Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Star Wars Prequels Media Movies Entertainment

Lucas Promises Star Wars on Blu-Ray in 2011 420

Several readers have written with word that George Lucas has announced a 2011 release date for the Star Wars series — all six films — on Blu-Ray. Engadget (linked) has an explanation of what to expect, and includes a video of a deleted scene that the Blu-Ray version will include. They warn that this might be a disappointment to anyone who (correctly) believes that Han shot first.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lucas Promises Star Wars on Blu-Ray in 2011

Comments Filter:
  • Memories (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:33PM (#33253562)

    See your childhood memories die in brilliant digital picture!

    • ...to not buy that, either.

    • In other news... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by denzacar ( 181829 )

      Lucas will not show common courtesy this time either. [youtube.com]

  • Six films? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dangitman ( 862676 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:34PM (#33253578)

    That's impossible - only three Star Wars films were ever made.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:38PM (#33253596)

      These aren't the prequels you're looking for...

      • Re:Six films? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Abstrackt ( 609015 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @08:37PM (#33253914)

        These aren't the prequels you're looking for...

        No, no they weren't.

    • by TinBromide ( 921574 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:41PM (#33253612)
      Maybe there were three direct to video releases of the quality seen in the star wars holiday special.
    • Finally, someone got modded up for a truly insightful comment! lol (:

    • by Diamon ( 13013 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:52PM (#33253682)

      ANH, TESB, ROTJ, Ewoks: The Battle for Endor, The Ewok Adventure & The Star Wars Holiday Special.

    • What about the fourth fan made episode? The Phantom something or other [wikipedia.org], I forget? It was a pretty good amateur effort.
    • I think you're forgetting about the Star Wars Holiday Special, Caravan of Courage: An Ewok Adventure and Ewoks: The Battle for Endor.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      That's impossible - only three Star Wars films were ever made.

      A highly relevant clip [youtube.com] from Spaced.
    • by interkin3tic ( 1469267 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @09:03PM (#33254068)

      There were the three movies, then a short special involving yoda flying around (bit of a long lead-up) called episode 2, and then a long, semi-funny gag reel (for instance, Darth crying when he finds out he's darth vader) called episode 3. I also vaguely recall a long, crappy commercial for the original series called episode 1.

    • StarWars and the Empire Strikes Back of course.
  • by freeballer ( 1160851 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:38PM (#33253598)

    George. Get the hint. Even if you aren't happy with your creation years ago - WE ARE
    I will not buy anything without original footage, with solo shooting.
    I'll keep my "original" trilogy dvd set until format is dead or he gets some balls
    and give us what we all want - Choice of either or, or both

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:41PM (#33253616)

    I bought an 'extra scenes' edition of the Original Three, which was gathering dust in my closet. A girl I rented out to said that she really wanted to watch Star Wars because, you know, "it's boy territory but she really wanted to see what it was all about". So I popped in film 1.

    It turns out that the 'extra scenes' all came at the start of the movie - when R2D2 and C3P0 have just landed and are wandering around in the desert.

    And they wander and wander and wander and wander.

    Eternity is two robots and sand.

    There is nothing but sand.

    And robots.

    For about half an hour.

    She fell asleep and didn't want to see the rest. Epic fail.

  • What a surprise, Lucas decides to re-release the star wars films yet again just to milk the franchise for even more profit, one last time...yeah right. If he must do this then perhaps he would be kind enough to edit Jar Jar out this time? Or maybe a young Han Solo could show up and "shoot him first"?
  • by jjohnson ( 62583 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:42PM (#33253628) Homepage

    Seriously, how many different versions will the fanbois pay money for? No matter how you feel about Greedo shooting first, doesn't owning four different box sets already make dumping $150 on another seem as silly as rebuilding your basement into the Emperor's Throne Room?

