I don't need to watch CW in order to get a vibe about whether I'd like it. ROTJ, TPM, AOTC, and ROTS were more than enough.
Ebert trashes "Star Wars: The Clone Wars"
- Thread starter Flying Spaghetti Monster
- Start date
I don't need to watch CW in order to get a vibe about whether I'd like it. ROTJ, TPM, AOTC, and ROTS were more than enough.
All the reviews on Metacritic are horrid. Looks like this will be a DVD rental for me.
Snails are hermaphrodites. sex takes between 2 to 6 hours as they both try to inseminate the other's female reproductive organs. Unfortunately the trip from outside in takes so long that 99.9 percent of the sperm from any sexual session is eaten by both parties own it's way to where it needs to be. Which is why they fire "love darts" at each other which damages their lover in such a way as as to decrease the number of sperm eaten.
Hutt sex would rock out so hard.
Although I have no idea what Jabba was planning to do with Leia in Jedi?
Hutt sex would rock out so hard.
Although I have no idea what Jabba was planning to do with Leia in Jedi?
Apparently it causes the female sexual organ to contract. but it's much like a 70's video game with the two of them trying to shoot the other one while remaining unhit themself. Speculation says that it's the basis of the Cupids arrow myth.
They bite and rub a lot and wail with their antenna.
Google is my friend.
They bite and rub a lot and wail with their antenna.
Google is my friend.
Considering dialogue issues on 2005's Revenge of the Sith should be laid at the feet of Tom Stoppard and Lucas only has a story credit on this summer's Indiana Jones film, I am not sure he has produced much dialogue "recently."
He approves or vetoes everything.
he could have shelfed the movie for being shit.
he didn't.
he could have shelfed the movie for being shit.
he didn't.
Um ... Tom F***KING Stoppard. Do you know who he is?
Kind of like saying to Neil Simon, "You know, Neil, you just can't write comedy."
--Ted
Who the heck is Neil Simon?
I thought the whole 'Tom Stoppard did the dialogue to ROTS' thing was just a rumour, never confirmed? Even if true, though, just because Stoppard has done great work in the past doesn't mean it ought to have been immune to oversight, to say nothing of being overwritten when that horrendous Anakin/Padmé dialogue started giving people aneurysms.
EDIT: Incidently, the local paper gave Clone Wars it's worst possible rating: zero out of five stars. The review itself was largely a collection of strung-together insults directed at Lucas and those who abet him.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
I thought the whole 'Tom Stoppard did the dialogue to ROTS' thing was just a rumour, never confirmed? Even if true, though, just because Stoppard has done great work in the past doesn't mean it ought to have been immune to oversight, to say nothing of being overwritten when that horrendous Anakin/Padmé dialogue started giving people aneurysms.
EDIT: Incidently, the local paper gave Clone Wars it's worst possible rating: zero out of five stars. The review itself was largely a collection of strung-together insults directed at Lucas and those who abet him.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
Well, I only needed to read part of the review to conclude that Ebert is an elitist moron. Just because the animators chose to employ a stylized character design rather than going for photorealism, he assumes that's because "corners were cut" on the animation. That's stupid -- like assuming that Picasso was too lazy to make his paintings look like real people. The goal of the creators of SW:TCW is to embrace stylization of the sort seen in the previous, 2D-animated Star Wars: Clone Wars miniseries. According to an article I read at Newsarama yesterday, they were inspired by the look of the toys based on the SW:CW characters, which showed them that the look of those characters translated to 3D in an interesting way.
Now, I'm not saying I particularly like the design style they've used or that I think it works well. But if Ebert can't understand the difference between deliberate stylization and laziness, then his opinion is not worth listening to.
Now, I'm not saying I particularly like the design style they've used or that I think it works well. But if Ebert can't understand the difference between deliberate stylization and laziness, then his opinion is not worth listening to.
And... how do you know the animators didn't choose this 'stylization', as you call it (when did 'stylized' become synonymous with 'ugly', I wonder?) because it was easier than a more realistic approach? Certainly less effort to have blocky, LEGO-style hair on your characters than having to render mobile hair, for instance.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
I'm certain that CW's style was chosen in part for economical reasons. Whatever the reasons for the stylistic choices behind CW, I respect those choices, and in a few ways, I like the result visually.
I was sort of looking forward to this.
That was, until I saw a commercial last night aimed at 11 year old girls. The one with the padawan chick holding the belching Hutt baby. I thought I was watching Bratz for a second.
This is not your father's Star Wars, more like your daughter's.
That was, until I saw a commercial last night aimed at 11 year old girls. The one with the padawan chick holding the belching Hutt baby. I thought I was watching Bratz for a second.
This is not your father's Star Wars, more like your daughter's.
I just read the reviews for this on Metacritic and lost pretty much all enthusiam I had for the movie. I mean it actually got worse reviews than The Phantom Menace, and that's saying something.
Now, I'm still going to watch this when it comes to DVD, and the TV series, because well it is still Star Wars afterall. I did like The Attack of the Clones, and Revenge of the Sith though, so I guess there is still a pretty good chance that I could like this. I'd be a little more willing to see this in theatres if it weren't for the fact that Tropic Thunder also opened today, and that is getting good reviews so far.
Now, I'm still going to watch this when it comes to DVD, and the TV series, because well it is still Star Wars afterall. I did like The Attack of the Clones, and Revenge of the Sith though, so I guess there is still a pretty good chance that I could like this. I'd be a little more willing to see this in theatres if it weren't for the fact that Tropic Thunder also opened today, and that is getting good reviews so far.
You just know that characters with wooden looking features had to appeal to Lucas in some twisted way.
It's funny but Ebert's review mimics those AICN reviews for the most part but with less histrionics.
It's funny but Ebert's review mimics those AICN reviews for the most part but with less histrionics.
Not just Ebert. Rotten Tomatoes has it at 22%. A sampling of what is being said. Ouch.
Like I said. Ouch.
Last edited:
It's at 22% over at Rotten Tomatoes, which is pretty remarkable. I doubt I'll ever see more than a couple of minutes of this turkey on cable.
