Roger Ebert rates Episode II: AOTC *Review Inside*

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Name 3 movies(how many new Star Wars movies there are/will be) that are better in special effects

Name 3 groups of fanboys more annoying than SW Fanboys

1) Trekkies

2) Intel Fan Boys

3) AMD Fan Boys

Well ok, maybe just the Trekkies.

*phew*

At least he didn't include the LOTR Fan Boys or Matrox Fan Boys.

amish

 

[Corn]

Hey, what's wrong with Trekkies Red? Kirk could kick Vader's ass, bigtime.

Phasers on stun.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Episode 1 was a waste of 2 hours. It shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as the 3 previous Star Wars Movies.

I agree with this statement completely. Episode 1 was a terrible movie.
And I'm a huge fan of the original Star Wars trilogy. Those three movies were an important part of my childhood. The original Star Wars was the first movie that I ever saw in the theaters and I've seen it since a hundred-plus times.
But then came the blasphemy and sacrilege of the "digital remasters" and then the heresy of Episode 1. Lucas has lost it and is now senile.
I'm boycotting AOTC.

 

[Balt]

I never said children alone has made SW a success. Only that its appeal to children greatly increases it audience. Remember, it's not just the children that go see these movies, it's also their parents.

Considering the fact that Star Wars is still the second highest grossing film of all-time in the United States (and arguably it would be internationally if it had been as widely distributed back then as movies are today), I'd say he was pretty successful without pandering to the kiddies (although many children still liked them, weird isn't it).

Have you seen the movie yet? Thought not, but it's nice to see you that you've got uninformed opinions based on what exactly, a review from Ebert? It's fine to have a preconceived notion of what to expect, so you go right ahead and keep believing this movies sucks, but I'll prefer to render my own judgement after I've seen it, instead of parroting someone else's opinion of it.

Nope, I haven't seen the movie. However, I have seen every trailer out there and based on those trailers I admit I had some preconceived notions of what could seriously wreck this film. Guess what, my suspicions about its faults were exactly what many reviewers have been complaining about. These include: weak dialogue, weak acting, and horrendous romantic cliches (ooh let's sit in a field of gently flowing grass).

LOL, wasn't it you who made a snap judgement using the term "drones" to describe someone who would watch this movie? Why yes it was. Next time you wish to complain about someone elses' "childish" behavior, perhaps it would do your reputation well not to be hypocritical about it, eh?

The term drones was used by me to refer to those who will see the movie multiple times regardless of whether or not it's a stinker based on pure faith in the franchise. Guess what, it's accurate. Your use of the term however was based on nothing but your belief that I would see the film despite having serious misgivings about the film. The fact that I have these misgivings and lack blind faith in the matter already exclude me from being a drone, sorry. My usage differed form yours completely.

Hey Balt, another newsflash for you: This is the first SW thread that I've had the misfortune of viewing. My world doesn't revolve around your sniveling rants about George Lucas or his movies. This is all rather amusing, really. Once again I'll point out something that's so obvious that your concern for my intellect is rather misplaced and should be directed back into some serious self-examination: You think Lucas is confused on how to make money from his franchise? Let's compare track records shall we. Lucas is a multi-millionaire, many, many times over. You are whining on a message board and are not a millionaire. Yeah, your track record is impressive. Maybe you should call George and offer your services, show him where he's "confused" and give him that clarity that has made you such a success in the entertainment business......

I never said you had to review every rant I've made about this film, but if you are going to criticize me you better know what I'm basing my statements and opinions on. Your ignorance about my opinion only makes your ignorance in the argument exceedingly obvious to myself.

And again, how many times do I have to bloody say it.. I KNOW THE MOVIE WILL MAKE MONEY because people such as yourself have faith in the franchise, misplaced as it may be. My point was that he could make more money if he knew that he had to make a good movie that can stand by itself rather than survive on its franchise.

Yeah, like he never used lame "comic relief" in his first three released SW movies, right?

Well it certainly didn't involve the use of such comic ingenuity as being farted on and stepping in animal poo.

LOL, if you say so, but the smart money say's you'll see it anyway.....which makes you a hypocrite. But that's OK, maybe you'll just download a VCD from the net, then you can be a hypocrite and a thief.

Right. It's wrong for me to assume that the movie will be bad based on multiple trailers, reviews, and facts contained within those reviews, but it's okay for you to assume that I'm a hypocrite and a thief based on nothing. Nice logic, Holmes.

Keep 'em coming.

 

[HendrixFan]

Episode I was much better than Episode IV, and nearly as good as Episode VI. The only thing it needed was a big emotional scene to top the Vader/Luke conflict throughout Jedi to top it, but it only had Anakin splitting with his mother. However, Episode I has set up a great movie with Episode II, so taking it in as a whole Episode I was fantastic.

