"Darth Vader, only you could be so bold..."

I was a nineteen-year-old college student in 1997 when George Lucas released his Star Wars trilogy "Special Editions" in theaters. For those who don't know or give a hoot, the purpose of the Special Editions was to allow Lucas a chance to refine the films so they more closely resembled his original vision of the saga. Budget constraints and limits in technology and computer graphics put a major crimp in his overall plan back in 1977 and the films we got, while fantastic achievements from both technical and storytelling standpoints, were deemed "unfinished" and imperfect by the creator himself. There were handfuls of changes made to each film in the trilogy for the 1997 re-release, some minor and some major, but the essence of the story remained intact. The Special Editions were also an opportunity for fans to get reacquainted with the trilogy after twenty years, and to give a new generation the chance to see the films on the big screen for the first time.

What shocked me the most about seeing the Special Editions was not the numerous edits Lucas had made to his trilogy. It was not the close-up view of the wampa in The Empire Strikes Back (I'll get to that in a moment). It was not the horrible CG Jabba the Hutt that was inserted into A New Hope (I'll get to that too). It was not even Luke's cowardly scream at the end of Empire, (interesting to note that this was the same death scream uttered by the Emperor in Return of the Jedi.) While I was aware of each and every one of these changes, it was not the edits onscreen that shocked me the most; it was the audience's reaction to a pivotal moment during Episode IV: A New Hope.

As I sat in the theater and the lights dimmed, the energy in the place was awesome. The theater was only a short drive from the local college I attended, so understand that most of the people in attendance were from my generation. I was surrounded by "my people". Granted, people from all colors and faiths and parts of New England, but people who were just like me: "Children of the 80s".

When the opening crawl disappeared into the vastness of space and the Star Destroyer closed in and swallowed Princess Leia's Tantive IV blockade runner into its belly, this marked the "first" appearance of one of the most memorable villains in sci-fi movie history. What followed however was not akin to the boos and hisses from audiences that met Darth Vader's arrival back in 1977. Instead of hating and/or fearing this character by default, as is the natural reaction to a screen villain, the audience cheered. They cheered Darth Vader. The walls shook and the sound was deafening. I was astonished. They cheered as Vader walked through that doorway. They cheered as he surveyed the Rebel bodies scattered at his feet. They cheered as he strangled the life out of poor Captain Antilles. These people, my people were applauding this guy, and I was utterly shocked. I was even more stunned to find that I was celebrating right along with them...


"There is no conflict..."

There have been fan rumblings with Star Wars: Episode III just around the corner, and it has been rumored that after Revenge of the Sith we will look at the Original Trilogy and Darth Vader in particular in a different light. There seems to be a fear that we might see Darth Vader as the pathetic character he really is. Vader will still be a "cool" villain, no one is arguing that, but from a character standpoint perhaps its more fitting that we see him as the sad shell of a man he really is. At least that's my take on it. His story, ultimately what the entire saga is all about is a sad one. Anakin Skywalker is a tragic figure who unfortunately made some very bad choices and had to suffer the consequences. He shouldn't be applauded for that. He should be feared, but does he also deserve our pity?

I believe this fear of not recognizing Vader as a dominant force of evil post-Episode III is somehow related to the celebration I experienced back in 1997. Perhaps the audience's cheering of Vader's arrival represented a psychological victory of sorts. A victory over our nightmares. Our generation hadn't experienced the magic of Star Wars in the theaters. Darth Vader had dominated our fears and nightmares as children, along with Freddy, Jason and Bruce the shark. But what frightened us as children had not killed us, and therefore made us stronger. We had conquered our fears and rather than banish them back into the shadows under our beds or into the depths of our closets, we embraced them. In a way, our villains had become our heroes.

On a side note, I believe this is very deep stuff that should be examined by open-minded individuals and a paper should be written on the subject. I'm deadly serious about this. It ties in with the success and popularity of "antiheroes" in assorted media, from pro wrestler Stone Cold Steve Austin to The Sopranos to the Grand Theft Auto video game series. Maybe part of it has to do with the fact that recent films and stories paint a more detailed picture of our bad guys. We learn that Anakin Skywalker, Tony Soprano, and Fred Krueger are just flawed family men. They are villains, but they have people in their lives that genuinely care about them and depend upon them. They have families and friends and jobs to do, and they struggle on a daily basis to hide and/or shelter their loved ones from their dark nature. Perhaps that's part of the attraction: in some bizarre way, we relate to them. The other part of the attraction is that guys like Tony Soprano are doing what we would all like to do if the rules of life changed. We'd all like to be a bad guy, if only for a day and only if there were no consequences for our actions. Whatever the case may be, it's an interesting phenomenon, and I'd be curious to learn how many other generations, if any have experienced something similar. Love it or hate it, the fact that they made a Freddy Vs. Jason film speaks volumes about my generation. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.


