[psmith2.0]

I've been poking around the web this morning, trying to find one good, positive review of this thing.

I can't.

I could tell by the trailers this might be a cheese-fest with slangy-talking young girl apprentice, farting baby Jabba, more stuff we've already seen (Jedis and clone troopers fighting battle droids), etc. And every review I'm reading is confirming all this (and much more). The music, sound, CGI, voice work, story/plot, etc. are all lacking, according to the 10-12 reviews I've read today.

How sad. What "could've been" vs. "what was made". Once again.

I was, early on, a bit amped to see this new theatrical release out today. But now, not so much.

I still don't get how anyone (Lucas, etc.) thought this is stuff to (once again) mine: face it, we already know what happens to everyone (this takes place between episodes 2 and 3), so any "danger" we see here involving Padme or Anakin, or any "threat" posed by Dooku and others, can't be real or heavy because we know who lives and survives into the third installment, and their ultimate fate. And with a full feature film (Episode II) and an animated TV series already devoted to this chunk of "Star Wars" history, why in the world is it worth visiting again? It's boring, all the faceless clone troopers shooting all the faceless battle droids, with a few Jedis and light sabers tossed into the mix. And all the exposition and political talk (senate, trade federation, councils, etc.). The originals never got mired down into that...they scooted along nicely, even "Jedi".



We've seen this. Quite a bit. Already. Years ago.



It's gonna be sad to see a "Star Wars" movie hit the theater and met with such "meh" or outright disdain. But Lucas & Co. have brought it on themselves, I believe. The only good thing that might come out of it (a genuine "Star Wars"-branded failure, which I believe is this movie's fate, after a so-so opening weekend) is the possibility that it'll smack Mr. Lucas in the face a bit and cause him to realize how far he's drifted). But, then again, if Jake Lloyd, Jar Jar and all the rest didn't do it, why should this?



Anyone going to see this, post your reviews and thoughts here. I'd love to hear some more "real world" input (I've read about eight "professional" reviews, and about 2-3 "regular person" write-ups).

[RowdyScot]

I'm a SW fanatic, and my anger with Lucas has finally come to enough of a boil that I have no plans to see this.

[psmith2.0]

I'm hearing that a lot today...



I've read no fewer than four reviews that reference Miley Cyrus/Hanna Montana in relation to that new female Jedi apprentice (the one you see in the trailers, talking all sassy and mallrat-ish).



That alone severely dampened my interest and enthusiasm. I really don't need to hear "like, whatever..." in a "Star Wars" movie, thanks. Not ever.



Just seems like such a blatant "girl grab" (where was this character in the prequels?). A toy-selling, demographic lunge...

Yeah, I know, I know...I should "see this for myself" before making such statements, but I don't think I can stand to. I trust the reviewers I've read, and the prequels pretty much tell me all I need to know in terms of what to expect from modern-day George. And the trailers for this thing, while snazzy and gorgeous visually, comes across like such a cringe-inducing turd (which was kinda the same deal with the prequels...better FX than 1977 or 1980 could ever hope for, but, obviously, it takes more than "stunning CGI and visuals" to create a compelling movie). All the visual splendor and cool-ass CG in the world can't fix dopey writing, acting and dialogue and convoluted, "who cares?" plots. 1999, 2002 and (to a slightly lesser degree) 2005 taught me that.

I'm afraid I'd just get upset and sad, watching this...

I guess I'm having one of those "I wish we didn't hear about 'Star Wars' ever again after 1983" kinda days...

[RowdyScot]

I've been angry with Lucas ever since he decided to change certain character histories that were regarded as canon, but just how bad I thought the prequel trilogy was (okay...just Hayden Christensen and the scripts, but still...) the history change, and the extent to which he's selling this out are just too much.

[psmith2.0]

"Episode I" was on TV (Spike?) the other day, and I was watching a bit of it (it's programmed into my DNA apparently...I can't help it ), and was realizing how "big" it felt, and that was a direct result of the CGI. But it was just so much (too much?) and, after a while, nothing looked real...not even the shadows cast by actors as they walked along corridors.