  • by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) <skennedy@tpno-co.oLISPrg minus language> on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:44PM (#33253638) Homepage

    I mean, a couple years ago? Maybe. Now? No. So what's changed? Well, I've gotten older, there are better movies out there that I'd spend my money on, and frankly, I'm tired of producers yanking our chains with new versions every couple years.

    So no. I will not be buying this, as I suspect will be the general refrain from his target base.

  • Boooo (Score:5, Insightful)

    by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:47PM (#33253654) Homepage Journal

    As I commented on Engadget:

    Originals == Buy.
    Special Edition == 1080p MKV DTS torrent.

    That and the decent Laserdisc rips of the originals will have to do, I guess.
  • by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:50PM (#33253672) Homepage

    Call me crazy, but is Star Wars even culturally relevant anymore? It feels like Disco at this point.

    • by Low Ranked Craig ( 1327799 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:59PM (#33253706)
      OK, you're crazy.
    • by kg8484 ( 1755554 )

      The opening crawl begins with "A long time ago," so the more the movie ages the more authentic it gets. Furthermore, Lucus made a good business decision targeting the new movies to children. Adults have already seen the original 3 movies and probably already own them on whatever medium and most will not upgrade. However, by getting a new generation of consumers, he extends the amount of time people watch the movies. Maybe in 10 or 20 years he'll make the last 3 to get another generation interested. Even by

      • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 14, 2010 @08:28PM (#33253862)

        Honestly the first 3 were just as targeted. We look at them thru rose colored glasses at this point. Dont watch them for e few years come back and watch them anew. You will see the first one is rather dull and boring with a whiney guy. The second one is a bit better written with some motivation thrown in for the chars this time. The third was a giant effects fest. Sound familiar?

        The problem the newer 3 have is pacing. Trim out about 30 mins out of each movie and they would be much better. Lucas is an old school 70s director. Pacing is slow and deliberate. Not what is currently in fashion of moving the the plot along at a fairly good clip. Probably the biggest eye opener of this effect is watching the extras on Ace Ventura. The director said 'I could loose a half hour of this movie and still tell the same story but jim was just too funny not to show all of this'. Many movies get all caught up on themselves and keep telling the same point over and over. A 30 min pod race in the middle of the movie did NOTHING to advance the plot. Next time you watch it, skip it. You will find the movie is much better. The second one was such a snooze fest I do not know if it could be edited to make it better. The only thing it did was make the motivations in the 3rd one better. That one probably wouldnt need much lost out of it.

        But overall they are targeted to 8-15 year olds. Just like the previous set. It was truly a rinse and repeat.

        Probably the worst thing that ever happened to Lucas was that he got rich. Which removed some of his real creativity. What would we have seen from him if he had actually had to work at his craft. For example I would say his equal of Steven Spielberg really worked at what he had to do. He kept up the relentless pace of making whatever he did better than what he worked on before. Lucas got lazy and fell back onto merchandising (hence the basic re-re-release of star wars on blu ray which is the same as the dvd set).

        But considering what will come out on bluray is almost exactly the same as what is currently on DVD. Hmm, guess I will wait some more (and trust me I am not shy about buying dvds or bluray). I do however tend not to rebuy things. At this point I am only slightly mildly interested in re-buying this. I already own the thing 3 times over. I would only be interested in the originals in decent enough quality to merit bluray or dvd. This is your basic shovel of what they already have. They scanned it high quality ages ago. Now it is just a bluray reencode and small menu tweak. Yawnski

        • Honestly the first 3 were just as targeted. We look at them thru rose colored glasses at this point. Dont watch them for e few years come back and watch them anew.

          Been there, done that. And I don't buy it. I enjoy those first three movies still today. Part of it is, admitedly, nostalgia. But I do like the movies themselves.

