USHE Press Release: E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1 Viewer)

[NY2LA]

Which he kinda did for the second word.  From my review:
"When Michael sang “nothin’ but health shit” as he checked out the refrigerator, the word “shit” got lowered in volume to the point where it effectively became chopped off after “sh”. E.T. still contained other mild profanity – why did Spielberg feel the need to make this odd little change? "

Maybe the MPAA, which can tighten its parameters in rating a new release. I wouldn't automatically assume it was SS.
Still I don't think he took this film he originally made for kids and "remake" it into a "fake" kiddie movie.

 

[Jason Charlton]

)

Emphasis mine,

Here, IMO, we get to the sad reality of the issue. IMO, Star Wars IS relevant, as is Raiders of the Lost Ark, Close Encounters, and any other film that has gone through digital "udpates" over time.

No longer is this a black and white issue of "originals" vs. "originals plus updates". It's become a soggy, gray mess of individual preferences over the validity of each and every change that's been made. No one will ever be satisfied, because everyone has a different interpretation of what's acceptable and what's "going too far".

"Greedo shooting first changes Han's story, so that's going too far."
"Removing cobra reflections in Raiders? Eh, that's OK, I can live with that."

"Showing the interior of the spaceship in Close Encounters? Why spoil the mystery? What's the point?"
"Changing shotguns to walkie talkies in ET? Well, we don't want people to think the officers would really have shot at a few kids on bikes."

All opinions, and all equally valid/invalid depending on your point of view.

I really hate when discussions get to this point, because there is no end can be no resolution - we've entered the "mobius strip" of discussion and it's become a game of attrition.

 

[TravisR]

No longer is this a black and white issue of "originals" vs. "originals plus updates".

I think it is when people say that they want history to be preserved. If they're concerned about historical preservation then they should want the original version warts and all and they shouldn't pick and choose the movies where history is important. If history is important for one movie, it should be just as important for another. That being said, I don't see any problem with wanting a verison with nearly invisible tweaks (or wanting a version with major changes) but it's not the original version anymore.

 

[SamT]

Close Encounters is a different beast because the theatrical and the special edition were never a complete director's cut. So I'm totally ok that Spielberg has done a third version. I don't think that what Spielberg has said on AICN is applicable to Close Encounters.

 

[NY2LA]

Emphasis mine,
Here, IMO, we get to the sad reality of the issue.  IMO, Star Wars IS relevant, as is Raiders of the Lost Ark, Close Encounters, and any other film that has gone through digital "udpates" over time.
No longer is this a black and white issue of "originals" vs. "originals plus updates".  It's become a soggy, gray mess of individual preferences over the validity of each and every change that's been made.  No one will ever be satisfied, because everyone has a different interpretation of what's acceptable and what's "going too far".
"Greedo shooting first changes Han's story, so that's going too far."
"Removing cobra reflections in Raiders?  Eh, that's OK, I can live with that."
"Showing the interior of the spaceship in Close Encounters?  Why spoil the mystery?  What's the point?"
"Changing shotguns to walkie talkies in ET?  Well, we don't want people to think the officers would really have shot at a few kids on bikes."
All opinions, and all equally valid/invalid depending on your point of view.
I really hate when discussions get to this point, because there is no end can be no resolution - we've entered the "mobius strip" of discussion and it's become a game of attrition.

My position on Star Wars is that you should be able to get the original along with the updates, and a friend who follows this much more than I gave anecdotal evidence that Lucas' actually has saved every foot he's ever shot, and his claims that the originals don't exist anymore is pure BS. What we have of CE3K seems ideal to me - an easy way to please everyone, so I really don't appreciate anyone suggesting any existing version needn't be available because they don't happen to like it. I have come forward defending the desire to have ALL versions available, so If someone makes wild, baseless claims to support their opinion that I shouldn't get what I want, but they should get what they want, I'm going to call them on it.

 

[SamT]

Here is the Spielberg interview. Make sure you read this:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/49897
Steven Spielberg: Oh, I know. I totally understand that. (In the future) there’s going to be no more digital enhancements or digital additions to anything based on any film I direct. I’m not going to do any corrections digitally to even wires that show.
Steven Spielberg: When people ask me which E.T. they should look at, I always tell them to look at the original 1982 E.T. If you notice, when we did put out E.T. we put out two E.T.s. We put out the digitally enhanced version with the additional scenes and for no extra money, in the same package, we put out the original ‘82 version. I always tell people to go back to the ’82 version.

 

[NY2LA]

Here is the Spielberg interview. Make sure you read this:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/49897
Steven Spielberg: Oh, I know. I totally understand that. (In the future) there’s going to be no more digital enhancements or digital additions to anything based on any film I direct. I’m not going to do any corrections digitally to even wires that show.
Steven Spielberg: When people ask me which E.T. they should look at, I always tell them to look at the original 1982 E.T. If you notice, when we did put out E.T. we put out two E.T.s. We put out the digitally enhanced version with the additional scenes and for no extra money, in the same package, we put out the original ‘82 version. I always tell people to go back to the ’82 version.

