Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Attack of the Clones Leaked

Posted by Hemos on Mon Mar 18, 2002 08:12 AM
from the i'll-believe-it-when-i-see-it dept.
dgris writes "ain't it cool is running a purported review of Epidsode II. Harry Knowles is claiming to have gotten a secret screening of the film while at the South by Southwest festival in Austin, TX. Short story: he loves it." Like the department sez: I'll believe it when I see it. After Phantom, I'm willing to wait a bit to see it.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Attack of the Clones Leaked | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 309 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Yeah uh-huh. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Romancer (19668) <romancer @ d e a t h s d o o r.com> on Monday March 18 2002, @08:15AM (#3180481) Journal
    And the publicity from this review is accidental too.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Naaah... by rudib (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @08:17AM
    • Re:Naaah... by nookieman (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @08:30AM
  • omg by Apreche (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @08:18AM
    • imho - BS. by mooZENDog (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @08:31AM
      • Re:imho - BS. by EvilAlien (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @08:42AM
        • Re:imho - BS. by flewp (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @08:31PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Wow! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Wind_Walker (83965) on Monday March 18 2002, @08:19AM (#3180489) Homepage Journal

    What? You say this guy saw the new Star Wars movie well before it was supposed to be displayed publically? And he has proof of this?

    Wait, you mean he has no proof? You mean he gives no sources for his information? You mean everything he says is peripheral information about the film that could have been gleaned from the trailers? You mean that there's no reason to believe that this is real?

    I'll also wager that tomorrow, we'll see a Slashdot story detailing how the review was "forcably removed" from the site by Lucasarts (who will deny any involvement, because they're not involved) and "pirated" copies of the text will circulate around the 'net, hyping up an already overhyped movie.

    This is not the review you are looking for. You can go about your business. Move along.

    • Re:Wow! (Score:5, Funny)

      by Nailer (69468) on Monday March 18 2002, @08:31AM (#3180526)
      This is not the review you are looking for. You can go about your business. Move along.

      This isn't the movie I'm looking for. I can go about my business. I'll move along now...

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Wow! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Geek In Training (12075) <cb398&hotmail,com> on Monday March 18 2002, @08:46AM (#3180576) Homepage
      Wait, you mean he has no proof?

      I just got done reading the article, and you're way off base here.

      Occasionally, some reveiwers on AICN seems liek they haven't really seen the movie. But this is Harry, the proprietor of the site. And after reading the entire review (which you clearly did NOT), it's highly probable that he has seen the movie.

      The details of the fight scenes between Yoda and the Count. The insight into Anakin being a "mass murderer."

      Trust me, he's seen the movie. And if you hadn't been in such a rush to get karma points, you might have read the article and posting something REALLY insightful.

      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Wow! by Wind_Walker (Score:3) Monday March 18 2002, @09:11AM
        • Re:Wow! by Geek In Training (Score:3) Monday March 18 2002, @10:56AM
          • Re:Wow! by Wind_Walker (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @11:17AM
        • Re:Wow! by wolvernova (Score:1) Tuesday March 19 2002, @03:48PM
        • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Wow! (Score:5, Funny)

        by TrevorB (57780) on Monday March 18 2002, @02:21PM (#3182286) Homepage
        The details of the fight scenes between Yoda and the Count

        What, are Henson and co. running out of muppets or something?

        One! Two! Three!!! Three Jedi Hah hah hah hah!
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Wow! by Geek In Training (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @02:59PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Longtime AICN reader (Score:5, Informative)

      by artemis67 (93453) on Monday March 18 2002, @08:52AM (#3180588) Homepage
      I don't know Harry personally, but I'm a long-time reader of AICN. IMO, Harry's got a lot more integrity than that. I would find it very hard to believe that Harry faked a review.
      [ Parent ]
      • Funny.... by Kibo (Score:3) Monday March 18 2002, @09:02AM
      • *snort* by Pope (Score:3) Monday March 18 2002, @10:09AM
        • Re:*snort* by Latent IT (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @02:04PM
        • Huh? by waldoj (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @02:49PM
      • Re:Longtime AICN reader (Score:5, Informative)

        by malducin (114457) on Monday March 18 2002, @10:28AM (#3180955) Homepage

        Well don't know him either and I don't care much for this review. But talking about Knowles, AICN and integrity, well that might be a bit of a stretch. Do you remember the OScar debacle from a few years ago or his apperance on Politically Incorrect. You should read the articles on Film Threat about him and some of his associates:

