MovieChat Forums > Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) Discussion > Lucas has no right to alter these films....

Lucas has no right to alter these films...

posted 8 years ago by MirkoS
26 replies | jump to latest

...without making the originals readily available alongside the Special Editions.

A simple analogy: a chef owns a recipe and cooks a dish. It's his creation, and he holds a copyright on it. Other people aid him in producing it.

However, after it's been consumed, it transforms into a greater collective. The meal has nourished the body's cells, it's enabled growth, it progresses, and appreciation and a new experience is gained. Sure, the dish began as the property of the "owner", but that's as far as it extends once given. No artist has the right to attempt to reach into our culture and change or remove what has granted that development when it has been absorbed into something far greater than itself. Furthermore, these movies could not even exist without what enabled them in the first place. Before the film is even made it is indebted to the culture that will help birth it, as is all art. Ergo, it owns it.

I'm really fed up with people believing Lucas has a right to do whatever he wishes to these films just because he was the driving impetus behind their vision and creation. No, it belongs to the masses, and that's not a statement of entitlement. What's entitlement is Lucas thinking he can meddle with something so much larger than himself, that has meant so much to so many, that has helped define us and helped revolutionize countless industries, to suit his own desires. That is the height of selfish entitlement.

What a disrespectful, arrogant, egotistical, narcissistic ******bag. Just watching the SEs on TV the other night pissed me off. The classic films that made Star Wars what it is are no more unless you go out of your way to find them. Children will grow up seeing the SEs and not the originals, and that's a real shame.

Lucas is a disgrace to the very medium that made him who he is, and is a disgrace as an artist.

[–] Hendry_William_French 8 years ago

Exactly. Well said.

Spielberg had a sly dig at Lucas when someone asked him about why he no longer liked the ET special edition. He said "I realized I robbed people who loved ET of their memories of ET". That's exactly what Lucas did to Star Wars fans with the special editions.

The Special Editions ruin the entire trilogy for me. I don't know how any self respecting fan can stand those horrible pieces of sh!t. I understand most fans don't care much, but for me when you start adding CGI to an older movie, and start twisting lines of dialogue, changing voices and ruining character arcs (han not longer killing Greedo outright) then the entire narrative and tone shifts. Vader saying "noooo" was the clincher - why mess with what was a perfect scene?

I always said that Lucas can do whatever the hell he wants with the originals - as long as he gives the fans the option of which version to choose from (theatrical or special edition). I don't understand why that's such a problem.

It is a shame that the default option is the special edition. As you said, you got kids growing up thinking that evil Hayden is supposed to be Anakin instead of the loving fatherly figure in ROTJ. That whole ending is ruined.

People might like to accuse someone like me of being a hardliner star wars fan for hating the special editions, but I'd hold those same views concerning any classic movie. If they put a CGI stay puft marshmallow man in Ghostbusters; or a CGI endoskeleton at the end of Terminator, or CGI fighter planes in Top Gun - then I'd feel the exact same way. You leave classic films alone. Changing them is like defacing a work of art.

And you can deal with me; Doug Masters!

[–] MirkoS 8 years ago

I'm not sure if you're aware of Harmy's Despecialized Editions...they are HD restorations of the originals available online, and they're professional in execution. You may wish to look into them, as the SEs shouldn't ruin it for you. Personally, I pretend they don't exist (alongside the prequels), as I now have full HD restorations of the OG films sitting on my shelves, and it's wonderful to have them. Here's a documentary on YT as to what they've done:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHfLX_TMduY

I couldn't agree more with your last paragraph. Films (as all art) are a stamp on the time period that they are made. I love to see "imperfections" in older movies, because they're not imperfections at all. In Terminator for example, when Arnold cuts out his eye and we see the puppet in the mirror, looking fake as all hell. I LOVE it and would have it no other way, and it's not nostalgia. It's a direct look back into the past and restrictions they had to work with, but yet, made it work. Art stands still and grants us a glimpse back to where we came from. The ridiculous hairstyles of the 70s and 80s, the clothes, the props, the effects, the cinematography, the corny dialogue. All being a product of that time. That is to be valued, not viewed as inadequate and changed dictated by today's standards.