The Remasters that you loathe so much were actually what Lucas wanted from the beginning, but was unable to do. It would seem that you have no appreciation for Lucas's work, and only want nostalgia.

 

[Adul]

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

 

[Adul]

Originally posted by: tigerbait

who cares what critics think?

 

[HendrixFan]

"Guess what, my suspicions about its faults were exactly what many reviewers have been complaining about. These include: weak dialogue, weak acting, and horrendous romantic cliches (ooh let's sit in a field of gently flowing grass)."

Ive seen 4 or 5 negative reviews that mention those points (one actually said the effects sucked!), and around 35 or 40 that had no problems with any of those points. The dialogue is as good as any other Star Wars flick, and if that isnt good enough, and you are one of the very few people who dont like the original trilogy, then Episode II certainly isnt for you. The acting is strong in this one, better than the original trilogy certainly (Mark Hamill?). Of course McDiarmid as Palpatine does a great job, but it is Christiansen as Anakin that really delivers. Finally a top notch actor, which was crucial to portraying his character as the right mix of good and bad. McGregor is wonderful as Obiwan, very much giving the Alec Guiness feel to the character. Portman is given alot more room to strut her abilities, now that her character is given the chance to open up.

As far as romantic cliches go, how would you set it up? How about the two of them falling in love while being hounded for their very lives by many imperial ships? Wait, that was Empire Strikes Back. I think getting the two of them secluded on her home planet is a good reason (not cliche) for the two characters to relax. She has been busy as a government figure since she was a child. He has had to shoulder the burden of having unlimited ability, but lacking the desire. Both finally escape into something more serene. Seems authentic to me, certainly much moreso than Empire's romance (which I enjoyed). I think its quite clear that you are holding the new trilogy to a completely different standard than the original trilogy if acting, dialogue and romance are your concerns.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: HendrixFan
Episode I was much better than Episode IV, and nearly as good as Episode VI. The only thing it needed was a big emotional scene to top the Vader/Luke conflict throughout Jedi to top it, but it only had Anakin splitting with his mother. However, Episode I has set up a great movie with Episode II, so taking it in as a whole Episode I was fantastic.

The Remasters that you loathe so much were actually what Lucas wanted from the beginning, but was unable to do. It would seem that you have no appreciation for Lucas's work, and only want nostalgia.

Yeah, I really love the remaster of Episode 1, like that part in Mos Eisley where Han Solo is supposed to be running for his life from Jabba the Hut's bounty hunters, and he even kills one in the bar (great secene in the original), and then (remastered version) he's suddenly face-to-face with Jabba and even stepping on his tail? There's a reason why Lucas (if the stories are even true) wasn't allowed to include that scene (and other scenes like it) in the original. It totally discredited Han Solo's motivation in all 3 films.

Why the original 3 movies rocked:
- it was a story of good little guys against all-powerful evil (possibly the most popular story plot of all time)
- the characters had real motivation, they were fighting for their lives
- great surprises and plot twists ("I am your father, Luke")
- while serious, the movies were tongue-in-cheek funny and never took themselves too seriously

Why the "first" three Episodes suck:
- good against evil theme is still there, but good is powerful now
- Jar Jar Binks
- characters have virtually no motivation
- Now all 6 movies are merely the life story of Anakin Skywalker aka Darth Vader

 

[mee987]

im tired of people who feel obligated to defend a movie they havent seen just because it has "star wars" in the name

 

[HendrixFan]

First of all, the Han Solo/Jabba the Hutt scene was filmed back in 76 with the rest of the movie. Its not like they reshot that scene (and digitally altered Ford to look 20 years younger) in 96 to add to the movie. THe reason it didnt make the was because of time restrictions. Maybe you werent paying attention, but Han Solo wasnt running for his life in Episode IV. He was as cool as a cucumber in that cantina. It was Luke and Obiwan running. Han Solo was just contracting work from them so he could gather up some money to pay off Jabba the Hutt. Solo was going to pay off Jabba with his reward money before the Battle of Yavin, but decided to help Luke instead. It wasnt until 3 years later (when Empire Strikes Back takes place) that Solo's debt put a huge price on his head. There is absolutely NOTHING in the original trilogies to suppport your assertion.

You are dead right about the "tone" of the originals. Its the small band of rebels fighting against the large evil empire. This is paralleled with Luke and his fight against Vader on a personal level. Vader's motivation wasnt given in Episode IV and it wasnt until the very end of Episode V that we learn it. Thats 2/3s of the trilogy before the main bad guy gets his motivation.

