Brain_F15ting: There was no DTS, nor DTS-ES when the original star wars trilogy was made.

I find it disturbing that the same people who cry for the original trilogy as released (no SE) and who prefer OAR to Pan & Scan have no problem with altering the soundtrack to make better use of your home theatre.

I wouldn't mind an "upgrade" of the sound if they also included the original track, but sound is a very important part of a motion picture and changing that element dramatically changes the entire "feel" of the film.

But that is a completely different question. As I have said several times now, I am fully in support of the OT's being released in addition to the most current verions of the film. What I am trying to figure out is if the changes that have been made really affect peoples opinion of the movies so much that they no longer enjoy them.

I guess I am curious because it almost sounds like people are saying that it is the emotional/sentimental aspect that is the sole source of their enjoyment. If breaking that sentimental attachment (via changing the movie from the way it is remembered) destroys the enjoyment of the movies, then the opinion of the quality of the original movie must not be that high. Which I find even more curious . . .

SE or original, who gives a shit? The whole series still has the same plot and characters and still sucks.

Honestly, I think it fits hans character better if Greedo shoots first. Han is a scoundrel, yes, but he is not a cold-blooded killer. If Han doesn't shoot Greedo in self-defense (i.e., after Greedo has shot at him), then that is exactly what he is . . . a killer. While Han is definitely rough around the edges, he is a good guy overall.

Oh no . . . now you've done it . . . I hope you have a place where you can hide.

Even if I agreed with that statement, I wouldn't say that here

Don't even know what last part means. There is no straw.

Regardless, this has already gone around in circles multiple times in this thread. These are Lucas' storys, and he can do what he wants with them and release them as he wants them. As far as i'm concerned, that's the "right" way. The same way that movies should be released in the aspect ratio that the director wants. Not what some vocal group of fans demand. As far as preserving film, it already has been preserved in VHS and Laserdisc. And i would find it hard to believe that those who argue for the film's preservation are similar to those who will base their purchasing decision on whether the movies are released as the special editions or originals.

It seems like once a year I have to dig up my old post and refresh peoples' memories.

To clarify: Star Wars was never released in Dolby Digital or DTS (the SE's are another story, but please read on). They were released in select theaters in 70mm blow-ups that allowed the film to contain a discrete 6 track magnetic soundtrack. These 6 discrete channels are identical to today's modern 5.1 set ups (theatrically and home theater).

The names "Dolby Digital" and "DTS" are the brand names given to the encoding and decoding hardware that presents 6 track discrete suround to both theatrical and home listening environments. When the Star Wars DVD comes out it should have a Dolby Digital and/or DTS track that will approximate the 6 track soundtrack that was original heard by audiences in 1977.

Note: Star Wars was also released in two track optical stereo and one track optical mono in other theaters not equiped for 70mm 6 track mag. I happen to feel having these mixes on the DVD would be interesting too.

I can truly say I don't enjoy them enough to buy them. I know that might be hard to believe to some of the die hard star wars fans on this board, but it's the truth.

Fair enough. I don't think it's quite as off point as you make it out to be, but I'll go with a different one. Let's say I pick out a limited edition art print I really like and tell the artist I'll buy it off him. I come back to pick it up a couple days later and he gives me a version of the print that's the same piece with all kinds of editions. If I think it looks like crap, I'm not going to buy it. And if a bunch of the artist's fans get all whiny and try to convince me that it's "just as good because you can still see the original and all the crap on top of it is how the artist wanted it to look", well, I'm just going to wonder why they're so concerned about my personal taste.

According to DVD.IGN, the Han/Greedo shooting fiasco may not be an issue anymore:

"Now, in case you haven't heard, it seems all but certain that LucasFilm will release the original Star Wars trilogy on DVD in a special, unseen edition in September 2004. Another source says that, thankfully, Han will shoot first. Apparently Lucas was beat up enough over Greedo shooting first that he got the hint. This new release will feature further tweaking of the film. I wish he'd leave well enough alone."

Here's the direct link:
http://dvd.ign.com/articles/458/458615p1.html

Sounds cool.

I can agree with this. I guess not everything is black and white. I just always liked Han shooting Greedo first. I dont necessarily need the very first edition of Star Wars(as I said before I will be buying whatever is put out), but I wish that if Lucas is gonna change things he would at least see some of the mistakes he has made and change them for the better. As has been said many times most of the changes are hardly noticeable.