        DECONSTRUCTING HARRY: AIN'T IT UNETHICAL? (part one) [filmthreat.com]
        THE GEEKS STRIKE BACK: DECONSTRUCTING HARRY (part two) [filmthreat.com]
        AIN'T IT CRIMINAL: DECONSTRUCTING HARRY (part 3) [filmthreat.com]
        AIN'T-HE-A-FOOL: JUDGMENT DAY FOR JOE HALLENBECK [filmthreat.com]
        AIN'T IT BACKLASH: HARRY GOES ON TV, BUT TV GOES OFF ON HARRY [filmthreat.com]
        HARRY & ME [filmthreat.com]

        I mean if is willing to pimp a script from one of his friends without telling anyone, it's abit of a stretch to talk about integrity and his site. Maybe instead of begging for presents he should put ads like Slashdot.

        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Longtime AICN reader (Score:5, Interesting)

          by artemis67 (93453) on Monday March 18 2002, @11:39AM (#3181258) Homepage
          Well, I'm not going to get into a lengthy defense of Harry because, like I said, I don't know the guy. However, just reading that first article you linked to is SUCH A BLATANT HATCHET JOB BY A COMPETITOR that it's downright silly. I mean, one of their points against AICN is (and I quote), "Really bad writing". Huh?!? Is that proof of his lack of ethics or proof that FilmThreat despises AICN? (Probably the latter.) In another part they blast AICN for using psuedonyms like Moriarty and Elektra, saying that "they might be studio hacks," but then a few paragraphs later go on to identify Moriarty as Drew McWeeny, an AICN staffer. So, which is it? Is Moriarty a "studio hack" writing puff pieces or an AICN staffer? (Everyone at AICN knows he is the latter.)

          The fact that the half-dozen tirades you linked to all came from FilmThreat tells me that they have an axe to grind. Probably they are just trying to siphon off users from AICN.

          Quite a sad way to build an audience.
          [ Parent ]
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Longtime AICN reader by MonkeyBoy (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @10:47AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Wow! by javert (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @08:58AM
    • Re:Wow! by erasmus_ (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @08:59AM
    • Re:Wow! by BoBaBrain (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @09:38AM
    • Re:Wow! (Score:4, Funny)

      by Paradise Pete (33184) <listcatcher@nOSPAM.fastmail.fm> on Monday March 18 2002, @09:48AM (#3180806) Journal
      I'll also wager that tomorrow, we'll see a Slashdot story detailing how the review was "forcably removed"

      Given that this is Slashdot, it probably will say "forcably."

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Wow! by prator (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @10:13AM
    • HEY MODERATORS! by NeMon'ess (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @02:34PM
    • Re:Wow! by MeNTyFReSh (Score:1) Tuesday March 19 2002, @03:45AM
    • Re:Wow! by joshsisk (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @12:25PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Aint it cool = don't it suck by jack deadmeat (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @08:20AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Grain of salt, but don't dismiss entirely by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @08:25AM
  • probably not... by marcro (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @08:31AM
  • Gungans in the last trailer by rrdejay (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @08:32AM
  • pretty reliable... (Score:5, Informative)

    by dioscaido (541037) on Monday March 18 2002, @08:33AM (#3180535)
    I've been a follower of Harry for many years. When he was an unknown, he was a fantastic source for Episode I rumors. Now that he is 'famous' his connections have increased exponentially, and I find their reviews and rumors to be pretty reliable. I don't doubt he got to see it. A months ago they had a full script review and, surprise, the newest trailer confirms what they wrote. As to whether its any good, I have to agree with a previous poster that many reviews are more fanboy slobbering than reviews, but I'm a fanboy so I usually aggree with what they say!
  • You know, (Score:5, Funny)

