logo Sign In

George Lucas to host showing of Star Wars "1977" for AFI's 40th anniversary. — Page 3

Author
Time
Post link
Well, they did change it say the Special Edition. It's a very, very, very small victory, but at least it stopped a bit of revisionism.

And if existing prints of the first versions are in poor condition, that nonetheless means that they do exist. And they best they can do?

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/mytwocentsa121.html#fr

Bullshit.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: CO
JediRandy is just a troll, and I find his posts hilareous sometimes, and we shouldn't take offense to him, cause you have to put it in context: He is taking time out of his day to write a post for something he doesn't care about just to mock us, I feel pretty sad for him, cause he could be doing something more constructive with his life.

I have debated JediRandy on TFN and ORS, and he actually isn't this PT gusher that he comes off as, as he is pretty reasonable, but he is just the type of guy who just doesn't hate Lucas the same way we do for the suppression of the OOT, and thinks were a bunch of whiners. So in a sense, he agrees with us on our assessment of the movies, he just isn't as passionate about it as we are, and he is trying to goad us with his posts.

I say to everyone, enjoy his posts with a grain of salt, and if nobody replies to him and he believes he isn't getting us, he will go away.


That is the most rational response to one of my goofy posts I've ever heard. You actually get it. Thanks. I agree with you folks, I just don't agree that GL is the Stalin of film.
"Among many things I have to be thankful for are you, the fans. I know that some of you haven't liked every single thing that I've done with the saga, and that you have a strong sense of ownership over all things Star Wars. But take that passion and devotion and channel it into a creative project of your own."
-George Lucas
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: CO
"Come see the landmark film that started it all, although you won't see the mindblowing effects that revolutionized movies in 1977 cause you are going to see updated effects from 1997."

Frauds!

It may be even worse cause I think it's the 2004 (DVD) version they're showing, a three year old (DVD) movie, not much of a classic. At least the 1997 version was actually shown in theaters (if that means anything to a film institute).

Author
Time
Post link
This is the letter I sent yesterday;
-----------------------------

Your website shows you are screening “Star Wars, Episode IV, A New Hope (1977)” on October 3rd. I’m curious as to which version of the film you’re actually presenting;


1977 – Star Wars - original theatrical release. 121 minutes

1981 – Star Wars Episode IV, A New Hope – a re-release with new opening titles. 121 minutes

1997 - Star Wars Episode IV, A New Hope – a release with added scenes and characters. 125 minutes

2004 - Star Wars Episode IV, A New Hope – a DVD release with more added scenes and characters. 125 minutes



For $25.00, I’m hoping it’s the original 1977 theatrical release.

Thank you,
----------------------------

I guess the change on their website explains why I didn't get a response. At least we know they aren't ignoring the incoming emails.

Oh well.
Forum Moderator
Author
Time
Post link
My complaints with Lucas and the handling of the OOT has nothing to do with which version I think is better. It has everything to do with the importance of art as a window into its culture and its time. With each modern revision, even if it is an improvement (and some of the changes were, in my opinion - not many, but a few), a piece of art history is lost. With each revision, the true reflection of its time is diluted.

For example, suppose that someone took some pre-Rennaisance paintings and improved them by correcting some of the technical mistakes in their use of perspective. Although the technical delivery would be improved, and quite possibly even their aesthetic appeal and power in some cases, they would have considerably less artistic/cultural value. Their significance would immediately become questionable, and it would be impossible to learn anything about art in the time period in which they were first rendered, since an observer would not know which aspects were actually from that era and which were added later.

I realize that with Star Wars, the differences are much more minor. But 20 years is a very long time in the rapidly expanding technology of Hollywood. The fact that it was Star Wars that largely begat this explosion of special effects realism makes it hugely important to preserve it in its original form for cultural/historic reasons. This is why I am so disturbed that film institutes such as AFI haven't been screaming bloody murder about the lack of preservation of such a groundbreaking film. In fact, NO film even of moderate interest should be allowed to be lost or diluted in this manner. It should be a cultural no-no, period. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what I like.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Puggo - Jar Jar's "Yoda"
This is why I am so disturbed that film institutes such as AFI haven't been screaming bloody murder about the lack of preservation of such a groundbreaking film.


I will say - their non-action where preserving Star Wars is concerned has certainly changed my view of them as a credible organization.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Anchorhead


I will say - their non-action where preserving Star Wars is concerned has certainly changed my view of them as a credible organization.



