New Redletter Media video about Lucas

[Kane Starkiller]

Oh of course not. The explanation could've been provided at the middle of ROTS as far as I'm concerned. But it never was. And for the prequels that always tried to be some kind of political thriller or something that was unforgivable.

EDIT:
This reminds me of a tidbit in AOTC; when Dooku spills the beans to Obi-Wan that there is a sith lord controlling the senate and that Obi should join him because Jedi are blind. It really got interesting and I thought that Dooku was some kind of deep cover agent working alone because he doesn't trust anyone but it never went anywhere. Apparently that entire scene was there to "mirror" Darth Vader/Luke scene from bespin even though it made no sense here.

[Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba]

It also wasn't comparable to the Anakin/Vader revelation scene because neither Obi Wan nor Dooku really seemed to care all that much; I wondered if the two of them were just exchanging pleasantries about galactic skullduggery but what they really wanted was to get home to watch the new episode of Buffy The Vampire Slayer or something. Then I remembered it was just bad acting and dialogue.

[Channel72]

Fantastic, another RLM versus Raynor thread. These seem to appear regularly every 3 to 6 months.

I've said it before, but I really do think the RLM videos have taken on a near-religious quality with some people. It doesn't matter that Stoklasa was making crap up and uttering nonsense most of the time. Now, every disgruntled fanboy has a representative, a champion they can point to in order to justify all of their own feelings.

Oh please. There's literally tons of Internet reviews bashing the Prequels. Most of them are garbage, like this boring crap. People like RLM because he's funny, his review style is fairly original, the editing/production is relatively well done for an Internet review, and most of all, his analysis actually gets to the heart of the problem with the Prequels, as opposed to the usual "Jar Jar sucks" rants.

Now, obviously you don't think he's funny, but his review-style/sense of humor certainly has a LOT more to do with his popularity than some disgruntled-fanboy need for a hero which you've dreamed up.

Forget the fact that his analysis is poor if not downright dishonest. He's one of them, and his review was too long for anyone to bother picking apart anyway (except for me). There's legitimately agreeing with someone, and then there's mindless adulation. I suspect the latter, especially when I see such try-hard attempts by certain RLM fanboys to defend him. Such as desperately trying to give everything a pass as "stupid comedy" even as they still insist that it's all logically valid as well.

I haven't read your counter review yet, but so far the excerpts I'm seeing are mostly plot-related nitpicks. You seem to be the most vocal about things like RLM's exaggerations about how long it took us to meet Anakin or various other plot-point minutiae. Who really cares if RLM is wrong about some detail regarding the plot to TPM? The overall point there was that it's difficult to get emotionally involved with the characters or story.

Whether you like it or not, points like this do resonate with a lot of fans. These are the sort of things which make the RLM reviews stand out. A lot of people, myself included, watched the Prequels, and found them pretty difficult to get emotionally involved with, if not outright boring. They have this inorganic, synthetic quality to them and RLM does a pretty good job of exploring this problem in detail and explaining why they're so emotionally empty: the fact that the main characters are mostly detached Jedi as opposed to the warmer, personality-driven characters like Han and Luke, the fact that the Force has become more of a measure of super-powers rather than a predominantly spiritual connection, the fact that it's difficult to feel any sense of danger or tension because the Jedi seem all but invincible, the fact that, compared with the originals, the light-sabre duels have no emotional depth because the combatants have no real connection with each other (other than the ending ROTS duel, of course), etc. etc.

Compared with all this, your complaining about RLM misrepresenting this or that plot-point in TPM just comes off as a "try-hard attempt" to defend these films in any way possible.

[Jim Raynor]

So why is the popularity of the prequel movies a point in their favor, but not one in favor of the RedLetterMedia review? After all, if we are to be consistent, then we should accommodate this for both of them. If TPM was popular for a reason, RedLetterMedia should be popular for a reason too then, shouldn't it? And if the reason is a negative reflection on RedLetterMedia, why should we take the popularity of TPM as a positive reflection on it, then?

Popularity really isn't an argument in favor of movie quality, because movie quality is subjective. It's evidence that the vocal portion of internet fandom is very different than the general population. Also, we should consider scale here. In over a year on YouTube, the first few parts of the RLM review have amassed low-single digit views. The later parts of it were in the hundreds of thousands. That's nothing in the grand scheme of things. Numerous other videos that aren't exalted as the best things ever have dozens of times more views than that.

You're full of shit.

Oh really? In this very thread, someone actually asked for an explanation of why Obi-Wan is obediant and conformist, when he grew up in the Jedi Order which encourages obediance and conformity. I distinctly remember a previous thread, where someone asked why General Grievous (note the high military rank) had verbal clout within the Confederacy. That is the level of stupid, obvious question asking that people are applying to the prequels. When they don't apply the same treatment to the original films. The OT painted broad, simple characters who had lives before the movies began which were mostly left up to the imagination. Nothing wrong with that at all, because most people don't want films to spell out every little obvious detail.

No one is asking why Palpatine is a Sith Lord who doesn't have any formal connection to the Trade Federation or why Nute Gunray is the leader of the Trade Federation. But once you have established those two things then you do need to explain how the fuck is Palpatine/Sidious dishing out orders to the cowed Gunray from the very start of TPM.

Oh please. They made a shady criminal deal that got out of hand, like every other shady criminal deal in movie history. Sidious is scary, confident, and assertive, while Gunray is a pampered businessman who's out of his element.

Might as well ask for the secret history of the Tarkin/Vader relationship, or what Han did to get on Jabba's bad side.

[Jim Raynor]

Oh please. There's literally tons of Internet reviews bashing the Prequels. Most of them are garbage, like this boring crap. People like RLM because he's funny, his review style is fairly original, the editing/production is relatively well done for an Internet review, and most of all, his analysis actually gets to the heart of the problem with the Prequels, as opposed to the usual "Jar Jar sucks" rants.

