zombie84

I think more of us--most of us--here are of this mindset than seems apparent. The thing is this forum is a place for many of us to vent anger, it was a creation born out of negative backlash, so the flaws we percieve in the franchise become bigger issues in our lives than they actually are--I don't mean that we really are okay with stuff like the PT but just pretend like we hate it, but rather that these things roll of our backs with greater ease than may be expected. I think this is sort of what the common fan is like anyway; dislike the majority of the franchise because its so big nowadays, but nonetheless concentrates on that minority that makes it special and thus is super-devoted.

Lucas changed his mind about that one.

Gaffer Tape said:

Once again, compared to the burning skeletons of Owen and Beru, the numerous losses of limb in later movies, and the whole Anakin burn victim thing, it really makes me wonder why Lucas would feel that strongly about something so minor.

 I think thats the point. When Owen and Beru get toasted and when Luke gets his hand cut off its supposed to be horrible and impactful; the Imperials you are not supposed to feel anything when they get shot.

Empire was never banned anywhere Skyjedi, it just didn't recieve the PG-equivalent in some territories (for example in many european countries it was rated 14+ or equivalent--though it was often simply just cut instead to get the younger rating) and Lucas didn't coerce anyone on the MPAA to get a PG-13, there is absolutely no way that movie would get an R. AOTC, on the other hand, is about as far as "PG" goes--I think he really pushed to get that one because Star Wars was supposed to be PG material; AOTC is really a PG-13 movie. I think the video-game visuals and high-school acting helped disguise how dark and violent it actually is (for a PG movie, that is).

As for SW, the guy that gets shot in the prison control room is slightly different in that his face is not priminently displayed, and the action happens pretty quickly--the hanger control shootings show the human face as the men get shot much more. Though this isn't something that is part of "the new" Lucas anyway--he had been wanting to change the two hanger bay shootings since at least 1983 and apparently for some time before even that.

The censoring was a personal choice of Lucas. He expressed regret over those two shots as far back as 1983.

Don't get me wrong; I like the serials. They are charming pieces of escapism. And its true that some are better than others, occassionally with an impressive effect. But they make the original Star Trek series look like it has the production value of Gone With the Wind. I hope you can see the difference betwen matte lines in 1977 and the "roman candle" rocketship on a piece of fishing line that is often seen in Flash Gordon. Not to say that the serials don't have cultural value; they have tremendous importance. But even at the time they were made they were crude and sometimes embarrassing--the 1930's equivalent to todays daytime soap operas.

Star Wars was actually rated G when it was submitted. Lucasfilm was one of the first production companies in history to ask that a rating be raised. The reason being that they thought a G rating would make the film seem uncool and scare away teens.

SilverWook said:

I don't know what serials you've been watching, zombie84, but the Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers serials were well made

Uh, when you can see the strings holding up the models I don't count that as well made. The serials were twenty minute Ed Wood films. Terrible acting and writing, most of the sets were cheap, bad special effect cutaway and formulaic plotting. The Flash Gordon series had a few cool sets because they re-used the stages from The Mummy and Phantom of the Opera, so that series has some acceptable production design there, but theres really little well-made about them. They were crude and cheap, especially the typical ones.

John Baxter's Mythmaker is pretty critical actually, and he gets a lot of people on record saying things about Lucas that aren't exactly in the vein of the picture-perfect image he like to project. He's not as immune as some people think--he only is in his own company's PR. Which is only expected. But Star Wars fans don't venture far from non-LFL material, unfortunately.

Lucas has basically devolved into making serial episodes. Not making great films that drew upon the serial tradition to craft smart pieces of entertainment--but a literal serial episode. The serials were weekly produced 20 minute episodes that were made as cheaply and quickly as possible; they were awful. None of them have anything significant to say, and they have the plotting, construction, acting level and production values of a high school play. The purpose of these episodes was to grab the short-lived attention span of a ten year old boy and keep it on the screen for twenty minutes. The stories were idiotic but the audience of ten year olds didn't realise how bad they were because they were, well, ten years old.

Lucas has not just emulated a serial episode--he has actually made one, with all the second rate corner-cutting, B-movie acting, low production value and meaningless plotting. Stuff like Clone Wars is pretty much as close as you can come to a modern-day serial.