    by yellowstone (62484) on Monday March 18 2002, @08:38AM (#3180548) Homepage Journal
    When I saw this, I screamed like a little girl. I mean it was like Uncle Tony grabbed my pantied ass. I jumped about 12 feet up in the air and squealed. WHAT A THRILL!
    When people say "too much information", this is exactly what they're talking about.
    • Re:You know, by KilljoyAZ (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @10:04AM
    • Re:You know, by fatbastard10101 (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @12:39PM
  • I read an article somewhere... by JPriest (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @08:39AM
  • To the naysayers... by billmaly (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @08:46AM
  • Harry Knowles has zero credibility (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 18 2002, @08:46AM (#3180575)
    "Leaked copy" my cowardly yellow anonymous ass. "Planted copy" is more like it. Lucas is obviously scared by the success of the LOTR and Matrix franchises, and is desperate to drive up those opening weekend grosses (since that's all the big-budget movies really care about anymore), so he's pandering to the fans he drove away with "Phantom Menace" by having Knowles rave about "Clones" on the internet. Don't forget that Knowles is the same guy that raved over Phantom Menace, raved over the Emmerich/Devlin debacle Godzilla, raved over Armageddon and even admitted liking Battlefield Earth before later retracting the positive review. He's the go-to guy for studios that want to target the geek demographic, because he's the Mikey of the cinematic world.

    (He'll also print anything on his tabloid website without bothering to fact-check in any capacity. I tested this once by making up the most outrageous thing possible and sending it to him in a drunken fit - do a search on aintitcool.com for "mammoth".)
  • Wasn't It Cool News? by the_rev_matt (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @08:53AM
  • He probably saw it. I won't argue that.

    But his opinion is crap ever since he claimed that he "cried at the end of Armagedeon". What a sell out. They were his site's biggest sponsor at the time.

    I shit you not.
  • by Rogerborg (306625) on Monday March 18 2002, @08:58AM (#3180613) Homepage

    Sad to tell, anyone who's followed Harry's fortunes over the years has seen him metamorphosise from a rebel outsider into a minor celebrity, feted by both individual directors and (gasp) Big Bad Studios just like any other influential mainstream reviewer. Even now, Harry still (very occasionally) gripes about mainstream reviewers, while at the same time accepting the exact same special access to sets and screenings. The only difference is that Harry explains exactly how the whole sordid business works, with reviewers buying themselves celebrity status by giving good review-bites that guarantee that their name will go up on a poster or trailer, thereby elevating them into more expensive and high class whores. And yet despite receiving the rewards, Harry would like us to believe that he is still untainted by the influence and can be trusted. This idea seems to flow from the fact that Harry explains the context behind each viewing (whether you want to hear it or not) and writes informally. It's superfically convincing, but the style of presentation is irrelevant other than for entertainment value, it's the substance that matters for a reviewer.

    I am simply unwilling to believe the spy-games circumstances that Harry claims. If he has seen this film, it is with the full sanction of Lucasarts, on the implicit or explicit understanding that he would give it a rave review, and that he would imply that it was a rogue showing. And note carefully, he leaves us to infer that by describing his feelings (which nobody can prove or disprove), but never actually makes a factual statement to support it. You have a think about that.

    Don't get me wrong. Perhaps it is a good movie and an honest review. But Harry can simply no longer be trusted. There are just too many examples of him raving about movies to which he has received special access for him to be a credible independent reviewer any more. I won't claim he has sold out, because he never claimed to want to be outside the system. In fact, he has made every effort to insinuate himself into the whole sorry cycle of review-reward, and I think this may very well be his crowning glory.

    Sorry Harry, you used to be someone I could trust. Now you're just a shallow parody of Comic Book Guy. The circle is complete; now you are the studios' bitch. Ain't it ironic?

  • What is the fascination..? by popeydotcom (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @09:00AM
    • Re:What is the fascination..? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Kibo (256105) <goodjobbob@NOspam.hotmail.com> on Monday March 18 2002, @09:22AM (#3180704) Homepage
      Well, I know why I sometimes make an extra effort to see a showing on the first day.

