Star Wars 30th Anniv. DVDs

[Fanticon]

No-one is forcing you to buy anything.

figure of speech my man.

 

[Rez]

Because seeing 90's CGI added to 70's fashion and prodcution design is jarring and takes you out of the movie.

And seeing horrible model and effects work doesn't take you out of the film?

I'll admit, not all of the updated versions are flawless- Jabba is a sore thumb, as is some of the creature work. But things like Cloud City, or the new spaceship work look absolutely fantastic. To be honest, the only thing I really don't like is the lack of the ewok song.

Addendum, I agree completely- technology is null and void when it comes to story. Story will always overshadow effects, and any old or present day low budget film will demonstrate this perfectly. But effects don't affect the story, so how does changing them hurt the story?

I can totally see preferring the original versions, but I don't see why people are so negative about updated versions. Who cares if they remaster old films? If you really like the old ones better, then just watch them. But there's no reason to put down or discourage the updating of them technology wise. It's no different than colorizing B&W films, and isn't a far cry from flat out remakes. I realize that they both get plenty of flack too, but again, I've never understood why.

In some cases, I like the originals. In others, I like things updated. It's all about preference.

 

[CConn]

I think the main reason the Special Editions get so much flack is how Lucas effectively tried to replace the old versions with these new ones. It's one thing to do something new, it's another to try (and try hard) to phase out the classics everyone loves.

 

[Rez]

I agree with you in that that is why they have been so frowned upon, but I disagree in that he's tried hard to phase out the classics. I know he supports the new versions as "the definitive versions" or whatever, but can you blame him? If you are an artist, the most recent version is always the final version, until you change it again.
But has the OOT really been hard to find? I don't think so. Back when the Special Editions hit theaters, VHS of the originals were everywhere. It was very easy to find both the SE and the Originals for years. Not until DVD took over and VHS was on the way out did the SE tapes become the more common, and that's only because they came out later. When the DVD set came out, people said they wanted the originals out on DVD... and now we've gotten them. The originals are still just as available as they've always been. There was a span of maybe 2 or 3 years when the format changed where the entire thing was blown out of proportion. I certainly never had trouble getting my hands on the originals, and I'm just a casual viewer. How hard could it be for the real fans?

 

[Orko Is King]

I think the main reason the Special Editions get so much flack is how Lucas effectively tried to replace the old versions with these new ones. It's one thing to do something new, it's another to try (and try hard) to phase out the classics everyone loves.

axctly. If they got Lowry to remaster the sound/picture on the originals, everyone would most likely shut the **** up.

 

[Sam Fisher]

You can get the VHS on Amazon for a penny each. So yeah.

 

[Addendum]

Addendum, I agree completely- technology is null and void when it comes to story. Story will always overshadow effects, and any old or present day low budget film will demonstrate this perfectly. But effects don't affect the story, so how does changing them hurt the story?

And I don't see how it helps the story if it was originally good enough to still have an impact decades down the road.

 

[Mr. Credible]

I love the updated versions.
Why the hell would someone want the original 77 version of SW with the inferior special effects, etc.?

i actually dig the updated versions... i mean, lucas is a butt-hole for doing what, 3 or 4 versions of the movie? but, the new dvd versions are awesome compared to the old ones.

simple as that. they are better in every way.

 

[Mr. Credible]

And seeing horrible model and effects work doesn't take you out of the film?

I'll admit, not all of the updated versions are flawless- Jabba is a sore thumb, as is some of the creature work. But things like Cloud City, or the new spaceship work look absolutely fantastic. To be honest, the only thing I really don't like is the lack of the ewok song.

Addendum, I agree completely- technology is null and void when it comes to story. Story will always overshadow effects, and any old or present day low budget film will demonstrate this perfectly. But effects don't affect the story, so how does changing them hurt the story?

I can totally see preferring the original versions, but I don't see why people are so negative about updated versions. Who cares if they remaster old films? If you really like the old ones better, then just watch them. But there's no reason to put down or discourage the updating of them technology wise. It's no different than colorizing B&W films, and isn't a far cry from flat out remakes. I realize that they both get plenty of flack too, but again, I've never understood why.

In some cases, I like the originals. In others, I like things updated. It's all about preference.

i agree with this almost completely... but 5-10 years between remasterings? that's ridiculous. there's no reason to do it.

i can see 20-30 years, but you might as well do a remake then... i don't care what people say, star wars could use a good remake. booya.

 

[Addendum]

"Just the other day I was thinking, you know that painting on the ceiling of the church with the different bible scenes being shown? Well, anyway, I was thinking how that ceiling mural looks incredibly out of date and what it needs is...What are you doing with that axe and why do you have that strange look in your eye?...Ok, you can put the axe down no need to be all defensive...If you come closer I'll yell rape!...OH MY GOD!!! YOU JUST JUST OFF MY ARM!!! I MEAN OF ALL THE THINGS YOU COULD..."

 

[sithgoblin]

And seeing horrible model and effects work doesn't take you out of the film?

No.

I can totally see preferring the original versions, but I don't see why people are so negative about updated versions. Who cares if they remaster old films? If you really like the old ones better, then just watch them.

I would if I could.

