Response to RedLetterMedia's TPM Review (108 Page PDF)

[Jim Raynor]

You're the one in denial if you think Stoklasa's main goal wasn't to show that the three films of the prequel trilogy were poor films PERIOD.

Stop changing the goal posts. Nobody is denying that Stoklasa's review was about TPM being a bad movie. That's uh, pretty obvious to say the least.

What was being argued was that my response to his review (which quoted and responded to practically all of his points) was somehow off base for missing some "main point" that was really Stoklasa's safe, subjective opinion that the movies just didn't engage him. A defense which completely falls apart when I show, over the course of a hundred pages, that Stoklasa was trying to portray Lucas as a complete idiot by pointing out a long stream of nitpicks. Nitpicks that weren't just about insignificant minutia, but were often completely illogical and factually incorrect.

Like whining about how Qui-Gon didn't have just cause to claim an invasion (after almost being murdered and seeing the invasion army), insulting the Jedi's tactics while suggesting Rambo-like idiocy as an alternative, or claiming that the visuals didn't show the Royal Ship being hit when they in fact showed multiple hits. Complete verbal garbage that went far beyond simple statements that the movies just didn't "engage" him or whatever.

I write out a list full of examples of Stoklasa's stupid nitpicking (as opposed to some mythical "main point" about being bored)...and you respond with an incredulous little line about me being "fucking annoying."

If you can't keep up then don't bother posting anymore. Everyone here can see right through you.

Ugh, yes you are annoying, as apparently you were so bothered by what people thought of RLM's PM review you felt you not only had to respond to it, you felt you had to overcompensate for it, with 108 pages.
I told you how I had already read your tirade, but you list things off like you expect it to change my mind, THAT is why it's you whining.

I don't know where you come from (since it's apparent that you just came here to defend the honor of RLM), but over here people are expected to back up what they say. If the discussion is about whether or not Stoklasa's review was full of nitpicks, then me posting a list of his dumb nitpicks is completely relevant. You responding in turn with one stupid sentence about me being "fucking annoying" makes you look like a punk.

And again you display your bias, by calling me out on my 108 pages of writing. As if sticking up for a guy who wrote a 70 minute (followed by 90 minute and nearly 2 hour reviews) is somehow consistent with that.

Stunning logic you have there. Repeatedly insinuating things about Lucas's personal and professional relationships, with no proof whatsoever, doesn't make Stoklasa a "scumbag" because some other guy out there was even more ridiculous in his mudslinging.

I get it man. You're a fanboy of a fanboy.

Says the star wars prequel fanboy.

You ACTUALLY tried to excuse Stoklasa's unsupported insults by saying that he's not AS bad as some freak who accused Lucas of being a PEDOPHILE. That is just so out there and extreme that I don't even know why you brought that up over here. Face it, you have no ground to stand on when it comes to this. Think next time before you decide to pollute this board with that kind of crap.

Gotta love you willing to be a classless prick, to anyone who disagrees or challenges your point of view.

I'm not the one telling people about pedophile-oriented slander.

He sensed the boy's Force talent, and had that Force talent confirmed with an objective test which showed Anakin having powers in line with what the prophecied "Chosen One" was thought to have. It ultimately came down to Qui-Gon's belief in the boy. He's trusting and has faith in people. That's his character.

Yeah he sensed so much force in the boy, he HAD to get a midicholrian count, his FAITH in people could've got them stranded there if the script didn't call for it.

So when presented with points that are completely supported by the movie itself...you try to change the subject. The contrivance of Qui-Gon landing on Tatooine has nothing to do with his reasons for trusting Anakin later on. It's also no worse than the string of contrivances that led to R2 meeting up with Obi-Wan and Luke in ANH.

Did you buy Luke kicking Vader's ass after being totally owned by him in the previous movie? Jedi powers can grow very quickly, and as a young growing boy I would assume that significant growth would be more possible with Anakin.

Luke was more mature than Anakin (who had NO concept of the force at that point), and I'm pretty sure all the other racers had more resources and money to make a better podracer, not to mention experience.

Racing isn't the same as defeating a Sith Lord, is it? This is irrelevant to the point being made, which was that Anakin was a growing boy with huge Force powers, and that Qui-Gon believed in him.

I love this. Most of the Jedi Council's screen time is spent criticizing Anakin over perfectly natural attachment to his mother or giving half-assed excuses for not training Anakin ("he's too old"). Qui-Gon has to fight to stand up for what he believes in, and it's strongly implied that his career as a Jedi Master has been held down because he won't fall in line with what the Council says. The Council FINALLY decides to train the boy as a way to grant Qui-Gon's dying wish...which somehow shows that Qui-Gon wasn't all that different or more open-minded than them?