You guys are so tiresome. You literally aren't saying anything here that I didn't address numerous times before. You're yet another person who insists that the RLM review is insightful and analytical, even as he defends it as stupid comedy. The vast majority of the review is simple-minded if not outright deceptive. And yes, people hold it up as the final word on the prequels, to the point that they simply post links to it in attempts to end debate on other forums.

I haven't read your counter review yet,

Then stop trying to look like you're debating this right now. Like I said to the other guy, don't admit your laziness while talking a big game.

but so far the excerpts I'm seeing are mostly plot-related nitpicks.

Because almost all of the RLM review is (incompetent) plot-related nitpicks.

Who really cares if RLM is wrong about some detail regarding the plot to TPM? The overall point there was that it's difficult to get emotionally involved with the characters or story.

Yawn. Yet another guy bringing up the vague, mythical "overall point" that I'm somehow missing, even as he admits that he didn't read my rebuttal. This RLM apologism is so cookie-cutter. You can't claim that something is about some other "main point" when the vast majority of its running time is devoted to stupid, dishonest nitpicking.

They have this inorganic, synthetic quality to them and RLM does a pretty good job of exploring this problem in detail and explaining why they're so emotionally empty: the fact that the main characters are mostly detached Jedi as opposed to the warmer, personality-driven characters like Han and Luke,

Obi-Wan can be described as detached, in that he cares more about getting the job done than he does for other people. Qui-Gon is clearly not detached, and is portrayed as compassionate and willing to go out of his way for people.

the fact that the Force has become more of a measure of super-powers rather than a predominantly spiritual connection,

They clearly didn't equate the Force to the Midichlorians, although Stoklasa dishonestly made that point then quickly recanted that to cover his butt. Mission accomplished, people aren't likely to readjust their thinking after you've already dredged up a certain feeling in them.

You know what's hypocrital? If you ask most fans why Luke has Force powers like his dad, they'll say that he inherited them like kids typically inherit traits from their parents. In "The Force" section of this page, Wong argues why the Force isn't the result of genetics...despite being well thought out, those arguments have almost no presence in the wider fandom. The Force being an inheritable genetic trait that can be passed on to children or cloned goes back decades, in both EU and fan discussion.

Midichlorians destroy the concept of the Force, but deoxyribonucleic acid doesn't.

the light-sabre duels have no emotional depth because the combatants have no real connection with each other (other than the ending ROTS duel, of course), etc. etc.

I addressed this already. The ANH lightsaber duel is the definition of emotion-less. Both Vader and Obi-Wan have had decades to cool off, and they face each other in a very brief fight that's very calm and businesslike. Stoklasa actually used the post-fight sacrifice of Obi-Wan to justify the "emotion" in the fight itself. I gave Stoklasa a pass on the Luke/Vader duel in TESB, but other people later pointed out that Luke basically just went there to kick ass. The fact that Luke thought Vader killed his father, or that Vader actually was his father, wasn't brought up until after the fight had concluded.

If we're going to use post-fight events like that, then someone can easily point out that Qui-Gon died and Obi-Wan was left with an obligation to train a boy that he didn't want.

Compared with all this, your complaining about RLM misrepresenting this or that plot-point in TPM just comes off as a "try-hard attempt" to defend these films in any way possible.

You flat out ADMITTED that you hadn't read my rebuttal. Who's the real try-hard apologist here?

[Jim Raynor]

You just don't get it.

First off, most your questions of the OT were actually answered. Most the rest are utterly irrelevant

Love it when someone's answer is to basically dismiss everything he can't respond to as "irrelevant." That's so easy, isn't it? Not like someone can't apply the same thing to every other movie.

[Elfdart]

Does anyone really fawn over the RLM reviews much these days? I don't really see them mentioned for the most part, even when the prequels are brought up.

Yes and no. For example, if you go to sites like io9 or even general interest sites like Huffington Post, and anything remotely having to do with Star Wars is mentioned, you can count on some fucktard posting a link to Heathcliff's video. Remember how fatuous Trekkies used to post links to David Brin's attack on Lucas all over the net? Well that fizzled out quickly after Bush/Cheney, 9-11, Iraq and other calamities made Brin look like a smugly stupid wanker.

Heathcliff's videos are more about the stupidity and mental maladjustment of the Ass Hurt Fan Boy and are really just a long-winded version of "George Lucas raped my childhood". So on that score they have a little more shelf life.

[Elfdart]

Oh of course not. The explanation could've been provided at the middle of ROTS as far as I'm concerned. But it never was. And for the prequels that always tried to be some kind of political thriller or something that was unforgivable.

EDIT:
This reminds me of a tidbit in AOTC; when Dooku spills the beans to Obi-Wan that there is a sith lord controlling the senate and that Obi should join him because Jedi are blind. It really got interesting and I thought that Dooku was some kind of deep cover agent working alone because he doesn't trust anyone but it never went anywhere. Apparently that entire scene was there to "mirror" Darth Vader/Luke scene from bespin even though it made no sense here.

No, it was meant to sow discord among the Jedi and the Republic on the off-chance that Obi-Wan survived and told the other Jedi what Dooku told him. Judging from what you see in ROTS, it worked.

[Channel72]

Because almost all of the RLM review is (incompetent) plot-related nitpicks.

After the point about the characters, (which is really the most important point), most of the video complains about how the plot, and the motivations behind character actions, are so ill-defined. And he's right: so much of the overall plot of TPM is pretty much left to the imagination, (and not in the "building-suspense" good way.) But whatever, I've been through this already. It always comes down to TPM apologists like you just handwaving away specific questions and babbling about Palpatine's overall nebulous plan that could accomodate so many different outcomes. I still can't fucking remember why Darth Maul went to Tatooine to capture Amidala, when Amidala testifying before the Senate would only help Palpatine's plan. But whatever, George Lucas is a genius so I'm sure it all works out somehow if you just close your eyes and fill in the missing plot points.

