StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I dispute this supposedly superior relationship between Han and Luke. They meet in ANH and get into some firefights onboard the Death Star. Han runs off after getting his money, then has a change of heart and shows up at the last second to help destroy the Death Star. In the beginning of TESB he saves Luke...and then they spend the rest of the movie APART. In ROTJ the gang saves Han, they go to Endor, and then they spend the rest of that movie apart as well. What character interaction.

Jim Raynor wrote:I dispute this supposedly superior relationship between Han and Luke. They meet in ANH and get into some firefights onboard the Death Star. Han runs off after getting his money, then has a change of heart and shows up at the last second to help destroy the Death Star. In the beginning of TESB he saves Luke...and then they spend the rest of the movie APART. In ROTJ the gang saves Han, they go to Endor, and then they spend the rest of that movie apart as well. What character interaction.

You're just downplaying the relationship between Han and Luke by describing the bare plot elements while glossing over the chemistry and character growth that occurs between them. In ANH, Luke was a starry-eyed naive farm-boy, and Han was a cynical smuggler looking out for himself. In ESB, Han takes on a sort of a "big brother" role with Luke; he risks his life to save him, but also feels threatened by him in regard to Leia. By the time RotJ comes around, Luke is a serious Jedi Knight who ultimately has to save Han. The two of them really grow together throughout the saga. The outcome of their friendship could have been handled a little better in RotJ, but RotJ is definitely the weakest of the original films.

Regardless, there's nothing comparable to the Han/Luke relationship in the Prequels. This is partly due to the fact that Harrison Ford is a better actor than just about anyone in the Prequels (with the possible exception of Liam Neeson), and even Mark Hamill comes across as likeable, unlike his whiny bitch of a father. But more importantly, the script never really afforded the opportunity for the audience to really connect with Anakin or Obi-Wan. In AotC, Anakin resents Obi-Wan's authority, but he never really grows as a character. Then, in RotS, he's suddenly more friendly with Obi-Wan, but we never really saw the events which led to this development. Contrast this with ANH, where Han's character arc takes him from a selfish, cynical bastard, to a hero of the Rebellion. In the Prequels, Anakin goes from being a whiny, obnoxious bitch, to... a somewhat less whiny bitch, to a homicidal maniac.

Granted, Anakin is supposed to have a darker streak, but his fall to the dark side would have been all the more tragic if he was a genuinely likeable character to begin with. There's really nothing tragic about a whiny, disobedient asshole turning into a power hungry maniac.

Channel72 wrote:You're just downplaying the relationship between Han and Luke by describing the bare plot elements while glossing over the chemistry and character growth that occurs between them. In ANH, Luke was a starry-eyed naive farm-boy, and Han was a cynical smuggler looking out for himself. In ESB, Han takes on a sort of a "big brother" role with Luke; he risks his life to save him, but also feels threatened by him in regard to Leia. By the time RotJ comes around, Luke is a serious Jedi Knight who ultimately has to save Han. The two of them really grow together throughout the saga. The outcome of their friendship could have been handled a little better in RotJ, but RotJ is definitely the weakest of the original films.

You make some good points, but I still have to somewhat disagree about the extent of their relationship development over three movies. Han saves Luke at the beginning of TESB and then they don't even see each other for the rest of the movie. Saving Han in ROTJ is not character development or interaction; Han was frozen until Leia melted him out, at which point he was blind and bumbling around. He interacted with Leia, Chewie, and Lando more than he did with Luke.

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

I already answered this point in the very post you quoted: the things you mentioned in the original films serve a purpose. You'll notice that no one complains that Maul is an alien or that Watto is an alien. You are simply sniping his commentary out of context. There is plenty more evidence he produces besides that single scene.
There is a difference between creating diversity and diversity showing its way in front of the main characters and distracting from the story. And stupid cartoony droid designs completely ruin tension in the film. I don't know who is supposed to find those silly four legged droids with big eyes threatening but it sure ain't me. They clearly began their design life as a kid friendly toy.

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

First the third villain I referred to was Grevious not Fett. And I don't see how your post addresses my point. Yes Dooku and Maul did different things but their role was completely the same: Palpatine's henchman that did lightsaber battle with the Jedi. The same goes for Grevious. It would've been far better to have a single "henchman" villain that grew through 3 films then introduce a completely new henchman each sequel.
Maul, at least, was a somwhat memorable villain, Dooku was bland and uninteresting and Grevious was a complete non character obviously designed to be a "cool" toy.
And I have to laugh at your notion that you can defend dramatic failings of a movie but saying it's "logical". Yeah no shit there are millions of separatists. There were also millions of Imperials. Maybe they should've replaced Vader with a new villain in ESB and then again new in ROTJ. Yes that would've made the films much better and memorable.