They are all about money, and not about principle, cause they know if they only want to show the 1977 version, Lucas will probably veto it. That's fine with me what they're doing, it just exposes them as to what they are really about: $$$$$$$$$$$$ That's is why Lucas & AFI belong together!
Author
Time
Post link
I'm not entirely sure about that. Lucas does have the power to keep the original version from being shown. He owns the movie, and if AFI wants to show the film, they have to cowtow to Lucas to get it. Sure, they could take a vocal stance against it, and it would be nice if they did, but it's really something the majority of people don't care about/won't notice, and it will just cause discord between Lucas and the AFI. Not saying I agree with it, but I can certainly understand why they would avoid the confrontation in that case.

I do, however, find it funny that, viewing the list of films they are presenting, Star Wars is now the only one that contains absolutely no date at all, replacing the year with the words "Special Edition" in parentheses.

Rocky (1976)
Beauty and the Beast (1991)
Star Wars (Special Edition)

Well, glad your e-mails managed to get through to them (sorry to say I never sent one myself), although now it would be nice to know which special edition. I'm putting my money on the 2004 version because if there's anything better than film revisionism, it's film revisionism caked on top of old revisionism!

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Puggo - Jar Jar's "Yoda"


For example, suppose that someone took some pre-Rennaisance paintings and improved them by correcting some of the technical mistakes in their use of perspective. Although the technical delivery would be improved, and quite possibly even their aesthetic appeal and power in some cases, they would have considerably less artistic/cultural value. Their significance would immediately become questionable, and it would be impossible to learn anything about art in the time period in which they were first rendered, since an observer would not know which aspects were actually from that era and which were added later.


Well said but if it's the original author of the piece of art... then you don't really have room to complain, IMO.

Good to see you guys got them to change the title, though.



"Among many things I have to be thankful for are you, the fans. I know that some of you haven't liked every single thing that I've done with the saga, and that you have a strong sense of ownership over all things Star Wars. But take that passion and devotion and channel it into a creative project of your own."
-George Lucas
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: JediRandy

Well said but if it's the original author of the piece of art... then you don't really have room to complain, IMO.


Assuming Leonardo DaVinci were immortal, should visitors to the Louvre complain about his latest made-in-Photoshop version of the Mona Lisa hanging on the wall?

Want to see the original version? Here's a small postcard of what it used to look like.

(Of course, that implies that Star Wars has the same cultural value as the Mona Lisa.)

You know of the rebellion against the Empire?

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Originally posted by: Puggo - Jar Jar's "Yoda"


For example, suppose that someone took some pre-Rennaisance paintings and improved them by correcting some of the technical mistakes in their use of perspective. Although the technical delivery would be improved, and quite possibly even their aesthetic appeal and power in some cases, they would have considerably less artistic/cultural value. Their significance would immediately become questionable, and it would be impossible to learn anything about art in the time period in which they were first rendered, since an observer would not know which aspects were actually from that era and which were added later.

Well said but if it's the original author of the piece of art... then you don't really have room to complain, IMO.

Good to see you guys got them to change the title, though.


Depends on what you mean by "don't really have room to complain." If you mean that the original author of the piece of art (ignoring once again the dozens of other talented people work on Star Wars) has the legal right to change the piece that they have ownership of, you're right. But that doesn't mean that people who love the work have to like it or agree with it or have no right to voice their displeasure. Moreoever, the simplist crux of matter is this: the original version is not restored. Personally, I wouldn't care less if Lucas made the changes as long as he allowed the original version an equal degree of respect. If Leonardo Da Vinci tried to change the Mona Lisa if he were still alive, people would still scream bloody murder, and deservedly so. Sure, he would be within his rights; but I think that people would more than understandably be unhappy. Now, if Michael Curtiz insisted that Casablanca had to be colorized to mee his original vision but ALSO released a high quality version of the original black and white edition on DVD and HD, then it would be a pefect compromise to meet halfway. You see where I'm coming from here with calling me immature and tryign to say that I'm claiming posession of the films (which I am not)?

I will say - their non-action where preserving Star Wars is concerned has certainly changed my view of them as a credible organization.


What the hell could they do? Lucas wouldn't allow them to even if they wanted to anyway.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: JediRandyWell said but if it's the original author of the piece of art... then you don't really have room to complain, IMO.

