Distressed Watcher reviews star wars

[Darth Yan]

The amazing athiest aka the distressed watcher is reveiewing star wars on that guy with the glasses; Personally I enjoyed them, and he made very good points on why the anakin padme romance was bad. He acknowledges red letter media, and goes out of his way not to imitate them.
http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videol ... -menace-01
http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videol ... ce-part-02
http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videol ... ce-part-03
http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videol ... es-part-01
http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videol ... es-part-02
http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videol ... es-part-03

[Srelex]

Sounds like the usual tired bellyaching. 'Blah blah Lucas bad, blah blah racism, etc, etc!' I mean, seriously, can't fat nerd idiots accept that bashing on the PT is fucking tired as hell? Jesus.

[Darth Yan]

Aside from that it was legit. His poing of qi gon being the only real character was legit, and his points of the characters being stale was legit. He also gets better in attack of the clones; he acknowledges it's strengths and his deal with anakin padme is that anakin's lines are creepy and her acceptance just seems forced after all that rejection. Her acceptance of him despite his admission of being a mass murderer is pretty stupid, and he does try to avoid making the red letter media arguements. Yes there are some weaknesses but I still enjoyed it.

PS my uncle who is half asian considered the nemoidians racist, and the watto jew thing was actually kind of accurate.

[Oskuro]

Haven't seen these reviews yet, I'm a bit undecided on the Distressed Watcher. On one hand, I like his trailer reviews, and he has his moments, on the other, well, his style sounds too much like he's trying too hard to sound interesting, and, worse yet, he won't stay still! It drives me up the walls to see him bobbing back and forth during the review.

Also, when I saw these SW reviews announced, I thought "not another prequels are evil rant". Guess RLM and the subsequent shitstorm around here kind of burnt me out on those.

And the DW initials always make me think of Darth Wong, wich messes with my head big time, I sometimes half expect the video to be Mike ranting about something.... Fuck, now I got the visual of the forum regulars doing their usual debate rants in video format... I'd consider paying to see Shroomy's videos, though

[Gramzamber]

On the one hand, bashing the PT got old long ago.
One the other, I can never get enough of people saying what a wooden, unlikeable asshole Anakin Skywalker is.
They took the implied hero, cunning warrior and "good friend" that Obi-Wan spoke of fondly and turned him into a sociopathic whiny brat who has absolutely zero chemistry with Padme.

[Darth Yan]

he actually does acknowledge the strength of attacks of the clones. His criticism of padme/anakin's romance was legit. He also highlights inconsistencies.

[Jim Raynor]

He acknowledges red letter media, and goes out of his way not to imitate them.

I don't feel like sifting through multiple videos of yet another guy reviewing the prequels, so can you tell me what he said about RLM? I watched part of his AOTC review and I was disgusted with the propaganda film-like techniques that he used to exaggerate his case and completely twist some things around. And oh yeah, I hate his fucking fake voice and think he talks like a retard. I've been meaning to write up a rebuttal to RLM's review when I find the time, since he has gotten so inexplicably popular among nerd circles.

[Stofsk]

yes, how dare someone on the internet hold a differing viewpoint to my own

[Jim Raynor]

yes, how dare someone on the internet hold a differing viewpoint to my own

If you're talking about me, that's hardly the case and I don't care for accusation. I didn't even go into the specifics of why I didn't like RLM's review in that short little post above, besides stating that I didn't like his "propaganda film-like techniques that he used to exaggerate his case and completely twist some things around." That's not disliking someone for a differing opinion, that's disliking someone for dishonesty and style-over-substance video editing that doesn't make as strong a point as it tries to appear to. Of course I haven't actually written that hypothetical rebuttal; all I did was state my own opinion of his work in a thread that's not even about him.

[Stofsk]

yes, how dare someone on the internet hold a differing viewpoint to my own

If you're talking about me, that's hardly the case and I don't care for accusation. I didn't even go into the specifics of why I didn't like RLM's review in that short little post above, besides stating that I didn't like his "propaganda film-like techniques that he used to exaggerate his case and completely twist some things around." That's not disliking someone for a differing opinion, that's disliking someone for dishonesty and style-over-substance video editing that doesn't make as strong a point as it tries to appear to. Of course I haven't actually written that hypothetical rebuttal; all I did was state my own opinion of his work in a thread that's not even about him.

Bullshit. You also said you fucking hate his fake voice and think he talks like a retard, and he's 'inexplicably popular' enough for you to consider writing a rebuttal. Claiming he uses 'propaganda film like techniques' is also a bunch of horse shit.

