Hey guys, since the DVD release of the first trilogy is right around the corner, I thought I'd conduct a little survey. What I am looking for is your overall feelings and thoughts on the status and content of the trilogy, as well as the changes over the years, by lumping it into 3 categories of describing 'WHAT ARE YOU?
You have 3 choices A, B, or C that best describes Your "true" overall feelings of films 4, 5, and 6. I know a lot of us would agree from each category, but I want you say what of three categories you mostly feel you fall in. So take a crack at it if you don't mind.
WHAT ARE YOU:
A) The Traditionalist: The Holy trilogy should have stayed the same and should never have been touched, even by its own creator. There was no reason for any changes to be made. These movies belong to the fans!
B) The Subtle but Important: More or less likes the special editions, and understands the purpose of the changes. Also, strongly believes only that necesarry changes should be made. Such as enhancing/redoing old special effects: lightsabers, rancor, space battle stuff etc... In addition other things including adding Ian Macdarmid in ESB, and Bail to alderan destruction. Also does not mind new 'minor' scenes inserted into the films. Basically something in the lines of: anything with Emporer on Coruscant.
C) The No Holds Bar New Waver: Total full blown CGI overkill overhaul. Adding just about digital everthing to every shot in the film redoing all of the special effects completely, as well as adding new and more things to the film, as well as changing it. So much so that a large majority of people would define it as above and beyond pointless, but you have such strong feelings you felt it completely necesarry and that it must happen. Such things include: digital ewoks, changing scenes ROTJ ending and OB1/Vader duel, and adding an image Natalie Portman to the'you remember your mother scene'. Also wants large majorities of deleted scenes reinserted back into the films.
between A and B... sure, lightsabre-effects, go ahead and all, but Bail on Alderaan? why? worked before and all
if they are small changes: ok, if not: not at all
__________________ "There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part; you can't even passively take part, and you've got to
put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus,
and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it,
to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!" - Mario Savio
C because the new versions were better than the original and the these version will be better than the 97 versions. think of it like this, if you would have seen the 97 verions first you would say those are better. and vice versa.
__________________ "You can stop a rose from growing if you nip it in the bud, but you can't stop the stream from flowing and you cannot stop the flood."
Not necessarily. If you had seen the 1997 S.E.s, then the 1977 originals, you'd more than likely appreciate the absence of the ridiculous Jah Yowza and Sy Snootles characters, Boba Fett's hitting on Jabba's new dancers, the Jawa falling off of the Ronto, and whatever other geeky CGI was added that honestly added little to nothing to the movie, corrupting it's purity.
Changes that occur in a movie don't always flow with 20 year old material. "Star Wars" was timeless in 1977, but these new add on's just drag it down, but the overall quality of the movie, production wise, and the clean up job, make the SE's much more tolerable.
i guess A...but not so passionate as other 'A's.
i think some of the changes were ok, but the bad ones made it all
sooooo not worth it in my eyes. i think the films would have been better off if GL had let them be.
I firmly believe that Star Wars is George Lucas's baby so he can therefore tamperfere with the original movies in any way he chooses. For Lucas, Star Wars is not the memory of fantasy and fun that it was for viewers in 1977, but an anguished series of compromises and chest pains. Isn't it natural he would want to change that - to make the films better, by his lights, but also to rewrite in his mind the physically and spiritually painful experience he endured? To keep changing Star Wars is anathema to many fans, but to Lucas it may be the highest form of therapy.
__________________
Post in the Indiana Jones forum.
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Chaos.
There can only be CHAOS!
Very nicely put, amity. I'm more a B, but character developing scenes like Greedo being shot shouldn't have been changed. Lightsaber effects were a great idea, just... CGI Yoda would be really f*cked up.
Registered: May 2004
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Yer, the puppet Yoda is much more bloody convincing that the copmpletly false CGI Yoda, i mean it's actually there! The actors are interacting with a real thing, much better.
Jul 19th, 2004 06:32 PM