I would like to see DK dethrone Titanic. I don't think DK is the greatest film ever but I'm kind of tired of Titanic having gotten the prestigious number one spot. I think DK will bow out the summer in the early $500, 000 area--if Warners did a re-release for the Christmas holiday it could potentially break Titanic.

Because Pixar movies are well done and made in a more sophisticated style that can be enjoyed by adults. There is a difference between making a film for kids and a film that panders to them. Wizard of Oz, Wall-E, and Star Wars are all examples of great kids films. Clone Wars is an example of a film that panders to them.

Besides which, its not even a well-done one. Surely you cannot be comparing Wall-E with Clone Wars? The difference between the two films is the difference between Star Wars and Wing Commander.

You guys realise this is the manufacturer's suggested retail price. No one ever sells it for that. It'll likely be $24.99 when you walk into stores and see it on the shelves.

I wish I could share your optimism CO, but I'm not so sure.

Yes, many have jumped ship. But an equal many have joined. So what if $20 million worth of OOT fans have left--double that amount in new kids have joined. The success of the prequels and all of its anscillary products is testament to that. Enough Star Wars fans eat this shit up, and even though OOT fans have turned their back on this stuff, an equal amount if not more have flocked in. Look at the video games, the novels, the comics--people are buying these. A lot of them are adults, most of them are kids, lots of them have been in the fandom for years and some of them are newly indoctrinated. Basically the way the fandom has always been.

In the end, you are right, the OOT is the one that will be remembered and this will ultimately be what most people watch. But not in this generation. The PT-version of the Star Wars series will continue to be as successful as it has always has been. The Clone Wars had a poor reception but I think they expected that, even if its lower than they estimated. Think of it this way: Its 1985. Lucasfilm releases Droids: The Great Heep in theaters. What do you think happens? It gets awful reviews and does lacklustre business (whilst nonetheless making a profit several times over). Does this mean that the OT is dead? All it really means is that only a fraction of the people who saw the episode films will turn out for a children's television cartoon--the hardest of hardcore and the audience the movie is actually targeted at, ten year olds. Thats basically what happened here. I wish I could say this means that Star Wars will finally get back to its roots now that Lucas has got a slap in the face, but this honestly is nothing unusual, remarkable or unexpected.

The sad part is that by tonight Clone Wars will have already turned a profit. Thats what happens when you release a television episode theatrically. I would estimate the movie's budget at under $10 million, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually only $5 million. Technically, this could turn out to be the most profitable Lucasfilm venture since the original. Why wouldn't they do one of these every year? Even if it ended up in last place on its opening weekend it would still break even, and with a kids action film in  the summer season with a brand name franchise there's no way you would ever open in last place. Thats why companies keep making these pieces of shit, they are just marketing love-childs, and from a business perspective theres absolutely no reason not to keep doing it.

Its only sad if you treat it with any seriousness. I mean if they had released that Droids TV special The Great Heep in theaters as an animated feature-film it would have gotten eviscerated, and deservingly so because its a piece of crap as an animated feature film. But like Droids, as much as I liked that series, Clone Wars really just a footnote in the scheme of things. I think right now LFL has created a sort of media tunnel-vision in the fandom because they have promoted this piece of shit so much. In the end, no one will ever remember it except this little footnote that happened after Lucas stopped making the actual episodes.

Ebert said Star Wars was one of the best films he had ever seen when it came out in 1977.

You know Pixar's John Carter of Mars when released sometime in the next few years will wipe the floor with this poorly produced pixar knockoff/ video game cutscene, known as clone wars.

 Pixar's doing that? Wow. That will be awesome indeed, and will show the difference between a TV show put on the big screen and an actual feature where they try.

I have to say, though, John Carter is a very strange choice for Pixar--its not very kid-friendly. And its pretty sexist as well. I'm sure it will be either highly sanitized when it actually gets made, to the chagrin of fans, or it will be mostly faithful, to the chagrin of some audiences. Unless they are going to make this their first teen-oriented project, more in the vein of Beowolf. Which would be kind of neat. It'll take a lot of skill to translate the story to the screen because its so ridiculously silly.