What is so abhorrent about what Lucas has done is that he has consequently robbed the films of their artistic integrity and merit within the context of that timeframe, not to mention **** all over those who helped him realize it and how cherished it is by so many people. By doing so, he has effectively ripped apart the very fabric of our cultural heritage for the most selfish of reasons. This is an issue much bigger than Star Wars or whether someone likes/dislikes the changes.

Frankly, I'm astonished the law allows for what he's done. There needs to be measures enacted against this to protect and preserve our cultural heritage. If Shakespeare came back from the dead today and wished to alter his works, people would laugh in his face and tell him to go take a long walk off a short pier, and rightly so.

Art transcends the artist so much, it's not even funny.

[–] Hendry_William_French 8 years ago

I'm not sure if you're aware of Harmy's Despecialized Editions...they are HD restorations of the originals available online, and they're professional in execution.

Yeah I've seen it, but I still think a fan edit is not good enough. The fans deserve an official release.

I don't know why Lucas can't release the special edition and the theatrical cuts and let the fans choose which one to buy. It's a total fiasco.

Personally, I think Lucas went a bit loopy for all those years up in Skywalker Ranch. Anyone who messes with their own films and denies access to them has got to be a bit bat $hit crazy.

I couldn't agree more with your last paragraph. Films (as all art) are a stamp on the time period that they are made. I love to see "imperfections" in older movies, because they're not imperfections at all. In Terminator for example, when Arnold cuts out his eye and we see the puppet in the mirror, looking fake as all hell. I LOVE it and would have it no other way, and it's not nostalgia. It's a direct look back into the past and restrictions they had to work with, but yet, made it work. Art stands still and grants us a glimpse back to where we came from. The ridiculous hairstyles of the 70s and 80s, the clothes, the props, the effects, the cinematography, the corny dialogue. All being a product of that time. That is to be valued, not viewed as inadequate and changed dictated by today's standards.

Exactly. Couldn't agree more.

Putting dated 90s CGI into a 70s movie just creates jarring inconsistencies which are impossible to get away from. It kills the film dead in its tracks. It's like everything just stops as you look at this sickeningly gratuitous CGI sh!t that has no place in the film, as well as the numerous dialogue changes and tweaks like Boba Fett's new voice, Hayden in ROTJ and Vader saying 'nooo'.

Films belong in the time of their release. That's a big part of their charm. Trying to change them to conform to today's standards makes no sense. No one came out of the theatre in 1977, 1980 or 1983 complaining about the special effects not being good enough.

No one thought the original star wars trilogy needed touching up apart from Lucas' warped mind.

And you can deal with me; Doug Masters!

[–] MirkoS 8 years ago

Sure the fans deserve an official release, but Lucas has made it abundantly clear he'll go to all lengths to refuse it. He's a piece of ****. I would not throw away these films simply because there's nothing official for the original films put out.

It's not an edit at all, it's a restoration using HD footage from the most recent official BR release with cleaned up original footage for the rest that is indiscernible with the work that's been put into it. They're Star Wars, beautifully restored. Having Lucasfilm's stamp of approval isn't necessary for them to be.

[–] Hendry_William_French 8 years ago

I call them edits, because they're not done professionally, and they use various sources including the 2006 DVDs, so it's not really 100%.

For example, the part where you see R2 from a distance travelling down a canyon in the first movie. For the Harmy edition, they removed the CGI background. However, that still isn't true to the theatrical version, because the foreground & scenery still remains, and for the special edtion, that entire shot of R2 going down the canyon (the rocks around him etc) is all CGI. Basically, they removed the background CGI but kept all the other CGI around him.

And you can deal with me; Doug Masters!

[–] MirkoS 8 years ago

They don't need to be employed by Lucasfilm to be professional, there are people that've worked on Harmy's project that are professionals in the trade. Official, Ok I'll grant, but what's that aside from an endorsement?

These are the best versions true to the original releases we have available unless you wish to watch VCR releases or DVD releases not at all taken care of. Are they perfect? No, but they restore Star Wars to what made it what it is, in HD, with few concessions. They correct character bastardizations, they bring back the Oscar award winning editing and sfx, they color correct, they remove grain, they are what we remember as the essence of Star Wars and retains what's garnered it such accolades in the first place.