Yawn. Yet another guy bringing up the vague, mythical "overall point" that I'm somehow missing, even as he admits that he didn't read my rebuttal.

Yeah, yawn. People keep bringing it up because you are missing it, you moron. The only reason RLM is popular is because he's funny and because of the larger scale, broader big-picture analyses. I don't even remember most of the plot-problems he brought up. What I remember is the point about the characters and the light-sabre duels.

Qui-Gon is clearly not detached, and is portrayed as compassionate and willing to go out of his way for people.

Liam Neeson is one of the few redeeming qualities of the Prequels.

They clearly didn't equate the Force to the Midichlorians, although Stoklasa dishonestly made that point then quickly recanted that to cover his butt.

I'm not talking specifically about Midichlorians. I'm talking about how the Force, in general, has gone from being a more subtle, mental/spiritual ability to something more like quantifiable super-powers. (Anakin has +50 force points.) After watching AOTC, I honestly wouldn't have been that surprised if Anakin just started flying around like Superman at some point. But whatever, you'll probably argue that in the OT Luke lifted a rock, so the OT is also about super-powers.

The ANH lightsaber duel is the definition of emotion-less. Both Vader and Obi-Wan have had decades to cool off, and they face each other in a very brief fight that's very calm and businesslike. Stoklasa actually used the post-fight sacrifice of Obi-Wan to justify the "emotion" in the fight itself. I gave Stoklasa a pass on the Luke/Vader duel in TESB, but other people later pointed out that Luke basically just went there to kick ass.

Christ, just give up. This particular point is SO obvious and conclusive that I can't believe you're shameless enough to bother to even put up a fight. It's like I have to go into painstaking detail just to demonstrate to you that the grass is fucking green:

Ep IV (Obi-Wan versus Vader): Obi-Wan is Vader's former mentor, and both Vader and Obi-Wan have already been built up as a threatening villain and a important character respectively.
Ep V (Luke versus Vader): A *lot* going on here: Luke confronts the man who killed his father and captured his friends. Luke also just prematurely abandoned his training so the whole situation is tense. Plus, Vader reveals an important secret.
Ep VI (Luke versus Vader): Even more going on than Ep V, Luke is now trying to redeem his father, and his father is trying to convert him to the Dark Side.

Ep I (Maul versus Obi-Wan/QuiGon): Maul is a character-less generic bad-guy. Therefore, there's no emotional depth despite the impressive fight choreography. QuiGon dies, which brings some much-needed gravitas to the fight, but he may as well have been hit by a stray laser bolt for all the connection he had with Maul.
Ep II (Anakin versus Dooku): Almost nothing going on here besides "kill the bad guy!". We were only introduced to Dooku like 20 minutes prior, and there's no history between Dooku and the protagonists.
Ep III (Anakin versus ObiWan): Here, obviously, there's a lot going on. Although, I have to admit that since Anakin's character sucks in every possible way, even this epic duel was a lot less interesting than the duels in Ep V and VI.

The fact that Luke thought Vader killed his father, or that Vader actually was his father, wasn't brought up until after the fight had concluded.

What the fuck kind of bullshit point is this? It happened a few seconds after Vader cut off Luke's hand. You really do have a thing for nitpicking. I really hope this isn't the sort of shit you wrote about for 70 pages.

You flat out ADMITTED that you hadn't read my rebuttal. Who's the real try-hard apologist here?

Yeah, what an admission of guilt. I haven't read a 70-page essay written by some guy on a Star Wars chat board.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

Are you stupid, Oni? Without that pod race, they wouldn't have gotten the part for the ship and Anakin would have remained a slave. POINTLESS OMG! That's advancing the plot and setting up Anakin's eventual murder of those holding his mother captive: she stayed behind, remaining a slave.

Awesome, which leads perfectly into another point: Plot-driven stupidity. It was not necessary in any way because there were plenty of other more reasonable, less costly (in terms of the viewers' patience) solutions that could have been done. They could have used their mind-controlling powers to get someone else to distract whatshisface while they stole the part. They could have found a place that would exchange their credits for something of value (and if nothing on Mos Eisley or Tatooine has any exchange rates for Galactic Credits, then the universe is set up in an unbelievably retarded fashion). They could have revealed that they were Jedi working on behalf of the Republic, and gotten the part in exchange for government favours. I can't wait to see the backflips that occur when you try to explain how all this is impossible while at the same time making the characters and universe look ever more retarded to justify it.

And as for 'setting up' Anakin's little death rage... again, plot-driven stupidity of a whole different sort: This begs the question of why, in the decade+ between rescuing Anakin and him finding his dead mommy, did they never once think to go back to Tatooine and rescue her? Why did Anakin never once go up to Obi or any other Jedi and go, "Hey guys, you have some massive power and influence with the government. You managed to rescue me while at the same time giving up nothing of value and laying low on the desert shithole I was raised... exactly how difficult and resource-consuming would it be for you guys to take a minor side-trip over there and rescue/buy my mother so I can stop worrying about her being a slave on a desert shithole? Hell, just give me a few credits and lend me a ship and I'll do it myself. Fuck, I'll take a hit out of my Jedi paycheck for it."

This isn't character motivation. This is plot-driven stupidity: The characters are morons because the plot demands they do, or fail to do, certain things. This is a basic no-no for fiction: The characters and motivations should drive the plot, not the other way around.