You raise a point that begs several classic questions... (1) suppose a great artist, say DaVinci, in his later years went clinically insane and had delusions that his masterpieces must be destroyed because they were possessed by demons. Must it be done? (2) what if someone paid DaVinci to destroy them, on a lark, and DaVinci decided he wanted the money? Must it be done? (3) What if someone today bought the Mona Lisa, and decided to publicly burn it? Must it be done? By your statement above, not only are the answers to all of these questions "yes", nobody should even complain about it.

Well, shouldn't someone? At what point does art take on a cultural significance beyond that of a mere commodity owned by someone?

Even more to the point, shouldn't an organization that purports to be a film "institute" at least condemn the major alteration of a classic film, regardless of whether it has any legal basis to enforce it? I think it should, on the very basis of what it says on its own webpage, that it "maintains America's film heritage". By not taking a stand on the preservation of a great film, it shirks its most fundamental duty, and loses all credibility as a film "institute", in my opinion.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
Sure, they could take a vocal stance against it, and it would be nice if they did, but it's really something the majority of people don't care about/won't notice,...

The majority of people don't care/won't notice if the works of Shakespeare, Michelangelo, or Ingemar Bergman are preserved either. That should be irrelevant.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Puggo - Jar Jar's "Yoda"
Originally posted by: JediRandyWell said but if it's the original author of the piece of art... then you don't really have room to complain, IMO.

You raise a point that begs several classic questions... (1) suppose a great artist, say DaVinci, in his later years went clinically insane and had delusions that his masterpieces must be destroyed because they were possessed by demons. Must it be done? (2) what if someone paid DaVinci to destroy them, on a lark, and DaVinci decided he wanted the money? Must it be done? (3) What if someone today bought the Mona Lisa, and decided to publicly burn it? Must it be done? By your statement above, not only are the answers to all of these questions "yes", nobody should even complain about it.

Well, shouldn't someone? At what point does art take on a cultural significance beyond that of a mere commodity owned by someone?

Even more to the point, shouldn't an organization that purports to be a film "institute" at least condemn the major alteration of a classic film, regardless of whether it has any legal basis to enforce it? I think it should, on the very basis of what it says on its own webpage, that it "maintains America's film heritage". By not taking a stand on the preservation of a great film, it shirks its most fundamental duty, and loses all credibility as a film "institute", in my opinion.


I shouldn't have said you don't have room to complain... you do.

Lemme word this differently.

I don't believe that a piece of art is ever not 100% owned by it's original author. Doesn't matter if it's shown to people who paid money to see it. It doesn't matter if the art has taken on a cultural significance. Because a group of people love something a lot doesn't mean they own it. If the author sells it, then that's another story.

A movie, while being worked on by plenty of other people, is still owned by the creator/director/writer. The argument that Kurtz, Kirsh, or whoever made it into the credits owns a part of SW doesn't work for me. These people are freelance creators who know going in that it's GL's show. GL hired them & paid them to do a freelance job. Freelance artists hardly ever own anything they create. The people they create the art for can basically do anything they want with it. Sure it sucks that some of their work is being altered or eliminated, but that's part of the gig. A gig they wouldn't have had anyway without the guy who is making the changes.

Should the 77 version be preserved? Absolutely. GL said it doesn't exist anymore, right? I highly doubt that, there's gotta be a copy somewhere on his compound up there. But the bottom line is he thinks these new versions are better. I agree with him that some parts are better... the cleaning up, the trench scene all make a better looking flick. Sure the Jabba stuff kinda sucks and the Greedo thing really sucks, but at the end of the day I still love the hell out of those movies... even the SE.

Well said again, Puggo.
"Among many things I have to be thankful for are you, the fans. I know that some of you haven't liked every single thing that I've done with the saga, and that you have a strong sense of ownership over all things Star Wars. But take that passion and devotion and channel it into a creative project of your own."
-George Lucas
Author
Time
Post link
JediRandy, I think what version we all like is irrelevant when it comes to this specific AFI showing. I just think when you are showing off a piece of history, it should be shown in the context of what made history, and this is where Lucas has done a disservice to the original SW.