And for the person who said the Star Wars Trilogy sucks.

But *not* at the beginning. If he's a generally good guy all the way through, you never think he's just taking his money and going home while everybody else attacks the death star.

Good news from ign.com there, now hopefully they can get rid of the schoolgirl scream when he falls.

I'm not a "purist" when it comes to these films, but I would prefer to have the original theatrical versions in addition to whatever cartoon computer dick-in-the-nintendo version they decide to put out.

I do hope they remove the Greedo shooting first, though. That was just a bad idea from the get-go.

I'm just suprised . . . I never considered the possibility that people would find changes (that had always struck me as . . . for the most part . . . cosmetic) to be so material that it would actually change there opinion of the "meat" of the film. Just suprised . . . that's all.Again, I think that the analogy is off . . . but better than the last one. The basis of this analogy is that you own the material. The only thing that you have purchased (outside of, possibly, VHS or LD copies) are the memories of the movie that you saw in the theater (assuming that you saw it in the theater) or perhaps some "freebie" memories from TV. And, if someone were to pull a "Total Recall" move and try to change your memories, then that would fit the analogy.

To re-arrange the analogy some, I would say it would be more acurate as this: You paid to see an art show where an artist had a limited edition art print on display. You really liked what you saw and so you bought a small copy (read "VHS or LD copy") of the print. Later, after enjoying the small version, you decided that you liked it so much that you wanted a full-size copy of it (read "DVD copy"), but upon contacting the artist, you find out that he discovered some new art techniques in the interim and is able to achieve a look that he had not been able to do before. Because of this new technique, he is no longer producing the piece in its old form, only in the new way (the way he had wanted to do it to begin with). Since all of the copies of the old version that were for sale have since been sold, the best option that you have to buy is the newer versions, which look very similar to the old one, but have some differences. Unfortunately, he doesn't have any full-sized prints out yet, but he is hoping to have some available in about a year . . . he is also considering doing special a run of the old version, but hasn't decided yet. In the mean time, he has some smaller copies of the new version and understands that there are some smaller versions of the original for sale by people selling their old, personal copies. Additionally, rumor has it that there are some people who are making some rough, full-sized versions of the original by making enlarged copies of the small versions that they had. Personal taste is your business . . . you are welcome to enjoy what you like . . . have fun. But by your comments, you are not enjoying the current state of the Star Wars OT releases. I can't speak for other people, but personally, I am hoping that you, and others like you, will someday see what I see in the SE releases that makes me enjoy them, so that you can stop be upset with them and can enjoy them instead.

Just trying to help.

C'mon now . . . at any point, did you really think that he wasn't going to come back and help out? And yes, he was definitely more self centered (re: taking the money), but not a cold-blodded killer.

Honestly, I think that the change could have been handled better overall . . . maybe Greedo draws, but Han shoots him before he can get a shot off (Greedo has to be a better shot than that at three feet away). But I still think that reacting to Greedo, rather than killing him unprovoked, is more in line with Hans personality . . . and, therefore, a step in the right direction.

So who makes the decision when we should support the director's vision, and when we should support the executive producer's vision?
Now this is just silly. By this logic, again, you shouldn't care whether your favorite movies are released widescreen or pan and scan. After all, the widescreen version has already been available, so what's the big deal?

Maybe you've misunderstood. By "preserving film history," I mean preserving it for public consumption in the future, not just preserving it in the sense that some copy of it exists somewhere.

There are two points here:

One, no, he's not a cold-blooded killer. Han knew that Greedo was going to shoot him. In essence, it was an act of self-defense, just as you describe the revision, but well in advance of Greedo ever having a chance to harm him. It does not make Han a less sympathetic character, it makes him more impressive. Having Greedo shoot first turns Han into a creature of dumb luck, rather than the wizened scoundrel he's supposed to be. And to say that Han shooting first in the original was "unprovoked" is just silly. I mean, geez, have you ever watched the movie? Greedo told Han he planned to kill him.

Two, a lot of people see the Greedo change as just one example, possibly the most glaring, of an overall pattern of the sanitization of the Star Wars movies. Yes, I know the first movie almost got a G rating, but that doesn't mean it can't be more sanitized, and that is the direction in which seemingly every decision regarding these movies made in the last ten years has pointed.