"You were right about me..."

If one examines the turning point in Return of the Jedi, one will realize that Darth Vader didn't just save his son's life, he saved the galaxy. He reversed the tide in the age-old battle of Good versus Evil. He brought balance to the Force. But I have no doubt that Anakin was only concerned with Luke's safety. He wasn't worried about the larger picture. He wasn't thinking, "Gee, this is my chance to redeem myself and get to party in Jedi heaven with Ben and Yoda." He didn't care about the afterlife or bringing balance to anything. All the years of allowing his greed and anger to dominate his existence were laid to waste by a single burst of compassion. Anakin cared about the simple fact that his son was in pain, and he was the only one who could stop it. George has said that Anakin is afraid of losing things, that he becomes too attached, and that is what sets him down his dark path. In the end, it was that same fear that saved him. Anakin didn't want to lose his only son. He cared about something for the first time in a long time, and that is what these movies are all about. When you strip away the fluff you'll find that Star Wars is really about basic ideas and motifs.

Star Wars is not about spaceships, aliens, talking robots or "Death Stars". It's not about "The Force" or Jedi Knights or lightsabers or any of that. You're more than welcome to enjoy the films for those things, but they are not what Star Wars is all about. Star Wars is about people. It's about characters. It's about fathers and sons. The classic themes that all good stories are about, fantasy or otherwise.


"Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes..."

As mentioned above, there were numerous changes made to the Original Trilogy for the Special Editions. Now with the films finally released on DVD there have been even more changes, and rumor has it there may be yet another round of edits after Episode III for the eventual six-film DVD box-set. This is a sticky situation and it brings up a very sensitive issue that concerns topics like creative control and film preservation. Does a creator have the right to alter his existing work however he sees fit? How much is too much? There are supporters on both sides of the fence and I'm caught somewhere in the middle. Big surprise huh? But before we get to that, let's examine a few of those changes:

EPIV: A New Hope

Jabba the Hutt: He was in the original script for A New Hope, but one cannot deny that the threat of Jabba was one of those little things that added flavor to the overall saga. The fear of this unseen "vile gangster". Up until Return of the Jedi, Boba Fett was our only face (or helmet) given to Jabba and his organization, and to Han Solo's dangerous and troubled past.

The added back and forth between Han and Jabba serves the purpose of setting up what Han does for a living, and it also illustrates the fact that Jabba doesn't want Solo dead, not yet anyway. He respects Han as a smuggler and a pilot and he knows it would be foolish to eliminate such a valuable asset. As a scene between two characters within a story, it works. It adds to the saga.

Unfortunately, the positioning of Harrison Ford and the human actor standing-in for Jabba does not fit the scene, considering that we all know Jabba is a giant slug. In addition, the design for the Jabba CG model was horrendous and Han stepping on Jabba's tail was laughable, not comical.

This scene was touched up for the DVD release and remains virtually the same, but it now has the Episode I: The Phantom Menace Jabba model replacing the Special Edition model. It's an improvement, but that's like saying warm soda is an improvement over warm, flat soda. They're both unappealing and ultimately a disappointment.

EPV: The Empire Strikes Back

The Snow Beast: This is a classic case of what-you-see versus what-you-don't-see. Lucas had always wanted to show the Wampa (snow beast) but time, technology and budget concerns prevented him, similar to the EPIV Jabba situation. However, the point I'm trying to make is that the original version of Empire, without the glimpses of the Wampa made the sequence scarier and more suspenseful. What is that growling in the distance? Whatever it is, it's getting closer! Hurry Luke!

The Special Edition Wampa looks great. It's classic monster filmmaking: just a guy in a suit. And the scene is still scary. I just think what you don't see is more frightening than what you do, that's all. You decide.

A New Emperor: For the DVD release, Lucas and his team went back and replaced the holographic Emperor Palpatine with actor Ian McDiarmid, the same actor who portrayed the character in Episodes I, II, III and VI. The original Empire hologram was a combination of an old woman with chimpanzee eyes superimposed over her own, and the voice work of actor Clive Revill. This change is more for continuity's sake than anything else. Some of the dialogue was changed, but the scene still works.

