Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

Star Wars Phantom Menace 1.1 Editor Speaks 400

Posted by Hemos from the interview-with-the-man-behidn-the-curtain dept.
guinnessy writes "Studio 360 interviews the person who carried out Phantom Edit 1.1. You can listen to the interview here if you have Real Audio. It's quite interesting and explains why he hated Jar Jar Binks so much and what he did."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Star Wars Phantom Menace 1.1 Editor Speaks More

Star Wars Phantom Menace 1.1 Editor Speaks

Comments Filter:

  • Does it take an interview... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 21, 2002 @06:47PM (#3384590)
    to explain why someone would hate Jar Jar so much? I figured most people over ~12 would understand his feelings completely.

  • listinging (Score:5, Insightful)

    by neo8750 ( 566137 ) <zepski&zepski,net> on Sunday April 21, 2002 @06:50PM (#3384597) Homepage
    You can listen to the interview here if you have Real Audio.

    Yeah I could if i Had real audio. Anyone will to write down the conversation and post it some were so those of us who don't have real audio can read it?

    • Re:listinging (Score:3, Interesting)

      by $carab ( 464226 )
      I seriously don't understand why virtually all of NPR's (National Public Radio's) [npr.org] online stuff is real audio encoded. I mean, wouldn't .mp3 (or .ogg?) encoding be cheaper and enable a wider variety of players?
      • That's because everyone knows that mp3 and ogg are only used for violating intellectual property rights ;-)

      • Streaming? (Score:4, Informative)

        by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Sunday April 21, 2002 @07:16PM (#3384692) Homepage Journal
        Probably because you can start listening nearly instantly, vs. waiting for the whole file to download first.

        Also, Real has some nice streaming features. They can dynamically change the bitrate of the audio depending on your ability to download it.

        I have no doubt that MP3 or OGG could be used to do the same thing, but consider that Real is a big player in this space.

        • Re:Streaming? (Score:3, Insightful)

          by invenustus ( 56481 )
          MP3 or OGG COULD be used to do the same thing? Um, have you ever been to mp3.com [mp3.com]? They have all kinds of streaming MP3. It plays in Winamp, and I assume it should work in XMMS or whatever Linux distributions are using now. I'd venture that as many people have Winamp as have RealPlayer, especially as RealPlayer gets crappier and crappier.
          • "Um, have you ever been to mp3.com [mp3.com]?"

            Um, did you catch my comment where I said "but consider that Real is a big player in this space."?

        • It also has neat features like that "Message Center", which is smart enough that it cannot be disabled, or else silly people like me would miss out on all those "Critical Updates", and we wouldn't want that, now would we?
        • I don't know if this is supposed to be a troll or not, but both Mp3 and OGG support those features.
          • No, not trolling. Misinformed maybe, but im not trying to cause trouble.

            What player plays these with variable bit rate features?
      • Because they too are interested in accumulating Intellectual Property and selling it [npr.org], and presumably RA assists in that more than MP3's would.
        • Probably true, but just to fill all you non-Us people in, NPR is generally thought of as representative of a very liberal viewpoint in the States. One would of thought they would embrace open formats rather than more closed formats.

          Seems like an obvious example of hypocrisy, from an institution that's one of the few sources of really high quality media (in general, the content on Public media outlets [PBS and NPR] is vastly superior to the commercial tripe we're all used to).

          • Re:listinging (Score:4, Insightful)

            by the_rev_matt ( 239420 ) <slashbot AT revmatt DOT com> on Sunday April 21, 2002 @08:04PM (#3384798) Homepage
            National Petroleum Radio is liberal? When did that happen?

            Last I checked they were moderate with a vaguely right wing tilt on fiscal/business/foreign policy issues and a vaguely left wing tilt on social issues.

            • Re:listinging (Score:2, Interesting)

              by Jack_of_Hearts ( 135367 )
              Uh, no, not really...

              NPR has been way left for years - decades - now. Right wingers yell a lot about this every time its budget is up for reapproval.
            • I'd REALLY like to know who moderated this as "insightful"... it's obviously a tongue-in-cheek joke. NPR stands for National Public Radio, and the parent of this post was correct in most of its assertions.

