Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Jedi)   Star Wars Nerds, prepare to get your geek on. A shot by shot comparison between the '77 and '04 versions of Episode IV. May the lack of sex be with you   (starwars.com ) divider line
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

29030 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Sep 2006 at 9:41 AM (10 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



151 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2006-09-02 02:26:41 AM  
Consider me busy for the next few hours.


/Sex is for the week-minded
 
2006-09-02 02:34:48 AM  
Golf-clap. Great headline.
 
2006-09-02 02:49:39 AM  
roflcopter.
 
2006-09-02 02:53:22 AM  
Headlines like this one need to be posted on a wall of fame somewhere
 
2006-09-02 03:31:54 AM  
Best headline I've read all day submitter.
 
2006-09-02 09:43:52 AM  
Sex is for sex offenders!
 
2006-09-02 09:44:16 AM  
I found that bizarrely fascinating.
 
2006-09-02 09:45:08 AM  
i97.photobucket.com

There you go Joshua, sorry for the delay.
 
2006-09-02 09:51:10 AM  
Han shot first
 
2006-09-02 09:51:35 AM  
Han no longer shoots first!
 
2006-09-02 09:51:36 AM  
Meh, much of it is nothing more than touch ups on the picture quality, something that is to be expected with any DVD reissue of an older movie. However, while I am surprised at how much they did end up redoing for the new releases, in a way it kinda makes it flow better with the bastard prequels.

/I'm just glad they're giving us an option between watching either now
 
2006-09-02 09:52:07 AM  
Just had sex, now onto the the star wars!
 
2006-09-02 09:52:41 AM  
I hate their god damn edits, leave the farkin film alone.
 
2006-09-02 09:53:05 AM  
I can't get behind making one single change to the original versions.

I have all three on VHS tape, thank goodness.
 
2006-09-02 09:54:22 AM  
Damned right Han shot first.
 
2006-09-02 09:54:57 AM  
Oh Boy, this one ought to bring the living dead out of the basement.
 
2006-09-02 09:55:44 AM  
I still have my original VHS tapes too. A couple minor changes might not have been too bad, like updating a few special effects but anything that impacts the plot or needlessy adds CGI just because it can be done is stupid and pointless.

/this is the last Star Wars purchase I will ever make
 
2006-09-02 09:56:54 AM  
Why can't I figure out how to get beyond the first pic? Nothing to click but "close window". I must be missing something. Oh well...
 
2006-09-02 09:57:37 AM  
I like the original flavour better (sort of like New Coke).
 
2006-09-02 09:59:51 AM  
Anyone else getting those buzzing banners? Sheesh, that's annoying.
 
2006-09-02 10:05:40 AM  
CravenMorehead

A lot of the minor visual improvements were great, but like all great special-fx, they're better if they do not interfere with with the story or the characters.

George Lucas took it a step farther and tried rewriting his movies rather than simply updating them. Of course, that was his right.. But he made Han Solo go from a space cowboy who knew how to take care of himself to a panzy little weakling who let some glassy-eyed salamander get the drop on him. I don't think the fans would have had a problem with the minor scene-enhancing effects. It was the story-altering effects that ruined what could have been a great restoration effort.
 
2006-09-02 10:06:35 AM  
Hey, at least they're finally admitting that they removed the 'graphic' blaster hit frames from the detention cell scene.

//'97 SE producers went overboard
//'04 DVD version is good
//'77 version sucks
 
2006-09-02 10:09:11 AM  
Some of you purists need to take a breath.
I liked the changes. Better visuals and better SFX, like the floating droid by the troopers and X-wing shot heading towards the Death Star.
Also, subby. I had sex WHILE looking at. My wife is THAT cool.
We both wanted to show you up.
 
2006-09-02 10:10:06 AM  
Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt!
 
2006-09-02 10:13:45 AM  
May the lack of sex be with you

The first ten or twenty times I heard that, it was funny and there was truth to it. The next twenty or so times I heard it, nobody was laughing at it anymore, but there was still truth to it. Then, sometime around the time the Berlin Wall fell and Salman Rushdie had a fatwa passed against him, girls decided nerds were cool. So it wasn't funny, and there wasn't much truth to it anymore.

