Star Wars: The Original Trilogy (1977-1983)

[jayman3]

Originally Posted by Jar Jar Stinks

I'm skeptical. Why would they need Lucas's approval?

Because he owns it

Kathleen Kennedy has said time and time again, Disney doesn't own the rights to the original unaltered theatrical releases. And that those are Lucas'. She'll touch or release them. As that was likely George's wish when the deal was made.

It's like QT and his exclusivity ownership over Kill Bill TWBA. It's only up to him to screen that privately. Which explains why it's never been released on disc to the public availability.

So it'd make sense to get permission to publicly screen those to mass audience.

[captveg]

Originally Posted by Jar Jar Stinks

I'm skeptical. Why would they need Lucas's approval?

It was an Academy hosted screening. They don't like to do official screenings of films without the blessing of the filmmakers if it all possible.

[stvn1974]

Is't there some DGA rule about having to get the original director to approve any changes to a film? If so and Lucas considers the Bastardized Original Trilogy his correct versions then I could see how they would have to get his blessing on releasing the originals. It would be like a reverse directors cut situation.

[Rizor]

Originally Posted by jayman3

Because he owns it

Kathleen Kennedy has said time and time again, Disney doesn't own the rights to the original unaltered theatrical releases. And that those are Lucas'. She'll touch or release them. As that was likely George's wish when the deal was made.

Is there a source for this? I see people mention Kennedy's statement often, but when they've tried to trace back to them all that existed was an interview with an fan who asked a confusingly phrased question that she tried to answer but didn't really understand. Skip ahead to 2:51.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZO0...youtu.be&t=171

[Falaskan]

I personally think Kennedy was just keeping up appearances when she said that.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by jayman3

Because he owns it

No he doesn't.

Originally Posted by jayman3

Kathleen Kennedy has said time and time again, Disney doesn't own the rights to the original unaltered theatrical releases.

No she didn't.

She said they wouldn't update Star Wars again. THAT's what she was asked. She was never asked if they would release the original versions.

[Martoto]

She says quite clearly there is no arrangmement regarding what versions they can or cannot release. And that there will be no further changes.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by Martoto

She says quite clearly there is no arrangmement regarding what versions they can or cannot release. And that there will be no further changes.

Correct. George was the only reason there were changes in the first place. And he's not in the picture anymore.

[Jar Jar Stinks]

Originally Posted by jayman3

Because he owns it

Kathleen Kennedy has said time and time again, Disney doesn't own the rights to the original unaltered theatrical releases. And that those are Lucas'. She'll touch or release them. As that was likely George's wish when the deal was made.

It's like QT and his exclusivity ownership over Kill Bill TWBA. It's only up to him to screen that privately. Which explains why it's never been released on disc to the public availability.

So it'd make sense to get permission to publicly screen those to mass audience.

He sold everything to Disney. Why would he care about holding on to the rights of the original films? Because he believes they're inferior and wants to hide them? That's absurd considering he released them on DVD like 13 years ago. If he cared about Star Wars he would've held onto some level of creative control. As soon as Disney bought Lucasfilm, they junked his ideas.

[EvaDK]

I reckon Lucas and Kennedy have an understanding so that Lucasfilm won't release any other cut of Episodes I-VI than the current versions, as long as Lucas is still alive.

[Himmel]

Well we'll find out in 2020 which versions get released in 4k.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Jar Jar Stinks

Why would he care about holding on to the rights of the original films? Because he believes they're inferior and wants to hide them?

It's not absurd. I'm not going to dig up the quote but several years he said something about wanting the special editions to be the only versions available to posterity. Something like 'a hundred years from now these will be the only versions'.

He sort of softened on that down the line. He once referred to the originals as workprints and rough drafts but later started calling them the 'classic versions' and said the main obstacle to their release wasn't him but the availability of elements and expense.

But there was definitely a time when he wanted the special editions to completely replace the original versions.

He's also a big proponent of the so-called moral rights of artists. Even though he sold the films it's not beyond the realm of possibility to think he might want to maintain some say in how they're presented.

So while I'm also skeptical of some rider buried in the contracts preventing a UOT release the idea isn't entirely crazy.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Jar Jar Stinks

He sold everything to Disney. Why would he care about holding on to the rights of the original films? Because he believes they're inferior and wants to hide them? That's absurd considering he released them on DVD like 13 years ago. If he cared about Star Wars he would've held onto some level of creative control. As soon as Disney bought Lucasfilm, they junked his ideas.

Do you think every filmmaker owns their films? I ask because a great many of them have been consulted with whatever new transfer or new cut or new audio remix of whatever film, despite them not owning the actual product themselves.

The question here is not now one of physical ownership but of the remaining rights of authorship, that the creator of the content must still be consulted about any changes to their work. While filmmakers are still alive then it's the duty of the rights owners to consult them about any new changes, not just edits to the film but new transfers and so on.

(See: Kino Lorber running into a brick wall with David Lynch on Lost Highway. They wanted to do a new transfer, new extras, new cover art, new everything. But having paid Universal for the licence Lynch rebuffed their advances so they were forced to use an old but director approved (key point there) DVD-era master, they had to junk their extras because nothing goes on there without Lynch's say-so and they even had to use the cover art from the DVD because, again, anything new had to be approved by Lynch. All that control, and he doesn't even own it!?!)

