Once a work of art is released to the public, who does that art belong to — the artist or the audience? It’s a question that has occupied sociologists and critics for years, but one that has become particularly worthy of contemplation in light of the relationship between Star Wars creator George Lucas and that iconic series’ legion of fans — an alliance already contentious after 14 years of mutual acrimony, made newly heated by the forthcoming Blu-ray release of the entire series.
Back in January, the announcement of the Blu-ray release of the Star Wars films was greeted with a notably mixed reception by fans of the series (and of movies in general). Yes, of course, many were thrilled by the news — this is the most profitable and iconic science fiction series in film history, in high-def video and audio. But there was a catch: the Blu-rays would only include the “special edition” re-releases of the original trilogy.
Some background for those less consumed: In 1997, in preparation for his long-awaited return to the franchise (in the form of the “prequel” films, Episodes I-III, released between 1999 and 2005), Lucasfilms and 20th Century Fox re-released the so-called “original trilogy” (Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi) to theaters, in “Special Edition” form. This was nothing new; filmmakers from Steven Spielberg (Close Encounters of the Third Kind) to Ridley Scott (the endless Blade Runner reissues) had been revising works they’d been unhappy with for years, to no real objection. Lucas took the opportunity to add in new computer-generated effects, background gags, and deleted scenes; he also altered the editing of certain sequences, most notoriously the encounter between Han Solo and Greedo in the first film, changing the scene that Solo was no longer cavalierly picking off the bounty hunter, but acting in self-defense.
Though the re-releases were hugely successful financially, hardcore Star Wars fans were infuriated by the Lucas’ disregard for the films as they remembered (and loved) them. The “Han shot first” meme was born, a three-word summation and rejection of the entire notion of the “special editions.” Some filmmakers might take in this outcry from their fans and reconsider their digital futzing and tinkering. Lucas, instead, doubled down.
When the original trilogy hit DVD in 2004, Lucas not only inserted additional changes and alterations to the already-vandalized “special editions,” but steadfastly refused to release the original, theatrical versions in the format at all. The Star Wars DVDs came with a bonus disc including hours of bonus features, but the original cuts were nowhere to be found; at the time, Lucas insisted, “The special edition, that’s the one I wanted out there. The other movie, it’s on VHS, if anybody wants it. … I’m not going to spend the, we’re talking millions of dollars here, the money and the time to refurbish that, because to me, it doesn’t really exist anymore.” In 2006, Lucasfilm finally acquiesced — or, perhaps, realized that they could make some more money — by releasing the original versions on DVD, though those discs eschewed the remastering of the “special edition” releases, instead using a thrown-together 2.0 stereo mix and non-anamorphic image that made the movies look like the red-headed stepchildren they were being treated as.
So no one was really surprised when the announcement for the Blu-ray discs made it abundantly clear that, in spite of the enormous storage capacities of the format, the original theatrical versions would not be included. And, frankly, no one should have been surprised by the slowly-leaking news, over the past couple of weeks, that Lucas has made even more alterations to the films—not only to the original trilogy, but to the prequels as well. But the anger and frustration of the fans boiled over once again, and for good reason; Lucas’ clear disdain for the wishes of his fans has become so entrenched that it has even sparked a documentary treatise on the subject. At this point, it almost seems as though he’s making these changes purely to piss people off.
So who is right here? To casual observers, the Star Wars kerfuffle may seem little more than whiny movie geeks engaging in an endless argument over inconsequential details with an increasingly irrelevant filmmaker. But film writer Scott Weinberg, in a smart and concise essay on the controversy, pinpoints exactly why this is a big deal. “Between 1977 and 1997 (the year the ‘Special Editions’ showed up),” he writes, “I watched and adored the original Star Wars at least 15 times. Like most hardcore fans, I know Star Wars virtually by heart — and that’s what makes all the ‘new’ stuff such an inescapable annoyance: I spot every change, every sound, every stupid addition as a reminder than I’m NOT watching the movie I love; I’m watching a version that was tweaked to get more asses in the seats for that damn theatrical re-release.”
But that’s not, it would seem, a concern to Lucas. “I’m sorry you saw half a completed film and fell in love with it,” he snarled in 2004. “But I want it to be the way I want it to be. I’m the one who has to take responsibility for it.” And that is a valid argument — as noted, previous filmmakers have had occasion to revise their works (though it should be noted that none have gone to the lengths Lucas has to bury their originals; check out the Close Encounters Blu-ray, which includes all of that picture’s iterations, even including a fancy chart to track the changes). And the films are, in fact, Lucas’ to revisit, if he chooses.
Or are they? Lucas wrote and directed Star Wars, and (to his detriment, really) the entire prequel trilogy. But he directed neither The Empire Strikes Back nor Return of the Jedi, and he only co-wrote the latter (he is credited with “story” on Empire). So are those his films to alter?
But even if they are, the original question remains. Whose art is it anyway? Does the snobbish, high-culture perception of the Star Wars pictures (as sci-fi popcorn movies for kids and overgrown teenagers who never move out of the basement) allow us to overlook the real and worrisome questions this controversy poses about the defacing of art? Once those films were released, did they — the films in that form, and the experience of seeing them — become part of popular culture, a part of our shared cinematic landscape? Or do they remain Lucas’, to do with as he pleases?
