Star Wars Episode II Trailer Tonight

Covant was among several to note that Fox is going to air a 2 1/2 minute trailer for Star Wars Episode II tonight, in between Malcolm and The X-Files. I've seen the trailers released so far, and really hope that this one can convince me that Clones isn't going to continue to follow the path to the dark side like Menace did.

Karma Whore :)

[albino eatpod]

OK, if you want to see some crappy pics of the trailer already, look here [ebportal.com]. If you look at one of the bottom pics, you can see the early Star Destroyer taking off.

Have you read Moriarty's TPM script review?

[KilljoyAZ]

I'd take anything AICN's Moriarty says about a Star Wars script with a grain of salt, considering how much praise he lavished over the Episode I script. Here's an excerpt:

Let go of your ideas of what the film is going to be, everyone. You can't be like Jeffrey Wells and walk into this ready to hate it. You can't possibly know how textured and wonderful the story Lucas has to tell is going to be. The thing that makes THE PHANTOM MENACE possibly my favorite STAR WARS story so far (on paper, mind you) is the details. The time off has done something unexpected to Lucas as a storyteller -- it made him better. Considering how he's always doubted himself as a writer, I think it showed remarkable confidence in not putting this script through another writer, someone who might have diluted our return to this place a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. Even the wonderful Frank Darabont would have diluted it, simply because what we got wouldn't be pure Lucas anymore. It's remarkable to read the actual words Lucas put on paper. There's just enough on the page to get the actors moving, but he doesn't really describe the world. What's there is just raw STAR WARS, straight from the tap -- the characters and how they relate. That's enough, though, because these are real characters that are instantly iconic, but also truly human.

Let me put the final nail in the coffin. Here's what he had to say about Jar Jar:

I am delighted to report that Jar Jar not only works, but that the Gungans are, as a whole, a welcome addition to the mythology of the STAR WARS universe. Jar Jar is an exile from the other Gungans because he's clumsy. Not just a little, either, but monumentally so. Once Jar Jar meets the Jedi, though, that trait begins to pay off, with Jar Jar mistakenly bumbling his way out of danger and up the chain of command until he ends up a general in the film's final battle. This works well in the script. Jar Jar is funny, but the humor in 1977's A NEW HOPE is one of that film's strong points. This script balances the humor with honest, direct writing that gives Jar Jar (dare I say?) a soul. He may be a sidekick, but here's betting that Jar Jar Binks becomes one of the biggest EPISODE I stars once audiences get their real introduction.

You can read the rest here [aintitcool.com]. I'll believe Lucas has actually made a good movie when I see it finished and on the big screen.

Re:i dont care what anyone says....

[Daemonik]

The prophecy of Anakin being the "one that will bring balance to the force" is a little deeper than just killing off the Jedi so that they equal the numbers of the Sith.

According to Yoda in the Phantom Menace, there are only 2 Sith, ever. So obviously numerical superiority has nothing to do with balancing the force.

Rather, look at the Jedi and how they behave. Living in towers, above the concerns of non-Jedi. Not accepting gifted students unless they were born into the order, or brought in at infancy (the better to instill their 'wisdoms' upon them before they can form opinions to the contrary).

The Jedi of this period are at the epitome of Jedi training and knowledge. The only way to restore any balance is to wipe them all out. Others will come who have the Force, but they will have to restart the knowledge pool at the beginning again and it will be a significant time before they have the numbers, resources and training to again need 'balancing'.

Re:What was wrong with Portman?

[Chasing Amy]

I'd like you to *try* to identify me. You can't. You'd discover that I post with the Chasing Amy nic only to /. and to USENET groups. This is the nic I started using when I came to do research in groups like news://alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.pre-teen , where I read and still read the text posts (and *only* the text, no binaries). As such, I've never given any *real* information about myself which could reveal my true identity, because a lot of people would be upset at anyone even for just reading text in such a group.

So, it's ironic that you're getting uptight about me mentioning how attractive Natalie Portman was even at a very young age. ;-) The guys in p-t and similar groups would just...well, agree. :-o

Admitting that underage people can sometimes be attractive, and actually wanting to touch them, are two very different things. By nature we're meant to find Natalie Portman to be quite attractive, even when she was 12--because in primeval times she would have made a wonderful mate, and in primeval times you'd want to snap them up fairly young, so that she'd bond with you by having you as her first sexual partner and so when she becomes fertile you can be pretty sure the baby is really yours. We're by nature meant to find nubile budding young girls like Natalie Portman at the time she did *Leon* to be sexually attractive. Modern social constructs try to overwrite nature and tell us not to be attracted to them--but on some level we still, even if only on rare occasions, are. It's just natural, and looking and touching are two very different things. I'm far healthier than a prude who thinks it's wrong to be attracted to a budding adolescent girl, because I acknowledge nature and choose to ignore it, rather than refuse to acknowledge it and repress it under social programming.

So, exactly why should I choose to keep a comment about Natalie's inherent cuteness and fuckability off a public board? We'd all be much more sexually healthy if we dropped the Puritan "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" crap. And it isn't even evil--it's just natural programming tha's no longer socially viable.

If we were in any other age but this one, you too would acknowledge the fuckability of the adolescent Natalie Portman. :-)