Episode II Surpasses $116 Million at Box Office

Domasi writes "The Force is with George Lucas again as the fifth installment of the Star Wars saga, 'Attack of the Clones,' took in $116.3 million in its first four days and to become the second-fastest film behind only "Spider-Man"." Spider-man is better. But I plan to see both of them again.

Comments

Pocket change

[tmcmsail]

Lucas took most of it. That ought to keep him in beer money for a week. Maybe next movie he can hire people that can actually act...

... Waiting for the DVD's of 4,5 and 6...

spider-man

[Anonymous Coward]

spider man was good, but the cheese factor is a little too much.

No one saw this.

[petree]

I bet there was no one amongst this crowd who ever thought Spider-Man would out perform -ANY- episode of Star Wars at the box office. Ever.

I certainly didn't see it coming.

Re:No one saw this.

[the_2nd_coming]

look again...it is a 4 day total. for 3 days, it raked in 86 million.

Re:No one saw this.

[thesolo]

I bet there was no one amongst this crowd who ever thought Spider-Man would out perform -ANY- episode of Star Wars at the box office. Ever.

Actually, I saw it coming, and I couldn't be happier!! A friend of mine didn't believe me when I said that Spidey would beat Episode II, and so we placed a nice $50 bet on it.

I just called him up, and he answered the phone with "Fine, you fucker, you win!". I guess he just loaded slashdot too! ;)

Re:No one saw this.

[rnb]

But Spider-Man was on 1,500 more screens than Episode II because Lucas wanted to only show Episode II in theaters equipped with digital sound.

Anyone have the per-screen averages?

Re:No one saw this.

[the_2nd_coming]

oops...miss read your post :-P EOF

Re:No one saw this.

[MrAl]

Lucas himself saw this. He limited the number of theatres AOTC was playing in - something like 1,500 theatres less than Spider-Man. In an interview he said that he knew he wasn't going to break any records, but been-there-done-that. He just wanted it to play in theatres that were up to par technically.

Re:No one saw this.

[schwatoo]

Actually everyone saw this. Spiderman was playing at almost every damn cinema in the country. AotC wasn't.

It didn't come down to how many bums on seats, it came down to how many seats were available

Wait a week or two, from what I hear the screens showing Spiderman are pretty much empty right now while Star Wars is still packed to the gills.

Re:No one saw this.

[cybrpnk2]

Check out the numbers - they are unbelievable. Spiderman made 40% of AOTC's gate recipts on AOTC's first three days, and it was Spidey's third weekend. That's what the AMAZING in Amazing Spider-Man means...

Re:No one saw this.

[Anonymous Coward]

it won per screen also. sorry, lucas still loses and he knew it in advance...

Re:No one saw this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone can say in hindsight that they saw it coming.

I saw the trailers for ep 2. It didn't look all that bad, but it looked like Titanic in Space.

I saw an ad for spidey. I was impressed by the fluidity of the way he ripped his mask on & off. I was impressed by the 3-d nature of the lines on his costume (I've read the comics, and never thought of them as 3-D). Some Comic book movies do amazingly well (Batman & Mask come to mind).

I'm looking forward to Spidey 2. More than I can say for Ep3 (or Ep2 for that matter).

Re:No one saw this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait a week or two, from what I hear the screens showing Spiderman are pretty much empty right now while Star Wars is still packed to the gills

The theater I went to see Ep2 in was selling out both Star Wars and Spider-Man for all showings. Part of it might have simply been that you had to get your Star Wars tickets about 3+ hours in advance, so people that hadn't planned properly were going to Spider-Man to kill the interim time, but maybe not.

Re:No one saw this.

[NerdSlayer]

I did.

Re:No one saw this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Empty? I thought Spider-Man would have died down as well so I waited until Saturday to go see it. Bad idea. I figured the 9:50pm showing would be pretty much empty but it was already sold out when we got there. Thankfully they opened up a 10pm showing as well and that sold out but we got our tickets. The place was packed to the brim for all showings including ones at 10:15, 10:30, and 10:50. Amazing Spider-Man! Great movie BTW. I'm not even attempting to bother with AotC until it comes out on DVD. I was burned by the lame ass Jar Jar Binks in the first film and I refuse to be fucked again by Lucas.

Re:No one saw this.

[jedidiah]

Despite that, StarWars-II was doing much brisker business on it's 4th day of release than SpiderMan was doing on it's 2nd. I would expect that StarWars-II was much closer to the theoretical maximum per screen than SpiderMan was.

However, it will be interesting to see what the "2nd week falloff" is like...

Re:No one saw this.

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

After seeing tPM, I expected Blair Witch 2 to be better than the next SW films. So I'm not suprised that Spidey did better, since it was a really good movie. Honestly, the whole rating a movie by sales thing is really dumb. Inflation and varying ticket prices really make this comparison only valid for movies released next to each other. The original Star Wars will not look as good because dollars were worth more and tickets were worth less in the late 70's. So can we really compare Spidey to episodes 4,5, or 6? Nope.

Re:No one saw this.

[Grab]

Shame the film isn't up to par technically then, really. CGI that looks it, dialogue like, well, like the last film really. It's a shame really, since there's so much going for Star Wars. However, Lucas seems to have the sadiM touch - everything gold he touches turns to shit. The phrase "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory" was made for Lucas's script-writing (or should that be "the Jawas of victory"? ;-)

Grab.

Re:No one saw this.

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that any Marvel movie out performed any good movie is amazing...ever see Captain America, the Punisher, etc.

Re:No one saw this.

[DohDamit]

Yeah....really empty. To the tune of $46 million dollars this last weekend empty.

Re:No one saw this.

[Lemmy Caution]

No kidding. What if people judged operating systems based on mass popularity? For those of us who take film seriously, Lucas films and their ilk is the Windows ME of film making.

Re:No one saw this.

[The Wooden Badger]

I don't know about per screen, but I saw Spider-man at the first showing of the day (11 AM) and Clones at the first show of the day (9:10 AM). Spider-man never got that early of a showing. That gave it more showings per day per screen at my favorite movie haunt.

Re:No one saw this.

[Spaceman Spiff II]

Perhaps there are some weird laws of supply and demand at work, and the "up-to-par" just something else? I know that there was a lot more interest here in my town because the tickets were sold out a week in advance for opening day. This could definitely create lots of hype, although it still seems like it would be better to play it in as many theatres as possible.

Why $$$?

[DrBiscuit]

A movie is supposed to impart human feelings via relationships and understanding. The way to measure the success of this is to ask people if they felt empathy for the characters and if they were moved by the plot.

The Star Wars() franchise is all about lasers, explosions and stepping in animal droppings. The success is measured in dollars.

Why am I not suprised that Slashdot prefers the latter?

Re:Why $$$?

[necrognome]

A film is a time sequence of images (not necessarily chronological) often intermixed with audio. "Impart[ing] human feelings via relationships and understanding" is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition of filmmaking. It's also a muddled notion of aesthetics. Some aestheticians have remarked that, "Art expresses human emotions," but this is a theory of beauty and certainly debatable. Furthermore, some films--concept films mostly--lack both characters and plot, and this is by design.

Distaste is not a reason for trolling.

Re:Why $$$?

[ryszards]

There's a lot to be said for using films as an escape and not taking much at all from them, purely using them as an escapist medium to escape reality.

Star Wars is arguably to most succesful human escapist work ever created, empowering generations to live in a world they could hardly imagine.

That its success is rated in dollars is purely a side effect of todays money biased society.

Who cares about the money and who cares if the film doesn't impart human feelings. If you enjoy it, that's all that matters. A movie isn't _supposed_ to _do_ anything, it's the viewer that interprets things, not the film forcing anything on you.

Rys

Re:Why $$$?

[Anonymous Coward]

Attention moderators:

This is an obvious troll. Please moderate accordingly.

Oh, and fuck off.

Re:Why $$$?

[GafTheHorseInTears]

Dammit bitch, you better have dinner ready when I get home, or you'll be explaining your theories about successful movies to the back of my hand.

Re:Why $$$?

[(outer-limits)]

Ahh, production data, that must be a first post for that phrase on /.

I completly Agree

[nervlord1]

With the review that says, boring first hour, much much better as it goes on.

This movie is no where near as good as the original starwars, but it makes up for the phantom menance. Go see it, You will probably like it.

Re:I completly Agree

[uncoveror]

I loved attack of the clones. Those who view it as inferior to the first trilogy are looking at Those three throught the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia. Compared to chilhood memories, nothing today can compete. Let's not buy into the myth of the good old days.
Think about it. As kids, we were easily amused. The first three did not have academy award worthy acting either, but star wars in all five movies is timeless storytelling. I sure hope this one out-grosses the lame silly chick flick Titanic. I can not wait for Episode III!

Re:I completly Agree

[Anonymous Coward]

amen--yoda with the lightsaber was worth the price of admission on its own...:-)
great story, ok dialog, great art direction as always, and just plain fun to watch!!

Re:I completly Agree

[crucini]

Those who view it as inferior to the first trilogy are looking at Those three throught the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia.

I seriously considered that possibility. Then I downloaded the script of Star Wars (aka "the first movie") and read it through. My reading confirmed my impression that it is far superior to AOTC. A few differences:

• Qi-Gong jumping out the window to grab a flying vehicle immediately set
  the tone of a very unrealistic movie in which the heroes would perform superhuman feats. And sure enough, the characters go through a lot of stuff that would surely have killed or maimed them, like jumping out of an aircraft in flight. In Star Wars, I think the closest thing is Luke and Leia swinging across the shaft. That was risky but believable.
  
• Anakin is just too moody, unstable and immature to be trusted with any independent assignment, let alone guarding a crucial politician. I wouldn't let this guy wash my car - it would probably end up in Tijuana. This lessens both the credibility of the movie and the ability to connect with the character. Luke had the same traits to a lesser degree, but he was not deliberately entrusted with much responsibility.
  
• Darth Vader was one of the best villains in any movie. The subsequent Star Wars movies have failed to come up with anyone nearly as impressive.
  
• Star Wars is the story of a young guy from a boring hick town, a strange old desert rat with a zen-like calm, and a cocky smuggler who inadvertently take on the Death Star. AOTC is about a group of powerful, privileged and respected people who ward off a possible challenge to their privileged position.
  

I could write a lot more, but I think the movies are deeply different. Certainly there are some aspects that remain the same, and to that extent your remark about rose-colored glasses could be true. But on the whole, AOTC is a very inferior movie.

Re:I completly Agree

[rethomas]

I disagree with you. I at first thought that some of the stunts were impossible, but then I realized that they were using the force. Had someone else done that, then it would've been impossible to belive. With the exception of that scene and Anakin jumping out of the aircraft (he is crazy), nothing else was that far out.

Your second point, Anakin was too unstable. You have to realize that first, he is in training, so you have to allow for some imperfections in his character, he did start late in life, and he does get the job done. Secondly, the force was being clouded by the darkside , so the future (as well as other things) was not able to be seen clearly.

Your third point is valid, but the point of the pre-quels is to give us history, and the villian now doesn't show his face.

Your fourth point is not valid either. The people are trying to save the republic. It has simularites to the civil war, there were systems breaking away from the republic, and in order to stop it (and from them getting killed), they needed to fight. Just because the people leading it may have been from "privilage" doesn't mean they are protecting their "privilage"

Re:I completly Agree

[jjeff]

Qi-Gong jumping out the window to grab a flying vehicle

I'm sorry who?
unless i seriously missed something in ep1 - i only saw obi wan do this in the ep2.

The movies arent supposed to be believable (its called science fiction) - and remember they are not mere humans, they are jedi (their reflexes are faster , they can manipulate things with their minds..)

I personally think AOTC was at least on par with return of the jedi and the special effects were fantastic (i especially liked yoda's light sabre scene).

Re:I completly Agree

[Anonymous Coward]

First of all ... Qui-Gong was deceased by this episode, so it's unlikely that he jumped through a window. If you're gonna pose as a die hard fan ... let's get it right.

Re:I completly Agree

[szap]

Qi-Gong jumping out the window to grab a flying vehicle

Your slip is showing. Qi-Gong literally means Breath-Force in chinese (or "ki" in japanese). See those funky martial arts moves (whether in real life or Crouching Tiger)? Qi Gong. That's an inspiration for Star War's Force, of course.

Anyway, I've no problems with Obi-wan doing that. I do have plenty of problems with the Jedis NOT using the force-push to throw down the hordes of drodes surrounding them. Heck, they did it in Episode 1, why not now? Worst. Stupidity. Ever.

Re:I completly Agree

[dytin]

Man, there are some reasons why you might not like this movie, but every single reason that you just listed is just plain dumb.

First of all, Obi-Wan and the rest of the Jedi ARE heroes that cen perform super-human feats. They can use the force, which means that they have premonition of danger and can manipulate people's minds. In A New Hope, Luke and Leia weren't Jedi, at the time they were just regular people. Remember, in later movies, as Luke became a Jedi he was able to do super-human feats like lifting things up with his mind and causing himself to fall into a ventinlation shaft and not die after falling a great distance.

Anikin is supposed to be moody and whiny and all around unlikable. After all, he is falling into the dark side.

If you don't think that Dooku is a good villian, than you must be on crack. And Palpatine/Sidious?! These are classic, truly great villians.

AOTC is about a group of poeple trying to save the republic, ANH is about a group of people trying to bring back the republic. Same principle IMO.

AOTC will never be the same as ANH or any of the old movies, but it still is great. Just beacuse things don't 'remain the same' does not make it a 'very inferior movie'.

Re:I completly Agree

[crucini]

First of all, Obi-Wan and the rest of the Jedi ARE heroes that cen perform super-human feats. They can use the force, which means that they have premonition of danger and can manipulate people's minds.

So why should they ever bother getting out of their armchairs and racing around in spaceships? Why not 1) sense the danger and 2) manipulate relevant minds to defuse the danger? Because, as I'm sure you know, all such fictional powers must be limited if the story is to be interesting. Even AOTC recognizes some limitation in the form of a collective force-myopia among the Jedi brought about by an imbalance in the force.

I think we're discussing a subjective preference. I prefer protagonists like those in Star Wars - essentially human beings. You prefer or at least like protagonists amply endowed with superhuman powers, ala Superman.

In A New Hope, Luke and Leia weren't Jedi, at the time they were just regular people.

Agreed. But you seem to imply that since the protagonists of AOTC are (inevitably) Jedi they must (inevitably) act like Superman. I disagree with the inevitability of both those things. The makers of AOTC had a great deal of freedom. Rather than emphasizing familiar characters and tying up loose ends, they could have penned a completely fresh story with only tangential connection to the rest of the "series". As for the second idea, in Star Wars Obi-Wan is a Jedi and the portrayal of his powers is restrained and tasteful.

Remember, in later movies, as Luke became a Jedi he was able to do super-human feats like lifting things up with his mind and causing himself to fall into a ventinlation shaft and not die after falling a great distance.

I don't think any of the sequels measure up to the original. I think that the scenes you mention cheapened the Jedi knight, who was at core a Zen Buddhist. One aspect of the problem, but by no means its heart, is the inability of the writers to think through the plot implications of increased superpowers. The viewer is frequently left with the question "Why didn't $HERO just use $POWER?".

Anikin is supposed to be moody and whiny and all around unlikable. After all, he is falling into the dark side.

For some reason, "whiny" is not an adjective I'd apply to Darth Vader, and Anakin remains unconvincing as a proto-Darth. Here's how I'd imagine a young Darth Vader: disciplined, precocious, tough and idealistic. He would have a fiery temper, but it wouldn't express itself in the childish tirades of Anakin. He would hold himself and others to unrealistically high standards. And obviously, he would be a fairly big guy. Only a few inches of Darth Vader can be accounted fro by boots and helmet. Anakin comes up short in more ways than one.

Re:I completly Agree

[Nakago4]

Man I have to agree with that.. during the obi-wan fett battle I was like.. umm why is he not using the force at all? He easily could have shoved him down or whatever, but he never used the force at all except for the really brief attempt to grab his lightsaber back. And why can they not use the force when piloting? I would have thought he could have easily shoved that homing missle into an asteroid with the force... hehe.

Re:I completly Agree

[dytin]

Why not 1) sense the danger and 2) manipulate relevant minds to defuse the danger?

Because as Yoda put it "The dark side clouds everything". They used to be able to this for the most part. They can't exactly manipulate relevent minds because only weak minds are susceptible to Jedi mind tricks. However, before the dark side, The Jedi's only responsibilty was to be a keeper of the peace, which basically involved sensing danger and telling the Senate about it.

As for the second idea, in Star Wars Obi-Wan is a Jedi and the portrayal of his powers is restrained and tasteful.

You can't really use Old Obi-Wan's or Old Yoda's power's as a basis for comparison. Although they were both at one time powerful Jedi, in episodes 4-5, they are very old and their power is weakening. A better basis for comparison would be to Vader and Palpatine. As you may recall, they were both very powerful, able to shoot lightning and strangle people with their mind from light-years away. When you realize this, you see that young Obi-Wan's and young Anikin's power's in Episodes 1 and 2 were really not that far-fetched in comparison to the original trilogy.

I think that the only reason that you don't like AOTC is that there are many powerful Jedi and they are not the underdogs. You prefer to root for the underdog.

Re:I completly Agree

[Spaceman Spiff II]

I could write a lot more, but I think the movies are deeply different

I think that this is the key. Sure, in AotC there was lots of Anakin whining and stuff, where in the old trilogy it was mostly action. Sure there was the scene in the Ewok village with Luke and Leia (sp?) but that was about it. The main thing, though, is that the movies are just different types of movies. AotC and Phantom Menace aren't a bad movies, they just hasn't stayed true to their roots. It's too much computer generated stuff and "chick-flick-y" dialog.

Re:I completly Agree

[Anonymous Coward]

I have not seen it. I just hope they dont clone an army of jarjar binks.On the other hand it would be fun to see how many different ways jarjar
can die.

Support your MPAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Invite all your friends, buy the movie, buy the action figures.

Its all to help starving artists and lobbying workers. They need your support to fight piracy, which will take away your soul and be civilization's downfall.

Every time you let a pirate copy a movie for his own use, God kills a Scientologist.

Re:Support your MPAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Every time you let a pirate copy a movie for his own use, God kills a Scientologist.

Well shit! If I knew that I'd be in the Phillipines making pirate bulk orders in the 100,000s!

Screens

[lemonk]

It is worthwhile to mention that Spider-Man is being shown on over 1000 screens more than AOTC, etc.

Re:Screens

[StudMuffin]

A large part of this was due to Lucas' condition that if a theater shows AOTC, that it show for a minimum of four weeks. Smaller theaters with only a few screens can't support this kind of commitment during the summer movie season. So, since Spider-Man had no such condition, it opened (and stayed) on more screens.

Re:Screens

[InnereNacht]

No, it doesn't.

If they're showing Attack of the Clones where I'm from, on release day, I'm sure they can show it most OTHER accessible places for people who want to see movies.

Re:Screens

[peter_goathead]

it isn't.
Spider-Man: 3615 Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones: 3161

from here [boxofficeprophets.com].
500 less screens.

Re:Screens

[kingpin2k]

It's also worthwhile to note that the per-screen take was still higher for Spiderman.

Re:Screens

[Evro]

It's also worth noting that AOTC's "opening weekend" was 2 days longer than that of Spider-Man, and had an automatic audience regardless of the quality of the film...

Re:Screens

[SplendidIsolatn]

>>A large part of this was due to Lucas' condition that if a theater shows AOTC, that it show for a minimum of four weeks.

Four weeks? IIRC, it's seven, which is a HUGE investment for a theater, and why fewer ones bit on it.

Re:Screens

[Spit_Fire1]

this week, but how many did spiderman have at open?

Re:Screens

[big.ears]

All this box-office gamesmanship is kinda silly. If you want to assess the human value or impact of a film (or a movie), I can assure you that the just about the worst way to do it is to count how much money it reportedly took in in ticket sales. Ever wonder why nobody records the number of ticket sales (which are already adjusted for inflation), but rather calculates raw sales $$? It is mainly to build hype for a film, because even a moderate success this year is bound to beat the blockbuster from two years ago. "Box Office Records" are laughable, because they are guaranteed to fall.

By making these arguments about total gross/per theater gross/screens/etc., we are just playing into the Hollywood money machine's hand. But, myself a victim to this game, I believe the 3615/3161 number indicates venues or physical locations where the film is played, whereas the number of actual "Prints" is something like 7500 vs. 6000, which is what the parent was apparently quoting. I don't know if anyone has actually recorded the number of screenings anywhere. Given that AOTC was a little longer than Spidey, this translates into fewer screenings per venue, as well as fewer per print: The difference between 2 hours and 2 hours 20 minutes is enough to reduce the number of screenings at some little theaters from 2 to 1 or from 3 to 2 per day; at multiplexes, it may reduce the number of showings from 15 to 12.

Re:Screens

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but Spiderman had no real competition on it's opening weekend. AOTC is pulling in fantastic numbers while competing for eyeballs against another blockbuster Spiderman.

Re:Screens

[Nuge]

I knew someone would use this as an excuse. Did you realize also that Star Wars was being shown almost 24 hours a day at most theatres? I don't remember Spider Man playing at 12 midnight and 9:30 am.

Re:Screens

[MisterBlister]

The 3615 vs 3161 numbers are theatres, not screens. Each theatre can and usually does allocate multiple screens to these types of large summer movies.

So shut the fuck up.

Re:Screens

[Lotek]

My local cineplex currently has Lord of the Rings STILL running on one screen.

Hooray!

Re:Screens

[Exedore]

Spider-Man wins. Fatality!

Re:Screens

[KirkH]

The same.

Re:Screens

[pokeyburro]

AotC had an automatic audience? So did Spider-Man. He's been in comics for longer than I've been alive.

As for AotC opening in mid-week, one could argue that if it had opened on Friday like Spider-Man, everyone who ended up seeing it Wed or Thu would've seen it on Fri or Sat, and AotC's opening would've been much more spectacular.

Even so, I think it would've been an uphill battle for Spider-Man, and I'm thrilled that it did as well as it did. In fact, it kicked major ass.

Re:Screens

[cuyler]

Check out the-numbers.com. They have plenty of stats on movies. Most notably is the gross per theatre a record that is held by Spider-Man.

Even though Spider-Man opened with more screens than AOTC it is still making more per screen than AOTC.

Re:Screens

[ColdForged]

It is worthwhile to mention that Spider-Man is being shown on over 1000 screens more than AOTC, etc.

It is equally worthwhile to mention that, with the opening of AOTC, Spider-Man is now playing on far smaller screens than AOTC currently is, meaning that fewer people are even able to see it now. And, if my experience is any indication, Spider-Man is still selling out these smaller screens (tried to go to a showing this weekend, but missed out on tickets).

Re:Screens

[Mike Hicks]

I'd heard that there were somewhere around 7000 screens for Spider-Man and 3500 theaters. From what I've heard in the past, figures are only given out about how many theaters are playing movies, not the number of screens. Therefore, the screen number is just an estimate. However, since both of these movies are generally playing on at least two screens per theater, and there are approximately 500 more theaters, you'd expect at least 1000 more screens to be showing Spider-Man.

But, I might have been misinformed.

Re:Screens

[tsiar]

What's really annoying, is that those numbers you quoted are THEATERS, not SCREENS.

Clones opened up playing on approximately 6,100 screens at 3,161 theaters across North America

Spider-man Swinging into 3,615 theaters ... with an estimated 7,500 prints

The math still works out that spiderman made more per screen, but of course the Thursday opening isn't taken into account.

Re:Screens

[Yort]

This argument goes both ways, however:

From IMDB:

The gross for 20th Century Fox's Star Wars: Episode II -- Attack of the Clones could have been higher had it not been for a strategic move made by Sony's Columbia Pictures when it locked up theater screens for Spider-Man, the Wall Street Journal reported today (Monday). According to the newspaper, the studio demanded the largest-capacity theaters at megaplexes through the Memorial Day weekend as a condition of its deals with exhibitors.

That said, I quite thoroughly enjoyed both movies, and will probably see both again. The only bad part for me, now, is that because Ep. II doesn't suck, it's likely I'll end up having to own the whole set, which means I have to pay good $$$ for _The Phantom Menace_. Ugh.

Re:Screens

[Anonymous Coward]

In the US yes, but AOTC is opening worldwide on the same day and Spider-man won't open overseas until June or July.

Re:Screens

[NewbieV]

I agree with other Slashdotters (and movie fans) who say that comparing movie grosses is an 'apples-to-oranges' comparison: inflation, competition, number of screens, and perhaps other factors, make 'first-weekend grosses' pretty much headline fodder only, not a good number comparisons can be based on.

Here's a modest proposal to accurately compare movie 'x' and movie 'y':

How many tickets were sold for the entire first-run screening of the movie?

If one million people saw "Star Wars" in 1977 (a made-up number, I know...) and one million people saw "Attack of the Clones" in 2002, I'd suggest that both moves were equally popular.

Does anyone have any idea if such a statistic is published anywhere?

Re:Screens

[56ker]

When it opened my local multiplex had it running on three screens.

Re:Screens

[Red Weasel]

It's also worth mentioning that (In Canada at least I don't know about the US) The Studio is demanding a much larger cut of the Ticket sales than any other movie released to date. Many of the smaller (read small business owned) theaters are not showing AoTC due to not wanting to start a precedent about the pricing of blockbusters.

Basically the Studio get as much as 70% of the ticket sales for opening weekend and that percentage drops every week that it shows. That way by the 4th week most of the profits go to the movie house. For AoTC the Studio want %70 for the next 2 weeks and a much larger cut for the rest of production run.

And damned if I can find the link to back this up.

Re:Screens

[Red Weasel]

Here Is a link on the BBC. It also appears to be mostly Quabec from the article and I'm still looking for a link reguarding the rest of Canada. Also Asterix and Obelix. HELL YA!.

Re:Screens

[Anonymous Coward]

Another useful metric would be return on investment. A movie that costs $100 million to make & market and returns $200 million is likely going to have several sequels. A movie that costs $200 million and returns $200 million is less likely to have any sequels.

Re:Screens

[valmont]

Agreed,

and it is also worthwhile to mention that George Lucas also had some theatre image and sound standard restrictions where he is trying to push to only let theatres equipped with digital projection to play the movie. I'm not exactly sure how far he got on those efforts but that may also be a factor in the far lesser number of theatres showing this picture.

I saw it sunday at "The Grove" in los angeles/fairfax and i was sitting close enough to see pixels on the projected image! It never got bothersome but i did notice it. weird. Did anyone else see pixels?

