PDA

View Full Version : THX-1138 "Special Edition" coming. What the...?!?



plasticfetish
03-20-2004, 02:11 AM
OK. I read about it, and now I've read about it some more. At first I didn't really believe it, but now it seems to be a fact. They're going to put out a "Special Edition" version of THX-1138 with some digital enhancements, additions and alterations.

WTF?!?

I remember making a joke about this a while back, (when the debate about the OTSE was getting hot and heavy.) I remember flippantly saying that Lucas would probably CG hair on all of their heads or something.

No doubt not many people, in general, are big fans of this 1971 film. I'm sure there's going to be a lot of comments about how cheesy it looked and how a remake sounds like a fine idea. A lot of people looking at it from a strictly current perspective and thinking about it only in relation to today's films. When I watch it -- and I'll admit, I first saw it in the mid-eighties and even then it looked dated -- I try to look at it from the perspective of a film viewer in '71, as well as someone today. I try to appreciate the film in relation to what I know about how, when and where it was made. I really love looking at it and seeing so many elements that Lucas snatched from other Sci-Fi films, as well as recognizing those story and visual ideas that he later used time and time again. To me it's like seeing an artists sketchbook from before they painted a series of brilliant paintings.

No doubt, there's gonna be a few (OK, maybe lots of) people that simply say, "So what? That film sucks. Who cares if he messes with it?"

Well, I suppose I care. I suppose I'm just not sure why he would bother to fiddle with this film and then put it out on DVD. To me it's looking like either greed, vanity or simple stupidity is serving as motivation here. I'm a little disappointed.

I dunno... I don't get it. Anyone else have any thoughts?

stillakid
03-20-2004, 08:19 AM
Yeah, I'm with you. It's been awhile since I've seen it, but I can't imagine what "enhancements" he might make. It's not like any of the FX stood out. Not even sure there were any beyond practical mechanical stuff or a small bit of pyro. Weird.

Beast
03-20-2004, 02:45 PM
I don't think it's going to be too bad. I think he just wants to tweak a few minor things that bugged him. And I'm always accepting of an artist that feels his work needs a few more brush strokes to make it more in line with what he originally saw in his mind when he made it. :)

Here's a bit of info from industry sources that's likely to get the undies of some fans all in a bunch. Word is that George Lucas' THX-1138, which is currently being prepared for DVD release later in 2004 by Lucasfilm and Warner Bros, is going to feature more than 100 new visual effects shots. Look for digitally-enhanced skylines and other additions and alterations.
MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

plasticfetish
03-20-2004, 03:04 PM
Why doesn't he remake Electronic Labyrinth and then turn it in for a new grade at USC?

I dunno, there really is a limit to how long an artist has before it's no longer acceptable to go back and fiddle with their work. In this case, it seems like grave robbing to me... this sucker's long over. I could see a complete modern remake as being acceptable, but not this.

Gee... why not leave it as it is, and then in the future, let some new director take a shot at a remake. In the mean time, go make a NEW film.

stillakid
03-20-2004, 07:35 PM
Why doesn't he remake Electronic Labyrinth and then turn it in for a new grade at USC?

I dunno, there really is a limit to how long an artist has before it's no longer acceptable to go back and fiddle with their work. In this case, it seems like grave robbing to me... this sucker's long over. I could see a complete modern remake as being acceptable, but not this.

Gee... why not leave it as it is, and then in the future, let some new director take a shot at a remake. In the mean time, go make a NEW film.


That would mean he'd have to hire somebody to write it. :eek: Or, god forbid, he'd have to write it himself, and we can see how great those results have been. :rolleyes: I've said it before and I'll say it again. Ironically as one of the only truly wealthy indie filmmakers alive, he is forsaking his freedom in favor of typical studio mentality that is grounded in fear. This THX re-deux is further proof that he, like the studios, have no faith in new material and would rather rehash the tried and true.

