Could the original, unaltered STAR WARS be on its way to Blu-ray? (2 Viewers)

[Jari K]

It's his film he can do anything he wants with it.

Well, not anymore. SW belongs to Disney now. They don't pay zillions to Lucas and then wait for his "approval" when it comes to new trilogy and (future) Blu-ray releases of the old ones.

 

[TravisR]

Well, not anymore. SW belongs to Disney now. They don't pay zillions to Lucas and then wait for his "approval" when it comes to new trilogy and (future) Blu-ray releases of the old ones.

I've already been told that I'm totally wrong about this but I wouldn't be too sure that Disney can release the original versions. If George Lucas was really serious about the SEs being 'the' versions of the movies, it's not hard to imagine that there's a stipulation in the sale that only allows Disney to release the SEs. With the amount of money that Disney will make from merchandise (Star Wars merchandise earned nearly $1.5 billion in 2012 alone and that's without a movie boosting toy sales), new movies, sales of new & old movies, not being able to release the original versions of the movies would be a non-issue for Disney.

I'm certainly not saying that this IS the case but until the original versions get announced, I'm not assuming that Disney can release them.

 

[Bryan^H]

I've already been told that I'm totally wrong about this but I wouldn't be too sure that Disney can release the original versions. If George Lucas was really serious about the SEs being 'the' versions of the movies, it's not hard to imagine that there's a stipulation in the sale that only allows Disney to release the SEs. With the amount of money that Disney will make from merchandise (Star Wars merchandise earned nearly $1.5 billion in 2012 alone and that's without a movie boosting toy sales), new movies, sales of new & old movies, not being able to release the original versions of the movies would be a non-issue for Disney.

I'm certainly not saying that this IS the case but until the original versions get announced, I'm not assuming that Disney can release them.

You're probably right. I used to think they would have to be released because it's the biggest selling point for another trilogy release on Blu-Ray. But with the advent of 4k......well the SE would sell itself with a new 4K transfer.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Well, not anymore. SW belongs to Disney now. They don't pay zillions to Lucas and then wait for his "approval" when it comes to new trilogy and (future) Blu-ray releases of the old ones.

No, they are still his films in the sense that he is the creator. Every creator of a film's rights in this area should be respected, regardless of what entity owns the negative.

 

[Carlo_M]

No, they are still his films in the sense that he is the creator. Every creator of a film's rights in this area should be respected, regardless of what entity owns the negative.

His opinion can be respected, but in film, movies, television, music, if you agree to go under a major studio/label/etc. the studio tends to own as much or more of the share. Sure it may have been "your idea" as a filmmaker, but the studio gave you the financing to get the actors, additional writers, crew, equipment, etc. It's not as if Lucas worked on Star Wars all by himself and some studio came in and is taking the credit. Unlike painters, who for the most part truly do control the creation process from beginning to end, without the studios there is no Star Wars (just like without Lucas there is no Star Wars).

Films are nowhere near a solitary endeavor, and Star Wars is no exception. His opinion is respected, but if he no longer owns the property rights (via a 4B sale to Disney) then as long as there is no prohibition clause, Disney can now do with the property as they see fit.

 

[Ken_Martinez]

Even when Lucas DID own it all, lock stock and barrel, the originals still found their way on DVD as unrestored, bonus features.

If Lucas was able to force any stipulation at all, it would likely forbid the OOT from being the main program of a home video release. To forbid Disney from releasing the OOT at all in any form would be a stricter stance than he himself took.

 

[Jari K]

Lucas is the original creator of SW and of course Disney and fans respect that. People respect the films so of course they also respect Lucas.But the fact is that it was Lucas himself that let his films to be released as they were back in the days (and creating these "original versions"). Finished films that were shown in the movie theatres.So some people are still saying that after all these years and especially after the megadeal with Disney Lucas still has the final word? I just don't believe that.But of course it could be that eventually Disney doesn't see enough money/revenue when it comes to "original versions". Sure, many fans would buy them and they could probably do a limited theatrical run in some selected theatres. But is that enough?

 

[cafink]

No, they are still his films in the sense that he is the creator. Every creator of a film's rights in this area should be respected, regardless of what entity owns the negative.

If being the creative "owner" of the films was important George Lucas, he could have kept them at Lucasfilm. Instead, he elected to sell the rights to Disney. If the money Disney paid him was more important to Lucas than was maintaining creative ownership of the films, what commitment should I, the viewer, have to Lucas over Disney? Of course he was well within his rights to sell the movies, but you can't have it both ways.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

I'm saying it's his call. If he doesn't care now then that's his call. And just because some inferior version was released earlier, and people experienced it, that doesn't mean that people have a perpetual right to that version. They have the right to what the creator chooses to make available.Kubrick withheld rights to his films in the UK for decades - WB owned them but they agreed to his request.People who restore films know that they can't just alter them - thats why people like RAH insist on leaving half frames out of Lawrence, that's the version that Lean approved so even though it can be "fixed" now you don't do it because the director can't approve it. Studios know the same thing, just because they own it they will often defer to the request of the director.

