'No'

The last time George Lucas  decided to improve the aspects of his original trilogy, fans (by this I mean people who loved the original set from 1977-1983) were outraged as to why he even bothered with 'fixing' something that isn't broken in the first place.


I had no problem with it at first. This was a chance to see the originals in the theater, the way they were meant to be seen, anyway. 


The only one I was lucky enough to catch on its original theatrical run was Return Of The Jedi in 1983. I was 4. Didn't even know what I was watching was the last part of an epic trilogy. Just that it completely blew my mind, specially those humming lightsabers and how bad guys can actually redeem themselves in the end. 


The earlier films, I watched repeatedly on the VCR. 


The 1997 special editions had, as was previously reported before they opened, some pretty good upgrades and additional scenes that were previously envisioned by Lucas back in '77 but was unable to do so due to the limitations in special effects technology then.

CGI Stormtroopers on CGI dewbacks absent in the original version

That was okay as far as I'm concerned. Who would not want a little additional refurbishing or addition to the landscapes you practically knew even in your sleep? As long as it did not interfere with the story or any major character's presentation.


What raised the red flag for me while watching it in the theater, particularly on A New Hope (Episode IV), was the scene where Han Solo was confronted by one of Jabba The Hutt's henchmen (Greedo). In the original '77 version, Solo shot the villain first.


On the upgraded version, the scene was played out in a way that made me suspect a defect in the movie reel they were using. There was an awkward shift in Solo's head that made it look as if he evaded Greedo's blast first, and fired his own to kill his nemesis. 

Turns out Lucas did not want him to look too ruthless by firing off first.

That scene turned everyone's favorite smuggler/gunslinger from a badass, tako-no-shit kind of person to a boy scout with a tough exterior. Whatever convoluted sense of morality Lucaswanted to impart on the Solo character, totally destroyed how people knew him.

For starters the character really is unlikeable. At least at first. He's supposed to be the balance to the all around good guy country boy hero in Luke Skywalker. You're supposed to view him as an opportunistic scumbag until the end when he turned out to be a great person after all. 


What's even more puzzling is that this is hardly one of the 'technological setbacks' Lucas kept complaining about that he wanted to improve. This is already about changing characters'  motivations and actions. 


It happened again in The Empire Strikes Back. Several key changes in the dialogues were noticeable. A bid for political correctness, most likely. Whatever 'upgrade' Lucas did in the effects department were surely eclipsed by the new things old characters were saying. In other words, the brilliant screenplay of Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan were not spared from the 'refurbishing'.  


But the worst part of it in the best part of the film as well.


This time in the climactic fight between Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker in Bespin's Cloud City. 


In the 1980 version, instead of giving in to the temptations of power his father promised him if he turned to the dark side, the young warrior from Tatooine chose death by quietly jumping off the small platform he was holding unto. 


In the 'improved' version, Lucas decided to insert a long girlyman scream as he was falling to the chasm. It also sounded distrurbingly similar to the Emperor's own freefall screams when Vader threw him to his own death in Return Of The Jedi.

Gone was the brave freedom fighter who defied the lures of power. In its place was someone who was probably about to go on traipsing in to the dark side for all we know, and just slipped.

Even Lucas realized how stupid the move was and decided to remove it in the subsequent DVD releases.

But what really is infuriating about all these changes is how the guy's obsessive drive to 'perfect' the materials that practically does not need it as far as fans---the real owners---are concerned. Even that kind of motivation or drive is forgivable. At least that shows you the depth of the man's dedication to his art.

However, marketing ploys are another thing. Specially on specialty products like this you know for a fact are held in high esteem by rabid fanboys who'd automatically gobble anything remotely attached to the series.

Insanity for your art is one thing. Butchering a beloved piece of work to sell more of it, is another.

A few days ago news about the Blu Ray version of Return Of The Jedi caused another stir when a leaked footage of the scene in question was seen by most fans. 

Perhaps Mr. Lucas felt slighted about the negative reactions to Vader's prolonged "NOOO!" in Revenge Of The Sith, that he decided to rub it in by letting the iconic character at it again just to get even.

Or maybe he's just being magnanimous by offering audiences countless options on how they want their Star Wars served. Like a twisted version of the Choose Your Own Adventure series.

In any case, if there's any Lucasfilm movie that badly needs a major overhaul, it's Howard The Duck.

A long time ago...in a geek convention far far away

I consider myself a true Star Wars fan.

Although I'm not a total dweeb who flaunts his geekdom by flooding the house with anything from C-3PO and R2-D2 lunchboxes to those uber-expensive 'realistic' lightsaber toys and whine and moan at what George Lucas did to my beloved series by butchering what was left of it. Nor will you find me in forums arguing with other hardcore fans as to why Jar-Jar Binks's presence in Episode 1 isn't all that putrid; or why Han Solo, and not Boba Fett, is the coolest character to have come out of that universe. I look at it the way I look at other films I admire. Just a movie, and not a blueprint on how to live your own life. I'm constantly amazed at the passion some fans show every time I come across anything on the net that is remotely attached to the series. You'd even read arguments that give an impression that if the two debaters see each other in person, they'll go after each other's throats with extreme prejudice. Fascinating really, considering what they're arguing about to the point of threatening old testament-style wrath to each other is only the figment of one man's imagination. 

