Slashdot Mirror


Star Wars Revelations - May the Force Be With You!

n0alpha writes "For all you Star Wars fans out there, if you've been less than satisfied with the last two episodes of Star Wars, fear not. There is a new episode coming out soon -- but I'm not talking about Revenge of the Sith. On April 16th, 2005 the world will be blessed with a brand new episode, Star Wars Revelations. This is an independent film, completely put together by volunteers and organized by Panic Struck Productions, but don't let that fool you into thinking it is sub-par. Visit their website to view a trailer."

628 comments

  1. meme... by the_non_geek · · Score: 0, Redundant

    i for one welcome our new independent film overlords

    1. Re:meme... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Overloads ha.

      Dosn't the trailer remind you of Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy?

    2. Re:meme... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We would have modded you funny if you weren't "the_non_geek".

    3. Re:meme... by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

      No.

      Doesn't it remind you of the Flintstones?

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
  2. This has... by poopdeville · · Score: 5, Funny

    ..."copyright infringement" written all over it.

    --
    After all, I am strangely colored.
    1. Re:This has... by compm375 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure they asked for permission first.

    2. Re:This has... by Rs_Conqueror · · Score: 5, Informative

      Considering George Lucas judges the yearly star wars fanfilms, this seems unlikely.

    3. Re:This has... by BurntNickel · · Score: 1

      Trademark would be more like it....

      --
      And the knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them...
    4. Re:This has... by ehiris · · Score: 4, Funny

      They could release it in Mexico. It would join the Oakley knock-offs you find there. Only that real Oakleys are better then the knock-offs.

      Just because Lucas owns the copyright on Star Wars he shouldn't film knock-offs :)

    5. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please go over the difference between "then" and "than" before posting again. Thank you.

    6. Re:This has... by MasterB(G)ates · · Score: 1
      --
      In the Slashdot moderating system, humourless based offenses are considered especially heinous.
    7. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is StarWars TradeMarked?

    8. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wired article on this subject:

      'Steve Sansweet (Lucasfilm's head of Fan Relations) had to say,

      "There is plenty of room for fans to express their own feelings and opinions," Sansweet said. "We believe our core fans are responsible for the continuing popularity of the series, and we want to encourage them. Our intellectual properties are there for you to play with, but we expect you won't try and make a profit or use our characters in a salacious way. Having that wide-open frontier serves as a self-policing mechanism for the fans, who are really appreciative of being included."
      "Sansweet added that Lucas believes fan films will grow more sophisticated as the amateur filmmakers gain new skills.'

      So... care to rephrase or apologize for slandering the creators?

    9. Re:This has... by jimi+the+hippie · · Score: 1

      Of course it is. But, Lucas allows others to write books and comics set in the Star Wars universe. He (his office) has to approve the story and make sure it doesn't conflict with someone else's work.

      So, in short it is trademarked and Lucas does stil own the rights, but you could write a Star Wars book if you really wanted.

    10. Re:This has... by Cracell · · Score: 2, Informative

      This has...crap written all over it. They editing was horrid, acting sucked, the cg crap was good if they would simply add textures. The editing felt like I was switching between movies. The song didn't fit. The actors were ugly in unugly roles. It's crap. Sorry to be so harsh, but looks to me like they should go for cg ship battles (add textures) that's the only thing the have going for them. And the lightsaber fights? wtf have they heard of coregrahpy? Or like emotion in the fight? or emotion in acting?! Episode 1 and 2 were good, not great or nearly as good as they should've been. This isn't even good for a "fan-film" they need to use some of that prop budget for acting lessons, and editing classes.

      --
      Signatures are so 90s
    11. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Simply add textures"?

      It's obvious you don't have the first friggin' clue about CG. "Add textures". HAH!!!

    12. Re:This has... by Khymaera · · Score: 1

      As of 10:53 Central time on March 14th their website is down. I cannot access any of the Panic Struck Productions domain.

    13. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lucas is filming knock-offs? Hunh?

    14. Re:This has... by servognome · · Score: 4, Funny

      He (his office) has to approve the story and make sure it doesn't conflict with someone else's work.
      And they do about as good a job as the patent office. Lucas even conflicts within his own films, and doesn't care.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    15. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      They editing was horrid,
      Pot meet kettle

    16. Re:This has... by Agarax · · Score: 1

      Fanfilms are nothing unusual for Star Wars, and there are even contests held by LucasArts.

      I would hypothisise that as long as you are not charging for it they dont really give a hoot in hell if you make a fanflick.

      --
      Remember folks, slashdot doesn't have a -1 "disagree" moderation!
    17. Re:This has... by xcreature · · Score: 1

      They could release it in East Asia, where you find the deigner clothing that is made in the actual clothing factory by the same underpaid people who make your North American clothing, but for a quarter of the price. It's not a knock-off, it just happens not to be sold on your continent for a disgusting profit.

      Do the rpesident of Diesel, and Tommy Hilfiger, and like likes of them know that their original clothing is esentially being "bootlegged" in Asia? If they do know, the more interesting question becomes do they care? They're still making boatloads of money off of American sheep who eat up their marketing like so much McDonald's that I can't really expect them to spend their precious time trying to get this stuff off of Asian streets...

      But to be honest, I really don't care one way or the other what George Lucas, Tommy Hilfiger, or any other big rich American icon does with their time and money until they start stepping on the "little guy" to save their multibillion dollar Empires...

    18. Re:This has... by hkmwbz · · Score: 1
      "Lucas even conflicts within his own films, and doesn't care."
      Newsflash: They are movies. Entertainment. Fiction. Created by people for you to enjoy (or not, depending on your tastes). They are not supposed to be accurate descriptions of real world events. They are made by people. People make mistakes.
      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    19. Re:This has... by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 1

      Obligatory Jay and Silent Bob Strikes Back quote: "George Lucas is gonna sue somebody."

      --
      There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
    20. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only that real Oakleys are better then the knock-offs.

      Excellent, I've been hoping to run into someone that can help me with a nagging question. "Knock-offs" aside, could you explain the difference between a $25 sunglasses and $150 sunglasses? Thanks and I'll take my answer off the air.

      P.S. Don't say "the mullet" because that's cheating!

    21. Re:This has... by ehiris · · Score: 1

      Attention to detail, resolution and customer service are the differences between 25$ and 90$ sunglasses. At 150$ you get a strong high resolution polarized lens. My reason for Oakley is not only that their glasses fit my face perfectly but because the actual Oakley company cares that their sunglasses will fit my face comfortably.

      "Countless, unseen details are often the only difference between mediocre and magnificent ..."

    22. Re:This has... by grixnair · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But is it too much to ask that he be consistant in his own stories? Just because it's a movie doesn't mean attention to detail should suffer. In fact given the enormous, dedicated following that the Star Wars films have, and how detail-oriented sci-fi fans can be, one would think Lucas would strive to be as true to his own storyline and not contradict himself.

    23. Re:This has... by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      He has created an entire universe you know. And anyway, hardcore SW fans will be quick to point out how he doesn't actually contradict himself anyway :) Try it. Post about it in a SW forum and you'll get lots and lots of explanations.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    24. Re:This has... by Kintanon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's called pride of workmanship. Yes, they are fictional entertainment. But why bother writing a series if you are going to change the details in every book/movie? Just make completely seperate works. That whole "People make mistakes" mindset is just an excuse for shoddy work.

      Kintanon

      --
      Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
    25. Re:This has... by slapout · · Score: 1

      I thought that Fox and Lucas shared the rights to Star Wars.

      --
      Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
    26. Re:This has... by banzai51 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because travelling to Asia is so easy and cheap for the average American. Doubly so just to save a few bucks on clothes!

    27. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's funny. It's a good thing you're not serious, because hoo-boy you'd be such a corporate whore...

    28. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it's copyright. "Revelations" is a derivative work. Can you imagine the insanity that would ensue if every single author, in addition to needing to file for copyright, also had to apply for a trademark on his characters and/or fictional world in order to prevent others from writing sequels, prequels, and the like?

    29. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fanfilms

      flimflams

    30. Re:This has... by ehiris · · Score: 1

      At least I'm a whore to someone who can deliver me an orgasm not where I just get fucked.

    31. Re:This has... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm genuinely curious about why you think this poster's post constitutes whoredom. Is it because he seems to wholeheartedly endorse a specific company?

      Disclaimer: I don't know the sunglasses scene. It is possible that *everybody* except me knows Oakleys are junk.

  3. cool by dirvish · · Score: 4, Funny

    That is the first exciting Star Wars news I've heard in a long time! ...and just when I had started to give up.

  4. Not sub-par? You already said it wasn't by Lucas by AtariAmarok · · Score: 4, Funny
    " but don't let that fool you into thinking it is sub-par"

    Since you said it was NOT by George Lucas, I was not tending to think it was sub-par already.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  5. Copyrights... by peasleer · · Score: 1, Redundant

    This is great -- but are they in any danger of copyright infringement?

    I checked the site and didn't see anything regarding if they were cleared to use the Star Wars trademark.

    --
    Mythos : Logos :: Slashdot : Intelligence
    1. Re:Copyrights... by djwavelength · · Score: 5, Informative

      Lucas endorses fan films - I was trying to find more detail, but all i found was here:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_fiction#Legal_asp ect/

    2. Re:Copyrights... by ehiris · · Score: 0

      F the trademark. Star Wars is a lot more. Star wars is the idea of a universal war. You can't copyright ideas.

    3. Re:Copyrights... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm I'm pretty sure that star wars is a galactic war and also it involves Jedi which are pretty trademarkable (though I've heard say that Lucas originally stole the Jedi idea anyway)

  6. now just... by Rs_Conqueror · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now if only somone would make a fanfilm involving the horrific death of jar-jar...

    1. Re:now just... by merkhet · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      When the first film came out, I firmly believed that the only way for Lucas to win back the audience was by starting out the second with a black screen and have Jar-Jar walk on and spontaneously combust... and roll around for about ten minutes... I expect that these fanfilmers would do well to take heed of my suggestion. ^_~

    2. Re:now just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      See joke trailer of Stars Wars Ep III here.

    3. Re:now just... by menace3society · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's always Episode 3: A Lost Hope. He's given.... special treatment.

    4. Re:now just... by xMonkey · · Score: 1

      I had never seen that before. Pretty funny.

    5. Re:now just... by dmaxwell · · Score: 1

      I don't even think they bothered with poison. I know I wouldn't have.

    6. Re:now just... by menace3society · · Score: 2, Funny

      This gives me an idea. We should google-bomb the link with "Star Wars Episode 3" and variants thereof (Star Wars Episode III) and see if we can deflect people from the actual film. Tell your friends!

    7. Re:now just... by jc_panda · · Score: 1

      Holy Sheep Dip! That is one of the funniest things I think I have ever seen. I think i should send them gross amounts of cash! Now that was acting AND directing!

  7. backups? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hope they weren't storing all their footage on the server /. just melted down.

  8. How can they do this? by TelJanin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The movie seems to be set after/during Episode 3. How do they know what they are filming will not conflict with the official movie?

    1. Re:How can they do this? by QQoicu2 · · Score: 3, Informative
      --
      "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
  9. Re:Hmm by uberdave · · Score: 1

    It wasn't a Universe-o-crap until Lucas got his hands on it...

  10. Just like the real thing by elflet · · Score: 4, Funny

    At first I was taken aback by the cheezy dialog ("she lied to me! She used me!"), adequate acting, and overall look. Then I remembered Jar-Jar. This band of rebel filmmakers may be the galaxy's best last hope.

    1. Re:Just like the real thing by dirtsurfer · · Score: 3, Funny

      You get taken aback by adequate acting? I guess you really are a hardcore Star Wars fan.

    2. Re:Just like the real thing by tricops · · Score: 1

      For a fan film it's pretty well done, but I had about the same reaction. I was having trouble trying to stop from laughing my ass off at how cheesy some the acting and dialog was... like some sort of B-film. The special effects are pretty well done though there were some spots (the glass breaking at the end?) which could have used a fair bit more work. The only other thing that bothered me is the lighting seems to leave something to be desired. Rather than looking ominous/whatever, a lot of it looked like cheesy made for TV red dwarf style lighting.

      Well, whatever... your reaction is still spot-on. At least I can laugh my ass off at cheesiness - JarJar just pissed me off to no end.

      --
      (\(\
      (^v^)
      (")")
      This is the cute vorpal bunny virus, copy to your sig or runaway, runaway in fear!
    3. Re:Just like the real thing by Cplus · · Score: 1

      As an experiment tonight I showed the trailer for this to a non-geek friend as I was burning her a cd. After watching the trailer she said "Ooh, that looks a little better than the last two, they had such a strange style to them, can't wait to see it".

      I then showed her the real trailer and she said "meh".

      Personally I'm interested to see what Ep3 has in store for us as the last darkish Star Wars movie (Empire) was the one that has held me in thrall for all of these years. It may be awful, or it could be good...I hear there's a dialogue coach onboard this time around.

      --
      "Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality." -- Dalai Lama
    4. Re:Just like the real thing by UrlorJkron · · Score: 1

      "This band of rebel filmmakers may be the galaxy's best last hope."

      No, there is none.

      --
      The public will believe anything, so long as it is not founded on truth. --Edith Sitwell
    5. Re:Just like the real thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the CGI was actually very good, I certainly didn't find it unlike the 'norm' + sound effects seemed okay too (though I didn't take quite as much notice.)
      What really got me was the 'sub-par' acting (which could be forgivable), and the cheesy plot/lines (like it's turning into some soap/drama - unforgivable! I don't think I'll watch it after all...)
      Joel

    6. Re:Just like the real thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that acting was a lot of things. 'adequate' was not one of them...

  11. Looks good by maotx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The movie looks pretty decent. The CGI effects are better than the original movies though the acting could use a little improvement. For an independant film I'm really impressed with it. If they showed it at my local theater I'd be willing to cough up the $9 to see it just for the original content.

    Any word on how they are going to release this film? Online? Select theater?

    --
    I'm a virgo and on Slashdot. Coincidence? Yes.
    1. Re:Looks good by compm375 · · Score: 3, Informative

      From TFA: Revelations is a non-profit film being made for private use, and is not intended for sales of any sort.

    2. Re:Looks good by maotx · · Score: 3, Informative

      That doesn't mean they're not going to release it at all. Though the private use does make one weary on if we'll ever see it. The article is down and Panic Struck Productions only have the synopsis.

      --
      I'm a virgo and on Slashdot. Coincidence? Yes.
    3. Re:Looks good by hey! · · Score: 1
      The CGI effects are better than the original movies though the acting could use a little improvement.


      Well, maybe you haven't seen the original film in a while, but the acting could have used a little improvement in that too. Old pros Peter Cushing and Alec Guinness were a pleasure to watch, but the newcomers were incredibly stilted. Kershner got so much more out of them, granted they were more experienced at the time, but it makes me wonder whether Lucas has any talent at getting performances out of actors. I've never seen Amercian Graffitti, was it any good?

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:Looks good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would also pay if I could cough up $9 but seeing as how I have to earn my money maybe I'll pass

    5. Re:Looks good by Anubis350 · · Score: 1

      heh, true as that might be, if nothing else itll get posted to some bittorrent site, even if not intentially. We'll get to see it eventually.

      --
      "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    6. Re:Looks good by AndyChrist · · Score: 1

      It reminds me of that "Fanimatrix" movie a while back.
      http://fanimatrix.net/what.html

      It looks okay. Until the live action stuff starts moving, and you can see it's video (which still looks cheap, not because it's any worse, just because is always has been cheap), you can see how awkward the actors are, you can HEAR how awkward they are...

      It's like some convention cos-play event taken too far.

      I will give them credit for some impressive SFX, though. At least in the trailer they look as good as Lucas's. Which is to say, not the best in the world, but not bad at all.

      Who would have thought we'd live to see the day that ILM WASN'T the best at special effects, BTW?

    7. Re:Looks good by The+Grey+Clone · · Score: 2, Informative

      Short Answers: It seems Lucas doesn't care as long as you don't sell it for profit. They're going to release it for free on their website

      Long Answers:
      Reading through their FAQ, they have this.

      Question
      Is Lucas aware of your film and isn't he going to sue the hell out of you?

      Answer:
      For most people who do not understand fan films we get this question often .To answer, I doubt if Lucas himself has seen "Revelations". However ,Lucas is a large supporter for fan films,and is very kind enough to let other inspiring artists play in his backyard, as long as you don't try and make money from his hard work, and respectfully so.
      "Revelations" is a non-profit film and everyone who worked on the film was a volunteer (no one was paid)
      The film itself will be availible free to download from TheForce.net and the "Revelations" website to anyone who wishes to watch it.

      God, I hope they're smart enough to use a torrent the next time around. It's a little dissapointing that the film will only be 40 minutes long, though. That's just over the average of an american hour-long tv show (sans commercials).

    8. Re:Looks good by Hadley · · Score: 1

      From the FAQ (http://www.panicstruckpro.com/revelations/revelat ions_faq.html)

      The film itself will be availible free to download from TheForce.net and the "Revelations" website to anyone who wishes to watch it.

    9. Re:Looks good by The+Wooden+Badger · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen the trailer yet, but the still pictures look pretty sexy for being a low budget indie. I just have to figure a good way to download it on my craptacular dial up service.

      --
      Heroscape, it's like legos combined with anachronistic wargames.
    10. Re:Looks good by kahlancypher · · Score: 1

      It will be released for a premiere (one showing) at the Senator Theater in Baltimore on April 16th, and then on their website for free download on April 18th.

    11. Re:Looks good by maotx · · Score: 1

      Sweet. Thanks for the info. Now I can catch it in theater as well as download it.
      Anyone know if this is a one time showing?

      --
      I'm a virgo and on Slashdot. Coincidence? Yes.
    12. Re:Looks good by kahlancypher · · Score: 1

      For now there's just the one public showing. There's some talk that they will try to get it shown at Shoreleave (Star Trek Con in Baltimore in July), but that has not been settled.

  12. Can we alter time/space... by Scareduck · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ... change the copyright laws and/or the course of Lucasfilm, and give these guys legal power to make whatever sequels/prequels they want? Without having seen any of this, it occurs to me that the conventional wisdom WRT the Star Wars franchise is that Lucas desperately needs to hand control over to somebody else, and he is increasingly unwilling and/or incapable of doing so.

    Lucas recently said the newest sequel is not for children, and given the quality of the other ones put out since about halfway through Return of the Jedi, it's not for adults, either. Die, midiclorians, die! Die, Ewoks, die! Die, Jar-Jar, die!

    lather, rinse, repeat

    --

    Dog is my co-pilot.

    1. Re:Can we alter time/space... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking that maybe a "George Lucas" copyright law could be used to battle the Sonny Bono one, but then it dawned on me that NEITHER of these two jackasses made anything worth protecting, and it's depressing that Sonny's name is on that law. If it was the Rolling Stones or Radiohead copyright law or something, maybe there'd be a reason to give a shit.

    2. Re:Can we alter time/space... by Dirtside · · Score: 1



      *** POTENTIAL SPOILERS AHEAD ***




      Ahmed Best is listed in the IMDB credits for Episode III, but Jar-Jar wasn't in the trailer. With any luck, that means Jar-Jar is barely in it at all, and with lots of luck, he gets violently killed. Preferably by Anakin.

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    3. Re:Can we alter time/space... by michaeldot · · Score: 2, Interesting





      *** MASSIVE SPOILER AHEAD: AVERT GAZE NOW IF YOU LIKE SEEING FILMS WITHOUT HAVING THE STORY PREVIEWED ***



      With any luck, that means Jar-Jar is barely in it at all, and with lots of luck, he gets violently killed. Preferably by Anakin.

      We've lucked out... Jar-Jar doesn't get killed, and instead gets to attend Padme's funeral, who is killed by Anakin.

      There's just no justice, is there!

    4. Re:Can we alter time/space... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that subject should be "Can we alter time, speed up the harvest, or teleport
      ourselves off this rock?"

  13. Looks nice but... by coupland · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Okay, the CGI, sound, and effects were outstanding. But the acting and dialogue made me pray I'd be struck by a passing meteorite. Wait a minute, that was a verbatim transcript of my opinions of Ep1 & 2... Maybe these folks are on to something...

    1. Re:Looks nice but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The bit that was strange to me was the lack of beautiful people.

      I'm so used to Hollywood serving up impossibly perfect human beings to star in their shows that seeing average-looking people just really threw me for a loop.

      It really made me realise just how used we are to only seeing certain types of people in our media - as soon as we start to get more realistic, it feels odd.

      Other than that though - the special effects were surprisingly professional! I never expected that quality from a fan-based venture :)

    2. Re:Looks nice but... by Coryoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually what was lacking was professional quality lighting, wardrobe, make-up and cinematography. That's understandable, these thngs are hard, and potentially very expensive. Most average (that's average, not ugly!) people can look good if you supply them with professional make up and tailored costuming, have professional lighting (that makes a surprsing difference actually - its one of the main differences in "look" between a alot of amateur films and professional productions) and shoot them in a way that makes the most of their features.

      You would probably be surprised to find, should you ever meet them in real life, that most celebrities are hardly more attractive than a lot of the people you'll meet every day. Sure they've got the knack of a winning smile, or a particularly "sexy pout" or whatever, but on the whole the difference isn't that great. What they do have is professional makeup, lighting and cinematography.

      Jedidiah.

    3. Re:Looks nice but... by starm_ · · Score: 1

      I actually thought the people were okay looking. I think the odd feeling came mostly from bad makup and in some scenes poor lighting. In some interior scenes you could see that the light was comming from spotlights behind the camera. That makes it feel very unatural.

    4. Re:Looks nice but... by ChickenBlood · · Score: 1

      The CGI is definitely the strong point. The sound ontop of the lighting and film quality is what got me (that sort of hollow dead echo in every noise made, as if it were recorded in my basement). All the non space scenes had the same atmosphere and film/sound quality of a soap opera or Dr. Who. It looks professional... but low budget.

    5. Re:Looks nice but... by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 1
      Yeah its interesting. Is good acting going to be the weak link in future home-grown productions?

      It is the exact opposite of what CGI was originally promised - which was to make actors 'obsolete'. Of course, I don't know how many people believed that (probably the same number of people that believed computerization would solve all employment problems), but its still an interesting point.

    6. Re:Looks nice but... by LS · · Score: 1

      Another problem is sound editting. They didn't pad the room or use the right equipment or filters or something... you can hear all kinds of sounds and noise when the actors talk, making it sound like it was recorded in a bedroom.

      LS

      --
      There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
    7. Re:Looks nice but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone will not stop confusing CG with CGI (common gateway interface)!

    8. Re:Looks nice but... by Coryoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Another problem is sound editting. They didn't pad the room or use the right equipment or filters or something... you can hear all kinds of sounds and noise when the actors talk, making it sound like it was recorded in a bedroom.

      Very true. Again, that's one of those things that's hard, and potentially expensive to do right. Then again, there's the issue of knowing your constraints. That, IMHO, is why Troops was so good. They knew sound and lighting and make-up were really the hard parts, so they managed to write something that required a minimum of it: Everything was shot outside in bright sun so lighting issues are minimised. 90% of the dialog is from the troopers and can hence be recorded separately in sound booth afterwards. Everyone is in costume (which was a point they were apparently very good at, and used to the hilt) except Beru and Owen, who are supposed to look a little haggard and distressed anyway - make-up becomes a non-issue.

      The truly great amateur films are the ones that understand what they can do well, and what they don't have available, and manage to create something that fits neatly inside those constraints. Being so constrained is a little more limiting, but if you're really creative in writing and direction you can often do wonders. There are some great Science Fiction films (Pi and Sticky Fingers of Time for instance) that were made on shoestring budgets. Knowing and playing to your limitations is what makes for a great low budget film.

      Jedidiah.

    9. Re:Looks nice but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Most average (that's average, not ugly!) people can look good if you supply them with professional make up and tailored costuming, have professional lighting (that makes a surprsing difference actually - its one of the main differences in "look" between a alot of amateur films and professional productions) and shoot them in a way that makes the most of their features.

      "I find your lacquered face disturbing." B=<

    10. Re:Looks nice but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep - I never meant to suggest they were ugly! They are all good-looking, but still near average - not what we'd consider star material :)

      (I myself am on the ugly side of average, and I'm in a habit of playing "rate the people" , which is why it jumped out at me in this case... I normally don't bother to play "rate the people" with TV or movies, since most of the actors/actresses are in the 8 - 10 region :)

      I agree with Coryoth above, and you that good make-up and lighting would have made a big difference in the feeling of professional quality :)

    11. Re:Looks nice but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Everyone will not stop confusing CG with CGI (common gateway interface)!

      I don't know if you're kidding or not, but CGI was an abbreviation for "computer-generated imagery" long before Common Gateway Interface hit the scene.

      So "CG" is an adjective, not a noun like CGI is.

    12. Re:Looks nice but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Say what you will about the lighting, it takes more than a powder and good illumination to obscure a beer and potato chips couch potato lifestyle. These Jedi warriors sure as hell better hope the force is on their side, because if they actually have to run or fight or something they're going to have a heart attack.

    13. Re:Looks nice but... by agendi · · Score: 1
      I do a fair bit of work in live theatre and I have often considered making a movie of the shows we do. However I am held back by the exact opposite problem - I have access to some very good actors, lighting designers, makeup people and costume makers but only a very limit access to the things that modern film needs, decent editing software for a beginner, special effects skills and raw talent when it comes to holding a camera.

      It is a shame really that sometimes Live Theatre people refuse to see Motion Pictures as quality theatre and vice versa.

      That is why my hat is always off to Peter Jackson. He just seemed to bridge the gaps by surrounding himself with what was best for the film - not for the box-office or having the right product-placed stars or the hippest soundtrack etc. PJ seemed to want to make a world not just a movie. Good luck to the independant Star Wars crew!

      --
      I just can't be bothered.
    14. Re:Looks nice but... by jp25666 · · Score: 1

      The acting made me think that it might be a Star Wars "adult" film... you know, the kind that's "not for children".

    15. Re:Looks nice but... by Coryoth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I do a fair bit of work in live theatre and I have often considered making a movie of the shows we do. However I am held back by the exact opposite problem - I have access to some very good actors, lighting designers, makeup people and costume makers but only a very limit access to the things that modern film needs, decent editing software for a beginner, special effects skills and raw talent when it comes to holding a camera.

