Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Yoda takes on an entire droid army in the season premiere of STAR WARS: THE CLONE WARS, an all-new animated series premiering at 9 p.m. Friday, Oct. 3, on Cartoon Network.

In the first episode, Ambush, Jedi Master Yoda and three clone troopers must face off against Count Dooku's dreaded assassin Asajj Ventress and the massive Separatist droid army to prove the Jedi are strong enough to protect a strategic planet and forge a treaty for the Republic.

The episode is directed by David Bullock (Justice League: The New Frontier) from a script by Steve Melching (The Batman). Dave Filoni is supervising director, George Lucas is the series' creator and serves as executive producer, and Catherine Winder is producer.


http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/1311/0014277lq8.jpg


Another useless thread to build the forum up. srug

At least they're kicking the series off with a bang, I wonder how Ventress will go against Yoda?

Also, short clip of episode.

http://au.tv.ign.com/dor/objects/826173/star-wars-the-clone-wars/videos/sw_clonewars_tv_092408.html;jsessionid=39c7ubor2uiul


Ok, this looks fecking awesome
Looks like the battle droids are still retarded, but they seem ok in the clip. Just wish they wouldnt talk as much.

Doesn't look too bad really. Very children's cartoony, but much cooler than what Mace Windu did when he jumped like the Hulk.

Hmmm... looks like SW has gone officially silly.

Originally posted by queeq
Hmmm... looks like SW has gone officially silly.

I thought it was silly... ever since the ewoks... but I still love it though

There's still action to look forward to

Originally posted by Outbound
Also, short clip of episode.

http://au.tv.ign.com/dor/objects/826173/star-wars-the-clone-wars/videos/sw_clonewars_tv_092408.html;jsessionid=39c7ubor2uiul


Ok, this looks fecking awesome
Looks like the battle droids are still retarded, but they seem ok in the clip. Just wish they wouldnt talk as much.

It will definately be entertaining...

Why does Lucas have to make Star Wars so childish now? I just watched episode 1 and 2 again and they're a complete joke compared to 3 - 6. And now the Clone Wars movie and this. Jesus

At least the action scenes look alright

RotJ had Ewoks.

Anyone who says Star Wars wasn't childish... needs to have their heads checked.

And the reason why Star Wars is childish is because children are the primary demographic, not you and I.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
RotJ had Ewoks.

Anyone who says Star Wars wasn't childish... needs to have their heads checked.

And the reason why Star Wars is childish is because children are the primary demographic, not you and I. Sure it had Ewoks...but that alone doesn't make a childish movie. Episode 1 - 3 were aimed specifically at children. Episode 4 - 6 weren't...they are made so children as well as adults can take something from them. 1-3 has flashy pictures.

Originally posted by Spartan005
Why does Lucas have to make Star Wars so childish now? I just watched episode 1 and 2 again and they're a complete joke compared to 3 - 6. And now the Clone Wars movie and this. Jesus

At least the action scenes look alright
I disagree about your view on episode 3: the first half-hour/hour (dunno where it ends exactly) was also childish with R2 and the battledroids

Yea, that scene had me worried.

I'm not sure the censors believe that about OT/PT; the OT is much more suitable as a children's work in many ways.

But it was less aimed solely at children. It was an adventure movie for young audience that didn't exclude an older audience. Ep1 & 2 seems to be more directed solely to a very young audience.

Originally posted by Jovan
I disagree about your view on episode 3: the first half-hour/hour (dunno where it ends exactly) was also childish with R2 and the battledroids

yeah, watching a man burn (after being mangled) while shouting how much they hate someone was very childish



I love the OT, and it will always be better than the PT, but please, SW was and is for kids

Originally posted by S_D_J
yeah, watching a man burn (after being mangled) while shouting how much they hate someone was very childish
which part of "the first half-hour/hour" is confusing you?

The last part?

Spartan wrote thisOriginally posted by Spartan005
Why does Lucas have to make Star Wars so childish now? I just watched episode 1 and 2 again and they're a complete joke compared to 3 - 6. And now the Clone Wars movie and this. Jesus

At least the action scenes look alright

you responded this

Originally posted by Jovan
I disagree about your view on episode 3: the first half-hour/hour (dunno where it ends exactly) was also childish with R2 and the battledroids

For what I see you either:
saw just the first 30 min and not the rest of the movie...
...or you're saying the whole movie was childish (and probably ruined for you) just because of a 2-3 min sequence...

which one is it? hmm?

Originally posted by queeq
The last part?

... could be

What bickering...

Originally posted by Bardock42
Sure it had Ewoks...but that alone doesn't make a childish movie. Episode 1 - 3 were aimed specifically at children. Episode 4 - 6 weren't...they are made so children as well as adults can take something from them. 1-3 has flashy pictures.

Six wasn't, in number 2 we see a child holding his father's severed head in his hands. The most child-friendly of the three was TPM with lil' Anakin, a Jar-Jar with more than ten lines, and the Gungans. The story gets progressively darker as it moves along, up to the point where people are being incinerated alive and younglings are getting diced up and sith lords are getting beheaded by the main character...



Anyone who says that the first 30 minutes of RotS was kid friendly obviously didn't pay attention, otherwise they'd remember Dooku getting his hands chopped off, than his head in cold blood...

As for the story. The PT's storyline is more tragic and complicated than the OT's, so I'm not really sure what you're trying to say...

The clone wars cartoon is ridiculous, though. I actually think that if Lucas wanted to protray the droids as anonymous, soulless bad guys he'd try to not give them quircky, lovable (to a five year old) personalities.

And TPM is about taxation of trade routes and senate hearings.... true kiddie stuff.... Boring as hell though.

I agree. Minus the Duel of Fates, that was the most boring movie out of all six (Minus ANH, imo).

Originally posted by S_D_J
For what I see you either:
saw just the first 30 min and not the rest of the movie...
...or you're saying the whole movie was childish (and probably ruined for you) just because of a 2-3 min sequence...