              Any existence of or relation to National Petroleum Radio is coincidental, seeing as that's decidedly not the radio station to which we are referring.

              -- Reverius

    • Re:listinging (Score:4, Funny)

      by epukinsk ( 120536 ) on Sunday April 21, 2002 @07:33PM (#3384736) Homepage Journal
      Yeah, here's the transcription:

      Studio360: So you did that phantom edit thing?
      PhantomEditor: Yeah.
      S360: How come?
      PE: TPM was lame. Lucas is a capitalist dog. I made it seem like Anakin is more badass and less of a tool and I took out all of the Jar-Jar CG bullshit.
      S360: How did it get so big?
      PE: Internet.
      S360: Has George Lucas seen it?
      PE: He wanted to, but his legaltroids made him say he wouldn't. He should tho, cuz it's 31337.
    • No problem. The Slashdot editors transcripted it themselves, and have it in this nice universal Word 2000 doc file. Enjoy it.
    • I don't have a transcript of this interview, but he has done some [zap2it.com] interviews [zap2it.com] in the past.

  • And check out... (Score:4, Informative)

    by jhunsake ( 81920 ) on Sunday April 21, 2002 @06:54PM (#3384618) Journal
    The Phantom Editor's Website [thephantomeditor.com]!
  • [rant]
    I believe that I speak for all Star Wars fans... or make that even all humans... when I state that Jar Jar Binks must be destroyed.
    Alright, perhaps that was a tad harsh. But what is the value to the character -- he is racially offensive, disrupts all possible dark and intelligent tones to the movie and, lest I forget to mention, quite possibly the most annoying character not portrayed by Pauly Shore or Carrot Top ever witnessed in a movie.
    Now, this is just my personal opinion. But Mr. Lucas, with all due respect, what on earth were you smoking?
    And one more thing! Didn't they learn their lesson from the Ewoks? Jar Jar = the Ewoks to the nth degree.
    [/rant]

    • Re:Jar Jar Binks (Score:2, Informative)

      by joel8x ( 324102 )

      Didn't they learn their lesson from the Ewoks? Jar Jar = the Ewoks to the nth degree.


      Not for nothing, but I was quite young when Jedi came out and I loved the Ewoks - they were something for me to appreciate and I found them very entertaining - maybe the kids today feel that way about Jar Jar. I didn't really appreciate the whole series until I was older, but those Ewoks really turned me on to the Star Wars Trilogy because of their childish appeal. I can see why George felt the need to include Jar Jar in the first Movie this time instead of the third - he wants the kids involved so they stick through all 3 new movies and hopefully watch the other 3.

      • Star Wars is a toy commercial... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Sunday April 21, 2002 @08:21PM (#3384854) Homepage Journal
        "he wants the kids involved so they stick through all 3 new movies and hopefully watch the other 3."

        Don't forget that Star Wars movies = release of some really cool toys. Go to your local Toys R Us and see what companies such as LEgo are doing with Star Wars. It's pretty impressive.

        I have no doubt that Lucas had kids in mind when he made Jar Jar. He even said so in this month's Issue of Maxim.

        Is this a bad thing? I agree that Star Wars would be more interesting if it were geared more towards the adult world, but the kids spend more money on it after the fact. The truth is that we can fully expect more kiddie stuff as Star Wars trickles out. Look at the preview for AotC. Anybody catch the flying R2D2 scene?

        There is some hope, though. Older people are buying more video games these days. It's possible we'll see Star Wars tuned more to the adult audience in the next couple of movies, because now the older people have a reason to buy Star Wars merchandise.

        At least that's what I'm hoping for. I'm not holding my breath, though. When I see AotC, I fully expect to see some silly moments that'll make the kids cheer. The best I can do is try to enjoy it. I know I thought the Ewoks were cool when I was 6.
        • I have no doubt that Lucas had kids in mind when he made Jar Jar.


