STAR WARS First Trilogy original cut potential release 1 1

[Buzzetta]

33 minutes ago, bentbryan said:

This was one of GL’s reasons for the Special Editions.  He wanted to smooth the transition between the 2 trilogies so they didn’t look like they were filmed 20 years apart. 

Yeah, at this point I throw the idea of "it's part of it's charm out the window."  If someone is nostalgic and likes the quirkiness behind it then more power to them.  Nothing wrong with it but it's not for me. Star Wars is not Episode 4 once Lucas made a sequel.  Star Wars is the overall narrative and Episode 4 is merely a chapter in a story that is meant to be told as a whole. The special effects of the classic trilogy in their original form are too distracting for my tastes and the charm is quickly lost making the series then unwatchable.  BTW: Other things I am glad that they changed was monkey face Emperor in ESB.

I liken this experience to Lord of the Rings.  To me the books pale in comparison to the movies... and it comes down to one thing... the songs. When you were reading Tolkien's Lord of the Rings books you are immersed into this world rich in culture, history and characterization.  You find yourself 'hearing' the characters speak their lines in the book and you are the narrator documenting it.

Then you come across a song that takes up a sizable amount of text.  The mind is quickly taken out of the narrative as you come across the text and try to 'figure out the song'. It becomes distracting as it interrupts that narrative.  

 

That is what a vaseline smeared print 'special effect' to make it seem like a landspeeder is floating does for me.  It interrupts the scene.  Personally, I watched the original cut a few years ago when JJ's Episode 7 was released at a friend's house.  I could not decide what was more awkward to watch, JJ's hack job of Episode 7 or Star Wars in its original format when compared to the rereleases.  

Now btw... some things are mind numbing in the re-releases.  As I mentioned Boba Fett turning to the camera in the Jabba scene was unnecessary.    There are a few other things like, how DID R2-D2 manage to put himself behind those rocks in Episode 4. 

[Antpark]

I don't mind tightening up a special effect here or there to give a shine to the film. Ultimately, that's not really changing the story.

The things I have issue with are making changes that DO, in fact, change events or moments in the film. 

• Greedo shooting first
• Noooooooooooo
• Inserting Hayden Christensen as a force ghost at the end of ROTJ
• etc.

With changes like those, I'm no longer watching the original story. It's now SW 2.0. 

[mattn792]

It's alright, trust me.

It'salrightIcanseealotbetternow.

[bentbryan]

3 hours ago, mattn792 said:

It's alright, trust me.

It'salrightIcanseealotbetternow.

Higher!!! Just a little higher!!!

[Logan510]

On 9/29/2019 at 11:04 PM, Number 6 said:

Personally, I don't think  you could be more wrong if you tried. 

Why exactly do you feel the need to refer to people who would like to see the original, unaltered version of the film as "butthurt fanboys"? 

If you prefer the revised versions of the film, guess what?  You're in luck because Lucas, Kennedy and those in control of the franchise hold the revised films as the "official" versions of the films. Those aren't going away just because they may release the original versions. 

Firecracker Death Star explosion? Toy lightsabers? Underpopulated space port? Magic-marker cover-up of the wheels on the landspeeder?  Yeah, I'm fine with ALL of it. Why?  Because it was a film made in 1977.   To my eyes, those facelift "improvements" are incongruous and stand out like a sore thumb. 

Wanting to see the original version has nothing to do with "butthurt"; I'm just a fan of old films in general - warts and all - and this film in particular. 

You've got your revised versions. Nobody's ever going to take that away from you.  We'd just like the same opportunity to see - and hopefully own - the versions we love. What's so awful about that?

I said it before and I'll say it again. He likes the band Phish.

 

Case closed.

[Buzzetta]

12 minutes ago, Logan510 said:

I said it before and I'll say it again. He likes the band Phish.

 

Case closed.

Try harder.  

