| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ninja-Bear
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Sep 2016
Posts: 209
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 1:41 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Sutehp, it's important to understand that garhkal's objective here is less about an unbiased analysis of the facts than it is about stubbornly resisting any and all attempts to deviate from the Gospel according to WEG. |
Whoa,.who said the.evidence was unbiassd? Do you have.proof that it.was? My sad taught me a.saying. "Figures don't lie but liars figure" Again the photo evidence is
n't as clear as people want it to be. Did the modelers build the ISD to scale.as the Executioner? Ic so then measurements can be considered correct. If unknown, then its a variable. And lets not forget too that photos can have optical illusions. The Lord of the rings movies used old Hollywood technique of postioning (can't remember proper term) to make Gandalf appear taller than.hobbits. The person closer to the front of the screen appears bigger than the.person behind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sutehp
Commodore
Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | CRMcNeill wrote: | | Sutehp, it's important to understand that garhkal's objective here is less about an unbiased analysis of the facts than it is about stubbornly resisting any and all attempts to deviate from the Gospel according to WEG. |
Whoa, who said the evidence was unbiased? |
Ninja, there's no such thing as "biased" evidence. There's no such thing as "biased facts." Facts and evidence can be deliberately misinterpreted (i.e. lying) or accidentally misinterpreted by a person (i.e. a mistake), but facts and evidence can't lie.
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | Do you have proof that it was? My dad taught me a saying. "Figures don't lie but liars figure." |
Ok, so if you know figures and evidence can't lie, why did you just suggest in your first sentence that they do lie?
And with all your talk of lying, who's the liar in this situation? WEG didn't lie when they came up with the mistaken 8km SSD length, it's been proven that they made a mistake (see previous posts and links). If there was no deliberate intent to lie, then WEG just made a mistake. All this talk of lying is irrelevant to our conversation.
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | Again the photo evidence isn't as clear as people want it to be. |
How is it not clear? Just look at the RotJ picture. we have 2 ISDs next to the Executor, one just in front of its profile and one just beyond, that we know are the same size because they're the same class of ship. I measured them and found them to be exactly the same visual length, which means they're both not that far away from the Executor. This means there are no optical illusions involved here. I compared the length of the ISDs with the Executor and came to find that the Executor in this pic is about 9.75 times the length of the ISDs. As I posted above, that's clear evidence that the Executor is not 8km long but is longer at 15.6 km. How is that not clear?
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | Did the modelers build the ISD to scale [with] the Executor? If so then measurements can be considered correct. If unknown, then its a variable. |
Except as was linked in a previous post, the scale of the ISDs to the Executor is known. And why would the models not be to scale during filming? Do you really think Lucas told his guys "Hey, let's make the models of the ISDs and the Executor we're filming side by side not to scale so's we can fool the viewers into thinking the big ship is really smaller than it actually is!"? C'mon, Ninja, that's ridiculous.
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | And lets not forget too that photos can have optical illusions. |
There are no optical illusions present in this RotJ photo I posted. See above.
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | The Lord of the rings movies used old Hollywood technique of positioning (can't remember proper term) to make Gandalf appear taller than hobbits. The person closer to the front of the screen appears bigger than the person behind. |
Except that positioning was done deliberately to make Elijah Wood look much smaller than Ian McKellan. No such optical illusions were deliberately made during RotJ nor TESB to intentionally make the Executor look smaller than it really is compared to the ISDs. Again, please refrain from mentioning irrelevancies in your arguments.
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yep. Definitely a lawyer. 
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sutehp
Commodore
Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Yep. Definitely a lawyer. |
Third generation in my family. I guess it shows. 
And being a third generation lawyer is kinda like what Emperor Palpatine said in the Dark Empire comic book about the Dark Side: Flesh cannot easily support this power! Then again, that's no longer canon....
And I haven't had my face melted by Force Lightning (yet).