And then the next thing to happen, was the re-release in '97. Now granted, when you have the mythological fat guy sitting next to you in the theater, ruining the re-release for you by pointing to the screen every thirty seconds and saying "THAT'S new..." it's a little tough to picture him getting lucky. But about this time, the SW "nerds" ratcheted back a little bit on the "can you fart if you're Darth Vader" stuff and the "just what did Luke and Leia swing on, anyway, when they left Jabba's sail barge" stuff, and began to inspect the series from a philosophical layer, reading up on Joseph Campbell, looking into the story Lucas was really trying to tell about good and evil.

This changed things. Philosophy, and good & evil, will get a guy laid. Quite a bit.

About this time, making fun of "Star Wars nerds"...not BEING a "Star Wars nerd"...became the province of guys who live in their mothers' basements and don't get laid. The "nerds" themselves, did just fine.

The trend continued as the prequels were released. If you were socially maladjusted, having a need to talk but nothing of substance to say, you just hammered on Lucas. It was a shortcut. You could learn to talk to people, or you could make fun of Jar Jar Binks.

THEN, the people who like to say Star Wars nerds don't get sex, said it...about a hundred more times.

NOW, we're well into what psychologists call "projection."

Maybe Sumby would get some if he stopped making fun of people. Of course I realize this is FARK...

/It just keeps on getting funner, every time you say it. Please. Continue.
//Going to pick up my son. Cleaning up the condom wrappers and re-shelving the Star Wars discs before I go.
 
2006-09-02 10:14:57 AM  
i97.photobucket.com
 
2006-09-02 10:17:36 AM  
Ok, that's TWO browsers in which the tour link doesn't work.
 
2006-09-02 10:18:47 AM  
The_Prick

Damn dude...NSFW much? Bastard.
 
2006-09-02 10:18:55 AM  
To me, part of what made the original Star Wars movie so great was it's sorta cheap and gritty drive-in movie quality. It makes it that much easier for the inner quality of the script to shine through.
That aspect was missing from all the Star Wars movies that followed it.

Similiar to Mad Max, everything that followed it was just too slick and over produced, with less attention paid to the scripts.

Night of the Living Dead did a pretty good job with the Dawn of the Dead sequel in that regard.

Another gritty drive in great, Fists of Fury, didn't exactly have sequels, but you could see the decline in script quality vs. improved production values in everything else that Bruce Lee took on.

I guess when you have a big hit, it's hard to stay cheap and gritty.
 
2006-09-02 10:20:22 AM  
The_Prick: You win the intertube. Brilliant.
 
2006-09-02 10:24:07 AM  
Image 1 of 122


I think I'll pass...
 
2006-09-02 10:26:25 AM  
I can't believe someone went through the effort to make that. Not the SW thing, that I can believe, the animated gif up there.
 
2006-09-02 10:26:50 AM  
More of the digital tunnel set extension.
More of the digital tunnel set extension.
More of the digital tunnel set extension.
More of the digital tunnel set extension.
More of the digital tunnel set extension.
More of the digital tunnel set extension.
More of the digital tunnel set extension.
More of the digital tunnel set extension.
More of the digAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH
 
2006-09-02 10:27:54 AM  
Lego Star Wars II is being released on the 12th!

I unabashedly and unashamedly love everything Star Wars. As does my son, who turns 9 this month. Proving that I had sex at least once in my life.

/A bit more than once, actually
//But not a whole lot more
///OK, thousands of times
////But I'm not bragging or anything
 
2006-09-02 10:28:13 AM  
This is just more pro Lucas editing propaganda.
 
2006-09-02 10:29:09 AM  
piscis ferox: Damn dude...NSFW much?

I didn't know your Church had computers.
 
2006-09-02 10:29:24 AM  
When I saw the new release, I wondered why they left this lightsaber looking so cheesy. Still do. Shouldn't there be a little more blue in there?

i63.photobucket.com
 
2006-09-02 10:30:05 AM  
The Death Star has nothing on Unicron.
He doesn't just destroy planets, he eats them.
i5.photobucket.com
... Han shot first.
 