          Sadly, though, the kids don't seem to like him all that much. When this movie first came out in the theater, I took some preteens and teens to see it - not a single one liked the Jar-Jar character. They all said he "sucked."

          Then again, they also mostly thought Anakin was a whiny brat, which surprised me. I thought they'd be wrapped up in the idea that he got to fly a pod racer, etc. But Lucas soft-peddled the whole slavery thing, and these kids, some of whom had been abused, weren't buying it.

          I know I thought the Ewoks were cool when I was 6.


          The Ewoks were cool when you were 6. I remember secretly thinking they were cool, and I was supposed to be too old for that (11 or 12). But then, of course, "the Ewoks Big Adventure" came out, to milk that dry.

          I could continue with more reasons why I think the "new Star Wars" won't even be palatable to kids, but it mostly has to do with the usual rants you've heard before, like wondering why "the Force" turns out to be just commensalism or something - it doesn't explain how there can be a "dark side" adequately, etc. And good lord... how can those thousands of robots all be such bad shots? =)
        • Legos gone bad these days. You just can't get legos from my childhood anymore, some 19 years ago legos rocked. Now, they are just specialty pieces that don't really fit any but one construction.


          Blah.

        • He even said so in this month's Issue of Maxim.

          God, what was he doing in Maxim?

          "If you thought that Angelina Jolie was hot, check out this month's interview with George Lucas! Fat, unkempt, reclusive, and very authoritarian, George was a promising young auteur until he decided instead to focus his career on revenge. Some of his works from that period are now considered classics, but George is not deterred. He has recut this strangely-revered pulp, proving once and for all that his love affair with film ended a long time ago.

          "Today, George is churning out new pre-teen cartoons with machine-like efficiency and has established the distribution network to send them far, far away. He is truly 'the Force' to be reckoned with in mass-marketing, intellectual property law, and digital rights management. We are pleased that George allowed us to help him self-promote his new cartoon, Attack of the Clones!"

    • Re:Jar Jar Binks (Score:5, Funny)

      by xdroop ( 4039 ) on Sunday April 21, 2002 @07:54PM (#3384777) Homepage Journal
      Whoa, buddy, relax. That's a pretty heavy load you are carrying there all by yourself. Looks like you might need a slight adjustment.

      Here's what you need to do:

      1. Get yourself a two-by-four, and write "Star Wars Is Just A Movie" on it in big, block letters.
      2. On behalf of mature movie goers everywhere, beat yourself about the head until you lose consciousness.

      If you have trouble with step two, just ask anyone sane and they will be happy to help once you have explained the need.

    • Re:Jar Jar Binks (Score:5, Funny)

      by Sabriel ( 134364 ) on Monday April 22, 2002 @12:37AM (#3385764)
      Alright, perhaps that was a tad harsh. But what is the value to the character -- he is racially offensive,
      Oh I hate this damn horse already. I'm sick and tired of the "(fictional alien in movie XYZ) is offensive racial stereotyping" crud.

      JJB is an example of racial stereotyping? Sheesh. Did you happen to notice that the countless thousand other representatives of his species in the movie enjoyed an idyllic, technologically advanced lifestyle until some pasty white sith lord decided he wanted to be Emperor? Do you see any races on earth wandering around with portable shield generators and living in underwater cities protected by high-tech forcefields? No? Well, damn, maybe that means it isn't the movie that has the racial stereotypes, but some of us have an over-sensitivity to such issues?

      There's plenty of racism to go round in the real world without having to forcibly inject it into a bunch of CGI characters invented for a movie, people.

      And on a more humorous note: Jar Jar's tongue. Have you considered the possibilities of a tongue like that? :)

      • Re:Jar Jar Binks (Score:2, Insightful)

        by tastegood ( 245991 )
        OK, forget the 'racism' angle -- how about just plain old fashion fucking laziness??

        Let's be realistic here. Lucas or his cronies couldn't conceive of new alien life forms of any interest without making them blanket caricatures of racial stereotypes. The original Star Wars was simply far more clever in its portrayal of alien life form.

