|
RedSpider posted:I recommend Fahrenheit 451. This one's subject matter is also disturbingly relevant to what Lucas has done with the SEs. I dunno. If you'd actually read it, you'd know this isn't accurate. People already disproved this line of thinking like 2 pages back.
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 18:30 |
|
|
RedSpider posted:I recommend Fahrenheit 451. This one's subject matter is also disturbingly relevant to what Lucas has done with the SEs. Fahrenheit 451 is an expansion of Ray Bradbury's earlier story The Fireman, which was published in a science fiction magazine, Galaxy, two years earlier. For a long time, it was extremely difficult to find a copy of The Fireman, and outside the issue of Galaxy it was only every printed in one anthology (nearly thirty years later). Presumably, Ray Bradbury didn't feel the need to have a lesser version of his story on the market. (Since his death, it has been reprinted in the collect A Pleasure to Burn.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
george lucas put a cage around my head and filled it with black trapezoid boxes with wheels
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
A person who doesn't sympathize with the desire of an artist to go back to their own prior work and alter it has likely never created art of their own.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
porfiria posted:While an artist is certainly within his moral and legal (well sometimes) rights to retroactively alter a film, it's usually a bad idea. Spielberg got up to the same nonsense with E.T. Of course, authors release revised and edited editions of their books all the time. They are often marketed as "definitive" texts. But I've never seen anyone throw hissy fits about the (actually much more dramatic) edits to the other dork bible, The Hobbit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
It's almost as if they're different situations? It's staggering to me that people need to antagonize others over the idea that they might want to watch the version of A New Hope that they grew up with. Like, if you like the special editions? That's totally fine! It's no skin off my back if you want to walk into a store and buy that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
Tender Bender posted:It's almost as if they're different situations? It's staggering to me that people need to antagonize others over the idea that they might want to watch the version of A New Hope that they grew up with. Like, if you like the special editions? That's totally fine! It's no skin off my back if you want to walk into a store and buy that. It's not weird to you that people think of themselves as "growing up with" a hyperspecific version of a Hollywood movie? It's not weird to you that some people's very identity is threatened by the fact that they can't purchase in a store a recreation of a specific childhood memory, that capitalism could promise so many things but not this? Everyone gets nostalgic about stuff -- the want is not the issue. The issue is the feeling of entitlement to it, that fans have more say over how somebody handles their own intellectual property than they themselves do. This is literally the plot of Misery, and spoiler alert, the True Fans are not the protagonists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
homullus posted:It's not weird to you that people think of themselves as "growing up with" a hyperspecific version of a Hollywood movie? It's not weird to you that some people's very identity is threatened by the fact that they can't purchase in a store a recreation of a specific childhood memory, that capitalism could promise so many things but not this? To be frank, I just find it weird and disturbing how much joy, value, and want people place in consumerism and capitalism and how terribly enslaved all of America is to an outdated, inhumane, and failed economic system. Anyway, which is everyone's favorite aspect of Star Wars? The Force, smugglers and bounty hunters, the rebellion, etc?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
What's weird is the slavish loyalty to George Lucas and his (constantly shifting) 'artistic vision' Hint: it's not artistic vision. It's a cash grab.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Wouldn't it make more sense for Anakin to jump out the window? He's portrayed as the impulsive one. Obi-Wan criticises Anakin for being impulsive but the films actually portray Obi-Wan as being equally if not more impulsive than his apprentice. Obi-Wan's arc in Episode One is learning to "live in the moment" and stop worrying about everything and just throw himself into battle things will (probably) work out fine it's the will of the force. sassassin fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Jul 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
Super Fan posted:What's weird is the slavish loyalty to George Lucas and his (constantly shifting) 'artistic vision' Star Wars rereleases would have made the same amount of money had they not made any changes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
Super Fan posted:What's weird is the slavish loyalty to George Lucas and his (constantly shifting) 'artistic vision' Lucas is on record before the prequels came out saying he knew that they were going to be controversial and a lot of people would be upset about them because he was deciding not to cash in on what everyone wanted. So actually they're the exact opposite of a cash grab. But continue to shadow box this imaginary person named George Lucas that you have prefigured in your weird imagination. It's amazing to think about how upset people are willing to get over a few frames in each movie. Here's a trick: if something in the SE is upsetting you, all you have to do is sit there and wait 3-5 seconds for the moment to pass and you'll have your precious ur-text back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:Lucas is on record before the prequels came out saying he knew that they were going to be controversial and a lot of people would be upset about them because he was deciding not to cash in on what everyone wanted. So actually they're the exact opposite of a cash grab. But continue to shadow box this imaginary person named George Lucas that you have prefigured in your weird imagination. You know, while I do enjoy some things coming out of Disney, I do worry, especially with Episode VIII on the horizon, that they might be doing that, that they're just doing what is guarnteed to sell in a bit of a cash grab. Rogue One gives me hope otherwise (even if I didn't like the film), but it's hard to say until we see Episode VIII.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:40
