Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Archives > Archives > DVD Talk Archive
Reload this Page >

Star Wars DVD change?

Star Wars DVD change?

 
Old 07-28-04, 09:42 AM
  #251  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 24,539
Received 106 Likes on 70 Posts
I can't buy M&Ms without the red ones, Lucky Charms without the purple horseshoes, etc.

Face it, manufacturers update their products.

If Chlorox comes out with a "new and improved" bleach... will they still sell the old one? Nope.

Last edited by GuessWho; 07-28-04 at 10:15 AM.
GuessWho is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 09:53 AM
  #252  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 3,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
New Coke anyone?
Abranut is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 10:07 AM
  #253  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I can't buy M&Ms without the red ones, Lucky Charms without the purple horseshoes, etc.

Face it, manufacturers update their products.

If Chlorox comes out with a "new and improved" bleach... will hery still sell the old one? Nope.
Yes if you think art is just a product to be replaced on marketing whims, go ahead and equate it with consumer products. I don't.
chanster is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 10:08 AM
  #254  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Docking Bay 94
Posts: 14,259
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by GuessWho
I can't buy M&Ms without the red ones, Lucky Charms without the purple horseshoes, etc.

Face it, manufacturers update their products.
But no one (including, I suspect, Lucas himself) views this as a 'product'.

I realize that he's made billions and there are Star Wars books, toys, bedsheets, gummy bears, and everything else in stores... but he always says that he's doing this to "complete his vision" or "finish the films". Not that it is a product that needs updating.


I think it's safe to say that the majority of people view this as a work of art, as pretentious as that sounds.
bboisvert is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 10:18 AM
  #255  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: NYC * See da name? Go get me some coffee...
Posts: 4,665
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
hmmmmmm M&M's...
Get Me Coffee is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 10:30 AM
  #256  
Retired
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 27,449
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by bboisvert

I think it's safe to say that the majority of people view this as a work of art, as pretentious as that sounds.
I don't know about the majority.

I'm not big on the movies as art thing period, as I simply view movies as nothing more than entertainment.

However, I can admit that some movies are more "artsy" or whatever than others.

But, as much as I love SW, these movies do not fall in that category. There mindless popcorn flicks, nothing more. I don't see anything artsy about them.
Josh H is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 11:09 AM
  #257  
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germantown Maryland
Posts: 2,488
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by Josh Hinkle

I'm not big on the movies as art thing period, as I simply view movies as nothing more than entertainment.

What exactly is your definition of art? You need to differentiate medium and content. Film is an art form. There is absolutely no denying that.
Rivero is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 11:33 AM
  #258  
Political Exile
 
Philzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: America
Posts: 957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Rivero
What exactly is your definition of art? You need to differentiate medium and content. Film is an art form. There is absolutely no denying that.
and art is entertainment
Philzilla is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 11:39 AM
  #259  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Docking Bay 94
Posts: 14,259
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by Philzilla
and art is entertainment
and art is not breakfast cereal. See, I was right!
bboisvert is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 12:01 PM
  #260  
Political Exile
 
Philzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: America
Posts: 957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
but is a breakfast cereal box art?
Philzilla is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 12:05 PM
  #261  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 3,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Philzilla
and art is entertainment
That is extremely debatable. Most art buffs would completely disagree with you. When films were being introduced at the beginning of the 20th century, there was a HUGE backlash from the arts community against film because they thought it would promote a culture of idiocy (opposed to sticking with painting, operas, and plays). Film can be an art form, but I think most films don't fit my definition of art.

Last edited by Abranut; 07-28-04 at 12:08 PM.
Abranut is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 12:21 PM
  #262  
Retired
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 27,449
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by Rivero
What exactly is your definition of art? You need to differentiate medium and content. Film is an art form. There is absolutely no denying that.

I'm not going to get into my definition of art, as I honestly have never gave two shits about art in general.

I didn't say that films couldn't be art. I said I wasn't big into films as art. By saying that I view films only as entertainment, I meant that's the only use I have for them.

If a film doesn't entertain me then it's a crappy film IMO. I don't judge films on any artistic merit, but rather on whether or not I was entertained. Any artistic merit is simply one of the variables that will either add to or take away from my entertaiment.
Josh H is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 02:58 PM
  #263  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,647
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by JONA99
I hate the new Emperor/Vader lines. I wish George would've just left 'em alone. But they add much more than just "talking."