Fool yourself if you want to, but don't try and tell me you don't dislike him because he trashes a bunch of shitty films you happen to enjoy. If all you were interested in was what the review in the OP said about RLM you could have just left it at that, but instead you added the above to your post. In fact the 'inexplicably popular' line is what I'm directly referring to with my pithy one-liner - what does it fucking matter if the popular and prevailing opinion is that the prequels suck shit? Does it affect you so badly you feel a need to post on an internet forum? Do you have stock in Lucasfilm and you're worried it'll go down because of said opinions? Dismissing said popular opinions in such a way are a defensive measure to dismiss those opinions as having any sort of merit, because they're 'inexplicable'. You even admit you didn't watch the entirety or even the majority of his review of AOTC.

[Jim Raynor]

Bullshit. You also said you fucking hate his fake voice and think he talks like a retard, and he's 'inexplicably popular' enough for you to consider writing a rebuttal. Claiming he uses 'propaganda film like techniques' is also a bunch of horse shit.

I posted other reasons why I dislike him...which is fucking irrelevant to your bullshit accusation that I am going after this guy for having a "differing veiwpoint" than me.

1. His alleged propaganda techniques is not the same as his basic opinion; he could've expressed the same exact opinions without using the editing techniques that he did. RLM is nowhere near the first or the only guy to criticize the prequels, but I have not accused everyone else of the same thing.

2. His intentionally fucked-up voice also has jack fucking shit to do with the opinions that he's expressing, so again you are doing nothing to justify your accusations against me by bringing that up.

3. I find it confusing ("inexplicably") why someone with such a fucked-up voice and bullshit editing techniques can be popular, and that is motivation for me to eventually post a response to him somewhere down the line as a counterpoint to the praise he gets. What the FUCK does this have to do with his opinions again?

Fool yourself if you want to, but don't try and tell me you don't dislike him because he trashes a bunch of shitty films you happen to enjoy.

You're a fucking mind reader now, aren't you?

If all you were interested in was what the review in the OP said about RLM you could have just left it at that, but instead you added the above to your post.

I plainly and immediately stated that I don't like him, as a reason why I was inquiring about him. Ooh, scandalous revelation!!!

In fact the 'inexplicably popular' line is what I'm directly referring to with my pithy one-liner - what does it fucking matter if the popular and prevailing opinion is that the prequels suck shit?

You lost your way in the middle of that sentence. I find it inexplicable that a guy with shitty ass presentation (retarded voice that's low on energy and hard to hear, can't emote or come across as anything approaching a normal human being) can actually get so popular on the internet. This has jack fucking shit to do with your statement about the "popular and prevailing opinion" that the prequels suck.

Does it affect you so badly you feel a need to post on an internet forum?

Does the Star Trek franchise sucking for years affect people so bad that they have to post on an internet forum? How about Karen Traviss's writings? Or people bashing Avatar and saying that the humans should've crashed asteroids on Pandora? Or any of the other scifi/fantasy related bullshit discussions here? That's what this board is for, talking about this kind of shit.

Do you have stock in Lucasfilm and you're worried it'll go down because of said opinions?

Yeah, fuck you too. Want me to turn this around and accuse you of being a RLM fanboy who's leaping to the defense of his favorite nerdboy who chooses to use a fucking speech impediment?

[adam_grif]

The dude makes ALL THE SAME POINTS that RLM does, only DW isn't funny. I watched the first part of TPM, skipping the rest. I'll give AOTC a chance, but it's not boding well for him so far...

[Stofsk]

I posted other reasons why I dislike him...which is fucking irrelevant to your bullshit accusation that I am going after this guy for having a "differing veiwpoint" than me.

1. His alleged propaganda techniques is not the same as his basic opinion; he could've expressed the same exact opinions without using the editing techniques that he did. RLM is nowhere near the first or the only guy to criticize the prequels, but I have not accused everyone else of the same thing.

2. His intentionally fucked-up voice also has jack fucking shit to do with the opinions that he's expressing, so again you are doing nothing to justify your accusations against me by bringing that up.

3. I find it confusing ("inexplicably") why someone with such a fucked-up voice and bullshit editing techniques can be popular, and that is motivation for me to eventually post a response to him somewhere down the line as a counterpoint to the praise he gets. What the FUCK does this have to do with his opinions again?

So what, his opinions are fine it's his delivery you object to? Aside from the fact your objections are full of shit, bringing up RLM then bashing him in the next sentence belies your protestations.

The hilarious thing is you can't understand why he's popular when it's clear to me he uses a fucked up voice for comic value and the techniques he employs in filming his criticisms win laughs. But I guess that's not your opinion right?

Fool yourself if you want to, but don't try and tell me you don't dislike him because he trashes a bunch of shitty films you happen to enjoy.

You're a fucking mind reader now, aren't you?

I don't have to dickhead, it can be inferred from your comments. You wouldn't have a problem with RLM if he criticised films you didn't like, because it would fall below your radar. Your protestations are disingenuous.

If all you were interested in was what the review in the OP said about RLM you could have just left it at that, but instead you added the above to your post.

