Star Wars: Episode II: Attack Of The Clones [Widescreen, Special Edition]

I was one of the suckers that got roped into catching this film on world premier night. I work with a fellow that is an over-the-top Star Wars freak. In fact, he dressed up as a storm trooper last Halloween. I would say I???m a fan of the Star Wars saga, but the movies are as far as it goes for me. I???ve never taken much interest in all the collectables, nor have I had the urge to live in a fantasy Jedi world. It was rather fun to watch this movie with a bunch of Lucas fanatics, and it at least made the evening interesting. I certainly felt more excitement on my first viewing of ???Attack of the Clones??? and really didn???t take much notice to the nerving flaws the first time out.

By my second viewing I still found the visuals very stunning to watch, however, the whole love story, and Hayden Christensen???s acting, began to grind at me as much as Jar-Jar from Episode 1. In fact, my friend that went with me was even snickering and eye-rolling during the hokiest parts of the film. Sometimes I have to wonder if Lucas actually thinks the audience is that stupid. Does the man really think we don???t know bad dialog when we hear it? To be honest, I even know some children who found the whole love story to be quite corny. Nevertheless, it probably shouldn???t matter because Star Wars movies are all about big sound and special effects, no?

Finally on my third and last viewing on the big screen, with my 9yr old daughter, I was beyond annoyed with Hayden and the love story. The visuals were still quite beautiful to look at and at least there are a few exciting characters to distract us from the main story. I mean to watch Yoda kick ass with a light saber was worth the price of admission alone. However, if I had to watch Hayden act like a sniveling little baby anymore I would loose it! I mean Hayden was such a cry baby that Woody Allen could have kicked his ass! This is the one thing about the film I couldn???t understand. Of all things, this is the guy that???s going to turn into one of the darkest villains in film history; you think Lucas could have found someone with a darker edge to their personality instead of Hayden...perhaps Johnny Dep for example. Not to mention, who the hell is Hayden Christensen? Lucas is always throwing some ???unknown??? at us, and you???d think with all the money and power the man has that he could get some top-notch actors. And when he does get good actors, Samuel Jackson for example, they get small parts or die off early in the saga.

Bottom line is, ???Attack of the Clones??? is a fun and exciting movie to look at as long as you don???t take the story, too, serious. It???s unfortunate because the story is the one element that should be given the most attention; however it is treated like a cheap soap opera. I can only hope the chapters on the DVD are set up in a way to skip over the lame love story because I can picture myself clicking that ???Next??? button on my remote quite a few times. No matter though, I???m sure it will be a worthy purchase for any die hard fan out there. In fact, I know I???ll purchase it with a bit of reluctance??but the eye candy is oh so beautiful.

Ironically, some people have enoght time talk about all of the negative things that they didnt like about Clones, that they forgot to mention that the story cant be changed. Anakin cant be a known actor. Who wanted to see Leo play him anyway. He has to whine, where do you think Luke got it from. He did a fine job portraying a role that he had no lattitude to stray from.
As far as the special effects and visual transfer, if you rated this movie negatively, then you need to buy better equipment. A High Definition television is not only a necessity, but it must be calibrated correctly. Certain aspects of the DD 5.1EX standout specifically with the newest amplifiying technology, that otherwise would not be heard with standard equipment.
The colors are breathtaking, the action is fast paced, and the love story is a table setter for the twins being born. It was not cheesy, apparently if you thought that it was, then you have never had a serious relationship with anything other than your Playstation 2. The DVD is the ultimate spectacle for the unaware and old school audience alike. Entertainment value is worth the price of the DVD if you have a TV bigger than 32 inches anyway. If you dont buy the DVD you are wasting your equipment, and you shouldnt have all the bells and whistles to begin with. I do have the DVD, I have had it for a week now, and I am constantly trying to find another DVD that even comes close to matching the colors, action and sound of Ep1. That said, Episode 2 will blow you away.