      It's a hard problem because you rarely find a group of people who naturally have a nice complete balance of skills. In the end you just have to play to your strengths, and try and minimise your deficits. If you're serious about making films of the shows then investing some cash in a Mac and Final Cut Pro wouldn't go astray. As for the rest - I'm not a film director, I just know some. There are books on the subject though (and your library will probably have them), and they can give you some good basic rules for contructing shots and editing things together. No, you can't become an expert in that, but that just means you want to construct the whole film to be as minimalist as possible with shots and editing. If you keep that aspect simple and let the actors shine, the end result will probably be surprisngly good.

      Jedidiah.

    16. Re:Looks nice but... by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Um, while those are all important parts, they do not address the fact that a few of the actors *cough*lady in red*cough* were just HORRIBLE.

      I think they did a beautiful job on the effects (specially the ATSTs walking) but at least the people in ep. I and II could ACT (not that they were given the best script, but still). I didn't feel anything from these people.

      That said, this still looks better than I and II, and probably III.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    17. Re:Looks nice but... by taernim · · Score: 1

      And acting ability? ...

      --
      "PC Load Letter? What the $@#% does that mean?!"
    18. Re:Looks nice but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could just skip all that stuff, add some sex scenes and turn it into the biggest porno of all time!

    19. Re:Looks nice but... by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 1
      You would probably be surprised to find, should you ever meet them in real life, that most celebrities are hardly more attractive than a lot of the people you'll meet every day.

      Indeed. I was working on a photo shoot years ago and this model shows up in a limo for the days work. I remember thinking "who the hell is this model that she needs a limo?" She went into the dressing/make up room for an hour or so and out walks...Cheryl Ladd. I completely did not recognize her until she was in costume.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    20. Re:Looks nice but... by Digital+Pizza · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What they do have is professional makeup, lighting and cinematography.

      And (hopefully) a good director. Unfortunately, fan films are made by fans, not Hollywood pros (usually), so there's no experience directing actors. Look how bad the acting in Episodes One and Two was - those were good actors but they were directed by someone who has said that he doesn't like actors (Lucas). Compare to what someone who does like actors can do (Ron Howard, Rob Reiner). Good direction can make a world of difference.

      --
      We apologize for the inconvenience.
    21. Re:Looks nice but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The truly great amateur films are the ones that understand what they can do well, and what they don't have available, and manage to create something that fits neatly inside those constraints.

      imho this is not only true for amateur film but for every art-project. maybe that's also the reason why episode I+II are now considered soulless?

    22. Re:Looks nice but... by sxmjmae · · Score: 1

      After meeting Pamela Anderson she looks exactly like she does on TV or the big screen (I did see "Barb Wire" on the big screen).
      Other stars I have meet look pretty close but it is really amazing how Pamela Anderson looks exactly the same.

      --
      My Sig indicates the end of the comment I posted.
    23. Re:Looks nice but... by divbyzero · · Score: 1

      Something I've wondered about... occasionally you see a "making of" video where the documentary camera is running at the same time as the real camera. It's seeing things from a different angle, but it's pointed at the same scene under the same lighting. What is it about the process that makes the colors of the real film so much more saturated than the documentary?

      --
      But my grandest creation, as history will tell,
      Was Firefrorefiddle, the Fiend of the Fell.
    24. Re:Looks nice but... by -Harlequin- · · Score: 1

      Sure they've got the knack of a winning smile, or a particularly "sexy pout" or whatever, but on the whole the difference isn't that great.

      While I agree on the lighting/costume/makeup budget making a huge difference, and a comparison of faces would reveal little difference, a huge difference is in posture, body language, and how they move. In this trailer, geeks in costume look like geeks in costume instead of SW characters even when they're too far away to see that their faces are no less attractive that your average SW actor.

      "Geek" body language is very strong, at complete odds with "macho hero" body language (which is also strong), so the gut-wrenchingly awful picture of someone in clearly-hero-attire-and-dialogue moving with clearly-a-geek-character, makes me squirm. (Yes, I do a LOT of squirming at conventions :-) Hint to the costume enthusiests at cosplay/conventions - there is a point of diminishing returns you've probably already reached where to improve your costume, you will get more mileage out of posture training than from sewing on more and more detail, or building more and more authentic props. Seriously. Obsessively replicating the costume is only half the job, and you do all your wonderful craftmanship a big disservice if you spend all that time on the outfit and don't work on the wearer.

      BTW, Don't 'spose you'll be passing through the Seattle area any time soon Jed? /Geek struggling to throw off the shackles of body language. :-)

    25. Re:Looks nice but... by -Harlequin- · · Score: 1

      This movie demonstrates that motivated by the right thing (star wars) there are plenty of geeks who will pour their SFX skills into a pet project. I can't help but feel that this is another game of the universe - you need technical film talent, and somewhere out there will be a group of film enthusiests who need your costume and acting crew, and if the two (or more) groups met, it would be a match made in heaven, but how do they find each other?

      All I can say is, keep looking. Don't let the universe's perverse sense of humour get the last laugh :)

    26. Re:Looks nice but... by kahlancypher · · Score: 1

      How can you tell what the acting is like? You can't really base it off of a couple of unfinished sound bytes. Let's not hate on the actors before we have a chance to see the finished product.

    27. Re:Looks nice but... by kahlancypher · · Score: 1

      These people are far from fat, if that is what you are implying here, anonymous coward! And I assure you they did all their own stunts, so I have no idea what you're talking about. How about avoiding making slurs against people you don't know, or at least having the courage to own up to them.

  14. Thieves ! by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1, Troll
    "This is great -- but are they in any danger of copyright infringement?"

    Haven't you been reading the slashdot arguments every time someone mentions Kazaa and p2p??? You can't call it copyright infringment. It is "Theft!" now. Just like war is peace and freedo is slavery.

    The producers of the film are thieves, as are you if you watch it.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:Thieves ! by strabo · · Score: 0
      You can't call it copyright infringment. It is "Theft!" now. Just like war is peace and freedo is slavery.

      Freedo is a bounty hunter, you idiot! Just because he works for someone who is in to slavery...

      Sheesh... get your facts straight.

    2. Re:Thieves ! by pyrrhonist · · Score: 1
      Freedo is a bounty hunter, you idiot!

      It's Greedo, and he didn't get a chance to shoot, because...

      HAN SHOOTS FIRST!!!!!

      Damn, it was easier than I though to segue that in there! Anyway, I'm off to pummel a deceased equine...

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
  15. Trust your instincts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "but don't let that fool you into thinking it is sub-par. Visit their website to view a trailer."
    I'll save everyone 2 minutes right now. It's craptastic.

    1. Re:Trust your instincts by sittingbull · · Score: 1

      Ohhh, it's Sith. I thought it was Revenge of the Shit.

  16. george lucas would be spinning in his grave... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if it ever got aired.... that is.... after the angry mobs who come out from watching revenge of the sith maul him to death with plastic light sabers.

  17. /.'d by Pretendstocare · · Score: 1

    Ack! slashdotted, any mirrors?

    1. Re:/.'d by RandomWordGenerator · · Score: 1

      http://www.mirrordot.com/ for all your slashdotted site needs. They were still in the process of caching up the trailer when I tried though .. it'll take a few moments.

  18. Spoilers by pbaer · · Score: 1

    Massive Spoilers Here. Unzip it then open the html document.

    --
    There are 11 types of people, those who know unary and those who don't.
    1. Re:Spoilers by XFilesFMDS1013 · · Score: 1

      Don't bother, no nude Natalie Portman pics. I mean, seriously, what were you thinking?

  19. they have good bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    iam downloading at 300k+, good to see someone knows how to set up a webserver

    1. Re:they have good bandwidth by Vidiot3k · · Score: 1

      So it was YOU who killed the server!

  20. People focus on the wrong aspects by praetis · · Score: 1

    If you take poor filmmaking and try to imitate it, you get something even worse.

    I love Star Wars for the story; not the screenplay that depicts it. By thinking that way I enjoy all the movies.

    Oh, and as long as you keep John Williams' brilliant work in there, it can't be all bad.

    1. Re:People focus on the wrong aspects by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 2

      You like Star Wars for the story? That's like watching pr0n for the plot.

      It's your basic cheeze story set somewhere cool with fancy swords and lasers.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    2. Re:People focus on the wrong aspects by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Well, maybe not "cheeze" (except for the acting), but you're right about "basic." My English lit. teacher in High School called it the "Epic hero"-type story. Basically, it's "The Odyssey in Space." One thing that list leaves out is that the hero typically goes through a "dark period" during his quest -- for Odysseus, it's the part where he decends into Hell to talk to his mother, for Luke it's when Vader cuts off his hand, and for Annakin it's when his mother is killed by the bandits.

      Incidentally, this is the point upon which Star Wars vs. Star Trek flamewars start -- people who like Star Wars are attracted to the familiar meme of the story, combined with the cool action and special effects, while Trek fans are attracted to the more hardcore sci-fi "what-if" and "cautionary tale"-type stories that are common in Trek, and overlook the cheezy special effects.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  21. slashdotted? by DrLudicrous · · Score: 2

    Seems slashdotted already, at 8 minutes past posting. Anyone manage to save a copy to bittorrent?

    1. Re:slashdotted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try again. It took about 4-5 minutes to connect for me, but then it just sped through on download.

    2. Re:slashdotted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did a bit of googling, found a few mirrors, but no torrent yet. this one is fast. http://www.dvcreators.net/discuss/showthread.php?t =5021

    3. Re:slashdotted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not anymore...

    4. Re:slashdotted? by Morden · · Score: 1

      I saved a copy, but I deleted it before I finished watching it.

      My mother told me if I can't say anything nice, not to say anything at all, so...

    5. Re:slashdotted? by aichpvee · · Score: 1

      Might want to look up the meaning of "mirror". Those are just direct links to the panicstruckpro.com files.

      --
      The Farewell Tour II
  22. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What was it before Lucas got his hands on it?

  23. The Rise of Free Content by Saxerman · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I've long been saying that the content cartels will eventually be overthrown by a mass of free content. The cost and availability of the tools required for 'high quality' special effects has been rapidly declining, and we're beginning to see more and more content from , flash sites, and .

    The majority of free content created is, of course, subpar. The tools still need to be wielded by skilled artisans to created above average content. Regardless, as the bar continues to be lowered for entry into the field, more and more people with some degree of talent will find new outlets for their creativity.

    I don't see there being any sort of mass uprising anytime soon, as the content cartels still have a lot on the distribution outlets, but the rise of the Internet has changed the playing field dramatically. The major counter-argument has been that the content cartels can merely buy up the few quality titles to maintain their advantage, but my theory is that there is enough latent creativity waiting in the wings they won't be able to stem the tide.

    Well... I can dream, can't I?

    --

    A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.

    1. Re:The Rise of Free Content by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The majority of free content created is, of course, subpar.

      So what? The majority of non-free content is total crap too. Look how many terrible big-budget movies Hollywood has put out.

  24. Parody! by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1
    You can get away with a LOT of what would otherwise be considered "copyright infringement" in your creative works if you can construe it as parody... particularly if it's not a for-profit enterprise and doesn't have a negative impact on the commercial value of the original work.

    Still, telling it to the court won't be particularly fun. =(

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    1. Re:Parody! by antimatt · · Score: 5, Funny

      how to make a parody of a Star Wars film:

      1. Make a film in the Star Wars universe.
      2. Hire good actors, and give them good direction.
      3. Profit. Fear no copyright infringement.

      -matt.

    2. Re:Parody! by Tim+Browse · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Yeah, don't go hiring any of those bad actors like Christopher Lee, Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Ian McDiarmid, Terence Stamp, Samuel L. Jackson etc.

      I mean, those guys freaking suck!

      (See what I did there?)

    3. Re:Parody! by Mr+Ambersand · · Score: 5, Funny

      Natalie Portman sucks? Wow! Now that's 'News For Nerds'!

      --
      "Your admirers in the street
      Got to hoot and stamp their feet
      in the heat from your physique" -King Crimson
    4. Re:Parody! by macshit · · Score: 4, Funny

      I just wish they'd pick a good hairdresser.

      This has bugged me ever since the first Star Wars film. They're flying around in spaceships, wearing funky clothing, fighting light-saber duels, etc., and I'll be suspending my disbelief just fine, ... but wait ... all the male actors have hair right out of the local teen boy-band concert! Gah!

      C'mon guys, either make the hair (1) really weird (the female actors seem to have this down), or (2) mind-bendingly conservative (pick something that hasn't changed in 1500 years, like shaving it all off). At least stop using Tiger Teen Beat as your model.

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    5. Re:Parody! by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 2, Interesting
      There is a good quote on this somewhere, can't be bothered tring to find it. It is something like:

      Mark Hamil: Shouldn't my hair be, like, all messed up after being in that trash compactor?

      Harrison Ford: I don't think it's that kind of movie, kid.

    6. Re:Parody! by madmancarman · · Score: 4, Funny
      C'mon guys, either make the hair (1) really weird (the female actors seem to have this down), or (2) mind-bendingly conservative (pick something that hasn't changed in 1500 years, like shaving it all off). At least stop using Tiger Teen Beat as your model.

      Have you seen George Lucas's hair? Is it any wonder they all look like Jack from Three's Company?

      --
      First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Gandhi
    7. Re:Parody! by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

      Strictly speaking, I don't think you can call that thing HAIR.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    8. Re:Parody! by steinnes · · Score: 1

      Who cares if he/she sucks?! Natalie Portman is a guy !?

    9. Re:Parody! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pick something that hasn't changed in 1500 years, like shaving it all off

      Did something happen to our heads in 500 ad?

    10. Re:Parody! by mbourgon · · Score: 1

      (Kenny..............)

      Jeremy Irons. Dungeons & Dragons. I rest my case.

      --
      "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
    11. Re:Parody! by idamaybrown · · Score: 1

      Not as much as the "actors" in the parody.

    12. Re:Parody! by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1

      Your case is that Jeremy Irons is a bad actor?

      Or that Dungeons & Dragons is a bad film?

    13. Re:Parody! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pick something that hasn't changed in 1500 years, like shaving it all off

      Mace Windu, bitch. Baddest Mofo ever to swing a lightsaber. Respect is due!

    14. Re:Parody! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your use of "or" in that construction is an insult to logic gates everywhere.

    15. Re:Parody! by drsquare · · Score: 1

      The problem is, even when you get good actors, if you give them awful scripts in a film with awful direction, they look like bad actors. Also the really good actors will just be embarassed by the awful dialogue, and it often shows.

      As for Samuel L. Jackson, can he play any other characters than 'charismatic angry black guy'? Yeah he has presence and breathes life into his roles, but he hardly has much of a range.

      Christopher Lee perhaps, but he's wasted in Lucas' pantomime-baddy role.

    16. Re:Parody! by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      That's bad news for nerds.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    17. Re:Parody! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, don't go hiring any of those bad actors like Christopher Lee, Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Ian McDiarmid, Terence Stamp, Samuel L. Jackson etc.

      Agree, those actors are actually quite good...well, maybe not Portman.

      The real problem is the director (Lucas) and the script (Lucas). Even Sir Freaking Laurence Olivier would look bad with turds like "I don't like sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere. Not like here. Here everything is soft and smooth." Agggh! Didn't anyone actually proof read this piece of crap?

    18. Re:Parody! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jeremy Irons knew he was giving a crappy, over the top performace when he made Dungeons & Dragons. He was just in it for the money. There's some hilarious commentary on the DVD about this. Irons is one of the great actors of our time, but he was just being a whore for that movie cause they really wanted him for the role. (Posting anon because this is admittedly off-topic.)

    19. Re:Parody! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's still looks better than Pete Rose. No wonder they won't let him into the hall of fame.

    20. Re:Parody! by Whyzzi · · Score: 1

      Natalie Portman sucks

      Ok sure - but the real question is - does she swallow?

      --
      "BSD is about people pissing each other.." (Moid Vallat)
    21. Re:Parody! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Natalie Portman is a really bad actress! After seeing Episodes I and II, I simply cannot believe that she has a reputation for being talented and beautiful... She is at best cute, and she delivers her lines like she's in an elementary school Christmas pageant. She is so awful! She wasn't that great in Closer either, but she was better than in SW (it would be almost impossible to be worse), and so unfortunately her career might not totally crash because of her ridiculously bad Amidala performance, but it sure deserves to!!! She deserves never to be heard from again, except maybe when the paparazzi catches her scratching her buttcrack again in public... She is just so disappointing, she has lost everything she had when she first got into acting: she's not all that pretty anymore, she not a good actress, and she is no longer classy or respectable. She's just like all the other young actresses who will bear their nipples and a$$ for the camera.

    22. Re:Parody! by radost · · Score: 1

      I think you are on to something here antimatt. I've just seens the trailer however and they clearly have not employed good actors or given them good direction. The dialog and speech patterns reek of a mediocre 2004 television pilot. No, I'm afraid this cannot be considered a parody of a recent Lucas film. I'm sure he is going to love it.

  25. Obligatory: by burne · · Score: 1

    Panic did strike. Their poor little webserver. Down in ruins.

  26. Now witness the power of this fully armed and -- by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 0, Redundant

    --slashdotted.

    Never underestimate the power of the slash.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  27. They can do more than that.... by AtariAmarok · · Score: 5, Funny
    " I firmly believed that the only way for Lucas to win back the audience was by starting out the second with a black screen and have Jar-Jar walk on and spontaneously combust... and roll around for about ten minutes."

    Hell, he'll win me back if he makes "Sith" nothing more than a 2 hour extremely bloody high body count Gungan snuff flick. The only time the Gungan slaughter stops is when the Ewoks show up and they become the target.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:They can do more than that.... by DarkSarin · · Score: 1

      funny you should say that. I was talking to a friend about how if Lucas had done Ep I correctly, Jar-Jar's role (if any, mind you), would have lasted all of about 5 minutes, at which point someone would have chopped his tongue out of his head, and then used their lightsabre hilt to beat him to a bloody pulp.

      Then the movie, tone set properly, could have then proceeded to tell the story as it should have been.

      Ep II, if done correctly, would have had Amadala leaving Anakin, saying something along the lines of, "call me when you can ACT!", followed by a real rage and not some Seattle-teen angst coupled with a pseudo remorse. Additionally, the senate would have killed Jar-Jar (presuming he made it that long), and Yoda would have had a clue about what was so obvious.

      I think there are several problems with the movie, but central to it all is that Lucas insisted on making them not to tell a story, but to entertain his kids (watch daddy make a billion bucks selling goofy stuff to the gullible peons, son...er, that is watch Jar-Jar, I made him just for you...) and make money. The Original Films were made to tell a story, even with moralistic overtones. It just so happens that they were a classic.

      Despite all that, Lucas' kids are older, and so he is telling a more mature story. The fact of the matter is that those who tell kids stories like they are talking to their dog fifi end up making crap. Those that take a story about things kids understand and tell them like an adult make excellent stories, books, movies, etc. Those are the ones that are remembered.

      If Lucas had taken the story of Anakin as a kid, and told it to adults, it would have a much broader appeal. Instead he took the story of Anakin as a kid, hid it in his dirty socks, sprayed it with bright shiny colors and Febreeze, and tried to distract everyone with the bright shiny lights--all the while saying what a good boy Fifi is.

      Blech!

      (As a side not, it should be noted that I am not a fan of dogs as pets unless the dog is over 18 or so inches tall and has a nice mean-sounding bark. Those sorry mini-poodles, chihuahuas and otherwise furry footballs are only good for roadkill and football...oh yeah, and dust mops!) //end rant

      --
      "We don't know what we are doing, but we are doing it very carefully,..." Wherry, R.J. Personnel Psychology (1995)
    2. Re:They can do more than that.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One correction - the young actors (Natalie Portman and Hayden Christiansen (spelling?)) can actually act well. George Lucas just can't direct for shit.

      If you watch their performances it is clear that they were just giving George exactly what he asked for. They are capable of much more subtle and illuminating performances - just watch some of their other work, where they are given better scripts and directors to work with.

      It is telling that even the established actors come off badly in these prequel movies - bad direction and dialogue can ruin anyone's performance.

    3. Re:They can do more than that.... by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 1
      I think the main problem is, Lucas is a terrible director and a terrible writer. The original (ep. IV) is the only film that he directed that is any good. In that movie, the basic story line is his, but the actual script lines are not - and that is a reasonable division of responsibilities IMHO. Same as writing code - the person who designs the interface is typically not the same person who engineers the program structure.

      Almost all of his famous movies (Indiana Jones etc) he produced not directed. Even Speilberg, seeing the disaster he made of episode I, offered to direct the remainder but acknowledged that it was Lucas' baby and the chances of him doing that were zero.

    4. Re:They can do more than that.... by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 1

      And they reincarnate Darth Maul. He was just too damn cool to not have a bigger part than killing obi-wan's mentor. Sheesh.

    5. Re:They can do more than that.... by einhverfr · · Score: 1


      If Lucas had taken the story of Anakin as a kid, and told it to adults, it would have a much broader appeal. Instead he took the story of Anakin as a kid, hid it in his dirty socks, sprayed it with bright shiny colors and Febreeze, and tried to distract everyone with the bright shiny lights--all the while saying what a good boy Fifi is.

      Blech!


      May the farce be with you!

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    6. Re:They can do more than that.... by HungSoLow · · Score: 1

      Hmm.. I never had anything against the Ewoks. They weren't abrasive like the Gungans (with emphasis on Jar-Jar and that irritating King .. or whatever the hell he's supposed to be)

    7. Re:They can do more than that.... by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 1

      Well, it was the same with Boba Fett. It is a sign of a film's greatness that even the bit parts become legendary. The only problem is, Ep I and II don't live up to it.

    8. Re:They can do more than that.... by thebroken · · Score: 1

      I've a revelation for you: Slashdotted.

    9. Re:They can do more than that.... by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2, Funny
      Hell, he'll win me back if he makes "Sith" nothing more than a 2 hour extremely bloody high body count Gungan snuff flick. The only time the Gungan slaughter stops is when the Ewoks show up and they become the target.

      Shh. Don't say that. George will hear and we'll have some made-for-TV series that involves a war between Gungans and Ewoks. But it won't be a bloodfest. It'll be stopped when two bumbling droids take it upon themselves to try and emulate the Jedi council, intervene, and end hostilities with a round of simply discussing each other's differences and much awkward hugging and salivating amoung Ewok and Gungan leaders.

      The final scene will be a closeup of Darth JarJar saying "Meesa really pleased..."
    10. Re:They can do more than that.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (As a side not, it should be noted that I am not a fan of dogs as pets unless the dog is over 18 or so inches tall and has a nice mean-sounding bark. Those sorry mini-poodles, chihuahuas and otherwise furry footballs are only good for roadkill and football...oh yeah, and dust mops!) //end rant

      I own a chihuahua. I consider your line of thinking cowardly. The chihuahua bark isn't to scare away whatever it is, it's to to alert me to the situation. I don't need a dog for a bodyguard. People with Pit bull terriers and such are almost always the opposite.
      I've met alot of stupid people who didn't realize that the my dog is harmless, it's me you need to worry about. Not all small dog owners are little old ladies and spoiled rich girls.

      Oh, and by the way "furry footballs" isn't funny.
      http://www.tennessean.com/local/archives/04/04/494 97774.shtml
      Not anymore.

    11. Re:They can do more than that.... by DarkSarin · · Score: 1

      Okay, so while i don't like the small rats, I don't think that it is really a good idea to drop kick the beasties. But I still find it funny.

      That said, I don't want a dog for a body guard. If I was going to have a pet to guard me, you had better believe that it would a whole lot meaner than any dog (try a panther/cougar--now that's vicious!). Dogs are best for pets when they are intelligent, quiet (except when there are problems), and helpful. I grew up around herd dogs (mostly border (sp?) collies) that are known for being intelligent and capable. To me that's what a dog should be.

      Most chihuahua's that I have seen (and not surprisingly, other small rat dogs) are very noisy, and frequently without reason. I don't mind the dog barking (once) to let you know someone has pulled up to your house, but when the neighbors mutt is barking at four in the morning, I really just want the thing to go away--permanently.

      As far as your comment goes about people not realizing the dog is harmless--what do they think its going to do? Pee on them? Only really a problem if you wear leather! Since I am unlikely to ever meet you (or anyone else) in a situation where I need to worry about which is more dangerous (them or the dog), I don't much care.

      --
      "We don't know what we are doing, but we are doing it very carefully,..." Wherry, R.J. Personnel Psychology (1995)
    12. Re:They can do more than that.... by mre5565 · · Score: 1
      Hell, he'll win me back if he makes "Sith" nothing more than a 2 hour extremely bloody high body count Gungan snuff flick. The only time the Gungan slaughter stops is when the Ewoks show up and they become the target.
      I think slashdot ought to have an annual Best Posts awards event, and I nominate the above for 2005.

      This will have me chuckling from now till the final credits role on "Sith".

  28. Re:Hmm by ian+rogers · · Score: 1

    At least we got some neat videogames out of the Matrix trilogy.

    I thought KOTOR was quite good. Without Star Wars, it wouldn't be out.

  29. why bother? by aoty · · Score: 1

    You know, I'm at the point where I rarely even click on links from /. They are always deader than dead. Why can't we get torrents of stuff like this ready before a story is posted?

    1. Re:why bother? by Misroi · · Score: 1

      nah that would be too bright, no way they could setup a tracker and release the videos or huge images, or even a mirror.

  30. Jar-Jar must die by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 1

    As long as Jar-Jar dies a horrible, guesome, and painful death in Episode three, it will be worth watching.

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
    1. Re:Jar-Jar must die by chiph · · Score: 1

      That's Senator Jar-Jar, thank you very much.

      J. Jar Binks Esq.

  31. Slashdotting: The Play by McCarrum · · Score: 5, Funny

    Alas, poor website! I knew it, Horatio: a site of infinite uptime, of most excellent fancy: it hath borne me on its pages a thousand times; and now, how absent in my browser it is! my gorge rims at it. Here hung those graphics that I have watched I know not how oft. Where be your scripts now? your applets? your stylesheets? your flashes of gif animation, that were wont to set my bandwidth on a groan?

