[Helena]

Enjoy.

[Just your average movie goer]

Yep, that's how it would be.

[SimeSublime]

That was quite clever. I rather liked it.

[barend]

good call...

[Paladin]

Hidous!

[Lefty]

That page's prequel scripts are quite captivating...Qui-Gon-Jin as a 50-year-old asian woman, cloned soldiers rather than robots as the trade federation's army, and actual excitement & danger. Their prequel numerology is 4-8 are the ones before A New Hope, as 1-3 would be pre-prequels.

I'm reading 4 ("The Impending Doom") now, it's good stuff.

[Helena]

Don't forget to read his parodies of the PT and the Special Editions. They're absolutely brilliant.

[Just your average movie goer]

I'll check it out when I have some time (I've just been busy working on the next movie outing... finished now! Yay!).

[DistantAngel]

Well, once again, George Lucas (a man who's taken the saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" and turned it into "if it ain't broke, fix it anyway, re-release it, then destroy the original") has proven himself to be a hypocrite of the highest order.

Sony has just released a number of "Three Stooges" classics on DVD which feature not only the original black-and-white movies, but also digitally colourised versions as well. As always, the architects of this cinematic vandalisation will justify themselves by claiming that they're "bringing old movies to a new audience", and that "it's a way of getting old black-and-white movies released", rather than just admitting that they're pissing on Picassos for profit.

By treating the audience as if it were a field of dosile, apathetic sheep that need to be told what they want (that's Hollywood all over if you ask me), they pay a great disservice to the thinking cinema goers who defy the pie-charts and demographics to watch "Donnie Darko", "Memento", "The Usual Suspects", "The Shawshank Redemption", and host of other films which no one saw in theatres, but have, quite rightly, become almost instant classics thanks to the determination of viewers who want something more substantial to watch than the latest mindless, creatively vacuous piece-of-s**t "From the creators of America Pie!"

This group of passionate film-lovers, among whose number I include genuine "Star Wars" fans such as those good folk here (let's face it - no one ever intended SW to be your usual Hollywood blockbuster - sci-fi was all but dead at that time), are the ones who find themselves being thanked by a film's director on DVD commentaries now for putting in the time, effort, and love, to ensure that good films get released, that people get to hear about them, and that worthy cinematic causes always have a champion or two. However, what annoys me above anything right now, is that George Lucas considers himself one of these people.

The man who has brutalised and damaged his own work beyond any hope of repair, was the man who testified with Steven Spielberg before congress in the 1980s against the colourisation and alteration of movies. And it's this very same scumbag who has come out as a vocal opponent of the Stooges DVD with the comment:

"Would colour distract from their comedy and make it not as funny anymore? Maybe just the fact that they're in black and white makes it funny, because their humour is dated. But by putting it in black and white, it puts it in a context where you can appreciate it for what it was. But you try to make it in full living colour and try to compare it to a Jim Carrey movie, then it's hard for young people to understand. Because you're then thinking you're comparing apples to apples, when you're not. You're comparing apples to oranges. I'm saying it's not fair to the artist."

George Lucas is a liar and a hypocrite. He claims to be opposed to the alteration of movies, and yet he has needlessly altered his own work more than probably any other "artist" in modern history. Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I would like to draw your attention to the following:

"Would colour distract from their comedy and make it not as funny anymore? Maybe just the fact that they're in black and white makes it funny, because their humour is dated"

Would putting some CGI creatures in Mos Eisely detract from the atmosphere of the scene and make it not work anymore? Maybe the fact that the existing creatures were people in latext masks and suits, and the effects were a little dodgy in places, are the things that make it endearing?

"... by putting it in black and white, it puts it in a context where you can appreciate it for what it was"

So, what about Greedo shooting first then, George? Isn't that just drastically altering the context for the sake of political correctness?

"But you try to make it in full living colour and try to compare it to a Jim Carrey movie, then it's hard for young people to understand."

So, altering your own 20 year old movies to bring them up to date visually with your current ones, does that make it hard for young people to understand? "So, how come the ships look cool and modern, but the haircuts still look like the 1970's, mummy?"

"... it's not fair to the artist" ..."

I'm sure the late Sebastian Shaw would heartily concur, you hypocritical bastard ...

[Just your average movie goer]

Wow! What a post! Thank you, Distant Angel, for this information about the movie going public's number one enemy. The information is very interesting...

Maybe someone ought to testify in congress against what Lucas is doing now...

And if so, they could remind everyone there that Lucas protested against exactly the same type of thing back in the 1980s.

Thank you once again for the brilliant post, Distant Angel. I salute you.