That's a bullcrap statement and you know it. Episode two at least had good action scenes and Sam Jackson as a Jedi with a purple lightsaber, and Yoda getting his game on.Sylveria said:They did, it's called Episode 2.Metalix Knightmare said:.Raiyan 1.0 said:I really can't see it being worse.FinalDream said:Now for the corporate fat cats to really run Star Wars into the ground!
You'll all be running to Lucas, begging him to return and save us all, just mark my words escapist!
Or, in an attempt to tackle the tween demographic and Twilight fandom, they remake the films entirely, but rather than focus on the awesome war, they focus on the character's romantic turmoils.
Well it was either this version with the Ewoks singing or the version with Hayden Christenson's face photoshopped over Vader and I frankly am put in a bad mood every time I am reminded of that squandered opportunity that was the prequel trilogy and how badly Vader was botched.Not G. Ivingname said:Why did you just happen to choose the one scene in the entire original trilogy that was improved by the 1998 rerelease? Not the 2005 rererelease (Jar Jar Binks is in the original trilogy? AAAAHHHHH) but that scene is a lot better with the Flute music , not the rather annoying Ewok singing.Treblaine said:
It's definitely possible. The original negatives have been destroyed, but there are surviving three strip technicolor prints, also known as the "why do we even need the negatives when we've got these?" prints. Seriously, as long as they're stored properly, they tend to last forever -- and there are several copies that have been stored properly. In fact, there were a few scenes in the original negatives that had degraded beyond use. They scanned in the missing scenes from one of the technicolor prints that Lucas kept for himself. If a technicolor print was good enough for that, it should be good enough for a bluray quality transfer of the rest of the film.Hero in a half shell said:I don't think it is possible to do so anymore. The original film was destroyed in the process of remastering it (some people claimed Lucas maliciously destroyed it, but it was actually just an unavoidable side effect of the remastering process) so the only truly versions that remain are tapes and secondary recordings of the film, which are a major drop in quality.sunburst said:Do you think Lucas realizes how much goodwill he could regain from Star Wars fans by doing that? I know I'd like him a lot better.Nicolaus99 said:Does this mean he will "allow" the release of the original untainted films onto DVD/Blu-Ray or will he refuse to do so out of hatefulness?
The single worst moment in the entire prequel trilogy.Metalix Knightmare said:Yoda getting his game on.
The way I understand it, it was a change he made to keep from getting a PG-13 rating. Apparently, in 1977 Han shooting first was PG-rated material, but in 1997 it would get it bumped up to PG-13, which Lucas didn't want. If I had to guess why he kept it for the 2004 version, I'd say it's because he's to stubbornly prideful to admit he's wrong. I think that, more than anything else, is why he's refusing to re-release the original trilogy in its original form.Treblaine said:Really? You sure Lucas isn't a corporate fat cat himself? Even though he railed against the studio system in the past in setting up his own studio he has become the very thing he sought to fight against. There must be a name for how people tend to end up like the thing they seek to destroy.FinalDream said:Now for the corporate fat cats to really run Star Wars into the ground!
You'll all be running to Lucas, begging him to return and save us all, just mark my words escapist!
The entire prequel trilogy is a shameless soulless cash in, and Lucas doesn't seem to care about how much he has utterly botched Vader's origins story and the establishment of the empire. I mean do you see Lord of the Rings resorting to such merchandising. The ONE good part of the Prequel Trilogy, Tartakovsky's Clone Wars well that was too good. He pulled it from air, got a tiny DVD release then retconned it out of history with his own version (with almost the exact same title) that was monumentally worse and borderline unwatchable.
I don't think you get how long it took the Star Wars fans to recognise this, what had happened, it took SO LONG for us to admit that Lucas had completely lost it and even longer to then realise that what he had, he didn't really have it. He depended so much on listening to and seriously considering the advice and criticism of the people around him. He rails against the studio system who didn't like Han Solo being essentially Greedo and have Chewbacca be an Ewok!
More than anything Lucas has shattered the perception of Auteur Infallibility.
He didn't make a single change in the Special Edition that improved the film. They were just his pet peeves. He forgot that he was an entertainer, he's like a Stand Up comedian who thinks he can just go out there and complain rather than tell any jokes. Han Solo is the type of guy shoots first, everything about the 3 films he appears in he is like that, when he meets Vader in Could City he immediately pulls his gun and tries to kill him. It was just the personal beliefs of an old man that Han should never shoot first, even if held at gunpoint.
You consider Yoda finally showing off just WHY he was a Jedi master as the single worst moment in the trilogy?krellen said:The single worst moment in the entire prequel trilogy.Metalix Knightmare said:Yoda getting his game on.
Well if that is Lucas' excuse then it is a piss poor one.Owyn_Merrilin said:The way I understand it, it was a change he made to keep from getting a PG-13 rating. Apparently, in 1977 Han shooting first was PG-rated material, but in 1997 it would get it bumped up to PG-13, which Lucas didn't want. If I had to guess why he kept it for the 2004 version, I'd say it's because he's to stubbornly prideful to admit he's wrong. I think that, more than anything else, is why he's refusing to re-release the original trilogy in its original form.Treblaine said:Really? You sure Lucas isn't a corporate fat cat himself? Even though he railed against the studio system in the past in setting up his own studio he has become the very thing he sought to fight against. There must be a name for how people tend to end up like the thing they seek to destroy.FinalDream said:Now for the corporate fat cats to really run Star Wars into the ground!
You'll all be running to Lucas, begging him to return and save us all, just mark my words escapist!