    1. Re:Slashdotting: The Play by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      when you get through patting yourself on the back for your hack of a singular wit, please, help yourself to a nice, tall glass of STFU

    2. Re:Slashdotting: The Play by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bravo. Bravo.

    3. Re:Slashdotting: The Play by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 1

      lol, that was the best post I've read in a while.

      --
      The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    4. Re:Slashdotting: The Play by op12 · · Score: 1

      Wow. Somebody really needs to get outside more.

      ...though I admit, it is amusing :)

    5. Re:Slashdotting: The Play by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      Says the guy reading about a Starwars fan fiction movie on slashdot at 2:13am.

    6. Re:Slashdotting: The Play by Spudds · · Score: 1

      omg that was one of the funniest postings I've ever read on /. !

      Give the guy his last Funny Mod!

  32. Smells like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A well toasted server

  33. You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by dark-br · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was raised on the the Original Star wars trilogy and have watched them over and over! But the new star wars prequels are pure junk, when compared to the original three. The original 3 are easy to digest and seem to whisk you away to this fantasy world and the story just flows freely throughout the movies.

    The new and improved CG crapfest movies are force fed (go on eat up, it's star wars of course you'll love it) and trudge along with jagged edges.

    The new movies also lack patience in its story develop, almost as if Lucas is trying to cram in to much crap. Mark my words, the new star wars trilogy will never become classics. However, the original trilogy is classic cinema. at least will always have those to enjoy.

    1. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      About the CG: Now, I for one have always played computer and console games, going all the way back to my sega genesis. I do some 3d programming work, so I know how a 3d engine works and feels. I know how real life works and feels.

      Getting to the point: In my opinion, there is something wrong about Lucas's CGI. Whatever he uses just doesn't feel right to me. My father describes it as feeling 'flat' - which he gave no such condemnation to Half-Life 2 or Far Cry. I describe it as being 'too smooth' or 'unrealistic' - but I just can't put my finger on it. It's extremly prominent in Episode 2. However, to see it at it's worst, see the original 3 remade - the CGI scenes in that, which are hacked in, REALLY feel wrong to me. Has anyone else noticed this? I think this may play a large part in the rejection of the newer films - the old ones, while a lot of it was nottoogreatlooking, it was still very real.

    2. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Taladar · · Score: 1

      If you notice something like that you should notice it in almost all Hollywood movies. Just watch for Industrial Light and Magic in the Credits, they are literally everywhere. They were actually founded by Lucas for the first Star Wars Trilogy AFAIK.

    3. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by CockblockTheVote · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Flat is not the word you are looking for. The word you seek is "soulless". There is nothing behind the characters, no life, no personality. Even with the puppets in the first trilogy there was someone behind the mask, behind the strings. That gave them life. And made the characters more believeable. And with the scenes in the original that were updated, the same thing applies. they feel more real because they were. There were spaceships, however small, that were filmed. They actually existed. You can't get the same feel from CGI, yet, as you can from something that exists in the real world, no matter what the scale.

    4. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by xgamer04 · · Score: 1

      I dunno, I've felt "personality" from characters in some CGI movies (I'm thinking Pixar). The same goes for traditional animation. Some CGI, though, doesn't have any personality at all (I'm remembering the first Resident Evil movie here).

      --
      When you look at the state of the world, how can you not become a radical, liberal anarchist?
    5. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      But does ILM apply the same technology in everything they do? For that matter, ILM also did the origional Star Wars. Not the same techniques at all, obviously.

      Of course - it's not just ILM. There are other recent films by other SFX shops that use cutting edge CGI that, frankly, is visibly straining. The trick is to not make it stand out so much. And a large part of that is to make it a minor part in the movie - not a lead.

      Star Wars is dependant on it's flash. It's always been that way. But it seems like the new trilogy has decided that SFX is no longer just a suport, albiet major, character but one of the main characters in its own right.

      Compare this to Forrest Gump. This film was also worked on by ILM. And, in fact, the movie won numerous awards for visual effects (to include 1995's Oscar). Yet it's very easy to forget... or not even realize... how much visual effects and specifically CGI is going on in the movie.

    6. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by henni16 · · Score: 1

      I think I know what you mean by "too smooth".
      In a way that is what I dislike most about the two new episodes.
      Especially the background feels like it lacks details, looks somehow neglected, simply generated, artifically painted wothout mutch contour and too clean/smooth.
      Even the indoor scenes look like they were filmed in a blue room without a real background(?or backdrop? not sure about the right english word for that).
      Episode I and (even more) II really feel like some loveless off-the-shelf cartoon to me
      - or like bridging video sequences of a computer game.

      It's somewhat similar to old movies where you can clearly see that the landscape in the background is not real but painted on a canvas.
      Maybe that causes some kind of disapointment:
      50 years later you might expect it to look more real (knowing that it is possible) and not to take a step back to artificial again.
      That somehow feels really cheap - even if all that (IMHO often unnecessary: give me real sets, dammit! I'm sure the actors/the acting will be thankful, too) CG stuff costs lots of money.. ;-)

    7. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Martin+Blank · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe part of what you're trying to grasp is the lack of atmosphere translating to the CGI. There is the subtle motion blur inherent in all movement filmed with a camera (digital or not), but I think the motion blur effect done with the CGI, when it is there at all, doesn't match up. This causes the CGI to stand out in ways that are hard to pick out during the action.

      Somehow ILM got it right when filling in the rest of Mos Eisley, because the atmosphere of the town worked and you could really get a feel for how bad a place it really was. The rest of the CGI just didn't work -- and the Jabba scene in the remake of Ep4 was just painful to watch. I cringed in my seat at the theater and had to look away a couple of times.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    8. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by B3ryllium · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You've never seen Monsters Inc, Finding Nemo, or Shrek, have you?

    9. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Canadian_Daemon · · Score: 1

      right, not to be anal or anything, but CGI is common gateway interface, it has nothing to do with graphics, but with webservers. CG is computer graphics.
      I have watched the new ones once, and never again. Too childish for me. Ewoks were ok, but Jar-Jar crossed the line

      --
      This sig is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.
    10. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, the original trilogy is classic cinema. at least will always have those to enjoy.

      Sort of, if Lucas ever stops changing them. We already barely have them to enjoy as the actual movies that became classics.

      I think the South Park about the remastered Indiana Jones films is dead on. Allegedly it actually prevented Spielberg from pulling a Lucas on those movies.

    11. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> right, not to be anal or anything, but CGI is common gateway interface, it has nothing to do with graphics, but with webservers. CG is computer graphics.

      CGI is "computer generated imagery," and the abbreviation was used for that before Common Gateway Interface.

      As for being anal about it, don't worry... you obviously didn't know this fact.

    12. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I totally agree. I am probably hyper-sensitive to CG compared to the average person, and I think that Episode 1 and 2 have some of the most obvious and horrible CG in any film I have ever seen. The main problem is the sheer volume of CG: there are many scenes where a real human character placed againstentire background that is blue-screened and replaced with CG. Combined with the fact that it is meant to be realistic(unlike Pixar etc) and it looks very obviously false to me.

    13. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I totally agree. I am probably hyper-sensitive to CG compared to the average person, and I think that Episode 1 and 2 have some of the most obvious and horrible CG in any film I have ever seen. The main problem is the sheer volume of CG: there are many scenes where a real human character placed against an entire background that is blue-screened and replaced with CG. Combined with the fact that it is meant to be realistic(unlike Pixar etc) and it looks very obviously false to me.

    14. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by _Hellfire_ · · Score: 1

      First of all I'm not a Star Wars fanatic. I have a passing interest in the movies and enjoy watching the original 3 every now an again.

      But, I always thought the whole point of Mos Eisley was that it was a barren wasteland - the few inhabitants of which were a "retched hive of scum and villainy".

      For me, the new CG scenes made it look too busy when it really needed a sparse "nothing really happens here look".

      --
      "And then I visited Wikipedia ...and the next 8 hours are a blur..."
    15. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Cplus · · Score: 1

      While I do agree with you that a lot of what special effects should do is better as substance than flash, and that the best CG work is that which no one notices you must realize that you're comparing a movie set in 50's - 70's America to one which is set in space, full of technology, and built as something new from the ground up.

      The CG award went to Forest Gump because they did a wonderful job of the tv scenes in which Gump was placed next to and interacting with various famous figures from the past, and it was done in a realistic fashion. That is very different from what the artists working on Star Wars attempt to accomplish.

      I do agree that graphically, Star Wars, particularly Ep II, has been a little bit too polished, but to compare it to Forest Gump in any way is a stretch. Try to stick to a single genre or style of film-making when making movie to movie comparisons.

      --
      "Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality." -- Dalai Lama
    16. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by MrCreosote · · Score: 1

      I always thought CGI in this context was 'computer generated images' or some such..

      --
      MrCreosote Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump! "You're right! There isn't enough room to swing a cat in here!"
    17. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by SQLz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Recently I watched both the original star wars trilogy (no special scenes) and prequals in an effort to understand why IV,V, and VI (to a degree) kick ass and I and II suck ass. I mean, you have Jedi,lighsabers, and bad acting in both movies but something is lacking from I and II. I don't know what it is, I can't figure it out. Maybe its too politically correct or too rehearsed. They are missing the soul that made the originals so great.

    18. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by earthtoandy · · Score: 1

      I agree completely. It seems to me that the original movies were a product of a great starting idea mixed with perfect timing. By timing I mean the technology and all resources that went into the originals, including pre-stardom lucas, forced it into its mold of greatness. Without computers the filmmakers are forced to be creative and make the actors and story carry a movie along.... I miss those days.

    19. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by tooth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      or LotR:TTT and LotR:RotK. Someone else posted that the environment felt "funny" in the SW films. I think LotR was a film that had the environment pretty spot on, and the trick was using it to fill in the real props and stages. I think Jackson did the right thing using miniatures, because it helped the CGI people get the "feel" right. It let them see the light and shadows falling across a real object.

    20. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Mancat · · Score: 1

      So, there are no people creating the CG? The rendering farms just magically created these scenes on their own? There's still lots of people behind the scenes here. In fact, with CG, there's probably quite a bit more than there were when there was just a single puppetteer doing Yoda.

      --
      hello dear sirs my name is jamesh i are india (bihar) can u guide me install red had linux 9?
    21. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The CG award went to Forest Gump because they did a wonderful job of the tv scenes in which Gump was placed next to and interacting with various famous figures from the past, and it was done in a realistic fashion. That is very different from what the artists working on Star Wars attempt to accomplish.

      I had thought about the mixing of genres when making my comparison, but went ahead with it for a couple reasons. First, the poster I was replying to noted that ILM's work appears throughout the industry. That sort of opens up the oportunity to jump genre. :) Second, the comparison underscores my point.

      The most obvious use of CGI in Forest Gump is the effect you mentioned - mixing current footage with archived footage. But the movie was riddled with CGI. Some examples include the feather in the opening sequence, the tracers in the combat scene, removing actor's legs for Lt. Dan's post-war scenes, the ping-pong ball... all subtle use of CGI.

      Sure - this is all different than what's being done in Star Wars. But maybe that's the point - it shouldn't be. Too often with the later Star Wars films, there are CGI scenes that scream "look what we can do." When the effect works, it's great. When it doesn't, it's painfully obvious. Or.. at least... obvious enough that others (to include myself) get a subconcious feeling that something just isn't right.

      I wouldn't call that polished.
    22. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by jamesjw · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Sprocket:Compare this to Forrest Gump. This film was also worked on by ILM. And, in fact, the movie won numerous awards for visual effects (to include 1995's Oscar). Yet it's very easy to forget... or not even realize... how much visual effects and specifically CGI is going on in the movie.

      I agree totally on this, I think the best special effects (CGI or otherwise) are those that either you dont notice or those that contribute to the scene, not take away.
      This is true to alot of the parts in the Lord Of the Rings trilogy, the effects were there when required, not all the time for glitz value, that said I'm sure alot of shots were "money" shots :)

      -- Jim.

      --
      -- If at first you don't succeed, lie!
    23. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by stor · · Score: 1

      or LotR:TTT and LotR:RotK.

      That is the more appropriate and well-recognised example, as the CG characters are in an environment where they have to interact with real life characters and scenery.

      Finding Nemo et al, while being awesomely realistic and cool, allow one to suspend disbelief a little easier as the format is more similar to a cartoon than a real-life movie. Nemo probably wouldn't look as realistic next to a real-life person.

      I think Jackson did the right thing using miniatures, because it helped the CGI people get the "feel" right. It let them see the light and shadows falling across a real object.

      It will be a combination of factors that helped PJ's production be so successful visually. Some factors may include:

      - Talented artists.
      - Modelling (as you mention).
      - Realistic and appropriate integration of the objects with the environment.
      - A critical eye that recognises unrealistic scenes and decides that the scenes should be reworked or scrapped.
      - Hard work and a great deal of motivation.

      One apparent truism is that a great production requires a lot of painstaking work. The shortcuts really show.

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
    24. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by servognome · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've watched the OT and Ep I & II also to figure out why the old ones are good and new ones are bad. It wasn't nostalgia, since I've watched other things that as a kid I loved and as an adult I see suck (ie Voltron, Robotech).
      The things I noticed:
      Sense of granduer - Watching the OT the universe seemed so much bigger than the characters. In Star Wars just the opening scenes allude to many things that were not explained until the prequels, and some not at all. You get a sense that there is a whole universe of things going on and you are just following the adventures of a particular group of people.
      Episode I & II seem to be more pre-packaged. There is no sense you are following the characters on their adventures through the universe, it is presented more as if the universe revolves around the characters.
      Extra Characters: In the OT I felt as if there were so many more things going on, other key players. While the movies followed Luke, Han, & Leia, there was still a war being fought, when they returned to that thread things had changed. Battles had been won and lost, the Alliance had grown, in many ways you could feel the main characters in the movies weren't that important, the universe went on without them.
      In Episode I, the main characters did pretty much everything. You couldn't come up with stories for Naboo Pilot 13 like you could for Wedge, an "extra" character that shows up in all 3 movies. Episode II does allow stories to be written about the clone wars, but there are no specific characters that you tie into the movies.
      Location: The locations in the OT were unique and had a sense of character. Dagobah, Hoth, Tatooine, Cloud City, all had a sense of character about them and they complimented the story. There is a reason every game pretty much has a Hoth battle. Not because the scenery itself was anything special, but because the frozen wasteland so paralleled the story of the rebellion and the battle itself; lonely, hopeless, and on the brink of death.
      The locations in Ep I & II were wasted or lacked character. The urban slums of Corouscant were ignored, Naboo had no particular sense that it was "special", and Tatoone was just a rehash.
      /rant

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    25. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by TG1 · · Score: 0

      Erm.. "CGI" absolutely has something to do with graphics - Computer Generated Imagery. Don't worry, you weren't being anal, just incorrect.

    26. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by cgenman · · Score: 1

      I think you're misplacing "soul." The Souls in the original series are, in descending order.

      Harrison "It was a lousy conversation anyway" Ford
      James "I find your lack of faith disturbing" Earl Jones
      Frank "Adventure. Heh. Excitement. Heh. A Jedi craves not these things" Oz
      Carey "Into the chute fly boy" Fisher
      Anthony "We seem to be made to suffer. It's our lot in life" Daniels

    27. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by m50d · · Score: 1

      Yes you can, the spaceships work. The thing that was soulless was the character of Anakin Skywalker. Learn to express emotion, or somebody dub him, please!

      --
      I am trolling
    28. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

      Shrek?

      Are you taking the piss?

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    29. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Its both!

    30. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by filesiteguy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If only we could get the original Trilogy on DVD....
      ...sigh. My VHS tapes are wearing thin.

    31. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by indifferent+children · · Score: 1
      It will be a combination of factors that helped PJ's production be so successful visually. Some factors may include:

      - Talented artists.
      - Modelling (as you mention).
      ...

      also:

      - A very good story, very well written
      - A story whith which fans are familiar
      - A literary basis which most viewers already know/accept to be 'high quality', no need to convince them of that fact.

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    32. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that's exactly what it is. Because the actors have to act in front of blue void, their acting is (subtly) different. Add that to the other drawbacks of CG and you have a movie that just isn't right...

    33. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by ChewbaccaD · · Score: 1

      I hear they take care of that in the next one...

    34. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Slider451 · · Score: 1

      Well, I was raised on the original WB cartoons (Bugs Bunny, Road Runner, et al). I was always able to pick out the lighter colored rock that would eventually fall on the Coyote's head. Yet I still managed to be entertained.

      It's not about perfect special effects, it's about finding the right balance of enraged villain and lovable smartass good guy.

      --
      Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
    35. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell modded that interesting?

      Star Wars prequels not as good as the original trilogy? The hell you say. In other news Pope is revealed as a Catholic, bears filmed shitting in woods and Bill Gates branded not a particularly charming chap.

      "Never saw that coming" said numbnuts. Jeez.

    36. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by banzai51 · · Score: 1

      I've always noted that Star Wars CG always gets people wrong. The legs are always too long and CG people don't quite move right.

    37. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by banzai51 · · Score: 1

      I claim this is by design. Don't have to look very far into Lucas' repitoire to see he doesn't like dynamic, expressive acting in his films.

    38. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Kehvarl · · Score: 1

      Nah, Tatooine was a barren wasteland of a desert world. Mos Eisley was supposed to be a thriving space-port city where scum, smugglers, pirates, and other low lifes could gather, exchange cargo, swap stories, and kill things without all the problems that more well developed planets have with those activities.

      And there goes the very last of my credibility...

    39. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by nappingcracker · · Score: 1

      Its the lighting. CG will always be "made" or broken by lighting and particle effects, deservedly so. Like the blues, they are easy to learn hard to master; in cinema, it is the difference between "oh, thats some pretty CG" and emersion in a fantastic world.

      The first (the new) episodes have such poor and unnatural lighting that the brain rejects it, sure the models are pretty (personally I do not like them, they do not seem to be properly engineered, more fluff than [fictional] functional machinery - what the crap was with those flying cars? Lame psuedo-studebakers with corny newyorker humanoids? ), but have they eliminated all dust and dirt in the advanced past? Are all surfaces polished and machined to liquid smoothness? Crap, you would need welding goggles on a sunny day!

      Their chroma-key effects and lighting were the worst (that I can remember) I have ever seen on a big budget film. Did any of the effects engineers choreograph the real lighting of the chroma screen with the "fake" lighting of the CG? Obviously not! I am not saying that it is easy, but with the substantial budget they could have done much better. Take T2, chromed out liquid metal kill bot - ok for mirror like reflections and perfect smoothness. Where is the atmosphere in SW1 and SW2? (really, its perfect visibility everywhere, nevermind the metaphorical atmosphere).

      LOTR - good CG, good lighting; Toy Story, good CG, good lighting (it fit with the "world"); T2 - fitting CG; The Abyss - same as T2; The Matrix - not pefect, but much better chromakey and similar budget.

      Blah blah blah, it should have been better lit and modeled if you are going to rely on shine and beauty instead of substantial content.

      --
      |plastic....or gasoline?|
    40. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by anothy · · Score: 1
      going all the way back to my sega genesis.
      i'm sorry, what? "all the way back" to your what?!? what's this newfangled "genesis" thing? i remember the NES being new, sleek, and snazzy.

      psh. kids today. bet your music collection goes "all the way back" to CDs, too.
      --

      i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
    41. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by coldmist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The overall problem that I have with the CG in the NT is the lack of attaintion to physics.

      For example, when the 2 jump down into the loading bay on the ship before stowing away to go down to the planet, see if there is any acceleration to their falls.

      It's also painfully aware in the droid b'kars (or however they are spelled). When they roll and move, there is no acceleration, just 2 speeds: stopped or rolling 100%.

      Many more examples could be given. (I'm not even going to touch it when he tries to ride that critter in the field with Padme looking on.)

      Now, think of Shrek where they (according to the commentaries) wrote their own 'mud' simulations for the arena fight when Shrek breaks off the spout from the beer barrel.

      Attaintion to physics detail. It's what's missing in the CG in the NT. Character modeling is fine, but someone just didn't pass their physics class.

      --
      Don't steal. The government hates competition.
    42. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by drsquare · · Score: 1

      I think that Peter Jackson had the same problems in Lord of the Rings. Some of the CGI was ok, some of it was awful.

      Some of the bad bits:
      - The battle in the last film. Was great until those horsemen came, then it just looked like a cartoon. It was like entirely CGI, it looks far too 'smooth' and orange for a battle. The battle in the two towers was a lot better.
      - Gollum. People praised it, but the way it moved, and its exagerrated expressions made it look like something out of "Who framed roger rabbit". The actor playing it was trying too hard.
      - The balrog. Too much fire, and the whip could have been drawn in with felt tip. Should have been darker and more mysterious.
      - The trolls. The movements were too quick and exagerrated, would probably have been better with costumes rather than CGI, and more rough scaly skin rather than the smooth clean surfaces that scream 'CGI!'
      - The baradur. What was it? In the first film it was a flaming vagina, in the last film a lighthouse. Was better in the book as a distant looming threat rather than an excuse to have some more CGI.
      - The orcs in moria, were clearly CGI especially when climbing down the pillars. Would probably have been best to use the CGI only where essential, rather than just to show off, it hardly ever works.
      - The palantir. No subtlety at all, just more special effects for the sake of special effects.
      - The glow-in-the-dark ghosts. Worst part of the trilogy. What an anti-climax to a battle!
      - The eagles. Looked like they were out of a computer game. Could take a lesson from monsters inc in regards to fur (or feathers in this case).
      - The black riders when frodo put on the ring. Too much CGI. The same goes for when frodo fell in the swamp. Sometimes subtlety is more effective than showing off.
      - The wargs. Just not convincing, again looked cartoonish, probably due to the exagerrated movements and expressions.

      Although a lot of it worked:
      - The cities/fortresses. Looked like they were made out of stone. I think some of them were models.
      - The black flying dragon things.
      - When theoden's face changed.
      - The rocks being catapulted everywhere. Great effects.
      - The battering ram. Looked terrifying when it's face came through the gate.
      - The volcano.
      - The flames on the ring.
      - The ents.
      - The octopus thing in the first film. Was a bit OTT but slimy enough to look realistic.
      - The river-tsunami thing.

    43. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by drsquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Watching the OT the universe seemed so much bigger than the characters. In Star Wars just the opening scenes allude to many things that were not explained until the prequels, and some not at all. You get a sense that there is a whole universe of things going on and you are just following the adventures of a particular group of people.
      Episode I & II seem to be more pre-packaged. There is no sense you are following the characters on their adventures through the universe, it is presented more as if the universe revolves around the characters.


      I think that's a good one. Also it didn't help that the places they went to in episode 1 were completely dull.

      I think that's where the Lord of the rings films fell down: there was no universe like in the books, they only ever went to the places that had something important to do with the script. There were no farmlands, no houses and villages, hardly any roads, it was as if the entire middle-earth consisted of a bunch of fortresses connected by plains.

      Part of the appeal of such fantasy things is that there's a universe that sucks you in, if you don't have that, you've nothing left but cliches and one-dimensional characters. The plot is often less important than the world you create.

    44. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by m50d · · Score: 1

      Erm, all of them, and I *am* a teenager. The teenagers I know actually sound pissed off when they are, go "awesome" or similar in a voice very different from normal a few times a day, laugh far more than he does, and would certainly make a better job of "I love you" than Christiensen does. He's supposed to be declaring his undying love for her and yet he talks more robotically than C-3PO. Sure, moodiness is important, but talking in the same flat voice all the time is not moodiness, it's just inability to talk properly. You could argue it's the jedi training, but if so why do all the other jedi and all the kids in training have emotion in their voices?

      --
      I am trolling
    45. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by m50d · · Score: 1

      Really? I've very very glad to hear that. Now tell me they've stopped the stupid head jokes and taken out Java or whatever his name is, and I'm actually optimistic about this film.

      --
      I am trolling
    46. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 1

      Yeah yeah, I know, while I'm 18, I'm still a kid to a lot of you people. However, ask the newer generation what the Genesis or the NES are, and you'll get a lot of blank stares - that's providing they even make the connection of "Is that like an XBox?" I feel blessed to have seen the inception of a lot of the industry.

    47. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by walueg · · Score: 1

      You had me until Shrek. The reason Pixar animation works is because they aren't trying to be hyper-realistic like they were in Shrek, especially in skin tone and texture. With Pixar movies, your mind fills in the gaps just like it does in traditional animation.

      --
      You are either part of the solution or part of the precipitate!
    48. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Pentavirate · · Score: 1

      I would agree with some of the scenes that you mentioned, but my way of judging good CG and bad CG is whether I notice whether it is CG or not. Considering how much CG was in Lord of the Rings, I rarely noticed the CG at all and lost myself within the film. The places where I did notice the CG were in parts that were difficult but could be done in few other ways, such as the wargs.

    49. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      "integrity has no need of rules."
      - albert camus

    50. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      repertoire

    51. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by rdnk · · Score: 1

      Yes I've noticed that too. Witch CGI you can create almost real-looking skin, hair, people, whatever, but once they are set in motion it's a different ballgame. I remember Shrek 2 was the first one that had a really cool motion blur, and while characters were made on purpose cartoon like, the camera's movement had a life-like feel to it, with all the blurriness and inaccuracies.

    52. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by anothy · · Score: 1

      i'm just giving you a hard time. i get the same thing at work with people talking about working on their old PDP-11s. i also work with jr. high and high school kids, and i know you're right - you should see the looks i get when i start talking about the Dukes of Hazard. i'm considering donating my old NES to the group, just for educational purposes.

      --

      i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
    53. Re:You r right... George Lucs lost his touch by banzai51 · · Score: 1

      anal

  34. Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by garagekubrick · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This isn't about issues of copyright - but a minor rant about the attention paid to every nerd's attempt to craft their own little aside in an established universe.

    The production tools the average person can get their hands on today are staggering. And yet we continually praise people for making films that show an absolute dearth of original imagination and inspiration. Yet audiences complain continually about how Hollywood shows no originality itself.

    All the time spent on Revelations could've been put into crafting a story that would be infinitely more intelligent and challenging than any large scale expensive production. I want to see handmade films that offer the expansive ideas in real science fiction and fantasy that the expense of large scale moviemaking prohibits.

