ChainsawAsh said:

Matt, you keep using Blade Runner's Final Cut as an example of how you'd like to see the OOT restored.

Thing is, that's not a restoration of Blade Runner. It's a special edition. Things were changed - color timing was radically altered, new effects shots were created, existing effects shots were recomposited.

I consider the Final Cut to be the first time Ridley Scott's Blade Runner was actually released. All other versions except the Workprint are bastardized by studio meddling. Its nice that they were released in hi-def as well but I see them only as an example of the damage talentless studio executives can do to a film. Yes, Ridley Scott did voluntarily bow to every ridiculous demand the studio made but I think he was playing the long game there knowing that somehow he'd get to finish the film the way he intended.

The final cut is the restoration of an original creative vision.

Star Wars however was not terribly compromised by the studio, and no hot shot yuppies trying to make a name for themselves as a studio execs tried to take it away from Lucas and impose their own vision on it. Lucas has no proof whatsoever that the film he made in 1977 was not his true "vision" whereas in the case of Blade Runner, well, that horrendous narration is all the proof you need.

Later on Lucas became that hot shot upstart who imposed his vision onto the film - his own film - and of course, Kershner and Marquand's films too. That is why I would support any initiative to have the release versions of those films restored. However I'm not opposed to some minor cosmetic improvements either. I quite think filmmakers have better things to do than worry if every matte line is the correct thickness.