Kane Starkiller wrote:None of that is pointless. It either establishes racial diversity of the Galaxy or is a method of transportation or it furthers the story (Honestly summoning several bounty hunters instead of just one is pointless?).
Totally missed my point, which is that a scifi movie about an entire fictional universe is far less rich if it doesn't have a diversity of different aliens, vehicles, or tech. Which is why RLM is retarded for using a few seconds footage of a few different types of battledroids to support some kind of bullshit claim about how the movies were soooo toy-oriented.
On the other hand having each prequel have a new villain which are basically the same serves absolutely no purpose other than boosting toy sales.
Darth Maul died and took the Sith's secrets with him, keeping the secret of "the phantom menace." Dooku showed the arrogance and complacency of the Jedi, and also served as a face for the Separatist movement. It was obvious that Jango Fett was put in there to please the Boba fanboys but whatever. It's really stupid to think that the entire Separatist movement, comprising of thousands and thousands of worlds, shouldn't bring some new villains into the movies.
Having Amidala change clothes every 15 seconds while at the same time we are supposed to believe her planet is starving or that she is running from an assassin actively destroys the story and tension.
You mean while she was disguising herself as a handmaiden?
Or when she was in the safety of her own luxurious resort home? TPM and AOTC each take place over entire days. It would have been retarded if she
didn't change her clothes.
How many yachts did she change in three films? Again for no reason than to sell more and more toys. Compare this with the original movies where Millenium Falcon itself becomes a character we care for, similar to Enterprise from Star Trek.
Is Amidala a broke-ass smuggler like Han, flying the same decrepit "piece of junk?" No, she's royalty and having a bunch of different
cars ships displays her wealth. And again, does a variety of different ships actually somehow detract from the damn movie?
There was room to make Anakin both the hero we imagined from ANH and a villain he was revealed to become in ESB. Instead they made Anakin a pathetic whiny bitch from the very first minute of the AOTC. Why should I even care about that whiny asshole? In fact I don't and when you don't care that the main character of the films is going to turn bad then what is the point?
Except this wasn't the bullshit I was pointing out in RLM's review. I was pointing out his lame attempts
to prove an inconsistency between Obi-Wan's ONE line (during a scene when he was lying) about Anakin being "a good friend" and his actual relationship with Anakin in the prequels. RLM went on for minutes of lameass video editing to try to prove a point when the reality was that he couldn't grasp the fact that Old Obi-Wan was lying.
If you didn't like Anakin's characterization, that's perfectly fine. It's your opinion and you're entitled to it. Simply say "I thought Anakin was a whiny bitch"...like a lot of people have said. That's done in a few seconds, and saves everybody the time. What RLM did was pad things out while pretending to make a point that he really wasn't proving at all, which is why I called bullshit.
I personally didn't have a problem with Anakin's portrayal, because the movie was clear that he was extremely flawed. Anakin had some inner nobility and ambition to do well (carried over from his childhood worship of the Jedi, and his dreams of freeing all the slaves), which mitigated his whininess for me. His fall to the Dark Side (and the movies make it clear that the Dark Side can control you) partially because of his desire to do good and protect what he cared about was the tragedy.
But again, that's opinion and not the basis of my complaints against RLM's review. My problem is not his opinion; it's him trying and failing to prove a point. That screech halt and zoom in on Old Obi-Wan was like RLM screaming "I'M AN IDIOT" at the top of his lungs.
Qui Gon didn't recognize him but he did say that he was "trained in the Jedi arts". Dooku was an ex jedi and Vader was an ex jedi and the movie offers no further insight into the nature of the Sith. So yes it's a perfectly valid question.
Qui-Gon's statement was obviously just stating the similarity of Maul's powers, given the fact that Maul is a complete unknown and Palpatine is never implied to be a former Jedi, despite being a
public figure who regularly interacts with the Jedi.
Obviously many of the things in the review are put there for humorous effect to make sly personal attacks on George Lucas, not to actually make a valid point.
Fixed that for you. I sure didn't sense any particular "humor" in that part. Also, "humor" is the popular cover for people who are making genuine points and trying to insult others. Lots of so-called jokes are still making a point, and this guy spends an extended amount of time trying to show what a heartless corporate sell-out George Lucas is supposed t obe.
Except of course that is not the main point. The trouble is people can't relate to either of those because one is a whiny bitch and the other a quasi wise sage that spouts platitudes and recycled one liners from the original trilogy.
I didn't say it was the main point of that part of the review, did I? I didn't dispute his opinion that Obi-Wan and Anakin are unrelatable, because again his basic opinion is not why I dislike his review.
Before he goes on talking about their actual characterization, he still says that the movie "like the last one" "doesn't have a main character." He takes a point that was much stronger and more valid about TPM, and grasps for straws to to equate it to this movie (another trick), only it falls apart because OMG...TWO main characters.
I personally thought that Obi-Wan and Anakin reflected some realistic father/son interactions. Obi-Wan is overbearing and critical, but not as infallible as he acts and prone to making mistakes of his own. Anakin is the hotshot youth with the angst that usually comes with it, who thinks that his overbearing father figure is holding him back.