          I've gone back to watch old TV shows I liked as a kid for nostalgia's sake as well. The A-Team. Hogan's Heroes. Buck Rogers. I cringe a bit when I watch them. Now I understand why my father would roll his eyes when I eagerly popped down in the beanbag to watch a show. I still get why I liked them back when I was a kid. But I suppose my e

    • by bigstrat2003 ( 1058574 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @08:08PM (#33253758)
      Depends on one's definition of "culturally relevant". They're good movies, but will never be viewed in the same category as something like Casablanca. Then again, there are a hell of a lot of people today who haven't seen that movie and have no interest in doing so, so there's a legitimate argument that even the movies which are considered classics are not culturally relevant any more.
      • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 14, 2010 @09:45PM (#33254250)

        They're good movies,

        Not really, no.

        I hardly need to argue that point for the newer three.

        As for the original three, they are bad movies made just about bearable by (a) Harrison Ford and/or (b) being 15 or under.

        Outside of nerd circles this is obvious. Inside nerd circles this is obscured by (somewhat ironically) the very same mindset that the very same nerds loudly decry in the smuggest possible terms whenever they observe it in anybody else: such as fans of sports teams, Bieber, American Idol, or whatever else. Namely, it's something people have in common. Drivel, but because it's shared drivel, it provides a platform for conversation, in-jokes, feelings of group identification and so on.

        The actual quality of what is in common is irrelevant, only that it is in common. But once something becomes key to a tribal identity, it's impossible to get people to analyse it objectively, and because nobody likes to admit they base their tribal identification upon childish drivel, they will come up all sorts of long-winded justifications for why it is not.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 14, 2010 @10:41PM (#33254452)

          Sup, Trekkie.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by wardred ( 602136 )
          Star Wars set the bar for Sci-Fi movies, action, and special effects movies for 20 years at least, in story, acting, and special effects. It can be argued if that was the bar we should've measured things against, as opposed to more cerebral efforts - ala 2001, but it was the bar. To some, it still is, and that's not just your nerdy geeky set either.

          The story of the first three was good. Nothing bookwormisghly great, but certainly not bad, and better than just about any sci-fi movie of its time. Some of
    • Given an entire generation (the boomers) was wowed by it, and then their kids exposed to it, thus comprising many *many* millions of people, I think its safe to say the answer is 'yes'.

    • by farnsworth ( 558449 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @08:15PM (#33253788)

      Call me crazy, but is Star Wars even culturally relevant anymore? It feels like Disco at this point.

      It is very much so, at least around here. Talk to virtually any 5-10 year old boy, and he will be very familiar with Star Wars. My own children went though a period of being fans, so I witnessed first-hand that it is still very appealing to young minds. It is such an elementary human story, put on in a very engaging production. I suspect that it will culturally relevant for generations.

    • by mhelander ( 1307061 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @08:49PM (#33253978)

      Right, but what answer do you expect to the question "is Disco really culturally relevant anymore" from alt.fan.disco? That is, you're not crazy for asking, it's asking that question _here_ that makes you crazy.

    • by Brian_Ellenberger ( 308720 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @09:39PM (#33254230)

      Call me crazy, but is Star Wars even culturally relevant anymore? It feels like Disco at this point.

      Ask your average boy who is 4-8 years old how relevant Star Wars is. I teach pre-K Sunday School, and I can tell you that Star Wars is extremely popular, especially the prequel/Clone Wars stuff. It is weird to get kids whose favorite character is "Obi-Wan". For more details on the how relevant Star Wars is there is a great article by Emily Bazelon called Why does Star Wars still take over the minds of small boys? http://www.slate.com/id/2215160 [slate.com]

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 14, 2010 @07:59PM (#33253702)


  • Star Wars: the great social experiment proving that, 13 years later, nerds will still be whining about a re-release that they can completely ignore.
  • by RyuuzakiTetsuya ( 195424 ) <taiki.cox@net> on Saturday August 14, 2010 @08:11PM (#33253770)

    The films largely are the same from their 70's/80's versions and the 90's enhanced versions. It's not like in the middle of A New Hope that Obi Wan decides to stop with this whole turning off the tractor beam business and start selling Amway to the storm troopers.