    Shane Carruth spent probably as much money on the film Primer, a completely original and not at all amateurish looking film that fits perfectly into the comprehension and intelligence of the slashdot audience. But instead any time a bunch of uninspired morons use their time to knock off and emulate and continue the tyranny of imagination that a thousand executives push on audiences like Robert McKee or endless abortions engineered from a cursory reading of Joseph Cambpell, nerds freak out.

    Own yourselves. Use those tools to make original, inspired, unique works of art. Stop making and continuing dreck based up on dreck, especially when you don't even have the option to afford hairstylists who'd make your film look as good as the original.

    --
    ** http://www.nkhumanrights.or.kr/ ** Human rights in North Korea. 1 million estimated dead from starvation.
    1. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by garagekubrick · · Score: 1

      Forgot to choose HTML when I posted - Info on Shane Carruth's Primer - now with a link.

      --
      ** http://www.nkhumanrights.or.kr/ ** Human rights in North Korea. 1 million estimated dead from starvation.
    2. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in the process of making an independent sci-fi action feature. Our budget is about $3000 -- most of that for proprietary software, yuck. (The Adobe Video Collection, Pro Edition runs $1400 alone. Then 3D suite, particle effects package...)

      Still, affordable tools, at least more affordable than they used to be. We've got a 120 page script of my own creation, completely original material. Well, it's a superhero story, so maybe not COMPLETELY original. But it's not set in the Marvel Universe or the DC universe and it's not about Spider-man's best friend in grade school or anything. In fact the thing I'm most proud of is that the superhero has very odd powers, not a typical "Oh I'm as strong as hercules! I can fly!" thing, so he's got to come up with creative solutions to the oh so typical superhero dilemmas he finds himself in (bomb ticking with 10 seconds left, that sort of thing.)

      The actors/production crew are all volunteers, but they're loving it and having a lot of fun. It's resume material for all of them.

      So, some of us are out there doing it. You're not likely to ever see the movie, of course. We'll do a few indy film festivals, maybe a lot depending on interest. We'll try to get a DVD distribution. And then find some nice Creative Commons bittorrent site out there.

      Still, some of us ARE out there doing it.

    3. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by YOU+LIKEWISE+FAIL+IT · · Score: 1
      But instead any time a bunch of uninspired morons use their time to knock off and emulate and continue the tyranny of imagination

      Great post on originality from someone who namedrops a famous director in their own username. -- YLFI

      --
      One god, one market, one truth, one consumer.
    4. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, maybe he has an effigy of Kubrick crucified in his garage! Hell, it'd be worth digging up the real one as revenge for Eyes Wide Shut.

      Dying like that before we could get our revenge.

      Why does everybody want to suck Kubrick off anyway? Half of his films are terrible, for god's sake.

    5. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A question.

      Why would you choose to do sci-fi action with a budget of $3000, which you mostly admit has been spent on software?

      For an example of a "sci-fi action" (=dumb splatter) that actually worked on a small budget, check out Peter Jackson's "Bad Taste". You will note that movie took about four years to complete, and was considerably less ambitious in its FX requirements. For the majority of the film the aliens look like... err.. guys in T-shirts and jeans, with a mildly retarded look about them. You can find those in New Zealand any day of the week, but you still have to give them a beer or two. Beer costs money too.

      The main issue is that because the movie was intended to be laughable (you're SUPPOSED to laugh at how hokey it is), it works. Trying to make a superhero movie on pizza money sounds like it can hardly fail to turn out total crap. Superheroes are, in their nature, impressive. If they're not impressive then they're not super either. Impressive is a hard thing to pull off when you have no money.

      Why not pick something that works because - and this is novel - all the scenary and props are easily available without having to make them or do FX? After all, assuming you have maybe $1200 left over after buying your software then that leaves you $10 per page of script. Dude, that won't even pay for drinks while you're filming. Even making a convincing looking bomb prop is going to cost you more than $10, so you'd better not be intending to do many of those.

      Cheap films can be excellent, but not when they try to do something expensive. It's like writing music for an orchestra then trying to play it with a three-piece rock band - it might work, but it's going to sound nothing like the orchestra in your head. It would make more sense to realise that at the writing stage.

      (Oh, and you have factored in costs for music, right? Superhero stuff needs rousing music, not a local punk band playing out of time)

    6. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by Anarchitect_in_oz · · Score: 1

      It's one of those supply and demand problems. Demand for moving pictures has far surpassed the talent required to make it good.

      So now we have the "movie business" and "art cinema" is difference is mostly one is a business that's M.O. is to reap the rewards of people still being amused and delighted by the technology of flashing still images at 24 frames per second to trick them in to thinking its moving (both emotionally and virtually). A market driven by teenagers who will see anything cause the scope for social gathering is otherwise limited, and various other groups restricted in social contact.

      The business is about the wizz bang of effects and building the perception that the technology is out of reach, by spending more money on advertising, stars and premieres than the modern cost of production.

      So if you find the business lifeless, and just a bit to pretty and neat, then the easiest thing to do is find the little cinemas that shows the art. Join their Club, go to short film festivals. If you really want to be challenged go to things like Gay film festivals or festivals of other minority groups.

      If there isn't one in your local area, talk to one of the cafe owners, pick a dead time, and start your own short film festival and if you don't think that will make a difference check out. http://www.tropfest.com.au/ Which started the same way, but got to big it took over the street, and didn't stop there.

      After all the cost to display has dropped along with the production.

      --
      "Call us when the New age is old enough to drink" Beck
    7. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by rhysweatherley · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If they had made something original, it probably would never had gotten mentioned on Slashdot or anywhere else. It would have been just another student project, lost in the film archives for all time.

      By using an established genre, they get more media coverage and potential viewers. This increases the chance that the director, special effects guy, or one of the actors will be noticed by a big name to work on something more substantial. And then they will be able to do their own thing.

      I believe that in university-level art classes, you need to turn in paintings in realistic, impressionist, post-modern styles, etc, to pass the course, to show that you have more depth than just one artistic style. Even if you never paint another da Vinci in your life, you still have to prove that you can.

      Consider this movie the answer to a film student's exam question: "Create a film in the style of Lucas".

    8. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Y'know what, GarageKubrick? Sounds to me like you're just a jealous, bitter, and petty.

      I understand your jealousy. These people are about to embark on something enjoyable, and you'd sit there and take potshots because you're not getting their press. Them's the breaks, Oscar.

      But y'know what? It's fun to dress up as a stormtrooper. It's fun to blow up TIE fighters. It's fun to give fans something they're going to clamor for. It's fun to be part of a universe that has become more of a cultural mythology. Filmmaking ought to be about originality, but it's also a labor of love. They do it 'cuz it's fun.

      Piss on their parade, but they're getting slashdotted. You ain't. If this really bothers you, go and wow the press with your own creativity. I'm sure they'll eat it up. (snark!)

    9. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by garagekubrick · · Score: 1

      No, that's what I'm saying... People like you should be getting more attention, more resources, more praise. I'd rather sit through a shoddy no budget handmade film shot on digital video if it at least attempts to be somewhat unique than a million more legitimate Star Wars films made by Lucas himself.

      For that matter has there been a single fan fiction film that has yet to get a director a single real job. No. Because like it or not and how the system eventually co opts originality, filmmakers who are talented who at least try to channel their influences or aim for complete originality do get noticed and funded.

      I think hey if kids do this, fair play to them. But grown adults wasting their time and effort... There isn't a single thing in Revelations that surpasses the delivery of dialogue or character or emotion in Ep. 1 and 2... And that's saying A LOT.

      --
      ** http://www.nkhumanrights.or.kr/ ** Human rights in North Korea. 1 million estimated dead from starvation.
    10. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by garagekubrick · · Score: 0

      I'll be thinking about your comments next time I watch my work air on MTV.

      Also when I go to deposit the bonus check I got from working on one of the highest grossing movies of last year (which incidentally, although entirely digital, did not feature a single crew member who came from the world of fan filmmaking).

      I don't need or want the coverage slashdot has to offer; it's not part of the niche I inhabit in the rather large world of film production. However, since I am not ignorant of the film world, I wish the focus on cultural stories at slashdot especially involving film gave press and attention to those who do deserve it.

      For all the talk of illegal movie downloading here I have yet to see a story on how DVD is turning the movie business into a primarily direct to video format. How technologies are being adopted and incorporated that offer less quality than what you've been getting analog for the past 100 years.

      However, I will sing the praises of a guy like Shane Carruth, who I do not know even tangenitally, whose film did not get seen as it deserved to, and who is infinitely more capable and skilled and ingenious than any fan fiction filmmaker. He deserves the attention.

      If you want to have fun, go dress up at San Diego Comic Con.

      --
      ** http://www.nkhumanrights.or.kr/ ** Human rights in North Korea. 1 million estimated dead from starvation.
    11. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by garagekubrick · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Name someone who worked on a Star Wars / Star Trek fan film who has been discovered by a big name and gone on to make a theatrically distributed motion picture.

      Rather, individuals out there may borrow from other genres or sensibilities or influences but they invest within it their own unique consciousness. Ask a Kerry Conran (Sky Captain) or Shane Carruth or for that matter a James Cameron or Peter Jackson. The latter two who were enormously influenced and inspired by Star Wars to go out and become filmmakers on their own terms. But neither decided to create their own little Star Warrs film, despite having had the ingenuity to do so in their youth on the 16mm shorts they made.

      This isn't to rain on anyone's parade - there's some wonderful technical achievement present in the discussed trailer. But the usual community theater level acting and rather silly casting. But what galls me is that the tools for personal, singular, unique filmmaking have fallen into the hands of people who have a chance to challenge the central authority of the studio system; and united with enough friends and volunteers something truly astonishing can be made - but all the geek community does with that opportunity is spit out more and more fan fiction films. We can do better.

      Any film school that would insist students ape and mimic other filmmakers rather than develop their own unique voices will find they aren't producing many working filmmakers at the higher level. Much filmmaking by its very nature is derivative... Asking to actuallly bury yourself in one of the most annoying atrributes is pointless.

      And what of Star Wars fan films in particular? Remember when George Lucas chose a cartoon which extolled the virtues of Star Wars merchandising as the most creative of the bunch? What's that director up to now?

      --
      ** http://www.nkhumanrights.or.kr/ ** Human rights in North Korea. 1 million estimated dead from starvation.
    12. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MTV! The height of hip and cool. A raucous, rebellious subsidiary of Viacom, Inc. Last relevant sometime during Clinton's first term in office, but still. I should have to learn which channel that is on DirecTV at some point.

    13. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by renderhead · · Score: 1
      Consider this movie the answer to a film student's exam question: "Create a film in the style of Lucas".


      Extra Credit: For additional faithfulness to style, make a series of progressively flashier yet emptier films and gradually sap away all goodwill generated by the first.

      Please make your marks heavy and dark, and make your dialogue heavy-handed and inane.
      --
      I wish that my inferiority complex were as good as yours.

      -RenderHead

    14. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
      Name someone who worked on a Star Wars / Star Trek fan film who has been discovered by a big name and gone on to make a theatrically distributed motion picture.

      ...Ask a Kerry Conran (Sky Captain) or Shane Carruth or for that matter a James Cameron or Peter Jackson...

      ...But neither [Cameron no Jackson] decided to create their own little Star Warrs film, despite having had the ingenuity to do so in their youth on the 16mm shorts they made.

      Methinks thou hast answered thine own question. Now, for my part I absolutely loathe the female acting: the good gal sounds like a soap opera actress, and the evil gal sounds like she is tense, not evil. But the fact remains that even the worst actors in the production did better than I would have, and some of the will go on to better things, and still better things.

      It is what it is, and it is interesting. I'd like to watch it, with suitable luqid refreshment in large quantities.

      Hell, have you ever seen the B5 pilot?

    15. Re:Fan films - lack of imagination and inspiration by kahlancypher · · Score: 1
      "I think hey if kids do this, fair play to them. But grown adults wasting their time and effort... There isn't a single thing in Revelations that surpasses the delivery of dialogue or character or emotion in Ep. 1 and 2... And that's saying A LOT."

      Um, how do you know that? Do you have some kind of second sight that has allowed you to see the finished product of Revelations before the director and editors have even finished the film? Your judgment is awfully preemptive since the film isn't even a finished product yet.

      In addition, who are you to judge whether it was a waste of the cast and crew of Revelations time and effort? Just because you don't enjoy the fan film concept doesn't mean that they don't/didn't.

      Also, you're wrong about no one ever getting anywhere "legitimate" from fan films. Actually a few of the guys who did CGI, etc. on Troops were hired by George Lucas to work for ILM. They aren't the only ones, but they are the ones who stick out in my memory at this time.

      It's unfortunate that you are so closed minded about people investing time and talent into something they love, whether it be original or "borrowed." If they love it, why bash them for it?

  35. Parody is OK! Remember Spaceballs?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "I see your Shwartz is as big as mine!"

  36. It has to be done... by WarPresident · · Score: 4, Funny

    When reached for comment about a new fan-created film, Mr. D. Vader, a spokesperson for LucasFilms released the following statement: "Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed, the ability to host a file is no match for the power of the Slashdot force."

    --
    Here come da fudge!
  37. beware of the dark side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will lead you to being slashdotted

  38. The Force by Vidiot3k · · Score: 4, Funny

    is not with their server... It fell to the dark side.

    1. Re:The Force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      and yes, you are not funny too

    2. Re:The Force by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1, Funny

      I felt a great disturbance in the Net, as if millions of clients suddenly requested the same URL and in response, a server was suddenly silenced.

  39. One major flaw by stalefries · · Score: 1


    The only problem is that we'll be getting a lot more crappy movies out there that idiotic people made one groggy saturday morning, thought it would be funny to show it to the whole world, and then post it on their geocities website.

    and then there will be the special movies, which people actually plan, work on, fix up, re-film, and add special effects to that end up being better than a lot of the movies in theaters (as in content, not looks. Looks you can buy, but content is priceless). Out of the thousands of movies in the mentioned scenario, only about 4 to 5 will be of this quality, maybe more if people catch on that only the good movies are watched.

    --
    -stalefries
    1. Re:One major flaw by YOU+LIKEWISE+FAIL+IT · · Score: 1
      and then there will be the special movies, which people actually plan, work on, fix up, re-film, and add special effects to that end up being better than a lot of the movies in theaters

      I wish someone would shoot John Fiorella enough money to make Grayson in it's entirety. I thought it had a lot of promise plotwise, and the execution is pretty amazing for a fan-flick.

      -- YLFI
      --
      One god, one market, one truth, one consumer.
  40. Don't like the name... by Bionic_Baboon · · Score: 1

    Too bad A New Hope is already taken.

    1. Re:Don't like the name... by cyberwiz01 · · Score: 0

      It sounds like the name to another Matrix sequel, except it's Star Wars.

  41. Mirror First, Post Later by joeware · · Score: 1

    This is frickin ridiculous. The post barely gets up and the page is slashdotted without any mirror. This happened yesterday to the Batman/Building Block movie trailer, too. I still can't get that page up, or even the mirror someone made.

    I'd rather not hear about this stuff if I can't check it out.

  42. Mirror (be nice) by amitti · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Got a new box, lets see how my Dual Xeon handles.. (be nice)

    web_trailer_II_larger.mov

    -Mitti

    1. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dual Xeon is handling very well, much better than the Panic Struck Productions server...

    2. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Angry+Toad · · Score: 1

      Holy Farking Crap. That looked damn good, it really did. I guess all those pirate copies of 3DS and Maya are good for something after all.

      Maybe the acting was a bit amateur in places, but all the same WOW. Best Fan Effort Ever.

      I think they're gonna get sued into oblivion.

    3. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Got a new box, lets see how my Dual Xeon handles.. (be nice)

      Sounds like a challenge to me.

    4. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Cplus · · Score: 1

      Proper respect.

      The CG actually looks quite good, particularly when you have no choice but to stand it up next to some of the highest CG budgets ever.

      Looks like it was shot in digital, or high-quality video, lacking that grainy feel, and not filtered to hell like Ep II.

      Oh, and women fighting with light-sabers...sure to provoke some kind of reaction in this crowd.

      --
      "Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality." -- Dalai Lama
    5. Re:Mirror (be nice) by sahonen · · Score: 1

      500 k/sec. Thanks dude.

      --
      Make me a friend and I'll mod you up
    6. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Hobadee · · Score: 1

      Seems to be holding up, but I'd still suggest putting it on ice...

      --
      ...Had this been an actual emergency, we would have fled in terror, and you would not have been informed.
    7. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your generous donation of bandwidth will not go unoticed :D

      gracias!!

    8. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thank you

    9. Re:Mirror (be nice) by openglx · · Score: 4, Informative
    10. Re:Mirror (be nice) by ghobbsus · · Score: 1

      Thanks! What type of connection do you have?

    11. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks!

    12. Re:Mirror (be nice) by ajna · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Good bandwidth (thanks for the mirror) but the acting looks horrid. Also it looks like it was shot in DV -- in particular the infinite depth of field bugs my eye and looks very non-cinematic.

    13. Re:Mirror (be nice) by gnuman99 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter. A dual PPro would be ok as long as you have 100+MBps bandwidth to waste! (this is a big static file, requested over and over and over and over... again)

    14. Re:Mirror (be nice) by amitti · · Score: 1

      I'm on a OC48 tier 1 fiber network though FastServers.

      Just hit 2.7% CPU usage, not bad.

      -Mitti

    15. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Sheepdot · · Score: 1

      Got a new box, lets see how my Dual Xeon handles..

      You need to improve Xeon's skill in "force grip". That's a pretty nice name for a duel lightsaber weilding dark-side character though. What level is he?

    16. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methinks you're judging performance with the completely wrong component. My PII 233 could keep up with it.. it's a matter of hdd and bandwidth.

    17. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Mr.Progressive · · Score: 1
      Oh, and women fighting with light-sabers...sure to provoke some kind of reaction in this crowd.

      I'm sure folks were fighting with their own lightsabers while watching that.

      --
      Okay, so a philosopher, a philologist, and a philatelist walk into a bar...
    18. Re:Mirror (be nice) by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 1

      Thanks, got it at a steady 40 kb/s ; after the site was thoroughly slashdotted.

    19. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you kindly for the movie.

    20. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Proper respect.

      From the /. crowd??? Surely you jest. We will poke fun at anything which has the most minor flaws, no matter how big an achievement it is or beyond our own abilities it may be! It's part of being l33t.

      > The CG actually looks quite good, particularly when you have no choice but to stand it up next to some of the highest CG budgets ever.

      At first watch, I'd say it easily holds up to just about anything on Voyager or (dare I say) Firefly. It does look like it was shot on video, but for a TV series I think it could pass muster.

      And god knows we've seen worse acting/makeup/lighting on TV.

    21. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Tancred · · Score: 1

      Thanks Aaron!!

      Btw, you don't need such a nice box for static content. Even an old pentium could fill most of an FE connection. And if you've got a gigabit link you can still fill most of that with a single gigahertz cpu box. Still nice to have for the more dynamic stuff though!

    22. Re:Mirror (be nice) by NXIL · · Score: 1

      Dude. Dual Xeon with a fat pipe. Thanks. Panicked Site.com is completely belly up now.... A pretty good trailer....some skanky girls, spaceships--that's all I need.

    23. Re:Mirror (be nice) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bow to your bandwidth.

    24. Re:Mirror (be nice) by dedeman · · Score: 1

      Hey, great mirror, worked like a charm, and the movie looks.....interesting. Could they have hired a lead female role without a lisp, or someone other then the comic book store manager pony tail guy? Or (and this is a stretch) attractive actors? Carrie Fisher is past her prime, but assuredly "there is another".

    25. Re:Mirror (be nice) by jafac · · Score: 1

      Wow. This is just about the best thread I've seen on slashdot in about 7 years. I miss this stuff. Back when people teased me for my 4-digit ID. *snif*

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  43. Re:Hmm by snuf23 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "At least we got some neat videogames out of the Matrix trilogy."

    We did? I though Enter the Matrix was a piece of crap. Were there others? The MMO hasn't launched yet, and I can't believe there are people interested in playing it.

    I won't argue the merits of the Star Wars universe, I admit it's pretty goofy and the last two movies lacked a lot of the fun factor that made the goofiness excusable in the first three. However, as far as games goes, I'd give the nod to Star Wars. Most of them have sucked, but several have been decent:

    Battlefront (unbalanced, buggy, but oddly amusing)
    Republic Commando
    Knights of the Old Republic
    the X-Wing and Tie Fighter series

    On the other hand, Force Commander was so bad it may just negate any good from other releases.
    And of course the MMO HAS launched and I can't believe there are people interested in playing it.

    --
    Sometimes my arms bend back.
  44. I could smell your stench all over this attack! by Spackler · · Score: 1

    May the slashdotting be with you.

    KKKKAAAAAAAHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!

    (fade to black)

  45. Re:Hmm by TotalFusionOne · · Score: 1

    KOTOR? Please... Give me old school Return of the Jedi for SNES anyday! Not to mention.. PODRACING! Who didn't waste a couple of bucks in that huge contraption next to the DDR machine?

  46. panicstruckpro.com by ac3boy · · Score: 1

    I would say there website was panicstruck once /. go t the story. Lord, did I just type that nonsense? ;-)

    1. Re:panicstruckpro.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lord, did I just type that nonsense? ;-)

      Yeah, and unfortunately you posted it, too.

      It's "their" d00d...

  47. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you actually played force commander or did you just read the reviews and take their word for it?

  48. Panic Struck... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Appropriate name for the site after being slashdotted

  49. mirror by tigerc · · Score: 1

    Theforce.net has the trailer...it's already a bit clogged. here

  50. Somewhere, very far away... by SteelV · · Score: 1

    ...a rumble was heard.

    Right after Lucas read about this on Slashdot.

  51. Last two? by ESqVIP · · Score: 1

    I'd say they were the first two!

    This whole reverse-order trilogies thing makes my head hurt...

  52. Where's Mel Brooks? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Funny

    What we really need is Spaceball 2 to hit the big screens. Of course, some people might be saying, "Oh, no... not again!" :P

    1. Re:Where's Mel Brooks? by sparkie · · Score: 1

      Mel Brooks said he'd never make a sequel to anything. Hence his movie 'The History of the world Part 2' but had no part 1 :)

    2. Re:Where's Mel Brooks? by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1
      I'm sorry, but I didn't really like Spaceballs. Somehow, those little cracks about "We're all assholes, sir!" just weren't funny enough for me. I'll grant them the combination-on-my-luggage joke, but the rest of it was just weak. Perhaps the drooling reviews of its fanboys had me expecting something more.

      Now, Young Frankenstein, on the other hand, was sheer genius. I found the dichotomy somewhat startling.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    3. Re:Where's Mel Brooks? by edalytical · · Score: 1
      The movie is called "History of the World: Part 1" not "Part 2", but you're right, despite the "part" in the title there is no second part.

      I don't think Mel Brook should make a part two of either movie. "Spaceballs 2: The Search for More Money" worked well as a joke and "History of the World: Part 1" works well as a statement about sequels. But neither would make a good sequel. Sequels never meet expectations and are mostly about "the search for more money."

      --
      Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
    4. Re:Where's Mel Brooks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you know, my dear boy?

      I say Jeeves, why don't you pour the young squire here a glass of brandy?

      Oh, Nelly, do be a dear and fetch me MY TEN INCH LONG RUBBER DILDO TO SODOMISE THIS PRETENTIOUS PRICK.

      Thank you, oh, so much.

    5. Re:Where's Mel Brooks? by WaKall · · Score: 1

      Spaceballs 2: The Search For More Money

    6. Re:Where's Mel Brooks? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Mel Brooks said he'd never make a sequel to anything.

      Perfect! He can follow George Lucas' example by creating a prequel. I can see it now... "Dark Balls In Space". :)

    7. Re:Where's Mel Brooks? by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      The movie is called "History of the World: Part 1" not "Part 2", but you're right, despite the "part" in the title there is no second part.


      They had the teaser of Part 2 in the ending of the Part 1. I actually waited for years for the Part 2 to appear, but no!

      "Jews in space!"
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    8. Re:Where's Mel Brooks? by sparkie · · Score: 1

      oh yea, the history of the world part one, correct you are. I dunno where the hell I came up with part 2.

    9. Re:Where's Mel Brooks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big screens? try DVD! Don't you know Spaceballs movies are out on home video before they're even finished being made?

    10. Re:Where's Mel Brooks? by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1

      Well, considering his recent flicks it's probably a good thing that he's not in films much anymore. 'Dracula: Dead and Loving It' was abominable; even 'Robin Hood: Men in Tights' really wasn't that great. I enjoyed 'Spaceballs,' but probably the best Brooks film ever is 'Young Frankenstein.' My family and I can recite every line by heart--it's that good.

  53. Nice effects, but... by Da+Rabid+Duckie · · Score: 1

    Seventeen minutes after the news breaks, and the site goes boom. You gotta love the /. effect... Anyway, I managed to grab it before it all went kaput, and I can't really say that the villainess strikes fear in me... mostly because she looks like a pug in a hot dog outfit. Oh I get it now, that's why it's called Revelations... we find out why most sith lords wear face masks of some sort! Great special effects though, especially the ships.

    --
    (From the Laws of Japanese Animation) Law of Inherent Combustibility -- Everything explodes. Everything.
  54. KOTOR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KOTOR would still be around without Star Wars. It's just D20 Modern/Future with some arcana thrown in. Not to minimalize the importance of Star Wars, the system had a lot more to with gameplay than you'd expect. Go figure.

  55. nyud.net mirror by totoanihilation · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's a mirror for the home page and the full-sized trailer:

    Homepage
    Trailer (.mov)

    I'd post a torrent but I don't have a tracker... Perhaps Slashdot should run one for things like these ;)

  56. Anyone seen... by microsoftlinux_user · · Score: 1

    www.mirrordot.com? Check out http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/fe8b6a800eb7b4f95 a558da0372aa63a/index.html Will take you directly there

    --
    I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life
  57. Much dissent I sense... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    againts George Lucas here. Some of you seam to forget that he brought us Star Wars in the first place. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

  58. 'webtorrent' for webpages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even better, why doesn't CmdrTaco post torrents of every story link on the front page?