For all their technical splendor, I found myself so distracted while watching the prequel trilogy because all I was seeing were fake-looking sets, floors, walls, etc. Nothing seemed to have any weight or "place", and on those sprawling cityscapes or lush indoor sets (Naboo or Coruscant), it felt so off.

Contrast that with how so much of the originals seemed to use real sets, lighting and shadows, etc. They just seemed more grounded (but also more "movie-like" at the same time).

I'm sure Lucas sees this newer stuff - and the technology available to him - as a good thing (that's why he's sticking Hayden's Anakin into the end of "Jedi", etc., but it also loses something. Think back to all your favorite parts (or just neat little scenes) in the first couple of movies, and then imagine how Lucas would do them today with this access to "digital technology", and how different it would look. Sometimes the "old way" just looks better, and grounds this stuff.

For some reason, one of my favorite scenes in "Star Wars" is when the Jawas arrive to the Skywalker farm and Luke's aunt calls him over and he runs over and stands on the ledge of that large hole in the ground and is looking down to her as she tells him to make sure his uncle gets a certain type of droid. I just thought that looked so cool, like a little house in the desert, in the ground.



But it was such a quick, simple scene but it was neat because you got the sense of Luke being young and being told things by his aunt, that he lived in a desolate, freaky place with a cool house, etc.

If Lucas did that scene now, we'd have some godawful fly-by, he'd digitally expand that hole to be about two miles wide, he'd have all kinds of droids and shit flying around Beru down below, Luke would be above her on an invisible "light bridge" (instead of standing on the ledge of the hole), etc.



He'd make a simple thing that "works" into this big complex, ridiculously ornate and cluttered "money shot", endlessly going for the "wow factor". At every turn, whether it's required or not.

That's what he seems to do. And it just rips the charm and appeal from so much of this stuff, it really does. It's "cold". "A New Hope" and "The Empire Strikes Back" just have a feel to them. "Jedi" to a lesser extent (but it's still there). But the prequels are completely lacking it.



I always get excited about the idea of new "Star Wars" projects and stories, but I've been burned enough to know that I should rein that in, and that it's probably going to be more of the same, unfortunately.

It'll be interesting to see what happens when Lucas finally passes. I'm sure this property will remain and be carried on by others. And if so, I'd love to see some guys in their 30's and 40's, who grew up with the originals, kinda "take it over" and - without Lucas' obsession with kids, cuteness, overloaded CGI, etc. added to the mix - make some really neat, well-written, well-shot "Star Wars" tales. Go back a few hundred years. Or explore that space between episodes 3 and 4. Or get off the Jedi/Clone stuff altogether and go tell Han Solo or Boba Fett stories.

It speaks volumes when I've seen modest-budget fan films contain better acting, drama, stories and visuals than the prequels...



So you know the talent and ability is out there, waiting to do this world justice, and to make a "Star Wars" release that doesn't embarrass anyone, and that anyone would be proud to talk about seeing. That hasn't been the case, really, since 1983.

[thegeriatric]

Fail with this.....we will.

[spotcatbug]

I'm not even going to rent the DVD.

[Luca]

George Lucas has made exactly one good movie in his life, and that was the first Star Wars movie. The Empire Strikes Back was better, but he didn't direct it, and someone else wrote the screenplay as well. With Return Of The Jedi, it was going to be better originally, but he intervened and made it sappier because he's just that kind of guy.

Return Of The Jedi was originally going to have Wookiees on the forest planet instead of Ewoks, and they'd rise up against the Empire that enslaved them with help from the Rebels. When the battle started to go badly for the Empire, the guy in charge of the Death Star began turning it to destroy the planet, knowing that would eliminate the Rebellion entirely (even though it would also destroy the Death Star and the Imperial fleet around it as well). So that added some time pressure to the final scenes. Lastly, the Millennium Falcon was originally supposed to be destroyed, though I've heard alternately that Lando was going to either die or somehow survive.

