CT Special edition - worst and best changes

But that's an approach Lucas explicitly does not want to take, because he doesn't want there to a bunch of different versions of his films competing with each other for supremacy in the hearts and minds of the audience. He wants there to be one version with his name on it that he believes in and takes responsibility for. George Lucas the man is reflected by his films, and he wants to be the one to choose what those films are--not the audience. I think that's a perfectly understandable and respectable position.

 

Well, if that is true, GL takes himself too seriously.
Many directors release alternate cuts and make both versions available.
Or they don't endlessly mess with their movies to begin with. I could never imagine Scorsese reediting Taxi Driver for example.

Countless musicians release demo versions, outtakes, and single edits of their songs. It doesn't negate or nullify the definitive or original version of the song. It only adds interest and fun for the fans.

I love GL and I enjoy watching all, what is it, 6! versions of ROTJ that I have including VHS to blu ray. It's really not a big deal to release the OOT on blu ray. Yes, it's Lucas's right not to I reckon, doesn't mean those of us who disagree don't have a right to express our opinion.

He's the one who opened up this can of worms in the first place with endless tinkering.

What if Stanley Kubrick had gone back and made major changes to 2001: A Space Odyssey in the early 1990s and made the original unavailable?

I wonder how Mr. Lucas would have felt about that being done to a movie he so loves and was majorly influenced by?

 

Correct, I don’t think Lucas owes me anything. I am just musing that it is a shame that he couldn’t acknowledge the affection that many fans have for the theatrical versions by having them available alongside the Special Editions, rather than a statement. It wouldn’t compromise anything.

I doubt this will get through to you though for as long as you have this bizarre love affair with the guy.

 

It would cost money. Money Lucasfilm won't make back. I know, I know... But Star Wars, the orignal cuts of Star Wars, would sell so many DVDs. There are so many people that have held off of buying VHS, DVD, or BluRays until the 1995 VHS versions are remastered and released on disc. There is this huge untapped market to make money. These people have refused to buy the any Special Edition of the films for 22 years now. They are just waiting with money.

Except how many people can there really be that aren't buying these films? The Star Wars Saga - or more directly the Original Trilogy - are the most profitable movies ever released on home video. We're talking hundreds of millions of dollars between those films and whatever is #2. The gap between #2 and #10 isn't a big a difference in profit as it is between #1 and #2.

So as of right now Star Wars is the most profitable series on home video by a large margin. There isn't really anywhere to go up from there with sales. Alternate versions aren't going to add much incentive to drive sales since everyone is already buying these. And the extra millions it would cost to remaster a 1977 or 1995 version of the film is not going to be made back since the movies are already selling better than any other film.

Let's say restoring and remastering all three movies costs $30 million dollars. There are ways to cut costs, but really these should be done right with a totally new restoration separate from the current Special Edition.

Would Lucasfilm sell $30 million worth of the theatrical cuts... Yes they probably do. The catch is Lucasfilm would still sell that $30 million even if they didn't remaster theatrical cuts. They'd make the same amount with the current Special Editions.

There just isn't any money in it, because Star Wars is already so successful.

 

I'm on the fence about the whole thing - thinking the original should be preserved AND respecting Lucas' wishes - but I know that the preservation of them is not nearly as dire as other historically significant revisions. In the context of film history, I think it's a gift that we still have Lucas to deliver his final word. When recreating films of the past where the directors are long gone, there isn't much guidance; the cut with the most footage usually becomes the "definitive" version.

Although the classical music analogy might not be 100% relatable since this is a fact most casual listeners aren't bound to know (admittedly I just learned that). I think the views of the artist are eerily identical, but we unfortunately don't have the benefit of the audience's perception. Star Wars is actually preserved so generations after the original audience can still make the comparison to the original. Would the original versions of Beethoven's symphonies be historically significant? Absolutely. It's hard to say I'd choose the artist's integrity over the survival of a certain piece of work.

But I can't help but contradict myself; what constitutes as preservation? There are plenty of high quality 35mm prints in safe storage (and even some 70mm). Question is, are we entitled to this? Can we demand a certain service from an artist? The way Lucas sees it, the original version has been delivered - multiple times. He made a point to announce the final release of it (and even budged again in 2006).

