star wars trailer
- Thread starter Bsmith
- Start date
Jim Brennan
VHS Member Old Skool
The trailer looks okay. I noticed Chewie in there. Maybe they will have a little back story on He and Han. That would be worth a ticket...or be a severe disappointment.
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
From IMDB.COM Link
Star Wars III: "'Titanic' in Space"
The final Star Wars movie will be an emotional "Titanic in space", according to director George Lucas. Episode III: Revenge Of The Sith will hit movie theatres in America in May bringing to an end the most celebrated sci-fi film franchise in screen history. Episodes I and II, released 16 years after the last of the original trilogy Return Of The Jedi, were derided by critics and fans - who felt they lacked the quality of their predecessors. But Lucas is promising Episode III, which will bring the series to a close, will be a different affair. He says, "It's a real tearjerker, and it will be received in a way that none of us can expect. I feel that I've made the movie the best I can and it turned out the way I wanted it to be, so I'm happy." And he insists he isn't concerned about fans' response to Episode III: "I never try to anticipate what the world's going to think or even worry about whether they're going to like it or not. That's not my job, to make people like my movies. They either like them or they don't. That's completely out of my hands." Speaking at the ShoWest conference in Las Vegas, Nevada, Lucas refused to give away the film's plot - but screened the first six minutes of the film, and told audience members, "Obviously, fans would love to see a movie about Darth Vader running around killing people. I'm not telling that story, and I'm not interested in that. That's not what the movie is. This first trilogy is really about the father, the struggles of a father, or a man, basically, to find himself, and at the same time fall into a trap of wanting certain powers, making a pact with the devil and basically spending the rest of his life regretting it."
.
.
Personally; one of the problems I have with this whole affiar is that "Aniken' is a child; what is he? 22 or 23? I think the character would have been alot more effective as a man.
Star Wars III: "'Titanic' in Space"
.
.
Personally; one of the problems I have with this whole affiar is that "Aniken' is a child; what is he? 22 or 23? I think the character would have been alot more effective as a man.
sugahsean469
Well-known member
galt said:
You could say that. I actually called her last Christmas to see how what was she was doing(we dated summer of 2003)--not me, apparantly!!:huh: We're still friends and I told I'll put her in one of my movies someday(yeah, right!). It was actually cool that I lost money on her around that time, or I would've bought a Canon XL1 or Sony PD150(the horror! Had zero knowledge of the DVX at this time, and just wanted a good 3chip cam--any 3chip cam). By the time I actually had money to buy a camera again, I just went to MacWorld 2004 in SF, CA, got an education of the DVX and 24p by the great Adam Wilt, who then mentioned DVXUser.com after his lecture. So one door closes, another opens(well, her "doors" were always opened anyway, but, I digress).
sugahsean469
Well-known member
dvpixl said:
Actually you're right, and for the diehards, they probably already know that. But for semi-casual to casual fan who doesn't have time to read the novels, the cartoons are cool.
krestofre
Knight of the Holy Order
Mr. Hudson, sir. You can't expect to take anything Lucas says seriously. Didn't he also say that Attack of the Clones was more romance than action? I don't know about other people, but I don't call eating a digital pear romance. And didn't he say that Episode II would have more Jar Jar than Episode I? Thankfully that was a false statement. I think George is using this Titanic in Space line to try and spin the movie to the way he hopes it will be received.
As far as liking the new movies, I understand where you're coming from. Star Wars is very near and dear to my heart. Growing up I learned more from Luke Skywalker than I did Luke the Apostle. Phantom was dismal. Even if you seperate Star Wars from it, it was poorly written, poorly directed, and poorly executed. I enjoyed the character of Qui-Gon Jinn, but the movie just isn't worth watching for that one point. AOTC I was OK with. It's mostly a good movie. Not a great movie, and not a film, but decent. The middle part drags, but it's a definite improvement from Phantom. So I'm hoping that Sith will be closer to the classic trilogy. I am, however, doubtful as I've stated previously.
Chris
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Chris
I agree; I was just posting a recent article in the thread. And damnnit; life without Han Solo just sucks.
I agree; I was just posting a recent article in the thread. And damnnit; life without Han Solo just sucks.
