Special Editions: Yea Or Nay?

@Get In Gear Check out my post on Who Really Owns Star Wars Episode IV in the general movie discussion.

 

Will do...

 

Actually...SE versions of the PT could be interesting...

I say this because you're primary talking about AOTC and RotS. Despite all the practical effects used, the CGI put around it and the way it was rendered made it look the way it does.

It is very very possible (unless there's just massive issues with the technological differences of the times) to go back and update ALL the CGI to the ever increasing realistic qualities they have today.

It won't fix the dialogue but it very well could do a lot for the overall look...

I just think Disney might do it if, for other reason, than a HUGE money grab from people wanting to see how different (and better) it might be.

Throw in some deleted and extended scenes and bam, tell me you aren't buying that.

 

Honestly, IMHO it'd basically be lipstick on a pig.

Adding slicker and slicker CGI isn't going to fix the PT's fundamental problems, which are far more closely related to story and script than to the realism of the effects. (Though I will say that a few tweaks like changing the battle droid voices to sound like something a wee bit more menacing than Alvin and the Chipmunks wouldn't hurt matters in the least.)

I've no doubt that there will eventually be "special editions" of the PT films, though.

 

Leonardo Da Vinci said "Art is never finished; only abandoned."

I've never directed a movie, but I can certainly see how it applies. The finished product is never going to be exactly what a director wants. There's always a scene he wants done differently, but even with the amazing budget George Lucas has, it's never enough to get everything exactly right. There are time constraints and technological constraints, laws and MPAA ratings and copyright infringements to consider, fan expectations and actors' limitations, and probably dozens of other obstacles that a Hollywood outsider such as myself doesn't know about.

So I certainly understand the temptation to go back and "finish" a movie when better technology and bigger budgets become available. I sympathize, Mr. Lucas.

I sympathize, but I don't agree.

A released movie is a finished art product. Once it's been released, judged by the critics, awarded or ignored by the Academy, and accepted or rejected by the audience, it shouldn't be altered. Book editors might change spelling and punctuation mistakes in the second edition of a book, but they don't have license to add dialogue, change events, or add characters. It should be the same for movies.

Yes Mr. Lucas, you now have the money to make the movies you really wanted to make. Doesn't matter. Part of the fun is seeing just how amazing the special effects you created for the OT were, considering the money and technology you had available at the time. More money and more technology don't necessarily make a better movie. Attack of the Clones wasn't better than Empire Strikes Back, even though it cost more.

Reboot a movie franchise if you're not happy with the movie franchise you made. But don't go changing it around and claim it's the same Star Wars movie that you released in 1977. It's not.

 

Been lurking for a while and thought I'd get involved.
The Vader/Emperor dialogue in ESB to me leaves some questions:

- movie opens with Vaber obsessed with finding Skywalker and referring to him by name.
- Fast forward and Palpy refers to him as "the Rebel who destroyed the Death Star" offspring of Anakin etc.
- Vader says "how can that be possible" despite the fact he has been chasing someone that is strong in the force (IV) and shares the same name as him.

So is this just a continuity error or was Vader being coy and not telling Palpatine that he knew of skywalker and was already hunting him down for his own personal reasons? ie: "rule galaxy as father and son"

 

Dan, I have never liked the reworked version of that scene. Not only did the Emperor's makeup look too much like a store-bought rubber mask (I had the same problem with it in ROTS) but the dialogue has never made any sense either.

It was always a bit shaky to begin with, really, even the original 1980 version. After all, Vader was already chasing Luke using an entire fleet of star destroyers - but the Emperor just found out about Luke right before he contacted Vader? Sure, I always sort of rationalized it by thinking that Luke's new training under Yoda put him on the Emperor's radar, Force-wise, but still... it always felt a bit awkward.

But this updated dialogue just compounds the problem. Now suddenly we have extra exposition cropping up around this same problem - it now sounds as though the Emperor has just learned that Luke was the one who destroyed the Death Star - even though he's had Vader and the fleet out hunting for Luke and the Rebels for god knows how long already. It's the same problem as before, but with even more focus placed on it.