The whole movie loses credit because of the irritating first part where crappy CGI (if you want to show off, do it right) and scenes directly aimed at little kids ruin the entire experience. If it was just for a minute or two, it's doable, but this keeps going on well beyond that.

You clearly remember the latter part which indeed is not-suited for kids, I simply do not. While I do think Ep3 is a good movie, it could have been much better if they just, for instance, dropped the entire R2 vs battledroids part... or shortened Obi-Wan & Anakin's race towards Grievous his ship etc.

THe space battle was pretty neat though.

Originally posted by queeq
THe space battle was pretty neat though.

It was a great start for the movie...Originally posted by Jovan
The whole movie loses credit because of the irritating first part where crappy CGI (if you want to show off, do it right) and scenes directly aimed at little kids ruin the entire experience. If it was just for a minute or two, it's doable, but this keeps going on well beyond that.

You clearly remember the latter part which indeed is not-suited for kids, I simply do not. While I do think Ep3 is a good movie, it could have been much better if they just, for instance, dropped the entire R2 vs battledroids part... or shortened Obi-Wan & Anakin's race towards Grievous his ship etc.

the R2D2/SBD sequence did irked me a bit, but it wasn't necessarily kiddie stuff, I remember most of the theatre laughing at such sequences, and most of the theatre were grown men and women... but yeah it was dumb comic relief.
Anakin and Obi Wan's race to Grievous was shortened quite a lot, as it was their jorney back to the cockpit....

Anakin's and Padme scene in the balcony however.... vomit inducing....

Ep III was a much darker and moody movie than any of the PT, it was a step in the right direction... but it still had those two other movies behind it that needed resolution

... but at least it had Jar-Jar saying just "hello" .... once

It's getting off topic peeps. Discuss PT in the PT thread.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
Six wasn't, in number 2 we see a child holding his father's severed head in his hands. The most child-friendly of the three was TPM with lil' Anakin, a Jar-Jar with more than ten lines, and the Gungans. The story gets progressively darker as it moves along, up to the point where people are being incinerated alive and younglings are getting diced up and sith lords are getting beheaded by the main character...



I-i agree.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
Anyone who says that the first 30 minutes of RotS was kid friendly obviously didn't pay attention, otherwise they'd remember Dooku getting his hands chopped off, than his head in cold blood...

They are certainly suitable for children. I don't get that argument though, I feel like all 6 movies are "kid friendly", despite all having some darker and more mature scenes.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
As for the story. The PT's storyline is more tragic and complicated than the OT's, so I'm not really sure what you're trying to say...

It's more tragic. Whether it is more complicated I don't know. What I am trying to say is that I feel like 1-3 (1 and 2 in particular) were aimed to get as many young teenaged and younger children to view as possible, disregarding wishes older viewers have regarding a movie.

Originally posted by Bardock42
They are certainly suitable for children. I don't get that argument though, I feel like all 6 movies are "kid friendly", despite all having some darker and more mature scenes.

All were kid friendly, but IV, V, and VI appealed to all audiences, and didn't have any real "Kiddy" characters (Like Jar Jar). And I just thought that the OT was just more well-rounded of stories.

The PT was ruined by: Incredibly fake (And near soap-operaish) love scenes, Jar Jar, Hayden, and GL's apparent loss in ability to create an engaging story.

Back on topic please, second time.

You know I was really hoping that the Clone Wars series was going to be more like Batman: The Animated Series from back in the 90's, then the movie came out and I saw that the cartoon was going to be more of a modern 2000's cartoon. But I still had hopes that the series would redeem itself into a more dramatic stance... but I am beginning to loose faith that Star Wars as it used to be will ever return.

Not that the series doesn't look good, it just isn't what I had hoped for...
Lets compare:

The style that it exists in now:
http://tv.ign.com/dor/objects/826173/star-wars-the-clone-wars/videos/sw_clonewars_tv_092408.html;jsessionid=40qg1pqpk859n

The style I had once hoped for:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1_STj9E4pk

Which was more like the first Clone Wars series then.

Yea, you could say that.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Sure it had Ewoks...but that alone doesn't make a childish movie. Episode 1 - 3 were aimed specifically at children. Episode 4 - 6 weren't...they are made so children as well as adults can take something from them. 1-3 has flashy pictures.

Episode III had a PG-13 rating - it was definitely not aimed at children.
Star Wars has always targeted 10-year old boys from the beginning. That the films have always had adults and kids held captive...it's the story.

You want to nitpick about silliness? You can find it right back through ROTJ, to the 1978 holiday TV special, the 1970's Christmas album...shall I go on?

Originally posted by THE JLRTENJAC
You know I was really hoping that the Clone Wars series was going to be more like Batman: The Animated Series from back in the 90's, then the movie came out and I saw that the cartoon was going to be more of a modern 2000's cartoon. But I still had hopes that the series would redeem itself into a more dramatic stance... but I am beginning to loose faith that Star Wars as it used to be will ever return.

Not that the series doesn't look good, it just isn't what I had hoped for...
Lets compare:

The style that it exists in now:
http://tv.ign.com/dor/objects/826173/star-wars-the-clone-wars/videos/sw_clonewars_tv_092408.html;jsessionid=40qg1pqpk859n

The style I had once hoped for:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1_STj9E4pk

What it used to be?

Star Wars hasn't changed at all. You have. It's called growing up.

Seriously. Star Wars was never some deep, profound thing, believe it or not.

And I don't care how silly or childish Clone Wars looks - it also looks like enjoyable fun (which I thought the movie was). Lighthearted-ness in SW is not inherently a bad thing.

True. But with the childish battle droids it gets kinda silly... and silly SW never was. Cheesy yes, silly no. Well, Jar Jar and Ewoks went in that direction, but it was still outweighed by the darker stuff. now the silly, lighthearted bit start to outweigh the franchise.

I can't really agree; the Ewoks were sillier than this stuff by far. I also think Episodes 1-3 were aimed at the exact same demographic as 4-6.

