AICN Skewers "The Clone Wars"

[DarKush]

I liked Volume 1 of the animated series, but Volume 2 largely sucked. I'm guardedly optimistic about new movie even after reading those reviews.

I do agree with one point though. By returning to the Clone Wars, it takes away some of the suspense because we already know what happens to the main characters in ROTS. So I guess it falls to really making Ashoka Tano and Asajj Ventress and the clones really interesting, standout characters.

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Well the whole "show the future then show how they got there" thing CAN work... its just the time in between Episode 2 and 3 is no longer an area where that has much value. I mean, is the climax of this movie REALLY a lightsaber duel between Anakin and Dooku? I sure hope not. They dueled at the end of Episode 2, and at the beginning of 3!!!! I mean, it's true? what possible value or suspense or resonance could there be to a duel between the two in between their other two duels?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

And apparently your spelling/comprehension abilities.

I feel like your post is missing something... a verb perhaps?

Starting a sentence with "and"?

Did they tell you in school that you're not allowed to do that?

Then I guess you're not.

 

[CaptJimboJones]

AICN long ago lost any credibility when they started accepting bribes and payoffs from studios. I don't know if he still does it, but Harry K used to beg for "pwesents" (yes, he really spelled it that way) a few weeks before his birthday, basically asking the studios to send him all sorts of free shit (which included free travel to previews and premieres, etc). It completely erases any claim he has to impartiality.

Reviewers for the dreaded "mainstream media" (newspapers, magazines, etc) are typically prohibited by their employers from accepting gifts, travel, bribes, etc.

Of course, the idiots who review online have no such compunctions and greedily grab as much graft as they can, and thus you get things like positive reviews of "Godzilla."

 

[davejames]

Genndy Tartakovsky's Clone Wars was the only thing to come out of The Prequels that was universally praised and loved by the fans.

Universally? There are plenty out there, myself included, who didn't like the animated Clone Wars series. I wasn't able to watch more than a few of those things; vapid, poorly drawn, and dispensed in absurdly tiny increments as though the producers were trying to pass a kidney stone.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

I loved the look and style of it, but the novelty still wore off for me pretty fast. Even in small doses, I didn't find the characters or stories to be worth following.

 

[TGTheodore]

Reviewers for the dreaded "mainstream media" (newspapers, magazines, etc) are typically prohibited by their employers from accepting gifts, travel, bribes, etc.

Yep. It used to be we could accept gifts up to $20 in value, but even that's out in most LEGIT media companies. (But we DO get the t-shirts and soundtracks which of course are worth SO much that it guarantees a positive review for movies like Jaws V.)

--Ted

 

[TremblingBluStar]

Wasn't Star Wars made for kids or is that more revisionist history?

Are you saying the average kid film in 1977 had neck snapping, scenes with burnt corpses, piling bodies into a bonfire, people dying fiery deaths, and limbs being severed?

But then, I'm sick of this argument.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

Wasn't Star Wars made for kids or is that more revisionist history?

Are you saying the average kid film in 1977 had neck snapping, scenes with burnt corpses, piling bodies into a bonfire, people dying fiery deaths, and limbs being severed?

But then, I'm sick of this argument.

Well, I was 7 when I saw Star Wars with my parents, and no one even blinked at the bloodless "violence" of the movie. My nephews, ages 7 and 5, adore Star Wars, and again no adults think twice about anything gruesome in the movies - 'cause there's not really anything. Saw Raiders when I was 10 and the Alfred-Molina-with-spear-through-the-head and melting faces - now that felt a tad strong, but only a tad.

Made for kids does not mean stupid, lame and not worth enjoying. I still go see Disney movies by myself and read children's books - 'cause they are often good.

 

[Valar]

Wasn't Star Wars made for kids or is that more revisionist history?

Are you saying the average kid film in 1977 had neck snapping, scenes with burnt corpses, piling bodies into a bonfire, people dying fiery deaths, and limbs being severed?

But then, I'm sick of this argument.

