Alright, these two seem pretty facetious and lack substance - I picked RLM as a target for a reason, you know.
So, what, I'm supposed to take their jokes / throwaway comments at face value and address them somehow? Foine, whatever.
This is basically just preaching to the choir:
1) The idea that the "bureaucratic conversation" are forgettable, or their presence alone a self-evident mistake, is treated as a given.
2) More on "robotic voice" below.
3) That standing in circles or standing in councils is another self-evident misfire, even though it's a familiar archetypal portrayal of aristocracy and clergy which is of course the whole premise.
4) I'm not even gonna humour the "racism" nonsense - at best he's making a tired joke in a boring fashion, at worst he's got worse problems to sort out than having potentially flawed opinions about a movie.
0) I don't really consider I-III "Star Wars", and any arguments including a leap from that to "poor quality" are gonna be discarded, by me.
1) What makes the "gradual suspense opening" of EpI different from The Matrix? One of many bandwagon memes that immediately start looking silly once you question them - I mean, an atmospheric mystery opening with some build-up is obviously wrong because 1/3 original Star Wars movies opened with an action shot... oh wait. Nvm.
2) Jadis from the BBC Narnia movies also had a low, thick voice - appears to be some kind of archetype, as in both cases a theatralic image of larger-than-life authority is being conveyed.
Why not have her talk like a 14 year old girl? Well for one her age is never specified, but he's ignoring the obvious fact that the Queen and her entire court were supposed to evoke a stylized high fantasy image of royalty, and later it becomes obvious that it's some kind of Naboo tradition and they're putting on this act in-universe.
Things like them keeping up this act even inside the escape ship, or the lack of digging further into Naboo's culture to avoid making it "weird and random", are all things that can be accepted or criticized, but he doesn't do that, and instead just wonders why high fantasy royalty isn't talking like his baseball pals in a bar, which is stupid.
3) This is just part of the larger problem in I-III, namely that a coherent picture of all these background machinations is never drawn, and in fact seems to get rewritten for every movie - so I sets up some kind of revelation for what exactly was going on there, but then II ditches that for the Separatist and makes up its own mystery plot which then gets dropped in III in order to focus on the personal character arcs - however, an Order 66 ploy is conjured up out of nowhere that probably should've been set up in some earlier film.
Finding contradictions where there SIMPLY ISN'T ENOUGH INFORMATION, is stupid - however, this point in particular is particularly stupid, because if she signed the treaty and escaped she still would've tried to convince the Senate, and they'd still be "skeptical" except now even moreso, and nothing indicates events would've developed any differently.
The actual valid question is what he was planning to do with her staying on the planet - him counting on the Jedi to rescue her is plausible, but speculation and irrelevant in the larger context of Palpatine's plan being way too vague.
That, however, isn't a particularly major issue in terms of impact on the film's quality.
4) Citation for "just to sell action figures" needed - repeating this to each other all the time don't make it true.
Why would a "kinda cool" action sequence get included in the movie, if not to sell toys, or to try to be really cool in the movie? Oh wait.
5) I'd like more arguments please - if, that is, the assertion that the "god mode" becomes boring after 3 fight scenes (second two in short succession and arranged in a structure) is supposed to be somehow persuasive and not just making like-minded people nod.
6) Point of Tattoine is the podrace and nothing else? No arguments given in support, and I've got plenty in opposition.
7a) And then they get to Corusaaaaaant, and it's tho boreeeeeng, cause, laike,... oh wait, it's that "self-evident" thing again, isn't it.
Of course, what you've got there is a bunch of calm scenes with dialogue and discussions, and that itself can either be done in a compelling way, or a boring way - and while you've got intrigue and atmosphere arguing for the former, there seems to be nothing arguing for the latter. HMM.
7b) It's as "pseudo-political" as LOTR is pseudo-GoT.
Am I supposed to address this laughable genre deafness, or is it unnecessary? This is simplified high fantasy court dialogue redressed in "modern" politics, the plot is basically that Nicole Carapathia is taking over.
All the political dialogue has dramatic significance, and never gets boggled down in "pointless" worldbuilding or pretentious/nerdy details.
8 ) The duel didn't end well? He's confusing it with ROTS I think.
5:05 Oh no a gloating taunting villain doesn't do something "logical". And adults want real politics.
8a) So a climactic finisher after the lowest point = a lot like an anticlimactic gag death? Whatever dude.
9) And, cause, like, burning corpses is weeeeeeird, and how could Luke have ever thought of thaaaaaaat
10) 7:10 Guess you spoke too soon.
Anyway, those two were a waste of time.
On to the (more) interesting half then...
