Star Wars: AOTC Trailer on Monster Inc

FortKnox writes "Starwars.com has officially announced that Star Wars II: Attack of the Clones 'teaser' trailer will appear at the head of the new movie, Monsters, Inc. Other reports have the full trailer on Harry Potter, but this is still speculation. Ep-I DVD owners should be able to view the trailers on starwars.com once Monsters, Inc. hits theaters." Good thing I'm planning on seeing both of those movies anyway.

Comments

Must be good

[MxTxL]

That Rowling guy must feel pretty good with the success of his books... in anticipation of the movie, my girlfriend and I have tried to read the Harry potter books, but they are not to be found in the library unless you reserve them, and they are completely unavailable in used book stores. I don't think i want to pay retail price for them (usually like $15) so i guess i'll just have to wait for the hype to die down.

Re:Must be good

[Anonymous Coward]

That Rowling "Guy" must be pretty impressed that people always assume she's a guy.

Re:Must be good

[groove10]

I thought J.K. Rowling was a woman!

Re:Must be good

[MxTxL]

S/he could well be.... i was under the impression it was a guy, but if you thought so, who knows?? :)

Re:Must be good

[ErikZ]

Huh? The paperbacks are 7 or 8$. The local Barnes and Noble were giving 20% off also.

You can do more than just sit around and drink coffee in a bookstore these days.

Re:Must be good

[Anonymous Coward]

Rowling is a she and paperback books (everything but azkaban) are 7 or 8 dollars.

Re:Must be good

[interiot]

"that Rowling guy", ala google's image search.

Re:Must be good

[Anonymous Coward]

yeag, she is a woman, but a rather ugly one .. but well she's rich :)

Re:Must be good

[MxTxL]

Lol, i stand corrected....

Re:Must be good

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think i want to pay retail price for them (usually like $15) so i guess i'll just have to wait for the hype to die down.

Well, if you have no scruples, you could download them from the alt.binaries.e-books news group. All four seem to be uploaded at least once a week.

Re:Must be good

[Anonymous Coward]

Rowling is a girl.

Re:Must be good

[RatBastard]

And her appearance has what to do with her writing ability?

Re:Must be good

[Anonymous Coward]

SHE IS A GIRL!

Re:Must be good

[ameoba]

Try Paperback, $7 each at your local KMart.

Re:Must be good

[Anonymous Coward]

Rowling is female, not male. Her publishers originally just had her known by her initials because they did not think that such a subject matter written obviously by a female would sell as well, and unfortunately I have to agree, though I don't agree with the society that determines such.

Re:Must be good

[verbatim]

"Most guys do..."

Re:Must be good

[Anonymous Coward]

Dunno about the rest of y'all. After seeing the photos, for a mid-aged writer she's a hottie.

Re:Must be good

[Anonymous Coward]

You must not spend much time around bookstores either.... The paperbacks cost less than $15 NEW for heck's sake -- you cheap bastard.

Anonymous Coward, yes. Cheap f*@k -- no.

Taste in Movies

[Ctrl-Z]

"Good thing I'm planning on seeing both of [Harry Potter and Monsters, Inc.] anyway."

Sheesh. CmdrTaco has a strange definition of "Good Things"[tm].

Re:Taste in Movies

[ichimunki]

I may be biased because I have a youngster the exact age to enjoy both of these movies, but I think they look like they'll be great movies even for adults. Maybe a little heavy on the "good, clean fun" angle, but still a nice 1.5 hours escape. Disney films are usually quite enjoyable, and Harry Potter is, well, a movie of Harry Potter (and the books are a good read-- I know lots of adults who've read them).

However, I wish CmdrTaco would evince a little ambivalence, since just running out to see these films is just what the MPAA would love for us all to do! That way they can easily finance their continued war against freedom of speech.

Now, so that I'm not off-topic, what I don't understand is how a *trailer* gets this much attention. Sheesh. Based on the last Star Wars, I'm having a hard time caring if they even come out with this next one.

More Info

[robbyjo]

Check the official homepage.

And check the parody site as well... :-)

Re:More Info

[Grape Shasta]

That "official homepage" looks extremely unofficial. But it has good news... Jar Jar will only make a brief appearance! Maybe I won't hate this movie after all.

Re:More Info

[xTK-421x]

That's an unofficial site. All the ads were a big tipoff for me.

This is the official site.

Re:More Info

[Anonymous Coward]

nice, do you always post your links after you type in the search box? trying to find pictures of natalie portman this time, huh? ;-P

huh?

[rppp01]

Attack of the Clones? One of the things I loved about the star wars movies as a kid was the cool titles given. Empire Strikes Back. A New Hope. Phantom Menace was pretty good. But Attack of the Clones? Lucas is trying to make me a non sci fi fan, isn't he?

Well, I guess I could live with it, if all the clones were of Natalie Portman :-)

Re:huh?

[|guillaume|]

Well, I guess I could live with it, if all the clones were of Natalie Portman :-)

I guess you would then have a Beowulf Cluster of Natalie Portman... mmm...

Re:huh?

[ekrout]

I'd say that the "cool titles" you mention aren't that spectacular at all, really. "Attack of the Clones" is just another lackluster title, IMHO.

Re:huh?

[rppp01]

The more I think about it, the more I agree with you.

Damn. A kid movie isn't the same when you are an adult.

Re:huh?

[snoozerdss]

If you remember in a New Hope (I think a new hope anyways it's been a while) They mention the "clone wars" that happened years before. I'm assuming this is what the title is addressing.

Re:huh?

[Lxy]

One of two possibilities. A) Lucas has lost his mind, B) he's waiting til the very last second to change the title. He did this in a few other Star Wars movies (possibly all) so that he could sue the sh*t out of people selling "official" Attack of the Clones merchandise. Anyway, I guess I have a good reaosn to see Monsters Inc. now (or at least the preveiews) :-).

Re:huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Well, I guess I could live with it, if all the clones were of Natalie Portman :-)

Like they could afford all those grits.

Re:huh?

[AtaruMoroboshi]

Is "Attack of the Clones" any less cheesy than "Empire Strikes Back"? Or "The Phantom Menace"?

At first, The Phantom Menace sounded silly to me, but now it works. He's intentionally evoking the feel of old serials.

(Not that I liked Ep 1, it was so bad, it hurt.)

Anyhow, "Attack of the Clones" sounds good enough to me.

Re:huh?

[Chundra]

Attack of the Clones conjures up images of massive armies of robots marching across the landscape for as far as you can see. Is it just me or is this stuff getting a little old?

I propose that Lucas just makes a 2-3 hour movie of "breathtaking" effects like marching clones beating the crap out of each other until they explode. Once he gets that out of his system the remaining Star Wars movies could then focus primarily on something important...

like, oh...say... a decent story.

Or at the very least Natalie Portman disrobed, flaunting 16 luscious blue breasts.

Re:huh?

[SirSlud]

Return of the Jedi?
The Empire Strikes Back?

They are cool names only because you associate them with cool movies. They sound 'retro'. Today, audiences are very wary, if receptive at all, of 'camp' and in general, the 'pulpy' style. Lucas, if anything, is not bowing down to current trends in keeping the names of the movies in line with the original campy names. Unfortunately, I thnk audiences are far too cynical and pessimmistic to accept such campy names anymore, as evidenced by the furor over the name "Attack of the Clones". Personally, I think the more money you spend on something, the less likely people are going to accept camp as entertainment, especially since camp is one of the cheapest styles to infuse into movie productions. (Indeed, being 'campy' is partly defined as appearing articicial; thus, your sets/titling/acting need not be juiced for every possible production dollar.)

The media/advertising pipelines are more clogged than ever, and since camp is more often a tool used by lower budget productions (for obvious reasons), people are not hearing of movies that utilize camp very much, and consequently are not demanding it or appreciating it unless its associated with a previously prooven franchise (ie, Star Wars, Batman, Star Trek)

At least, thats my take on it.

Garret

Re:huh?

[Leven Valera]

I'm willing to bet karma that the phrase "Attack of the Clones" will not appear anywhere in the trailer. :)

Re:huh?

[Lxy]

Is there any indication (I mean George Lucas certified) on what the true nature of the clone wars is? In A New Hope, the clone wars are briefly mentioned. As I recall that's the only mention of them. In the tense they're used, we assume that it's a pivotal point, and it's pretty much guaranteed (and expected) that EP2 or Ep3 will be about the clone wars.

Anyway, my point in all this rambling is whether or not anyone knows anything about the true nature of the clone wars. Is it true "clones" of something? Is it a band of dark side rebels that ends up seducing Anakin in some way? (my guess). "Attack of the clones" just sounds a little misleading. Maybe it's just a psychological thing, like "attack of the clowns" or "send in the clowns" or something.

Re:huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate the title too. I hope they change it.

It sounds like a show on NBC.

"Star Wars: When Clones Attack!"

yuck

Re:huh?

[d_lesage]

I fail to see what clones have to do with robots.

Re:huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or at the very least Natalie Portman disrobed, flaunting 16 luscious blue breasts.

I would settle for 2 small, yet perky, creamy white ones, with light pink pencil eraser nipples.

Mmmm. Hot grits.

Re:huh?

[MaxVlast]

My guess -- though pretty simple -- is that Anakin will be cloned, and the clone will be "evil." It makes it easier to turn that nice little boy (as presented in 1) to Darth Vader.

Re:huh?

[MaxVlast]

So, I guess you didn't see the last one. =)

Re:huh?

[superflex]

Yeah, that's right. When Luke meets Obi Wan for the first time on Tatooine, and they go back to Obi Wans' house. Obi Wan tells Luke that he fought with Lukes' father in the clone wars.

IMHO, the clone wars were probably the event that brought about the collapse of the republic and the installation of Palpatine as emperor. I believe in Ep. 4 the Emperor says something like "I've dissolved the senate. The last remnants of the old republic have been swept away."

Re:huh?

[zalix]

I believe that the Clones are going to be what will end up being what we all know as Stormtroopers. The Battle Drones in Ep I were what Lucas called an early version of the stormtroopers. It is just speculation though. There has long been a debate as to whether stormtroopers were actual people or what, we know that the suits can be removed. So Maybe the clones are inside of them. The never say who won the clone wars did they?

Re:huh?

[wolf-]

Well, I guess I could live with it, if all the clones were of Natalie Portman :-) I guess you would then have a Beowulf Cluster of Natalie Portman... mmm...

Protected by a moat of hot grits!

Re:huh?

[dark_panda]

According to the popular theories, the clones are basically a precursor to the Empire's stormtrooper army. Basically, the theory goes that the entire stormtrooper army is really just a bunch of clones of one guy, specifically, Boba Fett, or rather, Fett's father.

Apparently, Boba Fett is actually the clone of Jango Fett, who in turn was used as the "father" of the clone army.

Why the big deal with clones? Well, based on the post-original trilogy Heir To The Empire books, the Emperor is pretty adept at controlling large groups of people. Of course, the droid armies used in TPM are useless 'cause they aren't alive, and the Emperor can't control them directly. However, he could control a large group of clones. Something to do with the Force, I guess.

So the clone wars is apparently the beginning of the end for the Republic, with the Emperor (or Senator Palpatine at any rate) at the head of the clone army.

A lot of post-original trilogy stuff from Dark Horse Comics and the novels and such played with clones constantly. In the wicked-cool Dark Empire comics series from Dark Horse, the Emperor returned in a clone of himself. The blue flash the erupted as Vader tossed the Emperor down a shaft at the end of Return of the Jedi was apparently the Emperor's consciousness being released, on its way to a new clone.

The Heir to the Empire series also had a bunch of clones, including clone generators and such. A Jedi clone in that series (Joruus C'Boath, or something to that effect), tried to replace the Emperor as head of the crumbling Empire. I think Luke was cloned, too, as Luuke or something, an evil clone of some sorts.

According to the books and comics, clones are pretty unstable folk and prone to insanity. Joruus was pretty insane.

It's been a while since I've read any of that stuff, though, so I might be a bit cloudy on the details. But that's what I make from most of the lore and the rumors going around.

I recommend checking out http://www.theforce.net. (Check out the Knightquest film if you get a chance -- amazing for a fan flick.)

Man, I know too much about this crap.

J

Re:huh?

[Captain Tenille]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the Emperor probably won. Just a guess, though.

Re:huh?

[Black Parrot]

> Is "Attack of the Clones" any less cheesy than "Empire Strikes Back"? Or "The Phantom Menace"?

No, it's more cheesy.

Re:huh?

[Happy Monkey]

There has long been a debate as to whether stormtroopers were actual people or what, we know that the suits can be removed. So Maybe the clones are inside of them.

"Aren't you a little short for a Stormtrooper?" Perhaps they are all supposed to be the same height...

Re:huh?

[ejracke]

Cynical and pessimmistic? I think that's an understatement... Poeple are too caught up on how they wan't the movie to be filmed, what characters are in it, and most of all the Title... How many words are in the Title? and How does it compare to The original titles.... I think there is more similarity than people want to believe... That, and the fact that people are nostolgic about their childhood and the fact that most people on this site were just born on the original release dates... Same lucas, same storyline, just better production.

Re:huh?

[DoomHaven]

Hmmm, I would disagree with you about those points. From the Star Wars fiction I have read about Boba Fett, he was originally Jaster Mereel, a Journeyman Protector on the planet Concord Dawn, and he was banished for killing a fellow protector for unknown reasons (reasons that the best defense lawyer on the planet say may have been deserved). He served time as a stormtrooper before leaving the Imperial forces and starting out as a bounty hunter.

Lastly, stormtroopers are citizens conscripted from Empire planets into Imperial service. They are not clones, aside from the clones that Grand Admiral Thrawn created during that triology of books.

Re:huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

It appears at the end of the trailer, under the usual STAR WARS logo.

Re:huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to see George Lucas sue me for this "Attack of the Clones" merchandise... Satire is still protected by the first amendment, n'est pas?

Re:huh?

[dark_panda]

It is just a theory, as good as the next.