Re:Screens

[Yort]

As I noted in a different reply, though, this may also be misleading, as apparently Sony negotiated to have Spider-man shown on the largest capacity screens.

Re:Screens

[naoursla]

Did you know that a theater can show a single print on multiple screens? They run the film out of one projector and into the next one. There is generally at 15 minute delay between the two. This is why the same show on multiple screens start at similar times. If there are 7500 prints it could be on many more screens.

Re:Screens

[kilrogg]

Still wouldn't be a totally fair comparison, you'd have to adjust numbers due to population growth, and also take into account new technology (VCRs, DVDs).

Re:Screens

[Anonymous Coward]

15 showings pr. day? I see how American Multiplexes must have fiddled with the space/time continium, being able to fit 34.5 hours into one day ;)

Re:Screens

[NewbieV]

I'm not sure that I totally agree... how would (or could) you factor in for people who buy multiple tickets (repeat viewers)? Is a 'population factor' valid in a case like this?

The same might be said for VCRs and DVDs... yes, I do agree there, but that's also a difficult line to draw, and again, may not be as statistically significant.

Can any statisticians lend their opinion?

Re:Screens

[Cabal4269]

For those interested...

DOMESTIC GROSS/ADJUSTED GROSS
Star Wars $460,987,469/$797,975,786
The Empire Strikes Back $290,158,751/$431,710,050
Star Wars: Episode I $431,065,444/$431,065,444
Return of the Jedi $309,125,409/$413,782,013
movies.com

Came in second, eh?...

[meringuoid]

... Imagine Yoda there.

'Strong the Force is, but commercially more successful has Spider-Man been. Powerful is the Dark Side with this one...'

p.s... FP. w00t. Etc.

Re:Came in second, eh?...

[Spaceman Spiff II]

LOL! Perfect Yoda writing style have you.

Spider Sense

[LordYUK]

Spidey was a better movie, but my spider sense tells me that AotC will surpass it because Yoda's fight with Darth Tyrannus was simply awesome. It was worth sitting through the drivel of Anakin's raging rage and Amidala's sappy sap sap yet again.

Just for Yoda

[underpaid]

I'd see it again just to see yoda fight. I just wish there was a clear ending to the fight so everyone could have cheered for him.

Re:Just for Yoda

[Ryan_Singer]

There is an end, when he picks up his walking stick after stopping the falling pillar.

That's when everyone in my theater (12:01 showing, first showing for that theater) erupted into applause for Yoda.

Re:Just for Yoda

[thaigan]

He didn't even hit Dooku once! It seems Dooku is invincible.

Re:Just for Yoda

[jjsoh]

Thank God I didn't read anything about Ep. II prior to watching. That was one of the best surprises.

Best Lightsaber Duel. Ever.

Re:Just for Yoda

[nomadic]

All I knew was that there was a fight, which really did ruin it partially for me. I didn't even read that much, just a review or two, but still it came up.

Re:Just for Yoda

[Anonymous Coward]

There was a clear ending. Yoda demonstrated the true power of a Jedi, compassion and caring for others. Yoda could have easily taken Count Dooku, yet when faced with the decision to keep fighting, or to save young Anakin, and Obi-Wan from certain fate.... Yoda chose to save his padawans. Then to pontificate the situation even more, we realize that there was no clear, and definative possibility for a conclusion, as Master Yoda says, because the Clone War has begun.............
Biatch!

Re:Just for Yoda

[Xaoswolf]

Yoda totally had Dooku on the defensive the entire fight, to the point that he had to resort to dirty tricks to escape.

Now, I'm not sure how long Yoda could keep up fighting like that, but the way it looked to me, he would have won if he hadn't had to save Obi Wan and Anakin.

Re:Just for Yoda

[scootX]

Am I the only one thinkin the Yoda fight was highly overrated? I mean, it was cool and all, but it reeked of CGI, even more so than Jar-Jar. Yoda was bouncing up and down like a freaking chipmonk on steroids!

Re:Just for Yoda

[Kintanon]

Looked more like a midget Jet Li doing some badass wirework to me.... I found the CGI in ep II to be very unobtrusive. More on par with people in REALLY good costumes than digital constructs. Yoda looked just like he always looked, and his whole whirling dervish fighting style seemd appropriate.

Kintanon

Re:Just for Yoda

[Rick_T]

> Now, I'm not sure how long Yoda could keep up
> fighting like that, but the way it looked to me,
> he would have won if he hadn't had to save Obi Wan
> and Anakin.

Speaking of, why didn't Yoda simply move Anakin and Obi-Wan out of the way rather than trying to hold up the big whatever-it-was-that-was-going-to-crush-them? It's already been established that it's easier to "force" smaller objects to move.

"So you see, Lone Starr, why evil always triumphs. Because good is dumb..." (Dark Helmet - Spaceballs)

Re:Just for Yoda

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not what 'pontificate' means, and definitive doesn't have an 'a' in it. (Think of 'finite' when you spell that word.)

Re:Just for Yoda

[Chris Walker]

No, you aren't the only one. I found most of
that lightsaber battle somewhat unsatisfying
because it was too fast and frantic to really
follow well (I did quite like the description of
it in the AOTC book however). I think the
final battle in EP1 vs. Darth Maul was
better done.

Re:Just for Yoda

[Xaoswolf]

Perhaps because you aren't supposed to move accident victims, it could aggrivate their wounds. Not sure how that applies to lightsaber cuts and force burns(dark side lightening attack thingy does burn right?), but perhaps Yoda was a jedi scout when he was young, and he was just remembering what he learned while getting his first aid badge.

Re:Just for Yoda

[Canis of Ithaca]

See it on a better screen. I saw it twice, and some of the CGI looked OK at best in one theater and blew me away in the other. I can't wait to see it in a digital theater. Also, would you have prefered Yoda to just bash Dooku in the knees like a little, green Sopranos character?

Re:Just for Yoda

[Bluesee]

When Yoda started doing all those flips and dips and yips, everybody in the theatre I was at started spontaneously laughing and giggling.

Re:Just for Yoda

[Anonymous Coward]

i thought it was cheezy and unecessary. yoda was bad ass because he didnt have to fight.

i think it would have been better if he just used the force to move his lightsaber around.

actually when i saw it, most people just laughed and didnt cheer.

Re:Just for Yoda

[Orangedog_on_crack]

This was the scene that made the entire movie worth the admission price. The crowd in the theater where I saw the movie just about went nuts at three points of the fight. The first was when Yoda struck his "bring it on" pose after trading energy bolts with Dooku. The second was when Yoda pulled his light-saber out, making it jump off of his belt and into his hand. The third was after the fight when he picked up his walking stick in the same manner as he did the light saber, then just hobbled away like nothing had happened.

Personally I would have liked to have seen him do some serious thrashing on Dooku before the Count had to resort to playing dirty just to escape. But it was nice to see just why everyone always stepped very lightly around the old master. Lucas had always left it at "he's a very wise and powerful Jedi who's not to be toyed with." It was fun to see exactly why that was so accepted among the lesser Jedi.

Re:Just for Yoda

[Anonymous Coward]

It's already been established that it's easier to "force" smaller objects to move.

Not so. Moving objects of varying sizes is exactly the same. "Only different in your mind," as Yoda himself has said.

Re:Just for Yoda

[bishnu]

The only way Yoda could use his size to his advantage in a Lightsaber duel would be to bounce around like that - was anyone reminded of the Win95 mouse cursor, by the way?

Re:Just for Yoda

[scd]

Of course he didn't hit him. Lightsaber hits are serious; it's not like a fist-fight.

Think about the times that people have gotten hit by lightsabers. Luke - loses hand. Anakin - loses arm. Obi-Wan - minor cuts, because Dooku is toying with him, then dies, when Vader hits him. Everything else has been a death,I believe.

Therefore, it would seem that not being hit != being invincible. I mean, even Luke held off Vader in RotJ, and I don't think anyone is going to argue that Luke was a master along the lines of Dooku or Yoda or Vader at that point in time...

Re:Just for Yoda

[Rick_T]

> Perhaps because you aren't supposed to move
> accident victims, it could aggrivate their wounds.
> Not sure how that applies to lightsaber cuts and
> force burns(dark side lightening attack thingy
> does burn right?)

Anakin's "wound" was already cauterized, and he's not likely to be hurt more by a movement a foot or two to the side. I don't recall everything wrong with Obi-Wan, but I distinctly don't remember crushed ribs, broken bones, or spinal column injuries.

You might say that, assuming Yoda were to win the fight with Dooku if he'd used a *quicker* means to rescue Anakin and Obi-Wan, he would have saved *millions* of lives by preventing many of the events in the later Star Wars episodes.

Of course, maybe this was part of Lucas's point - that the Jedi *are* blind and incredibly shortsighted and they *need* a good swift butt-kicking by the more cunning Dark Side to whip them back into shape.

Yoda in particular wouldn't recognize the Dark Side until it swam up and bit him in the ass ... :)

Re:Just for Yoda

[Banjonardo]

My entire theatre was laughing and cheering "yeah!" through the entire fight.

I guess that's why they call him the master.

Re:Just for Yoda

[Xaoswolf]

Of course, maybe this was part of Lucas's point - that the Jedi *are* blind and incredibly shortsighted and they *need* a good swift butt-kicking by the more cunning Dark Side to whip them back into shape.

Yoda in particular wouldn't recognize the Dark Side until it swam up and bit him in the ass ... :)

I just like how the Jedi helped set up the imperial army, talk about short sighted. There's also the fact that Jar-Jar just had to go and make an emperior out of a senator.
I knew that if he died in the first movie, the world would have been better off...

Re:Just for Yoda

[hawkwind]

more like a gremlin on crack.

Re:Just for Yoda

[brams]

Lucas borrowed about 75% of "The Force" from Eastern philosophy (he was a friend of the late Joseph Campbell as well). The problem in Phantom Menace is that he reduced it to a crass physical/DNA thing: the metachlorians(sp?).

I began to wonder -- can you take a pill or hormone treatment and manipulate the force all the better? Since it's biologically/genetically determined, it seems to weigh in heavily on the "nature" rather than "nurtue" side. This contradicts Obi-Wan's Star Wars statements to young Luke on the Millenium Falcon about trusting the force, using intuition, etc. More like, "Trust the little microscopic lifeforms in your body."

And, since young Anikin had a higher metachlorian count "than even master Yoda", we are left with the impression that corruption is inevitable, and that evil is stronger than good.

Of course, if it were the other way around, you'd have a darned short movie, and no long epic good v. evil ala Lord of the Rings.

-Paul

Is this inflation-adjusted?

[danger42]

Has anyone asked the question, are the box office draws inflation adjusted?

My guess would be they are not, because movie studios are desperate to create enough hype to get people into the theatres before word of mouth kills the flick.

What would be interesting would be to see NUMBER of ticket sales, not total dollar amounts. The price of movies is more than double what it was 15 years ago, so it looks like more than twice the number of people are seeing movies now.

I can say that in 1985, when I paid $4.00 to see The Empire Strikes Back, there was alot more interest in the Star Wars franchise than there is now. But the movie studios want you to think the opposite.

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted?

[Anonymous Coward]

i was under the impression that spider man and star wars ep. 2 came out this year, so inflation differences would be.... minimal

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted?

[BoneFlower]

I agree completely. Raw dollar amounts mean nothing... what matters is how many seats out of the total available were filled, and how long the movie kept filling those seats for.

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted?

[Cire]

A quick search on Google picks up a number of places that rank movies according with grosses adjusted for inflation:

Boxofficemojo.com

Boxofficereport.com

--Cire

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted?

[SpaceboyScott]

sorry, no account yet.

If you counted the number of tickets alone, one movie should dominate - Gone With the Wind. People across the country paid 5 cents each back in the day.

Even more amazing (if I recall), it was the movie that E.T. knocked off the top of the money list - with ticket prices at like 60x that of GWTW.

From one review - "To date, no film has sold more box-office tickets than Gone with the Wind. Domestically, the tally almost doubles that for the phenomenally-popular Titanic."

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted?

[GrenDel Fuego]

Has anyone asked the question, are the box office draws inflation adjusted?

What the heck are you talking about?

They're comparing Star Wars Episode 2, released this weekend with Spider Man, released 3 weeks ago. You want them to account for 3 weeks of inflation?

I'm guessing that you're trying to compare the original star wars series with either Spider Man or the new Star Wars movie, but that's not what the article is about.

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted?

[Anonymous Coward]

boxofficemojo has it at
1. Gone With the Wind
2. Star Wars
3. The Sound of Music
4. E.T.
5. The Ten Commandments

The most surprising entry in the top 10, imo, is Jaws at #6. Empire and Jedi are at 14 and 15, respectively. Phantom Menace is at #20.

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted?

[joshsisk]

Why is Jaws a suprise? It was a _huge_ movie that launched Spielberg's career, spawned several sequels, countless imitators and, along with SW, started the whole "event movie" trend.

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted?

[Atryn]

Yes, because clearly the year Gone with the Wind came out there was a ton of competition out there with other movies, tv, video games, night clubs, computers,and the many other forms of entertainment available.

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted?

[Anonymous Coward]

$4 back in 1985? I paid $4 to see Ep II at the 7:30pm showing on Saturday night. This was in Temple, Texas at Cinemark 5. What are ticket prices where you guys live?

How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars?

[Win-Developer]

Both movies had lame dialogue and wooden acting. They both had a character that chewed up the scenery everytime the character was on screen(Jar Jar/ Willem Dafoe). Spider-Man had lame-o effects and a piss poor ending, while star wars had better effects and a piss poor ending.

At least star wars didn't have the oft repeated line "with great power comes great responsibility" :) But Star Wars did have a laughable love story...so I guess they're about even.

But I think I've got Clones nailed down into a single comment..."Attack of the Clones is Pearl Harbor in Space". Both have lame love stories and bad acting, and in the end...everything goes boom!

Re:How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars?

[Malc]

I agree with you about the acting. Lucas does a fabulous job with the technical details and CGI, but when it comes to acting, he seems completely clueless. Character development is poor, and his ability to draw on the skills of top actors and actresses is appalling.

The romance was supposed to be one of the key parts of the story, yet the scenes were jarringly bad. The whole scene towards the end where Natalie Portman was sprawling stunned on the sand then suddenly got up was right out of (no offense intended): "Dummies Guide to Winning Penalties and Freekicks Using the Acting Skills of South American and Italian Footballers"

Re:How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars?

[autopr0n]

At least star wars didn't have the oft repeated line "with great power comes great responsibility" :) But Star Wars did have a laughable love story...so I guess they're about even.

Keep in mind the first time that phrase was ever uttered was in a spider-man comic. And how is it worse then any of the idiotic cliches in SW? "He's not taking the hint?". Or just plain idiocy "I'm beside myself!"

Re:How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars?

[DarkRabbit]

At least star wars didn't have the oft repeated line "with great power comes great responsibility" :)

Of course not ... it had plenty of other 'oft repeated line's!

"May the force be with you" ... "Use the force!"

Re:How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars?

[mlsemon2]

The romance parts were actually good. Anakin was supposed to be inexperienced and clumsy. He did better than I did first time out. I was expecting to stammer and beat my head against the wall during the scenes, but that didn't happen.

The rest of the acting wasn't so hot, though. Obi-Wan carried the movie as far as I was concerned. I don't know what to make of Mace Windu. For Samuel L. Jackson to not have his trademark bad-ass attitude...I'm not sure if that was bad acting or the acting challenge of his career.

Re:How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars?

[Moonshadow]

The dialog in SW was some of the worst I've been subjected to. Ever. I've heard Ep II described as "a porno without the sex".

Yeah, that's about right.

Re:How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's funny, I thought Dafoe was one of the best parts of Spider-Man. Especially when he's in front of that mirror -- that guy's got mad acting chops.

Re:How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am totally biased because I loved spider-man
as a kid and was only so-so about star wars,
but I say spider-man was a better film because
in the end, I cared more for the characters
(Peter and MJ) than with AOTC.

Anakin was a whiny brat, Amidala a monotone
cardboard figure (Leia had MUCH more
personality), Obi-wan a bland
father figure that basically said 'no'
or 'you can't do that' to Anakin throughout
the movie, etc. Lots of CGI bots/clones
fighting... who cares?

as for stupid lines, how about
"I have a bad feeling about this"
"be mindful of your thoughts"
"much you have to learn about the ways of the force"
bleah

Re:How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars?

[dytin]

I personally thought that Samuel L. Jackson was pretty bad-ass. I mean, when he walks up, holds out his purple light-saber in front of Jango's head and says "This party's over" How could younot think that was the most bad-ass thing in the movie? (with the possible exception of Yoda's "much to learn you still have, Dooku") Although, he should have been in the movie more, IMHO.

Spider-man is better?

[schwatoo]

Yeah I thought so too. I just loved that scene with the New Yorkers on the bridge throwing down junk at the Green Goblin to distract him from beating up Spidey. "You mess with him and you mess with us!".

As plot devices go that's up there with destroying an Alien battle fleet with a PowerMac and Word Macro Virus

Re:Spider-man is better?

[tshoppa]

"You mess with him and you mess with us!"

The comic-book atmosphere is a big part of Spider-Man's success, IMHO, and the New Yorkers are very very much a part of it.

My favorite part was where Spiderman (in his "ordinary" persona) sits down with his arch-nemesis (also in his "ordinary" persona) for Thanksgiving Dinner. Big plot device because that's where the bad guy figures out who the good guy is.

I think Star Wars would be better if it got back more towards its roots in sci-fi serials.

Re:Spider-man is better?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, one lame scene vs. an entire lame movie. Gee, tough call.

Re:Spider-man is better?

[big_cat79]

The correct quote is "You mess with one of us, you mess with all of us", which Sam Raimi put in after September 11th, as a tribute to how New Yorkers, Washingtonians, and Americans in general came together after the attacks.

Re:Spider-man is better?

[darksaber]

With all the bitching about the scene, you'd think that Green Goblin gave up and went home at that point muttering about damn patriotism. If so, who was beating the crap out of Spiderman a few minutes later, albeit in a more discreet location.

Do you think he really wanted to be distracted by all the New Yorkers? In the worst case (very unlikely), he might have been knocked off the glider which would have been annoying. Anyway, if I recall correctly, he still wanted to get Spidey to go bad which is difficult when he has backup.

Re:Spider-man is better?

[4iedBandit]

As plot devices go that's up there with destroying an Alien battle fleet with a PowerMac and Word Macro Virus

What? You haven't seen all those Intel commercials featuring Pentiums powering alien spacecraft? You laugh now, but that Word Macro Virus is going to save this planets collective ass someday...

Re:Spider-man is better?

[jmoriarty]

As plot devices go that's up there with destroying an Alien battle fleet with a PowerMac and Word Macro Virus

I had no problem with that plot device. Any Alien battle fleet that doesn't keep up with the latest Office patches from Microsoft deserves what they get.

Re:Spider-man is better?

[Anonymous Coward]

"So your alien had a room at the Holiday Inn in Paramus?"

And he used "Word" too?

While I don't like to whine...

[mblase]

..."Episode II" did cheat slightly by opening on a Thursday, giving it an extra day to profit that Spider-Man lacked. (OTOH, it also opened on fewer screens, although I personally find that hard to believe as my local mega-theaters gave "Spider-Man" four screens opening weekend and "Episode II" got five.)

I personally think it will be more interesting to see how business is on the second weekend, which "Spider-Man" did extremely well on, after everyone's had a chance to hear and read reviews from their friends.

Not that I'm bedrudging "Episode II", mind you. I have yet to see it, but everyone seems suitably pleased with it. I just like to keep everything in perspective, and remember Mark Twain's warning about statistics as the third basic kind of lie.

Re:While I don't like to whine...

[Cheeko]

From what I've read the fewer screens isn't so much from the mega-plexes with like 20 screens, but rather the indipendent theaters. Lucas and 20th Century put some pretty big demands on theaters in regard to how long it had to stay on their biggest screen and revenue sharing, etc. All of which made it much more difficult for the smaller theaters with only like 4-5 screens to show the movie, and still operate normally.

This is at least what I gathered from an article that was on CNN a week ago. A quick scan didn't find the article, and I haven't had my coffee yet, so I'm too lazy to hunt. If I find it, I'll post it here.

You suck

[Anonymous Coward]

Spiderman is not better. LOL.

I'd go see it again

[dmuth]

And probally will, just to see Yoda in action.

I don't know how to describe it. It was like...Kermit the Frog on crack!

Re:I'd go see it again

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought Yoda looked more like a Mexican Jumping Bean with a tooth pick stuck in it :)

Re:I'd go see it again

[Anonymous Coward]

I did not come up with this I found it somewhere in the last few days(the origin eludes me I'm afraid) but I think this sums up the whole Yoda thing:

'Yoda is like Bruce Lee, Mister Myagi, and Kermit the Frog all rolled into one!!'

Re:I'd go see it again

[Geek In Training]

I did not come up with this I found it somewhere in the last few days(the origin eludes me I'm afraid) but I think this sums up the whole Yoda thing:

'Yoda is like Bruce Lee, Mister Myagi, and Kermit the Frog all rolled into one!!'

Good eye!! It's from my Score:0 Offtopic comment posted right after I saw the movie in digital on opening night.

A major Karma burn, but at the time I had to post, and I didn't have a convenient target thread. Here was my review, attacched to the videogame thread that night:

-----
The Indie Game Jam is a yearly game design and programming event designed to encourage experimentation and innovation in the game industry...

Whoop-tee-doo! :P Most of us 12:01am showing folks just got back from Episode II premiers. It's 4am, I saw it in digital with 11 close friends. Concensus reaction:

OH MY FUCKING GAWD.

(In a jaw-dropped, wide-eyed, wired-at-3am , good kind of way :)

The big surprise was that we somehow got the "Director's Cut," which according to the theater manager, was 11 minutes longer than the celluloid version. Which makes sense, since we were dispersing behind the 12:05 showing and right alongside the 12:10 showing, both of which were "non-digital" formal.

Valley View Cinemark in Ohio RULES!

Favorite quote was some dude commenting to the media after the movie: "Yoda is like Bruce Lee, Mister Myogi, and Kermit the Frog all rolled into one!!"

:D :D

Re:I'd go see it again

[Grab]

To literally see that, I suggest you watch "Meet the Feebles". Classic Friday night post-pub film! :-)

Grab.

Re:I'd go see it again

[dmuth]

I suggest you watch "Meet the Feebles".

Already have. Many times, in fact. :-)

Re:I'd go see it again

[Erik Hollensbe]

Ironically, this movie was also directed by Peter Jackson (LOTR fame)

Spider Man was better....

[neilb78]

I'm a pretty hardcore starwars freak, but I thought Spider Man was better than AOTC. I think we should all go see them both again :)

$183M International

[rosewood]

Reuters says:

Ticket sales for the new "Star Wars" movie were out of this world, racking up $183 million at box offices worldwide in the first four days of release. According to studio estimates issued on Sunday, "Star Wars: Episode II -- Attack of the Clones," grossed an estimated $116.3 million across the United States and Canada.

Re:$183M International

[yetiman]

you've gotta remember that spider-man hasn't even been released in most places overseas. Some places in europe have almost a three month wait before it gets there.

Re:$183M International

[rosewood]

That is just painful - why do they have to wait so long? I deduce that asian markets are last due to piracy issues (although the logic is flawed - if I lived in Japan and could buy a screener on the street for a few yen and the movie wont be playing for a few more MONTHS then I would - however, if it were at the local DynaPlex then Id just go see it like I do here in the States)

I do not get this crap about spider-man vs star wars. Can the two movies not co-exist? Can we not see both? If we liked Star Wars more then spider-man are we suposed to see it two times as much?

Im sure spider-man and star wars will do fine internationally

See it again.

[techwolf]

I found myself watching it the first time for "what happens next". I went again this weekend and enjoyed it WAY more because I watched what was happening. The subtle detail in each scene put a smile on my face more often than not.

TheForce.net had a good thread running about "the little things" in the film.

I think the repeat business will keep Clones going for a little bit.

-techwolf

Re:See it again.

[sykora]

The little things were good, yes, but it didn't save the movie for me. I went back to see it hoping I'd like it more, but I almost fell asleep during it the second time. It was too slow, and nothing really happened. There really seemed to be no plot, just a huge leadup to Episode III.

Re:See it again.

[Anonymous Coward]

I went to see it a second time, sat through the boring first hour and then just as the action was about to kick in....

.... the film snapped in the projector and the house lights came up!

The multiplex in question (UCI) don't employ projectionists these days, so no chance of fixing it.

Not even a refund, just a free-entry ticket to a future showing later.

So now I have to watch that first hour a THIRD TIME!

Re:See it again.

[dytin]

Ok, I read that thread, and they kept talking about Qui Gon's voice, or his call from beyond. Where was this in the movie?

BTW, my favorite little detail in the movie was on Tatooine when Anikin was saying goodbye to Padme right before he went to look for his mom. If you look closly Anikin's shadow looks mysterously like Darth Vader's shadow. I though that was so cool.

stop the starwars bashing here

[the_2nd_coming]

hello....Episodes 1-3 are the begining of the saga.

if the entire starwars saga was in a 2 hour film, 1-3 would be the first 45 min to hour.....that is always the worst part of a movie, but does it hurt your total experience? no.

4-6 are the climax, and 7-9......well, in book form.....are the resolution.

oh, and an entertainment reporter today on the radio siad that Lucas has told her that E3 will be the Darkest episode of all Starwars films.....I assume the bad guy totaly destroys the good guy and it will leave us with a bad taste, but.....it is supose to happen that way folks....any way...back to replaying the yoda fight in my head :-)

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[delphi125]

Considering the original Star Wars had Obi Wan Kenobi living in a cave in the Desert, The Empire Strikes Back had Yoda living in a swampy hellhole, and the entire Trilogy had Anakin Skywalker be Darth Vader (spoiler: except for the last few minutes), evil number 2 of a galactic empire, I assume that the good guys all stay undestroyed, with the exception of Anakin's lungs. These will attempt to burst through his chest in an effort to stop him having yet another rage of raging rage, but Emperor Palpitating will perform a quick lung bypass operation using a cloud of midichlorians, an old vacuum cleaner and a packet of cigarettes (not 'lights', sillies, nor filters). The only Jedi's to be totally destroyed by bad guys will be the faceless ones; SLJ and any other sympathetic characters who simply have to go will sacrifice themselves valiantly.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[the_2nd_coming]

no, until the birth of Luke, the jedi order was destroyed and thought to be totaly extinced....the good guys loose so badly that all hope is lost....then you get to episode 4, "a new hope" refering to Luke being the new hope.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[Anonymous Coward]

4-6 are the climax, and 7-9......well, in book form.....are the resolution.