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 11:01 pm Post subject: History of the 5-Mile Fallacy |
|
|
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | Whoa,.who said the.evidence was unbiassd? Do you have.proof that it.was? My sad taught me a.saying. "Figures don't lie but liars figure" Again the photo evidence isn't as clear as people want it to be. Did the modelers build the ISD to scale.as the Executioner? Ic so then measurements can be considered correct. If unknown, then its a variable. And lets not forget too that photos can have optical illusions. The Lord of the rings movies used old Hollywood technique of postioning (can't remember proper term) to make Gandalf appear taller than.hobbits. The person closer to the front of the screen appears bigger than the.person behind. |
CRMcNeill was not incorrect. garhkal has already indicated his bias that it was not possible for WEG to have been in error.
Everything Sutehp said! Regarding the screencap, it is often true in general that relative size and distance of object aren't clear without perspective, like for spaceships floating in space. If the photo only had the left Imp SD, we wouldn't know how far behind the Executor it is, so we wouldn't have any way of comparing their sizes. If the photo only had the right one which is in front of the star destroyer, we wouldn't know exactly how close the Imp SD is to us so couldn't compare their sizes. If the left and right Imp SDs were two different ships of unknown sizes, we would have any basis for comparisons.
BUT we know the two Imp SDs are the same kind of ship and of the same length (1.6 km). If they measure as the same apparent size on the screen, that means ILM is telling is they are fairly close together. Since they straddle the Executor from our perspective, that means they are an insignificant distance away from the Executor and their apparent size is measurably relative to the Executor.
But we have other evidence! I thought my post on Page 2 would settle this. In my effort to be complete I quoted quite a lot of text in paragraph form. Maybe some didn't read it. Let me try to display it more clearly here with full quotes from the original sources:
TESB screenplay (79): "Darth Vader's Star Destroyer, larger and more awesome than the five Imperial Star Destroyers surrounding it, sits in the vastness of space."
TESB novelization (80): "The sleekly elongated ship was larger and even more ominous than the five wedge-shaped Imperial Star Destroyers guarding it."
TESB Official Poster Monthly (80): "Larger and stronger than five ordinary star destroyers, Vader's craft is so enormous that its topside resembles a metropolitan skyline in size and shape." Notice the above three sources do not give relative size between the two classes of ships. The "five" refers to the number of ordinary Imperial Star Destroyers supporting the Executor. The bottom two sources are based on the top source, and the movie was of course filmed from the top source in 1979. The size of the Executor was not finalized until post production (where all special effects are done), in this case 79-80.
A Guide to the Star Wars Universe (84) "EXECUTOR. Darth Vader's personal flagship; classified as a Super Star Destroyer — approximately five times larger and more destructive than any Star Destroyer in the Imperial fleet." Notice that for the first time "five" is connected to size instead of just power. IF "any star destroyer" is in reference to Imperial SDs from the films, then five being a part of size comparison came out of nowhere (and is thus erroneous). However I did find a Marvel comic book star destroyer (79) that was "more than twice the size" of an Imperial Star Destroyer. IF "any star destroyer" considers these, then that would mean that the Executor would be over 16 km. 1.6 km X 11 = 17.6 km, so this source may not be that far off, especially considering that back then no one had these movies at home to review and pause. So the author either did a good job eyeballing the size and compared it to an unidentified comic book ship bigger than ISDs, or he was comparing it to ISDs and erroneously brought "five" into a factor of size when it never had been before that. As impressive as this very early SW reference book is, over the years errors have been found. This is a possible error, or at best a vague comparison.
WEG Imperial Sourcebook (89): "Length: 8,000 meters" I think the WEG author who came up with the ship's stats clearly took the Guide's size comparison to mean ISDs and did the arithmetic to get 8 km. That was either carrying a prior error forward, or assuming incorrectly the author meant ISDs. Either way, it's incorrect. The Star Wars movies were out on VHS then, but maybe the author didn't have the films or didn't have time to check the figure against the films. Maybe he was a working man with a deadline, found a quick answer, and just went with it. It would seem that the WEG author also got the "Super Star Destroyer" ship classification from the Guide.
Whatever the case, WEG was the first source that definitely made an error on Executor size, and other sources began to repeat the error.
