RedLetterMedia's Attack of the Clones review

[Jim Raynor]

I'm not falling back on anything. We're discussing whether or not a scene is emotionally compelling. That's ultimately a subjective discussion whether you want to admit that or not.

So then we have nothing more to fucking talk about. Stop debating now if you want to keep saying this.

This repetitive bullshit from you is tiring. You keep repeating the same shit without processing counter-arguments.

I'm posting "repetitive bullshit" now...when YOU'RE the one who's trying to have it both ways by repeatedly saying this is a "subjective" topic...and then undercutting that position by continuing to challeng me on objectively observable events in the movie? Pot calling kettle? Fuck you to dipshit.

Getting shot at is NOT always enough to generate significant danger, you idiot.

Funny, it's how tension and suspense is handled in 99% of action films. If Anakin barely hanging on to a speeder is not "dangerous," then no hero barely hanging onto a car is in sufficient "danger."

It's not interesting to watch the Terminator get shot at. That's why they had to introduce the T-1000. It's NOT interesting to watch Superman get shot at. That's why they had to introduce Kryptonite.

Resorting to dishonest analogies now? How pathetic of you. Terminator and Superman are fucking bulletproof and stand nonchalantly in the middle of gunfire. Anakin is not immune to blaster fire. His usual anti-blaster protection, his lightsaber, was unable to be used because he was barely holding onto the speeder with both hands.

What do you have some sort of DVD-only special edition that includes Anakin's "Power-Meter" on the top left of the screen? I guess you somehow know that Anakin had to spend 100 Force-Points to pull off that fall.

No, I only have my fucking eyes which saw Anakin struggling and grunting as he barely hung onto the speeder. But I guess not being able to execute a simple pull up means that he can generate ridiculous high G forces at any "arbitrary" moment he fucking wants.

Your "analysis" is nothing more than a useless attempt to extract ridiculously specific information from inconsequential moments in the chase sequence.

What you call "inconsequential moments" I call canon fucking evidence, asshat. You're not even TRYING to be subtle now, when you want to dismiss evidence that you can't deal with.

The visuals are clearly designed around the premise of falling, you moron.

So the writer, director, actors, and FX crew "clearly" didn't design the visuals of the villain fucking pulling a gun. Give me a fucking break, you don't even TRY to defend your opinion on this point on logical grounds. Repeating your opinion and then making some unsupported claim about how things were "clearly" a certain way is not a valid argument. Get the fuck out if you want to debate in such a childish way.

And the question of whether or not Anakin and Obi-Wan will successfully capture the assassin is really the only thing that makes this scene remotely interesting. But that doesn't change the original point: in a scene with visuals clearly designed to invoke the fear of falling, having Anakin safely fall thousands of feet totally nullifies the primary source of tension in the scene.

The scene was "clearly designed" the way you say so, blah blah blah ignore actual onscreen evidence no-limits superpower wanking at any "arbitrary" moment "repetitive bullshit."

It's hilarious how you go out of your way to deny charges of dodging the point, and then immediately proceed to just dodge it yet again. Are you seriously so stupid that you think my original point requires that Jabba the Hutt be directly involved with Anakin's mother? The point is that everyone knows Tatooine is a dangerous shit-hole controlled by psychopathic crime lords. Leaving Anakin's mom there as a slave is woefully inhumane.

"Everyone knows." Qui-Gon's dead. Padme's royalty and couldn't give a shit less, and furthermore has her own world to deal with. Anakin last saw his mom and she was fine, furthermore he's busy with Jedi training. That leaves...who exactly? Obi-Wan, who's charged with training the boy? Obi-Wan, who you expect to violate doctrine and procedure to beg for the Jedi to spend Republic funds buying off a non-Republic citizen?

No one is disputing that the Jedi were callous, the movie was clear that they have a policy of detachment and had grown insular and full of themselves.

But it "strains credibility" that she didn't give a shit about the mother of the boy that she didn't give a shit about.

No, it strains credibility that you can't seem to get it in your head that Padme must have been confronted with literally THOUSANDS of cases of people who had it worse than Anakin's mom, who were far closer to home because they were literally at her home.

Which is yet another example of the chaotic characterization in these films.