7-9? I know Lucas talks about this series like its some huge nine part master plan, but 7-9 have yet to be written.
I'm sure he has some ideas in head, but I really doubt there's any concrete story past Return of the Jedi.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[the_2nd_coming]

read all the books that take place after return of the jedi, those are the story for 7-9.

oh, and he is not anouncing 7-9 until he had Harrison Ford on board. he does not want to promis somthing that he might not be able to come up with.

remember, Lucas is not a hollywood ditto head, he wants to tell the story EXACTLY the way he has in his head. if ford does not come on board, he will not make them, however, if a ditto head made the movies, tey would pull some moron to play Han Solo.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[Anonymous Coward]

I've read a good 15 books that take place after Jedi. The Zahn trilogy, Kevin Anderson's Books, Correlian trilogy, black fleet crisis, and a whole bunch of other ones.

Still, none of these are episodes 7-9.

The books for these will come out after Lucas writes a screeplay.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[the_2nd_coming]

no, I did not sa they WERE the episodes, what I mean is that those books are the totality of what happens after jedi, and by that you can extrapolate what 7-9 will be about. you doubt that Lucas will pull a great amount of his material from those books?

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[Anonymous Coward]

As cool as some of those books were(Anderson's Darksaber rocked, anyhting by barbara hambly sucked hairy goat balls), I can't see Lucas using them.
The reason is simply, they don't take place far enough after Jedi.

We know Luke as Hamill, Leia as Fisher, and Solo as Ford. The problem is those actors are too old now. The stories written after Jedi are centered around those main three.

Episode three doesn't come out till 2005. The orininal cast is gonna be elderly by the time Lucas gets to working on episode 7 if he does at all.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[Chindi]

From what I saw on the Ep.I DVD, Lucas has stated that he will not make any more SW movies after Ep.III. We'll see.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[Anonymous Coward]

ever hear of make-up?

Hamel, he looks the same, and ford as well as fisher can be made up to look 10 years younger.

realy, though, I think the saga will be centered more on concluding the entire story line around bringing balence to the force.

with Luke turning and having him the sole bearer of the Jedi Skills, I would like to know what keeps him from going all the way over to the dark side.....and, other such interesting things.....I must admit, I never read any of the books, thoiugh I intend to do a lot of reading now that I do not have to work.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[the_2nd_coming]

he says that, but he is in active discussions with Ford...I bet....I mean he is the stop gap to making the final episodes, and realy, if all else fails, I see no reason that he can not just settle on 3 diffrent actors, or creativly remove Ford and focus more on Luke and Leia, or even just have Luke and leia's children as slightly older kids....I mean....Leia would be a good leader for the new republic and Fisher can just be around as part of the plot line, as Luke can run around the universe doing his Jedi think, Han can be writen out as dieing (yes, I know he is a major part of it, but.....oh well..it is the future, and it is not writen yet.)

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[Anonymous Coward]

Luke does go to the dark side. If you can find the Dark Empire series. It a comic book or "graphic novel" whatever.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[Anonymous Coward]

oh well..it is the future, and it is not writen yet

But I thought it was a long, long time ago?

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[Anonymous Coward]

the future in the time line, and is not a recorded part of the story.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[jo42]

Unfortunately, both Ford and Fisher are now wrinkly olde folks...

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[Anonymous Coward]

Lucas has already stated that the books are not part of the official continuity.

They've already been fundamentally contradicted by the prequels, and are little more than printed fan-fiction.

Re:stop the starwars bashing here

[Anonymous Coward]

ah the wonders of makup and face lifts ;-)

Re:i will wait

[Anonymous Coward]

Thief.

WTF is Taco smoking?

[Big_Ass_Spork]

The first half of Spiderman is a redundant piece of shit to anyone who read the comic (or even watched the TV show). AotC, OTOH, is the best (by far) installment of the SW saga. Reevaluate thyself, then try again.

Re:WTF is Taco smoking?

[joshsisk]

The first half of Spiderman is a redundant piece of shit to anyone who read the comic

So you think they should limit the movie's audience to only those who read the comic? Sounds like a good business strategy.

I mean, LOTR was pretty redundant, if you look at it that way. And something tells me I already know what's gonna happen in the next two in the series as well...

Re:WTF is Taco smoking?

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

"AotC, OTOH, is the best (by far) installment of the SW saga". Please, "Reevaluate thyself, then try again". The new SW movies are eye candy. The thing that made the first ones great (good writing?) are not as evident in AotC, although it was far better then Phantom Menace.

Re:WTF is Taco smoking?

[3.5 stripes]

The thing that made the first ones great (good writing?) are not as evident in AotC

Writing nothing, it was the fact that you were probably still young and impressionable, as I was, because when I finally re-watched it (star wars), I was severely disapointed... maybe I'm jaded though.

Re:WTF is Taco smoking?

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

No, actually, the writing was better. One of the best parts of the original was the little comments and quips the characters made to each other. They were totally unnecessary to move the plot along, but they made the characters interesting, more believable, and worth watching the movie for. The more recent movies were not blessed with this dialogue, and the characters were flat and dull because of it.

Re:WTF is Taco smoking?

[Strog]

I was reading the comic 15-20 years ago from time to time. A little redundancy would be good for people like me. Let's me get back up to speed.

I knew several things that were going on in Ep2 but I still enjoyed that.

I had just reread LOTR before I saw the movie and I wish they had more of this kind of redundancy. You can only do so much with 3 hours. They would have had to cut stuff even if it was 8 hours.

Redundant can be a good thing.

Re:WTF is Taco smoking?

[Anonymous Coward]

The first half of Spiderman is a redundant piece of shit to anyone who read the comic

Actually, the whole movie is pretty much redundant to anyone who has read the comic.
But it didn't stop me from enjoying the movie at all, and I've read plenty of them.

Re:WTF is Taco smoking?

[MoneyT]

Watch AotC again, there is lots of that sort of humorous dialouge going on. But it's all missed if you sit there going

"Where is the deep and moving conversations and where is the quality acting and where are the quality sex inducing romance scenes."

If you go looking for the above, you will miss the rest of the moive and you'll hate it.

Re:WTF is Taco smoking?

[MoneyT]

Haven't watched the originals in a while have you?

Re:WTF is Taco smoking?

[jazzydnb]

I totally agree - WTF is this d!ck smoking?!? I haven't even seen AOTC, but I'm sure it's a hell of a lot better than that crap called Spiderman. There is no comparison

Re:WTF is Taco smoking?

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

Admittedly, there was more dialogue than in Episode 1, and I _do_ like AotC, but it isn't quite up to where the originals were.

Only about 86 million when compared to Spider-Man

[thaigan]

Spider-Man did it in three days without a mid-night opening.

Here's a snippet from hollywood.com: 20th Century Fox and Lucasfilm's PG rated franchise installment Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones exploded in first place with an ESTIMATED $86.15 million at 3,161 theaters ($27,254 per theater).

After opening to $30,141,417 for Wednesday midnight screenings and Thursday, its four day cume is approximately $116.29 million. By comparison, Spider-Man's record setting opening was $114.8 million for a normal three day weekend (May 3-5).

Star Wars' average per theater was the highest for any film playing this weekend.

Directed by George Lucas, it stars Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman and Hayden Christensen.

"That's the third best three day regular weekend opening ever after Spider-Man's $114 million and $90 million for Harry Potter," Fox distribution president Bruce Snyder said Sunday morning.

"It's the second fastest to $100 million. Of course, Spider-Man did it in three days and this is four. The previous record was Star Wars: Episode I in five days. It opened on a Wednesday (May 19, 1999). Its five day number was $105.659 million. So we've kind of blown past that in four days with $116.291 million on this one. It's just terrific and we're delighted."

Looking back at Episode I -- The Phantom Menace, Snyder noted, "Its Wednesday, the opening day, was $28.5 million. That was the high water mark for the run. The next best day was $24.4 million on Saturday (of weekend one). In this case, we opened to $30.1 million, went to $25.2 million on Friday and Saturday looks like $32.25 million, so it's actually above the opening day and the opening day, remember, had the Midnight shows (from Wednesday) folded in. So this is really a spectacular performance."

Phantom Menace wound up grossing $431.1 million in domestic theaters. Its worldwide total (domestic plus international) was $923 million. Asked about reports that Clones' Wednesday midnight shows had ticket sales of approximately $6 million, Snyder replied, "Something in that area. It depends on how they got folded into (the total for Thursday), but I think that's a fair estimate."

Here's the breakdown of box office report

AOTC: Starcraft monster?

[RabidMonkey]

Did anyone else notice that one of the monsters in the 'arena' scene looked a lot like a Hydralisk, with the front legs of a Zergling? Maybe even a lurker?

I just saw it last night and laughed when I saw that one ...

The thing I enjoyed most was the subtle changing of the background theme towards the Imperial March ... it was so subtle that it was cool ...

Anyways, ok movie. I have to see it again to cast a better judgement.

Re:AOTC: Starcraft monster?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did any one notice in the preview for tom cruise's sci-fi movie that the cops were all driving clones of the Fett's Slave 1?

Re:AOTC: Starcraft monster?

[Anonymous Coward]

Blizzard should sue ... that would be ironic on so many levels ...

inflation

[austad]

They obviously aren't figuring inflation into this number. Wouldn't it be a little more accurate to list how many tickets were sold instead? Then the numbers could be compared against movies from years ago when it only cost $2-$4 for a ticket.

I think it's BS to say that "Movie X" is the biggest money maker of all time when movies used to cost 30% of what they do now.

Re:inflation

[mshiltonj]

They obviously aren't figuring inflation into this number. Wouldn't it be a little more accurate to list how many tickets were sold instead?

The inflation-adjusted top movies of all time list for viewing pleasure...

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted/

Re:inflation

[jspey]

The movie industry doesn't adjust for inflation on purpose. Not adjusting for inflation means that movies will keep bringing in more and more money, allowing studios to say that such-and-such a movie broke lots of box office records in all their ads.

Mr. Spey

Re:inflation

[azadrozny]

Adjusting for inflation is better, but counting tickets is just as problematic. There are more people today than there was 25 or even 50 years ago. The most accurate indicator would be what percentage of the viewing population saw the movie. That would even account for people like me who will go see the movie more than once. This is how TV ratings are calculated.

Re:inflation

[joshsisk]

The most accurate indicator would be what percentage of the viewing population saw the movie. That would even account for people like me who will go see the movie more than once.

How would you figure that out though, assuming that many people do see a movie more than once and given that ticket sales are anonymous?

Also, note that the industry probably doesn't care what percentage saw it as much as they care how many tickets sold. A movie that 1,000,000 people see once would not look as good in their eyes as a movie 500,000 people saw 4 times each.

Re:inflation

[BoneFlower]

What I'd like to see is a percentage of seats filled. Say a movie fills all of its 10,000 seats, I'd say it does better than another movie filling 12,000 of its 20,000 seats.

Re:inflation

[zzyzx]

That's not fair either because there are things like tv and video games that weren't competition for the movies in the 30's. I don't think there can be just one metric.

Re:inflation

[azadrozny]

Poling samples would be a good way to figure out how many people actually saw the movie. There would be some margin of error, but it would be a good indicator of how popular a movie is. Hollywood does alot of this in the conceptual phase of developing movies. Before spending $200 milion they have to figure out if that have a large enough audience of people willing to see a movie once or group of dedicated people willing to see it 10 times.

You have to first figure out what you are trying to measure. If you want to measure popularity, which many people are trying to do between Spiderman and Episode 2 dollar amounts are not going to cut it. It is too confusing, because you have to adjust for facts like, Ep2 had a midnight release but Spiderman opened on more screens. Hollywood is interested in how much profit they made on a movie so gross dollars is fine for them.

Re:i will wait

[$0 31337]

wtf was that post for? Did you want everyone to think your a l33t pirate because you can download *COUGH* DVD Rips? Woopty Fucking Doo. Who can't download DVD rips? They're everywhere! "Huhuhuh... I just downloaded some MP3s mofo! I'm soooo badass and l337. ph3@r m3!"

Get a fucking life.

Totally Predictable

[GeckoX]

Look, the fact that Spiderman beat out SWep2 on their respective opening weekends was pretty much written in stone a couple of weeks ago.

Here's the bottom line:

Spiderman was released into close to HALF of all the theatres in north america, partially because there was nothing else out at the time to compete at all. (The 3 or 4 Mega-Theatre complexes near me had it playing in at LEAST half of their theatres).

Two weeks later, SWep2 is released, but has to be stuffed in alongside Spidey.

In other words, it comes down to simple basic supply-demand. SWep2 just wasn't in enough theaters to generate the same amount of revenue on opening weekend as spiderman. That's it folks.

Really has very little to do with which is better.
They're both great flicks and both have high demand. If SWep2 and spidey's release had been reversed, you could likely just swap their opening weekend revenues dollar for dollar.

So, don't get your panties in a bundle that SWep2 didn't make as much as spidey on opening weekend because there was ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that it could have. Physically impossible, period.

Attack Of The Clones..

[Chicane-UK]

Finally went to see that this weekend - and was surprised to see people queueing still at 12:20am to watch the film even though it had been out for a few days already.

I wonder what its gonna be like for Spiderman, when they finally release it over here in a month or so?

Re:Attack Of The Clones..

[quigonn]

I wondered even more when I went to the local cinema on May 17th, and only 20 people watching the movie! I already experienced this with Episode I. Maybe all the people are so pessimistic. "Oh, I'm sure, it's sold out, so let's go in a few days".

Episode I

[debrain]

Could someone explain to me how it is possible that Episode I, which turned so many people off to Star Wars, grossed less than its successor? If you didn't see Episode I, what are the odds that you would see Episode II?

I know that our theatre, in the interim, had a $2 hike in prices. I wonder if it is related to the monotonic increasing revenues.

Anyone else find it odd that Episode II garnered more money than Episode I, though?

Re:Episode I

[the_2nd_coming]

no, becasue Episode I was not that bad.

arg...it was the begining of the entire saga, not a stand alone movie.....saying episode I was a bad movie is about a brilient as the folks who complained about the ending of Felloship of the rings.

Re:Episode I

[chrisvr]

Well, I think that everyone who saw Episode 1 also saw Episode II. I think the price hike is factored in so that shouldn't affect comparing revenues.

I think it's the fact that Episode II was shown on regular and digital screens, so for that reason alone, people (well, fanboys) were more likely to see it twice. And although I don't agree, most people seem to think II was better than I, so thus were also more likely to see it twice.

Re:Episode I

[joshsisk]

arg...it was the begining of the entire saga, not a stand alone movie.....saying episode I was a bad movie is about a brilient as the folks who complained about the ending of Felloship of the rings.

I find this arguement, which is on /. so much, really silly. Of course it is a stand alone movie. If you go see it in a theater by its self, it is standing alone. If someone pays $8+ to see it, not the other SW films, so it needs to be a fun piece of entertainment on it's own merits, or that person will feel like they wasted their money.

Sure, the events in the movie inform the other films, but the movie can be appreciated (or not) on it's own merits.

Re:Episode I

[Anonymous Coward]

if you went to see it for the right reason it can be appreciated on its own merits.

what its merrits are:

it is the origin of "Anakin the jedi"

that is what is importent, and going in wanting to see how the story unfolds rather than to see "oh yay lets see some shooting and watch the good guys win" then you are not dissapointed.

Re:Episode I

[Znork]

Actually, it was. It was bad enough to skip episode II completely. And Episode I wasnt bad because it was the first of a saga; the lack of advancing storyline could be forgiven; it was bad because it was a cross between CGI-grossout and slapstick comedy, the first which leaves you with a bored 'yeah yeah, been done before', the second which maybe is humourous to a fiveyearold but most have grown out of it.

I've given up on Lucas. He showed promise with Episodes IV and V, but then he lost his creativity and touch. The best he could do for the series would be to leave it to someone with a vision.

Re:Episode I

[Grab]

If it's the beginning of the saga, the rest of the saga has to be in place. Be assured that Lucas is making this shit up as he goes along and as CGI FX get cheaper. Since Lucas apparently crapped on the SW fiction writers bigstyle (I'm not into the books, but the word is that the films are way inconsistent with the books), then I'd hazard a guess that he doesn't much care about writing a consistent saga.

Let's be honest here, the first film was never conceived as being the "fourth" film. It was only some time later that Lucas thought he could chisel some more money out by giving himself the room to do prequels.

Grab.

Re:Episode I

[the_2nd_coming]

dude...it is the writers who are the morons. "the fall of the sith empie is a good example." never is there a hint that there is a huge army of sith Knights ever in the origional 4-6.

and they ignore that Luke was turning to the dark side at the end of jedi..there writers and they don't get the imagry and meaning of Luke wearing black and losing his hand, and then he finaly strikes at the emporer in anger...he follows his father's foot steps exactly, and the writes make him out to be some Jedi knight who is pure....get real.....he began to turn to the dark side and the writers ignored it.

Re:Episode I

[the_2nd_coming]

so Lucas is suposed to present a more adult story that he did before? what ever...R2 and 3po were the slapstick in 4-6, Jar Jar was it in 1, and r2 and 3po are back at it in 2 and 3.

bad slapstick has been in every movie Lucas made, you have just not been able to notice since you were a kid when you saw 4-6, but now as a seriouse adult, you expect diffrent.

Re:Episode I

[tonywong]

You forgot to include the number of people who watch Ep. I by bootleg and DVD as well.

I didn't want to see Ep II on opening weekend but my buddy made me go for his birthday. Love Starwars, hate Lucas.

Re:Episode I

[seti32]

They did not ignore it. In MANY of the books Luke still struggles with the dark side, but ever time the light side wins in him. In the book 'Truce at Bakura' (which takes place immediately after RotJ) Luke deals with that a little, but more so with later books. It's been a while since I read them, but I do remember clearly that he almost turned to the dark side more than once. They could not turn him to the dark side permanently, though, because that would ruin the running theme of rebirth in the New Republic.

One thing the books haven't done is refer to the events of Episode 1-3 in anything but vague terms. When Episode 1 came out, books began incorporating that story, and I'm sure they are starting with Episode 2 now. Check: there is no book that I know of that describes the clone wars or the fall of the jedi (which are Episode 2-3). And if they do, it is general, and would fit with anything Lucas did concerning that topic. I believe some of the books did mention the name Dooku, but few other major players are mentioned.

Re:Episode I

[andrewjnr]

If it was never conceived as the fourth film, then how come it always has said "Episode IV: A New Hope" at the beginning?

Re:Episode I

[Grab]

It didn't. Lucas added it about a year after the original release, when he saw it was a big success, everyone was raving about it, and he realised he could make pots of money out of it. The original didn't have that heading.

Grab.

Re:Episode I

[Znork]

Not necessarily. R2 and 3po have similarities with Jar Jar (and I found 3po fairly annoying from the beginning), but they didnt get the same focus. Maybe it was that the other characters were stronger in 4-6, or that Lucas didnt quite feel the same need to demo his New Cool Graphics, because they became more (bad) comic relief than pretty much 'main feature'.

It is Lucas great fortune that technology wasnt up to making episodes 1-3 when he started out, because if he had made them in order, and if they had been as they are today, the story would have ended with episode I.

Paid for One, Sneaked in to the other..

[cOdEgUru]

My only qualm was I ended up adding to Lucas's coffers instead of giving it to Raimi. I think he deserved it more that Lucas.

If I had a gun I would first shoot that Hayden kid. I cant convey enough the fact that he sucked so bad. "I killed them all, I slaughtered them like animals"... booo..booo. Dude, you need a lesson in emotions. The only emotion he had was his head tilted sideways when he drives, a smug expression on his face.

Natalie, get a life. Get out of Starwars while you still can. You are better off with just hot grits poured over you.

Kenobi and Yoda and Sam Jackson kicked ass. Period. Kenobi, however was the best.

Direction was as bad as a b-grade movie. The way the movie switched between Kenobi and Hayden was done badly. I was more interested in what Kenobi does and I had to close my eyes when Hayden and Natalie were frolicking in grass. I have seen Bollywood movies which are better than this.

Spiderman was awesome. The movie could have had more action to it, but the character portrayals were real neat. Toby really put all his effort in to it and it showed. Watching him morph in to spiderman and learning his new skills were as exhilarating as if I were doing it myself.

Lucas could take a course in directing from Sam Raimi himself.

And better of all. LOTR still reigns supreme as the movie of the year. Peter jackson and his army of hobbits and wizards and orcs could whip the Clone army back to medieval era.

Re:Paid for One, Sneaked in to the other..

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm. Lucas actually gets the money from AOTC. Raimi doesnt really get anything beyond his usual directors cut - the vast majority of the cash goes to the various honchos at Sony/Columbia (with a *small* chunk to Marvel for the licensing rights). You need to remember that contrary to what it seems, Lucas is really an independent filmmaker (albeit a *very* big/rich one)

Re:Paid for One, Sneaked in to the other..

[digger3001]

Yeah for a second there I thought I was watching The Sound Of Music when they 'wiped' to the scene of them in the hilly field with flowers.

I was waiting for them to break into song.

Re:Paid for One, Sneaked in to the other..

[hkmwbz]

I liked Spider-Man, but it had plenty of flaws. For one, the beginning of the movie seemed too slow at times, while the end went by too fast. The director should have taken more care with the overall pace.

Everything in the movie was so obvious, and there were no surprises at all. The acting wasn't exactly the best either.

Many situations were just shortcuts or not very well thought through. For example, how can spidey and MJ fall in love with each other when they don't really know each other? And how could they not know each other after being neighbours for all their lives? I also think spidey got the hang of his powers a bit too easily.

However, it was definitely spiderman, and the action sequences were nice. The "love story" was a bit unnecessary, or it could at least have been done in more style. One gets the impression that this MJ girl is a bit of a slut, or has a problem making a commitment to one person. She's going steady with one guy while falling in love with Spider-Man and kissing him, and shortly thereafter she loves Peter Parker. Yes that's right, she suddenly loves him, even though they've hardly even talked.

But I digress. Spider-Man is well worth a watch, and now I can't ait to see AotC.

I think you've been smoking to much dreck.

[spoot]

Clones was no Bergman film...but good God, Spiderman was so lame and predictable that I literally laughed thru half of the dialogue. At least SW's didn't have Skywalker reaching for a Dr. Pepper! With all of the hatred of the corporate media here at slashdot, you would think that you could see thru the hype of this kind of Hollywood drivel. Spiderman was just a kiddy ride and a commercial masquerading as a movie.

Re:I think you've been smoking to much dreck.

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course Spiderman was predictable, it was a re-telling of Spidey's origin story! What else did you expect?

Re:I think you've been smoking to much dreck.

[Anonymous Coward]

Your comment is coarse and gritty, like sand, not soft and smooth, like Spider-Man.

My reasons for liking Spider-man better

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't remember where, but there was a review that starts "George, hire a real director and good writers for the next installment, please."

Spider-man was better because it didn't have near the amount of crappy love story. Also, the future Darth Vader can't be a whiner!

Two cents worth, please

[blankmange]

Here it is, my summation of AotC: dreadful, simply dreadful. Comparing it to Spider-Man is comparing apples and oranges, but I did have a much better time watching Spider-man. I must qualify this statement with the fact that I have been a Star Wars fan from the beginning, but this installment was appalling. Why would a 2 & 1/2 hour movie need a hour's worth of a teen angst/love story that seemingly has no plot, especially when we know that Anakin will eventually turn his back on the Jedi in the end? Why are there no truly evil villains? Sure Count Dooku and Darth Sidius want to overthrow the Federation and create the Empire.... big deal. I miss the taut story lines and highly-defined characters of Episodes 4 - 6. Episode 1 had Darth Maul, but for far too short of time -- we need a bad guy. Granted, rumors of Episode 3 say that a bad guy will emerge (let me guess.... Vader?) but that is 2 episodes too late...

So ends my rant, please begin the flames.....

Re:Two cents worth, please

[Anonymous Coward]

"Why would a 2 & 1/2 hour movie need a hour's worth of a teen angst/love story that seemingly has no plot, especially when we know that Anakin will eventually turn his back on the Jedi in the end?"

Would you have preferred a 10 min one night stand instead? Sure Lucas can't do love dialogue worth shit but he needed to show anakin losing his wife (and his kids eventually). Otherwise Luke would have never been around.

"Why are there no truly evil villains? Sure Count Dooku and Darth Sidius want to overthrow the Federation and create the Empire.... big deal"

** SPOILER **

Did you not see Count Dooku holding plans to the death star. The same death star that will destroy an entire planet. These bad guys make Hitler's camps seem insignificant when you make plans to destroy entire planets at a time.

Obviously, I liked Episode 2. I thought the huge fight scenes made it worth it to see. Actually, 1 minute of Yoda fighting is worth it all.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[the_2nd_coming]

go ahead and mod me down for flaiming, but.....

you are a fucking idiot.

there is no well defined bad guy because the bad guys have not made themselfs known to the jedi. this is so conviluted becasue, if you would think, palpatine is hatching the plan to take over the republic...he now has the authority, he will now destroy the droid army (that the people in control of the droids think are actulay fighting on a diffent side than the senate...ha...idiots) and consolidate his power by killing amadala (who is his cheif rival)

the Jedi think they are fighting for the republic, when they are realy fighting for the Empire.

it is a con and the Jedi are obliviouse to it.

we do not need a bad guy, this is not a one movie one story plot, it is a multi movie 1 story plot......the bad guy is mysterious...you are not a fan of the starwars mythology you dolt, you are a fan of shootem up movies that take place in spoace and have a quick fix for morons.....pick up on the mythology, it will make you much happier........OH and if you did not realise you idiot...Anakin falling in love and marrying Padme is VERY VERY importent to the entire saga....how else is Luke and Leia supose to be born?

moron.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[chrisvr]

Episode II (as your oh so well worded defense above shows) was a movie that was directed solely towards the fanboy base.

Why is there no villain? Because "Palpatine is hatching a plan". Well, big whoop. That's essential to the overall arc of the saga but weakens the storyline of this one because there is no payoff in this movie. It's all positioning and conniving that ultimately fits into its place in the big puzzle but, as a standalone effort, makes this movie seems directionless.

Why does Anakin fall in love with and marry Padme? Because (as you say so coherently above) it's "VERY VERY importent to the entire saga....how else is Luke and Leia supose to be born?" Again, the love story is a plot point that makes the saga makes sense, but as a one off event, makes no sense whatsoever. Fine, Anakin still has a schoolboy crush on Padme, I'll buy that. But why the hell does she fall in love with him? Seriously, give me one good reason any mature, self respecting woman would be attracted to this dolt. He's a whiny, brooding child whose favorite phrase is "It's not fair." There is absolutely no chemistry between these two characters. I watched a bit of Empire Strikes Back this weekend- and THERE is some chemistry. Han and Leia are a joy to watch... none of that is evident in Anakin and Padme's relationship. It happens because it has to. The end. Again, it makes for a good saga but a lousy movie.