From Star Wars to Indiana Jones: The Best of the Lucasfilm Archives (95): "... the flagship of Darth Vader, was conceived as eleven times the size of the original Star Destroyer of Star Wars. (For reference, the conning tower that rises on the Executor was supposed to be as big as the original destroyer's conning tower.)" Some sources began to stop repeating the "5-mile fallacy". Despite this correction to WEG's error from a little over five years earlier, several other sources after this still continued to cite WEG's erroneous length instead of the corrected information directly from the team who made the special effects!
Inside the Worlds of Star Wars Trilogy (04) states that the Executor's length is "nearly a dozen times the length of a star destroyer." That's nearly 19.2 km. I own every single source mentioned above and I double-checked each source myself. From this point forward, most books and reference guides started saying 19 km, which is a little less than 19.2 km.
Lucasfilm continuity checker Leland Chee officially stated the 19 km is to be more consistent with the films themselves. This 19km figure was entered into the holocron of official Star Wars continuity as film canon. This was an official statement from Lucasfilm on the matter! So let's summarize:
(1) ILM's basis of comparison for the special effects was Executor being 11 times the size of ISD.
(2) When measuring direct film evidence a little more precisely than eye-thumbing it, it stands up to the factor of 11 comparison, thus showing that ILM's goal was pretty accurately realized on film.
(3) A vague comment on relative Executor size was published in 1984, and a flat-out incorrect statement of size was published by WEG in 1989. This error was repeated over the years.
(4) The correct size comparison was published by Lucasfilm with a direct quote of ILM in 1995. Some sources continued to cite WEG's error anyway.
(5) In 2004 a true size comparison statement was published that's much closer to ILM's intended standard and final product, and this statement became the official status quo.
(6) Lucasfilm made an official public statement on the matter, making the 19 km figure film canon. I don't know how I can possibly state this any more clearly: The Executor is NOT only five times the length of an ISD. It's not even close. By design, it is about 11 times. Lucasfilm has officially stated a figure of 19 km.
One thing I can sympathize with garhkal on is why WEG's error wasn't more firmly challenged sooner. I can only speculate that a lot of authors and editors are lazy and often just look for an easy answer. (If the source is wrong, they can just blame it on the source.) It's really sad that the error was propagated for so long that grognards adamantly refuse to accept corrections.
However, all this doesn't have to matter for your own SWU. If your game has mega fleet battles with WEG's "super star destroyer" and the larger ships from Dark Empire and you don't want to update the length of the ship because you don't want to update the stats, then don't. But unless you are doing mega fleet battles with the actual Executor itself, a solution that would allow the corrected length is to just say that the Empire also had a Super class ship that is 8km, has the existing WEG stats, and never appeared in the films. The actual Executor can be a different class of ship than the WEG version, and you don't even have to even stat out the film ship at all.
I don't see why the Empire can't have multiple classes of ships larger than ISDs. I'm keeping WEG's ship just because, and without violating film canon. It's such a simple solution.
EDIT: Updated a link URL.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage
Last edited by Whill on Sun Nov 13, 2022 6:20 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
garhkal, Ninja-Bear and any other doubters, please read the previous post.
| garhkal wrote: | | Whill wrote: | | garhkal, do you own TESB and RotJ movies in any form? Have you watched them at all in the past 30 years? |
Since they are still on VHS, i would say its been almost 9 years since i watched them. And even in the ESB scenes, i could see a 6-7x disparrity in size. Which to MY perception is closer to the WEG extablished 8k, than the 19.2k. |
You're too big of a Star Wars fan to not have the classic trilogy on DVD. Is there a DVD player in your home?
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sutehp
Commodore
Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | However, all this doesn't have to matter for your own SWU. If your game has mega fleet battles with WEG's "super star destroyer" and the larger ships from Dark Empire and you don't want to update the length of the ship because you don't want to update the stats, then don't. But unless you are doing mega fleet battles with the actual Executor itself, a solution that would allow the corrected length is to just say that the Empire also had a Super-class ship that is 8km, has the existing WEG stats, and never appeared in the films. The actual Executor can be a different class of ship than the WEG version, and you don't even have to even stat out the film ship at all.