B'Omarr Monkey
03-20-2004, 07:48 PM
This going back in and tweaking stuff long after the fact is really inane. The piece should stand on its own and if it's not up to par with the artist's more recent work, that is how it should be. An artist should be growing and moving forward. All this, if only I had the technology then that I have at my fingertips now, correcting is unneccesary. If Roger Corman were so inclined, should he go in and replace all the low budget Paul Blaisdell monsters from movies like "It Conquered the World," and "The She-Creature?" Should Ray Harryhausen revisit "Jason and the Argonauts" because he wished he could include more skeletons, and now with CGI he can?

What Lucas is doing is the equivalent of a novelist going back to something they wrote 40 years ago and rewriting the book, inserting new characters and settings, tweaking dialogue, all because they are a better writer now than they were when they were 20. What they really should be doing is writing a new novel.

George should spend more time on his scripts and preproduction work so that he's able to get the movie right the first time. Does he tell his actors, "Don't worry too much about this scene, because in 20 years I can go back in and fix it digitally."

He's worn the same shirt, beard and haircut for almost 40 years now without feeling aneed to alter his look, why can't he leave his movies alone?

plasticfetish
03-20-2004, 08:29 PM
Should Ray Harryhausen revisit "Jason and the Argonauts" because he wished he could include more skeletons, and now with CGI he can?
Yeah, it really is like that. And you have to ask, was it the original style and effects that made it so charming in the first place? By "upgrading" the film, do you end up simply whitewashing it and covering up the characteristics that made it special? It makes me think of when you hear those antique appraisers on TV say that an old piece of furniture is worth a lot less, if it's been re-varnished or had the hinges and handles replaced.

Ironically as one of the only truly wealthy indie filmmakers alive, he is forsaking his freedom in favor of typical studio mentality that is grounded in fear. This THX re-deux is further proof that he, like the studios, have no faith in new material and would rather rehash the tried and true.
Yeah, I'd have to say I agree with you.
And even more so I think that in the long run, having created this sheltered environment up there in the northern Marin hills, that he's really gone too far in that direction. I mean, I used to live there... I used to live in a town called Lagunitas a few miles from the ranch... it's very isolated. This whole ivory tower thing seems to have petrified his imagination. At the very least, I think that we should be seeing a larger variety of projects than we do. I don't hate what we've been offered (like some people ;) ) but I'd like to imagine that the LFL machine could and should be able to churn out a great deal more.

JediTricks
03-21-2004, 05:22 PM
And you have to ask, was it the original style and effects that made it so charming in the first place? By "upgrading" the film, do you end up simply whitewashing it and covering up the characteristics that made it special? It makes me think of when you hear those antique appraisers on TV say that an old piece of furniture is worth a lot less, if it's been re-varnished or had the hinges and handles replaced.Dude, that is my pick for quote of the day! You just took the entire argument against "Special Editioning" (especially SW for me) and summed it up with a good point and a great metaphor.


As for THX-1138 itself, Lucas shouldn't even bother monkeying with it, if he has ideas for the concept, he should pull a "Rollerball" and put out a revisioned new version (and like Rollerball's remake, it'll probably suck hard and bomb at the box office).

plasticfetish
03-21-2004, 05:38 PM
Geez. Rollerball.
I love that movie. I never saw the remake... I can't even think about it.

That's really why I think if you're gonna go back and remake something, it should really be for a good reason. It should be for d*** sure, done really well also. I keep thinking about Planet of the Apes and how I love Tim Burton, but that thing tanked because it was pointless. The entire reason that the original became anything, was because it delivered a moral message in a unique way. I dunno what Burton was trying to deliver with his film.

If Lucas wanted to revisit the THX idea, it'd have to be for a solid reason and he'd have to NOT wimp-out on the message behind the story. But... I dunno... his messages have been kind of wimpy lately.

B'Omarr Monkey
03-21-2004, 10:06 PM
That's really why I think if you're gonna go back and remake something, it should really be for a good reason.

