Star Wars Wars the UOT Strikes Back and OTHER PEZ dispensers

[BLU_Until_The_End]

Not trying to restart any debate at this point, because I am excited about this release. i just want to add a little speculative reasining (BluTitan said speculation was ok right?) as to why the UOT fans won't be getting what they want in this release....or probably any time in the foreseeable future if true:

It was explained to me that the divorce settlement between GL and his wife included a clause that stated that any revenue earned from the release/distribution of the Star Wars movies would mostly go to his ex-wife. To keep this from happening (spite perhaps?), GL conjured up this "SE" idea for the movies, and made changes to justify it being a new set of films that his ex had no rights to. That is why he has never even entertained the idea of releasing the UOT - she would get the profits. I have no idea how long this alleged clause is in effect for, but I'm quite sure that GL does not want to see her get one red cent from his original creations - ever - and will not release the UOT until the clause expires, or until she becomes one with the force. Although i've never been married, I can see GL taking this stance from a spiteful perspective...even though spite ultimately leads to the dark side.

Did anyone else hear this rumor?

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Never heartd it, but it seems legally absurd to me. There's no way they're changed extensively enough to legally be considered "different" movies. Not possible.

[Cowboy]

Originally Posted by BLU_Until_The_End

Not trying to restart any debate at this point, because I am excited about this release. i just want to add a little speculative reasining (BluTitan said speculation was ok right?) as to why the UOT fans won't be getting what they want in this release....or probably any time in the foreseeable future if true:

It was explained to me that the divorce settlement between GL and his wife included a clause that stated that any revenue earned from the release/distribution of the Star Wars movies would mostly go to his ex-wife. To keep this from happening (spite perhaps?), GL conjured up this "SE" idea for the movies, and made changes to justify it being a new set of films that his ex had no rights to. That is why he has never even entertained the idea of releasing the UOT - she would get the profits. I have no idea how long this alleged clause is in effect for, but I'm quite sure that GL does not want to see her get one red cent from his original creations - ever - and will not release the UOT until the clause expires, or until she becomes one with the force. Although i've never been married, I can see GL taking this stance from a spiteful perspective...even though spite ultimately leads to the dark side.

Did anyone else hear this rumor?

Yes I have heard the rumor but the question I have is this: If that were true and they were divorced in I think 82 or 83 then from that point until 1997 did she receive a cut of the profits? I mean thats quite a lot of video releases in that era. I am sure many of her edits still exist in the 1997 and 2004 dvd editions wouldn't you think? I am not sure I believe this one or not, although someone who was supposedly "in the know" posted that at one time.

[georgec]

Extremely long read but makes perfect sense. Lucas is not a god, despite what some SW fans might think. He's a person who benefited from having other creative people around him. Without people like Gary Kurtz, Marcia Lucas, etc., Star Wars would not be what we know it to be. As greed overtook Lucas he sought to make the movies purely his by weeding out the creative dissenters.

http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/marcialucas.html

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

Never heartd it, but it seems legally absurd to me. There's no way they're changed extensively enough to legally be considered "different" movies. Not possible.

Right.

She would have to have one really awful lawyer to let him get away with something that crazy.


.

[BLU_Until_The_End]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Right.

She would have to have one really awful lawyer to let him get away with something that crazy.
.

Granted its just speculation, but why is it so far fecthed? There is a loophole for every judgement. If the clause was specifically worded that she would receive proceeds from Star Wars, ESB, and ROTJ but not mention anything about any "special edition" versions it makes some sense to me. Let's face it - if you are as rich as GL is and you're in the middle of a mmessy divorce why wouldn't you want to screw over your ex by lettigg your dream live on in an incarnation that she can no longer profit?

[Troy73]

Originally Posted by georgec

Extremely long read but makes perfect sense. Lucas is not a god, despite what some SW fans might think. He's a person who benefited from having other creative people around him. Without people like Gary Kurtz, Marcia Lucas, etc., Star Wars would not be what we know it to be. As greed overtook Lucas he sought to make the movies purely his by weeding out the creative dissenters.

I don't think he's a god. I think he is more responsible for what Star Wars is than anyone else. He no doubt had a lot of support and help along the way. Let's look at this a different way, if Star Wars had ultimately failed he would have went down as a flop director and all blame would have squarely rested on his shoulders. However, since it is one of the greatest and most iconic films of all time he doesn't deserve all the credit? Interesting how it's okay to demonize someone just because the're successful.

[Troy73]

Originally Posted by BLU_Until_The_End

Granted its just speculation, but why is it so far fecthed? There is a loophole for every judgement. If the clause was specifically worded that she would receive proceeds from Star Wars, ESB, and ROTJ but not mention anything about any "special edition" versions it makes some sense to me. Let's face it - if you are as rich as GL is and you're in the middle of a mmessy divorce why wouldn't you want to screw over your ex by lettigg your dream live on in an incarnation that she can no longer profit?

