list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Star_Wars_Episode_II_Attack_of_the_Clones/207075/default.aspx Title: Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones
Year: 2002
Director: George Lucas
Plot: The second prequel to the original Star Wars trilogy takes place ten years after the events depicted in Star Wars: Episode I -- The Phantom Menace. Now 20, young Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) is an apprentice to respected Jedi knight Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor). Unusually powerful in the Force, Anakin is also impatient, arrogant, and headstrong -- causing his mentor a great deal of concern. The pair are ordered to protect Padme Amidala (Natalie Portman), the former queen of the planet Naboo, now representing her world in the Galactic Senate. Someone is trying to assassinate her on the eve of a vote enabling Supreme Chancellor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) to build a military force that will safeguard against a growing separatist movement led by mysterious former Jedi Count Dooku (Christopher Lee). After another attempt on Padme's life, Obi-Wan and Anakin separate. The young Jedi and Padme fall in love as he escorts her first to the security of Naboo and then to his home world of Tatooine, where the fate of his mother leads him to commit an ominous atrocity. Meanwhile, Obi-Wan travels to the secretive planet Kamino and the asteroid-ringed world of Geonosis, following bounty hunter Jango Fett (Temuera Morrison) and his son, Boba (Daniel Logan), who are involved in an operation to create a massive army of clones. A vicious battle ensues between the clones and Jedi on one side and Dooku's droids on the other, but who is really pulling the strings in this galactic conflict? In late 2002, the movie was released in IMAX theaters as Star Wars: Episode II -- Attack of the Clones: The IMAX Experience, with a pared-down running time of 120 minutes in order to meet the technical requirements of the large-screen format. ~ Karl Williams, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 24
Number of Lists: 92
Number of blog posts: 6
Number of discussion threads: 1
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Tue, 12 May 2009 02:37:22 GMTStar Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones2002George LucasThe second prequel to the original <a href=/films/32762/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Star Wars</a> trilogy takes place ten years after the events depicted in Star Wars: Episode I -- The Phantom Menace. Now 20, young Anakin Skywalker (<a href="/players/P___277514/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Hayden Christensen</a>) is an apprentice to respected Jedi knight Obi-Wan Kenobi (<a href="/players/P___196980/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ewan McGregor</a>). Unusually powerful in the Force, Anakin is also impatient, arrogant, and headstrong -- causing his mentor a great deal of concern. The pair are ordered to protect Padme Amidala (<a href="/players/P___197461/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Natalie Portman</a>), the former queen of the planet Naboo, now representing her world in the Galactic Senate. Someone is trying to assassinate her on the eve of a vote enabling Supreme Chancellor Palpatine (<a href="/players/P____47249/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ian McDiarmid</a>) to build a military force that will safeguard against a growing separatist movement led by mysterious former Jedi Count Dooku (<a href="/players/P____41362/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Christopher Lee</a>). After another attempt on Padme's life, Obi-Wan and Anakin separate. The young Jedi and Padme fall in love as he escorts her first to the security of Naboo and then to his home world of Tatooine, where the fate of his mother leads him to commit an ominous atrocity. Meanwhile, Obi-Wan travels to the secretive planet Kamino and the asteroid-ringed world of Geonosis, following bounty hunter Jango Fett (<a href="/players/P____50852/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Temuera Morrison</a>) and his son, Boba (Daniel Logan), who are involved in an operation to create a massive army of clones. A vicious battle ensues between the clones and Jedi on one side and Dooku's droids on the other, but who is really pulling the strings in this galactic conflict? In late 2002, the movie was released in IMAX theaters as Star Wars: Episode II -- Attack of the Clones: The IMAX Experience, with a pared-down running time of 120 minutes in order to meet the technical requirements of the large-screen format. ~ Karl Williams, All Movie Guide24Tag Target (>10)92613http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t24622fyaho.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Star_Wars_Episode_II_Attack_of_the_Clones/207075/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/the_mow/archive/2009/5/7/42109.aspx Post By: The_MOW
Post To: The_MOW Blog
Post Date: 5/7/2009 5:25:40 PM
Body: The "Republic" has been in shambles for the last decade. It is nearing a civil war where millions will surely die. One of the most high-profile targets of the opposition is "Senator Padme Amidala" (Natalie Portman) of "Naboo," who escapes an assassination attack thanks to her look-alike decoy, who gave her life to save that of the former queen. "Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi" (Ewan McGregor) and his apprentice "Anakin Skywalker" (now being played by Hayden Christiensen) are dispatched by the "Jedi Council" to protect the young politician. Upon their first meeting in the senator's home, she almost doesn't recognizes the former slave she first met on the desert planet of "Tatooine" ten years ago. What the "Jedi" discovers is that the on-going assassination attempts on the senator is just a small part of a much larger plan to cause unrest in the already fragile "Republic" which will lead to a war where clones of a bounty hunter will battle in the name of the "Republic" in uniforms that will be instantly recognizable to long-time fans of the franchise. As the "Jedi" goes on his search to find out who is behind the clones, "Anakin" and "Padme" go on their own adventure and slowly learn that they have feelings for each other. The first thing you will certainly notice is the special effects. There is a lot of CGI in this film that is simply fantastic. There is only a couple of things that I had a problem with when it came to the CGI. First, the spaceships looked more technologically more advanced than the original trilogy. I know that there has been advances in special effects, but this trilogy is suppose to be set before the original, which means the technology should have been more advanced in the