Quickies from a Galaxy Far Far Away

In celebration of the release of AotC, here are a bunch of random SW stories that have fluttered through our bin: Tim Drage has made a Lego Star Wars movie, POds sent us a fan film Fan Film (quicktime. Bah). Here is a comic to share and enjoy. iamchaos noted that the next Matrix Trailer will be showing with Clones. nellardo sent in a fine tribute to darth maul. Anyone want a Star Wars Axe? Zack sent us a great collection of SW Characters you won't see as much as you might want to. wiredog sent us some spoilers, the Skywalker family tree and how Anakin becomes Vader. peter_gzowski sent in an essay by Ebert where he gives it 2 of 4 stars, and discusses the digital filming. Finally ant sent us a bizarre tale of some guys who got the brilliant idea to build a life-size Millenium Falcon. So there it is folks. I have tickets for a 12:01 showing in Ann Arbor and I'll be getting in line in just a few short hours.

Comments

Peter Gzowski?

[CaseyB]

Wow, Canada's most famous radio personality is back from the dead and submitting stories to slashdot.

2 out of 4??

[flynt]

I didn't know Ebert gave that rating. I thought it was only 3.5/4 for bad movies, and 4/4 for mediocre to good movies?

Re:2 out of 4??

[IanO]

Actually with most movie "experts" the rating is generally backwards. The more they like the movie, the less likely the general public will. They couldn't like the same movies as the general public or they wouldn't be "experts".

Re:2 out of 4??

[Anonymous Coward]

An expert is someone who knows a lot about a subject. Certainly Roger Ebert knows a lot about film, film history, filmmaking, and the movie industry in general. Probably more than any other mainstream critic. By that standard, he is an expert (quotemarks not necessary).

It is not his job to praise whatever movies he thinks will be popular. Indeed, what would be the point? We can look up the box office receipts ourselves.

A snob is someone who thinks less of you because you don't share the same tastes as he does. By that standard, you are a snob.

Some people might prefer to call your particular form of snobbery "reverse snobbery" -- a distinction without a difference, if I ever heard one.

Re:2 out of 4??

[rgmoore]

Maybe you should read better reviewers, then. One of the things that I really like about the reviewers for the LA Times is that they actually understand that not everyone shares their taste in movies. They're capable of saying things like "I didn't really like this one, but I know that fans of this kind of movie will love it." I recall a review of a movie where the reviewer said something along the lines of, "I don't know why I'm even bothering to review this movie. The people who will like it aren't going to pay attention to my review anyway, and the people who won't like it don't need me to tell them that." It's not quite as good as having a reviewer who perfectly shares my taste, but it's a lot better than having ones who will complain about any movie that is comprehensible and praise anything subtitled.

Re:2 out of 4??

[Anonymous Coward]

They couldn't like the same movies as the general public or they wouldn't be "experts".

Have you read any movie reviews lately, all those elitist film critics got fired.

Some of the biggest films lately, such as Spiderman, Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter all got mostly positive reviews from major newspaper critics. Maybe they don't like Episode 2 cause it sucks, and not because they're just trying to act snooty.

Re:2 out of 4??

[Galvatron]

Actually, he hasn't given a 4 in over a month, and he puts out about half a dozen reviews a week. More recently, he gave Life or Something Like It one star, and Jason X zero and a half stars.

The one thing I do find amusing is that Ebert seems to talk more about the good things in movies he doesn't like, and more about the bad things in movies he does. I guess it makes sense, because if a movie really bites, the bad parts are likely to be simple ("the plot was stupid, the acting was bad"), while the good parts are likely to be more subtle ("but they did do some interesting lighting in these scenes"). Still, if you read the reviews without looking at the rating, sometimes it can be difficult to tell if he liked a movie or not.

Re:2 out of 4??

[biscuit67]

I got a chance to see the version floating around the net. The quality of the image ain't that good but it matches the movie. It's terrible. One of the worst movies I've seen this year. Forget going to see it, wait for it to be on HBO and go see spider man again. It deserves your money much more than this pile of drivvel.

Re:2 out of 4??

[Anonymous Coward]

I've heard Ebert say that the star rating he gives does not strictly represent how much he liked the movie, but how successful he feels the filmmakers were in achieving their goals with the film.

Re:2 out of 4??

[larry bagina]

Mr Cranky gives honest and accurate reviews.

Re:2 out of 4??

[Anonymous Coward]

They couldn't like the same movies as the general public or they wouldn't be "experts".

Then why does the "expert" Roger Ebert list the original Star Wars among his Great Movies of all time, along with other popular blockbusters of their day, like Raiders of the Lost Ark and ET?

Re:2 out of 4??

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the things that I really like about the reviewers for the LA Times is that they actually understand that not everyone shares their taste in movies.

I hate to break this to you, but all reviewers understand that not everyone shares their taste in movies. It's just that some of them will assume you're intelligent enough to figure that out for yourself. And discerning enough to decide what (if anything) in their reviews matters to you, and what does not.

Re:2 out of 4??

[Anonymous Coward]

how successful he feels the filmmakers were in achieving their goals with the film.

Considering the only goal of most Hollywood filmmakers is to make obscene gobs of money, how exactly does he do that before the movie is released?

Re:2 out of 4??

[Osiris Ani]

Indeed. Ebert is the man who gave Supergirl the thumbs up, after all. I dunno; for some reason, I just can't respect that.

Personally, I only pay attention to the SMC. Then again, I can always choose not to agree with the sentiments expreseed therein.

"THIS looks like a job for emergency pants!" - Torg

Re:2 out of 4??

[rustycage]

Did anyone see the pithy review in the Washington Post? It almost seems like something that comedian Dennis Miller would write.

Re:2 out of 4??

[(void*)]

Sorry, but Roger Ebert is not one of those snooty critics. He understands SF films

Fan Film

[Wyatt Earp]

It's a 122.8 MB Quicktime Movie.

Just a warning.

Re:Fan Film

[Discoteck]

Here is the direct link to it. Lego.com

Your right it is big, but I am sure it is worth it!

And here's another one...

[russx2]

http://www.asciimation.co.nz

Star Wars in ascii... Maybe it's a geek thing?

Re:And here's another one...

[seann]

for the copying impaired

Star wars in ASCII

Re:And here's another one...

[bleckywelcky]

Amazing, it's even better than what Lucas did. :)

Re:And here's another one...

[Captain Large Face]

Here's the same over telnet. Without doubt a geek thing. :-)

Re:And here's another one...

[56ker]

Can you get any more geeky than Star Wars in ASCII over telnet?

Re:And here's another one...

[Anonymous Coward]

Star Wars over Gopher comes to mind...

Re:And here's another one...

[Snags]

Here's a simple AWK script to play the ASCII movie. Requires usleep. Play in an xterm and rezise it to cut off the bottom of the previous frame.

#!/usr/bin/gawk -f
BEGIN {
delay = 1000000 / 15;
while (getline > 0) {
mult = $1 + 0;
for(i=0; i<13; i++) { getline; print; }
system(sprintf("usleep %d", delay*mult));
}
}

To get the text file, download the .jar and use unzip to get data/sw1.txt out of it.

Re:And here's another one...

[Spy Hunter]

Oh My God...

This could be the world's first recorded slashdotting of a telnet server!

Have you no mercy?

Re:And here's another one...

[Captain Large Face]

How about Star Wars in ASCII over telnet being discussed over Slashdot.

Re:And here's another one...

[commodoresloat]

Can you get any more geeky than Star Wars in ASCII over telnet?

Real geeks use ssh!!!

I felt a tremor in the force...

[Bonker]

Obi-wan: ...As if thousands of fanboys and fangirls had called in sick.

Luke: What is it, Ben?

Obi-wan: Something horrible. It's as if thousands of businesses were running along, being productive, and were suddenly silenced.

Re:I felt a tremor in the force...

[larien]

Hehe, here in the UK, they're more worried about the football (that's soccer for americans) World cup. As it's held in Japan & Korea, all the games will be shown in the morning. They're expecting a number of sickies to be pulled on the days of the England games.

At least they don't have to worry about Scottish fans calling in sick; we failed to qualify again, despite doing pretty well to begin with. Pity we couldn't beat those giants of the game, Lithuania *sigh*.

Re:I felt a tremor in the force...

[Bonker]

We Americans are always confused by World Cup Soccer. We know we want to be the best at it, but, on the whole, we don't really get it. No sport in the U.S. really has the near-universal draw that Soccer seems to have everywhere else in the world.

Even the other pro sports like American Football, Baseball, Basketball, and Hockey have their rabid fans, but nothing like the stereotypical rioting mobs that we associate with British Soccer. In fact, as those sports become more and more corporate, they become less and less popular.

Starwars is the closest thing we have to that kind of draw. LOTR came close, but even with the negative impression a lot of fans left Episode 1 with, I haven't seen the kind of rabid dedication and fandom that Episode 2 is generating anywhere else.

Re:I felt a tremor in the force...

[Discoteck]

I know I already bought my ticket for the midnight showing. I would be going to every single showing tomorrow, but you see I just can't afford to lay down that kinda money. I had done that before when the re-released episode IV (A New Hope), but things have changed since then.

If I did go see it tomorrow, I wouldn't be one of the many calling in sick to go and see the movie, although I know several people who are doing just that.

Being unemployed has its pro's and con's, but it is a shame that a new college grad can't find work other than McDonald's. My dignity is fading quickly, as with my bank account.

Who's NOT going to see it?

[kir]

I'm not. Not until it's released on DVD or I get confirmation from a reliable source (friend whose opinion I trust) that it isn't a bag-o-"lets sell some merchandise".

Maybe I'm too cynical... NAH!

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[Trebuchet]

I wouldn't, except I have $45 in gift certificates that expire in june. (expire? how the heck can they make a gift certificate expire? and how does it hurt them if it doesnt?). So I'm taking my girlfriend sometime during the second week. BTW, all the reviews I've read actually say that it's better then ep1, and I like the trailers better...

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[Anonymous Coward]

On NPR this morning the LA Times movie critic in his review said, "just like Peter Pan, George Lucas never grows up." In other words he was stating that AOTC is just a rehash of the same old SW stuff, nothing new. I have heard similar reviews stating while episode 2 is better than episode 1, it still isn't anything exciting.

I too am in no rush to see this. I have the VCD screener on my HD but I don't think I will ever watch it and opt to wait a few days/weeks to go see it in the theatre. There's no way I am waiting in long lines for it though.

BTW, when episode 1 came out I went to see it the second day at Hoyts in the Carousel Mall, Syracuse. They were playing the movie in two of their theatres all day long. No lines, theatre was half full.

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[adamjaskie]

I think I will see it at Fox Village theatre. They show the movies only after they have gone out of the regular theatres, but before they come out on video. That lets them charge only $1.50 or so a ticket. Even less than renting it from Video Watch.

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Not until it's released on DVD

I heard on the radio that they've been selling AotC DVDs in Malaysia for $3. Apparently it's like going to NYC and buying something from the back of some guy's truck, except over there they're poor and can't afford the truck.

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[Reid]

I realize I'm getting "old" at 33, but I can't believe people are still willing to sit in line for hours/days to see a Star Wars movie. It was a fresh, huge phenomenon after the first movie way back when, so it was more understandable then. The movies also seemed better. How can anyone get truly excited about this after having seen the last one? Yetch! Even Dennis Miller cracked a joke about the people going to see Spider-man having to step over the "losers" waiting in line to see AotC. I just don't understand it.

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[arkanes]

They don't sell stuff off of trucks in the city. Too crowded. Usually it's a guy with a table or some milk crates.

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[Discoteck]

"bag-o-"lets sell some merchandise".

Is this different than any other movie whose marketing people think that there is some extra bucks to make by selling molded plastic to children. I don't think its a bad thing and there are certainly better things you could criticize about our society than their decision to try make money through entertainment. How about going to see it to form your own decision?

I'm not, but its because I'm not a child raping, jobless, wretched, filthy, odiferous, malcontent Linux programmer.

I am none of these and I AM going to see the movie

If you are reading this, you most likely have no social skills.

It sure sounds like you have a big chip on your shoulder. Why do you even bother using slashdot if all you have to say is crap. How about adding something positive to the community, instead of berating it.

(expire? how the heck can they make a gift certificate expire? and how does it hurt them if it doesnt?).

Now that is a good example of sh*** marketing practice / scheme. That sounds alot worse to me than selling toys to kids. Think of the jobs of the people who design toys! Kinda like the movie BIG. I would rather the people against our personal liberties lose their job, than the people who make toys.

I went to see it the second day at Hoyts in the Carousel Mall, Syracuse. They were playing the movie in two of their theatres all day long. No lines, theatre was half full.

I just bought my ticket down here at the mall of Georgia and there was no line for tickets. Now of course it was 11:30 AM in the early afternoon, but I sure hope that more people go and see this movie than spiderman!!! It would be nice to set the record, not that spiderman was a bad movie, but I already hold Attack of Clones to a higher regard. Maybe it is fated that we will have to wait until the third one comes out to try and set the record.

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[Cro Magnon]

I'm sure I will see it, but I'm not sure when. I'm not even considering seeing it opening day, and quite probably not opening week. I'd rather wait for the crowds to die.

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha, no one here would believe in a million years you've got a girlfriend. Just be a nerd and quit denying it.

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[kir]

Man... I think I agree with you comment more than I've agreed with ANYTHING I've ever read on slashdot.

Re:Who's NOT going to see it?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well said l33t j03!!!

As for the rest of you, shut up and take notice.

please

[tps12]

How many times do we have to hear about the Star Wars axe? Many more, I'm sure.

And CmdrTaco, we all know about your tickets, you post about them in every story.

Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Sunken Kursk]

No matter what the movie is like, it will not live up to most people's expectations. One of the main problems with the Star Wars series is the long time between the originals and the new trilogy. During the time that has elapsed, the Star Wars fan base has been able to get used to the chintziness of the originals. As such, the originals have morphed from merely good stories to almost miraculous examples of cinematic perfection.

That being said, I'm still going to go see the movie. Rather than compare it to any of the previous movies, I will attempt to simply compare it to itself. Hopefully, by doing that, I will enjoy the movie much more than anyone who expects a papal blessing upon this film.

See you guys at the theatre at 12:01!

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Peyna]

It was pointed out to me the other day that much of the fan fiction is better than the stuff Lucas puts out nowadays. I haven't looked into it, but I'd believe it.

I waited a day too long for 12:01 tickets, so I'll probably just go see it over the weekend. It's entertainment, not life, not the end of the world, and certainly not the greatest thing to ever exist.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ebert definitely does know what he's talking about. Having seen the movie, I can say it really does suck just as bad as the last one. I don't know why I wasted the money to see it.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Joseph Vigneau]

Rather than compare it to any of the previous movies, I will attempt to simply compare it to itself.

I think it will be just as good as itself, if not better!

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[slutdot]

I agree with you but I also think the problem with Episode I as compared to 4-6 has to do with the lack of action in episode I. I still enjoyed TPM and Jar-Jar didn't annoy me as much as it did everyone else. Anakin did annoy the hell out of me though but since I've seen Star Wars again recently, I'm thinking that Lucas was maybe going for a cheesy pulp fiction type of movie and that's why he chose the actor that he chose to play the part of Anakin.

My wife and I were watching Star Wars the other night when it came on cable and I noticed that there were far more gun fights than TPM and the action scenes were much shorter. The pod scene in TPM was way too long...maybe.

People will still beat AOTC to hell because it just isn't perfect. Maybe fans need to lower their expectations a little and just enjoy the movie for what it is. Then again, I probably don't know what the hell I'm talking about.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[thaigan]

I do agree with Ebert when he complains about the dialog in TPM and probably in AOTC. I think Lucas was unimaginative in his accents and languages. Additionally, the actors seemed bored.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[biscuit67]

AOTC is like a subway sandwich: Cheesy Dialog, Hammed up acting and a total turkey. Don't waste your money or 2 1/2 hours of your life on this one.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Zathrus]

During the time that has elapsed, the Star Wars fan base has been able to get used to the chintziness of the originals.

Eh... personally I recall loving the movies when I was a kid, loving them when I was a young teen, but when I watched them in my early 20's I kinda wondered why I thought it was so good. The acting is very stilted with a few notable exceptions, there are huge gaps in the storyline, and at points it just seems very disjointed.

Sure, there's still bits where brilliance shines through, but by and large Star Wars is a B movie. What it did do was usher in a new era of special effects, changed the general public's view of science fiction movies, and further helped to create the phenomenon now known as blockbuster movies.

Personally, I long ago lost respect for Lucas as a film maker. I'm going to wind up seeing AotC this weekend (I hadn't planned to, but some friends are going, so my wife and I are herding along), but my expectations for it are rather whacked - I expect to be disappointed.

Why? Because everytime I watch one of the Star Wars movies I once again discover that it doesn't hold up to my dim childhood memories of "The Best Movie EVER!". And while that may be an unrealistic benchmark, it's still what I, and many others, keep hoping for from Lucas.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[dswensen]

It was pointed out to me the other day that much of the fan fiction is better than the stuff Lucas puts out nowadays. I haven't looked into it, but I'd believe it.

You'd be wrong. Even the officially sanctioned novels feature such gems as Ikrit, the Jedi Master bunny rabbit. Even Lucas hasn't dreamed up something that stupid (yet).

And most fanfics are based on people's Star Wars roleplaying game characters, who are named things like Darth Nightstalker Darkshadow, and have a double-bladed lightsaber like Darth Maul's, only much longer, and have been genetically engineered by secret Imperial training to be a hit with the ladies and a dynamo in the sack.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[birder]

I watched TPM twice in the theatre and a few times on DVD. I think anyone who has watched this movie more than twice really appreciates how much Jar-Jar adds enjoyment to the film. Anakin is far more annoying. Terrible, terrible acting and I shudder watching every scene he is in. Jar-Jar gives the film some humor which overall is fairly dry. Ok the tongue thing in Anakin's house was lame.