        In Phantom Menace, all you get are money grubbing flyin' Jews, sneaky Asian warlords, and stoned Jamaicans.

        Is this racist? I'm not offended by it, but it definitely qualifies as total trash.

    • Re:Jar Jar Binks (Score:3, Insightful)

      by fewl ( 133959 )
      I wonder...if Star Wars (A New Hope) came out recently instead of TPM, would you have the same rant against C-3PO? He was an effeminate droid that talked too much, shuffled everywhere he went, and windmilled his arms for all his gestures.

      So...C-3PO vs Jar Jar Binks...which one do you REALLY hate? :)
      • Actually, there's a lot of difference between C3PO's comedy and Jar Jar. Jar Jar's routine is physical comedy. He is a naive, bumbling fool that's stuck in circumstances way above his head. C3PO is not naive, just slow on the uptake. His humor is ironic, and there ARE times (ie. trash compactor) where he is useful.

  • Show me the money (Score:2, Informative)

    by ramdac ( 302865 )
    Costs.. Let's talk costs. $150,000 per digital projection camera for a theatre.

    Nice huh?

  • I made a better competing "edit" of the movie (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 21, 2002 @07:13PM (#3384684)
    which highlights JarJar's zany antics and removes the parts that advance the story. I call it the JarJar Yes-Pleasy-Yessir Phantom Meesa-Likie-Likie Edit.
    • An Anonymous Coward wrote: "I made a better competing 'edit' of the movie which (sic) highlights JarJar's zany antics and removes the parts that advance the story."
      Actually, I would prefer an edit of The Phantom Menace that left Jar Jar alone (all the SW movies had some kind of comic relief) and took out the embarassingly bad stuff about "chlamydians" (OK, midi-clorians, but I can't help but wonder if a simple dose of penicillin might have prevented the whole Darth Vader situation) and the virgin birth of Anakin. This little bit of Star Trek-like technobabble, in just a few minutes, completely ruined all the magic of the other three movies. The Force, before Episode I, was basically magic. How it worked was not explained and DID NOT NEED TO BE EXPLAINED, like the magic used by Merlin or Gandalf. Post-Episode I, it's a blood condition. Bleah!
      So Coward, I welcome your edit. But did you cut out that seemingly never-ending scene with the big fish getting eaten by even bigger fish?

  • Phantom Edit 2001 (Score:3, Informative)

    by Rufus211 ( 221883 ) <rufus-slashdot@@@hackish...org> on Sunday April 21, 2002 @07:23PM (#3384703) Homepage
    A new Phantom Edit has just been released this month. True it's not by the same guy that did the original (LA) version, but then again the 2nd (NY) version was done by 2 unrelated people in NY, so I guess it makes sense for the 3rd (DC) version to be made by yet an other unrelated person.
    You can find info about it at the phantom edit forum [onecenter.com]. Also you can download a 2cd VCD of the new version (thanks to Bit Torrent [bitconjurer.org]!) from me here [d2g.com].

  • And to think... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by hackwrench ( 573697 )
    there are laws in place to prevent this sort of thing... at least I think there are and if the current laws aren't up to the challange there are people working overtime to draft new ones. Actually I like the idea of being able to do this, at least for your own purposes as well as the ability to post a patch so you can attach these changes to your own legally bought copy of "The Phantom Menace" without anyone having to shell out extra money to Lucas. That way Lucas still sells 'The Phantom Menace' and new things can be done with the material.

  • Memento (Score:5, Interesting)

    by webloser ( 154746 ) on Sunday April 21, 2002 @08:21PM (#3384853)
    The most interesting part of that pathetic interview was the discussion afterwards, without the phantom editor, about Memento. That the England dvd release will have an easter egg that you can watch it in chronological order.

  • Whoa! (Score:4, Funny)

    by kennedy ( 18142 ) on Sunday April 21, 2002 @09:24PM (#3385060) Homepage
    So... a spyware free version of kazaa...
    interview with the phantom editor...

    All in the same day?!

    muahahahah!

