Posted by
michael
on from the money-money-money-money-money-money dept.
twigstamc420 writes "USA Today is reporting that Lucasfilm has announced the details of releasing the Star Wars episodes IV through VI on DVD as well as a bonus DVD with commentary."
Non special edition dvd's
by
Stinkythe1
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I tried to get a friend of mine to transfer his VHS version of the Star Wars trilogy over to DVD. Too bad you have to bootleg it in order to get the unadultered version of it.
Otherwise, DVD letterbox AS AIRED. If you want to add changed scenes, outtakes, commentary, etc. fine, just make sure I can view it AS I SAW IT IN 1977 if I want to.
-- Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
From the man who refuses to release original editions and continues to "rice" out his movies said this about movie purity:
"Star Wars" creator George Lucas, who testified with Steven Spielberg before Congress in the 1980s against colorization and other forms of alteration, said the process yanks such slapstick performers as the Stooges out of the black-and-white universe they belong in.
-- Bel, the mostly sane..
"Of course I can't see anything! I'm standing on the shoulders of idiots." -- Me
Han shoots first?
by
Alcimedes
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
If he does, I'm not buying them, period. I can't believe that they'd change what basically amounts to a massive character development over three movies, and rework it to crap. all because it's not nice for Han to shoot first. that was the WHOLE FREEKING point. ugh.
i hate people sometimes.
Re:Han shoots first?
by
Blakey+Rat
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Han shoots first? If he does, I'm not buying them, period.
So you're saying you like the reissues from 1997 better than the original theatrical release? Or are you just really bad at proofreading?
And, arguably, since Lucas directed and wrote the movie, and he obviously has no problems with Han shooting second, that kind of means that maybe that's *not* the whole point?
Re:Now that does not make sense?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
the theory is that when a jedi dies he comes back in his purest form..so yoda and obi wan come back as they were when they died, but anakin returns as he was before he went to the dark side
Re:Some of the changes (possible spoilers)
by
Aero+Leviathan
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I saw on some interview that the minor dialogue changes weren't even intentional; when they were remastering the film for 1997, they sometimes had to use different takes that hadn't deteriorated as much (or so they say). They claim they didn't even realise they had changed any of the dialogue until diehard fans started complaining... ^_~
-- ~ Aero
To point out the obvious (not a conspiracy theory)
by
kamapuaa
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
George Lucas is about making money, not about establishing or preserving legacies or whatever. I just have to believe that he'll release these DVDs, claim they're the only official release ever, and wait for every nerd to buy them, even though they grumble about it being the revised version.
Only then, after the DVD saled have slowed down, will he decide to relent, release the original movies on DVD, and snap up the profits from nerds re-purchasing the DVDs of the original movie.
Kind of the inverse of Lord of the Rings DVD strategy - Lucas realizes if he releases the original versions first, nobody will buy the revised versions later.
-- Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
Boycott the Release
by
l0ungeb0y
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
From the Article: "The versions of Lucas' beloved films that are on these new DVDs are not the original theatrical releases but the special editions that played in theaters in 1997. Rumor have circulated about additional changes, but Ward would not deny or confirm them. "We want to encourage our fans to check them out themselves."
If this is in fact true, I say don't buy the god damned things. Tell Lucas you're fed up with his constant reworking of a classic that needs no changing and that you want the unadulterated original release on DVD without any scene edits for DVD. Personally, Lucas needs to stand down and let others do the creative work.
Always Check
by
buckhead_buddy
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've noticed two types of DVD producers. Those who talk about the extended / enhanced super versions and those who do not.
My rule of thumb is that if a producer is side-stepping the question about producing an enhanced version that they are trying to get you to buy the first "sucker" version.
If they are against modifying the movie, they'll usually proclaim that they'll NEVER have an altered version available loud and clear.
If their production schedule for the enhanced version means that the two versions will be released separately, the honest producers will usually give two deadlines, but you've got to do your homework and check this out for yourself. Retail stores don't like to point out "This isn't the DVD you're probably looking for."
