Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Star Wars Prequels Media Movies

Star Wars: AOTC Trailer on Monster Inc 327

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the get-it-on dept.
FortKnox writes "Starwars.com has officially announced that Star Wars II: Attack of the Clones 'teaser' trailer will appear at the head of the new movie, Monsters, Inc. Other reports have the full trailer on Harry Potter, but this is still speculation. Ep-I DVD owners should be able to view the trailers on starwars.com once Monsters, Inc. hits theaters." Good thing I'm planning on seeing both of those movies anyway.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Star Wars: AOTC Trailer on Monster Inc

Comments Filter:
  • That Rowling guy must feel pretty good with the success of his books... in anticipation of the movie, my girlfriend and I have tried to read the Harry potter books, but they are not to be found in the library unless you reserve them, and they are completely unavailable in used book stores. I don't think i want to pay retail price for them (usually like $15) so i guess i'll just have to wait for the hype to die down.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 29, 2001 @01:37PM (#2493584)
      That Rowling "Guy" must be pretty impressed that people always assume she's a guy.
    • I thought J.K. Rowling was a woman!
      • S/he could well be.... i was under the impression it was a guy, but if you thought so, who knows?? :)
        • Well, that's what the publisher wanted you to think. Listen to some of the Rowling audio interviews from NPR [npr.org]'s archive; she says that the publisher wanted to publish her as J.K. Rowling instead of Joanne K. Rowling, out of fear that little boys would be turned off of a book written by a girl (ick, cooties!). As it turns out, they didn't need to worry; it's now well-known she's female (except on Slashdot, apparently) and it hasn't dampened the books' popularity one whit.


          To avoid the dreaded Off-Topic markdown, let me just mention that, as one of the DVD-owners, I have access to the Star Wars site; they're still hyping November 9th as far as I know. For the moment, they have what can only be described as a trailer for the trailer posted--a 7-meg Quicktime slideshow called "Choices" that shows images and posits such gripping questions as "What is the cost of failure?" and, my favorite, "What do droids worry about?"


          Since Quicktimes can easily be downloaded, I expect you could find it on Gnutella by now. It's not all that great, but at least it's something.

          • It may well be that the publishers wanted to go with J.K. and "not scaring off the boys" may very well be the reason. But your post gives the impression that this is somehow dishonest. The fact is, Rowling goes by, and always has gone by, "JK" to the extent that her family calls her "Jake".

            I'll also note that "J.K. Rowling" is mellifluous whereas "Joanne K Rowling" is less so.
          • "What do droids worry about?"

            Seems to me that line's almost a direct rip off of "Do androids dream of electric sheep?"
    • Huh? The paperbacks are 7 or 8$. The local Barnes and Noble were giving 20% off also.

      You can do more than just sit around and drink coffee in a bookstore these days.
    • by interiot (50685) on Monday October 29, 2001 @01:40PM (#2493610) Homepage
      "that Rowling guy [google.com]", ala google's image search.
    • nt means no text
    • That Rowling guy must feel pretty good with the success of his books...

      J(oanne) K(athleen) Rowling is probably very happy with HER success. Unlike many authors who have had their stories ported to the screen, she has a huge amount of creative control over the Chris Columbus directed Harry Potter movie.

      Here is the best FAQ I have seen about her and her rise: http://www.geocities.com/jkrfaq/bio.html [geocities.com]
    • Try Paperback, $7 each at your local KMart.
  • by Ctrl-Z (28806)

    "Good thing I'm planning on seeing both of [Harry Potter and Monsters, Inc.] anyway."

    Sheesh. CmdrTaco has a strange definition of "Good Things"[tm].
  • More Info (Score:2, Informative)

    by robbyjo (315601)

    Check the official homepage [ep2attackoftheclones.com].

    And check the parody site [campchaos.com] as well... :-)

  • huh? (Score:1, Troll)

    by rppp01 (236599)
    Attack of the Clones? One of the things I loved about the star wars movies as a kid was the cool titles given. Empire Strikes Back. A New Hope. Phantom Menace was pretty good. But Attack of the Clones? Lucas is trying to make me a non sci fi fan, isn't he?