Do the new cuts have a completely new copyright? If they have a shared copyright, like 1977/1997/2004 on the new cuts then legally, if the rumor is true, she would still get her money.

[Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Troy73

I don't think he's a god. I think he is more responsible for what Star Wars is than anyone else. He no doubt had a lot of support and help along the way. Let's look at this a different way, if Star Wars had ultimately failed he would have went down as a flop director and all blame would have squarely rested on his shoulders. However, since it is one of the greatest and most iconic films of all time he doesn't deserve all the credit? Interesting how it's okay to demonize someone just because the're successful.

Maybe Lucas should get the Lionshare but Kurtz had a lot of input into the first two films and that I feel is why ROTJ was not quite as good as the first two. I think Kurtz would have really reigned him in on all the damn "Muppets" in that film.

[whaleman]

Originally Posted by Cowboy

Maybe Lucas should get the Lionshare but Kurtz had a lot of input into the first two films and that I feel is why ROTJ was not quite as good as the first two. I think Kurtz would have really reigned him in on all the damn "Muppets" in that film.

At the time RotJ was released, was fan reaction to the Ewoks similar to the outrage at Jar Jar Binks? Try to quantify - if outrage at Jar Jar was a 10; and outrage at Hayden Christiensen being cast was a 7; rate the Ewoks level of annoyance to the majority of fans.

[Cowboy]

Originally Posted by whaleman

At the time RotJ was released, was fan reaction to the Ewoks similar to the outrage at Jar Jar Binks? Try to quantify - if outrage at Jar Jar was a 10; and outrage at Hayden Christiensen being cast was a 7; rate the Ewoks level of annoyance to the majority of fans.

No I would say back in 83 the hate for the Ewoks was not near as bad as Jar Jar in 99. (Maybe a 6 or 7) But they were still not well received by a lot of people my age...but then again all my friends and I were 18 years old by the time Jedi came out. We for sure thought Jedi was the weakest of the three films. But then you have people that saw Jedi when they were like 8 or 10 years old (the first one they had seen in a theater) and today it is still their favorite. So I am thinking age at the time you saw them plays into the equation.

I know from my circle of friends perspective one of the things we just hated was the fact that the first two films all the Rebels were Human and then all of a sudden we had every muppet under the sun in the Rebellion. Another thing we hated was the whole ok so Luke is his son but now Leia is his sister? Also, Han Solo's character went nowhere in Jedi. The best part of Jedi was the first 25 minutes and Solo was blind the whole time and I think his character was simply wasted leading a band of teddy bears. The way Boba Fett died was a joke as well........

But I will say this; as bad as Jedi was compared to SW and ESB it still had a lot of that Magic that the prequels did not.

[whaleman]

Originally Posted by Cowboy

I know from my circle of friends perspective one of the things we just hated was the fact that the first two films all the Rebels were Human and then all of a sudden we had every muppet under the sun in the Rebellion. Another thing we hated was the whole ok so Luke is his son but now Leia is his sister? Also, Han Solo's character went nowhere in Jedi. The best part of Jedi was the first 25 minutes and Solo was blind the whole time and I think his character was simply wasted leading a band of teddy bears. The way Boba Fett died was a joke as well........

But I will say this; as bad as Jedi was compared to SW and ESB it still had a lot of that Magic that the prequels did not.

I liked the last battle and ending of RotJ; I think it was a really good ending to the trilogy. Funny what you say about all the muppets and ewoks is true; but I never really noticed it until I heard that a lot of the fans were unhappy about it. Maybe because I didn't see it until 97 and I did not know any hardcore fans at the time. About your comment about Han Solo doing nothing - I heard Harrison Ford in an interview suggested he thought Lucas should have killed him off when he was frozen at the end of ESB and he was against the character coming back at all.

[Blu-Benny]

Originally Posted by kdo

I wouldn't say that's just for me at all...there are several other members posting there, and on top of that, I do like sequels, it just so happens that none of them are of the "Star Wars," "Jurassic Park," or "Indiana Jones" series of films.

u don't like empire strikes back??

[aimforsilence]

Originally Posted by Blu-Benny

u don't like empire strikes back??

What he said... Empire is the BEST Star Wars movie, in every respect!

[kdo]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Edit: I thought Empire Strikes Back was a sequel...that was pretty good.

Originally Posted by Blu-Benny

u don't like empire strikes back??

Originally Posted by aimforsilence

What he said... Empire is the BEST Star Wars movie, in every respect!

