SW opening crawl fonts offically ID'ed

Yes he did. He said he was making Star Wars movies, and he isn't.

I think that, like it or not, he is.

Let's say that movies are like music, and Star Wars is a set of concerti, sort of like Bach's Brandenburg set.

There are six Brandenburg Concerti, but suppose Bach wrote a seventh one that was completely atonal. Chances are that the audiences of his day would have hated it, but would that mean it wasn't a Brandenburg concerto?

This doesn't mean I don't think the PT isn't lesser music, as it were, because I certainly do think they're lesser creations, but I do think that Lucas is making Star Wars movies even if they have a different feel then the OT

Edit: I hope Bach's ghost can forgive for even suggesting the idea of him doing such a thing as I mentioned.

 

But story wise and character wise and in teh name Star Wars, ALL six are Star Wars.

I agree with the latter two, but not the first. The problem, as I've said many times before, is that Lucas' claim to having all three already written is a flagrant lie. And while the characters and name are the same, it does not make it the same story.

There are six Brandenburg Concerti, but suppose Bach wrote a seventh one that was completely atonal. Chances are that the audiences of his day would have hated it, but would that mean it wasn't a Brandenburg concerto?

I would say yes.

Let's make a simpler example. Say there's an artist who makes a series of paintings utilizing only the three primary colors of paint -- Red, Yellow, and Blue. No mixing. Just the pure colors. He calls this the Primary Series, and it is defined by the style I just mentioned.

Now say he makes another painting with all kinds of colors. Secondary, tertiary, quaternary colors and more all over the place. He calls it another entry in the Primary Series.

On the one hand, he's the artist. He can call it whatever he wants. And red, yellow, and blue ARE still present.

But anyone who looks at it quantitatively will see, quite clearly, that it is not a Primary Series painting, and the artist is fooling himself if he really thinks so.

But whatever. Shouldn't we be talking about fonts?

M. Scott

 

If you painted something that looked like a Picasso but told everyone that your style was photorealism, you have lost your touch. Not with art necessarily, but with the reality of what you're making. You would be communicating that you have no idea what it is you actually painted. George is doing that.

This just amazes me. Mike, you're a genius. I feel like I should start a slow clap for you or something.

 

Except whereas we are citing complex examples, Mike completely disregards to show how a simple peice of art doesn't show as well as a complex one.

I wouldn't say genius, I would say opinionated. He's wrong, but his opinions say he's right minded about his assertions and yet he'll quote this too and tell me I am equally wrong, which is fine, no skin off my back.

 

I think its funny how everyone knows Lucas so well that they can make any grandoise claims about he feels and thinks

I'm not sure if that was a reference to me, but Lucas himself basically said the same thing as I in an interview on Charlie Rose a couple months ago.

 

Primrodo, I have no idea what you just said. Honestly.

M. Scott

 

What's happened with the new trilogy is that George has gone Bush with his movies: He's surrounded himself with yesmen who don't question what he's doing, but instead do what they can to make it possible for him to get his vision to the world, no matter how seriously deficient or inane it is. (any response to this statement should go directly to the social thread).

Rick McCollum may be a great producer, but he's constantly restating and requoting what George says. John Knoll is only focused on getting the visual effects right as is Rob Coleman. Even co-writer Jonathan Hales doesn't seem to contribute much except to maybe fix a few typos here and there. The actors only want to fulfill their contracts and get paid. The only one who seems to grind sabers with George is Ben Burtt, the PTs first director. You can tell by the frustration he exhibits when he talks about the sound stuff that's not used. He is always trying new and different things to broaden or enhance the SW universe (albeit not all of them are successful).

I think George is a decent director; there are some shots in both movies that are almost iconic. It's the storytelling that's suffered, something he's always hired other writers and directors to do, then given them his 'stamp' of approval. My brother loaned me THX-1138, the Director's cut, and he and I wonder what happened; THX was brilliant.

One last thing: Mr. Lucas was wrong about fans not liking TPM Yoda puppet because it looked too real. Fans would have taken to Yoda had it looked like Yoda, even with the upgrade. It's what's called the Lon Chaney effect (for the actor who replaced Frankenstien after Boris Karloff quit playing said monster).







