Wannabe

At least a couple of years? Dude, you are completely and totally uninformed.

Josh H

Therein lies the problems. A lot of people on the net apparently have no lives in the real world as they have no qualms about repeatedly wasting their time posting about movies they hate.

I mean I can understand seeing a flick, not liking it, and posting a negative review as most everyone does that. But I personally have more valuable things to do with my time to repeatedly post about how much a movie sucks on the internet.

I mean I already lost two hours or more of my life watching the movie, I'm not going to spend more than a few seconds offering an opinion of it on the net.

kedalto1

I'll buy them, but I'm pretty sure I'll be tracking down VHS releases of the originals as well...or maybe versions of a more shadier nature.

Josh H

And I suppose you work for ILM, know the condition the prints of the original film are in, and how long it would take to clean them up and make a superior looking DVD version of the original trilogy (while at the same time working on Episode 3)?

Wannabe

The original negatives were restored, cleaned, scanned and reprinted in 1997. I'd be willling to bet my vinyl-caped Jawa that it wouldn't take two more years to prepare the films for DVD. So instead of answering a question with a question, why don't you hazzard a guess, Josh Hinkle?

Josh H

You're just speculating, same as the other guy.

They were restored, that doens't mean they were taking good care of for the past 6-7 years given that lucas has said repeatedly he has no intention of ever releasing the non-se's again. He could have thrown them in the scrap pile for all we know.

The other guy really has no idea how long they'd take to clean up, but at the same time you have no factual evidence that it could be done quickly so you look like an ass for jumping on him.

Sessa17

It's true, there is no way to tell on a message board. But those that know me now it's the truth b/c they have been making fun of me for years b/c I've always said I could care less if Star Wars hits DVD. I've also been saying it in this forum for years, so it's not like it's a new thing. It's also in no way hypocritical. I could care less, if they never came out it's not going to bother me, if they do come out, & I happen to feel like watching one, I could just borrow it. Hence, could care less.

Josh H

Well, you either care about them, or have no life, or you wouldn't waste your time posting about them "for years" on an internet message board.

Supermallet

Well, let's take a closer look at these things, then, shall we?

Both Aliens and the Blade Runner director's cuts were done to bring back the films closer to their original rough cut form, but couldn't be released that way initially due to studio interference. In the case of Aliens, it was a time constraint (Cameron even said Fox was very supportive to release the film theatrically at 2 hours and 17 minutes), and for Blade Runner it was because the studio wanted it to be more "accesible," hence the happy ending the voiceover.

The Criterion laserdisc of Blade Runner, which contains the European cut is fairly easy to find on ebay or amazon auctions for around $30. And while most people don't have laserdisc players, they aren't that hard to find from those same sources. The same holds true with Star Wars, of course.

And now, Aliens is available in both cuts, so that's a moot point.

As for Close Encounters, well, I can't imagine any changes to that film making it any worse than it always was.

I see the SEs of Star Wars as more akin to the director's cut of Alien. You take a great film, add in useless footage for marketing purposes, and end up lowering the quality of the overall product. In the commentary for the Alien DC, Ridley Scott basically says about every added scene "We originally took this out because it was redundant" or "We took this out because it ground all the momentum to a halt." And he's absolutely right. The added scenes are redundant and/or make the film lose suspense and momentum. That's why he also made the superior theatrical cut available. He even says he prefers the theatrical cut.

Lucas, on the other hand, goes back 20 years after the first film became a cultural touchstone, adds in a lot of junk that is at best useless, or at worst, actually detracts from the quality of the films. He then pulls the original versions from circulation and thereby denies anybody from seeing the films as they'd been released for over two decades. And you say you can't understand why people attack him?

I think the reason the Star Wars films take so much heat is that a) it's one of the most popular film franchises of all time in its original form, and b) the way Lucas goes about it is not consumer friendly. I realize they are his movies, and he can do whatever he wants with them, but that doesn't mean people should shut up and take it. They are allowed to voice their complaints, even if they lean the other way on the director's cut of another film. There are people (myself included) who prefer the European cut of Blade Runner to the director's cut. But the film isn't as big as Star Wars, nor were the changes as horrendous as many felt the changes were in Star Wars.

Your argument is valid in a general sense. But in this particular case, I'd say that the gripes people have with the SEs are legitimate.

And really, if the "double standard" sickens you, then you need to lighten up. It's just a message board.

GuessWho

1977-->1997 = 20

And it was such a well thought-out post till then...

Supermallet

Whoops! Haha. Thanks for pointing that out. I edited it to correct it. Just wasn't paying attention there. The rest of my points still stand.

caiman

Damn, did he really say that? What a retard.

ConanDestroyer

To the people riding on George Lucas' nuts and defending him at every corner, did you freaks even see the original trilogy or were you baptized with the 1997 Retarded Editions? If that is you, you don't have enough pubic hair to even challenge people on why they want the originals. To you it's all "what's the big deal about the originals"? To me, it's "My God you're an idiot."

talemyn

I would say that this was a good point if it weren't for the fact that it is just opinion/preference. There are plenty of people who disagree that the changes are bad ones.True, but what's the point of continuing the complaints ad infinitum? If people accept that he has the right to change his work, then, I can see that they might voice disapointment with the changes once or twice, but doing it over and over again is a little ridiculous . . .Why? I think it is probably true. I would imagine that most dierector's wish that they had more time, money, and technology to do their movie in a manner closer to what they had imagine. In this case, GL was lucky enough to eventually have all three.Umm . . . yes I saw the OT's back when they were released. Where does that put me?