Jim Brennan
VHS Member Old Skool
I did like his quote about it not being his job to make people like his movies. I believe in that statement.
Loki
Veteran
I think Lucas is consistant with his vision. He has said for many years in many interviews... that the first film is more of a kids film(agreed), the second film is more of a romance(debatable), and the third film is very very dark(so far agreed).
If you listen to the DVD audio commentaries, he is very candid about why he did things a certain way. And for the most part I think he is right.
Episode 1 and 2 had a lot of really genuine cool moments.. wicked star wars esque moments. But then they also had flat dialogue in parts, and so really bizarre acting.
I don't think people realize that the original trilogies are pretty much exactly the same as the new ones, only these days people can ***** and complain a lot quicker with the internet.
All three of the originals, had cheesy moments, bad dialogue, and odd moments of acting... same as the new ones.. only people notice them more now.
The originals were better yes, they were overall, better acted and had stronger characters.
I am wondering how much of an effect Ben Burt has had on the prequels being the editor.. there is a new editor for episode 3... I think it may resonate in the final film.. who knows..
I enjoy the new films, and can't wait to see the final third one. Nothing beats seeing a starwars film with a bunch of star wars nuts... what a great experience.
If you listen to the DVD audio commentaries, he is very candid about why he did things a certain way. And for the most part I think he is right.
Episode 1 and 2 had a lot of really genuine cool moments.. wicked star wars esque moments. But then they also had flat dialogue in parts, and so really bizarre acting.
I don't think people realize that the original trilogies are pretty much exactly the same as the new ones, only these days people can ***** and complain a lot quicker with the internet.
All three of the originals, had cheesy moments, bad dialogue, and odd moments of acting... same as the new ones.. only people notice them more now.
The originals were better yes, they were overall, better acted and had stronger characters.
I am wondering how much of an effect Ben Burt has had on the prequels being the editor.. there is a new editor for episode 3... I think it may resonate in the final film.. who knows..
I enjoy the new films, and can't wait to see the final third one. Nothing beats seeing a starwars film with a bunch of star wars nuts... what a great experience.
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
I have to say it again; for sake of saying it
The new ones suck. The III one will suck. Lucas should have left well enough alone. The III one will not make up for the suckitude of I and II.
They are too pretty with this overstylized CGI Bluescreen Virtual Set he has going on; the charm of SW and EMPIRE was that it wasn't pretty; it was real. You could touch and feel the world; the Falcon, The Death Star, The Cantina, the Space Port Mos Eisley, Hoth and even Could CIty had a tangible feel to it.
The characters were epic and will live in cinema lore; Han Solo, Princess Leia, Darth Vader, Obi Wan, Chewbacca and the Droids. The new characters suck; I can still wince at everytime C. Haydensen (sp?) whines in II; I mean even Luke didn't whine this much to Uncle Owen.
The new ones are forced and contrived and just simply do not hold up. These new ones are some of the most uninspiring pieces of filmmaking in the history of filmmaking. These films are so forgettable my almost 5 year old prefers watching EMPIRE over the new ones; that says it all.
The new ones are cheesy as all hell as if LUCAS doesn't even take them seriously; C3PO "I seem to have lost my head..." I mean WTF is that? Lil Ani' commanderring a space ship? Come on.
Sorry guys; these new films suck. suck. suck. suck. I will see it eventually (for closures sake) but I will be glad when its over so we can see if GEORGE has any talent beyond the Star Wars franchise; oh wait; then there's SW 3-D. Let it go man!
The new ones suck. The III one will suck. Lucas should have left well enough alone. The III one will not make up for the suckitude of I and II.
They are too pretty with this overstylized CGI Bluescreen Virtual Set he has going on; the charm of SW and EMPIRE was that it wasn't pretty; it was real. You could touch and feel the world; the Falcon, The Death Star, The Cantina, the Space Port Mos Eisley, Hoth and even Could CIty had a tangible feel to it.
The characters were epic and will live in cinema lore; Han Solo, Princess Leia, Darth Vader, Obi Wan, Chewbacca and the Droids. The new characters suck; I can still wince at everytime C. Haydensen (sp?) whines in II; I mean even Luke didn't whine this much to Uncle Owen.
