Word

http://search.ebay.com/Star-Wars-Las...ectZ1QQfromZR8

and furthermore...

http://search.ebay.com/Star-Wars-VHS...trypageZsearch

Now that I've settled the argument can we stop the whinning?

You guys really don't have the foresight to see that these formats won't be around forever. Astounding.

Since you brought up the subject of vinyl records, let's play what if...

What if the classic Beatles album Let It Be was ONLY available in vinyl, and if you wanted it on CD you had to get Let It Be: Naked. Wouldn't it be a shame that such a classic work of art was kept from the masses, and could only be enjoyed by a few collectors? Sure, you could buy it on vinyl, but it won't last forever, and as the years go by it will be harder and harder to replace, not to mention more costly, as no new ones are being produced.

You people don't seem to have any kind of perspective on the nature of collectibles. You're putting everything in terms of the next fifteen to twenty years instead of the larger picture. Don't you see that under the circumstances described above, gradually that work of art will become more and more rare, and hence more pricey, until it's eventually gone forever to the casual consumer?

Maybe that's what a lot of you want, to forget the original trilogy ever happened the way it did. It's amazing how the supporters of the Special Editions on this board aren't just happy with their Special Editions; they flat-out don't support the idea of releasing both editions... the originals editions ALSO, mind you; not instead of.

To the guy in the post above who said that George Lucas doesn't care about money because he's got plenty of it... that's a good one. In the words of Arnold Schwarzenegger, if you believe that, then there are Richard Simmons Jrs running around. Perhaps you'd like to purchase this bridge in brooklyn that I'm selling, it's quite reasonable. LOL. If George Lucas didn't care about money then there wouldn't be a such thing as a Jar Jar Binks inflatable pool lounger. There just wouldn't.

But as I said many posts ago, I suspect that GL is planning to release them eventually, but he's holding out on us to make as much money as he possibly can. That's my theory. The old boy just wants to further stuff his coffer. But at this point, any way you slice it, it stinks. If he's holding out on us to build up demand, he's a greedy bastard; if he's intentionally driving the originals to extinction, then he's got no soul. Either way, he's burning in Star Wars hell for eternity.

Well LPs have been out of production for years and they are still readily available. I think the point he is trying to make is that these films are not unreleased or impossible to find (see Song of the South).

Quite the contrary. Most people want both. There is a vocal segment bitching about not getting the originals. The point is that all the bitching won't change what LF is doing. They have a plan and are sticking to it. Some of us are happy to have the SE over nothing.

And as I said, he is damned either way. You want it now how YOU want it. That is the issue.

You do realize that Star Wars is a movie, not a cure for cancer, right?

To everyone saying LPs are out of production: I'm sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong. Are they produced in the huge numbers when they were the king? No. Can you get them at your average Best Buy or mall CD store? No.

But they are very much in production. Many albums still have a run on vinyl and they can be found with ease if you go to any decent indie cd/lp store. (God knows I've spent a number of dollars on LPs at Amoeba.)

Not a personal attack on you, Qui Gon, just had to point this out because this misconception bugs me (and yours was nearest the quote button).

To bring this post back on topic: If the Technicolor print of the original exists, I can't see why Lucas wouldn't release it as part of a massive box set in a few years' time. I think he's aware that to re-sell the trilogy, the add-ins have to be pretty phenomenal to warrant a double-dip and new archival footage of Anthony Daniels screwing around on set isn't going to be a deal-maker. A huge, multi-disc extravaganza like the Alien set seems totally plausible after the series is complete.

I personally agree more with the film preservationist stance and think the original should be preserved since it has some historical worth. But if it doesn't ever get released, it won't end the world for me because I already have, uh, an alternative.

Again, El-Kabong completely misses the point.

I want the original Star Wars films on DVD. I want the better quality that DVD has to offer. I want Lowry Digital cleaned-up versions that look as good as the films looked during their original theatrical run. I want the original soundtrack (no 5.1 remaster, please) to be crisp and clear. I want the video to be in anamorphic widescreen to get the extra resolution.

