Because that would be... disingenuous? You do understand that giving the viewer the ability to choose a version of the film isn't anything new, right?
Could Disney finally give us the remastered, unedited Star Wars we want?
- Thread starter rodneyfaile
- Start date
Because that would be... disingenuous? You do understand that giving the viewer the ability to choose a version of the film isn't anything new, right?
Oh I know. How many let you pick bits and pieces though? You may want the original crawl, while the next guy might prefer the A New Hope version, etc...
While there are many edits that have taken place since 1997 that I don't like, I am not opposed to every single one of them as others have been.
My comment was based on the fact that there are so many different versions floating around and wouldn't it be fun that the user could pick which edits they wanted based on the version they grew up on. It could be the ultimate version and please the vast majority of those that dislike the numerous edits.
Not to mention be a showcase for technology.
-Eric
-- Nobody agreeing on a "best" version of ANH :
I think it would be very simple to please the vast majority with one hybrid version of the OT now : Technical improvements in, creative changes out.
IMO this one-sentence editing plan would pretty much bullseye what the public really wants with very few exceptions. Or for that matter, do some surveying work and you could probably come up with an even more detailed list of things people do and don't want. I think the public's feelings on what they want out & in are probably pretty consistent overall (diehards notwithstanding).
Unfortunately this just makes way too much sense for it to happen. Even as well as Disney is trying to handle SW, I'm not optimistic that such a straightforward sensible thing will get done. We are probably facing a future of our ideal version of the OT being forever split between an original cut with distractingly dated SFX and a SE with frustrating creative changes.
-- "The original versions are perfect, just canonize them and forget about it!!!"
Yeah, we're sick of Han shooting first. But don't tell me it doesn't help the movie to have the SE redone battle of Yavin.
Younger generations won't love the 1977 sfx. Deal. Its not our duty to hurt their enjoyment of SW just to try to make them appreciate how far things have come. Technically improving the sfx is not different in principle than cleaning the 35mm print or fixing the soundtrack when you get right down to it. And besides GL, nobody is calling for wiping away the existence (or even widespread availability) of original versions.
I think it would be very simple to please the vast majority with one hybrid version of the OT now : Technical improvements in, creative changes out.
IMO this one-sentence editing plan would pretty much bullseye what the public really wants with very few exceptions. Or for that matter, do some surveying work and you could probably come up with an even more detailed list of things people do and don't want. I think the public's feelings on what they want out & in are probably pretty consistent overall (diehards notwithstanding).
Unfortunately this just makes way too much sense for it to happen. Even as well as Disney is trying to handle SW, I'm not optimistic that such a straightforward sensible thing will get done. We are probably facing a future of our ideal version of the OT being forever split between an original cut with distractingly dated SFX and a SE with frustrating creative changes.
-- "The original versions are perfect, just canonize them and forget about it!!!"
Yeah, we're sick of Han shooting first. But don't tell me it doesn't help the movie to have the SE redone battle of Yavin.
Younger generations won't love the 1977 sfx. Deal. Its not our duty to hurt their enjoyment of SW just to try to make them appreciate how far things have come. Technically improving the sfx is not different in principle than cleaning the 35mm print or fixing the soundtrack when you get right down to it. And besides GL, nobody is calling for wiping away the existence (or even widespread availability) of original versions.
There were three mixes released in 1977: Dolby stereo, mono, and 6-track 70mm. They all have differences.
The movie that premiered on May 25th 1977 had different sound mixes depending on where it was being shown.
Fixed
Yeah, exactly
Solo4114
Master Member
Well, a few things.
1. "The public" is largely apathetic as to which version of Star Wars they watch. The longtime fans probably want ALL of the versions, if you poll all of them. That means SEs, and theatrical versions.
2. "Technical improvements" is a broad concept. Arguably, it's a "technical improvement" to crush the blacks or screw with the color timing in ESB. It's a "technical improvement" to make the sabres look like they do in the prequels as opposed to the theatrical versions. It's a "technical improvement" to colorize a black and white film, Mr. Turner.
Here's the thing: I don't care. The same way that it's not the job of the older generations to HARM the enjoyment of younger generations, it's also not their job to IMPROVE their enjoyment. It doesn't really matter what younger generations think about the films. That misses the point entirely.
The point, in my opinion, is film preservation. The films should exist in versions that preserves what people saw in 1977, 1980, and 1983, respectively, when they went to the theaters. The goal is no who will love the newer versions more or less. The goal is to let the films be taken at face value, on their merits, for what they were at the time. You want to clean up the image by removing things like dirt from the negative? No problem! That's just preservation. But even when it comes to things like the matte boxes for the Tie Fighters and such, I say go ahead and leave 'em in.
Now, I should clarify, I'm not saying that the SEs or some "living version" of the OT can't be done in addition to this. And, at least from my point of view, I can see an argument for minor technical improvements (as opposed to image preservation) like removing matte boxes or otherwise "cleaning up" various f/x shots. But for purposes of film preservation, I'd prefer all that to be kept to a minimum. No new digital backgrounds -- keep the old matte paintings. No new sabre f/x -- keep the old stuff. No new gobs of ships in the Battle of Yavin -- keep the original number. No new cantina denizens -- keep the old ones, wolfman masks and all.