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

There you go again trying to defend dramatic failings by saying it's not impossible. She could've disguised herself without the overelaborate dresses which portray her as vain even as her planet is supposedly starving. I say supposedly because, as RLM points out, we never actually see it or the "catastrophic death tool". But we do see her elaborate dresses and make up and hair styles. "Let them eat cake!"
The same goes for AOTC: they are supposedly running/hiding from an assassin and again she is changing clothes every 15 seconds. Not any kind of clothes mind you but luxury elaborate dresses. And sure you could point out how she has the money but again it shows her as a vain self centered person especially when contrasted with every other character in the movie who don't change their clothes even though they have the ability to do so too.

Jim Raynor wrote: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?

Impeccable logic again. Still doesn't change the fact that Millenium Falcon is more memorable and well known than Princess Amidala herself to say nothing about Leia. Could it be that the audience doesn't like spoiled royalty displaying their wealth especially as the galaxy is falling around them?

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

Again you missed the point. He wasn't attacking it from a logical but dramatic point of view. Obviously there is no problem in simply saying Obi Wan lied but that's not the point. The point is people expected to see this great friendship and they didn't see it. Even disregarding Ben's line the prequels fail because since they were never friends to begin with where is the drama in their final fight? The way they constantly snipe at each other and without any real friend moments there is no sense of loss when their "friendship" is lost.
His fall to the Dark Side was especially badly done. With Luke in ROTJ the sense was that being a Force attuned being is a double edged sword and by manipulating your raw emotions can turn you evil like Emperor tried to do. It was simple and effective. In the prequels Lucas has Palpatine manipulate Anakin "conventionally" basically talking shit about Jedi, telling him stories about great power etc. There is no sense the Force is at work here like with Luke, basically a young dope got fooled by empty promises.

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

He is a greedy corporate. Trying to do everything with as little real sets as possible to save money but then turns around and crams every frame with toy-to-be CGI.

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

I meant "main point" in the two main characters bit. He states that there are two main characters but that we can't really relate to any of them and that is the problem. If we could relate to them like Han and Luke then there would be no problem.
There would be no problem with Obi Wan and Anakin fighting on occasions if we saw actual genuine friendship moments. But from TPM Obi-Wan is annoyed by Anakin, he thinks he should not be trained, he thinks he is dangerous, but then trains him because that was Qui Gon's last wish, then he thinks his abilities have made him arrogant etc.
He simply doesn't like the guy is the impression I get from the move and the feeling seems to be mutual.

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

Really? If no one told you that guy from AOTC is Anakin Skywalker you could actually recognize something of TPM Anakin in him? Every 9 year old has big dreams and is idealistic. If I saw him torturing a bird then I could make a connection with AOTC and ROTS Anakin.
Oh and certainly the relationship between Han and Luke is hardly "deep"; I doubt anyone would call the entire original trilogy deep or anything. That only serves to further illustrate how lifeless the relationship between characters in prequels is.
Can you find a single scene like the one at the end of ANH when Han, Luke and Leia celebrate their victory and hug each other? Everything in prequels is forced and detached.

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

Wow a single line. I'm talking about people acting friendly around each other so that we can see they become better friends not having to declare it to each other. I don't remember Han ever telling Luke "you are my friend, I'm so proud of you". But when he saves Luke from Wampa and then says with a smile "that's two you owe me now kid" we can see their friendship.
Anakin is gradually seduced? He is killing children in AOTC. And he isn't seduced by the dark side as I already pointed out, he is seduced by Palpatine's ridiculous promises.
Anakin obviously changes between TPM and AOTC since there is absolutely no connection between those two characters but them remains pretty much the same.

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

What fucking evil? In fantasy there is an evil force like an empire or a dragon or machines that control us whatever. Here he is supposed to "bring balance to the Force" but the movie doesn't establish that the Force is "out of balance". If the Jedi aren't even aware of the Sith then what is this evil they fear that the Chosen One is supposed to save them from?

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

Except original trilogy was never about how Empire came to be but how Luke is going to make it all better.
Put what together? Sidious wants to be Emperor+greedy corporation=profit? Why would these corporate assholes with their own army fearfully obey Sidious and his every whim?