Originally posted by roughrider
Episode III had a PG-13 rating - it was definitely not aimed at children.
Star Wars has always targeted 10-year old boys from the beginning. That the films have always had adults and kids held captive...it's the story.

You want to nitpick about silliness? You can find it right back through ROTJ, to the 1978 holiday TV special, the 1970's Christmas album...shall I go on?

Well, you may, but I never said that silliness in Star Wars started at a specific point somewhere in the 90s. I said that, to me, ANH and ESB and also, though to a lesser extent, ROTJ contain less silliness aimed at children. Which, one might argue, was just different times, and children back then similarly enjoyed the OT as they do the PT....but I think that there is a difference between OT and PT, however you want to personally weigh that, is self evident. And by no means do I want to say that the PT is utter garbage, I enjoyed quite a lot of it, I just also didn't enjoy large chunks, which, though really just my problem, is not due to some misguided love for the movies of my youth, as some claim, I believe.

Originally posted by Peach
Seriously. Star Wars was never some deep, profound thing, believe it or not.

And I don't care how silly or childish Clone Wars looks - it also looks like enjoyable fun (which I thought the movie was). Lighthearted-ness in SW is not inherently a bad thing.

I agree that the cartoon looks enjoyable as cartoons go. And obviously they are more aimed at children, which I don't find a bad thing either. It just seems to me that some people are overly protective of the newer Star Wars stuff, even if all one claims, is just an accurate evaluation of the matter. I mean, we both agree that the cartoon looks childish and silly, which, as you rightly stated doesn't need to be a bad thing. Personally I will probably by far prefer the comic form of the Clone Wars...and yes, that is because they are aimed at more mature readers (obviously they are not some Joyce-ish work of fiction...but aimed at older teenagers anyways).

Originally posted by Ushgarak
I can't really agree; the Ewoks were sillier than this stuff by far. I also think Episodes 1-3 were aimed at the exact same demographic as 4-6.

I agree there. But with the Clone Wars the amount of silliness increases and the balance tips ... We need a Chosen One to bring balance.

I don't see how the retarded droids are any sillier than the Ewoks, and 3p0's retarded shenanigans.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
I don't see how the retarded droids are any sillier than the Ewoks, and 3p0's retarded shenanigans. C-3PO PT or OT?

And I think it's how they were somehow fed Charlie Chaplin routines...


I do agree with your point though, the droids in Star Wars always had wacky personalities.

I heard from Ign that this and the next episode really suffer from battle droids being annoying and silly

Looks like this will be good fun.

the point is: they're battledroids... Droids that in Episode III say "stop right there" and aim at R2; who than happily goes on an attempt to electricute one of them. What's the reaction? He gets kicked.
A battle droid should shoot him to smithereens...
Or when R2 sets fire on two of them... what were they doing there? They should have just shot him.

The point is, they're programmed for battle (hence the name) or have programming in piloting etc. They're not programmed to goof around (for instance: in EpIII in the elevator: "Drop your weapons!" followed by every battle droid saying "roger" twice...), they're programmed to patrol, search&destroy, etc...

Yeah, cause the Stormtroopers were, like, totally all uber evil and badass. Competent, too, unless met with the mighty force of Ewoks.

Dude, stop nitpicking about one scene. Not every bit of comic relief is 'childish'- sometimes, a little slapstick in an otherwise serious event helps. This isn't LotR- this is Star Wars, and a healthy sense of humor always helps to bring SW up. Besides, one scene like that doesn't make the first hour 'childish' or kid-friendly or whatever. Honestly, RotS is the only movie in the six that has scenes and themes which genuinely aren't 'kid-friendly'.

All that being said, however, I don't think there's a single SW movie that is made specifically for kids. If some of the more 'hardcore' fans could relax, they may find Jar Jar amusing, or at least tolerable. Instead of waiting to jump at the next scene that has the slightest element of childishness, just chill. All of the 'kiddy' stuff in the prequels suddenly become so much more tolerable.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Yeah, cause the Stormtroopers were, like, totally all uber evil and badass. Competent, too, unless met with the mighty force of Ewoks.

Dude, stop nitpicking about one scene. Not every bit of comic relief is 'childish'- sometimes, a little slapstick in an otherwise serious event helps. This isn't LotR- this is Star Wars, and a healthy sense of humor always helps to bring SW up. Besides, one scene like that doesn't make the first hour 'childish' or kid-friendly or whatever. Honestly, RotS is the only movie in the six that has scenes and themes which genuinely aren't 'kid-friendly'.

All that being said, however, I don't think there's a single SW movie that is made specifically for kids. If some of the more 'hardcore' fans could relax, they may find Jar Jar amusing, or at least tolerable. Instead of waiting to jump at the next scene that has the slightest element of childishness, just chill. All of the 'kiddy' stuff in the prequels suddenly become so much more tolerable.

I'm sorry, but it is pretty much aimed at children. And ROTS didn't have the only scenes that weren't "kid friendly".

Also, I think it would have been quite an interesting movie if they had gone at it having LOTR in mind. Probably not very Star Warsy, but could have been cool.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I'm sorry, but it is pretty much aimed at children. And ROTS didn't have the only scenes that weren't "kid friendly".

I believe the average PT fan's age is about 17. RotS, quite simply, has a storyline that- like ESB's- is too complicated for young children to fully comrehend. Political overtones, for example. I doubt your average kid will understand analogies to the war on Iraq? Or things about democracy's nature? I doubt a kid will fully understand the nature of Anakin's turn to the dark side, as well.

The only scene that truly isn't 'kid-friendly' in the saga is Anakin's immolation. Other than that, what scene is there that isn't appropriate for young audiences to watch?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Also, I think it would have been quite an interesting movie if they had gone at it having LOTR in mind. Probably not very Star Warsy, but could have been cool.

Nah. LotR and Star Wars are very different things that I doubt will mesh together well.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
I don't see how the retarded droids are any sillier than the Ewoks, and 3p0's retarded shenanigans.