    • You do not yet understand the true power of the nerd rage young padawan.

    • by PNutts ( 199112 )

      It's not like in the middle of A New Hope that Obi Wan decides to stop with this whole turning off the tractor beam business and start selling Amway to the storm troopers.

      "These are not the phytonutrients you're looking for."

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 14, 2010 @08:19PM (#33253804)

    Gonna be completely honest here. I was young when the first Star Wars came out and watched it. When the Special Edition came out, I was older and enjoyed it also. Not until a few years later did I hear the words "Han shot first!" or something to similar effect. I always wondered what the hell people were talking about until I looked on the Internet one day and someone pointed out the scene in question. That's right, I never noticed that Han DIDN'T shoot first in the Special Edition. For that matter, I never even noticed in the original when I was younger that Han DID shoot first. I never noticed... or really cared. All that mattered to me is that Han blasted Greedo in the cantina. To this day I still don't really care and find it one of the more sillier things fanboys complain about. I mean, I see people's logic as to why but to me Han had his blaster out. He's gonna kill a bitch in that scene. The exact moment, if he does it before or after Greedo attempts to shoot, for the most part seems irrelevant to me. Feel free to call me a troll or whatever and point out the fallacy in establishing Han's character. That scene doesn't ruin Han's badassness for me or the movie for that matter. I still thoroughly enjoy it and Han's character.

    • by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @09:35PM (#33254212) Homepage

      To be fair, the special edition in the theater had Han shooting first in an atrociously butchered photoshop job. It's bad now, but the first version in the theater looked like a high-school student screwing around in flash.

      I do think the problem is that Han is supposed to undergo a character arc from a scoundrel willing to kill for his own benefit, to a scoundrel that is willing to die for his friends. Making Greedo shoot first flattens a big part of that character arch. In the original version, it's not even clear that Greedo is going to shoot. Han just doesn't want to go with him to face up to Jabba / his mistakes, and he's willing to kill because of that. Of course, it has also become symbolic of the problem that Lucas just doesn't know how to write a decent character arc. And that he needs to stop changing things with the original series as he does so without delicacy and with a tendency to make them worse.

      And, again, lots of outrage originally stems from the embarassingly bad effect the first time 'round. Thankfully, they cleaned it up a little for the disk releases.

    • by fermion ( 181285 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @11:28PM (#33254716) Homepage Journal
      From a plot persepective it may of little consequence, but 'Hans shooting first' is important because it provides character development, something that is important for a well written work. We know that Obi-Wan made a huge mistake, paid for it by living in exile, and gave his life so that the twins, he had to know who they were, could escape and fix the mistake.

      Hans is introduced as an amoral smuggler with little regard for life. All he wants is cash. He hangs out the bar not as a person who has to due to his chosen profession, but as a person who enjoys the life. There is no question that he is going to shoot first, because to do otherwise would be to acknowledge the needs of others. Obi-wan sees this in his character which is why he offers a small fee up front, to tweak his interest, with a large fee at completion. The thought that goes into this not only insures that Hans will not space them as soon as they leave the planet, but will continue on to the rebel base instead of doing the logical thing and abandoning them at the death star. There is a reason that Harrison Ford has a career. He was able to pull off a very complex character.

      By the end of the movie the Force and Luke had changes Hans from a self centered opportunist to a person willing to acknowledge that the universe was greater than himself. He was willing to risk his life for something that would not benefit him. Of course it is hard to believe that such a huge transformation could occur in a person, but that is why Star Wars is a fairy tale. Unfortunately, like all fairy tales, it has been cleaned up to suite a wider audience to gain more profit. In effect, Star Wars, and many of Lucases project, has taken the opposite trajectory of Hans Solo. Rather than progressing from amoral to enlightened, Star Wars started out as a rather gruff view of the Transformative power of Faith, to an amoral tool of profit.