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

I didn't say it was confusing but that there is no explanation. You can't say "taxing is in dispute" and call that an explanation for everything that goes on in the movie. How exactly did Sidious persuade the "hapeless" Trade Federation into "doing his bidding"? He is barking orders at them. How did he acquire that authority? The characters don't care because they are stupidly written.

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

That's bullshit. First they created a blockade, then on Palpatine's insistence they invaded but worried about legality after which Palpatine promised them he will make it legal and they spend the rest of the movie trying to catch the queen to sign the documents.
So it seemed to be about acquisition of territory. Not to mention that Trade Federation representatives deny there is an invasion and ask for "committe" to determine the "validity of accusations". Shouldn't they be openly declaring they invaded it and demand concessions and repeal of taxes or something?

Jim Raynor wrote: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.

Really so all those new separatist factions and their nature is all explained by the opening crawl of TPM that stated "taxation is in dispute". Bullshit. What is Techno Union? What is Banking clan? Why did they join up? Is Banking clan upset about taxation of trade routes? Why? Enough to want to secede? What about their customers in the rest of the Republic? Will they loose them if they secede? How is a "Banking Clan" a political entity that can secede?
But yes all of that is really explained by the opening crawl of TPM which states "the taxation of trade routes to outlying star systems is in dispute".

Kane Starkiller wrote:I already answered this point in the very post you quoted: the things you mentioned in the original films serve a purpose. You'll notice that no one complains that Maul is an alien or that Watto is an alien. You are simply sniping his commentary out of context. There is plenty more evidence he produces besides that single scene.

The narrative of ANH did not require R2D2 to get caught by desert midgets with their own giant tractors before finding his way to the Lars farm. TESB could have worked with three bounty hunters, or even one. A simple scene of Vader using HoloNet to contact Boba Fett would have sufficed. So don't pretend like there are all sorts of reasons when there really aren't. Again, this stuff is just background detail. Just like having the Separatist army have more than just droid infantry. And again, I'd argue that it's more important to show the Separatist army has combined arms and different droid designs.

There is a difference between creating diversity and diversity showing its way in front of the main characters and distracting from the story.[/ And stupid cartoony droid designs completely ruin tension in the film.

Oh, this is rich. A battle droid design rolling past the screen for a few seconds of a battle is more "distracting from the story" than unnamed desert midgets with glowy eyes getting an entire scene where they stalk and disable R2 (instead of a few shots of R2 just wandering through the desert alone before reaching the farm). Hey, whatever, it's your opinion I guess.

I don't know who is supposed to find those silly four legged droids with big eyes threatening but it sure ain't me. They clearly began their design life as a kid friendly toy.

It's a robot insect with a prominent gun and blank, blood red eyes. I don't find its mere appearance (in the midst of a huge freaking battle scene) any more distracting than the desert midgets.

First the third villain I referred to was Grevious not Fett. And I don't see how your post addresses my point. Yes Dooku and Maul did different things but their role was completely the same: Palpatine's henchman that did lightsaber battle with the Jedi. The same goes for Grevious. It would've been far better to have a single "henchman" villain that grew through 3 films then introduce a completely new henchman each sequel.

Grievous is a droid general for a preestablished droid army. Ooh, distracting. What's your alternative? Oh yeah, don't make any new name villains (despite a galaxy-wide coalition to draw from) and go with a single name villain instead. Doing this means that the villain can't be killed (or even ENCOUNTERED), because the entire story being about the villains operating in secrecy. There, you suddenly have to restructure the entire story just to fit in this little idea that maybe the henchman villain (who matters far less than Palpatine or Vader) should keep showing up. And it wouldn't even be good enough for you anyway, since you think a handful of seconds of a freaking battle droid is sooo distracting. If there are any distinctive supporting villain characters other than this guy, I suspect you'd still be complaining about the "toys." But another major villain who's NOT Palpatine or Vader isn't distracting to the story being told...

And I have to laugh at your notion that you can defend dramatic failings of a movie but saying it's "logical". Yeah no shit there are millions of separatists. There were also millions of Imperials. Maybe they should've replaced Vader with a new villain in ESB and then again new in ROTJ. Yes that would've made the films much better and memorable.

Vader is the main villain of the OT, more so than the Emperor who only showed up for real in ROTJ. Palpatine/Sidious serves that role in the prequel trilogy.

There you go again trying to defend dramatic failings by saying it's not impossible. She could've disguised herself without the overelaborate dresses which portray her as vain even as her planet is supposedly starving.

