Save Star Wars! (1 Viewer)

[Ruz-El]

Originally Posted by RobertR

Originally Posted by Russell G [url=/t/315174/save-star-wars/30#post_3857114]

Great post Ethan. I would like to add...


Except he did. We got non-amorphic DVDs of the original films based on the 90's laser discs. That wasn't good enough for the fans. Many of these fans were of the "Just give us the original films! They don't have to be full blown special editions!" type. George Lucas gave them exactly that, spruced up laser disc transfers. Not perfect, not remastered, but basically as good as those transfers can get. Even though he made it really clear that such things would not be released since he prefers the current cuts. And what happened?


The fan base shit the bed and considered it another slap in the face since they weren't total remasters.


Lucas is pretty much in the damned if you do, damned if you don't camp

Damned if he does what, exactly? If ANY other company in 2006 released a widescreen film using a 13 year old nonenhanced laserdisc transfer, it would have been roundly condemned, and rightly so. Yet somehow it's being "unfair" to Lucas to hold him to the same standard? You're being disingenuous in equating "full blown special edition" with "transfer using modern technology". They're not the same thing and you know it.

The difference though is this. Lucas made it really clear that the ONLY Star Wars that would be released is the current SE versions. As a fan service, and for no reason other then to serve the fans, he put out spruced up old LD transfers as a BONUS feature. Not as a stand alone, full retail disc, but as an extra disc to a DVD re-release. It shouldn't of been much of a surprise that he didn't spend millions of dollars to spruce up versions that he would prefer not watched in the first place. I could see being irate about it if it was marketed as a stand alone, but it wasn't. It was marketed as a one time, last chance bonus feature.


And because he does own them means he does have the right to release these however he wants.

 

[RobertR]

The difference though is this. Lucas made it really clear that the ONLY Star Wars that would be released is the current SE versions. As a fan service, and for no reason other then to serve the fans, he put out spruced up old LD transfers as a BONUS feature. Not as a stand alone, full retail disc, but as an extra disc to a DVD re-release. It shouldn't of been much of a surprise that he didn't spend millions of dollars to spruce up versions that he would prefer not watched in the first place. I could see being irate about it if it was marketed as a stand alone, but it wasn't. It was marketed as a one time, last chance bonus feature.

So according to you, all any studio has to do is announce that it’s releasing a film only as “a service to the fans”, and that makes it immune to any criticism of the quality of the release. That makes about as much sense as asking for fresh bread at a nice restaurant, and having the waiter deign to dump two day old bread on your table instead. You’d defend the waiter, because he brought the bread ONLY because it was asked for, and the “poor guy” is “damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t”.

 

[Ruz-El]

Originally Posted by RobertR

Originally Posted by Russell G [url=/t/315174/save-star-wars/60#post_3857237]

The difference though is this. Lucas made it really clear that the ONLY Star Wars that would be released is the current SE versions. As a fan service, and for no reason other then to serve the fans, he put out spruced up old LD transfers as a BONUS feature. Not as a stand alone, full retail disc, but as an extra disc to a DVD re-release. It shouldn't of been much of a surprise that he didn't spend millions of dollars to spruce up versions that he would prefer not watched in the first place. I could see being irate about it if it was marketed as a stand alone, but it wasn't. It was marketed as a one time, last chance bonus feature.

So according to you, all any studio has to do is announce that it’s releasing a film only as “a service to the fans”, and that makes it immune to any criticism of the quality of the release. That makes about as much sense as asking for fresh bread at a nice restaurant, and having the waiter deign to dump two day old bread on your table instead. You’d defend the waiter, because he brought the bread ONLY because it was asked for, and the “poor guy” is “damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t”.

Oh please. No one was naive enough to not know what Lucas was releasing on those transfers. I'm sure many other films have had additional versions of the film included in sub standard versions. The Warner Archives release many films with no remastering and those releases aren't hated due to quality, people are happy to have the films. There's some shorts on some of those archive collections that are barely watchable due to poor quality, but since it was made clear, just as those Star Wars DVDs were made clear to be bonus features not main features, there's no pulling the weasel on the customer. So stop being being ridiculous just because the same thing happened with Star Wars and stop attributing insane blanket statements to me.