I think the only reasons should be that the original had a good idea but was poorly executed or that due to the original's budget, or available technology, could be improved by making it now. Remaking a movie that was already good seems pointless to me.

I enjoyed the Dawn of the Dead remake which really was more of a "re-envisioning" than a remake vs what "Planet of the Apes" was, and I'll go see Peter Jackson's King King even though the original is perfect and the FX still hold up today, but the whole remake thing has gotten out of hand. They're remaking "The Fly" again!



There's plenty of crappy film noir thrillers and clunky Sci Fi and Horror films from the 50s that were made for no mone--and looked it, but had great ideas in them. Remake those.

It's also sad that the films being remade are more and more recent. I guess it's true that people now really won't watch anything that's more than a few years old. The Best Buy where I live reflects that. If the DVD has been out for more than 2 months (unless it's something like SW or American Pie) its not kept in the store, which aggravates me to no end whenever I go there to buy something.

Peter Jackson's reasoning for remaking King Kong is along the same rationale for why they did a shot for shot remake of Psycho, only in color. He feels that the original is a great movie, but that kids won't watch it because it's in black and white, so he's trying to recreate that same excitement in color. If kids won't watch something because it's in black and white, they probably don't deserve it.

plasticfetish
03-21-2004, 10:36 PM
If kids won't watch something because it's in black and white, they probably don't deserve it.
Yeah, for the most part I agree. I've sat through the original Kong with my kid, and it's still a strong enough story and movie to keep him interested... so I agree, the "movies too old" argument is a lame one.

Though at first I was a bit leery of the King Kong thing and how Jackson would handle it, I'm really looking forward to it now. I kind of hope, and think from what I've heard him say, that he's mainly interested in making a good adventure movie. If he can do it well, then I'll watch it and enjoy it. To a certain degree, I enjoy the '70s Kong... mostly because of Jessica Lange (mmm)... but also because it's -- Kong. Very much in the same spirit as the original, and pretty much the last of the big absurd Hollywood "blockbuster" movies.

I can see Peter Jackson coming at this and thinking how he's the man to take the Kong name and make a go of it. Given that New Zealand, and not Hollywood, seems to be the place where today's blockbusters are coming from... I almost think he can.

2-1B
03-22-2004, 12:58 AM
So what? That film sucks. Who cares if he messes with it?

stillakid
03-22-2004, 08:37 AM
So what? That film sucks. Who cares if he messes with it?


Will the same apply to TPM in a few years? :D

stillakid
03-22-2004, 08:52 AM
Given that New Zealand, and not Hollywood, seems to be the place where today's blockbusters are coming from... I almost think he can.


It's got nothing to do with Peter. http://www.ftac.org

Not to digress, but when handed a fully written story, eleventy-billion dollars, and a built-in fanatical fan base, it becomes nearly impossible to screw up.

Not too many features are made in "Hollywood" anymore, purely for financial reasons. Cold Mountain, for instance, could easily have been made in the States, but they chose to underpay hungry foreign workers instead. Same for RUDY and MIRACLE and countless other films.

Blockbusters can still come from "Hollywood," but greedy studios (who put out hypocrytical films like JOHN Q., the story of a man in the US driven to hold a hospital hostage because his job was exported overseas....shot in Canada...oh the irony) would rather pay A-actors higher and higher upfront fees in exchange for selling out the people who helped get them to that point in the first place.

Believe me, if New Zealand suddenly became "expensive," King Kong would move to the next "cheap" place on the globe. Vancouver, Prague, Australia, and New Zealand are the hot spots of the moment. Once their workers get tired of being taken advantage of, "Hollywood" will find somebody else to exploit.

This is like that "Seattle" sound thing the music industry went through a few years ago. "Grunge" was the thing and supposedly it only was possible to hear from groups originating from the Northwest. It's just a place and they were just people. Just like movies, the content is the thing that matters, and except for a few exceptions, location doesn't matter.