I think Episode III is going to kick ass simply because there is absolutely no way it can't. Every single detail of the plot has been set up, so no wasting time on trying to make it make sense. We know where it's going, so the suprise is not going to be what happens, but how it happens. If there is a shred of writing talent on Lucas's team, they can't screw it up.

Whether this is a multi-movie plot or not, a good writer could have made every individual episode stand alone as its own separate drama, and not leave its fanboys having to defend it (as you do) by saying "well of course it's no good by itself... it only makes sense as part of a multi-movie plot." Ok, yeah, whatever.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello , most people are not critizing the story of sw - it is the extremely bad directing/scripting performed by George Lucas

This man should take a look at him self and realize that he can't direct!
( just look at who directed the 2 really great sw episodes ESB and ROJ , ANH was more the revolution than a great movie )

and leave it up to someone good to direct this great story , but i don't think we should get our hopes up . becouse this mad man thinks he is the best director that ever lived...

Re:Two cents worth, please

[Anonymous Coward]

a good writer? oh you mean those assholes who know how to make a mainstream pop-movie...ok.

the rest of your message was total BS.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[Anonymous Coward]

I can accept that, but I cannot accept the others who say the movie sucks and write off the entire saga.......

yeah, all the movies blew ass directer wise, but the story is what is importent.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[Anonymous Coward]

fanboy fanboy fanboy you are a fucking clueless fanboy.

Every post you have made on this whole board shows that you have no perspective beyond your sad little Star wars universe.

Go play naughty games with your Amidala doll now and leave the adults to discuss things intelligently.

neener neener neener

Re:Two cents worth, please

[Anonymous Coward]

and THIS part of the story sucked. it's possible to say that and still like the overall saga.

unless you're a raving fanboy who has no perspective and no idea of what makes a movie good beyond whether or not it has good action figures for his collection.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[blankmange]

Just wanted to thank and acknowledge your response to "the_2nd_coming", above -- your statement made my response moot. It is a shame that devotion to the whole saga would make someone blind to the single movie being dreadful...

Re:Two cents worth, please

[chrisvr]

Yeah, I just don't get it when people are so blindly devoted to the Star Wars franchise that they can't see the problems with it. And people who must resort to nasty name calling when they encounter people who disagree with them, well, I just don't understand those folks. If you've got a coherent position, state it and respect that some may agree, some may not. I'm a fan but as with any part of my life, I take an objective stance and

I went into the movie on Thursday intending to like it. Wanting to like it. And I'm sad (as I was after TPM) that I can't like it (although I can thankfully like parts of it, like the jedi battle and Yoda going all mofo.)

Ah well, as I said, I am totally looking forward to Episode III.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[Anonymous Coward]

yes, I am a fanboy, so what.

I will be the first to say that all the movies Suck ass alone, the only thing that makes them good is that they are part of a series. and the fact that you can not see that makes you a fucking fanboy of crapy battle movies.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[Sinistar2k]

I had a lot of problems with EP2, and, as is the usual disclaimer, I'm a long-time fan. Saw ANH when I was four, still have a good chunk of my toys from childhood (and buy new ones when they come out), and even instituted "Star Wars T-Shirt Friday" where I work (and am the only participant).

So, my fan credentials are squarely on the table.

Having said that, EP2 was a pile of crap. Story-wise, it was great, really. It was complex, it opened just as many doors as it closed, and it gave us more peeks into the future that was solidified in episodes 4-6. But the execution of that story, the telling of it, the directing of it, well, sucked balls.

In a review I had written for some coworkers, I stated that Anakin had all the charm and personality of a date rapist. That might have been a bit strong, but it isn't totally without merit. Anakin had essentially been fantasizing about Amidala for 10 years by the time they were reunited, so his level of obsession was pretty deep. He was going to do whatever it took to win her over, but his way of doing it is just damn creepy - questioning her authority, saying he's been dreaming of her, launching into speeches about his burning desire for her. The only genuine thing he does is protect her, but it comes across as just a calculated means to an end of getting into her pants. This makes sense - he's obsessed, he's arrogant, and he feels there's no reason why Amidala shouldn't be his. Great. But then, how exactly does Amidala take this to be anything other than having a Jedi stalker? How does she actually fall in love with him when he's being a freak about everything? And yes, it's awfully tragic to lose your mother after, um, not seeing her for 10 years (next time, at least send a card!), but when you come back from retrieving your mother and say, "I killed them like animals", you know, I'll feel all sorry for your loss and stuff, but I'm going to be pretty freaked out that you went all barbarian on a bunch of kids. It seems to me like any self-respecting senator/former queen would recognize that guys who slaughter kids are bad news. But no, she falls in love with him. Go figure.

So, we spend over half the movie on this 'love story' that really contains no love and little story. Seems to me that it would have been better if Amidala had just been all gushy over Anakin from the start, because it would have made just as much sense and would have saved us 45 minutes of unbearable acting. But hey, at least Christensen got an eyeful during the first kiss scene.

And while that whole thing was going on, we've got Obi-Wan following up on the assassination attempt. He's lucky he's alive, really. First, an assassin takes out her own droid instead of just shooting the jedi hanging from it. And then a bounty hunter, who went completely undetected by two jedi, shoots a dart right past their heads to take out the assassin - instead of just shooting the jedi. Did I mention the assassin was a changeling? It's okay if I didn't, it's not like it made any bit of difference in the movie (talk about unused premise). Anyway, Obi-Wan finds out that some jedi 10 years ago put in a massive order for a clone army and also likely erased data from the jedi archives. "Curious," the Jedi Council responds - and then THEY FORGET ALL ABOUT IT! As soon as it looks like the clone army could come in handy, they seem to be not at all concerned about the conspiracy behind the creation of the clones and the removal of data from the archives! Oh well, it's not really important that somebody has been manipulating the Jedi and the Senate for 10 years as long as we have a ready army.

But you know, even gaping holes like those are sometimes easily overlooked when a film is so well acted and told that you don't have time to consider such things. But that wasn't the case with EP2. I think McGregor put in a passable performance (with the exception of the chuckle in the elevator regarding gundarks... that was very forced). I think Portman was slightly less stiff than in EP1, but didn't have a single natural moment until her flash of rebellion when leaving Tatooine to rescue Obi-Wan. Ahmed Best and Anthony Daniels certainly played their parts as silent extras in the bar scene rather well, but that doesn't do much for making the film enjoyable. I did enjoy Morrison's role, but felt that Jackson could have taken Mace Windu up a notch. Poor acting has been a hallmark of Star Wars films, but there was always at least Harrison Ford to save the day with a bit of charm. Nobody in eps 1 or 2 has any charm. McGregor is starting to develop it in Obi-Wan, but it's not there yet.

Then there were the things that made you say, "WTF??" The 50's diner on Coruscant. Jar Jar somehow being influential. C-3PO using puns ("What a drag!", "I'm beside myself!").

After those items were the "wow, you ruined that moment" moments. Showing the Death Star for a split second was cool - shoving it center frame and showing it for 20 seconds ruined the novelty of the first glimpse. Switching from physical C-3PO to CGI C-3PO on Geonosis - it was an obvious switch and a disservice to C-3PO. Having Yoda strike the kung-fu pose.

Did I like parts? Sure. I loved all the stuff on Kamino. I loved the Jango/Boba relationship (the fact that a bounty hunter's kid/clone takes pride in his father's abilities). I was amazed and pleased with the fact that Anakin went ballistic on the Tusken camp - that was a crucial event that showed, instantly, the evil he was capable of regardless of how many times he may have said "Yippee" as a child.

But those were very small parts of a much larger, longer, less compelling piece of work.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[Anonymous Coward]

nope, sorry. wrong again. I an a fanGIRL. which means that I have no patience for crappy battle movies but am all over mushy chick flicks. by watching such movies, I have been trained to expect plots and a reason for things happening. this one ain't got none of that.

you're an odd one... you say the movies suck ass alone (which I don't agree with) and the only thing that makes them good is that they are part of a series. if the elements that make up a whole all suck individually, how can the whole be good? that makes NOOOOOO sense.

so if every line of code is buggy but they are put together into one program, the program will magically run and do what it's supposed to, because it's a combination of individual sucky coding?

so if all your ingredients are rotten but you throw them together in an omelette pan, the omelette will be good because somehow the bad ingredients make a good finished product?

Don't make no sense to me.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[nil_null]

I went into the movie on Thursday intending to like it. Wanting to like it. And I'm sad (as I was after TPM) that I can't like it

I went to see AotC today, expecting it to be a bad movie (from what I saw in the trailers), and well it was better than I expected, I was entertained. When I went to Spiderman, I was expecting to see a masterpiece (after being fed all the hype), but only saw a movie that "good" but not "great." I guess a person's expectations kind of play into the overall impression of a movie. Its best when you have no expectations, for example when I went to see Fight Club, I knew nothing about the film, hadn't even seen a trailer, I just went and saw it because a friend said I might like it, and now its on my list of favorite movies of all time.

Re:Two cents worth, please

[keflex]

Hm... I think that was just a nod towards Eps 4-6. I mean, just because he was building some "ultimate" weapon didn't mean that he was more OR less evil than anyone else. I didn't think Dr. Evil was MORE evil when he decided to build "a huge frickin' laser."

Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[delphin42]

I loved Episode 2, but there were a few things that seemed a little too familiar...

Count Dooko's speech about "The Dark Lord" and his pleas of "Join me!" caused a little too much deja vu, since it has only been months since watching Lord of the Rings.

The clone factory on Kamino where 'humans are no longer born, they're grown' seemed to be borrowed directly from the matrix.

The gladiatorial style execution seemed to be inspired by another recent film. Besides that, the crab-like monster looked, sounded, and moved a lot like the aliens from Starship Troopers.

Yoda, Anakin, and the other Jedi borrowed quite a few martial arts moves from the characters in the matrix. They didn't fight that way in Episode One.

The cityscape of Corusant and the opening chase sequence was a little too reminiscent of the Fifth Element.

Just a few things I noticed! Hopefully $116M is just the beginning. It may be too optimistic to hope that it unseats Titanic as the box office record holder, but one can hope...

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[the_2nd_coming]

the Master of the dark side and his aprentice have allways been refered to as Dark Lords.

he clone factory was required to make a clone army...who do you think makes the strom troopers

that type of execution was used in return of the jedi...remember the rankor(sp?)

Yoda was leaping around becasue he is small and a master of the force/light saber....Obi-wan and anakin both had to fight with out a light saber at one point...how else would you suggest they fight...BTW....in return of the jedi, Luke and Vader both use Kicks in battle...oa, and most martial arts look the same from the outside.

Corusant is KNOW to look like that, ust becasue the Fith Element borrowed the look from reading Starwars books does not mean Lucas riped it off from them.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[tshoppa]

there were a few things that seemed a little too familiar...

You're forgetting that the original Star Wars was almost entirely a direct descendant of the sci-fi serials of the 30's and 40's, and that this time-worn format was executed with perfection in the original 3 Star Wars movies. IMHO the deviation from the simplistic good-guy/bad-guy/ cliffhanger mentality and more into "big screen blockbuster" mentality marks the decline of the Star Wars movies.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[mattbelcher]

Well, yeah. Also, the original Star Wars movie borrowed from "The Hidden Fortress" by Akira Kurosawa, 1930s radio serials, and tv westerns. Art builds on the art that comes before it. Nothing is truly original.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[the_2nd_coming]

arg...there is no bad guy/good guy in this becasue THEY DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BAD GUY YET.

we see the jaws closing on the trap, but they don't.

take some prospective.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[the_2nd_coming]

BTW...Lucas did it outside of Hollywood's control becasue of exactly the fluff you speak of. he wanted to make sure the story was told the right way, not some executive's way.....and if he did let an MPAA executive have a say, I bet no one would be complaining about anything.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[rlangis]

I noticed all of those as well. If the clones had a slightly reddish tinge to them, it would have been the Matrix: Revisited.

I couldn't help thinking during the chase sequence, "We'll have a chance when we get to the fog. If we make the fog..." in Bruce Willis' voice.

However, I absolutely *loved* Yoda in this film. He's a Jedi, after all. When 850 years old you reach, kick ass as well you will not, eh? (not 900 years because Anakin still has to have Luke, and Luke has to grow up, right? ;] )

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[tshoppa]

arg...there is no bad guy/good guy in this becasue THEY DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BAD GUY YET.

You mean that by Hollywood's design we've got to sit through six hours of pointless crap before the real stuff can start? Maybe that's inherit to doing a prequel, but I'd hope that someone in la-la land would stand up and point this out...

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[the_2nd_coming]

it is inherit to doing prequils.

if Hollywood had done these movies, they would have bene condenced into 2 films, episode 1 and 2 would ahve been condenced, e1 would be an hour long, and e2 would have been a "flash forward 10 years cut scene" then take up the rest of the film....perhaps around 2 hours. but in doing so, there would have been a lot of missed events in episode 1, like Darth sidious's hints at a master plan to take over the republic, and when we see what happens in the second part, it would have been confusing.

truly though, I can accept that E1 and part of E2 were not blovk buster films, but then again, I was looking at the movies from an art type stand point.

E3 will definatley be the best, and perhaps better than E5.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[for(;;);]

No kidding! I loved Episode IV, but there were a few things that seemed a little too familiar...

-- The entire plot and most characters (including Leia, R2D2, C3P0, Obi-Wan, and Darth Vader) ripped off from Kurosawa's "The Hidden Fortress"

-- The "hiding under the floorboards" scene from "Yojimbo"

-- The psychic messianic politician rising out of the desert from "Dune"

-- The epic hero Joseph Cambell hoo-ha

-- Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, and company

Part of the reason ANH was so good was that Lucas liberally ripped off from other directors, Kurosawa most of all. (Kurosawa was asked about this and other remakes of his films -- The Magnificent Seven, A Fistfull of Dollars -- and he didn't care, since he considered his films to be ripoffs of John Ford.) Good directors plagiarise.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[Grab]

And comparing Ep1 with the original? No fancy moves, no feet, no jumps, nothing.

Jean-Luc Besson has _much_ better things to do with his time than read teen sci-fi books. Besson nicked it from Bladerunner and Asimov's Foundation series of books, but Besson was the first to get the image onto the screen.

Grab.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[uncoveror]

All movies, books, plays, etc. have familiar elements. There are a few basic great stories that we constantly retell from generation to generation. If lucas can tell a better story by bowwowing from others, why not. That's been the way it's done since cavemen told stories to each other around the fire at night.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[grung0r]

did you just call Lucas a good director? I love star wars, but please, a good director he is not.

Lets go over the films he's directed shall we? "THX-1138", "American Grafiti", " A New Hope", "Howard the Duck", "The Phantom Menace", "Attack of the Clones". With the exception of American Graffiti and A New Hope(kinda), the man has never directed a good movie. "Clones" is okay as a star wars movie, but as a standalone film it's awful.

You forgot a great reference to a John Ford film in "A New Hope" BTW. When Luke comes back to the villa to find his home and his aunt and uncle dead and burnt to a crisp it's right out of "The Serchers"

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[for(;;);]

Not to descend into flame war, but I do think Lucas displayed greatness with "A New Hope" ("American Graffiti" is good but not great; the others vary from mediocre to shit). It's not a perfect film (although the dialogue gets a bad rap -- I think the overly-purple dialogue works in a space opera, and lord knows it's not as bad as many science fiction works), but I think it could be classified as great. ([Tangent] This is using Ebert's rule of thumb for film greatness: three great scenes, no bad scenes.) He couldn't keep it up the way truly great directors could (Ford, Hitchcock, Kurosawa, Scorcese), but he did have a bright flash of competence with ANH.

> You forgot a great reference to a John Ford
> film in "A New Hope" BTW. When Luke comes back
> to the villa to find his home and his aunt and
> uncle dead and burnt to a crisp it's right out
> of "The Serchers"

Nice! I need to watch that again.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[Anonymous Coward]

evert think that becasue there are no jedi left and Vader is a huge hulking machine that those moves are not used?

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[grung0r]

Lucas is perfectly capable of displaying greatness, just not as a director. His style is rather generic(other then the super cheesy wipes,which I will admit are sometimes fun)and he has problems conveying drama or emotion outside of special effects shots. Where his greatness lies is in storytelling. Witness not only Star Wars but American Grafiti and Indiana Jones(even THX-1138 would have an interesting story, if it wasn't so incomprehinsible).In other words, I think Lucas is one of the worlds great story tellers,but as a director he started off average and went downhill from there.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[for(;;);]

> His style is rather generic(other then the
> super cheesy wipes,which I will admit are
> sometimes fun)

These are also a Kurosawa rip-off (Hidden Fortress, Seven Samurai, Rashomon). I still say ANH is a well-directed film, but I'm hair-splitting at this point.

Re:Lucas borrowing from other hit movies?

[grung0r]

Does Kurosawa do that? hmm....I'll have to rent Hidden fortess and have a look-see.Anyway, I will conceede that A New Hope is a well directed film, but in the way Men in Black is well directed, not in the way that 2001 or ESB is. Now that I think about though, it's pretty hard to come up with well directed Sci-fi films. Perhaps I'm being a bit harsh.

Box Office

[Taco Cowboy]

I can't fanthom why in this age people still hang around that "Box Office" thing ?

I mean, 40 years ago, it didn't cost an arm and a leg to purchase a movie ticket, ahhh... those are the drive-ins day.

Today, how much does it cost for a ticket to a first-run movie ? $10 ? $ 25 ? $ 40 ?????

Who knows ?

I mean, the "Box Office" figure should have been retired many years ago, since it really DOES NOT REFLECT HOW MANY PEOPLE GO TO SEE THE MOVIE !

Let's say ...

If the Box Office figure for Episode II is 5 times the amount for Jaws (back in the '70s), do you think Episode II attracts FIVE TIME MORE PEOPLE to see it, than Jaws back in the '70s ?

I really hope that one day we will see the figure for "Box Office" in terms of HOW MANY PEOPLE PURCHASING THE TICKETS, instead of HOW MUCH $$$$.

Re:Box Office

[thesolo]

I really hope that one day we will see the figure for "Box Office" in terms of HOW MANY PEOPLE PURCHASING THE TICKETS, instead of HOW MUCH $$$$.

Kindly turn off your caps lock, then point your browser at http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted/. It shows the adjusted all-time figures for ticket sales vs. prices at that time.

Re:Box Office

[CyberGarp]

I really hope that one day we will see the figure for "Box Office" in terms of HOW MANY PEOPLE PURCHASING THE TICKETS, instead of HOW MUCH $$$$.

Adjusted for population growth (in place of inflation) I would imagine...

Re:Box Office

[Anonymous Coward]

The number of people who go and see a movie has no bearing what-so-ever on executives. If AOTC makes $700 million dollars, but only 2000 people go to see it, would they care? Business is business, movies are movies, and it's money that makes the world go around.

Why Spidey Beat the Jedis

[Dwiggy]

Because Spiderman is pure and simple popular story-telling, while AOTC was full of histrionics and exposition, much of which would probably be useless and/or confusing if you hadn't seen all of the other films.

I know this is going to sound strange, but as far as ease of digestion goes, it's almost as if AOTC is the art house gourmet movie and Spiderman is the summer popcorn movie.

Re:Why Spidey Beat the Jedis

[galaga79]

You have hit the nail on the head, in some ways AOTC and Spiderman are two different beasts. Whilst I have yet to see Spiderman I imagine its a far more self-contained film in that you don't need to read the comics to understand the plot.

AOTC on the otherhand exists to both compliment and set the backdrop for the classic Star Wars trilogy. Personally I enjoyed AOTC not in it's own right, but the back story it provided in terms of the origins of Storm Trooper, Boba Fett, the Empire etc. It was brilliant how it all came together in the last 30 minutes.

Re:Why Spidey Beat the Jedis

[the_2nd_coming]

it is not confusing at all. and it is quite good if you understand that the story is PART of an over all saga, not ment to be taken alone.

Re:Why Spidey Beat the Jedis

[the_2nd_coming]

thank-you...you have reinvigourated my faith that intelegent people exist.

new headline name suggested

[josh crawley]

We all know about apple.slashdot.org or yro.slashdot.org . These are for sections that pertain for the articles. Have you ever thought about creating one called payed-for-by-mpaa.slashdot.org ??? That's what this place is turning out to be.

Re:new headline name suggested

[Kutsal]

The word is actually spelled PAID not 'payed' as everyone else here thinks.... But then again this is /. and inherent in its purpose is the slaughter of the English language...

Re:new headline name suggested

[josh crawley]

I stand corrected. I try not to make mistakes like that, but sometimes they slip through. I know I dont mispell ;-) the meanings of the word, "its."

So who would win in a fight?

[Dark Paladin]

The contendors:

Anakin Skywalker
Strengths: Superfast reflexes, ability to move objects with the Force, ESP like reflexes, can jump really high.
Has a lightsaber.

Weaknesses:
While he's suppose to be a Jedi, he's as celibate as a Catholic Priest at a nude alter boy convention. Also, tends to get angry, then say really bad lines.

Spider-Man:
Strengths: Superfast reflexes, really strong, ESP like reflexes, can jump really high. Able to climb walls and shoot web from his wrists.

Weaknesses: Can't seem to make a decent business case, hangs around stupidly while people shoot "sleeping gas" into his face. Has a cute girl hot after his body, but can't seem to make the mind-penis connection and "go for the MJ".

Personally, I think Spider-Man could win it, but only if he got "The Rage" when Anakin threatens MJ. Seeing how Anakin has his own love muffin to worry about (unless he decides he likes women who actually have a chest), I think that we'll see Anakin just barely eek out a win.

Or, since Anakin is E-vile, Spider-Man should win, since Good always truimphs over Evil (just ask the folks who used to work for Enron.)

Re:So who would win in a fight?

[Drachemorder]

Or, since Anakin is E-vile, Spider-Man should win, since Good always truimphs over Evil (just ask the folks who used to work for Enron.)

No, Anakin wins BECAUSE he's evil. Don't you know that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb?

Re:So who would win in a fight?

[mcc]

Hm. I think this is a no-contest just because of the lightsaber. I mean, come on-- the man has a four foot rod of plasma that can cut through nearly anything and he can use it to deflect stuff. Anything who gets within three feet of a jedi is dead unless they have a lightsaber as well, or they can bind the jedi's hands. You have to fight Jedi with ranged weapons if they have their lightsabers on them. Period. And spider-man doesn't have any ranged weapons. (OK, the webfluid, but that doesn't kill and can be removed.) In order for this to be an even remotely fair fight, you would have to take away the lightsaber. Do that, and you'd have something interesting.

(This brings up the question, though: Could a lightsaber deflect bullets? Like, i mean, bullets, from a normal earthling gun. Would the bullets be absorbed in the plasma field, or would they just shoot out the other side transformed into slightly smaller drops of boiling lead?

At the least, when you think about it, a human automatic machine gun would be probably the best weapon you could attack a jedi with.. lots of tiny, hard to deflect, harder to sense projectiles.)

And Enron has nothing to do with good triumphing over evil. Enron has to do with entropy. Or, at the least, with evil defeating itself and collapsing.

Re:So who would win in a fight?

[Anonymous Coward]

Spider-Man climbs up a wall and shoots web fluid all over Anakin. "You'll never catch up to me when you're all glued together." Anakin starts slashing at the webbing with his lightsaber. "You don't know the power of the Dark Side, Spider-Man." Spider-Man shoots a web at Anakin's lightsaber and hits. "Got your flashlight, Braid Boy." Spider-Man jerks the lightsaber out of Anakin's hands, and grabs it. "You'll need a better weapon under your cape to make this a fair fight." Anakin points his open palm at Spider-Man. "Maybe you didn't realize that I am a Jedi Knight, Webhead." He uses the Force to pull his lightsaber back to him. Spider-Man holds on, but is tugged back towards Anakin. "All too easy." Anakin grabs his lightsaber and lights it up. He chops at Spidey's head, but Spider-Man's Spider-sense goes off, and he ducks with his Spider-speed. "Yikes." The two grab each other's arms and hands, and grapple. "Peter, I am your father." "No, no it can't be. Wait a sec. That's impossible!" Spidey shoots a web in Anakin's face. "Aaarrrgh!" "Lights out, Helmet Head." Spider-Man pulls his right arm back, and uses his full Spider-strength to deliver a crushing blow to Anakin's face, smashing his mask and knocking him out cold. "Sheesh. And I thought Doc Ock was weird." One onlooker says to another, "They don't call him the Amazing Spider-Man for nothing."

Re:So who would win in a fight?

[slipgun]

(This brings up the question, though: Could a lightsaber deflect bullets? Like, i mean, bullets, from a normal earthling gun. Would the bullets be absorbed in the plasma field, or would they just shoot out the other side transformed into slightly smaller drops of boiling lead?

At the least, when you think about it, a human automatic machine gun would be probably the best weapon you could attack a jedi with.. lots of tiny, hard to deflect, harder to sense projectiles.)

This is an interesting question that I've given some thought to lately: are firearms better than Star Wars blasters? I can't think of a Star Wars weapon (at least in the small arms category) that has the range of a .50 sniper rifle, or is as sure to kill at short range as a 12 bore. Then again, I suppose the main advantage of a Star Wars weapon is it doesn't need reloading every few rounds.

Re:So who would win in a fight?

[DarkHelmet]

Look at the nickname. Stop stealing my damn line :)

But speaking of which, when Dooku was saying about how his force powers are superior, I couldn't help but thinking, "I see your schwartz is as big as mine."

Re:So who would win in a fight?

[Starcub]

You left out Spidey's greatest strength: his intelligence (luck?)

Spidey beats his opponent because he is able to take full advantage of his environment and is able to pit his opponent's strengths (and weaknesses) against him. Battle ground NYC: Spidey without a doubt; Anakin might fair better in the Mojave, but Spidey is just too cool to lose :)

Re:So who would win in a fight?

[keflex]

If this were they comic based Spider-Man, I seriously doubt Anakin would win since Spider-Man can lift cars and (according to the comics) his web fluid is IMMENSELY strong. A small patch could hold a race car in place. Also, Spider-Man has superhuman reflexes... enough to dodge bullets and etc. AND has the esp-like spider-sense.

Very Impressive.

[psycht]

You have to note this: Spider-Man wa shown on more screens in their 3-day opening, than in Star Wars EP2 4-day opening. I think it was on 1500 more screens (if I remember correctly).