  • For the record (Score:3, Insightful)

    by LunarOne ( 91127 ) on Sunday April 21, 2002 @09:58PM (#3385184) Homepage
    explains why he hated Jar Jar Binks so much and what he did.

    My nephews (ages 10 and 12 at the time of Episode I release) loved Jar Jar Binks. I know the character made the movie unpalatable for many adults, but for what it's worth, lots of kids were happy with it.

    Personally, I really don't feel one way or the other about Jar Jar.

    • Re:For the record (Score:3, Interesting)

      by donglekey ( 124433 )
      Going to the lowest common denominator is no excuse. Making crap and shit that people will still buy doesn't make something suddenly stop being shit. Little kids liking it is no excuse.

      • Re:For the record (Score:3, Insightful)

        by daeley ( 126313 )
        Little kids liking it is no excuse.

        When it comes to creativity, adults not liking it is no excuse not to do something.
        • "When it comes to creativity, adults not liking it is no excuse not to do something."

          It is if you're trying to keep them as part of your audience. Besides, it's no so much that adults didn't like Jar-Jar, but rather that many of them hated him with a passion. Since Star Wars has always been something that's tried to appeal to everyone, Jar-Jar ruins the film for a number of people.

          Besides, it's been shown time and time again (especially by Pixar) that it's quite possible to create something that appeals to both children and adults. Lucas even had the "magic of Star Wars" providing fans with an incentive to overlook small flaws. But instead, he chose to completely screw things up by sticking a CG version of Barney in the film.

    • and for the record, I really liked that Disney Zip-a-dee-do-dah movie when I was a kid... that doesn't change the fact that it was offensive. I just didn't understand it.
      • I'd like to know what was so offensive about either one. Is it _your_ views that make it offensive? I just thought that Jar-jar was a little annoying, then again, I thought that Luke Skywalker was the biggest wuss in the world.

  • Racist Overtones (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 21, 2002 @11:47PM (#3385631)
    I'm an Eastern European Jew and I have a number of mixed Asian (Korean, Japanese, Chinese, and Cambodian) friends, and none of us percieved or interpreted any of the characters as racist statements made by Lucas. In fact, it didn't even occur to us until we read a post much like this one on some stupid message board a year ago.

    Racist? Give me a break.

    PS: strange how Watto is a racist statement against Jews and Natalie Portman is a glorification of them. :/. And yes, Ahmed Best is African American (he consented, didn't he? What about Samuel Jackson?). This racist garbage must be a result of political correctness where being human raises eyebrows.

  • Audio transcript here (Score:5, Informative)

    by ipsuid ( 568665 ) <ipsuid@yahoo.com> on Monday April 22, 2002 @12:29AM (#3385741) Journal

    Sorry for everyone's mispelled names...

    Kurt: This is Studio 360 [studio360.org], at my desk is the film editor Doby Dorn and we're talking about all kinds of editing. Millions of "Star Wars" fans were lukewarm about the 1999 prequel "The Phantom Menace". But one disappointed fan actually did something about it. He calls himself the Phantom Editor [thephantomeditor.com]. And with his personal computer he entirely recut the movie on video and started giving it away. This new phantom edit has become a global phenomenon thanks to the Internet and we invited him to speak publicly for the first time about why he did what he did.

    [Starwars soundtrack]

    PhantomEditor: The very first day that Phantom Menance premiered that...that afternoon I was thinking "Boy this movie needs a re-edit." I don't know, that afternoon I went up there sat next to a few people who had saw it when they were kidding about bringing their little kid in to see it. I thought "Wow this is really cool." And then the movie started and that sorta went right out the window.

    [Jar-Jar-Binks]

    PhantomEditor: On the screen there was so much extra material on there that I thought if they could remove some of this extra stuff THAT would actually make a better film. It's not that George Lucas didn't have the technology to do what he wanted to do, it's that he did. And somehow the movie became more about the technology then the storytelling aspect of it. The things that I...I was concerned with... uh... in my edit were the story redundancy, the over-abundance of Jar-Jar antics that didn't seem to carry the story forward, and the presentation of Jake Lloyd as Anakin Skywalker.