[Bosco685]

8 hours ago, Buzzetta said:

Yeah, at this point I throw the idea of "it's part of it's charm out the window."  If someone is nostalgic and likes the quirkiness behind it then more power to them.  Nothing wrong with it but it's not for me. Star Wars is not Episode 4 once Lucas made a sequel.  Star Wars is the overall narrative and Episode 4 is merely a chapter in a story that is meant to be told as a whole. The special effects of the classic trilogy in their original form are too distracting for my tastes and the charm is quickly lost making the series then unwatchable.  BTW: Other things I am glad that they changed was monkey face Emperor in ESB.

I liken this experience to Lord of the Rings.  To me the books pale in comparison to the movies... and it comes down to one thing... the songs. When you were reading Tolkien's Lord of the Rings books you are immersed into this world rich in culture, history and characterization.  You find yourself 'hearing' the characters speak their lines in the book and you are the narrator documenting it.

Then you come across a song that takes up a sizable amount of text.  The mind is quickly taken out of the narrative as you come across the text and try to 'figure out the song'. It becomes distracting as it interrupts that narrative.  

 

That is what a vaseline smeared print 'special effect' to make it seem like a landspeeder is floating does for me.  It interrupts the scene.  Personally, I watched the original cut a few years ago when JJ's Episode 7 was released at a friend's house.  I could not decide what was more awkward to watch, JJ's hack job of Episode 7 or Star Wars in its original format when compared to the rereleases.  

Now btw... some things are mind numbing in the re-releases.  As I mentioned Boba Fett turning to the camera in the Jabba scene was unnecessary.    There are a few other things like, how DID R2-D2 manage to put himself behind those rocks in Episode 4. 

I can understand and appreciate some minor updates to the original material. Minor. It's the major changes which altered the original films (mainly The New Hope) in certain scenes that seem unnecessary.

Changes in Star Wars re-releases

Quote

Greedo scene

 

Because I was thinking mythologically — should he be a cowboy, should he be John Wayne? And I said, ‘Yeah, he should be John Wayne.’ And when you’re John Wayne, you don’t shoot people [first] — you let them have the first shot.

George Lucas in 2015

 

In Star Wars, Han Solo is cornered in the Mos Eisley cantina by the bounty hunter Greedo, and the confrontation ends with Han shooting under the table and killing Greedo. The circumstances of the shot varies between versions of the film. In the original 1977 theatrical release of the film, Han shoots Greedo, and Greedo does not shoot at all. The 1997 Special Edition release of the film alters the scene so that Greedo shoots first and misses, and the scene is altered again in the 2004 DVD release of the film so that Han and Greedo shoot simultaneously.

 

Lucas stated that he always intended for Greedo to have shot first. He felt that the idea of Han shooting first depicts him as "a cold-blooded killer". This decision sparked objections that it changed Han's moral ambiguity, fundamentally altered his established character, and diminished his transition from antihero to hero; it became one of the most controversial changes to the films.

Quote

Biggs Darklighter on Yavin 4

 

During the production of Star Wars, scenes were filmed featuring Biggs Darklighter and his friendship with Luke Skywalker set on Tatooine and at the rebel base on Yavin 4 shortly before the attack on the Death Star. The scenes were cut because they were felt to disrupt the pacing of the film. In the original theatrical release, Biggs is only briefly mentioned as one of Luke's friends early in the movie, and he is seen briefly during the attack on the Death Star, in which he dies, and a relationship between Biggs and Luke is never stated. Despite this, Luke reacts strongly to Biggs' death. The 1997 Special Edition of the Star Wars film incorporated the previously deleted scene on Yavin 4. The loss of the scenes at Tatooine and Yavin 4 was felt to lessen the significance of Biggs' death, cast Luke's reaction to the death as overly strong, and make the framing of the death as a tragedy confusing. It was felt that the re-addition of the Yavin 4 scene helped to rectify this issue.

