Deleted & New Scenes - Lucas likes to sabotage his work

[Stofsk]

I don't know, I think it fits a lot better in context as it sounds like a tribal song/dance that the ewoks would play in celebration.

[Stark]

The movies were full of contrast and they were on a planet full of tribal dudes; even as a kid I didn't have a problem with teh idea that the victorious rebels would take the opportunity for some time off their warships and chill out with their ewok buddies.

I mean, it's pretty 'man of the people' stuff - I bet there were news cameras there. TRIUMPHANT REBELS CULTURALLY SENSITIVE!

[Elfdart]

Actually for those additions I am not against, it improves the visual continuity between OT and PT.

I found retconning Anakin's ghost to look like Hayden Christensen questionable, when Anakin looked like Sebastian Shaw when he died. Even the reason given, that Anakin looks that way ostensibly because the last time he was a Jedi he looked like Hayden Christensen, doesn't really work, since the whole point of the climax was that Anakin had been redeemed and was once again a Jedi when he died, so he still should have looked like Sebastian Shaw.

especially since obi-wan is 'old' not young. but also if you don't watch the PT (or watch ROTJ on it's own), it doesn't make sense to see hayden in the context of the movie as you only see the old anakin before his death.

My only issue with the shot is that if Anakin's ghost is supposed to represent Anakin before his "death" (conversion to Darth Vader), then why not just use his image entirely instead of superimposing Christensen's head on Shaw's body?

[MrCoffee]

On the off chance this hasn't been posted, here is a slightly relevant (and NSFW) SMBC sketch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KF02VoDQSd0

[Skgoa]

Just a little FYI regarding the "Han shot first" thing: Lucas was forced to change it to get the re-release of the movie a rating that did not exist back in the 70ies.

[Tsyroc]

Just a little FYI regarding the "Han shot first" thing: Lucas was forced to change it to get the re-release of the movie a rating that did not exist back in the 70ies.

If that's the case he should have just released it unrated. Normally that's an issue for movies, and maybe he was required to have a rating for 20th Century Fox to distribute it, but if that's not the case I can't see him having much trouble getting his "remastered" version of a 20 year old box office smash and cultural phenomenon in to theaters.

It actually would have been nice to see a wide release that said screw the MPAA.

[Havok]

Just a little FYI regarding the "Han shot first" thing: Lucas was forced to change it to get the re-release of the movie a rating that did not exist back in the 70ies.

Please provide some proof for this.

This goes against EVERYTHING Lucas believes in and is a driving factor in why he is a member of no unions and anyone he works with takes the job outside of the various Hollywood movies IIRC.

[aussiemuscle308]

And, well, yeah, who the hell in their right mind thought Greedo shooting first was better?

i'm sure because they wanted him to be a total 'good' guy, but i prefer the original as we see him change from crook to 'respectable' general. He needed to start out as an Anti-Hero imo.

[TC Pilot]

Even changing the scene in order to change the character is idiotic, since the scene does nothing to alter the fact he's a drug runner for a crime lord, or his totally self-serving behavior in the rest of the movie up until he decides to rush back and save Luke. It really baffles me why "I am going to shoot a guy who is sticking a gun in my face and telling me he is going to collect a bounty on my head" would even be considered "bad," especially when they're perfectly willing to shoot people totally "unprovoked" a million other times in the movies. Oh look, Obi-Wan totally drew his lightsaber before those drunk cantina patrons did, he's bad!

[aussiemuscle308]

Just a little FYI regarding the "Han shot first" thing: Lucas was forced to change it to get the re-release of the movie a rating that did not exist back in the 70ies.

it's not as bad as obi wan cutting the guys arm off. there's even blood visible.

[Darth Tedious]

Just a little FYI regarding the "Han shot first" thing: Lucas was forced to change it to get the re-release of the movie a rating that did not exist back in the 70ies.

it's not as bad as obi wan cutting the guys arm off. there's even blood visible.

I don't even know if there's truth to the "he did it because of ratings" rumour, but if there is, Obi-Wan chopping the guy's arm off isn't the same thing.

According to the rumour, the reason censors demanded change was because of the characterisation, not the actual level of violence.
It's like this:
Obi-Wan cut Pig-face's arm off openly in defense of Luke, who was in immediate danger and had done nothing wrong. So that's okay, they're good guys.
Han shot Greedo sneakily under the table, because Greedo was holding him up for trouble he'd gotten himself into because he does illegal shit. Oh noes, he's not really a good guy at all, he's actually a bit of a thug. How can he be a hero in a FAMILY movie??? etc. etc.

As I said, I don't know if there's any truth to the rumour at all, but it does make some sense. Still doesn't really excuse George. RotS was M-rated here in Australia anyway, and if I remember a conversation I had with Thanas correctly, all the SW saga is M-rated (or equivalent) in Germany. Who cares if ANH isn't PG?

[Elfdart]

Quite often a filmmaker will preemptively censor his movie out of fear of what the MPAA will do with the rating, and it is true that movies that are re-released are usually re-rated by the board. This might also explain why the fiery squibs in ANH were toned down, too.

[Grumman]

Quite often a filmmaker will preemptively censor his movie out of fear of what the MPAA will do with the rating, and it is true that movies that are re-released are usually re-rated by the board. This might also explain why the fiery squibs in ANH were toned down, too.

I'm with Tsyroc on this - it's Star Wars. It's a re-release of a cultural icon. Giving it an R rating would do more to hurt the MPAA's credibility than it would hurt Star Wars.

[Dominus Atheos]

No one said anything about an "R" rating, it would have been given a PG-13 and so not been considered a "family" movie.

[Vehrec]

PG-13 exists because of a George Lucas movie-specifically, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, what with it's heart ripping out and delightfully macabre banquet. Star Wars, if released today in it's original cut, probably would be skirting dangerously close to PG-13. I can see making cuts back on it, especially because the MPAA never tells anyone specifically what they need to do to bring their rating down.

[Elfdart]

I'm with Tsyroc on this - it's Star Wars. It's a re-release of a cultural icon. Giving it an R rating would do more to hurt the MPAA's credibility than it would hurt Star Wars.

Maybe, but if you're a filmmaker it's easier to cut a few frames here and splice a few in there than it is to roll the dice with a bunch of soccer moms. Knocking a film from a PG to a PG-13 might not seem like that big a deal, but there's been pressure to restrict advertising of anything higher than PG on kid shows or Saturday mornings. Since Lucas aimed Star Wars specifically at grade schoolers, it's probably something he's hypersensitive about. You'll notice he didn't do anything similar with the Indiana Jones movies, American Graffiti or TXH-1138 because those aren't aimed at kids.