They don't. As I said, I feel we are getting MORE silly elements...

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
I believe the average PT fan's age is about 17. RotS, quite simply, has a storyline that- like ESB's- is too complicated for young children to fully comrehend. Political overtones, for example. I doubt your average kid will understand analogies to the war on Iraq? Or things about democracy's nature? I doubt a kid will fully understand the nature of Anakin's turn to the dark side, as well.
dude, don't overthink star wars.

I was talking about childish battledroids, not storm troopers. The fact that they can't hit anything except an off-camera sandcrawler is nothing new and does not diminish their status as "dangerous footsoldiers". In most, almost all, series, the main heroes never get hurt.
That they look silly on dewbacks... they can't help it, that was inserted later on for the special edition (and after the '80s Lucas clearly went for the wishes of the little kids). The only other thing I can think of was that they got beaten by teddybears who only had sticks and stones which is a huge plothole imo.
This is all I can think off, nothing childish about them. Or have I missed scenes?

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
I believe the average PT fan's age is about 17.

You're wrong.

oh snap soo..this isn't the movie I seen @ the theatres, as I thought it was..

this is a whole new thing.

perfect!!

I am unimpressed by the show.

How so?

I don't like shows where they nerf the bad guys so badly just to make the good guys look good. The battle droids, aside from being ****ing idiots, totally suck in combat as well. That puts me off.

Ah...

You've never liked any Star Wars film then? What with the stormtroopers and all.

Actually, yeah. One of the reasons why I think the OT sucks, specifically ANH. I can't watch the death star scene and look at Luke standing in the absolutel open not getting hit once without cringing. Indiana Jones has similar problems.

The droids in the PT movies aren't as nerfed, neither are the clones. It makes a lot more sense for them to get their asses kicked by trained Jedi Knights than it does for Luke "farmboy with no cover" Skywalker to stand in one spo taking out trained storm troopers without a single scratch. It's just... irritating.

And let's not even mention the Ewoks.


That's why I like Lord of the Rings.

edit- But, srsly. THe OT isn't an inherently bad movie at all. I just heavily dislike the black and white, good guys are better and always good and bad guys suck and are ultimate bad" type of story telling. I dislike that in any movie.

though LotR seems to be the exception... mmm

Maybe you take fantasy/sci fi movies a tad too seriously.

Bravo.

I've been trying to say that for years.

Originally posted by queeq
Maybe you take fantasy/sci fi movies a tad too seriously.

Nah.

How can anyone like the PT more than the OT? That just...doesn't compute.

Anyway, I rather liked this. Yes, it's silly and light-hearted but it still has the Star Wars feel to it.

Plus Yoda doing his crazy ESB laugh was freaking awesome.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
I don't see how the retarded droids are any sillier than the Ewoks, and 3p0's retarded shenanigans.

The droids were perfectly fine in Ep1 and Ep2, they did what they were supposed to do: shoot stuff. In Ep1 they killed Naboo soldiers, Gungans, acted in formations, had decent voice acting. Ep2 they basically did the same thing but also killed Jedi, the only real silly part was 3PO getting his head swapped, but that was tolerable. Ep3 they had their voices changed to a higher pitch, they became stupid comic relief to contrast to the onscreen slaughter of clones and Jedi. The tv series is taking it further, they hardly act as mindless killing droids, they have been watered down and can't be taken as a serious threat, with the exception of when they have a massive army and are fighting pretty much just clones. Ep2 showed us a relatively small army could easily take down down a couple hundred Jedi, since then they cant even take down a Padawan with no field combat experience.



But anyways back to topic, we dont get this aired for another month weep So......torrent time

Good point.

Just finished watching Ambush, pretty cool.

But whats with the SBD voices? Ep2 they have no voice, Ep3 they have the same high pitched voice as every other droid, now they have a deeper voice? Wish Lucas would stop screwing around already..
And to add to the droid rant above, they are real fecking annoying now, they don't even follow orders

I wonder if they'll bring in any dark side Jedi from the comics or whatnot, Ventress and Dooku arent really interesting enough since they can't die in the series. Ventress especially has been completely useless so far - can't kill Anakin, can't kill Ahsoka, can't kill Obi Wan and can't kill Yoda. She's deadly in the comics and worthless so far in the show.

Now to watch #2 w00t

Originally posted by Peach
That just...doesn't compute.


I know, Lana. I know it doesn't. It's... in your nature.





So were you agreeing with me?

And yes, I'm prety much done with the show's retarded ass droids.

With the show as well?

Everyone needs to stop worrying so much about the silliness. Im sure as the series goes on it will get much darker. Grievous was said to be a jedi killer, so why would they put him in a series without him killing any jedi. We know that some time in the series that Anakins apprentice will most likely be killed, so yeah i say it will have some dark scenes.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Everyone needs to stop worrying so much about the silliness. Im sure as the series goes on it will get much darker. Grievous was said to be a jedi killer, so why would they put him in a series without him killing any jedi. We know that some time in the series that Anakins apprentice will most likely be killed, so yeah i say it will have some dark scenes.

Again character dying does not equal a dark scene.

I say it does. Name a scene that would be darker.

This is a kiddie series, I doubt it will go darker.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
I say it does. Name a scene that would be darker. A scene that would be darker than someone quickly being killed and never mentioned again?

All the jedi that died in ep.3 were never mentioned in the OT, so would you say ep.3 was not considered to be dark.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
All the jedi that died in ep.3 were never mentioned in the OT, so would you say ep.3 was not considered to be dark. You failed Logic 101 hardcore, didn't you?

How so?

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
How so?

I said "Death does not make a dark scene" you took that as "A scene where someone dies in can't be dark". Quite different those.

And i asked what would be a dark scene to you. You said a scene that would be darker(you using the word "darker" means you admitt that it would be dark) than someone getting killed fast, and then not mentioned again. So i brought up ep.3 and etc...

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
And i asked what would be a dark scene to you. You said a scene that would be darker(you using the word "darker" means you admitt that it would be dark) than someone getting killed fast, and then not mentioned again. So i brought up ep.3 and etc...

