Support NeoGAF

[SteveMeister]

Does complaining about the changes George Lucas has made to the original trilogy amount to a fascist attitude?

I'm not sure if I'd go quite as far as this article does, but it does bring up a point I haven't seen yet. What do y'all think?

 

[evil ways]

I'm a huge Star Wars fan, and while some of the changes do look bad and I believe they were unnecesary(young Anakin comes to mind), I understand it's Lucas's movies and I do agree that some of the bigger zealots get out of line with their obssesion over the original trilogy in it's classic form.

To tell you the truth I was one of those who were pissed and bashed Lucas's a bit for the young Anakin debacle, not because it changes the movie, but because it looks bad, and emotionless.

In fact, all my quirks about the changes were not because of the changes themselves but the quality of them. I don't care if Greedo shoots first as long as it looks good and not like Han Solo is having a seizure or a hiccup.

 

[MetatronM]

The opposition to Mr. Lucas' changes shows how far America has slipped off its foundation -- the idea that the individual has inalienable rights -- and is teetering on the brink of the sort of evil Galactic Empire that he imagined for the silver screen.

You're right. And I have the inalienable right to show my kids the movies I loved when I was a kid.

Asshole.




*note: I actually don't mind the changes to the DVD that much, but it's the point that is important.

 

[xsarien]

Jesus Christ, they're just movies.

 

[open_mouth_]

I'm fine with all the changes except the han shooting 2nd part... That just seems like a huge cop out to me.

 

[MetatronM]

Jesus Christ, they're just movies.

Yeah, it's a pretty melodramatic article.

 

[Ill Saint]

This article was fundamentally what I was saying in one of the "Lucas is a dickhead" bitchfests. The guy can do whatever he likes. It's his right. Don't like it, don't spend the cash.

 

[MC Safety]

P.S: The Star Wars movies aren't all that good.

 

[Phoenix]

Leave it to boxofficemojo to bring in some hack that not only misunderstand what fascism is, but keeps creating more and more reaching examples to try and show that the people who don't agree with Lucas' changes are evil. Damn hippies....

 

[maharg]

This article was fundamentally what I was saying in one of the "Lucas is a dickhead" bitchfests. The guy can do whatever he likes. It's his right. Don't like it, don't spend the cash.

Someone can have a right to do something, and others can not like it. One has nothing to do with the other.

I think a lot of this misses the point, really. What most people have a problem with is his deliberate burying of the original films. He doesn't let them get shown on TV, he doesn't let them get released on DVD or VHS, and for all intents and purposes they don't exist anymore.

He has a right to do so, but people have a right to make known the fact that there is demand for something he won't release.

Some people may also feel like he's shitting on them because he's acting ashamed of something they really really like.

 

[Dan]

BOM's articles are always filled with illogical nonsense.

*yawn*

 

[Cafeman]

I watched all three over the past week. Concerning the changes (and this applies to the S.E. changes as well), I'd say Ep4 ANH got the best of them. Greedo's and Jabba's scenes are fine now.

Ep5 TESB, I like the new Emperor scenes. The Wampa addition was a good idea too as well as the ships taking off from Hoth. Thank Lucas he eliminated a poor decision, Luke's scream. Thank Lucas that Yoda is not CG.

Ep6, RotJ, got the worst additions. I think Jabba's band with Sy Snoodle (sp?) is a bit too cartoonish and silly now with the CG models. However, the Sarlacc's beak is a great addition IMO. But the worst of all Lucas' changes -- showing Hayden as the Force spirit -- is here too. Man, that just looks DUMB. Especially since Hayden has the most freaking odd look on his face , you can just tell it's been superimposed and doesn't fit. Oh, well.

 

[Ill Saint]

Someone can have a right to do something, and others can not like it. One has nothing to do with the other.

I think a lot of this misses the point, really. What most people have a problem with is his deliberate burying of the original films. He doesn't let them get shown on TV, he doesn't let them get released on DVD or VHS, and for all intents and purposes they don't exist anymore.

He has a right to do so, but people have a right to make known the fact that there is demand for something he won't release.

Some people may also feel like he's shitting on them because he's acting ashamed of something they really really like.

Of course. I do agree with all of this, and never said otherwise.
If people feel Lucas is messing with them so much, they should just file a class action lawsuit on moral grounds or some shit.

 

[Comfort_Eagle]

People should actually pick good movies to get worked up about.

 

[Ill Saint]

I will also add, I personally don't give a fuck about the Star Wars movies or Lucas for that matter. What I have a problem with is the fundamental argument that someone cannot have total control over a work he/she has created and has full rights of.