When I get indepedantly wealthy, I'll buy that font. Until then, I'm gonna' have to use what I can afford...Helvetica.

 

I will preface my remarks by saying firstly that $50 to pay for a font is an insult.

Now, onto the far more interesting topic ...

I think George is a decent director; there are some shots in both movies that are almost iconic. It's the storytelling that's suffered, something he's always hired other writers and directors to do, then given them his 'stamp' of approval. My brother loaned me THX-1138, the Director's cut, and he and I wonder what happened; THX was brilliant.

The answer, to my mind, is to consider the resources and the mindset of the two Georges at the differing times. Consider: THX-1138 was low-budget, as was Star Wars for its time. Both were science fiction (either speculative or space opera, but scifi no less), which was at that point a really alternative genre of film--not nearly the mainstream buck-puller that it is today. George was young, the entirety of his career ahead of him, and was making movies which were commercially suicidal. I'd have to agree with Mike that there's no way George could have had the PT written 20 years ago; at best he had concepts, guiding ideas, and plotlines, but no script.

And the fact is that George is far, far better at overall ideas than at watchable film. For me, ANH succeeded because George had a vision, and didn't have the inexhaustible resources of ILM as it presently stands to back him. The old saying Adversity breeds innovation is probably as solid an explanation as any for how ANH could have succeeded. George didn't have a massive budget, so he had to rethink his ideas to come within the budget he had. He had to invent some special effects for the film. He had the good fortune of being able to hire two of the finest (but old and therefore cheap ) English actors of the time to form a backbone for the rest of the unknown cast. All of these factors, together with others, to my mind focused George and pushed him to produce something that was out of this world, and forced him to ask himself, constantly, "Come on, will this really work for my audience? Doesn't this sound/look/feel just a bit hokey?"

Twenty years on, it was a different story. George is twenty years older, which doesn't help. It's the John Landis phenomenon; consider "Blues Brothers" and "Blues Brothers 2000". The same dulling of the directorial edge occurs between the OT and the PT, for no other reason than the fact that most successful men don't retain their anger and passion into their autumnal years.

In addition, the relative positions of George and his studio backers has inverted. George now has the whip hand; he can dictate down to the last microcentimetre what his vision is, and no studio executive, no editor, and no independent director has the pull or power to really tell him, "No way. That Jar Jar character just ain't gonna work. Edit him out." We're not talking pursestrings being loosened; they just didn't exist. To paraphrase a member of Aerosmith from when that band went through its own good times: George has reached the point where he can afford all his vices...in this case, the exploration of ideas, themes and characters which just aren't as interesting to audiences expecting OT style and polish. There's still occasional flashes of it in the PT; the echoing of imagery (particularly in TPM) in particular is a delight.

But the story choice, the plotting, and the direction just feel wrong. We feel like we've come into Anakin's life too early, that the entry of Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon (probably the best aspect of TPM) should have happened maybe five to ten years down the line. One choice that rankles to me is the missed opportunity of Anakin's prophetic vision that he returns to Tatooine to free the slaves. That could have made a superb storyline, and would have at least tied in Obi-Wan's comment to Luke, "He [Owen Lars] didn't hold with your father's ideals, thought he should have stayed here and not gotten involved..." Instead, the dream is a red herring, and the Owen/Anakin relationship is down to one "Hi, welcome to Tat

 

Honestly, do you people even think about what you're saying?

Why did the original Star Wars create so much hype in the first week of being in theaters? The wonderful storyline? No. The memorable characters? No. The answer? SPECIAL EFFECTS. People didn't go there the first week to learn about Anakin Skywalker, Darth Vader, Luke, Ben, or R2. They went there because they wanted to see the X-WINGS and TIE FIGHTERS blow to bejeezus out of each other. The time period in which Star Wars was released was during Nixon. At that time, the box office was full of negative war films. And what was Star Wars? A war film. After people saw the amazing special effects, they told there friends. After said friends watched the film, THEN people stared seeing it again and again. The people who saw it again and again were the first ones that picked up on the storyline and characters, and essentially began the 'Star Wars Geek' phenomenon.