Somehow I don't think Qui-Gon would've been THAT bothered if someone besides Obi-Wan Kenobi trained him. I think he would've been happy just to have Anakin get training PERIOD.

Uh...yeah that was totally the point. Qui-Gon wanted Anakin trained, did he even say earlier in the movie that Obi-Wan had to be the one to do it? Stop bringing up irrelevant things and changing the topic. Nevermind that Obi-Wan's character flaw is that he's too much like the other Jedi. The point was that Qui-Gon was different than the other Jedi for believing in Anakin and wanting him to be trained from the start, and that his actions played an important part in the story.

In case you didn't notice, a significant portion of the movie is about Anakin letting go of his humble background on a journey to achieve greater things.

And yet Lucas couldn't get that to intersect with the main plot of the movie in a believable way?

Subjective opinion so there's nothing to argue here. Anakin got swept away on an adventure and blew some things up to save the day. Like it or hate it, I don't care.

Wow, how dorky can you be? I didn't even know that "Plinkett" had a first name and middle initial! I'm somehow a bad guy now for not using the obscure name of a clearly fictional character.

For someone who spent God knows how much time writing that 108 page review of A REVIEW, your calling me dorky?
I thought you would've had your "facts" straight on shit like that. The guy I talked to on another forum was right about you, when he said you were a classless act, and that if you were on any other forum boards, you would've got the boot.

I was trash talking you. That's pretty clear, and I did that because you were calling me out for not referring to Stoklasa by the obscure name of a fictional character...which is somehow a bad thing.

LOL at your buddy from this other mystery forum, who thinks I'm a "classless act." He probably only knows me from what I've written about Stoklasa's movie reveiw. He's probably a RLM-defender as well...

I'm "classless" for responding to people's often-insulting posts at me, demanding that they be logically consistent and back up what they say. Meanwhile, Stoklasa makes an hour long review full of poopie, rape, and murder jokes, as well as unsupported allegations about Lucas's professional relationships with his employees. Nope, not "classless" at all.

And oh yeah, I'm not the one who brought PEDOPHILIA into this thread.

[Jim Raynor]

I say you are litigous because you spent an incredible amount of time studying a review you disagreed with and then proceded to attack virtually every point that was made by RLM conceding basicly nothing to the reviewer.

After Stoklasa made a 70-minute video review nitpicking TPM to death...

I did concede a few things on the RLM review, mostly stuff that was fair subjective opinion. I am not obligated to concede stuff just because. If you have a problem with what I say, focus on the evidence and the reasoning of it.

Further, when people point out the flaws in your rebuttal you procede to argue each and every single point that they raise.

Ooh, I "argue each and every" point brought up by people who came to me with criticism! Would that be better than...not arguing with them? What am I supposed to do, in your opinion? Again, focus on the evidence and reasoning, rather than the simple fact that I am responding when called out.

[Loup Garou]

Soooo, then super speed is just part of the advancement of Jedi training and abilities. Thanks.

No, It's an editing mistake.
Seriously, mistakes happen during film making and sometimes the editors don't catch it before it goes on to the big screen. It's not even that bad a mistake really.

Err, excuse me. How exactly do you know it was an editing mistake, if you could be bothered to elaborate? Because as far as I know, that's exactly what the sequence was supposed to look like.

Occum's razor is my ally and a powerful ally it is[/yoda]

Either the jedi had super speed all along and used it only once to get away from slow moving droids, then forgot to use it (or were tired or mal was repressing their abilities or [OTHER OPTION NOT FOUND]) when they were facing a sith of unknown power and skill

OR

The editor messed up on two seconds of footage.

[Jim Raynor]

You don't seem to understand the way things work around here. When discussing things in the movies, the movies are treated as factual evidence. You have no logical argument for dismissing the super speed feat just because the Jedi didn't make use of it in other fights. Especially when they have many other powers that they don't always make use of, and how it was repeatedly shown that using the Force requires energy and concentration. You even brought up these other explanations yourself. So don't misuse "Occam's Razor" when the simple explanation already exists for why the Jedi don't superspeed around.

[Batman]

Occum's razor is my ally and a powerful ally it is[/yoda]
Either the jedi had super speed all along and used it only once to get away from slow moving droids, then forgot to use it (or were tired or mal was repressing their abilities or [OTHER OPTION NOT FOUND]) when they were facing a sith of unknown power and skill
OR
The editor messed up on two seconds of footage.

I'd look up SoD if I were you. Prove that sequence was an editing error. And it's Occam's. If you can't properly use it to support your point at least try to get the spelling right.

