Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fan-created Star Wars Spinoff in The Works

Hemos posted more than 8 years ago | from the better-then-crazy-lucas dept.

196

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.""

cancel ×

196 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Too bad IMPS died. (5, Interesting)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817672)

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.

Re:Too bad IMPS died. (1)

XFilesFMDS1013 (830724) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817999)

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.

Re:Too bad IMPS died. (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818537)

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

Democracy does work! (4, Interesting)

andrewman327 (635952) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817686)

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.

Re:Democracy does work! (1)

OldBus (596183) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817719)

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

Re:Democracy does work! (1)

andrewman327 (635952) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817799)

Still, Sky Captain's graphics bothered me a lot less than Star Wars Episode 3 [xanga.com] . 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.

SFX and quality (1)

CrazedWalrus (901897) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817871)

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.

Re:SFX and quality (3, Funny)

andrewman327 (635952) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817970)

"filmmakers seem to haved deferred to SFX to carry the movie"


Found it!

Re:SFX and quality (1)

CrazedWalrus (901897) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818140)

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

Re:SFX and quality (2, Insightful)

ArmyOfFun (652320) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817995)

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.

Re:SFX and quality (1)

ahsile (187881) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818471)

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).

Re:Democracy does work! (3, Insightful)

slackmaster2000 (820067) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817927)

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.

Re:Democracy does work! (1)

slaughterhause (992109) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817931)

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.

Re:Democracy does work! (4, Insightful)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817966)

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. :-)

Re:Democracy does work! (2, Informative)

andrewman327 (635952) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818411)

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.

Do not want (4, Funny)

birder (61402) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817706)

Do not want.

Re:Do not want (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15817756)

Mmmmm.... much flamebait, I sense in this one.

Re:Do not want (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15817806)

A picture is worth a thousand words (1)

mobby_6kl (668092) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817982)

clicky (13KB) [za.net]

Re:A picture is worth a thousand words (1)

corbettw (214229) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818287)

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

Re:A picture is worth a thousand words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15818415)

Copy & paste the url to another browser window.

Re:A picture is worth a thousand words (1)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818456)

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.

Re:A picture is worth a thousand words (2, Informative)

mobby_6kl (668092) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818488)

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 [imageshack.us]

Re:Do not want (0, Flamebait)

alamandrax (692121) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817864)

Tell me realy quick like.

Is jar jar going to be in this one too?

not the typical nerd (3, Insightful)

the_tsi (19767) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817708)

"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.

Re:not the typical nerd (1)

gmletzkojr (768460) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818014)

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

Re:not the typical nerd (0)

AlwaysHappy (951252) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818162)

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.

Re:not the typical nerd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15818299)

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.

Obligatory ... (5, Funny)

Stavr0 (35032) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817710)

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.

Re:Obligatory ... (2, Interesting)

Mayhem178 (920970) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817769)

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 [bbc.co.uk] .

Delve into the downfall of the Jedi? (1)

jpellino (202698) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818116)

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?

For the fans? (5, Funny)

Otter Escaping North (945051) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817711)

"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...

One in a long long line... (4, Informative)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817727)

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. [theforce.net]

Re:One in a long long line... (1)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817776)

And of course, Star Wars itself was not entriely a new idea [wikipedia.org] , either.

Re:One in a long long line... (1)

alamandrax (692121) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818476)

don't forget this [wikipedia.org] either.

press release (1)

konigstein (966024) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817731)

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

Life Sucking Lawyers (2, Insightful)

jo42 (227475) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817732)

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

Re:Life Sucking Lawyers (1)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817760)

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.

Re:Life Sucking Lawyers (5, Insightful)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817807)

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.

Re:Life Sucking Lawyers (1)

dr_dank (472072) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817880)

It's a trap!

Re:Life Sucking Lawyers (1)

LurkerXXX (667952) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817896)

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

Re:Life Sucking Lawyers (0, Troll)

WPIDalamar (122110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817957)

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?

Re:Life Sucking Lawyers (2, Informative)

LurkerXXX (667952) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818115)

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 [creativecommons.org] 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?

Re:Life Sucking Lawyers (1)

WPIDalamar (122110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818370)

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.

Re:Life Sucking Lawyers (1)

LurkerXXX (667952) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818526)

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 [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.

Re:Life Sucking Lawyers (1)

Karma Farmer (595141) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817971)

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.

Isn't this piracy? (1)

Suzumushi (907838) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817740)

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.

Re:Isn't this piracy? (1)

vertinox (846076) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818163)

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)

Pink-5 (1)

why-is-it (318134) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817762)

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 [trudang.com] 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?