      Watching a movie on your tv and in a theater are obviously different experiences. But there is one really key difference. Seeing it in a theater is a community experience. When you know a movie is really good and will just rock you, it is a very different experience seeing it last show of the first night and a week or so later. Out in seattle there's a bunch of cinemas, maybe not the most by land area or population, but there are a lot. Most of them are near good, and occasionally cheap restaraunts and even near by. Some, like the most excellent Cinerama are not. The better the movie, especially on a friday night the parking can be brutal. And standing outside in the crisp night air, possibly getting rained on, for hours on end looses its charm just as quickly as one might imagine. But it's worth it. The people who are there understand that it is an event and they are invested in it. A setting like that is almost enough to make you cry during Pearl Harbor. No, not for that reason, stop being so cynical.

      Basically, it's the same reason people put chocolate sauce on ice cream.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:What is the fascination..? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Detritus (11846) on Monday March 18 2002, @09:46AM (#3180799) Homepage
      One reason to see a film early in its run is the quality of the print. The print degrades with each showing due to scratches, wear and breakage.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:What is the fascination..? by Jaycatt (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @11:37AM
  • Harry needs another spanking (Score:4, Informative)

    by Demona (7994) on Monday March 18 2002, @09:02AM (#3180629) Homepage
    Guess the first [filmthreat.com] and even the second [filmthreat.com] weren't enough for him.
  • Can I say FAKE!!!!! by BaddMatt (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @09:03AM
  • Lets get some facts by count_dooku (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @09:04AM
  • I Doubt He Saw It by Spencerian (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @09:13AM
  • My prediction by Jucius Maximus (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @09:14AM
  • Hypocracy (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Wind_Walker (83965) on Monday March 18 2002, @09:15AM (#3180682) Homepage Journal
    It never ceases to amaze me how quickly Slashdot visitors forget their animosity towards the MPAA.

    We have countless stories proclaiming that the MPAA is destroying Fair Use, that they're devil spawn, that thousands of loyal Slashdot readers are boycotting the MPAA....

    But then, Star Wars comes out. Lord of the Rings comes out. Resident Evil comes out. And all of the sudden, you're forking over your hard-earned money to these devils.

    I have not seen a movie (aside from free TV movies) in the past year and a half. And I won't. I have scruples.

    • Not necessarily hypocrisy... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by GeekLife.com (84577) on Monday March 18 2002, @09:38AM (#3180757) Homepage
      Possibly different people. Believe it or not, slashdot users are allowed to have different opinions from one another, even if it's rare to see them expressed.
      [ Parent ]
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Hypocracy by matt2413 (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @09:46AM
    • Re:Hypocracy by Lonath (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @09:51AM
      • Re:Hypocracy by dlb (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @01:30PM
        • Re:Hypocracy by Lonath (Score:2) Wednesday March 20 2002, @12:40PM
    • Idiocy (Score:5, Insightful)

      by tswinzig (210999) on Monday March 18 2002, @09:56AM (#3180832) Journal
      It never ceases to amaze me how quickly Slashdot visitors forget their animosity towards the MPAA.

      And it never ceases to amaze me how a reader of slashdot can assume there is no plurality here, amongst at least half a million others. We don't all harbor a blinding hate of the MPAA.

      I wish the MPAA would drop their stance on a lot of issues. They wish I would stop using DeCSS to view DVD's on alternate OS's. They wish I would stop using Morpheus to view certain things.

      But that doesn't mean I won't go and entertain myself for $8.

      I have not seen a movie (aside from free TV movies) in the past year and a half. And I won't. I have scruples.

      You are free to protest it, just don't expect EVERYONE on slashdot to do the same. And because one part of slashdot is like you and complains loudly, don't expect another part of slashdot not to like and discuss upcoming movies.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Hypocracy by GospelHead821 (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @10:01AM
    • Re:Hypocracy by Chris Pimlott (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @10:55AM
      • Re:Hypocracy by Wind_Walker (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @11:20AM
        • Re:Hypocracy by joshsisk (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @12:53PM
        • Re:Hypocracy by Chris Pimlott (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @04:03PM
        • Re:Hypocracy by Nyarly (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @04:34PM
    • Re:Hypocracy (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Midnight Ryder (116189) <midryder@midnightryder.com> on Monday March 18 2002, @11:13AM (#3181131) Homepage

      I don't remember ever saying that I was going to boycott the RIAA or MPAA. Heck, I don't even remember a general consensus on Slashdot so far that said that the however many hundred thousand readers of Slashdot was going to boycott the MPAA.

