Leave a comment

Comments 25

style92 June 26 2007, 21:37:57 UTC
*Raises hand*

Um, you're FAR from the only one to not like the special editions. ALMOST ALL SW fans hate them. Me, I'm indifferent to the episode 4 and 6 specials, but they really screwed up Empire Strikes Back! breaks my heart. On that one, I stick only to the original. (Actually, the 1997 special of Empire wasn't so bad but the 2004 version really screwed it up!

Reply

mattzimmer June 26 2007, 23:35:23 UTC
In what way? I think the 2004 Return of the Jedi is the worst because they swapped Sabastian Shaw with Hayden Christensen at the end. Drives me nuts.

I haven't gotten to the Special Edition of Empire yet but I'm curious to hear why you think it's bad.

Reply

style92 June 27 2007, 00:51:33 UTC
Two things, really:

-they redubbed Boba Fett, using the actor who played Jango Fett in Attack of the Clones. Logical, and most fans give it a pass cause it's a stronger continuity tie. However, his performance is not nearly as good as the original, so the swapped voice bugs me.

-Added lines to the Darth Vader and Emperor conversation. It makes it sound like Vader didn't know luke was his son until that moment of the movie, which makes all the movie up to that point not make sense. Though, I think most fans are misinterpreting those lines, and Vader knew all along, but it doesn't help that most people think that's what the movie means now.

Reply

style92 June 27 2007, 00:54:38 UTC
As for the Hayden Christainsen swap out- Well, maybe it's just because I wasn't alive in '83, but that one doesn't bother me, and I can defend it as making sense for a certain reason: If you watch all six, from I-VI, it's more satisfying to see the Anakin you know make his come back. Plus, now that the originals are on DVD, it makes the changes acceptable. The Special Editions are the ones designed to groove better with the Prequals.

I know, that same arguement can be used on Empire, but eh. I'm petty.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

mattzimmer June 27 2007, 01:08:49 UTC
Okay, so if I'm NOT the only one who hated the Special Editions why the frak was George Lucas SO reluctant to release the originals on DVD? I waited for them for a long time and I'm glad I didn't have to double-dip to get them.

Reply

style92 June 27 2007, 02:47:23 UTC
Wow, you're out of the Loop. It was really a pissing contest about "Author's Rights." Lucas was insisting that he had the right to revise the films and release the revisions as the definitive versions of those movies. He argued that If he didn't want people to see the original versions anymore, (Which he started referring to as "workprints," a term for early cuts of movies before the edit is finalized,) then he had a right to not release them any more.

The other side, (much like in that South Park episode) argued back that once the films were released, they were a part of history and belonged to everybody, so he had no right to change history. And, it's been said the ONLY reason he put the originals on DVD finally is because he was losing money on the Specials only versions: Someone had made DVDs of the originals based on Laserdisc copies and the bootlegged original versions were the most bootlegged movies of all time for a while. The official release of the the originals was to curb piracy.

Reply

mattzimmer June 27 2007, 11:43:34 UTC
Wow, Lucas is QUITE delusional if he thinks a movie that is SUCH a classic like Star Wars that has been released to the theaters is a workprint. I'm glad he finally released them, but he obviously is quite a stooge for holding off so long.

Reply


90scartoonman June 27 2007, 02:36:20 UTC
The thing about Bender is he's easy to make as the "bad boy" character because he's a robot and doesn't have human morals. He actually NEEDS to drink alcohol and has other vices that aren't out there because he's not human. Bart started out as the star of The Simpsons because he's a trouble maker. Bender was the same way. Fry is a lot easier to relate to, though, because he is a loser and yet he gets a lot of tail (as seen in this set ( ... )

Reply

mattzimmer June 27 2007, 11:52:41 UTC
The difference between Bender and Bart is that the producers of Futurama never STOPPED selling Bender as the break-out character even though Fry and even Dr. Zoidberg were funnier and cooler. Bart was only focused so heavily on in the early first seasons because he WAS the break-out character in The Tracey Ullman Show shorts. It wasn't until they started doing half hour episodes that Homer was given a personality other than a grumpy authoritarian.

PYHoMS: The part where Fry thinks they are being too serious always bothered me. I know Fry is supposed to be a typical guy but it was SO mean and stupid.

Mother's Day: Yes. Yes, it does.

:P

Reply

90scartoonman June 28 2007, 03:30:42 UTC
Yeah, Futurama didn't stop selling Bender, but maybe if it went on for even half as long as The Simpsons has, it would've adjusted accordingly. I think I'm giving Fry a pass because Amy is ditzy and stupid as well, and she seemed to rebound pretty quickly.

Reply

mattzimmer June 28 2007, 11:19:53 UTC
I don't know about Bender. In interviews the producers seemed AWFULLY proud of him. I'd liked to have THINKED that would have happened but I'm just not sure.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up