    They could be 'webtorrent' links that require a browser plugin to view. It would work like a distributed cache of the page, like torrent does for files. Proxies & caching already exists for webpages but they don't distribute the load like torrent does.

    Requiring a plugin sucks but it's better than getting a dead site everytime. Also, if their are any inside deals going in exchange for banner clicks, cmdrtaco probably won't go for it.

    Is there such as thing as a 'webtorrent'?

  59. Trailer by DramaGeek · · Score: 1
    I managed to grab a copy of the large trailer.

    http://www.svsu.edu/~agsharro/web_trailer_II_large r.mov

    Let the /.ing begin!

    1. Re:Trailer by d3matt · · Score: 1

      I got the large copy from a mirror. It's Here

      It should survive the /. effect.

      --
      I am d3matt
  60. Re:Hmm by Misroi · · Score: 1

    How could you forget jedi knight!!

  61. A future we can believe in by RandomWordGenerator · · Score: 1

    I like this trailer - it's full of ugly and uncharismatic people . Now that gives a guy like me hope for the future. Perhaps I should sign up for that 'rogue starpilot' evening class after all.

  62. Re:Mirror (be nice) guess your box could handle it by Hurklefish · · Score: 1

    thanks for posting that, it was the only way I could see it. I really appreciate it. Hope you don't have a /. meltdown =)

  63. Please follow other link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oops - I threw in the linkfilter direct link to movie above, but didn't know the actual website didn't want hot-linking. Please mod up menace3society's post below, which will take you to the actual site of Star Wars 3: A Lost Hope.

    Thanks :)

  64. Wing Commander 2005 by SteveXE · · Score: 1

    Does this look like Wing Commander in 2005 with lightsabers to anyone? The acting is just...superb! They made the same mistake Lucas has been accused of. Hiding bad acting with pretty effects.

  65. Re:me so no think so by Bit_Squeezer · · Score: 1

    me so no think

  66. mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    http://www.ir0x0rz.com/mattias/videos/web_trailer_ II_larger.mov

  67. Trailer Impressions by __aailob1448 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is very nice looking for a fan-made movie. It is , however, subpar to a hollywood production (CG, actors, fight scenes...). But even getting to the level to actually be compared to a hollywood movie is a huge achievement so congratulations to the crew.

    I'll be sure to check it out when it comes out.

  68. What terrible acting by BlightThePower · · Score: 3, Informative

    the Kelly Osborne lookalike's "EVIL voice" was especially weak. I won't be bothering with that. You can slop all the CGI you want over something but if the acting is flat and the cast somewhat aesthetically challenged its simply not fixable.

    --
    Plays violent online games as: Nerfherder76
    1. Re:What terrible acting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      let's not forget

      "she lied to me! She used me!"

    2. Re:What terrible acting by Zsinj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree. The CGI, Sound, etc. were all top[ish]-notch.

      There were mainly 3 things that bothered me.

      1) the Acting. it seems bland, with little real emotion. You know it's bad when you can clearly tell they are acting when you've never seen the actors before.
      2) the writing. Although the writing might be good with good acting, I feel like i've got a bunch of Keaneau Reeves on the screen ... = NOT GOOD
      3) The Lighting. Especially with the lightsabers. I know it makes sense, but having the lightsaber pointed directly at the screen just looks... awkward. The lighting otherwise looks monotone, obvious, and non-suggestive.

      However, I'll probably still give it a see when it comes out on video (if?)

    3. Re:What terrible acting by Coryoth · · Score: 1

      the Acting. it seems bland, with little real emotion. You know it's bad when you can clearly tell they are acting when you've never seen the actors before.

      What really pulled the acting down was this: the actors simply weren't comfortable in their environment. They didn't sell the fact that they were there in the film world - they looked too much like someone who knows they're sitting on set. Having so many of the sets apparently CG only makes it harder. Acting on an empty(ish) set can be very hard indeed.

      the writing.

      I think that's a harsh judgement. There's really practically no dialogue of note in the trailer - just a smattering of lines. Anything can sound bad if not delivered with full conviction. I don't think there was enough to decide either way on the writing.

      The Lighting. Especially with the lightsabers. I know it makes sense, but having the lightsaber pointed directly at the screen just looks... awkward. The lighting otherwise looks monotone, obvious, and non-suggestive.

      Professional lighting is very hard. Lighting when a lot of your sets are CG is even harder. I thought they did okay under the circumstances, but realitically they were perhaps a little ambitious with what they were trying to achieve.

      I would suggest sound was actually a point that also suffered. A lot of the dialogue sounded unclear or had echoes to it. Again, it's all the little cues, like sound and subtle lighting effects, that help to add that feel of unreality. Sound recording and editing can be hard and expensive however.

      All around I think these people did a great job. I would possibly fault them for being too ambitious: trying to do more than their acting, lighting and sound were capable of, and hence losing a little suspension of disbelief.

      Jedidiah.

    4. Re:What terrible acting by stj · · Score: 1

      Shoulda been:
      She lied to me!
      I told you she'd never consciously betray the rebelion.
      Terminate her! Immediately!

      --
      iThink iHate iMod
    5. Re:What terrible acting by Dmala · · Score: 1

      Is it really that much worse that what Lucas has done?

      1) the Acting. it seems bland, with little real emotion. You know it's bad when you can clearly tell they are acting when you've never seen the actors before.

      Although all five of Lucas' movies have had top notch talent, there are certainly some examples of bad acting. What's-his-face from Episode 2, in particular, gave some pretty stilted performances, as I recall.

      2) the writing. Although the writing might be good with good acting, I feel like i've got a bunch of Keaneau Reeves on the screen ... = NOT GOOD

      Lucas has certainly done his share of terrible writing. Midichlorians anyone?

      3) The Lighting. Especially with the lightsabers. I know it makes sense, but having the lightsaber pointed directly at the screen just looks... awkward. The lighting otherwise looks monotone, obvious, and non-suggestive.

      I definitely recall a scene from the (unbutchered) original trilogy where a lightsaber ends up pointed at the camera, and it looked more like a flashlight or a neon tube. To be honest, the effect in this film, with the lightsaber in the same position, looks much better. I, for one, applaud these filmmakers. Given what I am sure is a miniscule budget, they've produced very impressive results.

    6. Re:What terrible acting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Shoulda been:
      > She lied to me!
      > I told you she'd never consciously betray the rebelion.
      > Terminate her! Immediately!

      Don't you mean:

      "I told you she'd never consciously betray the rebellion." [wave arm for a couple seconds like you're still talking]

    7. Re:What terrible acting by Epistax · · Score: 1

      I just wasn't getting the goth experience I was looking for.

    8. Re:What terrible acting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh come on now, surely the moody reverberated synth string sounds they lifted from some 80's B-movie horror flick take you to another place where you can overlook these amateur shortcomings.

    9. Re:What terrible acting by aztektum · · Score: 1
      That's the problem with amateur actors... They try too hard to be the character. It's not something you can force it has to seem natural. Lookit Red Vs. Blue (I never saw Troops wasn't that a funny haha one too?) where the guys who write/star get it, and while it's suppose to be a total joke, they are totally comfortable pulling it off so it feels natural.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    10. Re:What terrible acting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude that was funny.

    11. Re:What terrible acting by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      I disagree about the aesthetically challenged part. I don't think it is so important to have models for actors for every role. Why can't some people be ugly or *gasp* average looking? British television uses a lot of average looking cast members, and it makes the shows more believeable.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    12. Re:What terrible acting by iamzack · · Score: 1

      I agree. It's just a bunch of Star Wars nerds making a movie. I've seen a few Star Wars fan films, and the acting is aslways sub-par. I guess that's why they're just fan films.

    13. Re:What terrible acting by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Well, thats ok. But the jawbone of the female main cast is something that would be hit even on the street as "oh god that bitch is ugly". Not main cast material (especially not _that dress_)

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    14. Re:What terrible acting by Jiraiya · · Score: 1

      Totally agree, so much attention given to FX, and so little to acting. This has the feel of a (really bad) high-school production, and I mean, I've seen better acting in kindergarden. And what arrogance, taking something original someone has built and taking great care with, and presuming to make something better and attempting to provide those who prefer to latch on to the latest anti-George Lucas sentiment, with this seemingly inferior rip-off.

    15. Re:What terrible acting by SamSim · · Score: 1

      Flat acting? Did you SEE Episode II?

    16. Re:What terrible acting by u-238 · · Score: 1

      Her jaw, her chin, her cheek bones, her whole face. It was very indicative of years of thoroughbread inbreading (I used to live in Texas - I know it when I see it).

    17. Re:What terrible acting by dave420 · · Score: 1
      The acting was as bad as any porno, yet without the sex. Why would anyone want to see this? Some fat midwesterners running around being filmed, pretending to be stormtroopers. I admire their motivation and enthusiasm, but their lack of acting talent means I'll never watch this film without laughing my ass off.

      I thought it reminded me of a cross between star wars and Trailer Park Boys, but then I remembered the Trailer Park Boys is a great show.

    18. Re:What terrible acting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And let's not forget the horse-faced actress... ugh...

    19. Re:What terrible acting by mcb · · Score: 1

      there was only 1 bad actor in episode II, this entire cast sucks (not to mention they're all ugly).

    20. Re:What terrible acting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      you're from texas, all right; it's "thoroughbred" and "inbreeding." maybe you don't get enough to eat, and you had bread on your mind?

    21. Re:What terrible acting by kahlancypher · · Score: 1

      Kelly Osborne lookalike?! What broken down monitor are you watching the trailer on? I assuming you're referring to Zhana, who looks absolutely NOTHING like Kelly Osborne. Actually, on several sites I've visited she's been compared to Reese Witherspoon. And the voice has been completely redubbed in post - so, don't be so quick to judge.

  69. New Villain by racecarj · · Score: 1

    Hey, The make-up work is also great... they were able to make the woman who plays the new bad guy even uglier than Darth Maul in episode I.

  70. Re:A couple simple rules. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought it was extremely funny.

  71. Wet cats? by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1
    "Does this look like Wing Commander in 2005 with lightsabers to anyone?"

    I haven't seen this yet. Does it end with wet cats like the original "Wing Commander" did?

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:Wet cats? by SteveXE · · Score: 1

      If i told you it would spoil it.

  72. I'm still waiting for by StarKruzr · · Score: 5, Funny

    Spaceballs 3: The Search for 2

    --

    +++ATH0
  73. That's not film by catmistake · · Score: 1

    Looks like straight to video... by the Babylon 5 production team... and Kevin Smith (or a look alike). The special effects look cool enough, but the acting, camera work, needs some serious editing (like... editing out)

    1. Re:That's not film by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, just CG the whole thing. The 'acting' couldn't possibly turn out worse.

      And for further emotional and dynamic range, use the 'Stephen Hawking'-type electronic voice for all characters, with different pitches to differentiate the characters.

  74. Sorry by hey! · · Score: 2, Funny
    I misread

    That is the first exciting Star Wars news I've heard in a long time! ...and just when I had started to give up.

    as

    That is the first exciting Star Wars news I've heard in a long time! ...and just when I had started to grow up.
    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Sorry by dirvish · · Score: 3, Funny

      Keep practicing your reading, you'll get it right some day.

    2. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This should be the defacto response to any "I read x as y" comment on the first page of comments. I salute you.

    3. Re:Sorry by Epistax · · Score: 0

      Keep practicing your punctuation; you'll get it right some day.

      -or-

      Keep practicing your punctuation: you'll get it right some day.

      (Depending on who you ask, but the point of this post was that you're wrong. ;)

    4. Re:Sorry by bladx · · Score: 0

      I think your second example is incorrect. You could always use "--" instead. :)

    5. Re:Sorry by Nik+Picker · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I dont think that using -- would be acceptable since Im sure this thread wont take any arguments.

      --
      And thats why Firecrackers and kittens don't mix.
    6. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I misread

      That is the first exciting Star Wars news I've heard in a long time! ...and just when I had started to grow up.

      as

      That is the first exciting Star Wars news I've heard in a long time! ...and just when I had started to throw up.

    7. Re:Sorry by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 2
      I know you people are being facetious, but this film, judging from the outtakes in the trailer, has Mystery Science Theater 3000 written all over it. And what's with the chubby goth chick? Having watched this, all I can think of is that extra at the beginning of Empire:

      "Two escorts against a Star Destroyer?" A distinctly wooden moment, to be sure.

      Yet Revelations is an entire film featuring thespians of this caliber. Could this be a guerilla attack by the MST 3000 crew?

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    8. Re:Sorry by Mordaximus · · Score: 1

      Speaking of misreading, where you said

      "Yet Revelations is an entire film featuring thespians of this caliber."

      I saw

      "Yet Revelations is an entire film featuring lesbians of this caliber."

      I hope I was the only one.

    9. Re:Sorry by Tekzel · · Score: 0

      A slashdot thread that won't take an argument? Surely you jest.

      On topic, on topic... Nope, can't think of a single thing to say to keep this post on topic.

      Oh wait! No, that was just gas.

  75. I wonder... by lostwanderer147 · · Score: 1
    What is the record for /.ing a site after a link goes up on the main page? I'd guess that during peak reading hours, with a small bandwidth, it could go down within five minutes of posting. I'd love to see a printout of server statistics, just to look at the huge spike, followed by the death. You gotta feel sorry for the people runing sites out of their basements.

    And their ISPs.

  76. Very Skeptical by lcnxw · · Score: 1

    After viewing the trailer and hearing some of the dialog and seeing the effects, im a bit skeptical that this could be more entertaining than the real thing.

    to be honest, the actors sound like they're in a porno, except that instead of seeing naked people, we see lots of CG effects and homegrown lightsaber effects. I'm impressed at the quality they were able to achieve, yet the storyline and acting may prove to be even worse than episodes 1 and 2.

    i'm afraid that they will stray down the same path that the first 2 did and be full of neat effects (which seem cooler because they weren't made by ILM) but have no strong points.

    check the trailer and decide for yourself:
    http://panicstruckpro.com.nyud.net:8090/revelation s/video/web_trailer_II_larger.mov

    1. Re:Very Skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well obviously they didn't have Skywalker Sound to re-dub all the lines, so the voice work isn't going to be great (although quality acting can make a difference to).

      I think it's unfortunate that they spent so much time and effort making a "Star Wars" fan flick, when they could have made an original sci-fi flick that might have been a stepping stone to something better for the creators....

  77. were's my JAJA binks snuff movie by zenst · · Score: 1

    gimme gimme gimme, that I would watch.

  78. Ew, god, that sucked by legLess · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For a fan production I'd officially say "not bad." It obviously took a lot of work, and I can't denigrate that.

    OTOH, it kinda sucked. I've seen cable access shows with better acting. Not surprisingly given the source material, it's pretty similar to most of the scifi crap Lucas, and Hollywood, churn out these days: blow the budged on special effects, look to Ed Wood for directing inspiration.

    --
    This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
  79. I have a revelation... by rollerbob · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think this is part of a conspiracy by George Lucas to make the acting and dialogue in Episode III seem a whole lot better.

  80. Mirror by nilbog · · Score: 2, Informative
    Here is a mirror of the video - until it goes down!

    Right here

    --
    or else!
  81. Episode 3 Script by cuteseal · · Score: 1
    I'm not sure if this is the real deal or not, but I found this the other day:

    ***POTENTIAL SPOILER ALERT***

    Episode 3 Script

  82. Obligatory quote... by jpellino · · Score: 1

    "I find your lack of faith in the /. Effect disturbing..."

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  83. "watch the trailer on their web site" by lelitsch · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Funniest advice ever this is. A heap of molten lava their server will become."--Yoda

    My heart goes out to the poor admin--I just hope they don't have any daylies on the same machine.

  84. Barf! by Shooter6947 · · Score: 1

    UGH! Watching that just brings home that no matter how much I might have been disappointed by the plot and dialog in Episode I, it could have been made 100,000 times worse by getting a bunch of fanboys together to make a mediocre video of how they though it SHOULD have been done.

    Cheers me up for EpIII, really.

    1. Re:Barf! by xMonkey · · Score: 1

      Thats what I was thinking.

      Lucas sucks pretty hard, but after watching that, at least you know he's not a farking amature.

  85. The Force... by Das+Auge · · Score: 1

    is not strong with this server.

  86. Torrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    First time hosting a torrent, so here goes: http://68.205.82.17:3001/web_trailer_II_larger.mov .torrent

    1. Re:Torrent by Snwbeast · · Score: 1

      The torrent works great (thanks for that), but your MIME type is set to [video/quicktime]. So you either need to do a right click and "Save Link As..." or use wget to snag the torrent file. Once you do though it works fine and I'm getting great speeds, so thanks again!

    2. Re:Torrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry about that, as I said, it's my first attempt at running a torrent server. However on my end, the MIME type is "x-bittorrent" so I'm not exactly sure how it reads as "video/quicktime" for you.

    3. Re:Torrent by MarsLander · · Score: 1

      The MIME type is the same for me. Perhaps it's the .mov.torrent file extension? What webserver are you using?

      helms-deep ~/previews/starwars_revelations 502> wget http://68.205.82.17:3001/web_trailer_II_larger.mov .torrent
      [snip]
      Connecting to 68.205.82.17:3001... connected.
      HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
      Length: 8,683 [video/quicktime]
      [snip]
    4. Re:Torrent by vonsneerderhooten · · Score: 1

      You did a most excellent job, thanks!!

  87. "Wiser words never spoken have been" (n/t) by Bucky+Bit · · Score: 1

    "Wiser words never spoken have been"

    no text

  88. Holy crap... by nilbog · · Score: 0

    ...the acting in that movie looks incredibad. I mean, every character looks more annoying than Jar Jar.

    --
    or else!
  89. Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by RyoShin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First off, the CGI, while not to the level as the 'AAA' modern day films, is still quite amazing. Ships, exploding stuff, robotic limbs... Very nicely done. There were a few scenes in the trailer where the CGI looked blurry compared to the rest of the shot, but that could be fixed up before release.

    I don't really follow the Star Wars universe as a whole, so all I can say about the plot is that it is interesting.

    However, as many people have already pointed out, the acting is sub-par. The lead evil actress tries to have some sort of menacing voice, but just sounds like her mouth is packed with something. (acorns?) The acting of other parts (such as the confrontation on the 'good guy' ship) seems forced, with delayed reaction time. The lightsaber scene between the two lead females just didn't feel right.

    There were also some parts of the trailer that just didn't fit in with the pace of it. The one main example that I saw was the girl dancing in a futuristic version of those hanging cages (I have no idea what they are called.) The pace of her body threw off the suspense that was (supposedly) building, and conflicted with the (then) slow music. It also had no real purpose that I could tell.

    Hopefully the acting throughout the entire movie averages better than the trailer, but I wouldn't be surprised if the opposite were true.

    It's probably good for them that they can't charge money for it.

    I am not a film critic, obsessive Star Wars fan, or acting buff, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

    1. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WHY OH WHY will everyone will NOT stop confusing CG with common gateway interface!

    2. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would definitely agree with the lightsaber scenes. The delayed reactions and the slow swings remind me of those super old hong kong kung fu flicks which seemed more like Beijing Opera than actual fight sequences. They may have to plan out the choreography for the fights better

    3. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by Agarax · · Score: 1

      Since they arnt paying the actors anything I'm not terribly suprised that its not up to Hollywood standards.

      --
      Remember folks, slashdot doesn't have a -1 "disagree" moderation!
    4. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2

      Oh come on, this is a fan film for Jebus's sake, and in that context its pretty fucking amazing.

      Want to talk about cheese? How about the entire cantina scene from ep4? Or Jabba's palace? Thats muppet amateur night right there, but it cost millions. The 'film crime' per dollar is much higher with Lucas's people.

      Acting? In Star Wars? Err, Mark Hamil's whiney performance? The first Anakin? The gay droids? Natalie Portman's stone-faced performances?

      As far as CGI goes, go ahead and rent the trilogy and you'll see 70s/80s effects and then some CGI that sticks out like a sore thumb. Man, most film students would get an F for doing something that stupid. The CGI is this trailer looks like it belongs there. And lucas isnt getting any better at it, the "droid factory" scene in ep2 has to be the worst and most unconvincing CGI background set I've seen since 1999.

      >It's probably good for them that they can't charge money for it.

      Funny, when people pay for something they suddenly develop a double standard for it. See the endless my console/pc/car/etc vs yours flamefests.

      I really do feel sorry for people who go out of their way to make something as fun (and for free) as a fan film. The other fans just attack them because it doesnt live up to their nostalgia or because making a movie sans the millions is just so easy to make fun of.

      Not to mention, I just read about 10 posts about how "fat" the lead actress is. Oh right. Another double standard. When Hollywood keeps making movies with the same stars everyone cries foul at the branding, the botox smiles, the super-fit overly muscular bodies, etc. But when a normal looking person is in a movie suddenly the same people cry foul over "fat" or "ugly."

    5. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by Henk+Poley · · Score: 1

      The lightsaber scene between the two lead females just didn't feel right.

      Yes, I would recommend them to take some sword lessons by professional sword actors. Make it look like you are first trying to find the weak spots. Lightsaber fights are supposed to be a delicate sport, try to start gracefull. When someone 'needs to be finished' you can always notch up the speed towards the end. Ask the sword actors what are hints of failure, weave them in the scene.

      AFAIK lightsabers are supposed to have more of an air drag than weight. Maybe the sword models can compensate for that so the movements will start to feel 'right'.

    6. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by mauledbydogs · · Score: 1

      The pace of her body threw off the suspense that was (supposedly) building, and conflicted with the (then) slow music. One word: Boobs.

    7. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by mcb · · Score: 1

      Watch it again. The people in this aren't acting. I don't care how bad you think Mark Hamil or Natalie Portman were, they are still way above the level of these amateurs. It's like a movie full of Hayden Christensens.

    8. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by mikeg22 · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but she *is* ugly. If I saw that woman in real life I would have the same reaction.

    9. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      Just had to reply to say I agree with you. Gonna put you into the Friend category.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    10. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
      Yes, I would recommend them to take some sword lessons by professional sword actors. Make it look like you are first trying to find the weak spots.

      Actually, dramatic sword fighting has very little in common with real swordfighting. For example, that brief clip of the two men fighting seemed to be much closer to my experience of (simulated) sword fighting than anything I've ever seen: fast, and not particularly interesting to any but the principles. Theatrical fighting must serve the dramatic purpose, and so involves a lot of foolishness that simply wouldn't work in real life.

      I'm unconvinced that realistic fighting couldn't work in a dramatic context, but so far no-one has put it to the test. It'd be difficult, for certain (among other things, the fighters would need to be good).

    11. Re:Review based on Trailer (or, IANAMovie Critic) by kahlancypher · · Score: 1
      You clearly haven't done your research. The principals were all trained by Nick Jamilla, a former World competition AND Olympics champion in sword-fighting, who by the way has also been published on sword fighting techniques in both the Eastern and Western traditions. They were trained in both Western and Eastern styles and they spent many grueling hours in a dojo and outside in the sweltering summer heat in Virginia practicing. The reason the few moves you saw in the trailer looked a little slower is because both of the women were using heavy wooden dowels to fight with in that scene b/c they couldn't afford to buy the light aluminum stuff that they use on the real SW sets.

      Do your homework before you comment on stuff you don't know about.

  90. Looks pretty good... by Azureflare · · Score: 1
    But they REALLY need to work on the audio mastering! The ambient volume levels were noticably different in many of the dialogue clips (some of them were even cut off), which was quite strange. Of course, this might just be a preliminary preview of it, and maybe they're still going to do some more audio processing... I hope?

    Looks like a very ambitious project... I'm sure if they do some of the dialogue in studio and have the actors try some of those lines again, it will be much more polished.

    The action scenes even look half decent! Great job guys. I'll definitely get the DVD if I don't see it in theatres.

  91. Don't Insult the fanfilms by spacepirate09 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I find it a bit foolish to insult actors in fanfilms. I doubt the maker of the movie had an unlimited budget and could hire actors fresh out of Hollywood. Give the guy a break, he's trying.

    1. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by Wylfing · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I doubt the maker of the movie had an unlimited budget and could hire actors fresh out of Hollywood. Give the guy a break, he's trying.

      Indeed, it would be foolish to condemn any part of this effort. Sure, the acting isn't awesome, but there can be a lot of reasons for that, including inexperience at directing. It's definitely good enough to carry the show, and some of the lines are delivered quite convincingly.

      Now the special effects...Holy cow! Those are fantastic.

      --
      Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.
    2. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      and if you ask me, making a excelent job

    3. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by artemis67 · · Score: 2, Funny

      From the looks of the pictures on the website, I'm guessing that the stromtroopers they used were fans who happened to bring their own stormtrooper armor. Which would be fine, except that one seems a little too tall, and another is very short.

      On Bespin: "Hey check out those stormtroopers! They look a little odd..."
      On Tatooine: "Uhhh... aren't those the same... naah!"
      On Coruscant: "It's those same three stormtroopers again! Wow, those guys get around!"

    4. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by eeyoredragon · · Score: 1

      But... if they can't afford good effects (and even if they could), isn't decent acting one of the main features of a movie? No one's suggesting they should have gotten a "Hollywood actor" (and many of them can't act their way out of a paper bag), simply that someone should have said perhaps "... Hows about we tone it down on the whole evil voice thing, eh dear?" A good story and good acting to carry it is what makes a good (non-fluff) movie.

      Why shouldn't we have an opinion on it? Because we can potentially watch it for free? Because it's fanfilm? Bah.

      I for one don't think I could sit through it from what I've seen. In fact, I was embarrassed while watching the preview. (The Scifi remake of Dune comes to mind.) If anyone doesn't like that, tough luck. If you don't want opinions on something, don't put it out on the web for others to see.

    5. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by ltbarcly · · Score: 1

      Come on guys, he tried SO HARD. Let's give him a pass since we shouldn't ever give an honest estimate of the quality of something someone tried hard to do. After all, he TRIED SO HARD.

      (trying hard == not good enough)

      And before someone wants to be an ass and ask me "Where is the great movie you made!?" -- I'm not a cow either, but I know manure when I smells it.

      (recognizing crap != producing quality)

      The acting was awful. It was even worse than something like a high school drama club. No effort was made to dub voices or scrub sound on the live action scenes. The acting is about what you would expect to see if you grabbed a random person and said, "here, look at the camera and read this."

