Slashdot Mirror
Star Wars DVD Set Previews/Reviews
Reducer2001 writes "USA Today has an article up that has a couple more details about the upcoming Star Wars DVD release. The cantina shootout between Han Solo and the green-snouted bounty hunter Greedo is virtually identical, but now it seems their guns fire almost simultaneously." Reader Jutebox150 writes "Time magazine has an early preview of the Star Wars DVDs and gives some justification for Lucas issuing the updated versions of the trilogy and talking about his many mental and physical battles to finish filming. The article also describes a 2.5 hour documentary by Kevin Burns that traces the origins of the saga. 'The first cut of Star Wars,' Burns' narrator says, 'was an unmitigated disaster.'" Reader spoco2 writes "The Star Wars Original Trilogy is due for worldwide release on the 21st on DVD, but the first reviews are appearing already in Australia (obviously of the PAL version). Yes, they are the SEs with even more differences (Now Gredo and Han shoot at the SAME time!). I'm afraid I'll be waiting for the day when George reconsiders and releases the untouched originals."
I haven't seen anything that makes me want to buy his updated releases. I think I'll buy the original movies on DVD at a science fiction convention.
anata sekai o kakumei surush ga nai deshou? Anata no susumu michi wa yoi shite arimasu.
well at least he seems to have made a partial concession on such a controversial edit. Show's he has at least one tiny spec of respect.
Most annoying part about the Greedo change: the original version was a justifiable shooting in any state in the Union! Somebody's holding a gun on you and threatens your life - that's clear-cut case of self-defense, and you're entirely within your rights to shoot the bastard.
let me just cover all the bases and say, "a striking array of irrelevant and minute details"
-knowles
I don't care if Lucas thinks this is the way the movies were intended; as a customer, I'm not buying it from him unless he gives me what I want. Yeah, I know millions of people will buy the DVDs anyway, but that doesn't change my position.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Other than restoring the quality of the picture, I'm trying to think of what enhancements were made. Let's see, there's the Greedo shoots first scene, plastic Jabba the Hutt scene, Death Star w/shockwave scene, changed music in ending of RotJ..there's got to be more. Post a link if you got it. It's gotta all fit on one disc.
Even if branching wouldn't work, there's always DVD-18 (Don't worry, DVD writer users, it's only double sided dual layer). I believe T2 used that kind, and Terminator 1 used DVD-14.
It would be cool if it didn't suck.
In the original movie, Han Solo and Greedo are in the Cantina sitting at a table together. Greedo informs Han there is a bounty on his head, and threatens his life. Han in a casual sort of way shoots Greedo before he can get a shot off. In the re-release, Lucas changed this so that mean, evil Greedo shots first, but misses, and the more honorable Solo takes him down after that.
The reason this upsets so many people is that this scene established Han Solo as an anti-hero in the movie. He was a rogue and a pragmatist. The core appeal of this character was that he was not so damn foolish as to take his chances and let someone get the first hit in, if he knew a fight was coming. Han was street smart. He would strike first to survive.
Although many on slashdot are loathe to admitt it, this was part of the charm and good writing in the first movie that created its appeal. You had classic heroes,like skywalker. Who were good, but naive and ultimately had super powers to help them do the right thing. You also had heroes like Han who would do the right thing, but get dirty doing it. Characters like Leia were somewhere in between. She was "good" but willing to lie and sacrafice others for her cause. Reality tends to reflect this, which is why the movie spoke to so many so strongly. The changing of the Greedo scene cheapened the movie and its core complexities. Hence, the hatred on these fair forums.
my two cents,
-Iowa
"He who laughs last, didn't get the joke."-Cap
There is a scene in Lawrence of Arabia where you see a camel riding slowly towards O'Toole taking time to do it. This was the entrance of Omar Sherif. Afterwards David Lean said he got it wrong, and that that particular buildup ended too quickly, however, he did NOT change it for the reasons given.
Although George Lucas's modifications to the original Star Wars Trilogy may be making it more cinematically pleasing, and maybe even more to how he would have liked it to originally turn out, what he is doing could be interpreted as defacing. The original Star Wars Trilogy are works of art in themselves.
Everyone would have thought it ridiculous if Picasso took some of his earlier work back, and touched it up to make it more realistic, or in fashion. I think the same way about the Star Wars Films.
Web Sig: Eddy Currents
Seriously people stop supporting this nonsense. Even if you don't plan on buying all these hacks, this constant deluge of information about changes, edits and new editions of this crap is still supporting this garbage by keeping up the visible mindshare capital of this franchise.
