My biggest problem with it is that it's set in the flippin' CLONE WARS again.

I thought the new series was supposed to be set in the 30-odd years between the "new" trilogy and the "old" one. 

We already know what's to become of Anakin and Count Duckula.  I liked the cartoons that came out before Episode 3, but c'mon, there's plenty of room for new stories between the two trilogies.

Quote - Few people might not remember the feelings of betrayals the Return of the Jedi engendered in some people when it turned into an advertisment for "Ewok Teddy Bears" and all the gawd awful Ewok crap that followed the first three movies.  Apparently Lucas is just up to it again. :lol: LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL At least this stuff is not as revolting as Ewoks!  :lol: LOLOLOLOL

Hey now - none of that.  I happen to love Ewoks.  Especially with BBQ sauce.  Mmmm - good eating.

:)

Quote - FWIW - IMO Carrie Fisher is one of the absolute worst actresses to ever appear on the big screen.  Her awful, wooden acting in the original series put me in mind of a 6th-grade school play performance by a semi-talented middle school student.

I've seen her do a lot worse than even that in other......uh......."movies" that she's been in.  One of them being a likely career-ending performance in some Australian-made indie film about aliens abducting people in the jungle -- or something like that.

Carrie Fisher?  Oh, she's bad alright - no debate there.  But not even close to the worst.  Julie Roberts.  My goodness.  She doesn't act, she just plays herself in every movie.  And that face - egads.  Sea Biscuit had less of a horse face than she does.  Yikes.

But even Julie Roberts can't come close to the top of the list.  Nope, that honor in my book has to go, hands down mind you, to Madonna.  Wow.  Words cannot even express how absolutely terrible she was in every movie she was ever in.  Even the fact that the movies were such stinkers could disguise her absolute and total lack of talent.  When you can get blown away in the acting category by the likes of Gary Coleman and Brittany Spears, you just have no business being on film.  Or even in public for that matter.

Quote -
Just look at Final Fantasy:The Spirits Within and you'll get the point. It was the first animated feature to attempt photorealism and from that standpoint it was a technical milestone. But the movie bombed in the box office because its story was a letdown.

Somebody probably should have mentioned to the writers before hand that most sci fi fans aren't really much on preachy environmentalist new age rhetoric crap in there story lines.  Go figure.  Lol

Well, at least its not animated in the "dexter's laboratory" style cartoon unlike before. So they simply merged the dexter style and 3d together and they have a new product.

And, its easier to animate a model this way for using real models will demand too much perfection.

To add CONSPIRACY to the subject, the cabal reanimated the ooooold movie to brainwash the  kids and unsuspecting populace to turn from good to bad after a tragic experience in preparation to enslave us all by idolizing and symphatizing with Annakin. :O

Hey! I LOVE Dexter's Lab, and even Puffy Ami Uni!

Quote - To add CONSPIRACY to the subject, the cabal reanimated the ooooold movie to brainwash the  kids and unsuspecting populace to turn from good to bad after a tragic experience in preparation to enslave us all by idolizing and symphatizing with Annakin. :O

Well, kids aren't nearly as unsuspecting as we'd like to think.  In fact I have a feeling they are actually the ones running the cabal - it would explain a lot.  Lol

I think Final Fantasy is just being scapegoated as a reason to not do photorealism.  Look at The Polar Express and Beowulf - which had decent stories and were photorealistic.  So it is possible to have a successful photorealistic 3d movie.  I think it's more of an issue of marketing - if movie makers make films more cartoony (which Pixar admittedly does), then they able to attract a younger audience.

On a side note, in terms of bad actresses, Katie Holmes hasn't done anything since The Ice Storm that has been worth watching.

Quote - I think Final Fantasy is just being scapegoated as a reason to not do photorealism.  Look at The Polar Express and Beowulf - which had decent stories and were photorealistic.  So it is possible to have a successful photorealistic 3d movie.  I think it's more of an issue of marketing - if movie makers make films more cartoony (which Pixar admittedly does), then they able to attract a younger audience.

On a side note, in terms of bad actresses, Katie Holmes hasn't done anything since The Ice Storm that has been worth watching.

True, but she did push Tom Cruise of the deep end, which was worth watching, and it moves her stock up just slightly on the list as a result.   Lol

The other thing I don't like, and this was noticeable in the second trilogy, too, is the way Yoda talks.  Yes, he always talked strangely, but he didn't do it every sentence.

When Luke told Yoda that he wasn't afraid in ESB, Yoda did not famously say "Be, you will."  Be, you will."

GoM hit it.