This reminds me of an earlier argument I was having with someone, who said that the Dark Knight was too graphic for their kid. I asked him to come up with specific scenes that were violently graphic and he was dumbfounded- contrast that with the prequel where Darth Maul is severed in half and he brought his kids to see that movie. Just because the tone of a film is dour and serious doesn't make it "too graphic" for kids, conversely, just because a film is light hearted and upbeat doesn't mean it is solely meant for children. One must examine the themes in the narrative to judge who the film is aimed towards.

 

[JoeZhang]

Wasn't Star Wars made for kids or is that more revisionist history?

Are you saying the average kid film in 1977 had neck snapping, scenes with burnt corpses, piling bodies into a bonfire, people dying fiery deaths, and limbs being severed?

I don't know but it got the same certificate in the UK as bambi and watership down - which was "U" - the lowest certificate available - which means "universal" and suitable for all ages. So clearly the board of censorship felt that there was nothing unsuitable in it....

A review from the time said:

Last year it was Jaws, which gave us more dangerous frissons, and not long before that it was The Exorcist, with enough green slime to give us all nightmares. Inevitably 1977 was going to be the year of safer pleasures. Star Wars, let me tell you, wasn't given its U certificate for nothing. The only exclamation the producers want from you is "Wow!"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/1977/dec/27/derekmalcolmscenturyoffilm

 

[Tulin]

Genndy Tartakovsky's Clone Wars was the only thing to come out of The Prequels that was universally praised and loved by the fans.

Universally? There are plenty out there, myself included, who didn't like the animated Clone Wars series. I wasn't able to watch more than a few of those things; vapid, poorly drawn, and dispensed in absurdly tiny increments as though the producers were trying to pass a kidney stone.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

Yeah, the CW cartoon was just 90% flash-animated lightsaber battles and...that's about it. Overall, it was essentially pointless and repetitive.

Count me in as another who didn't like the GT mini-cartoon series.

It seemed aimed at the Samurai Jack crowd. The characters were bizarrely drawn and suddenly lone Jedi can move starships with the Force or somesuch nonsense.

It was NOT "universally" loved.

 

[Admiral_Young]

I'll still be seeing this...but not right away since I'm still recovering from surgery but probably in a month or two, hopefully it isn't that much of a box office flop that it will still be in theatres. The Clone Wars Visual Guide is a pretty good summary of what is in store for the movie and series and it got me excited and I wouldn't say that I'm a hyperfan or anything of Star Wars. The thing that is exciting me the most about this is Anakin's new padawan learner.

 

[V]

yeah jumping into discussion late here but there's the whole "Retraction" controversy now that AICN wasn't supposed to put up the review yet and now the studio is angry that now people will know IN ADVANCE that the "Clone Wars" stinks and now no one will watch it.

Hey, maybe you should make a quality product!

 

[IDIC]

As far as knowing how everything will unfold, that is specifically why they put in new characters. Of course you then get people complaining about the new characters coming out of no where with no previous reference...

 

[Mr. Adventure]

It sounds like Lucas made a kids show and the adults are mad about something that's not really meant for them in the first place.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

It seemed aimed at the Samurai Jack crowd.

Which crowd is that?

The crowd that enjoys well-written, imaginative stories that win four out of six Emmy nominations?

 

[CaptJimboJones]

yeah jumping into discussion late here but there's the whole "Retraction" controversy now that AICN wasn't supposed to put up the review yet and now the studio is angry that now people will know IN ADVANCE that the "Clone Wars" stinks and now no one will watch it.

Hey, maybe you should make a quality product!

Yes, apparently AICN broke the reviewers embargo, which is a legitimate issue and the studio had every right to request that the reviews be taken down.

That said, had the reviews been glowing "this is the best movie ever" kind of stuff, the studios very likely wouldn't have demanded that they be removed from the site.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

It sounds like Lucas made a kids show and the adults are mad about something that's not really meant for them in the first place.

If that's the case, then we're justifiably mad that Star Wars - which has the proven ability to be perfectly appealing to adults and kids alike - has been reduced to kid stuff aimed at enriching Toys R Us.

 

[OdoWanKenobi]

^The Star Wars toy line is aimed at adult collectors these days.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

That's true. I still give the figures to nephews and such as often as possible, though. Kids should get to enjoy Star Wars.

That's one thing I'll grant Lucas, even though I was disappointed with the prequels--kids frigging love them.