original trilogy. Another problem is the CG characters, who are still being poorly blended into backgrounds -- which is most noticeable when they share the screen with one or more of the human performers. There are stronger performances from the main cast this time around. However, Christensen, who takes over the role from a much younger Jake Lloyd, appeared to have had some problems with reciting his lines and made it appear that he was forcing them from his memory. McGregor, Portman, Christopher Lee ("Count Dooku) and Frank Oz (voice of "Jedi Master Yoda") are just a few of the performers who stand out in this film. The battle scenes are simply incredible. The space and ground fights are fast-paced, and edited very nicely. And just like the last film, the "lightsaber" battles make the ones in the original trilogy look like they were played back in slow motion. There is some character development problems with characters introduced in this film. I personally would have liked to have seen "Count Dooku" (Christopher Lee, who is best known for portraying "Count Dracula" on the silver screen) be better developed since he was the main villain in the film. We also get to see many questions from the originally trilogy answered. Especially the start of one of the major plot devices seen in "Star Wars" (that's "Episode IV" to you kids). Despite the flaws, "Episode 2" is a good addition to any sci-fi fan's DVD collection.
]]>Thu, 07 May 2009 21:25:40 GMTThe_MOWThe_MOW Blog5/7/2009 5:25:40 PMThe "Republic" has been in shambles for the last decade. It is nearing a civil war where millions will surely die. One of the most high-profile targets of the opposition is "Senator Padme Amidala" (Natalie Portman) of "Naboo," who escapes an assassination attack thanks to her look-alike decoy, who gave her life to save that of the former queen. "Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi" (Ewan McGregor) and his apprentice "Anakin Skywalker" (now being played by Hayden Christiensen) are dispatched by the "Jedi Council" to protect the young politician. Upon their first meeting in the senator's home, she almost doesn't recognizes the former slave she first met on the desert planet of "Tatooine" ten years ago. What the "Jedi" discovers is that the on-going assassination attempts on the senator is just a small part of a much larger plan to cause unrest in the already fragile "Republic" which will lead to a war where clones of a bounty hunter will battle in the name of the "Republic" in uniforms that will be instantly recognizable to long-time fans of the franchise. As the "Jedi" goes on his search to find out who is behind the clones, "Anakin" and "Padme" go on their own adventure and slowly learn that they have feelings for each other. The first thing you will certainly notice is the special effects. There is a lot of CGI in this film that is simply fantastic. There is only a couple of things that I had a problem with when it came to the CGI. First, the spaceships looked more technologically more advanced than the original trilogy. I know that there has been advances in special effects, but this trilogy is suppose to be set before the original, which means the technology should have been more advanced in the original trilogy. Another problem is the CG characters, who are still being poorly blended into backgrounds -- which is most noticeable when they share the screen with one or more of the human performers. There are stronger performances from the main cast this time around. However, Christensen, who takes over the role from a much younger Jake Lloyd, appeared to have had some problems with reciting his lines and made it appear that he was forcing them from his memory. McGregor, Portman, Christopher Lee ("Count Dooku) and Frank Oz (voice of "Jedi Master Yoda") are just a few of the performers who stand out in this film. The battle scenes are simply incredible. The space and ground fights are fast-paced, and edited very nicely. And just like the last film, the "lightsaber" battles make the ones in the original trilogy look like they were played back in slow motion. There is some character development problems with characters introduced in this film. I personally would have liked to have seen "Count Dooku" (Christopher Lee, who is best known for portraying "Count Dracula" on the silver screen) be better developed since he was the main villain in the film. We also get to see many questions from the originally trilogy answered. Especially the start of one of the major plot devices seen in "Star Wars" (that's "Episode IV" to you kids). Despite the flaws, "Episode 2" is a good addition to any sci-fi fan's DVD collection. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/3/27/41289.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/27/2009 9:00:44 AM
Body: Though the third Fast and the Furious installment, Tokyo Drift, wasn’t a huge box office disappointment with its $63 million domestic gross, it was significantly less successful than its predecessors, The Fast and the Furious ($145 million) and 2 Fast 2 Furious ($127 million). A fourth film would normally see an even bigger drop in box office receipts, but next week’s Fast & Furious has a good chance of actually being the highest-grossing film in the series yet, due to the return of original cast members Paul Walker, Michelle Rodriguez, Jordanna Brewster and, most importantly, Vin Diesel. With the expectation that Fast & Furious will be enough of a hit to save the franchise, we take a look at ten other films that similarly kept their respective series going, either because of an increase in profits or a surprising increase in quality, following one or many disappointing installments. Batman Begins (2005) It’s appropriate to begin with the film that has “begins” in the title. Also, this is one of the more obvious examples (it’s also the first in alphabetical order), but it almost seems to count the least, because while it did lift the Batman franchise back up, both in terms of box office and quality, after Batman & Robin, Christopher Nolan’s reboot of the character isn’t much in line with the previous installments. For all the difference between Burton’s and Schumacher’s pairs of films, they are of the same continuity, for the most part. Still, compared to attempted reboots like Superman Returns and Punisher: War Zone, Batman Begins is a real savior; just imagine if it had failed, and we’d never have gotten The Dark Knight. Goldeneye (1995) and Casino Royale (2006) While Casino Royale is another obvious choice and could very well have been the only James Bond film on this list, it’s worth including Goldeneye, too, because after the disappointing 007 films starring Timothy Dalton, this installment boosted the franchise’s profits way back up and thankfully knocked