http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-the-people-vs-george-lucas-and-star-wars-discussion/

I've never watched any videos from them before, but I know this has been an ongoing discussion here and amongst Star Wars fans in general so I thought I'd post it. Evidently the guy on the left is the writer and voice of the Plinkett reviews. I gotta say, he makes some good points but he seems clouded by his hatred of Lucas and I think it effects how well he came across in this. As I said, though, I haven't actually watched anything else from this site so maybe he comes across better in other things. Anyway, interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on this, like I said some good points were made but overall I don't know what to really make of these guys.

I liked the foreign guy. He seemed pretty earnest in his endeavor. As for the guy who voices Mr. Plinkett well he's moving in and out of being informative and abrasive at the same time. Lot's of internet video people do that. I'd like to see part 2 before making any further conclusions but it was a fairly good part 1.

the line on the big VHS boxset is so deliciously prophetic :>

---

プロジェクトゾハルとは何ですか？
ロボットが好き。

Another one from those idiots? If you want to see Jim Raynor's evisceration of their Episode I review, it's here. It's quite long, though.

---

"I'm just reading through your formspring here, and your responses to many questions seem to indicate that you are ready and willing to sacrifice realism/believability for the sake of (sometimes) marginal increases in gameplay quality. Why is this?"
"Because until I see gamers sincerely demanding that if they get winged in the gut with a bullet that they spend the next three hours bleeding out on the ground before permanently dying, they probably are too." - J.E. Sawyer

I will check that out, it seems interesting and I do like the idea of trying to argue against those who rally around the videos as though they're gospel. But I posted this because I thought it was less one-sided than everyone agreeing with Jim Raynor and I figured it'd be interesting to see the different opinions on this video.

Also, I agree VF5SS. The foreign guy did seem earnest and I think I'll check out his movie some day.

One comment on the video that I think needs to be made is that it doesn't seem that they're aware of the multiple attempts that George Lucas made to get other directors to work on the prequels with him as directors or co-directors or whatever. I'm aware of at least Sir David Shore and Frank Darabont having been asked in this regard, but they declined for whatever reasons. So it could be that his attempts to get people he respected to work on The Phantom Menace petered out, and after that he just decided to shoulder the rest of the prequel trilogy himself, despite the fact that his weaknesses were displayed rather prominently in all of them.

Why on earth would they make a video about George Lucas? I can see the reason behind videos about the Prequel Trilogy, but to make a video about Lucas seems a tad obsessed. And if the level of sophistication and fairness is the same as in Episode 1 review I'm pretty sure the video skirts on actual libel.

---

Confiteor Deo omnipotenti; beatae Mariae semper Virgini; beato Michaeli Archangelo; sanctis Apostolis, omnibus sanctis... Tibit Pater, quia peccavi nimis, cogitatione, verbo et opere, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa! Kyrie Eleison!

The Imperial Senate (defunct) * Knights Astrum Clades * The Mess

... What?

Haha. Yeah evisceration. More like another attempt at trying to justify such a useless movie.

---

プロジェクトゾハルとは何ですか？
ロボットが好き。

Considering how shitty and dishonest the RLM review was, yeah, I would say the systematic demolition of their points would be evisceration.

---

"I'm just reading through your formspring here, and your responses to many questions seem to indicate that you are ready and willing to sacrifice realism/believability for the sake of (sometimes) marginal increases in gameplay quality. Why is this?"
"Because until I see gamers sincerely demanding that if they get winged in the gut with a bullet that they spend the next three hours bleeding out on the ground before permanently dying, they probably are too." - J.E. Sawyer

Because people disagreeing with you is dishonest :v

---

プロジェクトゾハルとは何ですか？
ロボットが好き。

If I didn't know any better, I'd suspect TheSpaceman of deliberately throwing out a piece of raw meat just to watch the hilarity of the RLM and Raynor camps going at each others' throats once more. Not that I object, it's amusing to watch the fat fly.

---

Gaian Paradigm: Because not all fantasy has to be childish crap.
Ephemeral Pie: Because not all role-playing has to be shallow.
My art: Because not all DA users are talentless emo twits.
"Phant, quit abusing the He-Wench before he turns you into a caged bitch at a Ren Fair and lets the tourists toss half munched turkey legs at your backside." -Mr. Coffee

Considering the bullshit RLM threw out, yes, theirs were dishonest.