EPVI: Return of the Jedi

Jabba's Palace: The Special Edition showcased a newly enhanced dance sequence in Jabba's palace, with new music and a CG band replacing the stiff puppets of the 1983 version. The new song is much more hip and rockin' but it lacks the "alien" feel of the earlier music. And there's no more Droopy McCool solo with his clarinet/oboe/whatchamacallit instrument in the Special Edition. A tragedy to be sure!

Lucas has said that the anti-CG crowd's favorite argument seems to be that the CG "looks fake"; George says that it's all fake, since both CG and puppets are not real flesh and blood. That's true, but the real argument, at least my argument is that the CG actually looks worse than the puppets. Since the puppets physically exist in real space next to the actors, that translates much better on film than the jelly-limbed computer animated characters. CG characters never seem to have weight or substance. They look ethereal because that's exactly what they are. A puppet may have less freedom of movement, but at least it has a presence.

A Jedi Redeemed: For the DVD, Prequel Trilogy actor Hayden Christensen's Anakin appears as a Force ghost at the end of the film, replacing original Anakin Sebastian Shaw. Some argue why hasn't Obi-Wan retained his young body if Anakin has? Shouldn't there be a bluish, transparent Ewan McGregor instead of good ol' Sir Alec Guinness? The answer is no, because the point of this change is that Anakin "died" in Episode III, not in Episode VI, thus his ghost reverts to his last appearance as a good man in Revenge of the Sith. Obi-Wan and Yoda died as good, old men, so they keep their weary old bodies. Hardly seems fair, but thems the breaks.

This explains Anakin, but why not add more Jedi to the mix? Hasn't poor Qui-Gon Jinn earned forgiveness and his place in Jedi heaven? Why not Mace Windu and Ki-Adi-Mundi? Maybe we'll seem them included in the Ultimate DVD Edition in 2006. I wouldn't put it past Lucas. Besides, it might be a nice touch to see Anakin, Ben and Yoda smiling, and then the camera slowly pulls back as one-by-one, more long-dead Jedi appear, each with warm smiles on their faces in silent thanks towards Luke, their champion of the Light Side of the Force.

There were more changes, none so drastic, but this brings us back to the issue of editing an existing work: Is it right? If not, why not? They're George's movies and he can do what he wants, right?

As an artist, I fully support Lucas and his creative freedom. But as a movie buff, and more importantly as a Star Wars fan, I'm strongly opposed to his decisions. Not to edit his films, but his refusal to acknowledge that previous versions exist. To claim as he has that "this is the only version", that's just wrong. Call it a "Director's Cut", call it a "Super Special Edition", call it whatever you want. Just don't deny the old versions exist. Someone who claims to have such a respect for movie history owes it to himself, his fans, and to future generations to chronicle the evolution of his saga, as an example of the advancement in special effects and storytelling in the motion picture format. He may think the original versions are ugly and unwatchable, that's his right, but is it also his right to rewrite history? I don't think so.

Providing the public with multiple versions would be the ideal solution, although this would be costly and time-consuming. In the short term: multiple DVD versions cost more money to produce and require a lot of time and effort. But in the long term, he makes more money by selling more than one version. And trust me, Star Wars fans will pick up every version that's available. Your average fan might not, but I have to believe Lucas would more than break even in the sales department. And most Star Wars fans would agree, just give us bare-bones DVD versions of the classic trilogy. No bonus features, although that would be nice. We just want the movies we saw 25 years ago. I feel safe in speaking for my fellow fans when I say: we're interested in the Special Editions, and we're interested in future DVD enhanced versions. These editions make what's old seem new again. But if I had to pick only one version, I'd take the classic unedited versions any day of the week.

Maybe we're just spoiled and greedy and want to have everything our way. In fact, I know we're spoiled and greedy. Star Wars brings out a passion in its fans, and that's a powerful, wonderful thing. We can all agree that these movies have changed our lives, shaped our imaginations and still bring us joy regardless of what changes George makes to them. A world with Star Wars is certainly more interesting than a world without. That's a small comfort, but we'll always have our memories of that galaxy far, far away; grainy, unedited, "imperfect" memories that are not digitally mastered in THX. But they're still our memories, and that's all that matters.

One thing is for certain: The Force will be with us, always.