Moonraker off the highest-grossing-Bond movie throne. Beginning a more action-packed run with new lead Pierce Brosnan, Goldeneye was a terrific addition to the series even if it led to a subsequent drop in quality where spectacle took precedence over story. Fortunately, a decade later Casino Royale came in and saved the franchise once again. Halloween H20 (1998) Thanks in part to the return of Jamie Lee Curtis, who was joined by a crop of young, likable stars including Michelle Williams, Josh Hartnett and Joseph Gordon-Levitt (not to mention LL Cool J), Halloween H20 was a huge success and a huge breath of fresh air after a number of unwatchable (even with Paul Rudd) Halloween sequels. This film did the Superman Returns thing, too (and first), where it jumped back and ignored all the terrible installments, treating them as having never happened. It wasn’t great, but it was better, and for the first time, a Halloween sequel grossed more money than the original (since that time, the remake has replaced H20 at the top). Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004) Following two adequate but not great Harry Potter adaptations from Chris Columbus, the series got a huge makeover and new life when Alfonso Cuaron took on the third film. Though some of us may think it a tad overrated and not actually as great as the fourth film, Goblet of Fire, Prisoner of Azkaban was undeniably important in showing that the franchise could (and would) mature along with its characters. A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987) It wasn’t necessarily because Heather Langenkamp returned to the series, and it wasn’t necessarily that this second sequel took in so much money (A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge had already out-grossed the original). After a darkly shot and depressingly non-scary sequel, Dream Warriors did the best thing a horror franchise can do (in our opinion): it turned it into a fantasy film that combined the likes of Dungeons and Dragons and superhero movies. Without this refreshing installment, we children of the ‘80s might not have continued following the franchise so enthusiastically. Mission: Impossible III (2006) This J.J. Abrams-directed installment may have been the lowest grossing of the franchise, but it is the best of the three. Coming off the sloppy and confusing disasters that were Brian De Palma’s original and John Woo’s sequel, that may not be saying much, but shockingly it is an exceptional action film. Part of its favor is of course Philip Seymour Hoffman as the villain (and as Ethan Hunt disguised as the villain wearing a Philip Seymour Hoffman mask), but overall the film was more critically lauded than the first two films, and in spite of its being a box office disappointment, M:iI:III may have saved the franchise simply on the merit of its reviews (or, is a fourth installment merely being made because Hollywood has nothing better to do?). Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986) and Star Trek: First Contact (1996) Many Trekkies would note that every other installment in the Star Trek franchise saves the series, and it’s generally understood that even-numbered films are always better than odd-numbered. Many Trekkies would also argue therefore that Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should be on this list for initially saving the series following a relatively weak start. But we non-Trek fans have to point to The Voyage Home for bringing in us kids who cared more about humpback whales than space battles. Or, at least that seems to be how this installment managed to become the (still) highest-grossing Trek movie. Unfortunately, there were no sea mammals in any of the subsequent sequels and it wasn’t until the Next Generation TV cast got their own movie (as in, not shared with the original crew) that another installment, First Contact, out-grossed all other sequels (except the always-reigning whale-filled one, of course) and appeared to temporarily save the franchise once again. Later this year, we’ll get to see if J.J. Abrams’ reboot, Star Trek, has any ocean life and/or what it takes to jumpstart the series, too. Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones (2002) It made the least amount of money of the three Star Wars prequels, but Attack of the Clones was the trilogy’s saving grace, because after the “George Lucas ruined my childhood!” disappointments of The Phantom Menace, this second (or fifth?) installment of the franchise got the old fans excited again by alluding to (and leading in the direction of) more characters and events of the original movies, while overall featuring a better plot and more satisfying action. It helped, of course, that Jake Lloyd isn’t in it and that Jar-Jar isn’t quite as prominent. If it hadn’t been so good, many of us would have never bothered with Revenge of the Sith. In a way, it’s to the other two prequels what Empire Strikes Back was to the other films of the first trilogy, though it’s not quite worthy of such a favorable comparison. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:00:44 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/27/2009 9:00:44 AMThough the third Fast and the Furious installment, Tokyo Drift, wasn’t a huge box office disappointment with its $63 million domestic gross, it was significantly less successful than its predecessors, The Fast and the Furious ($145 million) and 2 Fast 2 Furious ($127 million). A fourth film would normally see an even bigger drop in box office receipts, but next week’s Fast & Furious has a good chance of actually being the highest-grossing film in the series yet, due to the return of original cast members Paul Walker, Michelle Rodriguez, Jordanna Brewster and, most importantly, Vin Diesel. With the expectation that Fast & Furious will be enough of a hit to save the franchise, we take a look at ten other films that similarly kept their respective series going, either because of an increase in profits or a surprising increase in quality, following one or many disappointing installments. Batman Begins (2005) It’s appropriate to begin with the film that has “begins” in the title. Also, this is one of the more obvious examples (it’s also the first in alphabetical order), but it almost seems to count the least, because while it did lift the Batman franchise back up, both in terms of box office and quality, after Batman & Robin, Christopher Nolan’s reboot of the character isn’t much in line with the previous installments. For all the difference between Burton’s and Schumacher’s pairs of films, they are of the same continuity, for the most part. Still, compared to attempted reboots like Superman Returns and Punisher: War Zone, Batman Begins is a real savior; just imagine if it had failed, and we’d never have