It's actually exactly what he was saying in the first place and you're just somehow unable to understand it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 14:48
|
|
|
Captain Jesus posted:It's actually exactly what he was saying in the first place and you're just somehow unable to understand it. he was smugly changing the subject in the first place, yes. i was hoping he had some sort of connecting thesis but it was just free-form rambling about how he is smarter than every star wars fan.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 14:53
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:he was smugly changing the subject in the first place, yes. i was hoping he had some sort of connecting thesis but it was just free-form rambling about how he is smarter than every star wars fan. It's not. Your misunderstanding doesn't mean it was unclear
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 15:01
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Nearly all of Boyega’s dialogue in the Jakku section of the film was reshot, badly ADR’d, or just outright muted. Yeah, it would be much better if they silenced every single bit of dialogue and replaced it with lovely techno music.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 15:05
|
|
|
The Marcia Lucas editing thing has been part of an ongoing effort by certain "fans" of the series to reconcile the fact the the guy who made a franchise that they love and obsess over also made the prequels, which have gone from just being disappointing movies to "the worst movies of all time" and "historically bad" etc The idea is that Lucas has always been an incompetent hack and the original trilogy was mostly a series of happy accidents he bumbled into mostly centered around a few things: "Art from adversity" - They point out some of the weird ideas you can easily find that Lucas had, like C-3PO being a lizard headed used car salesman or the 12 movie adventures of Luke Starkiller, and the idea seems to be that due to budget restraints and other things going wrong, Lucas had to throw out the bad stuff and keep in the obvious good and cheap stuff A group of people to steer him in the right direction, and more importantly tell him "no" - The idea here is that Lucas got too big for his britches and surrounded himself with "yes" men who were too afraid to tell him how all his ideas for the prequels stunk. Meanwhile, back in the OT days, you had people ad-libbing lines left and right and other people who would tell him when he had a stupid idea or just outright coming up with the best ideas (the ones with "heart") Marcia Lucas's editing - This one in particular seems to be a way to credit the original movie, written and directed by Lucas and made largely because of his drive and belief in the idea, to someone other than Lucas. Quotes about parts of the movie not working and the good work Marcia did to bring everything together have been adapted to mean that New Hope wasn't just "a mess" but that it was basically unwatchable due to George's incompetence until Marcia turned it into a classic entirely through editing. And when she went away obviously everything predictably turned to poo poo. SMg's point about TFA's editing just underscores how: nobody is talking at all about the editing in the sequel trilogy. I mean, they weren't really talking about the editing in the OT either, just that it was "good" and saved the bad movies Lucas made, but where are these people to discuss the editing -- which they seem to agree is very important -- in the new movies in their favorite franchise? And again, this isn't about how "all Star Wars fans are stupid", it's just a very specific group who latched onto the Marcia Lucas thing to justify their hatred for the guy who created their favorite movie series. It's also not to undercut Marcia's actual contributions, which are right to be celebrated. But if you want to talk about editing, good and bad, well, here's your chance!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 17:00
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:oh it's just you being smug and changing the subject, boring Cease to Hope posted:he was smugly changing the subject in the first place, yes. i was hoping he had some sort of connecting thesis but it was just free-form rambling about how he is smarter than every star wars fan. Careful, you're becoming too Cnut-like on this account here, Cnut.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:SMg's point about TFA's editing just underscores how: nobody is talking at all about the editing in the sequel trilogy. I mean, they weren't really talking about the editing in the OT either, just that it was "good" and saved the bad movies Lucas made, but where are these people to discuss the editing -- which they seem to agree is very important -- in the new movies in their favorite franchise? this an addressable point, but it again elevates "editing" into a somehow separate quality of the film that people are likely to perceive rather than a process by which the film is made. it doesn't matter how much was changed from assembly to final if the final passes muster. It's not like people aren't discussing the reshoots and last-minute alterations to the sequel trilogy, either. The reshoots of TFA were fodder for lots of speculation and after-the-fact analysis, and (I thought) it was common knowledge TLJ was retooled relatively late in