This whole AFI showing issue isn't about what version should be on DVD, or should the movies be remastered, it is about showing the special effects that Lucas & ILM accomplished in 1977 and letting people watch them in that context, and to understand how incredible it was at the time. The story is still there, the characters are still there, but the effects were such a leap ahead of ANYTHING at that time, it is almost laughable to watch anything sci-fi pre 1977 and wonder how the hell Lucas & the boys accomplished that.

I just don't get Lucas and why he is stubborn just on SW'77, not the OT, just this movie, cause this movie will be long remembered by the public more then the other 5 movies cause of its impact on movies, and sadly it deserves to be seen by the public as it was seen May 25th, 1977. I know that King Kong 1933 is the same way, even though many young fans probably would rather watch the 2005 Peter Jackson version, history shouldn't be rewritten.
Author
Time
Post link
The majority of people don't care/won't notice if the works of Shakespeare, Michelangelo, or Ingemar Bergman are preserved either. That should be irrelevant.


Still, that would be a very sad commentary on our present culture right now, if something of deep meaning is just thrown out the gutter and burned. While SW may be none of these these things, the idea that a film that has been seen by millions of people and is a part of the collective consciousness is destroyed without protest and replaced by an imposter film, see if that makes you not lose sleep at night. Lucas has already destroyed the OT in its original form and sucessfully replaced by the PT and the SE, and has made it a crime for anyone to show the original films without resorting to ancient technology or poorly made DVDs. Of course you are just going to troll about it anyways.

BTW, my hope for AFI has just died
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: JediRandy

<...a more reasoned response...>

Now I can agree with you for the most part. However, note that these letters are directed at AFI and their sense of dignity, not at anything legal and not at GL. Their purpose is ostensibly to try and wake someone up over there. I have to believe that there are real movie lovers at AFI... people who really really love the art of movie-making, and think it is important. If we can play some small part in arousing a few of them from their coma, maybe just maybe someday someone with some importance will see what to us and to most movie purists is obvious - that there is a great moment in movie history that has been neglected and must be preserved. I have to believe there are people there who would care if it was pointed out to them and they thought about it for 5 seconds. Perhaps someday, someone who GL respects would read one of our whiney emails by accident, have an epiphany, and actually appeal to GL to do the right thing. Or maybe after GL dies, some people will be waiting in the wings to act. There's hope as long as there are people with the passion to keep trying... that's why I like this board and how its members never give up.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: COI know that King Kong 1933 is the same way, even though many young fans probably would rather watch the 2005 Peter Jackson version, history shouldn't be rewritten.

What makes you say that? King Kong 1933 is available on a gorgeously remastered DVD in its original form.

Still, that would be a very sad commentary on our present culture right now, if something of deep meaning is just thrown out the gutter and burned. While SW may be none of these these things, the idea that a film that has been seen by millions of people and is a part of the collective consciousness is destroyed without protest and replaced by an imposter film, see if that makes you not lose sleep at night. Lucas has already destroyed the OT in its original form and sucessfully replaced by the PT and the SE, and has made it a crime for anyone to show the original films without resorting to ancient technology or poorly made DVDs. Of course you are just going to troll about it anyways.


Porn is far more profitable that Shakespeare. Is that sad? Oh, hell yes. But such is the state of humanity. And for once, Randy isn't trolling, so no offense, but I'd be careful here; he's finally engaged us intelligent discussion. Lets be nice as long as he continues to do so.

Now I can agree with you for the most part. However, note that these letters are directed at AFI and their sense of dignity, not at anything legal and not at GL. Their purpose is ostensibly to try and wake someone up over there. I have to believe that there are real movie lovers at AFI... people who really really love the art of movie-making, and think it is important. If we can play some small part in arousing a few of them from their coma, maybe just maybe someday someone with some importance will see what to us and to most movie purists is obvious - that there is a great moment in movie history that has been neglected and must be preserved. I have to believe there are people there who would care if it was pointed out to them and they thought about it for 5 seconds. Perhaps someday, someone who GL respects would read one of our whiney emails by accident, have an epiphany, and actually appeal to GL to do the right thing. Or maybe after GL dies, some people will be waiting in the wings to act. There's hope as long as there are people with the passion to keep trying... that's why I like this board and how its members never give up.