    Well, I guess I could live with it, if all the clones were of Natalie Portman :-)
    • Re:huh? (Score:2, Funny)

      by |guillaume| (151395)
      Well, I guess I could live with it, if all the clones were of Natalie Portman :-)


      I guess you would then have a Beowulf Cluster of Natalie Portman... mmm...

    • by Lxy (80823)
      One of two possibilities. A) Lucas has lost his mind, B) he's waiting til the very last second to change the title. He did this in a few other Star Wars movies (possibly all) so that he could sue the sh*t out of people selling "official" Attack of the Clones merchandise. Anyway, I guess I have a good reaosn to see Monsters Inc. now (or at least the preveiews) :-).
      • I'm willing to bet karma that the phrase "Attack of the Clones" will not appear anywhere in the trailer. :)
    • Attack of the Clones conjures up images of massive armies of robots marching across the landscape for as far as you can see. Is it just me or is this stuff getting a little old?

      I propose that Lucas just makes a 2-3 hour movie of "breathtaking" effects like marching clones beating the crap out of each other until they explode. Once he gets that out of his system the remaining Star Wars movies could then focus primarily on something important...

      like, oh...say... a decent story.

      Or at the very least Natalie Portman disrobed, flaunting 16 luscious blue breasts.
    • Re:huh? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by SirSlud (67381) on Monday October 29, 2001 @02:03PM (#2493726) Homepage
      Return of the Jedi?
      The Empire Strikes Back?

      They are cool names only because you associate them with cool movies. They sound 'retro'. Today, audiences are very wary, if receptive at all, of 'camp' and in general, the 'pulpy' style. Lucas, if anything, is not bowing down to current trends in keeping the names of the movies in line with the original campy names. Unfortunately, I thnk audiences are far too cynical and pessimmistic to accept such campy names anymore, as evidenced by the furor over the name "Attack of the Clones". Personally, I think the more money you spend on something, the less likely people are going to accept camp as entertainment, especially since camp is one of the cheapest styles to infuse into movie productions. (Indeed, being 'campy' is partly defined as appearing articicial; thus, your sets/titling/acting need not be juiced for every possible production dollar.)

      The media/advertising pipelines are more clogged than ever, and since camp is more often a tool used by lower budget productions (for obvious reasons), people are not hearing of movies that utilize camp very much, and consequently are not demanding it or appreciating it unless its associated with a previously prooven franchise (ie, Star Wars, Batman, Star Trek)

      At least, thats my take on it.

      Garret
  • A Serious Question (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ekrout (139379) on Monday October 29, 2001 @01:38PM (#2493591) Journal
    Am I the only one who HASN'T read the Harry Potter books? I don't mean to sound like an arrogant prick (although I really am), but weren't these books written for little kids? I mean, sure, I enjoyed Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers and all when I was younger, but these days I barely watch any TV. So, my question is "What's the appeal of these childish stories to grown, sophisticated adults?".

    Thanks.
    • My wife has been reading the Harry Potter series out loud to me. She really should do books on tape--she does all the different voices. Anyway, while the books are written at a level that makes them accessible to kids, the stories certainly hold interest for adults.

      The Harry Potter books are the story of a kid growing up, a series of mystery-adventure stories, and a story of fantasy magic.
      • My wife has been reading the Harry Potter series out loud to me. She really should do books on tape--she does all the different voices. Anyway, while the books are written at a level that makes them accessible to kids, the stories certainly hold interest for adults.

        I don't mean to make fun, really. But if they hold so much interests for adults, why do you need your wife to (1) read them out loud to you, and (2) do all the voices? Please tell me you have a pair of footy pajamas on when all this is going on...

        :)
        • I don't mean to make fun, really. But if they hold so much interests for adults, why do you need your wife to (1) read them out loud to you, and (2) do all the voices? Please tell me you have a pair of footy pajamas on when all this is going on...

          If you've never read books to one another as part of your courtship / marriage, then you're actually missing a great deal of fun. Not only do you get to find out about books that you might not have thought were interesting, but you get to find out what your spouse thinks is funny, sad, exciting, or boring -- excellent information to help you build a relationship.