And since the only True Sources of Star Wars Canon are the films and whatever Lukas himself says, all of this stuff is subject to change, including the whole Thrawn thing and anything dealing with Fett's history. So we could all be massively wrong about everything. I mean, having Anakin build C3PO in TPM pretty much destroyed a ton of supposed Star Wars history in one fell swoop, totally going against most of the Droids comics and such.

If you haven't already, theforce.net has a list of Ep 2 characters and a condensed version of all that they know about each of 'em. This list was pulled together from various interviews, rumors (some verified by spies, others unverified), and such. If you're not afraid of spoilers, check it out at http://www.theforce.net/episode2/characters/. They specifically mention both Jango and Boba. Not that this is solid evidence as to what will be in Ep 2, but from what I know of theforce.net, they're usually good about this kind of stuff.

J

Re:huh?

[bigdavex]

"Aren't you a little short for a Stormtrooper?" Perhaps they are all supposed to be the same height...

Wouldn't that have tipped off the imperials whom Han & Luke were trying to fool? I suppose everybody's short next to Chewbacca, but the two humans would have been different. Maybe Lucas is just envoking the Villains are Stupid movie convention.

A Serious Question

[ekrout]

Am I the only one who HASN'T read the Harry Potter books? I don't mean to sound like an arrogant prick (although I really am), but weren't these books written for little kids? I mean, sure, I enjoyed Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers and all when I was younger, but these days I barely watch any TV. So, my question is "What's the appeal of these childish stories to grown, sophisticated adults?".

Thanks.

Re:A Serious Question

[crow]

My wife has been reading the Harry Potter series out loud to me. She really should do books on tape--she does all the different voices. Anyway, while the books are written at a level that makes them accessible to kids, the stories certainly hold interest for adults.

The Harry Potter books are the story of a kid growing up, a series of mystery-adventure stories, and a story of fantasy magic.

Re:A Serious Question

[Stevis]

They're not childish stories. I had much the same opinion, but my wife, who is a children's literature buff, knew the difference--and convinced me to read them. At the end of Goblet of Fire, I had much the same ominous feeling that I had at the end of Empire Strikes Back...you don't know where the "good guys" are going from here.

The novels are dealing with the kids growing into adults, something that is universal. It is dealing with the kids as they learn about and define ourselves, and talks about what makes us who we are and how we face choices between good and evil.

In addition, from a storytelling side, JK Rowling has her arc plotted out and knows where she's going--while it's not as tight as Straczynski does things and some inconsistencies slip through, she's not pulling things out of her hindquarters as she goes along. Try reading book one; you'll like it. That's all I can say. Stevis

Re:A Serious Question

[mikester911]

So, my question is "What's the appeal of these childish stories to grown, sophisticated adults?".

I'm sorry....were you talking about Harry Potter here, or Star Wars?

I hated Phantom Menance - not just because it was a kid's movie, but because it forced me to realize, as a 28 year old, that the first three weren't amazing films in my mind because they were amazing films, but because I saw them when I was in grade school.

Attack of the Clones should refer to how Lucas recycled his own story ideas in Phantom Menace.

I will probably go see Ep. 2, but I will hate myself for doing it.

Re:A Serious Question

[ErikZ]

If you spend your time with grown, sophisticated adults, 99% of the entertainment out there is beneath you.

Go pick up "The Golden Compass" and read it. You'll find this book in the childrens section.

BTW, I hated the first Harry Potter book. It was childish and boring. But after reading the HUGE response on slashdot after the forth book won a Hugo, I decided to give it another chance. I'm glad I did.

Re:A Serious Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, yer not alone, I also have absolutely no interest in reading them. Of course, I can't read, maybe that's a side effect of me being blind, mute quadrapelegic?

Of course, I should also tell you now that I'm a chronic liar.

-- gid

Re:A Serious Question

[ijx]

See, I have to agree here.

A good friend of mine keeps on trying to get me to read the series, but I'm still very leery about the whole thing...

The story of my first impression regarding Harry Potter is thus:

The first HP book came out while I was attending my first year at college. At the same time, Amazon started up that feature that allows users to see what the most popular books at a given organization are. On a lark, I checked out my school's faves, and Harry Potter, classified as a children's book, came in at #1. That scared the crap out of me.

I think that, as a result of this 'trauma', it will be many years before I could conceivably consider reading an HP book.

Re:A Serious Question

[dpease]

Good question, and one that I had before I tried them out earlier this month. The GF wouldn't stop pushing them.

Here is my slightly off-topic Harry Potter series review.

First of all, what is the difference between a kid's book an an adult book? Generally, theme and realism--most "adult books" aren't about stuff like magic. And, to be sure, most of them aren't about kids, either. Bad things happen to people in adult books to a much greater degree than bad things happen in children's books.

Sure, HP is about magic, which is kind of goofy, but it's really brought off well. A lot of thought has gone into the whole backstory about how magic can exist in the modern world, and the relationship between the magical and non-magical realms.

HP isn't really sugar-coated. It's not hard-boiled by any stretch of the imagination, but good people get hurt and even die.

Now, let's talk about what is good in the series. Lots of series such as this one keep introducing new things in each book, to the point where you say "hmm, why didn't I read about that last book?" In other words, the authors are cheating by changing the world they created in the first book. I don't get much of a sense of that with this series. Rowling has gone out of her way to create this world, and she only has to tweak it slightly each book, rather than the wholesale changes other authors bust out.

The books are really well-written. They are easy to read and flow smoothly. I get the impression from some literary snobs that a book needs to be dense and hard to read to be good. I don't agree. It took me about a month to make it through McKillip's Riddle-Master Trilogy before I started Potter. It took two weeks to get through all four books in the HP series. They were both good reads, but I didn't mind the simpler vocabulary that Rowling uses one bit. It's no "See Dick Run".

Negatives: Some of the phrases Rowling comes up with are a bit precious for me (and all the "Muggle Clubs" sprouting up like weeds aren't helping. I'm not a Harry Potter cultist, and I'd rather not be associated with people who look at these books as a life changing experience). The series started kind of slowly. Books 5-7 haven't been written yet. :)

Overall, these books are an escape. If everything you read has to have deeper meaning, by all means avoid this series. But if you're just looking for a fun, well-written read, it's honestly going to be tough to do much better.

Good luck.

Re:A Serious Question

[bryanbrunton]

I too am amazed that adults find these books good reading. As a big fantasy book collector, I glanced at one of these books to see if it might appeal to me. The first words of text I saw were:

"Urrg, Troll boogers."

I didn't read any further.

Re:A Serious Question

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think it's fair to compare Rowling's books to childrens' TV shows. The Potter series is strangely reminiscent to other children's classics such as Narnia (Lewis), LoTR (Tolkein) & Wonderland (Carrol?), in how the author creates their world and characters that we as children (and even as adults) can grow attatched to. Watching Mr. Rogers reruns OTOH give me fits. They don't provide any of the "magic" that those books give. (Sorry, went a little OT)

Re:A Serious Question

[Robotech_Master]

There's a world of difference between "written for little kids" and "written down to little kids."

You could even say there's a sort of Star Wars analogy in the books (just to keep this vaguely topical to the thread). The first two are sort of light, kind of like the first Star Wars movie...but by the time you read the third and fourth, you're getting into definite Empire Strikes Back territory. Rowling pulls no punches. The villains are black and foul, not simply "misunderstood"; they're selfish and megalomaniacal but not the self-described "evil" (as in "God, I love being evil") of many down-written kids' shows and books. People die--and worse than die. There is very little sappy moralizing or sermonizing, and what there is flows naturally from the book, from adults giving advice to kids that isn't just "do this, don't do that," but gives them credit for being able to think. And the fourth book...well, don't read the first chapter of it in a darkened room, that's all I can say.

I'd recommend buying them without hesitation, but if you're still not sure, all four of the books are available on Gnutella. I'm not ordinarily one to condone piracy without paying--but I'm confident that once you've read them, you'll enjoy them enough that you want to own them.

Re:A Serious Question

[Smallest]

well, at least your opinion is based on a fair evaluation.

-c

Re:A Serious Question

[pogen]

Sure, HP is about magic, which is kind of goofy

That hasn't stopped Terry Pratchett from building a respectable adult following. And the Harry Potter books didn't strike me as being any more juvenile than, say, Equal Rites.

And at least the Harry Potter books don't suck (::ducking::)...

Re:A Serious Question

[jred]

Well, I started out reading the first HP book to my daughter at bedtime. I found myself continuing to read long after she fell asleep. Just because it's a children't book doesn't mean it isn't interesting, or well written. They aren't all like the Hardy Boys. Pretty much if you're into fantasy books at all you'll like it.

Re:A Serious Question

[Ivan Raikov]

The Wind in the Willows, by the Scottish author Kenneth Grahame, is based on stories written by him for his young son, Alastair, and is certainly a children's book. Nevertheless, it is considered to be one of the finest works of Edwardian literature (and British literature in general, for that matter). It remains one of my favorite books, and I keep rereading it in my twenties, although it was one of the first books I've ever read.

Just So Stories, by the English writer Rudyard Kipling, is a collection of stories written for his little daughter, and I remember my father reading it to me before I was even able to read, yet I keep rereading those stories up to this day.

So the fact that a book is labelled as a "children's" book does not mean it cannot be written in an exquisitely beautiful language, or that it doesn't have deep meaning.

That being said, I tried to read the first Harry Potter book once, and I wasn't particularly impressed with the language, or the plot that was unravelling in the first few pages I read. So I never bothered to read any more of those books.

Re:A Serious Question

[Jburkholder]

>"What's the appeal of these childish stories to grown, sophisticated adults?".

Probably depends if you have any kids of your own. I enjoyed reading these to/with my son (5-6 at the time we started) and I think they actually have a fairly good deal of appeal to adults as well.

Here's a suggestion: Get one out of the library, invest 1/2 hour of your time to read the first chapter and decide for yourself. I'm not saying you are guaranteed to like it, but maybe give it a try before you equate it to Sesame Street.

Re:A Serious Question

[bribecka]

My wife has been reading the Harry Potter series out loud to me. She really should do books on tape--she does all the different voices. Anyway, while the books are written at a level that makes them accessible to kids, the stories certainly hold interest for adults.

I don't mean to make fun, really. But if they hold so much interests for adults, why do you need your wife to (1) read them out loud to you, and (2) do all the voices? Please tell me you have a pair of footy pajamas on when all this is going on...

:)

Re:A Serious Question

[Jburkholder]

I got into them the same way. My son asked for one because a lot of his classmates were reading it. We got a copy from the library and started reading it (I was _sure_ it was going to be crap).

It wasn't. I have to say the 1st book isn't as good as the second, nor the second as good at the third, etc. By the time you get to Goblet of Fire, the characters have developed quite a bit and the story had grown much darker.

Re:A Serious Question

[tralfamador]

have you picked up any piers anthony "xanth" novels lately? talk about books that started with an older audience in mind and then quickly degenerated into childish dribble. sounds like HP is going in the opposite direction.

Re:A Serious Question

[crow]

I don't particularly need to have it read to me, but it is fun. Of course, one detail that I didn't mention is that most of the reading occurs when we're in the car, and while I do live in Massachusetts, I still don't think it would be appropriate to read it myself while driving.

And while I don't have footy pajamas, I do have gorilla slippers. :)

Re:A Serious Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, you apparently never looked at Goblet Of Fire, or you might have seen:

From far away, above his head, he heard a high, cold voice say, "Kill the spare."

A swishing noise and a second voice, which screeched the words to the night: "Avada Kedavra!"

A blast of green light blazed through Harry's eyelids, and he heard something heavy fall to the ground beside him; the pain in his scar reached such a pitch that he retched, and then it diminished; terrified of what he was about to see, he opened his stinging eyes.

Cedric was lying spread-eagled on the ground beside him. He was dead.

For a second that contained an eternity, Harry stared into Cedric's face, at his open gray eyes, blank and expressionless as the windows of a deserted house, at his half-open mouth, which looked slightly surprised. And then, before Harry's mind had accepted what he was seeing, before he could feel anything but numb disbelief, he felt himself being pulled to his feet.

The short man in the cloak had put down his bundle, lit his wand, and was dragging Harry toward the marble headstone. Harry saw the name upon it flickering in the wandlight before he was forced around and slammed against it.

TOM RIDDLE

-----

The books have become successively more and more dark-- more mature, as well. Harry will be 15 in the next book, a far cry from the 11-year-old kid in the first book.

And now he's facing the reality of the return of Voldemort and all his supporters, who want nothing more than to see Harry dead. To top it all off, the wizard government (The Ministry of Magic) refuses to believe that Voldemort has returned-- to fight Voldemort, Harry and the other students will have to break the law themselves.

Perhaps you should read more than THREE words of a book before you judge it, hmmm?

Re:A Serious Question

[alexjohns]

But after reading the HUGE response on slashdot after the forth book won a Hugo

Boy, you should try the Modula and Lisp books next. Of course, the precursor to them all is the Algol one. A little hoary in spots, but still a good read. Ahh, the good ole days.

Add my voice to the clamor for a freakin' spell checker. (Go ahead and mark me as off-topic, moderator boy. Getting my karma knocked down to 48 will teach me! It'll probably take me at least a day or two to get back up to 50.) Feh! It's Monday. I can't be bothered to care about anything today.

Re:A Serious Question

[bribecka]

Of course, one detail that I didn't mention is that most of the reading occurs when we're in the car

You have redeemed yourself :) That makes MUCH more sense. I was imagining a sad, sad scenario...

Re:A Serious Question

[Anonymous Coward]

My "wife" reads me the stories from Penthouse out loud. She even does all the different voices. And yes, I am wearing rubber pajamas at the time.




sorrryyyy, I couldn't resist

Re:A Serious Question

[Heywood Yabuzof]

Well, you could try reading them before passing such harsh judgement :-)

I read the first one and wasn't overly impressed, but the 2nd and 3rd ones are certainly a bit better. I wouldn't say they are on the same level of "quality" as the Narnia books, but they come close.

