"There is also the "Theater of Noise," an audio-only track, which explores the incredibly rich sound world provided by Murch, with branching video showing the development of the sound design."

This should be great. There is a terrific book called "The Conversations" that is a collection of conversations between Michael Ondaatje (the guy who wrote the English Patient) and Walter Murch, where they discuss the different ideas for sound he had for this film.

Am I the only one that has NEVER heard of this movie in my whole entire life? It looks awsome though and looks like a combination of gattaca and equilibrium.

Sweet boxart:



I can't even find the trailer though on their damn freaky website.

Sort of, I guess... it's in the same genre... like 1984, etc. It's a great movie, but just make sure to not go in expecting something 'action packed'.

I'm not sure what to make of these 'digital enhancements' to a film made in 1971. Unless he's added Hayden into the film, I suppose I'll reserve judgement until I actually see the changes.

sorry, I disagree Another Lucas film "fixed" what a shocker

as long as Lucas doesn't turn the little hairy midget guys at the end into wookies, then i think i'll be okay with some revisions. hell, after 7 years of Star Wars tweaks, i'm starting to get used to it.

It looks the added effects are environmental in nature. More people in crowd scenes, cars in the tunnel etc. One shot is a wide shot of the android assembly line. Another shows an android walking around without clothes in the background.
The additions may actually work much better in this film.

Yeah, the assembly line revision is the only thing I thought looked bad... but if it helps the film, I might actually welcome these changes... although it would still be nice to have the original cut on DVD, as this is my favorite George Lucas film, and indeed one of my favorite films of alltime. I guess time will tell... anyone know when this shows in Chicago?

If that is in fact the DVD cover (and I'm not sure it is, it looks more like a poster for the theatrical re-release), WOW. That by itself would make up for any minor "improvements" Lucas might make.

More power to Lucas to make the films how he wants them.

A shame he doesn't include the old versions as well, because they're great for competists who are interested in the film's evolution.

Gotta love how he doesn't let anyone change his mind, and does what he wants.

...no I don't...


lol

It is the cover art that is shown at the official site, so I'd assume it is.

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=365472

Looking at your DVDs you own, you seem to be a big fan of films made the way the director wanted, that didn't sacrifice what they wanted to please audiances. I don't see the difference, except for the fact that you (and I, BTW) find Lucas's changes to not be to our liking.

As I always say though, DVD technology allows that both versions could be avalible on one disc, but no one ever seems to do it. It's lame.

Thank God!!! The day Lucas starts listening to whiny, crybaby fans is the day I'll no longer view his movies.

I hear he's going to digitally paint hair onto all of the characters' heads as well. And add some color to their wardrobes, which are just "too bland" for current moviegoing standards.

Here's a bunch of the changes:

http://www.davisdvd.com/bin/extras3.html

The difference, though, is that the films you're talking about, the directors did all that leading up to the film being released ... once it was released, the film was what the film was. (There are a few specific examples to the contrary; not looking at his list, I'm thinking of stuff like '2001' or 'The Shining', where Kubrick used the early release the way directors use test screenings. And, even in those cases, I'd *love* to see the alternate cuts. I'm really curious to check out the R2 'Shining' with the even shorter cut Kubrick made.)

In the case of Lucas, much like Chaplin, it's a totally different scenario; an artist, like any other person, changes over time. Some of them attempt to change their films as they get older so that they're still "my" films, but miss the whole idea that the film *does* represent, accurately, their point of view ... at a specific time. The phrase "cultural artifact" comes to mind.

Note that, with 'American Graffiti', it was a totally different thing. Other than digitally enhanced sunsets and whatnot, the actual major changes he made were because the studio had demanded certain minor re-edits. I'm all for re-edits in cases like that. But if the only person you're re-editing is yourself, I see no reason why one version of a director's vision could be more valid than another ones, and at least one major reason why it would be *less* valid (the longer you're away from a film, the less connected to it you'll feel, which means you're attempting to feel connected to it again by changing it, but potentially at the expense of what it originally way).

[Obviously, this whole post is phrased in more extreme language than the changes in 'THX' probably warrant. I'm just saying, there's validity in the idea that later re-edits are an annoyance.]

Great comparisons there of the two different cuts

Wow, excellent screen shots! I'm not sure how I feel about the atlering of the film, but it *does* look cool!
I wonder if this "adding to" will be a trend.

Really??? I disagree as well. It's too plain to me.

And people complain and bitch about the new Star Wars covers.

Now put a light saber in the bald dude's hand and you got me....

J/K!!!

The cover owns!! It has a criterion feel to it. its good to finally see a cover with no stupid quotes and awards. ITs an amazing cover, fits the movie. i mean the lives of the people are bland, so is the cover.

Changes like the ones done in this movie are perfectly fine, its when you add a stupind musical number that things start sucking.

What's next? Replacing that ne'er-do-well Bruce shark from Jaws with a nifty Deep Blue Sea CGI mako?

Oh the humanity...

I hate Criterions. So there! Give me floating heads and abnoxious banners anytime.