This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Fuck you George Lucas. Again. Again.

1235

Comments

  • edited March 2012
    Fuck all you saying art shouldn't be changed, we change science all the time. Why should art get a pass?
    My problem is how it's not easy to get the unmodified Star Wars movies.
    Except it's so easy.
    Scott, you need to be in more pictures so that I can caption them "Scott is unimpressed." I've run out of up to date ones.
    Post edited by Greg on
  • This guy fixed Episode 1 and turned it into an awesome movie. If Lucas "changed art" and this was the end result, I would throw him a parade.
    Oh god, that sounds like a really good movie. I would pay money for that film.
  • edited March 2012
    Once you've exchanged your art for several billion dollars, you no longer retain the right to change the context of the art. I've purchased Star Wars both financially and emotionally. Lucas can tweak things that do not affect the story or characters, but he cannot change the fundamental facts that make Han be Han.
    No, of course he can. He made these characters up, he can change them if he is given the means to. People who create art can change the work drastically if they see fit, but I think that one cannot expect to erase the previous version both from physical existence and from public consciousness. This is why I support remix and fanfiction, because that way people can get their version of the character or the story, regardless of what the owner of the art intends. There are always going to be myriad versions of art, so why quibble over which version is the "real" one?
    Also, Which is the "official" art? The one preferred by the studio or publisher? The one preferred by the author? Sometimes these differ. The studio may force the artist to change things for the first release that go against their feelings (anyone seen Brazil?) but in that case, which is the "true" version? Every art is experienced differently by everyone, Lucas made some bad decisions, but the main problem is that he believes (just as some of you believe) that there should only be one version of a work of art.
    Post edited by gomidog on
  • edited March 2012
    Literary critique is post-authorial nowadays. It doesn't matter what Lucas thinks, or wants us to think, or any of that. The interpretation of the plot and story by the greatest amount of people will dictate the relevance of all other interpretations that come after the initial publishing, even those created by the author with evidence. So too are canonical works eventually determined by the critical public and not by the author in the world of academia.

    Lucas can change his films if he wants. It doesn't mean that anyone appreciates it or will view them as valid. His attempts to hide his old works and prevent their viewing and consumption are just attempts to impede the process of literary evolution and criticism.
    Post edited by WindUpBird on
  • Lucas can change his films if he wants. It doesn't mean that anyone appreciates it or will view them as valid. His attempts to hide his old works and prevent their viewing and consumption are just attempts to impede the process of literary evolution and criticism.
    Nor, Mind you - and cover your ears as millions of neck-beardy, entitled fucks cry out in anguish before being suddenly silenced - does that mean that anyone viewing them as valid or not matters jack shit. They simply are what they are. Different versions? Sure, each one simply is what it is. Like it, don't, whatever.

    And that is what, I think, enrages the people who get fucking livid about this, or the people who do that stupid "Oh it never really happened, tragic accident" Joke that was played out years ago. It's because Lucas, to them, isn't saying "This is what I think about what I made" and leaving it at that, they're hearing "Your interpretation of this thing you like is wrong and bad" - so they fight back with the passive-agressive fury of a thousand neckbeards. Just let it go, fucksake. He thinks differently about it than you do. So what? Sure, he can make new DVD versions with crap added. So can you, with crap taken out, you just can't legally sell them because of copyright.
  • Changes that alter the context of the art are bad.

    http://www.firstshowing.net/2012/wait-what-george-lucas-asserts-that-greedo-always-shot-first/
    I can back that, but if Han shot first (and I choose to believe he did) what difference does it make if R2 was hiding behind a rock as opposed to in an open cave? It'd make MORE sense in fact as the rock provide cover and concealment.
    The problem with R2 hiding behind the rock is that he doesn't fit through the opening in the rocks he's hiding behind.
  • Published art shouldn't be changed without record (in my opinion).