I am beginning to think Wong is correct: people MUST say that TPM is shit, they MUST show their hatred for it. It's a goddamned fashion statement now. But I do kick a kick out of TPM having a "fanboy following," when it's pretty much universally loathed by the Star Wars fandom and people rarely defend it.

Except TPM does have a fanboy following, as evidenced in this very thread. It's not big, but it is amusing to see a few neckbeards spaz out and become contortionists while trying to defend it.

Nice exaggeration. The pod-race is about 9.5 minutes long, from start to finish. Reminds me of how Stoklasa claimed that the Anakin/Obi-Wan duel in ROTS was "45 minutes" when it was really 12, and one of the shorter climatic battles in all of SW.

Well it sure felt like thirty minutes, and not a fun thirty minutes at that. *nods authoritatively*

Wow, it's like you telepathically downloaded your thoughts straight out of Stoklasa's review. The Trade Federation with a trade franchise has a problem with taxes on trade routes. Not that complicated. And people throughout history have resorted to force, or threat of force, to protest things like taxes.

The amusing thing here is that I've never even seen the RLM reviews. I tried, but I really just don't like their style at all, and I could never get more than a minute or two in. I came to these questions all on my own, and from what I've seen, so have others. On to the point: They have a problem? What is it? Are the taxes too high? Do they get a cut of the taxes and thus see them as too low? Are they the good guys or bad guys in regards to the tax-dispute? How does Naboo figure into this, are they a major trade-hub or tax donator? Again, even in the 'explanation', nothing is explained.

You're seriously asking "how it would be bad" to be blockaded...please don't tell me next that there was no problem unless a specific, critical supply was explicitly said to be denied. Because most people can see that being blockaded period is a problem.

Except Naboo is a planet, not just a country or state. And from the looks of it, a pretty damn self-sufficient planet. Food shipments blocked? You've got a planet's worth of wildlife to help. Tourism has dropped to zero? Well in that case I'm pretty damn certain the rest of the Republic would immediately notice, and thus render the whole 'are they really blockaded?' sub-plot moot. It's quickly seen that the blockade did nothing to hurt Naboo, and it was the invasion/occupation that was the source of, *le gasp*, a throwaway line about suffering and oppression never seen on screen.

The Trade Fed clearly had Senate representation.

Conceded.

<snip rest>

There's really nothing here to address. You clearly lack even a basic understanding of plot and character development, and seem to revel in that ignorance. I've already well made my point: The prequals are an exercise in sub-mediocrity that fail on multiple fronts. What makes them special in their sub-mediocrity is the small yet religiously devoted group of fatties who engage in mental gymnastics to defend concepts they don't understand in fields of study they have no qualification to address, for a greater audience who mostly doesn't care except for amusement purposes.

Why is Han a smuggler?

Because it's a job that turns a good profit, something that obviously fits well with his character, and is shown to be true by the main characters being desperate for a lift and willing to part with a large number of credits to do so.

Why is he friends with Chewie?

Because they get along, have similar interests, and help each other out a lot, as the movies show quite in depth.

What is the Kessel Run?

Something whose rapid completion gives a pilot bragging rights, as implied in some of Han's very first lines. Wow!

What exactly happened between him and Jabba?

He failed some job, and owes Jabba money. Jabba's obviously a big figure in the criminal underground and is not someone to cross, the former evidenced by the first lines exchanged between Han and Greedo, the latter evidenced by the hired bounty-hunter attempting to murder Han in the first part of the movie. Wow!

Who's Leia's father?

A ruler of Aldaraan, wow!

How is she a member of the Imperial Senate AND the Rebels?

Because she's a spy, as Vader said in the first five minutes of the film. Wow!

Why does a princess act so tough?

I'm not going to accuse you of being misogynist... but goddamn that's a borderline-misogynist statement.

Why does Luke want to leave the farm?

Because he's not happy there and wants to be a space jockey, as evidenced by statements between him, Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru in their first scenes in the movie. Wow!

How is there even a farm in the middle of a desert?

Because it's explicitly stated to be a 'moisture farm', which, and I'm going out on a limb here, is something designed to collect water in a desert environment... which would be a very helpful thing on a desert planet. Wow!

I repeat: You are very ignorant on even the basics of media analysis, and all the fanboy-nerdrage backflips you do cannot cover that fact.

[Aniron]

You really need to define "fanboy", Oni, because I'm anything but that. I only defend complaints that are dumb as fuck, like that idiot in this thread who said we needed to see kid Anakin in a major space battle owning shit. I've already dealt with that idiotic notion.

I can't wait to see the backflips that occur when you try to explain how all this is impossible while at the same time making the characters and universe look ever more retarded to justify it.

There's no need. I've already explained why the pod race is there, the two main reasons, but you refuse to accept it and continue to say OMG BAD CHARACTERIZATION SO BORING HERE'S HOW YOU FIX IT! Are you finished displaying your massive hatred for a kids movie?

[Bakustra]

That's not the main reason the podrace is there. It's there to provide an action sequence at the midpoint of the film, much like the Death Star rescue in ANH. The plot was constructed around that, and it shows. There's no compelling reason why they should do that within the logic of the film up to that point, whereas at the point the heroes arrive on the Death Star, they have a compelling reason every step of the way till they get there. The podrace is an excellent setpiece, but it's not really in place as a part of the film, and I think that that contributes to why people reject TPM- because the film feels disjointed at parts.

Had TPM been made so that there was a continuous chain of logic for the setpieces, then it would not have been so poorly received even if we ignore the problems with the casting.

Also, why should Anakin be a child in TPM?

[Aniron]

That's not the main reason the podrace is there. It's there to provide an action sequence at the midpoint of the film, much like the Death Star rescue in ANH. The plot was constructed around that, and it shows. There's no compelling reason why they should do that within the logic of the film up to that point, whereas at the point the heroes arrive on the Death Star, they have a compelling reason every step of the way till they get there. The podrace is an excellent setpiece, but it's not really in place as a part of the film, and I think that that contributes to why people reject TPM- because the film feels disjointed at parts.