I plainly and immediately stated that I don't like him, as a reason why I was inquiring about him. Ooh, scandalous revelation!!!

And then went on to talk about bullshit 'propaganda' techniques and speaking like a retard. Should I use a roll eye emoticon too? After all, it seems like all we have to do now is use instead of addressing someone's point.

You lost your way in the middle of that sentence. I find it inexplicable that a guy with shitty ass presentation (retarded voice that's low on energy and hard to hear, can't emote or come across as anything approaching a normal human being) can actually get so popular on the internet. This has jack fucking shit to do with your statement about the "popular and prevailing opinion" that the prequels suck.

Except that's the content of his video, but if you want to talk about the presentation then it's what actually gets him laughs, being the other reason why he's popular. Fail.

Does it affect you so badly you feel a need to post on an internet forum?

Does the Star Trek franchise sucking for years affect people so bad that they have to post on an internet forum? How about Karen Traviss's writings? Or people bashing Avatar and saying that the humans should've crashed asteroids on Pandora? Or any of the other scifi/fantasy related bullshit discussions here? That's what this board is for, talking about this kind of shit.

Yes, I know. Fatty nerds will be lame.

Do you have stock in Lucasfilm and you're worried it'll go down because of said opinions?

Yeah, fuck you too. Want me to turn this around and accuse you of being a RLM fanboy who's leaping to the defense of his favorite nerdboy who chooses to use a fucking speech impediment?

Oooh so defensive - except I don't care if you bash RLM. I was bashing you, not defending RLM. The fact that you think I would care to be called an RLM fanboy is tremendously amusing to me. The point I am making is you were 'disgusted' with RLM, he uses 'propaganda techniques' which 'exaggerate his case' and 'completely twist some things around'. Except that's nonsense, but it's even incongruous in this thread because Darth Yan only mentions him in passing. Had he not done so, would you even have posted in this thread?

[Jim Raynor]

So what, his opinions are fine it's his delivery you object to?

Opinions are subjective and are thus extremely hard to debate or object to, if it's even possible to dispute. If someone says "I hate the prequels," that's that. If someone tries to state reasons using questionable methods, and talks like a fucking annoying retard while doing it, I'm going to state MY opinion that I think his his review sucks ass.

Aside from the fact your objections are full of shit, bringing up RLM then bashing him in the next sentence belies your protestations.

Yeah, because it's impossible for someone to clearly explain their motivations when making a little request.

The hilarious thing is you can't understand why he's popular when it's clear to me he uses a fucked up voice for comic value and the techniques he employs in filming his criticisms win laughs.

Get this: I don't find his dickhead voice funny and I don't understand how you can put up with the same "joke" (if it can even be called that) for over an hour straight. I'm not alone in that either.

But I guess that's not your opinion right?

I don't have to dickhead, it can be inferred from your comments. You wouldn't have a problem with RLM if he criticised films you didn't like, because it would fall below your radar. Your protestations are disingenuous.

It's on my fucking radar because people posted about him on this message board that I frequently read. Believe it or not, I don't Google stalk the entire fucking internet for everybody who doesn't like the SW prequels.

If a movie video review gets on my radar, and I see it and think the reviewer is a fucktard with shitty presentation, I will say so even if I hate the movie.

Should I use a roll eye emoticon too? After all, it seems like all we have to do now is use instead of addressing someone's point.

WHAT point? What fucking point you cunt?

-I said I don't like RLM, and gave my reasons why. Which are other things besides him disliking the prequels.
-You made a one liner about how I'm such a dick for not respecting this guy's differing opinion.
-I dispute ithat accusastion.

WHAT is the fucking debate here? I sure as hell don't see a meaningful subject for discussion. I stated that I might write a response to this guy's review somewhere down the line (and I WILL point out his bullshit techniques in it), but I admit write now that that response hasn't been written yet so I have nothing to talk about or defend regarding it. You haven't seen shit either from me, so you're just carrying on being a bitch ass and trying to defend your lame one-liner accusation against me.

Yes, I know. Fatty nerds will be lame.

Another arrogant line from you that says nothing. This is a board for talking about scifi shit, where people have argued over the length of a SSD or bashed Karen Traviss's apologists (and I'm one of them). I don't see you bashing the entire board. Yet you sidestep the whole thing and still insist that it's "Fatty nerds" to talk about disliking RLM. Because a short little post about how some guy with a shit voice sucks is so beyond the pale on this board of all places.

Oooh so defensive

You came right at me with the insults and accusations, and I'm "defensive" for responding to you. Fuck you again you piece of shit.

- except I don't care if you bash RLM.

I suspect that you are. Maybe you're friends with him too. I know because I'm a mind reader, just like you.

but it's even incongruous in this thread because Darth Yan only mentions him in passing. Had he not done so, would you even have posted in this thread?