    Alter Star Wars? Awesome! As long as I can still get the originals. George Lucas is a wanker only for pretending that he planned it all along and being so adamant that no one see the original versions of the movies.
  • Alter Star Wars? Awesome! As long as I can still get the originals. George Lucas is a wanker only for pretending that he planned it all along and being so adamant that no one see the original versions of the movies.
    Well, it's not really the saying he planned it that way that makes him a wanker - After all, we are not mind readers, nor time travelers, we can't judge what he really intended. There is zero difference in end result if he's lying or telling the truth. Being adamant that nobody should watch the originals? Wanker.

  • edited March 2012
    Alter Star Wars? Awesome! As long as I can still get the originals. George Lucas is a wanker only for pretending that he planned it all along and being so adamant that no one see the original versions of the movies.
    Well, it's not really the saying he planned it that way that makes him a wanker - After all, we are not mind readers, nor time travelers, we can't judge what he really intended. There is zero difference in end result if he's lying or telling the truth. Being adamant that nobody should watch the originals? Wanker.
    Of course, not being mind readers prevents us from truly judging his intent, but that won't stop me from spouting opinion on the internet. I've got to believe that this recent insistence that Greedo was always meant to shoot first is not some evil lie or a newly-revealed truth, but merely evidence that the dude had completely lost his fucking mind.

    Post edited by Matt on
  • edited March 2012
    Saying Greedo was always meant to shoot first is just some batshit lunacy on George's part. There was absolutely no technical limitation preventing Greedo from shooting first in the original films.

    Anyway, the current practice of suppressing the original form of the trilogy is tantamount to censorship or the destruction of art. Say what you will about copyright and rights control, but once you put a piece of work out there, that work is free for anyone to consume. Any attempt to stop that makes a mockery of the artistic process Lucas claims to treasure. So it follows that, when you publish something, make sure it's fucking finished. Don't give us a patch a decade down the line that changes everything the public knows about a work and then just expect them to accept only that version. Imagine if Jackson Pollock walked into a gallery, hurled an entire bucket of black paint at one of his canvases, and went, "It was always meant to be this way!" Sure, some people would discuss the veracity of the act as a part of the artistic process, but I think most (especially the gallery owners) would bemoan the irreparable loss of a great artistic work.

    I'd like to see a dated script from Lucas around the filming of A New Hope claiming that this was his master plan the entire time. That'd change me from thinking that he's just crazy, to thinking that he really just sucks at writing films. I personally think his edits have a lot to do with the fact that Marcia Lucas was a large part of what made the original three films so goddamned good (the trench run, "I know," and all sorts of other stuff was all her) and that George is so fucking bitter over his divorce and doesn't want to kick her anything that he's edited the film.

    I would further wager that the problems with the prequels are due in large part to having complete creative control, no punch-up or script revision from a studio, an unlimited budget, and no editor suggesting improvements based on knowledge of how to edit a film for dramatic tension. There's maybe (maybe) 50 directors in the history of film that could be trusted with that kind of power in making a prequel to a beloved franchise (or really any big budget film), and George Lucas is simply not a good writer or director to count among them, as much as my nine-year old self would like to think he is.
    Post edited by WindUpBird on
  • Perhaps the answer to "what was George originally thinking?" could be found in the novelization he wrote of a New Hope shortly before it came out in theaters? I remember reading it years and years ago because my school had it, but I cannot recall details.
  • Darth Vader died in "Splinter In the Mind's Eye," which was the official novelized sequel to Star Wars before Empire.
  • Published art shouldn't be changed without record (in my opinion).

    Alter Star Wars? Awesome! As long as I can still get the originals. George Lucas is a wanker only for pretending that he planned it all along and being so adamant that no one see the original versions of the movies.
    Art change log, like on SVN. When was it edited, what edits were performed, the power to revert your local copy? This may somehow happen in the future with digital media.