 

We aren't entitled. We are only entitled to what we paid for.

Can people express their desire for the theatrical cuts? Sure. Can people express their dislike of the revisions? Sure. But I think it's about time people ceased to be surprised that the theatrical cuts are not being provided, ceased to pretend to be ignorant about why the special editions are a thing and why George does the changes to begin with, and accepted the reality that the movies were revised and would be revised again if the opportunity arose and Lucas wanted to. And that it's not about them or the audience (there are people who, in their irrational self-centered bubble, dare to claim that George makes the changes just to piss off the fans), but about an artist and his vision.

Most other directors don't own the movies they make, they don't even have final cut privilege.

And it's not just movies. Even Tolkien's changes to The Hobbit were dependent on the goodwill of the publisher. George fought for his artistic independence and he's entitled to his reward.

 

I have watched it and to me there is a massive difference between poking/touching someone in the chest and stepping on them.
Also, earlier Han also poked/touched Jabba in the chest and Jabba was still quite amiable after that.

And I would not say that human Jabba was visibly pissed off. Slug Jabba in the second SE, yes, that was anger.
Which was my point from the start.
You argued that Han spent the "Han spends the entire scene deliberately and blatantly antagonizing Jabba."
And my response that this would be idiotic and also incorrect, Han tries to sweet talk Jabba and offers him extra.
Han does NOT want to piss Jabba off, unless he has a death wish.
Han isn't weak or timid but neither is he deliberately rude and insulting, which stepping on someone very much is.

Look at the whole scene.


Han offers a slight smile at first and then stands up for himself and does not apologize to Jabba for shooting Greedo. Han is dismissive to Jabba's goons yes but not to Jabba himself.

And I have made counter arguments which you have ignored.
Like the examples of Boba Fett and Motti.
Boba confronted Vader and stood up for what he wanted. Motti was simply disrespectful and rude.
And my argument is that it is idiotic for Han to be a total **** and piss Jabba off, which stepping on him 100% is.
Consider this yourself, which would hurt more, someone poking lightly in the chest or kicking you hard on the shin?

As for Leia, there were other scenes that were written and filmed that featured Luke and Leia and about their feelings towards each other.


In that scene Luke and Leia almost kissed and no Han to make jealous there.
So originally there might have been more to that kiss other than to make Han jealous.

A lot of scenes are open to interpretation.
Some have taken Obi-Wan shot pause before telling Luke that his father was murdered by Vader as proof that Lucas had Vader as the father back then.
And Owen saying "That is what I am afraid of" as proof that Owen knew that Anakin was Vader and further proof that Lucas had Vader as the father back then.
This is a discussion forum and saying "This is not open to debate" isn't much of a discussion.

My view is simple, Han is confrontational and does not back down but that is to me quite different that being deliberately insulting and antagonizing the entire scene.
Stepping on Jabba would cross the line and I don't think Han is suicidal enough to do that.
But in the altered scene, Han does this, because slug Jabba is way bigger than the human actor and so there was a problem with adding slug Jabba to the scene.

It was neat the first time but it adds not a whole lot, it was a cut for a reason, and both Han doing such a rude thing does not fit and plus the effect still looks off.
So adding all that up, I think that either an alternative solution might have been better or simply not have the scene.

Bye.
Old Stoneface

 

Exactly. If these are the final versions he wants then that is all that should ever be available officially. One hopes that Lucas protected himself legally on that point because if he didn't then sooner or later the corporates will release all the versions.

Personally the only one I have a problem with is Han vs Greedo and not on any basis other than it simply doesn't work visually. No matter what is done with the scene there is no way to go from only Han shooting to Greedo shoots first (Han second) and make it work.

Lucas knows this and the 4K is his 4th version. It's about as good as you can get it but the wide shot will never really work because Greedo getting off a shot at all should hit Han. I like the new dialogue from TPM in there so that works.

For those that really want the originals there are plenty of high quality fan preservations out there. The draw those had for me was the grading variations based on the original color timing which is better visually to look at. Not that I really had much problem with the BD versions outside of some Lightsaber problems.