Fore example, I haven't seen "The Passion of the Christ" yet, may rent it, but I may buy it and if it's rubbish give it away for Christmas. But I notice it's being produced in all sorts of unenhanced versions (widescreen, normal, Church 50-packs, etc). Only rumors are circulating about a possible enhanced release. Personally, I'll wait for "The Passion of the Christ - Second Coming!" rather than sweep up the version available at the end of August.
Wake me up when they put the ORIGINALs on DVD
by
neurojab
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
An open letter to George Lucas.
Dear George,
The nostalgic value for DVD collectors of these movies is very high, but your changes destroy that value. No one who loved the movies in the 70s and 80s wants the "special edition" release, or the changes you have made since. The changes make them new movies, lesser versions of their former selves, they certainly are not the same movies I enjoyed in my youth. One of the great things about Star Wars was the amazing effect work that was very groundbreaking using the technology of the day. Updating the films with new technology destroys that accomplishment.
I will not buy Star Wars (again) until the original, unmodified movie is on DVD. Likewise for Empire.
Thank you. -an 80's Star Wars fan in your target market.
DCMA and copyright to the rescue
by
gordo3000
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I cannot find it now, but I remember reading that if a work is no longer made available in todays standards then it looses its protection against copyright. This might have only been high tech, I`m not even very sure of it,but I think it compares to coming out with a song on record adn now since you won`t release on cd, no one can listen. So you lose copyright.
If this istrue,I wonder if it would mean the original theatrical releases now fall under this because lucas refuses to release them.
I`m not sure adn definitely not a lawyer, but any takers as to the truth of this???
How hard would it be...
by
multiplexo
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
To get LaserDiscs of the original movies before George started fucking around with them and remaster them onto DVDs and then distribute them underground? I have no desire to see the new and improved _Star Wars_ and it just shows how unoriginal Lucas is, he can't come up with anything new so he just reedits _Star Wars_ and re-releases it every time he needs a few more bux (just like the way Francis Ford Coppola) keeps re-editing _Apocalypse Now_ and adding new footage.
I'd be willing to bet that with decent equipment you could make a pretty good transfer from a LaserDisc and while it might not have the resolution or sound of the new versions it would retain all of the stuff that made the original movies so great.
-- cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
Perhaps it's because I'm too young to have seen the original movies in theater, but I *like* the newer versions. They have a couple of extra scenes, and they look better. More, better looking Star wars can't be a bad thing? I also think they make some scenes feel more alive, with more people in the background and so on.
There, now you can go ahead and mod me down.
-- Martin
Every DVD preorder has fed the monster...
by
vudufixit
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
We can sign all of the petitions we want. We blew our chances at obtaining unaltered versions when we preordered the trilogy by the millions. We all fed the monster...
... If George Lucas would've learned something from his good friend Steven Spielberg. Make movies, don't muck around with your old ones (well, muck around as little as possible, I'm aware of the E.T. walkie talkies. Something tells me Spielberg didn't put in a fraction of the effort coming up with that.) Do something new every now and then. Take your skills and knowledge and try and tell a good story, maybe even break away from science fiction a bit. I know he had it in him at one point, American Graffiti's a great movie.
But I guess Lucas isn't a director at heart. If he was, he would've directed Empire and Return. He likes his special effects and he's good at them-- the last two movies felt more like advertisements for Industrial Light and Magic than labors of love.
Though to his credit, the Star Wars video games have generally been great... Fun, well-made, darker and more true to the promise of Star Wars than any of the movie's sequels have been.
(No, I didn't call it "Episode IV" or "A New Hope." I still call the first one Star Wars. The eight-year-old me would've wanted it that way.)
Re:Now that does not make sense?
by
DarkEdgeX
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
What kills me about this seemingly innocent change (the ghost of Anakin being changed to Hayden Christensen from Sebastian Shaw) is that there'll probably be no explanation as to how Luke knows that the Hayden Anakin is the same guy he de-masked on the Death Star.