The new ones are forced and contrived and just simply do not hold up. These new ones are some of the most uninspiring pieces of filmmaking in the history of filmmaking. These films are so forgettable my almost 5 year old prefers watching EMPIRE over the new ones; that says it all.
The new ones are cheesy as all hell as if LUCAS doesn't even take them seriously; C3PO "I seem to have lost my head..." I mean WTF is that? Lil Ani' commanderring a space ship? Come on.
Sorry guys; these new films suck. suck. suck. suck. I will see it eventually (for closures sake) but I will be glad when its over so we can see if GEORGE has any talent beyond the Star Wars franchise; oh wait; then there's SW 3-D. Let it go man!
dvpixl
Veteran
Loki said:
I pretty much had that thought in the beginning. It's a weird thing to realize but it is true. Also it's about how people feel at the moment, what they're into, and all that stuff. But StarWars always stood it's ground- that part whether people like it or not, was very consistent.- mostly it could be the music that's helping that mood along but whatever.
Loki said:
Actually I saw him editing this one too. on starwars.com as hyperspace member. but maybe there's another assistant editor. who knows.
but I think Ben Burt proved himself as a better sound engineer than anything else.
dvpixl
Veteran
John_Hudson said:
Agreed. But the first three tells of the days gone by where things were still new.
What I didn't get was when alot of people said, how come everything looks new? Isn't this supposed to be the past? It doesn't make sense!!!!
ah- ha but this was before the war. Before the dark times. And George Lucas is famous for his "used and dirty future" so I'd figure he knew exactly what he wanted.
but yeah... maybe he did overdo it- even I found myself cringing at the fake look. I dunno.. maybe he made a mistake with that one.
I read that episode 3 is all in-studio. No location whatsoever. With maybe a chair and the walls but everything else fake. It's nice and comfortable shoot, but does it make a better film? what Peter Jackson did- having a mix of both, that's really nice.- but maybe LOTR worked because it was a bit dirty and gritty. Where SW was so clean, it looked fake.
sugahsean469
Well-known member
John, I understand what you're saying. Outside of the usual complaints, my biggest gripe was that I felt Episode 1 could've had Young Anakin Grow up half way thru movie(a la Richard Donner's Superman), and not deal with "Anakin: Problem Child. " My other gripe, to get more casual fans interested in the human aspect of at least one character, I thought young Obi Wan should've been a smart-ass scoundrel. Obi was a mature anti-social old man by ANH, and unfortunately, a mature anti-social young man who you'd be embarassed to be seen with in public. Thruout the events of Episode 1-3, we could've seen his growth into becoming more mature, just like Han or Luke did, but alas, he was ALWAYS a boring partypooper to begin with.
That being said, I still like all the movies and the story as a whole, and still respect George Lucas, and am NOT going be a hater because fanboys of other "directors" who'll never achieve 1/16th of his success, tell me to do so. It's just so status-quo to hate him. Forget about all his technological and cinematical achievements; When somebody else makes six, 2 hour movies about one story, 30 years in the making, stays true to the vision, and still has legions of fans with NO complaints from anyone on earth, then maybe, just maybe, I'll join the Lucas-Hater club.
And like greats such as Hitchcock or Scorese always hit grand-slams out of the park, every single time?! Using the Lucas-Hater logic, was everybody supposed to say "those guys suck and should retire now" when their films didn't deliver(and believe me as a fan of both, they have there share of stinkers in there closets). Again, using Lucas-Hater logic, where are all the "Hitchcock sucks and rehashes the same ****" or "Scorsese has no talent past Goodfellas" posts at?
For trilogys sakes, Terminator and Aliens both struck out by the 3rd movie. Matrix fizzled horribly by the 2nd. Peter Jackson did great things with Rings(although it dragged at times, and had weird homoeccentric moments). . .for a story that was written by someone else half a century ago. Too bad Bryan Singer didnt wrap up X-men 3, as I wanted to see his vision of the Phoenix story. Sam Raimi is finishing Spidey after the 3rd, so thats something to look forward to. Are Singer, Jackson, or Raimi going for six movies telling one story. Don't think so.
