George Lucas's "Tinkering" with the films

[C Of K]

I never watch the newer versions of Star Wars that I own. And I own them all. About 2 times a year I'll put on the DVDs of the original Originals, and enjoy those. As long as we're discussing art, I might as well add that part of creating good art, no matter the medium, is about setting the mood. The original three movies set a certain mood from scene to scene, and it carried from film to film. It all fit together, and made for something ground-shaking that will never be duplicated again, because back in the 70s and 80s George Lucas was knee deep in his art for 10 years.

Returning 20 or 30 years later, with evolved technology and a new perspective, to make additions and subtractions in various places, the way he did, disrupts the mood and devalues the films. He has the right, like everyone has noted, but I have the right to draw a stenciled border over my computer screen in black permanent marker. It wouldn't be wise, but I have the right.

Same thing with the Beatles. If you mix glaring sounds and techno rhythms in with their classic hits, it will disrupt and devalue their songs. It may be a cool thing to hear once or twice, but I don't want to listen to that every time the Beatles come on the radio. I would turn away, the same as I turn away from Star Wars when it comes on tv, and the altered versions that I spent a substantial sum of money on.

[J Riff]

Beatles remixes appeared. an obvious cash grab, and I din't like them- didn't even want to hear them.
Actually.. you may recall that when CDs first appeared, some very weird things happened- some clever dick listened to Beatles, stereo and mono mixes(which are not true mono, put the old 45s on headphones to prove this)
- and decided he could 'clean it up'.. by isolating Lennon's guitar here, moving vox round etc.- and it was horrible, ghastly!
The mix, esp. the mono mix, was a big part of the sound. Separating and clearing up the audio trashed the song.
I agree with the general disgruntlement re:SW, tho I am not a StarWars afficianado by any stretch. It has to be profit motivated, or maybe Lucas just has too much free time.

[Captain Campion]

Originally Posted by C Of K

I never watch the newer versions of Star Wars that I own. And I own them all. About 2 times a year I'll put on the DVDs of the original Originals, and enjoy those. As long as we're discussing art, I might as well add that part of creating good art, no matter the medium, is about setting the mood. The original three movies set a certain mood from scene to scene, and it carried from film to film. It all fit together, and made for something ground-shaking that will never be duplicated again, because back in the 70s and 80s George Lucas was knee deep in his art for 10 years.

Returning 20 or 30 years later, with evolved technology and a new perspective, to make additions and subtractions in various places, the way he did, disrupts the mood and devalues the films. He has the right, like everyone has noted, but I have the right to draw a stenciled border over my computer screen in black permanent marker. It wouldn't be wise, but I have the right.

Same thing with the Beatles. If you mix glaring sounds and techno rhythms in with their classic hits, it will disrupt and devalue their songs. It may be a cool thing to hear once or twice, but I don't want to listen to that every time the Beatles come on the radio. I would turn away, the same as I turn away from Star Wars when it comes on tv, and the altered versions that I spent a substantial sum of money on.

Very well said. Bravo.

[AdamCollings]

I'm probably a bit in the minority here when I say that I quite like the new versions. I was excited when the first re-mastered versions came out with updated effects. I loved them, in fact I remember thinking 'why didn't he go further' at some points.

As for Hayden Christiansen at the end of Jedi, I can understand why some didn't like that, but to me it just completes the circle. It makes the Star Wars saga one complete 6 part novel on film. That's how I see it.

[soulsinging]

Originally Posted by AdamCollings

I'm probably a bit in the minority here when I say that I quite like the new versions. I was excited when the first re-mastered versions came out with updated effects. I loved them, in fact I remember thinking 'why didn't he go further' at some points.

As for Hayden Christiansen at the end of Jedi, I can understand why some didn't like that, but to me it just completes the circle. It makes the Star Wars saga one complete 6 part novel on film. That's how I see it.

Greedo shoots Han first... you are excited abotu this?

And kudos to CofK for so eloquently encapsulating in one post what it took me about 6 to not clearly express.

[IainRichmond]

I am glad George updated the films as it reminded me just how good the original three were. There was a passion of craft that made the original 3 special in a way that was hard to define, but could be experienced by watching the films.

There Lucas films & he can do what he wants as long as the original 3 are available for comparison.

[soulsinging]

Originally Posted by IainRichmond

There Lucas films & he can do what he wants as long as the original 3 are available for comparison.

I'm not sure they will be much longer though. Once he redid the films, no more copies of the originals on vhs were produced, you could only get his edits. When he switched to dvd he refused to offer the originals for a very long time, claiming they didn't have the film or some similarly bizarre lie. When the hue and cry from fans finally got to him he "found" that film and finally released the originals on dvd. However, they can only be bought with his updated versions, he refused to remaster them at all, and even forbid them being encoded in anamorphic, so that they appear in a tiny box on your screen... basically he did his best to sabotage them and make them unappealing compared to his updates. It's a telling sign of the damage he's done that even so, the dvd versions I have of the original, with crappy picture and sound and appearing in a tiny box on my large hd tv, are still vastly superior to his remastered versions.