          When my wife and I were dating, she was living in Pennsylvania, and I was living in Virginia. We'd see each other most weekends, but during the week we subsisted on email and phone calls. I ended up reading a couple of books to my wife over the phone, or cuddled up with her on a bed.

    • by Stevis (69064) on Monday October 29, 2001 @01:47PM (#2493645) Homepage
      They're not childish stories. I had much the same opinion, but my wife, who is a children's literature buff, knew the difference--and convinced me to read them. At the end of Goblet of Fire, I had much the same ominous feeling that I had at the end of Empire Strikes Back...you don't know where the "good guys" are going from here.

      The novels are dealing with the kids growing into adults, something that is universal. It is dealing with the kids as they learn about and define ourselves, and talks about what makes us who we are and how we face choices between good and evil.

      In addition, from a storytelling side, JK Rowling has her arc plotted out and knows where she's going--while it's not as tight as Straczynski does things and some inconsistencies slip through, she's not pulling things out of her hindquarters as she goes along. Try reading book one; you'll like it. That's all I can say. Stevis


      • > I had much the same ominous feeling that I had at the end of Empire Strikes Back...you don't know where the "good guys" are going from here.

        Yeah... <dreamyvoice>back when we still thought Lucas was one of the good guys...</dreamyvoice>
    • Try them (Score:3, Interesting)

      The first book is pretty light and features HP as an 11 year old boy. But each subsequent book is darker as Harry gets older (one year per book). The first time I read the 4th book (which I'm currently re-reading in anticipation of the movie and 5th book) I snuck it into my cubicle and work and spent the entire day reading it. It's that gripping.

      So no, they aren't for "little kids". They are for children of various ages. Just like the Narnia and Alice books.
    • So, my question is "What's the appeal of these childish stories to grown, sophisticated adults?".

      I'm sorry....were you talking about Harry Potter here, or Star Wars?

      I hated Phantom Menance - not just because it was a kid's movie, but because it forced me to realize, as a 28 year old, that the first three weren't amazing films in my mind because they were amazing films, but because I saw them when I was in grade school.

      Attack of the Clones should refer to how Lucas recycled his own story ideas in Phantom Menace.

      I will probably go see Ep. 2, but I will hate myself for doing it.
      • I hated Phantom Menance - not just because it was a kid's movie, but because it forced me to realize, as a 28 year old, that the first three weren't amazing films in my mind because they were amazing films, but because I saw them when I was in grade school.

        I personally thought that, apart from some truly fantastic action sequences (the lightsaber battles, the pod race), The Phantom Menace really brought out the quality of Episodes 4-6. While they too were cartoony, they really had an "edge" that TPM lacked - especially Empire of course but even Jedi had some truly dark moments and mature drama. Episode 1 generally lacked these. Not to mention that compared to the freezing wasteland Hoth or the arid beauty of Tatooine, the CGI Naboo looked like ass...
      • by dswensen (252552)
        I should probably put on my flame-retardant suit before even saying this, but Lucas' "recycling" of his story ideas in Phantom Menace was a conscious decision on his part, not born of laziness or lack of inspiration. He sees the series as akin to a musical composition, where different themes keep cropping up again and again; slightly different, but still recognizable and similar. Therefore, the fact that characters get in similar situations, end up on the same planets, etc. is because (by his own admission) that's the way the story goes.

        You can see this in the movie, and you can especially hear it in John Williams' music -- "Anakin's Theme" is the Imperial March modified, and the "celebration" music at the end of TPM is the Emperor's Theme from Return of the Jedi.

        Lucas even goes so far as to call his movies "essentially silent films," guided by the imagery and the music. I find this idea interesting, but personally, don't think he's pulled it off all that well (I keep wishing devoutly for silence every time a certain CGI character opens his mouth, for example.)

        How well Lucas made these ideas work, especially in TPM, is a matter of personal opinion, but, if you're at all interested, he talks about it a great deal on the Phantom Menace DVD, both in the commentary and in the many interviews on the bonus materials disc.
    • Lots of children's books are excellent reading. "The Chronicles of Narnia" and "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" are great examples
    • There's a world of difference between "written for little kids" and "written down to little kids."