The new trilogy certainly has the good in power, but that is really starting to change with Episode II and will be gone by Episode III. The new trilogy is about the fall of the Republic parallel with the fall of Anakin. I think that darker tone you are longing for appears with this movie coming up, and should brighten your view of the new trilogy. The characters didnt have motivation in Episode I, other than Palpatine and Amidala. The sad part is that none of the Jedi Council or the Senate are able to see the impending doom. The middle of Episode II is the turning point for Anakin and the turning point for the Republic. Then you will see the **** hit the fan, and motivations will be clear. You have to accept that this movie is part of a series, 6 pieces total.

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: HendrixFan
"Guess what, my suspicions about its faults were exactly what many reviewers have been complaining about. These include: weak dialogue, weak acting, and horrendous romantic cliches (ooh let's sit in a field of gently flowing grass)."

Ive seen 4 or 5 negative reviews that mention those points (one actually said the effects sucked!), and around 35 or 40 that had no problems with any of those points. The dialogue is as good as any other Star Wars flick, and if that isnt good enough, and you are one of the very few people who dont like the original trilogy, then Episode II certainly isnt for you. The acting is strong in this one, better than the original trilogy certainly (Mark Hamill?). Of course McDiarmid as Palpatine does a great job, but it is Christiansen as Anakin that really delivers. Finally a top notch actor, which was crucial to portraying his character as the right mix of good and bad. McGregor is wonderful as Obiwan, very much giving the Alec Guiness feel to the character. Portman is given alot more room to strut her abilities, now that her character is given the chance to open up.

As far as romantic cliches go, how would you set it up? How about the two of them falling in love while being hounded for their very lives by many imperial ships? Wait, that was Empire Strikes Back. I think getting the two of them secluded on her home planet is a good reason (not cliche) for the two characters to relax. She has been busy as a government figure since she was a child. He has had to shoulder the burden of having unlimited ability, but lacking the desire. Both finally escape into something more serene. Seems authentic to me, certainly much moreso than Empire's romance (which I enjoyed). I think its quite clear that you are holding the new trilogy to a completely different standard than the original trilogy if acting, dialogue and romance are your concerns.

I don't know, it seemed to me like in Empire Strikes Back the romance was secondary, which I really had no problem with. From what I gather, this movie has it at the forefront. Arguably it is more appropriate and necessary for the romance to be a major plot line in this movie because it is necessary for the introduction of Luke in Episode IV, but I just don't think Lucas has a lot of experience in making a serious romance.

Of course in the end, it's all opinion. Some may find its portrayal satisfactory, others may not. To each his own.

I do hope to be pleasantly surprised after I hear some reviews from friends of mine (Star Wars fans and non-fans alike), but at the moment I just can't have much faith.

 

[HendrixFan]

I would say that the romance on screen for Episode II is only marginally longer than Empire. In fact, alot of the back and forth between Anakin and Padme is a power struggle. The action finale is 40 minutes long, taking a huge chunk of time. The Coruscant chase scene, the Kamino and Jango Fett chase fill up another exciting 20 minutes. Then you have the rest of the time for a little romance, but really alot of Obiwan detective work and government meetings.

While the romance will me more pronounced, I would hardly call it excessive.

 

[LordMaul]

Why the original 3 movies rocked:
- it was a story of good little guys against all-powerful evil (possibly the most popular story plot of all time)
- the characters had real motivation, they were fighting for their lives
- great surprises and plot twists ("I am your father, Luke")
- while serious, the movies were tongue-in-cheek funny and never took themselves too seriously

Why the "first" three Episodes suck:
- good against evil theme is still there, but good is powerful now
- Jar Jar Binks
- characters have virtually no motivation
- Now all 6 movies are merely the life story of Anakin Skywalker aka Darth Vader

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!


The PREQUALS are SUPPOSED to be about VADER and LUKE's backround. That's the whole fsckin' point! On top of that, the good is SUPPOSED to be more powerful, since there is a whole ruling of Jedi Knights and the Republic, NOT just a Rebellion. Jar Jar, from what I heard, is explaine din the next movie and has a big role in the STORY but not on the screen or in dialogue.

What did you think Star Wars was supposed to be about? NOT how the most feared dude in the galaxy was once a Jedi, or about his kids? What, then? Just a whole bunch of people, without a real solid storyline and plot...unlike some similar movies? *COUGH Trek COUGH*

 

[Stallion]

I would rather spend $8 and find out for myself then to trust some one elses opinion. I would liken it to someone saying don't date a blonde gal, because I did and it was terrible. I would have to try it myself.

Although my wife is a brunette. hehe

 

[MadRat]

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan IMO is more enjoyable to watch than any of the Star Wars movies.

 

[C'DaleRider]

I'm sorry, but there's no way the Matrix appeals to older people....

Gee..........guess me bing almost 50 and liking the Matrix makes me not an older person. Thanks!