If you still want to be an arrogant prick and read the books, just do what I did and pick them up the original British english versions instead of the "translated" American ones :-)

Re:A Serious Question

[Black Parrot]

> I had much the same ominous feeling that I had at the end of Empire Strikes Back...you don't know where the "good guys" are going from here.

Yeah... <dreamyvoice>back when we still thought Lucas was one of the good guys...</dreamyvoice>

Re:A Serious Question

[Rude Turnip]

Spell checkers don't check context, however. The "forth" error would have popped up still since forth (in the programming context) is a legitimate word.

Re:A Serious Question

[dswensen]

I should probably put on my flame-retardant suit before even saying this, but Lucas' "recycling" of his story ideas in Phantom Menace was a conscious decision on his part, not born of laziness or lack of inspiration. He sees the series as akin to a musical composition, where different themes keep cropping up again and again; slightly different, but still recognizable and similar. Therefore, the fact that characters get in similar situations, end up on the same planets, etc. is because (by his own admission) that's the way the story goes.

You can see this in the movie, and you can especially hear it in John Williams' music -- "Anakin's Theme" is the Imperial March modified, and the "celebration" music at the end of TPM is the Emperor's Theme from Return of the Jedi.

Lucas even goes so far as to call his movies "essentially silent films," guided by the imagery and the music. I find this idea interesting, but personally, don't think he's pulled it off all that well (I keep wishing devoutly for silence every time a certain CGI character opens his mouth, for example.)

How well Lucas made these ideas work, especially in TPM, is a matter of personal opinion, but, if you're at all interested, he talks about it a great deal on the Phantom Menace DVD, both in the commentary and in the many interviews on the bonus materials disc.

Re:A Serious Question

[babbage]

Surprise! "Star Wars" is a kids movie. There's a reason that Jedi was "just a bunch of muppets", and Phantom Menace was dominated by Jar Jar. So, my question is "Why are you complaining about one children's story on a forum about a different children's story?"

Obviously adults can enjoy children's lit -- witness the appeal of _Gullivers Travels_, _Alice in Wonderland_, _Wizard of Oz_, etc up through the current examples.If you're too cool for all that, fine, but really why are you complaining about it here?

Might I suggest getting a life?

Re:A Serious Question

[Anonymous Coward]

In the UK they released an "adult" version of the first story, don't know about the 2-4 ones. The change was that they packaged it into a more normal paperback form, and removed the color, or is that colour, cover and replaced it with a black/white drawing of a train.

There are a fun book for adults, just don't expect many twists and turn in the storyline, however there are some.

Re:A Serious Question

[Happy Monkey]

'Forth' is a legitimate word outside of the programming context, as well.

Re:A Serious Question

[ErikZ]

Stop being so defensive. Now, tell me how a dictionary is going to catch a word that's spelled correctly. Forth is a word. It's the WRONG word, but is a real word.

I normally cut and paste my posts to WP with spell checking.

Re:A Serious Question

[Stevis]

Hmm...let me try that!

"Frodo Baggins?" What kind of gibberish is this? I won't read any further.

"Bite my thumb"? What kind of insult is that? shakespeare sux.

"The genealogy of Christ: he is conceived and born of a virgin." (Matthew 1:1). Senseless, there can't be any worthwhile reading in there...not to mention it continues "And Zorobabel begot Abiud." (1:13).

Sorry. Just wanted to point out that three words-well, two words and a grunt--don't show you what you're missing.

Stevis

P.S. "/."--what kind of gibberish is this? I won't read any further.

Re:A Serious Question

[ErikZ]

Xanth? I stopped reading those after he constructed a novel completely of puns that his readers sent in.

Re:A Serious Question

[ethereal]

I'd rather people just learn to spell. A spell checker is a crutch that a properly educated person doesn't need. To get back sort-of on topic, a good way to learn to spell properly as a child is to read a lot of children's books, like Harry Potter, LOTR, etc. If only I had as much time to read now that I did as a kid :)

Re:A Serious Question

[gladbach]

"Please tell me you have a pair of footy pajamas on when all this is going on... " o0o0o0o0o0o kinky

Re:A Serious Question

[nomadic]

I haven't either, and I don't plan to. Unless I have kids someday and read it to them. There are many, many more books on my reading list ahead of something written for 12 year olds...

Re:A Serious Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably the same appeal making the editorial board of Slashdot having LEGO and StarWars permanent sections. (Hey, where IS the Tolkien logo?!)

Re:A Serious Question

[Anonymous Coward]

So, based on what you don't know, you won't trouble yourself to find out, and therefore you dismiss it. I'll be sure to treat your future opinions on any topic with the same care with which you have formed them.

Re:A Serious Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, Piers Anthony was and remains one of the worst hack writers of SF who's ever walked the earth. His command of the language is abominable, his command of his subject matter is superficial, his story values are wretched, and he writes solely to make a buck, and if it isn't selling he isn't interested. I have read a good number of SF novels and stories over the years and I have yet to find someone who will go lower than he to sell a story. I read some autobiographical stuff of his in one of his short-story collections and was disgusted. To call him a "whore" is to gild the fucking lily.

Re:A Serious Question

[Hal-9001]

That being said, I tried to read the first Harry Potter book once, and I wasn't particularly impressed with the language, or the plot that was unravelling in the first few pages I read. So I never bothered to read any more of those books.

I had similar impressions a few pages in, but I kept reading and before I knew it, I was hooked.

Give them another chance. You'll thank yourself for it later.

Re:A Serious Question

[miniver]

I don't mean to make fun, really. But if they hold so much interests for adults, why do you need your wife to (1) read them out loud to you, and (2) do all the voices? Please tell me you have a pair of footy pajamas on when all this is going on...

If you've never read books to one another as part of your courtship / marriage, then you're actually missing a great deal of fun. Not only do you get to find out about books that you might not have thought were interesting, but you get to find out what your spouse thinks is funny, sad, exciting, or boring -- excellent information to help you build a relationship.

When my wife and I were dating, she was living in Pennsylvania, and I was living in Virginia. We'd see each other most weekends, but during the week we subsisted on email and phone calls. I ended up reading a couple of books to my wife over the phone, or cuddled up with her on a bed.

Re: A Serious Question

[thebabelfish]

That's what everyone tells me, but I have a lot of other books that I want to read, and, without a decent explanation of why they are so good, I don't want to sacrifice any time I don't have to. If they really are good books I'd like to read them. Can anyone offer a better explanation?

Re:A Serious Question

[MisterPo]

YeahI thought the same thing too.

So after picking up a Harry P book from London Paddington train station (well you need someting to while away the hours waiting for your delayed train...). Obviously I chose the alternative "adult" cover and began reading.

Yes it was as good as every says. Its strange but the only experience I could equate it to was when I was a small boy reading Roald Dahl. The whole setting (locations, magic, kids, evil-doers etc) was uncannily similar in feel :)

Go on, dive in, its only a couple of dollars/pounds/lire/peseta/yuan etc!

Regards,

Po

Re:A Serious Question

[aerelorn]

"Obviously adults can enjoy children's lit -- witness the appeal of _Gullivers Travels_" Gulliver's Travels isn't a children's book.

Re:A Serious Question

[portableguy]

I haven't read any Harry Potter stuff either. I hear they're pretty heavy English lit./mythology references, but that's still not enough to interest me. Going to play with my Legos now.

Re:A Serious Question

[gatesh8r]

I broke your ROT13 encryption btw...

Re:A Serious Question

[zero1101]

I hated Phantom Menance - not just because it was a kid's movie, but because it forced me to realize, as a 28 year old, that the first three weren't amazing films in my mind because they were amazing films, but because I saw them when I was in grade school.

Reminds me of this series of PVP strips.

Re:A Serious Question

[shogun]

You better watch out, they're going to come and smack you down with the DMCA now...

Re:A Serious Question

[ColdGrits]

You are completely correct, they ARE children's books.

I have read the first one, so I do have an idea what I'm talking about.

It was most definitly aimed at children.

Didn't bother with the other books in teh series as the first one showed no promise to my mind.

Ah well, I expect I'll get flamed to buggery for voicing a contrary opinion, but hey, free speech and all that ;-)

Re:A Serious Question

[LittleGuy]

Um, actually, the wife and I haven't read them, and until the movie, we didn't want to start until Rowling completed the set, so we'd get to read them in one felt swoop.

As for "childish stories".... eh, I'll leave to the others to comment. Funny, they don't *look* childish.

Re:A Serious Question

[gfreeman]

No doubt you'll get a million replies to your comment, some flame, some not. However, I was once in your shoes, wondering what on earth the fuss was about - surely it's just a set of kids books.

Well, once I had read the first book, I had to read the second, which led to the third and I'm one chapter into the fourth. It's gripping, compelling, and incredibly well written. Who cares if it's a kids book? JK Rowling could write about ancient sanskrit and I'd find it enthralling. Have you ever read an author that dragged you into their pages?

I'm a pretty intelligent guy, but the stories are twisty enough for me to get lost in, and I never manage to work out "who-dunnit" though I sometimes get halfway there.

Here in the UK, you can get the Harry Potter books in two covers - kids and adult. The kids version is cartoony, the adult covers are black/white and suggest a darker, more sinister book. Both sell well.

What do you expect from a book? To be entertained? You'll certainly get that from Harry Potter. To forget about the "real world" for a while? Easily done while reading Harry Potter. How about not being talked-down to? Again, Harry Potter books are by no means condescending. (That means talks down to... [joke]) They assume the kids reading it are switched on.

Try reading the first chapter of the first book, and then try putting it down. I dare you :)

Re:A Serious Question

[gamgee5273]

There's a strong difference between "childish" and "childlike." ACs posting insults on this site are "childish," but reading children's books would be defined as "childlike." Don't pull some idea that adults are "grown" and "sophisticated." How am I supposed tro raise my kids if I can't enjoy the same things they do? If anything I envy children because they don't have the overriding worries of anthrax, planes smashing into skyscrapers, mortgage payments, taxes, etc. If I can get a few hours to think in the mind of a child I appreciate it. However, I value being an adult because I can go from reading James Joyce to J. K. Rowling in an instant - just as I can go from Citizen Kane to Star Wars.

Now, why read Rowling? Precisely put, Rowling is a better writer and storyteller than most of the people who blunder onto the bestseller lists today. She is a better writer and an equal storyteller to people like Asimov and Clarke. End all and be all is: these books are GOOD.

The stories are aimed at children, but if you cannot take time to see through the eyes of a child you are missing a great deal of what the world has to offer. I suggest going directly to the theaters to watch Monsters, Inc. this weekend and then going to Borders and pick up the first book in the Harry Potter series.

Re:A Serious Question

[Ioldanach]

I'd recommend buying them without hesitation, but if you're still not sure, all four of the books are available on Gnutella. I'm not ordinarily one to condone piracy without paying--but I'm confident that once you've read them, you'll enjoy them enough that you want to own them.

I'll second that. My wife and I picked up the first one in paperback just as the fourth was coming out. We immediately went back and purchased all four in hardcover, because we know how much use they'll get. (And we don't even have kids yet.)

Re:A Serious Question

[Tetsujin28]

That hasn't stopped Terry Pratchett from building a respectable adult following. And the Harry Potter books didn't strike me as being any more juvenile than, say, Equal Rites.

Indeed. I read the first one or two Discworld books -- that was enough for me, thanks -- and I find the Harry Potter books much more mature and engaging.

Re:A Serious Question

[5KVGhost]

Perhaps you should stop allowing conveniently labelled genres to determine your reading habits, and find out for yourself.

Unfortunately most of today's children's literature (and TV, and software, etc.) is written to the assumption that kids are stupid. They're not, at least not in any greater proportion than adults. The truth is that a lot of the stuff is just produced by lazy people and marketed to parents with very low expectations. I haven't yet read any of the Harry Potter books, but that's just because I haven't gotten to them yet.

The whole idea that children even need special dumbed-down books is kind of silly in itself, IMHO. Maybe it's an outgrowth of the attitude that books for adults aren't any good unless they're unnecessarily convoluted and difficult to read.

Re:A Serious Question

[Anonymous Coward]

only a couple of lire? You have got to be kidding.

Correction

[Anonymous Coward]

That should read "Owners of the Ep 1 DVD who also own an Intel or compatible PC running a recent version of a Microsoft operating system". The online content is not available otherwise.

Actually

[CmdrTroll]

I searched GNUtella for "star wars" and the full Ep2 trailer came up. Might be something to take a look at. I will post it on Freenet as soon as it finishes downloading.

-CT

Re:Actually

[geomcbay]

Be aware that there's a fake fan-trailer or two that have been circulating for months now. What you find on gnutella might not be the real thing.

Of course, then again it might be real -- according to many Internet rumor sites a lot of preview-audiences and movie-house projectionists have seen the new trailer..someone may have cammed it and digitzed it as was done with the Phantom Menace trailer before an official net version was posted.

Re:Actually

[Heywood Yabuzof]

If you see people wearing kilts and holding wooden shields and lightsabers, then you don't have the "real" trailer :-)

It is fun to figure out where all the clips came from, though.

This is a bad sign

[crow]

Well, it isn't really news, but this is a clear sign of what audience the movie is targeted at. These are both children's movies. Sure, as far as children's movies go, they have a lot of adult interest; that's what usually makes for a successful children's movie.

Now if they were targeting a more adult crowd, they would be trying to connect to Lord of the Rings.

Of course, it may just be a matter of what big movies are coming out at the right time.

Re:This is a bad sign

[Lxy]

I wouldn't be so sure. Star Wars movies have generally been an all-ages type deal (some will argue, but I was 6 or 7 when I started watching them). Lord of the rings: not all-ages. Harry Potter and Monsters, Inc: definitely all-ages. Looking at the new movies coming out, this is probably his best choice.

Re: This is a bad sign

[Man of E]

The point of attaching trailers to other movies is to generate traffic both ways. The Star Wars and LOTR demographics are pretty similar, so putting the trailer there wouldn't achieve much - people watching LOTR are likely to see Star Wars anyway, trailer or no. By attaching the trailer to Harry Potter and Monsters Inc., they

- generate more revenue for those movies by selling tickets to people who only care about the trailers, and
- show the new Jar-jar off to kids who then drag their parents off to the Star Wars movie and buy action figures.