Incorrect.

You were asking me to name a scene that would be "darker".

To which I inquired whether you meant a scene where someone, for example, just gets killed suddenly, and is not mentioned again. The word "darker" came from you. Besides...it doesn't imply that I think it is dark at all, it may be 0 dark, there would be "darker" scenes anyways. Again, failing that 101, mate.

So, as to answer your question, I would find a scene, for example, where a young woman contemplates having an abortion with some disturbing imagery and dark music in the background, showing her deep despair either way, as darker than a quick kill.

It's beside the point though, all I was saying is that, even if a few Jedi get killed in that show, it won't necessarily make it much dark.

A dark scene is not defined by the back ground music. It is what happens that defines it. You are saying that jedi being killed without dark music wouldn't be a dark scene.

You can not describe a scene being "darker" if the other scene is not dark at all.

BTW how would you know how the jedi deaths happen. Do you think that if Anakin's apprentice died there would be no sense of emotion? Usually when a main character dies it would be considered a rather dark scene.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
A dark scene is not defined by the back ground music. It is what happens that defines it. You are saying that jedi being killed without dark music wouldn't be a dark scene.

No. Show where I said that.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
You can not describe a scene being "darker" if the other scene is not dark at all.

Yes, yes you can.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
BTW how would you know how the jedi deaths happen. Do you think that if Anakin's apprentice died there would be no sense of emotion? Usually when a main character dies it would be considered a rather dark scene.

Again...I did not say that it won't be dark. I just said that someone dying, alone, does not make a scene "dark". Christ, what's wrong with people's reading comprehension.

And again, it very much depends on delivery and set up. If it's an unlikable ass, or a very dull character and nothing really "dark" happens in the scene except for them dying, then it is not a particularly "dark" scene. You are fighting against wind-mills, friend. I did not state what you think I stated.

A scene where someone dies is dark, but the scene is not? Doesn't make a lot of sense. Any scene that has an act of darkness would be considered a dark scene. Maybe not a very dark scene, but a dark scene nonetheless.

When you say a scene is darker than another scene, it is another way of saying it is even more dark. How can you describe a scene as being darker(meaning more) if the other scene is not dark at all. It is like saying Satan(the lord of evil) is eviler than God(lord of all that is good and righteous), when God is not evil at all.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
A scene where someone dies is dark, but the scene is not? Doesn't make a lot of sense.

I didn't say that though. I said almost the opposite actually.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Any scene that has an act of darkness would be considered a dark scene. Maybe not a very dark scene, but a dark scene nonetheless.

I guess you could argue that. But generally someone would call something a "dark" scene that has lots or very strong dark elements, not just a little bit.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
When you say a scene is darker than another scene, it is another way of saying it is even more dark. How can you describe a scene as being darker(meaning more) if the other scene is not dark at all. It is like saying Satan(the lord of evil) is eviler than God(lord of all that is good and righteous), when God is not evil at all.

So? You can, of course, logically, say that Satan is mor evil than God. It would make perfect sense and not imply that God is even a bit evil at all.

Well in the christian religion God is the personification of love, good, righteousness, pure etc. So actually he is not evil. You can't say Satan is eviler than God, but you can say Satan is evil whereas God is good. That is the only way you can compare them.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Well in the christian religion God is the personification of love, good, righteousness, pure etc. So actually he is not evil. You can't say Satan is eviler than God, but you can say Satan is evil whereas God is good. That is the only way you can compare them. Nonsense.

Something being more evil then something else doesn't imply a base level of evilness in anything. If God is not evil at all then everything (except for things that are also not evil at all) are more evil than him.

That's just the way language rolls, dude.

No not really. There is no base level of evilness in God at all, so nothing can be described as being more evil than he is. Do you know what more means? You can't have more of something if that something is not there.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
No not really. There is no base level of evilness in God at all, so nothing can be described as being more evil than he is. Do you know what more means? You can't have more of something if that something is not there.


Err yes. You can.

If there is an empty glass and there is one filled with water. Then one has more water in it than the other (the other having none). Why are we even arguing that, don't be silly.

To go back on topic, I don't think they will make the show much darker, it's not meant to be that way, I believe (and no, a few deaths of Jedi, won't make me think it's particularly dark...I mean, Jedi died in the old Clone Wars series, and it still wasn't).

Here is a better example: Say you and a friend are both at a table eating. You have a bowl of cereal, and your friend has a bowl of noodles. Would you say he had more noodles than you, when you have no noodles at all? Or would you say he has noodles and you don't?

It would be like me asking for more water if i never had water. The only time you would ask for more water is if you already had a glass.

It may or may not get much darker, but most likely it will. Star Wars is not known to be real dark as a whole anyways.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Here is a better example: Say you and a friend are both at a table eating. You have a bowl of cereal, and your friend has a bowl of noodles. Would you say he had more noodles than you, when you have no noodles at all? Or would you say he has noodles and you don't?

Obviously he has more noodles than me. Me having none. Would you say your friend that has 5 US Dollar, while you have none, has more money than you?

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
It would be like me asking for more water if i never had water. The only time you would ask for more water is if you already had a glass.

You could ask for "more" water. It would make sense. Just not common. Also, that's a bad example, because when you ask for "more" water, you have "no" water, even though you had some before. It's totally unrelated. But I will stop talking to you about it, you just argue out of ignorance or stupidity, it is absolutely apparent that something is always more than nothing.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
It may or may not get much darker, but most likely it will. Star Wars is not known to be real dark as a whole anyways.

You seem to argue yourself there. What is it, will it get much darker or is it going to stay like you perceive Star Wars, which is "not real dark"?

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Here is a better example: Say you and a friend are both at a table eating. You have a bowl of cereal, and your friend has a bowl of noodles. Would you say he had more noodles than you, when you have no noodles at all? Or would you say he has noodles and you don't?.

You'd say he has more noodles, because technically he does. You not having doesn't change that fact...

