Originally posted by: Puggo - Jar Jar's "Yoda"
You raise a point that begs several classic questions... (1) suppose a great artist, say DaVinci, in his later years went clinically insane and had delusions that his masterpieces must be destroyed because they were possessed by demons. Must it be done? (2) what if someone paid DaVinci to destroy them, on a lark, and DaVinci decided he wanted the money? Must it be done? (3) What if someone today bought the Mona Lisa, and decided to publicly burn it? Must it be done? By your statement above, not only are the answers to all of these questions "yes", nobody should even complain about it.
Well, shouldn't someone? At what point does art take on a cultural significance beyond that of a mere commodity owned by someone?
Even more to the point, shouldn't an organization that purports to be a film "institute" at least condemn the major alteration of a classic film, regardless of whether it has any legal basis to enforce it? I think it should, on the very basis of what it says on its own webpage, that it "maintains America's film heritage". By not taking a stand on the preservation of a great film, it shirks its most fundamental duty, and loses all credibility as a film "institute", in my opinion.
Originally posted by: JediRandyWell said but if it's the original author of the piece of art... then you don't really have room to complain, IMO.
You raise a point that begs several classic questions... (1) suppose a great artist, say DaVinci, in his later years went clinically insane and had delusions that his masterpieces must be destroyed because they were possessed by demons. Must it be done? (2) what if someone paid DaVinci to destroy them, on a lark, and DaVinci decided he wanted the money? Must it be done? (3) What if someone today bought the Mona Lisa, and decided to publicly burn it? Must it be done? By your statement above, not only are the answers to all of these questions "yes", nobody should even complain about it.
Well, shouldn't someone? At what point does art take on a cultural significance beyond that of a mere commodity owned by someone?
Even more to the point, shouldn't an organization that purports to be a film "institute" at least condemn the major alteration of a classic film, regardless of whether it has any legal basis to enforce it? I think it should, on the very basis of what it says on its own webpage, that it "maintains America's film heritage". By not taking a stand on the preservation of a great film, it shirks its most fundamental duty, and loses all credibility as a film "institute", in my opinion.
I shouldn't have said you don't have room to complain... you do.
Lemme word this differently.
I don't believe that a piece of art is ever not 100% owned by it's original author. Doesn't matter if it's shown to people who paid money to see it. It doesn't matter if the art has taken on a cultural significance. Because a group of people love something a lot doesn't mean they own it. If the author sells it, then that's another story.
A movie, while being worked on by plenty of other people, is still owned by the creator/director/writer. The argument that Kurtz, Kirsh, or whoever made it into the credits owns a part of SW doesn't work for me. These people are freelance creators who know going in that it's GL's show. GL hired them & paid them to do a freelance job. Freelance artists hardly ever own anything they create. The people they create the art for can basically do anything they want with it. Sure it sucks that some of their work is being altered or eliminated, but that's part of the gig. A gig they wouldn't have had anyway without the guy who is making the changes.
Should the 77 version be preserved? Absolutely. GL said it doesn't exist anymore, right? I highly doubt that, there's gotta be a copy somewhere on his compound up there. But the bottom line is he thinks these new versions are better. I agree with him that some parts are better... the cleaning up, the trench scene all make a better looking flick. Sure the Jabba stuff kinda sucks and the Greedo thing really sucks, but at the end of the day I still love the hell out of those movies... even the SE.
Well said again, Puggo.