Mr. JabbaJohnL
03-22-2004, 11:26 AM
I've never seen THX-1138, but if he wants to change his old stuff a little bit, then it's his own deal. Kind of like how Disney apparently changes some things for their DVD releases to fine-tune the animation (which I think looks better the first way anyway, but oh well). I think it's weird how he's choosing to do this now, while he could be doing, I don't know, some post-production on some new movie he's putting out next year. Or change the godawful CGI on some of his movies that are more important to everyone than his first film. If it seems really dated, either re-make it or just forget about it and move on. But don't waste time on fixing it while other, better movies need fixing before their DVD release.

2-1B
03-22-2004, 11:40 AM
Will the same apply to TPM in a few years? :D

For the record, I was referring to King Kong. :crazed:

plasticfetish
03-22-2004, 06:01 PM
So what? That film sucks. Who cares if he messes with it?
Hahaha!

For the record, I was referring to King Kong.
Hahaha!

Not to digress, but when handed a fully written story, eleventy-billion dollars, and a built-in fanatical fan base, it becomes nearly impossible to screw up.
Which explains your love of the Star Wars prequels?

:sur:

I always assumed it was more of a "the bigger they are, the harder they fall" kind of thing. No guarantee that Jackson's Kong won't suck, it's just that I think he's got a good attitude going into it.

And, though I don't disagree that Blockbusters can still come from Hollywood. There's a part of me that knows it just isn't going to go back to the way it was 20+ years ago. This town has changed too much, has lost a lot of it's spirit and besides that, it's next to impossible to get a lot of things done here anymore. Too crowded, too expensive, etc. Remember why film makers came to Southern California in the first place, it's the same reason why they're going to other places now.

But we do digress...

I've never seen THX-1138
Go rent it. You should at least have seen it once.

JediTricks
03-22-2004, 10:28 PM
Not that I mean to get into this any deeper, but Stilla said a "fully written story", and Lucas could have all the money in the world but he never had one of those.


Also, I've been noticing a large ramp-up in local Hollywood-area location shoots the past few months, maybe one of the problems with making movies in this town was that Hollywood was all chewed up by the pointless subway construction.

stillakid
03-22-2004, 10:35 PM
Not that I mean to get into this any deeper, but Stilla said a "fully written story", and Lucas could have all the money in the world but he never had one of those.


Also, I've been noticing a large ramp-up in local Hollywood-area location shoots the past few months, maybe one of the problems with making movies in this town was that Hollywood was all chewed up by the pointless subway construction.

Yeah, exactly, yes. I knew that I should have put that in bold. :D

We have had a bit more lately, but the numbers are still down. Our biggest loss has been in the mid-level budgets, primarily the Movies of the Week. Vancouver took most of those. Crossing a border saves a production 40% or more so unless there is an actor asking for the show to stay in the states or there is some other very compelling reason to shoot here, the project travels. Period. Lucas decided a long time ago to turn his back on American crews. If nothing else, he's a trendsetter. ;)

plasticfetish
03-23-2004, 02:37 AM
Not that I mean to get into this any deeper, but Stilla said a "fully written story", and Lucas could have all the money in the world but he never had one of those.
Oh c'mon... the script had a cover and a blank page at the end for actor's notes.
That means it's done being written. :ermm:

Yeah, exactly, yes. I knew that I should have put that in bold.
I know, I know. It was a cheap shot, but I just couldn't resist. :)

stillakid
06-11-2004, 12:59 AM
http://www.thx1138movie.com

I can't not see this on a big screen, can I?

plasticfetish
06-11-2004, 03:15 AM
No. You're gonna need to see it. Not like we'll ever get a second chance I suppose.

I'm wondering just how many screens they're going to put this thing on. (At least it'll be somewhere here in LA.)

Exhaust Port
06-11-2004, 07:04 AM
Not too many features are made in "Hollywood" anymore, purely for financial reasons. Cold Mountain, for instance, could easily have been made in the States, but they chose to underpay hungry foreign workers instead. Same for RUDY and MIRACLE and countless other films.

