Slashdot Mirror
Star Wars: AOTC Reviews Pour In
Dork King writes "The New York Time's Review of AOTC (free reg, yada yada)
notes that Attack of the Clones doesn't look good for fans. Thankfully, I'm not a fan." Also, dw5000 writes "The BBC has a favorable review of Attack of the Clones on its news website, as well as an executive summary of what the UK papers are saying about AotC. The populist tabloids love it, while the broadsheets are giving cautious approval. Hmm. Maybe I won't wait for DVD ..." I also noticed Variety has a review up as well. Also, for those who have lost all hope for Star Wars, I submit to you the date of the Spider-Man sequel: May 7th, 2004. You should know that spoilers exist in one or more of these stories. Beware!
The reviews have, for the most part, been overwhelmingly positive. Chris Gore's review at Film Threat is a good example. He says AOTC is second only to Empire Strikes Back in quality. (It is important to note that he thought Phantom Menace was total crap, in fact he was one of its harshest critics.)
According to The LA Times, you can find AOTC on irc chat.
From the article:
The pirating of "Attack of the Clones" lends fuel to the film industry's efforts in Washington to crack down on piracy. While the studios' trade association steps up its enforcement activities, their lobbyists are pushing for laws that would require computers and consumer electronics to be modified to deter unauthorized copying.
"It's an extremely serious threat," said Jean Murrell Adams, head of the litigation department at DreamWorks SKG. "I'm not surprised that it's on the Internet. I talk to pirates because I want to find out why they're doing this. And what I've been told is that they were eagerly anticipating who would be first to do this. It's a challenge for them."
Apparently it's a version videotaped in the theater, which they're worried will cut into DVD sales (?)
W
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
I've been quite spoiled for this movie, reading the script and spy reports, downloading the pics etc.
It can be quite frustrating to know that a couple of my favourite scenes has been cut from the final, so I'm staying spolier free for EPIII.
A) The RIAA represents music labels not movie studios. That's the MPAA. B)
B) The two copies out are both pretty bad: one a cam and one a Telesync. Neither are screeners.
C) I got it, I watched it, but I'll still go see it at the cinema. Having the film early didn't do anything to change my desire to experience it in a theater, but once the DVDIVX comes out, no.. I won't buy the DVD and neither will about a half a million other people. They aren't worried about some crappy cam cutting into home video sales: they are worried about the super high quality High Def rips and DVDIVX encodes that are perfectly fine substitutes for DVDs for most people.
It'll still sell but anyone who doesn't think filesharing isn't the death of the music and (eventually) film businesses might do well to study the 1940's business models of the studios and labels, and realize...they're fucked.
3 out of 4 music business employees will be out of work in five years. Remember where you heard it.
Lacquer and celluloid business models don't do well against silicon and glass fiber.
"The pie shall be cut in half and each man shall receive.....death. I'll eat the pie."
I think you'll pleased to find not a single mention of Midichlorians in Attack of the Clones.
The guy at the NYTimes seems to have this strange notion that Star Wars fans don't already know the essentials of the plot, and could actually be surprised by this movie. Really, with an established timeline before and after this movie, how much possibility for surprise can there possibly be, but then again, I for one don't want to be surprised, I want Star Wars.
In the grand scheme of things, Star Wars is not, nor should it be high art. George Lucas is a cinematographic genius, but he is no Bergman, Hitchcock, or Lang. What most people don't seem to catch is that he never pretends to be. He has said in numerous interviews that Star Wars is based on the old movie serials from his youth, and those are inherently melodramatic, bombastic, and completely archetypal battles between good and evil. Is there ever any doubt in are minds that Darth Vader is evil incarnate? No, not until Lucas started listening to his critics with Jedi.
Stars Wars never pretends to be high art, but perhaps something so simple, and yet so appealing is more than high art. Let us not fool ourselves, The Illiad and Beowulf were so popular in their times because they are entertaining; we still read them today because they are inherently good stories. Star Wars is a good story, and no matter what the agenda of the reviewer, or what marketting deals have already been made, Lucas will never let it be otherwise.
Short version: NYTimes reviewer has missed the point by a few parsecs.
This is sure to open a can of worms.
Of course it got pirated so quickly because it is huge, but you know this will feed arguments in other forums.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"