Oh, so now your little bullshit nitpick complaint about is now elevated to a "dramatic failing" that I'm supposedly grasping for straws while trying to defend against. You're so full of it. She already has a collection of elaborate dresses, being a fucking queen and all. When she's disguising herself as a handmaiden, she obviously has to switch out of those dresses. When it's another freaking DAY, and she's supposed to appear before the Senate, you seem to expect her not to fucking change her clothes? What the hell is this? If anyone is reaching here it's you. Padme's clothing has jack fucking shit to do with her supposedly not caring about her planet's plight. And weren't we fucking talking about ATTACK OF THE CLONES and not TPM?.

I say supposedly because, as RLM points out, we never actually see it or the "catastrophic death tool". But we do see her elaborate dresses and make up and hair styles. "Let them eat cake!"

If RLM actually made that argument then that's another example of him talking out of his ass. It's retarded a retarded excuse for character "analysis."

The same goes for AOTC: they are supposedly running/hiding from an assassin and again she is changing clothes every 15 seconds.

No, they weren't. They retreated to the safety of Padme's luxurious home planet, where she very likely has lots of security and where she was accompanied by a Jedi as well. And they stayed there, for more than a day. Again you seem to be under the bullshit impression that a fucking queen shouldn't have a change of clothes available (or you're mindlessly parroting that dumbass RLM). Why the FUCK are we even talking about Padme's wardrobe? Of all the criticisms of the prequels, this just may be the single fucking dumbest thing I've ever read.

And sure you could point out how she has the money but again it shows her as a vain self centered person

Yeah, changing into clothes that you already have, over the course of days, makes you a bad person inside. Oh yeah, that's not reaching or jumping to conclusions at all. Fuck your bullshit attempts at analysis.

Impeccable logic again. Still doesn't change the fact that Millenium Falcon is more memorable and well known than Princess Amidala herself to say nothing about Leia.

Oh, so you want to make Padme's ship like the Millenium Falcon, almost a character unto itself or whatever you said before. Isn't that...distracting from the story? Because if Padme's ships are supposed to matter like the Falcon, she'd have to do far more with them or even get into dogfights and shit. So are you going to propose that they restructure the fucking trilogy to put more emphasis on Padme's fucking ships? But, but...ZOMG the toys are so distracting from the story!

Nevermind that Padme's first ship in TPM gets fucking shot up and has to stop on Tatooine because it's so wrecked. It would be ridiculous that in the YEARS after that, a queen/senator can't replace such a banged up vehicle. More likely the thing was decommissioned right after the crisis passed. The second ship...gets fucking BLOWN THE FUCK UP by a bomb in beginning of AOTC, for story reasons.

Could it be that the audience doesn't like spoiled royalty displaying their wealth especially as the galaxy is falling around them?

Could it be that you're an idiot who doesn't realize that she already has this wealth? Could it be that you're reaching for bullshit reasons to criticize this movie? Could it be that you're being an idiot who's actually judging someone's character based on the unimportant fact that she has more than one set of clothes? Could it be that if RLM actually said the same thing, he's also a fucking idiot?

Again you missed the point. He wasn't attacking it from a logical but dramatic point of view.

Uh, yes he fucking is.

Obviously there is no problem in simply saying Obi Wan lied but that's not the point. The point is people expected to see this great friendship and they didn't see it.

So "people" (and by that you mean Retarded Letter Media) came up with their own unsupported fanfic conclusions then spent a lot of time trying to show how Obi-Wan and Anakin weren't as chummy with each other as they THOUGHT they should be? Throughout AOTC and ROTS, Anakin displays his protectiveness and dedication to his friends during battle, when it counts. That is enough to qualify as "a good friend," especially when considering the FACT that Obi-Wan was lying and being selective in ANH. So, RLM:

1. Jumped to conclusions based on ONE vague line that said next to nothing especially since the character was lying..
2. Failed to consider other types of friendship.
3. Doesn't give credit for the loyalty that Anakin does show during battle.

Again, if you would have preferred that Anakin and Obi-Wan be better pals, then just say it. That's your opinion. Don't bullshit around trying to justify made-up ideas or pretend that there's an inconsistency.

Even disregarding Ben's line the prequels fail because since they were never friends to begin with where is the drama in their final fight?