 

[RobertR]

 

Oh please. No one was naive enough to not know what Lucas was releasing on those transfers. I'm sure many other films have had additional versions of the film included in sub standard versions. The Warner Archives release many films with no remastering and those releases aren't hated due to quality, people are happy to have the films. There's some shorts on some of those archive collections that are barely watchable due to poor quality

The original Star Wars films aren’t some “obscure alternate versions” or “shorts” found in a vault someplace. The original film is on the AFI’s top 100 film list, and is one of the top five moneymakers. Name ANY other film with ANY other studio with such credentials that was treated with the utter contempt Lucas has treated it. The fact is you can’t. And once again, you’ve defended the idea that if people “know what to expect”, no half-assed treatment can be criticized.

 

[Ricardo C]

 

Oh please. No one was naive enough to not know what Lucas was releasing on those transfers. I'm sure many other films have had additional versions of the film included in sub standard versions. The Warner Archives release many films with no remastering and those releases aren't hated due to quality, people are happy to have the films. There's some shorts on some of those archive collections that are barely watchable due to poor quality, but since it was made clear, just as those Star Wars DVDs were made clear to be bonus features not main features, there's no pulling the weasel on the customer.  So stop being being ridiculous just because the same thing happened with Star Wars and stop attributing insane blanket statements to me.

A couple quibbles with your last two posts: 1) If you think back to 2006, we only found out the "bonus" DVDs would be non-anamorphic because of production house leaks, not any explicit announcement prior to the actual release. In fact, I don't think it was ever officially announced that the transfers were 13 years old at the time the discs were produced. 2) The LD transfers were not "spruced up" in any way, they are straight dumps, except for the1977 crawl being restored. No matter what side you take on this debate, I don't think you can deny that Lucas tried to pull a fast one, trumpeting the release of the originals, selling a whole new line of merchandise (including a "Han Shot First" t-shirt, of all things), and neglecting to be open about the nature of the source material. In the age of HDTVs and projection screens measured in feet rather than inches, a non-anamorphic, 13 (now 18)-year-old transfer is an insult to the people that keep you in business.

 

[Ruz-El]

In the age of HDTVs and projection screens measured in feet rather than inches, a non-anamorphic, 13 (now 18)-year-old transfer is an insult to the people that keep you in business.

If you feel that way then you shouldn't of bought them. I'll stand corrected on your two points. I don't remember anything on the packaging saying that the original films were amazing new transfers either, just that they were available as a one-time only deal. No promises made. I also thought I saw a review on the Bits saying that the LD transfers looked better then on these DVDs then they did on the LD thanks to the encoding. Which is why I thought they were spruced up. I also thought that Lucasfilm confirmed it too. And that they chose not to do the anamorphic with these transfers since it would make them look extra crap. If Lucasfilm advertised these as remasters and then didn't deliver that, then yeah, I'd cry foul. As it is, you get what you get with bonus features. While not in the same class, there are dozens of blurays currently porting over SD special features instead of HD remasters. And Lucas chose to treat the original films as nothing more then a special feature. Was it the right choice? I don;t think so, but it was the choice, so be it.


I just don't understand the entitlement that some feel that they are owed anything from anyone in Hollywood. Lucas clearly doesn't feel that it's worth spending money on the old versions. He doesn't like them, he doesn't want to work with them. He's been tinkering with the original Star Wars almost from the point of it first getting a release. Why is this so hard to understand? It's his movie. He owns it. I don't think he's being a dick about it. He is doing what his artistic muse is telling him to do. He's presenting it to the world as an artist should. That's all his job is. that he's made heaps of money over a version of his artistic creation is irrelevant. That critics think to include it on a best ever film list is irrelevant.


Would it be nice if he released the old original versions for nostalgia/historic reasons in a fantastic version? Of course it would. That he doesn't do so doesn't make him a horrible bastard. Just stop buying Star Wars if you feel so strongly about it.


And by all means don't pressure the government to change ownership laws just so you can relive your past for 2 hours.


And since we want to compare Star Wars to other films. At least with people got the choice to buy some type of official version of the original trilogy on DVD. I doubt I'll be able to buy Song Of The South anytime soon from Disney. Disney owns the film, and they choose not to release it period, despite it being one of there more successful films, having huge historical value for the use of effects at the time, and for inspiring one of the most popular rides at their amusement parks. Because of pressure from minority groups, they are uncomfortable releasing the film or having it shown. It's there choice since they own it. Same as it's Lucas's choice to control the films he owns however he see's fit

 

[Worth]

He's been tinkering with the original Star Wars almost from the point of it first getting a release. Why is this so hard to understand? It's his movie. He owns it. I don't think he's being a dick about it. He is doing what his artistic muse is telling him to do.