From a storytelling point of view, now that we know the complete six-chapter arc, I suppose it makes sense that George added those lines. Since the entire saga is basically Vader's story, it's a bit of a cheat to have him learn about the existence of his son, and the identity of the pilot who blew up the Death Star, somewhere in between chapters 4 and 5. The central character's (Vader's) discovery is too vital and defining a moment to be left offscreen... from a storytelling point of view.
ok- here is the difference between the two versions of this scene that exists now.

the original verison
there are several points made here
1) the emperor and Vader both sense a disturbance in the force
2) the disturbance implies that Luke Skywalker, whom they both already know about, is now taking the steps on his way to becoming a jedi
3) if he becomes a jedi, he could take them down (or cause them a lot more problems than he already is)

the scene is about Luke becoming a Jedi and the repurcussions that will have on the bad guys



'04 version
this new dialouge seems to be trying to accomplish several things at once (and fails on each account).
the emperor, thru the use of very clunky expositional wording, now uses this opportunity to identify that Luke is the one who blew up the death star and probably is the same Skywalker as Anakins son.

so Vaders response is "how is that possible" and yet his VERY NEXT WORDS ARE "he is just a boy, obi wan can no longer teach him"

WTF is that?
that's like you confessing you cheated to your girlfriend, she acts shocked and surprised, but then a second later questions you with a detailed itinerary that shows she knew everything anyway.

the two parts here just do not mesh seemlessly.
And what is added, takes away from the power of what was previously concise and mysterious, and replaces it with expositional information (that will now have to be jettisoned from earlier in the film to make any consistent sense).

and you just can't read any ulterior motive into Vaders "how is that possible" because this never becomes an issue again- he makes absolutely no steps afterwards to gain the upper hand and wrest Luke from The Emperor.
it is again as if Lucas had a great idea, embellished it, and then when it came time to make another film, completely abandoned it and went in a whole other direction

ROTJ did not deal with Vader trying to get back to Luke beofre the Emperor found him, nor did it deal with any other ways that Vader may have been trying to directly undermine and usurp the role of Emperor- that implication is completely abandoned in that film- so it seems every bit like fanboy)and i use that affectionately) self delusion to read anything more into Vaders one line- other than it is a generic set-up so that Lucas can then use insert an additional line from the Emperor and use the colorful "search your feelings" phrase yet again.

and doesn't anyone else, regardless of whether you are a fan of the OTs or the SEs, doesn't anyone else think it is a crying shame that the characters in the OT are now being diluted so that they will mesh better with the PT?
even is you took this new Emp/Vader scene in a positive a light as possible (that Vader is so mind-clouded by the Emperor that he parrots back to Luke what the Emp planted in his head)- that still means that once, what was a pro-active, aggressive, dynamic, strong-willed character- is now shown to be little more than a mind controlled puppet.
yes, that gives his 'redemption' arc a little more justification (he's under a black spell), but in doing so , it takes away quite a bit of the 'evil incarnate' luster that the character had always had- at least until he got to ROTJ (he always lost his luster in that film ).
now its gone in ESB as well.
Wonder what Lucas could have changed in ANH to have us not look so harshly at Vader there as well.

Last edited by ckolchak; 07-28-04 at 03:12 PM.
ckolchak is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 03:19 PM
  #264  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Terrell
I actually love the way Ian reads the lines.
Why? He reads them all wrong. I don't have a problem with the way Ian does the Emperor in the prequels because hes a lot younger. The way he acts and talks should be different. My problem is that Ian plays the Emperor exactly the same in the new Empire DVD as he does in the prequels. What he should've done is played him exactly as he was in Jedi. It's such an obvious difference since the Emperor in Jedi was an annoying, grumpy old fogy who spoke and laughed like an idiot.
Lara Means is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 04:24 PM
  #265  
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germantown Maryland
Posts: 2,488
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
So the new version of Empire makes Vader out to look more like the Emperor's bitch. That's just fantastic Lucas. Keep up the great work, pal.
Rivero is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 04:34 PM
  #266  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 11,862
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Eh...Vader always acted like the Emperor's bitch...I guess the point of the new lines is to make it look like Vader is playing the Emperor.