I'm convinced that if George Lucas had fully written and directed The Empire Strikes Back, the series would have flopped long ago.

[psmith2.0]

True. The first two were the best (and yes, it's quite telling that the best one, "Empire", wasn't written or directed by him ). The third one, I like, but it was much lighter and campier (Harrison Ford acted like a doofus throughout, the "comic relief" - but not even good or edgy like he was in "Empire" - and the Ewoks certainly gave it a particular Disney-ish vibe).

The original idea, if that's true, would've been so much better (Wookies, etc.). That was kinda the first peek, the Ewoks, to the "cute" fascination or a conscious "let's make it for kids", I guess (later resulting in Jar Jar, etc.)?

Kids and grown-ups alike could watch and enjoy the originals. I know very few adults who feel anything about the prequels, beyond the initial, fleeting thrill of "ohmigosh, new 'Star Wars' movies...allriiiiight!" (but that quickly faded upon viewing).

Truth is, we, as kids, were never that stupid and dumbed-down. I saw the first two at ages 8 and 11, and nothing was spoon-fed to me. I didn't require any excessive cuteness or wisecracking to "get it" as a kid. I loved them just the way they were...the rebels on the run, Luke's aunt and uncle murdered (and we saw the smoking skeletons), Obi-Wan whacking that guy's arm off in the bar, Han shooting the shit out of Greedo (first, and with no apologies), Alderaan blown to bits, killing all those detention block guards, Obi-Wan sacrificing himself on the Death Star, seeing orange-suited rebel pilots dying during the Death Star battle, Vader killing all his screw-up commanders, Luke failing over and over on Dagobah, Boba Fett tracking our heroes and then watching them ultimately betrayed by Lando, Han getting frozen, Luke getting his hand sliced off and learning the truth about his father, etc. That's all pretty heavy, serious stuff. And I ate it up as a kid! We all did.

That "blame" for these prequels, since he wrote and directed (and if the DVD extras are anything to go by, micro-managed every tiniest detail and asked some of the goofiest things from his artists and technicians), falls 98% to George Lucas.

I don't feel so bad saying that now because it's honest, clear-eyed analysis and observation. I can still love the franchise, but I don't blindly suck up everything thrown at me. I expect more.

The best parts of any of the three prequels can't even touch the worst parts, frankly, of "Empire". IMO.

BTW, I've scrounged up three more reviews of "The Clone Wars", and they were all negative...



Nobody is liking this thing...holy crap, I never thought I'd see that.

[Jason]

One recalls Harrison Ford's immortal rebuke to him: "George, you can type this shit, but you sure can't say it."

[Yonzie]

Isn't this just an animated, slightly changed version of Episode II? Seemed like it from the trailer I watched. Also, Yodas voice acting was unimaginably atrocious.

In regards to the changes, I feel the change where Han Solo kills the bounty hunter in the bar in Ep. 4 is pretty telling. Originally, he shoots unprovoked. In the new version, the bounty hunter shoots first. Why change it? Han Solo is not a nice guy.

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by Yonzie Isn't this just an animated, slightly changed version of Episode II? Seemed like it from the trailer I watched.

It takes place between the events of Episode II ("Attack of the Clones") and III ("Revenge of the Sith"). So no, not a remake or mirror. Just a "filling in the gaps". But yeah, it's stuff we've seen already (the clone troopers fighting the droids, so it's going to look a lot like much of Episode II, just from who's fighting, the machines and weaponry involved, etc.).

I don't see the point; we've seen it before already, via a feature film and an animated TV show. So it's not even new, fresh territory.

Originally Posted by Yonzie Also, Yodas voice acting was unimaginably atrocious.

I don't think many people from the original six films are involved in this. No Frank Oz, John Williams or Ben Burtt (sound effects and editing). Certainly none of the people from the first three, and not even Rick McCallum from the prequels (although he's working on the TV version). None of the design guys from the prequels (no Doug Chiang, etc.). Samuel L. Jackson, Christopher Lee and Anthony Daniels providing voice work, but that's about it, actor-wise.