From a business perspective, it makes perfect sense.

Re:This is a bad sign

[Masem]

I know it's redundant, but Lucas has always said that Star Wars is aimed at kids; it's a classic tale of good vs evil when you pull out the SFX and the like. However, regardless of the plot, the Star Wars series has done wonders to push the entire movie industry forward in terms of SFX and sound improvements. So I will be going to see SW 2, despite numerous rumors that Jar-Jar is back, and while I might moan at the story, I expect to be fascinated by the production.

Re:This is a bad sign

[JojoLinkyBob]

Hmm, here's food for thought. Maybe Lucas has been targeting the young audience so that as they mature, they will be old enough to appreciate the original Star Wars trilogy, by the time the whole anthology is complete.

Re:This is a bad sign

[geomcbay]

Its politics and business really.

Monsters, Inc is a Pixar movie. Who sold Pixar to Steve Jobs? George Lucas. There's still pretty strong ties between Pixar and Lucasfilm/ILM, so there you go...

With Harry Potter the connections are (among other things) ILM doing many of the special effects and John Williams doing the score.

LOTR is a different beast...A New Line movie, music by Howard Shore/Enya, WETA doing the special effects...

Re:This is a bad sign

[lumpenprole]

There was an interview in a magazine put out by a local listner-supported radio station (go wfmu!) with a guy who worked on the Phantom Menace and part of the AOTC, before he was fired. According to him, Lucas was very sensitive about the criticism he got for dumbing down the first one, and determined to make this one a lot darker.

Not exactly and uninpeachable source, but interesting nonetheless.

Re:This is a bad sign

[Jburkholder]

Personally, I am more looking forward to the Harry Potter movie than ATOC anyway. Call it a children's movie if you like, but the series of books are actually a very enjoyable read (well, when read aloud to a child anyway) and I'm in hopeful anticipation of a good movie (Alan Rickman as Snape looks like a good cast and one of the highlights).

Re:This is a bad sign

[Chibi]

Well, I think having the trailer in these two movies serve a few purposes:

• As you mentioned, both of these movies will probably be big, so it increases the number of people that will see the trailer (like it'll be hard to get people to watch)
  
• There is a definite reason to target kids: Merchandising . Merchandising rights to the the Star Wars franchise is what helped Lucas get the money to create his own Empire. The more kids get excited about this, the more money he gets from merchandising and licensing.
  
• It's possible that studio reps want this trailer for certain movies. I'm sure there will be plenty of fanboys going to watch these movies strictly to see the trailer. Sad, but true...
  

Re: This is a bad sign

[dachshund]

The point of attaching trailers to other movies is to generate traffic both ways.

It's funny, this tactic seems to be a completely new offshoot of the Star Wars phenomenon. Did it exist before the Episode 1 trailer came out?

And will it keep working, now that the hype's been somewhat deflated?

Re:This is a bad sign

[ahde]

by "all ages" it sounds like you mean kids of all ages, which sounds like you mean exclusivly 30 year olds who collect comic books. Which is what monsters inc. is squarely targeted at. Not comic books, but 30 year olds who are in to pixar stuff.

Bugs bunny was all ages, star wars was all ages, phantom menace was not.

Re:This is a bad sign

[Black Parrot]

> Well, it isn't really news, but this is a clear sign of what audience the movie is targeted at.

Actually, I have Monsters, Inc. on my calendar.

Hope the SW trailer doesn't ruin it for me.

Re:This is a bad sign

[bitrott]

Monsters Inc is not a kids movie... It is a FAMILY movie, which means that it will potentially appeal to all possible members and age groups of a hypothetical family. It also means that it is appropriate for consumption across the age groups. Star Wars (orig trilogy and PM) meets this criteria. How is it a "bad sign" that the new one meets the same criteria?

Re:This is a bad sign

[ConceptJunkie]

WETA, the Washington DC public TV station?

Well, then I'm looking forward to Gandalf with a goofy-looking crepe beard, the computer effects to look all pixelly and chroma-key'ey (a la Electro-woman and Dyna-girl), orc makeup being cheap latex Halloween masks and spray-painted football helmets and a cameo by the Daleks.

Did anyone ever see "Overdrawn at the Memory Bank" produced, IIRC by public TV station WGBH and starring Raul Julia? Hot 'n' fancy computer graphics by a hacked Intellivision from what I can tell.

Re:This is a bad sign

[great om]

I saw it on MST3k

"Mom, my nuts" indeed :)

Re:This is a bad sign

[Bobo Kaput]

I seem to recall the EP I trailer was shown exlusively before A Bug's Life (Pixar/Jobs), and then on the Web exlusively in QuickTime (Apple/Jobs).

Hmmm....

Re:This is a bad sign

[Anonymous Coward]

This guy at work (single, no kids) was getting hyped up over the release of "Bug's Life Special Edition DVD" and the apparently wacky Cannonball Run-type outtakes it contained. Having seen a bit of the movie and been bored silly, I asked him if the movie was supposed to be for kids or not. He then went into this big diatribe about all of the "adult" humor in it. Frankly I saw less adult humor in that movie than in the average Bugs Bunny.

Which is not to say that Pixar doesn't market towards emotionally crippled adults. but that's not the same thing as being adult-oriented.

Re:This is a bad sign

[cheese_wallet]

I'm a little late posting here, so you probably won't get this...

Lucas has been saying the movies are for kids for a while now, but I don't buy it. Starwars episode 4 showed luke's foster parents as smoldering, smoking skeletons. That is not, in my opinion, kid stuff.

Re:This is a bad sign

[freakonaleash881]

Did anyone ever see "Overdrawn at the Memory Bank" produced, IIRC by public TV station WGBH and starring Raul Julia? Hot 'n' fancy computer graphics by a hacked Intellivision from what I can tell.

"FIIINGALLL!!! You shall set up a big buffet!"

This was from when MST3K ripped this movie =). It is soooo bad it's good.

Re:This is a bad sign

[cpt kangarooski]

Are you kidding? Kids love stuff like that -- check out old Brothers Grimm fairy tales. They're not this wussified Disney stuff, lemme tell you.

Re:This is a bad sign

[iainl]

I expect its just a +1, funny, but just in case anyone really is confused,

"WETA, the Washington DC public TV station?"

No, WETA the New Zealand effects company owned by Peter Jackson.

Re:This is a bad sign

[ConceptJunkie]

It's definitely one of my favorites, although I really have to wonder if that movie was meant to be a bit of a joke. Those whole scene with the little girl almost getting mustard on Aram Fingal's brain is probably the first clue. I dunno, I guess Raul Julia lost a bet or something.

"Panel World: For all your panelling needs"

Hope it's better than the last one

[atrowe]

All reports I've read say that Jar-Jar is going to be included.
Your going to hate the movie unless they take that fool out.
Base your movies on cartoonish animated lizards and no one will watch.
Are you listening, Lucas? Slapstick comedy does not
Belong in an epic movie like Star Wars.
To make the movie a success among adults, don't cater to kids.
US moviegoers learned their lesson last time, and won't buy your crap again.

Re:Hope it's better than the last one

[Malic]

For Great Justice...

Re:Hope it's better than the last one

[Anonymous Coward]

All reports I've read say that Jar-Jar is going to be included.
Your going to hate the movie unless they take that fool out.

I for one would prefer that Jar-Jar *is* in Episode 2. (I can't bear to actually type the full title...)

That is, however, assuming that he dies a horrible and painful death.

Re:Hope it's better than the last one

[Anonymous Coward]

And don't put any crap on the side of a burger king cup this time!

Re:Hope it's better than the last one

[Anonymous Coward]

To make the movie a success among adults, don't cater to kids.

Maybe you should grow up and start watching adult films. Star Wars is for kids.

Re:Hope it's better than the last one

[CmdrSam]

So, I hope you realize that AYB was ridiculously, terribly old and unfunny about two weeks after it made the rounds. You are astoundingly unclever for trying to perpetuate it.

(Those of you who may be confused, check the start of each sentence.)

--Sam L-L

Hrm?

[InnereNacht]

"Ep-I DVD owners should be able to view the trailers on starwars.com once Monsters, Inc. hits theaters."

Did I miss a previous story on this? Do you get a special key or something when you buy episode one so that you can view future trailers before they're allowed out to the general public?

Re:Hrm?

[geomcbay]

You get a special URL that works in conjunction with some proprietary Windows-browser that does some sort of checksum on the DVD-ROM disc (needs to be inserted in your computer's DVD drive).

There's already content on this DVD-ROM only site, still pictures from Episode 2, etc...The few people that have redistributed this content on publically accessible web-sites have, not surprisingly, been spanked by Lucasfilm.

Re:Hrm?

[snookerdoodle]

In a word: Yes. There is also other content on starwars.com available only to Episode I DVD owners.

Unfortunately (depending on your point of view), I'm not enough of a fan to spend a lot of time on their web site. I watch the movies. I go to bed.

The next day, I watch the Pod Race with my 4 and 6 year old boys. Then I watch the Pod Race with my 4 and 6 year old boys again. Then I watch the Pod Race with my 4 and 6 year old boys again. Then I watch the Pod Race with my 4 and 6 year old boys again.

Mark

Re:Hrm?

[count_dooku]

Did I miss a previous story on this? Do you get a special key or something when you buy episode one so that you can view future trailers before they're allowed out to the general public?

Episode I owners have access to exclusive content on dvd.starwars.com. When you insert the Ep.1 DVD into a computer (Mac/Windows omly) it installs an Intervideo player. This player allows access to the exclusive content.

They have already posted a still photo Episode II montage called "Choices."

It's possible that this is what's available on Gnutella. Its a quicktime video, but, like I said, is comprised of still photos and some background music.

--

Re:Hrm?

[xTK-421x]

The URL for the DVD site is:

http://dvd.starwars.com

I think it also does a check on your user agent and won't let you in if it's not the special PC Friendly stuff on the DVD. I haven't bothered to mess with my UA to see if the DVD checksum occurs.

Anyway, the "exclusive" trailer will probably be posted on the internet in a few minutes. The choices video was out the same day the DVD was in wide release.

Re:Hrm?

[Galvatron]

Remember, Lucas was a prime mover and shaker behind DiVX (or however it was capitalized). He's definately one of the Bad Guys where IP is concerned.

Re:Hrm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Didja watch the documentary? It's obvious they put more effort into the podrace scene than the whole rest of the movie. I loved the (extremely revealing) sequence where they showed how they cast Anakin. Basically, they weeded out a few Mark Hamill look-alikes from 3000 seven year old boys and then picked the one whose acting sucked the least. It was pathetic. George Lucas again proves he's got a firm grasp of all the wrong details.

Re:Hrm?

[mr100percent]

The DVD features are Windows ONLY, just to do that checksum thingy. Ugh.

What about November 9th?

[M_Talon]

Anyone who has the Ep 1 DVD knows they've been hyping November 9th. It was just kinda assumed that was the release date for the new teaser for Ep 2. Anyone check lately to see if 11/9 is still being promoted, or if they've changed that to 11/2 (the release date of Monsters Inc)?

Re:What about November 9th?

[FortKnox]

From what I've heard, 11/9 is when they'll release the "full" trailer to DVD owners.

Re:What about November 9th?

[geomcbay]

The general Internet buzz, which thus far has proved to be correct (it predicted the teaser on Monsters, Inc about a month ago) is that there are going to be three seperate trailers in quick succession, one with Monsters, Inc (Nov 2); one (longer one) with Harry Potter (Nov 16); and one Internet trailer that is released between the two.

My semi-educated guess would be Nov 9th is when the Internet trailer will be released..maybe as a DVD exclusive at first(?).

Re:What about November 9th?

[pmcneill]

According to the rumors on theforce.net, there will be two teaser trailers and the Harry Potter trailer this month. The first teaser, "Breathing" is attached to Monsters, Inc. The second is supposed to be released on November 9, and trailer "A" is November 16. Trailer B will supposedly show up in March.

Harry Potter?

[DragonWyatt]

Perhaps someone could fill me in on what all this Harry Potter stuff is about?

Maybe five or six sentences giving background and what's worth caring about?

Thanks,

Josh

Re:Harry Potter?

[ErikZ]

Why don't you move your lazy fingers and do a search on slashdot for the topic "Harry Potter" and "Hugo Winner"

6 sentences. Sheesh. How can you manage a whole book?

Re:Harry Potter?

[gmhowell]

Entertaining stories about an outsider/geek type kid. His parents were killed, he is now 11 years old, and it is time to fulfill his birthright.

I'm not sure why it is SO popular. I mean, they are entertaining stories, but I see nothing deep or profound in them.

My wife started reading them to find out what the kids were going on about (she's a teacher) and I picked them up, as I found out I was going to be taking her and infant son to the movie.

Re:Harry Potter?

[joeytsai]

Note: I've only read the first three books, so anything I say outside of those books is speculation - I haven't seen interviews with Rowling or read articles about books, etc.

The books are a series of seven novels, which follow an orphaned boy (Harry) between the ages 11-17. Naturally, teenage years are good fodder for stories, but then there's the fact that Harry learns he is a Wizard.

Each book is around a year, starting with his summer vacation, and then his school year at a Wizard school Hogwarts. (You go to Hogwarts for seven years, hence the series of seven novels).

Not only is there an adventure each year, but along with that you learn more and more about the Harry Potter universe, in particular the story about his parents. Going back to what I said earlier, not only do you see Harry growing and learning more about himself and where he comes from, but you also begin to get a better picture of Harry's wizard universe. In particular, the grand good vs. evil battle involving a Wizard so feared that most don't even want to say his name.

Re:Harry Potter?

[osjedi]

...and, in addtion to that each book has a mystery bad guy. You think you know who it is, but you are wrong. Every time. First book, second book, third book, fourth book...

Kids love these books because they are about children who conquer challenges in the face of adversity. Adults like them because they make them feel like kids again. The adventures are fun and my whole family enjoys the books together. ...and we liked Harry Potter before Harry was cool (my wife's a teacher).