    • by The Wooden Badger ( 540258 ) on Sunday August 15, 2010 @03:48AM (#33255624) Homepage Journal

      What are you talking about? The scene doesn't even make sense with Greedo shooting at all. He is there to bring in Han to collect the bounty. He either is going to take the money from Han or bring in Han to get the money from Jabba. He is no good to Greedo dead. There is no reason to think that Greedo would shoot unless he is first shot at. It just fits with the dialogue for Han to shoot when he does. It makes no sense that Greedo would just arbitrarily shoot at that moment. Never mind the fact that a guy with a gun already trained on his target for a few minutes is going to miss a point blank shot. Throw in how Lucas tried to make Han look like he nods to one side to avoid getting shot before returning fire. The reworked scene is an amazing display of idiocy on the part of Lucas and anyone involved who wouldn't show he had a pair by saying "this is just stupid." In the original it makes sense, it flows, and it shows Han being Han at a very early point in the narrative. In the retarded edition (hey, special is used in place of retarded a fair amount. It really fits here.) the Greedo scene makes no sense, the flow is fubared, Han is still Han, but he has this artificial nobility now. To top it all off the scene looks horrible with the wrong guy shooting and the other guy dodging. The effect is quite jarring if you are really familiar with the original. Makes me think of the part in the 70 minute Episode I evisceration where the guy referring to the opening scene of the original says something to the effect of "This scene is so perfect (or maybe genius) that I'm convinced Lucas had nothing to do with it." He puts his stink on things over and over again. He just can't leave crap alone. The result is the guy that should be delivering a masterpiece special edition with fixes and tweaks is upstaged by a fan working with off the shelf stuff at home in Star Wars Revisited.

  • by hey! ( 33014 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @08:23PM (#33253824) Homepage Journal

    Jar-Jar shoots Greedo.

  • by RazorSharp ( 1418697 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @08:28PM (#33253858)

    As a huge Star Wars geek, I've hated almost any discussion of the films I've been involved in since the prequels came out. I liked the prequels, especially Episode III, which is by far Lucas' best film. Just because you have fond childhood memories of the originals doesn't mean the prequels suck. Why is it that everyone acts as if the original three Star Wars films were perfect? They can be scrutinized just as much as the prequels have been. How is it that Darth Vader didn't sense Han coming up behind him when he was about to shoot down Luke in Episode IV? What happened to the force? What happened to Vader being the best pilot in the galaxy? Why didn't Obi-Wan kill Vader rather than sacrificing himself? He claimed that in death he would be more powerful, but his ghost did the same thing he did in life: guide Luke. We later learn that Luke never has the power to take on the Emperor himself, so wouldn't it have been better to eliminate Vader and then team up with Yoda and Luke and go after the Emperor? And for those who complain about Jar-Jar, I have one word: Ewoks. The entire series is riddled with plot-holes and silliness, but that's okay with me because IT'S A SILLY SCI-FI ADVENTURE. People are able to disregard that fact because, as a child, it was so much more. But as much as everyone wanted to revert back to that childhood mindset when they went to see the prequels, they couldn't, because like it or not they'd matured and the silliness of it all became apparent.

    I feel the same way about Indiana Jones. How is the Crystal Skull any more silly than Temple of Doom? And the Holy Grail one was just absurd on every level. If you want to watch a serious Lucas film, watch THX-1138.

    Concerning Star Wars, I'll always view the prequels as better, despite my fond childhood memories of the originals. The originals were so black and white, good vs. evil. The only intellectually intriguing moments was when Vader turned on the Emperor, and that lasted like 5 minutes. Episode III gave a deeper meaning to the entire series. A balance between good and evil can never be achieved when one group (Sith or Jedi) is in power. In the end, their allegiance is to an absolute adherence to their ideals, not to what they know in their heart to be right. Compromising men are the only effective governors, men like Han Solo or Lando Calrissian. Men who have vices but have a good heart. But Han and Lando are just presented as bumbling adventurers, it's not until the prequels that their greater significance is realized. It's not until the prequels until we are told that "the Jedi aren't all that," a message that many fans probably didn't want to here.