For me, I'm going to be imagining Luke saying "who the hell is that guy?" as the Hayden Anakin ghost appears.
-- All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
Saddest part about the whole thing:
by
dioscaido
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
That even with all the caveats about the changes, most people will buy the DVDs. Giving Lucas another $1 billion dollar smash hit, and further shielding him from the truth that most fans, while they consume his movies faithfully, hate them nonetheless.
Shadows of "Definitve Collection " LD Set
by
ThatbookwritingWheel
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Anyone remember the "Definitve Collection" Laserdisc set they put out in the mid 90s. 9 Discs CAV with lots of additional material. Those were the the Special Edition remastered versions WITHOUT the shitty new stuff. I remember being quite irate that they came out with the SE versions (after shelling out 500 Deutschmarks at that time for the LD set) now I'm happy I kept them.
-- We are all packets in the Internet of life!
Re:Some of the changes (possible spoilers)
by
Anonymous+Cowpat
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
LotR is one thing. They have additional scenes on the super fancy-pants versions. But they don't go changing the scenes you've already watched
Oh yes PJ does.
A relative of mine was an extra in the cinema/VHS release, but the scene that he was in was chopped out for the extended DVD.
Bad PJ, Bad PJ.
-- FGD 135
Re:Some of the changes (possible spoilers)
by
ideonode
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Lucas's revisionist history really does bother me as a geek.
Here's an interesting question for you. Tolkien published The Hobbit in 1937. When he was writing The Lord of the Rings, he realised that the 'Riddles in the Dark' chapter that he had originally written didn't really fit in with the whole ring mythos of LotR (basically, in the original, Gollum simply gives Bilbo the ring after the riddle contest is won - but of course, we know that there's no way that the ring-consumed Smeagol would have simply handed it over because he couldn't guess a riddle). My question to you is, is that ok? Is that any more or less wrong than Lucas' revisionism?
I think it's a tricky issue. Tolkien alludes to his re-write in the LotR (Bilbo occassionally mentions how he changed his story - cf. 'The Council of Elrond'), whereas Lucas tends to simply re-write the story and erase the previous versions.
Still, I think it asks interesting questions as to whether authorial control can ever be retained once the original text is out in the wilderness.
What's the problem?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Ok, so I don't like the Greedo shooting first part as much as the next guy, but jesus, is it really so bad that you have to curse the entire DVD set for it?
So what if he re-did some special effects? I didn't see this many complaints when the story about THX1138 getting redone came out!
Besides Greedo shooting first, how did he "ruin" the originals?!
Re:Some of the changes (possible spoilers)
by
CrazyTalk
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
OK, your mention of Jabba in ANH gives me a chance to rant a bit - he shouldn't be in that movie at all. Period. (In my mind, this is worse than the famous Han-shoots-first controversy). Having grown up watching the original movies, having Jabba be this unseen, mysterious figure added to the interest and suspense in the sequels. In ROTJ when he was finally revealed, that was a defining moment in the movies. Showing what he looks like up front in the "first" movie just ruins the ending! Of course, by now everyone on the planet with any remote interest at all knows what Jabba the Hut is and what he looks like, but in my mind his presence early on does nothing but hurt the story.
Re:Some of the changes (possible spoilers)
by
Class+Act+Dynamo
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I wonder if Mr. Lucas makes these unnecesary changes only to create rumbling among the hardcore Star Wars afficionados. Perhaps he subscribes to the whole "there is no such thing as bad publicity". I wonder how many people are gonna buy these DVD's just in order to study them and find every inconsistency. I'm not saying I agree with the changes. They suck. Only that maybe Mr. Lucas has some bizarre plan, evil mastermind that he is.
Sure there is. The originals are supposed to go into the public domain within a "limited time".
The fact that there may be situations where a given work is "lost" just goes to show just how badly broken the current copyright system is.
