I always find it a bit disingenuous when people say that they want the original version of the films for the sake of historical novelty. I mean don’t get me wrong I don’t want to have to sit through Han talking to CGI Jabba or ROTJ Hayden Christensen, but if all Lucas had ever done was to stop Obi-Wans lightsaber from flickering I doubt anybody would have cared.
I know I wouldn’t.
You kidding me? The flickering is what it’s all about! 
reylo?
You kidding me? The flickering is what it’s all about!
I am referring to the scene were he is fighting Darth Vader. I honestly thought that he’s lightsaber was running out of battery when I first saw it.
I actually thought the same thing
Eh. I’d prefer an OT release that’s as authentic as possible, but I’d happily accept a blu-ray with recomposited effects shots and a new 7.1 mix as long as the changes to the actual content are gone. Absolute authenticity would be ideal, but I’m willing to compromise.
I look at it the same way young George Lucas looked at it:
A copyright is held in trust by its owner until it ultimately reverts to public domain. American works of art belong to the American public; they are part of our cultural history.
People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians, and if the laws of the United States continue to condone this behavior, history will surely classify us as a barbaric society.
…
It will soon be possible to create a new “original” negative with whatever changes or alterations the copyright holder of the moment desires. The copyright holders, so far, have not been completely diligent in preserving the original negatives of films they control. In order to reconstruct old negatives, many archivists have had to go to Eastern bloc countries where American films have been better preserved.
In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be “replaced” by new altered negatives. This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten.
…
The public’s interest is ultimately dominant over all other interests. And the proof of that is that even a copyright law only permits the creators and their estate a limited amount of time to enjoy the economic fruits of that work.
…
Attention should be paid to this question of our soul, and not simply to accounting procedures. Attention should be paid to the interest of those who are yet unborn, who should be able to see this generation as it saw itself, and the past generation as it saw itself.
The original Star Wars trilogy is an incredibly important part of cinematic history and it most certainly deserves to be preserved in its original form. To alter the films and then intentionally suppress them in their original form is not only selfish but an insult to the many, many craftsman that all worked hard to create these treasured pieces of history. They’re what won all of those Academy Awards, not the Special Editions. The SEs have their place but even more so do the original theatrical versions.
I look at it the same way young George Lucas looked at it:
A copyright is held in trust by its owner until it ultimately reverts to public domain. American works of art belong to the American public; they are part of our cultural history.
People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians, and if the laws of the United States continue to condone this behavior, history will surely classify us as a barbaric society.
…
It will soon be possible to create a new “original” negative with whatever changes or alterations the copyright holder of the moment desires. The copyright holders, so far, have not been completely diligent in preserving the original negatives of films they control. In order to reconstruct old negatives, many archivists have had to go to Eastern bloc countries where American films have been better preserved.
In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be “replaced” by new altered negatives. This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten.
…
The public’s interest is ultimately dominant over all other interests. And the proof of that is that even a copyright law only permits the creators and their estate a limited amount of time to enjoy the economic fruits of that work.
…
Attention should be paid to this question of our soul, and not simply to accounting procedures. Attention should be paid to the interest of those who are yet unborn, who should be able to see this generation as it saw itself, and the past generation as it saw itself.The original Star Wars trilogy is an incredibly important part of cinematic history and it most certainly deserves to be preserved in its original form. To alter the films and then intentionally suppress them in their original form is not only selfish but an insult to the many, many craftsman that all worked hard to create these treasured pieces of history. They’re what won all of those Academy Awards, not the Special Editions. The SEs have their place but even more so do the original theatrical versions.
^ Citizen Kane clap.
“That Darth Vader, man. Sure does love eating Jedi.”
I look at it the same way young George Lucas looked at it:
A copyright is held in trust by its owner until it ultimately reverts to public domain. American works of art belong to the American public; they are part of our cultural history.
People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians, and if the laws of the United States continue to condone this behavior, history will surely classify us as a barbaric society.
…
It will soon be possible to create a new “original” negative with whatever changes or alterations the copyright holder of the moment desires. The copyright holders, so far, have not been completely diligent in preserving the original negatives of films they control. In order to reconstruct old negatives, many archivists have had to go to Eastern bloc countries where American films have been better preserved.
In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be “replaced” by new altered negatives. This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten.
…
The public’s interest is ultimately dominant over all other interests. And the proof of that is that even a copyright law only permits the creators and their estate a limited amount of time to enjoy the economic fruits of that work.
…
Attention should be paid to this question of our soul, and not simply to accounting procedures. Attention should be paid to the interest of those who are yet unborn, who should be able to see this generation as it saw itself, and the past generation as it saw itself.The original Star Wars trilogy is an incredibly important part of cinematic history and it most certainly deserves to be preserved in its original form. To alter the films and then intentionally suppress them in their original form is not only selfish but an insult to the many, many craftsman that all worked hard to create these treasured pieces of history. They’re what won all of those Academy Awards, not the Special Editions. The SEs have their place but even more so do the original theatrical versions.
And yet, the SE will be the only versions the public will be allowed to see for decades to come.