That being said, I still like all the movies and the story as a whole, and still respect George Lucas, and am NOT going be a hater because fanboys of other "directors" who'll never achieve 1/16th of his success, tell me to do so. It's just so status-quo to hate him. Forget about all his technological and cinematical achievements; When somebody else makes six, 2 hour movies about one story, 30 years in the making, stays true to the vision, and still has legions of fans with NO complaints from anyone on earth, then maybe, just maybe, I'll join the Lucas-Hater club.
And like greats such as Hitchcock or Scorese always hit grand-slams out of the park, every single time?! Using the Lucas-Hater logic, was everybody supposed to say "those guys suck and should retire now" when their films didn't deliver(and believe me as a fan of both, they have there share of stinkers in there closets). Again, using Lucas-Hater logic, where are all the "Hitchcock sucks and rehashes the same ****" or "Scorsese has no talent past Goodfellas" posts at?
For trilogys sakes, Terminator and Aliens both struck out by the 3rd movie. Matrix fizzled horribly by the 2nd. Peter Jackson did great things with Rings(although it dragged at times, and had weird homoeccentric moments). . .for a story that was written by someone else half a century ago. Too bad Bryan Singer didnt wrap up X-men 3, as I wanted to see his vision of the Phoenix story. Sam Raimi is finishing Spidey after the 3rd, so thats something to look forward to. Are Singer, Jackson, or Raimi going for six movies telling one story. Don't think so.
krestofre
Knight of the Holy Order
It's an interesting situation, and I'm afraid one that we'll never be able to view objectively. Times are very different now than they were in 1977. I've heard the "Classic Trilogy has poor acting and bad dialog" argument before. Honestly, I can't see it. And that's because I grew up with Star Wars. Lines like "You will never find a more retched hive of scum and villany" are like Shakespeare to me. Other people may hear that and bawlk at it, but my eyes are forever clouded by my experiences. It's possible that the next generation will think lines like "Master Qui-Gon sir, what are Midi-Chroians?" is great writing. To me, it's horribly bad exposition.
The internet exists now unlike 1977. The speculation and rumors and news floating around has killed surprise. Imagine if Empire was just now coming out in theaters. The ending would be all over the net, probably complete with footage that someone at Skywalker Sound leaked. I don't think that the internet is responsible for some fans not liking the new films, but it certinaly changes the environment in which the films exist.
Digital effects are here to stay, and Lucas, as always, is a pioneer in that area. He certainly does them well, and they're getting better all the time. Some CG in Phantom doesn't look too great, but there's a moment in Clones that absolutely got me. During the final battle there's a rather strange fast zoom on some Clone troops. I was talking with some friends after seeing Clones for the first time and made the comment that I didn't like the camera work during that scene. One of my friends stood there for a second and said "Chris, there was no camera. That was CG." That's the first time I was ever fooled by CG, and in hindsight, is a rather embarrasing story. Anyway, back to my point: CG cannot make or break a film either. It's been done poorly before, but Peter Jackson also proved that it could be used to the betterment of film. Golum anyone?
So, like so many things in life it comes down to opinion. I'll be the first to say that Lucas has taken more than his fair share of a beating over the new trilogy. The reviews and fan feedback after Phantom was unjustifiably brutal, and I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. As an aspiring filmmaker, I would have a hard time dealing with that kind of backlash. Couple that with the fact that Lucas has achieved what no one else has. He is a single movie making machine. He. By himself! That's a remarkable achievement, and on some level Lucas will always be a personal hero because I would love to have that much movie making power without any responsibility to anyone but myself. I would say in most cases he has been true to himself. I see some inconsistancy on his part through the years, but hey, we're only human, and people's opinions can change over the years.
On the flip-side of that coin, I would also be the first to say that this new trilogy hasn't lived up to my expectations. And that, may just be the key to all of this. Many of us have lived with Star Wars for almost 30 years. That's an incredibly long time to love a film. And the gap between the two trilogies has definitely hurt their acceptance with a lot of fans.
Orson Wells could never quite follow the wonder that was Citizen Kane. I fear that Lucas may be in a similar boat.