Here’s a quote that Mr. Lucas might want to read. It sheds some interesting light on the matter:
American works of art belong to the American public; they are part of our cultural history. People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians, and if the laws of the United States continue to condone this behavior, history will surely classify us as a barbaric society. The preservation of our cultural heritage may not seem to be as politically sensitive an issue as ‘when life begins’ or ‘when it should be appropriately terminated,’ but it is important because it goes to the heart of what sets mankind apart. Creative expression is at the core of our humanness. Art is a distinctly human endeavor. We must have respect for it if we are to have any respect for the human race.
Well said! What thoughtful cultural guardian was responsible for that eloquent and impassioned plea?
What do you think? Should Lucas leave his damn movies alone? Or should the Star Wars fans just settle down and watch their picture shows? Let us know in the comments.








Comments (12)
What bothers me is not the opinions of Lucas’s critics, but the manner in which they are expressed. Is the fact that Lucas has a particular philosophy about film making which differs from his critics reason enough for the vitriolic remarks common to any discussion of either Lucas himself or “Star Wars” in general? Almost every article or discussion I’ve read about anything SW-related for the past decade (and that’s no small number, let me tell you) has had at least some hyperbolic anti-Lucas sentiment either in comments or by the author of the piece itself. This goes for even things tangentially related to the films. Why the obsessive hatred? Can’t we just agree to disagree and move on?
And for the record, TESB and ROTJ are as much Lucas’s films as Kershner’s and Marquand’s. Really more so. He was so heavily involved in ROTJ’s production (as chronicled in “Empire of Dreams”) that he may as well have had a co-directing credit, and he was creatively responsible for TESB as well to a lesser extent. The work of those directors in this instance falls into the same category as the score of John Williams or the VFX of ILM. They were hired to tell parts of a whole story, ultimately spawned and helmed by Lucas. The value of their work should neither be diminished nor inflated.
Finally, in his speech, Lucas was complaining about people buying up the copyrights for films they had no part in producing and altering them (potentially against the wishes of the actual creators, living or dead). His arguments do not cover creators making changes to their own works for future releases. This happens all the time in publishing, with new editions correcting mistakes or adding new information, and not just in nonfiction.
That final quote… what a brilliant way to end this article. What a deep, deep burn, Mr. Lucas.
George Lucas is a writer, not a director. Almost every movie he has directed is bad. The Empire Strikes back is the best movie of Star Wars Saga because the director was other man, Irving Kershner. All the other movies of Star Wars sucks, the exception is Episode 4. George’s mind is full of merchandishing crap, maybe thats the reason he is changing Star Wars.
I’ve watched Adywans versions of Star Wars, it´s incredible how a person with a simple computer can do a better job editing the movies than a multimillonaire studio. But everything is possible when we imagine that the studio is full of assholes. Or maybe George is getting old with some mental disfuction, because no intelligent people could fuck a famous franchise like this.
The author’s argument makes an assumption that Star Wars is art. In my mind it is commerce. Something a person needs to purchase to enjoy. It is also entertainment. If the creator of this commercial enterprise, which is meant to entertain, wants to change the vehicle of entertainment, that is his perogative. If you don’t like the final product, don’t purchase it.
The ‘Han Shot First’ change signaled an imperious Lucas, and the victory of the ever empty headed PC society over rational survival. That single move doomed Lucas, and like almost every modern socialist, he is so convinced of his own superiority that he can not help but continually prove it by performing further alterations. It truly is a giant middle finger to the rest of us.
My high school art teacher said every artist should have an assistant who stands behind him or her with a club, which would be used at once when the painting is finished. With all the assistants directors have, you’d think there’d be one….
I have two cents….
One – The American Film Institute has Star Wars in their top 100 movies of all time.. I believe if Lucas changes his films, the movie should be re-rated (since that’s not how they were intended apparently) and ultimately removed from that list. Yes, the movie was iconic and revolutionary, but they were perfect the way they were. changing a word here and there or an entire line of dialog or even how an actor or actress delivered a line.. The actors in the films are artists too.. the films should be left alone. the “special editions” should be just that.. “special” and another take on the originals.. There is no reason not to release the Original of Blu-ray.. unless you are tiring to find ways around not playing your Ex-Wife. Just saying..
Two – If we are talking about Art here… lets take a look at Leonardo da Vinci.. Amazing Artist, and a lot of people consider the Mona Lisa to be one of his greatest accomplishments. If da Vinci lived today, would he go back can change the Mona Lisa? Maybe, but if he did… how many people would be mad? most would just ask “why?” why would you do that?
Sorry about the Rant! loved the article.
[...] all of the recent outcry against George Lucas for making unnecessary (if profitable) tweaks to his own baby — which, let’s not forget, is the most iconic science fiction series in film history [...]
I second PB’s thoughtful reply.
There seems to be a thread of entitlement running through your argument. I’m fine with the idea of works of art being part the public domain and not for or merely by the author/writer/director. However, surely by the same token we cannot expect the artwork to bend to our needs? I think you’d be much better arguing why the new editions/recuts are worse rather than saying he has no right to change them because it’s insulting to him as someone who contributed largely to the film to say that the public get to decide.
Not that I think it’s his absolute or inherited perogative (he’s such a rubbish director and writer anyway); my point is that the value of the art is what should be the deciding factor, and that isn’t arbitrated by either director or audience alone.
[...] George Lucas and that iconic series' legion of fans — an alliance … Read more on Flavorwire Leave a Reply | Tags: 'Storage, Lewiston, style, [...]
[...] very good at all, and c) its release was preceded by yet another chapter in the continuing saga of Star-Wars-fans-as-abused-wives-on-a-Cops-rerun, when creator George Lucas came out last week and said (insisted) that no, no, Han never shot [...]
Post a new comment