Friends have to pal with each other (despite not even being peers), otherwise they're not friends. Anakin saves Obi-Wan on Coruscant, and later rushes off to save him again despite strict orders from the Council to stay away. They seem friendly during the space battle of Coruscant, and Anakin saves Obi-Wan there again despite Obi-Wan's orders to forget about him (when he's in serious danger of being taken down by buzz droids) and press on with the mission. Also, Anakin almost rushed off to save some clone pilots during that same battle because they were being killed, and had to be talked out of that as well. Obi-Wan gets knocked out onboard the Invisible Hand, and Anakin saves him again. Later, Obi-Wan tells Anakin he's proud of him.

But nope, they're not friends, and Anakin doesn't do enough to justify Old Obi-Wan's vague, passing one-liner (while lying) about being "a good friend."

His fall to the Dark Side was especially badly done. With Luke in ROTJ the sense was that being a Force attuned being is a double edged sword and by manipulating your raw emotions can turn you evil like Emperor tried to do. It was simple and effective. In the prequels Lucas has Palpatine manipulate Anakin "conventionally" basically talking shit about Jedi, telling him stories about great power etc. There is no sense the Force is at work here like with Luke, basically a young dope got fooled by empty promises.

Oh yeah, perfectly reading a guy you've studied for years and telling him what he wants to hear is so much worse than "COME ON GET MAD!" Anakin is shown to be an extremely moody guy with lots of psychological hangups. He lets his emotions get the better of him. What Palpatine does is manipulate his emotions, WHILE also manipulating his conscious thoughts.

He is a greedy corporate. Trying to do everything with as little real sets as possible to save money but then turns around and crams every frame with toy-to-be CGI.

So you ignored my points on how RLM was manipulating videos to push a certain image...to respond with the same tired unsupported subjective crap about George Lucas being a sell-out.

I meant "main point" in the two main characters bit. He states that there are two main characters but that we can't really relate to any of them and that is the problem.

1. I don't give a fuck about what you think his "main point" was, because I wasn't talking about what he said later. I was pointing out the manipulative way he lead into it, taking a point that was a lot more fair for TPM and then tenuously trying to equate AOTC to it. Wow, this movie has TWO main characters.
2. I didn't even say this before because that wasn't what I was dealing with, but I'll even dispute his claims about the characters being unrelateable. He dismisses Obi-Wan as a "weird monk," when Obi-Wan's character is that of an overwhelmed father. Obi-Wan is old fashioned, and supposedly wiser and more cautious, and he criticizes Anakin as if he is. Yet he's clearly nowhere close to perfect (not as good as Qui-Gon), and he's prone to mistakes or hypocrisy himself. But he's still sympathetic because his "son" is reckless and out of control. Both Anakin and Obi-Wan have their own flaws, and also things that allow old and young viewers to identify with them.

Really? If no one told you that guy from AOTC is Anakin Skywalker you could actually recognize something of TPM Anakin in him? Every 9 year old has big dreams and is idealistic. If I saw him torturing a bird then I could make a connection with AOTC and ROTS Anakin.

I recognized a lot from TPM Anakin, when I was a fucking teenager who saw these movies the first time. Big dreams and idealism are the nice versions of ambition and extremism. It's stupid and simplistic to think that somebody who grows up bad has to do something like torturing fucking animals in his youth. Lots of people with decent upbringings (which Anakin did not receive) end up on the wrong path. Young Anakin grew up with little to nothing, and held on dearly to the things that he did have. He wanted to change the system and grow up to be a big hero. This little boy who had so little was taken away from his mother, then quickly lost his adoptive father figure.

Go forward ten years and he's pissed off at the lesser father figure he does have (the one who rides him hard and doesn't believe in him as much). He was also clearly holding on to his memories of Padme before he had even reconnected to her in AOTC. He holds onto her and eventually loses everything because he's afraid of more loss, and wants the power to control his life and everything around him to prevent that.

Can you find a single scene like the one at the end of ANH when Han, Luke and Leia celebrate their victory and hug each other?

You don't find a scene like that because the good guys lose. Obi-Wan's speech to Anakin after defeating him, where he expresses his anger, disappointment, and feelings of betrayal, says a lot more than a few freaking hugs.

I'm talking about people acting friendly around each other so that we can see they become better friends not having to declare it to each other.

I think that a fierce determination to protect the people you're close to, despite being told not to save them, says a lot more than some trite little displays of "friendship." But of course you and RLM don't seem to understand that or give it any credit.

What fucking evil? In fantasy there is an evil force like an empire or a dragon or machines that control us whatever.

The Sith.

Here he is supposed to "bring balance to the Force" but the movie doesn't establish that the Force is "out of balance".