Guys, I don't think we need to turn this forum into another "Star Wars" disaster thread, so I'll make it short and simple...Yes, "Empire" is the best Star Wars film, and at one time I very much enjoyed it. Then Lucas started all his revisionist crap with the original films, and then completely undermined the integrity of the original trilogy with those awful, nauseating prequels...at which point I lost any and all interest in the entire series. Sorry.

Originally Posted by octagon

Why stop there? If release threads are to be fanboy only we're going to need threads for people who don't like the cover art and threads for people who don't like the extras and threads for people who don't like the audio mixes.

Oh, and the price. We can't forget about that.

We're definitely going to need a thread for people who love the trilogy but think it should be cheaper.

Boy, this is gonna be an awful lot of work for somebody.

Glad it won't be me.

Agreed.

[adywan]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

lol. that looks totally fake...looks like the scene from ROTS, I think when he's talking to chewie. The same facial features and such. I bet its a FAKE!

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

I went to see Star Wars in concert 3 times...Never saw a CGI Yoda...I went to the first run of the concerts.


That looks fake. So, I don't know..cannot guarantee it's authenticity.

There was a behind the scenes special on the Star Wars in concert where they said that George went to see it and told them that they were using the "old" Yoda so he gave them the replacement clips with the new TPM Yoda. Those who saw the fist run never saw the new Yoda. I went to see it here in the UK and it had the CG TPM Yoda. Here's all the proof you need:

YouTube - ‪Star Wars Celebration V: Part 6 of 7‬‏

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

If you read the novel...the scene was there...it was also seen in some EU material. its not cobbled up as you put it. You don't trust Lucas? seems like more Lucas bashing to me, reminds me of the thread that was erased. If you don't trust him, do you trust Mark Hamill? he just said, he REMEMBERS IT!!!!!

Just because something appears in the novel or in the EU is no proof that it was ever shot. But i will provide proof that the scene was shot wiht Mark later

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

lol. I read those comments. they make it out like Lucas is hiding something. of course it was shot in 82...look at luke's face and robe...and the lightsaber...same one. You cannot replicate that.

Are you serious? Of course things like this can be replicated, especially with today's technology

Now we know the exterior shots of the cave scene was actually filmed on location including 3P0 standing outside the cave.

But, this doesn't mean that the shot was anywhere near complete when the score was being recorded. Pick-up shoots were still being done right up until a month before the film is finished and released. Many times the score is done while the film still contains temp footage,like storyboards, animatics etc in place of these shots, so just because the music exists doesn't mean to say that the scene was complete.

Now on the CD's this music is mixed in with the soundtrack of Vader boarding the Death Star, so people are saying that it has to have been done and that is the way the film was originally edited. Not true. I am lucky enough to have a copy of the original source music used for the anthology cd set. Now this is all the music as it was recorded at the sessions and before it was mixed together with other tracks as heard in the CDs including some tracks never heard on any releases. Now this scene is a completely separate piece of music and starts directly with the violins and not the synth section as heard in the CDs. Also read the 1997 linear notes for this piece of music:

...the music continues with "Tatooine Rendezvous," most of which accompanies a sequence eliminated from the film. In it, Vader uses the Force to contact his son, Luke Skywalker...The sequence begins with the brief telepathic exchange between Luke and Vader, which is broken by the appearance of droids Artoo-Detoo and See-Threepio, accompanied by Luke's theme and a playful bouncing wind melody as Luke places a newly constructed lightsaber inside Artoo's domed head."

Now i'm pretty sure that the telepathic conversation isn't broken by the appearance of the droids as it stands in the CV clip. In fact you don't even see any of the droids until luke has finished and ignited his sabre

Now the meditation chamber is taken from unused footage for Empire Strikes Back. They did not rebuild the chamber set for ROTJ. Vaders dialogue was never recorded by James Earl Jones for this scene. It's pieced together from other snippets of existing dialogue. Surely if this scene was finished at this time that JEJ would have recorded the dialogue?

Mark Hamill went on record to say he never shot this scene.

YouTube - ‪Star Wars Celebration V: Part 6 of 7‬‏

Now Mark has a very good memory about his time making the original trilogy so it seems strange to me that he would be so adamant that he never filmed it then suddenly remember it. Now George has a record of ostracising anyone who he falls out with or isn't one of his "yes" men. Now look at poor Dave Prowse. Lucas accused him of leaking secrets and banned him from the premier of ROTJ and has now banned him from any Lucasfilm event, even though it was proved at the time that it was in fact a crew member and not Dave. Would Mark want to go against the mighty flannelled one and get the same treatment? No. But that doesn't mean that Lucas made him lie.

Yes, a stand in could have been used but again this doesn't guarantee that it was shot during the making of ROTJ. More proof would be needed. Now here is a excerpt for the 1993 making of ROTJ book:

"Mark Hamill is coming back for one day of shooting later this month [November 1982] to do the scene where he builds his new lasersword..."

So that's it then, he did do it.