Now that the 4K's have addressed this there is no draw for myself whatsoever to watch the OOT TESB or ROTJ again since I always preferred the versions with the real Darth Sidious in TESB and the real Anakin Force Ghost in ROTJ. I'll go back and watch the OOT ANH for the mono mix, the Han-Greedo scene and out of a general nostalgia but that's it.

 

Look, I don't know why people say that the theatrical cuts haven't been provided. I own the 2004 release with both the updated versions and the OOT, and before that, I had the OOT on VHS. The original versions are available on video, and have been for decades.

My take is that Lucas may want the films to reflect what he wants in them, and that's his right. But these are films that were made and released long ago, and the people who saw them originally have those versions in their minds and hearts as the ones that resonated with them. It doesn't make Lucas in the wrong, nor put it make OOT purists in the wrong.

I am not a part of the first generation of Star Wars fandom, but I also originally saw the theatrical versions, or at least the versions released to video pre-SEs. That's where my largest amount of sentiment goes.

The SEs also exist, and I do understand why Lucas made the changes he made, even if I'm not a fan of all of them. I honestly don't see how the existence of the SEs impedes the OOT, which still exists on DVD and VHS.

Maybe that's just me. Someone else may prefer to see the OOT on a newer video format, this is just my perspective. I'm satisfied with the format I can watch it on. The existence of both the SEs and the OOT are the perfect compromise, in my view. If only one version exists on the newer video format, then that doesn't mean that the version already out on older formats is going anywhere. Copies still exist.

 

What people actually want is the OOT to be restored and remastered for home video. The -'06 DVD which are the same video files as the 90s Laser Disc just isn't cutting it.

 

@Emperor Ferus gets it

 

I'm not holding my breath, but I think there's still a chance of an official restored OOT release. It shouldn't be that expensive, considering that they could just theoretically restore the parts that were changed and cut that together with the unaltered parts of these new versions.

If not, at least these new versions can potentially be used for future fan projects. That's the big draw I see in them. A lot of the alterations still stand out like a sore thumb and take me out of the movie, but the restoration itself seems pretty good.

 

Not as they want them fully restored in HD (now 4K and later 8K and so on) and with the original original effects as opposed to all the remastered original effects that were done from the original films elements to match them.

Even if the SE's were reworked to look like the originals they still wouldn't really be them because of all the effects work that was redone in the 90's.

I was and as I said other than some nostalgia for certain aspects of ANH (most of which is addressed with the 4K version) it's just fine. Those few fans who want the high quality preservation can get them.

Which is different for everyone. Not seeing the real Sidious in TESB and the real Anakin Force Ghost in ROTJ takes me out of it so I rarely bothered with those. With the new 4K's those are completely out now so that just leaves the odd viewing for ANH.

 

Except that's not really the OOT. It's gotta be an all new transfer from the ground right. No short cuts. Done right it would need to be from scratch using the old negative or early generation print of the negative. I suppose the effects should just be the finished optical effect transferred to digital. (Not the individual effects elements digitally recomposed)

There are just too many changes through out to use the current version.

For three Star Wars films we're probably looking at $30 million for the complete process.

 

I doubt it'd cost even that much but what you would really need for that to happen is for someone at Disney to champion it and see the entire process all the way through the various stages of preservation and restoration.

The far easier thing would be to in effect do official despecialized editions. The 4K's as seen now with the obvious "CGI" changes reverted to the theatrical cut.

 

Similarly, not seeing the real versions of those on all these newer releases takes me out of it so I only bother with them to the extent that they're used as resources for fan projects.

I guess I was thinking more along the lines of an "official" Despecialized Edition, but yeah even that might require rotoscoping certain elements in. Though my next question would be, if they're working from the 1997 reconformed negatives, how many shots exist on those without any alterations whatsoever? Because they can still use the portions of these new restorations that don't contain any changes. Though, there are so many minor changes that I may be overestimating how many unaltered shots exist in those.

 

I don't think people are asking for the easier despecialized editions. We want the orignal theatrical cuts restored. That means warts and all. Otherwise we're just asking for personalized special editions that leave in changes we like and drop the ones we don't link.

The Special editions in 1997 cost roughly $15 million to restore. That's before advertising or prints. Factoring in inflation, plus the other costs for manufacturing, advertising, and shipping discs - $30 million may not be too far off what the project would cost.

