msycamore said:

What surprises me the most, is the extreme re-editing that took place, I simply cannot understand the reason for it other than it was done just for the sake of re-doing it. I'm no editor, but I cannot see what the new editing accomplish other than being different. I mean he was the editor on the original film, he and assistant editor Marcia had already done a great job on it. Sigh...

Don't forget Walter Murch - the visual/audio montages have his fingerprints all over them (especially the opening).

Referring to your earlier question, I assume the 2004 version's subtitle was a marketing ruse aimed at those who hadn't heard of it - it's the director's cut of the film, and that director is none other than GEORGE LUCAS!

Of course, as you rightly suggest, it isn't really a director's cut - it's a film where large chunks have been remade. The "We couldn't achieve what we wanted to at the time" mantra is especially hollow in this case - of course they couldn't achieve these CG vistas in the early 70s, no-one could... they simply made the best film they could under the circumstances (subsequent studio meddling aside).

What's particularly frustrating is how beautiful the restored (as opposed to altered) footage frequently is, particularly on the BD. Sadly I think this might be too big a repair job even for an Adywan or a Harmy...