Roger Ebert rates Episode II: AOTC *Review Inside*

[kami]

<< I doubt you'd be so critical if you saw the movie in a digital theater, >>


So what. As far as we know, there are only 19 frigging theaters showing it digitally worldwide!

I am still looking forward to the movie, but don't feed me this tripe. Digital filming wasn't ready to be used yet, but good ole George just has to be first at everything. Even high definition stuff in the future (HD-DVD possibly) will have a higher res than what AOTC was filmed at. 10-15 years from now it'll look like poop compared to most films on our brand new, shiny 1080P or higher display systems.

He should've waited til Episode 3 for digital filming. I imagine it will be filmed at a resolution that can rival film...and hopefully the color saturation and defintion along with the depth of field can match true film.

P.S. AICN is a bunch of fanboys, I wouldn't trust their "reviews" if my life depended on it. They are good for rumors and insider news, nothing more.

 

[Nefrodite]

This doesn't surprise me one bit. Episode 2 was shot in a pathetic 1440x880 pixels digitally, while the resolution of actual film is 3-5 times that!




yea that part i totally agree with, lucas is jumping the gun on the whole digital thing. that resolution is pathetic. it can't hope to match 35mm let alone 70mm. damned greedy punks. thats basically reducing picture quality to 1.2mega pixels, just beyond pathetic.


P.S. AICN is a bunch of fanboys, I wouldn't trust their "reviews" if my life depended on it. They are good for rumors and insider news, nothing more.


yup, paid lemmings they are a bunch of whores, nothing more.


just imagine how ilm would freak out if they had to do cgi at 70mm resolution they'd rather go to low res .. hides cgi better

 

[ultimatebob]

Yeah, I'm afraid that ol' Rodge has so many films in his days as a reviewer that he's just become jaded on the whole action film genre. He's lost touch with what the common guy is looking for in a movie, and therefore gives most of his favorable reviews to foreign "art" films and other such high-brow nonsense.

Gene's reviews were usually more grounded in reality, so I made it a point to see any movie where he disagreed with Ebert's negativity. I really miss that guy, and I haven't read many decent reviews since he died.

 

[Nefrodite]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Yeah, I'm afraid that ol' Rodge has so many films in his days as a reviewer that he's just become jaded on the whole action film genre. He's lost touch with what the common guy is looking for in a movie, and therefore gives most of his favorable reviews to foreign "art" films and other such high-brow nonsense.

Gene's reviews were usually more grounded in reality, so I made it a point to see any movie where he disagreed with Ebert's negativity. I really miss that guy, and I haven't read many decent reviews since he died.

really? somehow he liked blade 2? how do you explain that?

 

[littlegohan]

Originally posted by: Intake77
he didnt like spiderman either... who cares what critics think?

we dont have to care about what he thinks

spiderman is of the best movie i have ever seen

good action+plot makes me feel good leaving the theater

 

[Pocatello]

After watching Episode I three years ago, I had the same feeling as Ebert had for Episode II. Lots of flash but nothing special, and I'm a big Star Wars fan.

 

[Nefrodite]

although i like spiderman too, i did see many of the flaws people were carping about on my 2nd viewing it could have been done better. we're just happy we have spiderman at all ofcourse heh

 

[SerraYX]

Why do you think they made "The Critic" series. Everyone hates film critics, they hate the things we strive to love.

"The girls in prison treated me badly until they found out I was in for trying to kill a film critic. Did you know it's not even a crime in Texas?" - Stalker Girl
"Yes, all too well. At the Houston Film Festival only half of us came back alive." - Jay

 

[littlegohan]

spiderman has flaws?

what flaws?

only the last part was kinda corny, thats all.

 

[dude8604]

Damn, now there's about 4 movies that I need to see next weekend. I'm going to go see Star Wars anyways. At the least it will have some good special effects and action scenes...

 

[WalkingDead]

I agree with what Ebert said & I want my $9 back! Oh wait, I didn't pay $9 to see it. Never mind.

 

[LordMaul]

I'm pumped.


Sooo it seems that either you like it alot or you dislike it. Not much of a in-between.

I've heard quite a few day it rocks.

I'm still fscking excited!

6 more days, baby, six days until I see it..

 

[AaronP]

Ebert is smart, and Ebert is usually a good judge of movies, I like him. However, he gave TPM 4 stars! hahaha I think he's trying to make up for that a little here.