Apart from being a touch too long, TPM is a fairly decent film that sets the stage for 5 more films.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Tackhead]

> Anakin is far more annoying. Terrible, terrible acting and I shudder watching every scene he is in. Jar-Jar gives the film some humor which overall is fairly dry. Ok the tongue thing in Anakin's house was lame.

No shit. What's up with Natalie Portman falling for Anakin when she can have a guy with a tongue that can do that?

(Although, now that I think about it, both alternatives are pretty sick at the time of TPM. Lucas musta been on some weird shit when he wrote that script.)

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[AJWM]

Additionally, the actors seemed bored.

Of course they do. They're acting in front of a blue (or green) screen with no sets and minimal props, and interacting with some piece of masking tape that tells them where to look substituting for the alien that will be added digitally later.

It takes a very good actor to pull off a performance in those circumstances.

(Actually TPM isn't quite that bad in the above regard -- see the "Making Of" documentary on the second disc of the DVD -- but AOTC may well have been.)

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[kiatoa]

Maybe the movie isn't aimed at folks like you. I loved Episode I and my kids loved it too. Isn't it o.k. to have different tastes in movies. I watched Dinatopia on t.v. with the kids over the last few days and yeah, the acting fell a little short. But still, I enjoyed it and the kids loved it. Maybe technology has jaded you and others of your generation. Think: is it a bad movie or just not YOUR favorite kind of movie. Own your opinions. I like the Star Wars series. I don't like horror movies. Not: Star Wars movies are good and horror movies are bad.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or MAYBE George Lucas should have quit while he was ahead, say... a decade ago? Don't worry, I'm sure Indy 4 will be a smash hit!

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[sottovoce]

During the time that has elapsed, the Star Wars fan base has been able to get used to the chintziness of the originals. As such, the originals have morphed from merely good stories to almost miraculous examples of cinematic perfection.

Actually, if you look at the original reviews, most found it a lot better than "merely good" (do some Googling). In his re-review of A New Hope, Ebert says:

Seeing the film the first time, I was swept away, and have remained swept ever since.

And he doesn't idolize it now, either. He goes on to provide critiques:

Seeing this restored version, I tried to be more objective and noted that the gun battles on board the spaceships go on a bit too long; it is remarkable that the Empire marksmen never hit anyone important; and the fighter raid on the enemy ship now plays like the computer games it predicted.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Sorklin]

You'd be wrong. Even the officially sanctioned novels feature such gems as Ikrit, the Jedi Master bunny rabbit. Even Lucas hasn't dreamed up something that stupid (yet).

Guess you didn't like Darth Wuggles then?

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[nelsonal]

O/T does your sig measure that in dollar value or just acres? If its just acres, then that is fine with me, I don't need any eastern montana farmland. Its only worth about $500 per acre. I would guess that dollar value would be more equitable. 30-40% of the population holding 95% of the land.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[pardonne]

I too will see this movie, but I think I might be disappointed as well. Ebert and the other reviewers are raising valid points IMHO. Episode-I had too much CGI and not enough character. The acting seemed hurried, trying to make up time for the cgi effort which is the bulk of the movie. To me it seemed like Lucas is by no means a demanding director, he let the actors slip with subpar performances compared to what they can really do (yes there are exceptions.)

I think the story is still great but perhaps its Lucas who has changed. The dialogue is no longer interesting. The jokes are not new. Worse than that, they are cliche even for the Brittney Spears generation. With so much cgi, perhaps it is now very hard for Lucas to see what the end result will be like so that he can give better direction to the actors. And no it is not because I have grown old. I still love the original three and watch them every now and again. I think the magic that could have been there in Episode-I just barely escaped. Few things here and there it could have been...

In any case I will watch the movie and will no doubt like it. It just won't be as good as it could have been.

Pardonne

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[tarkin]

I really would like to beg to differ. I really think that comparing the prequels to themselves is a bad idea.

I didn't like Episode 1 as much as the original trilogy either, but I really think that if you consider the whole double trilogy (once completed) you'll like the Phantom Menace a whole lot more (and any other prequel that may or may not suck)
George Lucas has said often enough that "the big picture" will be the important one, and that eventually fans will understand the prequels a lot more.

And you could argue that the movies of the original trilogy are great if singled out, but back then we didn't know anything of the story. We didn't know about Vader, let alone the "balance of the force" thing. Another thing you could question is why almost everybody likes Empire the best. But still they don't complain about Hope and Jedi...

With the prequels , we almost know all the import things up front : "Anakin falls in love, gets seduiced to the DarkSide, kills all Jedi, and gets "damaged" in a fight with Obi-Wan"

The prequels will deal with all these issues and a lot more stuff that George (unfortunately) added to the Starwars universe ( can you say "Midichlorians" and "celebasy") AND at the same time (hopefully) connect al the loose ends the original trilogy created.

I'm sceptical about the prequels too , because I didn't feel for Phantom what I feel for the original trilogy, but let's hope "the big picture" will indeed be the one we Starwars freaks have been waiting for all these years, and not just Multi Mega Lightsaber Fights were JarJar dies 20 times by the hand of a DarthMaul clone while Amidala is naked all the time ;-)

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[CleverNickName]

Maybe fans need to lower their expectations a little and just enjoy the movie for what it is.

NO! We should NOT lower our expectations! It's precisely this type of thinking that lets the studios crank out POS after POS with [insert current flavor of the month here] in the title role.

I can't tell you how many times I've had this conversation with one of my friends in the industry:

ME: What are you working on?

FRIEND: Some piece of shit.

ME: Really? What's it about?

FRIEND: It's a rip off of [recently successful movie], starring [currently hot actor] and [producer's girlfriend/mistress/wife].

ME: So it's a piece of shit, and everyone knows that, but they're still spending 20 million dollars on it.

FRIEND: Yep. It'll make it back opening weekend before anyone realizes how shitty it is. Hey, it's starring [currently hot actor], you know!

ME: Sounds great. Let's get drunk.

Studios would love nothing more than for us to keep lowering and lowering our expectations, because it lets them focus on what they really care about: selling merchandise, and "synergy" with advertising tie-ins.

There was a time when movies were considered an art form, and studios were run by creative people who wanted to tell a story, or make a statement. Now, movies are just another excuse to sell crap, feature the actors who have been capriciously identified by Hollywood as "up and coming" (Vin Diesel? Please.) and push more and more product. Creative people are a necessary evil, and we are constantly over ruled by somebody's cousin, whose MBA from Harvard somehow qualifies him to make creative decisions about story structure. News flash: studios are run by multi-national conglomerates, and they can't WAIT for us to lower our expectations and give them our money.

Honestly, what's it going to take for us to say "enough?" Sure, Watchmen may get made, but they'll fuck it up. They're already trying to make Sandman, and I know first hand that the studio wants it to be an action movie. Sandman. Action Movie. Oh, sure, that makes sense. Let's just lower our expectations and go enjoy it.

If I go to enjoy AToC for "What it is," I may as well stay home and watch commercials for Burger King tie-ins and action figures.

I'd write more, but I have to go stand in line, and my Chewbacca suit is already itchin' my ass.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[lubricated]

Even though you're not going to use previous movies to be a comparison, you are still going to see the movie at 12:01. Do you enjoy seeing all movies as soon as possible, or are you using previous star wars movies to help make that decision.

Seams like a strange contradiction...

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Anonymous Coward]

Assuming that equi-goodness satisfies the RST axioms for an equivalence relation, yes.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[slutdot]

When I was mentioned lowered expectations I meant don't put Star Wars on such a pedestal that any new movie in the franchise can't possibly meet the expectations that are out there. When everything is said and done, Star Wars is just a movie created by a human writer. I didn't mean to bring hollywood as a whole into the conversation.

I agree that there is a lot of crap out there but it isn't as bad as you make it out to be. Movies are a form of entertainment, they're not art. I pay my $8 to be entertained for a couple of hours and don't ever expect a life-altering experience. Look at Spider-man for instance. Regardless of the hype generated beforehand, I expected it to be just another movie based on a comic book. When it didn't turn out to be another Batman or X-Men, I was very very satisfied and I'm a relatively big comic fan. The fact that Parker didn't invent a substance that could revolutionalize the S&M industry but instead gained his web slinging ability through the alteration of a spider's genetic code actually satisfied me. If someone decides to make a movie about my favorite comic, Shazam!, I won't go into the movie demanding perfection. I'll go into the movie expecting to be entertained. If it doesn't happen, I won't freak out like some SW fans are currently doing. I'll just deal with it. $8 isn't exactly going to break me if I piss it away on a movie that sucked. I've spent far more money on certain women in my life and got far less out of the experience.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[autechre]

I don't think that you can classify all movies as simply entertainment rather than a work of art. Most mainstream, big budget movies? Sure. But there are plenty of filmmakers out there (most, but not all, of whom are independant) who still actually care about things like that.

--Ray

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Anonymous Coward]

Star Wars was far from a B movie..Lucas was an accomplished director at the time, and a cast that included Peter Cushing, Carrie Fisher, Alec Guiness, and musical score by John Williams guaranteed that it was big time. Only Harrison Ford and Mark Hamill were unknowns at the time.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[slutdot]

I agree but some fans out there are acting as though Lucas and the studios owes the fans the equivalent of the Bible. It's just a friggin' movie.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[kubrick]

There was a time when movies were considered an art form, and studios were run by creative people who wanted to tell a story, or make a statement.

... and make heaps of money.

Seriously, when was this golden age you speak of? The majority of film producers are, and always have been, businessmen more interested in the bottom line than in artisitc integrity.

At least in those days the 'hot product' they were pushing was only expected to sell more movies (e.g. movie idols like Cary Grant). These days it's all cross-merchandised up the wazoo...

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[chrisos]

Bear in mind that up to the point of the release of the original Star Wars firm, films came in one of two flavours:

1. Films aimed at adults. (I'm not talking pr0n here!)
2. Films aimed at kids.

Star Wars was one of the first films that worked on more than one intellectual level, both kids and adults could go and watch the film, without the boredom that an adult would usually experience watching a kids film.

That may not have been what made the film so big, but it certainly contibuted.

The point you make about growing up and not loving the film, just shows that, whilst the kids level of the film worked for you, the adult level did not.

I know this is true, my dad told me so!

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Zathrus]

Names and star quality mean jack when it comes to whether or not a movie is a "B movie" or not IMO. It all has to do with whether or not it's sensible, consistant, and succeeds in the key "suspension of disbelief".

Star Wars succeeds in the latter at times, fails at others.

If you happen to think that names and directorial experience can keep you from making a B-grade movie, well then, I'd like to refer you to this classic, which is a movie released a few years ago that was directed by Michael Bay and stars several very highly accomplished actors (some of them Oscar winners) such as Billy Bob Thornton, Bruce Willis, Ben Affleck, and Liv Tyler. It also happens to be one of the worst (big-budget) movies of all time in my opinion.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[PsychoSpunk]

Seriously, when was this golden age you speak of? The majority of film producers are, and always have been, businessmen more interested in the bottom line than in artisitc integrity.

A friend of mine who went to film school likes to point out a simple fact. Before 1977 there were no movies that reached "blockbuster" status. Since then all studio films are produced to reach the lowest common denominator in order to maximize the "blockbuster" appeal. This is not to say that there weren't any successful movies, just that after a little space opera became the highest grossing movie ever (up to that point in time) all bets were off and the quality of what is pushed out by the studios deteriorated.

In other words, the studios went from pushing movies that had a guaranteed audience in specific genres to pushing movies that were fantastical conglomerations of these various genres that may not appeal directly but held enough appeal to produce a higher draw.

Re:Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about.

[kubrick]

Before 1977 there were no movies that reached "blockbuster" status.

Cleopatra? Ben Hur? Gone With the Wind? (I'm unsure of the levels of financial success of these three films, but they exemplify the "all things to all people" attitude (while purporting to be within a specific genre) that so sickens me about the Star Wars series.)

I agree that George Lucas is to blame for the 'blockbuster' mentality, and that practically every studio film these days aims for that level of (financial) success, but I don't think that it was that good in the good old days.

Besides, what counts as a studio film these days? Any film that gets even moderately good arthouse distribution these days probably has some studio investment...

Hollywood after the war was compromised by the Hays code and McCarthyism... and I can't imagine that someone like Sam Goldwyn was more concerned with artistic integrity than the money he made.

Re:skywalker family tree link is broken

[sjwt]

hears a coupple from a quick search..

will i hit the jackpot and get a right one?

http://thepensieve.net/skywalker_family_tree.htm
http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~lightsabre/familyt re e.htm
http://www.theforce.net/timetales/Sheet001. htm

Roger Ebert

[Black Aardvark House]

What I dislike about Lucas' approach is that he wants to change the entire world of film to suit his convenience.

I just do not understand Ebert's disdain for digital film, CGI, etc. If characters seem somewhat unrealistic using Lucasfilm methods, he forgets one thing: Star Wars is a fantasy. It's OK to stretch reality a little.

This reminds me of a similar debate of listening to music on CD's vs. vinyl records, where CD music sounds cold, lacking the richness of vinyl.

But then again, what's been the mosat popular music media until perhaps very lately? The CD.

Roger Ebert, please quit about the media and just give us the scoop on the content.

Re:Roger Ebert

[amstrad]

I just do not understand Ebert's disdain for digital film, CGI, etc

He doesn't have a problem with digital media. He has a problem with the transfer of a digitally shot movie onto film for projection. The point he was trying to make was that if you shoot in digital you should project in digital. The problem is that only a very few number of theaters in the US has the capability to project in digital. That is what Ebert means when he said "What I dislike about Lucas' approach is that he wants to change the entire world of film to suit his convenience."

Earlier in article Ebert says, "Lucas is so eager to promote his vision of the digital future that he is willing to penalize his audience."

Re:Roger Ebert

[Anonymous Coward]

In the latest Wired Magazine, Spielberg says he will be the last film maker to ever use digitial cameras. I guess what type of equipment is best, is still a matter of debate.

Re:Roger Ebert

[Wakko Warner]

But then again, what's been the mosat popular music media until perhaps very lately? The CD.

What does this prove? The CD is popular because it is convenient, not because it sounds particularly good. "Popular" has never implied "good" anyway.

- A.P.

Re:Roger Ebert

[Brian_Ellenberger]

ID Software does this all the time. Think back to Quake? Instead of making another Doom, John and the boys wrote a game that forced you to go out and get a 3D video card to enjoy the game. Looking at the incredible advances in 3D video cards, aren't you glad he forced people to upgrade? How many 3D video games still support software rendering? In the end I don't think it was "penalizing his audience" in any way.

Lucas's primary goal with the Star Wars films was not just making movies but pushing the moviemaking technology. And that will always be his biggest accomplishment.

Brian Ellenberger

Re:Roger Ebert

[EpsCylonB]

That is what Ebert means when he said "What I dislike about Lucas' approach is that he wants to change the entire world of film to suit his convenience."


If we listen to ebert there will be no progress in the film exhibition
industry.

I applaud Lucas, for years the focus has been on making the film look better
using special effects and post production. It is about time that some money
was thrown at the cinemas where the public (the consumers, who decide
whether these movies make money or not) actually watch them.

I personally have always disliked the low quality of cinema screens and yes
I do live near a modern multiplex, the fact is once a film has been shown a
few times (or say 5 or 6 times a day) the picture becomes degraded through
dust and scratches which I find all too noticeable (I cannot believe some
people argue that this is a part of film experience).

With the surprisingly fast adoption of DVD into the mainstream the appetite
of the film watcher for a clearer and sharper picture is obvious. I think
eberts main sticking point is that millions of cinema goers will suffer with
a slightly degraded picture because the vast majority of cinema's don't have
digital projectors. I really doubt that the difference in quality between a
film recorded digitally and traditionally shot film will be noticeable to
your average joe in most poor quality cinemas.

Ebert should remember that it is easy to criticise (which is why I hate
critics they don't have to prove themselves), I'd like to ask him if he has
any better suggestions on how to improve the viewing experience. I
personally can't wait for digital projectors to oust traditional projectors.

Re:Roger Ebert

[grung0r]

uhhh.....original Quake was not 3d accelerated untill months after it came out. Even Quake 2 could be played in software. There was not any "forcing" going on.

The anlogy dosen't hold up anyway. 3d acceleration was clearly superior to software rendering, while digital filming and projection has visual drawbacks to celluloid. Some people think that digital film looks flat and washes out in high contrast sceens. Besides, It's alot easier to make 10 million people buy 3d accelrators then it is to make 5,000 theaters buy digital projectors, especialy when most directors, besides lucas of course, aren't interested becuase either they don't like the look, or if a film transfer is required, it WILL look like shit.

Re:Roger Ebert

[phong3d]

Actually, there is a huge advance in movie projection technology that's not digital. Ebert's choice of the best next-generation projection medium is Maxivision 48, which is a fine-grain 48 frames-per-second method of projection that presents extremely high-quality pictures with no motion blur on pans and lateral dolly shots.

DVD certainly does offer a clearer picture, but that can't be extrapolated to digital projection just yet. It's very bright and the contrast and color are excellent, but I've seen them both, and I think Maxivision is considerably better at this time. However, since it's not "digital" it must be antiquated and not worth the trouble. Besides, wide adoption of digital is economically attractive to studios eventually, since movies will be downloadable instead of deliverable. That, and you won't have to worry about film splicing anymore.

Re:Roger Ebert

[www.sorehands.com]

I disagree. I find DVD not that sharp. In the past couple of months I have become to appreciate the extra sharpness of 1920x1080 resolution. I have been seeing some of the clips at that resolution for the past few months and still am impressed.

I know that AToC has been done in 1280x1024, but I suspect that is because of the limits of the TI projectors being in many of the cinemas.

Re:Roger Ebert

[Anonymous Coward]

Judging by the trailers all CGI has done for AOTC is create a whopping big shoot 'em up. Not a movie I would want to see.

Re:Roger Ebert

[jaoswald]

But CD is clearly more capable than the previous analog recording media. As in, more dynamic range than the analog mastering media.