      You could even say there's a sort of Star Wars analogy in the books (just to keep this vaguely topical to the thread). The first two are sort of light, kind of like the first Star Wars movie...but by the time you read the third and fourth, you're getting into definite Empire Strikes Back territory. Rowling pulls no punches. The villains are black and foul, not simply "misunderstood"; they're selfish and megalomaniacal but not the self-described "evil" (as in "God, I love being evil") of many down-written kids' shows and books. People die--and worse than die. There is very little sappy moralizing or sermonizing, and what there is flows naturally from the book, from adults giving advice to kids that isn't just "do this, don't do that," but gives them credit for being able to think. And the fourth book...well, don't read the first chapter of it in a darkened room, that's all I can say.

      I'd recommend buying them without hesitation, but if you're still not sure, all four of the books are available on Gnutella. I'm not ordinarily one to condone piracy without paying--but I'm confident that once you've read them, you'll enjoy them enough that you want to own them.
    • .. I have done so with a conscious effort. I refuse to buy into the commercialism. =)
      • I said that myself once. "Anything with that much hype can't possibly be any good." Except that then someone whose opinion I respected convinced me to read the first book, and I was hooked. They really are good books, hype notwithstanding.
    • by Greyfox (87712)
      Good children's literature will have several levels. All a child will generally catch will be the most simplistic story, which may be about cute talking furry animals or other such children's topics. Go back and study it in college (Or a good High School) and you'll find several layers of metaphor which could cover anything from Jesus (This is a favorite, you'll find a Jesus in a lot of Children's literature) to the WWII Holocaust.

      That being said, Harry Potter seems to be mostly preteen wish fulfillment with a slight Orwellian flavor. Orwell had a very similar masochistic writing style (Except his characters never had a chance.) The writing is as formulaic as Saturday Morning cartoons, and about as literary. On the plus side, it does piss the Baptists off and anything that pisses the Baptists off is a good thing in my book. It's also encouraging the kids to read, which is also a good thing, and sometimes you just want the literary equivalent of a slice of pie. After a week of digging through XML books, you really don't want to schlog through anything too heavy.

      Take what I say with a grain of salt though. I also despise CS Lewis, which is the literary equivalent of having a metaphor pounded into your head with a 2x4. Also, any Disneyesque story where children overcome hideously inept adult villians. That pretty well limits the children's literature that I'll be feeding my kids.

    • Surprise! "Star Wars" is a kids movie. There's a reason that Jedi was "just a bunch of muppets", and Phantom Menace was dominated by Jar Jar. So, my question is "Why are you complaining about one children's story on a forum about a different children's story?"

      Obviously adults can enjoy children's lit -- witness the appeal of _Gullivers Travels_, _Alice in Wonderland_, _Wizard of Oz_, etc up through the current examples.If you're too cool for all that, fine, but really why are you complaining about it here?

      Might I suggest getting a life?

    • I haven't either, and I don't plan to. Unless I have kids someday and read it to them. There are many, many more books on my reading list ahead of something written for 12 year olds...
  • I searched GNUtella [gnutella.com] for "star wars" and the full Ep2 trailer came up. Might be something to take a look at. I will post it on Freenet as soon as it finishes downloading.


    -CT

    • Be aware that there's a fake fan-trailer or two that have been circulating for months now. What you find on gnutella might not be the real thing.

      Of course, then again it might be real -- according to many Internet rumor sites a lot of preview-audiences and movie-house projectionists have seen the new trailer..someone may have cammed it and digitzed it as was done with the Phantom Menace trailer before an official net version was posted.
  • This is a bad sign (Score:5, Insightful)

    by crow (16139) on Monday October 29, 2001 @01:38PM (#2493597) Homepage Journal
    Well, it isn't really news, but this is a clear sign of what audience the movie is targeted at. These are both children's movies. Sure, as far as children's movies go, they have a lot of adult interest; that's what usually makes for a successful children's movie.

    Now if they were targeting a more adult crowd, they would be trying to connect to Lord of the Rings.