To those who say Star Wars was made for adults: they must look at the rating. The movie is rated PG. If Lucas REALLY wanted to target an adult audience, he could have slapped on a PG-13 rating, and added curse words and blood. But did he? NO. Why? Because Lucas realized that the fans who wanted to see a sequel were children. Kids who had seen the movie again and again, wanted to grow up to become Luke Skywalker, fly an X-WING, and blow up the Death Star. YES, FLY AN X-WING. THE MAJORITY DIDN'T WANT TO USE A LIGHTSABER. Why? If you remember, Luke wasn't the one fighting Darth Vader. It was Ben. Old Ben Kenobi. Why didn't they want to fight Darth Vader with a laser sword? Because a)The fight wasn't spectacular visually like the dogfights, and b)Because Ben lost to Vader in a sword fight. Luke won in a dogfight. The little kids who saw this, became the first hardcore Star Wars fans. Kids. If you polled the amount of fans back then, it would have been kids, because of the 'child-like' humor, and PG rating.

Has Lucas failed with the PT? Absolutely not. What has Star Wars been about from the beginning of its existence? Fantasy. How did he achieve this fantasy? SPECIAL EFFECTS. As we can see in TPM, he took thinks to a higher step. Lucas created one of the first fully CG characters on screen. Jar Jar Binks. However much you may like or dislike this character, he was a HUGE turning point in CGI. Think about that for a moment. Why were you angered by Jar Jar? Was he too... CHILDISH? Was he childish to you, the adult/late teenager out there? Did you ever think it was 'childish' because you were watching a PG RATED MOVIE? AOTC was another stepping stone in CGI. An example was the chase scene. Need another? The Geonosis fight? Another? Hmmm...something's missing...could it be...YODA? Yoda was THE FAVORITE CGI CHARACTER of all time. I don't know about you, but I never heard anyone saying Lucas should change back to puppets and stop motion for Episode III. ROTS obviously won't disappoint. Everyone's been focusing on the 'horribly done Lightsabers' (Which, by the way, doesn't make any sense. Many argue that the sabers aren't scientificly correct, but, isn't there not supposed to be sound or a "this side up" in space?) to overlook the main focus of the trailer: DID YOU SEE THE SPACE BATTLE? HOW CAN YOU CALL THAT FAILING!? ROTS will not have a SINGLE frame without special effects in it. Has Lucas failed with the PT? No.

Everyone says Lucas changes his mind on the true story of Star Wars. To that I say: too bad. The OT was about Luke. Now the PT is about Anakin. I propose to you that we should no longer use the separations of PT and OT. From now on, I will look at it as the Star Wars Saga (SWS). Why? Because that is what the story will be. It shouldn't be defined as two separate trilogies just because a set of three was created before another set. If Episodes I, II, and III were made first, and then Lucas released IV, would you still call it a trilogy? No. It would be a quadrilody, and then progress as more episodes were released. The SWS is about a man who falls to evil and is then redeemed with the help of his son

 

ZoolInc, just so you know, the PG-13 rating wasn't invented until well after the release of Return of the Jedi. I know because I'm old enough to remember when the PG-13 rating came out (sigh). Things were better back then. Anyone remember the movie Beastmaster or Sheena - Queen of the Jungle? Both movies had nudity (full frontal in Sheena) and both were rated PG. Ah those were the good old days... but I digress. This kind of throws some of your argument out the window. If the original trilogy was released nowadays, all three movies might very well be rated PG-13.

 

Actually, there's nothing in the OT that would warrant PG-13. There's no nudity, no extreme violence, no language, no drugs.. none of the things that make movies PG-13. One guy loses an arm and there's a little bit of blood.. whoopty-doo. I've seen worse than that on broadcast television.

This is turning into an interesting thread... it started off talking about the fonts for the ever-popular opening crawl, and has somehow morphed itself into yet another "The prequels suck" thread.