gotten The Dark Knight. Goldeneye (1995) and Casino Royale (2006) While Casino Royale is another obvious choice and could very well have been the only James Bond film on this list, it’s worth including Goldeneye, too, because after the disappointing 007 films starring Timothy Dalton, this installment boosted the franchise’s profits way back up and thankfully knocked Moonraker off the highest-grossing-Bond movie throne. Beginning a more action-packed run with new lead Pierce Brosnan, Goldeneye was a terrific addition to the series even if it led to a subsequent drop in quality where spectacle took precedence over story. Fortunately, a decade later Casino Royale came in and saved the franchise once again. Halloween H20 (1998) Thanks in part to the return of Jamie Lee Curtis, who was joined by a crop of young, likable stars including Michelle Williams, Josh Hartnett and Joseph Gordon-Levitt (not to mention LL Cool J), Halloween H20 was a huge success and a huge breath of fresh air after a number of unwatchable (even with Paul Rudd) Halloween sequels. This film did the Superman Returns thing, too (and first), where it jumped back and ignored all the terrible installments, treating them as having never happened. It wasn’t great, but it was better, and for the first time, a Halloween sequel grossed more money than the original (since that time, the remake has replaced H20 at the top). Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004) Following two adequate but not great Harry Potter adaptations from Chris Columbus, the series got a huge makeover and new life when Alfonso Cuaron took on the third film. Though some of us may think it a tad overrated and not actually as great as the fourth film, Goblet of Fire, Prisoner of Azkaban was undeniably important in showing that the franchise could (and would) mature along with its characters. A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987) It wasn’t necessarily because Heather Langenkamp returned to the series, and it wasn’t necessarily that this second sequel took in so much money (A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge had already out-grossed the original). After a darkly shot and depressingly non-scary sequel, Dream Warriors did the best thing a horror franchise can do (in our opinion): it turned it into a fantasy film that combined the likes of Dungeons and Dragons and superhero movies. Without this refreshing installment, we children of the ‘80s might not have continued following the franchise so enthusiastically. Mission: Impossible III (2006) This J.J. Abrams-directed installment may have been the lowest grossing of the franchise, but it is the best of the three. Coming off the sloppy and confusing disasters that were Brian De Palma’s original and John Woo’s sequel, that may not be saying much, but shockingly it is an exceptional action film. Part of its favor is of course Philip Seymour Hoffman as the villain (and as Ethan Hunt disguised as the villain wearing a Philip Seymour Hoffman mask), but overall the film was more critically lauded than the first two films, and in spite of its being a box office disappointment, M:iI:III may have saved the franchise simply on the merit of its reviews (or, is a fourth installment merely being made because Hollywood has nothing better to do?). Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986) and Star Trek: First Contact (1996) Many Trekkies would note that every other installment in the Star Trek franchise saves the series, and it’s generally understood that even-numbered films are always better than odd-numbered. Many Trekkies would also argue therefore that Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should be on this list for initially saving the series following a relatively weak start. But we non-Trek fans have to point to The Voyage Home for bringing in us kids who cared more about humpback whales than space battles. Or, at least that seems to be how this installment managed to become the (still) highest-grossing Trek movie. Unfortunately, there were no sea mammals in any of the subsequent sequels and it wasn’t until the Next Generation TV cast got their own movie (as in, not shared with the original crew) that another installment, First Contact, out-grossed all other sequels (except the always-reigning whale-filled one, of course) and appeared to temporarily save the franchise once again. Later this year, we’ll get to see if J.J. Abrams’ reboot, Star Trek, has any ocean life and/or what it takes to jumpstart the series, too. Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones (2002) It made the least amount of money of the three Star Wars prequels, but Attack of the Clones was the trilogy’s saving grace, because after the “George Lucas ruined my childhood!” disappointments of The Phantom Menace, this second (or fifth?) installment of the franchise got the old fans excited again by alluding to (and leading in the direction of) more characters and events of the original movies, while overall featuring a better plot and more satisfying action. It helped, of course, that Jake Lloyd isn’t in it and that Jar-Jar isn’t quite as prominent. If it hadn’t been so good, many of us would have never bothered with Revenge of the Sith. In a way, it’s to the other two prequels what Empire Strikes Back was to the other films of the first trilogy, though it’s not quite worthy of such a favorable comparison. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/12/18/38568.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 12/18/2008 5:00:50 PM
Body: Don’t you just hate when the movies make you care about a bigot? Sure, racists are technically humans, but that doesn’t mean we need to sympathize with them, right? No matter how great the film, it should be very difficult to accept the softening of intolerant people. Yet the lovable racist is not uncommon in cinema. In fact, out in theaters right now are two films dealing with this type of character. The Reader presents a cold Concentration Camp guard (Kate Winslet) for whom we’re meant to shed a tear, and Gran Torino focuses on a War Veteran stereotype (Clint Eastwood) who may evoke from the audience as much amusement as disgust. Maybe it’s like picking a scab, watching these kinds of movies. Some great films, such as Downfall, may only welcome an understanding of someone so heinous as Adolph Hitler, but other films have allowed us to totally enjoy racist protagonists of lesser offense. Check out the following examples to see some of the many intolerant heroes we’ve easily tolerated. Ethan Edwards (John Wayne) in The Searchers (1956) Compared to many classic westerns, John Ford’s The Searchers is not necessarily racist towards Native Americans. Yet it does feature one of the most unapologetically racist characters in film