EP1 was a sad film compared to the first three, and seeing the general consensus about EP2, I'll wait a few weeks until the theaters are fairly empty and see it during some matinee showing.

 

[AaronP]

ya know, instead of dragging out some stupid, contrived romance between whiny, annoying Anakin and 10 year older Padme, they should have done it quick and painless (to the viewers) and just had him rape her. Then we wouldn't get stupid stuff like "I don't like sand because its rough and coarse, not soft and smooth like you." and to use wrestling terms, it would really get Anakin some heel heat.

 

[AaronP]

Trekkies aren't nearly as annoying as Star Trek fans. Because they usually keep their fandom to theirselves, and when something sucks like Trek 5 or Insurrection, they don't delude themselves into thinking its good and trying to defend it.

On another note, I want a Captain Pike wheelchair with yes/no beeper.

 

[LordMaul]

Originally posted by: AaronP
Trekkies aren't nearly as annoying as Star Trek fans.

How does that go again?

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: AaronP
Trekkies aren't nearly as annoying as Star Trek fans. Because they usually keep their fandom to theirselves, and when something sucks like Trek 5 or Insurrection, they don't delude themselves into thinking its good and trying to defend it.

On another note, I want a Captain Pike wheelchair with yes/no beeper.

Gotta agree with that. I'm a Trek fan (not fanatic) but I don't see how anyone could deny that Star Trek 5 was horrible. Insurrection seemed more like an episode that should have been on television than movie. Didn't care much for Star Trek III or I either.

And no, I don't see the really bad ones in the theater.

 

[Corn]

Considering the fact that Star Wars is still the second highest grossing film of all-time in the United States (and arguably it would be internationally if it had been as widely distributed back then as movies are today), I'd say he was pretty successful without pandering to the kiddies (although many children still liked them, weird isn't it).

Star Wars was not always the second highest grossing film, and only notched it way back up near the top of the heap because of it's re-issue 20 years later.......weak.

The term drones was used by me to refer to those who will see the movie multiple times regardless of whether or not it's a stinker based on pure faith in the franchise. Guess what, it's accurate.

Actually, if that was your intention, it sure didn't come across that way, let's revisit what you said:

Assuming he is still capable of making a decent movie, he will have no incentive to do so as long as people line up like drones for crappy movies that take a lot less effort.

I don't see your qualification of fan boys seeing this movie "multiple times", nor even as much as an implication. Perhaps it would do wonders for your arguments if you learned to put into words what it is you're trying to say, eh?

I never said you had to review every rant I've made about this film, but if you are going to criticize me you better know what I'm basing my statements and opinions on. Your ignorance about my opinion only makes your ignorance in the argument exceedingly obvious to myself.

I'm critical of your statements from this thread. Don't delude yourself into thinking that you rate the effort to scour this forum in search of your previous drivel. LOL, as if.

My point was that he could make more money if he knew that he had to make a good movie that can stand by itself rather than survive on its franchise.

Again, you base your assumption on your particular taste, not the facts. Episode 1 was a fine movie, and it's box office numbers reflect it's appeal to a wide audience. You can shout "its crap, its crap", but the numbers speak for themselves. Again, it's slightly presumptious to believe that your vision of what the Star Wars saga should be is superior to that of Lucas'.

Well it certainly didn't involve the use of such comic ingenuity as being farted on and stepping in animal poo.

Nope, instead it employed the use of such comic ingenuity as a sophisiticated R2 robot that makes on the fly repairs to damaged spacecraft yet mistook power coupling for a network interface.

Right. It's wrong for me to assume that the movie will be bad based on multiple trailers, reviews, and facts contained within those reviews, but it's okay for you to assume that I'm a hypocrite and a thief based on nothing. Nice logic, Holmes.

Yeah, let's revisit this in a couple weeks. As I said, the smart money say's you'll be watching......we'll just see how honest you really are then. LOL

 

[Lithium381]

Originally posted by: Optimus
Critics are SO out of touch with reality today, that I don't give a rat's arse what they think.

about 90% of the time the movies they say are bad are good and vice-versa.........so i geuss they are in touch with reality, though just backwards....

 

[richd111]

I want to ask a question, and I want you star wars fans to try and answer as objectively as possible.

Never mind the special effects. From a storline perspective, if episode I was the first movie released instead of Star Wars, would there have even been a sequel? Do you think it would have been nearly as popular?

 

[LordMaul]

Originally posted by: richd111
I want to ask a question, and I want you star wars fans to try and answer as objectively as possible.

Never mind the special effects. From a storline perspective, if episode I was the first movie released instead of Star Wars, would there have even been a sequel? Do you think it would have been nearly as popular?

I believe so. it was always intended to be a series of movies, sooo...