Originally Posted by Yonzie In regards to the changes, I feel the change where Han Solo kills the bounty hunter in the bar in Ep. 4 is pretty telling. Originally, he shoots unprovoked. In the new version, the bounty hunter shoots first. Why change it? Han Solo is not a nice guy.

I guess for the same reason(s) Steven Spielberg removed guns from "ET" and replaced them with walkie-talkies...terminal pussification and acute boneheadedness?



Lucas had to make Han Solo more "likable" and non-threatening for those 90's kids, I guess (apparently those of us who saw him nail Greedo first in 1977 were scarred for life). Messing up an otherwise awesome scene with dodgy positioning effects and a rushed "Greedo shoots first!" bit of CGI work was just silly.

No, it's not a huge thing and it doesn't "ruin" the movie. But here's what it does do: it undoes a bit of stature/vibe. Even in 1977, at eight years of age, seeing Han Solo unbuckle his holster and get the drop on Greedo was cool. It showed, right there, that you're dealing with a bit of a bad-ass cowboy (something that movie needed).

The digital re-working to "Greedo shoots first" - in addition to being so damn unnecessary and silly - was also done in the most unnatural-looking, goofball way imaginable. The reason people hate it is two-fold: it robs the beloved Han Solo of two-plus decades of a certain image/rep, and it looks so cheesy and manipulated (how did Greedo miss from that distance? He was right across the table!).





Just one of a few dozen "Lucas-isms" from the past decade or so...

I know they're his movies and he's got the right to make them look the way he wants, but every time he gets his digital paintbrush out to "improve" the original trilogy he just takes something away (or, worse, adds something that doesn't need to be or that helps).

I'd have so much more admiration for him, at this point, if he said "you know, I've told this story...the Skywalker/Clones/Vader thing. Six movies, TV shows, etc. Let's go back 1,000 years and look at things from the start...the first Jedi and Sith".

Or hell, even "let's explore this universe 100 years after the fall of the Empire" or "we've got two of the most popular characters in movie history - Han Solo and Boba Fett - and we've really not done anything with them; they've both got an interesting life and backstory...let's create, and follow, their adventures in a new movie!"



Nope. More clones and droids, and Anakin and Artoo and anyone else they can cram in from the six films (Jabba? As a baby? Really?).

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Lucas had to make Han Solo more "likable" and non-threatening for those 90's kids, I guess (apparently those of us who saw him nail Greedo first in 1977 were scarred for life). Messing up an otherwise awesome scene with dodgy positioning effects and a rushed "Greedo shoots first!" bit of CGI work was just silly. No, it's not a huge thing and it doesn't "ruin" the movie. But here's what it does do: it undoes a bit of stature/vibe. Even in 1977, at eight years of age, seeing Han Solo unbuckle his holster and get the drop on Greedo was cool. It showed, right there, that you're dealing with a bit of a bad-ass cowboy (something that movie needed). The digital re-working to "Greedo shoots first" - in addition to being so damn unnecessary and silly - was also done in the most unnatural-looking, goofball way imaginable. The reason people hate it is two-fold: it robs the beloved Han Solo of two-plus decades of a certain image/rep, and it looks so cheesy and manipulated (how did Greedo miss from that distance? He was right across the table!).

That was a strange thing to change IMO. I like the original 1977 version of that. There are a few things that were changed in one of the two or three revisions (what a neat freak) they did in the late 90's early 2000 versions.

[Moogs]

This is a money-making gimmick, pure and simple. Looks like the dumbest movie concept of the year, by far. This makes Step-brothers look like Good Fellas... makes The Mummy: Tomb of Jett Li look like Enter the Dragon... makes Sisterhood of the Traveling Midol Packet Part Deux look like Casablanca.

A Star Wars cartoon? Baby Jaba complete with bad breath jokes? Ooooo-KAY, George. Time to hang em up buddy; you are officially a nutjob. I do mean a mentally not-there person. WTF.