To say "if you want the films go buy the VHS or LD" is missing the point. I have the LDs (although not an LD player anymore). I want them in DVD quality.

How will buying the LDs get me the original films on DVD?

I think he is responding to one of your previous posts:

Not be *allowed* and *not being on DVD* are different worlds.

And the whole pretend thing, you've got to be kidding.

I agree. I've never understood the "laser disc logic" in 2004 and I have heard all the so-called arguments.

With that said, I have the originals in 5.1 on DVD. They look decent, but by no means will compare to the September releases.

Ever heard of DVD-R? I've got 3 DVD-R copies of the original Star Wars films, that look and sound every bit as good as the LDs, and they play in my DVD player. Would I like to have them officially on DVD? Yes! But it's not gonna happen. At least it doesn't look like it's gonna happen. So I have to get the next best thing, the LD copy.

That's true, but you have the originals. Truth be told, they look damn good. They're twice as good as VHS.

If the old boy, as you put it, was only concerned about money, he wouldn't have sunk a half a billion of his own money to make the prequels. Then again, only people like us that aren't rich, like to call rich people greedy.

Folks, I sympathize with you. I'd like the originals officially on DVD as well. He should offer them. But he's not going to from the looks of it. All of the bitching in the world isn't going to change that. Nothing that's being argued here hasn't been argued at least a thousand times before. So all we're doing is going round and round in circles, and it achieves nothing.

Don't agree at all. That scene looks seamless, and the dewbacks fit in just as well as that dewback puppet in the original did. That scene is better than the original. That scene should not piss off purists at all. Greedo shooting first and Luke's scream, okay. I'm with you on those. But not this scene.

Well, that was just a bad rush job, and supposedly Jabba is getting redone and will look great. I say supposedly because we've heard nothing official.

I assume you mean the small droids with the storm troopers. Again, I see absolutely nothing there that takes away from the storytelling. Nothing at all. To suggest that it does is pushing it.

Again, we've seen or heard nothing official. Let's wait and see. But if that change is made, I'd agree with you it's pointless and causes a bigger problem that leaving it alone would. Seeing Shaw one minute and then seeing Hayden 5 minutes later is jarring and creates a bigger problem than just leaving that alone. There's nothing there that needed fixing in the first place. It's been two decades since Episode III, and Anakin's been walking around in an iron lung, so of course he'd look older.

Well, because they weren't the property of George Lucas. Yes, Lucas should release the originals. But he has every right to make changes he sees fit.

At this point, now that the original films are all over 20 years old and DVD has been the preferred home format for almost five years and the STAR WARS trilogy has been on top of the amazon request list forever, yes, I do think it's a little late for him to be joining the game. Lucas has shown his stripes by now, and obviously all he cares about is money. Please don't give me any lines about Lucas caring about digital quality or optimium presentation anymore, considering he has chosen to ignore the highest quality digital home format available thus far.

Nuff said. This attitude speaks volumes. I think it's fair to say STAR WARS is more than just a movie at this point. It's transcended simple movie status and has become a part of human history, much the same way the Mona Lisa has transcended simple painting status. This is an important piece of 20th century art, and when I see GL changing it, it disgusts me. It's like if some rich guy bought the Mona Lisa and decided she needed to look more like Carmen Electra to fit today's standard of beauty, and proceeded to paint over it. If he owns it, he can do whatever he wants with it, right? Maybe so, but only the most apathetic art lover would stand there with his mouth agape, doing nothing to stop it. WHITE CHICKS is a movie, STAR WARS is art. Art belongs to humanity.

Again, if both versions were offered, I'd have no gripe. But sadly, Lucas has shown nothing but contempt for the fans that have made him obscenely rich, so satisfying us is clearly not a priority for him. I think this attitude is probably the result of sheep like El-Kabong taking whatever GL offers with wallet open and a "thank you, sir."

SONG OF THE SOUTH is a perfect example of what could happen to STAR WARS. It is quite impossible to find a copy of SONG OF THE SOUTH that is not either:
1. a ridiculously expensive import
2. of sub-standard a/v quality
3. an illegal bootleg

I'm sorry, but this is unacceptable in the case of both films. At least you can chalk SOS up to Disney having no balls and fearing boycotts. By my estimation, all that would happen if GL released the SW originals would be more DVD sales for him and his.

