ebc8bc0a   
   Duggy  wrote:   
   : So, wait, are you complaining that the original version is being   
   : suppressed or not being preserved?   
      
   I believe that it has been preserved, and that the properly preserved   
   version is being suppressed.  Actually, I HOPE that it has been preserved,   
   I have no proof of that.  If it isn't being preserved, then that would be   
   even worse.   
      
   : Because they are not the same thing at all.   
      
   Of course.  But if the only version that is released is only marginally   
   watchable, and that all good quality copies are not allowed to be shown,   
   then that also constitutes suppression, at least of the film as was   
   experienced in its theatrical form.  And it IS true that he does not   
   allow the film to be shown in theaters (or television) in its original   
   theatrical form - that too is suppression (there was a recent showing   
   that was done without his approval - technically illegal).  Unless you   
   think that projecting the 2006 DVD extra on the big screen would   
   constitute the original theatrical form!?   
      
   : Suppressing a film is deliberately stopping any copies of it reaching   
   : the public.  The DVD release - no matter the quality - is proof that   
   : it is not being suppressed.   
      
   That is pure semantic gymnastics.  When what is released is purposely   
   made unwatchable, then by any practical measure it is being suppressed,   
   presuming he has a decent quality version.   
      
   : Preserving a film is something that is done by archivists and doesn't   
   : require a release at all.  I see no proof it isn't being preserved.   
      
   Interesting.  So you don't consider George Lucas' own claims that the   
   original film elements were destroyed to make the special editions, and   
   that he doesn't have the resources to clean up the original theatrical   
   versions, to be evidence that they are not being preserved?  If you don't,   
   then do you instead believe that those claims are lies (as I do)?  If so,   
   then we are on the same page on this point.   
      
   For that matter, since you are so into semantics, of course you see no   
   "proof" that it isn't being preserved... as you have worded it, it is an   
   unprovable thing.  But it's just a mental gyration; if he HAS preserved   
   them (as you seem to suggest he has), then it follows that he is   
   suppressing the preserved versions.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)