A typical scholarly debate on a certain topic:

JediMasterKen: COUNT DOOKU CAN'T BEAT DARTH MAUL EVEN IF HE MASTERED MAKASHI (FORM II) TO THE HIGHEST DEGREE. MAUL HAS MORE EXTENSIVE KNOWLEDGE OF OTHER SITH MARTIAL ARTS LIKE JAR-KAI. NOT TO MENTION HE'S ALSO YOUNGER AND MORE AGGRESSIVE.

Darth Bored: I DISAGREE. MAKASHI REQUIRES INTENSE CONCENTRATION AND FOCUSED ATTUNEMENT TO THE FORCE. NOT TO MENTION HE WAS ALREADY A FORMIDABLE JEDI LIGHTSABER DUELIST BEFORE HE WAS EVEN A SITH LORD. DARTH SIDIOUS DID NOT EVEN BOTHER TO TEACH HIM ADVANCED LIGHTSABER TECHNIQUES BECAUSE HE ALREADY KNEW TYRANUS(DOOKU) WAS ONE OF THE UNIVERSE'S BEST SWORDSMAN. HE WAS SO GOOD HE DIDN'T EVEN NEED TO RELY ON THE FORCE WHEN HE ENGAGED IN LIGHTSABER COMBAT. REMEMBER MAUL LOST TO AN APPRENTICE (OBI-WAN).

I don't think I need to show where this conversation leads to. Arguments like these can be compared to a religious or political debate. It's an argument with no end. Nobody wants to back down. And when all logic, fact, and reason fails, everyone resorts to personal attacks.

But what really amazes me about it is where the hell did these people get that kind of information? Fanficition maybe, but to speak about it like it was as real as describing how the flushing mechanism in the toilet bowl works is a bit unnerving. I'm sure it wasn't discussed in the movie, and I was also pretty sure that Maul could kick Dooku's ass based from what I saw, but upon seeing the other guy's very enlightening exposition, I was impressed. 

Do people like these really take the movie THAT seriously? Although you'd also hear these kind of heated arguments from LOTR or D&D fans, it is not as attention-grabbing because you know the so-called facts they throw at each other were taken from books and novels. What separates Star Wars though, is that it was a movie before some materials of it were adapted in book form (most are children's storybooks and novelization of the series), and that the movies didn't even cover half of what the two geniuses above are arguing about.

I have complaints about the movies myself--especially Lucas's take on pumping a vat full of steroids in the original trilogy (IV-VI) and dubbed them "Special Editions". Not only were the "upgraded" scenes useless, but totally looked artificial and only alienated scores of fans and myself from the original feel and nostalgia of the classics. What made the original movies classics were their imperfection. Other than that, the newer installments were not bad. 

The problem with movies like these is that every fan feels like he can do a better job than the people who created it. Some people felt like they died just because the author/director did not take the film the way they wanted it to go. Take it a little more higher in the obsessive scale and you'd have a person not unlike the Stephen King villain in 'Misery'. It's either that, or the 40-Year Old Virgin.

Revenge Of The Sith

I watched the opening of STAR WARS Episode III: Revenge Of The Sith last night. I was nervous as I entered the theater with my girlfriend. I realized this was the second time I am actually gonna see a Star Wars movie in its opening day just like I did with The Phantom Menace back in 1999 ( I caught Attack Of The Clones in its regular screening.). I didn't hate that movie but I didn't like it either (I realized this a few days after the novelty of the kickass lightsaber duels wore off.). That is actually much worse. Better to hate something with passion than be indifferent to it. It seemed flat and devoid of any likeable characters to root for. For the first time, I agreed with the critics. 

The critics.Those mindless, uptight, artsfy-fartsy morons whose idea of a good movie is a 5-hour snoozefest average people couldn't comprehend because they're not "classy" enough to understand it. I read the reviews to amuse myself on how those know-it-all-snobs couldn't get it and found, to my regret, that most of their observations---put downs actually---were correct. 

I was disappointed and hoped the next movie would be okay. Then Attack Of The Clones opened and only Yoda's lightsaber duel with Macchiavelian separatist/Sith Lord Count Dooku was memorable. That, I thought, was it. There goes the last shred of whatever childhood wonder I had for the series down the drain. But in the back of my head I was hoping Episode 3 could pull it off.

A few days before opening night I saw a copy of Time Magazine with Darth Vader on the cover. The article said it was good so I thought that could at least account for something--nearly all the reviews I read about the previews two films hardly ever used the word 'good' in them anyway. What the hell, watch it.

For me, part of the pleasure in watching the SW films is the opening drum roll for 20th Century Fox logo seguing to 'A long time ago...in a galaxy far far away..." to the opening bars of the all too familiar score by John Williams to the introductory summary of what's happening down to the panning of the camera to a spaceship or space station. So as these things were happening during the first few minutes of E3 I felt the same joy I felt while watching THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK on VHS for the nth time when i was in grade school. So about the movie. What can I say? Even if it did feel a little clunky in some parts, it wasn't the total crap I feared it will be. 

The Force, though not as strong as it was, is still with me after all.