Badmovies.org Forum

Good news for you purists, Lucas has decided to release the unaltered versions of the original trilogy on DVD on Sept. 12. It will be a limited release, as they will be pulled from the market on Dec. 31.


Here are the details (http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=0&id=35855).

WHOOHOO!!!!

I knew there was a reason why I didn't buy the first set on DVD.  This is gonna kick ass!

No surprises there. Now that a lot of fans have bought the altered versions, he's releasing the originals for the purists. Many fans will end up buying it twice. The limited release is a nice touch, just to add a sense of urgency. I guess it works for Disney.

Still, something tells me this won't stay in the Lucasfilm vault for long if there are still people who want to buy it.

Figures he'd just release it for a little bit, it's like "I can only bear to realease my god awful terrible self punishing original versions to the public for so long"

I'm buying them!

Finally! And I seriously didn't think it would ever happen! The only added elements that I like about the SEs are the scenes that had originally been cut from the film in editing.

All right! I never saw the point in the added scenes, and despite being one of the biggest Star Wars dorks around (I even bought the Star Wars Iron-On Transfers to make my own t-shirts), I haven't bought the original trilogy dvds. Now maybe I will. Thanks for the news, trek_geezer!

This is great news! Too bad it doesn't look like their will be any extras though if the 2-discs sets just include the original versions and the 2004 updates. I already have the 2004 set, but this is one of the very rare times that justifies double-dipping.

Didn't Lucas say at one point that he couldn't release an unaltered Star Wars because the master had been lost?

And it is funny, usually I like the "extented director's platinum" edition, with deleted/alternata scenes.  But with Star Wars, I just want the original, where Han shoots first.

raj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But with Star Wars, I
> just want the original, where Han shoots first.

Did anybody like the remade version?  The fan backlash on that was/is phenomenal.

I think having Greedo shoot first will go down in the annals of movie history as one of the most colossal mistakes ever made.  It is just one of those "what was he THINKING?" things.

Glad to hear the original is coming out.  I might just have to pick up the set (I've got 'em on VHS, but ESB is wearing out).

Yeah, I made the mistake of not buying all of the original cuts of the movies when they were still in print on LaserDisc - only 'Star Wars'.

It would be nice if it had the original trailers, tv spots, and deleted scenes with it.

This would have been good news for me a few years ago, but now I just don't care. I won't bother to pick up the unaltered versions because I can't enjoy them anymore... I just think about how stupid and money hungry Lucas is every time I try.

BTW, nobody mentioned the spin Lucas Films tried to put on this whole garbage:

(From Scifi Wire:) This new set of DVDs does not constitute "George changing his mind," Lucasfilm's Jim Ward told USA Today. "What we've always said is George viewed the revised versions of the films as the definitive versions." The original films' video quality will not match up to that of the restored versions. "It is state of the art, as of 1993, and that's not as good as state of the art 2006," Ward said.

With a statement like that you can expect revisions to all six films from now until the day George dies. "This new set is state-of-the-art May 2025, which isn't as good as your current state-of-the-art January 2025. Buy your copies today!"

Nobody - you bring up some excellent points. On one hand I love these movies, and I appreciate and admire the workmanship that went into making them. On the other hand, despite some excellent early productions, I think I may hate George Lucas, and I don't want him to get any more of my money.

What's wrong with capitalism? What's wrong with trying to make the most off of something? Lucas may be a multi-billionaire, but I don't begrudge him for that. If you don't want to make the man richer, don't buy the dvds. Lucas is a brilliant business man. Shrewd, maybe. I always felt he was going to release the original movies on dvd. If he had released the origianal versions BEFORE the SE dvds, not as many people would of bought the SE dvds. More power to Lucas. Now, if only if these dvds have extras  like the original trailers, tv spots, and deleted scenes (i.e. Toshi Station, etc..).

He can do what he wants, but I can react by not buying his products.

Actually George did have plans to convert the original trilogy to 3D for the 30th Anniversary. I haven't heard much about this lately, but I know they made a statement about it sometime in the last couple of years.

And that is why they call it a FREE market.

;)

I wonder how come nobody notices that every time a band plays their song they are doing the same thing?  "That" was the version that we recored ten years ago, *this* is he version we play today; we've grown. we've changed, our tastes and opinions are different, and the technology has improved so  that we can do soemthing different then we did before to get us closer to what we really want that song to be about *now*.

But sometimes the revamping of a song does not work, either.  I cannot think of a specific example at the moment, but I know I've heard it happen.  You just say "what did they do that for?"

Plus, there's a lot to be said for the 'comfort zone.'  People are basically creatures of habit.  You see a movie a certain way the first time, that becomes the 'right' way.

I doubt that if Greedo had shot first in the original that people would be going around saying "man, that would have been a better movie if Han had shot first."

I don't care what his justifaction was, NOBODY could have missed that badly at that range.

Fearless Freep Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wonder how come nobody notices that every time a
> band plays their song they are doing the same
> thing?

I guess the difference would be that the band is playing a live song or making a new recording in this case. I'd say its more analagous to filming a remake or continually staging a live play.

If, on the other hand, a band or a producer were to alter a classic album of 20 or 30 years ago, remixing the songs and adding in new bits, then releasing it as the same album, I think there would be an outcry from fans.

