Original Trilogy: Theatrical vs. Special Edition/Remastered

[DigiFluid]

A long raging debate in the Star Wars kingdom (lol). There are definitely (at least) two camps in the ongoing argument over George Lucas "updating" the original trilogy. Is it perfectly fine and logical, or is it an attack on an established piece of cinematic history?

I'm definitely a purist here, and absolutely prefer the theatrical versions. All were released before I was even born, but there's a charm to them that's lost in remastering. Plus, I loathe the later (DVD) effort to make the original trilogy line up with the newer prequel trilogy. No--that's not how it's done, George Lucas. You write your NEW stuff so that it makes sense in context of your classic stuff, not the other way around!

What do you think?

[Replicator Todd]

I only own the special edition DVDs(the 2004 release) and the theatricals on VHS, and its been a while since I have seen them! So i'm not sure until I get around to rewatching both, and I might not rewatch both until a Blu-Ray release. I think the Special/Remastered editions look great! But some of the CGI changes are just annoying, he really didn't have to change the Sarlacc Pit...

[nx01a]

A friend of mine complains bitterly about Han shooting first. *shrug*

[Replicator Todd]

A friend of mine complains bitterly about Han shooting first. *shrug*

Because he DID shoot first and that was changed! That was part of his character IMO.

[DigiFluid]

because he did shoot first and that was changed! That was part of his character imo.

correctamundo!

[the fifth man]

Honestly, I enjoy both editions for their own reasons. I don't put one over the other.

[nx01a]

Because he DID shoot first and that was changed! That was part of his character IMO.

OK... Then he complains about Han NOT shooting first. Bah. I really don't listen when they start arguing SW minutiae.
I was glad to see the ghost of Anakin show up as his pre-Vader form in the remastered The Empire Strikes Back. It was fitting.

[Replicator Todd]

OK... Then he complains about Han NOT shooting first. Bah. I really don't listen when they start arguing SW minutiae.
I was glad to see the ghost of Anakin show up as his pre-Vader form in the remastered The Empire Strikes Back. It was fitting.

It was Return of the Jedi, not Empire. You definitely are more of a Trekkie!

[DigiFluid]

OK... Then he complains about Han NOT shooting first. Bah. I really don't listen when they start arguing SW minutiae.
I was glad to see the ghost of Anakin show up as his pre-Vader form in the remastered The Empire Strikes Back. It was fitting.

Do you mean Hayden Christensen's appearance at the end of ROTJ?

That made me so angry.

[Replicator Todd]

Do you mean Hayden Christensen's appearance at the end of ROTJ?

That made me so angry.

*high five* IMO it was placed there for the kiddies to understand that Anakin is Vader, from watching my young cousins of 3-7 years old watch it. It socked them too!

[nx01a]

To my benefit, I realized and was coming back to edit the movie... but y'all beat me to it.

I think that having Hayden inserted made far more sense, especially after he was in the last 2 prequel movies and WAS Darth Vader in the last one. I don't like the concept of remastering just to update sfx or, more probably, to rake in more money, but including him as opposed to the guy beneath the mask [who WASN'T James Earl Jones as it SHOULD HAVE BEEN!] made far more thematic sense.

[DigiFluid]

To my benefit, I realized and was coming back to edit the movie... but y'all beat me to it.

I think that having Hayden inserted made far more sense, especially after he was in the last 2 prequel movies and WAS Darth Vader in the last one. I don't like the concept of remastering just to update sfx or, more probably, to rake in more money, but including him as opposed to the guy beneath the mask [who WASN'T James Earl Jones as it SHOULD HAVE BEEN!] made far more thematic sense.

How?

Anakin had redeemed himself in the end, on the Death Star. It made total and complete sense that his spirit would be the true face that we just saw 5 minutes before.

[nx01a]

That face was the scarred, old face brought on by years of serving the Emperor and the Dark Side. The younger face was the man who still uncorrupted, who had a choice and who wanted to be/do good.
Besides... In the original version, we had no other reference for the face of Vader, so the old guy worked fine. With the prequels, we had a face for Anakin before he became Vader, and that version is far more representative of his return from the Dark Side than the scarred face under the mask.

[DigiFluid]

Nonsense.... The face under the mask was the man who had redeemed himself, the man who fulfilled the prophecy and who had become the Jedi who destroyed the Sith. The old man face was his most true 'good' face in context of both the original and prequel trilogies.

[Replicator Todd]

Yeah, I didn't like the original actor being replaced with Hayden either. I can't believe Anakin would look the same age...unless a ghost can choose what it looks like.