eugimon

Okay, there's been 5 major releases. The MP and 1/60, then the 1/48, the 1/60 v2 and the hi-metal. There's been more than 5 optimus prime molds released JUST THIS YEAR. It's absurd to compare the two franchises. When the 1/60 and MP came out, the last vf-1 toy had come out 20 years before. When the 1/48 came out there wasn't even a clue that a v.2 of the 1/60 would be released. With TF and Joes, fans know that a new release is coming, two or three or more brand new molds every year. More if there's a new show or movie out. Same with Gundam. Macross fans don't get that. We get one show every couple of years, at best and at worst, it's a decade between shows. As for cheaper toys, Bandai and Yamato tried that with the 1/100, hi-metal, GNU lines... they all failed. You want cheap toys, put your money where your mouth is and buy them when they come out.

I'm sure if you told TF fans that MP-10 would be the *only* Optimus Prime mold they would see for the next ten years, they would be nit picky as well.

I'll keep posting it as long as people are wasting money by buying a whole new 1/60 just to use it for parts!

This isn't a new level. This is an old level. We had this discussion when the 1/60 yf-19 came out. there's nothing new under the sun.

sacrifice? The hinge is easy to fix

Honestly, I don't know if it has the shoulder issue or not. It's been holding up just fine but I've been told that all the shoulders will eventually explode so, you know... wait... it was a first release of the GBP combo and I remember those were definitely old stock with new heads. So it has the fatal pin, but it hasn't busted.

I really like my copy. No QC problems and no mold issues. The color is a bit lighter than the CF vf-1a but I like it. If I had the money I'd put together a CF squad, I like the way the darker brown of the cf 1a sets off the cf 1j

the GBP does look mighty fine on the 1j

ij all the way

oh sure. I agree. but it is what it is. No amount of fan complaining is going to change that.

In my professional life I've dealt with 3rd party chinese manufacturers on more than one occasion. I can tell you that often times the product sample that I've reviewed was *nothing* like the final, retail copies. There's a *reason* companies like Apple send QC engineers to their Chinese manufacturers on a monthly basis.

When I watched the Vader scene in Jedi, it didn't bother me. There's still several beats leading up to it where you can see the internal conflict in him and having him cry out "no" is far more in keeping with how Anakin was presented in the prequels.

but you yourself just said you wouldn't pay 300$ for it. No, I get that you think the SW transfers are horrible, and I get that no one else thinks that. *shrug* to each their own.

again, you want ben-hur quality transfers? be prepared to pay ben-hur prices. As it is, the video quality for Sith and Empire are widely praised. It's too bad you're so hung up on TPM but whatever makes you happy.

And Ben-Hur costs 45 bucks at retail, versus 90 bucks for all 6 movies. I'm sure you'd still be complaining if GL released the SW box set at 300 bucks.

FANWANK is how I personally justify the prequels, really-really elaborate fanwank...

easily explained: blah, blah, vision through the Force, blah, blah, blah.

Well then, you're wildly taking that quote out of context and applying it to a situation that doesn't even begin to approach parity, and you know it. These are George's movies, you can say all you want that he didn't direct Empire or Jedi but those movies were made because George wanted them and they would never have been made without him. They're *his* and he gets to decide what to do with them... not a committee. *zing* Okay, and I have two choices in response, I can buy it or I can choose not to buy it. Anything else is at best morally, ethically and legally grey. Well

No, it's not unreasonable. And I appreciate directors like Ridley Scott who do put out multiple cuts, even cuts he doesn't like, just because he wants to give fans what they want. But at the end of the day, no one tells George what to do. That's his right for putting up his own money and not using the studio system. And this conversation, at least this last part, is due only to the idea that the "fan edits" are the "good" guys and that Lucas is the "bad" guy for not giving fans what they want. Just because fans aren't getting what they want, doesn't give someone else to alter material that they don't own... whether or not they're making making money off of it, isn't the point. They don't own the material, they don't have a right to change it.

Yes, the writing credit is shared on his movies. Lucas himself says that his talents as a writer are few. But that doesn't change the fact that the story originated with him and he had/has the final say on the product. Even if Lucas didn't write every word of the script... it's not to say that Kasdan and Kershner sat down and decided to make a sequel and took it to GL for approval. That might give your argument some weight. It was George who decided to do a sequel, he approached the people he wanted, it was and remains his work. Yeah, sorry. Whether it's an over simplification or not. George didn't want to have to follow certain rules in the way he presented SW, so he did it himself. Obviously this is a guy who wants to exert control on his product. And that's great. I don't know the context of that quote and what it applies to. What I do know is that SW is George's creation. And just because his work has become a piece of modern pop culture, doesn't give the fans or society at large, creative control over what he created. George isn't take Blade Runner and sticking storm troopers in it. He's not taking Ran and giving them lightsabers. He's taking his own work, work he wholly owns and created and is doing what he wants to it. That's his right. Don't like it? Don't buy it. But there's no ethical argument that you can make that says when someone creates and owns something, the rights to modify that product belong to the masses. and Kanedas Bike, I may have missed SW when it came out in the theaters but I saw Empire and Jedi in the theaters and watched my VHS copy until the tape broke. I'm very much an old timer. I'm not saying I like all the changes. Would I prefer the option of watching the original theatrical release over the SE? Maybe... I do like some of the changes. I like the surround sound. I like how Cloud City actually looks like it's in the clouds. I like the CG Yoda in Menace. I don't care for the new dragon call. I don't like the new Vader Noooo. But ultimately, they're not my movies and George didn't ask me what I thought. If it were just me. I wouldn't buy these movies. I bought them for my kid so we could watch them together. And the fact that he's laughing at Jar Jar, falling in love with R2D2, heart broken over Anakin's fall to the dark side, at the edge of his seat during the Death Star trench run... well, that's enough for me.

"unrated" implies language/sex/violence but all it really means is that the version hasn't gone before the ratings board. It doesn't have to have more of anything naughty. As for director versus studio. I think it's important to not who is making the movie in the first place. Certainly there are some directors who have a specific vision and a specific movie they want to make. Other directors are guns for hire and they make the movie the studio or producer wants to make. This is certainly the case for brukheimer flicks. Certainly the director brings their own sensibility and flair to a project it's silly to say that Brukheimer doesn't, ultimately, call the shots on his flicks.

Are you joking? GL has the story credit to Empire and he's listed for the screenplay along with Kasdan for RotJ. As for what Studios do or don't do. that's entirely up to the contract they sign with the director. In the case of SW, the IP is owned by GL, he wrote the stories. He fronted the money, he even went against SAG to make sure he could do what he wanted to do with the movies from start to finish. If your argument is that Richard Marquand has as much of a say in RotJ as George Lucas, than you're really clutching at straws. But of course that's not what you're saying. You're saying that a bunch of 30 year olds who watched these movies 3 decades ago has more of a say in how the movies are treated than the guy who made them. That's a pretty silly standpoint.

You mean the director he hired? And he wrote the story for both and hired a script writer to polish it. What he's done is no different from him stepping on set and telling the people he hired to do what he wants because... because he hired them for the movie he was making with his money.

the guy who made it? the guy who used his own money to make it, just so he could do what he wanted to do with it? Really?