Early CD recordings had trouble because of a lack of experience in mixing for the new medium, and building a good reconstruction filter for the analog stage of a CD player is not trivial, but the medium is unquestionably better, except for audiophile mystics.

Digital projection is still not more capable than film, especially not the 70mm film shown under art house conditions that Ebert is comparing it to. Compared to an abused 35mm print shown at your local mall cinema, digital probably is better. In color saturation, digital is probably better. But the resolution is not quite there, and that is really what makes the difference in Ebert's comparison.

Re:Roger Ebert

[shogun]

uhhh.....original Quake was not 3d accelerated untill months after it came out. Even Quake 2 could be played in software. There was not any "forcing" going on.

Actually maybe he means Quake III Arena which would not run at all unless you have a 3d accelerated video card of some kind. There was a hack to force it to play with software opengl drivers, but it was so slow as to be worthless. However it should be noted that this was released well after there was already quite a degree of market penetration of 3d cards in general...

Re:Roger Ebert

[grung0r]

it should also be noted that he said "after doom".

Anakin does the Queen (comic)

[Snaggy]

For those who haven't seen our classic comic series, we've been running it again on AY2K as a countdown to Episode II.

It starts here...
... A long time ago, in a comic far far away...

Re:Anakin does the Queen (comic)

[Anonymous Coward]

How about coming up with some new AY2K episodes instead? I've seen maybe 3 new strips in the past 3 months.

Re:Anakin does the Queen (comic)

[Anonymous Coward]

Mesa thinks you should check the next and previous links so that the damn thing doesn't loop back every couple screens.

Other than those minor glitches, quite funny..

Please fix "family tree" link...

[FortKnox]

I'm really interested in the "Skywalker Family Tree" link. But its broke atm. Please fix. Thanks.

Re:Please fix "family tree" link...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for fixing...

Now I'll lose my karma :-(

Skywalker Family Tree

[dmomo]

Typo in the story. Here is the actual URL:

http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,52408, 00 . tml

Re:Skywalker Family Tree

[Spoons]

Typo in the story. Here is the actual URL:

And in your post here is the real link.

Some reviews

[Anonymous Coward]

The reviews for the feel good hit of the summer continue to roll in!

"There is not one line in this movie that you can quote with any pleasure. It is the most banal script I have ever read," raves Roger Ebert of Ebert and Roeper.

David Ansen of Newseek enthuses,"Lucas's enterprise has long since passed out of the arena of mere entertainment and into the realm of pure faith. You're either a true believer or an agnostic. To the former, its value is beyond debate, and all criticism a form of heresy. Which leaves guys like me doing the Devil's work. Let the hate mail commence... ...Anakin comes off as a whiny, brattish American teenager. He's vapid, not Vader... Lucas, frankly, is a feeble director of actors..."

Says John Anderson of Newsday, "...only those audiences already up to their necks in "Star Wars" ephemera could possibly care about the actual plot points on which the latest installment rests... ...[Christensen's Anakin] is the kind of whiny, irritating performance that would get most actors thrown out of 'Dawson's Creek,' much less a billion-dollar enterprise like 'Star Wars.' And yet, there he is, as pretty as Portman and easily as useless."

Intones Mark Caro of the Chicago Tribune, "Now Anakin is a headstrong, moody 19-year-old played with doleful looks and a curling lip by Hayden Christensen, and he's still barely a person. He speaks in topic sentences, and what they say is this: 'I like to take risks. I love Padme (Natalie Portman). I'm ready to be a Jedi knight. I resent that Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) still bosses me around. I love Padme. I'm frustrated that I'm so strong, yet I can't protect my mom.' For such a visually oriented filmmaker, Lucas commits an unpardonable sin: He tells instead of shows... Lucas' tin ear for dialogue doesn't help. Padme to Anakin: 'I've been dying a little bit each day since you came back into my life.' Oh, ick.!!!!!!!"

Raves Steven Rea in the Philadelphia Inquirer, "This thing will have your mind glazed over faster than a glob of dough in a Krispy Kreme plant... 'Clones' makes the Frodo-speak of 'Lord of the Rings' sound like Noel Coward."

And, last but not least, Michael Atkinson of the Village Voice says, "Jango serves as the template for a covert army of obedient, disposable, Asian- featured clones. The backlash against the last film's racist stereotypes apparently never reached Skywalker Ranch... Labeling a villain 'Sidious' is one thing, but calling a minor character 'Elan Sleazebaggano' is another achievement entirely... There is an odd cognitive dissonance at work between the obvious ingenuity dedicated to the film's visual details -- alien anatomies, industrial machinery, technological minutiae -- and the retarded intelligence quotient evident in its content... Lucas has in fact come closer than anyone could desire to the cheap, graceless, hackneyed sci-fi serials of the '30s and '40s. Predictably, the screenplay would make Buster Crabbe call for a rewrite... This is hardly an epic (a word that implies moral, human, and social weight). It's a marathon of irrelevant preadolescent dreaming... As the nationwide sidewalk camp-outs come to their climax, the maniacal wwwooooooos siren through the theater (even at the Lucasfilm Ltd. logo), and virtually every adult I know admits to a publicity-hammered submission, it's easy to feel like 1984's Winston Smith struggling with 2 + 2 = 5. Why should this invasion of self-ratifying, trans-marketed mythopoeia -- so electrifying and meaningful to so many -- be so inarguably empty and inconsequential? Attack of the Clones is a golden calf, worshiped not out of primitive fear but populist groupthink."

Re:Some reviews

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want serious groupthink, just go the "Jedi Council" at theforce.net.

Those people are unbeleivable, grasping at every straw to make aotc the second coming, banning or flaming everyone who might even suggest that Lucas is just an average entertainer who got lucky.

Re:Some reviews

[larry bagina]

NPR had a review of it this morning. Bottom line, it's a non-interactive video game, not a movie. They played a clip of Samuel Jackson; "Should we tell them we're losing our Jedi Powers?" Is that the best Lucas could come up with? Sounds like something from a viagra ad.

They don't have the full story on NPR.org, but here's the lowdown:

'Attack of the Clones' Los Angeles Times film critic Kenneth Turan has seen the new Star Wars movie, Attack of the Clones, but he wishes he hadn't. He says some things are better the first time around and don't need an encore. Star Wars Episode 2: Attack of the Clones opens in select theaters nationwide at midnight. (3:25)

Re:Some reviews

[Roto-Rooter Man]

Also note Rex Reed's excellent review. He calls Ep II "as exciting as a rancid Yoo-Hoo".

As for all the Ebert bashing going on here, he loved Episode I, and gave it 3.5/4 stars. So you know this one must be simply awful if he's giving it 1/2 star less than he gave The Scorpion King.

Re:Some reviews

[gowen]

How about this one from The Guardian, titled "Hit me Obi one more time..."

The highlight is:

Moreover, Anakin not only has a ponytail, but also a thin length of braided hair trailing winsomely over his shoulder. As the mighty Yoda would say: "Like a wussy 12-year-old girl he looks."

Re:Some reviews

[Wyatt Earp]

Dialogue was never strong in any of the Star Wars films, partly because Lucas is trying to do a rework of the 30s and 40s serials. Partly cause he can't write.

But frankly, I don't care what movie reviewers say, like Michael Atkinson of the Village Voice, there trying to make an issue out of the "racist sterotypes" of the last film. It's these attempts at making films non-confrontational or "clean" and non-offensive to everyone that has taken the story from "Sum of All Fears" and rewrote it so the Arabs won't be offended. Do the Germans get to be offended at World War Two films protraying them as killers?

I rambled, I need a Coke, in short. I don't feel movie critcis should be listened too, IMO they are nothing more than paid Comic Book Store Guys with newspapers and TV programs to vent upon.

Re:Some reviews

[kraf]

thanks for the link, I liked this one better:

along with the shadowy and superbly named Darth Sidious. (Who else? Darth Nuendo? Darth Vasion? Darth Tergalactic-Warfare?)

Re:Some reviews

[Galvatron]

Okay, one issue with the whole racial stereotype thing: if they're all clones, they have to be one single race, right? Furthermore, they're evil. So what race would be safe? Even the old fallback (if minorities are likely to get offended, just make them white) doesn't really work, because then they'll look like Nazi ubermensch or something. The Stormtroopers are already named Stormtroopers after all, do we need more WWII parallels?.

Re:Some reviews

[robson]

Dialogue was never strong in any of the Star Wars films, partly because Lucas is trying to do a rework of the 30s and 40s serials. Partly cause he can't write.

But DAMN, dude... what a terrible combination of weaknesses -- inability to write and inability to direct actors. It takes powerful forces such as these to make good actors like McGregor and Portman perform so very poorly.

Re:Some reviews

[dR.fuZZo]

The reviews for the feel good hit of the summer continue to roll in!

What? None of those were reviews of Spider-Man...

Re:Some reviews

[Anonymous Coward]

An Asian-featured race would be safe if people who looked like Asians actually appeared anywhere in the Star Wars universe as anything but clones. But they don't. And Asians are often stereotyped as being conformist and collectivist, hence the offensiveness of clones.

The Nazis, on the other hand, really were up to no good. That's not a stereotype, that's just the truth. A stereotype is something like "all Jews are long nosed, materialistic, greedy, haggling merchants with New York accents." When you put a long nosed, materialistic, greedy, haggling merchant with a New York accent in your movie, it's still a sterotype -- EVEN if you make him look like a winged shelless turtle and stick him on desert planet you ripped off from Frank Herbert.

Re:Some reviews

[shawnseat]

I think they were thinking of the appearance of Darth Sync. Oh well....

Re:Some reviews

[joel8x]

I just watched AOTC last night and it really was a good Star Wars movie. All the bitching about Anakin's part is realative to the story. His character is supposed to be a bitchy immature teenager - he's a confused kid who has no real social skills and it shows - look at his life story so far and its plain as day as to why he's such a pain in the ass. Same goes for Amidalla - she's royalty, you think the Queen of England was a dynamic person - she was born into roayalty and thats what she knows. You will see her character come to life by the end of the movie. She goes from a stiff Senator to a young adult in love, and she does a damn good job of it. All of the fears I had going into this movie faded very quickly when I realized how important this movie is to the series. Seeds that were sown in Episode 1 are sprouting and its exciting to see the forthcomming downfall of the Jedi and rise of the Dark Side. Overall, I say don't listen to these critics because they are not looking at it the same way a true fan would (your not supposed to like Anakin - he becomes a murderous villain, remember). As a Star Wars movie, AOTC is right up there with Empire Strikes Back - Its dark and vicious and I loved every minute of it.

Re:Some reviews

[Anonymous Coward]

Since Lucas could easily afford to hire dialog writers and directors, it's a completely valid criticism. Instead, he's holed up on "the ranch" surrounded by a bunch of toadies and a some seriously rusty filmmaking skills.

Note that Empire Strikes Back, commonly regarded as the most dramatically successful film in the series was largely handled by Hollywood vets that Lucas hired.

The stereotype issue wasn't so much that he did it, but instead that he is so out of touch that he didn't KNOW that he was doing it. Which isn't suprising if you've heard about the Yes Man culture that Lucas has engendered.

Re:Some reviews

[GreyyGuy]

I don't feel movie critcis should be listened too, IMO they are nothing more than paid Comic Book Store Guys with newspapers and TV programs to vent upon.

Exactly! These guys go and watch movies for a living. How is their tastes in movies going to compare to someone what wants to see them for fun?

Re:Some reviews

[NeuroManson]

Jango is asian? Gee, he looked like a black haired New Zealander to me (http://jfett.8m.com/tem.htm)... Maybe the Village Voice reviewer needs glasses...

Re:Some reviews

[onosendai]

In My Eyes.. Lucas is Forgiven for Ep1

ALright, real review time, I liked it ALOT (/me does the dance of the 'ahead-of-gmt-aussies'). It has all the hallmarks of episode 4 & 5, and has overcome the problems rampant in ep1.

Sure, Lucas can't write dialogue to save his life, but the story moves along and Christensen and Portman's scenes do get over the 'going to the plug-hole' romance well, and McGregor proves once again that his casting decision may have been the single best in all six episodes.

There is some kickass action, with the most jedi you'll have seen onscreen at once ever, lot's of great effects ( some amazingly brilliant (see coruscant ) some not ( Kenobi's friend in the cafe )... and then there's the Yoda fight scene for which i shall be paying my AU$13 to go and see again ..

So .. where'd do i put this ? Hmm, personally, it's on par with SW4:ANH, not as good as SW5:ESB, but better the EP6:RoTJ and EP1:TPM ( it'll actually make you think differently about EP1, but doesn't change the fact that Lucas really did scare us for a while )

Re:Some reviews

[Chris Siegler]

Peter Travers said it ranks third of the five Star Wars movies.

His ranking

1. Empire Strikes Back
2. A New Hope
3. AOTC
4. Return of the Jedi
5. Phantom

I like Ebert and enjoy his reviews, but this is the one kind of film that always confuses him. For god sakes, he gave Phantom 3 1/2 stars!

Re:Some reviews

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought he had a more Italian accent than NY jew. But I guess thats my westcoast impression...later.

Re:Some reviews

[Anonymous Coward]

and your point is? Princess Leia had 100X more personality than Amidala, so where did it come from? Certainly not her parents!

BTW: Queen Amidala was "elected", not born to the position as in your weak British royalty arguement.

Re:Some reviews

[joel8x]

Leia's charachter developed over 4,5, and 6 - at first she was a shallow bitch.

Yeas, she was "elected", but at a VERY YOUNG AGE.

Try seeing the movie and then complain about her personality in it - I'm telling you that you start to see her come to life by the end of the movie.

I usually ignore Anonymous Cowards - get your balls out of your mother's purse and use your real ID.

Re:Some reviews

[Anonymous Coward]

"I usually ignore Anonymous Cowards - get your balls out of your mother's purse and use your real ID."

You didn't this time though, did you. What a coward one must be to post annonymously on slashdot, where everyone else reveals his true identity and posts his email address, eh joel8x.

You know, I don't detect the slightest hint of irony in your quoting "comicbookstoreguy". I think you're just some rubber fetishist.

My stupid theatre

[rosewood]

First kink in the armour Ted

The tickets have "Wednesday, 12:01 am" printed on them- but thats suposed to be either wednesday 11:59 or Thursday 12:01 am - all wekk I was expecting to see it today. Grrrrrrr

Re:My stupid theatre

[m3000]

TheForce.net had a story about the advanced ticket misprint earlier in the week. I was wondering about that too though before I saw the story.

Re:My stupid theatre

[Anonymous Coward]

Here the show starts at 23:59 on wednesday...

Re:My stupid theatre

[rosewood]

Yea - we went through those same steps here

It kind of bugged me but I am still stoked

The funny thing is, Im not a star wars fan -- I just wanna see DLP!

Tnx for the link btw

Knowledge

[Phili]

Now everybody and his brother is knowing when the VIPs of /. are going to see what stuff.

Thank you sooo much, god

LEGO Movie Links Page

[echucker]

Lego Studios
link is here, but none of the javascript links work :-(

Being productive?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think so, we've been spending the last week trying to find open shares with copies of ATOC to leech?

I predict a big letdown from the movie,

That is, unless Natalie gets naked

Re:Being productive?

[Surlyboi]

Not naked, but that girl's got some damn fine abs.

Re:Please just get a life

[Havokmon]

..while eating hot grits

At first I thought you said "hot girls", and I thought, "Now there's something I didn't expect a geek to say.."

ahem

[BilldaCat]

my CmdrTaco impersonation

I HAVE TICKETS AT 12:01
I HAVE TICKETS AT 12:01
I HAVE TICKETS AT 12:01

psst...

I HAVE TICKETS AT 12:01!!!

and you don't.

Re:ahem

[tb3]

Yeah, but we get the last laugh. The tickets are in Ann Arbor.

Re:ahem

[Mandi Walls]

Fortunately, I do.

And that would be 12:01 Eastern, not 12:01 in that later time zone that contains Michigan.

So Nyah Nyah Nyah!

--mandi

Re:ahem

[Mr.Phil]

ummm I'm pretty sure most of Michigan is in the Eastern Time zone, all except a small portion of the UP (Upper Peninsula). I can say this as I've lived in Michigan for 20 years, having moved there from Chicago, which is in the Central Time zone.

Since Ann Arbor is in the large portion of Michigan which is in the Easter Time Zone, Taco's going to be watching it at the same time as you are...

Re:ahem

[Anonymous Coward]

>I HAVE TICKETS AT 12:01
>I HAVE TICKETS AT 12:01
>I HAVE TICKETS AT 12:01

>psst...

>I HAVE TICKETS AT 12:01!!!

I own a theater....and you dont ;-P

Re:ahem

[el_nino]

and you don't.

No, I have tickets for an advance screening at 21:00. In GMT+1, so I get to see it 9 hours 1 minute before CmdrTaco in Ann Arbor. </gloat>

Re:ahem

[Anonymous Coward]

I can beat you there. In Pittsburgh, therer is a 12:01 showing like everywhere else, but ALSO a 12:00 showing (presumably, 12:00 and one second so it is "legal")

Semi-Spoilage Post

[primal39]

It's not really a spoiler, since there are marketing images of him holding one, but wait till you see Yoda wield a light-saber. it is amazing.

Re:Semi-Spoilage Post

[CMiYC]

No its not. Because all you see is a green light blurring around the screen. It looks more like a Pinball tournament than a lightsaber fight. Oh and don't forget the overly (and I mean OVERLY) cheesy line, "It appears we can not settle this fight with our knowledge of the force..." bah. Episode II is an improvement over I, but not by much.

Quickies?

[stevey]

Couldn't this have been posted under the Star Wars topic for those people like me who couldn't care less..?

Re:Quickies?

[Anonymous Coward]

how about you just igore the fucking story. instead, you bother to read something you couldn't care less about (i can't figure that one out) AND take the time to post a comment whining about it (which is just freaking irritating). get the sand out of your pussy and move on.

Stop poking our eyes out Taco!!