---

"I'm just reading through your formspring here, and your responses to many questions seem to indicate that you are ready and willing to sacrifice realism/believability for the sake of (sometimes) marginal increases in gameplay quality. Why is this?"
"Because until I see gamers sincerely demanding that if they get winged in the gut with a bullet that they spend the next three hours bleeding out on the ground before permanently dying, they probably are too." - J.E. Sawyer

Haven't seen this new video of his. Don't think I'd bother, after spending far too long going through his stuff before.



I flat out stated in my response that if someone didn't like Episode I or didn't find it engaging, that was his opinion which he was entitled to. Stoklasa's basic opinion was not the reason I took issue with his review. It was his try-hard attempt to argue Lucas not only as a flawed filmmaker, but a complete and utter imbecile who couldn't string together a basic series of events in a story. And the smears about Lucas being a tyrant boss who causes mistrust and fear in his employees. Stoklasa couldn't even stand behind his own words there, covering his butt with a lame "I wasn't there" after going on and on with that stuff.



No, lying about what clearly happened in the movie makes you dishonest. Seriously, the "criticism" in his review often amounted to saying the opposite of whatever was said or shown in the movie, regardless of the circumstance. If Qui-Gon Jinn asked for the Gungans' help take care of the Trade Federation invasion (after escaping attempts on his own life and seeing the invasion with his own eyes), Stoklasa would say that Qui-Gon was "making shit up" because he had no evidence to claim that the Trade Federation was invading. That is how mindless and stupid it got. It reminded me of how little children sometimes argue, taking the opposite position on anything the other person said just to piss him off or carry on without admitting that they were wrong.

And oh yeah, there's that other reason I wrote up that big rebuttal to the RLM review. Apparently, numerous SW fans sat through all that nonsense and came out thinking that this guy was "insightful," intelligent, and unable to do wrong. They turned him into a geek idol, and worshipped him up as their guru of good taste. I doubt most of them even watched past the first part, out of nine (the YouTube view statistics supported me on that). Before I had even finished writing my rebuttal, I posted about how the RLM review reminded me of propaganda filmmaking, with all its dirty tricks and emotional appeals. And his review shows how easily people can be swayed by complete nonsense, without ever bothering to apply any thought to it. It was very telling when Stoklasa's own response to my rebuttal boiled down to a "tl;dr." He and his fan following encourage mindless bandwagoning.

The worst denunciation of Stoklasa's work didn't even come from me, but from his own fanboys. I found it hilarious when almost all of them (guys who had signed up on this board specifically to defend him) eventually fell back to calling his review nothing but stupid comedy. Because calling something stupid somehow protects it from criticisms of stupidity...

---

"They're not triangular, but they are more or less blade-shaped"- Thrawn McEwok on the shape of Bakura destroyers

"Lovely. It's known as impugning character regarding statement of professional qualifications' in the legal world"- Karen Traviss, crying libel because I said that no soldier she interviewed would claim that he can take on billion-to-one odds

"I've already laid out rules for this thread that we're not going to make these evidential demands"- Dark Moose on supporting your claims

Read his review, you blithering idiot. He shows, quite well, that the RLM moron's hatred for TPM clouded his ability to pay attention to the movie.

---

So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.

Again, haven't actually watched his reviews but that, I think, is what bothers me the most. I feel like people were so upset with the prequels that anyone who takes the time to try and explain why everyone should be upset with them, at least in the way RLM does, will be praised even if the criticism isn't necessarily apt.

I gotta be honest. I don't think I could read over a hundred pages about this subject without a funny voice. Although I must say, "But the audience doesn't meet Anakin until 45 minutes into the movie." and "Wrong. Anakin shows up at almost exactly 32 minutes into the movie." makes me think you missed the point. What I got from the Phantom Menace review and the reviews of the following movies is that Mr. Plinkett is meant to rebut the blind acceptance of the prequels by fanboys who have turned Star Wars into a literal religion. Plinkett is basically parodying the nature of the nitpicking fanboy and even paints it as ridiculous with his use of language and analysis. There are times when he's basically making fun of the fact people would care about the inane things he's arguing. Sure he may have cooked the books Michael Moore style, but there's a genuine heartfelt analysis. It's the kind of thing where people who don't even care about Star Wars can feel the mournfulness. And sometimes he basically breaks character and laments how sad he is that the first movie lacks the same gravitas, believability, and coherency of the old trilogy.


but whatever. some nerd haet new star wars. if he gets some facts wrong or exaggerates then his review is bad and you should feel bad.