history, one who influenced many subsequent intolerants like Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver and Anakin Skywalker in Attack of the Clones. Ethan is such a badass bigot that he’d even kill his own niece for mating with a Commanche. Despite all his racism, though, audiences can’t help but like Ethan throughout much of The Searchers, because although Ford clearly looks down upon his hatred, the film also treats the character as a heroic man of his time. It’s a love him and hate him at the same time sort of thing. Pino (John Turturro) in Do the Right Thing (1989) In a way, almost everyone in Spike Lee’s classic is at least a little bit racist, evident in the famous slur montage. But it’s Pino who is the most ignorant, calling black people “the N word” on a regular basis. Yet we may forgive him, just as Mookie (Lee) does, because his bigotry is brought about through a combo of stupidity and culture. After all, if he’s a fan of Magic Johnson and Eddie Murphy, he can’t be a true racist. Right? Melvin Udall (Jack Nicholson) in As Good as It Gets (1997) He’s portrayed as mostly hateful towards gays and women, but Melvin is also plenty racist. He tells Frank (Cuba Gooding Jr.) to “think white” and earlier, when yelling for police, he shouts, “Assault and battery! And you’re black!” But who can resist Jack? He may be a total bigot, but it’s okay, because he’s got OCD and he’s ultimately good to a sick little boy and his mother (Helen Hunt). He even reluctantly bonds with the gay neighbor (Greg Kinnear). What’s not to love about this Oscar-winning character? Borat Sagdiyev (Sacha Baron Cohen) in Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2006) Whether you’re Rob Corddry in Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay or Billy Bob Thornton in any number of films, it’s okay to be a bigot if you’re hilariously extreme in your intolerance. Sacha Baron Cohen takes the cake with his Borat character, though, when it comes to loveable racists. Hey, it’s satire! He holds up a mirror to explore our own racism, displayed best in a pre-film scene from Da Ali G Show, in which an audience of rednecks joins him in singing, “Throw the Jew Down the Well.” In the movie, he similarly gets applause at a rodeo for suggesting America kills all Iraqi men, women and children. Shaun (Thomas Turgoose) in This Is England (2006) He’s the most adorable little skinhead ever, so how can we stop loving Shaun when he ignorantly joins up with the Nationalist ex-con Combo (Stephen Graham)? Isn’t it cute when Shaun is being racist towards the Pakistani shopkeeper? It’s not like he’s the real bigot; that’s Combo. Shaun is just too young to understand at age 12 that losing his father to the Falkland War is not an excuse for racism. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:00:50 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com12/18/2008 5:00:50 PMDon’t you just hate when the movies make you care about a bigot? Sure, racists are technically humans, but that doesn’t mean we need to sympathize with them, right? No matter how great the film, it should be very difficult to accept the softening of intolerant people. Yet the lovable racist is not uncommon in cinema. In fact, out in theaters right now are two films dealing with this type of character. The Reader presents a cold Concentration Camp guard (Kate Winslet) for whom we’re meant to shed a tear, and Gran Torino focuses on a War Veteran stereotype (Clint Eastwood) who may evoke from the audience as much amusement as disgust. Maybe it’s like picking a scab, watching these kinds of movies. Some great films, such as Downfall, may only welcome an understanding of someone so heinous as Adolph Hitler, but other films have allowed us to totally enjoy racist protagonists of lesser offense. Check out the following examples to see some of the many intolerant heroes we’ve easily tolerated. Ethan Edwards (John Wayne) in The Searchers (1956) Compared to many classic westerns, John Ford’s The Searchers is not necessarily racist towards Native Americans. Yet it does feature one of the most unapologetically racist characters in film history, one who influenced many subsequent intolerants like Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver and Anakin Skywalker in Attack of the Clones. Ethan is such a badass bigot that he’d even kill his own niece for mating with a Commanche. Despite all his racism, though, audiences can’t help but like Ethan throughout much of The Searchers, because although Ford clearly looks down upon his hatred, the film also treats the character as a heroic man of his time. It’s a love him and hate him at the same time sort of thing. Pino (John Turturro) in Do the Right Thing (1989) In a way, almost everyone in Spike Lee’s classic is at least a little bit racist, evident in the famous slur montage. But it’s Pino who is the most ignorant, calling black people “the N word” on a regular basis. Yet we may forgive him, just as Mookie (Lee) does, because his bigotry is brought about through a combo of stupidity and culture. After all, if he’s a fan of Magic Johnson and Eddie Murphy, he can’t be a true racist. Right? Melvin Udall (Jack Nicholson) in As Good as It Gets (1997) He’s portrayed as mostly hateful towards gays and women, but Melvin is also plenty racist. He tells Frank (Cuba Gooding Jr.) to “think white” and earlier, when yelling for police, he shouts, “Assault and battery! And you’re black!” But who can resist Jack? He may be a total bigot, but it’s okay, because he’s got OCD and he’s ultimately good to a sick little boy and his mother (Helen Hunt). He even reluctantly bonds with the gay neighbor (Greg Kinnear). What’s not to love about this Oscar-winning character? Borat Sagdiyev (Sacha Baron Cohen) in Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2006) Whether you’re Rob Corddry in Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay or Billy Bob Thornton in any number of films, it’s okay to be a bigot if you’re hilariously extreme in your intolerance. Sacha Baron Cohen takes the cake with his Borat character, though, when it comes to loveable racists. Hey, it’s satire! He holds up a mirror to explore our own racism, displayed best in a pre-film scene from Da Ali G Show, in which an audience of rednecks joins him in singing, “Throw the Jew Down the Well.” In the movie, he similarly gets applause at a rodeo for suggesting America kills all Iraqi men, women and children. Shaun (Thomas Turgoose) in This Is England (2006) He’s the most adorable little skinhead ever, so how can we stop loving Shaun when he ignorantly joins up with the Nationalist ex-con Combo (Stephen Graham)? Isn’t it cute when Shaun is being racist towards the Pakistani shopkeeper? It’s not like he’s the real bigot; that’s Combo. Shaun is just too young to understand at age 12 that losing his father to the Falkland War is not an excuse for racism. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/christhilk/archive/2008/8/27/34476.aspx Post By: ChrisThilk
