George Lucas $*% are you doing to Star Wars?! Vol. Blu-Ray changes.

9,304
1,247
Joined Jul 5, 2006
[h1][/h1]
[h1]George Lucas Tweaks Pivotal Darth Vader Scene in 'Star Wars' Blu-ray (Video)[/h1] [h2] Fans grumble online about a change to the audio of a climactic scene in the upcoming Blu-ray release of the "Star Wars" films. [/h2]

Star Wars fans are girding themselves for the September 16 Blu-ray release of all six of George Lucas' epic films. It's not anticipation they're feeling so much as anxiety. Because with every new release of the films, beginning with the Special Editions in 1997, Lucas has gone back in to tweak and adjust and make changes to movies fans know frame by frame. The latest release is causing particular worries because of a clip leaked online that reveals a minor but significant change to a climactic scene in the final film, Return of the Jedi.

As first reported by Badass Digest, audio has been added to Darth Vader as he commits his final redemptive act by throwing the evil Emperor Palpatine down a shaft. In the original version of the film, Vader was silent as he did this. But in the new version, he cries out "No!" It's an echo of the "No!" the character cries out at the end of Revenge of the Sith, the third film in the chronology.

Though some thought maybe the clip was a fan-made hoax, Lucasfilm has since confirmed its authenticity.

And that isn't the only new change. The puppet Yoda seen in The Phantom Menace, the first film in the chronology, has been been replaced by a CGI Yoda. The cuddly Ewoks of Return of the Jedi now blink their eyes and Obi-Wan Kenboi creates a blood-curdling new shriek in A New Hope.

The other changes seem tolerable to fans, but its the "No!," one of the most widely-derided moments of Revenge of the Sith, that is causing much irritation.

As Star Wars fan and Lost co-creator Damon Lindelof noted on his Twitter: "I wonder if the [Lost] finale will be better appreciated if we have Vincent [the dog] shout "NOOOOOOOOO!" over the final shot."



The changes originally made didn't really bother me such as Hayden Christensen's force ghost being edited in ROTJ or even the music at the end of ROTJ, but this is just awful.
 

Sir San Diego

formerly brolic scholar
12,466
10,888
Joined Feb 20, 2011
So?

Does it change that scene so much? I grew up on the OG trilogy, saw ROTJ in the theater and I ain't ee'm mad.
 

Mark Antony

Supporter
43,010
39,260
Joined Apr 30, 2010
[h1]George Lucas's 1988 Speech About Preserving Films, and Maybe Not Adding a Bunch of CGI !%*@ to Them[/h1]
My name is George Lucas. I am a writer, director, and producer of motion pictures and Chairman of the Board of Lucasfilm Ltd., a multi-faceted entertainment corporation.
I am not here today as a writer-director, or as a producer, or as the chairman of a corporation. I've come as a citizen of what I believe to be a great society that is in need of a moral anchor to help define and protect its intellectual and cultural heritage. It is not being protected.

The destruction of our film heritage, which is the focus of concern today, is only the tip of the iceberg. American law does not protect our painters, sculptors, recording artists, authors, or filmmakers from having their lifework distorted, and their reputation ruined. If something is not done now to clearly state the moral rights of artists, current and future technologies will alter, mutilate, and destroy for future generations the subtle human truths and highest human feeling that talented individuals within our society have created.

A copyright is held in trust by its owner until it ultimately reverts to public domain. American works of art belong to the American public; they are part of our cultural history.
People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians, and if the laws of the United States continue to condone this behavior, history will surely classify us as a barbaric society. The preservation of our cultural heritage may not seem to be as politically sensitive an issue as "when life begins" or "when it should be appropriately terminated," but it is important because it goes to the heart of what sets mankind apart. Creative expression is at the core of our humanness. Art is a distinctly human endeavor. We must have respect for it if we are to have any respect for the human race.

These current defacements are just the beginning. Today, engineers with their computers can add color to black-and-white movies, change the soundtrack, speed up the pace, and add or subtract material to the philosophical tastes of the copyright holder. Tommorrow, more advanced technology will be able to replace actors with "fresher faces," or alter dialogue and change the movement of the actor's lips to match. It will soon be possible to create a new "original" negative with whatever changes or alterations the copyright holder of the moment desires. The copyright holders, so far, have not been completely diligent in preserving the original negatives of films they control. In order to reconstruct old negatives, many archivists have had to go to Eastern bloc countries where American films have been better preserved.

In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be "replaced" by new altered negatives. This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten.

There is nothing to stop American films, records, books, and paintings from being sold to a foreign entity or egotistical gangsters and having them change our cultural heritage to suit their personal taste.

I accuse the companies and groups, who say that American law is sufficient, of misleading the Congress and the People for their own economic self-interest.
I accuse the corporations, who oppose the moral rights of the artist, of being dishonest and insensitive to American cultural heritage and of being interested only in their quarterly bottom line, and not in the long-term interest of the Nation.