Given that fact and good math skill, EP2 did outdo Spider-Man. Either way.. I've seen them both twice anyways.. they both rock.

Re:Very Impressive.

[Anonymous Coward]

It has been pointed out before, but the difference was not that large, Spiderman still grossed more per screen, and EpII had an unusually large weekend.

Impressive that Spiderman did so well, lacking religious status.
Think it says a lot about the quality of the movie.

Re:Very Impressive.

[rob colonna]

It was noted somewhere that Spider-Man spent about $30m more on marketing that AoTC. That has a pretty big bearing on the 90% of the filmgoing public that is obsessed with neither of the two mythologies. They both rock, and it's unfortunate that the (overlapping) audiences of Spider-Man, Star Wars, and Lord of the Rings spend so much time arguing with each other over whose obsession is best, rather then just sitting back and saying, "damn, it's a freaking great time to be a movie-goer".

Re:Very Impressive.

[Aexia]

>>I think it was on 1500 more screens (if I remember correctly).

You don't. It was only about 500 more and Spiderman *still* had a better per-screen average.

Re:Very Impressive.

[2MuchC0ffeeMan]

bull-shiznit.

ep2 includes fees from wed (yes, wed... the day where people who won tickets from a radio show like radio 104.1 and others) and thursday...

two days more than what spidey had...

the press releases are just trying to beef up star wars... less people saw it on any three out of the 5 days it opened this weekend.

The Slashdot Subscription Model

[perl_god]

1. Set up Port-a-Potty in a public space

2. Hang a magic marker from a string inside the crapper; encourge users to write graffiti

3. Periodically toss advertising flyers through the door as users sit and write

4. Offer an "advertising-free" experience to users for a small charge

5. Nickel-and dime yourself into financial oblivion

AOTC v Spiderman

[bsDaemon]

I saw them both. They were both pretty good, however, I for one prefered Spiderman simply because it's the first movie i've ever seen with a downtrodden geek standing up for other downtrodden geeks, or downtrodden in gerneral, that did not have to do with being an l3et0 h4x0r, or was Antitrust. I'm still not sure that i've got a handle on that movie.

press release...

[Lumpy]

George Lucas today in a special press conference denounced the record sales on attack of the clones as clouding the issues at hand " Clearly It should have pulled in at least 30 Trillion dollars the first weekend, all those lost profist are due to piracy and the internet."

Soruces close to Mr. Lucas have stated at his dismay at not having more money than Bill Gates, and is deeply troubled at the rising costs of buying laws and legislators. The Senate is rumored to hold hearing to offer Mr Lucas financial support due to the huge losses he has incurred due to piracy. Sen Hollings today said, "This is a travesty, piracy has robbed this man of his ability to work... we must crush piracy in all it's forms"

AotC was better.

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you mean spiderman is better? Am I the only one that was not impressed by that movie? It was ok but not in the same league as the first Batman, or Superman or even X-Men.

When I leave the theater after a good action flick, I feel like kicking ass, that's how I felt after AotC, but Spiderman did not leave me with any long lasting impression, it was an average action/sci-fi movie.

AotC was a great action/adventure movie, and also a poor sci-fi movie (the Star Wars saga has more in common with Tolkien than Asimov, look who wrotes the book for episode 1), but one does know that before going in to see a Star-Wars movie.

So I loved AotC, and Spideman was ok, but neither fulfilled my sci-fi cravings. But films rarely do, I go to the library for that, BTW can anyone find a way to make David Weber publish a Harrington book a month without dropping the quality (like the last one)? I know it's also action/adventure but damn I need my Honor.

Re:AotC was better.

[shadowbearer]

Only way I can think of is to clone Weber and train his clone thoroughly.....*sigh* waiting for War Of Honor, but so far the sample chapters at Baen's Bar haven't been...well, great. Good, yes. Great, no.

I *shudder* when I think of Hollywood producing a Honor Harrington movie. It could be done very well, but I don't see a single director or company that I think could do it.

If the special effects were as good as AOTC's tho it could be a superb experience as action/adventure...but the subtleties of HH would be tough for our current crop of scriptwriters, IMHO.

SB
Agree completely about Spidey vs. AOTC. So did the audiences in all the showings I've been to so far. Mostly after Spidey they were talking about the bad theater seats, after AOTC (four showings so far) they were talking about Yoda. Heh.

i like how you state..

[VoiceOfRaisin]

"spider-man is better". maybe YOU THINK spider-man is better. its not a fact or something. i thought spider-man was painfully formulaic, nothing was a surprise. straight ahead boring story, exactly what i was expecting. i thought star wars 2 was MUCH better.

Re:i like how you state..

[Anonymous Coward]

I totally agree. Spiderman was a good movie but really didn't do a thing for me. I thought it was more or less completely predictable. I think making Spiderman was probably a lot easier and took a lot less creative spirit and ability compared to the amount found in the designs of the worlds, costumes, etc. in AOTC. Only thing I hate about AOTC was the guy that played Annakin. He was pretty lame and lacked sincerity I thought.

Re:i like how you state..

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh well.

It's too bad you are an idiot.

Home viewership skews such calculations

[MtViewGuy]

Unfortunately, you can't really use the tally of numbers of tickets sold comparing pre-1950 movies to post-1950 movies.

With the advent of television on a wide scale in the late 1940's and the advent of home video playback in the late 1970's, that tends to really skew the issue of movie viewership drastically.

Remember, up until around 1950 the movie theater was the primary form of visual entertainment; that of course meant huge numbers of tickets sold for movies like Gone with the Wind and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. Today, television and home video playback tends to create a huge audience for movies outside of movie theaters, so we have to contend with the issue of people seeing the movie well after its theatrical first run on DVD/VHS, pay-per-view channels and premium cable channels.

Re:Home viewership skews such calculations

[ameoba]

Not to mention that, in recent years, the price of movie tickets has been going up faster than the rate of inflation.

Re:Home viewership skews such calculations

[NewbieV]

Are there any statistics published on the number of collective movie tickets sold in any given year? Comparing population and # of tickets sold might make a good comparative index when looking at overall movie popularity...

Spider-Man was a little bit better than X-Men

[Anonymous Coward]

but not much.
I enjoyed reading the comic, so I was quite accustomed to Peter Parker. Maybe this is why
I don't feel very thrilled about the movie.

While the movie had some strong moments, I felt quite bored in many, many scenes.

SW: AOTC is so much richer in style, texture and content that you almost HAVE to see it twice to
get it all in.

At least I had to and I enjoyed the second time much more than the first.

Empty is $46 million? Doubtful

[Anonymous Coward]

Starwars is old and tired. It was cool in the 70's now it's just pandering. Biggest letdown ever.

International Release dates

[galaga79]

Regardless of which one is deemed the "better" film of two, one thing I do like about Attack of the Clones is that its release date of May 16 was pretty much synchronised throughout the world. Living in Australia it can be quite frustrating to read about all these great films currently showing in America and having to wait a month or two till it starts showing here. Spiderman is an example, you people in the US have been able to see it since early May but those of us in Australia have to wait till June.

Out of curiousity does anyone know what factors determine whether a film gets a synchronised global release or not?

Re:International Release dates

[complex]

i read somewhere that this was a decision by lucas in an attempt to thwart piracy. obviously, that leaked cam divx of atoc came out, but i think it will work. a large part of the piracy in southeast asian countries is due simply to the fact that they have no other way to see current u.s. theatrical releases, releases that they see advertisements for on satellite tv and through other channels.

Re:International Release dates

[Anonymous Coward]

The levels of ignorance and/or foresight on the producer's part.

Celebrity Deathmatch

[Col. Panic]

Natalie versus Kirsten - who will win?

Re:Celebrity Deathmatch

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a tough one. On the one hand, Kirsten has some serious ta-tas. On the other hand, Natalie has some serious abs. While ta-tas a re good to look at, abs are good for kicking. Unfortunately, we didn't see KD's abs.

So for now, I'm leaning towards Nat.

Re:Celebrity Deathmatch

[tordia]

That's really not a fair question to ask the slashdot audience.

Assuming Natalie has the prerequisite hot grits down her pants, she could use that as a secret weapon. I mean, come on, after all these years with hot grits down her pants, she has to be used to it, but I don't think Kirsten is ready for a shot of steaming, coursely ground corn down her pants.

Re:Celebrity Deathmatch

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm wondering if Kirsten would get some spidey skilz from S-man.

who cares?

[CeramicNuts]

with inflation, Scary Movie 7 will make $116 milion its opening weekend in 2018.

number of asses in seats would be the statistic to report.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

number of asses in seats doesn't mean anything either.
1 - population inflation will means that more people are around and have nothing to do, so will go to the movies.
2 - weaker and weaker rating systems mean that scary movie 15 will probably be rated g, so all the 6-year-olds will have their heads counted as well.
if you say who cares, you should really not care.

go and see the movies that you want to see. if you have a good time, great.

Yellow Journalism

[southpolesammy]

If you count only the 3-day weekend for each movie's opening, Spidey beats out AotC by almost $30M. Because of AotC's mid-week opening, it comes in ahead for the overall weekend, but the numbers don't lie. This is simply a case of journalists trying to stretch the truth to make it seem like something happened that actually didn't.

Also, they talk about the highest revenue weekend of all-time. Well, that's great, but what about ticket sales and inflation in ticket prices over the years? The last movie I saw in the theaters was a few weeks ago and it was $9 for entrance. If you do the math, for AotC, that comes out to a little under 13 million viewers of the movie. Now take into account how many more people are alive today as compared one or two generations ago, do the math again...I'll bet that although this is still an impressive opening, that it's not a record per capita.

Lame comparison.

[Evro]

I'm sure this is why Lucas opened Starwars on practically a wednesday night. That way they can say he had a huge opening weekend, when in reality he had 4 days to make the same amount as Spider-Man did in 2. Considering that Spider-Man's money was actually related to the quality of the film itself, rather than being some sort of a lame nerd cult with an automatic audience, I think Spider-Man will be the one remembered long after this year. Remember, Phantom Menace did well at the box office too, and that was an awful movie.

Re:Lame comparison.

[Anonymous Coward]

rather than being some sort of a lame nerd cult with an automatic audience

Comic book collectors... Conventions...

Re:Lame comparison.

[Anonymous Coward]

laughable.

spider-man doesn't have a nerd cult automatic audience?
noone goes and sees a movie on opening weekend based on the quality of the film. you can't make a judgement on the quality of the film until you have seen it.

Re:Lame comparison.

[Anonymous Coward]

not that i care, but are you saying thursday, friday saturday and sunday count as 4 days for AOTC, but friday, saturday and sunday only count as 2 days for spiderman, hmmmmmm......?????

Re:Lame comparison.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi, dumbass.

Nearly every newspaper had a review of Spider-Man out in the week prior to its release. Nearly all gave it 4 stars. Please return to your stupid fucking house and masturbate into your stupid fucking sock.

These statistics seem meaningless...

[linuxrunner]

First of all, when I'm told a movie grossed the most $$$ ever, I cringe.
These stats are great for me knowing that yes, Spiderman sold more tickets than Star Wars at the box office this year... But don't tell me it's the best selling movie ever. It's probably not!

I mean, look at how much it costs to buy a ticket today.. What, $8.50 round about?

So what you're telling me that year after year, with inflation, there will always be a bigger and better blockbuster according to gross sales?
Why has no one EVER ajusted for inflation? For all I know the best and most watched movie way Ben Hur... hehe....

Re:These statistics seem meaningless...

[ciurana]

Adjusted for inflation, the best selling movie ever was Gone With The Wind, with Star Wars being a close second. I think Ben-Hur is among the top ten.

Cheers!

E

Re:These statistics seem meaningless...

[oopy_-_]

Someone in fact has done this math:

Top 100 Ever Adjusted

The list makes a lot more sense with this math, though Titanic still gets ranked too highly. Unfortunately, this is only adjusted with the Consumer Price Index. I think someone should adjust for population growth as well.

Re:These statistics seem meaningless...

[Pat__]

I guess what you need is Top 100 Grossing Movies of All Time Adjusted for Inflation.

And it is not BenHur, it is Gone with the wind ...

Re:These statistics seem meaningless...

[pjl5602]

Why adjust for inflation?&nbsp What I want to know is how many people saw the film.&nbsp The gross earnings aren't accurate for determining this when the price of a ticket ranges anywhere from $4-$12 depending on time and location.

Re:These statistics seem meaningless...

[claeswi]

Why has no one EVER ajusted for inflation? For all I know the best and most watched movie way Ben Hur... hehe....

Somebody has done just that

Re:These statistics seem meaningless...

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone did--several years ago, I think it was Variety but don't quote me--figure up the biggest grossing movie of all time, adjusted for inflation and counting all money generated by the movie, including merchandising tie-ins. The answer was as obvious as the nose on your face: the number one movie of all time in terms of money grossed is Gone With The Wind. With a 50-odd year lead on Star Wars, and a fan-base that's arguably even more rabid than Star Wars fanboys, Lucas will never beat that record.

Re:These statistics seem meaningless...

[acroyear]

I don't see population growth as being that big a deal, since in spite of the world's increase from 3 to 5.5 billion since 1970, the united states has only gone from 210million to 270million, or numbers close to that effect. certainly not the near doubling effect the rest of the world (or at least, the third world) has seen.

What does make a difference in america though is the continual growth of the educated middle class, and/or the general growing affluence of even the lower classes, either in the cities or in the country.

More people can afford to go to movies more often, in spite of the increasing prices.

Re:These statistics seem meaningless...

[sckeener]

I don't know about that list...

It didn't even have The Rocky Horror Picture Show and that's been around for ages....

heck, it's been around longer than some of the techs I work with...

Re:These statistics seem meaningless...

[x130844]

well I would agree with you. But I also consider this:
A lot of people don't go to the theatre anymore because the prices are exactly out of control.
Lot of people wait for dvd/vhs release when they have a little family, or they would easily spend $50 bucks.
So that rules a lot of people that would have normally seen the movies 30 years ago.
Especially that at the time, movie theatre was the only way to see a feature.

Re:These statistics seem meaningless...

[sylvester]

From that link:
11 Ben-Hur 1959 $70.00 $512.64
12 101 Dalmatians* 1961 $152.60 $500.87

I don't recall my economics prof mentioning 100% inflation between 1959 and 1961. What's with that?

Re:Only about 86 million when compared to Spider-M

[JEDi_ERiAN]

ok, let's just keep in mind that many SW fans (freaks?) had a bad taste in their mouth from Episode I. yes, spider-man made more money the first weekend, but this is the first spider-man movie ever. fans have been waiting 30+ (?) years for it. let's see if spider-man 5 makes as much money as episode II, that would be a fair comparison. i dunno if spider-man can make 5 great movies, i keep having flashbacks of Batman & Robin (4th in the series, probably the last).

don't get me wrong, spider-man was a great movie.

E.

Episode II

[Anonymous Coward]

Your mom is like a nice car, she give a LOT of rides!

[This post brought to you by the Troll under the sink]

Something to think about

[ciurana]

I was watching CNN Headline News on Saturday morning when they interviewed the film critic for Entertainment Tonight. My attitude toward the $115 million box office mark is the same as his answer to the AOTC vs. Spider-Man question: Why should I care? I'm not getting a piece of the action.

The important thing is that, for the $9 I paid for my ticket, I got a comfortable seat and an a magical experience watching the film. I thought both movies were very entertaining and already watched Spider-Man twice. I'm going to watch AOTC again because I want to see the digital version (go Yoda!). Now, I couldn't care less about which movie made the more $$$ because I'm not among the people whose net worth was increased by the box office take.

Discussing this box office take rivalry is like arguing who is the coolest millionaire, Ellison or Gates? I don't really care. All I care is how their products perform and how they affect my business.

Cheers!

E

Re:Something to think about

[russ_allegro]

> The important thing is that, for the $9 I paid for my ticket

Gezz, I hope it was good, but for some reason everytime I read about movies on slashdot people always say they paid more and more for their ticket to watch a movie. I must live in the only place where the price of tickets don't get inflated 50% per month. I paid $3.75 for my ticket on a digital showing as well.

Re:Something to think about

[dupper]

Calling Bill Gates a millionaire is like calling his prime product a nuisance.

Re:Something to think about

[Carbonite]

Where?

This whole thing is wildly inaccurate...

[graphicartist82]

Mod Me down if you must, but ...

This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors,ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane... :)

but seriously, this whole "box office" rating thing is pointless.. the #1 box office movie should be rated on # of ticket sales, not # of $$$..

By the current rating standard, a movie with 2x the ticket price only has to sell half as many tickets to be rated as high as the inverse...

I'm not by any means saying that ATOC shouldn't be up there with the greats, but don't base your facts & reports on something variable (such as ticket prices... or even dynamic IP's) :)

ok, i'm done now *steps off soap box*

AoTC twice?

[haapi]

I don't think I can get myself to see AoTC again without the aid of narcotics, and that would be a bad example for my kids.

Twice I asked myself during the movie, "Am I watching MST3K?"

Could have used a better name...

[mupa]

The majority of the plot development really didn't have anything to do with the 'Attack of the Clones". I think that "Anakin gets his groove on" would have been a more appropriate title.

marketing 101

[mydigitalself]

price is not a competitive advantage. cash reserves are...

Re:marketing 101

[mydigitalself]

doh!
wrong article; was supposed to be the game cube one. anyone selling any good brains on ebay?

Re:Only about 86 million when compared to Spider-M

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it really that odd that box office revenues have been going up on things like this? It's not that many more people are going to see them, it's that the movie theaters have raised their damn prices.

Clones v Spiderman -- the long run

[The Ape With No Name]

I have had people tell me that comparing AOTC to Spiderman is like comparing apples to oranges, but I beg to differ. I think that AOTC is a more durable film, in other words, you can go see it time again and it gets better as opposed to worse or indifferent. Spiderman is pretty nifty, but I think it will flop down there with the first Batman in that it won't stand the test of time. My kids will be pining for (the non-existent) 7 through 9 episodes based on the coolness of these three episodes and the mega coolness of the first three. They will not be pining to see Spiderman 7: Spidey vs the Hulk.

Re:Clones v Spiderman -- the long run

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm going to have to argue for the first (and second) Batman (Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman-purrrrfect!!). Seriously, Tim Burton rocks! I still fire up Batman every once in a while. Now as for the remaining Joel Schumacher abortions...I offer a quote from Tom Shales (from a review of Batman and Robin (or is that Buttman and Throbbin'?) on NPR: "Very terrible, very gay."

Say no more!

I mean not before spider man came out

[petree]

I know you think you so cool cause you can refer back to some discussion you didn't take part in.

Except that was after the fact that the numbers were in for spiderman. It's really easy to make that sort of predicition when spiderman reported the most sucessful opening weekened ever. I doesn't suprise me that some thought of this a week ago, but what about a month ago.

Re:I mean not before spider man came out

[NerdSlayer]

I know you think you so cool cause you can refer back to some discussion you didn't take part in.

Ouch. You're mean.

Except that was after the fact that the numbers were in for spiderman. It's really easy to make that sort of predicition when spiderman reported the most sucessful opening weekened ever. I doesn't suprise me that some thought of this a week ago, but what about a month ago.

Well, personally, I can recall alot of my friends being disatisfied with the episode 1, and most of the early reviews of episode 2 were mixed as well. They seemed to indicate that episode 2 was "better" but not great.

Also, in the end, how many years of hiatus was there between episode 6 and episode 1? I think there was a LOT more buzz the first time around.

Finally, Lucas' insistance on "digital only" screens had me worried, though he did cave in the end.

Star Wars vs. the competition

[quark2universe]

It's interesting that when Episode I came out around the same time as the Matrix, the consensus was that the Matrix was the better movie. This time around it's Spider man and the winner is... not Star Wars.

Re:Star Wars vs. the competition

[the_2nd_coming]

the only diffrence is that the matrix is at least a durable movie that you can watch and watch and watch...much like all the starwars movies.

Re:Star Wars vs. the competition

[Anonymous Coward]

And George Lucas cares about your opinion as he counts his money...

Yeah, right.

Re:Star Wars vs. the competition

[hkmwbz]

I don't think there is any point in comparing the Matrix to Spider-Man. Spider-Man is a nice movie, but it has a lot of flaws that make it just another movie you can enjoy and go home. The Matrix (and Star Wars for that matter) created a new market.

Per Theater avg:

[holysin]

for the WEEKEND (not the first day in star wars ep 2's case)
it was shown in 3,161 theaters, for an avg of $27,254 PT.

For opening weekend of spiderman:
3,615 $31,769 (yes, the difference in theaters was 454.... screens might have been 1500 but theaters wasn't THAT different it seems)

all numbers from www.the-numbers.com

Re:Per Theater avg:

[Sancho]

Depends on their designation of "theater." It could be that they mean "screens" or it could be that they mean "housing for multiple screens." I had heard that 1500 figure before, however....

I was pretty shocked. At our local multiplex, Spiderman was on 4 screens when Ep 2 opened--on only 3 screens.

Waiting for video

[mjh]

Just like Vladimir and Estragon, I will be waiting (for what I'm sure seems an eternity) for the video/dvd representation of this film. Why? Because I finally saw spider-man. And if AotC is not as good as spider-man, then AotC is not worth my money.

I was really quite disappointed with spider-man. The dialogue was really bad. The FX were fun and the premise was great, but the dialogue was so contrived as to make it impossible for me to suspend my disbelief and enjoy the good parts of the movie. Which is too bad, because for once, this was a movie that didn't lack in story. It lacked in execution. It could have been a really good movie, and after having read the reviews provided here, I expected a pretty good movie. But what I got was ho-hum and it left me really disappointed.

So if THAT is the standard which AotC fails to achieve, then I think I'll wait for it to be released in a form in which I can watch it for only $4 and if I wish to watch it again, I can (until I have to return it to the vid store).

Re:Waiting for video

[Anonymous Coward]

Smart move. I wasn't too impressed with Spiderman either, but it was definitely better than AOTC.

Re:Waiting for video

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you are missing out, because atoc in a very enjoyable movie (if only for the fx) while s-man is dreck. I was completely amazed at how s-man got the good reviews after I saw it. On the other hand, atoc got unfairly mauled by the critics. Lucas is a victim of his own success.

Go see atotc. If the critics are wrong once, isn't it just as consistent that they will be wrong twice?

My Star Wars Strategy:

[laserjet]

My Star Wars strategy is along the lines of the quote:

"Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me."

Yes, I will probably get flamed for saying this, but Episode 1 was a piss poor movie. Without the effects it would have been nothing except a cheap setup to explain Episode 2.

So, George Lucas has lost my trust. Movies are getting more and more expensive (2 people = $8 tickets x 2, popcorn = $4, 2 drinks = $7, candy = $4 = 16 + 4 + 7 + 4 = $31 just for the movie experience).

SO what I did this time around was to download a copy of the movie in VideoCD format off IRC. I watched it last night.

Many will say, "How can you spoil such a great movie by watching it off a burned CD?"

And they have a point - but I will not be fooled again. I have chosen to review the movie first, then if I deem it worthy, I will go see it. While one might think this would spoil the movie, it really doesn't. Divx/VideoCD is poor enough in quality that there is still plenty to catch the second time around, not to mention the much better audio in the theater.

So, will I go see it in the theater? Proably yes. It was much better than the first. But shame on George Lucas for hyping the first one so much and cashing in on it because it was the first new Star Wars movie in a long time.

Re:My Star Wars Strategy:

[Washizu]

(2 people = $8 tickets x 2, popcorn = $4, 2 drinks = $7, candy = $4 = 16 + 4 + 7 + 4 = $31 just for the movie experience).

Skip the snacks. $16 is a bit more reasonable. Do you really need popcorn, soda, and candy?

Also, seeing Yoda's big scene at home just can't be the same as experiencing it for the first time with a room full of people.

Re:My Star Wars Strategy:

[nido]

>>Movies are getting more and more expensive (2 people = $8 tickets x 2, popcorn = $4, 2 drinks = $7, candy = $4 = 16 + 4 + 7 + 4 = $31 just for the movie experience).<<

Simple solution: don't buy the popcorn, drinks or candy, and you've saved yourself $15. Have dinner before you head out to the theater, and not only will you not be hungry for popcorn, but you could have eaten something healthier to boot.

Re:My Star Wars Strategy:

[the_2nd_coming]

you are not a starwars fan, you have no intrest in the mythology of it, you just want to see a big batle and have the good guys win evey time....don't bother with E3 then, the bad guys win BIG TIME..even worse than on Empire strikes back.

Re:My Star Wars Strategy:

[laserjet]

tell this to my wife, though! i don't want all this crap either.

Re:My Star Wars Strategy:

[big_cat79]

Movies are getting more and more expensive (2 people = $8 tickets x 2, popcorn = $4, 2 drinks = $7, candy = $4 = 16 + 4 + 7 + 4 = $31 just for the movie experience).

Yes, I'll agree going to the movies is getting more expensive. But it pales miserably in comparison to attending pro sports events. According to this article on Motley Fool, it costs about $150 for a family of four to attend a baseball game (and baseball is the cheapest of the four major sports to attend). If I wanted to take my dad and 2 brothers to a Redskins game (admittly the priciest of all NFL teams), it would cost me $442.54. For my money, I'd get four average tickets, 4 small drinks, 2 small beers, 4 hotdogs, 2 programs, parking, and 2 hats. Compared to the price of a sports event, watching a flick is a bargin. No weather to worry about, you don't have to go to a major city to see one, and you can pick anytime you want to go pretty much. And, if you want to save a couple bucks, there are always the matinees. Is going to the movies getting more expensive? Definitely. But for 3 hours of entertainment, much easier on my wallet than to catch a game.

Re:My Star Wars Strategy:

[lubricated]

I never understand why people think it's better to see a movie with a whole bunch of people. Everytime I go to a movie theater the seats are uncomfortable and sticky, there are some obnoxious people somewhere that can't stop talking, the snacks are expensive, someone with big hair sits in front of me, and someone with a horrible cackle sits behind me. If I wait for the dvd, I might not get the huge screen, but I get to pause the 2.5 hour movie, so I can take a leak if I need to because I have a pause button. After drinking a pop and eating salty snacks at a movie theater the last half hour is uncomfortable, and all those things that suck that I mentioned previously don't exist where I live.

Room full of people I don't know, what's so great about that, especially when your paying around $8.00 per ticket.

Re:My Star Wars Strategy:

[Anonymous Coward]

Beats watching it on a 13" tv

Thanks for supporting MPAA

[MountainLogic]

I wonder what percent of $116 is going to squash free software? Isn't about time we stop going to the slopp that Hollywood hands out when all that it does it hut us.

