The definitive Star Wars release was LucasFilm's "Star Wars: The Original Theatrical Editions," which was released on DVD in 2008 and has both the Special Editions and the original Theater cuts in a boxset. All others are imitators to the throne.
Um, I just got one question: "And?!" Who gives a shit about a placement of a rock or how much of his face that Ewok is covering. Goddamn your petulance and Leave Lucas alone!
It's an ideological thing. Art shouldn't be able to be retroactively changed. It's the same as Huck Finn and the n-word: making that change denies/alters history. Obviously Greedo shooting first doesn't do that (unless you choose to believe it did occur a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away), but I'm not comfortable drawing that line, so I just don't make exceptions.
Art shouldn't be able to be retroactively changed.
No way! That's totally arbitrary. So how long after I release something do I have to wait before it becomes bad for me to change it? I go back and edit old art sometimes. I am like "This hand was drawn poorly" and go in and fix it. If someone else did that to my art, though, I would be like "Whaaaat?" unless I had put the work in Creative Commons. Usually, directors cuts are good. (Blade Runner is an example that comes to mind.) Lucas just made bad decisions for his edits.
A director's cut is different. A director's cut is something that gets added to make a release "2-Disc" so they can charge $10 more for it. It's an alternate version. Lucas does the exact opposite, where the edit is just plain old "Star Wars" and real Star Wars is the "Theatrical Release."
In the grander sense, as soon as you release it, you need to acknowledge you are changing it like that. Any time before then, it's fine. You can be like Kubrik and practically live in the editing room until the release, but once it's out there, any further changes are alternate, and not vice versa.
Art shouldn't be able to be retroactively changed.
No way! That's totally arbitrary. So how long after I release something do I have to wait before it becomes bad for me to change it? I go back and edit old art sometimes. I am like "This hand was drawn poorly" and go in and fix it.
You fix a poorly drawn hand, sure. You make someone's hair look more realistic. Whatever. But you don't edit it to make someone who is frowning suddenly be smiling. You don't change the meaning of an entire scene.
Art shouldn't be able to be retroactively changed.
No way! That's totally arbitrary. So how long after I release something do I have to wait before it becomes bad for me to change it? I go back and edit old art sometimes. I am like "This hand was drawn poorly" and go in and fix it.
You fix a poorly drawn hand, sure. You make someone's hair look more realistic. Whatever. But you don't edit it to make someone who is frowning suddenly be smiling. You don't change the meaning of an entire scene.
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.
The "art shouldn't be changed" argument is bullshit. No one would be complaining if the changes made the movies better.
I know I would. Let me give you an example: Anno's cuts of the last few episodes of Eva explain a lot of the plot. They clear up a lot of confusion people have around which organizations do what stuff and all that. Despite that, I still don't consider them "Eva." They're an alternate Eva only for the fanboys.
It's a weird form of celebrity fetishizing to posit that Lucas should act as some sort of guardian of the product you hold some emotional attachment to, and to claim he has some how betrayed you when he doesn't. Literally everybody has the right to change the context of art. And when you also own the copyright, you can sell your changes too.
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.
Art shouldn't be able to be retroactively changed.
No way! That's totally arbitrary. So how long after I release something do I have to wait before it becomes bad for me to change it? I go back and edit old art sometimes. I am like "This hand was drawn poorly" and go in and fix it. If someone else did that to my art, though, I would be like "Whaaaat?" unless I had put the work in Creative Commons. Usually, directors cuts are good. (Blade Runner is an example that comes to mind.) Lucas just made bad decisions for his edits.
The debate is not really about the artists right to alter his work but about denying access to the original version.
There is a point beyond which the art leaves the artist's control and if/when precisely this happens can be debated as well. However I think I can put up a fairly solid argument about Star Wars belonging to the public at large in the sense that it is an integral part of popular culture not to speak of the millions of lives that were influenced by it.
It is completely within Lukas' rights to make and remake new versions of his movies and market the hell out of them. But it is not within Lukas' right to take away the experience that I had when I first saw the movies or deny the public, his fans, or even historians access to the original movies.
Comments
Lol, u mad? Yeah, u mad.
The definitive Star Wars release was LucasFilm's "Star Wars: The Original Theatrical Editions," which was released on DVD in 2008 and has both the Special Editions and the original Theater cuts in a boxset. All others are imitators to the throne.
http://www.firstshowing.net/2012/wait-what-george-lucas-asserts-that-greedo-always-shot-first/
Usually, directors cuts are good. (Blade Runner is an example that comes to mind.) Lucas just made bad decisions for his edits.
In the grander sense, as soon as you release it, you need to acknowledge you are changing it like that. Any time before then, it's fine. You can be like Kubrik and practically live in the editing room until the release, but once it's out there, any further changes are alternate, and not vice versa.
http://www.thegeekshowpodcast.com/2012/03/05/new-episode-is-an-intervention/
Direct link to mp3: http://www.thegeekshowpodcast.com/podcast/episodes/030512.mp3
There is a point beyond which the art leaves the artist's control and if/when precisely this happens can be debated as well. However I think I can put up a fairly solid argument about Star Wars belonging to the public at large in the sense that it is an integral part of popular culture not to speak of the millions of lives that were influenced by it.
It is completely within Lukas' rights to make and remake new versions of his movies and market the hell out of them. But it is not within Lukas' right to take away the experience that I had when I first saw the movies or deny the public, his fans, or even historians access to the original movies.
But yes, what George and Timo says.