The books are not 'superb literature', but they are very fun and well worth the time and money.

If you choose not to read them because they are "for kids" then it's your loss. I feel pitty for anyone who thinks that "fun is just for kids". Read them with your wife/kids, or kids, or girlfriend - you'll have fun together.

Re:Harry Potter?

[d-e-w]

They are good travel (plane/car) books. Easy to pick up and get interested in, but easy to put down for a while without losing your place.

In tone, they are very similar to British young adult books of about 15 years back. (I'm thinking specifically of Dahl, but he wasn't the only ya writer with that style.) Light reading, with a bit of humor, and a decent story line.

Re:Harry Potter?

[ahde]

it is easier to print/stock/distribute/promote one book. when everyone from the publisher, to the bookstore, to the critic are allied -- and no one is competing with them -- it only makes economic sense to reduce cost, and mass producing one product makes more sense than floating several and hoping one will catch on. Content is King -- and the king is appointed by a statisticial. The Harry Potter books are ghost written by as many demographickers as a hollywood script.

Re:Harry Potter?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, Phil. Ben Dover and I will be right over to give it to you. Why is it people post shit to slashdot to ask brutally easy to answer questions? Is it too hard for you to type "Harry Potter" into the little box on Google and spend 10 seconds researching it yourself?

What I'd rather see...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is a trailer for Zero Wing 2: Attack Of The Cats!

For Great Justice!

Correction

[Anonymous Coward]

"Ep-I DVD owners who don't use Macs should be able to view the trailers on starwars.com once Monsters, Inc. hits theaters."

Mac Users and Star Wars Episode One DVD Beware...

[BoarderPhreak]

Lots of neat Star Wars ASCII art is available at this site for the curious... :)

1st p0st!

[Anonymous Coward]

Own3D!!!!!!! f34r m3!

You can't download the trailer unless you buy...

[Anonymous Coward]

the DVD? Sheesh, thank goodness for limewire.

Re:Mac Users and Star Wars Episode One DVD Beware.

[BoarderPhreak]

D'ohhh!

Forgot to add the part about the DVD incompatibilities for Mac users of the Episode I DVD. Go figure, the site "Go2Mac" where a lot of the info is (or was linked from) is having some issues right now. Last I heard, the company that produced the DVD responded about it, but that's also on that site... :(

methinks Star Wars is for kids

[MattW]

me no think fans of original be liking dumbed down sequels. methinks second-run matinee for AOTC (at best).

Re:methinks Star Wars is for kids

[frank_adrian314159]

me no think fans of original be liking dumbed down sequels...

OK, I have to say that Lucas IS a marketing genius. Has anyone considered the possibility that he's just cutting down expectations in the second trilogy so that he can really wow the audience for the third? If this is his plan, you can count on this one being a bit better than Episode 1, and E3 being a bit of a downer again. After that, expect a crash-bang ending in E7-9.

Of course, the other possibility is that he's just a cynical old hack turning out crap because he knows that no matter how bad the movies are, a bunch of kids and loser geeks are going to go see them, buy the crappy toys that go with them, and make him a ton of bucks :-). Time will tell...

Re:methinks Star Wars is for kids

[MattW]

Keep in mind, Lucas has said he won't be making 7-9 into movies. (ostensibly, he's too old)

Re:methinks Star Wars is for kids

[Anonymous Coward]

Heaven forfend we might have to turn our precious IP over to a younger generation to finish it! What probably is the issue is that he has screwed the pooch by allowing a bunch of hack authors to plot his future storyline for Luke, Leia, and Han, and won't be able to fit in a word edgewise by the time they get through with it. Don't get me wrong, some of those stories are a credit to the series, but Sebulba, he always wins! I mean, some of those are good stories, but there is a lot of shit in there. It's a pity, because all of the characters have aged pretty nicely (except for Carrie Fisher -- she has not aged well, and considering the hormonal requirements of star wars fans she would either have to go on a serious personal fitness quest or get a lot of makeup or be replaced, figuratively, by a younger gal. I mean, besides Luke, Han and Leia, no one else in the movie showed their face, or if they did they're now dead. C-3P0 could be entirely digitized now, anyway (he played the same victim-bot role in EPI that he did in Empire and Jedi and all they did was overdub his voice, which could be done by any competent mimic). Not that I dislike Anthony Daniels (or Kenny Baker) as an actor, but if he kicked off sometime soon it wouldn't make a bit of difference to the ability to make a movie with the character he created.

At any rate, I don't see Lucas maintaining the momentum for another three movies after this, either. My 5-year-old son already can tell the difference between a quality star wars film (the first two) and hackwork (the last two) and his preferences in watching them clearly indicate that the series has lost its luster. I'll be surprised if ep III doesn't utterly tank. Not that I will miss its premiere in the theatre myself, but I only am picking these up for completeness. Kind of like you had to go out and get the mid 80's Rush albums, even though they pretty much wanked, if you wanted to be a real collector.

Funny... I look forward to HP more than AOTC

[stilwebm]

It is funny that as a child of the Star Wars generation, I look forward to Harry Potter more than the next Star Wars film. Phantom Menace just ruined my desire to see Attack of the Clones.

Star Wars Trailers and Movie Grosses

[BiteMyShinyMetalAss]

Slightly offtopic, but a question that I at least thought was interesting...

I remember reading that tons of fans went to see 'Meet Joe Black' (I'm prettysure that's what it was) just to watch the Episode I trailer, and I'm guessing that the same will happen with 'Monsters, Inc.' (although 'Monsters, Inc.' is probably more enjoyable than than 'Meet Joe Black')

I wonder: how much of an effect do the new Star Wars trailers have on the grosses of the films that they appear in front of? I'm sure that the take from 'Meet Joe Black' was nicely boosted by those who walked out after the trailer ;)

Re:Star Wars Trailers and Movie Grosses

[UserChrisCanter4]

IIRC, the first film with the Episode One trailer was Wing Commander. In the case of WC, a lot of Star Wars fans went for the first few minutes to see the trailer and then walked out to the lobby to demand a refund.

As far as Wing Commander is concerned, the Episode 1 trailer most likely did have an effect on the gross (although not much of one, Wing Commander failed horribly at the box office). In the case of Monsters Inc., though, I don't think it will be any effect at all. I had been planning to see that movie since I first saw previews. I own Toy Story 1, Toy Story 2, and A Bug's Life on DVD. Pixar simply does a wonderful job with their films. An Episode 2 trailer is just iceing on the cake.

Re:Star Wars Trailers and Movie Grosses

[Murdock037]

I remember the same thing-- that opening weekend grosses were boosted by quite a bit because the Episode 1 trailer was attached. (For the record, though, in my area at least, it wasn't attached to Meet Joe Black-- a minor tragedy, because anticipation for the trailer was the reason I agreed to take my girlfriend to MJB in the first place).

I doubt it'll be quite such a noticable effect this time around, though, for a few reasons:

1. Star Wars fever has cooled considerably. We're not waiting here after a 16-year buildup-- it's only been a couple since Episode 1.

2. Considering the general feeling of disappointment left over from Episode 1 among the hard-core fans-- who are the ones that would pay for another movie just to see the new trailer-- it probably won't be such an event.

3. Monsters, Inc. and Harry Potter are going to do some big fat business in the first place. Any boost they get from the new teaser is probably just another drop in the bucket. I know I'm more excited to see 90 minutes of Pixar than two minutes of Lucasfilm, and I doubt you'd be able to find a kid in America that would disagree.

Of course, all of this is rambling based on knowledge gained from my Entertainment Weekly subscription, so it's all up for debate.

Re:Star Wars Trailers and Movie Grosses

[Jeremy Erwin]

The trailer originally appeared before and after "Meet Joe Black" and "The Waterboy," at selected theatres. I've heard that the Waterboy was a pretty dumb movie-- as was (for slightly different reasons), MJB.

Re:Star Wars Trailers and Movie Grosses

[xTK-421x]

Count me in as one of those people. Although I agree that "Monsters Inc." will probably be much better than "Meet Joe Black", I'm just not big into the CGI Animation flicks. Ditto for "Harry Potter", I'm also not interested in that either. $18 for two trailers is a lot, but seeing them on the big screen is much better than on my 19" monitor.

I'm sure they'll be released after the weekend they premiere anyway, so I'll be able to absorb every detail on my PC afterwards, but it will be nice to see them at least once in a theater.

Re:Star Wars Trailers and Movie Grosses

[Anonymous Coward]

Have any of you even seen MJB? It wasn't such a bad movie.

Both on my list anyway...

[Nijika]

I'm starved for good sci-fi....

You can get the write up here:

[Anonymous Coward]

Seen it, didn't like it.

Off-Topic: Episode I Surround Content

[snookerdoodle]

Just a related note: Episode I is the first movie I've watched that had rear center channel info (the "EX" in "Surround EX") since I got a 7.1 system and added rear speakers.

It *does* add to the experience somewhat. OTOH, I found the THX Optimizer thing kinda cheesy and just a reiteration of what you had already done with your system if you had bothered to rtfm...

Mark

Re:Off-Topic: Episode I Surround Content

[bribecka]

I take it you mean 6.1, not 7.1.

But anyway, the optimizer is there also for video stuff, which is probably more valuable than the audio optimization.

Re:Off-Topic: Episode I Surround Content

[Anonymous Coward]

My TV has two tiny speakers, probably about 5" in diameter. I bet I enjoy a good movie just as well as someone who spent 10^3 on speakers for his TV. In fact I saw The Mummy last night on AMC. Made in 1932, starting Boris Karloff, mono sound (that's one channel) with the hiss and crackle on the soundtrack so loud that you couldn't possibly _not_ hear it. Probably every bit as entertaining as 7.1 THX Surround EX. A good movie registers in your mind, not your eardrums, and if you need a thousand dollars of equipment to enjoy a movie it was never very good.

Re:Off-Topic: Episode I Surround Content

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, doody dah. My radio has a little crystal and a neat 2" speaker and was practically free. More free even than free beer. I bet I enjoy listening to "The Shadow" and "Lone Ranger" and any good story just as well as someone who spent $50 on his TV.

A good story registers in your mind, not your eyes, and if you need fifty dollars of equipment to enjoy a story, it was never very good.

PLPLPLPTTT!!

Re:Off-Topic: Episode I Surround Content

[snookerdoodle]

Oh! I was accidentally watching QUANTUM Menace instead and it magically added another channel to my system!

(Yer right about the video - most tv's don't give you a lot of help fixing the setup).

Mark

Re:Off-Topic: Episode I Surround Content

[Anonymous Coward]

He probably meant 7.1 Surround, idjit. It's a new standard.

Re:Off-Topic: Episode I Surround Content

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh yeah! I read "Close Encounters" in novel form before I ever saw the movie, and if you need less than two cents of equipment to enjoy a mere radio show, it was never very good!

Try them

[BillyGoatThree]

The first book is pretty light and features HP as an 11 year old boy. But each subsequent book is darker as Harry gets older (one year per book). The first time I read the 4th book (which I'm currently re-reading in anticipation of the movie and 5th book) I snuck it into my cubicle and work and spent the entire day reading it. It's that gripping.

So no, they aren't for "little kids". They are for children of various ages. Just like the Narnia and Alice books.

I don't see the problem

[bowb]

Neither you nor your girlfriend can reserve them why?

According to the rumors...

[silent_poop]

...at theforce.net it sounds like Trailer B (the internet download) will actually be later than the Monsters, Inc release date.

My impressions...

[H0NGK0NGPH00EY]

I haven't read them either, so you're certainly not the only one who hasn't read them.

As far as the appeal, I may be totally wrong here, but as far as I can tell, the books are written more toward an adult audience. The latest book in the series, Goblet of Fire, is 734 pages! I don't know about you, but as a kid, I never read any 734 page hardback novels. I think the main appeal for the kids is that the main character is a kid, not that the story content is childish.

That's what I think anyway.

Ever Read The Hobbit?

[paranoid.android]

If you've ever read The Hobbit, you were reading a book intended for a younger audience. Yes, it's geared toward children, but it contains themes that adults can appreciate and enjoy.

Supposedly, the same thing can be said for the Harry Potter books, but I haven't read them yet.

Re:Ever Read The Hobbit?

[philglanville]

I read the Hobbit when I was eight, had no idea it was pitched at the same level as "Janet and John go camping".

Spoilers

[Aurelfell]

I'm almost afraid to watch teasers for Episode II. Two days before Episode I hit then theatres, I saw a track called Qui-Gon's Noble End on the soundtrack. Spoilers lake that can take away for one's enjoyment of a movie, especially and epic-style flick like Star Wars.

Re:Spoilers

[osjedi]

I hate the trailers anymore too. They just give away to much. I liked the way movies like "Unbreakable" and "Sixth Sense" were promoted - those trailers didn't even give you enough info to know what the movie was about - THANK GOODNESS!

But I hate the way many films are promoted, like "Castaway" for example. Before you even went it to see the film you knew he worked for FedEx, that he crashed at sea, that he made it to an island, that he lived there, that he was rescued, and that he got on with his life. It was a wonderful movie but they took away all the suspense. I hate that.

Re:Spoilers

[ErikZ]

You must of hated Wierd Al's song then. :-)

Re:Spoilers

[Anonymous Coward]

That is what this teaser is like. It is just a montage of video with Darth's breathing overlayed.

I have no idea what the movie will be like, even after seeing the teaser.

Advance Screenings rock, by the way.

Re:Spoilers

[Gremlin77]

Quigon's Noble End really bugged me too. I bought the soundtrack days before seeing the movie, after making a point not to look at any spoilers.

Does TESB have a track named "Vader is Luke's Dad"? I didn't think so.

Actually, . . .