    Of course, it may just be a matter of what big movies are coming out at the right time.
    • I wouldn't be so sure. Star Wars movies have generally been an all-ages type deal (some will argue, but I was 6 or 7 when I started watching them). Lord of the rings: not all-ages. Harry Potter and Monsters, Inc: definitely all-ages. Looking at the new movies coming out, this is probably his best choice.
    • I know it's redundant, but Lucas has always said that Star Wars is aimed at kids; it's a classic tale of good vs evil when you pull out the SFX and the like. However, regardless of the plot, the Star Wars series has done wonders to push the entire movie industry forward in terms of SFX and sound improvements. So I will be going to see SW 2, despite numerous rumors that Jar-Jar is back, and while I might moan at the story, I expect to be fascinated by the production.

    • by geomcbay (263540) on Monday October 29, 2001 @02:11PM (#2493763)
      Its politics and business really.

      Monsters, Inc is a Pixar movie. Who sold Pixar to Steve Jobs? George Lucas. There's still pretty strong ties between Pixar and Lucasfilm/ILM, so there you go...

      With Harry Potter the connections are (among other things) ILM doing many of the special effects and John Williams doing the score.

      LOTR is a different beast...A New Line movie, music by Howard Shore/Enya, WETA doing the special effects...

      • WETA, the Washington DC public TV station?

        Well, then I'm looking forward to Gandalf with a goofy-looking crepe beard, the computer effects to look all pixelly and chroma-key'ey (a la Electro-woman and Dyna-girl), orc makeup being cheap latex Halloween masks and spray-painted football helmets and a cameo by the Daleks.

        Did anyone ever see "Overdrawn at the Memory Bank" produced, IIRC by public TV station WGBH and starring Raul Julia? Hot 'n' fancy computer graphics by a hacked Intellivision from what I can tell.
  • "Ep-I DVD owners should be able to view the trailers on starwars.com once Monsters, Inc. hits theaters."

    Did I miss a previous story on this? Do you get a special key or something when you buy episode one so that you can view future trailers before they're allowed out to the general public?
    • Re:Hrm? (Score:5, Informative)

      by geomcbay (263540) on Monday October 29, 2001 @01:56PM (#2493691)
      You get a special URL that works in conjunction with some proprietary Windows-browser that does some sort of checksum on the DVD-ROM disc (needs to be inserted in your computer's DVD drive).

      There's already content on this DVD-ROM only site, still pictures from Episode 2, etc...The few people that have redistributed this content on publically accessible web-sites have, not surprisingly, been spanked by Lucasfilm.
      • Remember, Lucas was a prime mover and shaker behind DiVX (or however it was capitalized). He's definately one of the Bad Guys where IP is concerned.
    • Re:Hrm? (Score:4, Funny)

      by snookerdoodle (123851) on Monday October 29, 2001 @01:56PM (#2493692)
      In a word: Yes. There is also other content on starwars.com available only to Episode I DVD owners.

      Unfortunately (depending on your point of view), I'm not enough of a fan to spend a lot of time on their web site. I watch the movies. I go to bed.

      The next day, I watch the Pod Race with my 4 and 6 year old boys. Then I watch the Pod Race with my 4 and 6 year old boys again. Then I watch the Pod Race with my 4 and 6 year old boys again. Then I watch the Pod Race with my 4 and 6 year old boys again.

      Mark
    • Re:Hrm? (Score:2, Informative)

      by count_dooku (448992)

      Did I miss a previous story on this? Do you get a special key or something when you buy episode one so that you can view future trailers before they're allowed out to the general public?

      Episode I owners have access to exclusive content on dvd.starwars.com. When you insert the Ep.1 DVD into a computer (Mac/Windows omly) it installs an Intervideo player. This player allows access to the exclusive content.

      They have already posted a still photo Episode II montage called "Choices."

      It's possible that this is what's available on Gnutella. Its a quicktime video, but, like I said, is comprised of still photos and some background music.

      --

  • by M_Talon (135587) on Monday October 29, 2001 @01:40PM (#2493606) Homepage
    Anyone who has the Ep 1 DVD knows they've been hyping November 9th. It was just kinda assumed that was the release date for the new teaser for Ep 2. Anyone check lately to see if 11/9 is still being promoted, or if they've changed that to 11/2 (the release date of Monsters Inc)?
    • The general Internet buzz, which thus far has proved to be correct (it predicted the teaser on Monsters, Inc about a month ago) is that there are going to be three seperate trailers in quick succession, one with Monsters, Inc (Nov 2); one (longer one) with Harry Potter (Nov 16); and one Internet trailer that is released between the two.