If you are walking through a desert, and you are dying a thirst, when suddenly you come upon a house. Would you ask the owner of the house for more water, or would you ask for water? You can ask for more water after you drink up the water the owner gave you.

The series will most likely get much more darker than they are now. I never said Star Wars was dark. Ep.3 was darker than the other star wars films, but it still does not make star wars very dark compared to a lot of other movies.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
If you are walking through a desert, and you are dying a thirst, when suddenly you come upon a house. Would you ask the owner of the house for more water, or would you ask for water? You can ask for more water after you drink up the water the owner gave you.

The series will most likely get much more darker than they are now. I never said Star Wars was dark. Ep.3 was darker than the other star wars films, but it still does not make star wars very dark compared to a lot of other movies.

Again. You are talking about a different thing, to prove your incorrect statement. You use the definition of "more" meaning "additional" or "further" (as in, I'd like more (another) glass of water) to prove that the definition of "more" meaning "in greater quantity" (as in, Joe has more water than Tom) implies at least some amount of water, which it does not. You are incorrect. And you'd do best to be quiet now and research for some basic understanding of logic and grammar.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=more

Oh snap its on!!!!!!

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
I am unimpressed by the show.

Like wise

The show is decent, but I wouldn't want to watch it on a regular basis. You know, like if i happen to be watching TV (Which I rarely do) and there isn't anything on that I would rather watch I would probably watch it.

Originally posted by queeq
This is a kiddie series, I doubt it will go darker.

battle droids busting an escape pod open, and watching the clones suffocate was kinda dark...

until the droids open (figuratively speaking) their mouths and "there they go"

... those damn clankers

Originally posted by Bardock42
Again. You are talking about a different thing, to prove your incorrect statement. You use the definition of "more" meaning "additional" or "further" (as in, I'd like more (another) glass of water) to prove that the definition of "more" meaning "in greater quantity" (as in, Joe has more water than Tom) implies at least some amount of water, which it does not. You are incorrect. And you'd do best to be quiet now and research for some basic understanding of logic and grammar.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=more

You also said it was not "normal" to say it like that. So when you say a scene is "darker" than another scene, most people would think that both scenes were dark, with the other being darker. Maybe you are right techniqually, but if you want someone to understand what you are saying you should do it in a "normal" way.

As for Tom he can not have least water if he has no water at all. He would have no water.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
You also said it was not "normal" to say it like that. So when you say a scene is "darker" than another scene, most people would think that both scenes were dark, with the other being darker. Maybe you are right techniqually, but if you want someone to understand what you are saying you should do it in a "normal" way.

As for Tom he can not have least water if he has no water at all. He would have no water.

Don't be stupid.

I would say it was the other way around. You admitted that it was not the "normal" way to explain it.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
I would say it was the other way around. You admitted that it was not the "normal" way to explain it.

No, I didn't. You were just flat out wrong, admitted it, but tried to maintain some sort of dignity by lying about one part. It's idiotic. Either concede you were wrong or just leave and ignore it. Don't try to "drag" me down with you, I was just correct. And this is ridiculously off-topic. Don't you have something to add about the series or episode in specific, instead?

I admitted you were techniqually correct. Just as you admitted it was not a normal way of expalining things.

And i did say something about the series, you just did not address it.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
I admitted you were techniqually correct. Just as you admitted it was not a normal way of expalining things.
I did not. That's a misconstruction of what I said. You disregard the obvious difference between the two definitions of "more". Again, you tried to prove that your initial statement is correct, by using an unrelated, though similarly spelled word. Though, apparently, that fact is beyond you.

Either way, I am technically correct, so lets move on.

And all just because I pointed out to you, that mere death scenes won't make a series a particular dark piece.

Just please when you expalin something, explain it in a normal fashion.

Maybe not as dark as a horror movie, but dark for a kid series.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Just please when you expalin something, explain it in a normal fashion.

Maybe not as dark as a horror movie, but dark for a kid series.

Again, a few Jedi died in the earlier Clone Wars series, it was hardly dark really. Not even for a children series.

Yep, not even for a kdis series. Look at the old comic book TAS serieses. Those could be considered dark.

The first clone wars series did not get as deep as these series will. Killing is maybe the darkest you can get in a kid series. Any more darker and it wouldn't be considered a kids series.

Comic book TAS...

Anime.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
Comic book TAS...

Anime.

Are more for adult teens.

Question, is THIS the TV series that everyone's been waiting for? I've kind of been out of the loop, I thought there was going to be a live action one? Is that still coming or what?

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Are more for adult teens.

uh- no. No they're not. Naruto airs on the equevilent of FOX Kids and Kids WB in Japan, and that shows people getting split in half, exploding, crushed to death, impaled, many sexual themes, etc.

Don't like Naruto? There's plenty of others. You probably don't know much about Anim eas far as classes.

Shonen Anime (Naruto, DBZ ( I think), Pokemon, etc. are made for little kids and adolescents. Shonen literally is a boy who's age is from elementary school to middle school.

edit- I just checked.

Shonen is considred "appropiate" for kids age 8-18. So yeah, it's cool for 8 year olds to watch kids explode.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
uh- no. No they're not. Naruto airs on the equevilent of FOX Kids and Kids WB in Japan, and that shows people getting split in half, exploding, crushed to death, impaled, many sexual themes, etc.

Don't like Naruto? There's plenty of others. You probably don't know much about Anim eas far as classes.

Shonen Anime (Naruto, DBZ ( I think), Pokemon, etc. are made for little kids and adolescents. Shonen literally is a boy who's age is from elementary school to middle school.

edit- I just checked.

Shonen is considred "appropiate" for kids age 8-18. So yeah, it's cool for 8 year olds to watch kids explode.

