STAR WARS First Trilogy original cut potential release 1 1

[theCapraAegagrus]

7 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

Contrary to belief this is not elementary school.  Unless you have committed a grievous wrong on someone I do not care what your argument is toward people you squabble with. They are adults and they should be able to deal with it in the manner they see fit.  Years ago two people here that I got along with rather well at the time had a spat.  As far as I was concerned that was between them and they could work it out despite both of them wanting me to agree with their perspective.  
 

Again, I don’t care who you don’t get along with.  That is between you and them. I block (ed) you based on you and my perception of your overall behavior.

I was gonna send you a PM so that we don't derail the thread, but that doesn't appear to be an option...

You blocked me based on a disagreement with another user, though. A user who has openly admitted to doing everything he can to get me banned (he guaranteed he'd get me banned - to no success).

Contrary to a very popular belief - we can have civil disagreements. Not every topic has to be divisive. There's nothing wrong with reading my comments and disagreeing with them. Blocking me because of it? I just thought that was dumb.

Give me a fair chance - or don't. I think you'd be missing out if you don't, though.

[Buzzetta]

7 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

I was gonna send you a PM so that we don't derail the thread, but that doesn't appear to be an option...

You blocked me based on a disagreement with another user, though. A user who has openly admitted to doing everything he can to get me banned (he guaranteed he'd get me banned - to no success).

Contrary to a very popular belief - we can have civil disagreements. Not every topic has to be divisive. There's nothing wrong with reading my comments and disagreeing with them. Blocking me because of it? I just thought that was dumb.

Give me a fair chance - or don't. I think you'd be missing out if you don't, though.

As I removed you from block and freely receive notifications when you respond you should be able to send PMs.  That should not be a problem. 

I blocked you well before your particular disagreement with Hollywood (I assume it is he who you speak of.)  I’ve said it now twice. You continue to believe what you want though which is why I put you on block to begin with. 
 

you can take it to Pm if you want.  You should not have been blocked from doing so unless I do not understand how the system works which is very possible as well. 

Edited October 2, 2019 by Buzzetta

[theCapraAegagrus]

14 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

As I removed you from block and freely receive notifications when you respond you should be able to send PMs.  That should not be a problem. 

I blocked you well before your particular disagreement with Hollywood (I assume it is he who you speak of.)  I’ve said it now twice. You continue to believe what you want though which is why I put you on block to begin with. 
 

you can take it to Pm if you want.  You should not have been blocked from doing so unless I do not understand how the system works which is very possible as well. 

"Buzzetta cannot receive messages."

I'm not talking about Hollywood. I know when you blocked me. I even told you how to do it because you posted that you didn't know how lol.

You blocked me. It happened. It's history. Is it worth arguing semantics? Probably not. Do I know why you did it? Yes. Do I think it's fair? No. I'm just trying to understand why you think it was fair.

One of the reason's Hollywood and I often don't get along is because he infers emotions from my posts. I'm also just not a fan of bloviating and attention-seeking. And he simply gets triggered by my username. I made some mistakes as a n00b in the first 1-3 months I was here. I quickly learned that the mods have no sense of humor (mods, if you're reading, please infer that as sarcasm).

I come in peace.

Edited October 2, 2019 by theCapraAegagrus
Clarifications added.

[valiantman]

I'm pretty sure the VHS Star Wars Trilogy set from 1995 is the original releases.  It's like $10 on Ebay, if you can borrow your grandma's VCR.

Here's a set for $8: https://www.ebay.com/itm/383032665589

The "Special Editions" were 1997, so you're safe with anything prior.

Edited October 2, 2019 by valiantman

[Hollywood1892]

4 hours ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

"Buzzetta cannot receive messages."

I'm not talking about Hollywood. I know when you blocked me. I even told you how to do it because you posted that you didn't know how lol.

You blocked me. It happened. It's history. Is it worth arguing semantics? Probably not. Do I know why you did it? Yes. Do I think it's fair? No. I'm just trying to understand why you think it was fair.

One of the reason's Hollywood and I often don't get along is because he infers emotions from my posts. I'm also just not a fan of bloviating and attention-seeking. And he simply gets triggered by my username. I made some mistakes as a n00b in the first 1-3 months I was here. I quickly learned that the mods have no sense of humor (mods, if you're reading, please infer that as sarcasm).

I come in peace.

Maybe there should be a thread where people can discuss their personal differences.

I used to infer emotions from your threads. I try to restrain myself now.

I'm not bloviating or attention seeking. When I originally came on the site I was arrogant, I apologized for that about 3000 posts ago.I should have humbled myself and listened more.