So I suppose if you bought a painting and the artist showed up twenty years after the fact and decided to make some changes because he was "following his muse", you'd be okay with that?

 

[Ricardo C]

Russell, I only own the 2006 editions because when I moved to the US last year, I left most of my hard-to-pack stuff behind (DVDs, comic books, etc.), as I didn't want to deal with a $50-per-bag fee on top of all the expenses I had at the time (green card fees, plane ticket, moving into new apartment, etc.) Once here, I went out to replace the set, and the 2006 was the current release at the time. Do the DVDs look better than the LDs? Yeah, they do. But that doesn't appear to be as a result of any kind of enhancement to the transfer, but simply a consequence of the move to a higher-resolution format, which allows the transfer to be shown in a truer light, much the same way a BluRay done from a subpar master will still look better than its DVD counterpart. On a CRT TV, they look just fine. But this isn't the CRT era anymore, and it's disappointing that one of the most envelope-pushing filmmakers of all time settled for such a poor presentation. As it stands, I'm glad I have them, as they can be digitally enhanced into tolerability through third-party software like ffdshow. I'm in the process of re-encoding them at 1080p using a host of ffdshow tweaks. They won't pass for actual HD, but it's about as good as it gets, considering the source material.

 

[Ruz-El]

Originally Posted by Worth

Originally Posted by Russell G [url=/t/315174/save-star-wars/60#post_3857310]

He's been tinkering with the original Star Wars almost from the point of it first getting a release. Why is this so hard to understand? It's his movie. He owns it. I don't think he's being a dick about it. He is doing what his artistic muse is telling him to do.

So I suppose if you bought a painting and the artist showed up twenty years after the fact and decided to make some changes because he was "following his muse", you'd be okay with that?

No I wouldn't be ok with that because he's would be altering something I purchased and owned. That's not what is happening with Star Wars, your metaphor is wrong.


This is a case of me seeing an artists painting and really liking it. Years later I decide I want to own it, to find that the artist has altered it. I now have to chose whether or not I want to buy the altered one that the artist prefers, or a photocopy of the original I liked in the first place that the artist has chosen to offer for a limited time. I decided not to get the photocopy. Now a few years later I have a really nice frame and I think I wouldn't mind that unaltered painting, but now nothing is available but the altered one. I have to decide as a consumer if I want to purchase that one or not.


It shouldn't be up to the government to force the artist to release any version of his works.

 

[Greg_S_H]

I seem to remember a long period of time where four classic Hitchcock films were completely unavailable to the public--Vertigo and Rear Window were two of them; I don't remember the other two. I believe the Wayne estate was holding back The High and the Mighty and some others for years. When I joined this forum, it was to beg the studios for The Incredible Shrinking Man and Phantasm II. I waited a long, long time for both of them. The point is, there are a lot of things that are withheld from the public for one reason or another. Maybe someone involved doesn't want them out there. Maybe someone doesn't want someone else to profit from the release. Maybe the release just doesn't look promising to the beancounters. Maybe it's just too expensive to get it up to snuff. Whatever the reason, movies are kept off the market all the time. If we ask the government to step in and force Lucas to put out the versions we want (and, what does that mean? Should he have to leave off "Episode IV: A New Hope?" Should it include the full "open the blast doors!/close the blast doors!" segment? Should he be visited by agents if any stormtroopper laser hit is missing? Which takes should he be forced to include? Will he be in trouble if he fixes things that were always present, like garbage mattes, transparent cockpits, and the emperor's slug?), then can we expect raids on any studio who refuses to release something they control? I'm sure there are a (very) few (I hope) who would be all for that as long as they got the movie they wanted. I'd rather keep the memory of the films and my freedoms. Yes, the above is a bunch of hyperbole, but so is most of this thread. At least we seem to have left behind the silly notions that the LoC is lying to us and Lucas is strong-arming private collectors out of their prints.