2006-09-02 10:31:19 AM  
As far as I know, NObody has any video copy of Star Wars that doesn't have "A New Hope" tacked on the top of the title crawl. The one I first saw in the theaters had nothing before "It was a period of civil war". That movie was just plain Star Wars. I was worried they wouldn't go back that far with the the retro version ("Episode IV A New Hope" was added on the first re-release, I believe), but from the frame comparison, it looks like they did. Come ON dvds...

/gots me some arguments to win
 
2006-09-02 10:32:53 AM  
piscis ferox:

It's a CATERPILLAR having sex with a FRENCH FRY!!!

/sheesh
 
2006-09-02 10:34:15 AM  
A film should serve as a historical document. What Lucas did at the time was revolutionary. Sure technology has changed a lot, that doesn't mean the film should change to be up to "Today's special effects standards".

When I watch Seven Samurai, I am amazed at what they were able to make in the 1940's. And the final battle in the rain is incredible. I don't need to see an enhanced version with thousands of extra people added in with cgi. A good movie is a good movie.
 
2006-09-02 10:34:47 AM  
You know what really grinds my gears?

It's that star wars fans should in theory be progressive, intelligent, forward-thinkers. After all, they seem to have the willingness and capacity to expose themselves to the mindbending possibilities that sci-fi can offer.

And yet, they hitch their wagon to arguably the worst science ficsion ever: star wars, which is a thinly disguised Christian apologetic that, take away the spaceships and phasers, belongs squarely in the 16th century. Everything from the Divine Right of Jedi to the Healing Power of "the Force" (can I get a Halleleujiah!) to a really simplistic good-vs-evil story adds up to the fact that this is basically a chromed over bible you guys are into.

It's a shame. Sci-fi can be and generally is so much better than star wars shiate. But, then again, I guess the popularity of SW may be simply because it is so squarely aimed at the middlebrow.
 
2006-09-02 10:37:12 AM  
Never mind inigo already said it...
 
2006-09-02 10:37:25 AM  
SuburbanCowboy

Amen.
 
2006-09-02 10:38:18 AM  
So now there's a whole bunch of people with lines in their resumes like "I recomposited pyrotechnic shots in the 2004 version of Star Wars.

"My mother wanted me to be a doctor, but she's so proud of me now!"
 
2006-09-02 10:42:05 AM  
bender_the_offender: You know what really grinds my gears?

It's that star wars fans should in theory be progressive, intelligent, forward-thinkers. After all, they seem to have the willingness and capacity to expose themselves to the mindbending possibilities that sci-fi can offer.

And yet, they hitch their wagon to arguably the worst science ficsion ever: star wars, which is a thinly disguised Christian apologetic that, take away the spaceships and phasers, belongs squarely in the 16th century. Everything from the Divine Right of Jedi to the Healing Power of "the Force" (can I get a Halleleujiah!) to a really simplistic good-vs-evil story adds up to the fact that this is basically a chromed over bible you guys are into.

It's a shame. Sci-fi can be and generally is so much better than star wars shiate. But, then again, I guess the popularity of SW may be simply because it is so squarely aimed at the middlebrow.



Oh, please. It's not meant to be hard SF. It's a "prince rescues the princess from the evil castle" fairy tale set in a futuristic universe. It's more fantasy than SF; a kids movie that adults can enjoy as well. It's just meant to be fun. The SF you compare it to would have bored kids to tears.

Now fire up Solaris and have a good nap. You might be less cranky.
 
2006-09-02 10:43:45 AM  
If I have to choose, I'd rather be stuck in an elevator with Star Wars geeks than Trek geeks.

Next Trekkie/Trekker that insists I call him Admiral whatever, I'm demanding to know what naval ship he served on.
 
2006-09-02 10:46:06 AM  
bender, did you say "phasers?"

off with his head.
 
2006-09-02 10:46:40 AM  
More of the digital tunnel set extension.
 
2006-09-02 10:47:07 AM  
bender_the_offender

You're kidding right? A "thinly disguised Christian apologetic"?

You mean apart from the good-and-evil-being-two-sides-of-the-same-coin Hinduism aka "the Force"? Which also just happens to be one of the main points of the film?

Idiot.
 
Displayed 50 of 151 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report