    All this directly ties into politics: we want our politicians to be Jedis. To be free of vice, absolute to their ideals, and courageous. But setting such impossible standards is what makes politics as a whole so dishonest. It's what makes distinguishing between a Sith and Jedi nearly impossible. So we never understand the motives of our politicians because they're so cold an calculating, whether for good or for bad.

    Maybe that's not the best explanation of the prequel's theme but that's also what makes them so good: there are so many different angles one can view them from. With the originals, it's black and white. The final declarative message clearly deals with paternity, something like, "nothing can destroy a father's love for his son." I just find the prequel haters to be so ungrateful. Lucas not only made the films, but he added elements that went beyond the simple adventurism. If you didn't like the end product, don't hate on Lucas for it, it's HIS saga, not yours.

    • FYI, not everyone who saw it at the theater in 1977 was a child.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Jeremy Erwin ( 2054 )

      Episode III was so bad that I didn't even bother watching episodes 4,5, and 6.

    • George? Is that you??
    • by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @09:05PM (#33254076)

      If you liked the prequels that's fine but we are also entitled to our opinions. I thought they sucked. 3 was marginally ok, 1 was just incredibad. If you want some specifics:

      1) The acting. Just bad, bad, bad. This was probably partially the bad writing, partially directing, partially the fact that they were almost always on complete green screens. The combination just adds up to an extremely unconvincing performance from most of the actors. Also some were just flat out bad actors for the roles. The child Anikan was -horrible-. Anikan is supposed to be some hardened, badass slave kid and we get a kid who plays him as a happy go lucky middle class white boy.

      2) The writing. As I said the writing is very poor. The dialogue is really bad. Most of it does not feel natural and appropriate, it feels forced. The love scene dialogue in #2 is one of the very worst of all. There's plenty of non-dialogue related badness though, such as the space fight scene at the end of #1 where Anikan is just "playing" effectively and yet kicking ass. Rather than show him as extremely competent with supernatural talents, as you'd expect given the backstory, he is presented as a bumbling kid that happens to be lucky and manages to do what is needed by accident.

      3) The story. It was a shitty story arc. You had some just flat out retarded shit like the miticholrians, but over all the story was just bad. In particular the final part of Anikan's conversion to Vader was trite, forced, unbelievable, and poorly developed. It was a massively rushed conclusion that seemed stuck on to a meandering story to try and make it connect to the later films.

      I could go on, but I really don't need to because someone already did an excellent and extremely lengthy (and funny) analysis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI [youtube.com] There's one on EP2 as well.

      "don't hate on Lucas for it, it's HIS saga, not yours."

      Oh please, of all the cop out lines this is the worst "You can't criticize this because you didn't make it!" That is the same as saying "You can't criticize the government because you aren't the president!" Fuck you, it was MY time and MY money I sure as hell can criticize and I can can refuse to spend more on it. You can get down on your knees and blow Lucas and worship everything he does but you cannot demand I do the same. I get to have my own opinions and my opinion is that the prequels suck.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by RazorSharp ( 1418697 )

        You have some good points.

        1. Concerning the acting, I agree, Jake Lloyd wasn't very good. But I liked Hayden Christensen's performance. I heard a lot of people criticize him of acting too much like an arrogant, immature prick, but I felt like that was Anikan's character. I never understood why people expected Anikan to be likeable. His acting seemed genuine. Ewan McGregor and Natalie Portman did a great job as well.

        2/3. Concerning the writing: The plotting was better and, like I said, I found the Anikan/Vad

      • No that isn't a typo. What is Star Trek?

        Is it Kirk? Is it Janeway? Is it Picard? Is it Archer?