When you say you gave me advice, it never came across like that.

What it did come across like was confrontational, and the person who feels confronted is allowed that opinion.

I do not get triggered by your username. I occasionally get triggered by your responses to my threads.

Also in this case you are not arguing semantics, you are arguing as to why certain people have you "set to ignore"

That was funny...but alot of truth said in jest

Edited October 2, 2019 by Hollywood1892

[porcupine48]

Nick,your threads are getting dramatics again 

[Logan510]

People who aren't seeking attention generally don't start dozens of new topics.

Maybe I'm wrong about that 

[theCapraAegagrus]

16 hours ago, Hollywood1892 said:

Maybe there should be a thread where people can discuss their personal differences.

I used to infer emotions from your threads. I try to restrain myself now.

I'm not bloviating or attention seeking. When I originally came on the site I was arrogant, I apologized for that about 3000 posts ago.I should have humbled myself and listened more.

When you say you gave me advice, it never came across like that.

What it did come across like was confrontational, and the person who feels confronted is allowed that opinion.

I do not get triggered by your username. I occasionally get triggered by your responses to my threads.

Also in this case you are not arguing semantics, you are arguing as to why certain people have you "set to ignore"

That was funny...but alot of truth said in jest

Or, if PMs worked correctly...

You definitely bloviate. That isn't up for debate. You've simmered down, but it's still a small problem. Maybe one day it won't be. I can only hope that day comes soon enough...

Facts don't care about feelings.

I've posted 100% on-topic responses to some of your threads and you still got triggered and confrontational, so no, it isn't just my responses. It's definitely my person.

Nope. It's semantics.

[Hollywood1892]

1 hour ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Or, if PMs worked correctly...

You definitely bloviate. That isn't up for debate. You've simmered down, but it's still a small problem. Maybe one day it won't be. I can only hope that day comes soon enough...

Facts don't care about feelings.

I've posted 100% on-topic responses to some of your threads and you still got triggered and confrontational, so no, it isn't just my responses. It's definitely my person.

Nope. It's semantics.

[Cat]

14 hours ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Facts don't care about feelings.

Oh dear god. 

[RedRaven]

[valiantman]

16 minutes ago, RedRaven said:

As an interesting by-product... people who don't like how someone makes them feel won't listen to facts.  In fact, they'll reject the facts as ad hominem to the messenger.

Therefore, it is a fact that honey (sweet people) catches more flies (followers) than vinegar (bitter/sour people).

Ben is correct and counterproductive at the same time.

[theCapraAegagrus]

10 minutes ago, valiantman said:

As an interesting by-product... people who don't like how someone makes them feel won't listen to facts.  In fact, they'll reject the facts as ad hominem to the messenger.

Therefore, it is a fact that honey (sweet people) catches more flies (followers) than vinegar (bitter/sour people).

Ben is correct and counterproductive at the same time.

IRL, where vocal tone can make a difference, the manner in which I personally present facts does not come across in the same vain as it sometime does on the internet.

Ben often doesn't have the same presentation - but I applaud him for being mostly-factual.

[RedRaven]

Little known fact: If you say "facts don't care about your feelings" three times in a row while watching Yentil, Ben appears in a puff of smoke and kicks you in your shins.

[Bosco685]

‘Star Wars’ Original Cuts: Did Kathleen Kennedy Basically Confirm We’ll Never Get Them?

Quote

Every now and then a new rumor emerges that the original cuts of Star Wars are on the verge of getting a home video release without all the Special Edition modifications George Lucas has made over the years, some of which were made even after the new version of the movies hit theaters in 1997. Sadly, fans are always left disappointed when it doesn’t come true.

 

Due to issues with the rights to the original Star Wars trilogy, as well as the supposed difficulty of getting the original versions in a format that can easily be converted to a high-definition video format, it might be a lost cause. But even if there was the possibility of making it happen, Lucasfilm president Kathleen Kennedy seems to indicate that she doesn’t want to mess with what George Lucas has already done to the original Star Wars trilogy.

 

In a recent video interview with the Steele Wars podcast, Kathleen Kennedy was asked whether there was any contractual obligation which says the cuts of Star Wars, as they exist now since George Lucas updated them, cannot be changed in any way. The question is posed at the 2:51 mark right here:

 

 

Kathleen Kennedy is confused by the question at first, mostly because the interviewer tries to ask a simple question in an unnecessarily roundabout way. When he finally clarifies that he’s asking about whether the final cut that George Lucas left fans with could be altered over time, again a very poor way to ask the question, she says, “I haven’t touched those!” and laughs before saying, “Those will always remain his.”