The public's interest is ultimately dominant over all other interests. And the proof of that is that even a copyright law only permits the creators and their estate a limited amount of time to enjoy the economic fruits of that work.

There are those who say American law is sufficient. That's an outrage! It's not sufficient! If it were sufficient, why would I be here? Why would John Houston have been so studiously ignored when he protested the colorization of "The Maltese Falcon?" Why are films cut up and butchered?

Attention should be paid to this question of our soul, and not simply to accounting procedures. Attention should be paid to the interest of those who are yet unborn, who should be able to see this generation as it saw itself, and the past generation as it saw itself.

I hope you have the courage to lead America in acknowledging the importance of American art to the human race, and accord the proper protection for the creators of that art--

If only George Lucas had known George Lucas.
 
7,132
771
Joined Dec 14, 2007
Will not buy. Lucas just can't stop himself from trying to change irrelevant stuff. I would hate to be one of his kids.
 
29,990
8,439
Joined Jan 22, 2011
I'm planning on watching this when it comes out since I've never seen Star Wars.
 
2,420
569
Joined Oct 31, 2010
Dude's security kicked me off his property cuz I ran a little too much when I was a kid

#@%* this guy
 
12,723
70
Joined Apr 14, 2004
i want to drop kick this fool for the mess he's doing to SW as if episode 1-3 wasnt bad enough, he goes and messes with the original
 
25,730
2,900
Joined Jan 25, 2008
Originally Posted by Mitchellicious

Will not buy. Lucas just can't stop himself from trying to change irrelevant stuff. I would hate to be one of his kids.

Hate to be one of his kids? Is it really that serious bro?
 
6,623
13
Joined Jul 23, 2004
It's not that big of a deal. People just freak out way too much when it comes to stuff like this.
 
16,056
2,191
Joined Feb 11, 2008
i wish he would remake the last 3 movies just so they are higher quality and he would make more money
 
8,374
771
Joined Dec 20, 2000
Originally Posted by IMASOLEMAN18

i wish he would remake the last 3 movies just so they are higher quality and he would make more money
I thought I was the only one that thought that 
 
16,543
2,562
Joined Jul 29, 2001
Originally Posted by sammietheboss

What the big deal I don't think it's a bad idea to show some type of emotion
The way it's filmed, Vader is clearly conflicted and makes a decision in that moment that no words could convey. There's no need for him to yell "Nooooooo" on top of what is already a perfect and powerful scene.
 

dmoney82

Banned
5,483
18
Joined Dec 19, 2008
That #$% was so cheesy. It was more gangsta when he was quiet. I'm a big fan of the series and this is bull crap.
 
7,132
771
Joined Dec 14, 2007
Originally Posted by JumpmanFromDaBay

Originally Posted by Mitchellicious

Will not buy. Lucas just can't stop himself from trying to change irrelevant stuff. I would hate to be one of his kids.

Hate to be one of his kids? Is it really that serious bro?

I meant in the sense that you would never be able to live up to his expectations, because he would always be adjusting them to fit his "vision" or some junk.
 
42,721
10,306
Joined Oct 9, 2006
I'm a Lucas and Star Wars fan, but this is getting out of hand. I'm all for cleaning up the picture, enhancing the sounds, and maybe tweaking some of the original special effects (like the lasers, lightsabers and whatnot), but he's essentially changing the mood of a scene. Kind of disappointing.

I'll still get the BD set, so I hope it won't be as bad as expected...
 
911
39
Joined Jul 17, 2007
this idiot Lucas keeps on messing with his stuff with the excuse that "that's how he originally intended it to be." i'm all for little effects in the background, but putting Christiansen's head on the ghost Vader at the end of ROTJ and the different music at the end of the same movie basically ruined the DVD box set i bought a few years ago. i was going to buy this but i think i'll pass.
 
17,300
10,943
Joined Feb 14, 2007
Originally Posted by kash55

It's not that big of a deal. People just freak out way too much when it comes to stuff like this.
I'm probably one of the biggest SW's fans on NT but that's why I stay away from this topic on other forums.  There's so many options out there to get your hands on the unaltered OT that people keep complaining about, I don't really know why some people make it seem to be the end of the world whenever he adds changes and releases them.  Anyway, the "noooo" part in ROTJ is pretty awkward, but nothing to make me have any ill feelings towards George or makes me like SW any less.  On that note, I can't wait to bang out on all the bonus material once this comes out though
 
1,736
10
Joined May 10, 2006
Originally Posted by dmbrhs

Originally Posted by sammietheboss

What the big deal I don't think it's a bad idea to show some type of emotion
The way it's filmed, Vader is clearly conflicted and makes a decision in that moment that no words could convey. There's no need for him to yell "Nooooooo" on top of what is already a perfect and powerful scene.

I think the no is perfect for that scene because he is in a Real tough spot he didnt want his son to die yet he didn't want to turnHis back on the dark side I'm pretty sure he loved both of them
 
Top Bottom