Gaffer Tape said:

I was just re-reading zombie's Secret History of Star Wars, specifically the appendix about the sequel trilogy, and it made me wonder.  If Lucas had gone this exact same route only made it a CG feature based around the original trilogy, would any of us be more interested to see it?  I honestly think I probably would go out there opening night and check it out if that was the case, especially if he managed to get Mark Hamill to voice Luke (doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility at all).  Under normal circumstances, I would still roll my eyes that he was milking the cash cow, but lately it seems that all Star Wars is is about the Clone Wars era, so much so that it would be refreshing to see anything on the big screen with Luke and co, just to prove they still exist, and that we didn't just imagine those three other movies that happened a long time ago.

Any thoughts?

 Even though I'd be afraid it would ruin everything I'd still go see it. In fact, I think I would see anything with Luke and the original characters in it, even if they aren't portrayed by the original cast. I might not like it, but I'd at least check it out.

Actually, I've noticed a lot of fan-boys are the ones giving it the good reviews. If you go to a lot of sci-fi sites theres many good reviews, whereas the legitimate press generally is unkind. As far as Rottentomatoes is concerned, the Top Critics is really all thats relevant, because if you want to find out what the critical consensus is you want Variety and Newsweek and Washington Post, not CHUD and AICN and the like.

Its more the fact that there was a birth rate bulge from 1945-1955. I don't think talent is really all that more rarer than it once was, but as quick as all the majors were born all at once, they'll probably all start dying at the same time too. We might see Lucas, Spielberg, Coppola, Scorsese, Ridley Scott, Harrison Ford, Dustin Hoffman, John Woo, Pacino, DeNiro, Walter Murch, George Romero, Schwarzenegger, Michael Douglas, Richard Donner, Terry Gilliam, Christopher Walken and Jack Nicholson all die within years of each other. I think the celebrity death watch will really make visible the aging crisis in the USA when that starts to happen.

Someone said this at TFN...my first thought was 'typical defensive gusher stuff' , but now I think the guy may have had a point:

The Dark Knight is a sort of prestige title for Warner. It could almost be like another Titanic. Its going to dethrone Star Wars before the month's over and if they push it enough it could come within striking distance of Titanic. The whole "box office race" is seen as a significant competition, to be able to catch Titanic--no ones ever come this close.

Anyway, Warner probably wants Dark Knight to go as far as they can take it, even at the expense of other films of their own. If they have $20 million in advertising this month, they might still take 50% of that for Dark Knight, even if its a month old, and sacrifice some of their new films.

Well, Warner is also distributing Clone Wars. For a Star Wars film it really hasn't had a huge publicity push. You see the odd subway poster and the odd commercial. But less than what is typical--the vast majority of the buzz is from LFL itself and from fans. And right now analysts are predicting late teens for the B.O.--I think thats an underestimation, I think it'll do early 20's because of the grown-up audience that will come opening night and give it a bit of a kick.

But given the terrible word of mouth--this is one of the only times in recent history that a studio has actually enforced a review embargo, even after they invited critics to the early screening--they are probably just letting Clone War slip out there, make more than its meagre $10 million (or so) budget, and then disappear.

In other words they don't want it to dethrone Dark Knight. It would look good if Dark Knight stayed number one again--and it would look very bad if Clone Wars was the title that finally took it down. I think they might honestly want the film to underperform.

Just wait another ten when the baby boomers start dropping like flys. It'll be a celebrity apocalypse.

I happen to be of the opinion that Tropic Thunder will be number one this weekend. But I could be wrong.

Once Upon A Galaxy is one of the best books about the making of a Star Wars film. You can get it for about $10-20 on e-bay. Its a paperback. If you want a preview of the goodness inside, read this:

http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/magicofempire.html

Theres a book called The Making of Return of the Jedi that was created as a sort of follow-up. Its almost as good, but Jedi just isn't interesting to learn about. Also, Once Upon the Galaxy is literally just a personal journal a guy made while on the production, so its more personal and anecdotal, whereas the ROTJ is a standard making of book, but it has access to things that the ESB book lacks, like call-sheet reproductions and private memos.