STAR WARS ON BLU-RAY - FALL 2011 (1 Viewer)

[Douglas Monce]

 

Originally Posted by Yohan Pamudji

Quote:


I saw this article last night after posting here and thought about putting it up. Glad somebody did. It's always nice to be vindicated by true insider information. I think the statement "George Lucas cares mostly about the money" is pretty well factual instead of opinion at this point. It doesn't change anything, but it's nice to be right Lucas is the Bizarro-Midas. ROTJ, the prequels, the last Indy--'nuff said.

 


Too simplistic. The only art owned solely by the artist is art never released for public consumption. The line is certainly blurry, but denying the relationship between artist and patrons is ignoring a fundamental aspect of art.

Well I don't personally think of most films as art, and I particularly don't think of the Star Wars films as art. They are entertainment.

Regardless of that, in the U.S. “art” is something that can be owned by a single person. I could buy the Mona Lisa (assuming the French would sell it too me) and cut it up to make napkins if I wanted to. No one could stop me. The so called artist has no obligation to his audience any more than the audience has an obligation to him. The fact that a lot of truly horrible films are made each year proves this idea.

 

We aren’t required to pay and sit through a Star Wars movie anymore than Lucas is required to give in to the wishes of the fans. And frankly I’m glad of that. I’ve heard more dumb ideas about what should and shouldn’t be in a Star Wars movie over the years. (not particularly from this forum)

 

Doug

 

[Tim Mauldin]

Originally Posted by RobertR


 


Your personal attack only demonstrates how bereft you are of anything substantive to say.

yawn

 

[Mike Frezon]

Time for a reminder.

 

From the HTF's Terms of Service:

 

No personal attacks. We expect all members to treat each other with consideration and respect. While we encourage lively debate, we do not allow personal attacks. This includes direct attacks, such as name-calling, as well as indirect attacks, such as repeated baiting of a member in a provocative or belittling manner. If you believe that you have been subjected to a personal attack, or have witnessed one on another member, please see the section on Dealing with Problems for instructions on how to proceed.

 

Proceed with the discussion of the release.

 

 

 

[RobertR]

Thanks Mike. Let's hope it's followed.

 

[Douglas Monce]

 

Gary Kurtz also said, in the original Making of Star Wars documentary, that the next Star Wars movies would be "further adventures, rather than direct sequels". Shows you how much Gary Kurtz was in the loop even in 1977.

 

Kurtz was fired from the Star Wars films because he couldn't keep Empire on schedule and on budget, which was his job.

 

Doug

 

Originally Posted by Yohan Pamudji




Actually we do, straight from the mouth of Gary Kurtz who parted ways with Lucas because Lucas wanted to make toys more than he wanted to make a good movie:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2010/08/star-wars-was-born-a-long-time-ago-but-not-all-that-far-far-away-in-1972-filmmakers-george-lucas-and-gary-kurtz-wer.html

(Already posted in this thread, but reposted since it was probably lost in the noise and is relevant to the current discussion)

 

[Tim Mauldin]

Originally Posted by RobertR

Thanks Mike. Let's hope it's followed.

Trust me, as soon as I put you Ignore it's going to be followed.

 

[RobertR]

Best news I've heard all day.

 

[RobertR]

 

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce

 

Kurtz was fired from the Star Wars films because he couldn't keep Empire on schedule and on budget, which was his job.

 

Doug

 

That tends to confirm the statement said to be made by Lucas that Kurtz was "making this movie better than it needs to be".

 

[Douglas Monce]

 

In the immortal words of Ham Salad….

 

“Relax kid, its only a movie.”

 

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by RobertR


 


Does that tend to confirm the statement said to be made by Lucas that Kurtz was "making this movie better than it needs to be"?

 

No it simply says that Kurtz was not doing his job as a producer and getting Irvin Kershner moving on schedule. Its not the producers job to decide how well to make a movie, its his job to make sure its on time and on budget.

 

Doug

 

[RobertR]

That ends to conflict with what some have said about Kurtz' role, though, which was that he had a fair amount of creative input.

 

[Tim Mauldin]

Originally Posted by RobertR

Best news I've heard all day.

Then it must suck to be you.

 

[Douglas Monce]

I'm not so sure that is the case as much as he was being a little to indulgent with Kershner. Rather than telling him you've got 15 min to get this shot, he would let him go all day. Now thats not Kershner's fault because its his job to get the shots as best he can. If Kurtz had been telling him he had to move on he probably would have, but Kurtz was telling him he more time than he really did.