      Heck, I don't see a general consensus on /. about ANYTHING! That's why it's such a great place for discussion - otherwise CmdrTaco would post an article, we'd all agree with it, and move on. No discussion would be had. Instead we have tons of people with diverse beliefs and ideas exchanging them. Sometimes it's meaningful, sometimes it's just a flamewar.

      Me personally, I go to the movies every weekend. I don't boycott the MPAA, because I know they will just use it for an example of how the "Evil Internet and P2P File Sharing Applications Are Killing The Industry". I spend effort instead with making sure people know what's going on, and contacting my Congresscritters (the people who make the laws that protect the MPAA), and encouraging others to do the same.

      I somewhat boycott the RIAA, but, if I download an MP3, like it an enjoy it, I buy the CD. No need to FURTHER fuck the artist. Bad enough they don't make much money from the CD I purchase. Again, I spend my efforts differntly, trying to change the system with what little noise I can make.

      I use both Open Source (OpenBSD and Linux) and Close Source (Windows 2000 and Amiga OS) Operating Systems. I write Closed Source applications, but, prefer Open Source tools (I'm a game developer by night, Industrial Automation programmer by day) I'm working towards the idea of decaying my games into GPL'ed code after a certain timeperiod so that others can continue to enjoy my games long after they have been released - but one of the important issues is making enough money to continue to make games, so up front Closed Source is an important issue. Long term, Open Source is also very important.

      Ok, why the rambing additional information that has nothing to do with the MPAA Boycott? To illustrate something - people on /. are different from each other. Not all of us represent the same thing. Not all of us post our opinions on every article, agreeing or disagreeing with what's said (in fact, if we did, no one would bother to get any work done since there would be something like 200,000 reponses PER ARTICLE. Ouch. And the /. servers could hardly handle it!)

      So don't stand up and make a blanket statment that all /. readers (or even editors. Yeah, it's rare that I stand up for them ;-) agreed to the idea of boycotting the MPAA. Or the RIAA. Or Microsoft Products. Or... anything. Because we are all individuals, with different ideas, and damned well don't agree on ANYTHING! ;-)

      [ Parent ]
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Hypocracy by alexjohns (Score:3) Monday March 18 2002, @11:30AM
    • Re:Hypocracy by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @11:58AM
    • Re:Hypocracy by kindbud (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @01:39PM
    • Re:Hypocracy by ChaosDiscordSimple (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @03:05PM
    • Re:Hypocracy by Zenithal (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @05:31PM
    • Re:fuel is not the only problems of India by The Grey Eminence (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @01:09PM
    • 5 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • sad but true, and a question for the future by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @09:20AM
  • New subscription features by Sapphon (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @09:34AM
  • did he see what he thought he saw? by Madman (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @09:42AM
  • Why do I not buy this? by Proteus Child (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @09:48AM
  • Guys, guys, guys... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by aziraphale (96251) on Monday March 18 2002, @10:04AM (#3180849)
    Listen to yourselves. You really think Lucasfilm aren't aware that the majority of the fan community has decided this film will suck? That Lucasfilm doesn't care what the mass of fans thinks about this upcoming film? That Lucasfilm isn't terrified that they won't break box office records opening weekend?

    The ONLY way they can make the impact they want is to do everything in their power to make people see that the film isn't going to be crap. To that end - the latest trailer is an action packed monster that gives away the entire plot; they dragged Harry Knowles into a room and showed him a copy of the rough cut; they are willing to leak the entire plot if it will persuade the average Star Wars punter that he will see Star Wars regain its status as quality entertainment.

    And you know what - I bet it'll have some effect. I'm more inclined to go see the film after the last trailer than I was after 'Forbidden Love'. I'm even more inclined to go see it after reading Harry's review. I'm probably not alone.

    Why assume that Harry hasn't seen the film when it makes perfect sense for Lucasfilm to want him to see it? They just upped their box office receipts...
  • SW2: AotC _not_ at SXSW by delphin42 (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @10:06AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Yeah right (Score:4, Funny)

    by CMiYC (6473) on Monday March 18 2002, @10:16AM (#3180905) Homepage Journal
    Judging by the quaility of the site, and what I know about SXSW, I'm not buying it. I'm not sure I understand how anyone at SXSW would have acquired a copy, and I'm further uncertain why this guy was so cool he got to see it. If you look at the comments after the review, I understand why he threw this together. The people who read his site often are all applauding him. So he's riding on a cloud right now because he is "so cool." Ain't that cool.