But mark my words, George can't resist the almighty dollar. This is all a ruse so he can make as much money as possible by releasing them after we all thought we'd never see 'em again.

I'm sorry Bird. You can't argue on one hand that Lucas has refused to release the original trilogy on DVD up until now, and yet all he cares about is money. If all Lucas cared about was money, we would have already seen numerous releases on DVD. Not only that, as I said before, someone that was greedy and only cared about money wouldn't have spent a half a billion dollars of his own money. A greedy person would have horded that money. The evidence suggests otherwise.

Either way, you've never met Lucas and therefor aren't in a position to say whether Lucas only cares about the bottom line.

Even if Lucas does release the originals eventually, I'm sure you and the usual suspects will continue to be unhappy, even though he gave fans what they've been bitching about for so long..

Quite the contrary, Terrell. Bigger investment means bigger returns, and I don't think it took a marketing genius to figure out that these prequels would see profit. GL was just keeping his cards close to his chest here. Why share money with Fox when you can just give them a small slice of the gross for their distribution services?

With all due respect, Terrell, how do you know I've never met George Lucas? For all you know, I used to work for him up in Marin county as a freelance editor. Presumptions, presumptions.

I feel like you haven't been reading my posts, or maybe just skimming. I think he's waiting to release the originals in order to drive up demand, that way when they're released (as a wholly different box set), it will be a big event and more people will rush out to buy them. When a DVD is released is carefully plotted to maximize profit. That's why you're not seeing studios unload all of their huge catalogue titles on DVD at the same time.

He spent his own money to ensure that he gets all of the profits. He's a smart businessman.

Bird, with all due respect, do you honestly think Lucas is going to have trouble selling anything with the words Star Wars on it? He doesn't need to drive up demand. The demand already exists. Lucas could sell anything with the words Star Wars on it with no problem whatsoever. He sure hasn't had any trouble in the past.

Maybe, but you said he was greedy and only cares about money. Spending your own money is not the mentality of a greedy, person, especially when you can get someone else to spend theirs. Hording your money is the actions of a greedy person. Not only that, he makes far more from merchandising than he ever does from the films.

Also, Lucas does not get all of the money. According to a Variety article before the opening of Episode I, Lucas gets 40% of the domestic box office take. I have no idea what he gets from international box office, but I'd imagine it's less than that. That's why Lucas said he needed to make around 275-285 million dollars to break even, though the merchandising deals already paid for these movies. Lucas could also maintain creative control that way without a studio butting in and putting more pressure on him. Either way, from what we've seen, his actions are not the actions of a greedy man.

Well, actually Action Comics #1 IS still available.

Despite the story being silly and primitive by today's standards (and being completely retconned out of the current continuity of the comics) DC has kept the story available over the years in a number of different formats.

About ten years ago, I think it was for Detective Comics #627, DC even reprinted the first-ever Batman story from Detective Comics #27, as well as retellings of the same story with modern creative teams.

And, reconginzing the historical value of these old comics, DC has a rather exhaustive program in place, called "Archives," that reprint the old classic comics from the silver and golden ages. In spite of the fact that they do tend to be primitive by modern standards, DC recognizes the historical importance of them and endeavors to keep them available to modern audiences in an affordable format. (Yes, the archives are hardcover books priced at $50.00, but it's really comparable to Criterion DVDs in a lot of ways.)

I'm sure someone can find a few analogies to the discussion at hand in my post.

I think Ep III will explain why we'll see a ghost Hayden (if we do)

Remember, dead Jedi in Ep I & II don't fade, they just die.

After his mom died and Anakin was throwing his hissy fit in fornt of Padme, he said someday he'll find a way to keep people from dying.

Therefore...

He's going to invent the fade-upon-death and ghost phenomenon in Episode III. Perhaps seeing how this unfolds will explain how Anakin preserves his soul as the younger Anakin.