[Tha_Zanthrax]

I have tickets for a 12:01 showing in Ann Arbor and I'll be getting in line in just a few short hours.
Yes, and you page gets 1,5 million visits a day and you're getting married to you geek GF.

Ha, AOTC is opening on the same date worldwide.
If you really want to see it first you need planetickets to new sealand, you 733T 12:01 tickets are 10 hours and 1 minute late... :)

Re:Stop poking our eyes out Taco!!

[TrAvELAr]

Heh, if I would have known you were in Ann Arbor, I would have invited you to Kalamazoo this last weekened to watch it at my place.

Yea yea, it was on the net, I couldn't resist. :)

Re:Stop poking our eyes out Taco!!

[jamie]

"Yea yea, it was on the net, I couldn't resist. :)"

Speaking of on the net, you might want to remove a decimal point or two from the latitude and longitude in your sig. According to Terraserver, you live on the south side of a major road in Kalamazoo-Portage, probably on a minor cross street there. It's across from two private schools, and a block from a big home improvement store that just went in recently.

You really don't want strangers to come knocking at your door, do you? :)

Re:Stop poking our eyes out Taco!!

[TrAvELAr]

Hahaha.. I guess I might actually worry about it if there weren't like 2500 apartments right there, and since I took that reading while I was rolling out of the parking lot. :p

Soundtrack

[Anonymous Coward]

Could someone please post a link to the .mp3 for the lego movie soundtrack? I can't stand it that mp3.com requires cookies to get to the content. What BS.

Thanks

Re:please go ahead

[Anonymous Coward]

How many times do we have to hear about the Star Wars axe? Many more, I'm sure.

And CmdrTaco, we all know about your tickets, you post about them in every story.

Oh No!! CmdrTaco isn't a professional news agent with a degree! What next is he going to make jokes on the front page?

-1 Troll, -1 not that funny

Ebert is right

[ciaohound]

So much CGI just looks like CGI -- it often subverts the willing suspension of disbelief. Give me the old Star Wars/Ray Harryhausen stuff anyday. But CGI is the future and economics will be on its side. (I had to laugh at last night's Smallville -- it used CGI to show a waitress dropping a tray of coffee mugs. Now that is affordable CGI!) So, if it's inevitable, is anyone working on CGI that will mimic the results of the old physical modelling techniques?

Re:Ebert is right

[dswensen]

So, if it's inevitable, is anyone working on CGI that will mimic the results of the old physical modelling techniques?

They never stopped doing that. If you watch the documentary for Jurassic Park (it's on the DVD), you'll see that veteran animator Phil Tippett and his crew had a very hard time making the transition from "go-motion" animation to working with a keyboard to make CGI dinosaurs. So the special effects crew built a number of model dinosaurs that were tied into the computer, and the animators moved them by hand, just like they did with stop-motion, and the movements were recorded and smoothed out by the computer. The technique, ultimately, didn't change much at all.

One of the animators even complained that "people think that with computers, we just have a keyboard and press C for creature and D for dinosaur, and never do any hands-on work, which is just wrong."

Even TPM featured a lot more miniatures work than is apparent in a film. It's really nerdy of me, but I've gotten a bit of pleasure out of it when I was watching TPM with an anti-CGI fellow, and when he sneered "that looks so fake" at one particular part, pointed out to him that it wasn't CGI, but a miniature. Oops, now it looks real after all!

My favorite bit is people always yapping about the actors opposite Jar Jar (yeah, I know, I know) "looking over his head" or "into space," when in fact there was an actor in a Jar Jar suit right there in the scene with them, and was replaced later.

Certainly, some CGI effects look better than others, and I've seen enough piss-poor CGI Rorscharch blots to last me the rest of my life -- but this hating CGI "just because" just sort of puzzles me.

That said, I think Ray Harryhausen is to be revered as the pioneer that he was, but stop-motion, by today's standards, looks like complete ass. I think it's a testament to how spoiled we are as moviegoers that we can carp and gripe about special effects that look more realistic than anything that's ever been in the movies before -- no matte lines, no mismatched colors, etc. Like any effect, when it's done well, it's done well. When it sucks, it sucks.

Re:Ebert is right

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the video game esthetic that people loathe. Although CGI can be used to make many things, it facilitates some things more than others: i.e. ominous lighting effects, outrageous dexterity, and a certain giganticity (heaviness) of composition. People equate CGI with a certain esthetic quality that they do not connect with; perhaps because they are overfed on it, perhaps because they perceive it to be cold, dry and inhumane.

The criticism I would level against many CGI movies is that the actors at times seem to be not so much performing as rehearsing, relying on postproduction to "fix it up". The plausibility or "realness" of the stunning imagery is the least of my concerns.

Re:Ebert is right

[cvd6262]

Actually, Best played Jar-Jar on rehersal. The film was shot without him there.

Old...

[Misanthroporama]

I've seen all those "new" movies already. Keep at it though.

Shoulda been: "RETURN OF THE QUICKIES!!!"

[tweakt]

Wow, it's been quite a long time since /. did quickies. They were one of my favorite types of articles. You get some load balancing across all of the links so there's not quite as much /. effect directed towards each site ;-)

Glad to see quickies return. Keep 'em coming. It's been *AT LEAST* a year since the last one. =P

Taco's tickets.

[oyenstikker]

Taco has made a point to tell us of hit tickets over and over. I say we go jump him and take them. (:

Slurping Down the MPAA-Sanctioned Bile

[al3x]

I've said it before, and it'll be modded down as "flamebait" again, but I think it's appalling that the same editors who decry the practices of the MPAA at every turn go out and spend their money and give publicity to the most crass and over-marketed of MPAA-sanctioned output. Saying you hate the organization but love the content just isn't good enough: every dollar you spend on a MPAA film is another dollar that says "I want to be legislated against; I want to be treated like a criminal; I encourage you to use my tax dollars to hunt me down."

Re:Slurping Down the MPAA-Sanctioned Bile

[Bloodshot]

You forgot one thing: George Lucas has produced these films *outside* the MPAA structure, so when you buy a ticket the money goes into Lucas' pocket, not the MPAA.

Re:Slurping Down the MPAA-Sanctioned Bile

[al3x]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I'm puzzled by your statement. Could you elaborate, or perhaps provide evidence that the MPAA is not fiscally benefiting from the wide distribution and publicitiy of this film and associated previews and advertisements? Is it not MPAA rated, and ergo sanctioned? Please clarify; I'm genuinely interested.

Re:Slurping Down the MPAA-Sanctioned Bile

[Rogerborg]

• think it's appalling that the same editors who decry the practices of the MPAA at every turn go out and spend their money and give publicity to the most crass and over-marketed of MPAA-sanctioned output

And on the first day, too. What clearer way to send the message that you don't care about the content, that you don't give a damn about reviews (professional or peer), but that you've been bought by the trailers and the advertising, that your money is already in the bank. It sends the signal that the MPAA should be able to expect and demand our money.

Not that Cmdr Taco cares. Hey, man, he's just one guy going to watch a movie, right? I mean, what can one guy do? If he didn't buy those tickets, someone else would, right? And the movie would suck if he waited two weeks to see it, right? Right?

Re:Slurping Down the MPAA-Sanctioned Bile

[Anonymous Coward]

I've said it before, and it'll be modded down as "flamebait" again


you said it once before. And it was modded as troll. Yes you truly are a hero of the people fighting against the MPAA like that

Re:Slurping Down the MPAA-Sanctioned Bile

[sulli]

The parent is wrong. Lucas resigned from the Directors' Guild due to their moronic requirement that every movie have opening credits. (Star Wars has no opening credits at all, just the introductory text.) But the distributor, 20th Century Fox (all cheer the logo!), is very much a member of the MPAA.

Just back from the theatre...

[rediguana]

And I'm quite impressed. I watched Phantom Menace on DVD before going, and followed it up with AOTC. It was rather impressive and made Phantom look rather shallow. Yes, it may make you cringe in a couple of places, but overall, it seems more like the Star Wars of old, and it is cool to finally have the story coming together, something that didn't really happen with Phantom (of course it was mainly used as a movie to introduce characters and themes).

I went in with an open mind, not really knowing what to expect, just hoping it was going to be better than Phantom. I personally think it has well outdone Phantom. It is much deeper, more emotive, and certainly darker. I really enjoyed this movie, and overall I think the audience did too, especially Yoda's scene - you'll know it when you see it ;)

Re:Just back from the theatre...

[ZaMoose]

This is something that has confused me greatly: why do people let Lucas off easy for making Ep. 1 merely a "set-up episode" for Ep's 2 and 3? New Hope was thoroughly self-contained and was a far better movie than Ep. 1, due in large part to that fact IMNSHO.

The Matrix was self-contained, even though it was always planned as part 1 of a trilogy.

Maybe it's for the same reasons that Peter Jackson gets away with Fellowship . But then, that's always been known to be part 1 of 3 (and, even having said that, it was a far better movie than Episode 1).

Hrrm.

Re:Just back from the theatre...

[L0rdJedi]

ANH was self-contained because it had to be. If it didn't work, no more Star Wars. Luckily, it did. Look at the others after ANH, none of them are self-contained. Hell, I read an old review of Empire where the reviewer even said that it had no beginning and no end. Duh, it's the sequel with another part coming. And screw what Ebert said about Ep2. The man claims to have loved Star Wars since the beginning, when in fact his original review of Star Wars was that it was dumb (no, I don't know his exact wording). He only changed his review when it was a success and after Empire was released. Of course, he gave Empire a glowing review.

Re:Just back from the theatre...

[Anonymous Coward]

It was rather impressive and made Phantom look rather shallow.

No kidding, I watched an abtronic infomercial after seeing TPM on Fox the other day and it also made Phantom look shallow.

Re:Just back from the theatre...

[dswensen]

This is something that has confused me greatly: why do people let Lucas off easy for making Ep. 1 merely a "set-up episode" for Ep's 2 and 3?

Because that's what it is.

The original was only self-contained because Lucas had no idea if it would even make money. ALL the other films are dependent on one another, and making the prequels changes the nature of Star Wars as a stand-alone film. Phantom Menace (whatever you think of it) was not just setting the stage for Episode II, but for all six films. Lots of backstory to be established, and they still had to start in the middle.

If they start the prequels with the Republic already fallen and everything already dark and spooky-poo, there's no sense of transition.

Re:Just back from the theatre...

[Anonymous Coward]

Star Wars (what you call "AHN") was self-contained because that's all Lucas had in terms of an idea. It was only after it's success that Lucas developed the whole "epic saga" back story and relabled the film as "Episode 4". There was no Father-Son-Sister pretentions while it was being made.

Re:Just back from the theatre...

[mgblst]

Yes, it may make you cringe in a couple of places,

C3P0 anyone??

Matrix trailers on Entertainment Tonight

[bbh]

The Matrix trailer for Reloaded and Revolutions will be seen tonight on Entertainment Tonight. Check your local listings for it. Here is a link with more details about the May 15 ET trailer and about it being attached to another movie coming out this week.

Matrix Breaking News link

bbh

Re:Matrix trailers on Entertainment Tonight

[sgtsanity]

For those too lazy to click on the link, it'll be released on the net after 9 pm PST, which = 12pm EST. I'm too dumb to do the european time conversions.

Re:Please just get a life

[Tony Hoyle]

A geek might say it, but what geek would ever have the chance to do it?

We all know..

[saqmaster]

... that it just won't "be the same" as the originals..

I mean, you have to look at what exactly the originals were made from:

- A good guy (or two)
- A bad guy (or two)
- A chick
- A cheeky romance
- A fight in space

That was pretty much it. EP4 was pretty slow moving for the most part, but was awesome. I don't think anyway can accurately say *why* it was awesome, you'd need to back 24 years and be that kid again to really appreciate it.

Also, EP4, 5 and 6 were very much similar. Timeline, I mean. You could watch all three and it would certainly seem like they were all filmed in the same year (plot-wise). There is so much variation in cast, ages etc between EP1-3 which will make EP4-6 like an extended length movie if glued together.

Saying that though, it's not just the kid aspect that makes it all different now. The new movies (EP1 and most likely EP2) are absolutely jam packed with features and effects. I personally hated the pod racing scene in EP1, and I believe there's something similar in EP2. No thanks.

I'm still going to see it in the movies on Friday, it just has to be done.

Bash Bash Bash

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it amazing that the geeks who read /. are trying to be cool bashing Star Wars while drooling over Spider-Man. The world turned against Lucas because Phantom Menace did not live up to THEIR standards, so today we have people jumping on the bashing bandwagon so they sound like they have taste. Please. You can't make yourself any less of a fanboy by bashing Star Wars if you really liked Spider-Man.

Matrix trailer

[dachshund]

How many of us are going to go to AoTC just to catch the Matrix trailer, then walk out?

Re:Matrix trailer

[Anonymous Coward]

all the idiots who like to waste $7-$10 just to see a two minute commerical for the sequel to an overrated fung fu movie and who want to make some silly statement. the second part is the most moronic: by the time you watch the trailer and walk out in indignation, gloating about how you've stuck it to Lucas for fucking up Episode I, you've already paid to see Episode II!

Quick Review from New Zealand

[jstockdale]

Ok guys, just got out of the theater down here and I thought I would give some feedback to the community. First of all, I'd like to qualify any negative tones that come through by stating that a few of the specific scenes were tainted in my first viewing by a big fat guy next to me that kept saying "this isn't star wars" I felt like turning next to him and saying, "well fatso, what is it then, mary fucking poppens?" because undoubtedly this is star wars.

Over the years, I think Lucas may have lost touch a little bit with his fan base, but AotC is a step in the right direction. Its hard to go into any details without spoiling (which i promised myself i would not do) so forgive me if I skimp out in those areas

Lucas makes use of two main plots, regarding anakin and obi-wan (sp?) now the former plot in my opinion, endulges a little too much in the realms of honest idealism, and can get cheesy at times, but the remaining portions, along with the later plot, definitely make up for it. (Yoda. need i say more?)

Halfway through the movie I must admit I was quite skeptical, as I had already extrapolated every action to the end. However, the clues did not reveal all, to the point that at the end I was left stunned, contemplating what was going to happen next, what I missed, and how long until I could see it again.

Strong the force in this one is.

-John

disclaimer: as it is 3:21am and I only had 5 hours of sleep in the last 40, please excuse any spelling, errors, or lack of interes... oh screw it - flame away

Re:Quick Review from New Zealand

[Gavin Rogers]

Having just come back from the theatre here myself in Perth, Western Australia here's a few more thoughts... Like jstockdale, it's 03:30 in the morning so apologies for the spelling mistakes!

Ok. It was a good film. No, great film. The sound was incredible, the visuals were so spectacular and so unbelievably detailed I was scared to blink in caes I missed something...

I'm not what you would call a 'religious' fan as some people seem to be and I saw the film as it was - a masterpiece. State-of-the-art does not even come close to describing the detail of the sets and the impact of the sound. (albeit computer generated - but I dare you to spot the differences)

It was worth getting to the cinema at 7 o'clock for the midnight screening just to see the 'hard core' fans play light sabre fights in the cinema foyer until the ushers came and broke them up. Those damn ushers!

Writing this now, I can remember more about the fight scenes and the breathtaking space battles than the finer points of the plot. Especially the political stuff. Heck, I can't remember some of the movie's main character's names! That stuff just lost me but it'll probably make more sense once I see it again.

That's the one minor gripe - the finer points of the plot didn't hit me on the first viewing. I guess to really undertand the film, you have to see it twice!

Go see the film. If you're dedicated go to the midnight screenings. If you really want to have fun, dress up in a black cape and leather boots and wave a plastic light sabre around while you're waiting (just mind those cinema staff) :-)

Re:Quick Review from New Zealand

[alacqua]

...as it is 3:21am and I only had 5 hours of sleep in the last 40...

Sleep? You had sleep? Why, when we were reviewing the original Star Wars back in the day, we didn't have any sleep at all. You see, back then we used to wear an onion on our belt. That was the style. And we would [ramble filter: rambling post clipped]

Re:Quick Review from New Zealand

[jaoswald]

So, a movie full of eye candy without a comprehensible plot. What a surprise.
Sounds like a movie for people who wave around plastic light sabers, as opposed to people who go to the movies to see, oh, I don't know, a drama? As in a compelling plot with emotionally interesting characters? Where dialog serves to develop and expose character, as opposed to recite history? Where actors interact with one another, instead of with a digital scene to-be-inserted-later?

Maybe you had fun, but I like to enjoy movies without dressing in silly nerd costumes.

Re:Quick Review from New Zealand

[kelly_ormsby]

If you don't like Star Wars and what it stands for, and you can't appreciate people wanting to be fanatical about something and dressing up to show how much they love it... THEN DON'T GO AND SEE IT. Simple as that. There is no reason to completely trash a movie that it would appear you haven't even seen.

I must say I am not a Star Wars fan, but I will go and see it just to see what it is like. If "Driving Miss Daisy" is more your style then maybe you should buy yourself a video and sit at home and leave the people that want to celebrate the release of something they have been hanging out for to it.

Each to their own, don't trash a movie because you think it "sounds" crap. You really have no right to comment unless you have seen it. It almost sounds like you are using this forum as an excuse to bag Star Wars.

Silly nerd costumes? This is a nerd site..... Get Over IT.

Re:Quick Review from New Zealand

[Anonymous Coward]

``So, a movie full of eye candy without a comprehensible plot. What a surprise.''

Don't be silly - this is Star Wars not a period-piece costume drama. That doesn't mean that the plot is entirely pointless but it does mean you need to have the right attitude in order to see this kind of film. If you expect The Shawshank Redemption when going to see Flash Gordon (for example) then you'll be very much disappointed.

This movie is all about fun - period. You either enjoy it for that reason or not. If you prefer your movies to have more intellectual substance, then don't bother watching any of the Star Wars movies.

``Sounds like a movie for people who wave around plastic light sabers, as opposed to people who go to the movies to see, oh, I don't know, a drama? As in a compelling plot with emotionally interesting characters? Where dialog serves to develop and expose character, as opposed to recite history? Where actors interact with one another, instead of with a digital scene to-be-inserted-later?''