    And if by the 1,000,000th of a percent of a chance that I'm wrong, oh well. The guy still needs to learn to use a smaller font.
    • Re:Yeah right by Mad Browser (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @11:21AM
    • Re:Yeah right by TotallyUseless (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @11:52AM
  • Of course Palpatine is evil! (Score:3, Funny)

    by reachinmark (536719) on Monday March 18 2002, @10:17AM (#3180910) Homepage
    What is Harry Knowles smoking?

    ... remember thinking that Lucas could be soft in the head for trying to fool the audience into thinking Palpatine isn't Sidious. I mean we can see that in the credits. What the hell? Right? See that is so like a self-centered audience. To sit there and think they are the center of the universe. The Palpatine-Sidious thing from the first film... The trade dispute...

    Of course Palpatine is evil, doesn't anyone remember Return of the Jedi anymore? (whas it *that* bad?) Who's that dude zapping Luke with the magic bolts of lightening at the end of the film? Could it be.. "Emperor Palpatine"!?

  • Harry liked Episode I, too. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nobodyman (90587) on Monday March 18 2002, @10:55AM (#3181045)

    Not to say that it's going to be bad, but let's put it all in perspective. True, Harry Knowles says that Episode II is great. But keep in mind that He said the same thing about Episode I.

    What's worse, he likes Jar-Jar too. In quoting from his review of Episode I, "Meesa luvs him!".

    So you can put me in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp as well.
  • confirmed by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @11:42AM
    • Re:confirmed by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @04:38PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • AICN did it before.... by Durandel1020 (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @11:43AM
  • What about N'Sync?! by gimlix2 (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @12:04PM
  • At South by Southwest?? by Self-Important (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @12:12PM
  • Harry also liked the idea of the Scooby Doo Movie by aztektum (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @12:18PM
  • You don't get a screening this early unless... by SetupWeasel (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @12:23PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Knowles is Odd by KelsoLundeen (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @12:32PM
  • does this fool EVER say anything by abolith (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @12:36PM
  • David Brin's Theory (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DavidBrown (177261) on Monday March 18 2002, @12:43PM (#3181654) Journal
    This discussion reminds me of David Brin's theory that Anakin "bringing balance to the force" is a means of defeating the two great evils terrorizing the Galaxy: The Sith and The Jedi Order. Essentially, the Jedi are elitist fascists that disrespect the inferior populace as much as the Sith - it's just that they have an attitude of nobliese oblige rather and aspirations of exploitation.

    I hope this is developed, because in this context, Darth Vader is a hero - defeating both the Palpatine and Yoda and replacing the corrupt Jedi Order (I wonder if these celibates have as much problems as the Catholic Priesthood?) with something that's a bit more humanistic.

    Perhaps in this context the Jedi Science of mitocholorians (sp?) is just another example of their internal corruption - they should be training everyone in the use of the force who show potential, and not attempting to exclude people like young Anakin who was considered too old to begin training.

    • Re:David Brin's Theory (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Spencerian (465343) on Monday March 18 2002, @02:08PM (#3182205) Homepage Journal
      You hit the nail right on the head.

      The elitist (yet still cool!) Jedi can't read into their own prophesies. Someone else (probably from Space.com's "Phantom Heresies" series got this idea published earlier, but I'll repeat here for fun.

      The Jedi prophesy that the Chosen One would "bring balance to the Force" works, but as the Jedi discover, not in their favor. The Force doesn't need the Jedi or Sith--they need it more. The Chosen One creates the balance by DESTROYING some 10,000 Jedi and apprentices, leaving only one master and one apprentice on each side (Emperor/Vader, and Yoda/Obi-Wan).

      The reason that these Force users are around also has something to do with their use of foretelling through the Force. Most Jedi, like Qui-Gon, probably do the "keep your mind on the here and now" thing. That philosophy ultimately gets them killed. Yoda and Obi-Wan can SEE the end coming--and take measures for another day. They can even see their demise, more or less, as Obi-Wan predicted to Luke before sacrificing himself to keep Vader from hindering Luke's first Death Star escape.

