Dr. DVD

Which one is more important? There is a debate over at the Jedi Council (where I have spent most of my day off as I watched the DVDs) as to which one is more important to the saga. A lot of people there seem to thing that GL's vision as an artist should trump all. I think there's no need to debate that he does as well.


I was wondering what the rest of you think. Does artistic vision matter more in certain movies than in other movies? While I myself do wish that GL had taken the fans' vision into more consideration, it seems that many people here would stand up for a director like Martin Scorsese to preserve his vision in a movie before they would GL.

In short, it's okay for a director to fight for their vision with certain movies, but not all movies.

necros

As far as I'm concerned, it's his movie(s) and he can do whatever the heck he wants to. But, as a fan I think greedo shooting first is gay. Besides, how the hell could he miss Han that close when Han didn't even duck? And I don't care for the scene with Jabba at the spaceport, it looks better in this new version (they had a comparison shot thingy going on dvdtown.com) but it still looks too fakey. And if you're gonna redo some of the effects, why not just redo em all? and what about the computer screens still doing the old atari graphics instead of replacing them with something that kind of matches the "older" technology in the "newer" movies? And, how come Obi Wan doesn't recognize C3P0 or R2D2 when he was clearly around em in parts 1 and 2? He's old but I don't think he's senile.

This is actually my first time seeing any of the original films in like 10 years, I didn't see any of the earlier updated versions yet... Overall I liked the original and I'll watch the other 2 in the next couple of days. It will always be called Star Wars to me too, A New Hope sounds dumb. But so far I really don't mind the changes all that much. I'm just glad to have it on DVD finally.

PopcornTreeCt

As an artist, once you create something and release it to the world, it is no longer yours.

Tscott

Where's the both option? People wouldn't be quite as upset if they were given a choice of which version to watch when they put in the DVD (like the Alien films) or at least a choice of which version to buy at the store (like The Exorcist).

jaeufraser

Well, personally I think when something reaches that level of popularity, you should in ways honor the fans by giving them the originals. I have no issue with him changing the films, but the alternative should be offered. Cause let's be honest, without those originals and the millions of fans, Lucas wouldn't be able to make changes to them anyway.

On the other hand, those are his movies so I'll accept what he does. But, I do think he should release the originals if for no reason than that there's a definite market for them.

Mike Lowrey

Sorry, have to disagree with you on that. An artist signs his name to every piece of art they do, beit a painting or film. That in my opinion allows them to do whatever they want to do to their work.

The problem here with Star Wars is that is a film phenomenon. An icon in film history. If it were any other film, no one would care. I have used the soon-to-be released Daredevil - DC as an example, and the answer I get is either "both versions are available" or "who cares?"

If A New Hope, Empire, and Jedi were shot more recently, even just 15 years ago instead of the 25 that it was, the availabilty of the original prints would be easily available.

coladar

I haven't really read many threads involving this topic, since it's a long dead horse at this point. That said, I think calling it the "fan's vision" is an extremely bad way to phrase the option. The fans, for the most part at least, don't seem to have an overwhelming urge to dictate serious changes to the original trilogy. They simply want the original films, untouched by revision, on DVD.

Quite frankly, Lucas can revise the original trilogy a thousand times to meet whatever bizarre vision he sees in his mind. What's the saying... A thousand monkeys on typewriters over a thousand years and one will produce the works of Shakespeare?

Refusing to allow the original films, with whatever flaws they might contain, given the technology of branching and the like that DVD gives is illogical. That isn't fan's dictating a particular vision the films should follow, it's just requesting the vision Lucas had nearly three decades ago. It would be one thing if there were fan's saying "Hey, wouldn't it be awesome to have Vader survive the final battle during ROTJ!" They aren't... At least I hope not.

There isn't a fan's vision. Just the vision Lucas had from 77-83 and the vision Lucas has had since 1997.