What an unjust and cruel world. No other film is treated like this. Nor is any other film more important to cinema.
And yet, the SE will be the only versions the public will be allowed to see for decades to come.
Evidence?
I would put this in my sig if I weren’t so lazy.
And yet, the SE will be the only versions the public will be allowed to see for decades to come.
Evidence?
Well unfortunately there is no evidence to the contrary…
Don’t feed the frevious.
And yet, the SE will be the only versions the public will be allowed to see for decades to come.
Evidence?
Well unfortunately there is no evidence to the contrary…
2006 bonus disc.
The Person in Question
And yet, the SE will be the only versions the public will be allowed to see for decades to come.
Evidence?
Well unfortunately there is no evidence to the contrary…
2006 bonus disc.
I thought it was 04…but there’s no evidence it’ll be getting an HD/4K release anytime soon if ever.
No, 2004 did not come with the GOUT.
I agree with you OP. No one would have ever gived a damn if all he did was some non-intrusive, seamless FX updates and corrections. No one cares that they did that to the original Star Trek series. Granted, that’s partly because they still made the originals available, but no one really complains about the quality of the updated versions either. Because they were done faithfully to the intent of the originals without trying to fundamentally alter the content or story and without instantly dated shots that do nothing but distract the viewer and mess with their brain because they’re seeing stuff that doesn’t fit in with the rest of the stuff on the screen at all.
No one cares that they did that to the original Star Trek series.
But really, I like the new sound mixes but the obvious mid-2000s TV-grade CGI kind of takes me out of it. Fixing compositing issues is one thing, but I don’t want anything actually replaced.
It is for historic novelty as much as it is about wanting to see the versions we grew up with. As a filmmaker and film history enthusiast, I would hate to watch something like Citizen Kane, only to later find out the film I watched was not the film originally made by Orson Welles, but in fact a re-edited, colorized version. Or if the original version of Blade Runner was no longer available for me to see. I would feel as though I was being cheated out of experiencing the history of cinema. All films, with their flaws, are what impact the society they are released to, and to change those films decades after the fact and wipe the original versions from availability to the public is a great disservice to the generations to come, who want to understand past generation’s values and tastes through the lens of cinema, only to find out they are being shown through rose coloured glasses to try and adhere it to the tastes and values of modern audiences, which wipes away the historic value, and never accurately conforms it to modern audience’s tastes, because it is trying to make it into something it is not.
If the creators or owners of a film wish to change it, I say go right ahead, but nobody, not even the creator has the right to tear that original, historically significant work from the hands of society and try to revise history to better suit their current tastes.
No one cares that they did that to the original Star Trek series.
But really, I like the new sound mixes but the obvious mid-2000s TV-grade CGI kind of takes me out of it. Fixing compositing issues is one thing, but I don’t want anything actually replaced.
TNG then. If Lucas had actually just gone back and recomposited the original effects, which was the original plan, then I’m not sure we’d be clamoring for the theatrical cuts.
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
IKnowWhatYouDidLastSummer said:
I always find it a bit disingenuous when people say that they want the original version of the films for the sake of historical novelty.
Why? And what is “historical novelty”? Do you mean “historical accuracy”? I don’t consider historical accuracy to be a novelty. Well, actually it is a bit of a novelty to find historical accuracy, but that is a bit sad, don’t you think?
ADDENDUM - fearing that I might have displayed my ignorance of the term “historical novelty”, I Googled it. Your post came up first.
"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars
IKnowWhatYouDidLastSummer said:
I always find it a bit disingenuous when people say that they want the original version of the films for the sake of historical novelty.Why? And what is “historical novelty”? Do you mean “historical accuracy”? I don’t consider historical accuracy to be a novelty. Well, actually it is a bit of a novelty to find historical accuracy, but that is a bit sad, don’t you think?
ADDENDUM - fearing that I might have displayed my ignorance of the term “historical novelty”, I Googled it. Your post came up first.
He thinks we (meaning all of the me’s, apparently) hate all kids, so I wouldn’t worry too much about anything he says.
I want the films I originally saw in '77, '80, and '83 as they were when they were made. No more no less.
There’s nothing novel about it any more than wanting to experience Gone With The Wind or Lawrence of Arabia as audiences saw them when they came out.
Where were you in '77?
I know. It’s a completely sensible thing to ask for the original versions. But George Lucas is not a rational person, and Disney has chosen the SE as the official version, therefore continuing the miserable rut we are in. Do you think Disney is going to backpedal and give us the originals like we have asked for nearly three decades? They still haven’t even released the uncensored version of Fantasia after 75 years, so chances are nil.
Fantasia uncensored wouldn’t make nearly as much money, though.
Seeking only the most natural looking colors for Star Wars '77
Yeah, the average person doesn’t even know fantasia has been altered in any way, whereas even people who don’t particularly identify as star wars fans know about the changes to star wars, so it’s not quite apples to apples.
Regardless of how you feel about censorship, as a family entertainment company they have a rational business reason to avoid releasing offensive footage. Fantasia or Song of the South is completely different from Star Wars.
The Person in Question