Sorry for the novel. These are just things I've been thinking about recently with all of the Episode III talk.
Chris
The internet exists now unlike 1977. The speculation and rumors and news floating around has killed surprise. Imagine if Empire was just now coming out in theaters. The ending would be all over the net, probably complete with footage that someone at Skywalker Sound leaked. I don't think that the internet is responsible for some fans not liking the new films, but it certinaly changes the environment in which the films exist.
Digital effects are here to stay, and Lucas, as always, is a pioneer in that area. He certainly does them well, and they're getting better all the time. Some CG in Phantom doesn't look too great, but there's a moment in Clones that absolutely got me. During the final battle there's a rather strange fast zoom on some Clone troops. I was talking with some friends after seeing Clones for the first time and made the comment that I didn't like the camera work during that scene. One of my friends stood there for a second and said "Chris, there was no camera. That was CG." That's the first time I was ever fooled by CG, and in hindsight, is a rather embarrasing story. Anyway, back to my point: CG cannot make or break a film either. It's been done poorly before, but Peter Jackson also proved that it could be used to the betterment of film. Golum anyone?
So, like so many things in life it comes down to opinion. I'll be the first to say that Lucas has taken more than his fair share of a beating over the new trilogy. The reviews and fan feedback after Phantom was unjustifiably brutal, and I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. As an aspiring filmmaker, I would have a hard time dealing with that kind of backlash. Couple that with the fact that Lucas has achieved what no one else has. He is a single movie making machine. He. By himself! That's a remarkable achievement, and on some level Lucas will always be a personal hero because I would love to have that much movie making power without any responsibility to anyone but myself. I would say in most cases he has been true to himself. I see some inconsistancy on his part through the years, but hey, we're only human, and people's opinions can change over the years.
On the flip-side of that coin, I would also be the first to say that this new trilogy hasn't lived up to my expectations. And that, may just be the key to all of this. Many of us have lived with Star Wars for almost 30 years. That's an incredibly long time to love a film. And the gap between the two trilogies has definitely hurt their acceptance with a lot of fans.
Orson Wells could never quite follow the wonder that was Citizen Kane. I fear that Lucas may be in a similar boat.
Sorry for the novel. These are just things I've been thinking about recently with all of the Episode III talk.
Chris
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
sugahsean469 said:
Booya. There it is. That's just it. It did fizzle by part 3. The common conception is that Jedi was a quantam step down in the trilogy and it has fallen into the abyss in my opinion from there.
I am not a Lucas-Hater and didn't even know this club existed. I'm calling it like I see it. We can pay tribute to the artist sticking to his vision and innovation in technology but it still doesn't change the fact that the new films suck, does it? In fact, it is kind of sad really. 30 years? The same thing over and over, re-hashed, twisted and
changed. For 30 years?
Hey; I am an original Star Wars baby; I was 7 when I saw SW for the first time. I was there; I was part of that culture. This show was over long ago.
THX1138
Well-known member
I'm going to get beaten silly for this, but here goes...
I did not think that Episode 1 & 2 sucked. I quite enjoyed them. No, I don't adore Jar Jar and, yes, the movie's plot would work equally well if his character was eliminated, but I wasn't pulling my hair out because of him either. I thought it was great experimental fun.
Episode 2 just pushed the envelope further in terms of digital cinema and I enjoyed the movie immensely. Yes, there were dumb lines of dialogue (as in all the Star Wars films) and horrible scenes, sometimes, between Natalie and Hayden. Nevertheless, I thought the mvie delivered and I think 3 will deliver big.
Just me.
I did not think that Episode 1 & 2 sucked. I quite enjoyed them. No, I don't adore Jar Jar and, yes, the movie's plot would work equally well if his character was eliminated, but I wasn't pulling my hair out because of him either. I thought it was great experimental fun.
Episode 2 just pushed the envelope further in terms of digital cinema and I enjoyed the movie immensely. Yes, there were dumb lines of dialogue (as in all the Star Wars films) and horrible scenes, sometimes, between Natalie and Hayden. Nevertheless, I thought the mvie delivered and I think 3 will deliver big.
Just me.
Glad to know somebody enjoyed the first two.