A new, amazing, thorough and hilarious critique of The Phantom Menace (2 Viewers)

[Inspector Hammer!]

Having finally just watched Toy Story 3 I find myself thinking how amazing the prequels would have been if PIXAR had made them lol.

 

[RobertR]

This one seemed more "cluttered" than the previous two, but he sure does come up with spot on criticisms. The opening scene never did make sense to me (as do many other things).

 

[Sam Posten]

Totally badass.

 

[Pete-D]

Also to the popular refrain of "well it's Star Wars .... it's not supposed to be Citizen Kane" ... I'd answer with Star Wars (OT) *was* the Citizen Kane of popcorn/adventure movies.

Very likable, relatable (and yes -- well written) characters, quotable dialogue, fun romance, truly inventive and innovative action sequences, tinged with just the perfect mix of darkness, morality and mystery. It was the gold standard of storytelling in big popcorn Hollywood filmmaking.

Maybe Star Wars is supposed to be a hamburger and not filet mignon, but damn it if it wasn't the best damn hamburger and fries (with a nice milkshake thrown in for good measure) you ever had.

The prequels were just a stale hamburger and soggy french fries.

And now .... I'm hungry, lol.

 

[Carlo_M]

And now the Trilogy is complete. And I'll be damned if I didn't enjoy the review trilogy much more than the actual trilogy it reviewed.

If one actually watches all three of his reviews, peppered between his stinging [and accurate] criticisms is actual "Screenwriting 101" advice that is spot-on. Especially in this last one.

 

[Edwin-S]

His comments regarding the trilogy are cogent, but they lose credibility when he falls into the same trap that he is criticizing Lucas over. His digressions from the actual review serve absolutely no purpose, other than to interrupt and dissipate an otherwise well done critique of the failings in the prequels.

 

[Don Solosan]

"His digressions from the actual review serve absolutely no purpose,"

Humor has no purpose? For me, it makes the video watchable and enjoyable; I would not watch a straight review of these wretched movies.

Or are you one of the fanboys he's lampooning?

 

[Edwin-S]

Originally Posted by Don Solosan
"His digressions from the actual review serve absolutely no purpose,"

Humor has no purpose? For me, it makes the video watchable and enjoyable; I would not watch a straight review of these wretched movies.

Or are you one of the fanboys he's lampooning?

You've got to be kidding me. Did the comments you snipped that from sound like something a "fanboy" would post? I got more laughs out of the cutting remarks he made about these films than I did from watching his allegedly humourous digressions. Maybe you think that talkiing about finding a way to put cheese pockets on a floppy disc is funny, but I thought it and other stuff like it was just so much filler, which is exactly what he was complaining that Lucas was doing in the prequels. I don't have a problem with him tearing the prequels apart. He should just make sure he doesn't commit the same sins that he is complaining Lucas made.

 

[RobertR]

I think it boils down to "do you find the digressions funny". I thought the digressions weren't as good in this one, and kept wishing he would focus more. It doesn't really dilute the actual criticisms, though.

 

[WillG]

Maybe you think that talkiing about finding a way to put cheese pockets on a floppy disc is funny, but I thought it and other stuff like it was just so much filler, which is exactly what he was complaining that Lucas was doing in the prequels. I don't have a problem with him tearing the prequels apart. He should just make sure he doesn't commit the same sins that he is complaining Lucas made.

I think this issue is an apples to oranges comparison. Lucas is trying to tell a story with these prequels and Plinkett is (mostly correctly) pointing out how many of digression within the story are either pointless, senseless, confusing etc. The point is that Plinkett is saying that these diversisons weaken Lucas's narrative and rob the films of impact.

Plinkett is doing something completely different. I hope one realizes that Plinkett is a character. Plinkett is also satirical character. The serial killer bit is a satire of a derainged fan who would obsess over these films in such great detail. The diversions in the reviews are Plinkett being in character. You may not necessairly find it amusing, but there is a purpose behind it.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by WillG
Plinkett is doing something completely different. I hope one realizes that Plinkett is a character. Plinkett is also satirical character. The serial killer bit is a satire of a derainged fan who would obsess over these films in such great detail.

No doubt it's a character to some degree but it's partly the real person too. Who else but a 'deranged fan' would spend 10 years obsessing over and repeatedly watching movies that he doesn't like?

There's lots of movies that I don't like but I'm pretty confident that I won't be making videos about why Transformers 2 sucked in 2019. I know that criticism will get written off with the ever popular "It's different because it's Star Wars" but it really isn't. I'm not saying that people have to like the prequels or that when they're brought up, they can't voice their displeasure but that guy needs to find something positive to spend his creative energy on. Life's too short to spend that much time worrying about something as inconsequential as a movie that he didn't like 5 or 10 years ago.

 

[Sam Posten]

His movie is out on DVD this week and on streaming. Anyone take one for the team and check it out? Looks deliciously cheesy! (mmm, hotpockets!)

 

[Ben Osborne]

No doubt it's a character to some degree but it's partly the real person too. Who else but a 'deranged fan' would spend 10 years obsessing over and repeatedly watching movies that he doesn't like?