Yeah, because threads have never, ever deviated based on inquiries about something else that has already been mentioned in this thread...I'm not even the only person who has brought up RLM here. You're so desperately grasping for straws against me, and for what? Because you came out quick with a bullshit accusation (that I'm going after RLM for a differing opinion) against me, and you want to carry on and try to justify that?

[Channel72]

This guy's review isn't anywhere near as entertaining, insightful, or professionally put together as the RLM review. As much as I love prequel bashing, I wouldn't really recommend watching this; the reviewer doesn't cover any new ground nor offer any new insight into why the Prequels were so awful. He basically just repeats the same points made by RLM and everyone else for the past 10 years: Boring, lifeless characters, vague, unexplained plot details, Anakin as a totally unlikeable character, unconvincing CGI, etc. He also spends too much time harping on meaningless details such as the use of the word "turmoil" versus "unrest" in the opening crawl. Who cares.

[Stofsk]

Get this: I don't find his dickhead voice funny and I don't understand how you can put up with the same "joke" (if it can even be called that) for over an hour straight. I'm not alone in that either.

But I guess that's not your opinion right?

Obviously not... because like I said at the start of this, different people will have different opinions. But I wasn't the one who brought up RLM or bashed him in this thread now was I? Nor does RLM have anything to do with the OP or the linked videos, besides Darth Yan commenting on them in his own throwaway one-liner.

But the hilarious thing is you said opinions are subjective and virtually impossible to dispute, yet you originally offered your own opinion about your subjective dislike for RLM's delivery and you've offered it again, and you get defensive when someone disputes it... by saying different people have differing opinions, how dare they. Here's what you reply to me with:

yes, how dare someone on the internet hold a differing viewpoint to my own

If you're talking about me, that's hardly the case and I don't care for accusation. I didn't even go into the specifics of why I didn't like RLM's review in that short little post above, besides stating that I didn't like his "propaganda film-like techniques that he used to exaggerate his case and completely twist some things around." That's not disliking someone for a differing opinion, that's disliking someone for dishonesty and style-over-substance video editing that doesn't make as strong a point as it tries to appear to. Of course I haven't actually written that hypothetical rebuttal; all I did was state my own opinion of his work in a thread that's not even about him.

Straight off the bat you get defensive, even though there's no indication I was referring to solely you with my one-liner; you just assume my villainy! 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.

It's ok Jim! Everyone knows you don't like RLM! It's just that nobody cares.

[Jim Raynor]

Again, I haven't written my hypothetical response to this guy yet. But since I called RLM out on the "propaganda film-like" techniques used to exaggerate and distort, I'm going to quickly point a few out. Not that this has FUCK ALL to do with Stofsk's hasty accusation that I am bashing RLM for a differing viewpoint.

Part 1 of RLM's AOTC review.

2:14

You know if you stand back and look at this movie as a whole, it just comes off to the viewer as some kind of assembly line production, devoid of any emotional involvement from anyone.

This is a subjective claim by RLM, that can't really be proven or disproven. Towards the end of the statement, he cuts to a bunch of Lucas's employees sitting around a table as one of them reads off some dry numbers from a paper (which lasts for all of a few seconds). Yeah, that actually happened...but it shows nothing. I'm sure that even an impassioned employee who loves his/her job wouldn't be showing a great deal of emotion when reading some freaking numbers. Anybody with an actual job, or hell anyone who isn't abnormally perky knows that there are emotionally neutral moments like this all the time. What's funny is that immediately after those few seconds, we see an Asian employee smiling as he looks over some models. Oh yeah, what a cold, unemotional working environment where nobody gives a damn.

But at the same time, RLM goes off on his next sentence:

A film that coldly exploits the works of craftsmen and artists in a sterile computer-controlled environment.

"Coldly exploits?" "Exploit" is a loaded word with negative connotations. One dictionary definition is simply "to utilize, esp. for profit," but the word is most often used for more negative meanings, involving selfishness and mistreatment. I think it's safe to assume that Lucas's employees were fine to take money for their work, like everybody else with a job. RLM makes says "craftsmen and artists" which differentiates those people from the inhuman Lucasfilm entity. Geeks (the target audience for this video review) love artists, because geeks fancy themselves as artists. Whether it's by making fanfilms, fan edits, fanart, fanfics, etc. I know because I've lived that. Geeks also love to bitch against big business employers for constraining said artists, whether it be Lucas, Disney, Marvel, a TV network, or anything else.

OK, I guess I have nothing to prove RLM was being so cunning in his word choices there. But that's the beauty of making vague, unprovable statements. RLM can say that people at Lucasfilm weren't emotional, were exploited, didn't care or whatever, and nobody can prove him wrong on that. He still wasn't there himself, so he's basically just talking trash. And no, this was not one of his haha jokes either, he was just saying these things as if he knew.

