CT Special edition - worst and best changes

Discussion in 'Classic Trilogy' started by Jo Lucas, Oct 6, 2015.

  1. Benster7703

    Benster7703 Jedi Youngling

    Jan 8, 2018
    Best changes
    1. CGI improvements at the battle of Yavin
    2. New emperor hologram
    3. Cloud city improvements
    4. New music for Return of The Jedi
    Worst changes
    1. Han not shooting first
    2. Jaba the Hutt in A New Hope
    3. "Jedi rocks," which i skip every time i watch Return of The Jedi
    4. Changes to dialogue
    SateleNovelist11 likes this.
  2. Starwarsguy777

    Starwarsguy777 Jedi Youngling

    Nov 29, 2016
    1. Victory Celebration
    2. Emperor slug removal
    3. Lightsaber Colouring Correction
    4. Jabba model correction in 2004 relese

    1.Young Ghost Anakin
    2. Nooooo! in blu-ray
    3. CGI Jabba
    4. Luke's yell in ESB
    SateleNovelist11 likes this.
  3. Jedi Knight Fett

    Jedi Knight Fett Host, PT Interview Thread star 10 VIP - Game Host

    Feb 18, 2014
    Anakin Ghost
    Boba Fett Voice
    Cloud city upgrade

    CGI jabba
  4. cxcfffxx

    cxcfffxx Jedi Padawan star 1

    Jan 17, 2017

    I thought this scene was strange because I saw Return of the Jedi, and I thought Jabba could not walk.
  5. BoulderFaceplant

    BoulderFaceplant Jedi Youngling

    Dec 20, 2017
    Best change: The redone ending music to ROTJ

    Worst change: Jedi Rocks
    TripleZero and Sarge like this.
  6. ImpreciseStormtrooper

    ImpreciseStormtrooper Jedi Master star 3

    Jan 8, 2016
    Interesting few posts.

    This jostling for position in an argument by trying to define what constitutes "cultural heritage" in as narrow a definition as possible is simply an exercise in negating the valid opinions of others by the use of logic traps.

    Cultural heritage is not an historical construct. Nor is it defined as the actions of individuals in society. It absolutely is not the sole domain of an individual artist solely for the duration of their lifetime and only then part of culture as a whole.

    Culture is simply a shared and ongoing experience, ritual or activity that humans decide to participate in by repetition over a long enough time to be easily recognisable.

    Star Wars 'culture' has certainly been that for decades.

    It is absolutely true that SW is already part of cultural heritage. And it is exactly that only because so many share in and celebrate it.

    The artist has certain rights, of course. But like a parent, he only has so long to control his child before that child itself has rights.

    A parent might have created a child. But that doesn't give the parent the right to claim moral authority over who associates with that child ib later life, nor over that child's right to exist in its own right in thr first place.

    Without getting bogged down into legal minutia, first things first: The law is an ass. Culture is not what people claiming a moral authority decide it is. Culture is what poeople enmasse decide it is. The people have long since spoken.

    The Special Editions deserve to exist in their own right in exactly the same way. I enjoyed them. However, any argument that GL can fundamentally alter the originals or even decide they should cease to exist at all is morally reprehensible.
    Nate787 likes this.
  7. The_Phantom_Calamari

    The_Phantom_Calamari Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Nov 10, 2011
    Culture and cultural heritage are as much a construct as anything else, but we can still base our conception of them on certain logical principles. I'm arguing for my interpretation, and you're arguing for yours. I find your conceptions as morally reprehensible as you apparently find mine. Actually, it's entirely likely that I find yours more morally reprehensible than you find mine.

    However, mine also has the benefit of an underlying logical construct based on the laws of nature. All you have is feelings. Though we may talk about them in such terms (even George himself does), a work of art is not a child. It is not a thinking, living, feeling thing with sentience. A child is all of those things, and that is the reason we don't allow a parent to exercise total dominion over their child, and also why we give a child certain rights of autonomy once it reaches a certain age. However, as I've stated, we cannot apply the same principles to a work of art, because a work of art shares none of those essential qualities in common with a child. Philosophically, your analogy is incoherent. It is an unworkable metaphor. It is sophistic fluff.

    My construct, conceptualizing a work of art as an extension of the artist, is on much firmer philosophical ground, for the same reason that an act of speech is considered an extension of a person's individual integrity and therefore deserving of certain protections. Unlike your child metaphor, my philosophical construct is based on the actual ontological relationship between an artist and his creation.

    Try again, please.
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018
    Sith Lord 2015 and Qui-Riv-Brid like this.
  8. ImpreciseStormtrooper

    ImpreciseStormtrooper Jedi Master star 3

    Jan 8, 2016
    Everything social is a construct.