I don't see why the Empire can't have multiple classes of ships larger than ISDs. I'm keeping WEG's ship just because, and without violating film canon. It's such a simple solution. |
Exactly. If people want to use the 8km Super-class SSD, the stats are in the Imperial Sourcebook. If people want to use the 19km Executor instead, the stats for that are available at the Shipyard. And if anyone wants to use a non-canon command ship of neither class, those are also available at the Shipyard. There's no need to say that the Executor is not 19km long when we have so much irrefutable evidence that it is, because we have had the stats for the Super-class ever since the Imperial Sourcebook came out. So if you want to have an 8km SSD in your campaign, you can have it, as Whill said, without violating film canon. And if you want a 19km SSD instead, you can have that too.
This makes any argument about whether the Executor was 19km or 8km pointless. It's been settled long ago, as Whill and CRMcNeill have pointed out. And if you dislike one ship or the other for whatever reason, you can choose the option you like for your own SWU. Problem solved.
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 2:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: |
You're too big of a Star Wars fan to not have the classic trilogy on DVD. Is there a DVD player in your home? |
Yes, i just have not bothered buying all the movies on DVD.. I do own RotS though..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Whill wrote: | | You're too big of a Star Wars fan to not have the classic trilogy on DVD. Is there a DVD player in your home? |
Yes, i just have not bothered buying all the movies on DVD.. I do own RotS though.. |
Excellent. My new mission is to acquire the classic movies for you! They will likely be used, but I'll start looking soon.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sutehp
Commodore
Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | Whill wrote: | | You're too big of a Star Wars fan to not have the classic trilogy on DVD. Is there a DVD player in your home? |
Yes, i just have not bothered buying all the movies on DVD.. I do own RotS though.. |
Excellent. My new mission is to acquire the classic movies for you! They will likely be used, but I'll start looking soon. |
See, now this is the way to settle an argument: with bribery!
No, wait, that's not right.... Um, forget I said anything.
Whill, if at all possible, PLEASE get garkhal a version of ANH that actually has Han shoot first. The last thing we need is yet another flame war about whether Greedo was so incompetent that he would miss Han at point blank range.   
Also, I found an official pic comparing the Executor and the ISD. Take a gander at this: http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/4/49/Executor_Imperator_comparison.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20090109113052 That's an official comparison pic of both the Executor and an ISD. This pic is directly from Wookiepedia and jibes with all the evidence stated previously.
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sutehp wrote: | | Whill, if at all possible, PLEASE get garkhal a version of ANH that actually has Han shoot first. The last thing we need is yet another flame war about whether Greedo was so incompetent that he would miss Han at point blank range. |
And yet, in the Special Edition Trilogy Sourcebook, WEG explicitly states that Greedo shot first, justifying it by saying that youthful nerves caused his hands to shake so badly that he missed the shot.
Not that I accept it, but I've gone enough rounds with garhkal on similar matters that I will be very surprised if he deviates from WEG orthodoxy even for this.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Sutehp wrote: | | Whill, if at all possible, PLEASE get garkhal a version of ANH that actually has Han shoot first. The last thing we need is yet another flame war about whether Greedo was so incompetent that he would miss Han at point blank range. |
And yet, in the Special Edition Trilogy Sourcebook, WEG explicitly states that Greedo shot first, justifying it by saying that youthful nerves caused his hands to shake so badly that he missed the shot.
Not that I accept it, but I've gone enough rounds with garhkal on similar matters that I will be very surprised if he deviates from WEG orthodoxy even for this. |
Isn't Greedo a similar age to Anakin?
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Only if you count the TPM deleted scenes as canon.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sutehp wrote: | | Whill wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | Whill wrote: | | You're too big of a Star Wars fan to not have the classic trilogy on DVD. Is there a DVD player in your home? |
Yes, i just have not bothered buying all the movies on DVD.. I do own RotS though.. |
Excellent. My new mission is to acquire the classic movies for you! They will likely be used, but I'll start looking soon. |
See, now this is the way to settle an argument: with bribery! ...
Whill, if at all possible, PLEASE get garkhal a version of ANH that actually has Han shoot first. The last thing we need is yet another flame war about whether Greedo was so incompetent that he would miss Han at point blank range. |
Ha! Now you just had to drudge that up, didn't ya?!
