The Not-So-Special Editions Thread

Ekenobi you like the new stuff right? Me the only Old starwars flick I seen was ROTJ and at the end the little furry people were singing a song. In the tape I have they dont sing anymore. but the movie should what is happening around the world. would people rather hear the creatures singing?

 

The problem I have with doctoring old films is that for some reason I cannot suspend my disbelief. What I mean is - Since I've seen the Ewoks singing their song man many times I cannot all of a sudden pretend that scene doesn't exist.
I might not express myself right here so I'm using a different example. Spielberg's A.I.. I love the film to bits until the future mechas appear in the last 20 minutes. Up until that point I think it's a masterpiece. A friend of mine suggested to simply skip those scenes whenever I watch the film but that doesn't work for me. I know those scenes are in the film and I cannot pretend they're not.
Maybe that's why I'm having problems with the PT too. When I watch ANH I see Darth Vader plyed by Dave Prowse. I don't picture Hayden in the suit. Why? Because I simply KNOW that Hayden didn't exist when the film was shot and therefore Hayden has no place there.

Or maybe I'm just talking rubbish.

 

I have similar problems with the Fellowship of the Ring Theatrical versus Extended versions. I love the Theatrical version - every bit of it. I only recently got the Extended version, so for over a year, the Theatrical version had solidified in my mind as the "definitive" version. I had read a lot of reviews of the Extended version, all extremely positive and giving the impression that this was superior to the Theatrical. Thus it was with quite some excitement that I popped my new DVD in and began to watch the Extended version for the first time. To cut a long story short, I didn't like the additions made to the introduction, and I certainly didn't like much of the extra Hobbiton stuff. I felt it spoilt Frodo's excellent introduction and put too much emphasis on Bilbo. Most of the other extra Hobbiton stuff was distracting and unnecessary. At this point I was feeling a little bit let down. However, I persevered and watched the rest of the film. Every other additional scene was brilliant. That's right, as soon as the Hobbits left the Shire, I loved every bit of the new footage.

So as you can see, I'm in a bit of a pickle. For the beginning of the film, I want to see the Theatrical version, for the rest of it, the Extended version. How annoying is that? It's like I cannot consider "Fellowship of the Ring" as one film anymore; instead my idealistic version of it exists in a sort of fuzzy state of duality, somewhere in between the two versions.

Back to Star Wars. You can imagine I have similar problems with the OT. It is obvious that the Special Editions improve some aspects of the film (sfx, establishing shots etc.), and for that I want to watch the SEs. Yet with that, I have to put up with horrible new stuff like Jedi Rocks, Greedo-shoots-first and ANH Jabba. For me, the OT, like FOTR, is now spread over two versions, and I can longer consider either version as "definitive".

 

Great post, Corpsey, I feel the exact same way about SE; some additions are great, some are loathsome.

 

was wattching south park tonight, and cartman was on maury povich claiming to be an 'out of control kid'. in the midst of his claims of undreage sex and drugs, he said that he digitally edited jabba the hutt into star wars, and the audience gasped. i laughed and immediately thought of this thread.


watching south park doesnt mean i have no taste!

 

See my sig.
|
V

 

To rebut the fatman, I'd say that drawing on pre-existing artwork is a pretty accurate description of both scenarios. To further the argument, I might add that both the Mona Lisa and Star Wars itself are vastly overrated pieces of artwork, although the original Star Wars film has probably had a profoundly more significant impact on today's generation of filmmakers and storytellers than the Mona Lisa had on the Renaissance-era generation of artists. I could probably name 25 Renaissance works more artistically impactful and inspiring than that tiny portrait that sits all alone in a dimly lit hall in the Louvre.

 

Good discussion.

 

Go on then, TokyoXtreme.

Name those 25 more influential pieces of art.

While some of the Special Edition changes are awful- Greedo, and I don't like the approach to Mos Eisley, I'm not so sure about the outcry against the Jabba scene in ANH.

This is a DELETED SCENE! And I'm prepared to set aside the fact that Jabba looks crap in favour of enjoying a scene that is- From the 70's, perfectly well acted, introduces an important character and a future conflict. I'm prepared to endure a bad effect or two for that.

I didn't even notice that the ESB SE had any changes at all the first 25 times I watched it.

RotJ has about a minute of extra footage.

I guess what I'm trying to say is-

What's the big deal? Don't you have the originals on tape?

 

There are many horrible changes to ESB, most notably the Luke scream (so against his character, the scene and the music in the scene), Vader's new line (so prequelish in its longevity) and the entire Imperial Shuttle/ROTJ-scene ending. Horrible.

 

>>For me, the OT, like FOTR, is now spread over two versions, and I can longer consider either version as "definitive".<<

An excellent point, Corpsey.