[TK421]

Please. If that was his honest opinion...then Stoklasa is a paranoid conspiracy weirdo like I said he sounded like. Stoklasa stated that he saw "terror" and "mistrust" on the faces of perfectly normal looking LFL employees. He put words in McCallum's mouth and made statements about what the guy was supposedly thinking. He kept making comments about what was going on during the production, which he played no part in. Stoklasa insinuated a lot of things then covered his ass by saying he wasn't there, after already painting an ugly picture for everyone. That was one of his standard tactics throughout the review.

He also kidnapped a hooker and fvcked a cat.

It's so funny how Stoklasa has a free pass to talk crap about Lucas and and his employees...but me pointing out what he's doing makes me horrible and mean in some people's eyes here.

He's making jokes, saying people look scared, etc. You're actually calling people dumb, stupid, scumbag, etc., and seemingly getting really bent out of shape over a goofy movie review type thing.

Almost makes me believe that certain people signed up on this message board for the sole purpose of defending Stoklasa...

I'm sure people have.

Really, stop making excuses for his behavior. Especially when these personal insults were hardly even necessary for making a movie review.

If he had just been making a straight forward movie review. Instead he made something that functions as a piece of entertainment in its own right. Some people didn't find it entertaining, that's fine, but some people didn't find the prequels entertaining.

[TK421]

This does help explain why so many here seem to have such a problem with RLM review. If you take the suspension of disbelief approach and try to merge it with an analysis of the film-making then of course you’ll end up with rebuttals like about how he’s a padawan and that should be enough.

Yeah, I'm starting to think that's a big part of the problem with the RLM review here and in this thread. Two entirely different outlooks on this subject (filmmaking vs in-universe) are at work here and failing to connect on either side

[Loup Garou]

I say you are litigous because you spent an incredible amount of time studying a review you disagreed with and then proceded to attack virtually every point that was made by RLM conceding basicly nothing to the reviewer.

After Stoklasa made a 70-minute video review nitpicking TPM to death...

He's an editor. Nitpicking is basicly what he is paid to do. In fact, the better he is at picking nits the more likely he is to gain further employment. This can and will make him an ass to watch a movie with since editors have an innate skill for finding flaws in movies.

I learned this day one at the Toronto Film School.

Further, when people point out the flaws in your rebuttal you procede to argue each and every single point that they raise.

Ooh, I "argue each and every" point brought up by people who came to me with criticism! Would that be better than...not arguing with them? What am I supposed to do, in your opinion? Again, focus on the evidence and reasoning, rather than the simple fact that I am responding when called out.

Allow your review to stand on it's own merits?

Like, RLM Threw the reviews out there without giving a dam what anyone would say about them. I'm sure the studio appreciates the feedback from the viewers but I don't think they did it just to be popular. The fact that he hasn't given any serious response to the criticism that exists for his reviews and whatever errors they may contain show's that he is confident in what he has put forth.

[Loup Garou]

You don't seem to understand the way things work around here. When discussing things in the movies, the movies are treated as factual evidence. You have no logical argument for dismissing the super speed feat just because the Jedi didn't make use of it in other fights. Especially when they have many other powers that they don't always make use of, and how it was repeatedly shown that using the Force requires energy and concentration. You even brought up these other explanations yourself. So don't misuse "Occam's Razor" when the simple explanation already exists for why the Jedi don't superspeed around.

I can dismiss it because It does nothing to move the story forward, it is never used again, there are many instances where it would have been useful, it looks like someone accidentally turned up the film speed in post...

As to it requiring focus and physical energy: They were engaged in combat after having been choked with gas (which didn't effect them because...).

[Batman]

I can dismiss it because It does nothing to move the story forward, it is never used again, there are many instances where it would have been useful, it looks like someone accidentally turned up the film speed in post...

No you can't.

As to it requiring focus and physical energy: They were engaged in combat after having been choked with gas (which didn't effect them because...).

...they had breathing apparatuses? Did you actually see the movie?

[Freefall]

Err, excuse me. How exactly do you know it was an editing mistake, if you could be bothered to elaborate? Because as far as I know, that's exactly what the sequence was supposed to look like.

Do you have any particular reason for believing the scene was deliberately designed to look that way, besides "it was in the movie, therefore it was supposed to be in the movie"? That just seems like assuming Lucas and his crew and effects guys are absolutely flawless movie makers on all levels, and those of us who criticize it are somehow just ignorant of how it all really works. That smacks a little too much of fundamentalist ideology for me to openly accept. It's also basically like giving writers and filmmakers a free pass to throw out whatever absurd tripe they feel like, and leave it up to the devoted fans to make sense of it for them.