 

[Blayze]

6 days? way to long

going to see it in 4 days here!




the 15th is my birthday as well. Hopefully standing in line waiting to get in the theater that night will be worth it.

hell its star wars its worth it

*pats ticket on desk*

 

[Instagib]

Originally posted by: Intake77
he didnt like spiderman either... who cares what critics think?

I have to agree with about Spiderman. I didn't think it was that great at all.

 

[wyvrn]

If you guys don't care what critics have to say, why do you make such a big deal about them.

Ebert is no better than the rest, and his opinions, like others, are subjective. They would neither stop me nor motivate me seeing a movie because I always form my own opinion. I didn't like Episode I that much, so I am hoping this one is better. I am a huge Star Wars fan.

 

[Instagib]

Originally posted by: wyvrn
If you guys don't care what critics have to say, why do you make such a big deal about them.

Ebert is no better than the rest, and his opinions, like others, are subjective. They would neither stop me nor motivate me seeing a movie because I always form my own opinion. I didn't like Episode I that much, so I am hoping this one is better. I am a huge Star Wars fan.

Your right. If you want to see it than who cares anyway. The critics just give us dorks something to talk about.

 

[Novgrod]

IMHO critics are only worthwhile if you agree with them. If you find a critic with whom you usually agree (michael wilmington for me) then you've found something of use. I think that Ebert will like or not like a movie, then invent reasons for it. This holds true for Fellowship of the Rings, Spiderman, Gladiator, Fight Club, and a number of other generally-thought-to-be-good movies. Heh, criticism for Spiderman was that the hero didn't feel like he had weight, and he learned to swing from buildings too quickly, whatever that means.

As for spiderman, some of that dialogue (between mary jane and peter parker) is campy as can be

Anyway, I'm inclined to trust Ebert on this issue because he's a starwars fan--he gave four stars to episoides iv-vi, and three and a half stars to i. If he doesn't like the movie, it doesn't bode well for me, but as always, critics are only useful if you agree with them IMHO.

 

[LikeLinus]

<spiderman is of the best movie i have ever seen>

Someone needs to get outta the house more.

Spiderman was NOT that great of a movie. I cant understand why people are talking about it being so great.

Everyone i've talked to here locally (none of them read comics..so that might make a difference) thought it was just a good movie, but nothing great. But something just to watch for enjoyment. The effects were have way decent and fun to watch. It wasn't the perfect movie though.

 

[XZeroII]

I think that people are just setting themselves up for a dissapointment. You will go into the theatre, wait 2 hours in line, and expect the best movie you've seen in all your life. If that movie is not the best movie of your life, you will be dissapointed. True? Just sit back and enjoy the show. Don't worry about crittics or anything like that, just enjoy! Some people get too worked up over stuff like this.

 

[BD2003]

1440x880? Are you serious? Thats not even up to the standards of 1080i HDTV!

 

[dude8604]

Originally posted by: BigDee2003
1440x880? Are you serious? Thats not even up to the standards of 1080i HDTV!

Yeah I know. That's probably less than the resolution of most people here's monitors.

 

[Linux23]

Originally posted by: dude8604

Originally posted by: BigDee2003
1440x880? Are you serious? Thats not even up to the standards of 1080i HDTV!

Yeah I know. That's probably less than the resolution of most people here's monitors.

if none of you have never seen TPM on a digital screen, then i would suggest you shut your traps. as far as i know, it doesn't matter if you have as much resolution as film, if it is blurry then it doesn't matter much.

 

[BD2003]

Maybe its blurry because it has a lower resolution? Ever stop to think about that?

Digital or not I dont care. Lower resolution is lower resolution. And as far as I know, the digital film is lossy compressed, which will make it look even worse.

The transfer to DVD will likely be better than any film transfer to DVD, but that doesnt take away from the fact that no matter how you look at it, lower resolution is the absolute worst thing. Hell, its still at 24fps. Couldnt they at least have made it 60fps?

 

[Red Dawn]

Episode one sucked. I'm sure episode two will suck too despite what the pasty white geeks here say. The good thing about Star Wars Movies is that you know at any given point of time there are groups of no life losers assembled watching a sh!tty movie in case you want to rid the world of useless individuals. Hey I'm just kidding.. or maybe not??!?