You look quite unflattering wearing that irony, Mr. Lucas

Snake · Post by **Snake** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:45 am

http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/#3

George Lucas thinks the optional colorization presentation for the upcoming DVD release of various Three Stooges shorts is a really bad idea.

Uh, yeah, Georgie-boy, while we're on the subject of altering classics and saying "screw the dissenters"....

Gesani · Post by **Gesani** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:44 am

this link works better... take you straight to the story

http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/#7

he dose have a point in his arguement tho.. but of course isnt he the one who had his most famous trilogy altered?

DrSpengler · Post by **DrSpengler** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:47 am

I wish someone in the press or something would just ask him "How can you criticise colorization when you butcher your own films with CGI?" so we can get his explaination on that.

Snake · Post by **Snake** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 6:04 am

The most critical thing is that the colorization is an option; the originals can still be viewed. (Of course, even if the B&W originals weren't available, you could just desaturate the color to monochrome anyway, but still...)

It just strikes me as an "embarassingly hypocritical" thing to say, when you've already gone the extra step and insured nobody will see the original versions of material you have made. George is stealing off me; Hypocrisy is only okay as long as I am the only one to do it. I, Snake, not George Lucas... or anybody else for that matter.

And besides, no real man would ever dare criticize The Stooges like that. The humor is... "dated"? Striking a man over the head with a ballpeen hammer (with accompanying doorbell sound effect), or slapping him repeatedly and jabbing him in the eyes (again, with fx) will NEVER become dated. NEVER. It's utterly timeless, like much like the concept of comedy itself, or oral sex, or other such things...

Sir Auros · Post by **Sir Auros** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 9:44 pm

I really have to second Spengs' comment. I mean, how the hell has nobody picked up on this and run with it?

Anyone post on the official Star Wars messageboards? Does this ever come up there, or do the fanboys (you know, the ones that think Ep. 1 and 2 are actually good movies) flay the skin from anyone who dares question their lord?

DrSpengler · Post by **DrSpengler** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 11:15 pm

Originally posted by Sir Auros
I really have to second Spengs' comment. I mean, how the hell has nobody picked up on this and run with it?

Anyone post on the official Star Wars messageboards? Does this ever come up there, or do the fanboys (you know, the ones that think Ep. 1 and 2 are actually good movies) flay the skin from anyone who dares question their lord?

I imagine you just answered your own question. I'm sure Lucas has a hoard of loyal yesmen that ban/flame anyone who questions his authority on his own messageboard.

And I'm sure that the official messageboard is the only messageboard Lucas ever so much as glances at.

Lucas: So what do you people think about having a Gungan dnace sequence inserted at the end of Return of the Jedi, including Gungans screaming "Wesa Free!"?

Fan: I love it!

Fan: Where do you get these brilliant ideas!

Fan: Make love to me!

If anyone's interested in the fan reaction of asking such a rediculous question, I could sign up at the official Star Wars board and post the topic.

Chromia · Post by **Chromia** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:47 am

Originally posted by Sir Auros

Anyone post on the official Star Wars messageboards? Does this ever come up there, or do the fanboys (you know, the ones that think Ep. 1 and 2 are actually good movies) flay the skin from anyone who dares question their lord?

I do. And yes it comes up, and no we don't flay thier shins.

We do scrape them up a little bit, but that's all.

Chromia · Post by **Chromia** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:03 am

I posted it over there for ya.

Here:

http://forums.starwars.com/thread.jspa?threadID=189288

I'm Arrhae Tahl over there.

DrSpengler · Post by **DrSpengler** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:25 am

Originally posted by Kup1
I posted it over there for ya.

Here:

http://forums.starwars.com/thread.jspa?threadID=189288

I'm Arrhae Tahl over there.

Um...I think you posted the wrong link.

Sir Auros · Post by **Sir Auros** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 2:55 am

Well, it seems to be having the predicted reaction as sexless fanboys come out of the woodwork to defend their maligned master.

Snake · Post by **Snake** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:20 am

"This is not the pot calling the kettle black. Lucas is perfecting his works to look their very best. The colorizing folks are changing somebody else's work to look different and less true to the original intention of the artist(s) involved."