I'll never dismiss these films for such minuscule nitpicks.

Sure they're not 100%, but if you're willing to throw away these films simply due to the fact they're not 100% pixel perfect to the theatrical releases, that really is your loss and I can't hold much sympathy for that perspective. They most certainly should be, but I'll not toss out the what is 95% accurate for the 5% that is not, and is not apparent unless scrutinized under a microscope.

[–] Hendry_William_French 8 years ago

They correct character bastardizations, they bring back the Oscar award winning editing and sfx, they color correct, they remove grain, they are what we remember as the essence of Star Wars and retains what's garnered it such accolades in the first place

Amen. I do think it's a lot better than nothing. It's good that the fans have taken a stand against the Lucasfilm empire. Lucas has really let the fans down so much and surely he'd see the likes of Harmy and OriginalTrilogy.com as evidence that he's stepping on many people's memories of these films, that lots of people do indeed have attachments to this films that can't be described, and that they really want to see the theatricals again. It's a shame he'd too selfish to recognize that, though.

And you can deal with me; Doug Masters!

[–] MaximusGrandimus 7 years ago

You should be aware, if you want something that's even closer to the original than Harmy's Despecialized, there is now a direct scan of a 35mm print that a group called Negative1 did. It's available in HD on just about any torrent site and gets even closer to an "official" release. It's cleaned but still shows a few issues but overall it's as close to original theatrical release as you can get. There's also a "grindhouse" version of Empire out there, also a 35mm scan but not cleaned up like the Original Star Wars is. So far no scanned version of Jedi but Harmy's version of that is very well done.

I don't know if you're aware of this but I've already changed things. I killed Ben Linus.
--Sayid

[–] Hendry_William_French 7 years ago

Cool, thanks.

I am Djour Djilios. Could you spell that please? I don't think so. Try it with a "D".

[–] MaximusGrandimus 7 years ago

(reposting so you're sure to see this too)

You should be aware, if you want something that's even closer to the original than Harmy's Despecialized, there is now a direct scan of a 35mm print that a group called Negative1 did. It's available in HD on just about any torrent site and gets even closer to an "official" release. It's cleaned but still shows a few issues but overall it's as close to original theatrical release as you can get. There's also a "grindhouse" version of Empire out there, also a 35mm scan but not cleaned up like the Original Star Wars is. So far no scanned version of Jedi but Harmy's version of that is very well done.

I don't know if you're aware of this but I've already changed things. I killed Ben Linus.
--Sayid

[–] Kruleworld 8 years ago

There's an old saying; 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions'. I can understand why Lucas wanted to go back and fix some of the things that annoyed him. Then he went too far and started adding things that were never in the original cut. This crossed a line for me.

"He's dusted, busted and disgusted, but he's ok"

[–] mcdemuth 8 years ago

I have mixed emotions on the whole thing...

When it was announced in the late 1990s that the original trilogy was getting a "Face Lift" with new special effects. I was actually excited by this.

I did and still enjoy... the new X-Wing squadron visuals, as they go to attack the Death Star in "A New Hope"... and adding more views and adding windows to Cloud City in "Empire Strikes Back" to make it more visually interesting to those that live there.

But yes.. changing dialog, songs, and changing what the characters do, went WAY too far. That should never have happened.

HAN SHOOTS FIRST!

Still, if both versions had just been released, like with what Spielberg did with E.T., I think most of us would have been OK with that.

I just don't understand WHY, both can't be released, in the same High Quality video.

You see it all the time with other movies... I've got THREE versions of "Close Encounters Of The Third Kind" in the same DVD pack, and wasn't there FOUR versions of "Blade Runner" in one package? ...and no one complained!

[–] MirkoS 8 years ago

Because it's not Lucas' vision. He's gone one record stating that the original films constitute about 20-30% of what he initially envisioned, and he'll do whatever he can to eradicate them from the history books. He pursues any showing of original reels out there, claims them under copyright, and destroys them. He's essentially ashamed of them which is why he's not content with the originals being available.

It makes you wonder how much credit is to be laid at his feet. Look at the changes done to the OT and the prequels (both stemming from him having complete control, and both of which are largely reviled). It's other people that are the main reason the OT is what it is, not Lucas.