      My semi-educated guess would be Nov 9th is when the Internet trailer will be released..maybe as a DVD exclusive at first(?).
    • According to the rumors on theforce.net [theforce.net], there will be two teaser trailers and the Harry Potter trailer this month. The first teaser, "Breathing" is attached to Monsters, Inc. The second is supposed to be released on November 9, and trailer "A" is November 16. Trailer B will supposedly show up in March.
  • Perhaps someone could fill me in on what all this Harry Potter stuff is about?

    Maybe five or six sentences giving background and what's worth caring about?

    Thanks,

    Josh
    • Entertaining stories about an outsider/geek type kid. His parents were killed, he is now 11 years old, and it is time to fulfill his birthright.

      I'm not sure why it is SO popular. I mean, they are entertaining stories, but I see nothing deep or profound in them.

      My wife started reading them to find out what the kids were going on about (she's a teacher) and I picked them up, as I found out I was going to be taking her and infant son to the movie.

  • Lots of neat Star Wars ASCII art [asciimation.co.nz] is available at this site for the curious... :)
    • D'ohhh!

      Forgot to add the part about the DVD incompatibilities for Mac users of the Episode I DVD. Go figure, the site "Go2Mac" where a lot of the info is (or was linked from) is having some issues right now. Last I heard, the company that produced the DVD responded about it, but that's also on that site... :(

    • Here's the story [go2mac.com] on Go2Mac.


      Very strange though. This isn't the story I was looking for - there was another with actual details, and the reply(s) from the company producing the DVD. I've searched "Macsurfer" and although "star wars" brings up a bunch of hits, not the ones I had read a week or two ago. Were they erased? Were they moved? Got me. :-/

  • me no think fans of original be liking dumbed down sequels. methinks second-run matinee for AOTC (at best).
  • by BiteMyShinyMetalAss (444575) on Monday October 29, 2001 @01:46PM (#2493638)
    Slightly offtopic, but a question that I at least thought was interesting...

    I remember reading that tons of fans went to see 'Meet Joe Black' (I'm prettysure that's what it was) just to watch the Episode I trailer, and I'm guessing that the same will happen with 'Monsters, Inc.' (although 'Monsters, Inc.' is probably more enjoyable than than 'Meet Joe Black')

    I wonder: how much of an effect do the new Star Wars trailers have on the grosses of the films that they appear in front of? I'm sure that the take from 'Meet Joe Black' was nicely boosted by those who walked out after the trailer ;)
    • IIRC, the first film with the Episode One trailer was Wing Commander. In the case of WC, a lot of Star Wars fans went for the first few minutes to see the trailer and then walked out to the lobby to demand a refund.

      As far as Wing Commander is concerned, the Episode 1 trailer most likely did have an effect on the gross (although not much of one, Wing Commander failed horribly at the box office). In the case of Monsters Inc., though, I don't think it will be any effect at all. I had been planning to see that movie since I first saw previews. I own Toy Story 1, Toy Story 2, and A Bug's Life on DVD. Pixar simply does a wonderful job with their films. An Episode 2 trailer is just iceing on the cake.
    • I remember the same thing-- that opening weekend grosses were boosted by quite a bit because the Episode 1 trailer was attached. (For the record, though, in my area at least, it wasn't attached to Meet Joe Black-- a minor tragedy, because anticipation for the trailer was the reason I agreed to take my girlfriend to MJB in the first place).

      I doubt it'll be quite such a noticable effect this time around, though, for a few reasons:

      1. Star Wars fever has cooled considerably. We're not waiting here after a 16-year buildup-- it's only been a couple since Episode 1.

      2. Considering the general feeling of disappointment left over from Episode 1 among the hard-core fans-- who are the ones that would pay for another movie just to see the new trailer-- it probably won't be such an event.

      3. Monsters, Inc. and Harry Potter are going to do some big fat business in the first place. Any boost they get from the new teaser is probably just another drop in the bucket. I know I'm more excited to see 90 minutes of Pixar than two minutes of Lucasfilm, and I doubt you'd be able to find a kid in America that would disagree.