However, I would point out a few (imo) key distinctions between the LOTR extended editions and the "Special Edition" OT...

Firstly, the "new" footage in the FOTR EE is all part of what was originally shot. In essence, it's literally exactly what it claims to be: The same movie, only longer in parts. Only in a few cases are elements actually "changed," but moreso on the level of using alternate takes. This, to my mind, is quite a bit different from the insertion of entirely new elements 20 years after the fact or drastic alteration of essential character-establishment scenes rampant in the OT SE.

Secondly, I think it must be noted when comparing the two that the LOTR and SW OT series were filmed and released in entirely different manners. The OT films were all shot independently of one-another, as individual productions with clearly-defined beginnings and endings. By contrast, the LOTR trilogy was filmmed "all at once," as one mammoth production in what could be said to be one single huge movie. Thusly, I think, the exact "final" form of these individual "pieces" is less easy to define, since in any form they are still essentially the serialized "chunks" of a larger whole.

Currently, it looks as though there will wind up being a Theatrical and Extended version of all three films upon these initial DVD releases. Who knows what form this will take after that? When ROTK is out, will there be seperate box-sets for the Theatrical and Extended versions? A mammoth set encompassing all six? A single giant start-to-finish 11+ hours cut of the whole thing? Will it be reworked into yet ANOTHER form for broadcast-television miniseries presentation like "Dune," "Gettysburg" and "Godfather 1 & 2" were? Will they be broken into 2-hour-apiece "blocks" for syndication?

What I'm getting at is, this is a totally different type of "big" movie than has ever been launched previously... a film that is like a giant living being unto itself, capable of existing in multiple forms in multiple manners.

Finally, as if it needs to be said, some credence needs to be given to the difference in the way each series is being treated. The LOTR DVD makers have not, nor do they seem to plan to, pulled the theatrical cut from the sales floor. Fans of the series are being offered both "versions" of the film, whereas Lucas & Co. still insist that they will make the SE and ONLY the SE available to us.

 

On a side note, when I wrote the "See my sig..." post above, at the time my signature said something to the effect of, "People are acting like a great piece of art like the Mona Lisa was desecrated because they don't think the reinserted footage of the talking slug looks right! Where are your priorities, people?"

But at the end of the day, we all have to realize that we're not discussing something of great importance, we're talking about movies. Love or the hate the Special Edition changes, STAR WARS is just a bit of pop-culture entertainment and really not worth all the anxiety.

That said, the last several times I've watched an OT film, it has been the Special Editions, just because I enjoy them more.

It's also occured to me that the SE/Prequel haters really are technophobes. They say, "I don't mind special effects, just as long as there's a good story," and then they proudly point to the original films as examples of good storytelling. Then come the Special Editions whose changes can be described as innocuous at worse and you see these people start whooping and hollering about how Lucas "ruined" the films even though the story and characters are unchanged (no, Greedo shooting first and Luke screaming did not change the characters in any significant way whatsoever). They just don't like them because of the effects.

Well, regardless of what you guys think, Lucas will have the last laugh as he has made very clear and for quite some time that only the improved versions will be available on DVD. So you guys can either grow up and accept it or continue your little bitter crusade. By the way, how's that working for you?

 

Durwood

It's also occured to me that the SE/Prequel haters really are technophobes

Technophobes who use computers to communicate with others over the internet.

Hmmmm...





Then come the Special Editions whose changes can be described as innocuous at worse and you see these people start whooping and hollering about how Lucas "ruined" the films even though the story and characters are unchanged

Huh? Changes have been made to the films without changing the story or characters?

Weird.

In the original story of ANH that I saw, Han shot first and didn't encounter Jabba. Yet you are saying that the SE didn't change theses things?

What Special Edition did you see?

Well, regardless of what you guys think, Lucas will have the last laugh as he has made very clear and for quite some time that only the improved versions will be available on DVD.

"Last laugh"? Technology is overtaking GL's ability to have the "last laugh" in this area, I'm afraid. People will be able to get non-SE version of the OT on DVD. The only difference will be that the money will not be going to Lucasfilm, something which GL will most definetly not be laughing about.

So you guys can either grow up and accept it or continue your little bitter crusade. By the way, how's that working for you?

There are many, many people who think the SE aren't as good as the original versions of the OT and wish to be able to purchase them legally on DVD. You can either grow up and accept this or continue your little bitter crusade. By the way, how's that working for you?