|
|
|
Covok posted:You know, while I do enjoy some things coming out of Disney, I do worry, especially with Episode VIII on the horizon, that they might be doing that, that they're just doing what is guarnteed to sell in a bit of a cash grab. Rogue One gives me hope otherwise (even if I didn't like the film), but it's hard to say until we see Episode VIII. Your concerns have already been heard by Disney, and they're working tirelessly to thread the needle between appeasing people who just want "more Star Wars" (i.e. remaking A New Hope), and the sophisticated Star Wars aesthetes who want something "new" (to be determined when this part of the equation will be visible). I frankly feel that Rogue One was a much much more transparent cash grab on their part than VII.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
Covok posted:To be frank, I just find it weird and disturbing how much joy, value, and want people place in consumerism and capitalism and how terribly enslaved all of America is to an outdated, inhumane, and failed economic system. the trade federation 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:I frankly feel that Rogue One was a much much more transparent cash grab on their part than VII. Really. What is your reasoning for that? TWIST FIST posted:the trade federation You know, strangest things, both WEG and old notes by Lucas (probably related) claimed that Palpatine used trade agreements to slowly weaken the leadership of the Republic and place himself in charge, apparently. Not sure as I never read either myself, but I guess Lucas really had his heart set on trade being the cause of the Republic's downfall. I mean, while super loving mundane, it does make a sort of sense since, ya know, trade agreements have actually started many famous wars.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
I fuckin love podracing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
Barudak posted:I fuckin love podracing. Crazy to think that that's the last "new" thing introduced to the Star Wars universe that wasn't a play on Jedi/Sith, light sabers, or familiar spaceships. Here's to another 40 years of stagnation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:Lucas is on record before the prequels came out saying he knew that they were going to be controversial and a lot of people would be upset about them because he was deciding not to cash in on what everyone wanted. So actually they're the exact opposite of a cash grab. But continue to shadow box this imaginary person named George Lucas that you have prefigured in your weird imagination. Controversial. He likely noticed the poor quality and thought '"oh god people are going to hate this" and did damage control. The SE alterations are so prevelant you'd have to ignore huge swathes of the films. Best scanerio? Watch the despicialized versions Super Fan fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Jul 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Covok posted:Anyway, which is everyone's favorite aspect of Star Wars? The Force, smugglers and bounty hunters, the rebellion, etc? The sheer variety of visual design, including the mechanical and architectural designs, and the landscapes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
homullus posted:It's not weird to you that people think of themselves as "growing up with" a hyperspecific version of a Hollywood movie? It's not weird to you that some people's very identity is threatened by the fact that they can't purchase in a store a recreation of a specific childhood memory, that capitalism could promise so many things but not this? I mean I dunno man, how do you want me to say that at the time I was growing up, I watched a movie, and I would like to buy that movie now so I can watch it, in a way that doesn't offend you?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Covok posted:Really. What is your reasoning for that? Admittedly I only saw it twice in theaters and not since, and my attitude about the prequels certainly changed over time so I'm willing to accept that I might feel differently in the future, but Rogue One felt to me like what I imagine a Star Wars film dreamt up by a pre-teen with access to all of the toys and action figures would look like. It relies so heavily on the visual grammar of the OT to it's fatal detriment. Admittedly Gareth Edwards had some interesting ideas here and there (the opening shot, a lot of the ways he communicated the scale of the Death Star), but by and large it felt like they were just reaping the rewards left behind by Lucas. In its quest to fit in "seamlessly" between III and IV, it boxed itself in and was unable to do or show anything novel, which I think is the worst thing a Star Wars movie can do. Put another way: what if, for arbitrary reasons, the creators had to forego the visual dictionary of Star Wars, and elide all of those classic talisman's of the series: what would you be left with? The Force Awakens is of course similarly guilty of this, but Rogue One especially just feels like profiting off of past success ("you like Star Destroyers right? And x-wings? Well we've got loads of that stuff!") Think of all of the "iconic" shots in Rogue One (the star destroyer over Jedda, the Death Star appearing over the horizon, the dog fight about Scarif), and all I can imagine is a kid playing with his figurines in the sandbox. I'll admit this is a purely emotional and non-academic impression of the film. But the combination of all of that fan-service poo poo (the zoom in on the blue milk, the cameo of the Mos Eisley goons), the horrific score, and having totally charmless (to me) characters, and there was very little about it that separated it in my mind from a Battlefront cutscene. I've found some of the analysis in this thread regarding the characters and various motivations to be interesting, but not wholly convincing (or enough to salvage the movie for me). Whereas I find the analysis about the prequels to be utterly convincing and totally enhances my appreciation of them. I'll be happy to revisit Rogue One in ten years and hope that at that point I'll find something to appreciate, because it's always more fun to like something than hate it. Super Fan posted:Controversial. He likely noticed the poor quality and thought '"oh god people at going to hate this" and did damage control. Yeah this argument isn't worth having if you just make poo poo up out of thin air. Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Jul 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:Admittedly I only saw it twice in theaters and not since, and my attitude about the prequels certainly changed over time so I'm willing to accept that I might feel differently in the future, but Rogue One felt to me like what I imagine a Star Wars film dreamt up my a pre-teen with access to all of the toys and action figures would look like. holy crap, this. it felt just like the star wars games i used to play with my brother