 

[Mark-P]

No, but guess what? as the owner of that painting you'd be within your legal rights to deface it and paint in a mustache if you like and the artist would have no right to complain about it.

So I suppose if you bought a painting and the artist showed up twenty years after the fact and decided to make some changes because he was "following his muse", you'd be okay with that?

 

[Ruz-El]

Originally Posted by Mark-P

No, but guess what? as the owner of that painting you'd be within your legal rights to deface it and paint in a mustache if you like and the artist would have no right to complain about it.

Originally Posted by Worth [url=/t/315174/save-star-wars/60#post_3857315]

So I suppose if you bought a painting and the artist showed up twenty years after the fact and decided to make some changes because he was "following his muse", you'd be okay with that?

Which is pretty much what another poster in this thread is doing by transferring his DVDs to his PC and up converting them himself to try to tweak the old transfers into a decent HD presentation. I'm sure Lucas would frown on it, but it doesn't matter (provided you use it privately and don't earn money from it of course), you own the product.


Just like Lucas owns the masters and rights to distribute his product as he see's fit.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Ethan, do you really believe every fan who desires the original versions wants the government to twist Lucas' arm into getting what they want?

Is that really what I said? I used the term "fanboys," but I was really talking about those fanboys who are supporting the campaign in question. No, I do not believe that all fanboys desire such a thing. Because I am also a Star Wars fanboy and have no desire whatsoever to revoke the Constitution of the United States of America, just so we can see Star Wars.

 

[Ethan Riley]

And that's a crock. Lucas is able to make changes because he financially controls the films, not because it's within his rights as an artist to do so. With one or two exceptions, it's a privilege that no other filmmaker is afforded. This isn't about freedom of speech - it's about a billionaire mogul wielding financial power.

How is it a crock? Lucas financially controls the films and he's the artist/creator of "Star Wars." Don't inflate the issue; George Lucas is in a unique position because he holds both financial and artistic power over the Star Wars films. My statement had nothing to do with the woes of other filmmakers. I was talking about one specific issue, not generalizing about the film industry as a whole.

 

[Ryan-G]

You know what never ceases to astound me here? When the topic was the Lord of the Rings extended editions being unavailable on Blu-ray, I was told that the EE's were irrelevant because the Theatrical Editions were the director's prefered cut. Even though the EE's are much closer to what the original artist, Tolkein, wanted I was told they were irrelevant. Even though the EE's received a theatrical release, they didn't count, because that wasn't the director's prefered cut. Now, the topic is Star Wars. The director has flat out stated that this is his prefered cut...and suddenly every assertion for why the LotR EE's didn't matter has become irrelevant, what the director prefers is irrelevant, all that matters is the theatrical versions from decades ago. It doesn't even matter that the SE's are a theatrical version. This forum desperately needs to make up it's mind. Either what the director wants is all that matters, or what the director wants is irrelevant, but it doesn't go both ways. Because we will be talking about this again in a few years when Harry Potter gets it's altered cuts release and they lock away the theatrical editions.

 

[Ethan Riley]

You know what never ceases to astound me here? When the topic was the Lord of the Rings extended editions being unavailable on Blu-ray, I was told that the EE's were irrelevant because the Theatrical Editions were the director's prefered cut. Even though the EE's are much closer to what the original artist, Tolkein, wanted I was told they were irrelevant. Even though the EE's received a theatrical release, they didn't count, because that wasn't the director's prefered cut. Now, the topic is Star Wars. The director has flat out stated that this is his prefered cut...and suddenly every assertion for why the LotR EE's didn't matter has become irrelevant, what the director prefers is irrelevant, all that matters is the theatrical versions from decades ago. It doesn't even matter that the SE's are a theatrical version. This forum desperately needs to make up it's mind. Either what the director wants is all that matters, or what the director wants is irrelevant, but it doesn't go both ways. Because we will be talking about this again in a few years when Harry Potter gets it's altered cuts release and they lock away the theatrical editions.