    [Anikin: "You mean I get to come with you in your staaarshiiip?"]

    PhantomEditor: He ends up being the evil character Darth Vader in the other "Star Wars" movies and the actions don't really seem reflective of that character. The blowing up of the droid control ship within the "Phantom Menace" was actually done as a... you know... an accident, where he hit the button and physically he says the word "Oops" at the end of it during the explosion.

    [Anikin: "oops"]

    PhantomEditor: Instead of letting him be heroic he ends up being a fumbling goof. All the happy accidents are now diminished.

    PhantomEditor: Uh... throughout the whole movie from that battle sequence on Anikan's actions are now motivated by his heroic character. There are no oops's, there are none of the yippee's either...

    [Anikan: "yippppeee!"]

    PhantomEditor: There's an excessive amount of Jar-Jar antics, and what I mean by that, is the little examples which are almost a showpiece for the ILM special effects... where it takes you out of the story lets him participate in some little antic, and then you have to fight to get back into the story again. By removing alot of those things, I am not taking away from the story, I'm actually helping it by keeping people involved.

    [Jar-Jar]

    PhantomEditor: Initially when I did this it was for the audience of me and it really started out pretty harmless. The offering of a few copies to friends, who of course had friends who worked somewhere else who wanted to see it, and it began to get talked about. I mean, there was a point where I was getting over 200 emails a day. The first time I got one from New Zealand, that's what really scared the hell out of me, because I'm like "How did you see this?"

    [Music swell]

    PhantomEditor: First I remained anonymous because I guess that's originally what I wanted to do. You know, it was really a joke between friends, and I'm sure alot of those people knew who I was anyway. But when it got really huge like that it became really overwhelming for somebody like me who had edited this on a low end computer sitting on a $40 computer stand in my apartment. And then I didn't know the legal terms of it. All I knew is that I felt really safe because I wasn't making any profit off of that, but it was becoming aware to me that other people out there were.

    [Deathstar music]

    PhantomEditor: Initially George Lucas had said in public at the MTV awards that he did want to see it. But then later they put out a press statement that he would not ever watch it. Actually, I do think he should watch it. I just think that those people are making movies with their wallets. And might need a little kick in the butt from somebody like me who is completely at the other end of the scale which is similar to the message which is in the "Star Wars" films, that the underdog, the Luke Skywalker character overpowers the Empire.

    [Music swell]

    Kurt: Mike J. Nickels is the phantom editor and our story was produced by Michael May. Dody, you know the phantom editor I understand?

    Dody: Yeah I've met him a couple times, and I have a copy of the "Phantom Edit". Is that what it's called?

    Kurt: That's what it's called yeah.

    Dody: [Laugh] and uhh, but I've never watched it.

    Kurt: What do you think of... of what he's done? I mean the idea of... of a mere civilian taking a piece of, you know, zillion dollar entertainment and... and by his lights improving it?

    Dody: Well, uhm, I think if it's an irrepressable urge.. uh.. uh.. there's no reason why somebody should stop doing something that's an irrepressable urge. I mean why? Why should he, I mean, he's not try to, as he said, not try to make any profit from it. Uh... I understand the irritation of the person who did make it. I... I understand it. But I don't have an answer for that. I don't really have an answer for whether he... I mean, what are the options? Could they come and put him in jail for having done that? I mean, there are over... over time there are examples of.. of other films... I think it's "Once Upon a Time in America" that had the European version where the time structure was all over the place, and then they made an American version that was... much uhm.. I mean obviously these were the people who owned the film, but I doubt seriously if it was the film-maker who wanted it to completely rearrange the time and made it much shorter. And people were critical of it. So I think when something like that is done that it opens... that its a forum for discussion.

    Kurt: I understand that "Momento" in a European DVD form was in risk, or is going to be reorganized entirely, is that true?