What chaotic characterization? Not the movie's fault that you have some bullshit made-up image of Padme in your head as some perfect little do-gooder. She's a politician, who means well but also makes exceptions for people who are close to her.

Immediately after the Battle of Geonosis, or any time throughout the following three year war.

I already dealt with this in prevoius posts. "Immediately after the Battle of Geonosis" equates to the couple of minutes at the end of AOTC, which were spent on other things. During those three years of war means offscreen time between the movies.

It's not obvious that the Republic or the Jedi inspected anything.

Maybe you just don't understand it, but a modern armies have infrastructures and support systems. The army needs to actually be maintained. The Republic has to know how its own shit works.

After Episode II the whole conspiracy is simply forgotten. And yes, phasing out the clones would have been a good idea, despite the current circumstances. Using an army that was clearly designed by your enemies under mysterious circumstances is a monumentally insane risk to national security.

The army was fine. There weren't weaknesses or things that could have subverted the Republic. Again, the movie portrays the clones as highly capable and unquestionably loyal to the Republic. After going through the Army and seeing that it worked fine, the Republic could contract out the Kaminoans to keep on producing clones.

The clones made Order 66 a lot easier, but it doesn't matter because the whole conspiracy angle to this movie is utterly broken. It's bad enough we have the Jedi commanding an army which they know was created by their enemies, but what about the Separatist leadership? Nobody noticed that every single Republic soldier looks and sounds like that mysterious New Zealander who was always hanging around Count Dooku?

[/quote]

Dooku could explain that Jango must have been cloned him without his knowledge.

[stormthebeaches]

You realize that withstanding the sudden, huge increase in acceleration and not having his arms torn from their sockets needs a much fucking tighter grip?

Yes, this scene shows that Anakin still has some force abilities. So I'm not sure where your getting the idea that his force powers were spent from.

And notice how Anakin moved below him and gradually decelerated to slow his fall. We have no proof whatsoever that Obi-Wan could do the feats that Anakin could. Anakin is explicitly shown to have more natural power in the Force, and the stunts he pulls during the entire chase scene are NOT things that Obi-Wan is comfortable with.

I know that Anakin gradually decelerated to slow his fall. However, he only decelerated by a very small amount. This would have slowed Obi-Wan's fall by a very small amount. Obi-Wan would have lit that speeder with a speeder only slightly below terminal velocity.

Because, as I've said how many fucking times now, the industry standard for a repulsorlift-driven droid that size could be far above a single man's weight. And Obi-Wan has the fucking Force to guide his actions.

I find it hard to believe that Obi-Wan would have gotten a good look at the thing. Besides, he still doesn't know if the droids engines were modified. What if its power output was reduced to make it more stealthy at the expense of a reduced carrying capacity.

Except Obi-Wan was the one who dived on the bed to cut up those worms first, and was distracted by Padme.

Diving onto a bed to cut up the worms that are about to kill Padme is not at all reckless. If he had waited a few more seconds Padme would be dead. This does not change the fact that Anakin is portrayed as the more reckless of the pair whilst Obi-Wan is the wiser, more experienced one.

It would have been in everyone's self-interest not to have such stupid doctrines. That's the whole point, the Jedi Order is old, complacent, and flawed. Yoda thinks that a good Jedi should just forget about his past and he's not going to indulge Anakin...assuming he ever even heard about Shmi at all.

It is hard to root for protagonists who are so callous and selfish. The Jedi to me come across as a bunch of wacky fundamentalists.

[Jim Raynor]

Yes, this scene shows that Anakin still has some force abilities. So I'm not sure where your getting the idea that his force powers were spent from.

Because surviving the initial impact and grabbing on successfully was harder than merely pulling himself up. Anakin looked like he was struggling the whole time, with things that were far easier than that initial feat (which he had time to prepare for).

I know that Anakin gradually decelerated to slow his fall. However, he only decelerated by a very small amount. This would have slowed Obi-Wan's fall by a very small amount. Obi-Wan would have lit that speeder with a speeder only slightly below terminal velocity.

How did you quantify this?

I find it hard to believe that Obi-Wan would have gotten a good look at the thing.

He saw a droid through the blinds. He knows its general size. He has the Force.

Besides, he still doesn't know if the droids engines were modified. What if its power output was reduced to make it more stealthy at the expense of a reduced carrying capacity.