I realise what Lucas is doing is kinda shite for long-term fans, but if that is his "vision", then so be it.

 

[maharg]

There's no such thing as 'a lawsuit on moral grounds'

 

[IAmtheFMan]

Ripped from the IGN boards:

Quick, somebody make an OWNED version of this.

 

[Burger]

You're right. And I have the inalienable right to show my kids the movies I loved when I was a kid.

Uhhh, no you don't.


You don't own starwars. Lucasfilm does.

 

[Ill Saint]

There's no such thing as 'a lawsuit on moral grounds'

Trauma, anguish, mental scaring, confusion... whatever. Heh.
I'm no legal expert so excuse my mangling of legalese .

 

[White Man]

Nobody complained when Stephen King went back and changed the first book of The Dark Tower. Of course, those changes were mostly good.

As much as I dislike the changes to the original SW films, I do have to respect George Lucas' right as an artist to exert creative control over all his work. Joyce tinkered with his books until he died. So did Faulkner (to an extent). Faulkner's work was also altered after his death according to certain changes in his posts. John Milton changed a lot between the first 3 editions of Paradise Lost. Shit, William Shakespeare's work was edited and changed posthumously by god only knows. I hope that if I ever start getting books published, I'll have the ability to edit and change my works until I die. Sometimes art changes. Sometimes it's the artist's will that brings this on, and sometimes his work is taken away from him. We're just going to have to deal and hope that when Georgie kicks the bucket, one of his heirs will have the good taste to rerelease the originals.

 

[maharg]

Those all assume some sort of loss that can be compensated for. That is, you have lost the ability to work, or lost money in needing some form of treatment.

 

[Ill Saint]

Those all assume some sort of loss that can be compensated for. That is, you have lost the ability to work, or lost money in needing some form of treatment.

Obviously.

 

[border]

Ehhhh, this argument is a pretty ridiculous strawman.

Most of the people complaining aren't saying that he doesn't have some fundamental "right" to change the movies, but just that the changes are shitty and the original films should be made available.

As nice as it was for Faulkner to tinker with his novels and stories, I don't think any of his fans and scholars would have appreciated it if he had outright destroyed all the originals (which I think he literally almost did, with Sanctuary) or made them impossible to obtain.

 

[MetatronM]

Uhhh, no you don't.


You don't own starwars. Lucasfilm does.

I was being facetious.




Mostly.


Of course Lucas can do what he wants to Star Wars. It does belong to him, after all. It just annoys the hell out of me that he hasn't no consideration at all for the people who made him his millions. That just smacks of simply being an asshole.

 

[MrAngryFace]

I dont think we made him his millions, I think he made something we liked. However the dvd release of the old trilogy does exist as a new creation, we just dont happen to like it.

I never really liked that whole: We made so-n-so rich attitude. Its that whole build em up to knock em down attitude a lot of americans like to feed off of.

 

[snapty00]

Wow, I never even knew there was a zealous sect out there like this. Haha.

 

[MASB]

Scott Holleran. lol. I knew he wrote that article before I even read it. That man doesn't seem to have much in the way of brains in his head. Whether it's Passion of The Christ, Macauley Culkin or George Lucas, he sees fascists hiding around every corner. He can't seem to write any articles without saying that anyone who disagrees with his point of view is crazy and/or the subject he's talking about is some poor saint artist(Caulkin, Lucas) who should be left alone and/or revered (unless that artist is Mel Gibson who is worse than Hitler according to genius Holleran). He may have some good points, but his arrogance and paranoia usually overshadows them.

Plus he seems to use the prop that most of the Lucas apologists use. He owns the movies, so we shouldn't complain about anything he does to them. That's just a silly idea. Of course, Lucas owns the movies. The only problem people have, is that he changes the movies and is trying to destroy the original versions of those films (and/or not re-releasing the films in their original versions as well).

I mean, what if Columbia decided to use CGI to replace James Stewart in 'Mr. Smith Goes To Washington' with say, John Travolta. And then proceeds to destory or ban all copies of the original version with Stewart. And never releases the original version again. According to Lucas apologists, such an action would be acceptable and great, since Columbia owns the movie.

 

[Ill Saint]

Columbia is a company, comprised of many people. Please explain how you can justifiably compare the lifes work of one man, to that of a corporate mass?

What's with the whole "Lucas apologists" line anyway?

 

[border]

The funny thing is that I clicked on this topic expecting Lucas to be the one compared to a facist dictator -- ignoring the will of the people, trying to rewrite history to suit his own whims. It still would have been an equally idiotic comparison mind you, but it seems like you can swing both ways....