Rogue588

what Tscott said..

calhoun07

I would go with Lucas' version all the way, but I do think fans have SOME influence in his decisions. I know for a fact that he talks about the fan reaction to Boba Fett led him to put that character in the first three episodes more, and he now regrets killing the character off in the movie.

ArchibaldTuttle

Why not both, I liked some of the alterations, for instance the visual enhancement stuff, but not the new character, character replacement, and new scene stuff. Most of the dvd stuff I am ok with, the stuff that annoys me the most is in the original SE's.

Jackskeleton

Copyright laws would like to speak to you.

It's his film(s) no matter how much you want to latch onto it as a piece of your childhood, it just isn't yours and as far as I'm concerned the "Fans" don't have any "vision" on this because they never made their own version. Lucas made a couple of different versions of this film and they are all Lucas' artistic vision at a center given time. You may like one over the other, but no way does that make any one of those a "fan vision".

The fans have risen this trilogy above jesus. It could do no wrong and that is why the prequels failed. Besides not being up to stanrds to the originals, that is to say nothing would have made the fans happen other then the second coming stepping out of that theater screen.

For all I'm concerned the fans have no vision on the films. they have one they like over the other. I always find it funny when the folks start bitching about lucas but yet they demand that studios release the "directors cut" of whatever said film is out there. Double standards?

Rogue588

Quote:

Originally posted by Jackskeleton
The fans have risen this trilogy above jesus. It could do no wrong and that is why the prequels failed. Besides not being up to stanrds to the originals, that is to say nothing would have made the fans happen other then the second coming stepping out of that theater screen.

For all I'm concerned the fans have no vision on the films. they have one they like over the other. I always find it funny when the folks start bitching about lucas but yet they demand that studios release the "directors cut" of whatever said film is out there. Double standards?

First of all, I don't think there's a "comparison" to the OT. Though, i'm willing to concede that might be true for some. Think about it this way....if tPM/AOtC weren't related to the OT in any way, shape or form, would you think these were good movies? Would you like Jar-Jar more? Would Hayden & Jake's acting be that much more appealing/sincere/believable? Would the story be more thought out?

And as for the "director's cut" statement...it's not a "double standard". Here's why...

In "today's" Hollywood, every. single. thing. is Focus group'd to DEATH.

A director will NEVER have the final say on their film [unless they've amassed a GREAT amount of cred in the industry -- and sometimes even THEN they don't get it]. On most Director's Cuts, we'll hear the filmmaker say things like "It didn't test well" and "It was cut for time".

And, if I interpreted that recent documentary on A&E correctly [I haven't watched the extended "Director's Cut" on the DVD yet ], the OT [and DEFINITELY the PT] was George's ball. At any given time he could've taken it and gone home. Right?

Jackskeleton

Sorry, but unless the director is already established he will ALWAYS be in the hands of the Studio. I know I stand behind studio control because guess who is fronting the bill and taking the risk on releasing it? The studio. If the director wants full control and is not well established enough to have his say or walk then he could go about and fund it himself.

Well yeah, fox really did let Lucas run a bit more wild with it though there was times when they were a little worried. His past experience established him to some level for fox to give him that trust. But it was only till Empire that Lucas had complete control over it and well, in that regard all the versions are his directors cut.

lets put it this way, Ridley Scott comes out 20 years after the film is made and proclaims that Decker is a replicant ending years of debate. I enjoyed it better when he wasn't one. Does that mean that the Theater edition is the Jackskeleton Vision? Nope. I enjoyed it more but I wont call it mine. It's still Scott's, but just two different versions. I would like it on dvd, but I have my LD and I think that is what it comes down to. If fans of that version really want to see it they can as it is on some format.

I suggest going out and finding it.

Dr. DVD

Jack: Let me see if I've got this straight. You endorse GL's vision, even though, from the posts you've made regarding them in other threads, you think they suck.

No problem there. Showgirls was Paul Verhoeven's vision and he accomplished it. It stunk, but it was his vision!

