We should sue George Lucas. — Page 6

rcb said:

the whole hayden thing, i'm sure adywan, when he gets to it of course, could redo the Sebastian Shaw anikan head in when luke takes off the helment and replace it with haydens.

i think this already may have been attempted.

Oh god, no. Hayden will never appear in my OT edits

Vaderisnothayden said:

adywan said:

rcb said:

the whole hayden thing, i'm sure adywan, when he gets to it of course, could redo the Sebastian Shaw anikan head in when luke takes off the helment and replace it with haydens.

i think this already may have been attempted.

Oh god, no. Hayden will never appear in my OT edits

 

I'm still trying to fathom how he appeared in George's. Sticking in Hayden was far worse than sticking in Jar Jar.

 

why is it any worse?

anybody that saw the prequels first will 'get it'..

and people that saw the originals will ignore it..

doesn't bother me..

later

-1

Lucas answer for Young Anakin as a Force ghost is that was the age he went over to the dark side, ceased to be anakin skywalker and became darth vader.  You see Vader murdered Anakin from a certain point of view,lol.

It is a weird Idea but  my take on what Lucas wanted was that Anakin died when he betrayed the jedi and became a sith lord.  

Johnboy3434 said:

This is the non-SW fan in me talking here, so don't get too upset: If the fans weren't so insane, there wouldn't have been a rift to begin with. Numerous other films have had major changes made to them years after the fact without their fanbases going ballistic. Most of the people who don't like it simply say "Well, that was unnecessary" and leave it at that. They'd even buy the new versions and deal with the additions (i.e. not start some [honestly] insignificant boycott).

 There is a rift in SW-fandom, because Lucas takes shot at the fans all the time.  If you can name one director who talks against his fanbase, then your argument could be correct.

Remember these quotes by Lucas:

"I am sorry you fell in love with a half completed movie." -George Lucas talking about the Orignal Star Wars and the changes he made in 1997.

"The Original Versions don't exist anymore, the Special Editions are the ones that I only recognize."  George Lucas talking in 2003 after being asked about the Original Versions of the OT.

"We are releasing the Original Versions on DVD now with nothing done to them, we'll see if the fans really want them.  It will all come out in the end." - George Lucas asked by MTV.com about why he is releasing the OOT now on DVD.

George Lucas has alienated us simply because he refused to put out the OOT movies in any quality that is acceptable to DVD standards, and then saying they don't exist for many years too, which was more of an insult because those are the versions that bought him his Skywalker Ranch.  Many people bitched and complained on the internet about Bladerunner and Superman II: Donnor Cut, and ET (original version) and all of them are out on DVD in Great Quality, yet we have grainy, shitty versions.  The defense rests your honor:)

rcb said:

since when was jar jar stuck in?

Since 2004.

negative1 said:

 

I'm still trying to fathom how he appeared in George's. Sticking in Hayden was far worse than sticking in Jar Jar.

 

 why is it any worse?

anybody that saw the prequels first will 'get it'..

and people that saw the originals will ignore it..

doesn't bother me..

later

-1

It's worse because it doesnt make any sense.  I am not taking the stance because I saw the OOT first, but the whole point of ROTJ is that it is 'old' Anakin who becomes redeemed.

If Lucas shows young Anakin as a force ghost and saying he died in ROTS when he went to the darkside, then he dismissing the whole moral of the ROTJ story.  In ROTJ, it is 'old' Anakin who is conflicted through the whole movie, it is 'old' Anakin that saves his son and throws the Emperor in the shaft, and it is 'old' Anakin that says to Luke, "Tell your sister, you were right." 

By then having 'young' Anakin appear as a force ghost next to 'old' Kenobi, it contradicts everything that is done in ROTJ, because it says that Vader and Anakin were two different people, when they are the SAME person, that is the point!  Even though there is somebody behind that mask doing evil things for 20 years, there is a small little part of good in him that his son taps into in the movie.

Sorry, Negative 1, it bothers me cause it makes ZERO sense, and that is why Lucas shouldn't be screwing with the originals when it comes to putting new actors in 20 year old movies.

C3PX said:

rcb said:

since when was jar jar stuck in?

 

Since 2004.

Okay, now, is this really fact?  I thought that was just a fan colloquialism that the screaming gungan at the end of ROTJ was Jar-Jar Binks.  Officially, though, isn't he just a random gungan?

Johnboy3434 said:

In your humble opinion, of course. Other people think the added elements aren't intrusive at all. Are you saying they're wrong because they don't agree with you? Isn't that just a tad egocentric?

I would be against changes to classic films even if I liked the changes.  That is, if the originals were not also being made available.  You just don't do that to great works of art.

Johnboy3434 said:

In your humble opinion, of course. Other people think the added elements aren't intrusive at all. Are you saying they're wrong because they don't agree with you? Isn't that just a tad egocentric?

I thinkwe need to get straight that Lucas is changed the movies years after they were made, whereas most director cuts are scenes left on the cutting floor that filmed in the context of the movie that year it came out.

For instance, T2's extended version and Lord of the Rings extended versions are all scenes that were shot, but because of time constraints from the studio, they had to be taken out of the film.  So when the scenes are restored years later for a 'directors cut' they fit right into the movie cause they were there in the first place.

Most of Lucas's additions are made in 1997 or 2004, which is 20+ years after the films were released, and the context of those scenes are different then the story Lucas was telling from 77-83.  The addition of Hayden in ROTJ is totally different context from Shaw, The Emperor talking to Vader in ESB has a different context then the original scene, Greedo shooting first is a different context then Han shooting first in 1977.