[psmith2.0]

I normally think he's a complete goon and I often question his judgement (and eyesight), but if you want to read something funny and telling, check out Harry Knowles' take on this new release at AintItCool.com.

I hated the score, the animation, the shots, the characters and most of all the retarded fucking idiot story.

Harry, for those who don't know, usually likes everything (some of the crap he's raved and orgasmed over just blows my mind). So for him to be this down on something...yikes!



For that matter, check out all the 4-5 main reviews from the various writers at that site: www.aintitcool.com

None of them like it (and these are all pretty hardcore geeks and longtime "Star Wars" nuts).

[Mugge]

Originally Posted by Harry Fuck. I hated a STAR WARS. That fucking sucks.

Fail + fanboy =

I think I'm going to rent it on DVD just to see what all that whining was about.

[Capella]

The desire to get away from retellings of the Clone Wars (it wasn't even that interesting a period!) and what we know to see new adventures is precisely why I'm an EU fan. Sure, there are parts of it that suck incredibly (Legacy, for all its awesome premise, did such abuse of established EU characters that I wanted to be sick, and while the sheer scariness and unlike-anything-else-in-SW of the Vong in NJO was awesome, it also seemed un-SW-like at times.) On the other hand, there's sheer gold like the storyline of the KOTOR game (there's the 'thousands of years in the past' story for you, 'scates!), or the Thrawn trilogy. Many people think that the Thrawn trilogy should have been movie-ized instead of the prequels, and I totally agree. Seriously- Mara Jade, psycho C'baoth, Han and Leia being married, the epicness of Thrawn as a villain...couldn't be beat.

[Luca]

Originally Posted by Moogs A Star Wars cartoon? Baby Jaba complete with bad breath jokes? Ooooo-KAY, George. Time to hang em up buddy; you are officially a nutjob. I do mean a mentally not-there person. WTF.

Making it a cartoon doesn't automatically require it to be kiddie. But that seems to be the case anyway for anything produced outside of Japan. I'm not even a huge anime fan but there are anime series that are definitely geared toward an adult audience and are not kiddie at all.

But yeah, George Lucas seems to admire Walt Disney much more than he admires, say, Ridley Scott. He wants all his movies to be kid movies. Why? I'm guessing marketing bucks. That's all he had for the decades between the release of Return Of The Jedi and The Phantom Menace.

Steven Spielberg is almost as bad. The main difference is that he can actually make good movies once in a while, even if they are overly preachy and contrived. Lucas can't even do that - instead, he just throws in stupid gags that only small children and retarded people could possibly enjoy. Forget even Jar Jar Binks - he took him out of the movies after all the backlash, but replaced him with equally inane bullshit that actually made me sort of miss the ol' fella. C-3PO accidentally getting his head swapped with a battle droid in the middle of a fight, then spouting stupid one-liner puns?

Ultimately, the point is that Lucas is a completely talentless d-bag who happened to get lucky once in his career, and he's been riding things out since then.

[psmith2.0]

I read the first one-and-a-half books of that Thrawn stuff (he had red eyes?). "Heir to the Empire" or something like that? This was years ago. I didn't make it through the second book ("Dark" something), just via general lack of interest/patience.



Man, for all we know, this is Lucas' next "big plan": now that it has been 25 years since the last original trilogy installment, Lucas might be hatching a secret plan to round up Ford, Fisher and Hamill - all in their current "old fart" forms - to reprise their roles and do episodes 7, 8 and 9.



A pill-popping, slurring Leia, a scowling, finger-pointing Han ("give me back my hyperdrive!") and craggy-faced Luke, somehow managing to look older than Ford.

Holy crap. You folks do realize this is a distinct possibility...don't think this hasn't been swimming inside Lucas' head!



It would be the guaranteed biggest movie opening of all time, sure enough, seeing those original characters, played by the original actors 30 years on (has that ever happened before?).

Hell...I'm almost wanna see it, now that I think about it.



With the recent "Indiana Jones and the Search for Who Gives a Damn", Harrison Ford has shown that he's no snob and is open to the idea of revisiting past roles and glory. If he'll do Indy, he'd sure do Han Solo.