 

I've never read anything that indicated that Kurtz had any more of a creative role in Star Wars or Empire than say Howard Kazanjian did on Jedi.

 

Doug

 

[dpippel]

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce

In the immortal words of Ham Salad….

 

“Relax kid, its only a movie.”

 

If it was "only a movie" then this thread would be about 1/1000th its current size. For better or worse Star Wars is a part of our culture. It's woven into the zeitgeist. It had a huge impact on the childhoods of millions and in doing so became a very personal thing. The emotions on display here shouldn't be a surprise to anyone on this forum. The arguments are old and nothing new is being said. There are valid points made on both "sides" of the discussion, yet nothing constructive will come of it.

 

"These aren't the droids you're looking for. He can go about his business. Move along."

 

[MielR]

Originally Posted by TravisR 



Respect for a difference in opinion is a two way street though. It's not like the original trilogy-only fans are always angels and vice versa.

It's not about being "angels" - if the situation was reversed, and Lucas refused to release the SE in DVD or blu-ray form, I would not impugn the validity of SE fans' desire to have their favorite versions of the films released. Nor, I imagine, would many (if any) other OOT fans.

 

Many people have in fact expressed their desire for the 1997 theatrical versions, and I defy you to find an example anywhere of an OOT fan belittling one of those people because of their preference.

 

 

Fanaticism is a two-way street as well, Travis.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Originally Posted by dpippel

The arguments are old and nothing new is being said. There are valid points made on both "sides" of the discussion, yet nothing constructive will come of it.

And we really want to give everyone a chance to re-hash those arguments and vent their emotions--about the release. We've got 14 months--according to my challenged math skills--to wait on this set.
 

We've got all the time in the world. So let's all sit back and enjoy.

 

But that will be WITHOUT personal attacks and WITHOUT posts which have no bearing on the subject at hand. Consider this warning number one.

 

[Douglas Monce]

 

Originally Posted by MielR




It's not about being angels - if the situation was reversed, and Lucas refused to release the SE in DVD or blu-ray form, I would not impugn the validity of SE fans' desire to have their favorite versions of the films released. Nor, I imagine, would many (if any) other OOT fans.

 

Many people have in fact expressed their desire for the 1997 theatrical versions, and I defy you to find an example anywhere of an OOT fan belittling one of those people because of their preference.

 

Fanaticism is a two-way street as well, Travis.

I'm not sure anyone is belittling the desire for the original versions of the films, I know I'm not. I would like to have them also, but I don't know that I would watch them all that much. However I do think the teeth gnashing over the whole thing gets to be a little much at times. Attributing sinister motivations to the creator of the films is kind of silly in my opinion.

 

Doug

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by MielR

I have no quarrel with Lucas in terms of how much money he wants to make, or what kinds of films he does or doesn't direct, but in a sea of multi-version sets from peers such as Steven Spielberg and Ridley Scott, George Lucas stands alone.

Michael Mann says "Hi".

 

[flyers]

I still don't understand why the Special Editions and Original Cuts can't sit side by side in the same quality in this upcoming Boxset? Every big movie series on DVD and now many BluRays give the consumer both versions: Lord of the Rings, ET, Close Encounters, T2, Bladerunner, Aliens, I could go on and on.

 

I don't mind if people like the Special Edtions, as to each his own. I prefer the Original Cuts, and it is just the fact that I grew up with them and seen those versions a zillion times, so it is natural that I will find the new versions jarring at times. The same way a young kid who just saw the Special Editions wont really find those changes jarring, because they aren't changes to him because he probably never saw the originals. It's just the fact that Star Wars fanbase spans 2-3 generations now, kids who saw it in the theaters, kids who saw it on VHS in the 90's, kids who saw it in the theaters when the Special Editions and Prequels came out.

 

As I said, nobody is wrong about which version is better, because it is just an opinion, but I just don't understand why Lucas is so stubborn about releasing both versions to appease the whole fanbase. Spielberg, Cameron, Ridley Scott and Peter Jackson do it, and that is why you don't get the constant bickering among the fans when their DVD's come out. The fanbase is split among the Star Wars crowd, essentially because Mr. Lucas split it.

 

[Jason Charlton]

You know, all this talk about original versus special edition of the original trilogy STILL doesn't address what, to me, is the biggest downside of the whole set:

 

The inclusion of Episodes I-III in ANY form. To me, at least, ANY form of the original trilogy trumps ANY form of the prequels.