3:09

And [George Lucas] didn't even seem to care about anything, except for trying to shove in as many things as he could make into toys or video games as possible."

Another unprovable statement with anti-business slant. During this sentence, he shows a few seconds of the Battle of Geonosis, with some different types of battledroids present. How dare a scifi war movie show a combined arms military force with various units! He immediately goes into the next bullshit statement:

In the first trilogy, until he got into the Ewoks of course, all the toys seemed to be a byproduct of the movie. There's a charming simplicity to it all. Now everything sucks."

RLM displays a group of primitive 1970s/1980s (?) SW action figures free from their packages and arranged on a plain white table. What the HELL does "the toys seemed to be a byproduct of the movie" even mean? It sounds "sensible" but the statement is vacuous and stupid. All movie merchandise is a byproduct of the movie, produced with the aim of generating more profits. And I really don't care about the toys either, because that has nothing to do with the movie itself. He says "Now everything sucks" as he cuts to a wall of modern SW toys, still in their colorful boxes in a toystore. If he's trying to make some kind of distinction here between old toys and new, it's stupid because the latter is still packaged in a flashy way that is designed to help them sell. To be fair he sounded a bit sarcastic when he said "Now everything sucks." But he's still saying it and furthering the image he's trying to push of Lucas being a sell out.

3:47

So this movie like the last one still doesn't have a main character. Instead now it's got two: Anakin and Obi-Wan."

Point? He says this but it's meaningless. I mean wow, TWO main characters. How unfocused!

]4:38

So now we're given sixty seconds in an elevator to establish that Anakin and Obi-Wan are friends. And please notice that this is not accomplished by how they act as friends. But rather it's accomplished by things that happened in the past. Things we never see. Something about falling into a nest of Gundarks...Now this may seem trivial, but it establishes an important precedence in the way these films are written. We don't see or feel characters or connections with each other, we have to be told about them. With Luke and Han Solo, we see their friendship grow. At first they don't really like each other, then they save each other's asses a few times, they go through some rough patches together, and they grow and change like real people. So when Old Obi-Wan says 'and he was a good friend,' you get a sense that it was a real friendship. But it never seems to have been, because Obi-Wan still seems irritated with this brat.

The old "show, don't tell" proverb. It's true, and something everyone can agree with. So of course he brings it up now early in the movie review (at least he's finally getting to the movie itself after all the above bullshit) to criticize AOTC with. It's stupid to bring up "show, don't tell" in the freaking elevator scene. Years and years have passed, and you can't "show" the passage of time without telling. Get this: in real life people talk. The elevator scene quickly acknowledges the passage of time, tells the audience that Anakin and Obi-Wan have combat experience, and sends them on the way to meeting Padme.

When he brings up Luke and Han, he shows quick cuts (love that editing technique) from all THREE original trilogy movies (yeah, how fair to compare that to one scene at the beginning of one movie). His claims of character development amount to "[Luke and Han] save each other's asses a few times" and end up liking each other. I mean wow, what character and relationship development (which he supports with a quick cut of Han hugging Luke, during the Endor victory celebration").

He tries to show that AOTC contradicts Old Obi-Wan calling Anakin "a good friend" in ANH by showing some more brief clips of him criticizing his Padawan. Which doesn't prove anything for the following reasons:

1. There can be different kinds of friends. You might regard someone as a "friend" even if you don't pal around with him. For example a "friend" could be someone who deeply cares about you and watches your back when you're endangered. Which the movie shows when Anakin later defies orders to stay back, choosing instead to rush off and try to save Anakin...
2. Old Obi-Wan was lying his ass off to Luke. Going by the same guy in the same scene, Darth Vader betrayed and murdered Anakin. I don't consider someone to be a "good friend" if he betrays everything I stand for and tries to kill me. Obi-Wan was clearly being selective and deceptive for Luke's benefit in ANH, based on revelations in TESB and ROTJ. So it's stupid to try to point out a supposed inconsistency based on a lie in the original trilogy.

But of course RLM repeats the "and he was a good friend"clip from ANH, along with editing tricks like the sound screeching to a halt, pausing, and zooming in to draw attention to it again. As if he's making some kind of really clever point.

8:00

Then all we know about the Sith is that they're bad guys. That's pretty much it. Are they all ex-Jedis?

No you idiot, the Sith haven't been seen in about a thousand years, as of TPM. How can they possibly be ex-Jedi? That movie already provided more information than that without going into exposition.

(Mace Windu:) "You refer to the prophecy of the One who will bring balance to the Force." So what is this prophecy about? What does it say? Who wrote it? When? What does bringing balance to the Force mean exactly?

Anakin was "The Chosen One," a trope so damn common in scifi/fantasy that I can't believe RLM is even going into this. Some ancient wise man predicted it or whatever, who needs that exposition? SW already provides you with the background to infer that an old Jedi must have predicted it, since Jedi are capable of looking into the future. "What does it say?" Wow, the audience already saw Anakin's final fate based on ROTJ! He kills the Emperor/Dark Lord of the Sith, allowing the Jedi to stand alone without their evil counterparts, while the forces of good retake the galaxy.