    Dody: Not exactly, uhm... the... I think it's the DVD release in England has an easter egg on it where you can play the film in forward chronology and Chris and I actually have never put the film in forward chronology. So while we were working on "Insomnia" we rented [laugh] the film, and digitized it, and put it in forward chronology. And we were so shocked by the change in how you experience the film; it was a completely different film. Uhm.. the character of.. of Lenard Shelby was now a really bad guy and in the structure that is Chris's design, he is someone who is avenging his wife's horrible murder. So he is a sympathetic character all the way through. And part of the purpose of that in telling the story that Chris wanted to tell is that it is an anti-revenge revenge tale. Because you spend the whole film thinking this is a good guy that we have empathy with who is going to avenge his wife's murder and at the end, or the middle of the story you realize, oh, maybe he is just a psycho.

    Dody: And then it makes you question, I'd like to think it makes you question, the whole idea of revenge. Ah... because it's suddenly your perspective has shifted.

    Kurt: And when you re-edited it as technology allows us to do and put it in the normal straight forward fasion, it's like you turn a beautiful, amazing, oragami construction into a... just a piece of paper.

    Dody: Right, exactly, and it felt suddenly just like a... uh... uh... low rent, you know, film noir.

    Kurt: Dody Dorn, thank you very much for joining me today in Studio 360.

    Dody: Been alot of fun.

    Kurt: Starting next month, you can see Dody Dorn's work in the new movie by Christopher Noland "Insomnia". It stars, Al Pacino, Hillary Swank, and Robert Williams. For more information about Dody Dorn, or about anything else you've heard on our program, visit our website, studio360.org [studio360.org].

    Kurt: Studio 360 is produced by WNYC along with PRI, public radio international. The production team includes, Julie Berstein, Cary Hillman, Peter Clowny, Jocelyn Gonzolas, Steve Nelson, Michelle Speagle, Lisal Muhas, Andy Lancet, Lou Alcasky, Micheal Rayfield. The music is by David Vantiegams. I'm Kurt Anderson, and I do hope you'll join us next week in Studio 360.

    Announcer: Studio 360 is co-produced by WNYC radio and public radio international, and is supported by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, The National Endowment for the Arts, the Tiffany and Company Foundation, and the Horith W. Goldsmith Foundation.

    [PRI sound]

    ... transcription by ipsuid.
  • ...is that George Lucas is of course incredibly rich and famous, where this Phantom Editor guy is a nobody.
    Call me when he makes something of his own.

  • DVD "Re-edit" standard (Score:4, Interesting)

    by CaseyB ( 1105 ) on Monday April 22, 2002 @08:50AM (#3387009)
    The idea behind the Phantom Edit is really cool, but downloading an entire movie is both redundant (if I own the DVD already) and has obvious sticky legal issues.

    It'd be nice to define a way to re-edit a film from DVD footage, such that you can redistribute the edit as simple "score" information. You just list the edit segments as references to timed slices of the original data. The resulting file would be tiny, and you're not sharing any copyrighted information. When you "play" the edit, the DVD player just skips around the source movie playing the edits in order.

    More complicated editing techniques like the separation of audio and video tracks (to maintain music continuity for instance) could be implemented by having separate edit information for each. The player software must become a little smarter at this point though.

    This mechanism could also be used to implement the "amateur commentaries" that Ebert talked about a little while back. You just include the commentary information in a separate file, which would be much smaller as you would have to provide only the actual commentary, not all the "dead air" between comments. The edit score would play the appropriate comment at the right time, with nice crossfading if you prefer.

    • Although a great idea, it'll never happen so long as certain people in positions of power are allowed to trampse on the rights of the consumer. They don't understand that the entertainment experience doesn't end where the original does... it never ends as long as it is allowed to be manipulated, twisted and mangled to the mind's delight.
      I doubt that Kevin Smith minds when someone quotes his movie in an appropriate situation(comical). I also doubt that Lucas would mind if I made a tape of some kids playing with sticks and acting out jedi fight scenes, submit it to a film festival, and made money from it... would he?

Slashdot Top Deals

You know you've landed gear-up when it takes full power to taxi.

Close