Quote

Jabba the Hutt and Boba Fett

 

The original -script for Star Wars included a scene between Jabba the Hutt (who was designed in concept art drawings similarly to his Return of the Jedi appearance and often traveling on a sedan chair) and Han Solo, set in Mos Eisley's Dock 94, and the scene was filmed with Harrison Ford, playing Solo, and Declan Mulholland (for unknown reasons, dressed with a bizarre, furry, costume), a stand-in for Jabba. Lucas intended to replace Mulholland in post-production with a stop motion character. Due to time limitations and budget constraints, Lucas could not achieve this, and the scene was cut. In the 1997 Special Edition, the scene was reinserted with CGI replacing Mulholland. Because Ford walked too close to Mulholland in the original scene, Han stepping on Jabba's tail, causing Jabba to squeal, was created as a workaround. Boba Fett was also added to the background of the scene. Jabba's design was modified for the 2004 DVD release, making him more realistic and similar to his Episode VI depiction, and this is the currently canonical version of the scene, though the Star Wars Legends novel The Hutt Gambit depicts, on its cover, Jabba as featured in the 1997 edition of the film.

 

The insertion of this scene into the film was criticized for being superfluous to the previous cantina scene, slowing down the pacing, and failing to move the plot forward The original 1997 CGI, having big Cheshire Cat-like eyes and a small head, was also described as "atrocious".

At least with the Biggs additions, this makes sense.

[Buzzetta]

17 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

I can understand and appreciate some minor updates to the original material. Minor. It's the major changes which altered the original films (mainly The New Hope) in certain scenes that seem unnecessary.

Changes in Star Wars re-releases

At least with the Biggs additions, this makes sense.

I am with you on the Han shot first scene as not only do I like the idea of Han shooting first but the editing is awkward no matter how they try to improve it.  The characters seem to 'jump' and that interrupts the story with such a glaringly bad change. 

I actually like the Jabba scene but dislike the addition of Fett. 

I agree with you that the Biggs scene makes sense to include.  I would prefer that they added that rather than the Tattooine scenes as the scene with all of them running around Toshi Station seemed hokey. 

 

There are two deleted scenes from Revenge of the Sith that would have made the ending more concise with the rest of the saga.  Filoni decided to create his own version of this for the Clone Wars series.  Here a fan took the unfinished scene as filmed on Sith and combined it with some of the dialogue from the Clone Wars series. As Qui Gon trails off he tells Yoda, "Come to Dagobah."  The second scene was on the DVD release of ROS but did not make it to the Blu Ray list of deleted scenes.  The should have included at least one of these.  Apparently if I remember correctly from the Sith commentary Rick McCallum had stated that he would have liked to have seen one of the two scenes in the theatrical release but Lucas edited it out. 

 

 

 

 

[Bosco685]

55 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

Apparently if I remember correctly from the Sith commentary Rick McCallum had stated that he would have liked to have seen one of the two scenes in the theatrical release but Lucas edited it out. 

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

 

[Logan510]

3 hours ago, Buzzetta said:

Try harder.  

No.

[Mr Sneeze]

10 hours ago, Buzzetta said:

Yeah, at this point I throw the idea of "it's part of it's charm out the window."  If someone is nostalgic and likes the quirkiness behind it then more power to them.  Nothing wrong with it but it's not for me. Star Wars is not Episode 4 once Lucas made a sequel.  Star Wars is the overall narrative and Episode 4 is merely a chapter in a story that is meant to be told as a whole. The special effects of the classic trilogy in their original form are too distracting for my tastes and the charm is quickly lost making the series then unwatchable.  BTW: Other things I am glad that they changed was monkey face Emperor in ESB.

I liken this experience to Lord of the Rings.  To me the books pale in comparison to the movies... and it comes down to one thing... the songs. When you were reading Tolkien's Lord of the Rings books you are immersed into this world rich in culture, history and characterization.  You find yourself 'hearing' the characters speak their lines in the book and you are the narrator documenting it.

Then you come across a song that takes up a sizable amount of text.  The mind is quickly taken out of the narrative as you come across the text and try to 'figure out the song'. It becomes distracting as it interrupts that narrative.  

 

That is what a vaseline smeared print 'special effect' to make it seem like a landspeeder is floating does for me.  It interrupts the scene.  Personally, I watched the original cut a few years ago when JJ's Episode 7 was released at a friend's house.  I could not decide what was more awkward to watch, JJ's hack job of Episode 7 or Star Wars in its original format when compared to the rereleases.  

