The movie mistake mystery from "Revenge of the Sith"

Preserving “warts and all” vs fixing mistakes

• Many commenters dislike “overzealous” cleanup of films: removing goofs, film grain, and redoing color grading often makes movies feel worse, not better.
• There’s strong frustration that “corrected” versions become the only ones in print/streaming, making the original effectively inaccessible.
• Others argue some fixes (license plates, visible crew, reflections, anachronistic watches) are like correcting typos: they were never intended and only break immersion if noticed.

Restoration, remastering, and authors’ intent

• Debate over whether director-approved changes (Lucas, Cameron) are automatically “canonical” or whether films partly belong to audiences once released.
• Some see extensive revisions as akin to forgery or revisionist history; others compare them to later corrected book editions or musical scores.
• A common compromise position: change what you want, but always keep the original cut available, clearly versioned (like book editions/ISBNs).

Film grain, color grading, and the “digital” look

• Strong objections to aggressive DNR and grain removal in 4K remasters (e.g., Aliens, Cameron’s catalogue): they produce a plastic, video‑game look and erase the period texture.
• Color regrading is seen as hugely impactful—“as big as changing the music.” Sometimes it’s praised when it finally matches original intent; often it’s condemned as arbitrary or ugly.

Continuity errors and visible goofs

• People share favorite mistakes (Gladiator’s gas canister, Raiders truck flip, 2001’s “zero‑g” physics, Starbucks cup in Game of Thrones, accidental reflections turned into characters in Twin Peaks).
• Some viewers now can’t unsee continuity mismatches (hand positions, walking beats, reflections in eyes) and find them distracting.
• Editors and some commenters counter with Walter Murch’s “Rule of Six”: emotional impact, story, and rhythm trump perfect continuity; “errors” can be deliberate trade‑offs.

Analog charm, practical effects, and green screen fatigue

• Several lament the loss of practical sets and on‑location shooting; early Star Wars, Alien, and classic films feel more “real” precisely because physical things existed on set.
• The Star Wars prequels are criticized as over‑green‑screened and sterile, especially compared to more balanced productions (Harry Potter, The Mandalorian’s LED “Volume,” Oblivion, First Man).
• Others note younger audiences who grew up with the prequels often enjoy them unproblematically; generational taste and what “looks old” play a big role.

Archiving, fan restorations, and piracy

• There’s wide support for serious archiving: high‑bit‑depth film scans, large storage footprints, and careful cleanup without revision.
• Fan projects like 4K77 and Despecialized Editions are praised for reconstructing original Star Wars cuts from prints; their technical effort is admired.
• Because licensing and “fixed” releases often alter music or visuals, some argue that piracy/fan edits are the only practical way to experience historically accurate versions.