Re:Thanks for supporting MPAA

[kasek]

And what free software exactly is this going to squash? Also, by free, do you mean the open source movement, or "free" programs like kazaa, winamp, aol instant messenger, etc.? In either case, you are being entirely too broad. I see no evidence of the MPAA trying to stop open source or free software, only the software that they or their lawyers find threatening to them. Most likely, the software you are referring to are in fact items like Kazaa and its clones (no pun intended) and DeCSS.

There is plenty of free software out there that the MPAA could care less about. They go after software that infringes on their investments. Sure, you can get perfectly legal items via software like Kazaa, but a quick search of "Attack of the Clones" brings up about 90 results, 5 of them being legitimate trailers, the rest being pirated versions of the movie. The MPAA is protecting their movies, their investments, by going after software that allows the piracy of these things, and I see nothing wrong with that. If 10% of the $5.50 I paid to see Clones goes towards putting a stop to these people, I am fine with that. I paid them the money, they are free to do whatever they want with it.

OK, so of all the open source software out there the MPAA isnt going after, there is one needle in the hasystack called DeCSS. Sure, there are / were legitimate reasons to use this, to watch DVDs on linux. But it also allowed for easy ripping of DVDs into mpeg, avi, etc. A kazaa search on DVD Rip returned well over 200 results of movies that had been ripped. Therefore DeCSS is harming the movie industry, and again, they have to do whatever is necessary to protect themselves.

So before you go spouting your MPAA is evil bullshit, back it up with examples. Examples of free software that they are trying to squash, that is NOT infringing on them. Thats right, there arent any, because they dont care about that software.

I could go on about how this is no different from the person running the convenience store on the corner taking measures to protect their goods from being stolen, but I must now head over to class.

Re:Thanks for supporting MPAA

[thelonious]

Yes, we should outlaw computer programs in general too, cause everyone knows that it's computer software that is doing the actual data copying. I shudder to think of a world where people can make copies of data.

Both Spiderman and Clones...

[Anonymous Coward]

are for pussies. Blade 2 blew both those little kiddie flicks away. Geez people, if those movies were any more "G" rated they'd be Pokemon movies.

Having seen both I know Taco is on Crack!

[Anonymous Coward]

It has got to be pure hype when it comes to star wars. I work not two blocks from times square and none of the theaters here had a line ever for Spiderman, even in the evening when I was going to a local Pup not far from one of the two theaters. In NJ, where I live, the 40 or so screens showing AOC in my area (Bergan County) were flooded and there was no getting in, while the same could not be said for Spidey.

In fact, my brother, who lives smack dab on the belt buckle of the Bible Belt in Illinois noticed the same thing.

It is also important to note that Spidey was released to over 100 more screens than AOC thanks to the lack of restrictions for Audio and Digital projection that Spidey has in comparison to AOC. Even with this lesser number of screens AOC beat Spidey.

Having seen both, I am not sure what the hype is about Spidey. It honestly sucks... Kirsten Dumbass is a walking set of petulant looks and small boobs who can't act, and the kid playin Spiderman is just plain wrong for the part. William Dufoe sort of saves the movie from a total crap rating, but just. AOC is a far cry better than Clones, New Republic, and Return of the Jedi IMHO (I doubt Lucas will ever beat Strikes Back though)... it is well done with believable CGI characters this time around. The story is involved, and although it needs a long setup time, it is indeed quite worth it.

Am I the only one that thinks AotC is spectacular?

[arloguthrie]

I believe it was Goethe who supposed the three questions one must ask when criticizing a work of art:

1) What goal did the artist set out to achieve?
2) Did the artist achieve their goal?
3) Was that goal worth achieving?

In the case of AotC, Lucas sets out to continue his fantastical space opera, showing how the Dark Side "clouds everything" and is able to take over the Republic. Furthermore, how a young Jedi of extrodinary power becomes one of the most feared figures in the galaxy.

Did Lucas do it? YES. Was it worth doing? YES.

The dialog is wooden. So wooden that normally good actors, including Hayden Christiansen (who was great in LIFE AS A HOUSE) and Natalie Portman (who, from all the chick flicks she's been in, we know she's a competent actress) can't sound natural no matter what they do. But STAR WARS has NEVER been known to have spectacular dialogue. No, there's nothing as sharp and witty as the "scruffy nerferter" scene in ESB, but AotC is not without clever lines -- Obi-Wan's "Why do I get the feeling you'll be the death of me?" still makes me giggle with delight.

But if you weren't so busy squirming in your seat waiting for the next action sequence, you would have seen that the STORY is actually quite intricate and fascinating. The political intrigue is excellent. It's wonderful to see that the Empire happens not just out of the Dark Side's cannoodling but also with deceptive politics, forcing (no pun intended) a situation that even the Jedi get sucked into.

And the love story -- God I'm going to get flamed for this -- is great. The dialogue is not there, and it's unfortunate because with better dialogue, the plausibility of the love story would be more apparent. You're a woman who has been queen for many years and now a senator -- since life as a very young woman, you've been married to political service. In walks a strapping young lad who has the potential of being the most powerful Jedi ever, was ripped away from his mother, and is willing to give up everything he's worked for to love you. What woman in her position isn't going to totally fall in love with this guy?

He kills an entire village of Tusken Raiders -- he's a Jedi, he has the power to do that. And they killed his mother. Co-dependent Padme, who devoted her life to taking care of her people, now wants to take care of Anakin and tell him it will be okay.

And (again, despite the dialog) Anakin came off exactly as he should. His hormones are raging, not to mention his mitichlorians. He's in love with a woman he can't have. He thinks he's better than everyone. He's taken away from his mother, and when he finally sees her again, she dies in his arms. What 19-year-old boy in this situtation WOULDN'T be whiney?

Let's face it -- there's more thought going into a movie like AotC than a piece of fluff like SPIDERMAN. (Which I thought was boring, by the way. Sam Raimi just isn't very good with a huge budget -- DARKMAN, anyone?) Everyone is so ready to start a feeding frenzy on George Lucas, but AotC renewed my faith in him. He's still no good at writing dialogue, but he can concoct a wonderfully intricate story. He's still no good at directing actors, but he can still frame an image unlike any other director. It will never be anything more than a STAR WARS movie, so don't expect anything more than that.

Besides, not only is AotC better than PM, it's also better than RotJ, and don't you try to deny it.

4th & 5th episodes dull as can be

[peter303]

Lucas gives you no incentive to indentify with any of the characters, as in the first trilogy. It just becomes CG action scenes, that itself no spur for actors to act well.

Re:4th & 5th episodes dull as can be

[gamgee5273]

Umm...you mean the first and second episodes, lad. Fourth was ANH, fifth was ESB.

Spoilers ahead, folks:

Now, I don't know about you, but I identify with Anakin: his mother dies in his arms and he massacres men, women and children in the Tusken Raider settlement for revenge. The boy is conflicted and in massive pain. Add that to Obi-wan dismissing Anakin's dreams of his mother ("Dreams pass in time") and you have a very upset, very powerful individual. I suspect, once all is said and done, we will actually understand why Anakin would turn...we might even be sympathetic.

Spider-Man Better?!?

[theg]

Spider-Man is better, you're right!

Re:i will wait

[Anonymous Coward]

the word le is French, Viva is spanish.

You meant: "Viva el Limewire." "[Long] live Limewire."

Viva el Limewire, not even using la, because Limewire ends with an "e" and is therefore a masculine noun in Spanish and is treated with the el instead of the la.

Re:Something to think about (OT)

[Ezubaric]

> Discussing this box office take rivalry is like
> arguing who is the coolest millionaire, Ellison or
> Gates? I don't really care. All I care is how their
> products perform and how they affect my business.

Frankly, neither of them is very cool (pure evil and whatnot). My vote has to go for Mr. Buffet. You've got to respect a man who:

1. never got caught up in the tech buying spree
2. was eating a Dilly Bar one day and said, "Damn, this is good. I'm going to buy Dairy Queen."
3. only uses his computer for playing games (bridge) and slapping Bill Gates around (at bridge)

If Warren had a console out, it would cost $1,000, have the best games possible, and come with ice cream. He wouldn't lower the price (like his stock price) because it would actually be worth a grand.

Comparisons? Star Wars bashers are awful quick...

[HeMoNk]

To point out a victory...

Anybody remember what the competition to Spiderman was when it came out?

Oh you don't do you? *cough*cough* the all powerfull blockbuster the Scorpian King... three weeks past release.

No matter how badly you want Star Wars to fail, you have to admit that it had much better competition then the Scorpian King and bassically nothing else...

I'm just reminded what Green Goblin tells Spidey..

[Brian_Ellenberger]

With regards to the SW vs. Spider-Man, I'm reminded about what the Green Goblin tells Spidey in the movie. He basically tells him that it is no use being the good guy because everyone will try and tear you down anyway. People like building someone up and then tearing them down.

The new SW movies are evidence of that. Far too many of the "fans" are just out there to tear down SW with any nitpick they can come up with and build up a new "hero". Sure there are many problems with the new SW films. But there are many problems with the old ones as well (whiney Luke, bad dialog, etc).

I think people are too quick to tear down SW. It is a movie, not a religion. And it is a film for everyone, not just geeks. I think the general public likes the new SW films more than the hardcore geeks like to admit. I showed the Phantom Menace to my mother-in-law on Friday and she loved it. So much that our whole family saw AOTC on Sunday. The exit polls show people rating AOTC as a A-. I bet the minus comes from SW "fans".

In fact, the hardcore SW fans are hurting SW more than anything. By dressing up and standing in line and such they are threatening to reduce SW to simple geekdom (see Star Trek). Normal people generally avoid geekdom, and I bet alot of people are turned off on SW just because of the so-called-fans.

My final rant is that if Lucas was in it SOLELY for the money he would have made 10 SW films by now and 7 of them would be cheap crappy films (see Star Trek). Also he would have shown them on as many screens as possible instead of limiting them to the ones with digital sound.
Sure he likes a profit as much as anyone, but he is also SW's biggest and best fan.

Meanwhile, I'm waiting to see how much the Slashdot crowd turns on Spider-Man 2 and the Matrix Reloaded.

Brian Ellenberger

Support the MPAA

[r_j_prahad]

Just try to picture Jack Valenti rolling around naked in all those millions. That mental image has kept me out of theatres for over a year now.

Although it did almost put me head-first into the toilet a few times....

Sneaky...

[cafebabe]

I went to see Spider-Man this weekend and, after I sat down, saw that my ticket said Attack of the Clones. I asked a couple of people around me and they said the same thing. I wonder if that was just a ticket seller who didn't know what she was doing or intentional to inflate the amount of money Star Wars took in, at my theater at least. Wonder if they got some kind of bonus for Star Wars ticket sales or another incentive.

I find it strange...

[Colossus]

I find it strange that I saw Spider Man the day after it opened at the second screening and there were no problem getting tickets. I went right up bought my tickets no line no fuss. The theater was at about 70% capacity.

I saw Star War Episode II there two days after it opened and I could not get tickets until the 5:20 showing. There were people standing in-line to get tickets, and people standing in-line to get into the theatre. ( I had to wait hours for my showing in-line so we could get seats together ).

Maybe the 500 screens made a difference maybe not, but I find it strange the number don't reflect the experince I had. I am sure my expereince wan't out of the norm.

Anyone?

Re:Only about 86 million when compared to Spider-M

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, since 9/11 a lot of the entertainment sector, including movies, have been seeing an increase in revenue. Larger purchases saw a downturn, but people want to be entertained, and $10-15 per person (ticket, popcorn, drink) isn't a bad deal for most people to absorb 2.5 hours of that entertainment.

Ticket prices have gone up over the last 5 years, but that's always been the case.

Re: Your SIG

[Anonymous Coward]

GIR: I'm going to sing the Doom song now. Doom doom doom doom doom doom de-doom doom doom doom doom doom doom...

That's the other thing, while we're on the topic of Lucas borrowing from other sources. Is it just me, or did the waitress-bot in the cafe obi-wan visited sound exactly like Gir from Invader Zim? Okay, like Gir on a mild dosage of valium, but nonetheless Gir? ^_^

Lemme See If I Understand This...

[zentec]

How does slashdot do it?

On one story, they rag on Hollywood for its attempt to control what we watch and how we watch it, and 2 hours later you're extolling the virtues of a product put out by the alleged "evil machine"?

I know, I know...unbiased reporting. Seems to me that if Hollywood is evil, then everyone needs to eschew everything they put out.

Telling comment.

[Anonymous Coward]

>Spider-man is better. But I plan to see both of them again.

Loser.

Empty???

[spideyct]

Spider-Man did something like $43 million this weekend (it's 3rd). Most movies would be happy to see those kinda numbers on their opening weekend.

I saw it again on Saturday, at a matinee show, and it was sold out, as was the showing before it.

Count me out of the "everyone saw this" group. I really had no idea that the general public would be this interested in a Spider-man movie.

The funny thing

[MisterBlister]

The funny thing about all the Spider-Man vs AOTC garbage (and don't let me get off on a rant about how movie-geeks these days can't just enjoy movies for what they are rather than comparing them to everything else; I'm so goddamn sick of Matrix vs SW vs LOTR vs Spider-Man debates.. If you're ever involved in one of these, seriously get a life, loser)... is that Spider-Man suffers from much of the same problems as the harshest critics of AOTC claim.

The acting in Spider-Man is just as cheesy. The so-called romance is just as silly. Both can be targetted for overusing computer graphics, though AOTC's use of graphics was on a much higher level than anything else to date, including Spider-Man (except that one scene where Anakin was riding on the Naboo-pig or whatever...Here's a hint, special FX guys: Don't ever put a humanish figure 'riding' on something that's bucking around. Looked fake & stupid in Starship Troopers, Lord of the Rings, and now AOTC as well).

IMO, both Spider-Man and AOTC are great fanboy movies with tons of flaws if you care to nitpick...But I take them for what they are. Also I'd like to have hot sex with both Kirsten Dunst and Natalie Portman, preferably at the same time.

Better? ha!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Spider-man is better. But I plan to see both of them again."

Bullshit. Spider-Man was trash

I have noticed 2 types of people on /.

[the_2nd_coming]

those who are true fans of the Star Wars Saga an Mythology, anbd those who want quick fix entertainment.

E1 and E2 are not good movies if all you are doing is judging them on their merrits as stand alone films, but as small parts of a HUGE saga, they are perfect.

when all is said and done, watch all 6 movies in one sitting, then judge the entire Saga as you would a single spiderman film..then tell me which is better.

Re:I have noticed 2 types of people on /.

[Anonymous Coward]

true fan /= having to blindly love sucky movies just because they further the plot of non sucky movies that are part of the same HUGE saga

people pay $8-$10 to see each individual movie. so they have a fair right to assume that each movie would be worth watching by itself. Lucas should be delivering on that front, and he's not.

if that weren't the case then people could buy a $10 Star Wars pass that readmits them when the next ep comes out. and then your argument might hold some water. buth otherwise it just makes you look like a rabid fanboy.

Re:I have noticed 2 types of people on /.

[Anonymous Coward]

if you had not noticed, the other movies suck as well as stand alone films....what made them worth going to see was the fact that you knew there was another film after that furthered the plot. don't dilute yourself.

Re:I have noticed 2 types of people on /.

[Anonymous Coward]

bzzt. wrong. but thanks for playing.

Star Wars stands alone. it has an actual plot, with a beginning (in which we get the layout of the story), a middle (in which that story is developed) and end (in which the story is mostly resolved) which are specific to that film. you are left with questions but there is a dramatic arc that stands alone within that picture. when I first saw Star Wars I was dying to see what happened next, but I didn't have to justify it with saying "well, this didn't really make a lot of sense, but I guess it will in the long run, when I see the other movies." I walked out of the theater saying "wow- what a movie. And even better, there are more to come!" (and yes, I saw it when it first came out, I'm that old.)

same with ESB and ROTJ. hell, even that crapwad Phantom Menace has a better plot arc than AOTC.

AOTC has no plot arc, just a bunch of meandering all over to set up all the things that need to be in place for the 4th episode to make any sense. it's not a movie that any non-fanboy would walk away from saying "what a great movie."

you are just showing your lack of understanding of what makes a movie or piece of literature good. have you ever seen any movies other than the Star Wars movies? LOTR also left you totally up in the air, but there is a dramatic arc to it that, if they ended the movie ten minutes earlier, would have been completely fulfilling.

Re:I have noticed 2 types of people on /.

[RatBastard]

So I'm supposed to but up with lame acting, bad plot devices, and the woirst dialogue in recen histiry because it's part of a larger whole?

Bullshit. A movie IS a self-contained piece of work, and should be judged as such. People whio have to bring in other movies in the series, or (God forbid) the "extended universe" to compensate for the shortcomings of any movie are deluding themselves.

The Starw Wars "saga" has degenerated into total garbage. If it were not for all of the eye-candy and the rabid "Lucas Uber Alles" fan base, these last two movies would have been laughed out of the theatres as the drek they really are.

Answer me this: Should I overlook the craptastic nature of "Jaws 3" because "Jaws" was a much better movie? Should I convince myself that the shortcoming of "HellRaiser: Bloodlines" because it is part of a larger sotry arc started with a pretty good cheap horror movie?

Re:I have noticed 2 types of people on /.

[the_2nd_coming]

sorry, the Saga has not degenerated into anything, it remains. it is the quality of the actors and george Lucas's directing...BTW..the other movies sucked as well.

Re:I have noticed 2 types of people on /.

[the_2nd_coming]

Jaws was a self contained movie that made lots of money so the suits made more of them......Star Wars is a story that was ment to be told over many movies..

the matrix, underneith all its cool effects was about as good as SWE1....try looking at it and thinking about it as you go along....what makes it good is that you know it is part of a trilogy.

Re:I have noticed 2 types of people on /.

[the_2nd_coming]

I guess you totaly missed the love story, which had an arc, and the mystery of who is trying to kill amadala, and why.

Re:I have noticed 2 types of people on /.

[the_2nd_coming]

BTW......in LOTR books, that is how felowship ends.

you are not a reader/viewer of the art of the stroy, you are just another crapy pop-(I need a resolution now)movie watcher.

Re:I have noticed 2 types of people on /.

[RatBastard]

Let me get this straight. You're defence for AOTC sucking more shit than the New York City sewer system could handle in 100 years is that the original movies sucked, too? Why in God's name would you watch five movies that all suck?

And no, the first movie did not suck. It was cheesy, and goofy, but it was not anywhere near as craptacular as Episodes 1 and 2.

Another Thing..

[MisterBlister]

Anyone who points to box office receipts and claims that it somehow shows how movie X is better than movie Y is implicitly announcing his or her love for the movie Titanic, and thus is gay.

Re:Is Palpatine really Darth Sidious???

[GafTheHorseInTears]

Not only that, I think this Obi-Wan guy might be Ben Kenobi in Episode IV. Not 100% sure, though.

Re:Episode II Surpasses $116 Million at Box Office

[NeuroPulse]

"Spider-man is better."

This is incorrect.

What is the source of this information?

Star Wars is better.

Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday May 20, @10:21AM
from the that-kinda-cash-buys-a-lot-of-wookies dept.
Domasi writes "The Force is with George Lucas again as the fifth installment of the Star Wars saga, 'Attack of the Clones,' took in $116.3 million in its first four days and to become the second-fastest film behind only "Spider-Man"." Spider-man is better. But I plan to see both of them again.

Re:Inflation adjusted gross revenues!

[puck13]

Well, movies.go.com has done just that. The frame is here or you can start here and click through "All Time Leaders" and the "Inflation-adjusted list" link.

There are only 3 movies from the last 20 years in the top 15 spots, and TPM is #15. The rest are mostly classics.

Cheers, Noah

Episode II, The real title.

[hottoh]

The Apology, Star Wars Episode II.

At Seattle Cinerama, not digitally projected...

[ZhangFei]

Just a small note to warn fellow Slashdotters in Seattle. I had the disappointing experience of getting up at 6:30 a.m. on Sunday to catch the 8:00 digital showing of Episode II downtown at the Cinerama, only to find that it wasn't digital. Funny, because it's on the list. Don't waste your money on this theatre expecting digital. (Sad that we don't have any other digital theatres here.)

Cheers!

Re:At Seattle Cinerama, not digitally projected...

[adpowers]

I know someone who went there opening night. He saw it in digital. Apparantly, they were having problems with keeping the audio and video synchronized. I saw the noon showing on Sunday (right after you :) and was also disappointed it wasn't digital. The tickets cost 7 dollars for matinee! I was considering calling to ask what the deal was with these expensive tickets and trying to get a (partial) refund if it was because the movie was digital. Sadly, it wasn't digital, but it still is the best film and sound quality I have ever seen in a theatre.

Re:At Seattle Cinerama, not digitally projected...

[ZhangFei]

True, it was very good quality for analog projection, but the fact that there were no notices or warnings concering the horked state of their digital projector smacks of false advertising and slimy management. There is no excuse. I was actually able to get a full refund for all four tickets I had purchased. They claimed at first that they couldn't reverse credit card charges over the phone, but I pointed out that since they accepted a charge over the phone, they damned well better be able to reverse it in the same way. They acquiesced rather quickly after that. :) I would suggest calling them and getting your money back, if you paid with a CC.

Cheers!

What about seats?

[killmenow]

This got me wondering, what about screens in theatres that seat more/fewer people?

It would be so much better to quote number of tickets sold instead of $$ made.

But I guess you're right, that's precisely the type of data "they" don't want us to have.

Re:Only about 86 million when compared to Spider-M

[Rupert]

Directed by George Lucas, it stars Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman and Hayden Christensen.

You don't say. I bet no-one here knew that.

Star Trek sucks

[Thud457]

And Steven Spielberg screwed it up even more in the movies. I don't remember Mr Spock being that short on the television series.

Increasing price of movie tickets?

[hellfire]

You know, they call Spider Man now the highest opening weekend of all time, and Titanic (*puke*) the highest overall grossing movie of all time.

These figures get a lot of attention, but WHY? Ticket prices have been steadily growing and revenues are obviously up because of this... duh. So whats the point in putting these types of stupid figures up when it only satisfies the movie execs? You don't hear how much revenue The Wizard of Oz or Citizen Kane pulled in do you?

How about putting something out there about how many tickets were sold? I bet no movie sold as many tickets as the original Star Wars. THATS something I'd like to see.

Not Quite

[Anonymous Coward]

Different kind of 'comic book' movies. Blade two is all about ultraviolence and looks. I loved Blade and although I seriously enjoyed Blade II, I am not sure I loved it (I need to see it again I think). It's a different kind of movie. AOC and Blade II stack up pretty well if you think about, all gore aside (hell, there are even parallels in the story lines for crying out loud).

Movie theatre popcorn

[Rupert]

Why do people buy it? Particularly at those prices?

Disclaimer: my wife and I spent $120 on dinner before going to see AotC, so popcorn would have been a little excessive. But the Copper River King Salmon was excellent.

So are you apparently...

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when did a ticket for AOC cost more than SpiderTrash?

Seriously, if you want to see accurate numbers, you need to look for a comparison between the number of screens played on and tickets sold. A more accurate one would also take into account actual ticket stubs in the till to account for no shows.

Re:So are you apparently...

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when did a ticket for AOC cost more than SpiderTrash?

You have to factor in the 5 months spent waiting on the sidewalk for the AOTC ticket.

Duh! Very ambigious is the dark side

[Anonymous Coward]

There are no clear winners - only losers - just like empire

Re:Am I the only one that thinks AotC is spectacul

[Anonymous Coward]

He's still no good at writing dialogue, but he can concoct a wonderfully intricate story. He's still no good at directing actors, but he can still frame an image unlike any other director.

That's probably why ESB was the best of the films to date.

Lucas didn't direct that one...

And it's interesting to note that all the good performances in AotC are from the British actors - the American ones could just as well be one of the cardboard figures seen in theaters...

Ticket sales in numbers, not dollars

[OcabJ]

We should start using the numbers of tickets sold as the unit for box office sales, not dollars. Especially considering it's hard to compare current box office sales to movies 20+ years ago. But of course, people like to hear about $$$ numbers, rather than if X number of tickets were sold.

Yellow Posting

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong... Spidey was on 1/5 more screens nation wide than AOC thanks to the THX and other technical minimums that had to be met to show AOC. If you figure in that 1/5 less screens then you see that AOC just edged out SpideyTrash.

not too classy

[mgandhi2]

i don't have that much of a problem with lucas borrowing from other sources. that is always done. however, when he borrows a part from a hit movie...that was borrowed from another hit movie(yoda's kung fu pose->matrix->bruce lee), well that's stepping into the realm of tacky.

...just something i noticed: everybody i know who i discuss this movie with who liked it gets VERY upset when i say that i DIDN'T like it(even though i have a solid critique to back my opinion up). on the other hand, i haven't seen people who DIDN'T like it blowing up at those who did. did lucas implant subliminal messages in the film to make people violently react to critics of the film??

CmdrTaco said not to but I think we

[ballzhey]

need to question the intelligence of people who pay $9.00 for a ticket to go see a movie. Yes, there are no nerds here... Its called a student discount. use your old college id folks. $5.50 for me, maybe cause I'm a nerd.

Did anyone consider?

[Atryn]

I've heard a fair number of comments here about natalie vs. kirsten (I'll point out that kirsten had to show her chest to really catch anyone's eyes in her wet shirt scene), comparisons of the love story, the dialog, and the effect to a degree.

Tell me, how many non-human's were there in Spider-man? How much dramatic costuming?

I happen to think both were great movies! But, I've been to see EpII 3 times now, and Spiderman once.

Re:Did anyone consider?

[Atryn]

Oh, and I also forgot to mention John Williams is a master... I can't recall wanting the Spiderman soundtrack... in fact I can't recall the spiderman soundtrack.

Re:Did anyone consider?

[Ricofencer]

Don't you mean the score? Heck, the only thing I can recall about the Attack of the Clones score is how reminiscent it was of the other Star Wars movies.

Yoda rules.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yoda was the best thing in AOTC by a country mile.

Not only can he fight, he can ACT!

For Episode III, ditch everybody except Yoda and get Francis Coppola to direct.

Yoda could be the Capo de tutti Jedi.

Mmmm. Maybe let Ewan Macgregor be his consiglieri, as he was okay in the the film.

reason why Japan isn't showing the movie yet

[kird]

Japan and S.Korea get AOTC June 14th due to the soccer tournament going on...wierd reason to delay a lucrative source of movie watchers.

Re:reason why Japan isn't showing the movie yet

[yetiman]

it's not just a "soccer tournament" it's the freaking world cup! The biggest sporting event in the world except for maybe the olympics!

