1. Welcome to the new boards! Details here!

PT Changing the PT due to the ST, OK?

Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by Samuel Vimes, Apr 11, 2013.

  1. Axle-Starweilder

    Axle-Starweilder Jedi Master star 6

    Jan 6, 2005
    i would like to see the sequel trilogy establish the precedent that gungans never existed and for the prequels to be changed accordingly.
    Dredalus likes this.
  2. Samuel Vimes

    Samuel Vimes Jedi Master star 4

    Sep 4, 2012
    Rowling created Harry Potter and without her there would be no films so she could be seen as the "creator". Ridley Scott created the first Alien film and the design of the creature, along with Gieger and others. Without him, there could be no Aliens. So he could be seen as "creator" here.

    If you ask me, if the director/writer/artist objects to the change then I think it is wrong to ignore their wishes and alter something even if you have the rights to do so. I would also say that if the director/writer/artist is dead and thus not able to approve or disapprove then I am sceptical about changing their work even if you have the rights.

    Don't forget, Lucas didn't ask Marquands permissions before altering RotJ, he couldn't since Marquand was dead. He did have Kershners ok to do it. But to ask a counter question, say that Kershner was totally against the changes Lucas did and Lucas did them anyway, would it still be ok?

    But I am not really arguing for changes to the OT/PT and I doubt there will be any, Lucas most likely have put such clauses in the contract and I doubt Dinsy would bother.
    But I am just curious about the logic that one person doing X for reason Y is ok but if another person does X for reason Y then it is not ok.

    If someone thinks that changes are fine and perhaps even goes so far as to argue that old effects should be updated and puppets should be replaced with CGI. But that only applies if one specific person is doing it. If another person is doing the exact same thing for exactly the same reason then it becomes wrong. I am just trying to understand this reasoning.

    Bye for now.
    Blackboard Monitor
    Dredalus likes this.
  3. Jedi_Ford_Prefect

    Jedi_Ford_Prefect Jedi Master star 4

    Jun 9, 2003
    Yes, but the Potter films are adaptations, not continuations of the original works themselves. If she objected to the adaptations she'd have every right to organize a new one more aligned with her approval (ie Stephen King on his disastrous TV version of "The Shining" to spite Stanley Kubrick). But the adaptation itself becomes its own thing, not really subject to her approval. Likewise, Ridley Scott would have a right to be miffed over not being considered for the "Alien" sequel, but he didn't create the initial concept or screenplay, so he wouldn't really have much saying power over the direction any next film took, unless the creators wanted to work with him again that badly.

    Yes. Lucas was hands-on as a writer, designer, producer and second-unit director on both films. He was the creator of the original story and new characters for each film, and was involved at every stage of the script process. He's got a position akin to Alexander Korda's on "Thief of Bagdad", which was overseen by a murderer's row of directors that included Michael Powell. If Korda had wanted to make changes to that movie years afterwards, it would've been within his rights, too.

    Ignoring everything else, it depends on what reason Y is. I can understand somewhat if the motivation to make changes is merely to upgrade effects or CGI-- it's still wrong to do it without the creator's consent, but it's a fairly innocent mistake. But if it's making major narrative or aesthetic changes (and I'd argue that making any effects/CGI upgrades would naturally include this, either by the very nature of upgrading or by the reframing and rendering of elements onscreen), then that's a decision that only the film's primary creator can make. Nobody else has the right to claim reason Y as their own, not even hired-gun directors.
    Dredalus likes this.
  4. SweetZombieJesus

    SweetZombieJesus Jedi Padawan star 2

    Apr 12, 2013
    This. I say undo most of the changes to the OT -- keep effects cleanup and digital compositing, and Ian's first emperor insert in ESB but broom all the other junk like Jabba in anh, Hayden force ghost, etc. And leave the prequels alone.

    The OT has become like Joan Rivers -- you know she's ancient but she's become this plasticky, distorted monstrosity because of vain cosmetic surgery.
    Dredalus likes this.
  5. DRush76

    DRush76 Jedi Master star 4

    Jan 25, 2008

    Wow! Talk about exaggeration.
    Andy Wylde and Darth Chiznuk like this.
  6. Seagoat

    Seagoat PT and Music Section Dictator star 6 Staff Member Manager

    Jan 25, 2013
    I expected a Family Guy style cut away gag after reading this
    Dredalus likes this.
  7. WatTamborWoo

    WatTamborWoo Jedi Master star 3

    Jan 22, 2011
    I don't think there will be any changes anymore because GL is not in overall control.
    If there were it would not be to make the stories cohere more but to iron out a few "visual errors" like the Wampa arm in ESB. But from what I remember there was a real effort to iron those out for the Blu-rays.

    Furthermore, there will be so much new SW in the future that such changes will not be high on anyone's agenda.

    Basically GL's vision for the OT and PT is set in stone with selling to Disney.

    A new canon will emerge out of the old.
    Dredalus likes this.
  8. Darth Dominikkus

    Darth Dominikkus Jedi Knight star 3

    Apr 5, 2013
    I'll agree with you on this one.