      The CGI was impressive, the sound effects and music were clearly lifted from the Star Wars movies.

      Everything else was crudily crippity crap.

      Oh, and the evil chick was especially ugly.

    6. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by vranash · · Score: 1

      Probably because somebody didn't want to be told by their girlfriend 'no ***** for j00' It's called a sofa, where every man ends up if he doesn't do his 'master's bidding... Hey, women are just like Star Wars, they treat ya like their bitch ;-p

    7. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by TheCoroner · · Score: 1

      Agreed, and (*cross your fingers*) this will lead to a remake, a second production with a bigger budget, George Lucas letting a real director make a film on his behalf.

    8. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by Mordaximus · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Who knows, maybe they were acting down to the feature films' level!

      Acutally, some of their pricipals have quite impressive credentials. It's easy to spot those who have camera experience from those who've only worked on stage. Regardless, I think they've done a great job. Keep in mind they are all volunteers for this film.

      It says on the cast page (sorry, I actually RTFed the site) that one of the actors, Shane Felux, enjoys historical fencing. Did they ever luck out getting him. Some of the lightsaber scenes, particularly the ones with him onscreen, were quite impressive. Gina Hernandez, one of the other pricipals, also does costumes with her husband.

      Kudos to the entire cast and crew. I look forward to seeing the finished product. The trailer has already put episode I to shame.

    9. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Sure, the acting isn't awesome

      Of course, that would be a break away from tradition...

    10. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by drsquare · · Score: 1

      It's not about money, you can get decent amateur actors. These were not decent amateur actors, they were downright awful. It's as if he walked into a room and randomly picked some people to act, even if they'd never acted before.

    11. Re:Don't Insult the fanfilms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Mom? Is that you?

      Love, Shane

  92. thank the maker.... by Schmiggy_JK · · Score: 2, Funny

    Another bantha poo star wars flick...

    --
    Insert something witty here...
  93. I'll take natalie portman. by xMonkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    Some fanbois thought it would be cool to have two 'hot chix' as jedi's, cause that would be hot.

    But once you view the trailer you can see they failed miserably to deliver the hotness.

    So there really is no point in watching it.

    1. Re:I'll take natalie portman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fanbois

      How do you pronounce that? Is it French?

    2. Re:I'll take natalie portman. by vranash · · Score: 1

      I just know the only time I've ever seen 'boi' used is often by women seeking skantily clad toned bisexual men for their harem...

    3. Re:I'll take natalie portman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      geekish, a new form of nerd!

  94. A great disturbance in the Force by GeekTek · · Score: 4, Funny

    A million geeks cheering in joy and were suddenly silenced. By a million lawyers.

  95. Worst acting ever! by Isando · · Score: 1

    Okay the effects are quite good. I may even be willing to give the story a chance. But the acting is wretched. The actors were chewing the scenery the entire trailer. This strikes me as fanboys/fangirls who couldnt pass up the opportunity to make themselves part of the story, whether they could act or not. And in most cases, it appears they could not. Its probably too soon to pass judgement based on a trailer alone, but what I saw wasnt promising.

    But you have to respect the effort. They've made it this far. I doubt I could have.

    1. Re:Worst acting ever! by Mr.+No+Skills · · Score: 1

      I was thinking "girl friends of the guys putting it together" the whole time. Stolen soundtrack and the effects definately had the right vibe. But those two girls (especially the "evil" one) -- yikes.

      Kind of neat to see how professional a job this was. Especially the clips where you can see AT-ATs walking behind the real actors. The lightsabers looked right too. I guess the availability of tools for filmmakers on a budget has progressed amazingly. I keep thinking "Flight 405", but looks much better than that.

      --
      Sleep is for the Weak
    2. Re:Worst acting ever! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What story?

      Isn't a trailer supposed to tease with bits of story? So what was that? Who are these people? What the fuck is supposed to be going on?

      Effects, effects, effects. Which is exactly what Lucas' problem is.

    3. Re:Worst acting ever! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I was thinking "girl friends of the guys putting it together" the whole time.

      I'll take the one dancing in the plasma-tube. The one who has no lines. Thanks! :)

    4. Re:Worst acting ever! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's my Mom, you insensitive clod!

  96. Re:Hmm by snuf23 · · Score: 1

    Played it. Err, tried to play it. I don't know how it was for you, but for me it was very buggy, crash prone and had an extremely odd to use interface.

    --
    Sometimes my arms bend back.
  97. I've got a bad feeling about this. by slorge · · Score: 2, Funny

    I've got a bad feeling about this.

    --
    Some people are like slinkys. They're useless, but it puts a smile on your face to push them down the stairs.
  98. MIRROR FOR THE .MOV FILES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:MIRROR FOR THE .MOV FILES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks, yours hasn't been wrecked yet due to the snobby people that only see messages at 4 or 5. ;P

  99. It Did Not Suck by sabat · · Score: 1

    It didn't suck. Some of the effects shots were downright stunning -- if they were in an actual hollywood movie I'd be impressed.

    The problem with fan productions always seems to be the acting; it reminds me of how the problem with open source GUI apps is always the GUI. It's the human part that the geeks have trouble getting right.

    In the case of this trailer: the actors just don't look right for the parts, and their acting isn't very convincing. It's not horrible, just not good enough. There's a reason directors insist on take after take; a lot of the time it's so there is enough footage to piece together a decent scene.

    Outside of the actual acted scenes, everything else looked superb and downright amazing -- including the live shots with the stormtroopers etc.

    --
    I, for one, welcome our new Antichrist overlord.
    1. Re:It Did Not Suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It didn't suck. Some of the effects shots were downright stunning -- if they were in an actual hollywood movie I'd be impressed.

      Your corneas are in need of scraping.

  100. Re:Acting? No. Writing... by Coryoth · · Score: 1

    Star Wars had a stellar cast, all proven professionals...well, mostly.

    It certainly has some very good actors apperaing in even the prequels: Ewen McGregor, Liam Neeson, and Natalie Portman among others. What it also had was some very very poor actors in some critical roles: Jake Lloyd, and Hayden Christiansen. Then there were those weird choices for minor roles: Ahmed Best? I think we could have done better for a character with as much screen time as Jar Jar in Ep I (though the director is surely to blame for some of that). Temuera Morrison? You're not in Guatemala now Dr. Ropata. Has Martin Henderson somehow scored himself a role for Ep III?

    I agree though, despite some good actors, there's only so much you can do with a script and director who are apparently working against you. Most of the blame really has to fall squarely at Lucas' feet here.

    Jedidiah.

  101. Thanks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Worked fine for me!

  102. reminds me of the kessel run... by SQLz · · Score: 1

    the site was slashdoted so quick I was reminded of the kessel run and 12 parsects.

  103. British People? by blueadept1 · · Score: 1

    I thought all people in space were british? WHAT HAPPENED! Probably some stupid civil war on a planet far far away between a colony and these british space people, I suppose.

  104. uglies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the problem with star wars fan films is that they have star wars fans in them.

    1. Re:uglies by weighn · · Score: 1
      the problem with star wars fan films is that they have star wars fans in them

      I guess that girlie who arm wrestles robots is more into the Matrix films?

      --
      Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
  105. and me with mod points by Corf · · Score: 1

    pity there's no "+5, Groovy" available in this instance...

    --
    The pain was excruciating and the scarring is likely permanent, but that just means it's working.
  106. There's Hope For Chunky People Who Can't Act by perlmunger · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm in luck!!! -Matt

  107. Another mirror by uncoolcentral · · Score: 1
    (In case you missed others earlier in the thread)

    mirrordot is great stuff.

    redundant? sure.

    helpful? likely.

  108. Kernel Panic! and how does Lucas feel? by BiggRanger · · Score: 1

    Looks like a Kernel "Panic Struck" the server! I hope George Lucas doesn't feel this infringes upon his Star Wars franchise and decide to send the lawyers to them. You have to admit Star Wars is a huge money maker for him and the studio, and anybody trying to make some money off of it better have some good lawyers.

  109. Is it April 1st already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That was some awesome CGI interspersed with some of the funniest jokes I've seen in a while. If this was supposed to be serious I am worried.

  110. Vulonteer = We don't have trained Actors by BobPaul · · Score: 1

    The new movies also lack patience in its story develop, almost as if Lucas is trying to cram in to much crap. Mark my words, the new star wars trilogy will never become classics. However, the original trilogy is classic cinema. at least will always have those to enjoy.

    I agree with you 100%. What's even worse is all the changes Lucas made to the origional trilogy when they re-released it on DVD.

    However, nothing compares to the bad acting I just witnessed in today's independantly produced trailer. Computer actors or not, at least the Lucas films have paid actors... that really adds a lot. I'm sure their story line is a million times better than Lucas's Ep 1 and Ep 2, but I don't think I'd be able to sit through enough to find out.

    1. Re:Vulonteer = We don't have trained Actors by Uzziel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The site's Slashdotted at the moment, so I can't comment on the quality of the acting in the fanflick.

      But come on - George Lucas has managed to coax utterly craptacular performances out of good actors and actresses like Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman and Ewan McGregor.

      Every time I even think of the scene where Queen Amidala is speaking to the leader of the Naboo amphibians, I just cringe. "Please I ask you no I beg you . . . " Ack.

    2. Re:Vulonteer = We don't have trained Actors by BobPaul · · Score: 1

      Every time I even think of the scene where Queen Amidala is speaking to the leader of the Naboo amphibians, I just cringe. "Please I ask you no I beg you . . . " Ack

      Oh, god.. I guess I had blanked that out with the rest of Episode 1.

      Look down in the Slashdot comments for a post titled "Mirror (be nice)" for a good mirror of the trailer if you like pain.

    3. Re:Vulonteer = We don't have trained Actors by Angostura · · Score: 1

      I the quality of the CGi in the fanflick trailer looks really rather good, the amateur acting and the dialogue seems wretched. I thought it was an excellent attempt to make the fanflick match the authentic films.

  111. How do you define free? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think in many ways, you're right. When the day comes when we can easily download internet video content to our TVs at home, indie films will be much more able to compete with DVDs from the major studios, and we'll see a lot more great content that finds an audience this way.

    But good work takes money. And more importantly, don't most of us *want* to help out the people who make the things we like?

    Take Chris Tallman's Time Belt, for instance. I loved this little show, and I know a lot of others did too. I would gladly have paid a few bucks a month if I knew there were a thousand other people doing the same thing, and that doing so would get us all a new episode of Time Belt each month.

    I don't know Tallman, so I can't say whether or not a deal like this would've interested him. But I suspect it might have.

    There is a ton of free content out there, and there always will be, but when it comes to art, sometimes there are no substitutions. And I'm glad to pay when I like the person or what they make. So I guess my point here is that rather than describing things in terms of free vs. pay, it seems more productive to me to frame it in terms of opening the market to everyone rather than the virtues of destroying the market alltogether. Don't you think?

    Hope that made sense.

  112. for me to poop on... by gosand · · Score: 1
    Okay, the CGI, sound, and effects were outstanding. But the acting and dialogue made me pray I'd be struck by a passing meteorite. Wait a minute, that was a verbatim transcript of my opinions of Ep1 & 2... Maybe these folks are on to something...

    I was just waiting for Triumph the Insult Comic Dog to make a cameo. If you haven't seen the clip where he is harassing the dorks in the Star Wars Episode Garbage line, see it. See the full version. It is a riot.

    Yes, for an indy film this looks pretty good. But normally you put the best parts in a trailer. This looked like impressive tripe.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  113. Re:A couple simple rules. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was mistaken. Your swartz are not as big as mine.

    I don't know why else you'd be so anal retentive about a one-line comment. The comment's soul purpose was to give a body to the text. It was filler, nothing more. The subject line said all that needed to be said.

  114. Re: George Lucs lost his touch How Insightful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Parent is the same crap people say on slashdot everytime a Star Wars topic comes up and it gets modded as insightful. Please explain.

  115. Awful, but could be much improved! by Oz0ne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Concept = great
    CG = great
    Director of Photography = very good (composition of scenes and such is not half bad!)

    Acting = apalling

    A lot of the little oddities would be helped if they convert it over to 24fps, that would make it feel much more film like instead of someone's garage project... even though it IS someone's garage project. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I think it's completely awesome that they've put this much effort into it.

  116. Copyright safety by yow2000 · · Score: 5, Informative
    From: http://panicstruckpro.com/revelations/revelations_ faq.html#Anchor-27696

    Question
    Is Lucas aware of your film and isn't he going to sue the hell out of you?

    Answer:
    For most people who do not understand fan films we get this question often .To answer, I doubt if Lucas himself has seen "Revelations". However ,Lucas is a large supporter for fan films,and is very kind enough to let other inspiring artists play in his backyard, as long as you don't try and make money from his hard work, and respectfully so.

    "Revelations" is a non-profit film and everyone who worked on the film was a volunteer (no one was paid). The film itself will be availible free to download from TheForce.net and the "Revelations" website to anyone who wishes to watch it.

    A great article put out by "Wired" covers some good ground about fan films and here is what Steve Sansweet (Lucasfilm's head of Fan Relations) had to say:

    "There is plenty of room for fans to express their own feelings and opinions," Sansweet said. "We believe our core fans are responsible for the continuing popularity of the series, and we want to encourage them. Our intellectual properties are there for you to play with, but we expect you won't try and make a profit or use our characters in a salacious way. Having that wide-open frontier serves as a self-policing mechanism for the fans, who are really appreciative of being included."

    "Sansweet added that Lucas believes fan films will grow more sophisticated as the amateur filmmakers gain new skills. "

    1. Re:Copyright safety by Niartov · · Score: 1

      There have been several Fan files made already.
      The Force.net [theforce.net] hosts lot on their site. There are a few that are not to bad. The first to my knowledge was Troops a Cops parody and is one I tend to enjoy. At the end of the credits it thanks George for not suing them.

  117. Looks interesting but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought the preview looked okay, but I think I'd be a lot more interested if the actors didn't actually look like star wars fans... they seriously look like they could have made the movie while waiting in line for Episode III.

  118. Re:Acting? No. Writing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ha! A fellow Kiwi! (It never occurred to me to look at your website link)

    Nobody else is going to get the Guatemala joke :)

    The thought of Lucas replacing all the storm trooper voices with Tem Morrison's strong Kiwi accent is what has kept me from getting the Star Wars Trilogy - it might be cultural cringe, but even though I'm a born-and-bred New Zealander, I hate New Zealand accents!

    (It was also difficult to stay immersed in the LotR movies at times - everytime someone from Shortland Street popped up it was a little too much to take seriously)

  119. Lesbians in Space... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sorry...couldn't resist. the one chick toward the end looks like the Predator.

  120. Wow!!!! by tdhillman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That of course was a cheap wow to suck you in, justas this film will be. Traiers always look good. That's their job. Mediocre acting and bad fight choreography won't make this even hold up.
    Fact is, all the Star Wars films have been, in their own way, deliciously bad. Harrison Ford is a block of wood, Hamill just plain is no actor...

    It's all about the story- Star`Wars succeeded because there was never anything like it before- when it hit, no one knew. That Episode Four was a better picture was no surprise. By the time Six cam around, it was time to tie it up in a neat little basket.

    The true test will come when we look at this films in story order and see how the whole thing holds up- were te first three exposition adn therefore tedious as hell? Likely so. Revenge of the Sith just might be the tie that binds the exposition to the action. Too damn bad we'll never see the actual climax and resolution of the story.

    --
    befuddled (noun) 1. Unable to create a pithy sig
  121. Re: CGI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    FYI: the term computer generated imagery (CGI) predates the term common gateway interface (also CGI) by about 20 years.

    Quoting the wikipedia link on computer generated imagery:

    2D CGI was first used in movies in 1973's Westworld, though the first use of 3D imagery was in its sequel, Futureworld (1976), which featured a computer-generated hand and face created by then University of Utah graduate students Edwin Catmull and Fred Parke.

    Quoting the wikipedia link on common gateway interface:

    Originally, CGI was invented by NCSA for the NCSA HTTPd web server in 1993.

    I hope that clears things up!

  122. Re:Not sub-par? You already said it wasn't by Luca by zonker · · Score: 0

    a few minor quibbles about it and a few big ones too...

    a few of the ships didn't look quite like star wars like ships. mostly the ship that we see taking off from the ground. just didn't ring true as a star wars ship and instead looked like something they were giong to use in another project and used it in this one instead.

    the bigger issue though is that for what seemed like a good production, for the most part, it fell apart as soon as the 'actors' started talking. the main girls voice is kind of annoying and the other girl sounds whiny, like this was the oc, not star wars (or like young anakin). the dialog is about on par with jarjar's lines. had they gotten a group of real actors that were interested in this and not just the nerd collective, i think this would have been really great.

    as it is though it is a great looking work that is marred by the acting and held up by the visuals. on that note, it is fairly similar to episode i, and to a lesser extent, episode ii...

  123. Wardware Wars was the best send up ever by GomezAdams · · Score: 1

    This came out right after Chapter 4 and was histerical. I think it was produced by some college kids with a budget less than a week end beer party at a frat house. I still recall parts of it and remember the picture of a cartoon tractor that was the controller for The Tractor Beam. I wish I had a copy of it now.

    --
    Too lazy to create a sig...
  124. ugly girlfriends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate it when the film makers cast thier ugly
    girlfriends in the movie. The acting is horrible
    also.

  125. I know great acting and directing, and this is it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great writing, too!

    - George Lucas

  126. Re:Slashdotting: The Play: The sequel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Alas, poor website! I knew it, Horatio: a site of infinite uptime, of most excellent fancy:
    It hath borne me on its frames a thousand times; and now, how absent from my screen it is!
    Here hung those gifs that I have watched,
    Here, the scrolling Navbar of delight,
    now gone.

    Once a friendly searchbox, in quiet rectagonal rectitude,
    floated here, an iframe in a sea of harsh reflection, ..now an object, not found but for memory's sad repair.

    Where now your scripts? your applets? your stylesheets?
    Your flashes of gif animation, that were wont to set my bandwidth on a groan?

    Oh, I am doomed to go a googleing once more.

  127. What is so special about star wars by Tamerlan · · Score: 1

    I'll be definitely modded down as a flamebait, but I haven't heard any meaningful explanation why Episodes I&II suck. Any insights? They have at least some eye candy. I find older episodes extremely boring. That is probably a good idea for 'Ask slashdot' theme: why do you love (or hate) StarTrek/StarWars/Babylon5/XFiles/Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy (I listed iconoclastic books/movies that make me yawn).

    1. Re:What is so special about star wars by Narchie+Troll · · Score: 1

      As much as I hate making this reference...

      > iconoclastic

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

      *shudders*

      And to answer your question? Babylon 5 sucks, H2G2 is funny until you realize that you're now in the 42 Masturbation Klub, and X-Files has aliens and a token hot member of each gender.

      And Star Trek is one of those things that you have to had been there.

  128. The genius of John Williams and Ben Burtt by I+am+the+Bullgod · · Score: 1

    It's amazing how you can put John Williams' score and Ben Burtt's sound effects on any piece of garbage and make it give you the chills. Therein lies the true genius of SW.

  129. felt like porn by nobodyman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeah, I agree. The voice acting was right up there with B-List porn. Add some chickabowwow guitar riffs to that dual-saber fight and you'd have the perfect lead-in to the obligatory girl-on-girl scene.

    Oh come on! Tell me you weren't thinking the same thing. You're a perverted bastard and you know it.

    1. Re:felt like porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dude I got a siffy just thinking about it

    2. Re:felt like porn by BestNicksRTaken · · Score: 1

      Yup, just what I was thinking - the acting, ugly guys and kinda goth girls just made me think it was some soft porno and a double-ended dildo was going to appear any minute now!

      Personally I think you've got to give it to them - I assume none of them are actors or supermodels, so it's not too bad, the CGI certainly is pretty good.

      Not sure where it's supposed to fit though - Vader and Palpatine still alive, but no sign of Luke and gang - between 3 and 4 maybe?

      --
      #include <sig.h>
    3. Re:felt like porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Not sure where it's supposed to fit though - Vader and Palpatine still alive, but no sign of Luke and gang - between 3 and 4 maybe?

      Maybe. But as far as I can recall, there aren't any more Jedi at that point-- isn't the "Revenge of the Sith" all about the Sith wiping out the Jedi (except for Obi-Wan)?

      Nobody had any lightsabers in Ep. 4-6 except for Vader, Obi-Wan, and Luke (he had Anakin's old one plus the new one he made himself).

    4. Re:felt like porn by DrXym · · Score: 1

      Definitely! After hearing the terrible acting I was half expecting the Star Wars theme to give way to hard core all holes filled action.

  130. Slashdot controls the Force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the Slashdot effect does not fail. The website is completely dead. Mirrors anyone?

  131. One bad apple. by icedevil · · Score: 1

    Thank you /. nazi.

    Did someone run over your dog today? I happened to think grandparent's post was amusing.

    1. Re:One bad apple. by icedevil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You should get dog, you could use a friend.

    2. Re:One bad apple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's just rationalizing the fact that his Karma just went from Excellent to Good. Pay him no mind.

  132. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Half the links on SLASHDOT never work

  133. Archived Link by k96822 · · Score: 1

    The site seems to have been Slashdotted. Mined a link from Archive.org to it --> Here.

  134. the first rule of fight club is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a**hole. Don't be that guy man. Too late.

    Why you gotta ruin something?? I bet I can trace hundreds of things you've screwed up for the silent minorty over the years...

  135. Buy it on Amazon by rdunnell · · Score: 1

    It's out on DVD, seems like it was about 15 bucks or so. I know Netflix has it. :)

    1. Re:Buy it on Amazon by GomezAdams · · Score: 1

      Thanks. Gotta have it.

      --
      Too lazy to create a sig...
  136. Their Server is currently... by Ynazar1 · · Score: 1

    ....in a galaxy far far away.

  137. Karen Hammang... ugggh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Karen Hammang is just laughable. They'd have done better with Anna Nicole Smith... she's a better actress than Hammang (and looks the same, too, with that pouty thrust-out chin).

  138. Re:Copyrights... (proper link) by Lord+Haha · · Score: 1

    If your gonna link might was well use the proper one...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_fiction#Legal_a sp ects

  139. Hiring? by tbcpp · · Score: 1

    Showed it to my co-worker. It started cool and then went corny very fast. As he said, the last line on the screen be "And yes we are hiring"

    --
    Man is the lowest-cost, 150-pound, nonlinear, all-purpose computer system which can be mass-produced by unskilled labor.
  140. Just look at their credit card bill! by goon+america · · Score: 1

    Look at Panic Struck's Mastercard bill:

    * CGI animation: $16,000
    * Hair & Makeup: $2500
    * Costumes: $5000
    * Good actors: PRICELESS

    So, getting a refund on those actors then, huh?

    (Incidentally, this is very similar to George Lucas' Mastercard bill.)

  141. Every nerd's fantasy. by ta0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Imagine, just for a second, how much fun it would be working on this movie.

    I'd throw in my nine bucks just to support such a tremendous labor of love and nerd fantasy made real. Well, real as in movie real. Not real as in "don't cut your fingers off with the lightsaber."

    Forget SETI@Home, how about RenderFanFilms@Home? I'd be in for that. I imagine quite a few of you would, too!

    -Ta0
    Fear my exceedingly low UID, and my exceedingly low post count. Yes, I am the longest-running lurker on Slashdot.

  142. Re:Looks nice but... Oops! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > So "CG" is an adjective, not a noun like CGI is.

    D'oh! Except when it stands for "computer graphics." My bad. :(

  143. Well by StormMoon · · Score: 1

    I feel sorry for whoever is running the site. It's already been shut down.

    --
    Vote Democrat: The ass you save may be your own.
  144. Somebody, somewhere... by istewart · · Score: 1

    Just figured out how to bring back Enterprise for a 5th season.

    Well, it can't possibly suck MORE, can it?!

  145. eMule / eDonkey link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    eMule / eDonkey link

    ed2k://|file|Star%20Wars%20Revelations%20trailer %2 0II.mov|13635737|FF034C13DA9830A5B29881511447159C| h=QOIX3LQF3PDWCQBF3MI4TG5N3JGFZE4B|/

  146. Forgot the directional boom mike... by barfy · · Score: 3, Funny

    They are doing very very well in most of the technical aspects, but they forgot the guy with the directional boom mike. And when you do that, no matter how good the movie it sounds like a porno. And when it sounds like a porno, everyone thinks the actors act like they are in a porno and start bagging on the acting.

    Much of the bad acting are the vocals not being recorded and compressed properly. Hopefully a decent sound guy will step up and help them fix it!

  147. Re: Two and a half films do not make a trilogy. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

    The first three star wars films were 2 and a 1/2 films of a classic trilogy. The rest was crap for kids which continued into episode 1. Ewoks should have been wookies not cute dolls.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  148. yuk! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that don't compare to natalie! that ho ugly!

  149. What about "Hardware Wars?" by SpaceTaxi · · Score: 1

    I remember when this first came out. Histerical.

    http://atomfilms.shockwave.com/af/content/hardware _wars

    May the Farce be with You...

  150. I'll say it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *ahem*
    "zomg. torrent plz"

  151. Shame on us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They SAID they're not making any money off it, and we go and quintuple their bandwidth charges anyway.

    Anyone got a mirror for the trailer?

  152. My pet peeve. by killjoe · · Score: 2, Funny

    In the far distant galaxy mankind has the technology to make virtually anything fly. Whether it be spaceships the size of states or tiny little orbs.

    And yet they continue to make robots of all shapes and sizes that roll on wheels, walk or stumble around trying to get up stairs.

    --
    evil is as evil does
    1. Re:My pet peeve. by mrogers · · Score: 1

      Maybe levitation technology is too expensive to include in ordinary droids. I mean we have limited slip differentials and anti-lock brakes but we don't put them on shopping trolleys.

    2. Re:My pet peeve. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, so a protocol droid is like a shopping cart, but a probe droid is a ferarri. It comes with a blaster too!

    3. Re:My pet peeve. by cerebis · · Score: 2, Funny
      Now you've done it!

      Expect a Slashdot article on a shopping trolley mod soon.

    4. Re:My pet peeve. by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Have you seen the movies? Apparently they are dime a dozen and can be made very small. I think it was in the last one that a guy hung on to while flying all over the city.

