lucas apologists
i told my friend i'd write a post about this. we have all bitched and bitched about how crappy the new star wars movies are. episodes one, two, and three are particularly self-indulgent.. even by lucas' standards. but the revisions of the original movies in all our eyes go too far. other people have talked about this. all the starwars fans can now be classified into two groups: jaded and bitter sentimentalists and lucas apologists. clearly, i am a jaded and bitter sentimentalist.
so i saw the first ones before they were remastered. obviously.. not in the theaters, perhaps not as obviously, but i wasn't born until 1979.. and i was rather offended by aliens in any form (for more on my alien issues, consult me directly, or encourage me to supply an additional post), so i didn't see star wars until i was about 13 (though i did see return of the jedi when i was like 7 or 8). anyway. that was before they remastered them and rereleased them in the late 90's.. so anyway. we dug it. my whole social group.
so the lucas apologists. i've been called all sorts of apologists in my days. china apologist, clinton apologist, even a nixon apologist (i think i like to defend any unpopular thing in this country..), and so forth. never been called a bush apologist. and i should imagine that will not come to pass. so here's this about lucas. there are these people who will defend anything he does, any change he makes to the old star wars movies. so they not only agree with these changes, they actively defend them, they think they're better than the original stories. this i cannot understand. here's my question: are these people just so obsessed with lucas and his exalted ego, that they cannot actually see the betrayal? or are they just waiting blindly for him to feed them more crap that for them to parrot when people talk about star wars ? hmm?? i dont' know.
so i saw the first ones before they were remastered. obviously.. not in the theaters, perhaps not as obviously, but i wasn't born until 1979.. and i was rather offended by aliens in any form (for more on my alien issues, consult me directly, or encourage me to supply an additional post), so i didn't see star wars until i was about 13 (though i did see return of the jedi when i was like 7 or 8). anyway. that was before they remastered them and rereleased them in the late 90's.. so anyway. we dug it. my whole social group.
so the lucas apologists. i've been called all sorts of apologists in my days. china apologist, clinton apologist, even a nixon apologist (i think i like to defend any unpopular thing in this country..), and so forth. never been called a bush apologist. and i should imagine that will not come to pass. so here's this about lucas. there are these people who will defend anything he does, any change he makes to the old star wars movies. so they not only agree with these changes, they actively defend them, they think they're better than the original stories. this i cannot understand. here's my question: are these people just so obsessed with lucas and his exalted ego, that they cannot actually see the betrayal? or are they just waiting blindly for him to feed them more crap that for them to parrot when people talk about star wars ? hmm?? i dont' know.
5 Comments:
Now there's an interesting thought. I think that they're Lucas' films to do with as he pleases; and if he thinks it's improving them, then that's his prerogative to decide. Such is the value of art. Would you blame Raphael if he wanted to retouch some colors in an earlier painting? Would you not allow authors to edit their manuscripts for a second edition printing, if they believed it would help their work to speak to a more current audience? Of course not. Why is film so differently viewed?
Apologistically yours,
Screwtape
You would say that... you surly advocate for the devil. no, i think my point was that 1) the content WAS clearly better before. this is evident in that most of his fans are being alienated by his revisions. and 2) this really doesn't seem to be about art so much as money. if he was a skilled storyteller (i.e. the story was the most important thing) his artistic integrity would lead him to tell the best story he could, not pander to idiots. of course he has the right to pander, that will always be more profitable when you're talking about a massive thing like big budget movies, you have to sucker people into buying tickets. but once they're in the seats, they won't ask for their money back if it stinks.. they should. but they don't. but they sure as hell will tell everyone they know it was a steaming pile. wont' they? now star wars, people will see that regardless of the reviews. like harry potter. not to dis on harry potter.. .. of course. but people will see episode three because they are compelled to. they've invested so much time. and it is almost sure to disappoint them. like two and one did. how many times does it take? somewhere more than three.
of course he as the 'right' to change his art. but for instance, some things should be left as they were for posterity's sake. you should be able to buy the version of the original release of star episodes 4, 5, and 6. but no. that's not in the plan. they are to become very rare and when the vcr goes out, you will not be able to play them. i say ghetto. gah-hetto.
So what you're saying is that the original format of the "Star Wars" films is somehow worth something more in the grand scope of history than anything the re-created version can offer? Mayhaps in some specialized field of cinematic history (special effects evolution?) they may have some value; but in the end -- and I'm going to return to my literature comparison -- is it any different than having difficulty finding an out of print novel from thirty years ago?
Or how about this: What about the many other films that may have value that are languishing in the vaults of the major studios with no chance of being released in any format anytime ever? Shouldn't those who appreciate film be equally if not more riled up about those works' disappearance entirely? Or is it just that they have no nostalgic feelings toward them, having not experienced them in the same way? Isn't their conservation worth fighting for as well?
Socratically yours,
Screwtape
lucas, as with any artist, is free to do whatever the hell he wants to with "his" art.
I think the most insidious thing you can do, being an artist, is to create something that inspired others then change it and call the original piece of work "unworthy". Then sweep all previous versions of your original art under the commercial carpet and expect people to want your new crap and not have a chance to have and to hold what originally inspired them. bleh...
To degrade the original worth of the previously released star wars movies is like telling me that I wasted X years watching total crap. But then to give me complete and utter (even vomit inducing) crap to watch in its place is crazy go nuts!
Don't forget "insurance apologist." This conversation was quite lively. Who was the final anonymous who spoke? Thou shalt name thyself, methinks.
Post a Comment
<< Home