Plot for Episode 3

[rcharbon]

Notes for those not paying attention:

There was no real happy ending to Episode 2. The baddies got just what they wanted. In Episode 3, the Federation Chancellor won't give up his 'temporary' power (or will be replaced by someone who's evil, not just stupid), and he will use the clone army (created from a Bad Man, and already dressed suspiciously like storm troopers) to turn the Federation into the Empire.

Meanwhile, Luke and Leia are born, Annakin turns into Vader, the Jedi's get wiped or go into hiding, and a dark cloud rolls in from Mordor (Oops!).

What worries me about Episode 3 isn't that we know how it comes out , but that it won't have a satisfying ending. Watching the movies in the order of release (4-5-6-1-2-3) is going to work against the desired effect that Lucas had in mind.

Then again, if he had started with Phantom Menace, he never would have got to Episode 2, let alone 6. There's no market for weekly serials in theaters these days. TV has taken that over.

Re:Plot for Episode 3

[Orangedog_on_crack]

They have a whole lot of ground to cover in episode 3. Anakin is well down the path to the dark side but has a lot further to go. I don't know if or how Lucas and company will take him from having just lost an arm to being the mask-and-helmet-wearing "more machine than man" who has a flair for choking people a distance when they displease him ("I find your lack of faith disturbing").

The storyline would imply that Amidala will be pregnant by the start of episode 3. She'll have to come to believe that Anakin is so out of control that she must hide the children from him. (Vader didn't know about Leia until the end of 'Jedi' but did he even know about Luke before 'Empire'?)

From episode 4, 5 and 6, it would appear that in episode 3, all of the Jedi are killed with the help of Anakin, except for Yoda and Kenobi. If there were any others, then they would have been been "recalled to action" during or after episode 4.

They have a lot of things to cover and only one film left to do it in. Episode 3 might have have to have a running time of Kevin Costner magnatude to get it all in.

Re:Plot for Episode 3

[Mostly Monkey]

I think it's going to be really strange to jump from EP3 to EP4, especially for someone who hasn't seen the later episodes yet. The action and intensity during the fight scenes of EP1 and EP2 far outmatch the "Old geezers dance" between Darth and Obi One during EP4. Even worse the special effects are going to seem diluted when I watch the end story. I'll always like the entire series, but it'll seem backwards to me to go from high tech (EP1-3) to low tech (EP4-6)

Attack of the Clones

[Haiku 4 U]

is an apt title for the movies that follow

Lucas borrowing from Star Wars

[mcc]

Mm.. i partially agree and partially disagree. [NOTE: SMALL SPOILERS AHEAD]

The cloning facility.. while it did stylistically look a bit like the Matrix, this wasn't really that avoidable. The way the later books described "cloning cylenders" kind of would make it difficult to do anything that didn't kind of look matrix-ish. And you simply couldn't have come up with a realistic plot for episode 2 that didn't introduce clones being grown in a lab. But then again, the books implied that the clones were grown in the cylenders up until the point of being adults, and then some kind of memory transfer took place-- which would have meant that the image of exclusively fetuses in the clone-growing room was maybe taken from the Matrix. But perhaps this was a practice that didn't arise until the later years of the close wars; or perhaps i misread the books. I'm not sure.

As for "the gladiatorial style execution".. Well, to be honest, you know what that reminded me of? Think about it.. desert planet, jedi and friends are chained up and about to be executed by being eaten by a huge monster in a pit while hundreds of locals watch.. personally, this reminds me more of the beginning of The Return of the Jedi than anything. As such, maybe this was just one of the stylistic nods to the later Star Wars movies-- the tracking device on fett's ship, the image of obi-wan's ship clinging to the side of an asteroid while fett wanders off oblivious, Anakin's hand trapped under a plate of metal while pieces of a battle droid are slapped in place around him-- that pervaded the movie. But then again, all of the visual references that i noticed to specific events in later movies (I mean, as opposed to stormtrooper armor and such) referred to The Empire Strikes Back, and not either of the other two in the trilogy, so maybe this isn't good analisis.

As for the car chase scene.. yeah, i have to admit this was a little bit sketchy, if only for the moments where we get to see anakin plunge down the controls and swerve vertically through multiple lanes of traffic. That one moment, i'm pretty sure everyone in the theatre was thinking of The Fifth Element. And christopher lee, while he did a really great job, probably should not have been given that role in the interest of avoiding echoing LoTR. (You could have joined me, Obi-Wan.. but instead, you have chosen the way of.. PAIN!!!)

I don't know enough about martial arts to comment on the fight scenes :)

Re:I'm just reminded what Green Goblin tells Spide

[KirkH]

Meanwhile, I'm waiting to see how much the Slashdot crowd turns on Spider-Man 2 and the Matrix Reloaded.

Only if they stink!

Re:Something to think about (OT)

[gvibes]

Ah, I see a fellow student of Buffetology in the last place I would expect: I salute you.

Box office is a poor metric.

[Dirtside]

For obvious reasons, counting the amount of money a movie makes is pointless -- a movie that makes $200 million today might have been seen by fewer people than a movie that came out 50 years ago and made $50 million, because ticket prices were so much lower then. So a better metric would be to count the number of tickets sold.

Oops! There's still a problem: There are more people and more theaters than there used to be! So simply by virtue of that fact, a movie might be seen by more people today than 50 years ago, even if the old movie is, by all other accounts, "better". Another alternative -- to count the number of people who saw movies versus the number of people who experienced other forms of entertainment -- is infeasible because counting that many people is impossible to do accurately.

Probably counting the number of tickets sold, versus the total population (taken from gubmint estimates) is probably the best metric.

Re:I'm just reminded what Green Goblin tells Spide

[blake213]

My final rant is that if Lucas was in it SOLELY for the money he would have made 10 SW films by now and 7 of them would be cheap crappy films (see Star Trek). Also he would have shown them on as many screens as possible instead of limiting them to the ones with digital sound. Sure he likes a profit as much as anyone, but he is also SW's biggest and best fan.

Lucas is in it solely for the money. The original Star Wars movies were the first movies to introduce merchandising. Toys, books, coffee mugs, lunchboxes, you name it. There has to be at least one of every type of novelty item you can buy that has a "Star Wars" theme. Therefore, it doesn't matter how many screens his new movie is shown on, or how much money he makes off of the film. That's why he can be picky about where the movie is shown. He will make millions off of the toys and video games and other various merchandise relation to AOTC. He knows he's got a giant following, people eager to buy in to anything he feeds them, and he will use that to make his profit.

Star Wars is Dying

[ealar dlanvuli]

It is official; Box Office confirms: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Star Wars community when IDC confirmed that Star Wars market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all screens. Coming on the heels of a recent Hollywood survey which plainly states that Star Wars has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Star Wars is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Movie Goer comprehensive movie test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict Star Wars's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Star Wars faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Star Wars because Star Wars is dying. Things are looking very bad for Star Wars. As many of us are already aware, Star Wars continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

AToC is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core actors. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time Star Wars `actors' jar-jar and Yoda only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: AToC is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

Star Wars ringleader Lucas states that there are 3,161 screens for starwars. How many digital screens are there? Let's see. The number of Analog versus Digital posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 3,165/5 = 633 digital viewers. A recent article put repeat Star Wars viewers at about 80 percent of the Star Wars market. Therefore there are (3,161+366)/4 = 881 Star Wars users. This is consistent with the number of Star Wars Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Hollywood, abysmal sales and so on, Lucasfilms went out of business and was taken over by Senator Hollings, who works for another troubled movie franchise. Now Senator Hollings is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that Star Wars has steadily declined in market share. Star Wars is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Star Wars is to survive at all it will be among DivX dabblers. Star Wars continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Star Wars is dead.

Fact: Star Wars is dying

(in the digital theater) just like tron

[ProfBooty]

i saw the movie 2x, the second time in a digital theater. all of the cg looked a lot better, it wasn't as dark and there was less artifacting. action sequences looked a lot better. it was wierd to not have flicker.

that being said, the movie suffered from what i call the "tron" effect. all of the live actors seemed to pop out ontop of the computer generated backgrounds or objects (look at people when they sat in chairs or interacted with other CG objects)

It wasn't super annoying, but at that point i think lucas would have been better off just doing CG humans. maybe he will for his next set of movies.

Re:(in the digital theater) just like tron

[MoneyT]

Did anyone besides me notice that some of the clone troopers looked like they were CG characters? I'm not talking the lage group/wide angle shots. I'm talking like the guy at Yoda's side in the command center during the battle.

That said, I love the movie. I'm going back again.

Re:(in the digital theater) just like tron

[Nakago4]

actually. I think all the stormtroopers were CG. In every scene they were in.

Re:(in the digital theater) just like tron

[ProfBooty]

there were in every scene they were wearing a helmet.

it could be because lucas wanted troopers that were more mobile, it seemed in the original movies they had to shuffle about as the armour didnt seem to flexible.

Re:(in the digital theater) just like tron

[MoneyT]

Yeah, but that's what made it believable. The fact that they can move like normal humans in such bulky armor makes it seem unreal

It is a movie

[Anonymous Coward]

Not News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters. It is escapism, try drugs for the REAL thing. Do you assholes watch cartoons too, suck on mommies titties still? Grow the fuck up!

Seriously AOTC Needs help

[monopole]

I saw a 10pm showing of AOTC in the LA area (I was going to see Spiderman but it sold out while I was in line) the theater was not appreciably crowded and there was no audience response during the film.

I could see why. The film isn't bad if you eliminate the actors (with the execptions of Lee, McGregor and the ever perky Portman) and concentrate on the backgrounds and battle scenes.

Since the film is entirely digital this is a straightforward proposition (eliminating Jar Jar is a bit harder but I'm sure ILM already has this script ready to run).

I don't think that's the whole story...

[koganuts]

According to CNN, "[In Quebec, Canada,] Fox is believed to be demanding 70 percent of box office receipts for the first three weeks and insisting that 'Attack of the Clones' stay in the biggest hall for 12 weeks. The studio-theater revenue split is more commonly 70-30 in favor of the studio for only the first week, dropping to 60-40 the second week, 50-50 the third week and 40-60 by the fourth week." That's why most of Quebec's independent theater owners refused to book AotC in their theaters. If Fox's demands were similar here in the States, it may also explain why fewer theaters are showing it vs. Spider-Man... regardless of how Fox tries to spin (no pun intended) the numbers in their favor.

Why gross?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do the movies always report gross, rather than total ticket sales? I've always heard that hollywood had pretty tight grip on the movie ticket market. Today's movie tickets cost $8, when my favorite blockbuster (in terms of it's blockbustery-ness) is Jurassic Park, and I remember seeing that for a mere five dollars (and $3 for a weekday matinee).

On an aside, I beleive there are only four 'hallmark' movies when it comes to advancements in visual effects, in order of importance:

1) Jurassic Park
2) Star Wars
3) Toy Story
4) The Matrix

anything else, IMHO, is derivitive and special in zero ways. I just saw Jurassic Park, and let me say, it *still* doesn't stand up to the original.

Re:Why gross?

[dbretton]

-Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within-

Release dates of SW films

[uncledrax]

FYI: Every star wars film has been released on the 3rd Thursday of May.

In general the studio can dictate the release date worldwide whenever it wants. This is similar to really anything: many games (computer and board/mini/collectable) have scheduled release dates, same with CDs, etc.. stores are not permitted to sell items prior to thier offical release date..

Re:Release dates of SW films

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI: Every star wars film has been released on the 3rd Thursday of May.

Except, of course, for those that weren't. To pick an example at random, say... The Phantom Menace. Which was released on the third Wednesday in May. Or Return of the Jedi, which showed up on the fourth Wednesday. In fact, why don't you try to find a Star Wars movie other then Clones which was released on a Thursday. Check your facts.

Are you wet yet?

[gelfling]

George Lucas could've put a Rhino turd on the screen and the dimbots would still have waited in line for 8 months to get the first ticket.

Face it. Some things are like drugs for people too timid to take drugs. For people like that we have Star Wars.

The kiss did it

[falser]

The Spiderman kiss got all the women to go see the movie. Whereas Star Wars mainly attracts geeks. I'm positive this is the reason that Spiderman out-did Star Wars.

The Microeconomics of AotC

[gdyas]

Sometimes it's nice to get an idea of what's actually happening at average theaters and get away from the press-released sales figures.

I was AotC on Thursday night, & went & saw About a Boy on Sunday afternoon at a different theater. At both places, I asked the manager about AotC sales.

On Thursday, opening day, the manager for the popular 10-plex I went to said he had it on 2 screens and that it was selling OK, but not selling out at all, each showing at about 80% of capacity. In his words "good, but not earth-shattering". This, and only about 30 people were in line for the midnight opening show, with the theater ending up about 1/3 full.

At the 12-plex I was at on Sunday I was able to ask the manager what he thought of AotC's sales over the long opening weekend, and he said that it'd done well, but not great. He hadn't had an opening midnight show. It was continuing apace, but he said him and his division manager were generally not impressed with the sales.

So, at least where I asked, Lucas doesn't necessarily have the lustre he used to. In my own opinion, I think it's kind of ridiculous for Lucasfilm to compare AotC to Spider-man. I'd think that in a properly made Star Wars film there should be no comparison. No matter what you think of PM and AotC, the worst thing is that Star Wars is now just another stable pony in the movie race. Due mostly to PM, normal people really just aren't as excited or interested anymore about Star Wars.

As for as the film goes, I felt like I had to pay in two ways - first by shucking my bucks for the ticket, then sitting through an hour of laconic, truly horrendous dialogue and stilted acting before the lush CGI payoff. There used to be good dialogue - where's the "I know" from AotC? Who's quoting Count Dooku? Nobody, because all the lines were shit. And I never, ever want to watch Hayden Christensen masturbate again.

Re:The Microeconomics of AotC

[Hassman]

I think it depends on where you're at. I'm in the NW Chicago suburbs and there were 5 midnight showings at the AMC in Barrington. All were sold out.

The next day I went again at 9:30 (had my tickets in advance) and from what i could see on the board most shows were sold out that day too.

These aren't small theaters by any means. there are 4 HUGE ones (i'll take a guess and am probalby totally wrong), about 600 each, and then 2 smaller but large theaters of 450 probably...

The 12:01 shows used the 4 really bug ones and one smaller one. I think it was mixed the next day.

I'd say that that's pretty good. :) So, its all about where you see it it seems...

oh yea...
Who's been quoting Spiderman? That's what I thought.

Just the news, please

[dswensen]

I'm hoping the editors will soon lose their enchantment with shoe-horning a small slam on Episode II into every movie-related story they run. Today it's "Footnote: Spider-man is better!" A few days ago it was "Matrix Reloaded previews on ET! I sure am looking forward to this more than Episode III, which will suck, by the way, Jar Jar is the devil!"

I mean, can we at least wait until Episode III starts shooting before it becomes the Worst Thing Ever?

Me likey AOTC

[thelonious]

It seems to me that more and more people try to appear intelligent by insulting the works of Lucas. Even though popularity does not guarantee quality, it's tough to imagine this movie continuing to draw crowds if it were as big of a P.O.S. as people try to insinuate. I enjoyed AOTC very much. There were some special effects moments that were not that special. And one scene that was down right poorly mapped. And everyone loves to throw out CGI complaints like they know what they are talking about. And please, someone tell me what dialog they had a problem with. Give some examples. I'm just curious. I seem to see the same negative remarks repeated over and over like....like a bunch of clones. ARRRGGGG!!!
I hold my head high when I say that I like AOTC and recomend it to others.
I also enjoyed Spiderman, but not nearly as much. And I say this currently owning at least 50 Spiderman comics in little baggies in my closet. Along with having played the Spiderman character almost exclusively in the Marvel Universe RPG for years. I like the Spiderman character very much. I enjoyed several things about the movie, and will probably purchase it on DVD. Because they have come out in the same year and near the same time would I even think about comparing the two. And I liked AOTC the best. Ticket sales mean squat to me. If these movies had come out a year apart or 10 years apart, I still would have the same opinion. Minus the timeline of technology of course. But as it was, two really great movies were available to me within less than a month of each other. And that's great. To try and attack one in the hopes of making your favorite somehow seem better is useless and childish. I grew up with both SW and Spidey. I didn't even mind that Spiderman was shooting webbing out of his wrists. If they had wanted to go with a more natural production of the webbing it should have come out of his arse! Now that might have made it better than AOTC for me.
And it was somehow vindication for me to see the role that Jar-Jar had in helping to get the Emperior to his final status. Somehow fitting that Jar-Jar helped to f'up the universe so much.

Foxbat said it better: "With Great Power...

[lww]

comes Great Opportunity!"

What about the MPAA?

[Anonymous Coward]

So really, this is Slashdot, sitting bragging about how much of their own money they've given up for the MPAA? Fuck no wonder the MPAA always win, they just have to wait for you to screw yourselves over.

Re:I'm just reminded what Green Goblin tells Spide

[neurojab]

>(whiney Luke, bad dialog, etc).

Bad dialogue? I think the dialogue from the "holy trilogy" is filled with gems. "Never tell me the odds", "I love you, I know", "sorry about the mess", and so forth.

But yes, that kid sure is a whiner.

Re:i will wait

[Big_Ass_Spork]

You meant: "Viva el Limewire."

Actually I meant Vive le Limewire (IE: all in French). Thanks for pointing that out.

OTOH, why am I thanking a non-logged-in coward?

AOTC a jumble of other movies

[Angelwrath]

I'm sure others have thought the same thing - after seeing AOTC last night, I'm struck with the number of incredible similarities it has with other movies. I was seeing Gladiator, Apocalypse Now, Braveheart, Starship Troopers (of all things), Shaft (In fact, the entire movie could have been safely called 'Shaft'. Shortshaft grows up, city of shafts, Yoda has an appropriately short shaft, the evil guy has a bent shaft, Sam Jackson, Shaft, acts a lot like Shaft, etc.). Beyond those, I saw a lot of LOTR in the movie, particularly with Aniken and Amidala (Aragorn and Arwen) as well as Dooku the White (Saruman in sound and role), and the aliens of the lost planet seemed much like those from A.I., though with a lot more visual detail. And who could deny the Matrix/Dune similarities with Aniken.

I came away thinking that AOTC was more a jumble of tributes to other movies than a movie of its own. It was certainly entertaining and suspenseful in parts, and a far cry from the first movie, but it was not the masterpiece epic of the first three. And some of the dialogue had the audience laughing during the most serious parts, or just out of sheer amazement at the weakness of it.

There's my two cents on what I saw during AOTC. However, I'm still never going to see Spiderman, even if it is better. ;)

Re:AOTC a jumble of other movies

[Anonymous Coward]

I came away thinking that AOTC was more a jumble of tributes to other movies than a movie of its own.

Dude, welcome to the post-modern world. I don't think there's much out there that hasn't already been done. I mean the Corscant chase scene was almost straight from Fifth Element. Unless somebody comes up with something entirely new, the world needs to shift its view to this: It's not that something was done again, it's how well it's done again. All techniques and methods.

Re:Am I the only one that thinks AotC is spectacul

[Pyrosophy]

Well, taking your conjecture that AOTC is a work of art (which it isn't -- it's a work of business), there's an additional question that Goethe should have asked:

4) Could I have done it better?

And the simple answer is "yes". If anything is about the means, rather than just the ends, it is art. The goal was worth doing in the way you put it, but he should have had a better goal: to continue his saga in such a way as to appeal to multiple generations at once, with depth and consistency, and, since an intricate story sucks without people who can speak it aloud, good dialogue.

There are literally hundreds of people in Hollywood with better sense for these things than Lucas, but he chooses to ignore them. Simply put: when one can't see that one has no talent in an area anymore, so much the worse for people who enjoy film when there's still money involved.

Just use the Formula

[Jack1Eye]

We've all seen it before.

Take a popular movie license(Enter Star Wars, or Spiderman)

+ Hire one or two relatively big name actors, preferable with a hot female lead for consumer fantasy purposes.

+ Write a dragging, scenery focused screenplay with emphasis on reuse and recycle(thus allowing the younger, and older consumers to follow along easily).

= BLOCKBUSTER

Seriously people halfway through AOTC I asked: "Is this Star Wars, or the Sound of Music".

Darth Idiot-"I just slaughtered a whole village, including women and children"

Senator Portman-"Oh Honey, how cute, I love you".

How's got the brain?

[Stonan]

AotC - 166.3/4days
Spiderman - 286.5/21 days (3 weeks)

Note to original editor: either report how much Spiderman made in 4 days or piss off until AotC has been out for 21 days.

I can't believe this brainless f*ck's editor let this article go out while it was making as much sense Bills Clinton's sexual harassment defence.

Re:Am I the only one that thinks AotC is spectacul

[Ricofencer]

The dialog, often criticized, is high handed and often awkward. I attribute much of what many people found out of place and pretentious about the dialog acceptable given that these were the ruling class - the elite of the Republic. I got the feeling that Lucas was trying to generate a courtly love sort of theme with Anakin and Amidala. Lancelot caused the collapse of Camelot through a tryst with Guinevere and the same thing is happening here. The language is part of the story that reflects this. Also, all of the characters have lived strict and regimented lives. Anyone who is raised to rule a planet in there teens is not going to speak in a casual manner. There lives are built upon protocol and intricacies. It could be - and I think I may be stretching it here - that Lucas is trying to portray the characters as somewhat removed from the common person. The pageantry and costumes serve as a visual means of doing so but the pretentious speech is a verbal method of achieving the same. I did find myself amused by a few of the lines - the same Obi-Wan quote. Then the Star Trek dig - Yoda, "Target the nearest Federation starship."

The characters - the main characters at least - were generally flat and unsympathetic. The whiny, barely-contained Anakin was in no way sympathetic. Except perhaps for the scene on Tatooine with his mother. Other than that, he is yet another whiny Skywalker from Tatooine who yearns for more yet is restrained by the male authority figure in his life. Amidala, co-dependence is the only explanation of why this gifted woman would become smitten with a self proclaimed mass murderer. Anyone who cares for 'the people' and duty the way she is presented would be horrified by Anakin's actions on Tatooine. Perhaps she could sympathize with his loss but the retribution he exacts should be appalling. Yet she shrugs the proclamation off. Perhaps it was the cool way in which Anakin made his announcement, C3-P0 displayed more emotion.

The supporting characters were much more compelling. Obi-Wan was well handled - calm, centered and confident; everything a Jedi Master should be. Jango Fett, intruging, mysterious and dangerous. The wild west handling of the blaster pistols added a bit of flair to the action that seemed otherwise dull in comparison to other movies. Except for the green flash of Force-driven fury that is Yoda. Mace Windu exudes that same calm efficiency as Obi-Wan, perhaps moreso. His performance in the stadium is chilling in its brutal effectiveness. I admit I would have loved to have seen a Jules Windu type hipness to his character.

The script itself came across as preachy. It seems that Mr. Lucas has a disdain for politicians and holds them in no high regard. The polarized vision of good versus evil in the film is too simplistic. It is frustrating the way the script makes so many of the villians pawns of Darth Sidious. I would have found Count Dooku a much more compelling villian if he were not a servant of the Dark Side but rather a Jedi that saw the corruption in the Senate and was taking action to save what he cherishes from a corrupt force independent of a Jedi Council that would be pawns of the same corruption that rules the Senate.

One observation I had during the movie was that I feel that Yoda may know more than he lets on. Of course he knows a great deal, he's the Jedi Master. I got the impression that perhaps he has a notion of the coming slaughter of the Jedi, perhaps he is even willing to allow or facilitate it. I doubt Lucas would tread down that path, but the idea intrigues me. Especially considering some of the things Yoda says in E2 and the inordinate amount of attention he focuses on young Skywalker. Then there is that one little fact of him being the only Jedi to survive the eradication of the order - other than Obi Wan. I always found it odd that the eradication of the Jedi was so complete, some should have been able to flee to the Outer Rim or beyond.

All in all, it was an okay movie. Some of the faults others found with it were acceptable when viewed in a different context. The fact that the main characters did not inspire any great feeling was a great lack. Yes the special effects were great, but the action felt a bit flat. The light-sabre duels were pretty bland except for Yoda's. The battle scenes were also weak and illogical. Please someone tell me how a Jedi Master is qualified to serve as a field general in charge of thousands of infantry. Doubtful they teach that at the Jedi temple, the force seems more of a solitary exercise.

Basically, it was a popcorn, matinee movie that was sanitized and boiled to get a PG rating.

Episode II

[Anonymous Coward]

About 10 years later, it all starts with a failed attack on Ex-Queen now Senator Amidala. Because of this attack, the Jedi Order gets Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker to guard her. Another attack on the Senator while she is sleeping starts Kenobi and Skywalker on a chase through a city on a "hover car" and a foot pursuit through a tavern. They eventually catch their pursuant, Zam Wesell, a changeling bounty hunter, but she gets shot and killed by her boss, Jango Fett, father of Boba Fett.

Because of the second attempt on Amidala, Kenobi is ordered to research and discover the plot behind her attack and Skywalker is ordered to take Amidala back to her home planet of Naboo. Jar Jar Binks represents Amidala at the Senate Chamber and later gives Senator Palpatine the ability to create a grand army. What isn't known is that Palpatine has been making this army for quite some time. At Naboo, Skywalker and Amidala fall in love but are hesitant on pursuing their relationship because of their conflicting lives.

Kenobi learns more information about Amidala's attacks from the "bullet" used to kill Zam Wesell and flies to the uncharted planet of Kamino, a "water world" where an alien race is making clones out of Jango Fett to create the perfect army. Jango Fett had these aliens create an unaltered clone of himself as well, who ends up being Boba Fett.

Skywalker gets some bad dreams of his mother, Shmi, so he takes a jet with Amidala to his home planet of Tatooine to find her and save her. He finds Watto, the Junk Shop Owner that used to own both Skywalker and his mother as slaves. Watto sold Shmi to Cliegg Lars, who married her and had Anakin's half brother, Owen. They find Cliegg, Owen, and Beru Whitesun..."UNCLE OWEN!!! AUNT BERU!!!" Unfortunately, their camp was attacked by Tusken Raiders, and Shmi was taken. Anakin uses his skills to sneak into the Tusken Raider camp where Shmi was held. Anakin finds Shmi at the last moment before she dies. He gets pissed and kills the whole Tusken Raider camp, men, women, and children.

Kenobi gets into some trouble while searching for more clues about Jango Fett. He follows Jango Fett to a planet called Geonosis, where some battle druids are being built. He gets captured and finds out that the mastermind behind the whole thing is an Ex-Jedi called Count Dooku, also known as Lord Tyranus. Anakin and Amidala go to Geonosis to save Kenobi and get captured themselves. The three are put out into an arena where they are to be sacrificed by some nasty looking creatures.