Thank you for this simple and adequate explanation of a major disagreement. It's so much better than reading a wall of text about alternate scenarios to use and constant screeching.

Also, why should Anakin be a child in TPM?

He didn't have to be, but I guess Lucas wanted kids to flock to see it. I like looking at how innocent he is as a kid and then seeing what a murderous prick he becomes in Episode 3.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

You really need to define "fanboy", Oni, because I'm anything but that. I only defend complaints that are dumb as fuck, like that idiot in this thread who said we needed to see kid Anakin in a major space battle owning shit. I've already dealt with that idiotic notion.

Alright, I can admit to joining in the label throwing. Raynor and Elfdart are fanboys, you might not be, no more than I could be called an RLM fanboy despite never having watched, nor having any interest in watching any of his reviews.

There's no need. I've already explained why the pod race is there, the two main reasons, but you refuse to accept it and continue to say OMG BAD CHARACTERIZATION SO BORING HERE'S HOW YOU FIX IT! Are you finished displaying your massive hatred for a kids movie?

Except that I did accept the reasons and pointed out how they were shit reasons: Plot-driven stupidity, which goes hand in hand with bad characterization. It's amusing how you get all high-and-mighty with thanking Bakustra for pointing out that the pod-race sucked because it was the pre-set plot chugging along the tracks dragging the characters behind it, when I said in the very post you're quoting:

This isn't character motivation. This is plot-driven stupidity: The characters are morons because the plot demands they do, or fail to do, certain things. This is a basic no-no for fiction: The characters and motivations should drive the plot, not the other way around.

Your lack of reading-comprehension is not my problem. And an extra fuck you to the accusations of 'walls of text'. Sorry if, when I can't pull out a handy one-liner, I actually resort to writing separated paragraphs. Would it help if I broke down posts and did line-by-line rebuttals?

[Bakustra]

Well, that's another problem, though with the prequels as a whole- ideally they should have been constructed to compare Anakin to Luke, since the comparison is made throughout the OT about how alike the two are. But Anakin is reluctant to leave where Luke is eager. Luke is upbeat and cheerful where Anakin is sulky and hostile. The focus becomes more on the differences than the similarities, which is bad overall. We want the viewers, or at least I think we should want the viewers, to look at Anakin sympathetically up until he falls into depravity. That's not an easy thing to pull off without it seeming to come out of nowhere, but the best way to do it would be to take Luke, a quintessential hero, and make Anakin a riff on Luke, twisted to give him a grimmer edge than Luke did. He should essentially be where Luke is at the climaxes of ESB and ROTJ most of the time. To be fair, ROTS did give that, but it wasn't executed all that well and it was largely too late to establish Anakin. The audience should be picking up on the similarities between Anakin and Luke all the time.

Lucas also failed to make certain things clear that he should have. The most important of them is that the Jedi are wrong. Yoda gave Luke bad advice when he told him to stay away from Cloud City in ESB, because without that he would never have had the time necessary to come to an understanding about Vader and his father. The Jedi taught Anakin poorly, for he was unable to communicate his feelings to them, was forced into choosing between love and duty without them reassuring him that he could reconcile the two-

The Jedi are, overall, incomplete. If you look at how the light and the dark are described, they are a bald analogy for yin and yang from Taoist cosmology. The ideal is not for the light yin to drive out the dark yang, but rather to achieve a balance. And there we see how I can say that Lucas intended for the Jedi to be wrong, because the prophecy of the chosen one talks about balance. And balance is only brought to the Force when the Jedi and Sith are eliminated, leaving only Luke, who was able to call upon his emotions and attachments- the dark side itself- without succumbing to them, achieving in himself a tempering of dark with light- a new, balanced user of the Force.

Going back to what I was talking about, Lucas fails to make that clear. The message is there, but it is obscured because the story treats the Jedi as the good guys when it should not. It should highlight the flaws of the Jedi and present them as such (and not in the idiotic way that most people do when they complain about "child kidnappings" or whatever). I'm not saying that Yoda and Obi-wan should be made malevolent, but they should instead highlight the sense that the Jedi are out of touch that is marginally present. When the curtain closes on Revenge of the Sith, the viewers should be able to put together what "bringing balance to the Force" means without something so stupid as even numbers of Jedi and Sith.

We have no recurring villains between films in the prequels that show themselves. The Emperor must remain behind the scenes, but villains pop out of nowhere in the prequels. This is also a major problem.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

Bakustra nails my biggest problem with the prequals. It's the same problem I have with things like the latter two Matrix films, the second Hellboy movie, and a decent number of other movies: It's so easy to see how these movies could have been absolutely incredible stories, there were multiple ways to do it, yet they missed and missed badly. It's not the fact that they were sub-mediocre movies, because those are a dime a dozen, it's the fact that it would have been so easy to make them golden, the missed potential hits the storyteller in me hard.

Palpatine was easily the strongest and most consistent character throughout the films, yet his presence was diminished simply because the other characters' plot-driven stupidity removed his chance to truly show what an evil mastermind he was. All he had to do was just sit back and let everyone else be stupid around him. The other three main villains, with just a few modifications, could have been transformed into a very potent representation of what Anakin would fall to, while still remaining their own characters: Darth Maul could have been allegorical to Anakin's anger, Dooku to his pride, and Grievous to his loss of humanity. Of them, only Dooku got enough screen time to do this, and the opportunity was never really seized.

Anakin's and Padme's little affair could have been heart-wrenching, but mis-management turned it into something that was part unintentional hilarity, part creepy, and mostly dull. And say what you will about the actors, it wasn't entirely their fault, they were only working with the lines and scenes given to them

[Oni Koneko Damien]

Actually, here's one right off the top of my head: Anakin's mother.