I honestly think Ian's read of the lines is terrible...but that is just my opinion.
KnightLerxst is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 04:46 PM
  #267  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Kal-El's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fortress of Solitude
Posts: 7,992
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by ckolchak
ok- here is the difference between the two versions of this scene that exists now.

the original verison
there are several points made here
1) the emperor and Vader both sense a disturbance in the force
2) the disturbance implies that Luke Skywalker, whom they both already know about, is now taking the steps on his way to becoming a jedi
3) if he becomes a jedi, he could take them down (or cause them a lot more problems than he already is)

the scene is about Luke becoming a Jedi and the repurcussions that will have on the bad guys



'04 version
this new dialouge seems to be trying to accomplish several things at once (and fails on each account).
the emperor, thru the use of very clunky expositional wording, now uses this opportunity to identify that Luke is the one who blew up the death star and probably is the same Skywalker as Anakins son.

so Vaders response is "how is that possible" and yet his VERY NEXT WORDS ARE "he is just a boy, obi wan can no longer teach him"

WTF is that?
that's like you confessing you cheated to your girlfriend, she acts shocked and surprised, but then a second later questions you with a detailed itinerary that shows she knew everything anyway.

the two parts here just do not mesh seemlessly.
And what is added, takes away from the power of what was previously concise and mysterious, and replaces it with expositional information (that will now have to be jettisoned from earlier in the film to make any consistent sense).

and you just can't read any ulterior motive into Vaders "how is that possible" because this never becomes an issue again- he makes absolutely no steps afterwards to gain the upper hand and wrest Luke from The Emperor.
it is again as if Lucas had a great idea, embellished it, and then when it came time to make another film, completely abandoned it and went in a whole other direction

ROTJ did not deal with Vader trying to get back to Luke beofre the Emperor found him, nor did it deal with any other ways that Vader may have been trying to directly undermine and usurp the role of Emperor- that implication is completely abandoned in that film- so it seems every bit like fanboy)and i use that affectionately) self delusion to read anything more into Vaders one line- other than it is a generic set-up so that Lucas can then use insert an additional line from the Emperor and use the colorful "search your feelings" phrase yet again.

and doesn't anyone else, regardless of whether you are a fan of the OTs or the SEs, doesn't anyone else think it is a crying shame that the characters in the OT are now being diluted so that they will mesh better with the PT?
even is you took this new Emp/Vader scene in a positive a light as possible (that Vader is so mind-clouded by the Emperor that he parrots back to Luke what the Emp planted in his head)- that still means that once, what was a pro-active, aggressive, dynamic, strong-willed character- is now shown to be little more than a mind controlled puppet.
yes, that gives his 'redemption' arc a little more justification (he's under a black spell), but in doing so , it takes away quite a bit of the 'evil incarnate' luster that the character had always had- at least until he got to ROTJ (he always lost his luster in that film ).
now its gone in ESB as well.
Wonder what Lucas could have changed in ANH to have us not look so harshly at Vader there as well.
I don't mean this to come off as confrontational in any way but don't you think you're over-analyzing every.little.detail there? I mean, first you're upset that a minor character(Bobba) who has 5 very unmemorable lines(IMO) is being voiced differently and now you're upset about Vader's motivation for doing stuff? Seriously I think we should all just tone down the nitpickiness from 11 to about 6 or 5. Do you really think about this stuff as you're watching the movie and afterwards? Because I don't and I find that I enjoy movies more that way.
Kal-El is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 04:47 PM
  #268  
Senior Member
 
mythmaker18's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kentucky, USA
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I just wish more people would choose to not purchase these "The Original Trilogy Did Not Exist" versions.
Well, I don't plan to buy them, so you can at least count on me (I have way too many other things I'd rather buy, especially since I already have the THX widescreen tapes of these three films anyway).

Like someone else said, maybe Cool Hand Luc(as) will release a mega set sometime after episode III comes out (or on the 30th anniversary) with the original versions included as a bonus, like his pal Speilberg did with E.T.