This duty is most usually contractual but is also a moral one as well (something that Lucas argued for back in the day, re: protecting films where the filmmakers are no longer around to give their say), and even if there's not any fine print actually banning Disnee from releasing the original originals I firmly believe that they will simply respect his wishes to not release any versions of the OT other than what he specifies. Hence the people who ran that VFX seminar needed express permission from Lucas himself to run a 70mm print of the original Star Wars.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by chip75

FOX wouldn't have anything to do with it before the buy-out. They would just take their cut if there was any.



If I remember Warner Bros. were intent on releasing a director's cut of Blade Runner billed-as-such, but it was without Ridley's approval (I think it was the workprint or sneak-peak release), to the point where Ridley said he'd place an add disowning it if they did. From that point on they the DC started to get traction with his involvement (Warner Bros. were actually making a rival cut behind his back concurrently for some time).

If think Lucas would have just had to sign off on this one and how it was advertised.

Correct on BR, they were literally just going to release the workprint as a DC but Ridley said no, he didn't want a literally unfinished version marketed as his 'definitive vision' or whatever. But as he was busy on something else at the time I think Terry Rawlings cobbled together a quick version that added the unicorn reverie, removed the voice over and junked the happy ending. Still, that was enough to get Scott's approval in the time that they had.

Similar-ish situation to the Alien: Director's Cut as well: Fox were well along in assembling an extended cut which was just going to lump in a load of deleted scenes but Ridley was horrified as it badly upset the pacing of the movie. So he said 'give me a chance to recut it myself and you can call it whatever you want', and Fox acquiesced. No need to do this if the director doesn't own the film, shirley they could do whatever the funk they wanted? Nah.

[jayman3]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

No he doesn't.
No she didn't.

She said they wouldn't update Star Wars again. THAT's what she was asked. She was never asked if they would release the original versions.

Originally Posted by Martoto

She says quite clearly there is no arrangmement regarding what versions they can or cannot release. And that there will be no further changes.

Actually....

When Kennedy was asked directly by Saunders if George Lucas’s “vision of the final cut he left us with” would be altered — heavily suggesting a reissue of the original theatrical versions of the Star Wars trilogy — Kennedy broke into friendly laughter and said, “I wouldn’t touch those! Are you kidding? Those will always remain his.” This seems to also nix reports that a new 4K theatrical re-release (special edition or not) will hit theaters for the 40th anniversary of the original 1977 film.

https://www.barstoolsports.com/bosto...s-of-star-wars

[Jar Jar Stinks]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

This duty is most usually contractual but is also a moral one as well (something that Lucas argued for back in the day, re: protecting films where the filmmakers are no longer around to give their say), and even if there's not any fine print actually banning Disnee from releasing the original originals I firmly believe that they will simply respect his wishes to not release any versions of the OT other than what he specifies. Hence the people who ran that VFX seminar needed express permission from Lucas himself to run a 70mm print of the original Star Wars.

I don't understand the moral argument. The 1977 version of Star Wars was a collaboration of many people. It won 6 Academy Awards, not his CGI revision(s).

In 2004, when a new DVD special edition came out, Lucas told the Associated Press he had little sympathy for fans who yearn for the 1977 original. “It’s like this is the movie I wanted it to be, and I’m sorry if you saw half a completed film and fell in love with it,” he said. “But I want it to be the way I want it to be.”

But fans aren’t the only ones who want Lucas to release the original. Curators at the National Film Registry picked the 1977 version of Star Wars to preserve for history’s sake, but they still don’t have a copy in the registry. When they asked for a copy, Lucas refused, saying that he would no longer authorize the release of the original version. The Library of Congress does have a 35mm print of Star Wars, one that was filed in 1978 as part of the movie’s copyright deposit, but the registry, where films are meant to be preserved for history, is still without one.

It's an amoral choice to keep the original Academy Award-winning film locked away. I'm sure John Stears, John Dykstra, Richard Edlund, Grant McCune, and Robert Blalack would agree.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by jayman3

Actually....


https://www.barstoolsports.com/bosto...s-of-star-wars

Yeah. That's what I'm talking about. They didn't ask her about the original versions. It was a stupid NON-story that everyone ran with.

Not understanding your attempted point.

[jayman3]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

Yeah. That's what I'm talking about. They didn't ask her about the original versions. It was a stupid NON-story that everyone ran with.

Not understanding your attempted point.

The attempted point being was that Kennedy will never touch Lucas' unaltered films as she's respecting his wishes. Which means fans hoping to see a Blu-ray or 4KUHD release of them will never see the light of day.

Which then goes back to why permission from George Lucas would be needed to show the unaltered films in public. They're his.

[stvn1974]

None of us know what the contracts between Disney and Lucas state. We also don't know what kind of handshake agreement there is between Kennedy and Lucas. All we do know is that there are no announced plans to release anything on UHD.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Jar Jar Stinks

I don't understand the moral argument. The 1977 version of Star Wars was a collaboration of many people. It won 6 Academy Awards, not his CGI revision(s).



It's an amoral choice to keep the original Academy Award-winning film locked away. I'm sure John Stears, John Dykstra, Richard Edlund, Grant McCune, and Robert Blalack would agree.

Understand it or not, that's just how it works when it comes to authorship of such works: the director is the ultimate arbiter of such 'creative decisions', and whether they own the movie or not is largely irrelevant.

And it won 7 Oscars, not 6