[–] Theshornwonder 7 years ago

That's not how intellectual property works.

[–] danimal09752 7 years ago

I get that you want the original theatrical release. But here you are bitching about Lucas. Everybody here bashing Lucas. 2 key points everyone of you are completely ignoring....

1) When the special editions came out, Lucas OWNED Lucasfilm. He OWNED the movies that he created. So while you may be all butt hurt about him tweeking things to his liking...he OWNED the movies that HE created. End of story. He had every right to do whatever the hell he wanted to with movies that he wrote and paid to have made. As for your chef analogy. Your approach suggests that since the movies got released to the public, he's not allowed to touch them. That would be no different than you buying a brand new Porche and then driving it in public and somebody else (that didn't invest a dime in that car) coming up to you and telling you you aren't allowed to change anything on the car. I mean it's been out for the public to see....and might offend someone.

2) Lucas sold Lucasfilm to Disney YEARS AGO. So he's got no say what so ever at this point which version of the films are released. He has NO SAY AT ALL in that and hasn't for years. So why are every one of you still blasting him for currently not giving you what you want? LOL

[–] MirkoS 7 years ago

1) No, Lucas has no right. Under law he does, but from a ethical standpoint he does not. Your analogy comparison is flawed. A more apt one would be you buy a Porsche, you drive and love it for years, gaining experiences from it that affect you deeply, then Porsche comes into your garage one day and changes the car that you paid for because they own the copyright for that vehicle. Would you be OK with that? THEY created it, right? By your logic they can do what they want with it.

Of course this is different as when you buy a car you are paying for manufacturing and material costs, so in effect you own it as property whereas with a movie you are paying license to view it as the property itself is worth billions. So your comparison is faulty on a fundamental level, but my example still demonstrates the principle at play.

Art defines our cultural identity and heritage. All who create it are beholden to those as they supersede personal ownership once they enter the public consciousness. The owner cannot reach into that identity and heritage and attempt to replace it because they "own" it. They are small fries at that point.

[–] danimal09752 7 years ago

Babble on all you want. The owner CAN and if they so choose WILL change it. You bought a $20 dvd. Lucasfilm pays millions upon millions to make the films. They own the copyright. They can do whatever they hell they want as far as changes (and same goes for Lucas when he owned them). You can whine and moan about it all day snowflake, but you (or the general public at large) does not own squat as far as these films...so you have no say. You can argue that every way imaginable....but at the end of the day, the only thing that matters is they can do whatever they please legally...and you can't stop it. So stop whining.

[–] MirkoS 7 years ago

This topic has completely flown over your head.

I'm not contesting the technicality of copyright or ownership of property. I'm speaking from an ethical viewpoint. If you are content with any artist going back and replacing their work after it has held immense impact and relevance upon our greater culture, that's your perogative. You can hide behind ownership all you wish, just like Lucas does, because frankly, you've made it apparent you're incapable of arguing on any grounds anything other than adhering to this technicality instead of pulling back and debating in greater context .

[–] no_just_no 7 years ago

http://www.slashfilm.com/george-lucas-speaks-altering-films-1988/

Lucas is a hypocrite. End of story ladies and gentleman.

[–] danimal09752 7 years ago

You carry on about things flying over my head.....and then proceed to continue bashing George Lucas. He DOESN'T own these films. Hasn't for YEARS. That seems to have gone right over your head. And ethically? Who's ethics? Yours? Ethically the owners felt it was fine. End of the day, that's all that matters. Bands remaster classic, massive hit albums all the time...thus tweeking an existing well known piece of art. Movies are released all the time in directors cuts and so on...which is tweeking them from the original versions. It happens ALL THE TIME nimrod. The only reason I went in depth on the legal side of it is because you keep on going on and on like a damn fool about how they don't have the right to do so. They DO have that right whether you like it or not.....and Lucas was far from the only one to do it. Get the hell over it.