I don't believe any of these pictures are classics or sacred treasures but these films are not like Director's Cuts where the original vision was changed to get the movie to market, no matter what Georgie says. He is 'Robin Williamsing' these things because of his change in character after become a parent. That is, some famous actors, directors, etc... at some point feel everything they've done should some how be compatible with things their kids could watch.
--- I do not moderate.
Lucas on colorizing the three stooges.
"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.
"Would color distract from their comedy and make it not as funny anymore?" Lucas said. "Maybe just the fact that they're in black and white makes it funny, because their humor is dated. But by putting it in black and white, it puts it in a context where you can appreciate it for what it was.
"But you try to make it in full living color and try to compare it to a Jim Carrey movie, then it's hard for young people to understand. Because you're then thinking you're comparing apples to apples, when you're not. You're comparing apples to oranges. I'm saying it's not fair to the artist."
Part of Star Wars' charm was that while the special effects were advanced for the time, they were NOT excessive to any degree beyond being how they directly supported the plot. The extra things running around Mos Eisley, windows in Bespin... it just started being more distractive than immersive. The only two I absolutely agreed with were putting in the Jabba scene (yeah, it wasn't done well, but it did actually help establish Han a little more) and fixing the Hoth shots so you couldn't see AT-ATs through the actual instrument panel. (I'd never noticed before on small TV's, but almost a must for a high-quality DVD on large TVs.)
Don't get me started on Guido shooting first, that completely changed Han's daring go-for-it attitude as a lawless smuggler out only for himself. Having them shoot at the same time I can accept logically. Han decides to shoot, Guido sees it in his eyes and shoots as well. Of course, Guido missing makes little sense at 3 feet, but if he had hit him it would have been a pretty short movie. What really bugs me about this change was that it was never "I wanted to do this, but I couldn't", it was "I've changed my mind about how much of a lawless guy Han was at the beginning, thus weakening his story arc as he progressed to a caring person."
Huh, guess I got myself going. Anyway, I guess I'll go hit the local antique and pawn shops to see if anyone's ignorant mothers have turned in the laserdiscs of the originals...
R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
"It is only a fucking movie people. Get over it."
Exactly - it's only a movie that redefined special effects, and by lucas choosing to bar the future generations of artisans who do this sort of thing from seeing their roots would be like the Charlie Chaplin being able to prevent future film makers from being able to learn anything from his work.
It's a slap in the face of everyone who worked on a movie that was revolutionary for it's time to have Lucas, who was only one of hundreds of people involved in the creation of the film(s) legacy to claim "They're work was shit so I will do all in my power to make sure future generations cannot lay eyes upon it" - release both you swollen headed egomaniac.
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence in society - M. Twain
Of course he did, unless you believe that "Magic Blaster" theory Oliver Stone was touting...
(Han shooting first was what made his character. Having him shoot at the same time reduces the effectiveness of his story and makes his change from self righteous smuggler to selfless statesman less impressive)
Hey freaks: now you're ju
Now Gredo and Han shoot at the SAME time!
Gredo must have been a very, very, very bad shot.
I used to be a musician, and one of the frequent ideological debates I would engage in with other musicians was based around the concept of static or dynamic art. Many of them felt that once a song was done, it was done! No more revisions, this is the song in its final form. Why? If I happen to think of a better way for the rythymn to groove behind a riff, who cares if it was one year after the song was originally written. Ultimately we all fall into one of two camps: those who believe art is static, and those who believe it is (or can be) dynamic. I think the reason most people are so upset with Lucas' revisionism is because they feel that he is messing with the mythology of their childhoods. But I have news for those people: the release of Episodes I & II has already done that. Sadly, STAR WARS now belong in a category with Highlander and the Matrix: the first movies (first 3 in the case of star wars) exist on their own (as the masterpieces that they are), with the subsequent sequels existing in an alternate reality.
Well, someone has to do it...
:-)
In the original release, Han is presented as a tough, ruthless mercenary. When confronted by Greedo in the cantina, he acts cool and unconcerned by the blaster Greedo has pointed at him, while, under the table, he is pulling his blaster out. After a pointed threat from Greedo, Han blows him away in cold blood. While Greedo is clearly threatening him, it seemed apparent at the time that Greedo wasn't going to kill him on the spot.
In the new release, Lucas evidently decided, in his confused sense of morality (see David Brin and Orson Scott Card's analyses of the Star Wars series for more details), that Han shouldn't be a ruthless, cold-blooded killer, so he changed the scene slightly so that, after the pointed threat, Han ducks to the side, Greedo shoots wide, and Han shoots him in self-defense.
