Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Star Wars Prequels Television Entertainment

Disney Digitally Removes The Mandalorian's Accidental Crew Member Cameo (theverge.com) 57

Posted by BeauHD from the gone-but-never-forgotten dept.
Disney has digitally removed a lone crew member who accidentally appeared in the background of a recent Mandalorian episode. The Verge reports: The crew member, who the internet lovingly dubbed "Jeans Guy," appeared at the 18:54 mark in season 2, episode 4. Back flat against the wall, the crew member was not in the shot for very long, but they made an impact on Star Wars fans everywhere. People even made mock designs for action figures based on the crew member! You can't buy that kind of love. The Verge has reached out to Disney about the digital erasure. Upon revisiting the scene, however, the crew member is nowhere to be found, something I was worried would happen. The beauty of digital editing technology is that shows and movies can be worked on in homes around the world at a time when it's impossible to be in a shared office space. The downside is that accidental gaffes we've come to love are erased, lost forever in the digital wavelengths of time.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Disney Digitally Removes The Mandalorian's Accidental Crew Member Cameo More

Disney Digitally Removes The Mandalorian's Accidental Crew Member Cameo

Comments Filter:

  • Yes (Score:5, Funny)

    by Impy the Impiuos Imp ( 442658 ) on Monday November 30, 2020 @07:53PM (#60780626) Journal

    People even made mock designs for action figures based on the crew member!

    Inaction figures.

  • Remove it so what, itâ(TM)s fiction anyway (Score:5, Informative)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Monday November 30, 2020 @08:05PM (#60780664)

    As long as the original is preserved somewhere (and it is), itâ(TM)s fine. Just put a fine print in the end credits or something. Mistakes distract from the story especially for new viewers. Later on the gaffes can be part of trivia and things to read about on Wikipedia.

    • I kind of don't care whether the original is preserved anywhere (especially for cases like this).

      • Re:Remove it so what, itâ(TM)s fiction anyway (Score:4)

        by maglor_83 ( 856254 ) on Monday November 30, 2020 @08:44PM (#60780742)

        I kind of don't care whether the original is preserved anywhere (especially for cases like this).

        I do, purely because copyright is supposed to be for a limited time, and then public. This should require the original (and any subsequent edits) to be preserved so that it can be released to the public when that time expires (as if that is ever actually going to happen anymore).

        • Okay, that's sort of fair, I guess. They have to be unable to sue you if you use the version that is extremely similar to the edited version. Though I bet by the time this reaches public domain nobody will care at all about the Mandalorian, with or without the jeans guy.

          I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that an edit of this scale shouldn't be copyrightable at all, and instead should just be part of the original copyright term, even if it technically happened a week or two later than the original

        • He'll be replaced with a CGI Jabba the Hutt.

        • copyright is supposed to be for a limited time

          Sure, what is it these days? 60 years, with another 30 added every time the Mouse is about to enter the public domain?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Zak3056 ( 69287 )

          I do, purely because copyright is supposed to be for a limited time, and then public.

          That's not, strictly speaking, true. Copyright is of limited duration but does not (and, IMHO, should not) require you to release anything when that term expires. It merely allows anyone to make a copy of the work at that point.

          I'm a firm believer in "promoting [sic] the progress of science and the useful arts" but the level of entitlement that some people have about said works is frankly amazing.

      • You don't care that a blog you just read had a typo fixed?
    • But in some cases no originals are preserved, only the edited versions with the character removed. In time even those will fade from memory: Who still remembers Bubbles the Turtle from Shrek, or the Mysterious Chinaman from Princess Bride, or Fergal the Accordion Player from Home Alone? All we have now are the edited versions, it's as if all those characters never even existed.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      The photo in TFA is terrible, there is a better one here: https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbo... [vox-cdn.com]

      You can barely make out an arm for a fraction of a second. Han Shot First this is not.

  • Watch 1962's Hatari sometime (Score:5, Informative)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Monday November 30, 2020 @08:17PM (#60780694)

    The director, Howard Hawk, intentionally put himself in the picture. He's the big-nosed guy riding in the bed of the truck, towards the end of the movie, while they're going after the rhino. It's hilarious how it makes absolutely no sense for him to be there - but there he is, right in the front-center of the frame.

    Disney might have a little trouble with that one...

    (Also you can see him again, walking through the house later on)

    • I haven't seen the movie .. but did having a guy riding in the bed of the truck detract from the story or seem out of place in that scene? If not, it's not a problem. Why would it matter that it's the director and not some actor/extra?

      • People ride in the bed of the truck regularly in the movie, and they are always either the main stars of the movie - all of whom you’re familiar with by that stage - or their employees, who are all local black tribesmen (the movie takes place in central Africa). Having this unknown extra white guy suddenly show up simply doesn’t work. Plus he’s not in the background, he’s front and center.