-- A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Re:Some of the changes (possible spoilers)
by
ideonode
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
First off, there is a very strong rationale for his changes. He documents them fully. It is not in the interests of marketing.
Playing devil's advocate here....
Does the intention behind the author's revision actually matter in this argument? You could argue that George Lucas made Greedo shoot first as subsequent character development suggests Han wouldn't have done so. I don't subscribe to that view myself, but it's possible. At the same time, Tolkien effectively changed the actions of a principal character as he realised that their behaviour didn't make sense when viewed through the lens of its sequels.
To answer your second point, getting hold of the original Hobbit is difficult - yes, there are parallel editions, but these were only really produced in the 1980s, and genuine firsts will set you back $50,000+. At the same time, Lucas didn't exactly supress the laserdisc trilogy did he? After the second edition of the Hobbit was published, there was no reprinting of the first edition. This is equivalent to their being no DVD of the original trilogy once the Special Edition was created.
Sure there is. The originals are supposed to go into the public domain within a "limited time".
Bull. The copyright to the originals goes into the public domain. Nothing says that the owner is required to retain a copy of the original and release it at any time. Passing into the public domain simply means that he can no longer sue anybody for making their own copies (or, much more importantly, derivative works).
The fact that there may be situations where a given work is "lost" just goes to show just how badly broken the current copyright system is.
Double bull. Most works are lost (no quotes) almost immediately, never getting a second printing/viewing/hearing long before copyright expires. And this is a good thing, because 90% of everthing is crud. Copyright is the right to copy, not the responsibility to copy.
Slashdot Mirror
I tried to get a friend of mine to transfer his VHS version of the Star Wars trilogy over to DVD. Too bad you have to bootleg it in order to get the unadultered version of it.
In celluloid if at all possible!
Otherwise, DVD letterbox AS AIRED.
If you want to add changed scenes, outtakes, commentary, etc. fine, just make sure I can view it AS I SAW IT IN 1977 if I want to.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Bel, the mostly sane.. "Of course I can't see anything! I'm standing on the shoulders of idiots." -- Me
If he does, I'm not buying them, period. I can't believe that they'd change what basically amounts to a massive character development over three movies, and rework it to crap. all because it's not nice for Han to shoot first. that was the WHOLE FREEKING point. ugh.
i hate people sometimes.
the theory is that when a jedi dies he comes back in his purest form..so yoda and obi wan come back as they were when they died, but anakin returns as he was before he went to the dark side
I saw on some interview that the minor dialogue changes weren't even intentional; when they were remastering the film for 1997, they sometimes had to use different takes that hadn't deteriorated as much (or so they say). They claim they didn't even realise they had changed any of the dialogue until diehard fans started complaining... ^_~
~ Aero
Only then, after the DVD saled have slowed down, will he decide to relent, release the original movies on DVD, and snap up the profits from nerds re-purchasing the DVDs of the original movie.
Kind of the inverse of Lord of the Rings DVD strategy - Lucas realizes if he releases the original versions first, nobody will buy the revised versions later.
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
From the Article:
"The versions of Lucas' beloved films that are on these new DVDs are not the original theatrical releases but the special editions that played in theaters in 1997. Rumor have circulated about additional changes, but Ward would not deny or confirm them. "We want to encourage our fans to check them out themselves."
If this is in fact true, I say don't buy the god damned things.
Tell Lucas you're fed up with his constant reworking of a classic that needs no changing and that you want the unadulterated original release on DVD without any scene edits for DVD.
Personally, Lucas needs to stand down and let others do the creative work.
I've noticed two types of DVD producers. Those who talk about the extended / enhanced super versions and those who do not.
My rule of thumb is that if a producer is side-stepping the question about producing an enhanced version that they are trying to get you to buy the first "sucker" version.
If they are against modifying the movie, they'll usually proclaim that they'll NEVER have an altered version available loud and clear.
If their production schedule for the enhanced version means that the two versions will be released separately, the honest producers will usually give two deadlines, but you've got to do your homework and check this out for yourself. Retail stores don't like to point out "This isn't the DVD you're probably looking for."