Now btw... some things are mind numbing in the re-releases.  As I mentioned Boba Fett turning to the camera in the Jabba scene was unnecessary.    There are a few other things like, how DID R2-D2 manage to put himself behind those rocks in Episode 4. 

But it is part of the charm. I think of them (the trilogies) as two books written at different times of an authors life (obviously with different resources), they each tell their part of the overall story arc. Why do they have to tell their part of the story the same way as the other. The trilogies are after all completely different in feel and scope. Nostalgia has little to do with it.

The only thing that killed the narrative overall was part 7 masquerading as part 4. Kinda made any continuation in that direction pointless really (I'm not really a hater on Disney but I see little point in calling these parts 7, 8, 9 etc. but I will keep an open mind for what its worth).

Having said that there is little point arguing over which is better, there're both good, it all comes down to the individual of course or your whatever your in the mood for that day. I, like many simply want the option to see them as they were.

[Buzzetta]

1 hour ago, Logan510 said:

No.

I know it's hard for you, but c'mon give it a try.   Otherwise, all this is you coming over here, following my posts, and throwing out the usual.  All you seem to keep saying lately whenever you come across a post of mine is that you don't like a band I like.   Ummm okay.  Are you in elementary school?  It is what you do though so I will hand it to you that at least you are consistent. 

Seriously, there is a fine line between busting balls, and being pathetic.  You are venturing into the 'pathetic' territory. 

[Buzzetta]

52 minutes ago, Mr Sneeze said:

But it is part of the charm. I think of them (the trilogies) as two books written at different times of an authors life (obviously with different resources), they each tell their part of the overall story arc. Why do they have to tell their part of the story the same way as the other. The trilogies are after all completely different in feel and scope. Nostalgia has little to do with it.

The only thing that killed the narrative overall was part 7 masquerading as part 4. Kinda made any continuation in that direction pointless really (I'm not really a hater on Disney but I see little point in calling these parts 7, 8, 9 etc. but I will keep an open mind for what its worth).

Having said that there is little point arguing over which is better, there're both good, it all comes down to the individual of course or your whatever your in the mood for that day. I, like many simply want the option to see them as they were.

I could see that point of view.  I don't necessarily agree with it for my enjoyment in viewing all of the movies but I can understand it. 

I do agree with you on part 7 killing the overall narrative though.  When I saw that movie it instantly made me appreciate the prequels in a new light. 

Again, my original comment was more directed toward those that take one overall stand to the extreme with the whole "George Lucas ruined my childhood" mentality and those that level of "fandom" that took it so far they harassed the actress that played Rose in the last movie because they blamed her for ruining 'Star Wars."

I agree with you that there is plenty of room to view everything in any way you want. 

[Logan510]

1 hour ago, Buzzetta said:

I know it's hard for you, but c'mon give it a try.   Otherwise, all this is you coming over here, following my posts, and throwing out the usual.  All you seem to keep saying lately whenever you come across a post of mine is that you don't like a band I like.   Ummm okay.  Are you in elementary school?  It is what you do though so I will hand it to you that at least you are consistent. 

Seriously, there is a fine line between busting balls, and being pathetic.  You are venturing into the 'pathetic' territory. 

Too easy 

[Buzzetta]

13 minutes ago, Logan510 said:

Too easy 

[theCapraAegagrus]

I think that ignoring someone because your friends asked you to is more childish than poking fun at someone for their taste in music.

Could just be me, though.

[Buzzetta]

1 hour ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

I think that ignoring someone because your friends asked you to is more childish than poking fun at someone for their taste in music.

Could just be me, though.

I recently took you off ignore this weekend to see if I was wrong when you replied to the Mario Kart thread. 
 

I put you on ignore months ago and by my own volition regarding your ranting and raving on certain things and your overall demeanor. 
 

From your comments over the last weekend I can see I was not entirely wrong to put you on ignore to begin with. 

[theCapraAegagrus]

Just now, Buzzetta said:

I recently took you off ignore this weekend to see if I was wrong when you replied to the Mario Kart thread. 
 