This is just getting ridiculous now. The problem with these arguments is that you're obviously not going to change on your mind on what you feel is the right thing, and neither will I. Trying to pick holes in the logic behind my posts is ludicrous, and I dont see how the pan and scan/widescreen debate should even factor into the discussion on the release of Star Wars on DVD, let alone how an Executive Producer factors into this.

People on this forum have always clamored for OAR and the director's vision, yet when it comes to films with a cult following (Star Wars, Blade Runner) there's an exception.

Yes, and that exception is that when it comes to Star Wars, suddenly it's the executive producer's vision we all clamor for.

(Hint: Take a look at the credits to The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi some time. You will not find George Lucas's name anywhere near the word "Director.")

Shoot . . . I knew when I used the word "unprovoked" that someone was going to misunderstand what I meant. Of course, there was some threatening and it was generally a "less than friendly" situation, but, yes, I have seen the movie . . . just watched it again for the nth time last week . . . and, if I'm not mistaken, Greedo threatens to take him in or offers to let him go if he gives him the money that he owes Jabba instead. At that point, he still has the opportunity to use the skills that he has as a "the wizened scoundrel" to get out of it in many other creative and/or diplomatic ways, but, instead he just kills him. It just doesn't seem quite right.Sanitization? I'm not sure I follow what you mean there . . .

I think we already covered this earlier in the thread. Under normal circumstances, I think that your comment would be accurate, but, in this case, Lucas is not your everyday executive producer. I can't imagine anyone thinking of any of the Star Wars movies as anything but Lucas' films.

IMO, Lucas can release the version(s) he wants and we can choose to buy them or not. Personally, I'd like to see a box set with both versions included...or alternately both versions released separtely. The only set I am interested in is one that includes the original versions. If you want to throw in the "SE"s in an all-inclusive set, I'll take them...even if it raised the price a bit. But I don't think I'd buy an "SE" only set.

The only "SE" I've seen is Star Wars. I was extremely disappointed with the changes and didn't bother watching the other "SE"s...though I might check them out if they are included in a set with the originals. But I'm not interested in seeing Greedo shoot first or a bad CGI Jaba.

In case you don't know, this wouldn't be the first time Lucas changed a movie for DVD release. For some reason, he felt it necessary to add a sunset to the sky in the opening shot of American Graffiti. In this case, it made zero difference in the movie to me so I didn't care one way or the other....though it seemed like an unnecessary change.

Maybe he'll do like Spielberg and release both versions. I bought E.T. and have watched the original twice and haven't even been interested enough in the changes to watch the updated version.

I'm not sweating the DVD release of the Star Wars trilogy too much, though I would be disappointed if he released it with the original version available somehow. I have them on LaserDisc and have been content watching them that way for a long time.

Just throwin' in my thoughts....

p.s. - I do refuse to call Star Wars "Episode IV" or "A New Hope"...but I don't care if others do.

I think there is a pretty big difference between a director's "vision" and the OAR of a film. Say for example that a director makes the decision for his film to be widescreen from the beginning. He then shoots and releases the movie in widescreen. Then 10 years later decides that fullscreen was really his vision of the movie and decides to only release the movie in fullscreen from now on. In this situation, which aspect ratio would you prefer? Widescreen because that was what the movie was made to be from the get go or full screen because some dumb director changes his mind 10 years later? I'll take the widescreen thank you. The directors vision can eat me. So the same way that people want the OAR of a film, they want the ORIGINAL CUT for the same reason. AS has been illustrated in earlier posts, there are alot of changes in the movies that could have been done that way the first time around. I think most people want the movies the way they were made to be done not some new version because some guy that is not even the same person as he was back then decides to change his mind on a whim

I'm not going to disagree with you. Because really I don't. Lucas didn't want Han shooting someone in cold blood. That's all.It doesn't fit with the type of person Han was in the second and third movies at all in his mind.

So you want these original movies, but you want to get the actors to come back and record new lines?

I seriously hope this was ment to be a joke.

I'll be really disapointed if the OT isn't on there. But I'm not going to become a hypocrit and bitch at Lucas here. I've supported creators rights for so long, and acting like Lucas owes me is just so damn stupid. I just dream for seamless branching, but I have little hope it'll happen.