        The question depends on who you ask. The soap lovers probably thought DS9 was the bomb, they LOVED the long story arcs. To the old timers, that was the beginning of the end, when Star Trek became a soap.

        What is Star Trek depends on who you are. You see to SOME people, unworthy people, the conversion of Darth Vader was all the drama they ever wanted.

        There is a certain amount of outrage about Twilight and its spa

    • <ObiWan>That's no star wars geek...</Obiwan>
    • Why is it that everyone acts as if the original three Star Wars films were perfect?

      On the contrary, Episodes I, II and III made me realize how bad episodes IV, V and VI actually were. It was truly an "emperor has no clothes" moment after digesting the "midochlorians" in Episode I after it was very clear from the original movies that the "Force was a mystical energy field that binds us all together" not some bacterial infection. After seeing how contrived and a complete farce the prequels were, I realize

      • by Artifakt ( 700173 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @10:51PM (#33254508)

        Watch "A New Hope", for the scene where Obi-Wan tells Luke he knew Luke's father in the Clone Wars. That's a classic throw away line. The writer thinks, "Where could they know each other from? I know, they were in the army together. Hey, it's SF, do they even have an army? Well, space navy or whatever... Anyhoo, they were in the war together. That oughtta fit with the title. We got this new rebellion, and now I should mention older wars so Star Wars makes more sense. Vietnam? No it's space, so they were in a spacy sounding war together. Hey, how about 'Clone Wars'?"
                At that point. Lucas has no idea who or what the clones were clones of, which side the clones fought on, or anything else about the Clone Wars, just that they give the film a feel that fits his title. Later, when he writes sequels, prequels, and Christmas specials, he goes back to look for hooks that can anchor them into the same universe, and decides to make this one of his hooks.
                That's not bad writing. It's also not good writing in and of itself. A half way competent writer normally asks some questions that don't follow from the basic plot ("OK, so Agent Clarice eventually stops Lecter, but what makes her succeed when others have failed? She's more committed. Why is she more committed? She really empathises with victims. I'd better write a scene to emphasise that." The writer looks for chances to fit that scene in, and a month later, realises he hasn't written a scene where Lecter tries his special mind screwing powers on Clarice yet, and realises he could probably combine the two. A week after that, the writer realises what the title of his work should be.). These days, college writing courses will teach people to add detail or individual touches to any line that comes out as cliched as "They met in the war" does in the short form. Lots of writers have learned, if you do this, you also automatically create hooks you can go back to if you want a sequel or whatever. Once it's clear that Kirk and Spock went through the academy together, a prequel about those days becomes an easier option. If the original throw away line says the academy is in Frisco, there's a setting for the new story, already picked. (Remember, for Trek, it was part of the basic rules not to show Trek era Earth, so references to where the academy was were never expected to be all that important until that rule was changed. In that case, the throw away nature of the line is more obvious than most.)

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You know what made the original 3 better? Harrison Ford and Catie Fisher (and I probably misspelled her name). You are right - they're silly sci-fi action films. And you know what? Those two actors realized that and ran with it. You can tell that they're just having fun with a lot of it and not taking it that seriously. The prequels take themselves FAR too seriously, and they suffer for it immensely.

    • Wow, George Lucas posts to slashdot?

    • by DoofusOfDeath ( 636671 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @09:49PM (#33254270)

      A balance between good and evil can never be achieved when one group (Sith or Jedi) is in power.

      Why on earth would someone want to balance good and evil?

      • by RazorSharp ( 1418697 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @11:36PM (#33254746)

        Because the whole idea of "the Force" is based off eastern religions, so "good" and "evil" are more akin to "yin" and "yang." One of the things I like about the prequels are that the Sith aren't just evil for the sake of being evil. Palpatine believed the Jedi to be just as evil as they believed him to be. One thing that is clear in all six films is that Palpatine is a Hitler-like figure, but the prequels demonstrate how such a man rises to power and what motivates him. In the original three he's more like Dr. Evil. In the prequels he's more of a student of Machiavelli.