And now bluray is coming... and I can guarantee you will not be able to buy the originals for comparison in bluray, they will only be his edited versions. Maybe in 10 years when he wants to fatten his wallet a bit, he'll throw together a bluray of the originals that is purposefully inferior in quality in order to "prove" how superior his new edits are.

Lucas isn't allowing the originals to have a fair comparison. He has, every step of the way, tried to bury them and erase all memory of them and when he relents he attempts to sabotage them in a petty and egomaniacal attempt to validate his edits.

[J Riff]

It would be nice if StarWars just ....went away, ended. Then he could try his hand at some modern SF, instead of rehashing 30s-style space opera.
Subtly colorizing old movies is one thing, changing the plot line is... wrong. )
Funny how some big names get weird about their work, no matter how succesful it is-
Zappa started doing re-mixes of his old stuff for no good reason.

[Rodders]

As a long time fan, i really don't want to see it end, but i was looking forward to the darkness and the adult themes that we were supposed to be seeing for the new TV series.

No, it shouldn't end, but Lucas needs to hand the franchise over to someone that's prepared to take it in a new direction.

[IainRichmond]

Originally Posted by Rodders

As a long time fan, i really don't want to see it end, but i was looking forward to the darkness and the adult themes that we were supposed to be seeing for the new TV series.

No, it shouldn't end, but Lucas needs to hand the franchise over to someone that's prepared to take it in a new direction.

I fully agree with Rodders on this. Lucas needs to let his cash cow go and allow new blood to take it in a different direction. Dump the "campyness" and bring the darkness and deeper themes. Batman, Spiderman and the Revenge of the Sith have all benefitted by darker themes, and less campyness in their latest versions.

In my humble opinion, of course.

[Parson]

I must misunderstand "campyness." As I would understand campyness it would refer to tongue in cheek, wink, wink, you know what, I mean kind of dialogue. Think Rocky Horror Show or TV Batman.

Star Wars is so far above that and so much richer it doesn't even begin to compare. Please enlighten me as to what Campy really means.

[Dave]

Parson's idea of 'Camp' was mine too, but I still think 'The Empire Strikes Back' is the best of the films and I don't think it is a coincidence that it was directed by Irvin Kershner rather than George Lucas, and that it is significantly darker in tone. So, I'd have to agree with Rodders on that score.

[C Of K]

Originally Posted by Captain Campion

Very well said. Bravo.

Thanks CC.

Originally Posted by soulsinging

And kudos to CofK for so eloquently encapsulating in one post what it took me about 6 to not clearly express.

Well, I do have about 50 posts more than you. That might have something to do with it.

No, but seriously, SS. I connected so strongly with what you were saying, that I was compelled to post in agreement. You made perfect sense to me.

[pyan]

Originally Posted by soulsinging

claiming they didn't have the film or some similarly bizarre lie... he refused to remaster them at all, and even forbid them being encoded in anamorphic, so that they appear in a tiny box on your screen... basically he did his best to sabotage them... sign of the damage he's done... still vastly superior to his remastered versions... to "prove" how superior his new edits are... he attempts to sabotage them in a petty and egomaniacal attempt to validate his edits.

He owns the films - he had the concept, he thinks they're better after his "tinkering", and he has the right to do whatever he wants to do with them. If you, or any of the posters decrying the changes, were in the same position, would you be unable to resist the ability to make them, in your own opinion, better?

Originally Posted by soulsinging

when he wants to fatten his wallet..

.
The man is worth over three billion pounds* - I doubt very much that this is a factor in his actions...


*The Richest People in America - Forbes.com

[Dave]

Originally Posted by pyan

If you, or any of the posters decrying the changes, were in the same position, would you be unable to resist the ability to make them, in your own opinion, better?

A good question, and I'm not sure because I'm not a film director. The analogy has been made with an artist or sculptor, and you could make it with anyone doing something creative such as a novelist. I'm none of those either, but I do think that, like anything else, in any walk of life, I would have "moved on" by now. I don't believe that a painter would go back again and again and retouch some very early work of his, any more than a bricklayer would pull down a wall he built 30 years ago because a brick was the wrong way around, or that Alan Sugar would be still on a market flogging car aerials. They would all be doing something much bigger and much more exciting than that to be even bothered. I think this says something about George Lucas himself. Why isn't he out creating something that will top Star Wars and Indiana Jones, instead of making sequels and "tinkering" with his back catalogue?