StarDestroyer.Net BBS

It's a shitty movie. It's not the worst by any stretch of the imagination, but I can't even call it 'average'. A really crappy plot, no character motivations, with the exception of Liam Nielson, no acting to make up for the lack of characterization, it's effectively a long, boring, special-effects reel with a bit of a fanboy following.

Veef's statements pretty much echo my own thought about the pod-race scene. On it's own, it's an excellent visual spectacle, but as part of the larger movie, it's just filler that doesn't really serve a purpose.

Wow what a shame. This recent tirade from RLM is pretty disappointing.
His commentary on 'Cameron's Avatar' almost had me baptising my monitor
with pepsi, and now this longwinded nonsense...

Le Sigh....

For me, the first quarter of an hour to twenty minutes of TPM are pretty good. After that it turns to suck pretty quickly.

And fuck you Adam ESB is awesome

Under that definition of 'great', ESB would fall into that category for me, as would the entire OT.

Darksider wrote:Veef's statements pretty much echo my own thought about the pod-race scene. On it's own, it's an excellent visual spectacle, but as part of the larger movie, it's just filler that doesn't really serve a purpose.

...
...
...

It sets up Anakin's piloting abilities. Jesus. Would you rather him keep saying he's a great pilot or actually see it?

Oni Koneko Damien wrote:It's a shitty movie. It's not the worst by any stretch of the imagination, but I can't even call it 'average'. A really crappy plot, no character motivations, with the exception of Liam Nielson, no acting to make up for the lack of characterization, it's effectively a long, boring, special-effects reel with a bit of a fanboy following.

You don't have to like the movie, but I'd argue that everyone's motivation is simple: save Naboo. For the bad guys, it was to get away with the crap they did to Naboo. It wasn't some mystery.

And there was characterization. If anything I would say the characterization was hammered in very hard. Almost every one of Obi-Wan's lines were meant to show his mindless adherence to authority figures, or how he cared much more about getting the job done than he did for other people. Almost every one of Padme's scenes showed her naivety, or how the much pressure of the situation was weighing on her. I would even say that Anakin one of the most complex and fleshed out characters in the entire saga, since all of his adult behavior is rooted in everything that was established in the first movie.

Aniron wrote:

Darksider wrote:Veef's statements pretty much echo my own thought about the pod-race scene. On it's own, it's an excellent visual spectacle, but as part of the larger movie, it's just filler that doesn't really serve a purpose.

...
...
...

It sets up Anakin's piloting abilities. Jesus. Would you rather him keep saying he's a great pilot or actually see it?

Fuck the podrace, let's see him in battle like in, oh, ROTS. Maybe we'd actually get something better than that stupid vulture droid shit as well.

Darksider wrote:Veef's statements pretty much echo my own thought about the pod-race scene. On it's own, it's an excellent visual spectacle, but as part of the larger movie, it's just filler that doesn't really serve a purpose.

And when you pair it with the gratuitously long trip through Naboo's 'core', you realize an awful lot of the movie is filler that doesn't really serve a purpose.

Aniron wrote:It sets up Anakin's piloting abilities. Jesus. Would you rather him keep saying he's a great pilot or actually see it?

Except that it's still pointless. Imagine if 'Top Gun' had a thirty minute scene with nothing but Tom Cruise being in an intense dirt-bike race, with the other characters doing nothing but watching, to establish that he's an awesome fighter pilot. Not only is the connection between A and B ridiculously tenuous, but it's also done in a pointless, ham-fisted way that could have been better spent, I dunno, giving plot and/or character development.

Jim Raynor wrote:You don't have to like the movie, but I'd argue that everyone's motivation is simple: save Naboo. For the bad guys, it was to get away with the crap they did to Naboo. It wasn't some mystery.

Except it is a mystery because we don't know why, we only know the what. The Trade Feds want to blockade/take over Naboo. Why? How does it benefit them, and how would it be bad for Naboo if they did? There's a 'tax dispute', but that really doesn't explain much. Whose taxes, Naboo? If Naboo's a part of the Republic, why would they pay taxes to an entity that's allegedly separate from the Republic? And if the Trade Feds aren't separate from the Republic... why is the Republic sending agents of the Republic to negotiate with the Republic about an alleged Republic blockade of a Republic world? If there's no explanation, if there's no hint of an explanation behind what's happening on screen, why should anyone care who isn't already invested in making up their own story behind it?

Contrast this with the opening conflict in ANH: The Empire wants to capture the princess and anyone she may have been in contact with. Why? Because she stole the technical specs to their new superweapon with the intention of giving it to an insurgent group. Within the first few minutes of dialogue you know what peoples' aims are, and why it's important to them. You might not like the movie or characters, but at least you have some idea WHY they're doing WHAT they're doing.

And there was characterization. If anything I would say the characterization was hammered in very hard. Almost every one of Obi-Wan's lines were meant to show his mindless adherence to authority figures, or how he cared much more about getting the job done than he did for other people. Almost every one of Padme's scenes showed her naivety, or how the much pressure of the situation was weighing on her. I would even say that Anakin one of the most complex and fleshed out characters in the entire saga, since all of his adult behavior is rooted in everything that was established in the first movie.

Characterization is more than just 'what', it's also about 'why'. Obi's dead set on following authority. Why? What is it that gives him this 'quirk'? Anakin's, allegedly, an incredible inventor, a great kid, an unbelievable pilot, an oppressed slave, in love with Padme, and a mama's boy. Never mind the two facts that it's way too much to cram into one kid that age... and the actor behind the kid did such a crap job of expressing all that... the question is why? Why is he all this? What forces, outside or within drove him to it? Because he was a slave? There are plenty of slaves, what made him so special? Midichlorians? Well in that case what does that say about his 'character' that it takes a magical micro-organism to grant him all his character traits?