Im not talking about in Japan. Power rangers in Japan also had a lot of fowl language. The ratings are different in Japan. Please believe if a cartoon was made in the US with people getting chopped in half, people getting crushed to death, or a lot of sexual themes, it wouldn't be a kids show here in the US.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Question, is THIS the TV series that everyone's been waiting for? I've kind of been out of the loop, I thought there was going to be a live action one? Is that still coming or what? No, that's the series that has been pulled in between cause the idea of a live action show is so badass that Lucas needs a year or two more to screw it up.

Still coming though.

Originally posted by Bardock42
No, that's the series that has been pulled in between cause the idea of a live action show is so badass that Lucas needs a year or two more to screw it up.

Still coming though.

Damn. That's the one I was looking forward to. I think they've pretty much milked the Clone Wars as much as possible already.

There's many more episodes to come.

I cant believe I waited three years for this...

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Im not talking about in Japan. Power rangers in Japan also had a lot of fowl language. The ratings are different in Japan. Please believe if a cartoon was made in the US with people getting chopped in half, people getting crushed to death, or a lot of sexual themes, it wouldn't be a kids show here in the US.

Then why mention anime, the majority of which is made in Japan?

What you mean to say is that Anime is made for children as well as adults, but American bastardization makes it for kids.

But even then Dragon Ball Z and Batman, both of which aired on Cartoon Network and thus were made for kids, showed people get killed in pretty dark fashions...

But it doesn't matter, ebcause you're abck peddiling now. Yoiu're stance now is that people dying in a kids show is dark for american kids. That doesn't matter though, because American kids are all punks and weiners.

Originally posted by queeq
Hmmm... looks like SW has gone officially silly. No offense but it has always been silly. A couple years ago I thought ESB was the ****. After watching it this summer and listening to Chewbaca and the whole theme.............yea I think it was intended that way.

I don't think ESB was very silly.

Only caught the last 10 mins of it, was alright in a toonish fashion. Will watch a few more before I make judgement.

FAir enough.

Originally posted by Nactous
I cant believe I waited three years for this...

Yeah, you should probably kill yourself now.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
Then why mention anime, the majority of which is made in Japan?

What you mean to say is that Anime is made for children as well as adults, but American bastardization makes it for kids.

But even then Dragon Ball Z and Batman, both of which aired on Cartoon Network and thus were made for kids, showed people get killed in pretty dark fashions...

But it doesn't matter, ebcause you're abck peddiling now. Yoiu're stance now is that people dying in a kids show is dark for american kids. That doesn't matter though, because American kids are all punks and weiners.

A lot of anime is also aired in the U.S. The more adult themed ones are not listed as a kids cartoon in the U.S. BTW you are the one who brought up anime.

You are missing the point. I said it can not get any wose than killing, or it would not really be considered a series for kids.

And what does your opinion of American kids have to do with anything?

Okay, the whole anime/dark stuff is off topic.

Originally posted by Nactous
I cant believe I waited three years for this...



What do you mean?

Its painfully disappointing. I waited three years to finally check this out....

Originally posted by S_D_J


What do you mean? He's just baiting.

Originally posted by Bardock42
He's just baiting.

Not really no, the serious is kind of a let down, announced in 05 I was expecting more than the final product....

I had the same feeling when TPM came out.

It was actually really good, to my surprise. It's the second episode that I wasn't keen on.

Ah.

Maybe because this is some 25 years before ESB and technology changes over time?

Originally posted by Peach
Maybe because this is some 25 years before ESB and technology changes over time?

You mean, it gets worse over time? The Rebles woudl have taken out the whole fleet over Hoth with the Malevolence weapon. There were also ion cannons in KOTOR, that were...ya know...ion cannons lol.

Clone boy is back. Hiya Alliance!

Hehe, ty.

Well, finally seen these things. I feel some of your complaints are exceptionally picky, Ordo. Talking of 'freezedrying the officer inside' a. implies that Star Wars should have anything to do with real science and b. isn't actually scientific in of itself, as he wouldn't freeze unless exposed for quite a while. What you would actually want to compllain about is the problems of rapid depressurisation making him ill... but at this point I have lost all interest in the criticism.

Meanwhile, the important thing about the term 'ion cannon' is its effect (it disables ships), NOT the special effects used by the animators. It was a one-off experimental weapon which presumably is very difficultt to build again; not something the Rebels could have got hold of. Frankly, big-scale experimental suoer weapons are exactly the sort of thing I want to see from a Trade Federation/Techno Union coalition. It is not any osrt of continuity breach at all.

I found both episodes rather fun.

Well, I care a lot about this series, I'm going to be picky. Just because I criticize something doesn't mean I think the episode was horrible...its just more something I felt detracted.

My problem with the freezedrying was inter-series canon. We see clones being killed as they are vac'ed into space, but you can magically open a pod door and live? There is an inconsistancy there. If they had shown that the door was shileded or whatever, it would be fine.

They didn't.

As to the canon, it is called an ION canon, a noun, not an ionizing canon, an adjective that would describe a type of effect. They're both called "ion canons"...the difference was never explained. I agree with you that the Rebels wouldn't have been able to duplicate the separatist version, but since the mechanics, appearance, firing mechanism, and everything else is so different, I think there needs to be another adjective in there.

Ambush was fun for me as well.

Regardless of continuity, your freezedrying comment still had nothing to do with either a. Star Wars science or b. REAL science. Nor do I see it as a continuity issue in any way; I am sure the suits can be sealed if given prep time.

Your other paragraph is simple nonsense. Like I say, it's the final effect the name is needed for, not the special effects the design team use. If it was given a different name but still had the same final effect, THAT would be the stupid thing. As it is, Ion Cannon is 100% exactly the right name for it. So it uses a different effect- so what? Weapons sometimes have different effects in Star Wars. The rebel one was narrow, this one was broad. The mistake would have been to use a different name.

Incidentally, used as a noun or an adjective, it make absolutely no difference; the term 'ion' tells us more about the cannon and is therefore acting as an adjective, and the established effect is that ion guns disable things, NOT that ion guns look like a certain thing.