    • by roc97007 ( 608802 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @11:24PM (#33254698) Journal

      > Just because you have fond childhood memories of the originals doesn't mean the prequels suck.

      That's absolutely true. I totally agree. Fond memories of the originals do not mean the prequels suck.

      The prequels suck entirely on their own. They're too crowded, too noisy, ineptly paced, badly directed, and have some of the worst dialog in modern cinema. Lucas managed to squeeze bad performances out of good actors, and atrocious performances out of mediocre actors. (Kind of a Stanley Kubrick in reverse...)

      The prequels were tragic, unintentional camp and Lucas still doesn't get the joke. If you watch the behind-the-scenes footage for Phantom Menace, there was a time when you could see Lucas was starting to come to the realization that he can no longer tell a coherent story. But he decided to bluff his way through it, and he still is.

  • These movies have been on HD television for years. Sure, a nice BD transfer would look better, but not enough to get gouged again buying yet again what has been seen ad nauseum for decades. Episode 4 was on this afternoon on some no-name HD channel (Spike or something), with commercials and everything. The movies just aren't anything that special any more.

    And if we have Lucas meddling with plot and effects as he's done in the past, the BD version will be even more of a waste. Star Wars is a cinematic l
  • Screw it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by marco.antonio.costa ( 937534 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @08:56PM (#33254016)

    but if you can stand living in a world where Greedo shot first

    I can't.

  • I have no intention of buying this.
  • I've not bought a DVD in years and have no interest to invest in Blu-Ray especially with the dust collecting on the movies I DID buy on DVD. The only way I'll have a Blu player is if it comes with my next Laptop (and I don't have a choice). The first words that came to mind when I saw this headline was "Who cares - how did this article get approved?" Good luck George, maybe do a Laser Disc release while you're at it.
  • I stopped caring (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ITBurnout ( 1845712 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @09:48PM (#33254266)
    when the first trilogy ended with dancing teddy bears.
  • Han shot first (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Hamsterdan ( 815291 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @10:02PM (#33254322)

    1- Han shot first, not after, not at the same time. First as in *I'm a smuggler and a tough guy*
    2- Remove Jar-Jar
    3- Remove midi chlorians
    4- remove Darth Vader's *NOOOOOOOOO* at the end of ROTS
    5- remove the walkie-talkies and put back the guns (sorry, wrong movie :)

  • by roc97007 ( 608802 ) on Saturday August 14, 2010 @11:05PM (#33254622) Journal

    Lucas will try to jerk us around some more but there really isn't anything more of value to see. Ever since Episode One Lucas seems to be nursing a grudge against his fans. "You don't like JarJar? Well prepare to see a lot more of him!" Now "you still think Han should have shot first? Well we're splicing in additional scenes showing he didn't!" Maybe even since Return of the Jedi, when geeks who were supposed to be praising him as a god instead got a little too snarky about certain spear-wielding teddy bears. (A show of hands: Who saw "Ewoks: The battle of Endor"? Yeah. Have your eyes stopped bleeding yet?)

    Fer crissake, skim Lucas' imdb entry, and try to pick out anything he's written or directed in the last quarter century that wasn't a shameless, heartless, lifeless rip-off of Star Wars or Indiana Jones. The guy hasn't had a fresh idea since the early '80's.

    Give it a rest. Everyone, please just give it a rest. Let Lucas pee in his own sandbox on his own dime. You know the added clarity of Blu-ray will not make up for the additional liberties he's going to take with your childhood memories. Let us demonstrate that collective geekhood can say no to Star Wars. For God's sake, let it go. Find another up-and-coming director to patronize, one who isn't yet barn-sour and can still produce a fresh idea.

  • Dear George (Score:3, Informative)

    by blair1q ( 305137 ) on Sunday August 15, 2010 @01:20AM (#33255136) Journal

    Fuck you.

Neutrinos have bad breadth.