Creost,

I can understand your enthusiasm; it is a visually splendid film. I also agree that the picture quality of the DVD is quite good, but I would not go so far as to say it was the best I had ever seen on disc. To say this would be to say that "AOTC" has the best picture quality of any film ever made as reproduced in a movie theater, and my experience and the experience of others with "AOTC" in the movie theater is mixed. Unless, of course, you believe the movie had its video quality altered (and improved) for the DVD. Anything is possible, I suppose.

Your comment that the disc should be watched on a high definition television stumps me, though. The disc is not in high definition. It is in regular resolution. A high-def TV would not change that. In fact, a high-def television might not even play it back as well as a good, high-quality regular television would. Did you mean by a "high definition" set a good, regular television? I use a 36" Sony Trinitron direct-view XBR400, about as high quality as you can get (and capable of receiving high definition). The picture I get from "AOTC" looks fine, as I have said, but I prefer the clarity of "The Fifth Element" in Superbit and the colors of "LOTR" better. Personal preference, maybe.

John P., DVDTown

Creost, I have to wonder about you. First, why do you have the DVD so many weeks before the street date? If youre a reviewer, your comments ought to be in the form of your own review at your own site or publication. If youre a PR person or have a vested interest in the DVD doing well (i.e. you work for Lucas, Fox, or the DVD authoring plant), then you shouldnt be commenting since that would be a conflict of interest. Finally, if you obtained the DVD through back channels, I wouldnt be advertising my actions if I were you.

Also, I agree with John that your comments about watching the movie with the best equipment makes no sense. ANY DVD would look appreciably better on the best equipment than if played on a 13-inch TV with an RF modulator feeding the DVD signal. Since the current DVD format is not hi-def (not until HD-DVD will we have true hi-def on a disc), theres a limit to how good a DVD will look anyway on either analog or HD TVs.

And yes, a DD 5.1 EX track would need special equipment since regular DD 5.1 is the federally mandated standard. Its not required to have an EX (or DTS ES) set-up, but its preferred. If the Episode 2 audio needs an EX receiver to sound better than a non-EX movie, then Lucas and Co. would have failed bitterly in trying to make a decent DVD experience. I say this because the EX channel is not a true direct feed to the center channel--it is a matrixed speaker, meaning, the sound comes from what is encoded to the left and right rears. So, while the EX center rear adds to the ambience, it does not exist of its own accord. As we all know, matrixed channels are not as good as discretely encoded signals anyway...so once again, it makes no sense to praise the EX format. Besides, Episode 2 is not the first EX DVD release, and it is unfair to say that Episode 2 sounds better with a rear center channel because the more speakers you add to a room, the more enveloping your audio experience becomes by default anyway.

Simply put, digital video is still not as good as film. DV has a third of the resolution of a film negative, and images are flatter on DV than on film. Also, everything looks plastic with DV. Im not talking about the special effects--Im talking about flesh tones and the actors clothing. If you want great digital transfers, the only ones that are wondrous now are the transfers for Monsters, Inc., Final Fantasy, and Shrek.

Finally, you want to talk about the story? Okay, yes, its true that the story was set in stone the minute Episode 4 was released back in the late-1970s. You know what, though? Its not the end result, but the journey, that counts. Lucas has given us a promising beginning (Episode 1 was great) and then given us a horrible part 2. The acting is atrocious--I love Natalie Portman, but she is a mere cypher in this entry. The lovers fall in love just because Lucas told them to do so, not because they actually care about each other. Okay, fine, maybe theyre in lust, but lust is still not love. What does Padme, a mature woman, see in a man-child? He must have a hugely satisfying package. If thats the case, then Episode 2 is nothing more than a romance novel. If you think that the love story is true love, then it is YOU who has never read a good book in your life, nor have you had anything more than kiss-kiss-grope-grope in a back seat.

The thing is, the series is supposed to be about good trumping evil. However, in every one of these movies, the bad guys are always cooler than the good guys. It makes me want to join the Dark Side. Come to think of it, when I play the Star Wars video games, I ALWAYS play as the bad guys, lol.

Creost,

This comment alone had me laughing for a good 10 minutes:

"the love story is a table setter for the twins being born. It was not cheesy, apparently if you thought that it was, then you have never had a serious relationship with anything other than your Playstation 2. "

Im convinced youre one of those kids from Rotten Tomatoes, no?