      The Emperor and Vader use the same talent, but it seems that mucking with the Dark Side doesn't give you the clarity that the Jedi had--otherwise, both Palpatine and Vader would have gotten a vague clue that they were about to part ways the Hard Way.

      The Jedi have survived as stoics (like the Vulcans of Star Trek fame). They know that emotion taints the use of the Force. That's why they really should have left Anakin alone, but their curiosity got them killed.

      Yep, ultimately, Anakin is a hero--he was the ONLY person capable of taking out the Emperor, who was more powerful than anyone except Vader. The Emperor knew this and subjugated Anakin to prevent what he ultimately did--kill the Emperor.

      Why must Anakin become a Sith? It was the only way to get close enough to the Emperor.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:David Brin's Theory by LoFat ByLine (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @08:36PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Don't get your hopes up yet... by NanoGator (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @12:52PM
  • harry is hollywood's lapdog by SethJohnson (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @12:53PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • advance tickets? by prizzznecious (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @01:01PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • He saw it, and I think the studio orchestrated it by Mean_Nishka (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @01:06PM
  • Prrff! (Score:5, Funny)

    by MouseR (3264) on Monday March 18 2002, @01:41PM (#3182030) Homepage
    This guys says he's seen a rough cut of episode 2.

    Big deal.

    I've seen final cuts of episode 4, 5 and 6!

    And guess what? (SPOILER ALERT:) Vador is Luke's father!!
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • The real question is by xihr (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @02:16PM
  • Leaked...? by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @02:47PM
  • Can somebody put up a mirror? by GPS Pilot (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @03:25PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • It's gonna stink. by capologist (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @05:09PM
  • I don't care about the damn movie by Burgundy Advocate (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @05:10PM
  • Harry on CNN today... by niftyeric (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @06:19PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Reviews of AOTC from independant sources ... by SmokySalmonHead (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @11:04PM
  • Smells like a PR stunt. by Dark250 (Score:1) Tuesday March 19 2002, @01:23AM
  • Uncle Tony by Squeeze Truck (Score:2) Tuesday March 19 2002, @03:26AM
  • Book sales anyone? by NeilArrow (Score:1) Tuesday March 19 2002, @09:35AM
  • Re:Haha. What some people will do to get visitors! by bje2 (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @08:37AM
  • by nookieman (548184) <kiel@NOsPAm.nookie.dk> on Monday March 18 2002, @08:39AM (#3180552)
    Yoda Says: Optimise JAVA code by inlining methods you can. Optimising slashdot karma by inlining article you cannot.
    [ Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:Not exactly a big secret... by bofkentucky (Score:1) Monday March 18 2002, @09:23AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:I wonder by hrieke (Score:2) Monday March 18 2002, @10:25AM
  • by NanoGator (522640) on Monday March 18 2002, @12:39PM (#3181615) Homepage Journal
    I'm not so sure that it's a matter of people acting like fanboys of the movie, but most of us at Slashdot probably have something riding on Star Wars success. I'm willing to bet most of the people frequenting here have some interest in Sci-Fi. Star Wars has a way of expanding Sci-Fi to a greater audience, provided it doesn't suck. A greater appeal for sci-fi would certainly make a lot of our lives easier. If Star Wars ep 4 hadn't opened the doors to sci-fi, we'd all have to hide in shadows just to watch Doctor Who ;). If Episode II stinks, we won't be able to take our significant others to see the next one, or possibly any other sci-fi movie.

    As for the computer industry, Ep2 could give it a serious boost. Digital artists would be more in demand and we may start to see more movies done entirely digital. If this happens, we could see a serious upgrade to theaters aka digital projectors. My hope is that one day movie theaters upgrade to the new projectors, it might mean an increase of frame rate (smoother motion...) is possible, and for viewing on a big screen that'd really be nice. Ep2 could help usher that in, but not if it sucks.

    You don't have to be a Star Wars fan to feel the benefit of a good Star Wars movie. I have virtually no interest in seeing this movie, but I do hope for its succees anyway. It could mean a rather lucrative career for me.
    [ Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • 29 replies beneath your current threshold.