Yeah I read that a while ago. So what?
Go back and read his statement again. He is not telling everyone not to watch the update. What he says is when he is asked, he suggests the first one. I didn't ask what version to watch. He chose to make the update, and I choose to watch that. Why not then, as he did before, "for no extra money, in the same package, put out two E.T.s" - including the other existing version, as he did with the ET DVD, and the BR of CE3K? Or do you think people shouldn't be allowed that choice, either? If you feel that we should only have the filmmakers' currently preferred version (and we all know how often they change their minds) then you should agree with Lucas that people should shut up and buy only HIS preferred version of Star Wars. Make sure you read that article you linked to again. What you conveniently left out was:
Quint: Having the option is the big deal for me. Using the Star Wars example, I don’t think there’d be an outcry if we could watch a nice transfer of the original versions. We’d be like, “George can do what he wants and I’ll watch it… but you know maybe the fans would like the option of watching the movie they fell in love with, too.”
That works both ways, you know...that article advocates a CHOICE of BOTH versions.

 

[Rick Thompson]

I'm fine with wire removal, unless you can convince me the film makers wanted the seams in their special effects to show. Where I draw the line is adding things that aren't in the original, which is what George Lucas has been doing with a vengeance, or other significant alterations i.e. taking out the guns from E.T. or matting Hayden Christensen into the end of Return of the Jedi.

 

[ahollis]

Well I guess I can dispose of the DVD and replace it with the SE DVD and still have a decent set. However I am fonder of the original version. That's the one that played for over a year in some theatres.

 

[Charles Smith]

Never saw the revised one -- in fact, I still only have the LD box -- but I have wonderful memories of going to the original several times in L.A. It was great, btw, to be talking about that over on Cinema Treasures a while back, and be responded to by the very projectionist who was running a couple of the shows I was at (at the Picwood).

 

[haineshisway]

I'm not ambivalent in terms of what I feel about the 2002 "version" of ET - I loathe it. I lost all respect for Mr. Spielberg when I saw it. I felt the same way with the redone Close Encounters. All these "problems" that people suddenly have years later - they are hilarious. There were no "problems" with ET nor were there with Close Encounters. They were two completely successful and magical films. Period. Huge hits both, as well they should have been. I am thrilled he is not making available the 2002 redo and glad he's come to his senses. I also think the only version of Close Encounters should be the original. That's what he made, that's what audiences saw and loved. The End. ET was perfect. It IS perfect. I don't want the option to watch some rethought version - I don't want anything but the original and the people who say this is no longer a day one purchase (whatever that means - will they purchase it on day two) truly cannot love the film. Those who love the film that Mr. Spielberg made and released in 1982 will be all over this release, as they should be. And those are my two centimes for whatever they are worth.

 

[TravisR]

That's what he made, that's what audiences saw and loved.

As I've said before, I'm not really that concerned about the lack of the SE but there has to be younger people that fell in love with the movie via the special edition (as well as a smaller number of original fans that came to enjoy the SE more) and they're not getting to see the version that they prefer. I'm not writing my Congressmen or boycotting the release but I do understand how some people don't like its exclusion.

 

[Radioman970]

I'm surprised to see the love for the 2002 version, as I thought the changes/additions were neutral at best and harmful at worst.
The 1982 version was great - the alterations only hurt it...

Not sure how they hurt it. The original impressed me so much in 1982 when I was young I went from extremely shy to wanting to act. Ended up in radio because of ET. I treasure the film. But I still love what they did with the 2002 version. I seriously don't see what hurts it. If fans just want the original version, and I understand why, it would hurt if both versions were included for folks like me. Now, I wouldn't buy it if only the 2002 version were included or both weren't available at all. I'll buy when both are available. the DVD looks fabulous! I just watched it 3 weeks ago while on vacation (a tradition) and enjoyed it immensely.
I like it when subtle fixes are done to some films. I'd love to watch The Exorcist and not see the wires. Truly, I hate that. Takes me out of the movie.
Now, extra scenes in flicks seem to be a hit or miss with me personally. I loved ET 2002. dislike Alien and Aliens extended editions. Well, with Aliens the scenes are nice but some ruin surprises, like seeing Newt's family before the marines arrive. Takes away the mystery of what's there. Alien 3 I found excellent with the different cut. I won't watch it in theatrical ever again.