    However, you are appealing to authority by deciding it only has validity if it is handed on by a reliable source first who has ultimate control (which in the case of SW is doubly incorrect seeing as movies are collaborations not the work of a singular individual).

    Why does culture need to be logical? I refute this assertion of yours. That is fallacious. Some cultures circumcise women by convention. There is nothing logical about it. Culture is inherently emotional. It only exists if an emotional bond is formed across a group and a ritual is observed that triggers that response.

    Your construct that the art is an extension of the artist eternally is a conceit of your argument and is self serving. While it is true that art can be observed to be fundamentally part of the artist at one point, ultimately that bond is broken.

    Clearly the issue is when is that bond broken. For me it is broken when the art is coopted by society as a whole. From that point on the snowball effect is wholly dependent upon the value society puts on that art.

    In the case of Sw that value is high. Which makes this argument of any interest at all.

    You are attempting to define SW and GL to be one and the same thing as a justification for his decisions decades after the fact.

    I simply refute that too.
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018
    DrDre likes this.
  9. Starwarsguy777

    Starwarsguy777 Jedi Youngling

    Nov 29, 2016
    I agree. Yub Nub was good, although strange.
    I didn't really mind Jedi Rocks. Although it was unneccesary and slightly bad, I am not bothered by it.
  10. Jedi Knight Fett

    Jedi Knight Fett Host, PT Interview Thread star 10 VIP - Game Host

    Feb 18, 2014
    I don’t know why they needed to extend that scene so much
  11. {Quantum/MIDI}

    {Quantum/MIDI} Force Ghost star 5

    Dec 21, 2015
    I’m completely fine with the scene if it didn’t add in those close ups. The previous one lacked energy, this one does but has over extended itself in some ways more than one.
    Force Smuggler likes this.
  12. Bob Effette

    Bob Effette Jedi Knight star 3

    Dec 20, 2015
    This was one of the worst changes of the SE I think. Firstly, I believe that it was artistically a bad choice to reveal Jabba in episodes IV and V, thus removing the mystique of the character who was only referred to before finally appearing in ROTJ, and as disgusting and dastardly as you imagine him to be. Not to mention an absolutely brilliant design.

    The characterisation in ANH SE makes him somewhat cuddly, and reasonable, and dare I say it, quite likeable. This then is in stark contrast to the characterisation as described further above.

    Lastly, that "Han walk's on Jabba's tail moment" Wrong, wrong, wrong.
    Nate787 and Encuentro like this.
  13. The_Phantom_Calamari

    The_Phantom_Calamari Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Nov 10, 2011
    I don't think art is an extension of the artist eternally. I conceive of art as an act of expression by an artist, and just like any other act of expression, I believe the artist has a right to modify or even retract it at any point they like. A painter cannot be compelled to put his painting on permanent display, nor can he be compelled not to alter it in any way he sees fit. It doesn't matter how much you argue the painting has become a part of culture--forcing a painter to show his painting, or to show it in a particular form, is forcing him to express himself in a certain way which you deem best. That's philosophically repugnant. Now, once the artist dies (or some reasonable amount of time afterwards) they lose that right because well, they're dead. You should probably try reading and understanding my argument before trying to critique it.

    That film is a collaborative effort is a fact lost on no one, but everyone also understands that not everyone within the production of a film deserves a binding say over the final product. A film production is a dictatorship, not a democracy, and for good reason. A Lucas film is a Lucas film just as much as Kubrick film is a Kubrick film or a Hitchcock film is a Hitchcock film. Both directors were notorious control freaks and most every serious person agrees that their films are uniquely identifiable as belonging distinctly to them--yet no one ever seems to question this concept except when it comes to George Lucas and his Star Wars movies.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2018
  14. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Apr 18, 2013
    That's because he made movies so many people REALLY care about in such a profound, ongoing and alive way that is arguably unmatched in movie history.

    Other movies are mythic. Star Wars IS myth and that is not supposed to be exclusive to one person's vision.

    Yet somehow he did it.

    Ever amazing!!
    {Quantum/MIDI} likes this.
  15. icqfreak

    icqfreak Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Mar 7, 1999
    There's also the possibility that at the time lucas was already aware of having jabba in TPM, so adding him to ANH wouldn't have any effect on his "mystique" since it wouldn't be his first appearance then either.
  16. ImpreciseStormtrooper

    ImpreciseStormtrooper Jedi Master star 3

    Jan 8, 2016
    I think you'll find this is not solely a GL concern.

    Kubrick removed A Clockwork Orange from British cinemas due to a copy cat crime spree. If he'd had his way the film would never be allowed to be watched by anyone on Earth.