      In the mean time the people making a robot army make them with legs and make them roll like wheels.

      Crazy.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  153. Re:Hmm by tibike77 · · Score: 1

    I guess... void ? ;)

    --
    By reading this signature you agree to not disagree with the post you just read.
  154. Re:Hmm by geminidomino · · Score: 1

    TIE Fighter was one of the best SC sims I ever played...I still play it to this day (thus why my windows partition is still Win98 instead of 2K).

  155. Re:Acting? No. Writing... by Simon+Garlick · · Score: 1

    After all these years, the gag still gets a laugh from me!

    You know, if there really was a god, Tem would have had some cool throwaway line as Jango Fett in Ep 2. Maybe a "You're not on Coruscant any more, Jedi" or something like that.

  156. Forget the high tech crap.... give me by ZoomieDood · · Score: 0

    Old fashioned catfights between women!

    That light saber fight looked like they were drying their nails on the heat from each others' lightsabers....

    Gah.

  157. Star Wars Porn by biologicalunit · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Although the special effects are pretty good, I don't think I'd be able to get over the high school acting. They should have taken their rescources and made an adult movie.

  158. Next time.... by stfvon007 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Just shoot me off an e-mail next time you want one of your posts modded down. Ill be glad to help! :)

    --
    All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
  159. Wow by tidewaterblues · · Score: 1

    Never have I seen computer animation so human mixed with human actors so mechanical.

    --


    ...En að Besta Sem Guð Hefur Skapað Er Nýr Dagur
  160. The acting sound better than people say... by aepervius · · Score: 1

    Frankly when people speaks of woodfen-acting, did they even saw SW 4-6 or SW 1-2 ? Also the problem might be that the actor "sound" like if what they told has not be worked over by a sound engineer, which can change a slighty ton, pitch and so on and make up a lot. The trailer at least interrested me.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  161. May The Product of Mass And Acceleration Be ... by antispam_ben · · Score: 1

    Oh, never mind.

    --
    Tag lost or not installed.
    1. Re:May The Product of Mass And Acceleration Be ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      lol great stuff, if i had points atm i'd mod you up

      thx, you made my morning

  162. Actors by earthtoandy · · Score: 1

    Geez... the actors in that trailer almost made me appreciate hayden christensen.... no wait i won't go that far but they were baaaaad

    1. Re:Actors by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      Oh, be fair - it's an amateur production. Acting convincingly is hard, and anybody with training in it is going to be far too busy waiting tables to appear in a fan-film.

  163. phew... by binarybum · · Score: 1

    well, I almost let the description fool me into thinking it was sub-par, but thankfully I viewed the trailer - not I'm not fooled, I'm utterly convinced. We're talking like quadrple boogey sub-par.

    I'm betting that every special effect in the movie is right there in that trailer - watching the film would only mean more dialog by that jut-jawed goth chick. I can only imagine how painful this would be.
    Only one good thing could possibly come of this, and it involves a comic insult dog.

    --
    ôó
    1. Re:phew... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can assure you the movie is 95% CG, and you ain't seen nothing yet.

  164. Re:cool... not hardly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amazing 3D and effects!

    Amazingly bad acting!

    Amazingly bad lighting of the live action!

    Revelations = Trekkies now doing Star Wars

    Good animation and effects + bad story + bad acting = total flop

  165. Hehehe by nate+nice · · Score: 1

    God bless fan films and fat guys with beards!

    --
    "If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer ..."
  166. It's Official by nate+nice · · Score: 1

    Star Wars fans have finally sunken as low as Star Trek fans. It's going to be a battle for the bottom.

    --
    "If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer ..."
  167. What I want to know is... by mauledbydogs · · Score: 1

    Who shot first - the fat guy or goth chick?

  168. Thouldn't that have read.. by Henk+Poley · · Score: 1

    "Reading you should practice, getting it right you will some day." ;)

  169. Revelations... At a glance... by Trackster · · Score: 1
    It sounds a lot like the "Revolutions."

    The Force has you.

  170. panic struck "presemts"? spell check please? by deft · · Score: 1

    I know they put alot of time into it, yadda yadda, but when the poster for the movie says "panic struck presemts star wars revelations"
    I'm a little weary. :)

    If you need a photoshop guy, I'm here for you, and I'll fix your poster :)

    --

    There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
    1. Re:panic struck "presemts"? spell check please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      checking!!

  171. Re:Not sub-par? You already said it wasn't by Luca by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only do the actresses sound annoying they are fugly as well...I can't imagine hearing and seeing them for an hour and a half (or however long it may be).

  172. Piggy Jedi.... Piggggy Jedi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    May the pork be with you...

    sheesh...

    yeek...

    scared.

    and calling it revelations?

    I have festering boils that are more creative than that title.

    die die die fan freaks.

    garrrrr.....

  173. On performing arts by Qbertino · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I studied and trained performing arts, have a diploma in that and I also consider myself somewhat firm at general visual/fine arts.
    The thing hat occured to me about watching and noticing the bad acting , as a lot of people here allready have done, is I thought that I would have done it better. Yet the other part of that is that it also occured to me how extremly difficult it would be to get it just right. For novices aswell as for me.

    I've long considered starting a little independent film project and I think I would be the type of guy to a) not consider a fan project like this 'below' me and b) actually be able to aply my skills in such a way that everybody would profit from it. Like for instance the mentioned bad acting. There are a few extremly simple rules of acting that just sink in with the years that these people could have followed to greatly enhance even that short trailer. Very much like the simple rules you just know when to apply as an experienced programmer.

    Some must-have basics:
    If you want to sound fierce, loud and evil, tone down on the vowels and emphasise the consonants. Do speech training. Do speech training with your lines.
    The moment you know your lines is the moment you START practicing them, you don't stop it there. (That's what differs a school play from professional acting btw)

    When you act, your head and facial expression leads your motion, when you dance your body leads your motion and facial expression. For dancing: On at least one part of your body at a time the musical beat should be visible. (Cue stupid dirty jokes below :-) )

    And finally, my performing arts process I've refined over 10 years of professional work -
    practice an act in this order (and in this order ONLY):

    1) Learn to know the play and learn your lines by heart. Nothing else. Don't dare try to act at this stage. NEVER try to act at this stage. If you do, you WILL suck on stage/film. Trust me. I've studied with to many third class perfomers, the world has enough of them. In fact, you shouldn't even move very much when reciting your lines at this stage.

    2) Give your lines flow and vividness by supporting each one with an inner picture and vision. EACH AND EVERY SINGLE ONE. Give the string of visions a storytelling consistency. It's at this stage perfomers notice wether they've understood the playwrite or wether they have to correct their povs at some place or other. This is the stage at which storyboarders, and directors of photography double check their plans for shooting. Again: don't act yet. Do more of a reciting or storytelling thing. Good RPG Gamemasters enter this stage frequently for instance.

    3) Forget your lines for this stage. Think of that other person whos lines you happen to know by heart and what kind of a character he might be. Pratice stances, poses and gestures emphasising basic emotions with the impitus of that character. Don't do that with the lines. Don't act the play! Do that with differen't things. Lines you make up. Best is to make up a little play by itself. You're on the safe side if you take - for instance - the tragic Anakin Skywalker (well he was a tragic character and the acting wasn't bad at all for such a 5th grade script) and try to play him as if he were a part in a comedy. Don't speak to early. Practice the stances, poses and gestures. Learn the difference between movement leading to pose and pose leading to movement.

    4) Now practive stances, poses, gestures and movement of the play. Use the visions of 2). Don't speak your lines to much. Whisper them or speak them toneless. You want to concentrate on the moving part. You practice that seperately from speaking at first.

    5) Add you lines and and your adversaries in play. Get in sync. If your coplayers are good, you won't even need a director. Do the stuff. The thing. In one word: Act.
    HERE is where the acting kicks in. And once again: Anybody who starts earlier in the process WILL suck in performance. When you

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:On performing arts by IdJit · · Score: 1
      "Pratice stances, poses and gestures emphasising basic emotions with the impitus of that character."

      ...the first thing we learned NOT to do in my college acting class. That technique might've been cool 100 years ago for a silent film, but it's total cornball-community-little-theatre today.

      Oh, and you'll do well to get off the high-horse. Pride goeth before the fall, you know. If you think you can make a better film, let me know when your trailer's online, bub.

  174. you forgot Natalie PORTMAN by JW+Troll · · Score: 0

    and hot grits. How could you??

    --
    just like the humble blood clot... turboporsche@telus.net
  175. Acting by ThJ · · Score: 1

    The acting in the trailer was on par with *shrudder* a Xena episode. The CG was good but the live action sucked. This was most definitely not recorded on film. It looks like a TV news report.

    1. Re:Acting by joper90 · · Score: 1

      yea, that chunky bird thinks shes cool..

    2. Re:Acting by rblancarte · · Score: 1

      Which one?

      Geeks + Star Wars + video camera + CGI != good thing
      (not always true, but for the most part...)

      RonB

      --
      It is human nature to take shortcuts in thinking.
  176. What about "episode iv" ? by tibike77 · · Score: 1

    I really have to wonder how come Lucas started his first movie (i.e. "A New Hope") with the specific subtitle of "Episode IV".
    Did he actually plan on making the "prequels" later on, or was it simply that "incomplete" feel that made (ultimately) the OT so fun to watch ?

    So, about the "sense of grandeur" - couldn't agree more, with regards to the OT. I couldn't say that the prequels lacked a "grand design", but I could say that it was too "forced".
    I don't know why... lazyness to come up with not-so-straightforward developements, need to "cram in" as much possible, desire to explain everything that wasn't explained in the OT (when I say "midichloreans", I guess many *will* cringe and cover their ears going "la-la-la-la").
    You know, some things SHOULD remain unexplained, or at least not so "thoroughly" explained.

    The secondary characters... again a jackpot. I think you can see a clear pattern of "in-depth" to "comic relief" secondary characters emerging from the "episodes 4,5,6,1,2" timeline. I truly hope we see no references to either Jar-Jar nor ewoks in "episode 3". Please.
    While under a "Republic", one would expect numerous (and pretty powerfull) interest groups to develop and manifest themselves. True, there was almost no political backdrop (except the rebels and isolated passive resistance pockets) in the OT... but at least you weren't spoon-fed a snapshot of a pseudo-political war between "used puppets".

    Also, for an "evil genius" that Sidious/Palpatine is supposed to be, I guess he could have worked out a better plan than "create sympathy for me by placing homeworld under wrongfull siege so I can then use some obedient army I just created to destroy the obedient armies of my probably not so obedient puppets so I can rule the galaxy, while trying to corrupt a young but powerful twerp I just met mid-plan by sacrificing some of my more experienced underlings" scenario.
    What I mean, the OT was (even if sometimes only barely) PLAUSIBLE. The prequels just take a "stop point" in Ep.4, add into the story some "milestones" set there by years of respectable books and maybe not so respectable fanfics, pour in some "forced enlightenment" and expect us to buy it.
    Err... sorry, when faced with a "continuity with all SW universe but hair-pulled events" vs. "some very well tied things in slight contradiction with the non-movie OT universe", I'd rather pick the latter.

    But I guess I'm part of a minority when it comes to "paying customers", so nobody'll listen to me... right?

    --
    By reading this signature you agree to not disagree with the post you just read.
    1. Re:What about "episode iv" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I really have to wonder how come Lucas started his first movie (i.e. "A New Hope") with the specific subtitle of "Episode IV"."
      As someone who saw the first run of Star Wars, I can tell you - he bloody well didn't. "Episode IV : A New Hope" was not in the opening crawl the first time I saw the film.

      IIRC, the "Episode IV" caption appeared in the second cinematic release. The extras on the DVD include something about this.

    2. Re:What about "episode iv" ? by banzai51 · · Score: 1

      According to Lucas and all the press I read in the 70s, is that Lucas wrote an outline of a really long story about a guy who falls then is redeamed, then his legacy is pushed forwad by his son. Lucas realized the story was way to long to film, so chose the best 'chapter' to take to the film studio. That was episode 4. So he started in the middle hoping the whole thing would catch on.

    3. Re:What about "episode iv" ? by pianophile · · Score: 1

      I really have to wonder how come Lucas started his first movie (i.e. "A New Hope") with the specific subtitle of "Episode IV".

      He didn't. "Episode IV" was added to the crawl later.

      --

      'Your brain is God.' -- Dr. Timothy Leary
  177. No, you're confused by mosb1000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you feel that the characters in the prequels have anything behind the actor? No, there is nothing, even the parts of these movies which are "real" lack soul.

    On the other hand, if you watch Finding Nemo, everything feels real, even though it's just CG fish in a CG ocean. What's the difference? Writing, story, acting, perhaps.

    The idea that the problem is CG is just absurd. People said the same thing about color movies when they were first released. The problem isn't that you loose something when you use CG for effects, the problem is that you don't gain anything. You can't expect a movie to be good just because it has good special effects.

    Go and watch the original movies, the special effects weren't anymore believable. The might have looked more real, but all that means is that Yoda looked like a real puppet, and Jabba the Hut looked like a real bunch of plastic with real people inside. They weren't any more convincing in the roles they were supposed to play. And don't even talk about space scenes, there's no way the space scenes look more realistic in the original movies. The only difference is that they couldn't do as much because of the limitations of using "real" models instead of CG models.

  178. The Force is strong with this one by Rune+Berge · · Score: 1

    It's been on slashdot for several hours, yet still I'm able to download the trailer at 150KB/s!

  179. Derivative works by martyn+s · · Score: 1

    I think there it is a crime against humanity that people are not free to make their own Star Wars movie (or any other derivative work based on any other mythology). I'm not going near the copyright issue really: if you produce you a unique film perhaps you should have the right to profit off of it for a period of time. But you shouldn't have the right to own characters or universes and anyone should be able to make their own unique film (book, etc.) similar to it.

    1. Re:Derivative works by cherokee158 · · Score: 1

      I agree. Unfortunately, Star Wars has not really reached the level of mythology yet, or even public domain. And, thanks to persistent lobbying by Hollywood suits, who keep pushing the for longer lived copyright laws (which already exceed the life of the artist PLUS 75 years), it will not do so for a long time.

      In general, however, copyright law is less of a deterrent to derivative works than trademark law, which is very restrictive. However, trademark protection only lasts as long as company's can afford to enforce it, and expires rapidly (ten years) if not renewed. Unfortunately, mega corporations like the film studios have become can afford to keep protecting their franchises forever.

      Funny how often laws designed to "protect us" always seem to end up imprisoning us.

  180. Texas Ranger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    haha this must be a joke... ive seen better choreography in a WALKER, TEXAS RANGER episode! :)

  181. Re:Acting? No. Writing... by ivano · · Score: 1
    to be honest all of the Star Wars movies had very bad acting. But if you look closely (actually hear) you can see/hear how bad the voice syncing is (actually it's not that bad, visually). But due to every voice being dubbed the acting just gets thrown out the window. So you can have great actors like Ewen McGregor or Harrison Ford in it but it's ruined by the voice dubbing that no great actor and acting can hide.

    And to be blunt I don't think George Lucas knows how to direct actors. Sorry but just a cursory glance at Jake Lloyd's performances screams out "RETAKE!"

    Ciao

  182. Not sure what the big deal is... by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

    Is it that this is a non Lucas Star Wars movie or that someone else will release a Star Wars film that they will continue to revise, edit, and tweak over time always moving closer to their "original vision"?

  183. soapy by molywi · · Score: 1

    It looks like daytime tv soap opera with a futuristic touch.........

  184. Miscast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Is that portly Jedi in the field contemplating his next snack?

    Ambition and effort, A+

    Dialog recording, audio, D

    Effects, B

    Casting, D

    Dancing, D

    A low point:

    (Nasal-whine) "Do you have it?"

    But I'm sure the ones behind this are quoting their own creation:

    "I really don't care what you want!"

  185. OT vs. NT - why the anger? by hkmwbz · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You are comparing apples and oranges here. The OT is a grand space soap Opera, whereas the NT is specifically created to show you how Darth Vader came to be. OT is about good vs. evil in the universe, NT is about Anakin's path from good to evil. Two completely different levels.

    I quite enjoyed episode 1 and 2. I always kept Darth Vader in the back of my mind, and I could gradually see Anakin change - I could understand how he might end up on the dark side of the Force. And the NT constantly foreshadows what inevitably will happen in episode 3.

    I think you are too caught up in the fact that the NT is not made the same way the OT is. It's not supposed to! The NT is telling a completely different story on a completely different level.

    There was a discussion about Star Wars the other day, and amidst all the +5 insightful "SW used to rock, but now it sucks" comments, I found this gem, where the poster explains how things fit together, and why it's done this way. It makes a lot of sense!

    The OT could be watched separately, but the NT is a real trilogy, where you won't get the whole picture, or indeed appreciate it all, until you actually see all the movies.

    Presumably :)

    --
    Clever signature text goes here.
    1. Re:OT vs. NT - why the anger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Offtopic versus Windows NT? WTF are you talking about?

    2. Re:OT vs. NT - why the anger? by EvilAlien · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how that is supposed to make the awful dialog ("yousa people gonna die?"), computer-animated toy commericials passed off as new characters, and flat portrayals in the new trilogy somehow not what they were. Whether or not Lucas managed to convey aspects of Anakin's decent into evil does not alter the other facts of the films.

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
    3. Re:OT vs. NT - why the anger? by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      I agree. Bad acting aside (am I the only one that thinks it's truly hard to spout off the things like:

      Mace Windu: You refer to the prophecy of The One, who will bring balance to the Force. You believe it's this boy?

      As an actor, I think you may have difficulty saying lines such as these with a straight face. It's not that the script was entirely bad, it's just, not normal....it's not anything like the dialog in other movies they had done.

      While I agree that the midichlorian thing should have been left for things likt the RPG you can play with pencil/paper/books and a few friends, the rest of the movie wasn't that bad. I think why we think Ep. IV thru VI were so good is we are looking at it as great memories of our childhood.....after seeing the movies as a 5-10 year old, who didn't want to get a X-Wing toy and action figure? Now it's our kid's turn. My son LOVES watching ANY of the Star Wars movies with me just like I watched them with my parents when I was 6. He's asked for Star Wars toys as have my nephews. I personally think it's great and while I will have to carefully watch my son's reactions when Anakin turns complete to the Dark Side, I can't wait to see it. It will make the first two complete. We had to see how good Anakin was to finally see how Luke was able to get him to make that choice in the end.

      --

      Gorkman

    4. Re:OT vs. NT - why the anger? by drsquare · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not about the story, it's about the films as a whole. I'm not a star wars fan, I don't give a damn about Anakin's path to evil or any of the backstory about republics and empires. You're a star wars fan, you're more interested in finding out the backstory than the actual films. Other people are actually interested in watching decent films, I think that's where the disagreements come from.

      It's as if the new three films are there just to tell star wars fans what 'happened' before the originals, rather than to actually make something you're going to want to watch. Perhaps Lucas should have instead made a 'documentary' about the history of star wars, it would have saved a lot of disappointment.

      There was a discussion about Star Wars the other day, and amidst all the +5 insightful "SW used to rock, but now it sucks" comments, I found this gem, where the poster explains how things fit together, and why it's done this way. It makes a lot of sense!

      I'm afraid that post does nothing to explain why it was decided to have a lame script with awful dialogue, bad acting, a dull score and excessive low-quality CGI, not to mention no tension or excitement.

    5. Re:OT vs. NT - why the anger? by greylouser · · Score: 1
      The NT is about the transition from good to evil, but to me it doesn't feel as well-executed as it could have been.

      For comparison, take the Lex Luthor character from the TV show Smallville. (I know, but we were never exactly talking about the great works of literature in the first place.) Here's a character in much the same situation as Anakin: we know he's going to turn into slimey evil at some point in the future, but right now he's supposed to be kind of a good guy. With Lex, I can see both sides - he's a pretty stand-up guy now, but I can believe that he'll turn (really) evil in the future. With Anakin, it's harder for me to see - he's kind of a good guy now, but mostly he just whines. So I could see Anakin turning into a "whiney drug junkie" kind of evil, but not so much the "galactic conqueror" kind of evil. My tendency is to not so much blame the actor as the writing, but I don't really know anything about either one, so I should probably just leave it alone. :-)

    6. Re:OT vs. NT - why the anger? by hkmwbz · · Score: 1
      I'm not really a huge Star Wars fanatic. I do like the movies, and I find it to be an intriguing universe. However, I haven't even watched any of them at the cinema.

      But maybe you are right. Maybe the movies take a bit more than just casual viewing to appreciate. Maybe you need to know about the OT (Original Trilogy), and all that. But so what? Some movies simply require you to look beneath the surface to really appreciate them. Those are the movies that force you to think if you want to get the most from them. Star Wars is a huge universe, and there's so much depth if you first start looking more closely at things. Maybe you wouldn't think that there's any depth to the movies just by watching them and not knowing anything about what's going on, but that's your loss. I know that the Star Wars universe has incredible depth, and there are so many aspects to discover.

      On the surface, maybe Star Wars is crap. But I don't just scratch the surface, because I already know the Star Wars universe, and I appreciate what it seems that the new trilogy is trying to do. I think it's exciting to see Anakin before he turned into Darth Vader.

      Kids and people who want to dive in and go below the surface may actually like the NT. Kids because it's fun, fans because it fills in quite a few holes in the OT. It explains a lot of things.

      So why do these movies get huge audiences? Maybe because the OT did indeed intrigue many people, and they want to know what happened. They want to know more. You don't? That's fine by me, but I'll watch episode 3 with the same attitude I've had so far: They are movies that fit into a whole, and to fully appreciate them, you might want to keep that in mind.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    7. Re:OT vs. NT - why the anger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite simply, the screenplay for Ep5 was outstanding. The screenplay for Ep6 was ok, the screenplay for Ep4 was simplistic but kinetic, and the screenplays for 1 and 2 were terrible.

      A great screenplay makes for a great movie. Even bad directing and bad acting can't ruin a good, fresh screenplay (see every Kevin Smith movie ever made - bad acting, horrible directing, but the screenplays are fun). But it's very rare that skilled acting/directing/CG can drag a shoddy screenplay up to the mediocre level.

      Ep1 and 2 are/were poorly written, it's that simple. It has nothing to do with the POINT of the stories, the bottom line is that the writing is amateurish and uncompelling.

    8. Re:OT vs. NT - why the anger? by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      Actually, I still disagree with you. Screenplay poorly written? Pure opinion.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
  186. Re:A couple simple rules. by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

    What does "anal retentive" actually mean?

    --
    That was classic intercourse!
  187. Re:cool... not hardly by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Good animation and effects + bad story + bad acting = total flop"

    Are you sure that's right? Lucas himself has been using precisely this formula for deacades with amazing success, and he's not the only one either.

    --
    That was classic intercourse!
  188. Re:Hmm by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

    I think it was E E 'Doc' Smith's "Lord Tedric and the Balck Knight oif the Iron Sphere".

    And that was shit too.

    --
    That was classic intercourse!
  189. Re:Not sub-par? You already said it wasn't by Luca by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A-fuckin-men, brother, a-fuckin-men!

  190. Gimme a Break by adnvvfr · · Score: 1

    May the Acting Class be with you ...
    I understand CGI are important, but who will give $9 to John "Jedi Wanabe" Doe?

  191. What Happened to Lucas? by pjdoland · · Score: 1

    I picked up the director's cut of THX 1138 a few weeks ago. I hadn't seen the film in a number of years and I was blown away.

    It's actually quite remarkable how well it has aged. While other "dystopian-vision" sci-fi films from the 1970s look dated to the point of being almost laughable now (Logan's Run, A Clockwork Orange, Soylent Green), THX 1138 looks as if it could have been made yesterday.

    Robert Duvall's performance was understated and brilliant. Walter Murch's sound design was hypnotic and unyielding. The screenplay didn't get in the way by awkwardly offering too much exposition (as is often the case in sci-fi films). And every shot was framed with obvious deliberation.

    I'm going to make a few enemies here, but the experience left me wondering how such a talented filmmaker managed to produce Star Wars, an abomination of poor-acting and screenwriting rescued only through its sheer campiness.

    And why do you people fixate on it?

    --
    -- "The reward of suffering is experience." - Aeschylus
  192. Two words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keanu. Reeves.

    (Actually I think the fat-I-really-don't-care-what-you-want-guy delivers his lines pretty decently. Those two "chick"s, however, looks like they come from the "Power Rangers School Of Acting".)

  193. Another mirror by pdxaaron · · Score: 1

    If you need another mirror, you can try my site.

  194. Great... by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1

    A bunch of goth chicks make a star wars movie. At least it proves that George Lucas isn't the only one who hires actors that cannot act. Of course, for an amateur production, they did an amazing job.

  195. I have a bad feeling about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the very first page of their site reads "Emperor Palpatine declares marshall law on Corsucant" you know you're in trouble already.

  196. Not in this trailer by CBDSteve · · Score: 1

    I just downloaded the trailer - boy, the effects look good!

    Pity the acting SUCKS ASS. Those nomarks couldn't act their way out of a paper bag.

    And yes, IAAA.

  197. Re:A couple simple rules. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    5) Before trying to use words like "juxtaposition" be sure you're at least smart enough to spell words like "reference" properly.

    ass

  198. 60 min interview with George Lucas by Danathar · · Score: 1

    60 min had an interview with George Lucas last weekend. Leslie Stahl asked him about critics and his response was to compare it to an analogy about painting houses. Paraphrased he basically said "Just because somebody else wants your house green when you paint it white does not mean you should paint it green. Now in fact..maybe it SHOULD be green. But Green is not what I wanted, I wanted white so I painted it white"

    I also agree with the reporter who pointed out the fact that he financed all three films with his own money. His money = his film. He can do whatever he wants.

  199. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  200. If copyright were still as the founding fathers by gov_coder · · Score: 1

    intended - Star Wars would be public domain this year (1977 + 14, plus another 14 assuming renewal).

    Instead Star Wars is slated to be public domain in the year 2071 (I read last night that copyright is 94 years).

    Sometimes we focus so much on the bad of patents that we can tend to forget the loss to our culture that now stems from insane copyright law.

    The numbers come from my reading of Larry Lessig's book (which you get for free, btw, when you become an associate member of the FSF). Imagine how many wonderful movies could be made if things were as they were originally inteded!