 

One interpretation of this quote could be that the Star Wars original cuts will never be released because Kathleen Kennedy doesn’t want to tamper with whatever George Lucas did to change them for the Special Edition release and subsequent, further modified home video releases. After all, she does say, “Those will always remain his,” implying that they will never change what he did.

 

On the other hand, she could just be providing an answer to the awful question in a more literal way by saying they won’t ever make their own additions to the original trilogy. In that case, she wouldn’t actually be saying that seeing the original cuts released again is out of the question. Technically, to release the original cuts, they wouldn’t be modifying the versions that George Lucas made, just regressing back to the versions of the movie that were once released in theaters and home video.

 

At this point, fans should probably just abandon all hope that we’ll get official versions of the original cut of the Star Wars trilogy again. 

 

[media_junkie]

On 10/1/2019 at 8:05 PM, Bosco685 said:

George Lucas, unfortunately, took the fun out of the films after a while. Even the 'Yoda as gassy old man' scenes were cut.

 

Jeez, how have I never seen that before.  LOL

[bentbryan]

Lucas had said years ago that the originals were damaged and no longer existed but then I believe reversed this statement somewhat. Would be awesome to get them on a studio-released blu Ray someday. 

[Bosco685]

1 minute ago, bentbryan said:

Lucas had said years ago that the originals were damaged and no longer existed but then I believe reversed this statement somewhat. Would be awesome to get them on a studio-released blu Ray someday. 

I would love for Disney to take that leap now that it owns the complete film portfolio. Crazy not to.

[Bosco685]

JJ Abrams Wanted Disney To Release Original Star Wars Versions

Quote

J.J. Abrams asked Disney about the possibility of releasing the Star Wars trilogy's theatrical cuts, but was told that box set can't happen

 

J.J. Abrams reveals he asked Disney about releasing the theatrical cuts of the original Star Wars trilogy, but was told that can't happen. As many people know now, George Lucas first introduced the special editions of the trilogy in 1997 to commemorate A New Hope's 20th anniversary. They featured numerous changes to the films, some of which proved to be very controversial among viewers. Much to the chagrin of fans, Lucas kept making alterations with each subsequent release of the original trilogy, such as the 2004 DVDs and the 2011 Blu-rays. Even the Disney+ version has a new wrinkle: Greedo's infamous final word, "Maclunkey."

 

There are ways people can get their hands on the unaltered Star Wars trilogy (see: the Despecialized Editions), but those versions have not been officially available since a 2006 DVD release that included the theatrical cuts on a bonus disc. The only problem there was that they were low-quality, non-anamorphic transfers unequipped for widescreen televisions. Over the past handful of years, there have been countless rumors about the theatrical versions receiving a Blu-ray box set, but that hasn't come into fruition. Still, it remains something many would like to see, including Abrams.

 

In an interview with Now This News to promote Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker, Abrams was asked if he'd be interested in seeing the unaltered Star Wars trilogy get a commercial release. The director definitely would, and he even inquired Disney about it:

 

"And I have asked about this... But I've been told that, for reasons that I quite don't understand, that that's not necessarily possible. Which is, you know, too bad because that was the thing that I loved."

 

The documentary 'The People vs. George Lucas' details Lucasfilm's official response to a fan request for an official theatrical cut release, with the studio claiming the original negatives of the movies were permanently altered for the special editions and any existing unaltered prints were in poor condition. That could be the reasoning Abrams doesn't fully understand (since the Despecialized Editions are out there), but there's more to this. In 2017, Kathleen Kennedy went on record to say she "wouldn't touch those" in reference to the original trilogy, out of reverence to Lucas. For better or worse, the special editions are how Lucas wishes to present the first three movies (this is not a Snyder Cut situation), and Disney is adhering to that desire. There's surely a great deal of money to make from an unaltered Star Wars box set, but the company's respecting what the artist wants - which in a way is admirable.

 

There remains the slim possibility this could change in the future, as Kennedy reportedly said there are no contractual agreements in place to block a Star Wars theatrical cut release. But it would appear such a box set is not in the cards. What's most frustrating about this is the fact other films, like Blade Runner and The Lord of the Rings, have multiple versions available, so people don't really understand why Star Wars can't be the same way and give fans the option. If Abrams' appeals to Disney can't change any minds, it's worth wondering if there's anything that ever could.

 

[bentbryan]

Well if JJ doesn’t even understand why they can’t be released...doesn’t look good