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:Crazy to think that that's the last "new" thing introduced to the Star Wars universe that wasn't a play on Jedi/Sith, light sabers, or familiar spaceships. Episode III had jellyfish opera so second to last. Fingers crossed pazaak or some other gambling game gets mentioned or shown in Episode 8
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:It's amazing to think about how upset people are willing to get over a few frames in each movie. Here's a trick: if something in the SE is upsetting you, all you have to do is sit there and wait 3-5 seconds for the moment to pass and you'll have your precious ur-text back. It's more than just a few frames you disingenuous imbecile. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_changes_in_Star_Wars_re-releases It's appalling. And yes, it was a cash grab as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
Outside the Mad Rebo band, those changes are less than 15 seconds in length, or at least the ones labled "Major Changes". There are tons of really good changes throughout that are more subtle that and, personally, I think the films look tremendously better with and I wouldnt want to go back to the original version. All that said Disney should do a choose your own adventure version of the Blu-Ray and charge like $100 a movie because goddamn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:01
|
|
|
Tender Bender posted:I mean I dunno man, how do you want me to say that at the time I was growing up, I watched a movie, and I would like to buy that movie now so I can watch it, in a way that doesn't offend you? So you want the VHS version that you saw as a kid? Or do you want some amalgamated from memory version that only exists in your head? If you want the "first time seeing it in a theater" experience (which I doubt you had as most goons saw the movies on VHS originally), then that's tough poo poo because the theater experience is wholly unique in itself that no home entertainment system will ever faithfully reproduce. I own the original trilogy on VHS and have watched it a few times that way. I've also watched the Special Edition blu rays. Both are fine, we're fine, we're all fine here, now, thank you. How are you?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
RedSpider posted:It's more than just a few frames you disingenuous imbecile. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_changes_in_Star_Wars_re-releases This speaks for itself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
In the original version of the Hobbit, Gollum is like a friendly gremlin and he bets the ring voluntarily and is a good loser and not sore about it at all. Also some of the Elves are called Gnomes. Tolkien went back and changed it when he wrote the sequel because it didn't fit his new version of the lore. And then wrote in a bit of dialogue that said the original version was wrong and a lie, diagetically. He also made edits to LOTR several times to get firmer copyrights in a very literal cash grab. They don't sell the originals anymore
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
Well any time you keep putting out more stuff there's going to be a desire to go back and retcon the prior stuff to make it line up better. That doesn't really seem to have been the intention with the Special Editions, actually, though, with a couple of exceptions. Edit: The reason no one gives a poo poo about the Hobbit fuckery is because nobody here read the originals.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
The alterations wouldn't be so grotesque if they were implemented better or had some consistency. They're so slapdash that the OT is like Frankenstein's monster.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Edit: The reason no one gives a poo poo about the Hobbit fuckery is because nobody here read the originals. In my opinion this is all that's going on here. You can't go home again
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
DeimosRising posted:In my opinion this is all that's going on here. You can't go home again Oh I forgot, also the Special Editions were lame. Remember the Jabba scene? Christ on a cracker. Like nobody cares about the digital paintings in Cloud City or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
Super Fan posted:The alterations wouldn't be so grotesque I think I'm going to be sick.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Oh I forgot, also the Special Editions were lame Meltdowns incoming!
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss0M_EUNbdA I just can't. And this is the improved version! I won't subject you kids to the '97 edition but...it's some Cronenbergian poo poo let me tell you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
Super Fan posted:Meltdowns incoming! Wait weren't you the one saying you could remove C-3PO and R2-D2 entirely from the films and it wouldn't change them at all? And you're upset about the minute changes in the SE? Cool cool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
Minute my rear end
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
They are a little less substantial than removing C-3PO and R2-D2, surely you'd admit that. Or, could it be that you're just flailing around, arguing in bad faith?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 18:30 |
|
|
Jewmanji posted:They are a little less substantial than removing C-3PO and R2-D2, surely you'd admit that. Or, could it be that you're just flailing around, arguing in bad faith? Do you have a single original thought in your head? You're just regurgitating poo poo people have been saying for pages. White noise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 00:31
|
|