(Of course, the wrench thrown into this theory is that Qui-Gonn's voice was heard in Ep II)

God, I hope not. I always thought it was some jedi rite of passage with a deeply spiritual explanation, not some cheap parlor trick. Besides, how could Anakin "invent" it, wasn't it Obi Wan who said "if you strike me down, I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine," and wasn't he talking to Anakin/Vader? Hmmm.

While STAR WARS may have a built-in audience, you can't tell me GL subsequently doesn't care about marketing, i.e advertisement/strategic planning. Money seems to be the one thing that no matter how much of it you have, you always want more of it. Otherwise, fellas like George Lucas or Donald Trump wouldn't have a reason to get up in the morning and go to work.

It's also worth noting that Lucas's deal with Fox was considered the ultimate sweetheart deal for him. Everyone knew that Lucas was holding all the cards and Fox just wanted to retain a piece, however small, of the Star Wars franchise.

An excellent point, Josh.

Wrong. It's actually like Da Vinci going back and making changes. You can bitch all you want but it's not your painting. It's his.

but Draven, Da Vinci is dead.

Donald Trump and George Lucas don't get up in the morning to go to work because they're worried about money. I imagine they get up because they enjoy what they do. Lucas enjoys what he does. Now, of course he's out to make money. Anyone that runs companies like Lucas are in it to make money, otherwise, what's the point of running a company. It wouldn't last very long. So from that standpoint, of course he cares about marketing.

Well, it's out of place because Star Wars was a film made in 1977 and that technology wasn't available. I'm bothered less by issues of continuity with the star wars universe than I am by the fact that the retooling removes the film from the era in which it was made.

Spielberg wanted to make the ET puppet look better, but he provided the original version on the DVD, which was classy. Lucas is welcome to revisit the films as much as he wants, but he does a tremendous harm if he makes the original versions unavailable. The methods employed by filmmakers to work around limited budget or limited technology are very important, and the accomplishments of the original ILM team in 1977 are every bit as impressive as modern digital effects.

Actually, the concept of "ownership" of a thing like this is really theoretically questionable. There is a compelling argument that a work of such cultural importance should belong to society.

The constitutional preservation of copyright was conceived as a limited monopoly intended to allow inventors and authors to profit from their work sufficiently to incentivize creation, and beyond that, the work would pass into the public domain. However, the owners of ideas have increasingly been corporate entities who see revenue streams extending for decades from these rights, and they have successfully lobbied congress to extend these rights to such an extent that many experts actually believe the current copyright regime to be unconstitutional, though the Supreme Court recently declinde to strike down a congressional extension.

Public choice theory holds that the problem with our legislative system is that motivated groups whose interests may be inconsistent with society's will push their agendas because the benefit to them is great while the harm to any individual is too small to provoke sufficient opposition. However, the fact that something is legislated does not make it right.

George Lucas has had plenty of time to benefit commercially from Star Wars. There is no policy reason to allow him to continue to own it. It should belong to the fans, to film lovers, and to history, and it should be preserved as it appeared in 1977. The fact that he created it does not give him the right to destroy it.

I hope someone is preserving the original elements in such a manner that they can be restored when the copyright expires, but the period is so far in the future that there is no incentive for anyone to lay out the resources for this kind of preservation because there is no economic benefit in doing so. As a result, Star Wars, as it appeared in 1977 may be lost with the degredation of the current commercially available releases.

Not that it matters that much. Lord of the Rings is better anyway.

Surely you realize that, even when the copyright on these films expire, the physical elements will still be owned by Lucasfilm. Even after the films are in the public domain, restoration of the original elements in 1977 form will not happen unless Lucasfilm agrees to it. You can't suddenly force them to do what you want simply because the copyright has expired; there is no expiration on personal property rights. And, of course, there's the unexpiring moral sense that artists should be free to exercise dominion over their works withouht having to bow down to the demands of the masses, which existed long before copyright.

Unless, of course, you wish to extend your tyrannical "art doesn't belong to the artists" theory to personal property, too. I can just imagine an FBI raid on the Skywalker Ranch, stopping Lucas before he can do anything to hurt a work of art owned by "society." Viva artistic freedom.

DJ