Warning: The following material may offend some people. It contains well thought-out arguments against selfish capitalistic censorship, and should be read with extreme caution. The material in this post will challenge what you strongly believe in, and may change your mind on something which was very important to you.

Zion. Let Me Put It This Way: IF I had a picasso, the original painting and I've kept it preserved for art lovers to see, would it be right of me to "fix the part that bothered me"?

Would that be preserving Picasso's work? More To The Point: Would it be preserving the painting?

Enid Blyton was the author of Noddy. She has since passed away. Her work should have been preserved, instead it was edited to "make it better" by the capitalistic censoring morons who thought having the Golliwog character in it was raciest. Alright, fine. If YOU wrote the noddy books TODAY you would do it differently, but these were written at a DIFFERNT time in a DIFFERENT culture, and right or wrong her work shouldn't be censored.

That what this is about, it's not about what specific changes you want to make. If you want to make your own specific version like MagnoliaFan - go for gold, make it into your own artistic take of the Star Wars Trilogy - however THAT does not preserve the original trilogy and neither does this. Just like me painting a collage of Picasso paintings into one doesn't preserve Picasso's work, it's just my own inventive input made using his creations.

ADigitalMan, to answer your question. Do people look at original art for any particular reason? Why do people look at picassos rather than MY IMPROVED "picasso paintings"? Are you telling me, if Picasso painted a dull looking picture, and I made it look better you would prefer to look at my version of it rather than picasso's original?

"Episode IV: A New Hope" is not a MAJOR concern for two main reasons. The first is that it was released theatrically in that form before the entire trilogy was completed, and the second is that Lucas did honestly intended it that way from the beginning.

LD Man I don't have the time or the resources to make that option viable right now. Though I would like to, we don't get everything we want - and we can't do everything we want to ourselves. As I've said before, no painting is perfect, we don't want them to be and we shouldn't change them to be so. They reflect something about that time, they capture a presence. As do movies. Do you want to watch the Elephant Man as it is, as it was made Theatrically - or do you want to watch an "improved" colourized version? Do you want to watch the original Terminator with all-new improved digital effects? Do you want to watch The Star Wars Trilogy with all new digital effects?

Well, it seems that you do. As does MeBeJedi and Zion. You all want brand new digital effects, so long as YOU are in control of them. So much for respecting originality. And the only difference between you and Lucas is the choices you make with the digital changes. I'll now share with you consequences of censoring work:

Jehova Witnesses exist because they read from censored scripture.

Enid Blyton's Noddy books were censored after her death.

In South Korea they thought "The Sound of Music" was too long, so they censored it by removing all the songs.

RPC (Region Protection Control) exists to limit consumers ability to play back legally acquired material.

In many countries governments control the media.

Censorship is who people are when they aren't themselves.

Notice yet how it is capitalistic? I'm not the bad guy. The censors are.