In itself, it isn't that big of a deal, but many people (myself included) thought that part of Han's coolness was his handling of the situation and that changing it to self-defense was a major wimp-out that was symptomatic of Lucas' weird attempt at making the series more kid-friendly (or something -- the more you think about the ethics of the entire trilogy, the creepier it gets. See below). Similar to Spielberg's digital removal of guns in his ET re-release.
The reason this is weird in contrast is that Lucas attempted to write the series as a textbook myth, literally following Campbell's Hero With a Thousand Faces pattern. What he ended up with was a series about a genocidal pyschopath who we should feel sympathy with because he was a cute kid; a supposedly revered mystical sect of warrier priests who believe that taking children from their parents and forbidding them to love or marry makes them better people; an incestuous love triangle; and a convoluted way of telling the story so that the climactic presentation of the series (Episode III) will have to resolve unbelievably divergent plot holes and involve the rise of an evil empire, the physical and psychological maiming of the main character, and the deaths and exile of most of the other main characters.
Despite this, I'm not bitter
Actually, I am a bit bitter, but, like the obediant Star Wars fan and mindless consumer I am, I have already pre-order by DVD set...
-- stream of did I lock the front door consciousness
What about the lightsaber that never hits Obiwan? Vader goes to kill him, Obiwan sayes "If you strike me down I will become more powerful than you could ever imagine" (or something like that). Vader swings, Obiwan "dies" before it ever touches him. I guess Lucas did not care to correct that
Let's see.
I could respect a director who makes a controversial film decision (Han shoots first) provided that the film is made well, and it doesn't look like a mistake (see my film because it's controversial trash)
I could respect a director who admits to making a mistake in a film (or believes that his greater vision was compromised at first release) and rereleases the film with corrections (Greedo shoots first) provided that the film is remade well, and it doesn't look like he's just caving into a compromised version of his vision.
But I can't respect this. Either Lucas is stating that his vision was for Han to be a chior boy in bad boy clothing, or that his vision wasn't important enough to stand by, or that he has no vision, he's just doing whatever the polls say.
After watching Kirosawa's "The Hidden Fortress", I am fully convinced that the success of Star Wars was part plagarisim and part mistake. Lucas's disneyland inspired lightening up of the film in it's theatrical re-relase was touted as being closer to his true "vision". Every improvement detracted from the story and lightened the tone of the film. I mean, Luke's family was just killed, and we're supposed to be laughing at visual gags when it's time to go find Han. "Empire Strikes Back" probably was saved due to the extra help he brought aboard. Help which he now eschews in the episode 1-3 films.
Let's face it. We'll never have a good Star Wars until the Master stops driving his Empire into the ground in the name of Profit.
Well, for me personally, the only scene that I don't like is the same one everyone else agrees upon, where Greedo shoots first.
I think it was much better character development showing the "scoundrel" side of Han prior to his involvement with Obi-Wan, Luke and the rebellion. It shows the change in the character from a that of an almost thug to the "good guy".
While I agree that the trilogy as a whole does a pretty good job of this, I think that having Han shoot first shows that the character journeyed a longer road.
Please don't turn this release into an E.T. Anniversary Edition where, among other things, the guns are replaced by flashlights. Mr. Lucas, stop the second guessing of yourself and minimize the political correctness. Just give us the film we remember!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
If I was a typical moviegoer for the original trilogy, then he's banging his head on the wall for nothing, or actually self destructively.
I was just mentioning my reaction to Star Wars (EP:IV ANH) yesterday.
There were these inexplicable commercials on TV about some movie, but I couldn't make heads or tails of them and ignored them along with spots for Palmolive Dishwashing Liquid, Fleismann's Margarine and anything about the upcoming 6 O'clock news. Then a friend calls, with an almost frantic voice, and asks have I seen the new movie something something. No... Go see it! Drop whatever you are doing and go see it!
Well, you don't get a phone call like that every day (though it may give the MPAA some ideas) I ask and it so happens my Dad, brothers and sister are already planning to go see it, because they've been told this is something really different. Gosh, what can this bee?
So I'm sitting in the theater with my bucket of popcorn and soda and watch the titles, ready for another thrilling cinematic experience, or at the worst, ninety minutes of nursing my snacks and then immediatley forgetting about what I've seen. It wouldn't be like that. Above the broad curvature of a planet a little spacecraft is coasting along with something like short bursts of phasers hitting it. Then the star destroyer seemingly passes overhead while the sense-surround in the theater rumbles and popcorn I just put in my mouth falls back out into my lap. Wooowwww....