Reality check - Hollywood (and let's be honest, as ``independent'' as Lucas claims to be, he's still very much part of the Hollywood machinery these days) does not create grand sweeping epics anymore - sad but true. These days you have to cover a lot of ground in a very small period of time (and in the case of these prequels, answer a lot of questions that were raised in the minds of those who enjoyed the original trilogy).

``Maybe you had fun, but I like to enjoy movies without dressing in silly nerd costumes.''

Not everyone goes to see Star Wars dressed in an outrageous costume. Spoiler alert: When you see Yoda accepting Count Dooku's challenge to a lightsabre duel by adopting a Jackie Chan-like stance, the cliched dialogue and flat romance subplot are the furtherest things from your mind...

Well if Ebert is wrong

[sielwolf]

Ebert has a good basic measuring stick of a good movie: if you can remember any quotes from it.

Then list five memorable lines from Phantom Menace.

Then list five lines from A New Hope.

"Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope."

"That's no moon! It's a space station."

"When I left you, I was but the learner; now I am the master."

"Only the master of evil, Darth."

"He doesn't like you."
"I'm sorry."
"I don't like you either. You just watch yourself. We're wanted men. I have the death sentence on twelve systems."
"I'll be careful."
"You'll be DEAD!"

Do you think that Attack of the Clones will be as basically enjoyable? I don't think so. At least we get to see some Mandalorians. I'm going to wait. Maybe catch a matinee.

Personally I want to see the Star Wars where Jar-Jar dies on every page.

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[Hellburner]

"You were right about one thing, Master...the negotiations were short."

"There's always a bigger fish."

"A podracer, eh? I hope you didn't kill someone I know to get it..."

"Wipe them out. All of them."

"At last we shall reveal ourselves to the Jedi. At last we shall have our revenge."

Oh...and I almost forgot:

"ROGER, ROGER."

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[hplasm]

"Now there are TWO of them..."

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[SirWhoopass]

I usually agree with Ebert, but I think he's wrong here. No Star Wars movie ever had good dialogue. Just because you can remember a few quote from a twenty-some year-old movie that you've seen eighty billion times doesn't make it good.

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[Mignon]

Ebert has a good basic measuring stick of a good movie: if you can remember any quotes from it.

By that measurement, "Spinal Tap" wins hands down.

These go to eleven.

There's such a fine line between stupid and ... clever.

You can't really dust for vomit.

OK, I'll stop now before I get too far off-topic.

Moderator: Too late. (-1 Off-topic.)

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[ncc74656]

"Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant, next to the power of the Force."

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[ncc74656]

Oh...and I almost forgot:

"ROGER, ROGER."

You missed the rest of the line:

"What's our vector, Victor?"

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

"I have a bad feeling about this"

...which sort of spans all of them.

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[Xerithane]

You missed the best one!
"How can I leave this behind"

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Then list five memorable lines from Phantom Menace

1) There's always a bigger fish.
2) Always two there are. No more, no less. A master and an apprentice.
3) Clouded this boy's future is.
4) Agree with you the council does. Your apprentice, young Skywalker will be.
5) The ability to speak does not make you intelligent. (All you Jar-Jar haters will love that one)

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[Cro Magnon]

My favorite came from Empire. "They told me they fixed it! I trusted them to fix it! It's not my fault!!"

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[aztektum]

Memorable quotes from the movie itself or from audience members as they left the theatre?

"Meesa Jar Jar Binks!"

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[jopasm]

Actually - I don't know that's it fair to entirely compare the two different trilogies. The original films tell of the successful rebellion - lots of excitement, good triumphing over evil, etc.

The new trilogy is the fall of the republic and the rise of the Sith. Good has languished, evil is destroying the Republic in order to control it and anybody who stands against it will die. The next film is going to be dark - it's got to be. These are the tales of how all hope died and the world looked grim until A New Hope came along.

I probably won't be standing in line Wed. night in order to see this. I will probably see it in a theater though. I won't be looking for the fun, bright, hopeful atmosphere of the first three movies though - 'cause hope dying, remember? :)

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[capologist]

Ebert has a good basic measuring stick of a good movie: if you can remember any quotes from it.

I dunno about that. I can remember lots of quotes from Jedi:

"Boba Fett? Boba Fett?! WHERE?!!"

burp

"You should have bargained Jabba. It'll be the last mistake you ever make."

"Oh, I'm afraid the deflector shield will be quite operational when your friends arrive. Mwa-ha-ha!!!"

"Hurry up, will ya? I haven't got all day."

"Leia! Leia's my sister!"

Perhaps the measuring stick ought to be whether you remember these quotes fondly.

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[BigAl_nz]

"Form, around the survivors, a perimeter."

There's something about battle orders in reverse polish notation :)

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[shogun]

Whats our clearance Clarence?

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[aarku]

Then list five memorable lines from Phantom Menace

1. Oyi, mooie-mooie! I luv yous!

2. No...no! Mesa stay...Mesa yous humble servaunt.

3. Oh boot tis! Tis demunded byda guds. Tis a live debett, tis. Mesa culled Jaja Binkss.

4. Wesa goen underwater, okeyday?

5. Count mesa outta dis! Better dead here, den deader in da core...Yee guds, whata mesa sayin?!

Misa list mora, okeyday?

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[hymie3]

"Meesa Jar Jar Binks!"
You know, this is terrible, but that "How wude!" and "Yippee!" are the only three lines from the movie I can think of.
What's bad is that I can remember more lines from "Runaway Bride" and "The Mummy" (both released the same year as TPM).
Really.

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Always two there are...no more, no less.

Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[hippo_of_knowledge]

You forgot the classic: "I've got a bad feeling about this."

The Next Episode, Sounds Like Snoop Dogg

[puto]

Seriously, it amazes me how many people are up in arms over this flick. Now I am 32 and remember seeing star wars at age six. It wasn't the effects that got me, they were not that good anyway. It was the whole farm boy makes good story, a cute girl, the bad ass ride(the Falcon and the famous Kessel beer run story).

So it might not be the best. But I am going see it because it brings back memories of plastic lightsabers leaving welts and heated discussions on why Han Solo(reference to onanism?) was cooler than Luke Skywalker(latent homo?) and I enjoy the series(not the ewoks, animated hairballs).

Who hasn't tried the old Jedi Mind Trick on their parents?

So as much as we all bitch and whine about it we are all going to see it. And many will download it, though the theater with dolby will be the choice for most of us, no immersion at home, I dont care how big your screen is.

I am bringing a date in case it gets boring... But she was born after star wars was released. So, I am gonna have to tone down the geekiness and supress my knowledge of the Jedi. And if I can't use the force on her there is always the old hole in the popcorn tub and unzipped pants trick"This isn't the jolly time kernels your looking for"

Lighten up people. I think we all need to get out more often.

Re:The Next Episode, Sounds Like Snoop Dogg

[Anonymous Coward]

"Now I am 32 and remember seeing star wars at age six."

Uhm, I'm 28 and saw Star Wars when I was five... something don't grok here.

Didn't it come out in '79?

Re:The Next Episode, Sounds Like Snoop Dogg

[Anonymous Coward]

No, but it did run in the theaters for several years (no video market at the time!), and then was rereleased before Empire.

Re:The Next Episode, Sounds Like Snoop Dogg

[Anonymous Coward]

No, '77. Hence the 20th anniversary re-release in '97

Building your own Falcon

[kob43]

Kinda reminds me of something I read before.

Man, I love the Onion.

Re:Building your own Falcon

[Darth Troll]

Interesting note:

In the RealMedia "documentary" on the building of the Falcon the first guy says,

"to stand back, look at it , and think, 'yeah, I did that...I helped build a full-size mock-up of the vulcan'"

(Emphasis mine) The guy doesn't even know what he's building.

Re:Building your own Falcon

[rhiorg]

"This pile of wood and nails will never get us past that blockade."
-------------
It's not even "life-size". Not even close.

If ya want an idea of how big a LIFE SIZE Falcon would be, check out this page ( http://www.synicon.com.au/sw/mf/elstree.htm ) that shows the construction of the actual life-size set at Elstree studios during the filming of ESB. Some other great MF info at that site as well.

34 good reviews, 6 mediocre, 12 bad

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems that only the BAD reviews are ever pointed out. For the record:

http://www.mrqe.com/lookup?^Star+Wars%3a+Episode +I I+-+Attack+of+the+Clones+(2002)

Digital Matrix trailer?

[Snags]

I wonder if the Matrix trailer will be straight-from-digital. On the website, they claim that the internet version is compressed directly from the 20 GB master digital copy, so my guess is that those fortunate enough to see Clones in digital will get the additional joy of seeing the Matrix trailer that way. Here's to living not too far from NYC!

I've seen part of it

[alen]

A friend gave me a bootleg of the first hour or so and it looks pretty good. I saw the first 15 minutes or so. The rest I'm going to watch at home. I think the whole bootleg thing is a George Lucas conspiracy. Ironically you can easily find the first part of AOTC on the file sharing networks, but the second part is no where to be found. Maybe it's a way to wet people's appetites?

Don't forget your lightsaber

[Jim Hall]

No Jedi-geek outfit would be complete without a cool lightsaber from Parks Sabers. I have the Defiance lightsaber (from before they came with blades and electronics). A must-have for any fan geek!

oh no!

[/dev/trash]

You have tickets to the first showing.But the MPAA is evil. Oh and you'll be getting in line? Why? Don't you have a ticket?

Oh well I hope it doesn't suck.

MF life size and ebbert's grudge

[Anonymous Coward]

It would have been alot cool if it was done in metal parts than wood. Ebbert has alwayys hated the star wars franchise. Partly because he considers it to be the "death" of the modern movie.

Jisms are best served when you least expected it - over heard at #E IRC channel

Quick Review from New Zealand -jstockdale addendum

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh one other thing to add,

I had no expectations for this movie when I saw it. That I think may have improved how I percieved it. My advice is to go into it the same way. The opposite happened with PM and look what happened.

Posted Anon as to not Karma Whore (tm)

-John

The Force

[Kraegar]

Can't forget The Force or Troops in an article like this. Also, the Theater page has plenty of great links.

Re:Roger Ebert and Digital Media

[boloni]

Yes, he does have a problem with digital media, and does from the pure point of view of visual experience. And with the current digital standards, he is right. He also has a grievence that the movie industry is not using the 70mm film any more.

Let's make a still image of a DVD film: we get a nice, small 720 x 480 image.

What I scan from a regular 35mm film (with an amateur quality film scanner) is something like 4000 x 2500. I assume that from 70mm film, the equivalent resulution would be 8000 x 5000.

That means that the desert scenes of Lawrence of Arabia have 100 times more detail than the ones from the Attack of the Clones 2 DVD. And this is what Roger Ebert is missing, and he is right. It is not about problems with digital, it is about settling for less.

Lotzi

PS: I don't know the resolution of digital cinema equipment, it is probably higher than DVD. Still.

Problems with viewing on a Digital Projector...

[Kreylix]

My wife and I watched Monsters, Inc. at a digital projector theater (AMC 1000 in SF).

Positives: Incredibly sharp, bright picture (like Ebert says)

Negatives: Action scenes blur when things move fast. This really sucks (hey, Spiderman seemed to, too!). Also, we both had headaches afterwards.

Basically, we have technology here that's extremely expensive that's NOT Good Enough yet being pushed by the greatest toy seller ever, George Lucas. Where in the galaxy can we hide?

Wrong: Should be: "Attack of the Quickies!" (NT)

[Mr. Sketch]

lameness is what this text really is because I can not just repeat 'lameness' because of the lame slashdot lameness filter when all I really want to say is in the subject, but no, the slash code never thinks about the fact that a reader could be so concise that everything they need to say is in the subject, oh well, such is slashdot.

Re:FLIP

[Anonymous Coward]

hooray for leet joe!

Quickies from a galaxy far away?

[IHavePowers]

Someones been watching one to many tentacle rape animes.

Critics

[Jobe_br]

Haven't seen it myself, but here's a sampling of what critics are saying:

"Too much of the film is given over to a romance between Padme and Anakin in which they're incapable of uttering anything other than the most basic and weary romantic cliches, while regarding each other as if love was something to be endured rather than cherished. There is not a romantic word they exchange that has not long since been reduced to cliche."

"Surprisingly flat-footed dialogue scenes that feature wooden acting, dreary art direction and old-fashioned optical wipes are either intended as an homage to the sci-fi of the '50s or reflect the director's impatience with exposition."

"And for another, while "Attack of the Clones" is many things -- a two-hour-and-12-minute action-figure commercial, a demo reel heralding the latest advances in digital filmmaking, a chance for gifted actors to be handsomely paid for delivering the worst line readings of their careers -- it is not really much of a movie at all, if by movie you mean a work of visual storytelling about the dramatic actions of a group of interesting characters."

"Only a teenage boy could find this kind of stuff continually diverting, and only a teenage boy would not notice flimsy emotions and underdeveloped acting. It seems George Lucas, like Peter Pan, has never really grown up."

Too bad, really ... Lucas used to be a good storyteller, but anymore, he doesn't appear to be. The UK papers heralded this as being better than Episode I, but it seems that Lucas has yet to meet, much less exceed, the movie-making seen in the first three released episodes.

Already seen it, it sucks.. unfortunatly.

[Anonymous Coward]

I downloaded Attack of the Clones off Kazaa last
week and was pretty lame. The first quarter is
very painful the middle is okay and the end they
hurridly jam all the important things into the
last 5min.

In general the acting is pretty sheite but one
thing that _really_ annoys me is the way they
intersperse ye olde speak with COOL DUDE! speak in the dialog.. it is even worse than jarjar's annoying manerisms.

Whenever they discus the politics and democracy in the dumbed down way that they do it made me cringe..

The worst is definitly the dialog.. then you've got acting which is pretty sheite too.. the special effects are okay of course but they just don't make up for the lack of a good story and acting.

12:01 tickets

[Anonymous Coward]

Taco - which theater you gonna be at? Goodrich or Quality?

For all your braggin about the tickets - it really wasnt that tough to get 12:01 tickets in Ann Arbor.

Re:Blatent 'Merking troll

[Anonymous Coward]

Only Americans (and Australians!!) could call a game where you throw and catch a ball with your hands "FOOT"ball and yet cant comprehend why the rest of the world calls a sport which you kick a ball with your foot, Football!! ;-)

Mind you, you do call your premier baseball competition the "World Series" even though the rest of the world isn't invited :-) So I guess we shouldnt be too surprised.

Rex Reed.

[/dev/trash]

This sucks

Attack of the Clones is terrible

[Anonymous Coward]

I read the novelization by R. A. Salvatore. The entire book seemed like an episode of "Convenient Plot Playhouse". The story is BAD, with all-too-convenient plot devices, stupid twists, and no intruige. The dialog is even worse. This movie is pure eye candy.

I think Armageddon had a more intriguing plot than Attack of the Clones.

Bring me the head of Geo. Lucas!

great.....

[dmnic]

mod me down or whatever, but what exactly does Star Wars have to do with "news for nerds. stuff that matters"???
I cant even bring myself to sit all the way through any of the previous 4 Star Wars movies, so why should I care about this one when people are allready saying how its only marginally better than episode1?
the best Star Wars related anything Ive ever seen is the "Pulp Phantom" flash movie/cartoon....and that was only passable.

Why not post the (more numerous) positive reviews?

[Anonymous Coward]

Good question huh?

I await your answer.

Star Wars (New Hope) converted to ASCII(?!?)

[j-turkey]

Found this great host a while ago:

telnet to towel.blinkenlights.nl

It streams the original Star Wars (Episode IV, New Hope, blah blah) over ASCII. Its pretty cool -- have a look.

-Turkey

Re:Star Wars (New Hope) converted to ASCII(?!?)

[Anonymous Crouton]

Very cool, though it certainly rates as whoever created that had way way too much time on their hands and nothing to do with it. :) All things being equal though, I've let it run in a window for the last several minutes and will probably watch it straight through..
Ugh..
Slave to Star Wars.. Can't resist..

Re:Star Wars (New Hope) converted to ASCII(?!?)

[j-turkey]

I especially dig the @'s for Leia's hair (buns)!

-Turkey

Washington Post Pans It

[wiredog]

A few choice quotes from the review.

It's too long, it's too dull, it's too lame.

But the mythic source he seems to have based this episode on is . . . "The McLaughlin Group"

It's like reading the latest dispatch on the Mongolian parliament, as reported by Elizabeth Drew in a really cranky mood.

the master Obi-Wan (Ewan McGregor) and his young mentee, Anakin Skywalker (played by 'N Sync star Justin Timberlake - no, no, played by Hayden Christensen, who looks like an 'N Sync kid but doesn't have as much talent).

I'll tell you one thing: no star system central, as in, say, MGM, would have built a movie around the dim Americans who haunt this one. In fact, the movie is kind of a laboratory on American vs. British technique. Score: Brits 10, Yanks 0.

even an actual great actor, Samuel L. Jackson, seems ridiculous. He never looks comfortable as the Jedi Mace Windu, in robes and boots, and there's nothing he can do at all with a line like "The Genosians aren't warriors. One Jedi has to be worth a hundred Genosians!"

The 'N Sync kid is even worse. He seems to have wandered in from a Pepsi commercial. No, that would have been Justin Timberlake. Who knows where this dreary boy has been?

Digital Theatres

[dissonant7]

Okay, so I've heard over and over again how "this should really be seen projected digitally" and "there are only [20|30] theatres in the country equipped to show it this way"... Anyone have a list of these theatres? I tried googling it, but there just aren't very good search terms to choose from, "digital projectors" or "digital theatres" yield lots of projection equipment manufacturers, but little else...

Re:Digital Theatres

[BacOs]

http://www.starwars.com/episode-ii/digitalproj_lis t.html

Who cares about the review?

[Maul]

It is pretty obvious this guy hates the entire Star Wars franchise from the start. With Star Wars, you pretty much either like it or hate it.

