True. I totally agree that he is the "owner," so to speak, he can do what he wants.
But I think he's incredibly dishonest to the consumer who is old enough to know better.
You really do have to be a freaking die hard fan, close to conjoined twin of Lucas to know which version is what. The typical consumer who says, "Hmmm, haven't seen Star Wars in a while...let's go to Best Buy and get it!" is inevitably going to be disappointed because the movie sitting on the shelf for purchase is NOT the same movie they wanted. Its not the film the title says it is.
My versions (whatever they are) say only, "digitally remastered." It doesn't say, "digitally remastered, 1997 version with 2004 additions, new characters, added scenes, missing songs, changed songs, flips, flops, tweaks, twunks and teasers!"
Nah, it just says "digitally remastered," which every movie that had to be transfered to DVD says.
I don't mind that it IS a different version, I just think its false advertisement to call it "Star Wars" when it isn't REALLY.
It would be the same as buying say, "Casablanca" and it turns out as you hit 'play,' its a MST version with commentary. The title didn't warn you it was the movie with a bunch of crap added in...but whatever, that's YOUR problem, eh?
They should at least warn the typical consumer what the DVD really is. Otherwise, its unethical business.
reply
share