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

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!

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

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: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??

[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?

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: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.