The entire prequel trilogy is a shameless soulless cash in, and Lucas doesn't seem to care about how much he has utterly botched Vader's origins story and the establishment of the empire. I mean do you see Lord of the Rings resorting to such merchandising. The ONE good part of the Prequel Trilogy, Tartakovsky's Clone Wars well that was too good. He pulled it from air, got a tiny DVD release then retconned it out of history with his own version (with almost the exact same title) that was monumentally worse and borderline unwatchable.
I don't think you get how long it took the Star Wars fans to recognise this, what had happened, it took SO LONG for us to admit that Lucas had completely lost it and even longer to then realise that what he had, he didn't really have it. He depended so much on listening to and seriously considering the advice and criticism of the people around him. He rails against the studio system who didn't like Han Solo being essentially Greedo and have Chewbacca be an Ewok!
More than anything Lucas has shattered the perception of Auteur Infallibility.
He didn't make a single change in the Special Edition that improved the film. They were just his pet peeves. He forgot that he was an entertainer, he's like a Stand Up comedian who thinks he can just go out there and complain rather than tell any jokes. Han Solo is the type of guy shoots first, everything about the 3 films he appears in he is like that, when he meets Vader in Could City he immediately pulls his gun and tries to kill him. It was just the personal beliefs of an old man that Han should never shoot first, even if held at gunpoint.
According to IMDb, Lucas was a writer for both of those movies, though he didn't direct them.Aiddon said:No kidding; especially when he made changes to Empire and Jedi which he didn't write OR direct. I still don't know why Lucas insisted on directing and writing the prequels when he admitted that he wasn't very good at either.InvisibleMan said:No one ever said Lucas is a terrible person! Only that he is a terrible director...
http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag/the-people-vs-george-lucas-and-star-wars-discussion/Samus Aaron said:Who the hell cares that Lucas altered his films? Is he not entitled to create his stories as he wishes? Further, his edits are so minor that they're barely noticeable at all, and any person who hasn't seen the unaltered versions wouldn't think any less of the altered versions. I really don't see why Lucas is so hated despite everything he has accomplished.
You have to be careful, the final cut of Blade Runner has come out so much later than the original release and it's considered one of the best versions.Jingle Fett said:The reason people are screaming at George Lucas isn't because he made changes...it's the fact that he changed them like 20 years after release. If the special remastered editions had come out not long afterwards or something like that while the movies were still young, it'd be ok. I have the director's cut of Watchmen and while the changes feel weird because I'm used to the theatrical version, the movie is relatively young, the cement hasn't dried. Furthermore, the original version is just as available and the altered one.
Imagine if we somehow brought Leonardo DaVinci back to life and he decided he wanted to make changes to the original Mona Lisa. Quite frankly the world would be in an uproar. It's the exact same scenario with Star Wars. After a few decades, the assumption is that the movie is done, finished, the way the creator intended. If you want to make changes after all that time, that's perfectly fine as long as the original version is still available. If it's not, you're basically forcing people to get something they don't want.
Yoda being a Jedi Master in the terms of being a Happy Fun Ball with a tiny little lightsabre is completely contrary to his established character. Yoda being "badass" is not Yoda.Metalix Knightmare said:You consider Yoda finally showing off just WHY he was a Jedi master as the single worst moment in the trilogy?
He wrote the basic ideas and edited the scripts but he was NOT a lead writer. His script-writing is legendarily clumsy. Like I said, TONS of dialogue in the first film was ad-libbed due to the script being pretty bad.Zetatrain said:According to IMDb, Lucas was a writer for both of those movies, though he didn't direct them.Aiddon said:No kidding; especially when he made changes to Empire and Jedi which he didn't write OR direct. I still don't know why Lucas insisted on directing and writing the prequels when he admitted that he wasn't very good at either.InvisibleMan said:No one ever said Lucas is a terrible person! Only that he is a terrible director...
That's true, but the Blade Runner Final Cut was also the only version where Ridley Scott had full creative control over the movie. So in a way, it's almost like a completely new movie, whereas Star Wars is the same movie with changes. George Lucas had control from the very beginning--him making changes now is like saying "I never made the movie how I wanted so I'm doing it now" (when he fully could have) whereas in Scott's case it's more like "I wasn't given the chance to do the movie how I wanted and I'm doing it now".Treblaine said:You have to be careful, the final cut of Blade Runner has come out so much later than the original release and it's considered one of the best versions.Jingle Fett said:The reason people are screaming at George Lucas isn't because he made changes...it's the fact that he changed them like 20 years after release. If the special remastered editions had come out not long afterwards or something like that while the movies were still young, it'd be ok. I have the director's cut of Watchmen and while the changes feel weird because I'm used to the theatrical version, the movie is relatively young, the cement hasn't dried. Furthermore, the original version is just as available and the altered one.
Imagine if we somehow brought Leonardo DaVinci back to life and he decided he wanted to make changes to the original Mona Lisa. Quite frankly the world would be in an uproar. It's the exact same scenario with Star Wars. After a few decades, the assumption is that the movie is done, finished, the way the creator intended. If you want to make changes after all that time, that's perfectly fine as long as the original version is still available. If it's not, you're basically forcing people to get something they don't want.
No I think it's not quite as simple as "he changed it, how dare he" but "These changes are shit".
And how that obfuscates things, normally you should just be able to say "Hey, Star Wars, I liked that movie" with the idea that that movie is a solid thing, and if it gets better well great, but he didn't make it better, anyone can tell what a horrible mistake it has been in almost al of the changes are either zero-sum or cheapening.