Film's budget break-down (5, Funny)

StefanJ (88986) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817780)

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

Re:Film's budget break-down (4, Funny)

JFMulder (59706) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818031)

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

Re:Film's budget break-down (1)

shawn(at)fsu (447153) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818275)

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.

Re:Film's budget break-down (1)

JFMulder (59706) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818351)

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.

Re:Film's budget break-down (1)

shawn(at)fsu (447153) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818589)

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

Re:Film's budget break-down (1)

ZenKen (963177) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818118)

Making a movie about something you love: priceless.

Commander Rob!!! (2, Funny)

tod_baudais (572245) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817782)

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

http://www.commanderrob.com/ [commanderrob.com]

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

Tod.

Re:Commander Rob!!! (1)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818380)

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

Re:Commander Rob!!! (1)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818492)

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 [bravehost.com]

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

Still illegal... (1)

stubear (130454) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817817)

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

Geek Dreams (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15817827)

"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...)

Star Wars Kid (1)

thegoofy (301855) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817830)

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

Re:Star Wars Kid (2, Interesting)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817883)

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.

Re:Star Wars Kid (1)

jbarket (530468) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818010)

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.

99% of all Star Wars Fanfilms suck (4, Interesting)

mrshowtime (562809) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817831)

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/ [tydirium.tv] they actually built a huge Star Destroyer model and had real sets.

Re:99% of all Star Wars Fanfilms suck (1)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817862)

And 99% of Hollywood films suck. Coincidence?

Re:99% of all Star Wars Fanfilms suck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15818374)

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).

And I'm supposed to believe... (1)

im_thatoneguy (819432) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817860)

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.

Re:And I'm supposed to believe... (3, Funny)

0123456 (636235) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817910)

"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.

Re:And I'm supposed to believe... (2, Insightful)

Lazarian (906722) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817914)

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.

Re:And I'm supposed to believe... (2, Insightful)

DAharon (937864) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817979)

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.

Re:And I'm supposed to believe... (1)

aardvarkjoe (156801) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818606)

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 [wikipedia.org] )

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.

Who will they find... (1, Funny)

Chatmag (646500) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817863)

thatcantalk

like

James T.

Kirk?

Re:Who will they find... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15817900)

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

Re:Who will they find... (1)

Psmylie (169236) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817984)

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 :)

from the if-then-better-than dept. (1, Insightful)

Speare (84249) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817877)

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.

Re:from the if-then-better-than dept. (1)

logophage (160591) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818084)

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...

Re:from the if-then-better-than dept. (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818220)

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.

Re:from the if-then-better-than dept. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15818495)

Wow, the problem is worse then I thought.

Ironic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15818422)

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.

ugh... (4, Insightful)

TrippTDF (513419) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817894)

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.

Re:ugh... (2, Funny)

Geoffreyerffoeg (729040) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817958)

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...

Why all the bashing (2, Insightful)

lecanucker (945957) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817915)

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.

misses the character development of original?? (0)

LOTHAR, of the Hill (14645) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817948)

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahaha

More Obligatories (5, Funny)

hellfire (86129) | more than 8 years ago | (#15817997)

"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."

Cast (4, Informative)

dafz1 (604262) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818009)

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.

They should release this film as OPEN SOURCE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15818039)

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

As bad as Hollywood. (1)

milatchi (694575) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818057)

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

Re:As bad as Hollywood. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15818528)

Yeah. With blackjack. And hookers.

Fanmade movies tend to not know their limitations (1)

doublethekillerdelet (991943) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818064)

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

Dear Nerds, (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15818074)

Star Wars is dead. George killed it with his accomplice Jar Jar.

Please stop the necrophilia. Just barricade yourselves inside with your Boba Fett outfit and a jar of KY, and set your Limited Collectors Edition Original Star Wars Trilogy Digitally Re-Mastered with the han-shot-first segment intact to infinite loop. Do nothing to up your feeble chances of procreation. Please.

The rest of the world has moved on.

You aren't the first (4, Informative)

LuminaireX (949185) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818098)

"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 [ifilm.com]

If I'm not mistaken, that one sucked too

Jar Jar (1)

Chineseyes (691744) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818228)

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.

Between Eps III and IV? (1)

Motterman (992314) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818249)

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

Re:Between Eps III and IV? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15818447)

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!

Meesa Dying! (1, Offtopic)

Lazarian (906722) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818251)

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.

Re:Meesa Dying! (1)

MrNiceguy_KS (800771) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818399)

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.

Leigh Brackett's Other Work (3, Informative)

sesshomaru (173381) | more than 8 years ago | (#15818379)

I think it's sad that no one ever pays attention to any of Leigh Brackett's [kirjasto.sci.fi] 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.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>