The Official Boycott Star Wars Bluray thread
- Thread starter SVTStingRay
- Start date
cayman shen
Master Member
Holy crap that was priceless!
I've got two theories on GL's lunacy.
1. He sees SW as a recent and ongoing phenomenon, part of a whole, and therefore is only tweaking something contemporary, not "altering a classic."
2. He doesn't see the SW films as artworks, but rather as commodity which must be given a facelift now and then to stay current.
DanielS
Well-Known Member
I just want to say; god dang, give it a rest! For crying out loud what's so friggin wrong? Imo, if George Lucas wants to fiddle with HIS movies, he is more than allowed to. I didn't know there was such childish hate on this forum. Talking about boycotts and riots? Kicking George in the nuts? What the hell? Grow up. The day you guys write the script and direct a movie in the same caliber as Star Wars, you may damn well do whatever you want with it but please stop being such kids about this.
If you think it's the end of the world, then don't buy the blu-ray and find yourselves some nice VCRs instead. For me, I still like it, no matter what because it's not all about what the lines are or the effects or what changes has been made since the last time. It's the feeling and the memories behind all this that makes it so unique.
Thank you.
/D
If you think it's the end of the world, then don't buy the blu-ray and find yourselves some nice VCRs instead. For me, I still like it, no matter what because it's not all about what the lines are or the effects or what changes has been made since the last time. It's the feeling and the memories behind all this that makes it so unique.
Thank you.
/D
cayman shen
Master Member
Aren't imperative sentences a violation of the code of conduct?
jme3
Sr Member
And this is precisely what is being ripped to shreds with each and every new release.
DanielS
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry for not being a doctorate in English. My native language, as you might have guessed since it says under my picture that I'm from Sweden, is Swedish. But hey, why don't you try a sentence in my language and I'll be the ******.
DanielS
Well-Known Member
That's a matter of opinion really. I, for one, will not loose my memories over a few changes. And I will certainly not throw out threats and harassments towards the creator for it either.
I'm not saying that you're not entitled to your own opinion, ofcourse you are. And you are allowed to speak your mind. But why can't we do so in a mature way?
cayman shen
Master Member
I wasn't mocking your English skills. An imperative sentence is a command: I was sarcastically suggesting you shouldn't tell people what to do. Chiming in with "get over it" comments is probably not going to be met with a lot of support in an outrage thread.
DanielS
Well-Known Member
Well, I guess I owe you an apology. I am sorry for "attacking" you.
But you, and all others who have written in this thread, must admit that this thread could've been so much better and more interesting if we all just acted like grown people?
cayman shen
Master Member
How are we not acting like grown-ups?
DanielS
Well-Known Member
Well, for starters saying things like "if these changes are real I will riot" and "I would punch george lucas in the nuts" isn't really a good start for a thread.
Actually, just read the first page and I hope you'll understand what I'm saying.
My point in all this is that I personally don't think it's okay to talk like that about people. No matter who they are. I mean, it's not like he's a dictator or a murderer. He hasn't broken any rules nor laws, so why call him names?
jme3
Sr Member
No, just a liar and a hypocrite.
cayman shen
Master Member
Ah, fair enough. I guess I did those things myself, now that I think of it. Well, even if the anti-Lucas vitriol is childish, I do believe there's a very legitimate cultural concern here, and it's worth addressing and debating. The name calling is just people venting, which has its place too, even if it can become counter-productive in its extreme forms.
I stand by my "Nazi bukake" post, however. :lol
SSgt Burton
Sr Member
I feel like a broken record with how many times this has already been said-
The changes themselves are not the problem.
"My" problem (that I believe most of us share) is that it feels like the original theatrical releases are slowing being erased from existence.
So far the originals are only available on VHS and dvd.
VHS tapes can only be viewed so many times before the tape itself begins to degrade and become unwatchable. They are also prone to being damaged/destroyed by a malfunctioning VHS player.
Not to mention VHS looks absolutely terrible on a large screen HDTV.
These days HDTVs with screens of 50+ inches are becoming the norm (I own a 60" tv myself). Dvds are hit and miss as far as Blu Ray player upconversion goes. Sometimes they are "tolerable", and sometimes they look awful like a low rez .jpeg picture that has been blown up too large.
The OT theatrical DVDs are just an extras disc. I'll be the first to admit I know "nothing" about how "disc encoding"/quality works. But what I understand is that the extras disc is not even as high a quality as the main movie dvd disc. So if I get this, the original theatrical release isn't even up to the quality that dvds can normally deliver.
And there is no Blu Ray release in sight. This is annoying (to put it mildly) for those of us who just want the original movie, with the original effects, and original nuances (the "Han shot first" scene) in a high quality format that is feasible and affordable (as we all can't own 35mm prints of the film
).
Lucas can do whatever he pleases. However it feels as if he is "embarrassed" by the original theatrical films; why else would he treat them with such irreverence?
Kevin
The changes themselves are not the problem.
"My" problem (that I believe most of us share) is that it feels like the original theatrical releases are slowing being erased from existence.