Watching his reviews made me appreciate that even when Japan got the prequel fever they didn't screw up that much. Shit, makes me appreciate the brilliance of Macross Zero and MS Igloo.

Ok grant me this one thing though. "We never see the crisis on Naboo" and you say we can easily imagine it. Really? This isn't like in Star Wars where they blew up Alderaan and we knew it was bad because they blew up a planet without showing people getting immolated in seconds. Naboo is so squiddamn perfect for most of the movie it's like this invasion is a minor inconvenience. Hire a few dozen extras to stand around in food lines or lay around in hospitals in desperate need of supplies or something. I know it's a PG movie but damn I've seen Anne Frank specials made for kids with more underpinnings of fear, oppression, and desperation.

---

プロジェクトゾハルとは何ですか？
ロボットが好き。

Yes, cherry pick one small (but completely factual) criticism out of a hundred pages and claim that I "missed the point." Like I didn't see that one before. Are you going to say I'm such a square for taking his stupid comedy seriously next?



If anything is the "religion" here it's the fanboy following of RLM. The SW movies, and Lucas, take more than their share of criticism.



So now the excuse is that the whole thing was some kind of reverse psychology, and that Stoklasa didn't mean everything he said over the course of a near movie-length review of a movie. Nope, not buying that. He has come out in interviews, clearly stating that he was explaining everything that was wrong with the movie.



Heartfelt analysis like actually stating that Qui-Gon didn't have evidence that the Trade Fed was invading Naboo, after seeing it happen. Or that Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan should've Rambo'd their way through thousands of battledroids, after running from a mere two droids a minute earlier. Or getting extremely nitpicky about the visuals, claiming that the Royal ship was never hit by lasers while running the blockade, even as he shows clips with the ship being struck multiple times.

If that's "heartfelt" then Stoklasa's just not very smart.



He didn't just "gets some facts wrong," he clearly and blatantly twisted what was happening throughout most of the movie. Or he really is that clueless. Pick one. I don't care. Doesn't change the fact that his review was basically worthless. You really seem to be reaching to defend him.



I kind of got the impression there was a crisis when the robots marched into the defenseless capital. And I'd say it is kind of like Alderaan, since billions of people we never saw or heard were basically killed offscreen, with the movie quickly resuming its fun and energetic tone.

---

"They're not triangular, but they are more or less blade-shaped"- Thrawn McEwok on the shape of Bakura destroyers

"Lovely. It's known as impugning character regarding statement of professional qualifications' in the legal world"- Karen Traviss, crying libel because I said that no soldier she interviewed would claim that he can take on billion-to-one odds

"I've already laid out rules for this thread that we're not going to make these evidential demands"- Dark Moose on supporting your claims

Ok so unless I do the whole SDN line by line thing and explain every in excruciating detail I can't argue with you. So yeah you are a total square for taking it seriously. You got the blinders up so squidding bad.

Like in the Attack of the Clones review where he does the thing where "Clones did this wrong and Empire did this right. I love Empire so much I fuck it!" and then it shows a copy of Empire Strikes Back in his bed because he fornicates with it. Yeah that's what I mean by he's exaggerating the fanboy thing. He knows he's biased but it's the thing that shapes the character.

Ok here's the point about Alderaan vs. the Naboo thing. Killing a planet is a clear threat in the sense we know what a planet has on it and why making it go poof is bad. CGI robots walking around a mostly deserted city where the only people we see (I don't remember civilians honestly) is guards, pilots, and main characters just isn't selling the crisis. Like people fleeing from Stormtroopers in Cloud City drives home the point that it was a bad thing and it doesn't detract from the movie's pace or tone.

And the blockade scene? The point is the blockade sucked if one ship could get through. It's lame. Maybe if they decided to ripoff the first movie and have like a turret scene. Turret scenes are cool because then you can make video games about it.

Ever play the Phantom Menace Playstation game? It was so bad.