That is what annoys me about Lucas's changes, is that most, not all of the scenes are created in 1997/2004 in the context of the story he is telling now with 6 movies in mind rather then 3 movies at the time, and they look ridiculous in a 20+ year old movie.

Gaffer Tape said:

C3PX said:

rcb said:

since when was jar jar stuck in?

 

Since 2004.

Okay, now, is this really fact?  I thought that was just a fan colloquialism that the screaming gungan at the end of ROTJ was Jar-Jar Binks.  Officially, though, isn't he just a random gungan?

No, I do not believe it has ever been officially stated that it was actually Jar Jar. It was a Gungan who sounds exactly like Jar Jar yelling out "Weeesaaa freeeee" in a very Jar Jar esque manner. So, at the end of the day, does it really make a difference if it was actually Jar Jar, or just another Gungan EXACTLY like him and equally annoying?

if, and when someone re-makes, or re-visualizes star wars..

i can only image the complaints and protests that people will

have against it..

i doubt Lucas would allow it.

but it would be interesting to me, to see someone redo the

original trilogy in a different style, with different people , etc..

as for why people revisit things they've done,

why not, it worked in a financial way, and brought

a huge new audience back to the theater that paved

the way for the huge success of the prequels..

i doubt that if he just restored the films, and released them

without any changes, there would barely have been any interest..

or maybe not as much..

later

-1

negative1 said:

if, and when someone re-makes, or re-visualizes star wars..

 

i can only image the complaints and protests that people will

have against it..

I could care less if they got remade, wouldn't bother me a bit. Remakes get made all the time, mostly pointlessly. I think you still do not realize that our problems with the SEs is the fact that they have replaced the originals. If they made remakes with new actors, then tried to pretend the old ones never existed, I'd be more than a little annoyed, but the idea of a remake itself would be a relief to me. With a remake there would be no reason to keep screwing with the originals, and that would be a nice change.

as for why people revisit things they've done,

why not, it worked in a financial way, and brought

a huge new audience back to the theater that paved

the way for the huge success of the prequels..

It wasn't that the SEs paved the way for the prequels. People had been eagerly awaiting the prequels long before the idea of the SEs were announced. The theatrical rerelease of the original trilogy in 1997 would have been a success regardless of changes. In fact, the TV commercials advertised it as if it were a well loved movie revisiting theaters to be seen on the big screen once again after being confined to tiny television sets for so many years. Why would the ads make the asumption that peopel would be interested in seeing this tired old film on the big screen once again? I knew a lot of people who went to see the films in theaters again and were surprised to see the changes, so obviously they didn't go because of the changes. The changes didn't have to happen, and I even thought they were kind of cool, until we were denied the originals for the sake of the SEs.

Also the "the changes brought in more dough" argument holds no water in regards to the fresh batch of changes made for the 2004 DVDs, why more changes then? Everybody was eagerly waiting for a DVD release pretty much since the invention of the DVD player, a lot of people didn't care what version they were, they just wanted Star Wars, and a lot of others DIDN'T buy them specifically because they had changes. Even if they had been the 1997s SE I would have been quicker to by them. In fact, I remember I set money aside to go out and buy them the day they were released even though I knew they were only the special editions and not the originals, I was still excited about them. It was when I heard the rumors that they were completely changed once again, including things like Anakin's face and Gungans that I immediately changed my mind about perchasing them. After hearing about how many errors were made in coloring and audio, I realized I made the right choice. 

Don't you think a decent quality release should have been a better grab for the hesitant consumer than "oh goody, more changes!"? Can't believe some of you people still defend this crap with such zeal.

i doubt that if he just restored the films, and released them

without any changes, there would barely have been any interest..

or maybe not as much..

 

later

-1

Ah, so that is why there is not a single old movie released on DVD without severe and drastic changes being made to it. Now I get it. I think you are right, I do not think I would have bought that copy of Citizen Kane on DVD had the CG changes no been made to it, effectively changing Rosebud from the name of the sled to the name of a UFO he found crash landed in his backyard as a child. That change vastly improved the film.

Kind of ignorant for someone to come around and say one of the top selling trilogy of movies of all time would have barely had any interest in them had it not been for a bunch of meaningless changes. Complete and utter ignorance...

negative1 said:

 

i doubt that if he just restored the films, and released them

without any changes, there would barely have been any interest..

or maybe not as much..

 

later

-1

Dude, I guess I have to reply to this stupid statement, unless you are just a troll who likes to start trouble.

Are you telling me that if Lucas never released the SE in 1997, a whole generation of fans would have missed the boat on what was great about the OT?

I don't think you understand what the world 'classics' mean when it comes to a movie sense.  Classics live on years and years later, as new generations fall in love with them.  The Wizard of Oz was  all weekened on TBS/TNT, as it has been since I was growing up, and my nephews and friends kids all love the movie.  Did they need to update that movie for it to find a new audience?

The OT would have been just as beloved whether it were released in 1997 or not.  Sure it was a great marketing tool to get people talking about SW again, but trust me, kids would have found the movies on.....Home video......Cable TV......and now DVD.

I think you need to re-read your original statement, "Without any changes, there would have barely have been any interest."  Sorry, but that is as moronic as a statement that I have read on any SW boards, as idiots from TFN say stupid shit like that.

Or maybe youre a troll, and you've done your job by getting me to respond.....

^ Probably wasn't Ahmed Best, if it was it was probably lifted from out takes from TPM. If it was somebody else who did the voice, they were obviously trying to imitate Best's Jar Jar voice.

Baronlando said:

I'm thinking this whole thing is treated with too much emotion, with the talk of suing and erased childhood memories...

Those guys make us all look like a bunch of idiots.