Blockbusters can still come from "Hollywood," but greedy studios (who put out hypocrytical films like JOHN Q., the story of a man in the US driven to hold a hospital hostage because his job was exported overseas....shot in Canada...oh the irony) would rather pay A-actors higher and higher upfront fees in exchange for selling out the people who helped get them to that point in the first place.

Believe me, if New Zealand suddenly became "expensive," King Kong would move to the next "cheap" place on the globe. Vancouver, Prague, Australia, and New Zealand are the hot spots of the moment. Once their workers get tired of being taken advantage of, "Hollywood" will find somebody else to exploit.
This is one of the biggest issues over the last decade that no one seems to either know about or care about. I'm shocked at the carefree attitude producers, directors and actors have about this course of action. I think it's going to take the actors and actresses to stand up and say they won't work on Project X unless it's shot in the US with US workers. Studios are willing to pay their "talent" millions of dollars just to show up but balk at the idea of paying the techical people $5/hr more than they end up getting in Canada or NZ.

stillakid
06-11-2004, 07:47 AM
This is one of the biggest issues over the last decade that no one seems to either know about or care about. I'm shocked at the carefree attitude producers, directors and actors have about this course of action. I think it's going to take the actors and actresses to stand up and say they won't work on Project X unless it's shot in the US with US workers. Studios are willing to pay their "talent" millions of dollars just to show up but balk at the idea of paying the techical people $5/hr more than they end up getting in Canada or NZ.

We got XFiles back because of that. T3 also shot here primarily because Arnold wouldn't leave LA. It happens sometimes, but only with A level stars who can throw their weight around. For the majority of projects (like Movies of the Week and such), the talent is B level or less so they have no say in it.

I think that every film should be advertised with a stamp saying where it was shot. Then, just like any other merchandise like cars or clothes, people could vote for that Made in America stamp if they so choose. As it stands now, nobody knows until the credits roll and even then, how many people stay til the end anyway? :ermm:

plasticfetish
06-11-2004, 03:11 PM
I think that every film should be advertised with a stamp saying where it was shot.
That's funny... you'll see "filmed in Hollwood" when you watch old, '50s or '60s TV shows.

stillakid
06-12-2004, 12:37 AM
That's funny... you'll see "filmed in Hollwood" when you watch old, '50s or '60s TV shows.

Well, because, as you know, they were actually filmed in Hollywood (or Burbank, or Century City as the case may be). Not to say that filmmaking can't be global if the locations deem it necessary, but the trend for the past 8 years or so has been to cut the bottom line on initial outlay of costs by taking projects over the borders (essentially just paying foreign workers less than they're worth) while the executives reap bigger and bigger rewards.

What's this got to do with THX? Not much ;) except that they were trapped in a society led by an elite who held absolute power over them. We're headed in that direction only this time it is "corporate" ideology which is taking hold and, in a sense, controlling us via the economy.

Exhaust Port
06-12-2004, 05:22 PM
I think that every film should be advertised with a stamp saying where it was shot. Then, just like any other merchandise like cars or clothes, people could vote for that Made in America stamp if they so choose. As it stands now, nobody knows until the credits roll and even then, how many people stay til the end anyway? :ermm:
That would be great! It would be great to see a few stars actually realize the importance of such a statement and make sure to include it in the advertisement. I wonder if studios would ever allow it though knowing that it would only draw attention to the other 75% of their movies that aren't made in the US. (that percentage is made up)

It's one thing to take work out of the country for location reasons, like going to France to film a WW2 movie, but there's no reason when it can be done anywhere. I know the AFL/CIO puts labels of support on certain events or products, it would be nice to see the Screen Actors Guild or other industry unions do the same.

Mandalorian Candidat
08-31-2004, 12:14 PM
Now that the limited re-release of this movie is less than two weeks away, has anybody heard about where it will be shown?