And Fisher and Hamill could probably use the work, and would sign on for scale.

I can't remember if Lando was in those Zahn novels. If so, what's Billy Dee up to these days? Bring 'em all back!

[Moogs]

So tell us how you really feel...

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37951




The fact that die-hard star wars people are ripping this multiple new assholes is more than a little telling. However I find it comical any of these guys ever considered Lucas "an artist".

No, Star Wars is an ailing, dying beached whale of a property, too large to ignore but left too long in the sun to save. And the stench is unimaginable. So leave it to television writers to sit down and come up with a classic solution to lagging ratings. Their genius booster shot in the arm of suckdom? A plucky tween girl sidekick who keeps getting herself into trouble while being delightfully precocious and calling Anakin…Darth fucking Vader himself…Skyguy. Again. And again. And again. Every time this 14-year-old little monster opens her mouth to say something “witty” my jaw went slack and my eyes rolled into the back of my skull. She’s unbearable, absolutely excruciating to watch, and yet she finds herself in almost every scene of the film. She’s around so much I half expected her to pop up in scenes with the emperor or the Hutts, just stumbling into frame while saying something “cute” like “Oops, wrong door,” or “This isn’t the shuttle bay.” Seriously, the only way she could be any more annoying is if she added the word MEESA to the beginning of every sentence and BOMBAD to the end of it. You beginning to feel me? I get that they might be working towards a Luke Skywalker type transformation, but that doesn’t replace the fact that A) her very presence makes me want to punch the person nearest me in the face repeatedly

[Mugge]

Cartoons can be just fine for grown ups and I don't necessarily think they need to be made in Japan to be so. As a matter of it, I've never really taken much to Japanese cartoons. However, many of the big Disney movies such as the Lion King and Shreck seems to appeal to all age groups. And I do seem to have noticed quite a few Pixar fans here, right?

Heck, I can even live with Jar Jar because I love to hate him.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 I read the first one-and-a-half books of that Thrawn stuff (he had red eyes?). "Heir to the Empire" or something like that? This was years ago. I didn't make it through the second book ("Dark" something), just via general lack of interest/patience. Man, for all we know, this is Lucas' next "big plan": now that it has been 25 years since the last original trilogy installment, Lucas might be hatching a secret plan to round up Ford, Fisher and Hamill - all in their current "old fart" forms - to reprise their roles and do episodes 7, 8 and 9.

Ford outright refuses to do Star Wars again, he thinks its the worst acting he ever did, so they'd be hooped there. I actually rather liked the Thrawn stuff, very well written and the story is much deeper than anything Lucas has done since IV.

[psmith2.0]

Yeah, that review is even funnier than Harry's. I should've linked it earlier as well.

A sad day for those of us who grew up on, and loved, this stuff. It's just different now. Yeah, we're different (I'm 30 years older, after all), but, as I said earlier, the original stuff didn't treat us like morons. And it didn't hinge solely on "cute and sassy". The acting was serviceable, but the story and writing were simple, yet deep (if you went looking). The FX worked (those Imperial walkers on Hoth, to me, look more real and believable than anything I've seen in the prequels). Kids and grown-ups alike loved them (my Dad and Mom, my friend's parents, etc.). It wasn't "kiddie" in 1977 or 1980 (maybe a little in 1983 with those damn teddy bears and all).

And I can watch them all, today, and enjoy (and not feel like a dork, or like I'm wasting two hours).

But I don't even own any of the prequels (and don't plan to), and I can really only watch Episode III. I and II are, to me, just a loss and a bunch of noise and bullcrap for the most part. A few nice scenes, but I distinctly remember leaving the theater afterward, in 1999 and 2002, just feeling like "what in the hell was that?! This is what we've waited for?"