Just a few simple changes, and all of it is merely lines of dialogue, which would have strengthened characters, motivations, and pathos:

When Anakin and Obi have their discussion about his mother, reveal that the Jedi had been searching for her, albeit covertly. Watto had died shortly after they left thanks to some criminal deal he was involved in going bad (it's Tattoine, it happens there), Schmi was sold off to someone else and Watto's records were stolen/destroyed. The Jedi can't make too big a deal out of it because 1) they don't want to launch a public investigation and paint big glowing lights around Anakin as their 'chosen one', and 2) they do have a lot of other problems to deal with and can only devote a limited amount of resources to the operation.

Pow, just like that: Anakin, Obi-wan, the Jedi order in general become a hell of a lot more sympathetic because it's revealed they do give a shit about his mother outside plot-necessities. Pow, character motivations and plot in general both make more sense and become a lot more compelling. And best of all? All it would take to do this is change a few lines of dialogue and remove the very brief scene with Watto.

[Channel72]

We want the viewers, or at least I think we should want the viewers, to look at Anakin sympathetically up until he falls into depravity.

This pretty much sums up the largest problem with the Prequel saga. Despite the bland characterization and nebulous plots, despite Jar Jar Binks, despite the buzz droids and cutesy childish crap, all could have been forgiven if Anakin at least was an awesome character.

And yet Anakin is basically not even in the first film at all, and when we finally meet him in the second film, he's already a murderous, angry, brooding asshole. So there's very little actual tragedy in his "fall". Instead of a good man who was tempted and turned to evil, we have an angry asshole who becomes more evil.

[Jim Raynor]

After the point about the characters, (which is really the most important point), most of the video complains about how the plot, and the motivations behind character actions, are so ill-defined. And he's right:

Did you right a point-by-point rebuttal, with time stamps sometimes just seconds apart, of pretty much everything he said in his review? I did. You, on the other hand, flat out admitted that you didn't even bother reading my rebuttal, which you think you can so easily dismiss in your previous post.

No, the vast majority of the RLM review is taken up by his stupid attempts to create plot holes or show how the nitty gritty details are off. The reason I even had to talk about things as paltry and insignificant as whether lasers hit the Naboo ship, or what was uploaded into R2, was because he did.

so much of the overall plot of TPM is pretty much left to the imagination

A MacGuffin motivation that the movie moves beyond within its first minute (because after that the problem is the blockade, and not the taxes) is not "the overall plot."

It always comes down to TPM apologists like you just handwaving away specific questions

Who's handwaving here? Who's so lazy he admitted that he didn't even read my rebuttal? Who's making excuses on the level of basically brushing off anything that was said in the RLM review, alternating between calling it stupid comedy or alluding to some vague "main point" about how it was all just his subjective opinion on how the movie made him feel?

I still can't fucking remember why Darth Maul went to Tatooine to capture Amidala, when Amidala testifying before the Senate would only help Palpatine's plan.

Because Palpatine wanted to share credit with someone ELSE who would valiantly stand up for Naboo? Because Palpatine could be 100% sure that Amidala would throw her friend Valorum under the bus? Because Palpatine could count on winning a hasty election with no time to prepare? Don't fail to consider all the facts then insist that something has to be a certain way.

Yeah, yawn. People keep bringing it up because you are missing it, you moron. The only reason RLM is popular is because he's funny and because of the larger scale, broader big-picture analyses.

I'm the "moron"...when YOU are the one absolutely refusing to even address all the points. You insist on your own made up "big picture" which strangely doesn't include the vast majority of the review.

You know, you could put this whole discussion to rest simply by saying this: "Most of the RLM review is a bunch of bogus crap. I subjectively find it funny, because I like his stupid comedy. I agree with some of his subjective points about how the movie didn't emotionally appeal to me, but I'll admit that he was spewing nonsense most of the time."

Cast your position in that light, and we've got NO problem. But you won't. You want to have it both ways. You want to use the "comedy" excuse, and you want keep alluding to your vague "main point," yet you still seem to want to protect the honor of the review in its entirety.

They clearly didn't equate the Force to the Midichlorians, although Stoklasa dishonestly made that point then quickly recanted that to cover his butt.

I'm not talking specifically about Midichlorians. I'm talking about how the Force, in general, has gone from being a more subtle, mental/spiritual ability to something more like quantifiable super-powers. (Anakin has +50 force points.)

Give me a break. An individual's Force ability ALWAYS had quantifiable onscreen limits. Luke straining to reposition a few rocks is a clear example of that. You keep straining to come up with new things to condemn the prequels with.

After watching AOTC, I honestly wouldn't have been that surprised if Anakin just started flying around like Superman at some point.

Yeah, the same guy who struggled to take down one woman in a car. The same guy who repeatedly screws up during the fighting on Geonosis, gets captured, tied, and has his arm chopped off. The movie even made a plot point out of the fact that Anakin was not all powerful, and couldn't do everything he wanted.

Christ, just give up. This particular point is SO obvious and conclusive that I can't believe you're shameless enough to bother to even put up a fight. It's like I have to go into painstaking detail just to demonstrate to you that the grass is fucking green:

Ep IV (Obi-Wan versus Vader): Obi-Wan is Vader's former mentor, and both Vader and Obi-Wan have already been built up as a threatening villain and a important character respectively.

And yet the duel itself is sterile, calm, brief, and businesslike.

Ep V (Luke versus Vader): A *lot* going on here: Luke confronts the man who killed his father and captured his friends. Luke also just prematurely abandoned his training so the whole situation is tense. Plus, Vader reveals an important secret.

And most of the things you said here are things that occurred outside of the actual fight.