Quite why you bring up adjectives is beyond me- we use nouns as adjectives all the time, and that's the way we talk about weapons (and many, many other things) in English. We say 'tranquiliser gun' not 'tranquilising gun', and we don't expect all tranquiliser guns to look and act the same, only to have the same final effect- to knock someone out.


Such things are not excused by a love for the series. Dwelling on them decreases the value of your reviews.

There were apparently sealable suits in ANH, but other than that, it has been canon in every other medium that I have experienced that clone suits are not sealable. This goes even for the ARC 170 pilots in ROTS. So, you can make endless excuses and bend over backwards trying to find a way to bend the ends of consistency together, but the simple fact remains that if this episode had been written better, none of us would have to.

Regardless of whether series canon matches actual canon, which is an issue to itself, when it doesn't match its own canon, I feel its proper to point out the inconsistency. I don't even know why this has become an issue on suits. The clone I'm referring too was a Naval Officer inside the pod. No helmet, no armor.

As to the cannon canon, the effect does matter. If I have a tranquilizer gun, and another tranquilizer gun, both shoot some kind of dart with a toxin. If a "tranquilzer gun" released the same toxin in a gaseous spray, calling it a tranquilizer gun would just be asinine. Guns are classified and name by how and what they fire. The bullet from a pistol and a machine gun have the SAME effect, but they are very different guns with very different names for that reason. Hence the difference between ion and ionizing, tranqulizer and tranquilizing. I think this distinction should have been appreciated in this episode.A differnet name would make the seperatist weapon singular and more meanacing, a new class of ion canon. It also would make more sence.

As to my reviews, I'm not dwelling on anything (except for why Rex is not Alpha or vice versa). I write these reviews because its fun for me to write down my thoughts and express them. I thought since I was taking the time to do this, I'd share my opinions with others who also watch the series. If you find my reviews personally unvaluable, I don't care. You have long chastized and seemingly disliked me, and personally, I don't really enjoy your presence or find your thoughts that insightful. As long as my reviews are not breaking any sort of rules that warrants your administrative criticism, their value is to me and me alone. If others find them enjoyable, I think that's great. If not, I'm not going to belabor it.

Do we know whether the Pilots in ROTS actually did not have sealed suits? I mean there's quite a few other explanations why being catapulted out of an exploding spaceship during a huge space battle might be lethal, regardless of whether you had a sealed suit to begin with.

Yes we do. It would be impossible to discern as you pointed out, but the suits had partially open faceplates.

Which conveniently supports neither my nor Ush's point.

But, it does beg the question, if pilots did not have sealable suits, why would any type of trooper? That answer leans my way.

There have never been clones in space in any other medium without some kind of additional protection. There is the moment in the Gendy series where Tinn jumps ships with a croup of clones. I'd need to actually look at the episode again to note any differences, but i do remebnr the helmets were different, containing breathing apparati and I recall some kind of backpack too.

Regardless, this would be one instance in all of SW, and regardless I'm more concerned about the breach of inter-series canon than extra-series, though all should be taken into consideration.

Ah yeah, haha. Well, I still don't really know what the issue is, though.

I mean, Star Wars was never hard Science Fiction, nor should it be, really. What did you have an issue with exactly?

Certainly not. I just expect canon to be continuous and for some logic to be present...like gravity.

I saw two problems on this issue:

1. Plo and clones leave an escape pod while the naval officer who stays inside isn't freeze dried.

2. Some clones appear to die being vac'ed intos space while other clones can fight in space for a period of time with no effect.

Originally posted by Ordo
Certainly not. I just expect canon to be continuous and for some logic to be present...like gravity.

I saw two problems on this issue:

1. Plo and clones leave an escape pod while the naval officer who stays inside isn't freeze dried.

2. Some clones appear to die being vac'ed intos space while other clones can fight in space for a period of time with no effect.

Well, I figure you could say that there's a mechanism that made that possible which we didn't see.

As for the second, I don't see the error, unless there was a scene in the movies that had Clone Troopers with the same gear die in space, that survived in the show, which I believe is not the case.

to 1. Yeah, you could say that. You could also say that purple elephants flew in and blocked the vacuuum, eating and defecating Plo and the clones out into space. If the episode was well written such a mechanism would have been shown, instead of Plo and the clones magically appearing out in space while one officer sits in the pod.

I'd argue that, since we've seen escape pods in ANH, ROTS, and in Rising Malevolence and we've seen how people enter pods (via simple door mechanism) the leeway for such an apparatus is slim.

To 2. We saw clones die in space when their pod was crushed. Thus, i felt the other ones should have gone too.

This was later expanded on in Downfall of a Droid, where Alpha Rex and the other were shooting on AT-TEs form the planetary rings so, it seems like the series canon is sayin g more that suits are sealable (which is still against movie canon and all other EU to my knowledge), but I'm asking more for consistancy in the show.

I dunno, I feel all this is really being blown out of proportion.

Originally posted by Ordo
to 1. Yeah, you could say that. You could also say that purple elephants flew in and blocked the vacuuum, eating and defecating Plo and the clones out into space. If the episode was well written such a mechanism would have been shown, instead of Plo and the clones magically appearing out in space while one officer sits in the pod.

I'd argue that, since we've seen escape pods in ANH, ROTS, and in Rising Malevolence and we've seen how people enter pods (via simple door mechanism) the leeway for such an apparatus is slim.


Meh, might be a slight inconsistency. Though, I don't really see a reason why it couldn't be not seen. I agree with you actually though, I recall also thinking "Hmm, that's odd"...

Originally posted by Ordo
To 2. We saw clones die in space when their pod was crushed. Thus, i felt the other ones should have gone too.



But, as you rightly pointed out, they had an open helmet. Though, we actually didn't see them die due to being in space that is just an assumption...I like to think they were perfectly fine and got picked up by a passing Jedi later in the battle.

Woah, sorry on the last point. My brain skipped over "movies." There is no canon example of a trooper dieing in space do to the pressure.

An enjoyable first episode tp the series, featuring Yoda who gets some great almost ESB-like moments in this.