Josh H

It's his story, his characters and his movies. He can do what he wants with them.

The director's vision is always all that matters. If people don't like the director's vision they can just not watch the films.

The Antipodean

Lucas's vision all the way. I can't believe this poll is ever close. How sad that all these "fans" think they actually have some claim to influence a creator's vision. Your claim begins and ends when you put your money down to partake in it, that's it.

Kal-El

Gee, considering this is DVDTalk and the poll is about Luca$, I wonder what option will win...

Anyway, voted Lucas' vision. In the greater scheme of things, it's HIS movies afterall.

Rogue588

Quote:

Originally posted by Jackskeleton
Sorry, but unless the director is already established he will ALWAYS be in the hands of the Studio. I know I stand behind studio control because guess who is fronting the bill and taking the risk on releasing it? The studio. If the director wants full control and is not well established enough to have his say or walk then he could go about and fund it himself.

Well yeah, fox really did let Lucas run a bit more wild with it though there was times when they were a little worried. His past experience established him to some level for fox to give him that trust. But it was only till Empire that Lucas had complete control over it and well, in that regard all the versions are his directors cut.

Umm...that's what I said...

Quote:

Originally posted by Jackskeleton
lets put it this way, Ridley Scott comes out 20 years after the film is made and proclaims that Decker is a replicant ending years of debate. I enjoyed it better when he wasn't one. Does that mean that the Theater edition is the Jackskeleton Vision? Nope.

It becomes the, say it with me, Original Theatrical version. In addition, I see what you were trying to say by using Blade Runner as an example, however, Scott did not write the story...

Quote:

Originally posted by Josh Hinkle
It's his story, his characters and his movies. He can do what he wants with them.

The director's vision is always all that matters. If people don't like the director's vision they can just not watch the films.

Believe it or not, Lucas did not direct either Empire nor Jedi. Using that train of thought, Leigh Brackett or Lawrence Kasdan should be able to make Director's Cuts of their own, right...?

nemein

That's one of the biggest problems I have... Along w/ the fact if Owen was Luke's uncle why is there no mention that Anakin has a brother? I guess that's the problem though of changing the overall plot 20 years later.

Josh H

Owen was just Anakin's step brother, and one he likely only met that one time in AOTC.

Josh H

That complicates matters some, but I still say Lucas can do what he wants as they are his characters, his story lines, etc. He just hired others to direct those two films.

Rogue588

Complicates? I see no complication. In fact, it's pretty simple to me.

He's basically taking someone else's "work of art" and modifying it without their input [granted, Kershner don't care and Marquand is dead]. Why doesn't he just re-make them if he didn't like 'em? I don't see Stephen King altering Kubrick's "the Shining" [even though he was VERY disappointed with it].

Or...here's a radical thought...release the films the way they were ORIGINALLY made offering the buyer a choice! Don't wanna spend the $$$ to restore 'em? No problem. I'm sure some studio would. And then we could have the Original Theatrical version and Lucas' version to choose from.

Innovative, huh?

Josh H

Someone elses work done at Lucas's request, with Lucas's characters and Lucas's storyline. It's Lucas's intellectual property. Kershner and Marquand were bascially contracted laborers. They have no stake to the films IMO.

Zodiac_Speaking

I think in 1997, when the SEs hit, it was a fan concern due to "what has he done to our favorite films", but now watching them on DVD (I've only seen ANH and Empire thus far), the changes are subtle-atleast in the first two. I aprrove what he has done, but I wish nobody else tries to do the same.

Jackskeleton

And I've stated this countless times. those two directors were pretty much puppets to lucas will. Hired help since Lucas was in control of all the other aspects. Star Wars is still his baby.

So the "he didn't direct them so he can't make a directors cut" dispute could be tossed out because he may not have been in the directors chair, he had every role possible in creating them. Most importantly the funding. Considering one of them is dead and the other I recall approved of the changes, you can say that it's justified to call them the directors cut.