Hooray for semantics. Let's be a bit more objective here: both parties are using CGI to achieve what was impossible at the time due to the limits of the current technology. Only in one case, they are making it optional; you aren't required to watch it their way. It's not a change of the underlying materials; it's just another version. Compare that "Like my new versions or get bent!" attitude from Lucas. He has changed Star Wars. Sure, you can try to say the SEs are "just another version too, Snake!", but that would be incorrect. They are the ONLY version now.

Let's talk about another movie, a bonified masterpiece that I also happen to hold dear. Citizen Kane. I bought the two-disc set, I bought RKO 281, and I'm considering the limited edition Kane box. I mean, Orson Welles was pissed at the idea of Ted Turner colorizing Citizen Kane "Tell Ted Turner to keep his goddamn crayolas away from my film!" And rightfully so, as it was his film. Personally, I don't see a problem with colorizing it. If that's what it takes to get some true cinematic art into the attention-span of the public, fine by me. But it went beyond just providing a colorized version... it was the annihilation of the original form. You know Ted Turner was going to make it as difficult as possible to get your hands on the original B&W format of Kane. And that my friends, is inexcusable...

I mean, nobody really gets that bent-out-of-shape when movies are remade. Sure, there's the usual compliants, but there isn't a huge uproar. Why? Because the remake will not wash-away the existence of the original. If it did, there would be hell to pay. Same thing applies here really, only it's basically a remake using the original's elements.

Lucas is a hypocrite. He is the one truly changing things, irregardless of why, and doing what many would consider a desecration. It's his right, I agree 100%, but that makes it no easier on those who would prefer the originals. You can't accuse Sony of doing the same; they're just offering a second form of Stoogery...

KillTheKids · Post by **KillTheKids** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:34 am

GREEDO SHOOTS FIRST!

DrSpengler · Post by **DrSpengler** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:36 am

Dude, you should really post that in the thread.

Can't see how any of the fanboys can make an intelligent counterpoint to that.

Snake · Post by **Snake** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:58 am

Originally posted by DrSpengler
Dude, you should really post that in the thread.

Can't see how any of the fanboys can make an intelligent counterpoint to that.

Actually, I don't see how any of them can argue that inserting new scenes/overlaying CGI and merely colorizing everything the same kind of "change" when you can simply undo the change of the latter yourself, at home, by going into your tv's display controls and destaturating the color back to monochrome. The former is a bit more, shall we say, permanent? Plus, that lil' difference aside, their argument also relys on the assumption that The Stooges were somehow against colorization. Sure, you could argue that making the Mona Lisa B&W is the same, but paintings rely on color as much as impression to be art. The physical antics of The Stooges are what make their art. Colorization would be a mere interesting and optional tweek that in the end wouldn't hurt the comedy itself, but would make the video appeal to monochrome-opposed auidences...

Jetfire · Post by **Jetfire** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:25 am

I agree with Snake. As soon as colour became affordable almost all film makers started making in colour. for artistic reasons some did still use black and white.

Lucas is a hypocrite. I don't mind adding the CGI but I'd prefer to have the option of seeing the originals.

The Han/Greedo shooting thing is an example. Lucas didn't just make the film look better but because his brain has detoratiated by huge amounts he assumes the fact Han HAD to kill him would be missed by people and thus had to be over empathised. Which is stupid. It takes away the fact Han didn't start out completly as a hero and his conversion to the rebels is less intresting because as far as we know his character developement isn't significant.

By the way I can't believe some of those first few replys. Mindlessly backing LKucas NOT being a hypocrite with virtually no reasonable arguement beyoind "if Lucas does it, its right, if Lucas doesn't want it it's wrong". The "moe slaps him first in this version" reply wa classic though

Sir Auros · Post by **Sir Auros** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:27 am

Originally posted by Jetfire 2.1
The "moe slaps him first in this version" reply wa classic though

Agreed. I laughed my ass off at that one.

Post by **inflatable dalek** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:42 pm

Those crazy Star Wars fans, makes me glad I'm part of the perfectly sane and reasonable Transformers fandom instead..

Incidently, has anyone tried to count how many chins Lucas has now? In the doccumentrys on the SE videos he looked like Jabba's dad

Dead Man Wade · Post by **Dead Man Wade** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:48 pm

I stopped counting once he reached the teens...

Sir Auros · Post by **Sir Auros** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:27 pm

The saddest thing is that a beard can cover multiple chins so easily...you have no idea how many he has under there.

Chromia · Post by **Chromia** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 11:57 pm

Um...I think you posted the wrong link.

I know. I fixed it.