Beast
08-31-2004, 12:31 PM
By the way, here's some picture comparisons that show the changes. It seems that Lucas had the right idea here. Keeping the Claustrophobia world, but also showing it in a bit more scope. Especially adding more cars and workers to the film. :)

http://www.davisdvd.com/bin/extras3.html

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

plasticfetish
08-31-2004, 10:00 PM
Now that the limited re-release of this movie is less than two weeks away, has anybody heard about where it will be shown?Here's a list that I just pulled from somewhere...

Cinerama, Seattle WA
Lloyd Center, Portland OR
Metreon, San Francisco CA -- Digital
Shattuck Cinemas, Berkley CA
ArcLight, Los Angeles CA -- Digital
Irvine Spectrum, Irvine CA -- Digital
Mira Mesa, San Diego CA -- Digital
Pavillion, Denver CO -- Digital
Arbor Cinema, Austin TX
Magnolia, Dallas/Plano TX -- Digital
Soutwind, Lawrence KS
Eden Prairie, Minneapolis MN -- Digital
Westgate, Madison WI
River East, Chicago IL -- Digital
State, Ann Arbor MI
Beachwood 11, Athens GA
AMC Lennox, Columbus OH
Ritz Five, Philadelphia PA
Empire, New York NY -- Digital
Boston Commons, Boston MA -- Digital
AFI, Silver Spring MD -- Digital

(You may want to check with a specific theater to make sure.) I'm gonna try to see it at the ArcLight in Hollywood. :)


It seems that Lucas had the right idea here. Keeping the Claustrophobia world, but also showing it in a bit more scope.Yeah... I think I may end up eating some of my words over this one. All of the additions and changes that I've seen, have looked really good and seem really appropriate. I'll wait to make up my mind until after I see it on the big screen though, but I'm kind of excited about the whole thing. Excited about seeing a "digital" version of the film(?) also.

I'm still not entirely sold on Lucas' motives for re-doing the film, but hey, who knows? If the thing ends up being great -- I'm fully willing to say it's great.

stillakid
09-02-2004, 11:12 AM
Looks like the Arclight for me. :D

The cosmetic changes look great. Hopefully the car chase at the end remains close to the same. Some of those original shots were nice as they were. We'll see.

plasticfetish
09-05-2004, 08:09 PM
Arrrrg!!!

So... this film is being shown at, what, 21 theaters? Both of the two choices that we have here in southern California are run by complete idiots!

I check the ArcLight's frigging Web site, and they've finally posted a show time. It's 12:05 AM Friday, which really means midnight -- THURSDAY. I call them and they start to explain to me how yeah, 12:05 is actually Friday, but yeah, it's also Midnight Thursday, hahahahaha, etc. etc.

I'm telling the poor girl that they're idiots for not simply listing the stupid film as midnight Thursday, because most people are gonna show up the next night -- the 10th, like it says on the STAR WARS and THX-1138 Web sites, looking to see the film.

She's all -- "uh, well, you know our calendar says..." and I'm saying, "Yeah, I learned how to use a calendar in the first grade, don't even start."

So, no ArcLight for me, because I've gotta a frigging baby-sitter lined up for Friday night. (Idiots.)

What next? I call the Edwards in Irvine that's showing it also. I say to the LOUD man that answers the phone using the same voice that he uses to record those movie times messages, "Hey, you're showing THX-1138..."

"YES WE ARE! BUT I CAN'T TELL YOU ANYTHING ABOUT IT."

I continue cautiously, "Uh... what I was going to say was, do you know if you're showing it Thursday night or Friday night?"

"I REALLY CAN'T TELL YOU. WE DON'T KNOW BEYOND THE 9TH JUST WHAT WE'RE SHOWING, AND WHAT THE TIMES WILL BE"

So, now I say... "Are you serious? You really have no idea what..."

"THAT'S RIGHT! WE DON'T KNOW!"