You're just making crap up here. And again, he has the Force.

Diving onto a bed to cut up the worms that are about to kill Padme is not at all reckless. If he had waited a few more seconds Padme would be dead.

Did I fucking say it was reckless? No. Anakin saved Padme, while Obi-Wan went after the droid. Simple.

It is hard to root for protagonists who are so callous and selfish. The Jedi to me come across as a bunch of wacky fundamentalists.

Whatever. I'm not even talking about people's interpretations of the characters' flaws, only the assertion that there was a plot hole.

[Elfdart]

You're mixing up 'kid-friendly' and 'family friendly'
Here, I'll show some examples

No thanks, the last thing in the world I need is to be patronized by a fucktard.

Star Wars IV and V: Family friendly, great action, great character interaction, death and torture but nothing too graphic.

Star Wars I: has shoehorned kiddy movie elements like Jar Jar Binks, Anakin, comically useless enemies, slap stick, urrrrhg

As opposed to R2-D2, who was included to bring in teenage girls. As opposed to stormtroopers who walk face first into the fucking door. As opposed to Han kicking Chewie in the ass in the middle of a shoot-out.

Clear on the difference now?

The only difference is the stupidity of a loud minority of fans. It takes a special blend of retard to think of Jar Jar Binks as a sop to the kids, while believing that Chewbacca or R2-D2 were not. Chewie is little more than a two-legged Old Yeller who can fire a gun and fly a spaceship.

So when Lucas said his movies were kid movies and shows it with his stupid slapstick and terrible child actors he's obviously unaware that the Star Wars movies were successful because everyone, the little kids, the teenagers, the future obsessive nerds, everyone could watch it and find something they liked. This isn't nerd rage, it's market demographics.

Lucas doesn't know why his own movies were so popular after 30-plus years. Yeah. Are you trolling or are you really that stupid?

For the record, the teenagers back then were into Saturday Night Fever. The grownups thought Star Wars was goofy kid stuff (with the exception of all the moms who went nuts for Harrison Ford), in comparison with Close Encounters, Smokey and the Bandit and other films that were popular back then.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

Star Wars IV and V: Family friendly, great action, great character interaction, death and torture but nothing too graphic.

Star Wars I: has shoehorned kiddy movie elements like Jar Jar Binks, Anakin, comically useless enemies, slap stick, urrrrhg

As opposed to R2-D2, who was included to bring in teenage girls. As opposed to stormtroopers who walk face first into the fucking door. As opposed to Han kicking Chewie in the ass in the middle of a shoot-out.

R2-D2: You know what, I don't even know what you're trying to get at there. Exactly how was R2-D2 included to 'bring in teenage girls'? I have never heard this argument before and strongly suspect you're merely talking out of your ass.

Stormtroopers walking into doors: That was a blooper that accidentally made it on screen you twit. That was not a deliberate attempt to appeal to any age group and was only kept because people who noticed it tended to like it.

Han kicking Chewie: So apparently one brief comic moment makes things into a kiddie movie?

I love how your supposed counter-arguments actually prove his point. His argument was that a 'family friendly' movie can have slapstick/kiddie moments, but they're just occasional flavouring over a general theme that appeals to a greater audience. Every valid example you brought up (all one of them) are... occasional flavouring as opposed to running themes.

On the other hand things like Jar Jar and his retarded antics, goofy talking war droids, etc, are either essential to the slipshod plot, and/or are pervasive, recurring themes in the prequals. I find it highly ironic that you accuse people who point this out as being a screaming delusional fanboy minority, when 1) pretty much everyone who has pointed this out are self-professed 'casual' viewers, and 2) you're a screaming fanboy erecting walls of ignorance left and right.

It takes a special blend of retard to think of Jar Jar Binks as a sop to the kids, while believing that Chewbacca or R2-D2 were not. Chewie is little more than a two-legged Old Yeller who can fire a gun and fly a spaceship.

You really do have problems adjusting to reality, don't you? Chewbacca had some comic moments in the movies. He also was fucking competent at what he did, and fucking scary when angered or acting in defense of others. He might not have talked, but he was a fully-fleshed character based around 'simple' technical proficiency, scary amounts of strength, and a strong loyalty to Han. R2-D2... again, I still have no idea what the fuck you're getting at here. He beeps, he had a few comic moments, so what? He was also an incredibly competent droid with surprising intelligence and personality whose skills were essential to helping out others.