Do you honestly think this is the best Lucas, who's movies have featured photo realistic 3d characters, could do?

The style and quality are specifically intended to be exactly as they are since they chose to exactly emulate the style of the 2d cartoon.

Do I think it was necessarily a great idea to go for this look? No. But at the same time I don't think they could have really produced a photo real series for TV and kept the quality up from what they can do for a movie.

I'm not a fan of the look, but I understand why it looks as it looks and that it looks that way on purpose. It seems intended for kids, Star Wars has always appealed to kids. Lucas is smart and knows how to make a buck, this is not a move that was arrived at over night.

And honestly, if they make this series look like living action figures how do you think that's gonna effect the action figure sales when they come out? Through the roof right?

Attached Link: http://www.hasbro.com/starwars/default.cfm?page=Products/Catalog&subbrand_id=217&viewall=yes

I like the Galactic Heroes toyes too (see link).

IMHO, Fisher was perfect in the first (fourth?) movie. Sure, she was wooden, but so was everyone else because that was the whole idea: it was supposed to be this cheezy homage to those 30s-era Saturday morning serials. Then Lucas decided he wanted to create something serious, and the whole thing went to hell from there. Sorry, but the last three (first three?) are almost unwatchable, and the "added CG effects" put into the first three (last three?) took all the fun out of all of them, especially the first (fourth?).

If Lucas had stuck to the concept, it would have been a very different series, no question about it... but it wouldnt have been the angst-laden mess we have now.

Final Fantasy? They needed to spend more than a weekend writing the script. The storyline is almost incomprehensible. Gorgeoous to look at, sure, but it took me three times watching to figure out what was going on and what happened in the last fifteen minutes.

Quote - IMHO, Fisher was perfect in the first (fourth?) movie. Sure, she was wooden, but so was everyone else because that was the whole idea: it was supposed to be this cheezy homage to those 30s-era Saturday morning serials. Then Lucas decided he wanted to create something serious, and the whole thing went to hell from there. Sorry, but the last three (first three?) are almost unwatchable, and the "added CG effects" put into the first three (last three?) took all the fun out of all of them, especially the first (fourth?).

If Lucas had stuck to the concept, it would have been a very different series, no question about it... but it wouldnt have been the angst-laden mess we have now.

Hrmm...I never really looked at it that way but if that ruin's it for you I guess it's bad. Frankly I never paid that muchattention to the concept of it being an Homage to anything. I just watched and enjoyed it for being Skiffy!

>> Frankly I never paid that muchattention to the concept of it being an Homage to anything

Go look at some of those old serials, like Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers, and you'll see where he got a lot of his original ideas.

Yeah I'm a big fan of the hasbro galactic heroes, also the superhero showdown figures (marvel comic characters), and also the new indiana jones figures done in the same style. I like em cause the artwork on the packages is killer, and the figures all have a cute 'twist" to them.

The Millenium falcon, and x wing done in the same style are just great. I not really fond of star wars licensing at all anymore, but these did catch my fancy.. and spud vader, and the spud trooper... ;)

Quote - >> Frankly I never paid that muchattention to the concept of it being an Homage to anything

Go look at some of those old serials, like Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers, and you'll see where he got a lot of his original ideas.

Oh I recognise that now, I'm just sayin'! When they came out I was in Jr. High and my art teacher took me to see the first one with his (VERY Cute) son. I might have been a bit distracted.

I think the only reason of doing 3d animation photorealistically is to demonstrate that it could be done. IMHO the closer an animated movie looks "real" the more it loses its appeal as an animated film. IBeowulf and Gollum from LOTR looked very real but there were tells that still made them look and act CGI. I think that we will come to that point that it will be hard to distinguish a 3d animation from live action. And when that time comes, what will be the point of doing a 3d animation that looks live action rather than a live action with CGI elements when you can't distinguish both from each other. I guess my point is keeping a 3d animation cartoony is not a bad thing.

>> And when that time comes, what will be the point of doing a 3d animation that looks live action

In a perverse way, economics.

Your stars will never age; they will always be young and beautiful and handsome and capable of doing their own stunts and easy to costume because they'll never gain or lose weight.

The Japanese figured this out years ago when they introduced the first totally CG newscaster. She was a huge hit, not only because she was easy on the eyes but she was easy to license for other uses, like posters and cel phone wallpapers and ads for fast food and perfume. Her union never complained that she was being overworked, because she had no union. She was always on time, knew her lines, never required more than a single take for a commercial. She never got into any scandals. She was, bottom line, the perfect employee.

That is why Hollywood is so fascinated with photorealistic CG characters.