The rest of the movie passes with chills of excitement and oohs and ahhs, I probably would have won a staring constest as I don't think I blinked once the whole time. I'd be back a few times, others would be back every day or a few showings every day for months.
When I got home, still late afternoon, I stood in the sun on the driveway with my jaw still slack at what I had seen. Looking up, as if expecting to see a star destroyer cruise over my house. It seemed space fantasy had taken a big step forward and it clearly had a significant impact on millions of others as Star Wars was a massive merchandising success (my sister still has piles and boxes of original stuff, clearly it impacted her more than myself.)
Video games would suddenly take on certain similarities to Tie Fighters, X-Wings, R2D2 and Darth Vader was the epitome of cool.
Star Wars rocked the world and gave George Lucas the finances and clout, which have carried him these 27 years, to do a great many things other producer/directors could only dream of.
It really is pretty awful that he can't be happy with this original artifact and, like some old silver coin with a patina, feels he has to polish it with some course cloth until it's bright, shiny and utterly unattractive to those who appreciate it for what it was.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I am a Star Wars fan, but not hardcore in any sense of the word. I have never seen the 1997 redone versions, mostly because redoing that movie sounded like the most retarded thing I had ever heard of.
I didn't even know about the Cantina shootout thing until this post, but it might be one of the gayest moves a filmmaker has ever made. The thing is, it is NOT a "Star Wars Nerd" thing....it's a film thing. If what I have read here is true, that is a MAJOR change to a subtle but important incident in the movie. If people don't understand why that change makes a difference, then they don't understand the movie or the character of Han Solo. It's not about whether the movie agrees with all the times you've reenacted the scene with action figures in your bedroom, it's about a movie that was good because of the story it told and the characters it developed being hacked by a director who used to know what he was doing but has now fallen off into a pit of mediocrity.
I can't believe the other changes he made either. Fuck continuity...who CARES for chrissakes? Who would complain about the lack of coninuity? No one. Who would complain about fucking up a masterpiece? Apparently quite a few people. Isn't this movie being made for the audience to enjoy? Apparently not because now the artist is rehashing his work, to the displeasure of the fans, on some kind of ego trip that's supposed to make up for the fact that he will NEVER make a movie that good again.
What is it with people? You go out and make one of the better scifi movies ever made and then shit all over it when it's released to DVD to support continuity with movies that NO ONE thinks are as good as the originals. Dumb Dumb Dumb.
Sorry, this turned into something closely approximating nerd-rage, but it's about ART...and if it's one thing I hate to see it's artists who sell out and forget what they used to be about.
I still have the originals on laserdisc (widescreen) and my laserdisc player still works - so some of us can keep the dream alive.
An elegant format for a more civilized time.
Richard Marquand and Irvin Kirshner. They directed VI and V, respectively. I honestly think that Lucas is trying to make the entire trilogy patently his and by doing so is forced to "rewrite" history. Granted, yes, the first was directed by him, but I firmly believe that the first installment was the roughest out of the 3.
Richard Marquand must be spinning in his grave.
1. Initial release.
2. Videotape (dropped a scene - which I can't freakin' remember NOW)
3. Added some scenes (with some really BADLY done CG at times)
4. YET another Edit...
Hell, Thomas Dolby is about the only artist I can think of who has re-worked the same material only to come up with essentially the same thing.
And the first one STILL is better...
IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
Overall, the expected changes on the DVDs aren't as dramatic as those for the Special Editions in 1997, says Scott Chitwood, one of the co-founders of TheForce.Net, a Star Wars fan/news site. "I think a few of the changes will only make sense after Episode III," he says.
Hopefully this is true, but not because I'm one of those purist Star Wars fans, but rather I'd love to hear an end to the incessant whining sound coming from some of you.
BTW, I think Hayden Christensen at the end of Jedi makes a ton of sense and is an excellent decision on the part of Lucas. It will really wrap up the continuity of the entire series of films in a simple and effective way.
Disagree with me? Probably. Do I care? Probably not.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
Bear in mind, people, that directors (even Lucas) get pressure to alter their films, change things, remove things, cut corners, etc. At least give Lucas's new versions a chance before denouncing them outright. It appears to me that lots of things have been changed just to improve what he originally intended and only a few changes to tweak the films to make them line up with the prequels. I see lots worth being excited about, little worth whining about.
I'm especially thrilled that they took the time to color correct the damn Rancor scene in Jedi. It never looked right that Luke's shading was a noticeable lighter value than the Rancor's. It looked like an actor moving around in front of a movie screen. Judging from the stills on the site above, it looks perfect.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."