We should give up though; I don't see any hope. But really, I don't think that this is some grand scheme to get them to show the OOT or anything. We simply wanted to stop the revisionism, and it was acknowledged.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Post link
I'd be more likely to give up and move on if the original 1977 version wasn't currently sitting in every store in the country. So, it's hardly being repressed, it's readily available, it just looks like total shit. That just proved there was nothing involving artisitc integrity keeping the original versions from being released. If the demand is still there (i.e. us pissing and moaning) it'll happen. Now with 5 different hidef versions of Blade Runner and 3 of Close Encounters coming out, the whole thing seems dumber than ever.

.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Red5
AFI Star Wars

They seem to have updated the webpage, it now says Special edition and they removed the (1977).

No big surprise, it's good though that the message got through.

GREAT!!!! The whole point of this thread was to accomplish just that. Good job, everyone.



Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Mike O
Originally posted by: Anchorhead
I will say - their non-action where preserving Star Wars is concerned has certainly changed my view of them as a credible organization.


What the hell could they do? Lucas wouldn't allow them to even if they wanted to anyway.


They could have chosen not to deal with him at all. They could have shown one of a myriad of other films that had a cultural impact; The Godfather, 2001 A Space Odyssey, To Kill A Mockingbird, The French Connection, The Graduate, Jaws, Apocalypse Now - just to name a few. They could have taken a stance.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time
Post link
it gets even stranger because the only versions of star wars and empire strikes back that were on AFI's 100 movies 100 years list were the original theatrical versions.

They were pretty vocal in public before about Lucas suppressing the original versions then in 2005 they kissed his ass by giving him a lifetime achievement award and special.


Lucas it a moron and is not in reality the man is insane or competely ego driven.

i'm going to keep the eternal search going for the film prints and some day maybe i'll have enough money to buy the original versions on film and a anamorphic projector to watch the original versions in better quality than the gout. my only other hope is the X-0 project.


i used to be one of Lucas biggest fans and supporters before 1997. now he can burn in hell for all i care for destroying the films i grew up with and love.

i just wish more people in hollywood and the movie business were more vocal. put advertisements in cinefex and american cinematographer to protest the original versions not being restored.

the people in france were outraged by the gout and the upscaled ntsc to pal transfer and non anamorphic. they should have kicked lucas ass out of cannes and not allowed him back until he restores the versions that made him famous.

Lucas has so much money power and influence that even his closest friends, former employees and friends, etc. are affraid to appose him or expose the lying tyrant he is.

Kershner and kurtz as well as kasden should vocally appose him on the issue. where is the former marcia lucas, or even mark hamill who supposedly prefers the original versions. where are the effects artists matte painters and others whos work is being shit all over by lucas.

i guess to remain in the business they kiss his ass, and don't want any bad blood. Richard Edlund, Dennis Muren, John Stears, john dyktsra should have gone toe to toe with the bastard.

instead of honest producers and collaborators telling lucas the special editions and prequels are shit you have puke yes men who keep him in his bubble of lies about being a genius and everything he produces is gold.

the critics can often be wrong yet the best way for a writer in the business of writing books is to have constructive criticism to make the end product better and an editor. seems to me some in the business of making movies need the same.

the biggest lost to Lucas and the star wars films as a whole his divorce in 1983 from marcia lucas she is the one who kept him grounded and gave star wars a humanism it is bereft of without her.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: skyjedi2005
it gets even stranger because the only versions of star wars and empire strikes back that were on AFI's 100 movies 100 years list were the original theatrical versions.

They were pretty vocal in public before about Lucas suppressing the original versions then in 2005 they kissed his ass by giving him a lifetime achievement award and special.


Lucas it a moron and is not in reality the man is insane or competely ego driven.

i'm going to keep the eternal search going for the film prints and some day maybe i'll have enough money to buy the original versions on film and a anamorphic projector to watch the original versions in better quality than the gout. my only other hope is the X-0 project.


i used to be one of Lucas biggest fans and supporters before 1997. now he can burn in hell for all i care for destroying the films i grew up with and love.

i just wish more people in hollywood and the movie business were more vocal. put advertisements in cinefex and american cinematographer to protest the original versions not being restored.

the people in france were outraged by the gout and the upscaled ntsc to pal transfer and non anamorphic. they should have kicked lucas ass out of cannes and not allowed him back until he restores the versions that made him famous.

Lucas has so much money power and influence that even his closest friends, former employees and friends, etc. are affraid to appose him or expose the lying tyrant he is.