None of the reviewers seem to understand that Star Wars is MADE for the "12 year old" audience.
They are all full of cutout characters, lame dialogue, cheezy cliches, etc. 20 years from now, all the kids will remember how great Episodes 1, 2 and 3 were, and will still think they are great whenever they watch them again. Just like everyone
remembers how great Episodes 4, 5 and 6 were nowadays, and still think that whenever they watch them.

I'm sure I'll enjoy AOTC because I'm not expecting anything life-altering, or anything that will suddenly lead to enlightenment. I'm expecting a cheezy space fantasy with some cool lightsaber fights, and a far-fetched plot. In short, I'm expecting just about everything this reviewer hates about the movie. That is what Star Wars always has been.

My problem with this review is that I find it strange that he says that he couldn't remember a thing about the movie 10 minutes after he leaves the theater (because it was so incoherant, etc.), yet he us able to tell with great detail things about the movie in a coherant fasion.

Re:Who cares about the review?

[Telastyn]

The only problem of course, was that even the orignal star wars had memorable lines and was in a few ways funny because it was absurdly bad (trash compactor scene anyone? 3cpo? ewoks?).

Ebert at least was dismayed because the dialoge in 2 sounds like laywers chanting 3rd grade english books. The first movies (and even phantom menace to a degree) were at least lawyers reading trashy sci-fi novels.

btw: ever notice how Harrison Ford is the only actor that was ever good in a lucas film?

Re:Who cares about the review?

[CaffeineAddict2001]

I thought Walter Matthau's role as chewbacca was excellent.

Re:Who cares about the review?

[Galvatron]

It is pretty obvious this guy hates the entire Star Wars franchise from the start.

I would advise you to go back and look at the archives of his reviews. Sadly, the archives don't go back far enough to see his original reviews for the original trilogy. However, when they were re-released in '97, he gave each one four stars. Even The Phantom Menace got 3 and a half stars. So I think it's pretty obvious that this guy loves the Star Wars franchise, but this one really let him down.

Ann Arbor Theaters...

[MikesOnFire]

Hey CmdrTaco. A bunch of us are looking for a theater in AA. Are any of them showing it digital?

Re:Ann Arbor Theaters...

[Anonymous Coward]

Try the Star Theater in Southfield.
Its about 45 minute drive from AA, take 14east to 275 north to 696 east to telegraph north to 12 mile west (its a michigan left) the theater is a few blocks west of telegraph on the left.
There are only limited shows that are being shown in Digital. Ticket prices there are $8:50

http://startheatres.moviefone.com/services/theat er special.adp?theaterid=9544

Looks like the digital shows are being sold out by the hour.

From the links

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Like any young man, he is torn between the duties of being a Jedi and pursing the woman he loves.

Did I miss something? I could have sworn no 19 yr old has had to choose between being a Jedi and boinking Nat Portman. :-P Hell, I don't think anyone has ever had that choice.

Re:From the links

[Tackhead]

> > Like any young man, he is torn between the duties of being a Jedi and pursing the woman he loves.
>
>Did I miss something? I could have sworn no 19 yr old has had to choose between being a Jedi and boinking Nat Portman. :-P Hell, I don't think anyone has ever had that choice.

Probably not. So we really don't know what the right choice would be in Anakin's situation.

We can, however, say with some certainty that anyone who's ever had to choose between posting on Slashdot and boinking Natalie Portman, either (a) chose the hot grits, or (b) chose poorly.

The best part...

[Lac]

The best part... of Ebert's review.

Too much of the rest of the film is given over to a romance between Padme and Anakin in which they're incapable of uttering anything other than the most basic and weary romantic cliches, while regarding each other as if love was something to be endured rather than cherished. There is not a romantic word they exchange that has not long since been reduced to cliche.

No, wait: Anakin tells Padme at one point: "I don't like the sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating--not like you. You're soft and smooth." I hadn't heard that before.

You can harp all day about how this movie can't possibly live up to expectations... But what about those of us who just want to expect a decent film with palatable dialogue?

Re:The best part...

[shogun]

There is not a romantic word they exchange that has not long since been reduced to cliche.

Comeon, this is a long time age in a galaxy far far away, so I think its not cliche there yet..

Links to mirrors

[cmdr_beeftaco]

Seems all the sites listed are slashdotted. Here is a link to at least one mirror

Speaking of Comics...

[Consul]

There's an interesting storyline going on over at a comic called Misty the Mouse. Most of this comic is an anthropomorphic madcap romp, but the latest storyline is a (so-far) well done fan comic of Star Wars called "Imperial Guardrails".

Enjoy. :o)

Quoth Cmdr Taco

[Rogerborg]

• I have tickets for a 12:01 showing in Ann Arbor and I'll be getting in line in just a few short hours...

...with the other sheep.

What, will it become a worse film if you wait a week? Everybody that goes to see this film on the opening day is sending this message, clear and load: "We don't give a damn how good this is, because we decided that we had to see it years ago. You've had our money in the bank since 1977. You could show 2 hours of Jar Jar breakdancing, and we'd queue up to see it and then temporise about ways in which it could have sucked more. Don't bother yourself actually making more than a trailer's worth of decent footage, and the rest of you Hollywood studios, take note. We're sheep. Baa. Baaaaaaaa."

But don't mind me. You go and see it, and demonstrate that it doesn't matter if you're flogging a dead horse, so long as it's a horse that people loved a lot when it was alive. Demonstrate that Hollywood (like the RIAA) is right to expect and demand a guaranteed revenue stream, regardless of whether they're making anything worth while. Demonstrate that if you lower our expectations enough, cognitive dissonance will kick in and a feeling that "Hey, that movie didn't suck as much as I feared!" will somehow morph into "Hey, that movie was OK! I guess I'll decide here and now to see the next one, no matter how drab awful it appears."

Bah, enough. You're a sheep, Taco. Enjoy being fleeced.

Re:Quoth Cmdr Taco

[seaan]

First, I've found that a good audience can make up for a less than stellar film (I'm remembering the opening night of Stargate). That is why I usually try to catch science fiction films on opening nights, it is simply more fun.

Second, I agree there is a conflict between making the MPAA/RIAA aware of our displeasure, and going to see something like Star Wars. The truth is that I like books, music, and movies. If I did not value them so much, I would not care very much about how the MPAA/RIAA/etc. are busy screwing up the system!

That is the main reason I don't have a total ban on buying CDs and DVDs. I'll grant that it gives a mixed message, but then life is not perfect. I do know, for example, that some of the music sales drop is attributable to me (and presumably other people who feel the same way). I've gone from more than 1 CD/week purchases to less than 1 a month. I also try to buy directly from the artist when possible. Not really an effective action in the overall scheme of things. All it really accomplishes is to give the RIAA an excuse to attribute the lost sales to so-called "sharing piracy".

Re:Quoth Cmdr Taco

[Tryfen]

I went to a 0005 GMT showing for two reasons.

1) I don't like spoilers. I had to keep away from all my usual haunts for episode 1, I'm still doing it for Buffy and Spiderman. I like to see the film with no idea of what will happen / who will die et.

2) My girlfriend said she'd dress in a gold bikini ;-). Nah. It was the fact that I've never seen a Star Wars movie for the first time on a big screen. 4 - 6 were on tv, 1 was pirated.

I don't think I'm a sheep. I didn't buy the souvenier book they were handing out, nor purchase the CD, nor the toys. I just wanted to stay up late and see a fun movie without knowing the details beforehand.

Re:Roger Ebert and Digital Media

[Zathrus]

Your comparison is valid only if you happen to have a 70mm film projector available to view a fresh print of Lawrence of Arabia on. If you don't, then the comparison is fairly meaningless - DVD is pretty much the best home viewing video format available to date (some may argue LD is better, but frankly that depends entirely on the bitrate of the DVD).

As for digital cinema, I belive the theater-grade DLP systems are 2048x1536. No, this may not be as much resolution as you can pull out of a 35mm slide, but the flip side is that the chroma values can be insured to be perfect (virtually never true with film), you'll get a better black level then you get with traditional film projection, and the image won't degrade with repeated showings. That 35mm film may be wonderfully crisp and clear the first showing. It won't be by the 500th showing.

Ebert is spewing smoke. He admits that a digital projection of AotC is better than the film, but attempts to justify it by saying that it's because the film was shot digitally. Virtually any movie with special effects goes through a digital pass (or at least elements of the film do) nowadays. If it really was a "pure digital" issue then he should do a great deal more complaining about the fuzziness of any SFX shots in traditional filming. He doesn't. And while it's a stretch to say "so he's wrong", I really do suspect that digital cinema will _vastly_ improve the quality of the movie experience, contrary to what celluloid buffs claim.

Quickies? Galaxy Far, Far, Away?

[ratguy]

Heck, I'd settle for a Quickie somewhere in THIS galaxy.

Re:Quickies? Galaxy Far, Far, Away?

[Anonymous Coward]

fastseduction.com

I'll take that with a grain of salt.

[dswensen]

Looks to me like one of those reviews more enchanted with making hip in-jokes and pop culture references than actually saying anything substantive about the film. Kind of ironic, a reviewer panning the film for being too shallow while writing an utterly shallow review.

Re:I'll take that with a grain of salt.

[frank_adrian314159]

Kind of ironic, a reviewer panning the film for being too shallow while writing an utterly shallow review.

When there's no "there" there, you have to make your own entertainment. You cannot delve into a once-river that is now only a muddy trickle without bringing up some dirt. Given what he had to work with, the reviewer did a masterful job...

Actually, he does.

[kevcol]

I saw it last Saturday at a special showing here in the Bay Area. I pretty much agreed with Ebert. The dialog between Portman and Christensen was just terrible. In fact most of the dialog seemed so forced and fake-formal. The action was ok but for me it served to distract the bad acting of the above 2. And there was far too many dumb looking CG characters.

My opinion of course, but my thumb is down on this. SW fanatics may disagree.

LEGOs galore

[n8willis]

Well, that's interesting and all, but when I saw the link copy I must admit I was expecting something more like this: http://www5b.biglobe.ne.jp/~mbsf/sworde.htm

Though I would still dearly love to see a stop-motion recreation rather than stills. You gotta love that smiling Darth Maul figure....

Mini-review (no spoilers) of AotC

[hype7]

Just got out from seeing AotC. Went to the midnight session in Canberra, Australia, so I got to see it before most of you guys from the US.

Impressions:
1. The plot is starting to come together for the original three. Whereas Phantom Menace seemed totally unrelated, the plot is starting to intertwine in the arc we all know and love. Towards the end, you're really left wondering about Dooku. I'm not sure he's as bad as they crank him up to be.
2. Ewan MacGregor puts in a good performance, Natalie Portman was excellent too. Hayden Christensen was so close to doing the perfect job; the teen cheesy play Padme's heartstrings just doesn't quite work.
3. Yoda kicks ass(TM)
4. The Gladiator -> big fight scene is breathtaking. It had a similar effect on me that Black Hawk Down did. Gut wrenching. You forget you're in a movie, you look up and find you're clinging on to your seat.
5. But (there's always a but), despite loving it, there's just something missing. Maybe it's because I've always seen the original three together, but it kind of left me with that Lord of the Rings pissed-off-because-you-can't-leave-it-there type feelings.

You'll like it. It's worth seeing.

-- james

1)

[Joe Mucchiello]

"There's always a bigger fish."

Re:1)

[Pfhreakaz0id]

that's the only funny line in the EPI. My wife and I both commented after leaving that it lacked the humor.

SFBG: It Doesn't Suck

[sulli]

Here is a positive review from the SF Bay Guardian.

Sounds Like Snoop Dogg

[jck9626]

hahaha, "And if I can't use the force on her there is always the old hole in the popcorn tub and unzipped pants trick"This isn't the jolly time kernels your looking for" ... lodi dodi ... thats some funny stuff:)

clango VS jango!

[rstevens]

you should have seen this one coming a mile away

Lucas speaks in London on Phantom Menace

[maccallr]

I just saw this:
The Guardian newspaper has a short piece about Lucas defending Phantom Menace [also annoying popup].

Quick plug:
Why not compare all the Star Wars episodes in one swell foop! (You can also try terms like: lame, merchandise, thrilling, classic etc...)

Re:Lucas speaks in London on Phantom Menace

[Peyna]

LONE STARR: But, Yogurt, what is this place? What is that you do here?

YOGURT: Merchandising.

BARF: Merchandising? What's that?

YOGURT: Merchandising. Come. I'll show. Open up this door. Ha, ha, ha, come. Walk this way. Take a look. We put the pictures name on everything. Merchandising. Merchandising. Where the real money from the movie is made. Spaceballs - the T-shirt, Spaceballs - the Coloring Book, Spaceballs - the Lunch box, Spaceballs - the Breakfast Cereal, Spaceballs - the Flame Thrower.

DINKS: Ooooooo.

YOGURT: The kids love this one. Last, but not least, Spaceballs - the Doll. Me.

Quickys : Cringes from Australia : Minimal Spoiler

[EvilBastard]

List of Cringes :

Boba Fett : lets just say that kid made Jar Jar look good.

The Fireplace Scene : Urgh. I mean, just. Urgh. When the fireplace appeared the audience started laughing.

The Assembly line sequence : Caused massive Galaxy Quest Flashbacks. "This makes no sense!"

R2-D2 : He can fly ? Since when ?

Actors (Australia Only) : Jack Thompson shouldn't be in a Star Wars film. Nor should anyone from Playschool

C3-PO in final battle : C3PO should not be doing that and making jokes. Did *ANYONE* see anything wrong with this ?

Never, Ever get Christopher Lee to say "The Dark Lord". That film is at the end of the year, not this one. You might as well have Yoda shoot webbing out of his arms.. Oh.. yeah...

Trailers : In Australia we didn't get the Matrix 2 Trailer. We got : Stuart Little 2, Snow Dogs and The Crocodile Hunter Movie. I'm not f'n kiding. The goddam Crocodile Hunter. Can't we shoot him or something ? He's sending the wrong impression of our country, when he's actually a guy who got fired off a third-rate childrens wildlife show back in '91

Oh, and they screwed up Parsec again. Well done. If two star systems one parsec apart, they are closer then Alpha Centauri is to Earth. You have to do an awful lot of fanwanking to explain why Tatooine is in range while the Arena planet isn't.

Re:Some reviews - 4 episodes left

[marcop]

And there are 4 more new movies in the series. If reviews like these continue I wonder if they will all get made.

Just got home from the Cinema.

[AntipodesTroll]

Just finished seeing it here in Australia. I liked it. Better than Episode 1, but dosent dethrone Empire, to be sure. If you liked the good bits of Ep1, go see you and you should quite like it. If all you could do is MST the entire film of Ep1, dont go see it, and spare the rest of us about how much you think it sucks. AT..

Attack of the Clones Script and other Downloads

[totallygeek]

Here is the script and the downloads are here (click on downloads).

Just saw it

[BenJamin.G]

Okay, just got back from seeing the film in melbourne (australia) I have to say I was waiting to be disapointed, avoiding all of the press on the film for the last two years, including stuff on slashdot.

I have to say, yes much better than tpm.

If your having doubts, don't go see it, it is great.

Even Jar Jars role is interesting.

Benjamin

NPR Review and Lucas Interview

[Red Rocket]

NPR has posted a RealAudio interview with George Lucas and a review by LA Times critic Kenneth Turan (Kenneth, what is the frequency?)
Bottom line . . . Spider-Man is a good movie.

Another quick one

[thanjee]

Well, I just got back from seeing Episode 2, AoTC.

I thoroughly enjoyed it, heaps better than episode 1.....now I just have to wait 3 more years for Episode 3!

Awesome movie :)

Re:Quickys : Cringes from Australia : Minimal Spoi

[AntipodesTroll]

Yeah, there was some quite cringeworthy bits in it. (But hey, isnt that what SF cinema is about? :)

The fireplace scene was ugh! But then, the acting of Anakin was stilted and forced IMO. That said, I think a better actor would have made the whole movie that much better, but what we got is okay if it dosent get on your nerves particularly.

As for Parsecs, thats why Star Trek has its own bogolingo to describe things. I'd prefer the use of "parsec" in a flawed manner, than saying "Tatooine seems to be within the 10 megapascalcomfrobulator range my powerconduitquadlithiummidichlorean com badge can transethermit." :)

As for accuracy, well, the whole series suffers from plot holes. I had a debate about the old line from Ep4 from Obi Wan "I thought I could teach your father as well as Yoda taught me. I was wrong." Now, a friend argued with me that maybe Yoda took over Obi Wan's training and completed it, between 1 and 2. But no, I think Obi became a Jedi at the end of 1 when he took Anankin as his apprentice. Therefore Yoda was never involved, and there is an inconsistency.

Now everyone can start on all the inconsistencies Ep2 bring in. But I still mostly enjoyed it.

AT..

No McDonald's tie-in

[Animats]

McDonalds is pushing BattleBots instead.

Somewhere, there is a mountain of Jar-Jar Binks plastic toys awaiting recycling into Rubbermaid trashcans.

Re:No McDonald's tie-in

[bofkentucky]

That would be the pepsi/frito-lay/tricon unholy trinity there, with KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut, McDonalds/Disney had something better to do that summer

Life size millennium falcon.

[CaffeineAddict2001]

I think luke skywalker put it best:
What a peice of junk. =)

Re:Quickys : Cringes from Australia : Minimal Spoi

[thanjee]

I thought it was cool that R2D2 could fly :)

The C3P0 thing in battle was definately wrong. I won't go into detail now, too much spoilage is at stake.

I got slightly better previews in my cinema in Brisbane Australia: MIB2 and Austin Powers 3 and something else....forgot what - lol - it is 3:30am, time to sleep :)

Want spoilers?

[Anonymous Coward]

- Padme has become senator
- Boba Fett's dad wants to kill Padme
- The clone army (to become the storm troopers) are modeled on Boba's dad DNA
- Anakin's mum will die seconds after he arrives to save her (pfff, right!). He becomes very angry and kills women and children
- Boba's dad is killed by Samuel L.
- Anakin loses an arm (I'll let you discover which one)
- Yoda does some Matrix moves, everybody laughed in the theater
- For those who don't have a clue, Palpatine *is* the emperor-to-be
- His mate Christopher Lee does as if he was a threat to the Republic, so that Palpatine can build a big clone army

Anything I forgot?