  • Little known fact: If you zoom and enhance, you can see that this "Jeans Guy" is, in fact, Barbara Streisand, visiting the set. Let the erasures proceed â¦

  • Han shot first! (Score:5, Informative)

    by sjames ( 1099 ) on Monday November 30, 2020 @10:00PM (#60780908) Homepage Journal

    That is all.

  • The drawback of 'streaming only' (Score:3)

    by Rick Schumann ( 4662797 ) on Monday November 30, 2020 @10:21PM (#60780962) Journal
    No one who didn't see it in the first place will ever see it now.
  • Seriously. The team adding the digital laser blasts to the scene were as blind as the stormtrooopers they were editing.

    • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

      by scalptalc ( 6477834 )
      Editing didn't catch it because having it "leaked" creates yet more buzz for the creatively dying franchise that is Star Wars. You know, that trio of movies from the 1970s? All these clumsy storylines to keep in your face the stormtroopers - the worst effing soldiers in the galaxy, and those dumb s**t light sabers - one moment they cut through a metal access door and the next they bounce off a steel pipe guardrail (facepalm...). And always YodaYodaYoda. It's become little more than a green intergalactic Bar
      • You're misunderstanding what made Star Wars popular. People weren't, and aren't, going into Star Wars for its creativity in the first place. Star Wars is literally about doing what was done before in a more streamlined, polished way.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Rhipf ( 525263 )

        and those dumb s**t light sabers - one moment they cut through a metal access door and the next they bounce off a steel pipe guardrail (facepalm...).

        Have you ever used a reciprocal saw? It might not be the most apt comparison but it isn't that far off. You can use a reciprocal saw to cut a steel pipe rather easily. That same reciprocal saw will just bounce off the very same steel pipe if you swing it at the pipe.
        When a lightsaber is being used to cut through a metal access door they don't just swing the lightsaber and the door falls apart. They are usually forcing the tip of the lightsaber into the door and then slowly drag it around until a section of

        • A Sawzall is a fallacious analogy, and not just because you're comparing one to an utterly bogus fictional device used as a memory anchor to make you think SW & Co. is some kind of grand epic. It's not just fictional; it's lazy writing. It's low-hanging fruit. The real first three were fine when I saw them first-run but that was the end of it. The prequels were the clue. As for the "some of us", you're being conned, even if you do speak for them. (I'm not really worked up, here in Actual Everyday Real L

  • Lost forever, really ? (Score:3, Funny)

    by tofleplof ( 2214032 ) on Monday November 30, 2020 @11:04PM (#60781042)

    Yeah, it's pity no one's kept an illegally downloaded copy on their drive.

  • Not necessarily (Score:3)

    by JustAnotherOldGuy ( 4145623 ) on Monday November 30, 2020 @11:41PM (#60781126) Journal

    "The downside is that accidental gaffes we've come to love are erased, lost forever in the digital wavelengths of time."

    Not if you recorded it. *cough*

    Now we need a fan-restored version with Jeans Guy put back in.

  • Too late. He's now canon. (Score:3)

    by richardtallent ( 309050 ) on Tuesday December 01, 2020 @02:37AM (#60781334) Homepage

    Too late. He's now canon.
    He needs a Wookiepedia entry.
    "De'nim Fightwatcher"

  • The story is out, it happened. It is irrelevant. It doesn't take from the story. What possible reason could you have for going through the expense of erasing it. If anything the inclusion of jeans guy made the episode more famous, like a Starbucks coffee cup in 297 AD

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by GuB-42 ( 2483988 )

      Because that makes it doubly famous: once for the inclusion, and once for the removal.

      Plus, it is a mistake, it distracts from the story if you notice it. It is not supposed to be a bloopers reel, so they fixed it. I think it is a professional thing to do.

    • It interferes with the suspension of disbelief that most people require to watch this Star Wars stuff non-ironically.

      As for myself, I watch this as prequels to Space Balls, Laugh It Up, Fuzzball: The Family Guy Trilogy, and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. I'm hoping the next franchise leads up to the discovery the one ring, perhaps Yoda: There and Back Again.

  • Go get a life son (Score:3)

    by AndyKron ( 937105 ) on Tuesday December 01, 2020 @06:18AM (#60781698)
    Wow. Who cares? I mean really, who would have such a miserable life that this is news?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Mitreya ( 579078 )

      Wow. Who cares? I mean really, who would have such a miserable life that this is news?

      It is not that specific change, but what it represents.
      For all we know, other streaming shows may be changing (in smaller ways) without our knowledge.
      What if I "buy" a movie or a show, are they required to notify me when making changes to my already-purchased product?

Slashdot Top Deals

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Close