And are you really going to compare the magnitude of criticism of one 30 plus year old franchise to a set of reviews that has been around for a few years? And Lucas and Star Wars taking more than their share of criticism? It's a popular franchise no duh it has been criticized a lot. At what point is it too much criticism? Who cares. I heard Romeo and Juliet has a lot of criticism because it's like centuries old. People criticize the Catholic church a lot too so I guess it's not a religion :v


Here's what he thinks of your novella

---

プロジェクトゾハルとは何ですか？
ロボットが好き。

Did you really say in an earlier post in this thread that you hadn't even read what I wrote? If you're not willing to put in an effort to actually debate this and make good supported points, then this isn't the forum for you. You said so yourself, it's the "whole SDN line by line thing." People don't usually like it when you try to admit and justify your laziness in the same sentence.



I basically ignored all his irrelevant "comedy" about abducting and brutalizing women, and stuck to his points against the movie. Points that he was actually making, not this unsupported excuse of yours about how he was just parodying the worst of the whiny SW fandom. Which would actually mean that he was defending the movie, if true.



A crappy joke is not the same as a stupid actual argument about something in the movie. And what was it that I already covered earlier in this thread? It does NOT matter if he was joking. If something is just "stupid comedy" as most RLM fanboys eventually fall back to saying, then fine. It's alright if you like mindless lowbrow comedy. Just don't come back and try to defend its logical validity in the same sentence, after doing more to denounce its credibility than I ever did.



There was that guy reporting all the horrible conditions in the camps, which was about as much elaboration as we ever got on Alderaan's population.



No, that wasn't the only point. Stoklasa's point was some awful false dilemma about how shields helping at all means that there's no danger. As well as a failed attempt to nitpick the visuals and claim that the Trade Fed didn't even hit the ship after R2's repairs, which his own hand-picked clips clearly refuted.

You're just straining so bad to bash the movie here. Guess what, in action/adventure movies the heroes will win and escape danger throughout the story. Every example of Luke and Han blowing up TIE fighters are evading Stormtroopers is an example of Imperial troops sucking. That happens. TESB has the Rebels blowing through the Imperial blockade with ease as well. Big deal.



When you have someone posting a 70-minute review full of nonsense and distortions, that stoops to smearing Lucas's character and making unsupported claims of him being a monstrous boss who terrifies his employees? When this same video is accepted and passionately defended by people who don't even care to apply any critical thought to it? Who simultaneously want to brush off any counter-criticisms by calling it "stupid comedy," then want to have it both ways by exalting it as the final word on the SW prequels?

[/quote]

Is this the video that I already mentioned in this thread, where his response could be summed up as a "TL'DR"? Yawn.

---

"They're not triangular, but they are more or less blade-shaped"- Thrawn McEwok on the shape of Bakura destroyers

"Lovely. It's known as impugning character regarding statement of professional qualifications' in the legal world"- Karen Traviss, crying libel because I said that no soldier she interviewed would claim that he can take on billion-to-one odds

"I've already laid out rules for this thread that we're not going to make these evidential demands"- Dark Moose on supporting your claims

My, my, somebody's mad. What, you can't handle any criticism of your false idol?



Stay on topic. VF5SS claimed that Stoklasa was just parodying the "blind acceptance of the prequels by fanboys who have turned Star Wars into a literal religion" (which is an unsupported excuse that undercuts his validity as a logical review anyway). As if the prequels being defended too much is some kind of problem. I responded by pointing out the near-religious treatment that RLM's fanboys treat his video. It was a little back-and-forth that had nothing to do with any of the actual points being discussed in this thread.

And here you come charging in, pretending to be all big and bad, calling me a "god damned retard"...because there's some nerds out there who write in "Jedi" as their religion on some census forms. Or whatever. Not like any of those people have any presence or influence on boards like this, where topics like RLM's hour long review actually come up.



I hope you're saracastic because if you really think that then it's really sad.



Is this a total troll post, or are you really this weird? I'm not going to name a fictional character when I'm talking about a real person.



That is what he said. Are you posting drunk, or are you just gripped by indignant rage over how I dared point out that the RLM review isn't the end-all, be-all of SW discussion? Because "god damned retard" got old after the first two times you used it.



No, Qui-Gon said that he wanted to stop the Trade Fed from attacking the Naboo. Stoklasa literally says "Qui-Gon is still talking about warning the Naboo that they're about to be attacked. When he really doesn't know that they are actually going to attack them" Which is the height of denial and stupidity.

