NEWS: Star Wars III Titled, Fans Try to Care

CULTURE: Star Wars III Titled, Fans Try to Care

With a title that surprises no one and an extremely valiant effort on the part of the franchise's fan base to actually care, LucasFilm has announced a title for Star Wars: Episode III:

Revenge of the Sith

Though, apparently, he did not comment on the lack of symmetry anywhere else in the new additions to the franchise.

Well Jedi was once Titled Revenge of the Jedi. It only makes sense. HOPEFULLY it wont SUCK but we know it will.

good to see an impartial news title, you could give fox a run for their money.

its an obvious title, but at least a damn site better than the last two.

i'll go see it when it comes out, but i'm not holding my breath for it to be good. if lucas is directing it, it will be dull, and without any real feeling. lucas: great story teller, sucky director. note to lucas: you can write the story, but bring back lawerence kasdan to do the screen play, and have irvin kershner direct it. "empire" allways has, and allways will be my fav, because it is the most emotional of 5 movies, and the best written.

just my 2 cents worth.

ps. CGI films suck!!!! learn how to use a camara and film, fuck digital.

I guess quietlythere didn't like Lord of the Rings...

Revenge of the Sith...I hear it was down to that or The Skywalker Supremacy. Brilliant title for what will be a brilliant movie.

Yes, fuck progress, let's not go forward, only backward.

We should also only shoot films in black and white, silently!

Some major magazine had reported years ago that the titles of the three movies were supposed to be "The Balance of the Force", "The Rise of the Empire" and "The Fall of the Jedi".

It was a good idea to scrap the first title since that one sounded about as exciting as salad (of course, then again, so was the film). The other two would have shown a lot more symmetry between these and the originals. Sadly, these movies share very little with the original films, the biggest difference being that, with the first three, I gave a crap about the characters. With the prequels, Lucas has just been trying to shove plot down your throat as fast as possible without getting you attatched to any of the characters. I realized while wastching the second one that, at one point, a character almost died, and I really would not have cared if he did. Meanwhile, while watching A New Hope, I was on the edge of my seat hoping for Luke to destroy the Death Star and survive, even though it was so obvious that everything would end happily.

Plus, I agree with quietlythere. Very few movies look any good on Digital Video, and this movie is no exception. If you want to put a movie on DV, you have to make up for the shitty picture quality by providing a solid story! Lucas is putting far too much faith in these easy, unrealistic special effects. It was more effective when he had the makeshift FX back in the 70's.

In conclusion: LUCAS, YOU'RE A FUCKASS!

There's nothing wrong with going forward. There is a problem, however, with going forward when the advanced technology is not perfected yet and is vastly inferior to the old technology.

The CGI in LOTR was different. They didn't rely solely on it, they used a lot of minitures and practical effects, and they did a lot of completely original CGI work from scratch.

man screw you guys who have to judge everything...

so what if George Lucas, who wrote the damn thing in the first place, wants to go a specific way with HIS creation... just becaust it's part of YOUR cultural foundation give you a right to bitch about the CREATOR creating and making changes where he sees fit.

i say let 'em do whatever they wanna with the franchize. it's his right as the originator and owner.

You can only progress by using the technology, if you don't use it you fail to progress and stagnate.

Um...actually, you can wait until the creators finish improving the technology. I'm a film student and I'm sure as hell not going to start shooting my movies on digital video because "it's the future". Yes, it is the future, but as for now, it's crap quality.

Yes, they do have that right. And we have the right to point out that it's a humungous load of horse shit.

I agree, let's go forward. But...the first three films had waaaay more character utilizing stop-motion animation and miniatures that the last two using CGI. And when Star Wars, Empire, and Jedi were re-released with added, CGI material, they were ruined for me.

Game, set, and match.

You must not know to much on this subject (maybe you do. if you do. good for you. welcome to my world of Film Production and Post).....

CGI - Computer Generated Image
Film - Crystal Halide Emulsion (the best image color depth,)
Digital - Can Shoot 24p (24 frame progressive (film standard) Although yes it is not the best (some people beg to differ) film will never dissapear. (youd have to put 10,000 pixels into 1 pixel (10,000 mega pixels) to aquire film quality)

sooooooooooooooooooooo.......
I dont see your argument..... Yes the Puppet days were fantastic.... But CGI is becoming very real....

Plus... you mention 3 industry mediums.... that either work together or are completely different....

Um.... so what are you saying....
You saying SW sucks cause of the CGI....

I remember a movie called Jurassic Park (1994 CGI and Robotics) and I was terrified as a kid cause it looked... well... real

I dunno.. Not arguing... just trying to understand..... whats your argument and grounds for that?

hey-zeus kryst, look at these people drawing battle lines over starwars...

it's like geeks about to throw on armor and duke it out medival style...

all, i'm sayin' is that a creator should be free to do WHATEVER they want with what they've created. all you guys are gettin' pissy because you feel as if you have a right to say something, when you honestly dont.

[Edited on Jul 24, 2004 7:15PM]

Well, I think that the quality -- or lack thereof -- of DV and CGI isn't really the problem with these two prequels. It's the quality of the writing and direction.

You could film those movies in IMAX and use only models and minatures and they'd still suck. Jar-Jar Binks wouldn't have been less annoying if it was a guy in makeup, not CGI.

Nerd fight!!!

But seriously, from the moment the 1997 rereleases came out to Episode I to Episode II and now finally to Episode III it's utterly amazing how much George Lucas has done to destroy every bit of creativity and imagination from the Star Wars franchise.

Anyone remember those pre-1997 days when your memories were unmarred?

Time to put the baby to bed and pull the plug. The "fun" of Star Wars has left the building.

Excuse me, since when do consumers have no right to criticize the products they purchase?

CGI can be done right (right being subjective), it wasn't for the past few Star Wars films (my opinion). CGI isn't perfect yet, but it's getting there and a lot of stories that are being told couldn't be told without it, at least not on the same scale.

Also, I've seen good movies shot on digital, I've seen bad movies shot on film. It's just how you use it.

I equate this with the fight between people who praise vinyl and shit upon cds... and those that just like music and know that a song is a song no matter where you hear it. For those that value techniques and technology then fine, but it's a bit much to say a film or an album is "shit" because it's digital... it's not shit, it's a story....

watercolor? pastels? charcoal? what's your choice?... that's the same thing.

So, if George uses some computers to make his movie then I am fine with it. What bothers me is that the story he tells is boring and that his actors are terrible. Star Wars is just boring now, they could shoot it on a shaky handycam with cardboard puppets and I'd be happy as long as they tell a good story.

(While battling with large, glowing, radioactive rods)
-Phantom Menace sucked more!
-Attack of the Clones sucked more!
-Phantom Menace!
-Attack of the Clones!

-The Simpsons

Look either you shut up and purchase products or we'll have to report you. It's the LAW!

I love it when people defend mega-companies! George Lucas' feelings are SOOOO hurt right now from people ragging on him that's he's curled up in a fetal position hugging a stuffed Ewok.

Boo Effing Hoo.

Example: Spike Lee's "Bamboozled". Excellent movie, extremely well written, impeccable performances from everyone involved. Yet, it was shot on video, and, aesthetically, it's crap. Granted, shooting on video went with the theme of the movie, but it looked like crap. Yes, it is about how you use it, but video is just, without a doubt, inferior. The contrast ratio is just horrible.