Hiya Liz im 13 and i luv Starwars

Having bought the "Star Wars 2" DVD release, I must say that I both agree and disagree with you on the video quality. I think that its an excellent transfer, probably a "10". However, the way that the film was shot was horrendous. The DVD makes all the flaws of digital filming more apparent. Light levels are unnatural. I hated how some shots were too bright (hurting my eyes), and some shots were very unfocused (not soft filter, like how Hitchcock would shoot his heroines, but simply unfocused). Also, whats up with everything looking so muddy? Many backgrounds were hella blurred. All in all, its an awesome transfer of horrible technology (namely, the fact that digital video is still not as good as film negative and the fact that the CGI shots are not as photorealistic as those in "Final Fantasy"). Id give the video an "8" rating, like you, but for different reasons.

Agreed. It probably is a good transfer. I did not mean to imply otherwise. However, unless a DVD picture displays obvious transfer defects like excessive grain or pixilation, there really is no way to know whether any blurring of the image is the result of faulty reproduction (compression, transference to disc) or inherent to the original film stock. Not having access to any original prints for direct comparison, I can only report on what I see; the rest is conjecture. In any case, it is good but not the best video quality I have seen on DVD, the cause of any minor problems still being unresolved in my mind.

John

I just got this DVD last night and found my self disappointed in the picture quality. It was, as noted previously, muddy for a pure digital transfer. The technology just isnt there yet to do what Lucas is envisioning. Compared to LOTR - extended or The Fifth Element - Superbit, this DVDs picture quality is better than average, but not as good as the afore mentioned DVDs. (I watched this on a progressive scan player with component connections to a Sony 36 inch XBR 400 monitor set to 16:9 enhanced mode)

On top of that, the THX sound just isnt as good as a DTS soundtrack. The rear channels arent as crisp nor is the bass as deep. Once again, I compared the sound to LOTR and Fifth Element (Superbit) and was underwhelmed. Maybe I was expecting too much with all the hype, but THX just isnt all that better than vanilla Dolby Digital 5.1.

However, the movies itself was fun to watch with all the eye candy. You just have to skip all the sappy and bad acting. Hmmm... If this were a video game it would have gotten a 10, but as a movie, I cant give it more than a 7.

RIGHT, lets get one thing out of the way, so we are on the same page, I am a huge star wars fan. ROTJ was the first film I saw at the cinema, and fell in love with the saga. Having said that, I am not of the opinion that GL can do no wrong. For example, although I enjoyed the SE of the OT, some of the CGI was unnecessary, and almost ruined my childhood memories.

I thought TFM was an OK OK sw film. I accepted that it had to set the scene and establish motives. I would give that 6 out of 10. AOTC is a different matter completely. I saw it twice on the first day, and twice more the following week, and enjoyed it more and more with every viewing. The story progresses well, the action is breathtaking, and the effects are unbelievable. The final 45mins - 1hr is classic sw. It reminds you why you fell in love with the saga in the first place. However, I would still rank it behind ESB and ANH, but before ROTJ and TPM.

The DVD is excellent !!!! It is a very close cousin of TPM DVD, only with better upbringing. By that I mean the heart and brain of this DVD is, well, more in place in the sw universe.

The picture, which is a digital transfer from a digital source as it was filmed digitally (try saying that after a few pints!), is faultless. It even beats the transfer for the LOTR:FOTR EE, but only just. It is vibrant, clear and crisp; and you will see details here you missed on any number of previous screenings.

The sound, WOW. Now this is great. You are engulfed in a sound field, with the sw universe coming to life right before your ears !! All speakers are used to the max, the sub hardly stops, and the rears are exercised almost constantly. To put it simply, only FOTR EE and Pearl Harbor DC are as impressive.

The extras are reminisent of TPM DVD. There is alot of stuff here. The commentary is highly informative and well worth a listen. All the docos and featurettes are relevant, informative and interesting. The creation of the CGI Yoda is my fav. Finally, the R2D2 thingy is funny, but not helerious, as some of the reviews I have read state.