Yoda and Mace talk about how the Force is all fucked up, in the middle of AOTC. We see that the galaxy is not right throughout the prequel trilogy, given how violent and dysfunctional it is. Do you seriously need Yoda to beat you over the head by sayng "the Force is out of balance" before you can understand this?

If the Jedi aren't even aware of the Sith then what is this evil they fear that the Chosen One is supposed to save them from?

It's an old prophecy and the Jedi didn't even know when it was supposed to come true. Qui-Gon is the one pushing for Anakin's recruitment on the basis of his natural Force talents, which apparently match up with the descriptions of the Chosen One. You, as the viewer, have more outside knowledge, nevermind the narrative expectation that if a prophecy is mentioned, it WILL come true.

Except original trilogy was never about how Empire came to be but how Luke is going to make it all better.

Except that TPM was never about the Trade Federation, but about how dysfunctional and impotent the Republic was.

Put what together? Sidious wants to be Emperor+greedy corporation=profit? Why would these corporate assholes with their own army fearfully obey Sidious and his every whim?

Onscreen, Sidious clearly and explicitly states to the Trade Federation that he controls the Senate and can manipulate it for their purposes. The greedy (and stupid) Trade Fed patsies are willing to take any help they can get to lift the taxes. It's not hard to think that Palpatine called them up and offered his help.

I didn't say it was confusing but that there is no explanation. You can't say "taxing is in dispute"

What the fuck? Taxes are taxes. Government passes them to get money, businesses bitch. That's all there is to it; there's nothing mysterious about the situation.

That's bullshit. First they created a blockade, then on Palpatine's insistence they invaded but worried about legality after which Palpatine promised them he will make it legal and they spend the rest of the movie trying to catch the queen to sign the documents.
So it seemed to be about acquisition of territory.

WOW HOLY SHIT. When people want political changes, they sometimes resort to force or the threat of force. Or even just disrupting the natural order of things. Why do people stage sit ins? Why do people go on strikes and picket? Why do people riot? But it's "bullshit" that they were blockading and invading Naboo to protest taxes, despite the text explictly stating that they are? But you obviously can't understand this simple concept. You obviously need things spelled out for you. You obviously like to go off on your own bullshit wild-ass theories, hence your bizarre claim that it was about the "acquisition of territory." Despite Sidious having to TALK the Trade Federation into invading.

Not to mention that Trade Federation representatives deny there is an invasion and ask for "committe" to determine the "validity of accusations". Shouldn't they be openly declaring they invaded it and demand concessions and repeal of taxes or something?

They're trying to dodge the law. Jesus Christ, they don't want to acknowledge an actual ground invasion until after they get to legalize it with a treaty, at which point they can jump through loopholes and escape prosecution.

Really so all those new separatist factions and their nature is all explained by the opening crawl of TPM that stated "taxation is in dispute". Bullshit. What is Techno Union? What is Banking clan? Why did they join up?

The corporate-sounding names are obviously supposed to tell you that they're more of the Trade Federation's ilk.

He's uploaded part 1 of the RotS review, but his videos are too mediocre for me to bother linking them.

Does he have any interesting points, or any points at all? I don't want to have to suffer through something like twenty minutes of nerd-bellyaching.

His main issue was that palpy's manipulation was really fucking obvious (he has a hilarious take on "do it." no. do it. no. do it. well when you put it that way), a complaint raised by chef elf as well. He also felt the buzz droids were stupid, and that padme was way to stupid to live. And that anakins motivation was paper thin. His complaints on the romance was actually more along the lines of "really fucking creepy" rather then stupid and unlistenable. He does acknowledge the strengths, and he is able to avoid sounding like a total fanboy. His only real issue was that everyone acted like morons.

? But it's "bullshit" that they were blockading and invading Naboo to protest taxes, despite the text explictly stating that they are? But you obviously can't understand this simple concept.

Minor nit pick from a newbie, so forgive me, but was it ever establish what the conflict regarding the taxes was about? All the scroll says is that there is a dispute regarding taxes in the outlying systems that has lead to turmoil.

For all we are ever shown or told, that means the Trade Federation leveled the taxes themselves, with consent from the Senate, and some planets refuse to pay them.

It's not just greedy corporations that hate taxes. It's pretty much everyone.

And that is one of the major problems with TPM, we don't know what the hell is going on or what people's roles and motivations are. For all we know, the Naboo could be violating the terms of an agreement with the Trade Federation, in which case, the TF may have been well with in their rights to blockade them (it was a perfectly legal blockade, afterall).