    --
    Rob Enderle's excellent new book: Everything I needed to know about Computer Science I learned in Marketing School
  201. ...but it looks like a geek-produced film by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It reminds me of another fan project I ran across a while back. Lots of work done on the set, effects, everything technical looks great...but the acting and script are...well, kinda painful, to be blunt. Someone else mentioned lighting and makeup as being a bit weak; I imagine some sound work would go a fair ways too.

    Yeah, I know Exeter and Revelations are done by amateur volunteers, and from that perspective they're both impressive. But I'm still somewhat struck by the apparant imbalance of effort in both cases. Really, they're both cool projects and hope they continue their work, I just hope they focus on the weak bits and keep improving.

    -U
    Only anon 'cause I never made an account.

  202. Acting... by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 1

    The special effects are nice, but, lets face it, the acting makes the acting from the other movies look good.

    --
    I do security
  203. Here's a Revelation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sucks.

  204. Lots of SW III clips on 60 Minutes by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Leslie Stall interviewed George Lucas last Sunday. They must have shown about ten ten-second clips from episode three. Among there were wookies, the climatic battle scene on the volcanic planet, whoi the Sith leader really was (as we didn't now), Hayden Christian turning haggard and zombie-like, the new & improved digital yoda, and son on.

    Other tidbits include ILM impeding move to S.F. Presido (too bad Star Fleet HQ), Lucas's three children as teenagers, and news about SW VII.

  205. WTF?? by beldraen · · Score: 1
    He (his office) has to approve the story and make sure it doesn't conflict with someone else's work.

    Have you even played Star Wars: Galaxies?? The latest expansion pack is going to include the wookiee planet, and everyone and all wookie buildings are on the ground!

    Lucas, et all, are completely unconcerned about about cannon. Lucas just wants to have final say on his play in his toy room.

    --
    Bel, the mostly sane.. "Of course I can't see anything! I'm standing on the shoulders of idiots." -- Me
    1. Re:WTF?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "canon."

  206. I like it. by citizenklaw · · Score: 0

    And I'll bet it will kick Episodes I, II and possibly III if GL does not do something.

    --
    the future is but past forgotten
  207. Mod this guy over-rated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Between the pompous didactic lecturing and the look-how-smart-I-am-asshole sig, this guy's a loser. One part of your body should show the beat at all times? Let me call up my local ballet ensemble and show them how they've been fucking up. "Your music has no beat, people! The internet says you're wrong!"

    In accordance with your sig: "Don't speak to early." is wrong; you may or may not be missing an o. In my original mode: lemme see your pastiche, buddy; you sound like every high school drama teacher I've ever met. The last thing anyone needs is your advice -- and I use the term advice loosely, because this seems to be a prepared speech that you just paste from clip at every opportunity.

    Ignore this retard, folks. He's just another one of those who can't.

  208. Alternative Source by CosmicDreams · · Score: 1

    Their site said that the trailer was on theforce.net so I hunted down the link. Here it is:

    http://www.theforce.net/fanfilms/comingsoon/reve la tions/index.asp

    --
    Go Gusties
  209. Proof positive by LookSharp · · Score: 1

    All the CGI talent in the world... all the carefully choreographed sabre battles... the bad-assness of a 2-chick 1-dude 3-way (sabre fight, you perv)... the originality of the idea...

    It all goes for not if your dialogue and acting isn't even up to Lucas-standard.

    Nobody's expecting Patrick Stewart doing Shakespeare quality here, folks; but seriously-- geeks are not generally the best actors, and it really shows. And the dialgoue sounds like it was ripped off from writers who were creating a Desperate Housewives knockoff.

  210. Eureka! by TempusMagus · · Score: 1

    Now I know what people do between Dragoncons! Note to self: Don't cast girlfriend in movie.

    --
    -_-
  211. Faster - with more feeling! by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    whether Lucas has any talent at getting performances out of actors

    According to interviews with actors Lucas's directing style consists solely of saying, "Let's do it again - this time faster - and with more feeling," supposedly to the point where they want to jab pencils in their heads after hearing it for the 2000th time.

    I thought Lucas did a great job of porting Jungian/Campbellian archetypes to SciFi and pulling together a terrific SFX operation. It's just that directing and screenwriting aren't his best strengths and his works really shines when he effectively delegates.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  212. Cast Away - film mastery of background CGI by Simonetta · · Score: 1

    Compare the last Star Wars with Cast Away for CGI mastery. All the scenes on the deserted island were filmed in Southern California and all the visual artifacts of civilization were removed post-production.
    I saw the last Star Wars in a bar-theater and the whole audience was stunned at the banality of the story. The CGI was impressive, especially after watching lots of rubber-mask SciFi on television (Star Trek Voyager).
    But the story sucked. The first twenty minutes of the film was a flying car chase lifted directly from The Fifth Element that had been released five years earlier. There was another scene later where the young princess falls off a land cruiser going about 100 MPH. She just jumps up and starts chasing after it. The whole audience howled! The film was bad and only seemed reasonable when compared to its "competition" like that excreteable Planet of the Apes remake.
    Methinks Mr. Lucas has simply run out of ideas and is getting deeply tired in his soul about having to be remembered in film history by this over-blown series of light pop space fantasy.
    Star Wars was just supposed to be a step for Mr. Lucas. A project that provided finance and credibility for other projects that let him become the next Kurosawa. Instead it's become an albatross around his neck, an anchor that prevents him from doing mature work.

  213. YOU CAN! by dark-br · · Score: 1


    Gosh! You can! I have the Especial Edition LD rips encoded to DVD. That was the OT as it was supposed to be seen, in great quality and without any CG crap artificialy inserted in.

    I got it from ed2k... cant find the right links now but search for it, shouldn't be a big of a problem. The biggest problem here is being sued by the RIAA ;)

  214. You nailed it with "soulless" by Deagol · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I always bring this up on the CG threads, and I'll do so again.

    Take the asteroid sequence in ESB -- fabulous! You get a sense of real depth and motion, to the point of tipping back and forth in your seat and feeling your stomach drop at times, like watching those roller coaster films on an IMAX screen. That was all done with models and real cameras.

    Take the asteroid/ring belt scene in Clones. Visually, it's a nice piece of eye candy, to be sure. But I was immediately struck by how flat and/or soulless it felt as compared to the ESB scene. There was no spacial impact, if you get my meaning.

    I don't know if it's a fundamental flaw in CG vs real models and cameras, but until it's solved, I really think models are better in some cases.

    However, the creature CG effects can be done pretty well. I think the CG Yoda in Clones was 95% there. I'm really hoping the latest movie will have it nailed.

    1. Re:You nailed it with "soulless" by Dimitri-san · · Score: 1
      Take the asteroid/ring belt scene in Clones. Visually, it's a nice piece of eye candy, to be sure. But I was immediately struck by how flat and/or soulless it felt as compared to the ESB scene. There was no spacial impact, if you get my meaning.

      The problem with the Clones ring belt scense was a sense of "been there, done that." If you've seen ESB, this is nothing new or exciting.

      Also, you knew that neither of the participants was going to slam into an asteriod and die. Even if you had never seen a spoiler in your life, you still knew it deep down. At least ESB had TIE fighters crashing and Star Destroyers getting parts knocked off. Plus, the heroes could have been captured (which was the point after all), whereas the Clone chase was a kill-or-be-killed with two main characters.

      It had nothing to do with the CGI, just with the stakes as presented in the sequence.

  215. my analysis: by robertceng · · Score: 1

    lets see: 1. unattractive females 2. horrible dialogue (from what i can tell in the trailer) 3. overall lackluster special effects 1 + 2 + 3 = 0 = this movie is crap, period... George Lucas began to stray from the path with ep.6 (Jedi) in my opinion. The first two movies have a Tim Burtonesque look and feel, dark and foreboding with characters that you loved and characters that were intimidating; these first two films had a much more mature/realistic flavor. Starting with Jedi, Lucas seems to be custom-cutting his script/characters to kids, and takes away from the overall believability of the film and its impact on an adult audience. To be quite honest, watching ANY film (by Lucas or not) after Empire is like a kick in the nuts.

  216. Star Wars Kid by VGh0st · · Score: 1

    Will he be on that?

    1. Re:Star Wars Kid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      indeed...he's actually the secret power of the universe that is the plot device

  217. Jar Jar is in SW III by peter303 · · Score: 1

    He is listed in the film credits now at the official lucas website.

  218. Re:"May the Force be with you!" was never said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, it was. Several times, actually. Do you require proof, or will you take a geek's word for it?

  219. Where is the torrent feed? by Offwhite98 · · Score: 1

    They should at least have a text page with a torrent link available so they do not overload the server.

    --
    Brennan Stehling - http://brennan.offwhite.net/blog/
  220. Unfortunately the force is not with them... by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

    We are experiencing the Slashdot effect ie 95GB of traffic an hour for the last 9 hours.

    We will be back as soon as possible. Please visit www.Slashdot.org and tell them to put up mirrors when they post stories so they do not take down websites.

    You can find a mirror here at http://www.mirrordot.org/ who help to reduce the Slashdot effect by mirroring stories. (Thanks for the tip Jonathan)

    Thank You,

    The webhost of Panicstruckpro.com

  221. Great, now aliens are critics! by Moekandu · · Score: 1
    I've seen cable access shows with better acting.

    Really. So... what's the weather like your planet?

    For a fan production I'd officially say "not bad."

    Not bad. Just not bad. Wow, I would really like to see some of the stuff that amateurs and fans are churning out on the planet you live on! This project, "for a fan production", is down right phenomenal. Trust me, I've seen Caribou Moving Pictures' Planet of the Killer Robots.

    Yes, the lighting could have been better (and how much of it was the conversion? You can have problems just going from miniDV to VHS). And yes, the audio needs work. And yes, the woman in the red dress is an unconvincing actress. It happens. The trick is not to make the same mistakes again. For every local independent production I'm involved with (whether I'm directing or just crew), I learn more about what works and what doesn't. I know a hell of a lot more about filmmaking now than when I started. And I'm learning more each day.

    As a fellow indie filmmaker, I think that everyone at Panic Struck Productions should be damn proud of what they have accomplished.

    --
    Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself; but talent instantly recognizes genius. -- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
  222. Re:Cast Away - film mastery of background CGI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More mature work like Howard the Duck...

  223. Why looks matter by BlightThePower · · Score: 1

    Its not Eastenders, its not even supposed to even nod at being realistic. Star Wars is ersatz mythology. Its incongruous within that for the characters not to be handsome/beautiful or where ugly, hideously so. These are average joes on the whole. I know it sounds harsh (and frankly I'm not exactly a candidate for the next James Bond role myself) but it goes with the territory.

    --
    Plays violent online games as: Nerfherder76
  224. Another Big SW Fan Film by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Star Wars: The Evil Within
    http://www.theevilwithin.com/

    A fan film shot in the Great White North. Winnipeg, specifically. It premiers soon, with proceeds donated to the local humane society.

  225. Well the other 2 covered it pretty well, but by bryan1945 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Dear God man- are you a prancing fairy or what?! I've acted, stage managed, and directed from high school to regional theatre and you just sound like a prat from Juliard who has about zip talent and all the "theory".

    Mentioning that you are trying to win an award is about as bad as it get (your international multimedia award). Until you get it, do not speak about it, because I am working on an Emmy, even though I am not attractive, can't act well, but I took an acting class! And hell almighty- you think yogup.com is the "cream of the crop"? It's freakin' the sim "Life" with penis looking animations.

    I just checked your comments to stories, and I see that you were a teacher. I guess that explains most of your leanings.

    I'm sure you are a nice guy and all, but you do come off as very pretentious.

    Cheers!

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  226. SFX great but... Lightsabres? Nerf-sabres? WTF? by -Harlequin- · · Score: 1

    Compared to the care that went into the rest of the FX scenes, why would they screw up the lightsabres like that? The time consuming part of those FX is in the rotoscoping, not the design and rendering of the blades, yet they've rendered the blades as a crisp-edged 2" fat white cylinder + glow effect, which looks nothing like a lightsabre blade, and a lot like a glowing foam bat. I wasn't even looking at the blades the first time I watched the trailer (looking at the actors) and white-foam-baseball-bat design bizzareness of the blades still made me go "WTF?"

    Judging by the rest, it can't possibly be a lack of technical ability. I'm wondering if their prop master made the blades too thick (perhaps due to an SCA background) and the SFX people were forced to use a big white cylinder to cover up the fat prop blades.

    Hats off to the production. I have criticisms, but they all fall into the category of being very justifiable for this kind of production. Those nerf-sabres, however, seem to be an unnecessary screwup.

  227. If Freedo was a bounty hunter... by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1
    "Freedo is a bounty hunter, you idiot! "

    If Freedo was a bounter hunter, then why didn't he turn Aragorn over to the orcs?

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:If Freedo was a bounty hunter... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Freedo is a bounty hunter, you idiot!
      >
      > If Freedo was a bounter hunter, then why didn't he turn Aragorn over to the orcs?

      "I know it was you, Frodo. You broke my heart. You broke my heart!" :-D

    2. Re:If Freedo was a bounty hunter... by strabo · · Score: 1

      I'm just glad he won't shoot at Han Bilbo until the re-release...

    3. Re:If Freedo was a bounty hunter... by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1
      ""I know it was you, Frodo. You broke my heart. You broke my heart!" :-D"

      Do I have to buy the special boxed edition of "The Ringfather II" to see this?

      --
      Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  228. you fail it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    reading should you practice; get it right someday, you will.

  229. I see things coming together... by jswalter9 · · Score: 1

    It can't be far off that the actors get replaced by finely tuned CG characters. Then directing will be a lot easier for geeks like us.

    So if good acting and direction is all this film lacks, WE'RE SO CLOSE TO SAYING GOODBYE TO THE FILM STUDIOS!

    --
    Retired from software... maybe. Sort of.
  230. Actually... by neonmagic · · Score: 1

    I prefer Ep1 to Ep2, even though Ep2 has some really kickass action in it, and the CGI is pretty good as well. There's a lot of people bitching about CGI - it was pretty good. I think a lot of people got turned off by the CGI cos of Jar Jar. I actually enjoyed Jar Jar and his slapstick humour. That's all it was intended to be, it's a shame that those adults that saw the OT as children have grown up and fail to see that. But then, maybe there's still some child in myself, and maybe that's why I see Jar Jar like I do. Now - the musical score for the NT has been fine. Nothing super gripping, but it's been fine - I feel that it's successfully conveyed the emotions of the characters at the appropriate times. The actors - they are fine actors. Even the synopsis story is fine. The sets and costumes have been fine imho. So - what has let the NT down? I firmly believe it's several things. 1. screenplay/dialogue. The dialogue has been awful Truly. Lucas' forte is not in writing. He can do a rough synopsis with a original idea pretty damn good, but when it comes to fleshing it out, he's not the man. He really should have deferred to a professional screenwriter. Honestly. The quality of a screenplay really limits how the actors can determine their characters, and that, in turn, makes them less believable. There's a reason why TESB was the best movie of the original trilogy, and that's cos Leigh Brackett wrote the script. She did a damn well fine job. Brilliant. I don't think too many Star Wars fans will disagree with me here. 2. Direction. Sorry, but Lucas is a 2nd rate director. That said, he's a better director than he is a writer :-) A directors job is to create the vision, transfer the actors, the script writer, the music, the sfx into a film. He directs the composer, the sfx guys, the film editors, the sound recordists, the sound editors, the set design to an extent, the mood of the film. Sadly, EP 1 and EP 2 lack mood. Characterisation. There are brief periods where you see it. Padmes impassioned speech to the senate in EP 1. Qui Gons quite reflection about Anakin on Tatooine when he realises who he is. Anakin when he impatiently rushes to take on Count Dooku, rather than take him on 2 on 1 with Obi Wans help. Mace Windu in Ep 2 - who can forget who kickass he is when he's pissed off! The seething menace in Palpatines voice in the trailer for EP 3 when he says "are you threatening me?". The menace is simply dripping, and his face. You can see the hatred. Obi Wan in the trailer for Ep 3 when he says "you were the chosen one" - the anguish, the pain. It's in his voice. The emotion. Even the look on his face, says it all. Ep 1 & Ep 2 could have been better - by simply a better script and better directing. But - they weren't bad films. People like to bash things i'm afraid. It's fashionable these days. Sad, very sad. Dave

    --
    Slashdot can go and get fucked.
  231. Some thoughts by virg_mattes · · Score: 1

    > So, about the "sense of grandeur" - couldn't agree more, with regards to the OT. I couldn't say that the prequels lacked a "grand design", but I could say that it was too "forced". I don't know why... lazyness to come up with not-so-straightforward developements, need to "cram in" as much possible, desire to explain everything that wasn't explained in the OT (when I say "midichloreans", I guess many *will* cringe and cover their ears going "la-la-la-la"). You know, some things SHOULD remain unexplained, or at least not so "thoroughly" explained.

    While I don't harbor any feeling that he's likely to do this, I thought that the idea of midichloreans was a good one, in the idea of the intelligencia "overexplaining" the world. In the Middle Ages, the concept that the world was built of four elements was done to death, and grandiose and very "intelligent" explanations were derived for observation that fit this concept, but turned out entirely wrong when the underlying premise fell to pieces. For example, scientists thought that drilling a cannon released the fire element from the metal, and this is why it heated up. It was perfectly sensible for the premise, and completely wrong. In the same way, I always wanted midichloreans to be exposed as the "right answer given the wrong premise" in episode three, wherein Obi-Wan discovers that the vast knowledge of the Jedi had been based on some mistaken assumptions, driving him "back to the drawing board" and off to Tatooine to reflect and learn again.

    It'd be a great subplot, but I'm not betting the moisture farm on it.

    > Also, for an "evil genius" that Sidious/Palpatine is supposed to be, I guess he could have worked out a better plan than "create sympathy for me by placing homeworld under wrongfull siege so I can then use some obedient army I just created to destroy the obedient armies of my probably not so obedient puppets so I can rule the galaxy, while trying to corrupt a young but powerful twerp I just met mid-plan by sacrificing some of my more experienced underlings" scenario.

    Not fair. Even if the premise is so strongly based on Hitler's rise that I had trouble with some of the actors not speaking German, Palpatine's plan was more than what you describe. The idea behind it was that he wanted to be chancellor of the Senate. To that end, he engineered a blockade of Naboo, the queen of which was the current chancellor's strongest supporter. She went to the Senate (and to him) for help that he was unable to provide, due to Palpatine's machinations with the trade guilds. By getting her to turn against him and call for a vote of no confidence, he was able to drive out the sitting chancellor at a time when he was a literal shoo-in for the seat. The fall of Darth Maul was unintended, and the discovery of Anakin Skywalker was marked by both Palpatine and by Qui-Gon Jinn, because the force was so strong with him that both sides took notice and began courting him.

    Episode two finds this plan well underway, with the discovery that the Senate and chancellor have commissioned a clone army "for the defense of the Republic" against forces that can see Palpatine's power grab. Count Dooku and his cohorts are made out to be rebels, and even though they're the bad guys they realize that Palpatine's consolidation of power is a bad thing. In return, he uses the clone army (notice how much like the stormtroopers we know and love they are) to beat down the insurgents. Meanwhile, he passes resolutions that give him ever more power to do stuff without seeking Senate approval, and uses the insurgents as his reason.

    Virg

  232. Setting the Story by virg_mattes · · Score: 1

    > I think that's where the Lord of the rings films fell down: there was no universe like in the books, they only ever went to the places that had something important to do with the script. There were no farmlands, no houses and villages, hardly any roads, it was as if the entire middle-earth consisted of a bunch of fortresses connected by plains.

    By the time of the Second Ring War, that's really all there was left. The fall of the nation of men (Numenor) had left behind a bunch of disjointed and bickering factions (of which Rohan and Gondor were the most pivotal in the war, but which included places like Angmar which simply didn't figure strongly in the war due to geography). The whole reason for the rise of Sauron's power was the fracturing of the nation of men when Isildur was corrupted by the Ring, and the resultant abandoning of ties with the other races. By the time Bilbo recovered the Ring, Middle Earth was compartmentalized into little more than fortresses connected by plains (or mountains), and the reuniting of the peoples of Middle Earth by the king of Gondor (that being Aragorn) was integral to the story.

    Virg

    1. Re:Setting the Story by danila · · Score: 1

      The parent meant a slightly different thing. Look at Minas Tirith, for example. The books describe the gardens, the busy roads, everything. The movie has a city surrounded by empty boring plains.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  233. Declan from "Revelations" here by logan2112_ · · Score: 2, Informative

    A few friendly notes here to some of the curious out there:
    No one is saying that this work is perfect. It has its flaws, as most project do, but I read some of the post some people were putting out yesterday and while Shane has decided not to address any of that at this point, (partly because he's so busy trying to get the film through post production, and manage the premiere, and partly because he's on the verge of nervous exhaustion) I feel I must step up and set a few things straight.
    First of all Gina and I did not really know Shane and the crew of Panic Struck prior to this, except as competitors. Shane thought Gina would be good for the role after seeing some of her work. While it is true I rode Gina's coattails into the project, once Shane saw a little more of what I could do, he asked the writers to write a little more into the script for me. I am grateful and I will let those scenes speak for themselves. The point is no one cast their girlfriend in this thing! Furthermore all this talk of the girls being ugly is just stupid and petty. All of the girls are quite simply, stunningly attractive if you meet them in person. Of course the fact that I'm married to one does mean that I am a bit biased.
    A lot of people have come out saying the acting is poor. This is simply and completely unfair. You can not and should not try to judge the acting of an entire production based on a trailer, especially with a fan film. For one thing the takes that were used in the trailer may not be the same takes as what you see in the final movie, this happens even in professional movies. Furthermore you're seeing, what you are seeing completely out of context. For example; the scene with Taryn (Gina) saying "she lied to me" "she used me" is cut with scenes of characters fighting. That's for the trailer. That's not the way you are going it see it in the movie. In the actual film this is part of a highly emotionally charged scene. So why then did they use it in the trailer? They used it in the trailer because it's what was available at the time. This is the same reason Shane used the music from the actual Star Wars movies in the trailer. The plan had always been to have an original score but it wasn't done at that point.
    With respect to the fighting, we did in fact have a dedicated fight coordinator and he did a splendid job. Here again it's a matter of context and available footage. When you actually see the finished fights in context, not only do they look good, but they actually help carry the story along.
    As to the trailer itself, while we have all had the experience of going to a movie and realizing that all the best parts were in the trailer, this I assure you is not the case here. With a low budget fan film, trailers and teasers are released, not after the project is done to show of the best of what has been done, they are released to coincide with local conventions using what is available. Shane had a lot of tough decisions to make about the trailer and he decided to be deliberately vague as to story details, character motivations and so on. He didn't want to give too much away and whether I agreed with everything he did or not at the time, I want to make it clear that I stand by his work now.
    Rest assured that the finished project is far more polished than the trailer. We went back into the studio and did a lot of voiceover work to get rid of any of the ambient background sounds that you can clearly hear in the trailer.
    The CG in the trailer, while stunning, is in many cases just not finished. I clearly remember Shane saying that some of it was just above video game level in his opinion and that he was going to go back and rework it. Now when I watch some of the more finished stuff I am truly amazed. In some cases I was there, in the shot, and I can't tell you what was real and what was added later.
    This movie was shot over a long period of time; sometimes on a location, like the quarry, the caves or the bar, sometimes in the studio (green screen and all), sometimes on a set that we built. This was done to

  234. Slightly Different by virg_mattes · · Score: 1

    > Look at Minas Tirith, for example. The books describe the gardens, the busy roads, everything. The movie has a city surrounded by empty boring plains.

    While I agree that it was more spartan than one would expect, the only difference I'd find rational is that of having more houses and fields, but not much more traffic. Remember that the parts of the movie that took place around Minas Tirith were in the days directly preceding the fall of Osgiliath and the assault on Minas Tirith itself, so it's reasonable to assume that the inhabitants of the surrounding lands would have moved into the walls for safety by the time we as viewers arrived.

    Remember, the books mentioned a lot of stuff that wasn't part of the present story, and some of what was present-day was left out of the movie for time reasons. While I agree that the terrain was plainer than it could have been, I'm not quite as comfortable saying it was plainer than is should have been.

    Virg

    1. Re:Slightly Different by danila · · Score: 1

      The traffic and busyness are described in the book in the present tense. I agree that during the siege itself there probably wasn't anyone wondering outside, but the infrastructure should have been visible in all those bird-eye views, and the people should have been doing something outside before the Mordor army came. The problem is present in every episode - take Rohan, for example, there isn't a busy road outside of the city. In fact, one can barely discern the road, even though Rohan was an agricultural country and there was supposed to be lots of heavy traffic.

      The parent put it very succinctly - the whole movie world of ME is just a few fortresses with plains between. While you are correct that organisationally there weren't many powers outside the main story points, it doesn't follow that there literally were no people outside of the few cities of ME.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  235. Re: I agree by basebot · · Score: 1

    I thought that Ep 1 and 2 were good. A few things could def. be improved in Ep 1, but what can beat the awesome saber fight with Qui Gonn, Obi Wan, and Maul? Definitly a great. One thing i didn't quite like in Ep 2 was the unoriginal score- with the reuse of the great duel music (although the death march is great at the end). I really am hoping that Ep 3 comes through. Jon

    --
    "Ready are you? What know you of ready? For eight hundred years have I trained Jedi. My own counsel will I keep on who I
  236. Scripting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure those guys are good but they can only do so much with a shoddy script and sub standard directing. Good ingredients and a bad cook still make a bad meal.

  237. Re:"May the Force be with you!" was never said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> "May the Force be with you!" was never said in any of the movies! That's a revelation.

    > Yes, it was. Several times, actually. Do you require proof, or will you take a geek's word for it?

    I think he's confused - actually Obi-Wan never said "may the Force be with you" in the movies.

  238. Non-abrasive? by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1
    "Hmm.. I never had anything against the Ewoks. They weren't abrasive like the Gungans (with emphasis on Jar-Jar and that irritating King .. or whatever the hell he's supposed to be)"

    If it is non-abrasive it is OK? I suppose you are first in line at Care Bears and "Hello Kitty" movies!

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.