Nothing compared to Advent Children but then again I'm very biased.

Well....I think this was a pretty decent film actually. It had decent characters, decent stand alone story and visually it looked actually much better then AC in my opinion.

Actually AC in my opinion is a poor movie comparing to SW...why, well, without a game, you watch AC and you do not get a thing. When I saw AC first time, I did not play the game yet at that point, and I was pretty lost at who was who and what the hell is that all about. AC - you gotta be familiar with FF7 to get it. AC is made with assumption you are well familiar with FF7, as it is made for FF7 fans. BUT the film/story on its own its weak and makes no sense what so ever..and that is not a good thing.

SW - you can watch anytime, anywhere, with anyone, and you do not have to be a FF obsessed fan to enjoy it and understand it. That is proper movie here, that anyone can enjoy.

Perhaps it was not a stereotypical representation of FF series, and I can understand that point of view, and fans always crticise that. Meaning no chocobos and moogles and so on and on, but that I actually found that refreshing about it. But on the other hand it is a SE film and if they think it deserves a FF title, then they have a full right and I am sure a good valid rason to give that title to their own product.

As far as goes with opinions like that a fantasy movie should contain swords to be considered a such ...that is not correct. And I have read a lot of posts here that have that point of view. A term "fantasy" can stand and be applied to many different things: great imagination unrestricted by reality, an illusion, something existing in perception only, whisful thinking, dream, misconception, false belief, and so on and so on....and when it is applied to movie genre, or books it includes many movies and stories and books and tales that do not feature swords but are still fantasy movies. For example: Pan's Labyrinth, Splash, or oldies such as Wizard of Ozz are few that comes to mind. List of books and stories can go on forever here...and especially old myths and legends and fairy tales....

Magic is completelly different, magic must happen in fantasy to be a fantasy, for magic crosses over the border of reality. No fantasy fiction in any form does not come without magic. The classic european folk tale that we all know for example- Snow White, des not feature swords...or fighting warriors...actually the prince does not do any fighting at all...he comes in the end and save the day with a kiss; and that kiss a very powerful magic. The original version of little red Riding Hood is another fantasy tale, and much scarier that what the kids learn today. Little girl doe not find a happy ending with her grandma where a hunter saves the day with his trustworthy knife; oh no, she and the grandma gets devaured and torn appart by werewolf and tranformed, for they are reborn to the moon, another powerful form of magic in a tale that does not vield weaponry of any kind.

POint hree is that magic comes in many ways and many disguises in movies and books and stories, connected to different things and beliefs. Magic can be presented differently, it does not has to be a stereotypical magic preformed by a wizard or a mage. Therefore SW is a fantasy movie...it might not have have swords, but does it have magic. It does, perhaps our heroine does not recite spells and shoots ice out of her hands, but deals with different kind of magic. Spirits on their own are magical enitity, they are beyond reality in every way, therefore magic here is different but it is still magic.

Besides in todays times, warriors do not have to be only viewed with stereoptypical swords in their hands, modern guns and weapons replace ancient weaponry in modern tales, so even from that perspective SW can be considered to have weapons worthy a fantasy tale warrior.

I actually liked Spirits WIthin a lot. It certainly looks better than AC does...much more realistic seeing as it was made before AC. As for people not liking it because it's not proper Final Fantasy, it's not up to you people what IS or ISN'T Final Fantasy....it's up to Square Enix. Same thing is going on with many games (like Mana series...but opposite). As for it not being Final Fantasy because it doesn't have icons from games, does that make Kingdom Hearts a Final Fantasy game? It has LOTS of characters from FF....AND MOOGLES. But THAT'S not classed as a Final Fantasy game, so THAT theory is out the window right away. Did Square ever say the film was BASED on the series? If I remember, every new game IS a different stroy so there ISN'T really a series so to speak. It's like a collection of different stories. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE AC a lot, but when people put down this film just because they're too fixated on the games to realise it doesn't HAVE to have anything to do with the games to be a Final Fantasy film, it really annoys me.