i feel like i'm really missing out

I'm only 21 years old, but I've loved Star Wars my whole life.  When I was eight and got a dog for my birthday I even named him Luke Skywalker.  Unfortunately, I don't believe that I have ever seen the original trilogy in it's completely original form.  I'm an anthropology major an intend to write my 25 page senior research paper on Star Wars and not only the effect that it has had on our culture as a whole, but on it's own subculture that it has inspired.  I would feel pretty irresponsible if I were to write that paper without seeing the original trilogy; the movies that started it all, and that changed so many peoples' lives forever.  If anyone knows how I can access those original movies it would be SO GREATLY appreciated.  I thank you again and again from the bottom of my heart, and seriously I really just want to see the original movies, but I am doing this paper and would love every and any one's help!!  If anyone wants to know more about who I am, either as a person or as a Star Wars fan, before bestowing upon me any information I welcome your questions, etc.  Please, please, please let me have a chance to get to know what your know about the movies that have had the biggest impact of anything on my life!  And thanks so much! -Katie

The easiest way to watch them is to watch the theatrical bonus discs from the most recent DVD release. 

If you want better quality, you can look into some of our fan preservations and theatrical reconstructions.

Also check out adywan's ESB Theatrical Reconstruction and Harmy's ROTJ Theatrical Reconstruction.

And dark_jedi's GOUT v2 is available if you can't wait for v3.

Anchorhead said:

Here are two good places to start;

http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/starwarsmemories.html

I've never seen this before. This is really really cool!

I would feel pretty irresponsible if I were to write that paper without seeing the original trilogy; the movies that started it all, and that changed so many peoples' lives forever.

Why, many people have never seen the original trilogy and their delusions of how great a movie they are is just as passionate. 

There are only 'Versions' of this movie.  No original, no current just versions.

It is arguable that the original version of Star Wars were a few thoughts that popped into Lucas' head when he found out he couldn't get the rights to Flash Gordon.

Katie,

Lucas's biggest changes aren't visible. It's not about Han shooting first, or CGI X-Wings. While I think those suck, and it's good for you to see the OOT when you can, but  it's the change in context he created that most deeply effect the films.

I hope you've read "Secret History of Star Wars" that goes really in depth into this. But the next time you watch "Star Wars" keep in mind all the things that AREN'T in the movie. Vader isn't Lukes dad. He isn't even the main villian. There's no Prophecy, no Sith Lords, Obi Wan isn't lying. It's about a farm boy on a quest to save a princess.

THAT is the movie that shattered box office records and changed lives. Good luck with your paper.

TheBoost said:

Lucas's biggest changes aren't visible.

I know this isn't what you meant, but it's true in another way - the big changes are audible as well. :-(

TheBoost said:

Katie,

Lucas's biggest changes aren't visible. It's not about Han shooting first, or CGI X-Wings. While I think those suck, and it's good for you to see the OOT when you can, but  it's the change in context he created that most deeply effect the films.

I hope you've read "Secret History of Star Wars" that goes really in depth into this. But the next time you watch "Star Wars" keep in mind all the things that AREN'T in the movie. Vader isn't Lukes dad. He isn't even the main villian. There's no Prophecy, no Sith Lords, Obi Wan isn't lying. It's about a farm boy on a quest to save a princess.

THAT is the movie that shattered box office records and changed lives. Good luck with your paper.

While I somewhat get what you're saying, I doubt this has much to do with the original topic - aside from that, didn't "Empire" burn itself strongly into the public mind, as well?

Isn't the "father" one of the most famous and iconic "reveal twists" in cinematic history (how good it actually is is another question)? 

It might be worth repeating that the meaning of the scene in EMPIRE with Luke in the cave was a big topic, and may be the first and last time a million grade- school kids on playgrounds were debating symbolism and meaning in a film. Over punch and fruit rolls.

TheBoost is absolutely right--while the visual and audio changes to the movies can be very annoying at times, the most disturbing aspect is the revisionism of their history and reframing the context of the story into something that was never part of how it was created in the first place.  When watching the classic versions, it is best to firmly divorce all notions of anything related to the prequel films and let the story speak for itself.  This way, it maintains creative integrity and a greater degree of self-consistency.  Keep in mind particularly how it is a story about the adventures of Luke Skywalker, not some overblown 'tragedy of a whiny twit posing as Vader'.  This point is very important to the cultural context of the films.

If you have a decent ear, you'll also notice that the quality of sound mixing in the first movie was originally much better.  ;)

@ Mielr: I'm convinced that Youtube comment sections are the rubbish dumps of the internet, where the uninformed and imbecilic gravitate to compete for the title of dumbest person alive.

hairy_hen said:

TheBoost is absolutely right--while the visual and audio changes to the movies can be very annoying at times, the most disturbing aspect is the revisionism of their history and reframing the context of the story into something that was never part of how it was created in the first place.  When watching the classic versions, it is best to firmly divorce all notions of anything related to the prequel films and let the story speak for itself.  This way, it maintains creative integrity and a greater degree of self-consistency.  Keep in mind particularly how it is a story about the adventures of Luke Skywalker, not some overblown 'tragedy of a whiny twit posing as Vader'.  This point is very important to the cultural context of the films.

If you have a decent ear, you'll also notice that the quality of sound mixing in the first movie was originally much better.  ;)

 

@ Mielr: I'm convinced that Youtube comment sections are the rubbish dumps of the internet, where the uninformed and imbecilic gravitate to compete for the title of dumbest person alive.

Obviously, you missed the fact that TheBoost was criticizing the retconning and reframing WITHIN THE ORIGINAL TRILOGY.

Yeah, OBVIOUSLY . . . but the caps-lock was very helpful in setting me straight.  *massive eye roll*

hairy_hen said:

Yeah, OBVIOUSLY . . . but the caps-lock was very helpful in setting me straight.  *massive eye roll*

So then why do you keep talking about the "self-consistency of the original trilogy", when it's all but self-consistent and it's "obvious" to you?

Couldn't you criticize the retconning and reframing of any movie that has sequels?

I don't know how relevant it is, but when it comes to the prequels reframing the original films, it just doesn't happen for me. The drastic stylistic and visual differences between the PT and OT make it really hard for me to even think of them as taking place in the same universe. I have to actually actively frame it in my mind to view the OT from that perspective.

Quackula said:

Couldn't you criticize the retconning and reframing of any movie that has sequels?

You can certainly criticize it in a lot of sequels, that's for sure :D

But point is, at the end of the day, had the storywriters put more thought in, say, the "reveals" in the OT, that story would be more consistent, or at least the plot holes not as huge and obvious. 

But hey, look at Men in Black II? Now I haven't analyzed its plot holes or anything (surely, any such "memory gambit" plot with twists and reveals is highly susceptible to gaping mistakes), but does it really "reframe" the premise of the first? Or even retcon anything significant?

Also, note that "reframing" isn't always a bad thing - for example, I don't have any particular problem with Alien 2 being in a different genre than its predecessor, it's sure an interesting concept.

With Riddick, wasn't it cool that they took that claustrophobic space horror movie, and then set the main character into a much larger context? I mean, can't you get into a dungeon full of snakes in real life and then 5 years later get involved in fighting the evil empire that happens to occupy your land, in real life? Why not?

At the end of the day, I just thought the actual movie was kinda cheesy and lame, though. Riddick is Win, obviously :D