You see, this is when a fish-out-of-water main character comes in handy. All those people know this stuff, so they don't talk about it. But if you throw in a quick scene where a character called a "Protaganist" has it explained to him, then it's explained to the audience as well. You see, there are very few scenes like this in the prequel.

Funny how the guy who criticized the movie for telling instead of showing is calling for exposition scenes (for crap that can easily be inferred, or for stuff that we ALREADY know) just a couple of minutes later.

...That's just part one. And notice how most of what I've pointed out here (most of what RLM wasted time on talking about himself in the first part of his decompressed, overlong video review that's nearly feature length) isn't even ABOUT the movie itself, but tangential crap like how Lucas is a sell out businssman. Or a few retarded nitpicks which he's a complete moron for even bringing up, given what the audience should already know from past movies ("hur hur what is the Chosen One supposed to do?"). Notice how I'm not even disputing his opinion on the movie itself throughout much of this post, but instead pointing out his wording and editing techniques. If he's not intentionally twisting things to convey his unsupported statements about Lucas or the movie, then he's doing a damn good job of making things look like that by accident. Whatever, his review sucks either way. I've noticed that lots of stupid people talk like propaganda pushers even if they're not that shrewd, because it's easier to talk up bullshit than it is to support statements with real logic and evidence.

[Jim Raynor]

Stofsk, you're prick. And oh yeah, about my "horse shit" accusations about your precious Retarded Letter Media, you can deal with some in my above post.

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!),

Retard. I called RLM out for a poor review with bullshit editing techniques and shitty presentation, not about his opinion of disliking the movie. Stating an opinion...and um giving my opinion of his work...is the same fucking thing.

whilst pointing out how you did so in a thread that's not even about RLM.

It's ok Jim! Everyone knows you don't like RLM! It's just that nobody cares.

Oh look, the standard cliche "I'm too cool to care about you" bullshit that every kiddie on the internet eventually resorts to. You seem to care enough to carry on with this bullshit non-debate about nothing.

[Darth Yan]

he also plans to cover the originals. He also said that he wanted to avoid sounding too much like Red letter media. I loved how he pointed out obi wan's contradictary actions, and I like that he was able to acknowledge the strenghs of attack of the clones. I'll still upload his rots and original trilogy review.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Wow, you might as well have said, "TheAmazingAtheist Reviews Star Wars". When I turned it on, I was like 'this dude sounds like TJ, exactly like TJ, it IS TJ!'

I remember when he used to be your typical, 'I'm not a conservative, but I'm not a fucking liberal, I'm a libertarian.'

Yeah, TJ has a unique sense of humor.

[Gramzamber]

Another unprovable statement with anti-business slant. During this sentence, he shows a few seconds of the Battle of Geonosis, with some different types of battledroids present. How dare a scifi war movie show a combined arms military force with various units! He immediately goes into the next bullshit statement:

Oh come on. There's combined arms and then there's pointless shit with giant wheels that's put on screen once and never again.

The old "show, don't tell" proverb. It's true, and something everyone can agree with. So of course he brings it up now early in the movie review (at least he's finally getting to the movie itself after all the above bullshit) to criticize AOTC with. It's stupid to bring up "show, don't tell" in the freaking elevator scene. Years and years have passed, and you can't "show" the passage of time without telling. Get this: in real life people talk. The elevator scene quickly acknowledges the passage of time, tells the audience that Anakin and Obi-Wan have combat experience, and sends them on the way to meeting Padme.

Way to miss the point. The friendship and camraderie between Anakin and Obi-Wan was referenced since the OT. We should be shown this.
The reason the elevator thing is a complaint is because we're told Anakin and Obi-Wan are great friends and a great master and apprentice team, then for the rest of the movie what we SEE is Anakin bitching about Obi-Wan, disobeying his orders, arguing with him in public and generally being a whiny asshole.

He tries to show that AOTC contradicts Old Obi-Wan calling Anakin "a good friend" in ANH by showing some more brief clips of him criticizing his Padawan. Which doesn't prove anything for the following reasons:

1. There can be different kinds of friends. You might regard someone as a "friend" even if you don't pal around with him. For example a "friend" could be someone who deeply cares about you and watches your back when you're endangered. Which the movie shows when Anakin later defies orders to stay back, choosing instead to rush off and try to save Anakin...
2. Old Obi-Wan was lying his ass off to Luke. Going by the same guy in the same scene, Darth Vader betrayed and murdered Anakin. I don't consider someone to be a "good friend" if he betrays everything I stand for and tries to kill me. Obi-Wan was clearly being selective and deceptive for Luke's benefit in ANH, based on revelations in TESB and ROTJ. So it's stupid to try to point out a supposed inconsistency based on a lie in the original trilogy.