You know what's most ironic about the "prequels suck" crowd? You're still going to go see the movie.. most likely more than once. And you're still going to buy the DVD. And you'll probably buy some of the toys and books. And this is different from a normal "Star Wars Yay!!" fan... how?

 

"And this is different from a normal "Star Wars Yay!!" fan... how?"

The enjoyment factor/less complaining factor. Other than that, not much difference.

 

Sorry, time for a nitpick here.

It would be a quadrilody, and then progress as more episodes were released.

There is no such thing as a quadrilogy. It would be a tetralogy, then a pentalogy and so on.

It drives me bonkers that people use the word quadrilogy. It's made up, folks. Most likely by marketing execs who figured that the general masses were too stupid to know that tetra meant four.

//mini-rant

 

I gotta say, this particular crowd bashes what Lucas does an aweful lot, then encourages fanfilm makers to "do what you like, it's your story." Never made much sense to me.

 

All of the Star Wars movies have many similiarities, yes. However what Episodes 4, 5 and 6 have that is better than Episodes 1 and 2 (and most likely 3) is better writing and acting (for some of the actors anyway). The characters in the newer movies don't seem to express enough emotion to make them likable and the humor thus far has been attrocious to say the least. I do not fault this on the actors so much as I do the directing and writing. Also from what I've heard, the actors do not get the script far enough in advance (due to security reasons) to really "get into character". This causes the movie to suffer on THAT level. Sure the action and effects are great but... action and effects do not a great movie make. A watchable one yes but not necessarily a good or great one.

Will I see Episode III? Yes. Will I buy the DVD of it when it comes out? Yes. Will I think the movie is very good? I seriously doubt it. Why then am I going to go watch it and buy the DVD? Because it's part of the Star Wars universe and I'm a big fan of said universe. It's the same reason we watch Star Wars fan films (or at least my reason). Not because we think it will be good but because it's part of the Star Wars universe. A SW fan film being good is just a fringe benefit.

 

There are six Brandenburg Concerti, but suppose Bach wrote a seventh one that was completely atonal. Chances are that the audiences of his day would have hated it, but would that mean it wasn't a Brandenburg concerto?

I'll kick in on this since the Brandebergs was one of the first classical recording I ever heard and it introduced me to Bach in a big way. However, now that I have expanded my horizons some 20 years after the fact. IMHO, the concertos are the best example of popular music of that era gone bad. They are derrivative and repetitive- one could argue that they carry a common theme through out, but having listened to them start to finish more than once, I can say with all sincerity that they are dull. That being said, it doesn't detract from Bach's ability as a composer, rather it seems to me that since he wrote them on comission, that he somehow lost interest in the project and they lack soul, at least compared to his other works.

This is what I feel Lucas has done. There is no sense of fun in the PT, they don't reach me as the OT had. Granted, I have had 27 years through which to view them, however I am still the same kid at heart I was in 1977, and the same things appeal to me- I liked SF then, I like it now while my tastes have matured and improved in other areas. I see glimmers of that other worldly coolness that they OT had by the bucket full, but it isn't capitalized on the way the old films did. It isn't just the stiff actors, the stilted dialog, or razor sharp near flawless effects that can't even elicit a 'Wow!' from me. To me they appear to be nothing more than a way to placcate fans by providing meagre amounts of what Star Wars is, and capitalizing on franchise helmed by a man who has lost his touch with ME. And since I can only speak for myself, that's what matters.

 

The time period in which Star Wars was released was during Nixon.

Hehe. Carter, actually. Nixon left office almost three years before Star Wars came out. Just sayin'.

To those who say Star Wars was made for adults: they must look at the rating. The movie is rated PG. If Lucas REALLY wanted to target an adult audience, he could have slapped on a PG-13 rating, and added curse words and blood.

As has been pointed out, there was no such animal as PG-13 at the time. But George did "add blood" to "slap on a PG rating" - what do you think that severed arm on the cantina floor was for? Look at the shot - it just sorta comes outa nowhere, doesn't fit with the rest of the scene, and the arm doesn't even match the critter it was supposedly severed from. It's an insert added specifically so the film would get a PG rating, instead of the dreaded "G" that would make movie-goers assume Star Wars was just for kids.