Great point. Maybe these fan made digitizations of film prints are the way to go and an official release isn't nessasary.

 

It's not that Lucas takes himself too seriously, but that he has a set of principles that he chooses to abide by. One of which is that he believes in the rights of the creator to do with their work as they please. Lucas is a perfectionist and he had always strove to find ways to improve his work. Even when it seemed like he was done, he would always find some other flaw that he had missed the first time around, that he felt compelled to change. This is why he made said changes. Ridley Scott had a different take on the subject. He considers the initial releases of "Alien", "Blade Runner" and "Legend" to be his director's cut. The other re-releases that he did were more experimental, as he wanted to see how he would edit those films coming from a different frame of mind than in the initial release. He chose to co-operate as a courtesy, since the studios could have gone ahead without his permission or involvement. But since there was mutual respect, he was asked and accepted their offer. Scorsese, on the other hand, only agrees with Scott in that the first release is the director's cut. Unlike Lucas and Scott, his films haven't been subject to alterations. "Blade Runner" alone had television edits that didn't involve Scott at all. These were what prompted him to get involved in the end.

 

It was expensive to scan in HD back then for something that wasn't and couldn't be released in HD anyway. The first HD DVD and Blu Ray discs didn't come out until 2006. That's why the TV industry that shot on 35 film just scanned everything in SD. On top of that they had to actually physically handle the film to clean it up with chemicals.

Someone has really got to want to do it though. Who on the inside is so passionate about that? No one I've ever heard. Plenty on the outside of course but they probably can't get in even if it is possible.

 

Ridley Scott's director's cut of Blade Runner is not the theatrical cut, nor the one labeled 'Director's Cut', but the 'Final Cut' released in 2007. And his director's cut of Legend is the 'Director's Cut'. But the theatrical cuts of Alien and Gladiator for example, are his director's cut.

Ridley Scott's filmography is a good reminder that marketing labels like 'director's cut', 'extended cut', 'unrated cut', etc are not necessarily the true director's cut of a given director.

 

If Lucas chooses to market the version of his movies that he considers the real deal, I’m not against that. However, the OOT happened, and audiences shouldn’t have to pretend it didn’t. That doesn’t mean that Lucas can’t change the movie his way or re-release it as such.

While a more advanced release of the OOT would be nice, I’m comfortable with the format I have it on. I also have the 2004 updated version for whenever I want to try the OT that way. I see no need to update it past that.


Aside from that subject, some changes I like that I might not have mentioned on here are:

The appearance of the clashing lightsabers, most notably in the ANH duel (though I like the original version well enough)

I’m not partial to Temuera Morrison’s voice over Jason Wingreen’s, but I appreciate the consistency it adds between the two trilogies without (in my opinion) taking away from the original version of TESB

The reinsertion of Biggs and Luke meeting before the Battle of Yavin. Biggs is mentioned near the beginning of the film, but that line is easily forgettable if you haven’t seen it enough times. Aside from that, Luke mentioning “Beggar’s Canyon back home” to Biggs makes no sense if you don’t know that the two of them go way back.

Not so much a fan of:

The change in music as Luke’s X-Wing goes into the Death Star trench. I like how the original ANH uses the same music as in the Jundland Wastes when Luke references Beggar’s Canyon, tying the first act of the movie to the third act. (Admittedly, I could be mistaken with the soundtrack piece, but I remember the 77 version reusing the music on Tatooine when Luke dives into the trench).

Any of the added content in Jabba’s palace in ROTJ, except maybe the Oola footage

The Executor’s hangar in TESB (takes me out of the movie, though I haven’t seen that version in a long time)

Greedo with Jabba and his entourage in Docking Bay 94 AFTER HIS DEATH. Yes, that could be called a different Rodian, but it was clearly meant to look like Greedo.

 

You are mistaken about this. The music has always been the same in all the releases.

 

How does one quote me in name only, but have post content from someone else?
Is this some dark side power I'm unaware of?

Seriously though, what's up with that?

 

Which of the three identically dressed Rodians in Jabba's entourage is Greedo?

 

I will admit that I never caught the three individual Rodians. You were right to point that out.

However, all three of them look just like the late Greedo.