Well, you're absolutely right. And what I think is funny about the forum is that a lot of people here feel that if something isn't done now, it's never going to be done. Sheesh...have a little faith people, okay? So Lucas didn't release Star Wars on bluray. Yeah, it's annoying. But then there's some dude from England! of all places suggesting that we gladly revoke George Lucas' first amendment rights (not to mention about 100 laws) and force him to deliver the original films. I mean--good god--every time I think of it, it becomes more absurd, not less. Over in the "tv on dvd" message board, go back several years and look up all these impassioned posts from people claiming (with self-delusional "authority") that both "Saturday Night Live" and "Ally McBeal" would never--ever receive dvd releases because of the high music costs. Well, I wonder what those same geniuses think today? Miracles on dvd happen every week. Stuff appears out of the blue with little advance notice. Tv shows that fans never thought would see the light of day, suddenly do. Stuff that was cancelled suddenly gets put back on the schedule. No one has a right to be upset about Star Wars unless we get to the last day on Earth and George Lucas still hasn't released the originals on bluray. Then maybe people can yell at him. But he's never expressly, definitively stated that he will never release them on bluray. Just keep writing to him--politely--and making your desires known. That's it. That's all that has to be done. That's a fan's job. And in the meantime, enjoy the current blurays, or laugh at them, or hate them, or watch The Lion King instead. It's so very easy. But at present, I feel there's no further need for the drama, Congressional intervention or George Lucas' head on a silver platter.

 

[Ricardo C]

You know what never ceases to astound me here? When the topic was the Lord of the Rings extended editions being unavailable on Blu-ray, I was told that the EE's were irrelevant because the Theatrical Editions were the director's prefered cut. Even though the EE's are much closer to what the original artist, Tolkein, wanted I was told they were irrelevant. Even though the EE's received a theatrical release, they didn't count, because that wasn't the director's prefered cut. Now, the topic is Star Wars. The director has flat out stated that this is his prefered cut...and suddenly every assertion for why the LotR EE's didn't matter has become irrelevant, what the director prefers is irrelevant, all that matters is the theatrical versions from decades ago. It doesn't even matter that the SE's are a theatrical version. This forum desperately needs to make up it's mind. Either what the director wants is all that matters, or what the director wants is irrelevant, but it doesn't go both ways. Because we will be talking about this again in a few years when Harry Potter gets it's altered cuts release and they lock away the theatrical editions.

You have to view that argument in context, though: At the time, it was known that the extended cuts would be released, perhaps in 2011, perhaps in 2012 as part of the marketing push for The Hobbit. But it was known that they were coming. Had Jackson/New Line/Shaye/my dog said they were going to put the extended editions into a vault, and that "they don't exist anymore" the argument would have looked very different.

 

[RobertR]

No one has a right to be upset about Star Wars unless we get to the last day on Earth and George Lucas still hasn't released the originals on bluray. Then maybe people can yell at him. But he's never expressly, definitively stated that he will never release them on bluray..

That's utterly ludicrous. People are supposed to "have faith" in George Lucas until "the last day on earth"?? And until that "last day", they have NO "right" to be upset? I've seen examples of Lucas-worship, but this is perhaps the silliest. Not only is it nonsensical to wait until the "last day" (we'd all be dead by then, and whoever's left would have no time left to watch the damn things, assuming people wanted to spend their last hours watching movies), George Lucas wouldn't be around on the "last day" to change his mind about ANYTHING, unless you "have faith" that he's somehow going to divinely resurrect himself. It's obvious to everyone that Lucas has a loathing, a contempt for the original films that goes FAR beyond the usual reasons (money, lack of a good source, rights issues, perceived lack of interest) why a studio hasn't released a given item. That makes your "faith" utterly irrational.

 

[ahollis]

Originally Posted by RobertR

It's obvious to everyone that Lucas has a loathing, a contempt for the original films that goes FAR beyond the usual reasons (money, lack of a good source, rights issues, perceived lack of interest) why a studio hasn't released a given item. That makes your "faith" utterly irrational.

That I agree with. Lucas does have a loathing for the original films, it might be because he did not like the way the original came out, Remember that Spielberg was not happy with Close Encounters and after it's success, Columbia allowed him to go back a work on it, what is different is that both versions along with a third are available. I truly feel that Lucas wants the six films to run seamlessly from one to another to tell the epic story, and to do so he felt he had to make changes in effects and story. However, some of those changes don't make sense to me, but I will guess they do to him.

As long as he is thinking this, the originals will never been seen again.

 

[Ruz-El]

I don't think Lucas hates or loathes the original films at all. I think as a creator he sees Star Wars as a living thing, not a museum piece. Hence the constant, obsessive tinkering with the originals.