Here's where you're a bit off base, JB:

Star Wars doesn't entirely belong to Lucas anymore, no matter how much he thinks it does. The same can be said for any work of art. Once it enters the public consciousness, a part of it belongs to the public for their own interpretation and appreciation. I think Lucas fails to recognize that.

Furthermore, I think that some of his additions - the "nooo," Greedo shooting first - have ruined the films somewhat. In the first case, let us not forget that film is a visual medium first, and the visual cues we get in Jedi are all we really need to know what Vader is thinking. Now Lucas has turned what is a very powerful scene into one that is utterly ridiculous.

In the second case, I'd argue that Star Wars is about Luke's transformation as a character, but also Han's. Han goes from uncaring jerk to hero. At the start, he is someone who would shoot first. By the end, he's a hero. Having Greedo shoot first neuters Han's character arc.

In the end, I ultimately feel sorrier for the poor schmucks who have shelled out thousands of dollars to purchase a film that has become more and more inferior with each release. When I bought the Star Wars trilogy for my nephews, I got them the discs that had the original theatrical cuts on them...and that's all I gave them. As for Lucas' preferred versions? I threw them in the trash.

But let's not forget he and Speilberg did rape Indiana Jones, however.

The constant changes to Star Wars is annoying personally, but the changes to the Blu-Ray discs have only increased my apathy for buying them. Seriously, what's the point? I mean, I don't see the "Lucas raped my childhood" analogy as anything other than fanboy hyperbole, to be expected and not worth listening to, but hearing about the changes killed what little interest I had in buying the blu-ray verson.
-Jeremy

I agree for the most part. However, there is another perspective: Star Wars was a huge phenomenon, and George Lucas is now basically rewriting that history by withholding the original versions of the movies.

It does detract a little from the original trilogy that you never know whether you're seeing a practical or a digital effect. The amazing thing about the original trilogy was that Lucas was able to bring such realistic images to the screen back in the analog era. It's also obvious that doing the special editions in the late 1990s was a bit too early; the digital beasts look pretty fake.

But the real mistake George Lucas made was the Jar Jar Binks "comic relief" and a 9-year-old Anakin in the first movie. Both are ridiculous and undermine the whole enterprise. Fortunately these issues are gone in the other two movies.

But more than anything else, all six movies are a triumph of imagination.

I think it's bullshit to say that when something gets put out there, it belongs to everyone. There wouldn't be copyright laws if that was the case. The interpretation and reaction to a piece of art (or, in this case, pop culture - I do not view SW as being "art") are individualist things but the property itself belongs to Lucas. He is free to change it as he sees fit and doesn't need the approval (or lack thereof) of anyone to do so.

The original versions of the movies are out there; they just haven't been made commercially available in the most desirable formats. And Lucas has pristine, fully restored copies in his vaults.

It would be a different story if Lucas was actively attempting to destroy all existing copies of the theatrical releases. But that's not happening. He's just unhappy with those versions and doesn't want to sell them anymore. It's that simple.

My guess is that after his death, if there is a market, they will become available.

The movies do belong to Lucas, however the money that comes from what he does with them has to come from somewhere...

I looked up the Christmas special on Wiki and was not entirely surprised to see it referred to as the 'holiday' special. Is this just another bit of PC gone mad?

On the subject of who shot first, however pointless, I agree that it doesn't matter and more so that it didn't need changing. Solo was about to be forceably kidnapped by an individual working for money, not for a sense of justice, and brought to an individual who would have possibly tortured and definitely killed him in a painful manner. The 'Star Wars' universe is a hostile place, despite the U age rating the movies were given and it's not at all surprising that Solo did what he had to do.

Was it any better when Indy shot the swordsman?

It probably was called the Holiday Special. Hard to remember after all these years, but I think it was a Wookie celebration, not Christmas. That holiday belongs exclusively to Earth, and there's no Earth in a galaxy far, far away.

As for Solo/Greedo, no matter who shot first, it's obvious that Greedo was a punk and represented a clear and present danger. He had to be taken out. Doesn't bother me one way or the other and doesn't change anything about Han's character arc. It is curious, however, that Lucas cherry-picked this moment to change leaving, for instance, the incest stuff in there.