    Seriously, although I agree that the changes to the Star Wars movies were bad, the kind of thinking that these fans engage in reminds me of the people who want to take away the creation of a webcomic from its author when they aren't fast enough with updates, or if they make plot decisions that much of the audience does not agree with. That always pisses me off. It seems like an incredibly entitled attitude. No-one is preventing you from making up your alternate plot, but saying that a creative work should be taken away from its creator by the fans is ridiculous.
  • I don't have much of an opinion of the Star Wars changes, other than why do you have to keep adding in more special effects and whatnot, do you think we're so stupid that we won't watch it because it looks old? (Which could sadly be true for the average movie goer these days)

    But anyway, I am weird about creative works being changed/modified/added on to in general. The best example that bothered me was Harry Potter. After the 7th book came out, Rowling kept verbally (in interviews and whatnot) adding details about the book. Saying Dumbledore was gay, certain characters got married and got certain jobs, etc etc. Even though she's the author and all, for some reason I don't consider those things true because they weren't in the books. (You could argue about the Dumbledore thing being in books, but I think it would be better to leave for the reader to figure out.)

    I don't know why I feel this way. Maybe if she finally wrote that extra book with all the random details made up, then I'd consider it part of the real story. Otherwise I still consider it a mystery who got married and did whatnot with their lives. I just think its kinda dumb going "Oh um, so and so did this" making it up on the spot or whatever.
  • Seriously, although I agree that the changes to the Star Wars movies were bad, the kind of thinking that these fans engage in reminds me of the people who want to take away the creation of a webcomic from its author when they aren't fast enough with updates, or if they make plot decisions that much of the audience does not agree with. That always pisses me off. It seems like an incredibly entitled attitude. No-one is preventing you from making up your alternate plot, but saying that a creative work should be taken away from its creator by the fans is ridiculous.
    I don't think anybody is saying that someone can not create whatever they want. That's basic freedom of speech. You are free to make whatever art you want whether or not people like it or hate it or it's good or bad.

    What I am against is not creation of art, but destruction. Take your webcomic in whatever direction you want. Remake or remix your movie, or any other movie, however you please. But do not destroy anything. If Gabe wanted to go back and redraw the earliest Penny Arcades, that would be totally cool. But if he took the originals offline and tried to destroy them so that nobody could see his earlier art skills, that would be the worst.

    Lucas can make all kinds of special editions of Star Wars he wants. I don't even care if Han and Greedo shake hands and start making out and nobody gets killed. As long as that original movie is available, which it isn't. The best we have are DVD and laserdisc versions. How can someone possibly see the original Star Wars trilogy in it's true form on film in a theater, or at least in much higher resolution? You can't. It is a piece of artwork that has been destroyed, and that is the travesty.
  • Saying Greedo was always meant to shoot first is just some batshit lunacy on George's part. There was absolutely no technical limitation preventing Greedo from shooting first in the original films.
    image
  • edited March 2012
    As long as that original movie is available, which it isn't. The best we have are DVD and laserdisc versions. How can someone possibly see the original Star Wars trilogy in it's true form on film in a theater, or at least in much higher resolution? You can't. It is a piece of artwork that has been destroyed, and that is the travesty.
    It is available. Multiple copies exist, and the whole "GEORGE LUCAS DESTROYED ALL THE ORIGINALS" bullshit is just that, bullshit. At last count, there are good quality 35mm print masters, the Technicolor prints, perfect duplicates of the negative in separation masters, and of course, the original negative itself, which is still in perfect condition - the only problem with it is that the physical pieces of film have been re-cut into the special edition order, which would be trivially fixed, and even if you don't want to do the physical editing, for a modern release, the negative would be scanned anyway, so simply re-order it digitally.

    The problem, of course, is that Lucas just refuses to release them. Yeah, sure, hate on him all you want for that, but saying it's been destroyed? Yeah, that's pretty much just straight up lying. This is also the second or third time I've told y'all this.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • He still actively represses public access to the original work, which at the very least makes him a self-censoring phillistine, and at worst makes him an art criminal. He may not have destroyed those works literally, but to the outside world (namely, anyone without access to the masters and film stock) he absolutely has destroyed them the same way that censors destroyed Joyce's Ulysses when the only copy he could have published had huge amounts redacted. Sure, it survived as a manuscript, but art is about revealing a vision to the world, and tampered visions are no better than ones wholly destroyed.