Kershner and kurtz as well as kasden should vocally appose him on the issue. where is the former marcia lucas, or even mark hamill who supposedly prefers the original versions. where are the effects artists matte painters and others whos work is being shit all over by lucas.

i guess to remain in the business they kiss his ass, and don't want any bad blood. Richard Edlund, Dennis Muren, John Stears, john dyktsra should have gone toe to toe with the bastard.

instead of honest producers and collaborators telling lucas the special editions and prequels are shit you have puke yes men who keep him in his bubble of lies about being a genius and everything he produces is gold.

the critics can often be wrong yet the best way for a writer in the business of writing books is to have constructive criticism to make the end product better and an editor. seems to me some in the business of making movies need the same.

the biggest lost to Lucas and the star wars films as a whole his divorce in 1983 from marcia lucas she is the one who kept him grounded and gave star wars a humanism it is bereft of without her.


And that is the kind of response that I don't get at all. "Lying tyrant", "bastard", "burn in hell", "moron", "insane".... geez, thanks for taking a civilized discussion and turning it into another TfN basher sanctuary bible verse.


On another note, looks like the AFI web site changed the title... looks like the emails worked.
"Among many things I have to be thankful for are you, the fans. I know that some of you haven't liked every single thing that I've done with the saga, and that you have a strong sense of ownership over all things Star Wars. But take that passion and devotion and channel it into a creative project of your own."
-George Lucas
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: skyjedi2005
i used to be one of Lucas biggest fans and supporters before 1997. now he can burn in hell for all i care for destroying the films i grew up with and love.


"Don't hate the black, don't hate the white. When you get bitten, just hate the bite."

Sly Stone.

Seriously, I'm mad about the situation too, but we must try to at least to be somewhat understanding. Lucas is not making that easy, lord knows, but lets focus on the films and not on wish the man ill will. Seriously, I'd rather not get the DVDs if it mean malice toward a human being. I mean, as much as we love the films, he does own them; yeah, he's certainly being an asshole, but they aren't out movies. Instead, lets try to channel the energy into a contructive way to fight him to the last breath for the OOT.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Post link
I going to play devils advocate for a second and be George Lucas:

He wants EVERYONE to see the saga 1-6, he wants EVERYONE to recognize the PT, the SE, and not the OOT. He wants everyone to see it as the story of Tragedy of Anakin Skywalker, that is why he has Hayden there now instead of Shaw at the end of ROTJ. He doesn't want to put out multiple versions everytime on DVD, he would rather just put out 6 movies of the version he feels is the story he is telling now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is the problem with that, a majority of SW fans don't see it that way, and he has a dilemma now. He did the same thing to SW'77 fans back in 1977, either see the story as the OT, or don't, as he changed SW to Episode IV: A New Hope. Alot of fans are still just SW'77 fans, but a large chunk of us loved ESB, like ROTJ and went with his vision of seeing the story not as originally intended, but as Darth Vader, Luke, and Leia all being related.

What will eventually happen is Lucas will realize that a huge part of the fanbase will just not recognize the SE/PT as canon, and although there is many of us that will put up with the SE on DVD, cause they are great quality DVD's, we still prefer the OOT instead. The DVD format for SW has been screwed up since day one, as the OT/SE took 7 years, TPM took 2 1/2 years, and only AOTC & ROTS came out day and date. And finally the OOT came out in halfass quality in 2006 to finally put the nail in the coffin that split the fanbase up.

HD-DVD/BlueRay will correct all this nonsense, cause the Saga is done now, the movies are done, and Lucas doesn't have anything new. Just the fact that the OOT came out on DVD, albeit crappy DVD, shows that Lucas knows there is a market for those movies, as Lucas said in 2005, "People under 25 love the PT, and those over 25 mostly have not liked those movies." I am paraphrasing and it is a general statement cause not every over/under 25 feels that way, but that statement tells me Lucas knows what the fanbase wants, and he was just trying to get fans to see it the way he wanted to. Unfortunately to alot of diehard SW fans, he failed with the PT/SE, and he knows there is a huge OOT fanbase out there who will still buy anything from 77-83. Wait for HD-DVD or BlueRay, that will finally give us what we want, cause SW is a bigtent fanbase now, it isn't just SW'77, or the OT, or the saga, as Lucas has tried to get his fanbase to evolve to over the years, it is all 3.