 

[Spiritreaver]

That article is hilarious, I think people on either side can see that. Meh, don't fight over this silly thing, it's so not worth. Like someone has said, they are just films, the originals exist, you can find them easily with the computer age. Yeah, no DVD quality, but hey, you get what you pay for.

It's funny though, most people let the changes get to them. If they just ignored them, or tried to enjoy the story that IS still there, they wouldn't really be bothered. The films are exactly the same at its core, and the changes are so very minor that they don't affect the viewing experience at all. But if you sit there for the whole film griping over them, well expect it to be ruined as you ruined it for yourself, not Lucas. I just suggest getting over it, enjoy the films and just live with what you don't like. The DVDs are incredible and I think everyone who's a fan should buy them.

 

[DDayton]

Well, we know that Lucas listens to the zealots... he DID put a Boba Fett character into his new films (yeah, Jango -- whatever), and he slashed Jar Jar's presence in the last film. If folks complain long enough, Lucas might actually give in and rerelease the originals...

 

[Phoenix]

Well, we know that Lucas listens to the zealots... he DID put a Boba Fett character into his new films (yeah, Jango -- whatever), and he slashed Jar Jar's presence in the last film. If folks complain long enough, Lucas might actually give in and rerelease the originals...

Its probably in his will to release them on the event of his death.

 

[ManaByte]

Well, we know that Lucas listens to the zealots... he DID put a Boba Fett character into his new films (yeah, Jango -- whatever), and he slashed Jar Jar's presence in the last film. If folks complain long enough, Lucas might actually give in and rerelease the originals...

It's been part of Star Wars lore for a long time that the Mandalorians (Boba/Jango Fett) were involved in some way in the Clone Wars. And do you really think Jar Jar needed an hour of screen time just to hand over the Republic to Palpatine?

 

[border]

He didn't need an hour of screen time to do whatever the hell he did in Phantom Menace (nothing, more or less), yet there he was.....ruining the movie =P

When TPM was released the way they were talking did seem to indicate that he would be a relatively significant player in all of the movies. I gotta imagine that they scaled it back a great deal after the backlash.

 

[Boogie]

It's been part of Star Wars lore for a long time that the Mandalorians (Boba/Jango Fett) were involved in some way in the Clone Wars. And do you really think Jar Jar needed an hour of screen time just to hand over the Republic to Palpatine?

And yet the word "Mandalorian" has not been mentioned once in the prequels.

 

[ManaByte]

When TPM was released the way they were talking did seem to indicate that he would be a relatively significant player in all of the movies. I gotta imagine that they scaled it back a great deal after the backlash.

No, Lucas was saying he had a major part to play in the story. Putting the Empire into power is a major fucking part.

 

[BojTrek]

My brother-in-law and I were viewing the changes on the DVD's on Saturday night... we called his wife in the room for the "young" Anakin spirit and she said...

"Who's that"

We rewound the DVD (Do you say rewind for DVD?) and let her watch it 3 times...

She kept saying "who is that"

We finally told her that is the young Anakin in the prequels... and she likes the actor "he's hot"... but her words were...

"That's stupid, he was an old man when he died"

Smart woman...

 

[Ah Beng]

I guess at the end of the day Lucas is not even changing an existing work.. he is just releasing new updated editions that no-one is obligated to buy. It is not like he is going around and destroying all the old VHS editions and prints of the originals that he released 20 years ago. It is time and natural processes of erosion that are doing that.

 

[border]

No, Lucas was saying he had a major part to play in the story. Putting the Empire into power is a major fucking part.

So you really think that he got all that time in the first film, just to be dropped completely? That really doesn't jive with what Lucas has done for every other character in the series. Once they are established, they are there for good. Unless they die, they tend to get carried over into an equally-sized part in the next film.

Jar Jar's non-role in AOTC would be like restricting Chewbacca to a one-line cameo in Empire Strikes Back. His disappearance is such an anomaly that I have to assume it's the result of some tinkering based around the near-constant bashing of the character. They always talked about how they were going to have this great character that's "Totally CG" and we would witness him grow and learn, etc, etc. After all that hype, I really don't believe that the original plan was to put him on the shelf after one movie.

 

[Ah Beng]

LOL.. I just read the article and got the Godwin's law reference. If you quibble with Sy Snoodles singing scene you are similar to those who supported Hitler? I agree.. this star wars debate is officially done.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Its probably in his will to release them on the event of his death.

Now you've gone and made him hire extra bodyguards.

 

[FoneBone]

I have to ask, ManaByte: is Lucas capable of doing anything that you won't make excuses for?