The dialog under the end title music is more audible.
this one bit is almost certainly down to how audio was remixed for home video at different stages (restorations are notorious for this sort of thing)
I first noticed the difference the one time I saw the shorter version in the theatre in 1979.
I'd have to argue that referring to the official version as "abridged" is like arguing that the revised Juliet Prowse episode is somehow tainted.
Sorry; I shall continue to call the shorter version "abridged". The first time I rant in this journal about canon, people will find out just how much stock I put in the idea of fictions possessing at all the property of being official or unofficial. Endorsement by the intellectual property's legal owner of the shorter version doesn't mean there weren't bits taken out. And taint is in the eye of the individual viewer, or it isn't; cf. Star Wars.
go to someplace like Muppet Central and see about getting the story sorted out
That's a good idea, and I did take a quick look over there after the first time you suggested it to me. At this late date, though, I don't have enough interest in the story getting sorted out for me to register at a new message board for the sole purpose.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-03 09:43 pm (UTC)Sorry; I shall continue to call the shorter version "abridged". The first time I rant in this journal about canon, people will find out just how much stock I put in the idea of fictions possessing at all the property of being official or unofficial. Endorsement by the intellectual property's legal owner of the shorter version doesn't mean there weren't bits taken out. And taint is in the eye of the individual viewer, or it isn't; cf. Star Wars.
That's a good idea, and I did take a quick look over there after the first time you suggested it to me. At this late date, though, I don't have enough interest in the story getting sorted out for me to register at a new message board for the sole purpose.