I'd love to sit down with him and pick his brain about the rationale behind each of the changes. Since most of his public comments have been cryptic and/or general, we can only speculate about the reasons behind many of them.

So the original trilogy DvDs that came out after the special edition DvDs (when Star Wars first appeared on that format) are no longer available? I remember the original unaltered trilogy being available on DvD...just with no special features and sound in stereo only. Am I correct or am I imagining things?

You are correct. I do not have them, but I believe the beef was the sound issue you mentioned and NOT being anamorphic for widescreen.

Someone somewhere else mentioned that some time ago "Star Wars" (Ep. 4) was named to the Smithsonian or Library of Congress or whatever the hell it was, that it was a "culturally significant" film to be saved there. So which of the half dozen versions do they have saved?

It would really be no skin off of Lucas' balls to include in the new Blu Ray copies a "proper" anamorphic Blu Ray of the originals; but truth be told they are probably only losing 1% (or less) of sales because of this. For now....I am in that 1%. I'm not going to shell out that kind of coin and not get what I want. If Lucas is fine with that, then so am I.

I agree 100% with JB on this one. While there was a time when I too was obsessed with everything to do with Star Wars, those days are long gone. And since then I have seen too many movies better than any of the various Star Wars chapters to care much about who shot whom first. I'll buy the set on Blu-ray just to have them in my collection, but I can wait until they're on sale.

But then, I am reminded that JB gave The Phantom Menace 3.5 stars, a rating that is incomprehensible to me.

A wise man once said:



This wise man was called "George Lucas". Of course, he was arguing in favour of the "artist"'s rights (as opposed to those of the copyright holder) when changing films. Still, I wonder if he would still use those same words today. Probably not.



South Park tackled Lucas and Spielberg years before Indiana Jones got raped (2002, to be exact). The episode "Free Hat" is about them changing their movies years later. Required viewing, in my humble opinion:
http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s06e09-free-hat

What people seem to be forgetting is that George Lucas was not the sole author of the Star Wars saga - he neither wrote nor directed Empire, and he only co-wrote Return of the Jedi, and didn't direct it. They're not "His films" in that sense, and it's something everyone debating this would do well to remember.

Good point. He certainly was the chief creative force but not the only creative force. I wonder how the other parties feel/would have felt about the changes.

So, in the case of Star Wars, is George Lucas "the artist" or "the copyright holder"? Maybe both?

What's that thing about Indiana Jones? I hadn't heard anything about changes to those movies before.

The interesting thing is that Spielberg made huge changes to Close Encounters of the Third Kind—twice. But nobody seems to care, and the blue ray edition has all three versions on it.

However, all the digital cleanup done on the Star Wars films probably makes it impossible to combine the original and new versions through seamless branching. And apparently Lucas has said that the original versions no longer exist. But there should be a separation master that could be scanned and combined without too much trouble. I wouldn't be surprised if we see the original movies mastered through such a process in a few years, probably after the 3D versions have been released and milked dry. Money talks...

It's too bad that Lucas is spending so much time on the old movies, though. I would have loved to see more original work in the Star Wars universe. Say what you will about the prequel trilogy, but the worst of those movies still beats stuff like Transformers or all these inane super hero movies of late.

Lucas has made the excuse that he can't release the original versions because the original negatives for each film are in bad shape and would require too much time and effort to fix them. I call bullshit on this one. If old movies like "Casablanca" and "Citizen Kane" can get a proper remaster, then there's no reason why "Star Wars" and its sequels can't either.

Lucas surely has the money and time to fix them. Bear in mind that "Casablanca" and "Citizen Kane" won't even make back half of what the original "Star Wars" films would pull in if those were properly remastered. But despite this, the studios went ahead and properly remastered these films anyway.

Not really. At most he only edited some of the scenes, restored one scene and shot two new ones. Pretty minuscule compared to what Lucas has done.

There are no changes, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull just sucked really bad*.



*Not really, but I'm in the minority on this one.

Did you guys hear about Spielberg showing recent regret for the changes he made to "E.T." back in 2002? He says he feels he's robbing "E.T" fans of their memories and experiences of the original version by making changes to it.

Spielberg has also said when "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and "E.T." hit blu-ray next year they will be the original cuts only.