[Limburgher]

First of all, J.K. Rowling is a woman. On a more relevant note, the Harry Potter series is a fascinating epic with many threads and topics that keep adults enthralled, myself included. My wife read the first one, and recommended it to me, and I thought, 'oh, ok, i'll succumb to the hype this once' but it was amazing, and the other three only get better. There are also parallels with Star Wars. Young boy of unusual ability lives with aunt and uncle from infancy due to parents' mysterious deaths at the hands of an unknown evil. These facts are revealed suddenly and the boy's world is changed forever, as he learns to tap his powers and fight evil, while gathering friends. A New Hope, or The Sorcerer's Stone? Both, actually.

Rowling is a lady -nt-

[Captain_Frisk]

nt means no text

C.S.Lewis, Lewis Carrol, etc

[Kris Warkentin]

Lots of children's books are excellent reading. "The Chronicles of Narnia" and "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" are great examples

Re:C.S.Lewis, Lewis Carrol, etc

[Flower]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned 'A Wrinkle in Time.' by Madeleine L'Engle. I recently saw that it has been made into a mini-series set to air in 2002.

Re:C.S.Lewis, Lewis Carrol, etc

[Eagle7]

And I'm surprised no one mentioned The Wizard of Oz. Esp. if you're a US history buff.

BTW, I hated A Wrinle In Time as a child.

Re:C.S.Lewis, Lewis Carrol, etc

[the Man in Black]

Or Lloyd Alexander's 'Black Cauldron' series. I remember these books keeping me seated in the library for days at a time. My very first "can't put it down" books.

Re:C.S.Lewis, Lewis Carrol, etc

[cpt kangarooski]

"The Last Unicorn" by Peter Beagle, and "One for the Morning Glory" by John Barnes. Excellent books. And of course I ate up the Oz books when I was a kid... loved 'em, had a whole shelf of 'em.

Harry Potters Books

[bamberg29]

I've just finished reading the first Harry Potter book on Saturday and since have read about one fourth of the second book in the series.

I must say that although it seems like a children book (I told myself a while back that I would never read them), they are quite entertaining and are a fun read.

If the movie is any much near the book, then it will probably be one good movie.

BTW, I'm a 18 year old male...so I definately don't fall into the Harry Potter stereotype.

Re:Harry Potters Books

[Anonymous Coward]

But the fact you are an 18 year old male and were reading a book on a Saturday makes you fall into the Slashdot stereotype. ;)

Re:Harry Potters Books

[bamberg29]

Well it may, but I was also reading it on a Palm m100 in a US Air Force jet hangar in Rhein Main while manning a first aid station for a Boy Scout campout :-)

Typical

[elefantstn]

Good thing I'm planning on seeing both of those movies anyway.

CmdrTaco then continued by saying,

"Then I plan to complain on slashdot that Disney, AOL-TW, and Fox -- coincidentally the companies who will be making money off Monsters, Inc., Harry Potter, and Star Wars Episode II respectively -- are using their vast monetary resources to purchase laws in the United States Congress. The irony of blasting these movie studios repeatedly on my website and then in the same breath praising and promoting their movies is apparently totally lost on me."

Re:Typical

[Anonymous Coward]

hahahahaha...

so so true..

i love the hypocrisy of /. editors and their slashbots of enjoying everything "Big Media/Business/Whatever" produces but absolutely hate it when they try to make money from it. how DARE they!

.

Re:Typical

[MikeBabcock]

You mean I'm not allowed to purchase tickets to a movie by WB or Disney but not like the fact that they take my rights away with the profits?

I thought thats what laws were for ... regulate what they could and could not do with the money they make off making good movies.

PS, yes, I do think they make good movies.

Re:Typical

[AndroidCat]

Besides, these movies should be Open Source so that anyone can go in and fix the plot holes.

Re:Typical

[elefantstn]

Yeah. If the Phantom Menace were open-sourced we'd have to dump everything and start again, Mozilla-style.

Re:Typical

[ryanvm]

You mean I'm not allowed to purchase tickets to a movie by WB or Disney but not like the fact that they take my rights away with the profits?

Correct. It's too bad you're being sarcastic.

Do you vote for politicians whose policies clash with your own? Wouldn't that be kind of silly? When you give Disney $20 bucks for a DVD or movie ticket, you have sent them the message that you approve of their business policies.

I thought thats what laws were for ... regulate what they could and could not do with the money they make off making good movies.

Ummm, are you new in this country? Who do you think pays for those laws? I'll give you a hint: If you haven't written a $20,000 check to someone's campaign in the last year, then it ain't you. As long as there are deep-pocket lobbyists in Washington, I wouldn't count on any laws protecting your interests.

Re:Typical

[MikeBabcock]

Actually, I'm in Canada and we have laws against campaign contributions like that. We often comment on corruption but look south of the border for examples of it en-masse in this form.

I'm sorry that these corporations have these rigths in the USA, but why not work to change that instead of trying to change the big companies themselves?

Re:Typical

[Happy Monkey]

Do you vote for politicians whose policies clash with your own?

Yes, don't you? Or were you lucky enough to find a candidate you agreed with on all issues?

Your other points are good, though...

Re:Typical

[ryanvm]

I'm sorry that these corporations have these rigths in the USA, but why not work to change that instead of trying to change the big companies themselves?

Good point. I'm afraid what you've witnessed is a small fraction of the hopelessness that pervades the American psyche with regard to our current political machine.

It's like a terminal disease. After watching so many good candidates passed over for the puppets with big money backing them, you begin to stop trying to fix the system and instead focus on treating the symptoms. *Siggghhhh*

Re:Typical

[tregoweth]

Now, wait a second -- he could be sneaking in to those movies.

Re:Typical

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently it's lost on me too. Perhaps Taco can see a difference between the actions of corporations and their products?

who CARES?

[Anonymous Coward]

EP II will sucks anyway, why try to get your hopes up? Sure, for EP I i was at the first screening at midnight (only because a professor had bought tickets for the show, then couldn't make it, sold them to me at cost), but it sucked, you think EP II will be any better? come on, fucking give it up already, the new shit will never had the charm that the originals did.

Re:Mac Users and Star Wars Episode One DVD Beware.

[BoarderPhreak]

Here's the story on Go2Mac.

Very strange though. This isn't the story I was looking for - there was another with actual details, and the reply(s) from the company producing the DVD. I've searched "Macsurfer" and although "star wars" brings up a bunch of hits, not the ones I had read a week or two ago. Were they erased? Were they moved? Got me. :-/

Good thing I'm planning on seeing both ...

[vanguard]

Good thing I'm planning on seeing both of those movies anyway.

Really? I'm probably going to see the next star wars but I'm not eagerly looking forward to it. C'mon, the last two star wars movies sucked.

I'm not looking to start a flame war but I really don't see this as a major event. It's not even "News for Nerds". It's just news for star wars fans that haven't stopped caring after the last two episodes.

/me checks the "no star wars news" box in his preferences.

Re:Good thing I'm planning on seeing both ...

[Anonymous Coward]

It aint released under GPL, wont run under Linux?? It must really suck!

Rowling, Clones Trailer

[Robotech_Master]

Well, that's what the publisher wanted you to think. Listen to some of the Rowling audio interviews from NPR's archive; she says that the publisher wanted to publish her as J.K. Rowling instead of Joanne K. Rowling, out of fear that little boys would be turned off of a book written by a girl (ick, cooties!). As it turns out, they didn't need to worry; it's now well-known she's female (except on Slashdot, apparently) and it hasn't dampened the books' popularity one whit.

To avoid the dreaded Off-Topic markdown, let me just mention that, as one of the DVD-owners, I have access to the Star Wars site; they're still hyping November 9th as far as I know. For the moment, they have what can only be described as a trailer for the trailer posted--a 7-meg Quicktime slideshow called "Choices" that shows images and posits such gripping questions as "What is the cost of failure?" and, my favorite, "What do droids worry about?"

Since Quicktimes can easily be downloaded, I expect you could find it on Gnutella by now. It's not all that great, but at least it's something.

Re:Rowling, Clones Trailer

[Anonymous Coward]

"Wurst.. post... ever!"
-comic book guy

Re:Rowling, Clones Trailer

[Omerna]

"What do droids worry about?"

Seems to me that line's almost a direct rip off of "Do androids dream of electric sheep?"

Jar Jar must not die

[Aurelfell]

I agree that Jar Jar Binks is the most annoying Star Wars character ever, possibly the most annoying fictional character in history. It's for that reason that he cannot die in Episode II; There's no one worthy of slaying the most annoying character ever. Not Obi-wan, not Jabba the Hutt, not Palpatine, not even Boba Fett, (although Fett is pretty close). No one in Episode II is worthy. Of course, in Episode III . . .

Consume.

[Anonymous Coward]

Consume. You know your duty. You are what you consume. Star Wars is nothing without you. You are nothing without Star Wars. Consume. Partake. He who knows no bounds is holy. Without limits, we are endless. Those that would limit your freedom are insincere. Those who revel in their glutton will know god. Consume.

News Flash!

[gcondon]

MegaCineCorp has announced the list of films showing the highly anticipated "teaser trailer" for the upcoming Hype Wars Episode N - Send in the Clones.

Studio spokesman, Rip Ewoff, was quoted as saying "after we milk those freeks for two full-price tickets, it should be just about time for them to get into line for the premeire".

MegaCineCorp President, Ernesto Palpatine, could not be reached for comment.

Apple

[Scrameustache]

Side note to Mac fans: According to IGN, Steve Jobs was the one that confirmed the trailer was playing with Monsters Inc.

I know what the trailer will be like!

[Amon CMB]

"They came from outer space!"

"They came from Planet X!"

"OH NO!"

"Run, hide! They are coming!"

Natalie Portman: ::screeeeam::

"Come see the latest in the Star Wars saga!"

Star Wars Episode II: When Clones Attack

Re:I know what the trailer will be like!

[buckeyeguy]

Hmm, maybe she'll act a few years older this time... she's supposed to in this one.

Possible Trailer: (cue Terminator music... bah dum dum da dum)
(voice over) "He's back... and this time, he's..."
[Cut to JarJar] "wooo-ed!"
(voice over) "JarJar Binks, as the Gungan, in 'Fistful of Clone'!!!"
[JarJar] "Meessa tinking you gonna make my day, yousa punk-sa!!"
(voice over) "Now in theatres all over the universe."

Or some such nonsense... it'll either be great or dreadful...

*sigh*

[DigitalSorceress]

Anyone ever get the feeling that Lucasfilms is the Microsoft of the movie industry?

They are so brilliant at marketing their wares that you almost forget that their actual product it crap.

Other Fantasy Movies (on harry potter comment)

[xfs]

In the movie industry, it seems that Fantasy has been forgotten (as opposed to scifi) Harry Potter series has a chance of being OK, if you consider what it goes up against... Willow. (im sorry but imho, that movie sucked.) but we all know LOTR will be king of all

Trailer IS on Monsters, Inc.

[Proteus]

My partner has seen Monsters, Inc. due to having friends who manage a movie theater. There is, in fact, a trailer for Episode II on the front end of it.

Needless to say, I'm also jealous as hell that she saw it and I didn't. :P

Star wars for kids?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh no crap? You think maybe thats why R2D2 used to be on the muppet show and sesame street and things? God jesus get a life and grow up people

Not Only Have I NOT Read Them..

[citizenc]

.. I have done so with a conscious effort. I refuse to buy into the commercialism. =)

Re:Not Only Have I NOT Read Them..

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, brother.

J.K. Rowling is NOT Stephen King. She doesn't write shitty books, knowing that her fans will lap it up because it's a J.K. Rowling book.

And if you're so worried abou commercialism, you're not alone-- Rowling herself agrees with you. She has said that parents should tell their children that she thinks most of the Harry Potter merchandise is "horrible" and she doesn't like it.

Which might be part of why you see most of the HP figurines on the clearance rack at Kohl's nowadays.

But don't let the absurd commercialism fool you. The books are great, trust me. If you're really worried, consider checking the first book out from the local library. Or download the books online (just do a search on Google for "harry potter ebook").

Re:Not Only Have I NOT Read Them..

[elmegil]

I said that myself once. "Anything with that much hype can't possibly be any good." Except that then someone whose opinion I respected convinced me to read the first book, and I was hooked. They really are good books, hype notwithstanding.

J(oanne) K(athleen) Rowling

[Bonker]

That Rowling guy must feel pretty good with the success of his books...

J(oanne) K(athleen) Rowling is probably very happy with HER success. Unlike many authors who have had their stories ported to the screen, she has a huge amount of creative control over the Chris Columbus directed Harry Potter movie.

Here is the best FAQ I have seen about her and her rise: http://www.geocities.com/jkrfaq/bio.html

Re:J(oanne) K(athleen) Rowling

[jafac]

if that's the case, what's with the glaring inconsistencies? Like, how HP's scar, as described in the book, is located in the center of his forehead, but in the movie, it's over on the side - and how, in the book, his hair is described as messy, unkempt, sheer anarchy, but in the movie, it's neat and tidy, all done up by a hollywood makeup artist?

Re:J(oanne) K(athleen) Rowling

[Tassach]

Movies are not books. What works in books does not always work in movies. Details like hair, appearace, & costume play differently in print than they do on the screen. Movies are time-constrained, books are not. A book can spend several pages setting up a scene or explaining some nuance of the plot.

The measure of a good book-to-movie adaptation isn't necessarily a 100% accurate transcription of the printed story. The goal (and difficulty) is to preserve as much as the plot and tone of the original.

One of the best adaptations to date was (IMHO) Anne Rice's Interview With The Vampire. Yes, it differed from the book in a lot of pretty significant ways. But it worked. It captured the TONE of the original. Take the character of Armand. In the books, his apperance is that of a 12 year old boy; but in the movie the character was played by Antonio Bandaris -- a pretty big revision. But if you try and substitute a child actor in the role (say Haley Joel Osmet of the 6th Sense) it just wouldn't play as well on screen. Armand is supposed to be the oldest known living vampire in the world; a source of wisdom & understanding. On screen, you have no problem believing that Antonio Bandaras is older & wiser than Brad Pitt; it wouldn't be as believable with a 12-year-old playing the role of Armand. The nature of the medium makes changes like that a Good Thing (if done carefully).