Sounds like this new one is continuing the proud tradition of "may the WTF?! be with you"



I say nothing in this thread as a trendy "bash Lucas" bandwagon jumper. I'm a fan, and have been since May of 1977. I love this stuff. I had/have the toys. My best friend and I lived and breathed this stuff during our childhood. Those original three movies were (and are) a gigantic part of my life, and I always go back to them. I'll always be a fan of this stuff. That theme song will always give me a slight chill and rush, the hum and spark of a lightsaber will always make me tingly and excited.

I'm snarky not because I hate "Star Wars"; in fact, it's the exact opposite...and it just makes me a little sad.

[Luca]

Originally Posted by Mugge Cartoons can be just fine for grown ups and I don't necessarily think they need to be made in Japan to be so. As a matter of it, I've never really taken much to Japanese cartoons. However, many of the big Disney movies such as the Lion King and Shreck seems to appeal to all age groups. And I do seem to have noticed quite a few Pixar fans here, right?

For sure. It's entirely possible to make good kids' films that their adults don't dread going to see. I'm not a big fan of most of those Pixar movies but I could at least sit through them without wanting to leave.

Lucas, though, has shown (with the prequels and now this cartoon movie) that he's no better than the people who come up with those terrible live-action Disney (or otherwise) summer films... you know, the ones with fart jokes and kids "taking over."

Originally Posted by Mugge Heck, I can even live with Jar Jar because I love to hate him.

BAN!!!

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by PB PM Ford outright refuses to do Star Wars again, he thinks its the worst acting he ever did, so they'd be hooped there. I actually rather liked the Thrawn stuff, very well written and the story is much deeper than anything Lucas has done since IV.

If they dangle a big enough paycheck (or whatever Harrison Ford is big on), he'd do it. He's getting old enough to hit that "I don't give a shit...what are they gonna do to me?" stage that old men eventually reach (it's why everyone's grandpa rips sound barrier-breaking farts in quiet restaurants or tells "a blonde with huge titties and two midgets walk into a bar..." jokes in church). They've put in their 65, 75 or 85 years...they just don't give a rip anymore. You can't fire them, you can't disown them, goodness knows you can't embarrass or shame them, etc.

[Mugge]

Originally Posted by Luca (...) BAN!!!

Warning: Jar Jar behind spoiler tag!

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Yeah, that review is even funnier than Harry's. I should've linked it earlier as well.... I say nothing in this thread as a trendy "bash Lucas" bandwagon jumper. I'm a fan, and have been since May of 1977. I love this stuff. I had/have the toys. My best friend and I lived and breathed this stuff during our childhood.....

Hey I was a star wars nut too back in the 70s / early 80s. Had the figures, x-wing, battled my best friend with the light sabres in the stairwell, yadda yadda... but the thing is, Lucas only had one truly great moment in all this and that is the first movie. It was so interesting and different it actually held our attention for two more movies, even though each one got progressively worse and less compelling. When the Ewoks arrived it was a harbinger of things to come. Replace substance with cute... replace stories with effects.

And I think we can all agree whatever art he had in him in 77, died 20+ years ago. The reviews are exactly right; this is all one giant commercial for the merchandise. While the scripts have sucked since Return, the story took a fatal nose-dive with Episode JarJar.

[Bryson]

You are so blind.

You so do not understand.

You weren't there at the beginning; you don't know how good it was. How important.

This is it for you, this jumped up fire works display of a toy advert!

People like you make me sick! What's wrong with you?

Now I don't care if you've saved up all your 50p's, OK.

Take your pocket money AND GET OUT!

[Moogs]

movie reference I'm guessing?

[Naderfan]

So my husband and his friend might actually drag me and friend's girlfriend to go see this movie. God help me.

I was reading the review for this movie in The Columbus Dispatch. Apparently, they have to save Jabba's baby in order to sign a treaty. The reviewer wrote: "If I had a dime for every action-adventure space fantasy that hinged on the signing of a treaty, I'd have - wait, how many Star Wars movies have been made?"

I can't really add much to the general disdain and hatred expressed here. I loved the original Star Wars series as a kid, and can't watch the new ones without wanting to go on a murderous rampage. It's just sad. Pathetic and sad.