Re:Roger Ebert and Digital Media

[SirWhoopass]

Your comparison is valid only if you happen to have a 70mm film projector available to view a fresh print of Lawrence of Arabia on.

Exactly. A pristine 70mm print will blow away digital projection. It will blow away 35mm projection too. Unfortunately, 99% of us never get to see a movie that way. The actual, day-to-day quality of digital projection is better than the actual, day-to-day quality of 35mm projection. Since theaters and studios are not going to upgrade to 70mm for all movies, digital is good.

Let us not forget...

[count_dooku]

Historically, Star Wars movies have not been critically acclaimed by critics. For example, Here's a line aboout the Empire Strikes Back from the New York Times:

Confession: When I went to see "The Empire Strikes Back" I found myself glancing at my watch almost as often as I did when I was sitting through a truly terrible movie called "The Island." The Empire Strikes Back" is not a truly terrible movie. It's a nice movie. It's not, by any means, as nice as "Star Wars." It's not as fresh and funny and surprising and witty, but it is nice and inoffensive and, in a way that no one associated with it need be ashamed of, it's also silly. Attending to it is a lot like reading the middle of a comic book. It is amusing in fitful patches but you're likely to find more beauty, suspense, discipline, craft and art when watching a New York harbor pilot bring the Queen Elizabeth 2 into her Hudson River berth, which is what "The Empire Strikes Back" most reminds me of. It's a big, expensive, time-consuming, essentially mechanical operation.

Yet, mostly everybody agreess that ESB is the best Star Wars film. And most critics hated the original Star Wars. Of the reviews I've read of the original trilogy, only Roger Ebert seemed to really get it.

Just keep this in mind when reading reviews of the latest Star Wars.

--

More silliness

[je4d]

http://www.asciimation.co.nz/ - star wars in ascii

Taking tacos tickets

[Anonymous Coward]

Dudes/dudettes,

I live near Ann Arbor and have a high degree of confidence that I know the exact theater that Commander Taco is going to be attending the 12:01 showing of Star Wars.

I just had a discussion with a close friend, that owes me a favor, and also happens to be a local cop in Ann Arbor. If we knew what Commander Taco looked like, my bud said that he and his partner would stop in there in uniform and pull him outta line, cuff him, and confiscate his tickets for his lewd public display of bragging. I will shoot video of the entire event and encode it for public comsumption if someone will post a link to Commander Taco's picture.

You have 9 hours to post a link to his picture.

ps. Those guys spent $2000 on lumber to make a Falcon ??? Shoulda used PVC so it could be torn down and reassembled. *walks away shaking head*

Re:Taking tacos tickets

[Anonymous Coward]

Google Images. Go get 'em! :)

Re:Taking tacos tickets

[Anonymous Coward]

which theater is he gonna be at? goodrich or quality?

Re:Quickys : Cringes from Australia : Minimal Spoi

[Anonymous Coward]

isn't there a scene where yoda is teaching young (kids) jedi. i thought the idea was the yoda teaches all the young jedi to a certain age at which point they become the padawan of another jedi. anakin started his training late, and all the early stuff was taught to him by obi-wan, not yoda.

Re:Please just get a life

[Anonymous Coward]

how the heck is this post "redundant"? "troll", yes. just plain stupid, yes. but "redundant"? do the shit-for-brains moderators even know what redundant means?

Atom films

[Fjord]

Since it doesn't seem to be posted yet, Atom Films recently picked the winners and runners up in their Star Wars short films contest. Some good works.

Lego Movie

[phriedom]

When I choose my download option for "The Han Solo Affair" it serves me up a very nice "Holy Grail" sendup. A shot for shot redo of the "Camelot" song with lego men. It is not at all what I was looking for, but OTOH, it is probably more enjoyable. Has this happened to anyone else?

Re:Lego Movie

[__aasfhc1949]

Yeah, it happened to me as well.

Good old text-mode fun

[krogoth]

Telnet to towel.blinkenlights.nl (no slashdotting please :) for star wars in all it's ASCII-art glory (and animated, no less!).

2)

[Joe Mucchiello]

"Yippie"

(ducks for cover)

Re:Blatent 'Merking troll

[phriedom]

Hey, it isn't just the US in MLB; we invite the Canadians too.

Pamphlet from Pueblo, CO

[Anonymous Coward]

I like you Stuart, you're not like the other people here in the trailer park.

It will be ok, the source is weak in Star Wars.

[Anonymous Coward]

Face it, you will never again have a star wars
experience like the first one, simply was because
it was so startling to see someone finally get
a movie out that had a real science fiction feel
due in large part to special effects taking a quantumn leap and Lucas borrowing heavily from
what I immediately recognized as the true source:
Tolkien..

In the beginning was The Lord of The Rings.
(the book)
After came everything else.
We may still be on The Fellowship of the Ring,
but the Lord of the Rings Movie by highlighting the unmatched magic of
Tolkien, it truly is the Return of The King.

the source is Tolkien and the source is not
strong in Lucas and especially in his latest
works . It is weak.

Remember One Ring to Rule them..._ALL_

TPM Quotables

[Sabbac]

Here we go:

5) You assume to much.
4) What, you think you're some kind of Jedi, eh?
3) You speak of the proficy of the one who will bring balance to the Force? And you think it's this boy?
2) Wipe them out. All of them.
1) Fear leads to anger; anger leads to hate; hate leads to suuuufffffeeeeerrrrriiinnnggg.

Re:TPM Quotables

[capologist]

Fear leads to anger; anger leads to hate; hate leads to suuuufffffeeeeerrrrriiinnnggg.

And then, without a hint of irony: "Much danger I fear in his training."

What an annoying little troll.

Get me the DMCA army!

[Darth_brooks]

Darth Brooks, Minstrel
As some Jedi are drawn to the dark side of the Force, some Sith Lords have been pulled from the dark side to an even more malevolent, insidious life: country music. Darth Brooks is known for being able to sway large crowds with his Jedi mind-music and for associating with bounty hunters, smugglers and other people in low places.

Those Dirty Bastards! I'm suing!

Just back from a 12.01, my greatest worry...

[laeraun2]

How on earth (or otherwise) is Lucas going to follow that one?

I feel like he has just raised the bar to another level

Wow :)

Parsecs again!

[skwang]

Oh, and they screwed up Parsec again. Well done. If two star systems one parsec apart, they are closer then Alpha Centauri is to Earth. You have to do an awful lot of fanwanking to explain why Tatooine is in range while the Arena planet isn't.

For those of you who are wondering, a parsec is a unit of distance, equal to about 3.086 x 10^18 meters. The distance to Alpha Centauri is about 1.2 parsecs from earth. If you systems are less than one parsec apart in distance, then they are about 3 light years apart.

I havn't seen the film, but I really hope that Lucas did not use parsecs as a unit of time. I swear I will walk out of the theater if he does. He has had 25 years to not make the same mistake twice. From your post it seems that he used it to mean distance.

One of the great revelations about special relativity is that time and distance are really the same thing, if we use the speed of light as a metric. Since c=2.99 x 10^8 m/s is constant, we can use both meters and seconds to describe the other. For example, if I say, "The store is 1000 meters away," I can also say "The store is 3.34 x 10^-6 seconds" away. The amount of distance it takes light to travel in 3.34 x 10^-6 seconds is about 1000 meters. In the opposite direction the context is a little more screwy, so that I can say, "I will be there is 1200 seconds" can also be translated as "I will be there in 3.6 x 10^11 meters" since it takes light 1200 s to travel that distance.

So Han Solo, having the fastest ship in the galaxy can make the Kessel run in 40 parsecs. 1 parsec = 3.086 x 10^18 meters and the speed of light is 2.99 x 10^8 m/s so he was saying, "... made the Kessel run 4.11 x 10^9 seconds" or 130.5 years. Gee Han, if you have the fastest ship in the galaxy I would hate to make the Kessel run in one of those bulk freighters.

Re:Parsecs again!

[Telemakhos]

IANAA (I am not an astronomer.)

That having been said, isn't a parsec defined as the distance from the earth to a hypothetical star such that the hypothetical star would have a parallax of one arcsecond? The number 30.857x10^12 km corresponds to that distance if measuring parallax from earth. Parallax in turn depends in part on the length of the axis of the earth's orbit, or rather the distance of the earth from the center of its orbit... but what if, in "a galaxy far, far away" the standard for parsecs was based not on observations from Earth, but from a planet with a different orbit? Would that throw off the distance at which a star would appear to occupy a second of arc, and thus the length of a parsec?

On the other hand, who cares -- I'm going to see the movie not to see a treatise on astro-trigonometry or to see a fine piece of art cinema or even to view high-class science fiction -- Star Wars was never about any of that (hence the explosions in space, FTL drives, etc.). I'm going to be entertained, to see a space movie with big, flying ships and laser swords and little green men. Boo on anyone who's going just to pick faults and whine.

Emperor's New Clothes...again.

[hcduvall]

Mainly because he can't write. The most irritating thing about Lucas has been his ever changing storyline considering his motives. He came out with Star Wars saying it was fun movies recreating the serials, but as the movies gained the holy aura about them, his story changed, and suddenly he decided to try his hand myth making. Mitochlroides? (sp) and that ridiculous immaculate conception, a tacked on mother with a tacked on boy with tacked on feelings for her...sigh...

He makes these movies for his own flawed inner vision, w/o regard to the audience. When its good, he meant to have it big, and when it's criticized, well, he was making it just for kids. He needs less yes-men and fanboys around him, most of the problems any average honest movie-goer can see and even Lucas can fix.

I watched Phantom Menace again on DVD recently, to see if it was as bad as I remember it, to overcome my spite toward the man. Man, that movie sucked...I tried to give the actors credit, they had nothing to work with, but the dialogue...

I watched for the stereotyping, I caught it the first time and wanted to see if I was being too sensitive. Well, I still am sensitive to it. Historical movies, movies with extremists are a different story, but I was irritated again with clear racial accents in phantom menace. In a dated peice, you let it go. In a historical peice, I like them close to factual, so the germans wouldn't get to complain. But the cowardly machiavellian alien with an asian accent isn't a historical figure. I won't say insulted, its too obviously harmless in intent, but for osmeone who has been made fun of with accents and the like, and knows how movies and media make stereotypes (Romulans and Klingons in that other Sci-Fi series), its sad and painful. Confrontation is a good thing, stereotypes start somewhere, but you have to mean it and be ready to address it, make a point with it, not go "whoops" and brush it aside.

jar-jar improved actually. Thinking of him as kids cartoon helped...irritating yes, but no longer stupid beyond belief.

As for critics, the Village Voice is an especially pretentious one, but they're the ones who evaluate them to see if they go beyond entertainment, and in this case, to go beyond the glow that movies imprints on its fans. Then again, I like the onion reviews the best.

David Edelstein of Slate has a reasonable review of it, saying that entertaining and its flaws are evident. But hey, its entertaining.

http://slate.msn.com/?id=2065822&device=

Loving something a lot doesn't make it high art, but don't riled up when people point that out either. Remember one last thing, being better than Phantom Menace still might not make it a good movie.

Re:please go ahead

[Anonymous Coward]

He isn't?? I'm outta here!

I can only remember one...

[ringbarer]

"How Wude!"

So I guess Jar Jar had SOME effect!

Re:I can only remember one...

[daeley]

Actually, I think C-3P0 had the effect, since he says it in Return of the Jedi. s/Wude/Rude, of course. :)

Star Wars Galaxies Wired Article

[sgtsanity]

There's an article in the newest wired article about Star Wars Galaxies and how it it taking control of the Star Wars universe away from Lucas & company and giving it to the fans. Very interesting read.

Going early: it's not the movie, it's the crowd.

[raygundan]

The film will not get worse if I wait. I'm not even expecting it to be all that good, and it certainly isn't going to improve if I see it later, either.

However, it will be a hell of a (geeky) fun time to go hang out with the loony star wars fans in their costumes cheering at the movie and having a 3-hour party in line outside. And THAT will not be there after opening day.

I'm not going to see the movie-- I'm going to see the nuts.

Re:Roger Ebert and Digital Media

[uigrad_2000]

Since theaters and studios are not going to upgrade to 70mm for all movies, digital is good.

Well, I live in Champaign, and went to Roger Ebert's Overlooked Film Festival this year. I heard Ebert talk a lot about how much bull the movie industry uses to sell movies. Our little historic theatre here was donated about $6000 (IIRC) this last year, so that they would have a 70mm projector for Ebert's festival. Why can't a modern theater afford this?

When a theater charges me $13 so that I can watch a 2 hour movie (thats $7 admission, $6 refreshments), I expect the latest technology! If the going price for a 70mm projector is only $6000, then the multiplexes should easily be able to put one in every other theater! Instead, they expect us not to care.

I've stayed away from the multiplexes for quite a while. I won't be seeing EP2 tonight, because I won't settle for the service they give. I'll be traveling an hour tomorrow to see it at the Lorraine Theatre in the tiny town of Hoopeston. That 1922 theatre has a large screen (unlike the multiplexes), and is the only theatre in downstate Illinois with 8-channel sound.

Many people might agree with your statement, but only out of ignorance. I have to agree with Ebert on this one. Anti-progress is never good.

Yeah, Yeah, this is off topic

[Parsa]

But I want to rant about Luke Skywalker. Am I the only one that thinks he sucked overall as a Jedi in the movies?

Ok, so he did destroy the DeathStar in the first one. Great job...

But the second: 1) He gets his butt kicked by the snow monster thing. 2) He gets shot down in the attack of Hoth. 3) He quits his training to rescue his friends which leads to 4) His failed attempt to rescue his friends. 5) Darth Vader whoops his butt and cutts off his hand.

In the third I'm not convinced Luke did anything to lure Vader back to good other than just being his son. And the Emperor whooped his butt in that one. Is there anyone in the movies that didn't put the beat down on him?

Re:Roger Ebert and Digital Media

[SirWhoopass]

Note that it has to be theaters and studios. Installing 70mm projectors all over the place won't do any good if you cannot get prints.

Theaters, basically, break even on the ticket prices. They make the money on refreshments. Studios take a huge cut of the tickets, especially in the first few weeks.

I would love to see 70mm, but it isn't going to happen. Digital is better than 35mm, so it isn't a step-backwards.

Handicapped accessible tool shed.

[Restil]

Now THERE'S a line I gotta use to shut up nosy neighbors.

Not that I have nosy neighbors. They only seem to notice I exist about once every three years or so when I throw a party. They then respond by promptly calling the police as if I'd been bothering them all the time and they just finally got tired of putting up with it.

-Restil

new star wars movies in name only

[lubricated]

The new star wars movies have very little to do with the old star wars movies. In fact the only similarity is the name of the movie and the characters.

Don't believe me... Watch the first three then watch phantom menace. I am not going to see attack of the clones since to me it seams like a huge waste of money and time.

Calling Phantom Menace a Star Wars movie is like calling a Dodge, a Mercedes, just because Chrysler and Mercedes merged, you still know it's a dodge.

OT - Gift Certificates

[Anonymous Coward]

Gift Certificates are a liability on the company's books. When you hold a gift certificate they owe you something. If they don't expire, they have to track them on the books forever. By having a lifetime of say one year, they know they only have to carry that liability for one year at which time it just disappears.

In some states gift certificates cannot expire by law, so YMMV

Where Are They Now?

[DeadBugs]

CNN has a quick "where are they now?" feature on Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher and Billy Dee Williams.

AoTC

[jellybeanz]

It opened about 9 hours ago in New Zealand(midnight showing...)
It's awesome!!! The target age seems to be about 10 years above the age of Episode One, and it is a brilliant movie. Go and see it. Now.

You know, even the movie falcon was 1/3 scale...

[Thag]

Check out this site for obsessive fanboy analysis.

Jon Acheson

Re:Blatent 'Merking troll

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually its the world series of baseball, just like its the world cup of soccer/football. And considering that anyone who is anything in baseball plays in MLB, it really is international.

Re:Some reviews - The magic is gone

[Tungbo]

that what I was thinking as I left the theater.

The AotC is OK as a spectaccle. The Fight scenes, esp. in the arena, are better than Ep I. However, the Anakin and Padme love scenes are aweful, however pretty Portman is. In addition, AtoC is wedged between Ep I and IV plotwise, leaving little room for surprises. This would not be a problem if the film could sustain a classic sense of tragedy, foreboding, and doom. But there is nothing in Ep I and II to make the viewer really care about the characters and the plots.

The magic is gone. Go see Spiderman.

Another LEGO movie gem

[Jon Abbott]

Spite Your Face, the group that did the Lego Star Wars movie, also did the Camelot scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail. It is incredibly detailed and similar to the original!

Re:Another LEGO movie gem [correction]

[Jon Abbott]

Damned Mozilla and its recently renamed right-click menu options... Without further ado, here is the Camelot scene in LEGOvision(tm).

You sir are an ass.

[bitrott]

Blither blither blither. This is probably news for you: MOVIES ARE FUN. Going to see a film with people who are looking to have a good time can be fun. I've seen many movies on opening night. Even ones that I knew were going to SUCK on many levels, but knew that I'd still have a good time with my friends, berating the film afterwards or praising it for it's creative banality. Does that make me a sheep? No more so than the millions of other movie goers that enjoy ANY film throughout the year, because, by your definition, simply being a butt in a seat is 'sheep-like'. Pot/kettle/black much? You going to tell me you havn't seen a single MPAA film since the 'shit went down'? Or that you never paid for a ticket to a movie you knew was going to be total crap? Support indie films by seeing them opening night, support truly creative efforts with your dollar as well as mainstream entertainment, and dammit, feel free to have a good time at a pulp-scifi movie event. You don't have to hate yourself for enjoying a movie that's not a Citizen Kane. 'Nuff with the culture wars, the only victim is good taste, and well, last I checked it's alive and well.