Fore example, I haven't seen "The Passion of the Christ" yet, may rent it, but I may buy it and if it's rubbish give it away for Christmas. But I notice it's being produced in all sorts of unenhanced versions (widescreen, normal, Church 50-packs, etc). Only rumors are circulating about a possible enhanced release. Personally, I'll wait for "The Passion of the Christ - Second Coming!" rather than sweep up the version available at the end of August.
An open letter to George Lucas.
Dear George,
The nostalgic value for DVD collectors of these movies is very high, but your changes destroy that value. No one who loved the movies in the 70s and 80s wants the "special edition" release, or the changes you have made since. The changes make them new movies, lesser versions of their former selves, they certainly are not the same movies I enjoyed in my youth. One of the great things about Star Wars was the amazing effect work that was very groundbreaking using the technology of the day. Updating the films with new technology destroys that accomplishment.
I will not buy Star Wars (again) until the original, unmodified movie is on DVD. Likewise for Empire.
Thank you.
-an 80's Star Wars fan in your target market.
I cannot find it now, but I remember reading that if a work is no longer made available in todays standards then it looses its protection against copyright. This might have only been high tech, I`m not even very sure of it,but I think it compares to coming out with a song on record adn now since you won`t release on cd, no one can listen. So you lose copyright.
If this istrue,I wonder if it would mean the original theatrical releases now fall under this because lucas refuses to release them.
I`m not sure adn definitely not a lawyer, but any takers as to the truth of this???
I'd be willing to bet that with decent equipment you could make a pretty good transfer from a LaserDisc and while it might not have the resolution or sound of the new versions it would retain all of the stuff that made the original movies so great.
cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
Perhaps it's because I'm too young to have seen the original movies in theater, but I *like* the newer versions. They have a couple of extra scenes, and they look better. More, better looking Star wars can't be a bad thing? I also think they make some scenes feel more alive, with more people in the background and so on.
There, now you can go ahead and mod me down.
Martin
We can sign all of the petitions we want. We blew our chances at obtaining unaltered versions when we preordered the trilogy by the millions. We all fed the monster...
... If George Lucas would've learned something from his good friend Steven Spielberg. Make movies, don't muck around with your old ones (well, muck around as little as possible, I'm aware of the E.T. walkie talkies. Something tells me Spielberg didn't put in a fraction of the effort coming up with that.) Do something new every now and then. Take your skills and knowledge and try and tell a good story, maybe even break away from science fiction a bit. I know he had it in him at one point, American Graffiti's a great movie.
But I guess Lucas isn't a director at heart. If he was, he would've directed Empire and Return. He likes his special effects and he's good at them-- the last two movies felt more like advertisements for Industrial Light and Magic than labors of love.
Though to his credit, the Star Wars video games have generally been great... Fun, well-made, darker and more true to the promise of Star Wars than any of the movie's sequels have been.
(No, I didn't call it "Episode IV" or "A New Hope." I still call the first one Star Wars. The eight-year-old me would've wanted it that way.)
What kills me about this seemingly innocent change (the ghost of Anakin being changed to Hayden Christensen from Sebastian Shaw) is that there'll probably be no explanation as to how Luke knows that the Hayden Anakin is the same guy he de-masked on the Death Star.
For me, I'm going to be imagining Luke saying "who the hell is that guy?" as the Hayden Anakin ghost appears.
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
That even with all the caveats about the changes, most people will buy the DVDs. Giving Lucas another $1 billion dollar smash hit, and further shielding him from the truth that most fans, while they consume his movies faithfully, hate them nonetheless.
Anyone remember the "Definitve Collection" Laserdisc set they put out in the mid 90s. 9 Discs CAV with lots of additional material. Those were the the Special Edition remastered versions WITHOUT the shitty new stuff. I remember being quite irate that they came out with the SE versions (after shelling out 500 Deutschmarks at that time for the LD set) now I'm happy I kept them.