Post To: ChrisThilk Blog
Post Date: 8/27/2008 6:01:15 PM
Body: With the arrival of Star Wars: The Clone Wars in theaters (which I’ve still yet to see) I thought it a good opportunity to revisit the first part of Lucas’ space epic. As I worked through The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones and then Revenge of the Sith (with the first animated Clone Wars series in between the last two) I found the biggest change is a gradual diminishing of unnecessary moments in each consecutive film. Where Menace is filled with shots that serve no discernible purpose, Sith is pretty tight from a story-telling point of view. We aren’t subjected to many useless shots of a character looking from one side of the frame to the next, and the camera doesn’t linger upon the glory of Lucas’ CGI creations as it so often does in the first movie. It’s impossible, even if you’re like me and are willing to forgive a lot as I am, to not be occasionally taken out of the moment by the hammy bits of dialogue and instances of wooden acting that litter the films. But even with those roadblocks in place the trilogy probably isn’t as bad as most people would have you think. It’s simply impossible to feel about a movie at age 30 the same way you did when you were seven. And that reality has done a lot of damage to a set of movies that, really, aren’t as bad as they’ve been made out to be. Originally posted on:Chris Thilk
]]>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:01:15 GMTChrisThilkChrisThilk Blog8/27/2008 6:01:15 PMWith the arrival of Star Wars: The Clone Wars in theaters (which I’ve still yet to see) I thought it a good opportunity to revisit the first part of Lucas’ space epic. As I worked through The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones and then Revenge of the Sith (with the first animated Clone Wars series in between the last two) I found the biggest change is a gradual diminishing of unnecessary moments in each consecutive film. Where Menace is filled with shots that serve no discernible purpose, Sith is pretty tight from a story-telling point of view. We aren’t subjected to many useless shots of a character looking from one side of the frame to the next, and the camera doesn’t linger upon the glory of Lucas’ CGI creations as it so often does in the first movie. It’s impossible, even if you’re like me and are willing to forgive a lot as I am, to not be occasionally taken out of the moment by the hammy bits of dialogue and instances of wooden acting that litter the films. But even with those roadblocks in place the trilogy probably isn’t as bad as most people would have you think. It’s simply impossible to feel about a movie at age 30 the same way you did when you were seven. And that reality has done a lot of damage to a set of movies that, really, aren’t as bad as they’ve been made out to be. Originally posted on:Chris Thilk http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/7/30/33290.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 7/30/2008 12:00:50 PM
Body: After watching the new teaser for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, I personally had no comment. Having stopped reading the series somewhere in the center of the previous book, I didn’t feel I had any authority on the matter. The only thing I thought while watching the clip was that it seemed more like one of those annoying prequels that comes after a series to humanize that series’ villain with an origin story (y’know, like the Star Wars prequels and Young Hott Hannibal (wait, that’s not what it was titled?). And until I read an interesting trailer analysis on MTV Movies Blog this morning, I thought that couldn’t actually be the case. Actually, MTV’s look at the teaser began last night with a frame by frame analysis, in which Shawn Adler reveals his expert knowledge of J.K. Rowling’s text by pointing out the myriad ways that David Yates’ film is different from the book, from a previously reported added-in scene to little changes within adapted sequences. My favorite observation: 0:43: Our first glimpse at young Tom Riddle, the boy wizard who would grow up to be Voldemort. Surprisingly, I’m more interested here in Dumbledore, who is costumed differently than in the novel, where he was described as wearing “flamboyantly plum velvet.” OK, now for Adler’s continued thoughts, from the blog. He notes that both the book and this film are indeed about the background of Tom Riddle/Voldemort/He Who Shall Not Be Blogged About. Surely there’s more, though. Obviously there’s the stuff set in the present. So, perhaps it’s more The Godfather Part II than Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones? As if the Potter fans care about such comparisons. Well, neither do I, really. My primary interest in Adler’s analysis is on the film’s marketing rather than the film itself: This first trailer, in fact, isn’t really a trailer at all — not in the sense that we’ve grown accustomed to, anyway. Most trailers tell you about story. This trailer, conversely, tells you about character, the character of the young orphaned wizard who grows up to be the most powerfully dark sorcerer or all-time. A trailer that isn’t a trailer in the traditional sense? Sign me up for more. Half-Blood Prince teasers, I mean. Or more character-centered trailers. As for the actual movie, well, I can take it or leave it. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:00:50 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com7/30/2008 12:00:50 PM After watching the new teaser for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, I personally had no comment. Having stopped reading the series somewhere in the center of the previous book, I didn’t feel I had any authority on the matter. The only thing I thought while watching the clip was that it seemed more like one of those annoying prequels that comes after a series to humanize that series’ villain with an origin story (y’know, like the Star Wars prequels and Young Hott Hannibal (wait, that’s not what it was titled?). And until I read an interesting trailer analysis on MTV Movies Blog this morning, I thought that couldn’t actually be the case. Actually, MTV’s look at the teaser began last night with a frame by frame analysis, in which Shawn Adler reveals his expert knowledge of J.K. Rowling’s text by pointing out the myriad ways that David Yates’ film is different from the book, from a previously reported added-in scene to little changes within adapted sequences. My favorite observation: 0:43: Our first glimpse at young Tom Riddle, the boy wizard