 

[sithgoblin]

Seeing CGI put into Star Wars is no different than if they put CGI into the original King Kong, or into Nosferatu. It doesn't f**king fit.

 

[The Caped Knight]

Aren't they releasing them in Imax 3D this year?

Awesome .

 

[Rez]

No.



I would if I could.

Umm, you can. This nonsense about not being able to find the originals is a bunch of crap. Like someone said, amazon has the VHS tapes for nothing. Borders and Barnes & Noble have the DVDs with the originals. Quit *****ing about nothing.


As for your King Kong comment, like I said before, adding CGI is no different than colorizing old B&W films. If you want the originals, watch them, but there's no reason to shun technology updates.

 

[The Caped Knight]

In My opinion The Original Trilogy owns The Prequel ass . The Prequels sucked [Exsept for ROTS, even that had it's moments] But The Original Trilogy was a masterpiece from start to finish .

 

[Addendum]

But what's the point of updating earlier stuff? Because you now can?

If that's the reason then it says a lot about people nowadays, and none of it is good.

Why stop at movies? There's books and paintings.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

They need CG Yoda in Episode I, and Quigon's ghost in episodes III and VI

 

[Addendum]

Qui-Gon had nothing to do with Luke

 

[Rez]

But what's the point of updating earlier stuff? Because you now can?

If that's the reason then it says a lot about people nowadays, and none of it is good.

Why stop at movies? There's books and paintings.

Because artists are never satisfied with the final product. As they evolve, they look back at their older works and think of how they could have been better. This is common in anyone. Ever look at something you wrote a few years ago, and say, "Man, this sucked?" It's no different.
Luckily, we live in a time where artists now have more opportunities to change their works. It's not like Star Wars is the only place where this has happened, but it's certainly the most prominent. In many ways, Director's Cuts and re-edits of films are similar changes. Just because they aren't that thing you first saw on the big screen, does that mean they have no right to exist?

You mentioned books and paintings, and I hate to break it to you but that has already happened. The most famous example I can think of is Stephen King, who recently heavily edited his first novel, The Gunslinger(and here's the kicker), to better fit with the final novels of the Dark Tower series.

So tell me, how is that any different than adding in current effects to have the films' visual flow fit together more?

 

[Addendum]

Art is never finished, it's simply abandoned. A famous quote said by many though I forget who said it.

Some of the "director's cuts" and "re-edits" are simply money-making exercises by the studio to get more money out of a fickle audience. Of course there are legitimate ones, such as the director's cut of Daredevil.

While I am annoyed by all the incessant changing of the past to better fit it into the future, which is as worthwhile as digging through a pile of feces to find a diamond, as long the original is still available is all I ask.

And if people need updated eye candy to enjoy a movie made years ago, I guess they've forgotten how to use one's imagination

 

[Warhammer]

Qui-Gon had nothing to do with Luke

Luke would be like "Who in the blue hell are you?"

 

[Kevin Roegele]

And seeing horrible model and effects work doesn't take you out of the film?

The special effects in Star Wars were revolutionary and won Oscars. Calling them horrible is ridiculous. As Star Wars is considered the pinacle of model work in movies, you're effectively saying all model work sucks.

You'll also notice that most of the model shots of X-Wings and such like remain in the movies, and stand up effortlessly against the CGI.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Because artists are never satisfied with the final product. As they evolve, they look back at their older works and think of how they could have been better. This is common in anyone. Ever look at something you wrote a few years ago, and say, "Man, this sucked?" It's no different.
Luckily, we live in a time where artists now have more opportunities to change their works. It's not like Star Wars is the only place where this has happened, but it's certainly the most prominent. In many ways, Director's Cuts and re-edits of films are similar changes. Just because they aren't that thing you first saw on the big screen, does that mean they have no right to exist?

You mentioned books and paintings, and I hate to break it to you but that has already happened. The most famous example I can think of is Stephen King, who recently heavily edited his first novel, The Gunslinger(and here's the kicker), to better fit with the final novels of the Dark Tower series.

So tell me, how is that any different than adding in current effects to have the films' visual flow fit together more?

Lucas' obsession with updating the movies is nothing to do with his artistic impulses, and everything to do with his love of technology.

 

[Addendum]

I've never read a Stephen King book

 

[Rez]

The special effects in Star Wars were revolutionary and won Oscars. Calling them horrible is ridiculous. As Star Wars is considered the pinacle of model work in movies, you're effectively saying all model work sucks.

You'll also notice that most of the model shots of X-Wings and such like remain in the movies, and stand up effortlessly against the CGI.

Quite the contrary, I prefer model work and practical effects in nearly all cases, my one big exception being the original Jurassic Park.

But there are plenty of moments where you see something and it is clearly fake or at least jarring enough to pull you out of the movies. For the models, the grey boxes come to mind. For the CG, Jabba in ANH. In some cases, they are both pretty piss poor, like the yellow alien singer girl in ROTJ- Both the puppet and the CGI versions look pretty bad.

As for Lucas's artistic impulses, who are we to say what he does or does not have? If your passion is your profession, and your profession is your art, then advancing technology could very well be his art. Your argument on what is art sounds like someone trying to say that rap isn't music.