[–] MirkoS 7 years ago

You are offering no argument stemming from original thought...it's obviously very simplistic for you: creator=owner because the law says so, so they can do what they want. You adhere to legality and predicate your position on it when my point encompasses a discussion as to WHY it should be law or not. So what if it's the law? Lucas has the right legally, but anyone who actually reads my post should understand what I'm arguing is he has no grounds from an ethical/moral standpoint. I've argued that art shouldn't be able to be altered and replaced once it's released to the public as it then enters something far greater than what initially birthed it, as my chef analogy demonstrates. It only belongs to the creator at that point in terms of financial compensation due to copyright. Ownership with art enters a questionable grey area once it's gone public. And newsflash: the law is not necessarily a reflection on what is moral or ethical.

That out of the way, can we actually have a debate now that transcends legality instead of you coming in here with your condescending tone and juvenile insults resorting to absolutism in a subject that in reality is not so cut and dry?

Who's ethics? Are you aware of this? You should read it, and note the speaker. I especially enjoyed this part:

"American works of art belong to the American public; they are part of our cultural history."

-George Lucas

http://www.slashfilm.com/george-lucas-speaks-altering-films-1988/

So yea, these ethics are not mine at all and your only response has been "it's the law, period, stop whining, get over it, blah blah blah" as if that's supposed to convince me. I'm simply standing on one side. But at least I'm putting forth an argument instead of citing legality full stop as if that's somehow the end-all-be-all knockout punch. It's not.

And no, it doesn't happen all the time. Far as I'm aware Director's Cuts don't replace the films, or if they have, tell me which ones. Hence the term, "Director's Cut". And they do not change the originals....only add omitted scenes. They are also complimentary. I'd have no issue if Lucas allowed the Special Editions to exist alongside the unaltered ones and even considered them cannon. Hell, he could change them into new My Little Ponies in outer space for all I care as long as we got to keep the originals. But that's not the case.

Citing the law is a statement of fact, it's something I'm well aware of, and is not an argument. Why are you here to tell me something I already know? I didn't think a disclaimer was needed in my OP so people wouldn't waste my time telling me so, but apparently was mistaken.

[–] danimal09752 7 years ago

I don't need to offer argument. I don't need to win you over with some slick retort. You own nothing of these films. You've got every excuse why Lucas (who again hasn't owned these films for YEARS and can't tinker with them) shouldn't tinker with them. The law is the only fact that is needed. Disney CAN and should they decide to, WILL tinker with these films. You can run around whining about how butt hurt you are that they were tinkered with. Did it piss people off when Lucas did it? Sure. We all get that. There were changes I liked and changes I didn't like. But nobody's stopping them. They OWN these films. Not you. Not me. Not fan boys. Regardless of your feelings on art.

[–] ZakkWyldeMyLittlePony 7 years ago

Lucas obviously had OCD the way he constantly felt the need to alter the films.

Avenged Sevenfold ships Fluttershy and Discord

[–] Conan-1982 7 years ago

It's not big a deal if you get the De-Specialized Edition: for the fans, by the fans, free of charge.

[–] mcdemuth 7 years ago

I thought Lucas, now Disney, owns the films... & I thought the films were copyrighted.

The last I heard, anyone who puts up a film on "Youtube", without the permission of the owners, is committing "piracy" and that is "illegal".

(Forgive me for possibly using incorrect terms, I am not a lawyer.)

At least that is what all those warnings say at the beginning of every DVD/Blu-Ray I purchase say... 'You can't even upload a "scene" from the movie!"

So what is the deal with these "Despecialized Editions"?

And if it is legal... Can I order a copy on Blu-ray?

[–] Kruleworld 7 years ago

So what is the deal with these "Despecialized Editions"?

And if it is legal..

legally if you own the disk (genuine one) you are permitted to consume it as you see fit, within reason, like copying to play it on your ipod or playing it from a file on your computer.
Since you've already purchased a legit copy, a downloaded version isn't going to get you into big trouble, as courts have made allowances for how you consume that which you've paid for. Harmy sort of uses this to skirt around the issue.

Can I order a copy on Blu-ray?

No, but Lucasfilm has been pretty bloody-minded about letting non-special editions exist, even though i'm sure they'd be well within their rights to take them and sell them and pay Harmy nothing for all his work. You'll have to wade though the sewage that is torrent to find them.

"He's dusted, busted and disgusted, but he's ok"