Great, so you're retroactively trying to make the OT fit the PT instead of Lucas having to do the hardwork by doing it the other way around.

But of course RLM repeats the "and he was a good friend"clip from ANH, along with editing tricks like the sound screeching to a halt, pausing, and zooming in to draw attention to it again. As if he's making some kind of really clever point.

It's an old point, and an obvious one. It's not "clever", it's just there.

No you idiot, the Sith haven't been seen in about a thousand years, as of TPM. How can they possibly be ex-Jedi? That movie already provided more information than that without going into exposition.

Except, you know, the Jedi have been around for thousands of years so the question is valid.
What are the Sith? Oh they've been away for a thousand years because.. um.. because of the Jedi I guess. Why? What did they do? Who are they? Never explained.

Anakin was "The Chosen One," a trope so damn common in scifi/fantasy that I can't believe RLM is even going into this. Some ancient wise man predicted it or whatever, who needs that exposition? SW already provides you with the background to infer that an old Jedi must have predicted it, since Jedi are capable of looking into the future. "What does it say?" Wow, the audience already saw Anakin's final fate based on ROTJ! He kills the Emperor/Dark Lord of the Sith, allowing the Jedi to stand alone without their evil counterparts, while the forces of good retake the galaxy.

So you write episode one on the basis that everybody's already seen episode six.
What?

[Jim Raynor]

Oh come on. There's combined arms and then there's pointless shit with giant wheels that's put on screen once and never again.

There's pointless shit like robed desert midgets with glowy eyes who scream "Utinni!" and fry R2D2 for some reason completely unrelated to the plot of the movie. There's pointless shit like their giant desert tractors. There's pointless shit like most of the aliens in the cantina. Or the Wampa. Or five out of six bounty hunters. Or that weird cyborg dude in Cloud City. Hell, Cloud City itself. Or most of the aliens in Jabba's palace. Or four different types of Imperial starfighters. Or four different types of Rebel starfighters. Or the brand new fish men who suddenly show up to lead the Rebel forces in ROTJ. Or that weird looking alien dude who sat next to Lando during the Battle of Endor...

You don't truly "need" any of this. But if you cut it down to the bare elements that the movie does need to tell the story, then the movie is far less rich. Not to mention dumber, because in real life militaries do use a variety of units. The different types of battledroids on Geonosis have zero impact on the plot, but they do show that the Separatists are a well equipped coalition army with a variety of weapons. I could've taken a few seconds out of the TESB and shown the same number of new units/characters, but that would be a waste of time as well.

Way to miss the point. The friendship and camraderie between Anakin and Obi-Wan was referenced since the OT. We should be shown this.

We are shown this, nevermind Old Obi-Wan was a total liar in the one scene where he uttered the one sentence about Anakin being a good friend. We see Anakin and Obi-Wan saving each other's asses in this movie, and we see more of it in ROTS. Again, a "friend" doesn't necessarily mean someone you hang out and goof around with.

Great, so you're retroactively trying to make the OT fit the PT instead of Lucas having to do the hardwork by doing it the other way around.

Lucas already made fans retroactively fit ANH with TESB. There's nothing for the PT to fit, because again, Old Obi-Wan is a fucking liar, and not just "from a certain point of view" as he tries to lamely justify it later. One line in one scene from one liar. Yet RLM, and other fans who don't get it, are trying to create some kind of inconsistency where an inconsistency doesn't have to exist.

Except, you know, the Jedi have been around for thousands of years so the question is valid.

He clearly asks if the Sith are "all" ex-Jedi. The movies never, ever show anything suggesting Palpatine/Sidious was once a Jedi. The Jedi had no damn clue who Darth Maul even was. RLM is a moron.

So you write episode one on the basis that everybody's already seen episode six.
What?

1. It's a stock fantasy element as old as time. Even kids don't need useless exposition about some irrelevant dead guy from a thousand years ago or whatever who made the prediction. I sure as hell didn't need that irrelevant blank to be filled in to get the movie.
2. Yes, movies in the same series are made with the assumption that you've seen previous movies in the same series. Big deal.

[Kane Starkiller]

There's pointless shit like robed desert midgets with glowy eyes who scream "Utinni!" and fry R2D2 for some reason completely unrelated to the plot of the movie. There's pointless shit like their giant desert tractors. There's pointless shit like most of the aliens in the cantina. Or the Wampa. Or five out of six bounty hunters. Or that weird cyborg dude in Cloud City. Hell, Cloud City itself. Or most of the aliens in Jabba's palace. Or four different types of Imperial starfighters. Or four different types of Rebel starfighters. Or the brand new fish men who suddenly show up to lead the Rebel forces in ROTJ. Or that weird looking alien dude who sat next to Lando during the Battle of Endor...