Re:J(oanne) K(athleen) Rowling

[sillyputty]

I remember reading somewhere that, although the illustrations for the books show the scar in the center, the text doesn't mention the exact location. The article further stated that the movie location is where Ms. Rowling wanted it. I have read the HP books, but it's been a while and I no longer have the copies, so I can't verify this, but if you have the text handy you might check your assumptions.

sillyputty

Trailer synopsis and Ep II review

[artemis67]

Aint It Cool News has had some intersting Episode II news lately... the first is a synopsis of the trailer that seems to have been verified by TheForce.net. It can be found here:

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=10579

The second is even more tantilizing... it's a full review of the movie, allegedly based on the second editied version. That can be found here:

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=10528

Enjoy.

Re:*sigh* TROLL

[buckeyeguy]

Now, be fair... only the Ewok-riddled third one was crap, and then only parts of it... given the choice between the latest two movies, and a 'Notting Hill/Wedding Planner' double feature (or insert your favorite inane chick-flick titles here), you can bet I'm ready to overlook the shortcomings of the SW movies ;)

Ah, I remember the TPM trailer

[Junks Jerzey]

Having seen the Star Wars movies as a kid, the TPM trailer gave me chills. "wow, just like the previous" movies. It was so perfect, so slick, I couldn't get over it. Then I saw the movie and _yikes_ was it horrible. Did I just grow up or was TPM just plain embarrassing? Sadly I think that you needed to be nine years old to appreciate it.

Re:Ah, I remember the TPM trailer

[mickeyreznor]

well, lucas did say he wanted the movies to be for a "new generation", though i think he did overdo it a bit for TPM.

Re:Ah, I remember the TPM trailer

[bitrott]

Oi... TPM Is a story about a child. Why such surprise that it's told with child optimism, foibles, and simplicity. In short, it's told from a child's perspective. A sly way to introduce the series in my mind. Innocence > Darkness > Rebirth

Re:Ah, I remember the TPM trailer

[dswensen]

You took the words out of my mouth. Thanks.

TPM is also the first act of, well, six, looking at the long view. You can't have a story of fall, despair, and redemption if you start out at the bottom. If Anakin starts out being like Chucky from Child's Play, where's the drama when he finally goes bad? Nowhere.

I think we'll see the movies mature as Anakin matures, and get darker as he does.

Re:Ah, I remember the TPM trailer

[dswensen]

I was incredibly jacked about TPM when I saw the trailer. I thought it was going to be the Best Thing Ever. Then the advance reviews started coming out, some expressing not so much disappointment as existential despair, and I started to worry. A whole generation of former kids had hung their identities on this series of movies, and felt personally betrayed when the new one didn't deliver the same magic through a wall of years and life experience.

I saw TPM opening night, I enjoyed it (with some reservations), and I've seen it many times since then. I think my initial disappointments sprung from a few things:

1) It's far from a perfect film.
2) I'm no longer a kid.
3) I expected it to be the Best Thing Ever, thereby almost ensuring it wouldn't be.

I don't think TPM was embarrassing, but I do think it's a very different film from the rest of Star Wars. It adds a more openly "comic" character (which, to my mind, was a good try but a failure), and includes things like politics, intrigue, foreshadowing, and deception -- which the classic trilogy was fairly short on.

I love and appreciate the classic trilogy for its wahoo, space-cowboys appeal, but honestly, I'm not so sure I need to see three more movies of it. I'm glad Lucas is not entirely resting on his dramatic laurels and is branching out into new ground (for him, anyway).

Personally, I'm excited to see the new flick, to see if Lucas will have learned from some of his mistakes in TPM, and also because I think TPM was all foreshadowing and setup, and we're going to see some real action in the next two flicks.

Re:Ah, I remember the TPM trailer

[mgblst]

Dont feel so bad, the fact is that trailer and advert writers are some of the most talented people in hollywood, and can turn a 2 hour piece of crap, into something we all want to see.... utter genious!

Why the initials?

[ToastyKen]

You know, this makes me wonder why she chose to bill herself with her initials.. Perhaps this confusion isn't accidental, but intended? Perhaps, like George Elliot, she's intentionally hiding her true sex in order to avoid people who'd avoid her books just because she's female? Or perhaps I'm just being paranoid, since I recall reading a lot of children's books written by women, and no one seemed to mind that.

Re:Why the initials?

[Mondrames]

The author of The Outsiders did the same thing. She was worried that J.Q. Public wouldn't want to read a book about male adolescense written by a teenage girl.

Re:Why the initials?

[ToastyKen]

*sigh*. And not only do they have to pretend to be male, but they have to write about male characters in order to make them more "generic", since male characters appeal to both sexes, but female characters only appeal to females.. unless they have big boobies or something. *sigh*

Re:Why the initials?

[Mondrames]

I believe that will take will take much longer to correct than the acceptance of female authors...

TPM made the first 3 look *better*, not worse.

[No Such Agency]

I hated Phantom Menance - not just because it was a kid's movie, but because it forced me to realize, as a 28 year old, that the first three weren't amazing films in my mind because they were amazing films, but because I saw them when I was in grade school.

I personally thought that, apart from some truly fantastic action sequences (the lightsaber battles, the pod race), The Phantom Menace really brought out the quality of Episodes 4-6. While they too were cartoony, they really had an "edge" that TPM lacked - especially Empire of course but even Jedi had some truly dark moments and mature drama. Episode 1 generally lacked these. Not to mention that compared to the freezing wasteland Hoth or the arid beauty of Tatooine, the CGI Naboo looked like ass...

SSSCA

[HiThere]

Disney is the company that bankrolled the SSSCA. It will be quite a long time before I do anything that might be seen as beneficial to them.
I don't really care what trailers they include. Some things are more important.

Re:SSSCA

[90XDoubleSide]

At least Disney only gets a 50% cut plus 13% distribution fees. Not fair, but still better than buying a RIAA CD.

how about for non-dvd owners?

[jchristopher]

I just found out that even though I own the Episode I dvd (which I use in a standalone player), I won't be able to access the trailer on starwars.com, since I don't have a DVDROM in a computer running Windows. (scam, but that's another post)

Can anyone suggest a website that will have the trailer besides starwars.com? I assume that someone will save it from starwars.com and post it elsewhere...

Re:how about for non-dvd owners?

[lunadude]

I'm in the same boat. I guess I'll have to wait for it to be mirrored.

Re:how about for non-dvd owners?

[BlueTurnip]

I assume that someone will save it from starwars.com and post it elsewhere...

I'm guessing that it will probably be encrypted. At the very least it will be copyrighted so even if it is posted somewhere else, they will probably be required to take it down.

I do sympathize with you though. I purchased the DVD, but I have neither a DVD-ROM drive, nor do I use Windows.

Re:how about for non-dvd owners?

[DrSbaitso]

I have this sneaking suspicion that a cracked version will be on Morpheus/Kazaa and gnutella within hours after its release :)

Corona has got the scoop on the trailers.

[somnambulant]

I always check these guys out for movie info.

Here's a link to their SW2:AotC page:
http://www.corona.bc.ca/films/details/sw2.html

-s.

Disney doesn't allow non-Disney movie trailers?

[tibbetts]

If my memory serves me correctly, Disney has a corporate policy that doesn't allow non-Disney-connected trailers to be shown before their films. I'd be especially surprised that they'd allow Lucasfilm to do it. Anybody here work for a theater and can verify this, or have the internecine goings-on of the multimedia industry gone fuzzy in my mind?

Re:Disney doesn't allow non-Disney movie trailers?

[k_187]

I'd be willing to bet that Steve Jobs had some dealings with this. As he's CEO of Pixar and must have close ties to Lucasfilm to have all their stuff hosted by Apple and only in Quicktime.

Re:Disney doesn't allow non-Disney movie trailers?

[jchristopher]

I think you overestimate the power of Steve. As of now, Macintosh users can't even access the DVD-ROM content of most discs (including Episode I), despite the fact that Apple did huge cross promotion for the film. He either doesn't have the power, or doesn't care.

Re:Disney doesn't allow non-Disney movie trailers?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, yeah, but it's not like Disney and Lucas haven't worked together in the past for mutual cash-making. Remember the Star Tours ride at Disney-MGM? Or the Lucas filmmaking video seminar there as well? Or the Indiana Jones stunt show there?

Re:Disney doesn't allow non-Disney movie trailers?

[Anonymous Coward]

I worked in a movie theatre over the summer as a projectionist. I was sometimes responsable for building up everything that shows before the movies (trailers, and in some cases commercials).
As far as I know, trailers don't have to be disney connected to show before the movie. But, Disney movies never had the commercials that other movies had (Jeep/Verizon/Jordans Furniture/etc...) before the trailers, so you were part right ;-)

When you think about it

[Anonymous Coward]

When you think about it "Star Wars" is a pretty stupid name. I mean it's not like it's about stars fighting.

random move recommondation

[Planesdragon]

"Captain Corelli's Mandolin."

Don't ask, just go see it. I know what you mean about movies being spoiled by previews, and this one didn't.

Re:random move recommondation

[Anonymous Coward]

yes. you're right - Captain Corelli's Mandolin was not spoiled by previews - instead, it was spoiled by Nicolas Cage :(

(my advice - read the book instead!)

Original Article

[90XDoubleSide]

This news was first broken in an article at theforce.net on information from someone who was at Pixar's cast screening of Monster's, Inc., where Jobs announced that the trailer would be showing with the film and was included with the copy they watched at the screening. The article even has a link to an MP3 file of Jobs making the announcement. At first, this was disputed by people citing internet trailer listings, but has now been confirmed by today's official Lucasfilm announcement.

Working for Pixar and seeing the trailer first... how luckey can you get!

Spoken Like a CS Major

[Greyfox]

Good children's literature will have several levels. All a child will generally catch will be the most simplistic story, which may be about cute talking furry animals or other such children's topics. Go back and study it in college (Or a good High School) and you'll find several layers of metaphor which could cover anything from Jesus (This is a favorite, you'll find a Jesus in a lot of Children's literature) to the WWII Holocaust.

That being said, Harry Potter seems to be mostly preteen wish fulfillment with a slight Orwellian flavor. Orwell had a very similar masochistic writing style (Except his characters never had a chance.) The writing is as formulaic as Saturday Morning cartoons, and about as literary. On the plus side, it does piss the Baptists off and anything that pisses the Baptists off is a good thing in my book. It's also encouraging the kids to read, which is also a good thing, and sometimes you just want the literary equivalent of a slice of pie. After a week of digging through XML books, you really don't want to schlog through anything too heavy.

Take what I say with a grain of salt though. I also despise CS Lewis, which is the literary equivalent of having a metaphor pounded into your head with a 2x4. Also, any Disneyesque story where children overcome hideously inept adult villians. That pretty well limits the children's literature that I'll be feeding my kids.

Re:Spoken Like a CS Major

[festers]

. I also despise CS Lewis, which is the literary equivalent of having a metaphor pounded into your head with a 2x4

And how much Lewis have you read? There's a lot more than just the "Narnia" series. Oh, and if you ever studied the man, you'd know how much he hated people reading metaphor into his books, a metaphor he never intended. Narnia may be seen as a "loose allegory", meaning he didn't write about religion in our world using a childrens story, he created a new world and tried to imagine what it would look like if Jesus went there. See this FAQ entry for a better description.

And here are some quotes from the man:

"When I started The Lion, Witch and Wardrobe I don't think I foresaw what Aslan was going to do and suffer. I think He just insisted on behaving in His own way. This of course I did understand and the whole series became Christian. But it is not, as some people think, an allegory. That is, I don't say 'Let us represent Christ as Aslan.' I say, 'Supposing there was a world like Narnia, and supposing, like ours, it needed redemption, let us imagine what sort of Incarnation and Passion and Resurrection Christ would have there.' See?"

Elsewhere, Lewis also continued to deny Aslan's presence as an allegorical figure, stating instead that his lorldly lion was to be seen as suppositional:

"If Aslan represented the immaterial Deity, he would be an allegorical figure. In reality however he is an invention giving an imaginary answer to the question, 'What might Christ become like if there really were a world like Narnia and He chose to be incarnate and die and rise again in that world as He actually has done in ours?' This is not allegory at all. So in Perelandra. This also works out a supposition. ('Suppose, even now, in some other planet there were a first couple undergoing the same that Adam and Eve underwent there, but successfully.')
Allegory and such supposals differ because they mix the real and the unreal in different ways. Bunyan's picture of Giant Despair does not start from supposal at all. It is not supposition but a fact that despair can capture and imprison a human soul. What is unreal (fictional) is the giant, the castle and the dungeon. The incarnation of Christ in another world is mere supposal: but granted the supposition, He would really have been a physical object in that world as He was in Palestine, and His death on the Stone Table would have been a physical event no less than his death on Calvary."

Misleading

[BillyGoatThree]

It may well be that the publishers wanted to go with J.K. and "not scaring off the boys" may very well be the reason. But your post gives the impression that this is somehow dishonest. The fact is, Rowling goes by, and always has gone by, "JK" to the extent that her family calls her "Jake".

I'll also note that "J.K. Rowling" is mellifluous whereas "Joanne K Rowling" is less so.

What the...?

[gughunter]

This is going to be the best Star Wars yet!

Check out this selection from the "photos" section.

World Depth

[mckwant]

In my experience, I've found that the media I enjoy most have extremely deep worlds. For instance, I ignored the first few episodes of The Simpsons, since I figured it was a cartoon, and not really meant for mature college students like myself (at the time).

And, in truth, the first season of that series isn't very deep. Once you get into the later seasons, however, you start to get peripheral characters that flesh out the world very nicely. I'm thinking specifically of characters like Comic Book Guy, Apu, and Mayor Quimby. Minor characters all, but it makes the world of the Simpsons seem a little more believable.

The Harry Potter series does much the same thing. In the first book, you travel with Harry to see his new world. It's pretty simple, but gets fleshed out amazingly in the later books. I think that's what makes it worthwhile, even for adults.

Just pick up the first one, and if you can put it down after the first 100 pages, I'll be quite surprised.

