First of he starts talking about how in '77 there was a limited release of Star Wars and wide release and therefore there's always been special editions. Like fuck off dude that's clearly not what people are referring to.
You haven't understood what Worley is saying, there is no "original version" in the way that the manchildren intend it, Star Wars was going through changes comparable, and in fact sometimes larger than the special edition changes that people complain about while it was being released in theaters. The stereo and mono audio tracks are very different with changes as minor as additional alien and robot noises, and as severe as entire voice actresses being changed or whole lines of expository dialogue being added in. Mike Stoklasa and the guy who made the People VS George Lucas literally got together and complained about a scream being added and removed from the falling scene in Empire, and they complain about Ewoks blinking or an additional alien being added in some scene or another. Do they want the original audio track or the revised mono audio track? Later versions are based upon both audio versions, with the additional noises, but using the base of the stereo version and original actress for Aunt Beru. And why shouldn't the original public screening of Star Wars count? Is it suddenly not problematic for George to be monkeying around with special effects just because fewer people had seen it? He isn't talking about the test screening, which he excludes because it wasn't a public screening, the limited release was a version that George was happy to show to the public, and he just had the ability to improve the movie after the initial public release, just like he did in 1997. In fact, you complaining about this just proves his point, you don't really care about the "original version", you care about the version you saw when you were younger, and earlier versions don't count as different versions because you arbitrarily don't care about them.
He also falls into the pitfall that a lot Prequel defenders do in that they take Lucas' word as gospel. In particular, his defense of the Greedo shoots first edit is pretty atrocious. He plays Lucas explaining that he always intended Han to shoot in self defense and justifies the changes by saying it makes it more clear. If that was always the intention why did you need to edit Harrison Ford into this super uncanny bobbing of his neck to avoid the shot and not just have Ford dart across his seat or something to show he was avoiding an active shot? The scene is very clearly referencing this scene from Good, Bad and the Ugly:
Tuco and Han both have guns drawn at them and puts them in self defense situations so shooting first is completely justified. It's not my fault that Lucas and/or the audience are dumb liberals who think that makes them heartless killers and not just men out looking to defend themselves. And the worst part is that Rick Worley KNOWS about this movie being referenced and criticizes others for not seeing the parallels. Why doesn't he bring it up? Likely cause then Lucas was wrong to use it as a reference if Greedo shooting first was always the intention. It's just bullshit. He also completely glosses over the unnecessary addition of the Jabba scene in New Hope. It got cut for a reason and that's cause all the info is in the Greedo shooting scene and much better conveyed there as well.
You're arguing with a straw man, Rick explicitly says that the change, despite being hailed as the most important change in the whole special editions, is actually a really minor change, the only difference is whether Greedo actually succeeded in pulling the trigger before he died, since it's really clear from the subtitles in the 1977 versions that Greedo was intending to kill Han Solo. And George chose to update the scene for two reasons, one of them is as you mentioned, that some people, especially those featured in the People VS George Lucas, really did think that this scene was portraying Han as a cold-blooded killer, which bothered George, and one of them is that the visual storytelling simply isn't as clear as George wanted it to be. Sure, it's clear that Han is in danger, but not that he's in imminent danger of death, unless you read the subtitles, but George wants his movies to be similar to silent movies insofar as you don't need any dialogue to understand what's happening, but the imminent danger of death is of course a really important part of the scene. Does the alteration look "super uncanny"? No, but it is a little bit awkward, which is why George tried to make it look better in later revisions like the 2004 DVD release. I would encourage you to read the top comments on this video to see whether George's concerns were legitimate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=la7uuFsCIrg Also consider the fact that even if this scene was really changed for the worse, it would simply be one bad change among hundreds of good changes and not worth all the bitching.
I find your suggestion that George should have had Han dive out of the way if he was intending for him to actually be evading a shot to be very interesting because your proposed change actually does significantly change this scene and Han's characterization, because Han would be significantly less cool and collected by doing this rather than moving his head out of the way or managing to stop Greedo before he can shoot. Your point about the scene being a "very clear reference" to GBU is also pretty strange because, although the scenarios are fairly similar, and I can believe that George was consciously thinking of that scene while filming, the scenes aren't actually that similar, and it's pretty obvious that Han's characterization would be quite a lot different if he had actually shot Greedo multiple times and continued shooting him after getting up. If a change as large as that is an acceptable variation for the homage, why is Han shooting first so important?
I find it very strange that you're so upset about seeing Jabba the Hutt in Episode IV, despite apparently only considering it an "unnecessary addition", that is outdone by the Greedo scene. If it's just a little bit of filler, why does it matter so much whether George wants it to be in the movie? It's also strange to call it an "addition" when George always wanted the scene to be in the movie, but due to time and budget constraints he wasn't able to add in a proper Jabba creature, these same constraints being the reason why 4 was the most altered of all the movies with the special edition revisions, George was able to do pretty much whatever he wanted with the later movies except for technological constraints and continuity with movies that were only partly formed in his mind. The scene is also pretty clearly quite important for communicating both the reason why Han Solo and the gang aren't being chased by any more bounty hunters after Greedo, and showing the fact that Jabba respects and values Han, and that Han knows he isn't quite as expendable as Greedo thought, and in fact shows that Jabba sent Greedo more as an expendable message to Han than an actual bounty hunter. I encourage you to rewatch both the original version of the scene and the updated version to see all of this (and also note that, despite the fact that I'm pretty sure Jabba's dialogue is included in the subtitles, it isn't necessary to understand the scene).
All the edits are incredibly hard to defend cause there's a very simple solution. Just release high quality versions of the original movies which are as close to their original wide theatrical runs. You could sell them on their own with no extras or anything and they'd sell like hotcakes. But there's literally a Lucas mandate that prevents that from happening. Directors aren't gods and can fuck up. Like look at all the recent James Cameron movies on 4K with absolutely terrible transfers but they advertise "overseen by James Cameron himself."
Well of course the original versions are worse, and even if they weren't who really cares? They're just a series of well made movies, would it really be worth the effort, which is not some easy undertaking as you imagine it to be, to meticulously recreate all of the special effects as they were in 1977 but in 4k? If you consider it to be some important piece of history, we already have the old pre-97 VHS releases, they just aren't in HD. Should the government take the original negatives from George Lucas so that someone who wants to do the work can? Should they force George to do it himself? It's one thing to say that George doesn't really own Star Wars, which is true, it's an entirely different thing to say he doesn't own those film negatives or that he should be forced to make his own films worse in his own eyes. Of course it's true that directors can make things worse when they continue to tinker with their films, Worley acknowledges this when he mentions the 4k rereleases of the LOTR trilogy which were updated to be more visually bland like the Hobbit movies, but why should I care? At the end of the day all of these are just well made movies and you care an excessive amount due to emotional attachment, while Worley cares an excessive amount because he has an irrationally high view of the liberal arts and "creative people". You might argue that this or that film is "culturally important", but of course the Koran is extremely culturally important for Saudi Arabia, and you absolutely shouldn't believe that the Koran needs to be preserved.