Star Wars was a thing that happened at a particular point in time, and was a staggering achievement in its historical context. You want to restore the image? Go ahead. You want to improve the image? Save it for the "Special Editions" or "ongoing editions" or whatever. But keep an archival copy of the films as they were on release. We can debate which sound mix is the "definitive" mix, but other than that, preservation only for whatever archival version.
As for canon...I give not a fig for what people tell me is canon. I make my own canon.
I don't think we are disagreeing.
I'm not advocating taking anything off the market. But what's happening right now isn't pleasing the vast majority. Probably a single-digit percentage of the fans would ideally like the SE versions as they are, and probably a single-digit percentage of fans would ideally like the originals 100% unaltered.
A huge portion of the buyers for an original copy just don't want Greedo shooting first and Han stepping on a CGI-Jabba's tail.
A huge portion of the buyers for the enhanced version just don't want to watch Luke's landspeeder float on a cushion of Vaseline and the rebels blowing up the Death Star with sluggish toy model ships.
IMO 90% of the prospective buyers for the OT would ideally prefer a hybrid if they had some idea of the situation. One single new version could probably please almost all of them.
Last edited:
CB2001
Master Member
For me, it's the OT on LaserDisc, pan and scan versions.
Zombie_61
Master Member
Dead on. If people prefer the Special Edition versions that's fine with me. I just want to be able to watch the versions of the three movies that I saw in the theaters in 1977, 1980, and 1983, with respectable visual and audio qualities, and so far that hasn't really happened.
cayman shen
Master Member
I refuse to buy the OT in any SE vesion. I won't buy the BR until it's the unaltered OT. I can not believe there aren't thousands and thousands like me. Disney, c'mon...
There is actually one bluray version I prefer over the version I saw in the theater and that is The Phantom Menace. Mainly due to how much I disliked the ugly puppet they used as Yoda. That thing did not look like Yoda.
Honestly Star Wars OT definitely didn't need any of the 97, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007lol) or any other changes to work. R2 didn't need to be more hidden when the Tusken Raiders came. Most certainly not inside a cave he couldn't even get into in the first place. I'll quote Darth Ridiculous: Noooooooooooooooooooooo!
Honestly Star Wars OT definitely didn't need any of the 97, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007
lol) or any other changes to work. R2 didn't need to be more hidden when the Tusken Raiders came. Most certainly not inside a cave he couldn't even get into in the first place. I'll quote Darth Ridiculous: Noooooooooooooooooooooo!
Wolfsburg
Master Member
Totally agree. I'm not actually against the idea of an SE with tweaks and fixes but the majority of the changes GL made were superfluous and pointless at best.
And yeah, TPM Yoda was an abomination. I can't fathom how anyone could've looked at that thing and thought "Yep, this is what we'll go with..."
And yeah, TPM Yoda was an abomination. I can't fathom how anyone could've looked at that thing and thought "Yep, this is what we'll go with..."
I didnt want to quote the whole post as I know how annoying that is when it's soo big but this just all made great sense to how I feel and I'm sure to how lots of people feel. Great post Dan.
Ben
sbaxter
Sr Member
I'd like to know the definitive answers to these questions myself. I am convinced you are right in your first paragraph — Fox having distribution rights is not the same thing as being able to do anything they want with the films. All the previous re-releases have been driven by Lucasfilm, which still exists as a subsidiary of Disney. Fox and Disney have worked together in the past, and have done so very recently with an as-yet unreleased film. I see no reason Fox would simply decide to be petty, because they like money more than spite.
As for the second graph, I imagine Lucasfilm does have certain conditions in the license that would allow them to pull the rights from Fox, if those conditions are not met. For example, the reason Disney doesn't have much of a Marvel presence at Walt Disney World is because Marvel has a contract with Universal that allows them to have the rides and, more importantly, stipulates that no other company can have theme park rides with Marvel characters within a certain radius of Universal Orlando (just what that radius has been the subject of confusion, but the fact that a radius exists is certain). However, Universal can't just do whatever they want with Marvel. First, they have to maintain the rides they have to certain standard, or Marvel/Disney can revoke their right to that ride (and you can bet that Disney has been scrutinizing those rides regularly, looking for signs those conditions aren't being met. Second, the contract is very specific in delineating which characters Universal can use. Think Universal might like the idea of developing an attraction based on Guardians of the Galaxy? If so, too bad; those characters aren't among those Universal is allowed to use.
Also, Marvel had distribution deals in place with Paramount for two or three films, which included The Avengers. Disney approached Paramount and the two struck a deal that gave Disney those rights instead, but still allowed Paramount to have their logos on those films (which will cause no end of minor confusion in years to come, I expect). It was expensive, but Disney feels it was worth it, considering the performance of the films in question. More than most other companies, Disney understands the value of the long-term holding of catalog titles, and have since Walt and Roy came up with the idea of re-releasing the studio's animated features every seven years back in the day. It is part of the reason that Jim Henson and George Lucas went to Disney when they were interested in selling their creations — Disney has a lot of experience with being stewards of venerable characters and intellectual property.
We'll see what happens …
Qapla'
SSB
Similar threads