But again, I don't necessarily care if he has a different opinion on the characters; and saying things like Anakin being whiny are totally fair. It's bullshit like saying "it has two" main characters as if that's supposed to be some kind of indictment against the movie that I'm pointing out.
Yes years and years have passed because Lucas decided to portray Anakin as a 9 year old the last time. Obviously there is no way audience will feel any connection between AOTC Anakin and TPM Anakin since they are completely different people played by different actors. So, as RLM states, Anakin is basically a completely new character that starts whining and bitching right off the bat.
I felt a connection because it was clear to me that 19 year old Anakin's personality stemmed from his 9 year old personality. As a 9 year old boy he was idealistic and had big dreams. Then he was torn away from his mother, and Yoda even pointed out his attachment problems. Then his father figure (Qui-Gon, the good, understanding and nurturing one) was prematurely killed, and he was stuck with Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan who came down hard on him, and chastised him the feats that he pulled off with his natural talents. He ends up blaming Obi-Wan and the Jedi, and is fiercely possessive of Padme, the pretty girl who he knew for all of a few days in his youth. The first time I saw AOTC, I understood that he was being creepy and had latched on to her image from 10 years ago, in his first scene with her.
But again, this opinion of mine isn't even relevant to what I was pointing out in that review, which was that RLM was blowing an efficient little elevator scene (that quickly conveyed information on the passage of time while moving the characters to their destination) out of proportion, while using bullshit quick cuts from THREE original trilogy movies to try to show some kind of vast difference in character development. Han and Luke go through some fights together...and end up liking each other. Wow what change. That's so deep.
Where is it in the prequels? Show me how Obi Wan's relationship with Anakin changes one bit from the first minute of AOTC to,say, the middle of ROTS. It's all barter exchanged with Obi Wan berating Anakin.
The part where Obi-Wan tells Anakin he's proud of him before flying off to fight Grievous? Or, you know, the part where Anakin is gradually seduced by the Dark Side and they become enemies? The entire trilogy shows how an idealistic and ambitious boy's good intentions can lead him down the road to hell. It's undeniable that Anakin changes over the course of the trilogy.
Yes but being the "one" comes with an explanation what he is going to do. "Balance to the force" doesn't mean a god damn thing. Apparently it turned out to be killing all the Jedi so that leaves us with the question of what did Jedi think the prophecy meant.
We saw Anakin's final fate in ROTJ. Obviously bringing balance to the Force was supposed to be a good thing, otherwise Qui-Gon wouldn't have been pushing for Anakin's recruitment because of it. It's downright retarded to think that balancing the Force is supposed to mean killing all the Jedi (to even them up with the 2 Sith, hur hur!). If "balance" was such a simple and senseless concept then the Jedi wouldn't be trying to kill the Sith, as they did in the past and as they try to do throughout the prequels. Obviously, "balance" means the good, rightful state of things, and the Jedi see the Dark Side as something to be destroyed.
Again, The Chosen One who is supposed to save the world and deliver us all from evil is a common trope in fantasy that everyone is familiar with.
Not to mention that we never find out why or how did Trade Federation become Sidious's stooge,
We weren't shown exactly how Vader hooked up with Palpatine, until 2005. Therefore the original trilogy sucks.
Sidious is actively plotting to cause turmoil in the Republic using anything and anyone he can find, and the Trade Federation are a bunch of heartless corporate assholes with their own private army. Put two and two together.
what was taxation "dispute" all about,
Big business hates taxes. Jesus, look at all the bitching over taxes in real life today. There is nothing confusing about this; furthermore it doesn't even MATTER because it's a MacGuffin reason Sidious was able to use to persuade the hapless Trade Federation into doing his bidding. The characters THEMSELVES don't even care about it, because it's not even what the real conflict of the movie is about.
why Trade Federation thought invading Naboo will benefit them in the dispute,
To hold it hostage and use it to demand political changes that will benefit them. That's so obvious. You really seem to need things spelled out for you.
what is Trade Federation: a political entity or economic organization, why did the choose to secede in AOTC, why did Banking clan, Techno Union join them, who were they anyway.
The motivations of the separatists and their nature are completely unknown and portrayed as irrelevant other than their desire to blindly obey Palpatine.
The Trade Federation doesn't care for the Republic's laws and taxes and has even fought the Republic's forces in TPM. It obviously set the precedent for the others.
You next claim you didn't even go into specifics, as though that's the point. Hint: it's not. You opinion has already been given, but then you repeat yourself regardless by claiming RLM uses propaganda techniques etc. You then get defensive again, and claim that's not you disliking him for having a differing opinion but for something else - even though it's entirely your opinion he uses propaganda techniques and completely twists things around. You then, um, 'clarify' by saying all you did was 'state your opinion' (when you said in the previous sentence that you didn't dislike him for having a differing opinion, even though his work is based on his opinions, and your response to his work is based off of your opinion!), whilst pointing out how you did so in a thread that's not even about RLM.