    This is a thought crime, and considering the merit of the movie an artistic travesty.

    By your definition he has the right to destroy his own work. I simply disagree. Especially once it's handed out to the world and celebrated by the wider public.

    This is where SW sits.

    Spielberg butchered E.T. to make it more family friendly for the 00's. This is also a crime as is negates the deeply 80'a sensibility of the film.

    Again. You would support this, I imagine.

    I ask this question, is GL the billionaire in the 90's the same man as the auteur in the 80's. I'd say he wasn't. People change. For art to be immortal is must be remain impervious to changing social morays, and to the whims of old men from simply changing their minds. GL used to believe that himself once.

    Turner colourized movies for network broadcast. This was a horrible act of vandalism. He did it because he thought his audience wanted colour pictures. He did it to repackage the product and make some cash. The intrisic beauty of the Black and White movies, which were of another time, even if a more unsophisticated time was dispensed with.

    The Special Editions are like Ted Turners' colourized monstrosities. Appeals to the rights of an artist or artistic rights 'holder' in this case to change whatever they see fit - especislly when it Is solely for monetary gain - is the exact reverse of what cultural heritage and great art is all about.

    Art sometimes needs to be protected from Artists, not only by artists.
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2018
    Nate787, Force Smuggler and Encuentro like this.
  17. {Quantum/MIDI}

    {Quantum/MIDI} Force Ghost star 5

    Dec 21, 2015
    The comparisons between Ted Turner and Lucas aren’t very good ones.
  18. Encuentro

    Encuentro Jedi Knight star 2

    Aug 8, 2013
    Lucas' situation is worse as the original theatrical versions are no longer in print. I'm assuming that whatever it was that Ted Turner colorized is also widely available in black and white. Most fans who long for the original theatrical trilogy wouldn't give a darn about the Special Editions if the original theatrical versions were available as well.
    Force Smuggler likes this.
  19. ImpreciseStormtrooper

    ImpreciseStormtrooper Jedi Master star 3

    Jan 8, 2016
    The comparison isn't between Ted Turner and GL personally.

    It's between the the company GL owned which had the rights to alter and re-release SW movies and the company Ted Turner owned which had the rights to alter the cinema classics it had the rights to.

    The effect is the same.

    It's a corporate transaction. Not an artistic endeavour. No matter how many times appeasers call GL an artist.

    Although, I also used Kubrick as an example of a man making a questionable personal decision to trash his own creation as another wsy to interpret it.

    Either way, the interest to me is how little interest there is by some in defending the rihht for the originals to be left alone.

    The SE are fine as additions. I happily accept them as such. Just not as permanent replacements.
    DrDre likes this.
  20. Jedi of Baker Street

    Jedi of Baker Street Jedi Knight star 1

    Dec 28, 2015
    For what its worth, I remember years ago reading an interview with George Lucas where he said that was deliberate decision. The Jabba we see in ANH is years earlier and it is the culmination of a hedonistic, over-the-top lifestyle that got him so spoiled and over-indulged to the point he couldn't even walk anymore by ROTJ.
    christophero30 likes this.
  21. Chewies_bandolier

    Chewies_bandolier Force Ghost star 4

    May 5, 2002
    I just watched ROTJ and honestly NONE of the visual additions did anything for me or the film - the "NO" as Vader threw the Emperor down the shaft at the end was awful at it took away the gravitas of the moment, by interrupting the wonderful music.
  22. SateleNovelist11

    SateleNovelist11 Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Jan 10, 2015

    1) Ian McDiarmid as Sidious in TESB.
    2) Adding, "Who are you?" to TESB.


    1) Luke's yell in TESB.
    2) Han shooting second in ANH.
    christophero30 likes this.
  23. Togruta

    Togruta Jedi Master star 4

    Oct 30, 2010
    I don't have the most recent special editions, but most changes range from "meh" to "bad", IMO. Then there's weird little things I don't get the point of, like Threepio saying "And do take good care of yourself."

    I think the only changes that I consider improvements were the different Ewok song, and muting Luke's falling yell on Bespin.
    christophero30 likes this.
  24. christophero30

    christophero30 Jedi Grand Master star 5

    May 18, 2017
    I like the new music at the end of ROTJ, I thought the special effects really made A New Hope better. I did not like Boba Fett's new voice, or the new song in Jabba's palace. Or Luke yelling during his heroic fall.
  25. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Apr 18, 2013
    That isn't on the BD version. It could have easily been on the original version of course. The problem is if it had then it's exclusion would have been decried for not being there.

    The real point is that if Lucas wanted or didn't want it there then it should or shouldn't be.
    oierem likes this.