As for the Old Yeller reference... are you trying to debunk yourself? Old Yeller wasn't kiddie-friendly comic relief you delusional little fanboy. He was a fully fleshed non-human character who was integral to the plot, believable and relatable (to anyone who has cared for dogs, anyways), and eventually got rabies and had to be shot. What the unholy fuck is kid-friendly about that?

Jar Jar Binks, on the other hand started off as a walking plot device to get Obi and Quigon from point A to point B, then degenerated into an incompetent, slap-tongued string of physical jokes whose only purpose was to provide childish comic relief. It's not our fault that you're a screaming delusional fanboy who refuses to accept this easily visible fact.

Lucas doesn't know why his own movies were so popular after 30-plus years. Yeah. Are you trolling or are you really that stupid?

Did you actually have an argument to provide? Lucas hit it big with his movies, it doesn't necessarily follow that he automatically knows why. He's human, just like anyone else, and just as capable of making mistakes, you delusional little fanboy.

For the record, the teenagers back then were into Saturday Night Fever. The grownups thought Star Wars was goofy kid stuff (with the exception of all the moms who went nuts for Harrison Ford), in comparison with Close Encounters, Smokey and the Bandit and other films that were popular back then.

And this addresses any of the points made... how? Oh wait, it doesn't, it's just a red herring. It doesn't matter if someone 'thought' it was goofy kids' stuff. If they, like you, can't actually back up that assertion, then it's just as empty.

[Elfdart]

As opposed to R2-D2, who was included to bring in teenage girls. As opposed to stormtroopers who walk face first into the fucking door. As opposed to Han kicking Chewie in the ass in the middle of a shoot-out.

R2-D2: You know what, I don't even know what you're trying to get at there. Exactly how was R2-D2 included to 'bring in teenage girls'? I have never heard this argument before and strongly suspect you're merely talking out of your ass.

It's called sarcasm, peckerhead!
Heathcliff claims yet another victim.

Stormtroopers walking into doors: That was a blooper that accidentally made it on screen you twit. That was not a deliberate attempt to appeal to any age group and was only kept because people who noticed it tended to like it.

Han kicking Chewie: So apparently one brief comic moment makes things into a kiddie movie?

First of all, the stormtrooper hitting his head could have easily been cut out, but it wasn't -meaning that Lucas either didn't care, or he liked it that way. Either way, the scene is goofy as hell, which is the point.

Imagine if Obi-Wan had kicked Jar Jar Binks in the ass during a fight scene. Nerd Ragers would shit their pants in blind fury.

You really do have problems adjusting to reality, don't you? Chewbacca had some comic moments in the movies. He also was fucking competent at what he did, and fucking scary when angered or acting in defense of others. He might not have talked, but he was a fully-fleshed character based around 'simple' technical proficiency, scary amounts of strength, and a strong loyalty to Han.

Old Yeller was also competent in his duties, scary when angered, and loyal to his friends. He was a fully fleshed-out character as well. He could express himself clearly with howls, growls, barks and whines. Just like Chewbacca. Oh, and Old Yeller was a dog. Lassie and Rin-Tin-Tin were also. That's right fucktard, Chewbacca is The Family Dog -only with prehensile front paws. In fact, he was patterned after the Malamute Lucas' wife owned.

R2-D2... again, I still have no idea what the fuck you're getting at here. He beeps, he had a few comic moments, so what? He was also an incredibly competent droid with surprising intelligence and personality whose skills were essential to helping out others.

He was put in the movie to be cute and to appeal to kids. The fact that he saves the day time and again doesn't change that.

As for the Old Yeller reference... are you trying to debunk yourself? Old Yeller wasn't kiddie-friendly comic relief you delusional little fanboy. He was a fully fleshed non-human character who was integral to the plot, believable and relatable (to anyone who has cared for dogs, anyways), and eventually got rabies and had to be shot. What the unholy fuck is kid-friendly about that?

The fact that it was a Disney movie aimed primarily at children. For most of the movie, he is a clownish character who is always causing trouble .