Darth Yan wrote:He also felt the buzz droids were stupid

To expand, his complaint was that the Seperatists made a weapon that defeats an enemy in the slowest way possible and asks why weren't these droids strapped with explosives and detonated when they clamped on.

That's easily rationalized by buzz droids being weapons designed to capture. EDIT:I think this is more or less outright stated by canon sources.

But what happens after they rip the ship apart and leave the pilot drifting in space?

And don't say to read the novels or some other source. If your audience has to do homework in order for your movie to make sense, then you are doing something wrong.

It's one thing to use the EU to enrich and deepen the universe, it's a totally different thing to use to try and fix gaping holes in the movies.

I thought it was fairly clear in the movie--they did say that they were 'shutting down all the controls', not 'tearing the ship apart'.

Still, left adrift in space. The buzz droids showed no ability to actually bring their quarry back to base. They didn't seem to be hacking into the controls or anything, just ripping at it.

Well, yes, but it doesn't take much imagination to suppose that a nearby ship simply grabs the helpless fighter with a tractor beam or something.

In the middle of a firefight with all that other debris floating about? And isn't there just as good a chance your quarry's own side will pick him up?

I'm not saying this exact instance ruins the PT or even RotS. On it's own, it is easy to ignore. It's just a symptom of a larger problem. The "how much can I cram into frame" issue that makes the battle at the end of AotC so lame.

Yes, it makes sense to have different kinds of droids to employ combined arms. The problem is, there is no discernible combined arms tactics. Both sides of the battle seem to employ the "run at the enemy guns blazing" strategy. There were no formations. There was no coordination between the different types of droids.

Showing us all those different droids served no purpose other than to let us know what action figures are coming out.

Also, I'm sure this has been pointed out before, but does anyone else find it ironic that the bad guys(or the characters we are told are the bad guys) in these stories are greedy, super rich, technology reliant control freaks that rely on soulless machines to do the job?

Perhaps George is subconsciously apologizing?

Well, frankly, unless one has telepathic insight into George Lucas's mind, who knows just how much room for merch he was intending to squeeze into the film; for all we know, he just wrote 'and then a variety of droids fights the clones' and the guys at Merchandising rolled with it.

True, none of us are mind readers, but it is well establish the amount of control he exerted over the entire project and just how many instances of "so much crap in the frame it takes away from the scene" happened.

It is kind of difficult to buy into the idea that the merchandising department got to control the climactic battle.

It really does seem like he was more about seeing what cool stuff he could do with CGI and what could he merchandise rather than how could he best tell his story.

Perhaps it was both. Star Wars merch was profitable before the prequels, to my knowledge, and if Lucas truly wasn't interested in telling the story he would have just turned screenwriting duties over to someone else and left them with guidelines. Even with the recent Clone Wars stuff, it's evident that he cares at least to a small degree, given the part he's played in the episode productions. But then, I'm sure he was hoping for a little moolah 'on the side'; I'm not going to start arguing that Lucas is some angel who only wants to bestow wonderful entertainment upon us. He is still human.

That's easily rationalized by buzz droids being weapons designed to capture.

That's why the weapon exists, why were they being deployed in that battle? To which you reply "well they were just firing everything". Even the most stupid bullshit can be rationalized. Regardless, it's more stupid shit in the movie.

Well, frankly, unless one has telepathic insight into George Lucas's mind, who knows just how much room for merch he was intending to squeeze into the film; for all we know, he just wrote 'and then a variety of droids fights the clones' and the guys at Merchandising rolled with it.

I'd be more inclined to think he walked into a room and said "SO THERE'S THIS HUGE BATTLE" then everybody spent the next few hours brainstorming, and somebody said "How about robots? That RIP THE THE SHIP APART WITH SAWS AND SHIT?!" Then everybody thought it was awesome, and some poor fucking intern was given the task of rationalizing why it exists.

Donal wrote:I'm not saying this exact instance ruins the PT or even RotS. On it's own, it is easy to ignore. It's just a symptom of a larger problem. The "how much can I cram into frame" issue that makes the battle at the end of AotC so lame.

Exactly; this is why the Battle of Hoth is so much more interesting than the AotC battle. There's only like four or five Imperial walkers at Hoth, but they inspire a lot more interest and dread in the audience than all the shitty robots crammed into the Geonosis battle. With Hoth, there's a slow build-up to the battle. The rebels see these monstrous walkers slowing coming in the distance. Throughout the battle, there's dramatic ups and downs: Luke destroys a walker, but then his fighter is shot down and his co-pilot dies. We can actually follow the action. Contrast this to Geonosis, where the entire battle is just a mind-numbing CGI orgasm of useless shit happening that nobody can follow. Nobody knows who's winning or losing. We just see Yoda shouting orders and blaster bolts flying everywhere. It's just utterly boring.