--joke--
And yes, you are the only person who hasn't read them.
--/joke--

Nah...

[dachshund]

Unfortunately, I thnk audiences are far too cynical and pessimmistic to accept such campy names anymore, as evidenced by the furor over the name "Attack of the Clones".

I think the words "cloning" and "clone" have been so overused that they've gone beyond camp. The image that comes to my mind when I hear either word is of Woody Allen picking up the Leader's giant flattened nose in "Sleeper". For those of you with more up-to-date memories, I'm sure you can find some other silly association.

Obviously in this case Lucas has to mention the Clones somewhere in the title, but he didn't have to make it so comical. Even "Episode 2: The Clone Wars"-- while utterly unimaginative-- sounds a good deal less silly.

I think "Return of the Jedi" would be a perfectly acceptable name for a $100 million+ movie today, assuming people knew what the heck a Jedi was.

Re:Nah...

[SirSlud]

I guess so, but then again, since the clones were mentioned in "A New Hope", "Attack of the Clones" isn't all that different from "Return of the Jedi" in the respect that both Jedi and Clones are entities of the SW universe. Obviously, Jedi is a far more explicit SW reference than "clones" is.

I think you have a valid point, although I believe my original comment about camp going out of style is still valid and applicable to at least a part of a public reaction to the title of the movie.

Re:Nah...

[dachshund]

I have to confess... Until recently (the last few years), whenever I saw "A New Hope", I thought Luke was talking about the "Kaloan Wars" (despite the fact that this sounded remarkably like a certain brand of Coffee-flavored liquor.) I think my ears preferred not to hear the word "clone", because it somehow made the sentence uncomfortably campy.

All that aside... "Return of the Jedi" didn't have all of the baggage that goes along with "Attack of the Clones". For people hearing the Jedi title for the first time, I imagine the reaction was a) "what's a jedi? why have they returned?" or b) "great, another star wars movie! those jedi are cool." The camp factor was probably much lower than we imagine-- at that point, we didn't have Australians entering "jedi" as their religious affiliation on Census forms, and the like. It hadn't become a joke.

The word "clone", on the other hand, has a million connotations, Jay Leno routines and silly jokes attached to it. Did I mention Wierd Al? Not to mention the "Attack of the [Killer Tomatoes/Creatures from Mars/etc etc." aspect. At least the phrase "Clone wars" has a modicum of seriousness, but... do they really have to attack?

Now that I've said way too much on this subject...

Re:Nah...

[Grahf666]

"Attack of the Clones" reminds me of "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes," actually....

You beat me to it...

[Greyfox]

I was going to post this (And probably get bumped to -2 redundant) if no one else had beat me to the punch. I went digging around on Opensecrets.org and noted, in part, that Orrin Hatch (The father of the DMCA) got 17 grand from Disney this year. Imagine that. Yes, both Monsters Inc and Harry Potter look interesting. No, I'm not going to either one (For all the good it will do) because Disney and Time Warner will use my 8 bucks to further rape my rights in the US. I don't find that acceptable. If they want to rape my rights, they can damn well do it without my funding it.

Anyone thought of getting a petition drive to ban corporate campaign donations? It's the only way the people will recover any influence in the Government.

Trailers are much better than movies

[krelian]

I guess these days most trailers are better than the movies they promote.In the last couple of years i can't even remember the number of great trailers that i saw that only led to bad movies. Who knows, maybe in the future the hype will pass from the movies to the trailers. Actually ,its already starting.

Re:Trailers are much better than movies

[Galvatron]

Hmm, would they have trailers for trailers then? How would you know which trailers to go watch?

Madeleine L'Engle

[larq]

I was thinking of Madeleine L'Engle, too, because of a quote of hers that I remembered:

"If I have something that is too difficult for adults to swallow, then I will write it in a book for children."

I haven't read the Harry Potter books, but I think that often the ways we categorize books can be quite arbitrary (because bookstores need to have a section to put them in-- although virtual bookstores should be able to get around that problem by listing in multiple categories).

I hadn't thought before about whether Star Wars is childish... And perhaps that is why many of us were disappointed with Episode 1, as other posters have pointed out.

I, for one, am not too worried if I like things intended for children. My religion says I ought to be childlike, though not childish.

Re:*sigh* TROLL

[DigitalSorceress]

What about all the happy-meal aliens(JarJar et al) and MidiChlorines and the blonde super-genius in Ep 1 - they were as bad as Ewoks

*I never got a troll before - personally I think the moderator was a little harsh... criticize Lucas and BOOM! you're a zero. (I would not have been so taken aback if you had rated me offtopic)

Joy doesn't thrive under stress

[bADlOGIN]

"What's the appeal of these childish stories to grown, sophisticated adults?".

I think there's a lot to be said for allowing yourself the pleasure of enjoying "childish" things. Let's face it. There's a hell of a lot about the "sophisticated adult" world right now that just flat sucks. Sept. 11th attacks, military response to them, Antrhax, economic downturn, and high-tech layoffs are all a painfull contrast to the past few years of blinding prosperity. What the hell is so damn great about being a grown-up again?

The worse things look, the more I just want to go ride my bike through the leaves in the street this afternoon. Instead, I'll be sitting around trying to decode and deal with stupid office political struggles. The world would be a much better place if we all went back to taking naps in the afternoon after cookies and milk. Perhaps not realistic, but more productive than office politics.

I refuse to read Harry Potter because it's Satanic

[moz711]

Remeber that simpson's episode where Flander's was reading to his kids?
"And then Harry Potter and all his friends went straight to hell for practicing witch-craft. The End."

I'm shocked there's this much interest...

[eclectric]

I'm not what you call the world's largest Star Wars fan, but I enjoyed the movies, despite the fact that scientifically, they were less informed than Star Trek: TOS. But I'd have to say that Ep 1 was probably the worst sci-fi movie (okay, okay, ST 5 is the worst, but you can barely call that sci-fi.)

How is then that anybody is actually looking forward to EP 2? The only redeeming quality is that the title is SO bad that the movie has to be good, right? Granted, I will see both EP 2 and EP 3, simply because it's pretty much required, but I can't imagine why someone is actually *excited* bout this movie.

On another note, to reply to another thread, yes, Lord Of the Rings will be the best fantasy movie ever. This alone doesn't mean the movie won't be crap. It just means it'll be the best crap out there. And I will see all three, despite the fact that I'll be cringing every time they stray from the Book. Because it's required.

ep 4 emperor ?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

the emperor doesn't say anything until Ep 5, and doesn't appear in the flesh until Ep 6. The quote you refer to was stated by Tarkin.

Superflex witlessly stated:
I believe in Ep. 4 the Emperor says something like "I've dissolved the senate. The last remnants of the old republic have been swept away."

Final Name

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I would bet money that Attack of the Clones will be the name of the film that is released in May.

Our fearless leader doesn't leech VCDs?

[disc-chord]

Hmmm... I thought we were all pretty much in agreement not to give the RIAA and MPAA any more money untill they learn to play nicely with others. I haven't given them a dime in 2 years thanks to Mp3s and VCDs...

I sure hope none of you go to see either of these films, when you can watch them in the comfort of your own home theater, for the price of a couple blank CDs.

Re:Our fearless leader doesn't leech VCDs?

[blowhole]

a couple blank CDs : $1.00
54" big screen HDTV: $3000
Dolby 5.1/DTS Decoder + Amp: $1000
Surround speakers: $500
Bandwidth used to download VCDs that could have been devoted to downloading pr0n: priceless

Re:Our fearless leader doesn't leech VCDs?

[NetGuruFL]

Unless you have a damn nice video processor, those VCD's are probably going to look like shit blown up to 54" on an HDTV-capable display (due to the sheer lines of resolution the display is capable of).

Broadcast NTSC is bad enough on my 65", I Don't want to think about VCD.

Blech

[Snarfvs Maximvs]

For a "community" that prides itself on the mindless march to the beat of "information wants to be free", Slashdot sure pays a whole lot of attention to the antics of a money-grubber named Lucas.

Am I the only one who finds the wholesale commercialization of the Star Wars series a little sickening? Everything from Pepsi to Lego has been defiled by Jar Jar.

Not that the original trilogy was that great, nor that there weren't any tie-ins, nor that I like Pepsi, but this is ridiculous.

I for one will not even bother to watch.

Seriously, guys (and gals). Lucas is the Bill Gates of Hollywood.

Yes, this is flamebait. Who gives a f*ck.

I've seen it

[joshuaos]

The new trailor looks pretty damn cool. I downloaded it from the Gnutella network using the Limewire client. Hell, that was months ago. It's got one scene of lots of jedi's in the dark, charging into battle with lightsabre's flailing! Not to mention a damn fine female jedi hottie!

Cheers, Joshua

Re:fuck george lucas

[CrazyP]

Well, I dont say fuck george lucas, but Howard the Duck is a classic movie. I mean, a duck from outer space is a classic movie idea, a little on the dumb side, but can't win them all.

Trailer schedule (three trailers!)

[antdude]

This was e-mailed from my friend who is a big movie fan (Thanks Spaceman Spiff!):

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 3 SWE2 trailers coming
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:58:02 -0800

Found this at Coming Attractions...

The first trailer, dubbed the "Breathing" teaser, will definitely run
attached to all prints of Monsters, Inc. on November 2nd.

The second trailer, slated to appear online at the official Star Wars
website, will debut November 9th.

The third trailer, longer and containing more adult-oriented material than
the first teaser trailer, will be attached to Harry Potter and the
Sorcerer's Stone on November 16th.

Re:Trailer schedule (three trailers!)

[ChadN]

The third trailer, longer and containing more adult-oriented material than
the first teaser trailer

Any word on Natalie Portman pouring hot grits down her pants, with 70's funk music in the background?

Re:Trailer schedule (three trailers!)

[Dacmot]

The third trailer, longer and containing more adult-oriented material than
the first teaser trailer, will be attached to Harry Potter and the
Sorcerer's Stone on November 16th.

What??? They're going to show Natalie Portman naked in Harry Potter? Now that'll surely make me go see Harry Potter!

Re:*sigh* TROLL

[SomeOtherGuy]

"given the choice between the latest two movies, and a 'Notting Hill/Wedding Planner' double feature (or insert your favorite inane chick-flick titles here), you can bet I'm ready to overlook the shortcomings of the SW movies ;)"

Amen brother. Even a bad si-fi like TPM is better than that stuff.

any book that the nazi wannabes want banned from..

[gladbach]

schools, cant be all that bad... seriously guys, give the harry potter books a shot. once you get past the first chapter of the first book, (kinda slow, starts off very child like) you will slowly but surely be hooked. ive read all of them more than a couple times (dont you hate it when you want to sit down and read, but dont have anything new worth reading?) IMHO, the HP series is up there almost with my other favorite series dune, and LOTR. lately ive been reading the laurell k hamilton "anita blake, vampire hunter" series. laura croft, is a pansy compared to her... : D

Ever so slightly off-topic...

[2x4]

So in 10-15 years will 'Attack of the Clones' be as bad of a title as 'Attack of the Test Tube Babies' Or 'Attack of the Sperm Donnor Children' for the kids that are the result of one of these methods of reproduction, being as Lucas is aiming his movies at the younger population.When I was first cognicant enough to understand the Starwars trilogy, it had been out for several years. "Mommy, will I be evil when I grow up?"

Children's stories

[greylouser]

Viewing Episode 1 at age 25 was a growth experience for me. Previously, I had thought that the Star Wars movies were the best movies ever made. Episode 1 was a good movie, but it really was a movie for children, not adults. This made me realize that Eps 4-6 were also movies for children. I'm really glad that Lucas waited as long as he did to release Episode 1, and I wonder if waiting as long as he did to release it wasn't a conscious decision on his part. ("People are worshiping these kids' movies I made; I'll wait until they're older to release the next bunch, and they'll see that they're really just kids' movies.")

In any event, after I saw Ep1, I was able to start expanding my taste in movies. I still enjoy movies for kids, but now I can appreciate movies for grown-ups, too.

The difference, I think, between Star Wars and Harry Potter, is that SW has stayed at the level of entertainment for 12-13 year olds, while HP started at that level, and is moving towards the level of 16-17 year olds. I quite enjoy the HP books, and they're only getting better with time.

That said, these previews don't hold much interest for me. I'll probably see the Ep2 when it comes out, but I really don't feel particularly hyped up about this. I also don't feel the need to buy an HP ticket just to see the Ep2 preview.

Phantom menace snobs

[Anonymous Coward]

Somehow the Phantom menace didn't live up to the high bar of realism that the Ewok's somehow passed. please, I need an explanation on that one. I saw the phantom menace the first night and I thought it was about as good as you could expect. The only part that was bothersome was that noone seemed to get killed through hours of fighting. Also were we just supposed to think darth Maul is the bad guy because he was red and black with horns and bad teeth, jeesh!

Re:*sigh* TROLL

[buckeyeguy]

Ah, yeah, well, taking a wide shot at the SW movies is probably best described as doing a Ben-Franklin-kite-job in a lightning storm...

Specific gripes, of course, all the SW fans have to some degree... I rile up my friends with bad JarJar impressions in email; the midi-chlorians? Well hopefully they're explained more in the next movie; treating TPM as a stand-alone movie, that part certainly was left hanging.

I was imagining a SAD SAD scenario

[Anonymous Coward]

Hate to post a "me too" but, Me Too. If sharing this at the watering hole or the water cooler (or anyplace else), you should consider not dropping the important detail that you are driving while this is happening.

Yes

[Anonymous Coward]

yes please

The trailer I am most anticipating...

[LittleGuy]

.... is the one done by the "Park Wars" guys for AOTC.

http://download.theforce.net/theater/episode2/ep2_

[Anonymous Coward]

http://download.theforce.net/theater/episode2/ep2_ large.mov Hope this helps??

Must be good-looking.

[sfled]

Saw a pic, she's not to be thrown out of bed for eating crackers.

CS Lewis

[Greyfox]

I've also read a few of his short stories which also rubbed me the wrong way. Of course, I'm the kind of guy who roots for the dragon.