its production based on the response to TFA. SMG's frame-by-frame analysis is interesting in demystifying how the sequel trilogy was assembled, but it's not like saying that the sequel trilogy films saw a lot of changes as late as the editing process is shocking to anyone paying attention. As for his actual analysis, I know SMG thinks the ST is inferior and that the haphazard edit is why; pointing at frame by frame analysis is a good start but not self-evidently a conclusion. "Bad editing" is how a movie turns out to be ineffective or offputting or nonsensical. It's a cause, not an effect in and of itself. For example, Finn's Frankenstein dialogue edit disproves... Marcia Lucas... somehow? What? Marcia Lucas's most famous edit fix involves loving up a timer displayed prominently on screen and lots of clips of people standing around in between what were obviously line readings while off-screen speakers talk over them. Why is it bad that Finn's performance is assembled from those different takes, possibly from other scenes? How does that edit negatively affect the final product? Marcia Lucas's most famous edit fix involves loving up a timer displayed prominently on screen and editing in lots of clips of people standing around in between what were obviously line readings while off-screen speakers talk over them. Is that noticeably incongruous rearrangement of scenes also a bad edit, or does it differ in some way not yet explained? I'm open to the idea that there is some logical connection, but I can't read anyone's mind and I don't know what Marcia Lucas has to do with it. (It's also a bit of a head scratcher because SMG is derisively describing the sequel trilogy as being heavily reassembled in the edit, just like the well-liked original trilogy and unlike the prequel trilogy, of which he is an outspoken defender.) Contrast this with the very good deep analysis explaining why the timeline and geography on Jakku in TFA is confusing, because it was assembled from multiple in-universe days judging by the lighting. I think the SMG's deep analysis of the scars from edits in the sequel trilogy is interesting. But connecting it to Marcia Lucas is going to take more effort than "they're both edits, editing is very important, don't you care about editing?" That's boring smug noise, and it's disappointing because I'd hoped for a non-shitpost response.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 18:04
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:"Bad editing" is how a movie turns out to be ineffective or offputting or nonsensical. It's a cause, not an effect in and of itself. You're talking about whether you like or dislike the film, which has nothing to do with how editing is used to generate a narrative sequence. And of course that's exactly what we're talking about : how people use pseudo-critical terminology to express like or dislike. 'Dislike' is translated to "CGI", 'like' is translated as 'good editing', and so-forth. AndyElusive stated that he liked both Solo and the Ewok movies, despite popular disdain for those films. My response was that, unlike Solo, the Ewok movies are actually well-made and undeserving of their reputation. I then went into an example of how various films' reputations have little to do with their actual quality. An example of how bad editing compromises the narrative is how Niima Outpost is clearly divided between the haves and the have-nots, so there is a thematic point with the crossing from one side of town to the other (when Rey brings her scrap in to Simon Pegg, she first needs to drag it over to the tents and presumably rent her own cleaning supplies). In the later scenes, there is no distinction. Also, Force Awakens has a very prominent sun theme, which is obviously impacted by the poor continuity with the lighting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 19:00
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:You're talking about whether you like or dislike the film, which has nothing to do with how editing is used to generate a narrative sequence. SuperMechagodzilla posted:I then went into an example of how various films' reputations have little to do with their actual quality. SMG, you need to have a chat with SMG here. Unless you're proposing some objective measure of film quality?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:SMG, you need to have a chat with SMG here. Unless you're proposing some objective measure of film quality? The third option between 'everything is purely subjective' and 'everything is purely objective' is to simply know what you're talking about. Your counterargument is like, 'just asking questions': "Is that noticeably incongruous rearrangement of scenes also a bad edit, or does it differ in some way not yet explained?" At the end of a new hope, Marcia Lucas' repeatedly cuts to this image of the rebel moonbase orbiting the planet.  In context, this image conveys that the rebel moonbase is not yet visible. Since the number does not function as a timer, it reads as a readout of coordinates or something (while evoking a timer, for obvious reasons). Someone could theoretically look at this image and get confused when the moonbase isn't destroyed 20 seconds later. But that's simply misreading the narrative: later shots in the sequence very clearly convey that the moonbase is not yet destroyed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The third option between 'everything is purely subjective' and 'everything is purely objective' is to simply know what you're talking about. What knowledge does one need to possess in order to divine the universally-observable difference between a good edit and a bad edit? Alternately rather than chomping down on this obvious bait, I'm actually curious why you thought Finn suddenly coming to terms with the idea that he could (at least pretend to) be a hero was a bad scene. Or why you thought it was a good scene. That would be a lot more interesting than more rhetorical fencing I think!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 20:11