    /art criticism wank

    I think that what people looking for the original films in HD can hope for, at best, is for Lucas to die without destroying the original stock, and for his eldest daughter to realize that the public is clamoring for her mother and father's joint work and therefore release them in their original unaltered form.
  • edited March 2012
    That's all a fair point. However, it doesn't make saying "The originals were destroyed" any less of a lie.

    Oh, and there are also original reels of film floating around, in quality ranging from pink-faded and a bit scratched all the way up to the mint condition technicolor print that was shown at the Baltimore's Senator Theatre's closing down screenings - which could trivially be scanned, if the private owner could be convinced. They're in the hands of private collectors, some of which will do private screenings. It's not unavailable, it's just harder to get.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • edited March 2012
    If you can't see, hear, smell, touch, or taste something, then it effectively does not exist. Until the prints are released they exist the same way that the rainbow platypus in my bathroom exists.

    Where they literally destroyed? Perhaps not. Are they effectively destroyed? Absolutely yes.
    Post edited by Apreche on
  • edited March 2012
    If you can't see, hear, smell, touch, or taste something, then it effectively does not exist. Until the prints are released they exist the same way that the rainbow platypus in my bathroom exists.

    Where they literally destroyed? Perhaps not. Are they effectively destroyed? Absolutely yes.
    Oh fuck off, Scott. You got caught talking bullshit, and now you're trying to weasel out. This doesn't make you clever, just cowardly.

    You were absolutely wrong. Get over it.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • >Star Wars
    >art
  • Well, I will agree that the ability to experience high quality versions of the original is hampered greatly. They are not "destroyed" but they are inaccessible.
  • Well, I will agree that the ability to experience high quality versions of the original is hampered greatly. They are not "destroyed" but they are inaccessible.
    Pretty much. Your only chances at the moment are either lucking out with an illicit(well, in the eyes of Lucasfilm) screening of an original reel, like the Senator theatre screening in 2010 I mentioned, or George Lucas either having a massive change of heart(not likely) or dying and someone else doing the smart thing in his stead.
  • Sure Greedo can shoot first, but explain to me how he is such a shitty shot that he misses a guy sitting right there within punching distance.

    Even Han and Greedo shooting at the same time has the same problem. How does he miss?
  • Sure Greedo can shoot first, but explain to me how he is such a shitty shot that he misses a guy sitting right there within punching distance.

    Even Han and Greedo shooting at the same time has the same problem. How does he miss?
    My internal explination - that has no bearing on anything, really - is simply that Han shot first, and greedo's finger tightened by reflex action when he jerks, as one does tend to jump a bit and tense up when you're shot in the stomach.
  • edited March 2012
    Are you guys (Scott) mad because there isn't a bluray release of the original? Really? There are torrents. The quality isn't the best probably, but it's still there. It's not the version of creator wants to promote (especially not at the same time as his fancy edition), and it doesn't make commercial sense to recut/master/release it either.

    @The Greedo thing: You could also argue he was startled because he was about to get shot, and then missed.
    Post edited by Aria on
  • Sure Greedo can shoot first, but explain to me how he is such a shitty shot that he misses a guy sitting right there within punching distance.

    Even Han and Greedo shooting at the same time has the same problem. How does he miss?
    My internal explination - that has no bearing on anything, really - is simply that Han shot first, and greedo's finger tightened by reflex action when he jerks, as one does tend to jump a bit and tense up when you're shot in the stomach.
    I don't doubt that, people tend to jerk after getting shot. I'm saying that if Greedo shot first how the hell does he miss? But that's neither here nor there because Han shot first.
  • and it doesn't make commercial sense to recut/master/release it either.
    I disagree on this point. It would cost relatively little to restore it properly - you'd probably do the whole job for a million or so - and you'd make that money back easily ten times over by the exact sort of people who complain about the Special editions and new versions rushing out to buy it.

  • Whatever.
Sign In or Register to comment.