Jar Jar Binks, on the other hand started off as a walking plot device to get Obi and Quigon from point A to point B, then degenerated into an incompetent, slap-tongued string of physical jokes whose only purpose was to provide childish comic relief. It's not our fault that you're a screaming delusional fanboy who refuses to accept this easily visible fact.

Since when are your opinions fact?

By the way, I was comparing Old Yeller to Chewbacca.

Lucas doesn't know why his own movies were so popular after 30-plus years. Yeah. Are you trolling or are you really that stupid?

Did you actually have an argument to provide? Lucas hit it big with his movies, it doesn't necessarily follow that he automatically knows why. He's human, just like anyone else, and just as capable of making mistakes, you delusional little fanboy.

Notice the bolded part?

For the record, the teenagers back then were into Saturday Night Fever. The grownups thought Star Wars was goofy kid stuff (with the exception of all the moms who went nuts for Harrison Ford), in comparison with Close Encounters, Smokey and the Bandit and other films that were popular back then.

And this addresses any of the points made... how? Oh wait, it doesn't, it's just a red herring. It doesn't matter if someone 'thought' it was goofy kids' stuff. If they, like you, can't actually back up that assertion, then it's just as empty.

It shows that while Star Wars had crossover appeal, it was still a kids' movie and anyone who thinks otherwise is a delusional moron.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

It's called sarcasm, peckerhead!
Heathcliff claims yet another victim.

So what you're saying is you have nothing to disprove his claim, but you'll screech and whine about it anyways, then take the 'But I wasn't seeeeerious' road when called out on it.

First of all, the stormtrooper hitting his head could have easily been cut out, but it wasn't -meaning that Lucas either didn't care, or he liked it that way. Either way, the scene is goofy as hell, which is the point.

...or that nobody noticed it until it was too late. But no, mistakes like that *never* happen in the film industry, do they?

Imagine if Obi-Wan had kicked Jar Jar Binks in the ass during a fight scene. Nerd Ragers would shit their pants in blind fury.

Ah, you silly, delusional little fanboy. You happily gloss over the point that an action like that is completely unneeded because Jar-Jar's already nothing more than a walking physical gag.

Old Yeller was also competent in his duties, scary when angered, and loyal to his friends. He was a fully fleshed-out character as well. He could express himself clearly with howls, growls, barks and whines. Just like Chewbacca. Oh, and Old Yeller was a dog. Lassie and Rin-Tin-Tin were also. That's right fucktard, Chewbacca is The Family Dog -only with prehensile front paws. In fact, he was patterned after the Malamute Lucas' wife owned.

So, at some point during all this frothing fanboy vitriol coming from you, were you going to point out how Chewie can't be primitive and animalistic in ways but still be a fully fleshed out character? Because your point earlier was that he was the equivalent of Jar Jar, who was a one dimensional walking joke whose sole purpose was to appeal to the children. But you wouldn't try to shift the goalposts like that now, would you?

He was put in the movie to be cute and to appeal to kids. The fact that he saves the day time and again doesn't change that.

Evidence for this? Or should I conclude that you're once again talking out of your ass.

The fact that it was a Disney movie aimed primarily at children. For most of the movie, he is a clownish character who is always causing trouble .

He's a dog, acting like a dog, in a Disney movie about a dog. Chewie's a primitive being, formerly a slave, with a strong loyalty to the one who rescued him, and he acts like it. Conceded that Old Yeller is a kiddie movie, but that's not because a dog acts like a dog, and there are still some very adult concepts in that movie like dealing with the concept of the death of a loved friend. Just because Chewie stays true to his character doesn't make him a kiddie-attraction, you raging little nerd.

Since when are your opinions fact?

By the way, I was comparing Old Yeller to Chewbacca.

When they agree with reality, you delusional little fanboy. Or are you going to try and claim that Jar Jar isn't a walking gag. That also doesn't change the fact that you were also comparing Chewbacca to Jar Jar as well.

It shows that while Star Wars had crossover appeal, it was still a kids' movie and anyone who thinks otherwise is a delusional moron.

No, it doesn't you raging little nerdboy, what some people at the moment think something is has no bearing on what it actually is unless there's also objective evidence for it. I like how you respond to a request for actual evidence that it has the hallmarks of a kiddie, as opposed to a family movie with... a blunt reassertion that it's a kiddie movie. Silly, delusional little fanboy.