who would grow up to be Voldemort. Surprisingly, I’m more interested here in Dumbledore, who is costumed differently than in the novel, where he was described as wearing “flamboyantly plum velvet.” OK, now for Adler’s continued thoughts, from the blog. He notes that both the book and this film are indeed about the background of Tom Riddle/Voldemort/He Who Shall Not Be Blogged About. Surely there’s more, though. Obviously there’s the stuff set in the present. So, perhaps it’s more The Godfather Part II than Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones? As if the Potter fans care about such comparisons. Well, neither do I, really. My primary interest in Adler’s analysis is on the film’s marketing rather than the film itself: This first trailer, in fact, isn’t really a trailer at all — not in the sense that we’ve grown accustomed to, anyway. Most trailers tell you about story. This trailer, conversely, tells you about character, the character of the young orphaned wizard who grows up to be the most powerfully dark sorcerer or all-time. A trailer that isn’t a trailer in the traditional sense? Sign me up for more. Half-Blood Prince teasers, I mean. Or more character-centered trailers. As for the actual movie, well, I can take it or leave it. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/downwest/archive/2007/12/22/23131.aspx Post By: downwest
Post To: downwest Blog
Post Date: 12/22/2007 1:04:32 AM
Body: Probably one of the more visually accomplished of the installments, particularly the innovation in making a digital Yoda, such that he brandishes his lightsaber in the chapter's awe-inspiring climax. At the same time it is the installment of all six that feels most in tune with a 1930's serial, of which the style of all episodes are based on. The acting itself is not exactly memorable but it is the sensual essence of the film, the story propelled by stunning visuals and audio and score, that will forever remain prevailant in our recollections of the six episodes that make up the film we know as Star Wars.
]]>Sat, 22 Dec 2007 06:04:32 GMTdownwestdownwest Blog12/22/2007 1:04:32 AMProbably one of the more visually accomplished of the installments, particularly the innovation in making a digital Yoda, such that he brandishes his lightsaber in the chapter&#39;s awe-inspiring climax. At the same time it is the installment of all six that feels most in tune with a 1930&#39;s serial, of which the style of all episodes are based on. The acting itself is not exactly memorable but it is the sensual essence of the film, the story propelled by stunning visuals and audio and score, that will forever remain prevailant in our recollections of the six episodes that make up the film we know as Star Wars. http://www.spout.com/groups/Repeat/Star_Wars/132/6864/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: gothere
Post To: Repeat
Post Date: 4/10/2007 12:39:57 AM
Body: When I was 7, the first Star Wars (okay, now known as Episode IV) was released in theaters. It was a watershed moment for me as for many others. I owned the soundtrack album on vinyl, the figurines, a viewmaster with short segments to watch over and over. I saved my allowance for several weeks to afford the $14 X-Wing toy spaceship. Call me a geek or a cliché, but it left an indelible mark on my psyche relating to good and evil, technology, and optimism. Star Wars become the first movie that I watched several times - I think I saw it five or six more times in the theater. This was quite a feat for a 7-year old in the days before cable as we know it, VCRs, DVDs, and DVRs. Now that we have all this stuff, and that the following two movies - The Empire Strikes Back (Episode V) and Return of the Jedi (Episode VI) - as well as the second wave - Episode I, Episode II, and Episode III - have all come out, I can now watch each of them to my heart's content. Okay, I'm not 7 anymore, and these films certainly don't have the pull they once had. Still, I was as excited as many others to see all these films made. Ewoks aside, I enjoyed all these movies and find myself watching them, or parts of them as it happens, on cable when they're on. I'm even starting to enjoy the second wave a bit more than I did after a first look.This experience however simply reaffirms my feelings about the original Star Wars. It's the best of the series, the one that started so much madness and delight. It still takes me back to an age when I wanted and needed heros, to the 70s when the heros weren't so clean cut, and the special effects weren't so perfect. When outer space, only rarely depicted in this way previously, was magical and fresh. I've found that it's a movie that to this day, I can watch again and again with great pleasure and nostalgia.
]]>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 04:39:57 GMTgothereRepeat4/10/2007 12:39:57 AMWhen I was 7, the first Star Wars (okay, now known as Episode IV) was released in theaters. It was a watershed moment for me as for many others. I owned the soundtrack album on vinyl, the figurines, a viewmaster with short segments to watch over and over. I saved my allowance for several weeks to afford the $14 X-Wing toy spaceship. Call me a geek or a clich&eacute;, but it left an indelible mark on my psyche relating to good and evil, technology, and optimism. Star Wars become the first movie that I watched several times - I think I saw it five or six more times in the theater. This was quite a feat for a 7-year old in the days before cable as we know it, VCRs, DVDs, and DVRs. Now that we have all this stuff, and that the following two movies - The Empire Strikes Back (Episode V) and Return of the Jedi (Episode VI) - as well as the second wave - Episode I, Episode II, and Episode III - have all come out, I can now watch each of them to my heart&#39;s content. Okay, I&#39;m not 7 anymore, and these films certainly don&#39;t have the pull they once had. Still, I was as excited as many others to see all these films made. Ewoks aside, I enjoyed all these movies and find myself watching them, or parts of them as it happens, on cable when they&#39;re on. I&#39;m even starting to enjoy the second wave a bit more than I did after a first look.This experience however simply reaffirms my feelings about the original Star Wars. It&#39;s the best of the series, the one that started so much madness and delight. It still takes me back to an age when I wanted and needed heros, to the 70s when the heros weren&#39;t so clean cut, and the special effects weren&#39;t so perfect. When outer space, only rarely depicted in this way previously, was magical and fresh. I&#39;ve found that it&#39;s a movie that to this day, I can watch again and again with great pleasure and nostalgia. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12478