"Well. That's super -- thanks a bunch."

Total BS. I managed a movie theater, and I knew what days we were showing films months in advance. (Idiots.)

So, I really hope this THX-1138 thing works out for someone, because I figure I'm gonna end up missing it, because the whole things so poorly organized -- and at this point, I want to kill myself whenever I go to the THX-1138 Web site, and watch as the Flash takes over my computer and it's all a big puzzle and I don't feel like spending an hour fumbling around just to learn something. (Why isn't there a smiley for "grits teeth" available?)

<< Insert F-bomb here >>

OK. I'm done. Thanks! :)

stillakid
09-06-2004, 01:01 AM
Sooooooo, how long is this running in theaters? I plan on going the opening weekend (hopefully) and will make it a priority if it only runs a week.

plasticfetish
09-06-2004, 01:16 AM
If I go by what I see at the ArcLight Web site, then I'd say one night, one showing. The dip at the Irvine theater said that it was going to run like a normal movie -- which I think meant that it'd be there for a while. But again... "YES WE ARE! BUT I CAN'T TELL YOU ANYTHING ABOUT IT."

So... :confused:

I'll try the Irvine guy on Tuesday. See if his frigging evil masters have given him any more info.

plasticfetish
09-26-2004, 06:03 AM
So... I bought the DVD and I've watched the film twice now. As much as I can honestly say that I don't (generally speaking) like the idea of making drastic changes to a film some 30+ years after it was first released -- I'm really pretty impressed with the quality of this new/old film.

I'll need to look through it a few more times to say for certain, but on the whole, there's nothing that's been done to this film that bothers me. The changes, though sometimes far too obviously 2004 rather than 1970, are all very interesting and do everything to support the story in only the most appropriate ways.

There's one addition to the car chase that looks a bit too "digital." The animated part where THX's car drives through and dodges around other cars inside the "city" area was just a bit fake looking. It doesn't edit seamlessly with the live action stuff that comes right after it -- and the more you watch, the more obvious the digital stuff is throughout the film. There's something subtle about the difference in textures between the new and old stuff that sticks out. I don't think that the digital "enhancements" or additions can ever blend perfectly, yet, I'm not sure that it matters here.

If I'm to look at this not so much as an old film redone, but rather as if it were an all new movie... then I think it great. The story and the style is something that I really like. The new stuff is really nice, and it mixes in giving the film a new kind of rhythm -- shifting subtly between very analog 1970 tones that are punctuated by very sharp 2004 digital details.

So, I think it's a good thing. I'm not about to change my basic opinion that it's wrong to completely wipe out history and do away with the original theatrical release of this film (it'd be nice if we had it available) but everything said and done, I think George Lucas could do far worse (subtle jab done not too subtly) than what he's done to this significant piece of cinematic history.

I'm watching the extras right now and they're very interesting. The most significant thing that I've heard Lucas say, is the very last thing that he says at the end of the commentary, "...but these more, sort of, slightly offbeat movies are really where my cinematic heart is."

I guess it'll be interesting to see if Lucas' heart is in Return of the Sith when it comes out next year.

Hmm, now to buy that Star Wars DVD set.

Mandalorian Candidat
09-27-2004, 01:02 PM
I'm watching the extras right now and they're very interesting. The most significant thing that I've heard Lucas say, is the very last thing that he says at the end of the commentary, "...but these more, sort of, slightly offbeat movies are really where my cinematic heart is."

Let's get GLu together with David Lynch and they can make a movie with dancing Ewoks who talk backwards. :D

So, was the DVD set worth getting at the ~$20 price tag? I'd get it...maybe...if it were cheaper.

plasticfetish
09-28-2004, 12:36 AM
Hmm, dancing Ewoks... and they could be trying to rescue the Eraserhead baby from the Elephant Man. :crazed:

I suppose the worth depends on how much you like this movie. To me it was $20 worth -- and the extras, including the American Zoetrope docu-thingy, are pretty cool.