Maybe that's going down a bit of a slippery slope, but to me it sounds like the proposal really is to take all imagery as gospel, regardless of absurdity. Spiderman beating Firelord in his black costume (that was vulnerable to fire) is now as valid as Spiderman beating up guys like Vulture or Scorpion.

I mean, what about that scene in some of the edited versions of ANH where Han dodges Greedo's blast and his neck gets all distorted? Are we supposed to believe that Han canonically has some weird bendy-neck abilities? Or do we believe that it was a poorly done effects alteration? Which is more likely?

I'd look up SoD if I were you. Prove that sequence was an editing error. And it's Occam's. If you can't properly use it to support your point at least try to get the spelling right.

Occam's Razor isn't about proving things though, it's about likelihoods.

...they had breathing apparatuses? Did you actually see the movie?

All indications are that they did not actually use them there.

[Batman]

Err, excuse me. How exactly do you know it was an editing mistake, if you could be bothered to elaborate? Because as far as I know, that's exactly what the sequence was supposed to look like.

Do you have any particular reason for believing the scene was deliberately designed to look that way, besides "it was in the movie, therefore it was supposed to be in the movie"?

That'd be the complete absence of evidence that it shouldn't?

Maybe that's going down a bit of a slippery slope, but to me it sounds like the proposal really is to take all imagery as gospel

Err yes. That's what we do. It's called SoD.

regardless of absurdity. Spiderman beating Firelord in his black costume (that was vulnerable to fire) is now as valid as Spiderman beating up guys like Vulture or Scorpion.

Assuming that actually happened in Marvel comics, yes.

...they had breathing apparatuses? Did you actually see the movie?

All indications are that they did not actually use them there.

Hello? We see them using those in that very scene.

[Aaron]

Are you sure your not confused with the bit when they go with Jar-Jar underwater.

IIRC all they did was hold their breath in the conference room.

Skip to 3:10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joTzwjVU ... re=related

[Batman]

As a matter of fact no I'm not, so I'm conceding Ben and Qui-Gon having used them. As simply holding their breath at ordinary human levels would have sufficed to get them through the gas attack I'm not sure what difference that would make.

[Aaron]

As a matter of fact no I'm not, so I'm conceding Ben and Qui-Gon having used them. As simply holding their breath at ordinary human levels would have sufficed to get them through the gas attack I'm not sure what difference that would make.

Depends on what kind of gas it is I suppose, most agents today would have been pretty shitty to endure, even if it was just a blister agent but I'll chalk that up to Hollywood not knowing anything.

[Loup Garou]

As a matter of fact no I'm not, so I'm conceding Ben and Qui-Gon having used them. As simply holding their breath at ordinary human levels would have sufficed to get them through the gas attack I'm not sure what difference that would make.

I would assume the trade federation viceroy waited more then 3 minutes (Harry Houdini's personal best) for them to pass out. Even if that were the case, the Jedi would be gasping for breath and not in any condition to "focus their force powers".

[Aaron]

As a matter of fact no I'm not, so I'm conceding Ben and Qui-Gon having used them. As simply holding their breath at ordinary human levels would have sufficed to get them through the gas attack I'm not sure what difference that would make.

I would assume the trade federation viceroy waited more then 3 minutes (Harry Houdini's personal best) for them to pass out. Even if that were the case, the Jedi would be gasping for breath and not in any condition to "focus their force powers".

Obviously they used "force repel gas."

[Batman]

Either it was an agent that needed to be inhaled or it was not. If it was, them having held their breath would have sufficed for the length of the sequence. If it was an agent that only needs skin contact, we should have seen it taking effect anyway.

[Aaron]

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Dioxis

Apparently it was that---^

Edit: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Breath_control

So I wasn't that far off with my "force repel gas" joke.

[Batman]

Errm-nothing in there says it was a skin contact agent, and again, ordinary human level holiding breath would have sufficed to get them through it.

[Aaron]

Yeah I realize that, it was for info purposes only.

Jesus dude, pedantic enough?

[Loup Garou]

One assumes the viceroy know the limitations of human lung capacity is roughly 2 minutes before unconsciousness occurs and 6 minutes before death.

[Batman]

Batman, remember? There's a picture of me next to 'asshole' in the dictionary.

I did misunderstand your post to mean it wasn't an agent that needed to be inhaled, so I apologize.

[Batman]

One assumes the viceroy know the limitations of human lung capacity is roughly 2 minutes before unconsciousness occurs and 6 minutes before death.

You DO know ordinary humans can hold their breath considerably longer than that without access to Force powers, right?

[Aaron]

Batman, remember? There's a picture of me next to 'asshole' in the dictionary.

I did misunderstand your post to mean it wasn't an agent that needed to be inhaled, so I apologize.

It's cool man.