      Of course, all of this is rambling based on knowledge gained from my Entertainment Weekly subscription, so it's all up for debate.
    • The trailer originally appeared before and after "Meet Joe Black" and "The Waterboy," at selected theatres. I've heard that the Waterboy was a pretty dumb movie-- as was (for slightly different reasons), MJB.
  • Actually, . . . (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Limburgher (523006)
    First of all, J.K. Rowling is a woman. On a more relevant note, the Harry Potter series is a fascinating epic with many threads and topics that keep adults enthralled, myself included. My wife read the first one, and recommended it to me, and I thought, 'oh, ok, i'll succumb to the hype this once' but it was amazing, and the other three only get better. There are also parallels with Star Wars. Young boy of unusual ability lives with aunt and uncle from infancy due to parents' mysterious deaths at the hands of an unknown evil. These facts are revealed suddenly and the boy's world is changed forever, as he learns to tap his powers and fight evil, while gathering friends. A New Hope, or The Sorcerer's Stone? Both, actually.
  • Typical (Score:5, Funny)

    by elefantstn (195873) on Monday October 29, 2001 @01:58PM (#2493698)
    Good thing I'm planning on seeing both of those movies anyway.

    CmdrTaco then continued by saying,


    "Then I plan to complain on slashdot that Disney, AOL-TW, and Fox -- coincidentally the companies who will be making money off Monsters, Inc., Harry Potter, and Star Wars Episode II respectively -- are using their vast monetary resources to purchase laws in the United States Congress. The irony of blasting these movie studios repeatedly on my website and then in the same breath praising and promoting their movies is apparently totally lost on me."
    • I was going to post this (And probably get bumped to -2 redundant) if no one else had beat me to the punch. I went digging around on Opensecrets.org and noted, in part, that Orrin Hatch (The father of the DMCA) got 17 grand from Disney this year. Imagine that. Yes, both Monsters Inc and Harry Potter look interesting. No, I'm not going to either one (For all the good it will do) because Disney and Time Warner will use my 8 bucks to further rape my rights in the US. I don't find that acceptable. If they want to rape my rights, they can damn well do it without my funding it.

      Anyone thought of getting a petition drive to ban corporate campaign donations? It's the only way the people will recover any influence in the Government.

    • Hmmm... I thought we were all pretty much in agreement not to give the RIAA and MPAA any more money untill they learn to play nicely with others. I haven't given them a dime in 2 years thanks to Mp3s and VCDs...

      I sure hope none of you go to see either of these films, when you can watch them in the comfort of your own home theater, for the price of a couple blank CDs.

  • News Flash! (Score:2, Funny)

    by gcondon (45047)
    MegaCineCorp has announced the list of films showing the highly anticipated "teaser trailer" for the upcoming Hype Wars Episode N - Send in the Clones.

    Studio spokesman, Rip Ewoff, was quoted as saying "after we milk those freeks for two full-price tickets, it should be just about time for them to get into line for the premeire".

    MegaCineCorp President, Ernesto Palpatine, could not be reached for comment.
  • by Amon CMB (157028) on Monday October 29, 2001 @02:09PM (#2493752)
    "They came from outer space!"

    "They came from Planet X!"

    "OH NO!"

    "Run, hide! They are coming!"

    Natalie Portman: ::screeeeam::

    "Come see the latest in the Star Wars saga!"

    Star Wars Episode II: When Clones Attack
  • My partner has seen Monsters, Inc. due to having friends who manage a movie theater. There is, in fact, a trailer for Episode II on the front end of it.

    Needless to say, I'm also jealous as hell that she saw it and I didn't. :P
  • by artemis67 (93453) on Monday October 29, 2001 @02:31PM (#2493854)
    Aint It Cool News [ainitcool.com] has had some intersting Episode II news lately... the first is a synopsis of the trailer that seems to have been verified by TheForce.net. It can be found here:

    http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=10579 [aintitcool.com]

    The second is even more tantilizing... it's a full review of the movie, allegedly based on the second editied version. That can be found here:

    http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=10528 [aintitcool.com]

    Enjoy.