ThatGuamGuy

FYI, to fill out your otherwise rock-solid post, 'Close Encounters' original version, and 1980 version, were available from Criterion for years on LD. Also, both versions were compromised by the studio; the initial version had a skimped budget (but, on the other hand, Spielberg saved the company), the second version had a forced ending.

So only the final version of 'Close Encounters' was *just* Spielberg (albiet, a 20-years later Spielberg who added bits of CGI). But, on the other hand, he made *all* the old footage available, which Lucas doesn't seem to be.

If you knew what the quote meant, you'd know that he's generally correct. As it is, almost every major filmmaker of the last thirty years agrees with him.

The point is that you get to a certain point and you have to stop for various reasons, either contracts or release dates, but that *most* people who make movies would continue to edit as long as they possibly could and would constantly change things until they finally had to abandon them.

Most filmmakers don't use the word abandon, that's all. I've heard the same quote said by Gilliam and Jackson both, and each used a different word instead of 'abandon', and they're all right. If left to their own devices, most filmmakers would tinker indefinitely.

The strange thing is, though, that Lucas *knows* this and still insists on tinkering indefinitely.

Demontooth

If it's on sale for a reasonable price I will buy it. If not, I will ask a relative to get it for me for Christmas. But I will not be sitting outside the store, that's king-kong monkey!

randy1320

Just curious if you think this applies to the scene with Jabba. After all that scene was filmed back in '76 with the intention of being in there and was only abandoned because Lucas felt the technology at the time was inadequte to get it right. I don't think it's quite the same as Greedo firing first.

Sessa17

Actually none are true, you do take things a bit too literally though. the posts have been few & far b/w, it is a DVD talk forum & occasionally when a new thread pops up about the most anticipated DVD release of all-time (even if it was a movie I hated, it's DVD news I'd like to know), I may chime in on my thoughts, when I'm bored at work like now. It is the point of a forum.

But thanks to you guys for really caring about my opinion enough to analyze it again & again. I didn't think I was that important to strangers, I feel all warm & fuzzy now.

TomOpus

After wading through the 12 pages...

1. While I have major problems with a few of the changes to the OT, I will still buy this because I love all 3 movies.

2. I find it amusing that so many people seem genuinely surprised that it's only the SE being released. Hasn't this been a given ever since the rumors of the release first came out?

3. Man, is it me or do we have a shitload of "new members"

Gatsby

I still don't think the scene is necessary, it was already covered in the Greedo conversation that Jabba wanted his money, or Han would be killed...there was no need to repeat it again with Jabba. There are a lot of repetitive and unnecessary scene that will be left on the cutting room floor, the Jabba scene should have been one of them.

Not to mention the scene doesn't work because Jabba's a slug and Han walks behind him. The fact that they decided to have him step on Jabba's tail proves how they have pushed aside the story for computer generated images.

DavidH

There isn't one scene in any of the three SE movies that is necessary or adds anything of value. With that said, I will be buying these as the SE is better than nothing for sure.

Gatsby

I'm with you..I have some issues with the SE versions, but I will definitely pick them up 9/21/04.

The Third Jake

I'll definitely be buying these, because I'm a firm believer in Executive Producer's Cuts. Too long directors have hogged all the credit, while the genius of the executive producer wilts in obscurity.

I will be casting my vote for more Executive Producer's Cuts of my favorite movies with my wallet by buying this set of two Executive Producer's Cuts and one (ugh) Director's Cut.

When are you people going to get it through your heads: It's the Executive Producer's movie, he did all the work, it's his genius that brought it to the screen, and he can do whatever he wants with it!

(Obviously, I'd like to see the originals available. (For those with poor reading comprehension skills, or an overzealous evangelical verve, "I'd like to see the originals available" does not equal "Lucas owes it to me to release these movies the way I want him to." It means just what it says: I'd like to see the originals available.) Still not sure if I'll be buying this set. We'll see.)

The Antipodean

This just in: Sky is also blue.

Supermallet

I agree, the scene is redundant. We know Jabba wants the money, we know Han is going to take Luke and Obi-Wan to Alderaan specifically to pay off his debt to Jabba. It's the same as all those redundant scenes in the Alien DC: Filmed at the time, but never necessary.

I was also thinking about it, couldn't they have had Han circling Jabba and Jabba turning to face him, instead of Han stepping on his tail? Eh, he probably can't move that fast, but, considering he already wants to kill Han, I can't imagine he'd let him get away with stepping on his tail like that. That would be like me owing Tony Soprano $100,000, and while I'm telling him that I will have his money in time, I knee him in the groin.


My comment about Close Encounters was really a cheeky little remark saying I didn't like the film in any version. But thanks for filling in the missing info.


You're right, it is just personal preference. But, again, considering how popular the films were in the original form, and how long they've been available to such a wide fan base, it does seem fair to offer the people the chance to see it that way.

As for why people still complain, I think it feeds right back into what I was saying before. Star Wars is so huge and so popular that it's inevitable that people will complain until they get what they want. They can't vent to Lucas about it, so they have to vent somewhere else. It's the nature of the beast, as they say.