IMHO, Lucas should at least have kept the same dialogue as before when he inserted Ian McDiarmid into the scene.

 

Yep, pretty much what I was thinking. Always felt odd to me and agree with the updated makeup including ROTS.
Definate step backwards from Jedi Emperor.

 

Voted no. I just want to see them as they were originally intended, like most SW fans do. Regardless of whether there's improvements or not, I want to watch the version I saw growing up as a kid.

Yes I don't mind improvements to sound and picture quality, but changing / adding scenes altogether is something that should be an optional extra feature on the disc..

 

Yes to all of it. Palpatine in Sith and Empire looks like a cheap Halloween costume!

The scene is awkward because it comes before Vader reveals his parenthood, hence the jumbling exposition/dialogue. Leave it to George to go in and fumble some more onto it, instead of streamlining it.

How about

THE EMPEROR: "Lord Vader...Have you caught Skywalker?"
DARTH VADER: "He escaped from Hoth, but I am on his trail."
THE EMPEROR: "He must not become a Jedi. Find him. Destroy him."
DARTH VADER: "If he could be turned to the Dark Side..."
THE EMPEROR: "...he could become a powerful ally...Yes, yes. Can you do it?"
DARTH VADER: "He will join us, or die, my master."

Same needed info, less text/exposition, the reveal kept a secret, less awkward (no need to call Luke "the son of Skywalker", it feels so forced since Vader is the mentioned Skywalker. You don't talk about a person like that when you are talking to that person and no one else's around).

 

But Anakin Skywalker wasn't there. He was dead... from a certain point of view...

 

I know that's the angle you have to take, but it's still strange. I know, Palpatine keeps the identities separate, perhaps to keep Darth Vader from "remembering" his true self, but it would have worked better if there was some hint that this was going on. Also, when Vader a few scenes later tells Luke he's his father it's clearly not working or Palpatine didn't mind-control Vader to forget he is the Skywalker with a son.
It's messy, of course. Perhaps the best would be to excise the scene from the movie.
The scene is meant to show us the Emperor for the first time; and to setup the plan to turn Luke to the Dark Side instead of simply killing him (with the resolution in Jedi); the problem is writing it in a clear manner without spoiling the reveal later in the film.

The problem here being the "Son of Skywalker" line. If the Emperor could say something else it could become less confusing. Perhaps something like, "Obi-Wan's new apprentice", or "the Tatooine farmboy", or the "Death Star Destructor". I don't know. Shrug.

But really, I have more problems with the Emperor's looks in the SE scene. More so than the original Clive Revill actually.

 

Instead of "the son of Skywalker", and instead of completely reworking the scene's dialogue... why not just have the Emperor refer to him as "young Skywalker", as he does throughout ROTJ? "Young Skywalker must not become a Jedi."

 

I think the point was to help differentiate the personas of Vader and Anakin, that Palpatine considered the latter 'dead' and a separate entity to Vader.

 

Sure, I understand that. But it was always a fairly awkward bit of dialogue from the very beginning, going back to 1980. It became even more awkward when Lucas changed the dialogue in that scene for the DVD special edition.

 

Originals restored all the way.

Yeah Han standing on Jabba was funny the fiirst time! but after that

 

The problem with the Jabba scene, other than its redundancy with the Greedo scene right before it, is that there's no way to do it without having Han step on Jabba's tail. Harrison made that cross behind Declan Mulholland in the original scene, years before they had designed Jabba to be long and slug-like. No way of changing that, or of incorporating Jabba's design into it without taking his tail into account.

IMHO, all the more reason to leave the scene in the Special Features rather than keeping it in the movie itself.

 

Speaking of the Special Editions...

 

You mean Boba Fett was Basil Fawlty under that mask the whole time?!

 

We could have fun with this...