Ep VI (Luke versus Vader): Even more going on than Ep V, Luke is now trying to redeem his father, and his father is trying to convert him to the Dark Side.

This one was full of emotion, as it was meant to be.

Ep I (Maul versus Obi-Wan/QuiGon): Maul is a character-less generic bad-guy. Therefore, there's no emotional depth despite the impressive fight choreography. QuiGon dies, which brings some much-needed gravitas to the fight, but he may as well have been hit by a stray laser bolt for all the connection he had with Maul.

I love how you admit that there were consequences, yet still deny that the fight had emotion and significance. Because of your position that the villain has to be fleshed out for it to matter. Regardless of the fact that the hero and/or identification figure is in danger. So, were all the examples of Luke and Han blowing away TIE fighters and Stormtroopers unemotional, because those Imperial troops were all generic, faceless bad guys?

Ep II (Anakin versus Dooku): Almost nothing going on here besides "kill the bad guy!". We were only introduced to Dooku like 20 minutes prior, and there's no history between Dooku and the protagonists.

Yeah, avenging all your fallen comarades who were herded together and shot is nothing. Saving the Republic is nothing. Anakin acting reckless and being smacked down isn't an example of emotion. Two comrades fighting to save each other is nothing.

You flat out ADMITTED that you hadn't read my rebuttal. Who's the real try-hard apologist here?

Yeah, what an admission of guilt. I haven't read a 70-page essay written by some guy on a Star Wars chat board.

The way you take pride in your own laziness and inability to properly debate is quite astounding.

[Panzersharkcat]

They could have used their mind-controlling powers to get someone else to distract whatshisface while they stole the part.

Except the parts were huge and required pack animals to carry.

They could have found a place that would exchange their credits for something of value (and if nothing on Mos Eisley or Tatooine has any exchange rates for Galactic Credits, then the universe is set up in an unbelievably retarded fashion). They could have revealed that they were Jedi working on behalf of the Republic, and gotten the part in exchange for government favours. I can't wait to see the backflips that occur when you try to explain how all this is impossible while at the same time making the characters and universe look ever more retarded to justify it.

I would say something about not attracting attention except that re-enacting Ben Hur is not exactly subtle. Then again, the kid was going to race anyway. May as well use him.

Except Naboo is a planet, not just a country or state. And from the looks of it, a pretty damn self-sufficient planet. Food shipments blocked? You've got a planet's worth of wildlife to help. Tourism has dropped to zero? Well in that case I'm pretty damn certain the rest of the Republic would immediately notice, and thus render the whole 'are they really blockaded?' sub-plot moot. It's quickly seen that the blockade did nothing to hurt Naboo, and it was the invasion/occupation that was the source of, *le gasp*, a throwaway line about suffering and oppression never seen on screen.

Being blockaded is kind of a very hostile act. Even if it doesn't do shit to the planet in question, there's still the matter of infringing on that planet's sovereignty. Plus, Naboo, from the Trade Federation's viewpoint, was only a hostage. Being poorly defended and possibly a capital planet makes it a good choice of hostage.

[Jim Raynor]

Nice exaggeration. The pod-race is about 9.5 minutes long, from start to finish. Reminds me of how Stoklasa claimed that the Anakin/Obi-Wan duel in ROTS was "45 minutes" when it was really 12, and one of the shorter climatic battles in all of SW.

Well it sure felt like thirty minutes, and not a fun thirty minutes at that. *nods authoritatively*

So your position is subjective, not based on any facts, and you were wildly exaggerating in your "example" as I pointed out.

The amusing thing here is that I've never even seen the RLM reviews. I tried, but I really just don't like their style at all, and I could never get more than a minute or two in. I came to these questions all on my own, and from what I've seen, so have others. On to the point: They have a problem? What is it? Are the taxes too high? Do they get a cut of the taxes and thus see them as too low? Are they the good guys or bad guys in regards to the tax-dispute? How does Naboo figure into this, are they a major trade-hub or tax donator? Again, even in the 'explanation', nothing is explained.

Now you are just clearly creating your own "problems." No one cares to learn the nitty gritty details of the tax code. Watch a movie on the American Revolution, and you will not see people explaining the details of the taxes. The problem is that there are "taxes," and people don't like them. That's it. The movie quickly moves past that because it has actual fight scenes and stories to show.

You're seriously asking "how it would be bad" to be blockaded...please don't tell me next that there was no problem unless a specific, critical supply was explicitly said to be denied. Because most people can see that being blockaded period is a problem.

Except Naboo is a planet, not just a country or state. And from the looks of it, a pretty damn self-sufficient planet.

So now a blockade, a legal act of war is no big deal to you. It is an aggressive action, and a a violation of sovereignty. Anyone who wasn't talking in full denial (like you are) would see that as a problem.

Why is Han a smuggler?

Because it's a job that turns a good profit, something that obviously fits well with his character, and is shown to be true by the main characters being desperate for a lift and willing to part with a large number of credits to do so.

Yeah, no duh. That was my point, that characters have pasts that just shouldn't be delved into because it's totally unnecessary to what's actually happening onscreen.

Why does a princess act so tough?

I'm not going to accuse you of being misogynist... but goddamn that's a borderline-misogynist statement.

Who are you now, Karen Traviss?

No, most princesses in real life are not members of insurgent groups and better at handling a gun than the guys who can mow down numerous soldiers on their way to saving them. And you DO realize that none of my questions were "real," but examples of stupid questions of the type that are asked of the prequels, right?

[Jim Raynor]

Love it when someone's answer is to basically dismiss everything he can't respond to as "irrelevant."

Asking about shit like the Kessel run IS irrelevant. It doesn't impact the plot or the characters.

Yeah, no duh. That was the point.