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:this an addressable point, but it again elevates "editing" into a somehow separate quality of the film that people are likely to perceive rather than a process by which the film is made. it doesn't matter how much was changed from assembly to final if the final passes muster. I think we're largely on the same page honestly. My point was that the people who originally started elevating Marcia Lucas's role were implying that editing could be so impactful that it effectively changes authorship of a film. They're the ones inflating the importance of editing to that level. Because once again, their aim is to reduce George Lucas's actual control of the original as much as possible to explain how he has always been incompetent. Of course, they also never bring THX or American Graffiti into the conversation, because his actual skill as a filmmaker takes a back seat to how much of Star Wars is "his". The fact that this specific contingent is largely silent about the editing in the ST just shows what bullshit politics it all is. And again, I'm not just talking about analyzing the editing in general. If people think the editing of the original was such a key factor in making it a sci-fi classic that transcends generations, shouldn't there be a massive amount of conversation about who is editing the ST, how it's affecting each title, and demanding higher quality and more insight into how and why these reshoots and reedits are happening? Like, you're not seeing people trash Bob Ducsay over the editing in TLJ, or calling for a specific editor to be brought in for Episode 9 to fix things. Because I don't think people know a lot of editors by name.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 20:21
|
|
|
I think it’s really as simple as having the knowledge that the editing in the first Star Wars was wonky and got changed by Lucas and Marcia in the final hour, and for the ST, that hasn’t been a big story. It’s known things got re-jiggered, but no one knows what it was originally because Disney is keeping everything so close to their chest. We know a bit more what happened with Rogue One, but nothing either way says the film would’ve been better or worse with the changes. Just that they needed “more dialog here and there” or whatever. People are quicker to blame the writing of the ST than anything even though the script always changes to a point where the shooting script and final draft might as well be different things all together.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 20:36
|
|
|
It's weird in the editing narrative that Paul Hirsch and Richard Chew are totally absent, as if they didn't edit a third of the movie each and Marcia Lucas was the only one who knew how to do it. Or the fact that it was George Lucas who brought in all these people to cut the movie the way he wanted it to be cut, after the original editor, John Jympson, had failed to do so.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:I think it’s really as simple as having the knowledge that the editing in the first Star Wars was wonky and got changed by Lucas and Marcia in the final hour, and for the ST, that hasn’t been a big story. It’s known things got re-jiggered, but no one knows what it was originally because Disney is keeping everything so close to their chest. Yeah absolutely! One of the cool things, to me, about the old movies is how much material we have on early scripts, alternate plans and ideas, and just kind of the entire filmmaking process that went into them. It's a bit of a bummer to me that it's been used in some circles as a way to attack Lucas, who I think is a really cool guy and good filmmaker, even if I don't enjoy the prequels as much as I wish I did. Mooey Cow posted:It's weird in the editing narrative that Paul Hirsch and Richard Chew are totally absent, as if they didn't edit a third of the movie each and Marcia Lucas was the only one who knew how to do it. Or the fact that it was George Lucas who brought in all these people to cut the movie the way he wanted it to be cut, after the original editor, John Jympson, had failed to do so. Also that Lucas himself was a trained editor who presumably brought them all in because he recognized what their skill would do for his film.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:What knowledge does one need to possess in order to divine the universally-observable difference between a good edit and a bad edit? Literacy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 20:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 19:23 |
|
|
I dislike Lucas because of the special editions. I can’t get behind the mentality that, that is okay
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 20:53
|
|