Gramzamber wrote: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.

Whiny assholes have friends, too. Obi-Wan was Anakin's friend and mentor. The fact that Anakin often didn't reciprocate doesn't make Obi-Wan less of a friend -it made him MORE of a friend.

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.

Maybe George Lucas overestimated your intelligence. Everything you need to know about the Sith is explained in one scene: When Qui-Gon Jinn tells the Jedi Council that his attacker was "well-schooled in the Jedi arts" and thus a Sith Lord. Then the Council mentions that the Sith haven't been seen in a thousand years. So if you had bothered to watch the movie, you would know that (a) the Sith have abilities very much like the Jedi and (b) they have been in hiding for centuries. What more do you need to know?

His fall to the Dark Side was especially badly done. With Luke in ROTJ the sense was that being a Force attuned being is a double edged sword and by manipulating your raw emotions can turn you evil like Emperor tried to do. It was simple and effective. In the prequels Lucas has Palpatine manipulate Anakin "conventionally" basically talking shit about Jedi, telling him stories about great power etc. There is no sense the Force is at work here like with Luke, basically a young dope got fooled by empty promises.

So the fact that Palpatine pushes different buttons with different people is bad storytelling?
I suppose he could have tried telling Luke that the only way to save his pregnant wife from an untimely death was to join the Dark Side but uh, Luke didn't have a pregnant wife in mortal danger.

He is a greedy corporate. Trying to do everything with as little real sets as possible to save money but then turns around and crams every frame with toy-to-be CGI.

You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about, do you?

I meant "main point" in the two main characters bit. He states that there are two main characters but that we can't really relate to any of them and that is the problem. If we could relate to them like Han and Luke then there would be no problem.

There would be a huge problem, since the STORY is about how one generation of characters fucks everything up because of their character flaws and a new generation (one more virtuous and empathetic) makes things right again.

What fucking evil? In fantasy there is an evil force like an empire or a dragon or machines that control us whatever. Here he is supposed to "bring balance to the Force" but the movie doesn't establish that the Force is "out of balance". If the Jedi aren't even aware of the Sith then what is this evil they fear that the Chosen One is supposed to save them from?

If the Force was in balance, the Jedi wouldn't be waiting for their messiah to bring balance now would they?

I didn't say it was confusing but that there is no explanation. You can't say "taxing is in dispute" and call that an explanation for everything that goes on in the movie. How exactly did Sidious persuade the "hapeless" Trade Federation into "doing his bidding"? He is barking orders at them. How did he acquire that authority? The characters don't care because they are stupidly written.

Watch the fucking movie!
Gunray and his flunkies made a Faustian bargain with Sidious: They use force against Naboo; Sidious promises to cover their asses politically. THEY know he's a Sith Lord and rightly fear him. One of them even tells Gunray that they shouldn't have made a pact with the Sith.

That's why the weapon exists, why were they being deployed in that battle? To which you reply "well they were just firing everything". Even the most stupid bullshit can be rationalized. Regardless, it's more stupid shit in the movie.

No, you're too stupid to follow a movie that most grade schoolers understand. Palpatine and Dooku want to make sure Anakin lands on the right ship (preferably by himself). Disabling the fighter and reeling him in makes perfect sense.

Except it was Kenobi's fighter being attacked by the buzz droids.

Donal wrote:Except it was Kenobi's fighter being attacked by the buzz droids.

Actually they both were. Sidious can't possibly have known Artoo would be able to zap the buzz droids any better than obi-wan's r5 unit.

Also, Elfdart, you are also wrong about them wanting to bring Skywalker in alone. The ROTS novelization makes it clear that part of the plan to try and turn Anakin aboard the Invisible Hand is to have Dooku kill Obi-wan in front of him to piss him off. His exact instructions are to "isolate Skywalker, and Slaughter Kenobi"

I did feel that his issue of how fucking obvious palpatine was; anakin does come across as an idiot at times. his final three films are fucking hillarious

I felt that his reaction to how obvious palpatine is was pretty funny

DW: Don't worry you'll GET WHAT'S COMING TOO YOU!!! OH. OK. NEAT. He's not the first to raise this at all. Palpy's not subtle.