"Many fans will end up buying it twice"

I probably will, and I'm not even a true fan.  I'm just a sucker.

I may actually try to get them now. I have the originals on VHS, but DVD is much better and I would have both versions.

I'm only going to say what I always say about Lucas modifying his own movies, it's his choice to do so. They are his property and if he can make a buck recycling his old stuff to fund his other projects I say more power to him.

I do believe he should stick to producing, he's a lousy at directing actors.

If, on the other hand, a band or a producer were to alter a classic album of 20 or 30 years ago, remixing the songs and adding in new bits, then releasing it as the same album, I think there would be an outcry from fans.

Yes, they do.   A lot of CDs are "Digitally Remastered" from the original recording tapes from 20,30 or more years ago.    Part of the process is to clean up, re-eq, enhance, compress, etc...what is part of the original.  They are then released as the same 'album' as the original vinyl, even though they may sound markedly different.  Also, check out what Paul McCartney did by re-releasing old Beatles music *without* a lot of Phil Spector's instrumentation and production.   Many or most "Live" CDs have studio recorded overdubs of vocals, etc...so what you buy as the "live" CD is not what was played "live".  A given song in the hands of the artist is a constantly evolving thing, as tastes change the artists interpretation of their own music and technology makes it possible

Like it or not, buy it or not *shrug* but don't whine just because George Lucas has made it technologically possibly for filmmakers to do the same thing that other artists can, and do, do all the time.  I think the only reason you don't see more filmakers do this is because with the current system, very few single filmakers so completely own their own material as he does because he works outside the system, but also has the technical and financial resources to make it happen.

Whenever I comment on George (or Gene Simmons of "Kiss"), this pro-capitalist counter attack usually follows... and honestly, no offense to you personally, but I think it's a really dumb response. You're obviously not understanding (or ignoring) why I find George so repulsive.

I have no problem with capitalism. I fully support George's (and everyones) right to market whatever commodity they have at their disposal. And, believing in personal responsibility, I can't possibly feel sorry for anyone who racks up a billion dollars in debt to buy said commodities.

However, I find it shameful and pathetic when George, who tries to pass himself off as a grand artist, openly flaunts how little he cares about "art" and how much he cares about the almighty dollar. At any point will he have enough cash? Will he ever start making movies for the purposes of personal expression and storytelling alone?

On the same topic, did you hear the latest news about the new George-Trooper figure? "Hasbro is honoring Lucas" the articles say "by immortalizing him in action figure form"- but I'm supposed to believe that George had nothing to do with this personally? He probably suggested it himself. But if not, doesn't he still have to okay every action figure produced? Doesn't the "Star Wars" universe currently extend to some 500+ figures already? And if that wasn't enough, in order to purchase this "honorable" figure, you have to send in a handful of those proof-of-purchase pieces from other action figure packages. This is the kind of stuff I find disgusting... but you're right, this is capitalism, and George has the right to make an ass of himself.

I have no problem with capitalism. I fully support George's (and everyones) right to market whatever commodity they have at their disposal. And, believing in personal responsibility, I can't possibly feel sorry for anyone who racks up a billion dollars in debt to buy said commodities.


I'm not a capatlist,  I'm a musican, and I respect any creators right to do whatever they want with what they've created and if people don't like the result that is created then that's fine, but I think it's foolish to protest their creative rights to have done so

Just because somebody can alter their work doesn't mean they should.

I wouldn't mind his alterings so much if he had just released the orginal versions or made it so that you can switch back and forth between version with just a push of a button.

Instead he ignored people that wanted the OT and said that the film so many people grew up with and loved was "incomplete" despite the fact that those special effects helped revolutionize (ms) and set a new standard for special effects.

Now there is a case where I don't mind the creator tampering with his work. There is this comic I like a lot called "Bio Booster Armor Guyver" Now the main character has a weapon called the "Guyver", (if you've seen the movies then you'll know what I mean" a few issues later a villian challenges the main character with his own Guyver unit. Now when first drawn Guyver II looked a lot like Guyver I, very little difference really. A few years later they did the second anime, Guyver II was revamped and had his own look, then Takaya (the creator) went back and re-drew Guyver II's scenes with this new look. I much prefer the newer GII look however I'm glad I was able to get the Viz release version which contained the orginal GII look.

My point is, sometimes it's cool to revamp, sometimes it's not, and sometimes it just doesn't matter if you do revamp as long as you can preserve the original look.

I think we can respect that Lucas has every right to do what he wants, and still disagree with it.

I don't mind some of the tweaking he's done. It's the idea of making drastic changes (not just a little cleaning up or recutting), witholding the original movie, and then saying "There, now this is Star Wars." That seems like rewriting history to me. I just think he needs more respect for the significance of his own work. What the fans object to, I think, is the seeming arrogance of tampering with something that is such a big part of film history, not to mention their own fond memories. He might own it, but it's become bigger than him, which is true success for any artist -- nothing to complain about. He's created something great, and it's time to let go and move on.

Of course, I never had any doubt that the original movies would be made available when there was a likelihood of selling people two sets of DVDs. I figured that was the trick all along. Convince people they have to settle for the new versions, then when they've paid their money, offer to sell them what they really want. Lessons learned from doing it in the opposite order with the VHS releases in the 90s.