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?).
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. 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.
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.

We are shown this, nevermind Old Obi-Wan was a total liar in the one scene where he uttered the one sentence about Anakin being a good friend. We see Anakin and Obi-Wan saving each other's asses in this movie, and we see more of it in ROTS. Again, a "friend" doesn't necessarily mean someone you hang out and goof around with.

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?

He clearly asks if the Sith are "all" ex-Jedi. The movies never, ever show anything suggesting Palpatine/Sidious was once a Jedi. The Jedi had no damn clue who Darth Maul even was. RLM is a moron.

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.

This is a subjective claim by RLM, that can't really be proven or disproven. Towards the end of the statement, he cuts to a bunch of Lucas's employees sitting around a table as one of them reads off some dry numbers from a paper (which lasts for all of a few seconds). Yeah, that actually happened...but it shows nothing. I'm sure that even an impassioned employee who loves his/her job wouldn't be showing a great deal of emotion when reading some freaking numbers. Anybody with an actual job, or hell anyone who isn't abnormally perky knows that there are emotionally neutral moments like this all the time. What's funny is that immediately after those few seconds, we see an Asian employee smiling as he looks over some models. Oh yeah, what a cold, unemotional working environment where nobody gives a damn.

Obviously many of the things in the review are put there for humorous effect not to actually make a valid point. The point stands: the overuse of blue screen makes the film look fake. This is best established towards the end of the review when he contrasts Hoth set with actual models and sets with fakeass Jedi Temple scene which looks like something out of 3DMark video card test.

Point? He says this but it's meaningless. I mean wow, TWO main characters. How unfocused!

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.

The old "show, don't tell" proverb. It's true, and something everyone can agree with. So of course he brings it up now early in the movie review (at least he's finally getting to the movie itself after all the above bullshit) to criticize AOTC with. It's stupid to bring up "show, don't tell" in the freaking elevator scene. Years and years have passed, and you can't "show" the passage of time without telling. Get this: in real life people talk. The elevator scene quickly acknowledges the passage of time, tells the audience that Anakin and Obi-Wan have combat experience, and sends them on the way to meeting Padme.

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.

When he brings up Luke and Han, he shows quick cuts (love that editing technique) from all THREE original trilogy movies (yeah, how fair to compare that to one scene at the beginning of one movie). His claims of character development amount to "[Luke and Han] save each other's asses a few times" and end up liking each other. I mean wow, what character and relationship development (which he supports with a quick cut of Han hugging Luke, during the Endor victory celebration").

Yes there is development. You can clearly see the change in attitude between Han and Luke from ANH to ROTJ. 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.

Anakin was "The Chosen One," a trope so damn common in scifi/fantasy that I can't believe RLM is even going into this. Some ancient wise man predicted it or whatever, who needs that exposition? SW already provides you with the background to infer that an old Jedi must have predicted it, since Jedi are capable of looking into the future. "What does it say?" Wow, the audience already saw Anakin's final fate based on ROTJ! He kills the Emperor/Dark Lord of the Sith, allowing the Jedi to stand alone without their evil counterparts, while the forces of good retake the galaxy.

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.
Not to mention that we never find out why or how did Trade Federation become Sidious's stooge, what was taxation "dispute" all about, why Trade Federation thought invading Naboo will benefit them in the dispute, 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.

[Channel72]

Yes there is development. You can clearly see the change in attitude between Han and Luke from ANH to ROTJ. 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.

Good points, overall. However, I think there is at least some development between Anakin and Obi-Wan. In AOTC Anakin is basically an impudent, disobedient asshole who constantly complains about Obi Wan. In RotS, the two seem to be more comfortable with each other. (Anakin is a bit more mature, albeit still whiny.) The problem is that unlike the relationship between Han and Luke, none of this really feels natural. This is because Han and Luke went through a lot more together than we ever see Anakin experience with Obi Wan. In ANH, Han and Luke rescue the Princess from the Death Star, then Han has a change of heart and helps out the Rebels. In ESB Han saves Luke's life again, and there's an interesting love triangle going on between Han, Luke, and Leia. Then in ROTJ Luke saves Han's life. Their relationship is constantly growing in an organic way.

In contrast, we don't even see Anakin with Obi Wan until the second Prequel film. In that film, we only hear about their adventures together. The only thing we really see them do together is chase after the assasin and then fight Dooku at the end. They're basically separated for most of the movie, and there's really no growth in their relationship. Then in RotS, the two of them appear to have a decent friendship, but we never really see how it got to that point. Apparently it all happened off screen during the Clone Wars. It's sad, but the dramatic weight of the final battle on Mustafar is carried mostly by what we know of Darth Vader and Obi Wan from the Original Trilogy rather than any natural attachment we have to the Prequel characters.

[Jim Raynor]

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.