are all remasters not updates

>>63718250
I honestly would not even be mad if he progressively made it better and better over the course of the year. It would be the weirdest most innovative thing to happen to music since we went digital.

>>63718319
trust me, this would be an awful trend

Sounds exactly what Lucas was doing with the original Star Wars trilogy.

>>63718438
It's okay when yeezy does it

>>63718438
So when Lucas edited the original trilogy the copy that you owned automatically updated?

Carl Craig redid his album once, but i guess that's like an expansion pack

not an album, but kubrick made a bunch of cuts to 2001 a couple days after the world premiere

i'm sure there are other examples too

>>63719109
Yea that happens after test audiences and film festival premieres but this was already hyped up and released to the world.

>>63719163
this was after the /world premiere/ though.

>The film was edited by Kubrick and editor Ray Lovejoy between April 5 and 9, 1968 and detailed instructions were sent to theater owners already showing the film, in order that they might put the trims into effect. Of course this meant that some of the cut scenes may have been poorly done in a particular theater and, so the initial version seen by viewers early in the film's run may have varied from theater to theater.

>>63719109
Does blade runner count

>>63719216
Movie theaters back then would edit films however the fuck they wanted anyways.

>>63719216
That's actually kinda cool.

>>63719286
I still love the original theatrical cut just because of hearing Harrison Ford say "nigger".

>>63718250
what kinda hack does this, i understand if the album had potential, but expanding on a shitty album? kek