Anyway, back to talking about fonts.

 

You're still going to go see the movie.. most likely more than once. And you're still going to buy the DVD.

It took over two years for me to bite the bullet and buy the TPM DVD, and the SOLE REASON was the "the beginnign" documentary.

After that it took probably six months before I even tried looking at the film. Since then, my son has become a SW nut and is not as PT/OT picky as dad so I've seen it on screen a few times and realized that George ripped off Flåklypa Grand Prix 100% w. the podrace sequence!

/Z

 

Damn. I could sworn that font was Courier. Or Hoefler Text or something.

I like Star Wars. I don't try to push the point any further than that these days, there's no point. I could say a hundred things that really miff me about the old movies and the new movies, but at the end of the day I don't care enough about it. I don't feel offended by any of it, it's just a movie. The only movies I care about that much are my movies.

And as for 'The Beginning' documentary... was anyone else bothered that there weren't many interesting features on the Episode II DVD? How stingy - the commentary was all about special effects, and so were most of the features. And the deleted scenes were awful and boring. Cheap.

Maybe even Arial Black. Possibly Capitals.

 

I would like to have these fonts, but I'm not paying $50 a piece for them.

 

Kier_Nimmion, I must say that was a much more insightful look at my analogy then it previously garnered. And to some extent I'd have to say you're right too.

Just be glad i didn't decide to use The Art of Fugue as the basis for my analogy.Ha, if you said that was dull I'd have to send ninja after you.

I'm rambling off-topic again so, back to fonts.

I might not be willing to pay fifty bucks for the font, although I think that's fairly cheap for one when it comes down to it.

 

I would like to have these fonts, but I'm not paying $50 a piece for them.

Not apiece, total.

The fonts are $25.99 apiece. Together it's $50 for the accurate fonts (or $52, to be exact; or $51.98, to be exact-er).

Then again, each font gets you a five-machine license. So that's really $5 a license per font. Get five people who want super-accurate fonts to go in for it as a team and you're only paying about $10 for the pair.

And hey, bulk orders get discounts. We get 10 people on this, the fonts drop to about $8.50 for the set.

That's actually not so bad. Anyone interested in doing this with me?

M. Scott

 

Has anyone mentioned Star Wars isnt ours? So we make comments and move on. Just as TheForce.Net isnt ours, and we make comments on threads like "donations for fan films"... unfortunately, all we can do is make our comment and move on. Arguing about isnt going to help. =(

 

I've got three people interested so far. All the people saying "I want these fonts, but..." isn't it in your reach for just under 9 bucks?

Now, there's fonts out there that'll do similar stuff. Personally I already have SF Movie Poster and the actual Franklin Gothic family, which gets the crawl damn near completely accurate; it'd be hard to tell the difference without a side-by-side comparison.

But for $9...I've spent SO much more money on stuff for my fan film, that's nothing at all. And it's useable for other stuff down the line.

PM me if you're interested. As soon as I've got 10 I'll notify all the interested parties and get this rolling.

M. Scott

 

The line "Heroes on both sides" is a subtle foreshadowing of Obi and Anakin -- they are heroes...but which side are they on?

War specifically, and conflict in general, blurs the lines of right and wrong. That is why Palpatine uses this conflict to bring about his purposes.

But we see this in real life as well. How often have you gotten in an argument with your girlfriend/wife, when you were in the right in the first place, and then said or done something so totally wrong in the midst of the conflict as to remove your standing in the right?

Look at the success of the voting in Iraq this week, that was amazing, yet people trying to bring about that tortured folks. Which side were they on?

Lucas is showing that war brings out in people what they truly desire most above all else -- and that is usually their own life and comfort and attachments. They will do anything to protect that, instead of sacrificing for what is truly good. That is a mature point, one that is a them of the OT, seen in Han Solo and in Luke.

I like the crawl, especially in light of the fact that it leads right into Obi and Anakin going to save Palpy, the very essence of the "other" side. Irony abounds.