Jim Raynor wrote:
I love your arrogance, even as you play stupid semantic games. Oh no, that stuff about the Gungans and the Naboo coming together wasn't the CENTRAL point of the movie, even though it was but one of SEVERAL things I brought up! I must be soooo "simple."
You most definitely have something wrong with your brain, since you didn't even bother to finish reading my post before jamming your finger down on "reply" and breaking it. Did it hurt, Raynor? Did you have to go to the hospital? Did the nurse laugh when you explained how it happened? Tell me about your mother.
So because the movie supports its point...it somehow doesn't "reinforce" it. LOL.
Obi-Wan openly questions and argues with his mentor. Going so far as to tell his mentor to compromise his beliefs just because he might get a promotion to the Jedi Council by conforming. Qui-Gon remains calm and patient with Obi-Wan throughout all of that, and even praises him. Which is the complete opposite of how Obi-Wan handles disputes in AOTC.
So Qui-Gon trusting Anakin to win the pod race, then arguing with the Jedi Council about training him, doesn't make it a "prominent" theme. Yeah, whatever you say.
See, when you're trying to communicate a theme, you communicate more than one aspect of it. In order to say "believing in the people you mentor is a good thing", you have to show disbelief as a bad thing for it to be truly effective. Instead, we never get a situation where Qui-gon doubts in Obi-wan or Anakin, and so it only presents such belief as a natural thing, rather than as a theme to be communicated, and so it
cannot be said to be a theme of The Phantom Menace.
Please. Amidala's entire arc was to stop being a sad powerless princess hoping that the Republic would save her planet, and to get up and save it herself. The movie clearly portrays it as a good thing that she saved Naboo. Palpatine's election doesn't change that fact. He wasn't even revealed as the villain until the last few seconds of the penultimate scene.
I hope you know that the alternative to saving Naboo was to let her people rot and die, while Palpatine STILL milked the situation for sympathy and political gain.
No, the alternative was to let Naboo sit in limbo because the movie never shows any negative effects of the Trade Federation invasion. Which is another criticism your tiny, decayed brain cannot adequately address. PS: Palpatine was revealed as the villain from the very moment his name is mentioned, since he was the Emperor in the OT. Only idiots and people unfamiliar with the previous movie believed otherwise.
But the whole point is that she did what the villain wanted her to do. That cannot be said to be an endorsement of the action, unless you're mentally handicapped in some way.
Don't change the goal posts. Being generic doesn't change the fact that it's still there. BTW, how many generic action movies for kids are about the constraints of tradition, and institutional decay?
You are mentally handicapped, or else dishonest. Having read through the whole post, you are clearly dishonest. So I doubt I'm going to treat your posts with anything regarding seriousness, since you're perfectly willing to chop up sentences to make dubious points. So, uh, go stick your hand into a sausage grinder and indulge in a little cannibalism, you sick freak.
"You're a fucking liar, Raynor", is what I would say if I were indeed as distorted an individual as you. Instead, I will simply say that I have never seen any of RedLetterMedia's reviews of any Star Wars movie, or indeed of anything, and I have no intention of doing so, and that it is a sign of your feeble grasp that you believe that characterizing all of your opponents as components of a hivemind is devastating rather than pathetic.
LOL. So because you don't suck up to RLM, I'm a "liar" for saying something that does apply to other people here?
No, you're a liar now because you lied about what I just said. I have helpfully bolded the critical clause if you're really so conveniently illiterate as to not grasp it, but you'd still be a liar for presenting yourself as a literate individual.
But you miss the point, which is that calling your opponents a hivemind is pathetic. Like, now I can see you, sitting in your computer chair, squeaking out your posts in your prepubescent voice, chuckling at your "jokes", and you lean back, ready to hug yourself at the "hivemind" zinger- that'll get them for sure!!- and your chair falls over. You blubber a little, before righting it and pretending nothing ever happened, like a cat with all the lovability surgically removed.
The exact nature of the taxes is not "character motivation." The movie clearly shows that the Trade Fed thinks that throwing its military might around can allow it to get its way on political and economic matters. Everything they do after the invasion (which comes in the first few minutes) is all about escaping legal consequences. That's also clear. You can understand the movie just fine right there. Most people did.
But nooo, we need more details on the taxes, otherwise the "character motivation" isn't clear. Despite being literally written out onscreen.
The lack of information on the taxes means we have an unclear motivation as to what the Trade Federation wants and how they are going to get it beyond ridiculously broad parameters, and the fact that the three defenders of TPM here can't agree on what the motivation of the Trade Federation is puts the lie to your claims. Maybe you should take this up with Anguirus and Elfdart, seeing as those two are clearly wrong about Trade Federation motives according to your very post. But that would require you to have more than a Cracker-Jack prize version of integrity, now wouldn't it?