So far the originals are only available on VHS and dvd.
VHS tapes can only be viewed so many times before the tape itself begins to degrade and become unwatchable. They are also prone to being damaged/destroyed by a malfunctioning VHS player.
Not to mention VHS looks absolutely terrible on a large screen HDTV.
These days HDTVs with screens of 50+ inches are becoming the norm (I own a 60" tv myself). Dvds are hit and miss as far as Blu Ray player upconversion goes. Sometimes they are "tolerable", and sometimes they look awful like a low rez .jpeg picture that has been blown up too large.
The OT theatrical DVDs are just an extras disc. I'll be the first to admit I know "nothing" about how "disc encoding"/quality works. But what I understand is that the extras disc is not even as high a quality as the main movie dvd disc. So if I get this, the original theatrical release isn't even up to the quality that dvds can normally deliver.
And there is no Blu Ray release in sight. This is annoying (to put it mildly) for those of us who just want the original movie, with the original effects, and original nuances (the "Han shot first" scene) in a high quality format that is feasible and affordable (as we all can't own 35mm prints of the film
).Lucas can do whatever he pleases. However it feels as if he is "embarrassed" by the original theatrical films; why else would he treat them with such irreverence?
Kevin
DanielS
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry but, when did he ever promise not to make any changes? When did he lie?
Why this unnecessary hostility?
jme3
Sr Member
Your definition of hostility and mine seem to be two different things. I have no urge to visit bodily harm on GL for any of this, and I haven't voiced an intent to do that anywhere, in any thread, but I don't see how it's hard to misinterpret his meaning in, and current diversion from his prior convictions in...
THIS:
My name is George Lucas. I am a writer, director, and producer of motion pictures and Chairman of the Board of Lucasfilm Ltd., a multi-faceted entertainment corporation.
I am not here today as a writer-director, or as a producer, or as the chairman of a corporation. I’ve come as a citizen of what I believe to be a great society that is in need of a moral anchor to help define and protect its intellectual and cultural heritage. It is not being protected.
The destruction of our film heritage, which is the focus of concern today, is only the tip of the iceberg. American law does not protect our painters, sculptors, recording artists, authors, or filmmakers from having their lifework distorted, and their reputation ruined. If something is not done now to clearly state the moral rights of artists, current and future technologies will alter, mutilate, and destroy for future generations the subtle human truths and highest human feeling that talented individuals within our society have created.
A copyright is held in trust by its owner until it ultimately reverts to public domain. American works of art belong to the American public; they are part of our cultural history.
People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians, and if the laws of the United States continue to condone this behavior, history will surely classify us as a barbaric society. The preservation of our cultural heritage may not seem to be as politically sensitive an issue as “when life begins” or “when it should be appropriately terminated,” but it is important because it goes to the heart of what sets mankind apart. Creative expression is at the core of our humanness. Art is a distinctly human endeavor. We must have respect for it if we are to have any respect for the human race.
These current defacements are just the beginning. Today, engineers with their computers can add color to black-and-white movies, change the soundtrack, speed up the pace, and add or subtract material to the philosophical tastes of the copyright holder. Tomorrow, more advanced technology will be able to replace actors with “fresher faces,” or alter dialogue and change the movement of the actor’s lips to match. It will soon be possible to create a new “original” negative with whatever changes or alterations the copyright holder of the moment desires. The copyright holders, so far, have not been completely diligent in preserving the original negatives of films they control. In order to reconstruct old negatives, many archivists have had to go to Eastern bloc countries where American films have been better preserved.
In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be “replaced” by new altered negatives. This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten.
There is nothing to stop American films, records, books, and paintings from being sold to a foreign entity or egotistical gangsters and having them change our cultural heritage to suit their personal taste.
I accuse the companies and groups, who say that American law is sufficient, of misleading the Congress and the People for their own economic self-interest.
I accuse the corporations, who oppose the moral rights of the artist, of being dishonest and insensitive to American cultural heritage and of being interested only in their quarterly bottom line, and not in the long-term interest of the Nation.
The public’s interest is ultimately dominant over all other interests. And the proof of that is that even a copyright law only permits the creators and their estate a limited amount of time to enjoy the economic fruits of that work.
There are those who say American law is sufficient. That’s an outrage! It’s not sufficient! If it were sufficient, why would I be here? Why would John Houston have been so studiously ignored when he protested the colorization of “The Maltese Falcon?” Why are films cut up and butchered?
Attention should be paid to this question of our soul, and not simply to accounting procedures. Attention should be paid to the interest of those who are yet unborn, who should be able to see this generation as it saw itself, and the past generation as it saw itself.
I hope you have the courage to lead America in acknowledging the importance of American art to the human race, and accord the proper protection for the creators of that art–as it is accorded them in much of the rest of the world communities.
ChaoBreeder
Well-Known Member
Nooooooooooooo!!!
Every member of the 501st needs to storm the ranch....
SSgt Burton
Sr Member
Similar threads