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

How has he lied in the past? name your source please...

Anyone saying that Lucas is a liar is a basher. Plain and simple. provide those sources where Lucas has lied..

I for one, was born in 1972. I've seen the originals at the movies...in the 80's. I grew up with the originals..I've seen them over 500+ times..and guess what? I love the changes and the updates. I want to see all the deleted scenes in existance fixed/repaired whatever it may be and put back into the film. A directors cut or whatever you wanna call it.

Lucas has lied many times. you only have to look around at early interviews to see just how much he has recently revised the true history of Star Wars.

He now says that he had all the films planned out and that the saga was "the adventures of Anakin Skywalker" and how he became Darth Vader. Erm, no. Anakin and vader were two completely separate characters even after filming ANH. He only decided to combine the two while writing ESB. Luke an Leia were always brother and sister as it was about the twins. Again, no. Luke was to have a sister but she was a completely different character that you wouldn't see until episode 7. Just read Splinter of the Minds eye. Now this book was actually commissioned by Lucas to be the sequel to Ep4. If the film wasn't a success he planned on making a low budget TV movie follow up, and this was the result. You can see from this book that leia was never meant to be Luke's sister. He even said in an interview in the Making of Star Wars doc that he didn't know who was going to end up with Leia, but that he was siding more with Luke.
He says now that it was only ever going to be a 6 film saga. Again, lies. At one point it was going to be a 12 film saga which was then reduced to 9. It was going to be 3 trilogies. As i said before, this is where you would meet Luke's real sister. While writing ROTJ he decided to end it at 6, but not only did he now need to reveal "the other" that was mentioned in ESB but also he was stuck finding a reason why Luke would get so angry, almost turning to the dark side and defeating vader. So Leia became the sister. Also the proof that she was never his sister can be seen in Lucas' own handwriting in the printed story treatment for ESB printed in "The Vault" book.

In the recovery room Leia takes care of Luke. he is obviously in love with her, and he tries to Express this to her. Leia says she can't love him, job etc, but gives him a sentimental kiss. this tenderness is broken by the entering of Han and the robots, also Chewie.

Now we know that this scene was actually filmed as a clip can be seen of Luke and Leia moving in for the kiss in one of the early ESB trailers. You can bet that this scene won't make it to the Blu-Ray

Yoda was never going to be a character in Star Wars, so how the hell can Lucas have originally written him in his prequel backstory? Simple, he never did. Yoda was only introduced because Lucas needed someone to train Luke and he had decided to kill Ben in the first film. Got to love the fact that Yoda was originally called "Buffy".

Lucas is lying and changing Star Wars history all the time. The proof is out there. To say that anyone that calls him a liar is just a "basher" is pathetic. You can believe everything he says all you want but it isn't bashing someone just because you have a free thinking mind and can see how many times he has changed his answers to a lot of things over the years, especially once the prequels came out. I don't dislike the guy and have a lot of respect for him but i will never blindly believe everything this guy now says.

Also there were never supposed to be prequels. ESB was going to be Episode 2

[starwarsagent]

Wow..just wow...I am speechless...why does the lucas bashing continue? Its mark hamill in the lost scene..you see his face...he remembers shooting it now..lucas did not force mark to remember it..you are being ridiculous..I've proven everyone wrong with the clip I posted..the vader scene was shot for rotj..you are out of order sir!

[adywan]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

Wow..just wow...I am speechless...why does the lucas bashing continue? Its mark hamill in the lost scene..you see his face...he remembers shooting it now..lucas did not force mark to remember it..you are being ridiculous..I've proven everyone wrong with the clip I posted..the vader scene was shot for rotj..you are out of order sir!

my god, you really live in another world don't you. It has been said by people who worked on the movie since the clip was released that the chamber was NEVER built for ROTJ and that it was an outtake from ESB. And i wasn't bashing Lucas as you call it. You called for proof and i gave it you. It is you that is being ridiculous. I made some very valid points both for and against the argument. I even provided proof that that Mark did indeed come back to shoot this scene, yet you call me ridiculous because you claim i said that Lucas forced him to remember it. Please try to read my comments a little better next time and you will see you are wrong. I was writing it from both points of view. But you only bothered to read the negative didn't you?

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by adywan

Got to love the fact that Yoda was originally called "Buffy".

This must have been an earlier draft in which part of Luke's training would involve slaying vampires.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by adywan

Now look at poor Dave Prowse. Lucas accused him of leaking secrets and banned him from the premier of ROTJ and has now banned him from any Lucasfilm event, even though it was proved at the time that it was in fact a crew member and not Dave.

"Poor Dave Prowse"?

He's been bashing and whining about his role for decades, from the time he learned it wasn't going to be his voice in A New Hope. Lucasfilm finally had enough of his crap in 1982!