And if not, I'll still have my tapes (it's not like I watch them that much anyway, once a year tops).
mythmaker18 is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 04:50 PM
  #269  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,647
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Vader was always the Emperors bitch- in the stories- even back in ANH he was presented as this black Force-powered liason from the Emperor to get results admist all these secular burrecrats- however the way the films (ANH, ESB) were told (the storytelling), Vader was the effectual primary antagonist- especially in ESB.
the conflict in ESB was not between Luke and the Emperor- it was between Luke and Vader.

another problem i have with the new scene- aeven if the dialouge wer unchanged- the Emperors hologram is too clean, too clear, and too well lit.

the spfx before had a feeling of verisimilitude becasue the transmission was not high fidelity...it was coarse and highly contrasted and that could be attributed to the proximity to the asteroid field and the fact that the pursuit of their quarry was taking them deeper and deeper away - the emperor(monkey woman) was also at least expressivly lit, with deep shadows to give him some air of mystery- i guesss with the much superior prequels though, you don't need that mystery- just like you don't need a lot of the qualities that used to be present in these films a long time ago- because now everyone will always watch all 6 films from begining to end.
ckolchak is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 04:56 PM
  #270  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 11,862
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I wonder what other surprises Lucas has for us.

Any word on changes to Star Wars other than lightsabers, Greedo, and Jabba?
KnightLerxst is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 05:06 PM
  #271  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 24,539
Received 106 Likes on 70 Posts
Originally posted by KnightLerxst
I wonder what other surprises Lucas has for us.

Any word on changes to Star Wars other than lightsabers, Greedo, and Jabba?
Bea Arthur's been re-inserted as the owner of the cantina

GuessWho is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 05:08 PM
  #272  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 11,862
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by GuessWho
Bea Arthur's been re-inserted as the owner of the cantina
Well it is about God damned time!!!

Now just insert Art Carney into the damn movie for Chrissakes!!!
KnightLerxst is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 05:10 PM
  #273  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 24,539
Received 106 Likes on 70 Posts
Originally posted by KnightLerxst
Well it is about God damned time!!!

Now just insert Art Carney into the damn movie for Chrissakes!!!


GuessWho is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 05:14 PM
  #274  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Docking Bay 94
Posts: 14,259
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by Kal-El
I don't mean this to come off as confrontational in any way but don't you think you're over-analyzing every.little.detail there? I mean, first you're upset that a minor character(Bobba) who has 5 very unmemorable lines(IMO) is being voiced differently and now you're upset about Vader's motivation for doing stuff? Seriously I think we should all just tone down the nitpickiness from 11 to about 6 or 5. Do you really think about this stuff as you're watching the movie and afterwards? Because I don't and I find that I enjoy movies more that way.
But, do you disagree with ckolchak's central point? That is, ckolchak is pointing out the problems that these "additional lines" create for the film. Do you think he's wrong?
bboisvert is offline  
Old 07-28-04, 05:35 PM
  #275  
Cool New Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by ckolchak
this new dialouge seems to be trying to accomplish several things at once (and fails on each account).
the emperor, thru the use of very clunky expositional wording, now uses this opportunity to identify that Luke is the one who blew up the death star and probably is the same Skywalker as Anakins son.

so Vaders response is "how is that possible" and yet his VERY NEXT WORDS ARE "he is just a boy, obi wan can no longer teach him"

WTF is that?
that's like you confessing you cheated to your girlfriend, she acts shocked and surprised, but then a second later questions you with a detailed itinerary that shows she knew everything anyway.

the two parts here just do not mesh seemlessly.
Seamlessly isn't the adverb I'd use, but I think the parts mesh just fine.

"How is that possible?" Not knowing he has a son, Vader asks the first question that any surprised father-to-be asks. Let's be glad Lucas didn't follow it with the Emperor giving a "birds and the bees" speech. Instead it's followed by...

"He's just a boy." Vader has just done the math in his head, and realized that his offspring can't be more than 25 or so.

"Obi Wan can no longer help him." Vader doesn't mean that Obi Wan cannot CONTINUE helping him. He just means that Obi Wan, the sole surviving Jedi (that Vader knows of, anyway) is no longer in the position of being able to help Jedi wannabes (on account of his demise and all.)

Like I said, I wish Lucas hadn't made any more changes, but this one actually makes sense from a storytelling point of view. With the addition of the prequels, it's become clear that the main character of the saga is now Anakin/Vader. So Vader learning the existence and identity of his son is a character motivator that should not occur offscreen, i.e. between Episodes 4 and 5. THIS is why George added it. Clunky exposition be damned.
JONA99 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.