After the life-size Millenium Falcon...

[Wolfstone]

The life-size Millenium Falcon was a lot of fun.
I hear for their next project, they're building a life-size Death Star.

Apparently, you care.

[Anonymous Coward]

Who's worse: the reviewer, or the reviewer's reviewer?

And for the record, Empire Strikes Back was a solid movie, not just campy fun.

I have the same sort of conversations

[aztektum]

but they usually start with let's get drunk rather than end with

Make your mind up, people...

[chriskenrick]

The MPAA is taking away all our rights! We can't just lie down and take it! We must act .. and act now!

Or maybe after we've seen SW Ep II...

Matrix reloaded trailer

[smallstepforman]

Wouldn't it be ironic if people bought tickets to AOTC just so that they can see the Matrix Reloaded trailer, after which they'd walk out of the cinema.

Re:Going early: it's not the movie, it's the crowd

[Anonymous Coward]

Correction: you are the nut.

Like any young man...

[LordYUK]

Anakin's fall from grace is central to the Star Wars world. Like any young man, he is torn between the duties of being a Jedi and pursing the woman he loves. The conflicting emotions cause him to make snap judgments that consistently lead to him into danger.
Yeah, I know last week I was torn between staying home and practicing with my 'saber or going out with my woman...

When this story was posted...

[mallie_mcg]

I was sitting in my seat waiting for starwars - Ep2 to start. I was fortunate in that my cinema had a reserved seating policy, and that my friends and i had purchased our tickets within the first 6 sold. The previous 2 tickets sold, the people chose to sit in the back row. (WTF were they thinking?!?!?)

I would have to say that AotC was very much better than the first, but agree with a few of the gripes that others posted. The "love" scenes, ugh! wtf was lucas thinking, what he got was surely what he wanted, but why did he want that.
The scene where Amidala eats the pear like fruit after anakin cuts it, is so obviously CGI, i mean the "bite" occours about 5-15mm from her mouth.
Mace Windu is obviously sexually frustrated, something Anakin seems intent on not repeating, because i mean, purple light sabre?!?!?!
But Yoda, hot diggity damn, that little puppet can really move!

Re:great lines

[jaoswald]

Spinal Tap is a great source of lines, right up there with Monty Python's Holy Grail.

"Money talks and bullsh*t walks."
"How much more black could it be, and the answer is none...none more black"
"Listen to the Flower People"
"Gimme some Money"
"Lick My Love Pump"
"Too much f*cking perspective."
"Currently residing in the where-are-they-now file"
"And on bass, Derek Smalls...he wrote this [jazz odyssey]"
"My job is to be in the middle, sort of like lukewarm water."
"Patron saint of quality footwear"

Then again, a turd shit by George Lucas in the shape of Darth Vader's head delivers better lines than most in his movies.

The only well-delivered lines I remember were Harrison Ford & Carrie Fisher. "You call this a rescue?" "Get this walking carpet out of my way" "You're braver than I thought." "I love you./I know."

By now, Lucas is definitely counting on special effects to override the need for compelling dialogue between characters.

All films are digitally edited, and my mini review

[ajv]

AOTC is a good film if you like the Star Wars franchise. It's as good as Empire Strikes Back, and that is saying something.

I saw it at one of our better cinemas here, and I could see the artifacts that Ebert was moaning about. Unlike him I can't wait for the digital projectors to become universal. What many miss is that ALL films are now edited digitally, and a transfer is made to film after that. Going digital for the last stage (effectively ADD or DDD a la CDs) will help *all* films, regardless of what Ebert thinks of the use of digital movie cameras. And if George Lucas hadn't made a stand on crap sound, we'd still be listening to mono or at best stereo matrixed Pro Logic analog audio at multiplexes. He drives the industry to the next level, and I think we'll be better off for it.

AOTC is a much better film - good story arc, what Ebert mistakes as pedestrian conversation advances the character development and fleshes out the story. The action sequences are far more fun, and Anakin's descent into the dark side obvious.

Christopher Lee is excellent yet again - that dude rocks. Yoda also kicks butt, I'm glad he is no longer a puppet. :-)

The romance is a bit over the top, and realistically they are not like the overheated 19 year olds (and supposedly late 20 somethings) that I know of. And the Sound of Music hillside was so kitsch. I wonder his Lucas was having a nod deliberately, or if it was unintential. We've heard Natalie sing before in the Professional, and lets just say I thought she was going to break out in really badly sung "THe HIIIIIIIILS are ALIIIIIIVE with the sound of MUUUUUUUSIC", so bad was the surrounding "romance".

There is one Galaxy Quest-esque scene in here. I wish George Lucas had bothered to watch it before writing the script, as I think the writers of that film could fairly charge plagarism. Instead of what's supposed to be a scary second-to-last final action sequence where the protagonists are in mortal danger, the audience was laughing! Lucas can do so much better than relying on a factory cliche with die stamps.

Spoiler from Oz

[The Sith Lord]

Wow!
Who'd have thought Yoda was Anakin's father!!!!

Re:Quickys : Cringes from Australia : Minimal Spoi

[thanjee]

Scooby-doo!
I knew I would remember after a bit of sleep :)

Re:All films are digitally edited, and my mini rev

[Star_Gazer]

I liked the movie as well but this is certainly the fastest film I have ever seen - sometimes a little slowdown in the actions scences would have been nice. At some moments it was nearly impossible to really follow the course of action, i.e. at the great Jedi battle.

But in the end there remains only two questions: What is Saruman doing in Star Wars and why does he try to look like Sean Connery? :)

Re:Quickys : Cringes from Australia : Minimal Spoi

[Reack]

Heya, Saw it in Sydney @12.01 and we got Spiderman for our preview (yes it isn't out in Oz yet). Jar-Jar isn't the comic relief this time, I would have to say that the romance takes a good part in this. Well that is how the crowd reacted to it anyway. All-in-all, it rocked. Best part: Yoda. -Reack

Re:All films are digitally edited NOT!!!

[jaoswald]

"Digitally edited" does not mean "digitally imaged."

Editing, roughly speaking, is the cutting-and-pasting of the daily shoots into something that actually tells a story.

For digital editing, a copy of the daily shoots is made in digital form for assembly. HOWEVER, the sequence of film segments can then be referred back to the originally shot film, which is PHYSICALLY cut and assembled in order to form an "analog master" from which the final prints are made.

There are obvious reasons why digital editing is superior: you don't have to bother with physically cutting and splicing many pieces of film. It is easier to cut and recut. The film itself is handled only the minimal amount. The digital copy that the editor works with does not need to be high resolution, as it is only used to establish the cuts, not fed into the projector in the cinema.

damnit

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not able to see the movie today... but that is really not a problem with me as I am not obsessed about it. Don't let that think that I won't cause some serious pain if even one asshole is talking out loud and gives away ANY part of the movie.

Re:Roger Ebert and Digital Media

[Apotsy]

As for digital cinema, I belive the theater-grade DLP systems are 2048x1536

No they aren't. They're 1280x1024, and have been ever since they started doing demos 5 years ago.

Episode II Delivers!

[Anonymous Coward]

I just came out of the premiere showing of Episode II here in Europe and IT ROCKS! Let me assure you that Ep2 has everything you were looking for in Ep1 and were so badly dissapointed, plus even more. Thanks, George!

A very happy visitor, just 20 minutes after leaving the theater.

PS: Please, until you see it yourself, keep still pretending to fear that the movie will suck - that way, you will enjoy it even more :-)

Look, here's the facts

[evilviper]

The movie sucks...

Don't stop reading yet... You'll have time to mod me down after you've read.

The reason it sucks is because it's nothing more than a very cheesy story with some good special effects.

It's the same sort of Jedi worshiping film as Phantom Menace was.

The three real star wars movies were very well written complex scripts. These prequals have the predictability of any disney film.

The story in it's entirety:
Anakin Guards the girl. That leads to discovering a covert cloning project. Anakin sees his mother died, blames himself, and does a little evil because of it. Big jedi fight. Cloning story line reveals corrupt ex-jedi in leage with Sith. Yoda makes fearful prediction. Anakin get's the girl.

I really didn't leave anything out. That's the whole damn story. Just like EP1, it's visually impressive, but there's no story to it. I think Lucas actually HURT the popularity of the original 3 with these terrible terrible prequils. These movies suck. Not the worst movies I've ever seen, but in the top 25.

Re:Look, here's the facts

[mgblst]

The three real star wars movies were very well written complex scripts.
br.Wow.. i would love to see these movies, are they anything like a new hope, empire and jedi???

Just came out of a showing...

[Anonymous Coward]

IT ROCKS!!!!

Re:All films are digitally edited (!) NOT!!!

[ajv]

Please refer to your Phantom Menace DVD bonus features. Phantom Menace was also edited digitally and composited from there back onto film - some of the editing tricks include removing characters completely from a scene by V edits, something that you simply cannot do using a sharp knife for hundreds of frames.

I'm sure you're right about many films using the SMTPE codes to generate an edit list (effectively a A-D-AA process), but with the film scanners that are available today, the quality difference between a digitally edited and composited film and one that uses traditional edit techiques (effectively splicing lots of physical film frames together) isn't much.

The problem as you note is the original source - a digital camera. If you read my original posting, I make the point of saying that the problem relates to the digital camera not the editing process. Films like the Matrix were also digitally edited and composited, and do not suffer the effects of a digital camera.

Re:All films are digitally edited, and my mini rev

[ajv]

I think your mistaken! - Christopher Lee has been Christopher Lee long before Sean Connery tried the distinguished looking beard.

Check IMDB - Christopher Lee has been in hundreds of films - he IS the centre of the universe if you play six degrees at all. Kevin Bacon eat your heart out.

***SPOILER*** Re:Well if Ebert is wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

The best line in the movie is Obi Wan saying "you want to go home and rethink your life". You'll get it when you see it :)

Re:Roger Ebert and Digital Media

[MtViewGuy]

I think Ebert is wrong, too.

While a true 35 mm print in pristine form is great, the problem is that for a two-hour movie you're talking six 20-minute reels of 35 mm film that is probably going to weigh around 35 pounds for each reel. I'm not going to guess how much it costs to ship 210 pounds of film anywhere even by UPS Ground service. Also, movie prints have some really major downsides: easily scratched, easily breaks, and color quality could fade over time.

With the rapid development of blue-spectrum LED lasers in the last few years, I expect pretty soon that a movie intended for theatrical digital projection will easily fit on a single 300 mm two-sided optical disc, about the same as the old Laserdiscs. Given that such a package would probably weigh about 5 pounds at most, that is a reduction shipping weight by a factor of 42.

Anyway, wuth the combination of my suggested digital storage format and improvements in digital projection systems that will lower its cost dramatically by 2010, I expect by 2010 most of the major theater complexes will have at least 40-50% of its screens using digital projectors.

Saw it in Australia at 12:01am

[spoco2]

Just wanted to throw in a couple of cents worth:
a) Got the tickets the afternoon before we went to see it, no real probs doing so, and ended up with great seats.
b) The cinema complex was bloody full, and the movie was playing in, I suspect, around 5 cinemas?
c) I went into the movie not expecting much at all... the Phantom Menace was crud... I keep trying to like it, but can only enjoy pieces of it. So my hopes for EPII were quite low indeed.

d) I REALLY enjoyed it... it started off slow, and my thoughts started waiving over to the 'oh crud, it's crap again'... but then it really started to grab me, and by the end I felt it was a movie I would love to watch again and again, and it would probably improve on subsequent viewings.

e) One of the biggest things for me was that on thinking back over it, and whether I'd enjoy repeated viewings, in comparison to EPI, which I struggle through now, is that there's the absense of children. Oh sure there's a little section with little training Jedi's, but it's over quickly, and not much is asked of them. The real difference is that one doesn't have to endure an annoying little kid being poorly directed for a film's entirety. The more mature Anakin is far more palitable to watch.

So, in conclusion... I was very plesently suprised by this film. (However I do have to agree with Ebert's review, which I read after I watched it, and his comments on the lack of clarity of the picture. There were many, many times during the film where the image, or parts of it, were ill-defined and grainy in a 'soft' way... I'm sure the DVD will indeed look great, but the digital to film transfer process needs work... or it was intentionally made poor to push cinemas to digital.)

Re:Saw it in Australia at 12:01am

[CatPieMan]

I probably saw it in the same place you did and had most of the same reactions.

I thought that there was definitly too many 'cigarette holes' in the film (those little black circles, watch fight club and understand) and Anakin was really whiney.

One of the problems was there are no screens showing it with digital projectors anywhere in Australia or New Zealand. There really aren't that many in the US either (and the US has about half of them). Since this is the first time digital cameras have been used, the process will only get better on other films. I just wish that they had picked a movie that I don't care about seeing to be the test subject (crossroads would have been a good movie to try it on, but, that would imply that they had a budget for that movie).

In responce to an earlier posting about memorable lines, I like Yoda's "You still have a lot to learn" or some thing like that (hey, I only remember other movie lines b/c I've seen them many times and I was quite drunk last night so I have only had the chance to see it once). I saw TPM twice on the theatre, and will proably see this one again too (as ticket prices are a lot cheaper than back home in the US).

Cheers-

-CPM

You're just pining for the Good Old Days

[Saint Fnordius]

Expectations rise and fall in tides. You ought to know that by now. When the first Star Wars came out in '77, what good fantasy action flicks were there? Planet of the Apes had been run into the ground, and no studio was willing to spend the money needed then to generate the F/X needed for suspension of disbelief.

Star Wars got into production because it was an hommage on the old serials, and George Lucas was typecast as good for "good old days" stuff thanks to American Graffiti. I don't think anybody expected to touch a nerve like it did. Now it (ironically) has it's own wave of nostalgia to overcome, like any "first love".

You want movies made for the sake of the art? Go to Europe. Deal with government grants instead of stockholders. If it succeeds, Hollywood will buy the rights and remake it. But don't expect Hollywood to take the first risk.

ranking

[nikster]

dialog: ridiculous
acting: bad
story: ok
action: good
gc/sfx: awesome

don't take it seriously and it's quite enjoyable.

tip: it helps to stare at natalie portmans during the ultra-cheesy attempts at love story. i am all for love stories, but the ones in ep2 qualify as truly bad b-movie any time.

Re:Roger Ebert and Digital Media

[Zathrus]

When a theater charges me $13 so that I can watch a 2 hour movie (thats $7 admission, $6 refreshments), I expect the latest technology!

Know how ticket prices work? Well, it varies by movie, but for your typical summer blockbuster the theater receives pretty close to 0% of the take for the first week, 20% the second week, 40% the third week, etc. For some movies it's even worse, with the 0-20% extending for more than one week. The studios claim that money as part of payment for the film.

Which is why, as another poster mentioned, the theaters make their money off refreshments.

As for the 70mm projector - I would be surprised if $6k buys you a new projector. I'd be surprised if it even buys you a decent used one. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Ebert only footed part of the bill for the projector... but I could be wrong. 70mm is essentially dead, so there may be fire sales on them in the industry. Even if the theaters buy them though, the additional cost of producing and distributing 70mm makes it very unlikely that the industry will ever move back to that format.

Again, if you want the best movie-going experience, push for digital projection. Why? Because while the resolution and color depth may not be as good as on a fresh can of film, it is better than the film by the time you see it in the theater.

Re:Roger Ebert and Digital Media

[Zathrus]

Blue-spectrum LED lasers isn't even necessary. There have been several proof-of-concept displays that would allow HD content to fit on a disk the size of a CD/DVD using red lasers. They generally use varying pit sizes and up to 10 layers per side to accomplish this though, and none have been commercialized yet (I dunno why, but I can guess a 10-layer disk would be rather expensive to produce).

Digital distribution is expected to virtually eliminate distribution costs. Forget distributing on media - all the theater needs is a satellite dish and a keycode to decrypt the datastream. At least one movie has already been distributed this way (erm... and I forget what it was - an computer animated movie from last year I think).

Thing is, the distribution cost reduction doesn't really help the theater chains. It helps the filmmakers and studios. They want to reap the cost reductions, but I doubt they're talking about passing them on to the chains. So the chains have very little incentive to move forward here.

why almost everybody likes Empire the best

[CaptainCap]

After the success of A New Hope, there was money for some really good special effects.

But what really made that film great was the revelation that Darth Vader was Luke's father. In the years between the two movies I never heard anyone speculate on a relationship. It really came from out of nowhere. And then you knew you had been set-up royally from the start of A New Hope with that first conversation between Luke and his aunt and uncle.

Re:why almost everybody likes Empire the best

[tarkin]

Exactly, you are absolutely right. And because we almost know all the important stuff we are always gonna get less value for our money. I'm guessing we'll get some revelation or two that George adds in Ep2 and Ep3 about some relationships between original trilogy characters and new trilogy characters (is Chewbacca a hairy cousin of the ewoks ? Is Darth Maul the father of tk-421 ? ;-).
But in order to get a climax as good as "I am your father" he needs to pull some big fat rabbit out of his hat, preferably one with 8 lightsabers and operated by Frank Oz...

Well, just my 2 cents, I'm off to see Episode2 here in Belgium. Let's hope I don't need breathmints to get the foul taste out of my mouth afterwards

Re:Roger Ebert and Digital Media

[Apotsy]

By the way, here is a reference from TI's official website stating that the resolution is 1280x1024.

Re:Quickys : Cringes from Australia : Minimal Spoi

[CatPieMan]

Scooby Doo! That was a good trailer.

I too saw the 12:01 (or was it 11:59, either way it started about 12:05 + trailers) in sydney.

I like trailers, but, I heard that a couple of theatres in the Sydney area skipped all of the trailers and at 12:01 started w/ the 20th century fox fanfare. That would have been neat. I think it could have done without all of the trailers that have been playing for a while and should have had some new trailers, this was star wars, and a good time to market some new ideas to the masses who got there 10 hours early to try to get a good seat. Maybe I just wished I had seen the Matrix Reloaded trailer instead of having to download it on my slow computer/connection.

-CPM