Asking "why is the Trade Federation invading" actually matters. That would change the character's responses to different situations. If they are doing it about some taxes, you'd expect them to do things to move toward lifting the taxes, like negotiating with the Senate.

That's like asking why people riot or protest in real life, instead of negotiating with the Senate.

If they do it for Darth Sidius... well, why the hell should they listen to him? What's in it for them?

They were clearly NOT doing it "for" Darth Sidious. The invasion was a preexisting plan, should the blockade fail to achieve results. Sidious talked them into rushing forward when they were scared after finding out there were Jedi on their ship.

Can we talk about Nute Gunray like this?

Escaping prosecution isn't a clear goal.

Count Dooku?

Clearly being a part of an EVIL CONSPIRACY to undermine the Republic isn't clear.

Hell, does even our main character, Anakin Skywalker, have a well defined motive or goal? That he's an asshole influences the plot... so it's fair to ask, why is he such an asshole?

Good God. They spent multiple movies exploring Anakin and showing why he was dissatisfied with his life.

[Aniron]

Good God. They spent multiple movies exploring Anakin and showing why he was dissatisfied with his life.

Obi Wan is holding him back, the Council as well, no one trusts him, couldn't save his mother, etc.

[Jim Raynor]

Good God. They spent multiple movies exploring Anakin and showing why he was dissatisfied with his life.

Obi Wan is holding him back, the Council as well, no one trusts him, couldn't save his mother, etc.

Nope, not clear enough! We need an onscreen psychological evaluation, as well as voiceovers and/or monologue from Anakin to spell it all out even more for us.

[Channel72]

Who's handwaving here?

I'll quote you handwaving in a few seconds...

Who's so lazy he admitted that he didn't even read my rebuttal? Who's making excuses on the level of basically brushing off anything that was said in the RLM review, alternating between calling it stupid comedy or alluding to some vague "main point" about how it was all just his subjective opinion on how the movie made him feel?

Where did I brush anything off as stupid comedy? Some of the RLM review is just comedy, but there are also many serious points.

Because Palpatine wanted to share credit with someone ELSE who would valiantly stand up for Naboo? Because Palpatine could be 100% sure that Amidala would throw her friend Valorum under the bus? Because Palpatine could count on winning a hasty election with no time to prepare? Don't fail to consider all the facts then insist that something has to be a certain way.

Behold the handwaving. As I said, you're just filling in missing plot details (i.e. making shit up), because TPM itself isn't very clear. You can argue that this isn't a problem for you as a viewer, but you obviously can't refute the point.

I'm the "moron"...when YOU are the one absolutely refusing to even address all the points. You insist on your own made up "big picture" which strangely doesn't include the vast majority of the review.

What points?? What are the points you want me to address? Pick a point made by RLM which you feel is completely erroneous and I'll respond. Keep in mind that I don't claim that everything in the RLM review is a valid criticism, so I might agree with you on certain points.

Give me a break. An individual's Force ability ALWAYS had quantifiable onscreen limits. Luke straining to reposition a few rocks is a clear example of that. You keep straining to come up with new things to condemn the prequels with.

The comic-bookish way the Force is treated in the Prequels is nothing new, and is a fairly common criticism.

Yeah, the same guy who struggled to take down one woman in a car. The same guy who repeatedly screws up during the fighting on Geonosis, gets captured, tied, and has his arm chopped off. The movie even made a plot point out of the fact that Anakin was not all powerful, and couldn't do everything he wanted.

Yeah, the same guy who jumps out of moving vehicles, and falls thousands of feet while his buddy shrugs it off like nothing serious happened.

And yet the duel itself is sterile, calm, brief, and businesslike.

The duel in ANH obviously isn't that spectacular, but the point is that it was still very personal: a student versus his former master.

Ep V (Luke versus Vader): A *lot* going on here: Luke confronts the man who killed his father and captured his friends. Luke also just prematurely abandoned his training so the whole situation is tense. Plus, Vader reveals an important secret.

And most of the things you said here are things that occurred outside of the actual fight.

Of course they occurred outside the fight. The point is that the characters have a history before they meet as combatants. In the Prequels, this barely happens. Nobody knows who Darth Maul is, and Obi-Wan just met Dooku a few hours (or less?) before they duel.

Ep I (Maul versus Obi-Wan/QuiGon): Maul is a character-less generic bad-guy. Therefore, there's no emotional depth despite the impressive fight choreography. QuiGon dies, which brings some much-needed gravitas to the fight, but he may as well have been hit by a stray laser bolt for all the connection he had with Maul.

I love how you admit that there were consequences, yet still deny that the fight had emotion and significance. Because of your position that the villain has to be fleshed out for it to matter. Regardless of the fact that the hero and/or identification figure is in danger. So, were all the examples of Luke and Han blowing away TIE fighters and Stormtroopers unemotional, because those Imperial troops were all generic, faceless bad guys?

The fact that you actually make this argument is utterly baffling to me. I'm starting to think you have entirely different expectations out of drama than I do, or anyone I've ever known does. Do you really not understand the dramatic difference between a set-piece light-sabre duel and an encounter with random henchmen in an action sequence?

Ep II (Anakin versus Dooku): Almost nothing going on here besides "kill the bad guy!". We were only introduced to Dooku like 20 minutes prior, and there's no history between Dooku and the protagonists.

Yeah, avenging all your fallen comarades who were herded together and shot is nothing. Saving the Republic is nothing. Anakin acting reckless and being smacked down isn't an example of emotion. Two comrades fighting to save each other is nothing.

This doesn't address the point that Dooku is still a generic bad guy, and Obi-Wan and Anakin have no real personal history with the guy. Again, you can argue that this isn't a problem for you as a viewer, but you simply can't argue it's not true, nor that it's dramatically equivalent to the duels in the OT.