First off, it’s not at all unlikely that back in the 70s people may have seen slightly different versions of movies. A long-time projectionist once told me it wasn’t an uncommon practice to edit movies themselves, or as he admitted to me skip an entire reel if he just wanted to go home early. :eek:
Secondly, drive-ins do get different prints. They’re generally just lightened versions of the theatrical prints (so the picture shows up against the outdoor screen in uneven darkness).
Is it possible the drive-in print could have been printed from an earlier/alternate cut? I don’t know anything about film printing, so maybe somebody can take it from here?
I know what you mean. Reading this thread has me half convinced I’ve seen those scenes too although I know full well I have not. My money is on False Memory Syndrome.
Not sure how I missed this earlier - sorry. It goes like this:
Veers destroys the generators, a few shots later a Speeder is hit, (no close-up, although you can clearly see it get hit), spins out of control and you can see it advance towards the bridge of the AT-AT from the bridge POV. It then crashes into the bridge of the AT-AT and takes out the AT-AT. Honestly I cannot tell if it hits Veers’ AT-AT, as you cannot see him in the POV shot from the bridge. The explosion of the AT-AT is very similar to an ealier scene where a speeder shoots the tripped-up AT-AT and the head explodes, then the body, and the scene of the bridge people recoiling is very similar to a later scene where they recoil when they think the Millenium Falcon is ramming them, so maybe he removed this scene due to the similarities.
This weekend I will do some digging into the possibility of transferring this scene from the Beta tape (VHF screws only) to RCA outs to USB so I can burn to DVD on my TiBook and grab and place on the Web somewhere.
Well I was going to create an MOV of the whole scene, but frame grabs will do too I guess. A small MOV of that scene wouldn’t be a copyright violation, would it?
I suppose it would depend on whether or not you edit it to show a kamikaze speeder
Joking, now I’ve been told the scene’s there I’m intrigued. I can remember all sorts of scenes in films I saw as a kid that re-viewing as an adult I realise were false memories. Like the end of Mad Max;
I always thought his last words ended without repetition of the word minute, which to me sounded cooler without.
Not a great example I admit, but the only one I could really remember.
I’ve thought about the False Memory theory and realized something. It distinctly remember seeing (and at the time wondering what the hell was going on) what I quoted from that script, something which is impossible for me to have picked up from anywhere else save the novel which I barely remember even reading. For me to have a false memory is highly unlikely; I’m with RumMunkey and his drive-in theory.
No. The ball is indeed in Morbo’s court, and I hereby specifically state here and now that I will pay for all transfer and shipment costs accrued by him if he makes a copy of the alleged scene and sends it to me for verification.
But the scene has to be this one in question: A damanged snowspeeder crashes headfirst into an AT-AT, resulting in the destruction of both.
Therefore, because this is alleged to have been shown and exhibited as a part of an “alternate” version of ESB, this, obviously, must be an effects shot, which means stop-motion models and completed miniature pyro work like the rest of the Hoth Battle sequence.
If and only if this is what’s been transferred and submitted will I pay for all the expenses as promised.
“He doesn’t like you.”
I was 16 when it was released in Akron, Ohio. I saw it the first week, paid to see it about 22 times in the next three months (stopped counting by that point) and I have no memory of a Biggs/Binoc scene.
