George Lucas is demented.

[Suu]

I'm not buying it.

1: I don't have a Blu-Ray player

2: I can quote all 6 movies whenever I want, in all 3 versions out PRIOR to this release. I'm getting sick of it.

3: I got hit on by so many men this weekend because of my Star Wars tattoos, too. This has nothing to do with this thread.

[Elder Iptuous]

Although i'm not saying that these recent changes he made were for the better, i gotta say that i support the notion of film makers revising their works as an evolutionary process.  When he added the CGI stuff into ep 4-6, i thought it was mostly good enhancement, myself.
I also like the idea of other parties layering onto existing pieces in an evolutionary way, but i wouldn't imagine that Lucas would be too fond of that...

The notion that the films should not be 'adulterated' from the form that people saw them in as children seems kind of silly to me.

[AFK]

The problem is that he changed scenes with some of his "enhancements".  I mean, having a little ring around the planet/Death Star explosions, okay, I can deal with that.  Bigger and glossier explosions aren't a big deal. 

But the bit with Greedo shooting first, was pretty awful.  It felt like he was making Han Solo PC.  It was fine the way it was.  He entered the story as a ruthless, self-centered smuggler who evolved into this hero, swashbuckler.  It was okay for us to see him shoot first when we first meet him.  He didn't have to make that change.

The other thing that annoyed me was changing the celebration at the end of Jedi.  Though I suppose it should've served as a warning that the new, prequels were going to be CGI orgies of lameness. 

Also the bit where the puppet singer in Jabba's palace was replaced with CGI, along with a new, hipper song to sing.  Just seemed unnecessary.   Yoda was obviously a puppet, Jabba was obviously a puppet, that blue thing that played the piano was obviously a puppet, it's okay Lucas, really.  We can deal with puppets.

But above all, as someone who grew up with these movies, and who had parents who lined Lucas pockets with lots of dough to buy all of the toys, etc. for him to then develop this attitude where he seemingly looks down upon the original creations AND wants to cut off fans from being able to get those original version, it just rubs me the wrong way a little.  I want to share with my boy the original McCoy, not the CGI love-fests.  Luckily I still have the VHS originals and a VHS player that still works. 

/soapbox

[Cramulus]

I'm sure that by the time the original films are unrecognizable, the Free Market / George Lucas will satisfy your demands with a "classic" version... and it'll be like a hundred twenty bucks for the trilogy. 

[Elder Iptuous]

don't get me wrong.  some of the 'enhancements' were pretty horrible imo.  all of the ones that you mentioned, i agree with you.
I just like the idea of a work being evolved over time.  sure, sometimes i might not like it, and sometimes i will.  but it just seems to be a lovely idea that is an untapped potential.
If the original artist decides that he wants to change his creation from what i thought was great as it was into something that i now think sucks, then i would certainly express that i think he screwed it up, but what i'm unable to get behind is the notion that Lucas is somehow taking something from us.
Of course, i was under the impression that they still had DVDs available of the original versions, and it seems stupid not to offer them.  I would imagine that you could DL them off the torrents, if you'd like.  That would kill two birds with one stone, no?

[Suu]

I'm sure that by the time the original films are unrecognizable, the Free Market / George Lucas will satisfy your demands with a "classic" version... and it'll be like a hundred twenty bucks for the trilogy. 

He released an original untouched trilogy boxset a couple years ago.

[Cramulus]

oh ... what are people up in arms about again? 

[Suu]

oh ... what are people up in arms about again? 

Star Wars fans hate Star Wars. That's all.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think it's pretty lame to go back years later and alter your art to suit your own aged/evolved vision of it. It's artistically false. Remake it, sure; but revising it is a lie.

[Cramulus]

what does artistically false mean?

[Doktor Howl]

what does artistically false mean?

"Make minor changes to sell the same product AGAIN."

[AFK]

don't get me wrong.  some of the 'enhancements' were pretty horrible imo.  all of the ones that you mentioned, i agree with you.
I just like the idea of a work being evolved over time.  sure, sometimes i might not like it, and sometimes i will.  but it just seems to be a lovely idea that is an untapped potential.
If the original artist decides that he wants to change his creation from what i thought was great as it was into something that i now think sucks, then i would certainly express that i think he screwed it up, but what i'm unable to get behind is the notion that Lucas is somehow taking something from us.

Eh, a bit of an overstatement really.  Obviously as the creator of the art he's able to do whatever he wants to with his art.  I'm just exercising my end of the exchange by expressing my displeasure.  I don't expect him to do anything about it.  Just voicing why I wouldn't be arsed to spend the money on the new set.  I'm an unapologetic, and noisy, purist. 

Of course, i was under the impression that they still had DVDs available of the original versions, and it seems stupid not to offer them.  I would imagine that you could DL them off the torrents, if you'd like.  That would kill two birds with one stone, no?

That would be news to me.  I didn't think the original ever made it to DVD, only the versions with the touch-ups.  And I don't really do the torrent thing, it doesn't jive with my sensibilities. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

what does artistically false mean?

A slap in the face to the creative self that made the original work. A betrayal of that self and that vision as it stood at the time. A revision of history and self.

[Cramulus]

what if that self is a jerk?

I frequently revise old "finished work".. I owe my old self nothing. If anything, that sucker owes me some gas money for dragging his boney ass along for the ride.


I can't get behind the idea that the original star wars (or any artistic creation) was somehow sacred and that lucas is being a bad artist by rereleasing them all the frigging time. It's not like the old art was destroyed by the modern adaptation -- as suu said, you can still get the original boxed set if you feel that strongly about it.

But I agree with Dok that he's probably just doing it to make a buck and stroke the fanboy machine.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

If it's sitting in your house and has never been presented to anyone else, reworking an old piece of art seems less traitorous than taking it, post-release, and changing it in critical ways that diminish the reflection of what you were and what it was when you made it.

And hate your younger self if you want, but as both a maker and appreciator of art, seeing the changes in people's artistic expression over the years is something that I find beautiful. I would never revise a 20-year-old poem, though I might write a new one based on it. But the old one is an accurate reflection of who and where I was 20 years ago, and it would require me to hate that 20-year-old self to simply write over her expression.