AOTC is a return to form for GL, it seems as if he actually knew all along what he was doing. The film is a mamoth accomplishment, and although many will still complain, this is sw as I remember it (minus some of the OTT CGI).

This is one of the best films of the year (many times better than that poo called spiderman) and comes to DVD on one of the best DVD sets of the year (again many times better than that DVD poo spiderman gave us). BUY THIS NOW --- OR YOU WILL BE CONSUMED BY THE DARK SIDE --- MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU.

i hate to break the argument here (then again, it ended in 2002). this was the first "wars" movie i got to see in theaters and wow it was stunnung. i had seen the original trilogy from the '97 VHS tapes a few times, but didnt really know anyhting about the star wars universe. from seeing those special effects in full screen, off a VHS, on a not-so-great TV; to seeing this film on the big screen in all its DV goodness was spectacular. i loved this, and the dvd is excellent as well. the special features, sound and video quality get a 10 from me. the movie gets a 9.

-matt

Okay, I just watched the 2 prequels again after viewing the Holy Trilogy for the first time in over 5 years.

Some random thoughts on Episode II:

I think this film deserves many of its criticisms but, overall, it is underrated and unfairly maligned.
Lucas could have done a much better job with the love story, there's no denying that. Instead of being inspired to write a good love story he treated it as if it were pesky exposition he needed to get out of the way. If he really wanted to make the best movie he possibly could he should have swallowed his pride and let another writer do a treatment.

Regarding Hayden Christensen's acting: I've been watching movies, television and plays long enough know good acting from bad. Hayden's performance is by no means bad, in my opinion. It's adequate. Face it, the kid did the best he could with the material he was given. Could Johnny Depp have done a better job? Probably, but I don't think it would have made that much of a difference.

That aside, this film is still an adventure story and in that regard, it's superb. All the action sequences are visually stunning and fun. And the story is pretty interesting, too. I give it 4 out of 5 for sheer entertainment value. And while I agree the Trilogy characters are more likeable I still like most of these prequel characters well enough. Even Anakin. And what's not to like about Ewan MacGregor as Obi-Wan? He is the glue that holds these movies together and he does a terrific job.

I also like the fact that Episode II is a bit of a mystery. There are many questions that can only be answered in the next installment, and that's a sign of good storytelling. Who really ordered the Clone Army? Who was the Jedi that altered the Library records about the Cloners' planet? Are the Cloners involved politically or are they just doing their job and filling the order? Why is the Jedi Council's ability to use The Force diminished? How does Palpatine/Sidious manage to exist as both the Chancellor and the Dark Lord of the Sith? Is one a clone?

And for those of you who can't stand Anakin, have no fear. He gets his ass kicked at the end of the next movie.

-Justin

Episode II is one of the best of the saga to me it is very underated by critics and true fans becuase it my opinion it is second best to EMPIRE STRIKES BACK which is the best well quote me on that until MAY 19 for Revenge of the Sith. Which from the trailer looks like he got it right and in my opinion he got episode II right too the only one he missed was Epsiode I which was confusing and boring. The reasons these new Wars films get so much bad rep. is becuase fans are going expecting to see things from the Original when u cant becuase this is a new Adventure of Star Wars and everything is the way it should be all we have to do is wait to see if Episode III sums up everything.

After watching Episode II several times over, It's visually a wonderful film to look at, but the acting and story tend to get worse everytime. In fact, this movie tends to get more boring every time I see it.

Tim.

Okay, this movie is crap. Which is to say it is only slightly less crappy than Ep 1 which was likewise excrementally challenged. I do have to agree that Ep III looks deceptively good from the trailer, but I'll reserve judgement until I see it.

It's not necessarily that fans expect the original trilogy, I think they just expect a good movie, which Lucas has yet to prove he can make anymore. Like Tim says, Ep I and Ep II have some stunning visuals and decent action setpieces, but if you don't have a story, you don't have a movie. You can't expect two films to simply rest upon the lore you created 20 years ago; you actually have to make a movie that has life to it. These two don't.

Will Ep III be any better? Who knows?

Sean ('though the Shadow knows what evil lurks in the heart of Lucas!...)