  • by Junks Jerzey (54586) on Monday October 29, 2001 @02:36PM (#2493899)
    Having seen the Star Wars movies as a kid, the TPM trailer gave me chills. "wow, just like the previous" movies. It was so perfect, so slick, I couldn't get over it. Then I saw the movie and _yikes_ was it horrible. Did I just grow up or was TPM just plain embarrassing? Sadly I think that you needed to be nine years old to appreciate it.
    • by dswensen (252552) on Monday October 29, 2001 @03:37PM (#2494261) Homepage
      I was incredibly jacked about TPM when I saw the trailer. I thought it was going to be the Best Thing Ever. Then the advance reviews started coming out, some expressing not so much disappointment as existential despair, and I started to worry. A whole generation of former kids had hung their identities on this series of movies, and felt personally betrayed when the new one didn't deliver the same magic through a wall of years and life experience.

      I saw TPM opening night, I enjoyed it (with some reservations), and I've seen it many times since then. I think my initial disappointments sprung from a few things:

      1) It's far from a perfect film.
      2) I'm no longer a kid.
      3) I expected it to be the Best Thing Ever, thereby almost ensuring it wouldn't be.

      I don't think TPM was embarrassing, but I do think it's a very different film from the rest of Star Wars. It adds a more openly "comic" character (which, to my mind, was a good try but a failure), and includes things like politics, intrigue, foreshadowing, and deception -- which the classic trilogy was fairly short on.

      I love and appreciate the classic trilogy for its wahoo, space-cowboys appeal, but honestly, I'm not so sure I need to see three more movies of it. I'm glad Lucas is not entirely resting on his dramatic laurels and is branching out into new ground (for him, anyway).

      Personally, I'm excited to see the new flick, to see if Lucas will have learned from some of his mistakes in TPM, and also because I think TPM was all foreshadowing and setup, and we're going to see some real action in the next two flicks.
  • by HiThere (15173)
    Disney is the company that bankrolled the SSSCA. It will be quite a long time before I do anything that might be seen as beneficial to them.
    I don't really care what trailers they include. Some things are more important.

  • by jchristopher (198929) on Monday October 29, 2001 @02:55PM (#2494012)
    I just found out that even though I own the Episode I dvd (which I use in a standalone player), I won't be able to access the trailer on starwars.com, since I don't have a DVDROM in a computer running Windows. (scam, but that's another post)

    Can anyone suggest a website that will have the trailer besides starwars.com? I assume that someone will save it from starwars.com and post it elsewhere...

    • I assume that someone will save it from starwars.com and post it elsewhere...

      I'm guessing that it will probably be encrypted. At the very least it will be copyrighted so even if it is posted somewhere else, they will probably be required to take it down.

      I do sympathize with you though. I purchased the DVD, but I have neither a DVD-ROM drive, nor do I use Windows.

  • Original Article (Score:2, Informative)

    by 90XDoubleSide (522791)
    This news was first broken in an article at theforce.net [theforce.net] on information from someone who was at Pixar's cast screening of Monster's, Inc., where Jobs announced that the trailer would be showing with the film and was included with the copy they watched at the screening. The article even has a link to an MP3 file of Jobs making the announcement. At first, this was disputed by people citing internet trailer listings, but has now been confirmed by today's official Lucasfilm announcement.

    Working for Pixar and seeing the trailer first... how luckey can you get!

  • Remeber that simpson's episode where Flander's was reading to his kids?
    "And then Harry Potter and all his friends went straight to hell for practicing witch-craft. The End."
  • by antdude (79039) on Monday October 29, 2001 @04:05PM (#2494395) Homepage Journal
    This was e-mailed from my friend who is a big movie fan (Thanks Spaceman Spiff!):

    -------- Original Message --------
    Subject: 3 SWE2 trailers coming
    Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:58:02 -0800

    Found this at Coming Attractions...

    The first trailer, dubbed the "Breathing" teaser, will definitely run
    attached to all prints of Monsters, Inc. on November 2nd.

    The second trailer, slated to appear online at the official Star Wars
    website, will debut November 9th.

    The third trailer, longer and containing more adult-oriented material than
    the first teaser trailer, will be attached to Harry Potter and the
    Sorcerer's Stone on November 16th.

3500 Calories = 1 Food Pound

Working...