There's lots of movies that I don't like but I'm pretty confident that I won't be making videos about why Transformers 2 sucked in 2019. I know that criticism will get written off with the ever popular "It's different because it's Star Wars" but it really isn't. I'm not saying that people have to like the prequels or that when they're brought up, they can't voice their displeasure but that guy needs to find something positive to spend his creative energy on. Life's too short to spend that much time worrying about something as inconsequential as a movie that he didn't like 5 or 10 years ago.

Mike Stoklasa (Plinkett) has thorough (and equally scathing) reviews of all of the Star Trek:TNG movies too, so I don't know if he's singularly obsessed with Star Wars. In one of the TNG movie reviews, he even says something like "Why would I review a 10 year old movie?" and responds with something along the lines of "I aint got nothing better to do."

In terms of finding something positive to do, his company did just release a direct-to-DVD movie, "Feeding Frenzy." I have no interest in it, but I'm sure his popular Star Wars reviews have generated more interest in his material and therefore have helped sales.

Also, I would say that the reviews he does are a positive thing. In addition to being entertaining and humorous, I find that they are educational in terms of film-making and film criticism. The explanation of the "shot / reverse shot" technique is just one example. His review taught me what that was and how to recognize it. When he shows examples from of the original trilogy about something that was done right, his explanations of why the scenes/shots work are quite insightful and add to my appreciation of those movies. For his complaints about the prequels, he's great and giving examples to support his arguments. In general, I think his reviews help people be more informed consumers of movies.

Finally, the Star Wars movies are still extremely popular and part of the cultural conversation. They prequels come up often in the conversations I have with my friends about movies. There are still obviously disagreements about their quality. So for someone to put in a lot of time to explain their reasons for liking or not liking them in an interesting way is worth it. It adds to the conversation. It forces people on both sides of the argument to consider the new arguments being offered. I'm all for that kind of point and counterpoint. And I don't care how old the movie is being discussed. If there are people interested in discussing it, let's keep discussing it.

 

[RobertR]

I'm not saying that people have to like the prequels or that when they're brought up, they can't voice their displeasure but that guy needs to find something positive to spend his creative energy on. Life's too short to spend that much time worrying about something as inconsequential as a movie that he didn't like 5 or 10 years ago.

Many of us find his efforts more entertaining than the prequels, so we obviously don’t find them a waste of time (as you seem to). On the other hand, many of us find the prequels to have been a waste of time. Now of course you can respond that others didn’t, and that Lucas can spend his time however he wishes, but surely you wouldn’t suggest that Plinkett isn’t as entitled to spend time doing something people find entertaining and educational (even if you don’t agree with them) as Lucas is.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by Ben Osborne
In terms of finding something positive to do, his company did just release a direct-to-DVD movie, "Feeding Frenzy." I have no interest in it, but I'm sure his popular Star Wars reviews have generated more interest in his material and therefore have helped sales.

I guess he's crazy like a fox then.

I'm sure the joke has been a thousand times already but it'd be funny if George Lucas put a video on You Tube trashing that guy's movie.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by RobertR /forum/thread/296068/a-new-amazing-thorough-and-hilarious-critique-of-the-phantom-menace/330#post_3767558

Now of course you can respond that others didn’t, and that Lucas can spend his time however he wishes, but surely you wouldn’t suggest that Plinkett isn’t as entitled to spend time doing something people find entertaining and educational (even if you don’t agree with them) as Lucas is.

 

[RobertR]

Originally Posted by TravisR
I'm sure the joke has been a thousand times already but it'd be funny if George Lucas put a video on You Tube trashing that guy's movie.

Funny or "a waste of time obsessing on something he shouldn't bother with"?

 

[TravisR]

Funny or "a waste of time obsessing on something he shouldn't bother with"?

If he does it now, I think it would be funny. If he lets it fester and watches the movie over and over until 2021, it's probably something that he should see a psychiatrist about.


I typed a response to your previous post but the crappy software screwed it up. Basically I said that no matter how big of a pop culture event SW was, it's time to move on after a decade. Since this same exact conversation with the same points and counterpoints has been had at least 2 times before, I think it's pretty clear that none of us are changing the others' minds.

 

[WillG]

Oh, but it is. Transformers and many other films aren’t remotely the pop culture phenomenon that Star Wars was.

To add, I don't even think it is correct to refer to Star Wars as Pop Culture. By now, it is full blown Americana like Baseball or Coca-Cola. So, the fact that people still feel dissapointed by the prequels isn't surprising. The prequels were like New Coke except they can never be undun.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by WillG /forum/thread/296068/a-new-amazing-thorough-and-hilarious-critique-of-the-phantom-menace/330#post_3767576

So, the fact that people still feel dissapointed by the prequels isn't surprising. The prequels were like New Coke except they can never be undun.

I love Star Wars but I'm an even bigger fan of the original Halloween and I have no problem ignoring most of the Halloween sequels (and I don't care how terrible anyone finds the prequels, they're masterpieces compared to the Halloween sequels). I find it easy to ignore the sequels since I don't like them.