Number of people who tagged: 338

Number of times used: 1480

]]>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:29 GMT124783381480Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/war/MemberTagFilms.aspxwar
Number of films tagged: 6177

Number of people who tagged: 179

Number of times used: 608

]]>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:16:35 GMT6177179608Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sci-fi/MemberTagFilms.aspxsci-fi
Number of films tagged: 217

Number of people who tagged: 102

Number of times used: 375

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 19:33:53 GMT217102375Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/space/MemberTagFilms.aspxspace
Number of films tagged: 495

Number of people who tagged: 54

Number of times used: 140

]]>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:16:33 GMT49554140Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mother/MemberTagFilms.aspxmother
Number of films tagged: 2522

Number of people who tagged: 53

Number of times used: 152

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT252253152Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/assassination/MemberTagFilms.aspxassassination
Number of films tagged: 1052

Number of people who tagged: 44

Number of times used: 90

]]>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:55:14 GMT10524490Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/army/MemberTagFilms.aspxarmy
Number of films tagged: 868

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 77

]]>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:16:35 GMT8682777Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/government/MemberTagFilms.aspxgovernment
Number of films tagged: 1063

Number of people who tagged: 21

Number of times used: 126

]]>Sun, 16 Aug 2009 05:39:36 GMT106321126Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/battle/MemberTagFilms.aspxbattle
Number of films tagged: 30

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 37

]]>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:16:35 GMT302037Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/CGI/MemberTagFilms.aspxCGI
Number of films tagged: 35

Number of people who tagged: 16

Number of times used: 61

]]>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:14:47 GMT351661Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/civilwar/MemberTagFilms.aspxcivilwar
Number of films tagged: 176

Number of people who tagged: 11

Number of times used: 20

]]>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:02:17 GMT1761120Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mentor/MemberTagFilms.aspxmentor
Number of films tagged: 242

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 14

]]>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:23:54 GMT2421014Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/natalie-portman/MemberTagFilms.aspxnatalie-portman
Number of films tagged: 10

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 18

]]>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:36:34 GMT101018Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/battle-war/MemberTagFilms.aspxbattle-war
Number of films tagged: 1931

Number of people who tagged: 7

Number of times used: 10

]]>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:03:15 GMT1931710Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/jawesome/MemberTagFilms.aspxjawesome
Number of films tagged: 113

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 118

]]>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:03:02 GMT1135118Tag