It's Obi-Wan who says that the Trade Fed would go after the Gungans after taking out the Naboo. Ooh, so what. That's basically the standard non-isolationist reasoning that's used to encourage numerous international interventions in real life. And oh yeah, Obi-Wan is on a mission to help the Naboo. Not a minute later the Jedi use a mind trick to get Gungan assistance, after their pleas fail. Oh no, characters with an objective will say things to help them accomplish that objective. "Shitty progression."



Yeah, a seconds-long burst of speed (that wore quickly wore off as we see the Jedi running at normal speeds on security cameras right after) means that they can survive any fight, no matter the number or positioning of the enemy troops. Why would they run at all if they didn't fear death? Don't apply your ridiculous black-and-white simpleton "logic" and then call someone else a "god damned retard" for the fifth or sixth time in the same post.

Stoklasa was not making some vague "point" about how the movie didn't create the level of tension or emotion behind the threat. I dealt with fanboys just like you in all those previous threads. You all use the same tired procedure: avoid dealing with anything that was actually said in the review. Either by trying to give everything a pass as "stupid comedy," or by trying to obscure everything, boiling it all down to some made-up "main point" which is unassailable because you've made it all seem so vague. Then trying to have your cake and eat it too by still insisting that the 70 minute long marathon of specific points against the movie is still intelligent and thoughtful analysis.

No, Stoklasa was quite specific in this part of the review. Attempting to pick apart the Jedi's tactics, while suggesting several of his own alternatives that were in fact far dumber.

EDIT: quotes

---

"They're not triangular, but they are more or less blade-shaped"- Thrawn McEwok on the shape of Bakura destroyers

"Lovely. It's known as impugning character regarding statement of professional qualifications' in the legal world"- Karen Traviss, crying libel because I said that no soldier she interviewed would claim that he can take on billion-to-one odds

"I've already laid out rules for this thread that we're not going to make these evidential demands"- Dark Moose on supporting your claims

Great troll job there.

---

"They're not triangular, but they are more or less blade-shaped"- Thrawn McEwok on the shape of Bakura destroyers

"Lovely. It's known as impugning character regarding statement of professional qualifications' in the legal world"- Karen Traviss, crying libel because I said that no soldier she interviewed would claim that he can take on billion-to-one odds

"I've already laid out rules for this thread that we're not going to make these evidential demands"- Dark Moose on supporting your claims

You are seriously putting too much effort into this troll attempt, man.

---

"They're not triangular, but they are more or less blade-shaped"- Thrawn McEwok on the shape of Bakura destroyers

"Lovely. It's known as impugning character regarding statement of professional qualifications' in the legal world"- Karen Traviss, crying libel because I said that no soldier she interviewed would claim that he can take on billion-to-one odds

"I've already laid out rules for this thread that we're not going to make these evidential demands"- Dark Moose on supporting your claims

I'd rather sit in an empty room than watch TPM again. I thus admire Plinkett just what he would have had to go through watching, re-watching, and editing that bad, bad, very bad movie into his reviews.

I've watched it three times since I got the Blu-ray. It's awesome.

---

So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.

I know right. I'm trying to rewatch this movie and since I don't recall watching it since I saw it twice in the theater (one for ma and once for pa) I forgot how utterly boring it is. I was saying to a friend that I've never seen so many actors sleepwalk through a movie. He of course reminded me of like every Bruckheimer movie ever but anyways. I'm on Tatooine right now and holy squid does the movie grind to a halt. Honestly I don't even feel like much was accomplished in the movie by this point. Other than inspiring a semi-decent N64 game, the pod race feels so out of place. I mean this is after the Queen (whose performance is so lacking in authority it's kind of funny) got the possibly fake communique from Senator dude saying that "millions are dying" (off screen) under the occupation by the Trade jerks. No pressure to hurry up Qui-Gon Gin, we really need the cartoony wacky races here. Shoulda just made a side movie all about pod racing really. But you know what's crazy messed up? There's more background extras and people milling about in all the Tatooine scenes than like any of the stuff on Naboo. Hell there's an entire stadium of people on screen. It's a good thing Ray Park didn't find the Queen's ship during all these shenanigans otherwise Obi-Wan would have had to face Maul all by himself without an epic power generator backdrop.

Anyways, maybe I'll compile my thoughts into a podcast or something.

---

プロジェクトゾハルとは何ですか？
ロボットが好き。