 

[Scott Calvert]

Emphasis mine,
Here, IMO, we get to the sad reality of the issue.  IMO, Star Wars IS relevant, as is Raiders of the Lost Ark, Close Encounters, and any other film that has gone through digital "udpates" over time.
No longer is this a black and white issue of "originals" vs. "originals plus updates".  It's become a soggy, gray mess of individual preferences over the validity of each and every change that's been made.  No one will ever be satisfied, because everyone has a different interpretation of what's acceptable and what's "going too far".
"Greedo shooting first changes Han's story, so that's going too far."
"Removing cobra reflections in Raiders?  Eh, that's OK, I can live with that."
"Showing the interior of the spaceship in Close Encounters?  Why spoil the mystery?  What's the point?"
"Changing shotguns to walkie talkies in ET?  Well, we don't want people to think the officers would really have shot at a few kids on bikes."
All opinions, and all equally valid/invalid depending on your point of view.
I really hate when discussions get to this point, because there is no end can be no resolution - we've entered the "mobius strip" of discussion and it's become a game of attrition.

Which is why I believe what one thinks regarding changes being for the better or not is irrelevant. I don't care.
It's not the film that was initially released to the public in 1982. Period. The only thing that matters is the film that the filmakers made when they released it for public consumption.

 

[haineshisway]

Not sure how they hurt it. The original impressed me so much in 1982 when I was young I went from extremely shy to wanting to act. Ended up in radio because of ET. I treasure the film. But I still love what they did with the 2002 version. I seriously don't see what hurts it. If fans just want the original version, and I understand why, it would hurt if both versions were included for folks like me. Now, I wouldn't buy it if only the 2002 version were included or both weren't available at all. I'll buy when both are available. the DVD looks fabulous! I just watched it 3 weeks ago while on vacation (a tradition) and enjoyed it immensely.
I like it when subtle fixes are done to some films. I'd love to watch The Exorcist and not see the wires. Truly, I hate that. Takes me out of the movie.
Now, extra scenes in flicks seem to be a hit or miss with me personally. I loved ET 2002. dislike Alien and Aliens extended editions. Well, with Aliens the scenes are nice but some ruin surprises, like seeing Newt's family before the marines arrive. Takes away the mystery of what's there. Alien 3 I found excellent with the different cut. I won't watch it in theatrical ever again.

Do you honestly think ONE person who saw The Exorcist in a theater saw "wires"? I can assure you they didn't. If people freeze-frame and blow up and/or just LOOK for these things, they'll see them. This is a home video phenomenon. No one saw the wires in the knife throwing finale of Carrie - no one. Only by freeze-framing at home.

 

[Jason_V]

Originally Posted by haineshisway /t/321107/ushe-press-release-e-t-the-extra-terrestrial/30#post_3932364
No one saw the wires in the knife throwing finale of Carrie - no one.

Okay, sorry for being "that guy," but Carrie did about $34 million in domestic box office. No one who saw the film in the theater saw the wires?

I know what point you're trying to make, but come on. Saying that no one saw the wires is a bit of an exaggeration no one can back up with any facts.

 

Well, speaking of "Carrie." The blu-ray has the wrong contrast to it. The prom scene is way too bright and "hot" looking...the fire is so bright that you can tell some of it is actually animation. The original film was darker and flatter, and you couldn't see the fake aspect of the fire. So, it's not just HD that brings out flaws, but errors in reproducing the image for home consumption as well.

 

[Brian Sallot]

I personally think that this is the right choice as this is the 30Th Anniversary of the theatrical release of E.T. and not the 10Th Anniversary of the 2002 version of E.T. In that respect I believe this is how the film should be released on Blu. That being said I feel that it probably would not have hurt to release another edition that includes an extra disc that includes the 2002 version as extra content for those that wish to have it in their collection. Having seen E.T. at the theater when I was twelve years old was a very magical experience and I am grateful that that version is the one being released. I personally do not care what changes a film maker makes to their films as long as the original versions are preserved and made available to those that wish to have them in their collection. With all these releases coming up it is a very good year for Blu-Ray. Hopefully Universal does not screw these up. Later everyone.

 

[NY2LA]

As I've said before, I'm not really that concerned about the lack of the SE but there has to be younger people that fell in love with the movie via the special edition (as well as a smaller number of original fans that came to enjoy the SE more) and they're not getting to see the version that they prefer. I'm not writing my Congressmen or boycotting the release but I do understand how some people don't like its exclusion.

Finally a voice of reason! It amazes me when ordinary folks get such inflated egos that they decide their opinion and desires are all that matters, and therefore feel absolutely entitled to deprive others of their own. We see a lot of that here.
I already have the deluxe boxed edition from 10 years ago, which has BOTH versions of the film, and that's fine with me until a Blu Ray includes the 2002 version.
I have every right to vote with my wallet, and those who berate me or look down on me for that, well that IS hilarious, because they have shown no evidence why their opinions should matter to me at all.

 

[NY2LA]

I know what point you're trying to make, but come on.  Saying that no one saw the wires is a bit of an exaggeration no one can back up with any facts.

We see a lot of that around here, too!