We are all packets in the Internet of life!
Oh yes PJ does.
A relative of mine was an extra in the cinema/VHS release, but the scene that he was in was chopped out for the extended DVD.
Bad PJ, Bad PJ.
FGD 135
Lucas's revisionist history really does bother me as a geek.
Here's an interesting question for you. Tolkien published The Hobbit in 1937. When he was writing The Lord of the Rings, he realised that the 'Riddles in the Dark' chapter that he had originally written didn't really fit in with the whole ring mythos of LotR (basically, in the original, Gollum simply gives Bilbo the ring after the riddle contest is won - but of course, we know that there's no way that the ring-consumed Smeagol would have simply handed it over because he couldn't guess a riddle). My question to you is, is that ok? Is that any more or less wrong than Lucas' revisionism?
I think it's a tricky issue. Tolkien alludes to his re-write in the LotR (Bilbo occassionally mentions how he changed his story - cf. 'The Council of Elrond'), whereas Lucas tends to simply re-write the story and erase the previous versions.
Still, I think it asks interesting questions as to whether authorial control can ever be retained once the original text is out in the wilderness.
Ok, so I don't like the Greedo shooting first part as much as the next guy, but jesus, is it really so bad that you have to curse the entire DVD set for it?
So what if he re-did some special effects? I didn't see this many complaints when the story about THX1138 getting redone came out!
Besides Greedo shooting first, how did he "ruin" the originals?!
OK, your mention of Jabba in ANH gives me a chance to rant a bit - he shouldn't be in that movie at all. Period. (In my mind, this is worse than the famous Han-shoots-first controversy). Having grown up watching the original movies, having Jabba be this unseen, mysterious figure added to the interest and suspense in the sequels. In ROTJ when he was finally revealed, that was a defining moment in the movies. Showing what he looks like up front in the "first" movie just ruins the ending! Of course, by now everyone on the planet with any remote interest at all knows what Jabba the Hut is and what he looks like, but in my mind his presence early on does nothing but hurt the story.
I wonder if Mr. Lucas makes these unnecesary changes only to create rumbling among the hardcore Star Wars afficionados. Perhaps he subscribes to the whole "there is no such thing as bad publicity". I wonder how many people are gonna buy these DVD's just in order to study them and find every inconsistency. I'm not saying I agree with the changes. They suck. Only that maybe Mr. Lucas has some bizarre plan, evil mastermind that he is.
My other computer is a Jacquard loom.
Sure there is. The originals are supposed to go into the public domain within a "limited time".
The fact that there may be situations where a given work is "lost" just goes to show just how badly broken the current copyright system is.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
First off, there is a very strong rationale for his changes. He documents them fully. It is not in the interests of marketing.
Playing devil's advocate here....
Does the intention behind the author's revision actually matter in this argument? You could argue that George Lucas made Greedo shoot first as subsequent character development suggests Han wouldn't have done so. I don't subscribe to that view myself, but it's possible. At the same time, Tolkien effectively changed the actions of a principal character as he realised that their behaviour didn't make sense when viewed through the lens of its sequels.
To answer your second point, getting hold of the original Hobbit is difficult - yes, there are parallel editions, but these were only really produced in the 1980s, and genuine firsts will set you back $50,000+. At the same time, Lucas didn't exactly supress the laserdisc trilogy did he? After the second edition of the Hobbit was published, there was no reprinting of the first edition. This is equivalent to their being no DVD of the original trilogy once the Special Edition was created.
So, no, not a different kettle of fish at all.
Bull. The copyright to the originals goes into the public domain. Nothing says that the owner is required to retain a copy of the original and release it at any time. Passing into the public domain simply means that he can no longer sue anybody for making their own copies (or, much more importantly, derivative works).
Double bull. Most works are lost (no quotes) almost immediately, never getting a second printing/viewing/hearing long before copyright expires. And this is a good thing, because 90% of everthing is crud. Copyright is the right to copy, not the responsibility to copy.