I don't know if you have read some of the other threads over the years where 'Han shot first' was discussed or I reviewed the blu-ray set which discussed release history. I'm pretty much the anti-purist when it comes to the classic films. Lucas has made some unnecessary but inconsequential changes (which I categorize as "whatever George, eyeroll"), but Lucas made a lot of needed and/or beneficial changes. I have a laundry list of changes still needed but were never made. With the Disney sale, I have accepted that Lucas has done something he never could do, finally abandon the films unfinished, once and for all. Since 1977 and still to this day, the original Star Wars is my favorite movie of all time (any version), and Han is my favorite SW character.
At one time I even defended 'Greedo shot first' by saying Greedo was drunk to explain how he missed Han at point blank range. (Greedo is a mook who was shown drinking at the bar before visiting Han. Greedo only even got up the courage to confront Han by getting plastered first, and then was seeing double and shot at the wrong Han head.) In more recent years however, although Greedo shooting at all is still not 'childhood destroying' for me like it is for so many Lucas-bashers, I do now concede that it does weaken the drama of Han's arc in the film because of him being a rogue that leaves the Rebels to their doom then comes back at the climax of the film to save Luke and thus the Rebellion. I've known Han comes back since 1977, but for first time viewers, I admit that it is a better movie if Greedo does not fire. As of becoming a parent over 7 years ago, I am a tad disgruntled that Lucas' stated purpose for the change was for children too young to read subtitles (and realize Greedo's threat to kill Han) to not be confused by Han being a cold blooded killer before becoming a good guy. Lucas was trying to take the parental guidance out of PG. I don't need Lucas to do my job as a dad.
You'll be happy to know that a couple years ago when I showed the film to my son the first time, we watched the blu-ray but I paused right before Greedo fired, my son turned his head, I advanced it a split second past the shots being fired, and then we resumed the film, so that little live edit restored the original version where you do not see any shots, just a cloud of smoke and Greedo falling over with a blaster hole in him. Afterwards we had the father-son parental guidance discussion about Han's changing morality. I do feel Lucas went too far with this change, but it's still not a big deal because you only have to blink and you'll miss Greedo shooting.
I've known garhkal through the internet for many years. We gamed together as players 7.5 years ago at Origins without each other knowing it at the time. 1.5 years ago I was a player in an adventure he ran at Origins. He now lives on the other side of the same city as me. We may not agree on everything but we both love Star Wars and the WEG RPG. I really just feel he needs to own Star Wars beyond VHS. The unaltered original versions of the classic films were only released on DVD in 2006 and 2008 (as bonus discs of the 2004 updated versions). In searching online it's usually expensive to find these for sale now because of their low supply and high demand. If I happen upon a copy that has the unaltered ANH with that isn't too expensive, I will get it for him. I'll try for RotJ too because, like me, he probably likes Lapti Nek better than Jedi Rocks. However the updated TESB is completely better with Ian McDiarmid replacing the old Emperor hologram and updated dialogue that makes more sense with respect to the prequels. If I can get him a trilogy set I will, but if I can't get the original versions for any or all three films, he does still have his VHS set for nostalgia and 'Han shot first'. I hate to be sound harsh, but all the Lucas-bashers old enough to remember the original versions of the films had their chance in 2006 and 2008 to get them on DVD. If they didn't and they can't afford it now, the have no right to complain. But since demand for the original versions is so high, Disney will probably re-release them eventually.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sutehp
Commodore
Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Huh. Greedo certainly didn't sound drunk. He didn't move drunkenly, either...but w/e.
Yeah, I don't have any problems with most of the changes Lucas made to the re-releases, especially the ones in TESB as those definitely made the movie better. Seeing more of Cloud city and redoing Emperor Palpatine's hologram transmission definitely made the movie better. As for Greedo and Han, everything that could be said, has been said, and doesn't need to be said again.
(Has anyone made a Han Shot First poster or somesuch? A Han Shot First bumper sticker would be cool, but there's no room left for more bumper stickers on my car....)
| Whill wrote: | | Sutehp wrote: | | Whill, if at all possible, PLEASE get garkhal a version of ANH that actually has Han shoot first. The last thing we need is yet another flame war about whether Greedo was so incompetent that he would miss Han at point blank range. |
Ha! Now you just had to drudge that up, didn't ya?! |
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