 

But at the end of the day, we all have to realize that we're not discussing something of great importance, we're talking about movies. Love or the hate the Special Edition changes, STAR WARS is just a bit of pop-culture entertainment

Maybe your problem, Durwood, is that you see things this way. Star Wars is not "just a bit of pop-culture entertainment." Art, something that as far as we know is uniquely human, can most definitely be "of great importance." Cinema is an art form. The SW series is one of the most significant achievements in that art form. The original versions of the OT are important pieces of history. Even if they were not the superior versions, their preservation would be imperative.

 

And you all might be interested in this link, which talks about the campaign to get the original trilogy released on DVD.

Interesting to note one of the people who are part of our "little bitter crusade" is...

Steve Leggett, staff coordinator of the National Film Preservation Board, the body that advises the Library of Congress on which films to include on the [National Film Registry of the Library of Congress]

 

Durwood:
>>But at the end of the day, we all have to realize that we're not discussing something of great importance, we're talking about movies.<<

With due respect given to the certainly valid opinions of others, Durwood, I would take some issue with the quote you'd until-recently adopted as your sig. (which, stop me if I'm wrong, came from an editorial on Operation Sombrero, no?) From where I'm standing, "ironically" comparing the SE re-cut to "taking a sharpie to the Mona Lisa" doesn't really make much sense. It would seem to me that what's being said (and stop me if I'm wrong) is that while it would be WRONG to alter CERTAIN art, i.e. a famous painting; it's perfectly alright to do so to OTHER art, i.e. movies, because they are somehow of lesser artistic value.

At least, thats the notion I get from this:

>>Love or the hate the Special Edition changes, STAR WARS is just a bit of pop-culture entertainment and really not worth all the anxiety.<<

Allow me to respectfully but VEHEMENTLY disagree. Films, (yes, even science fiction and fantasy films with "talking slugs,") are works of art every bit as valid as a Renaissance painting or a Greek sculpture, and they deserve the same degree of respect. Yes, one enters a bit of a gray-area on the subject when the person doing to defacing is the creator and owner of the artwork, but the outrage from fans is certainly justified.

>>It's also occured to me that the SE/Prequel haters really are technophobes.<<

Now, thats a bit much, isn't it? Really, calling someone who objects ideologically to the digital (or otherwise) alteration of films is akin to saying that those who objected to the removal of the added "fig leaves" from classical nude statues "perverts."

>>Well, regardless of what you guys think, Lucas will have the last laugh as he has made very clear and for quite some time that only the improved versions will be available on DVD.<<

The same last-laugh that Kubrick had when he claimed he hated Widescreen and only wanted his stuff released Pan & Scan?

 

GeekBob, I've never seen any post of yours before (unless you're a sock), but those two on this page are GREAT. I agree and I find your comparision between the extended FOTR dvd and the SEs very important.

 

I hated the Greedo shoots first scene and Luke's scream in TESB, they're by far the worst crimes of the SE.

Lucas doesn't realise that sometimes you should leave well enough alone, the new Wampa footage is a good example, I know they originally wanted more Wampa shots in 1980 but it turned out better because of the mystery, imagine if Spielberg decided to add a bunch of CGI shark scenes into JAWS. At the time he desperately wanted better shark footage, but afterwards he admitted that the lack of them actually made a more tension-filled movie.

Lucas also messed about with the editing and the music cues, which was really dumb. His wife won an Oscar for ANH, will she have to give it back if George keeps insisting that these SEs are the only real versions?

I really just wish that he'd just re-shot some of the poorer FX shots (with models, not CGI) and left it at that. Jabba looks ridiculous, much worse than any bad matte job in the originals.

But its too late now , we're not going to get a good special edition, so if I have to choose I'll watch the original versions.

Someone said there was a petition to release the originals on DVD -- where is that?

gez

 

is that while it would be WRONG to alter CERTAIN art, i.e. a famous painting; it's perfectly alright to do so to OTHER art, i.e. movies, because they are somehow of lesser artistic value.

Well, STAR WARS has never been about art, it's been about telling a good story, and if the films' creator feels that making small changes will enhance how he wants the story to be told, who am I tell him he's wrong?

Yes, one enters a bit of a gray-area on the subject when the person doing to defacing is the creator and owner of the artwork, but the outrage from fans is certainly justified.

1) Lucas is not defacing his own work. I like the improvements. You don't. Big deal.

2) The outraged fans are justified in their own minds, but hey, if that works for you.

Now, thats a bit much, isn't it? Really, calling someone who objects ideologically to the digital (or otherwise) alteration of films is akin to saying that those who objected to the removal of the added "fig leaves" from classical nude statues "perverts."

If it was really about the story and not the effects (as some people claim) then the changes made to the original films which do not alter the story shouldn't be receiving such condemnation, so I find things a bit out of joint. Perhaps calling you guys "technophobes" was a bit much on my part, but I'm just trying to reconcile the inconsistencies I see in your logic.