I put you on ignore months ago and by my own volition regarding your ranting and raving on certain things and your overall demeanor. 
 

From your comments over the last weekend I can see I was not entirely wrong to put you on ignore to begin with. 

I wouldn't infer any demeanor from my posts other than 'matter of fact'. I understand that it may come off as some sort of attitude, but I'm not putting any emotion into my posts. I guarantee you that.

I'm just poking you. I don't understand why you poke back with other users, but 'punish' me. I get that you're probably friends with a lot of them. I thought you were open to a similar sense of humor.

Just because I don't get along with 1 of your friends who tries to force his opinion on me doesn't me that you and I can't get along.

[Buzzetta]

18 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

I wouldn't infer any demeanor from my posts other than 'matter of fact'. I understand that it may come off as some sort of attitude, but I'm not putting any emotion into my posts. I guarantee you that.

I'm just poking you. I don't understand why you poke back with other users, but 'punish' me. I get that you're probably friends with a lot of them. I thought you were open to a similar sense of humor.

Just because I don't get along with 1 of your friends who tries to force his opinion on me doesn't me that you and I can't get along.

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. 
 

 

[justafan]

Hi my name is Dan and I'm a butt hurt fanboy of the original trilogy Theatrical release.  Thinking back to when the Special Editions came out, I hated them immediately but it was mainly the poor CGI.  I mean sure it was in the primordial ages of CGI where we were still learning the structures of computer generated morphing in our C++ class.  But it was still soo bad at the studio level and unrefined of a technology that it's usage on a masterpiece like Star Wars was criminally ignorant.  I liken it to if someone were to take an unfinished masterpiece painting and passed it through one of the first inkjet printers to hit the market in an attempt to fill in the missing parts or if someone used one of the first 3D printers to complete Michelangelo's David or put injection molded plastic/manequin arms on the Venus de Milo.  It was just so stark that it didn't look good on so many levels.  I refused to watch them again.   However, fast forward about 15 years and dramatic improvements in the rendering of CGI and now I don't mind some of the CGI scenes. 

Still not sure about Jabba the Hutt in that added scene. He looks smaller than he does in Return of the Jedi.  If I had my way I would either remove that scene OR reshoot it with a much larger animatronic Jabba.  I GET that he was resized due to it originally being shot with a shorter stand-in actor so to put a larger more imposing Jabba the Hutt in that scene would require a complete reshoot with facial de-aging technology or a creative amount of digital trickery to get it all to fit that might end up looking worse.

However, the scenes that irked me the most was replacing older Anakin's ghost with the younger actor's at the end of the ROTJ.  I also want the original nub nub song back.

As for Han shooting first, I really disagree with GL's later reasoning.  Why, if he wanted Han to be more like a John Wayne type character did he ever allow him to be written as shooting first?  As a 4 year old boy even I understood what the director/scene writer had in mind.  Greedo already has a gun on him.  Han already knows he's a wanted man dead or alive.  The moment Greedo says "that's the idea" to Han's prior retort "over my dead body", Han KNEW Greedo was there to kill him.  He KNEW the ONLY way he was going to get out of there alive was to get the jump on him and shoot him first.  It makes no sense to me for Han to wait for the last possible moment for Greedo to shoot.  You can even see it coming in that scene.  He uses several gestures to distract Greedo.  First, he casually uses his left hand to to pick at something on the wall to the upper left while he uses his right hand to unbutton his blaster and position it at an upward angle just in case all while keeping Greedo distracted with banter.  Finally, once Greedo basically confirms he's going to kill him, Han uses one final "gun gesture" with his left hand to distract Greedo's attention just before his fires. 

So for me Han shooting first isn't so much a conviction of his character as a cold blooded killer as it was a revelation on how savvy and street wise he was.  It completely set the stage for me as him being a smooth bad as opposed to a weasely smuggling scoundrel.

For what it's worth, even John Wayne shot first in Big Jake when he knew someone was about to try and kill him. 

So yeah, I vote for the full 9-Episode 4k box set the latest in CGI enhancements but with optional Original Theatrical release versions included.