 

[Jari K]

You can't create "art", finish it, publish it, distribute it, promote it, show it to the wide audience, put it out there for years and years... And then suddenly decide that people can't see it in HD and in "great quality". It's just too late for that. It's not his "call" anymore.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Absolutely you can. Just because you like and want something doesn't mean you're entitled to it.

 

[cafink]

Studios know the same thing, just because they own it they will often defer to the request of the director.

They often choose to; they don't have an obligation to.

Whether or not to release the original versions of the Star Wars movies *used to be* George Lucas's call. If being in the position to make that call was important to him, Lucas could have retained that right simply by keeping the rights to movies at Lucasfilm. But once he sold them to Disney, he gave up that right (ostensibly, anyway--as Travis mentioned, there may have been some stipulation about this in the sale). The films don't belong to George Lucas anymore, and they're not his to do whatever he wants with.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

I make no legal claims. These are moral rights.

 

[Carabimero]

If you do release the originals, what do you change? Which sound mix do you use? (I believe there were three original mixes: mono, stereo, and one mullti-channel)

What amuses me is that fans want the original, but not really: they'll want a 7.1 mix, a product reaching some level of technical perfection that never existed in the first place, some dolled up restoration that only exists because new technology created it.

So what to do, what to do? What's okay to change and what isn't?

 

[TravisR]

But the fact is that it was Lucas himself that let his films to be released as they were back in the days (and creating these "original versions"). Finished films that were shown in the movie theatres.

That the movies got released to DVD is the one thing that makes me think his attitude towards them is that he doesn't mind them being out there as long as he wasn't spending any of his money on what he considers unfinished versions of the movies. Now that it would be Disney's money, maybe he doesn't care at all if they're out there. That being said, I'm not making any assumptions because, like I said, it would be such a non-issue to Disney that if he wanted them buried, they're buried.

What amuses me is that fans want the original, but not really: they'll want a 7.1 mix, a product reaching some level of technical perfection that never existed in the first place, some dolled up restoration that only exists because new technology created it.

So what to do, what to do? What's okay to change and what isn't?

From what I've gathered from my time on the internet is that for some people, changes that they like are OK (erasing matte lines that were originally visible) but changes they don't like (Greedo shoots first) are bad. You can also find people who essentially want some kind of pick-and-choose-the-changes version where they get the better space battle shots but drop stuff like Greedo shooting or the CG Jabba.

 

[Carabimero]

The question I always ask, for example if War of the Worlds is ever released on BD: If the original creator's could have made the wires completely invisible, would they? If the answer is yes, you remove the wires for the BD. But I'm not sure that kind of question works with Star wars, since one could conclude if Lucas had gotten what he wanted back in 1974, episode 4 would be pretty awful.

Me? For Star wars I'd be happy with scratches and matte lines removed (since I don't think the creators wanted those visible), and the original multi-channel mix.

 

[Carlo_M]

If all that were offered to me was the original theatrical versions warts and all (garbage mattes, vaseline smears, etc.) along with a selectable mono/stereo/surround soundtrack, I'd be happy.

While I'd also be happy with a "cleaned up effects" version (with no substantive changes, i.e. Greedo shooting first, Bring My Shuttle, random CGI creatures inserted for no reason), I'll take the above if I can only have one.

 

[SilverWook]

I'm saying it's his call. If he doesn't care now then that's his call. And just because some inferior version was released earlier, and people experienced it, that doesn't mean that people have a perpetual right to that version. They have the right to what the creator chooses to make available.Kubrick withheld rights to his films in the UK for decades - WB owned them but they agreed to his request.People who restore films know that they can't just alter them - thats why people like RAH insist on leaving half frames out of Lawrence, that's the version that Lean approved so even though it can be "fixed" now you don't do it because the director can't approve it.Studios know the same thing, just because they own it they will often defer to the request of the director.

I thought it was just A Clockwork Orange that had been withdrawn?

 

[SilverWook]

If you do release the originals, what do you change? Which sound mix do you use? (I believe there were three original mixes: mono, stereo, and one mullti-channel)

What amuses me is that fans want the original, but not really: they'll want a 7.1 mix, a product reaching some level of technical perfection that never existed in the first place, some dolled up restoration that only exists because new technology created it.

So what to do, what to do? What's okay to change and what isn't?

Why not all three original mixes? Not like there isn't room on a Blu Ray for them.

I'm a big fan of the mono mix myself. It's the one they put the most spit and polish on, since nobody knew in 1977 if Dolby Stereo was going to catch on. A couple competing sound systems have never been heard from again. Pun intended.

 

[TravisR]

I'm a big fan of the mono mix myself. It's the one they put the most spit and polish on, since nobody knew in 1977 if Dolby Stereo was going to catch on.

Wasn't the mono mix the one that wasn't really handled by Ben Burtt and Lucas?