They put up a fight for several minutes and then the whole Jedi Order shows up, pulling out light sabers all over the place. The battledroids start attacking. Several Jedi are killed, but as the battle continues, Jango Fett and Mace Windu, played by Samuel L. Jackson, get into a fight, eventually leading to Mace Windu cutting off Jango Fett's head as Boba Fett watches.

The battle proceeds to go outside of the arena where a huge war begins with the clones and battledroids and Jedi fighting it out. Kenobi and Anakin chase Lord Tyranus to a Hangar where Tyranus uses the bad finger electricity to zap Anakin. Kenobi and Tyranus get into a light saber battle. Tyranus eventually wins by slicing Kenobi's arm and leg. Anakin manages to get his strength back and fights Tyranus with both his own light saber and Kenobi's light saber. Tyranus bests him, however, and ends up cutting off Anakin's arm and knocking him out.

You think it's the end of both of them, but who walks in??? Badass YODA!

Tyranus uses the force to throw objects at Yoda, but it's no problem for the little guy. He just pushes them aside. Then Tyranus uses his bad finger electricity, Yoda sucks it up with his hand and zaps it back at Tyranus who doesn't really get hurt by it. Since they decide they are equals at all the Jedi arts, they decide to settle it with an all out light saber battle. Yoda kicks Tyranus butt by flipping and spinning around, eventually causing Tyranus to retreat on his ship.

Later, some, but not all of the Jedi are dead. Lord Tyranus meets up with Palpatine, and they discuss how well their plans are working out and how they favor Skywalker's progress in turning to the dark side.

The last screen shot is of Anakin and Amadala getting married. Anakin has a robotic arm.

Lack of imagination plagues star wars...

[bsdparasite]

For example, the "football" type games in the arcade/bar where obi wan and anakin get in. And what's with the diner where obi wan meets Dex? Can people not think of other places? I understand people relate to these things, but "long long ago in a galaxy far far away....they had DINERS?".

Okay, Okay the devices, bots, droids and other creatures are definitely cool, but why can't people think of a different kind of place for a diner? Remember, the diner is just an example. More stuff like bars, clubs, billboards...etc., are all very similar examples of the same plague..

Well........

[Anonymous Coward]

If the release of these two movies had been reversed, with Star Wars coming out two weeks before Spider-Man, don't you think there would have been a change in box office numbers? Spider-Man being the first big action film of the year probably had a little something to do with why it did so good. I bet if Star Wars came out first instead of vice versa, it would have beat out Spider-Man. Plus the fact that there was TWICE as much money spent on advertising Spider-Man than Star Wars, I would say that there are quite a few factors people aren't considering.

Re:Well........

[crath]

Actually, if you click through and read the article the /. note refers to you will discover that Star Wars outsold Spiderman w.r.t. first weekend box office returns.

The azreporter.com article compares 4 days of Star Wars revenue with 2 weeks of Spiderman revenue, and then says Spiderman won.

Never trust the media... use your *brain* Luke.

episode 2 disappointing (spoilers)

[Surt]

Bleah, went to see it last night, and I was completely disappointed.

CGI: not that impressive. i'm really pretty unable to name a specific scene that will lose out when converted to pan & scan. why see this movie in the theater?

Jar-Jar: around just enough to really set you on edge, but doesn't die so you don't know what scene he's going to pop up in next.

Action yoda: loses! So now we're left hoping to see him win a fight in ep 3, but i'm guessing we'll be left yearning to see him win a fight even after 3. Also, it was disappointingly obvious that yoda wasn't real since he at no point physically interacts with dokuu.

Dokuu: should have been a completely earnest good guy. Imagine how much better a place the storyline would be in right now if everything else had been left the same, but dokuu was earnestly good, and killed by yoda (personally or by his forces, or better yet by anakin).

Jedi sword fights: nothing comparable to ep1. Nothing really exciting. Decent battle with jango fett ends undecided, later jango is completely unable to do anything vs windu. Too obvious intent to have boba clone grow up to kill windu. Sadly, boba is the best actor in the whole movie.

Acting: awful all around except for kenobi, who was decently portrayed, and boba, who does a really pretty good job of being the kid of a bounty hunter. This kid could have said yahoo in ep 1 and made us believe it.

Love story development: just awful and unbelievable.

I'm sad to say, but i'm guessing that in the months ahead, people will ultimately wind up ranking this the lowest of the 5 movies.

Re:episode 2 disappointing (spoilers)

[kirkjobsluder]

Not only that, but what about the music? The music for Episode I was the first really good work from John Williams in years. The Jedi Fight Scene music is an amazing dramatic work and if you listen to the very end of the credits for Episode one you are treated to a bit of musical foreshadowing as the Episode I theme subtly transforms into Darth Vader's theme.

The music for Attack of the Clones just seems to be lifted directly off of the original Star Wars. Nothing sticks out in my mind two days later.

Re:episode 2 disappointing (spoilers)

[Hassman]

CGI: not that impressive. i'm really pretty unable to name a specific scene that will lose out when converted to pan & scan. why see this movie in the theater?

You obviously didn't see it in digital. A-maz-ing. I saw it on film and then dig. projection. The difference is like night and day. If you can't see it in digital wait for the DVD, best effects I have ever seen (live action movie wise).

As for the pan and scan comment. there are several scenes that will get hacked...trust me. I can't give you an example but I remember thinking that in the movie.

Action yoda: loses! So now we're left hoping to see him win a fight in ep 3, but i'm guessing we'll be left yearning to see him win a fight even after 3. Also, it was disappointingly obvious that yoda wasn't real since he at no point physically interacts with dokuu.

wow. I can't believe you said that. Yoda didn't lose, but dooku had to "cheat" to get away. Did you watch the same scene as me?

Dokuu: should have been a completely earnest good guy. Imagine how much better a place the storyline would be in right now if everything else had been left the same, but dokuu was earnestly good, and killed by yoda (personally or by his forces, or better yet by anakin).

You're right. Sith should be the good guys.

Jedi sword fights: nothing comparable to ep1. Nothing really exciting. Decent battle with jango fett ends undecided, later jango is completely unable to do anything vs windu. Too obvious intent to have boba clone grow up to kill windu. Sadly, boba is the best actor in the whole movie.

I'm literally laughing at your comments here. You must see 2 movies a year to think boba was the best actor.

Ya know, I can't even go on to respond to the rest of your comments, but I really think you were watching a different movie. I totally felt Anakin's internal conflict and that between him and Obi-Wan.

Acting and everythign else aside, I'd see it just again for the music in the scenes. The way the emperor's theme comes up when Anakin is explaining to Padme about the Tuskin Raiders. The final shots of the clone army preparing for battle with the Imperial March in full effect. The duel sunset theme outside the ranch on Tatooine. The quite hints of the imperial march whenever Anakin slips toward the dark side a little... Sent chills down my spine.

This movie was 1000 times better than ep 1. My only gripes is that the love story was a little too forced. It flowed so well for about half way then became unbelievable. Everything else was great.

I hate it when people complain about the dialogue and other corney stuff. Remeber all that shitty dialogue in the first triligy? Remember how annoying Luke was? Come on people, open your eyes and realize all the Star Wars films are like that.

I personally liked it better than Ep 4.

Re:episode 2 disappointing (spoilers)

[Hassman]

:(

I totally disagree. I thought the music was a wonderful compliment of the movie. True it was super original, but it didn't need to be.

You have to look at how the music compliments the actors. I'm not going to rehash my previous post, so read that, but I thought it played very well with the move.

The Sport of Film

[Dances with Sheep]

Looking at the boxoffice results makes as much sense as looking at football scores. It's all about picking a team and rooting for it: economics as a spectator sport.

(and isn't that a little encouraging?)

SPOILER

[ocbwilg]

But I think I've got Clones nailed down into a single comment..."Attack of the Clones is Pearl Harbor in Space". Both have lame love stories and bad acting, and in the end...everything goes boom!

Can someone please explain to me why they called it attack of the clones? It implies that the clone army is being raised to attack the republic when in actuality it was used to defend it. The clones didn't attack anything. It's really more like "Defense of the Clones" or something. Or "Yoda and an Army of Clones Saves Mace Windu's Ass."

Re:SPOILER

[The Wooden Badger]

Well if you count the fact that Jango Fett's clone (AKA Padme's body guard) planted the bomb in the opening scene, then the name says it all. The clones did the attack and the defense. Clone war indeed.

Re:SPOILER

[TomHandy]

For the same reason that the first movie was called the Phantom Menace. The clones attack the Republic in the sense that the use of the clones is part of the downfall of the Republic and the Jedi. -Tom

Re:I'm just reminded what Green Goblin tells Spide

[Anonymous Coward]

some comments:

I think people are too quick to tear down SW. It is a movie, not a religion.

not true. star wars has a huge legacy that other movies don't have. it's neither a movie nor a religion. it is Star Wars - the modern day legend/myth.

And it is a film for everyone

i think this is extremely interesting about star wars. it is enjoyable for "everyone" but it takes a true SW fan to understand. i bet you 95% of the audience did not get that palpatine is the evil emperor in ep1. [hold back you geeks, you _are_ the minority].

this is what i really like about lucas - he does not dumb down his plot so everyone understands it.

all other big blockbuster movies -including spider-man - explain all plot elements so many times that even the dumbest of audience members understand. SW doesn't do that.

Sure he likes a profit as much as anyone, but he is also SW's biggest and best fan.

that is absolutely correct!

Do you smoke crack?

[Fooknut]

To sum up my comment, it seems almost like complaining about star wars is fashionable lately, and I hate it.

Frankly Episode II wasn't the best movie I've seen or even the best Star Wars movie i've seen, but it did not suck.

I think it's stupid to expect perfection in Star Wars. The originals weren't perfect, and the new movies won't be either, but perfect or not, they are still better than most of the movies coming out these days. Lucas is locked into the story no matter what does. He must follow the storyline because these movies already have prequels and sequels. IMHO this is something to take into account when critizing the movie.

Complaints about Jar-Jar and CGI are pathetic excuses. These are complaints merely for the sake of complaining. ILM's effects are still some of the best in the industry, and Jar-Jar was so small of a part that I can't believe anyone would focus on that rather than focusing on the myriad of other *GOOD* things.

Re:Do you smoke crack?

[Surt]

I think the most telling thing in your response is that it lacks a single positive point in favor of the movie, other than Jar-Jar being a very small part this time around.

I don't expect perfection from star wars. I hoped for an enjoyable moviegoing experience, though. Frankly, it was a bad movie. It continued and detailed the fall of the republic story line, and that was the only rewarding part for me, really. Sadly, I felt they missed a huge obvious opportunity to tell a better version of the story.

I don't doubt ILMs effects capabilities. I don't, however, think they lived up to their potential in this movie. Sadly, having recently seen ep 4,5,6 the spaceships look better in those movies. The CGI just isn't up to model quality in this movie, and it certainly could be. They probably wasted too much of their graphics horsepower animating the landing pads.

Even more sadly, while the CGI wasn't as good as it could have been, it was the only thing making the movie tolerable for me. I wouldn't say that this movie sucked, but it was pretty painful to watch a good portion of the movie, and could have been probably more than an hour shorter without losing any of the decent parts.

The originals weren't perfect. But they were better than this movie. I still feel confident that in a year when the newness has worn off, most people will rank this one as the worst of the 5 movies.

So why was it called Attack of the Clones? (Spoil.

[sielwolf]

Since the clones really only came to the rescue. I would usually consider an "attack" when someone does a preemptive strike-

Oh wait, Lucas was talking about Hayden Christenssen's acting!

Anakin: "Obi-wan... is... holding me #$#*@!"
Grip: "Oh no! The Hayden-bot is malfunctioning! Everybody... run!!!"

Spoilers and general insights
* The Yoda fight was cool.
* Jango being able to kill Jedi easily and then not was lame.
* When Boba picked up his father's helmet, Jango's head should have popped out.
* When lil' Boba and Jango were flying around was anyone else thinking of Bruce Spence in Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome? ("Their ain't no Mara-Mara Land!")
* R2 having jets was stupid.
* Killing Tuskin Radiers, vicious nomadic peoples who just pillage and steal, doesn't seem to be that big of a "sin".
* How many outfits did Amadala take with her? "We are refugees... refugees with a full wardrobe!!!" She must have changed outfits forty times.
* Christopher Lee kicks ass. But the problem was that he made no appearance until the last 45 minutes. Also it just makes Darth Maul even that more lame: a minor character who should have either hung around or should have just been replaced with Darth Tyrannus in the first place. Scaramanga!!!
* When was Obi-wan just all about explaining the plot? "Let me go here so I can explain this and then make useless dialogue to explain the plot"

Final Verdict: I guess the background story to a good story isn't necessarily good nor interesting.

I was watching the latest Kurosawa documentary DVD (BTW: it kicks ass) and he says at the very beginning that he always hated expository dialogue and always tried to avoid it. He actually tries to view scenes as silent movies and see how they would work and then add any necessary dialogue. Lucas, who paid homage to Kurosawa's Hidden Fortress, now seems sidetracked with his own Hero Mythos crappola egoism and has forgotten the teachings of a true master.

Of course without Lucas's (and FF Coppola's) help, Kagamusha and Ran would have never been made. For that reason I can never hate Lucas. Although he may be hit and miss, he seems to recognize true genius.

Re:Something to think about (OT)

[Anonymous Coward]

My vote has to go for Mr. Buffet. You've got to respect a man who:

1. never got caught up in the tech buying spree
2. was eating a Dilly Bar one day and said, "Damn, this is good. I'm going to buy Dairy Queen."
3. only uses his computer for playing games (bridge) and slapping Bill Gates around (at bridge)

If Warren had a console out, it would cost $1,000, have the best games possible, and come with ice cream. He wouldn't lower the price (like his stock price) because it would actually be worth a grand.

...and then, perhaps unfortunately, he would sell almost none of them and lose boatloads of money on the development.

But it could have been better.

[overunderunderdone]

Did Lucas do it? YES. Was it worth doing? YES.

Yes he achieved his goals but sadly there are poorly done elements which undermine his achievement.

I think Lucas is good with the big picture. The epic sweep of his fantasy world's history is great. The basic fairytale story and epic myth with a dose of political intrigue is all well done.

Lucas is also very good with the fine visual details. The exotic, fantastic worlds are spectacular visual creations. Some of the little establishing scenes like the strange aquatic flying creature soaring past the clone factory on Kamino are capable of standing on their own as little works of art. They had the same effect on me that some of the better sci-fi or fantasy cover art did when I was a kid, they are beautiful, exotic, filled with mysterious portent.

Unfortunately between the grand sweep of the storyline and the fine details Lucas' failings as a storyteller emerge. The bulk of the problem in this film is the dialogue. The romance between Anakin and Amidala is fine, even excellent as a story. The actors even seem capable of pulling off the *telling* of that story - until they open their mouths and jabber on (and on) about it. The love story could have been told twice as effectively in half the time. Any chance feeling any "chemistry" is killed under a deluge of mostly unnecessary and entirely poorly written dialogue.

Then there are a whole slew of little details unnecessary to the larger story which only served to undermine that story. The comic relief was often ham handed (to match the dialogue?) and some of the action (Ok. really just all the jumping out of speeders) was so improbable as to strain my already tattered credulity beyond the bounds of my tattered suspended disbelief.

Finally, it's a minor point but it bugged me that Amidala was an *elected* queen, we even find out in AotC that she is term limited! Please, this is a fairytale with beautiful princesses (& Queens) emperilled by ugly villains & monsters and rescued by brave knights (& occasionally doing a little rescuing themselves as every plucky fairytale princess should) Let it be what it is without apologising for it. Perhaps this one little detail bugged me so much because it is emblamatic of the other failures - a storyteller intent on telling his story and concerned only with telling it well would not have included this little detail - or overexplained his characters motives - or beat us over the head with lame attempts at comic relief.

Re:But it could have been better.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Finally, it's a minor point but it bugged me that Amidala was an *elected* queen, we even find out in AotC that she is term limited! Please, this is a fairytale with beautiful princesses (& Queens)"

And if Amidala is not Queen anymore, how can Leia be a Princess!!?

Re:Am I the only one that thinks AotC is spectacul

[Drunken_Jackass]

He's still no good at writing dialogue

I don't think he intends to be a good dialog writer.

I was watching TPM on DVD the other day, and was listening to the commentary. One of the most telling bits that explained a lot about all of the Star Wars movies is when Lucas said that he made/is making these movies much in the same vane as silent movies. Where what's on the screen, and the accompanying music tell most of the story. I think that dialog is more or less an afterthought to Lucas.

I definately enjoyed watching TPM more without any dailog, just letting the visuals and score take over.

Re:I'm just reminded what Green Goblin tells Spide

[pbuxton]

People like building someone up and then tearing them down.

People, such as rock stars, like whining about this, too. They'll forever claim that the "American" press or the "British" press more or less purposely engage in this build-'em-up-and-tear-'em-down cycle. The truth about modern artistic failure is closer to "Your last three albums sucked." You could blame the record companies, but they just work with people as they find 'em. If these people are unwilling to grow, then they're disposable stars.

"I'm a sucker for that timeless element.... Who wants to grow up to be a disposable lighter?" -- Robbie Robertson

My final rant is that if Lucas was in it SOLELY for the money he would have made 10 SW films by now and 7 of them would be cheap crappy films (see Star Trek).

If he was in it for the fans would he have waited until his ex-wife wasn't in a position to get any more money? And I suppose Gene Roddenberry is turning in his grave, yes, but while he was alive the franchise was true to his particular vision.

Re:So why was it called Attack of the Clones? (Spo

[athakur999]

* How many outfits did Amadala take with her? "We are refugees... refugees with a full wardrobe!!!" She must have changed outfits forty times.

What, would you rather have her run around naked?

Oh, wait...

Clones is the best?

[The Wooden Badger]

All I can say is that I thought Clones was too predictable. I knew a couple things that were going to happen but I was able to guess many of the events based purely on the snippets I saw on trailers and commercials. Oh, the dialogue was really bad IMHO. When was C3P0 reprogrammed so he lost the really bad puns. I thought puns that bad were only to be heard at my family's dinner table and thankfully nowhere else.

Yes it was overrated

[The Wooden Badger]

Very much so. It was still very cool however. I thought the highlight of the series as far as duels was Obi Wan vs. Darth Maul.

The Death of Darth Vader

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember when "The Phantom Menace" was released it took about 2 weeks before anyone admitted it was horrible. I think it has to do with all the hype. TOO many people feel too stupid waiting in line for hours at Midnight to watch such a horrible film. They just cannot admit it, even to themselves.

AOTC was horrible, and ruined the whole excitement around Darth Vader...a character who, in my mind, was one of the greatest bad guys ever.

Now he is just a whiny teenager. More of a joke than a character to fear.

If I was writing the Prequels it would have gone like this:

Episode 1: Meet Anakin, young kid with some scary jedi possibilities.

Episode 2: Anakin rises to the Tiger Woods of the Jedi Order. Big ego and big skills, but his fame brings influence to the Jedi order so they have to keep him around. He is obviously out of control, saves the day but shows that he is not afraid to do anything to win in battle. Anakin is definitely evil in this movie, but the audience kinda has to root for him so he can save the Jedi order (and he does).

Episode 3: Freak Jedi accident leaves Anakin in a protective suit (Darth Vader) and causes Padme to reject him for his ugliness (and spite). To get back at the Jedi, Anakin starts his own Jedi order, (Again kinda like Tiger Woods and the PGA) and threatens "If a Jedi gets in my way, he'll pay with his life".

They key is, with my prequels we get to actually SEE Darth Vader, and why he is such a badass. My third episode would be 100 percent evil Anakin (not this wimpy Good Anakin)...with the rebels fighting to just survive.

At the current rate of speed, Lucas' (dark)episode 3 will feature MAYBE thirty minutes of Darth Vader, not NEARLY enough to explain why he is feared and so powerful.

What a lost opportunity.

Star Wars = Porn

[DarkHelmet]

Episode 2 reminds me a lot of porn movies that are out there. Not a lot of content, but both have really cool midgets that do tricks and entertain audiences.

Re:So why was it called Attack of the Clones? (Spo

[Hassman]

She didn't change once when she was on the refugee ship. The next clothing change was back on Naboo (though she did change a bit too much...)

Anakin and Padme - why dialogue is so lame

[Goonie]

I think we're pretty much all agreed that Lucas's efforts to screenwrite and direct the love story between Anakin and Padme didn't work. However, there seems to be an assumption that the wordiness and stiltedness was purely a screwup of an attempt to write it in contemporary style.

I don't think so. If you've ever seen any BBC costume drama (I think some of it gets shown on PBS for the Americans in the audience) such as Pride and Prejudice, the characters discuss their feelings at great length in a somewhat similar way. The difference is, of course, that Jane Austen was one of the best writers of her era. Lucas, well, isn't.

Opinions?

Re:Am I the only one that thinks AotC is spectacul

[Hassman]

Yet ANH (which he did direct) was up for best picture, director,...

spiderman sucked compared to AOTC

[cybergeak]

here is a spicy hot flame of mine, saying that spiderman is uddercrap compared to episode 2, and im not just saying that cuz im some insane star wars fan, i saw both movies, and while spider man had neat effects and the like, the story sucked, and all around it doenst hold a candle to star wars.

negitive karma, here i come

Re:I'm just reminded what Green Goblin tells Spide

[gurensan]

I've been a Star Wars fan since '77. I've seen every single one first-run. I've seen the trilogy a good 100 times, and can recite most of the dialog from memory. Episode 2 was a huge jump in quality over 1. Simply put. The acting was nowhere near as bad as Taco said (don't ask for a link - do you own research), and the movie opened up much earlier than he said as well.

In case you've forgotten, not every geek can speak for every geek. I loved 2, especially compared to 1, and I think it makes a worthy successor (or predecessor) to episodes 4-6.

That said, even with the bad dialog, over-reliance on FX, and bad acting, it's the *world* and the *story* that people love, even the geeks.

Re:I'm just reminded what Green Goblin tells Spide

[Chiasmus_]

It is a movie, not a religion

It is a religion.

In fact, it's even listed as a religion on Britian's national census. Because over 10,000 fans listed "Jedi Knight" as their religion on the 2001 census, the government cannot consider it statistically insignificant.

Lest I get heavily flamed, let me just acknowledge that this fact does not grant the Jedi any legal religious status.

Spider's "Love Story" is More Laughable

[TomHandy]

Come on, Spidery's love story makes no sense given the context of the film. Almost everything Peter Parker does in the film is a direct response to his longing for Mary-Jane, and then, at the end, when Mary-Jane finally says she wants to be with him, he wimps out and says he can only offer her friendship (which is completely pointless....he has already defeated the one person who knew his secret identity so it wouldn't have done any harm). -Tom

Re:Spider's "Love Story" is More Laughable

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't the point that Peter 'grew up'? That
just longing for MJ isnt enough, that as a super
hero he is doomed to endanger all those he
cares about, so the fewer he cares for the better? If the GG found out about his
identity/MJ easily, then couldnt other villians?

I agree that it wasnt as smooth as it could
have been, but it definitely showed growth,
something neither Anakin nor Padme showed.

*SPOILERS*
Padme's reversal made even less sense. What
happened between the time she said they
should be friends and she said she was
hopelessly in love with anakin? She found
out that he murdered all the
tuskin raiders in the camp, including women
and children, he is basically a momma's boy,
she's in danger in the
factory and R2 saves her. What did Anakin
do to win her love?

s-man seriously blew

[Anonymous Coward]

I totally agree. Spiderman blew chunks. The first half was enjoyable, but the pain I endured during the second half made me glad I did not bring a pistol, as I likely would have ended my suffering there and then.

I think the real difference is that spiderman spent $80 million on marketing wheras clones spent $50 mil. If you did a statistical analysis I'm sure you could show that people who claim that spiderman was a good movie were exposed to the bulk of this.

I have no tv, saw no trailers for spiderman, hence could tell myself it was a good movie.

ATOC on the other hand, at least had decent FX.

Too bad all that piracy crippled its earnings

[dave_mcmillen]

Gee, imagine how much more money AotC could have made if people hadn't been able to download a crappy digital copy before the movie even opened. They must have lost, what, thousands of dollars to all those people who thought that the download replaced seeing it on the big screen -- and who were in the odd category of "obsessive enough to find and download a bootleg copy, but not obsessive enough to walk out to a theatre."

Really, there ought to be a law. Nay, there ought to be vast, sweeping legislation controlling every aspect of the creation and distribution of digital content, to make sure that this sort of tragedy isn't repeated.

picture quality

[Anonymous Coward]

I've seen AoTC twice in different theaters (it wasn't digital) and I noticed that the picture was not "perfect" sometimes, just like if when you receive TV ALMOST perfectly or if there was some compression or something... did someone noticed that too ?

Ep2: Edit the Groans

[bstt]

Whoever did the 'Phantom Edit' version of Ep1 - listen up, here's my request...

Edit out of Ep2 ALL of the dialogue EXCEPT the dialog spoken by Dooku, Yoda and Obi-Wan - and, I hate to say it, but you have to leave in Jar-Jar's one line (if for no other reason to show how idiots . Suddenly you'll have a far more enjoyable movie - no terrible C3PO puns and no 'romantic' dialogue my 6 year old could have written. That's and Ep2 I would watch over and over again.

Just my 2 cents...

Spidey VS. AOTC

[trippinfool]

IMO Spiderman is probably the best movie I have seen in my 25 years. The free-flowing movement of his webslingin', perdy MJ Watson, Dafoe plays an awesome Green Goblin. It made me think of the old TV show, the Atari game, all said, it made me feel like a kid again. ATOC was a good movie. George Lucas has so much $$$ that he has lost sight of what made Star Wars cool, it was a movie that depicted the past (future) as we know it. Instead, we are treated to a sappy ass love story, some OK CGI, and a really rushed ending to the movie. I do admit the CGI is 100000% better than Episode I, but considering the old 3 movies still look better than the first 2 new ones. Doesn't monofilament line and some cheesey model cost substantially less than a farm of Linux boxes doing CGI?

I respect Star Trek much more; here's why...

[jibs]

Why is George Lucas peddling an elitist, anti-democratic agenda under the guise of escapist fun?

http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/1999/06/ 15 / rin_main/

But I can still enjoy Star Wars on a shallow level...

opinions ... and yeah piracy was a good thing here

[wessman]

To say Spiderman was better than Ep.1 is entirely personal preference, as one cannot be compared to the other except for maybe special FX and acting.