Originally posted by: Fang Zei
why does the OT defy comparison to any other revised work? ...
Close Encounters: Columbia released a "Special Edition" not too long after the film's original 1977 release. I think this was 1980 or so. Correct me if I'm wrong

You are correct about the year. But let's look into a better analogy than Lucas vs. Tolkien ... i.e., Lucas vs. Spielberg.

Something very close to the original 1977 version of Star Wars was just released on DVD. It has audio that is not original in some respects, and it's not up to modern standards of picture quality or animorphic presentation. Lucas has a "special edition" of this film which he prefers and has released the original version in less than optimal condition.

Spielberg has NEVER released the original 1977 version of Close Encounters on any sort of home video. Not VHS, not laserdisc*, and not DVD. (*The Criterion laserdisc that claimed to be 1977 original was not). Spielberg has said he disliked the 1980 "special edition" of CE3K, which was a compromise with Columbia Studios, and that his preferred version is a "directors cut" released in the late 90's. To my knowledge, he has never said he doesn't want the original to exist ... but it simply does not exist. Two very important scenes have not been seen by the public since 1978, when the original went out of theatrical release.

I don't know if the footage has been lost or what. But how can we give Steven Spielberg a pass when we want to hang George Lucas in efigy? Lucas' quote about the original Star Wars and O.T. is repulsive, but his actions in releasing even a substandard version of the O.T. and his 1977 masterpiece are immeasurably better than ZERO release of Spielberg's 1977 masterpiece.

I trust we are comparing apples and apples now, and there will be no more red herrings about books vs. films when it comes to artistic revisionism.

So what about it? Spielberg and Lucas. How come Steven gets no flak, while George should be "hit by a car?"

.