In contrast: Take The Agent in 'Serenity'. Like Obi, he's driven to do his job, he's very much of the belief that the ends justify the means, and he's willing to kill anyone who gets between him and the completion of the job. Why? Oh he both says and shows why: He has very firm beliefs about humanity, how he's just doing his small part to work towards greater order and harmony, how the pain and death he inflicts now will prevent a much greater amount later when advancements eliminate violence and dischord. How he's willing to sacrifice his humanity and become a monster for the 'greater good'. And when he's shown that his beliefs and drives are false, it completely shatters him and he's left a ghost of a man.

You can list off all the 'whats' you want, but without showing at least some of the 'why', or at least showing it exists, you still haven't explained what motivates the characters to do what they do. And in the case of TPM, the primary character motivation for everyone turns out to be, 'Because the plot says so'.

Soontir C'boath wrote:

Aniron wrote:

Darksider wrote:Veef's statements pretty much echo my own thought about the pod-race scene. On it's own, it's an excellent visual spectacle, but as part of the larger movie, it's just filler that doesn't really serve a purpose.

...
...
...

It sets up Anakin's piloting abilities. Jesus. Would you rather him keep saying he's a great pilot or actually see it?

Fuck the podrace, let's see him in battle like in, oh, ROTS. Maybe we'd actually get something better than that stupid vulture droid shit as well.

We did, you goofball. But seeing as how he has not honed his Jedi skills, he didn't own shit like in RotS. Try again.

Oni Koneko Damien wrote:Except that it's still pointless. Imagine if 'Top Gun' had a thirty minute scene with nothing but Tom Cruise being in an intense dirt-bike race, with the other characters doing nothing but watching, to establish that he's an awesome fighter pilot. Not only is the connection between A and B ridiculously tenuous, but it's also done in a pointless, ham-fisted way that could have been better spent, I dunno, giving plot and/or character development.

Are you stupid, Oni? Without that pod race, they wouldn't have gotten the part for the ship and Anakin would have remained a slave. POINTLESS OMG! That's advancing the plot and setting up Anakin's eventual murder of those holding his mother captive: she stayed behind, remaining a slave.

I am beginning to think Wong is correct: people MUST say that TPM is shit, they MUST show their hatred for it. It's a goddamned fashion statement now. But I do kick a kick out of TPM having a "fanboy following," when it's pretty much universally loathed by the Star Wars fandom and people rarely defend it.

Is it loathed by the fandom, or just a small fraction of vocal fans that hang out on SW forums and such? Elfdart pointed out in one of the previous giant TPM threads that the movie has a fairly solid rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and it did well at the box office.

Guardsman Bass wrote:Is it loathed by the fandom, or just a small fraction of vocal fans that hang out on SW forums and such? Elfdart pointed out in one of the previous giant TPM threads that the movie has a fairly solid rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and it did well at the box office.

Yeah. The general public seem to like it, which is to be expected. But the hardcore Star Wars fans loathe it. Anecdotally, at the midnight release "party" I went to, everyone I talked to said they hate the prequels, including RotS, which I found completely odd. On forums that I've visited, most dislike TPM, and when you defend certain aspects of TPM, you're jumped on by a lot of people who just call you stupid, etc. At least here people use arguments to defend their hatred.

Raynor has actually been a breath of fresh air in its defense ever since that moron from RLM made that 70 minute video, that people, including celebrities, raved about.

Guardsman Bass wrote:Is it loathed by the fandom, or just a small fraction of vocal fans that hang out on SW forums and such? Elfdart pointed out in one of the previous giant TPM threads that the movie has a fairly solid rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and it did well at the box office.

I like to make fun of it, too, and think it's probably the weakest Star Wars movie of the six, but it's still a Star Wars movie.

Aniron wrote:

Guardsman Bass wrote:Is it loathed by the fandom, or just a small fraction of vocal fans that hang out on SW forums and such? Elfdart pointed out in one of the previous giant TPM threads that the movie has a fairly solid rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and it did well at the box office.

Yeah. The general public seem to like it, which is to be expected. But the hardcore Star Wars fans loathe it. Anecdotally, at the midnight release "party" I went to, everyone I talked to said they hate the prequels, including RotS, which I found completely odd. On forums that I've visited, most dislike TPM, and when you defend certain aspects of TPM, you're jumped on by a lot of people who just call you stupid, etc. At least here people use arguments to defend their hatred.

Raynor has actually been a breath of fresh air in its defense ever since that moron from RLM made that 70 minute video, that people, including celebrities, raved about.

Are you seriously advocating both popular and anti-popular estimations of quality in the same breath?

Aniron wrote:Raynor has actually been a breath of fresh air in its defense ever since that moron from RLM made that 70 minute video, that people, including celebrities, raved about.

Which should prove just how utterly stupid they are, since celebrities also rave about Scientology. At least L. Ron Hubbard didn't narrate the audio book versions with the voice of Heathcliff. Maybe someone should turn Raynor's essay into a YouTube video. If he wants, I can do a pretty mean Bullwinkle or Snagglepuss.

Guardsman Bass wrote:Is it loathed by the fandom, or just a small fraction of vocal fans that hang out on SW forums and such? Elfdart pointed out in one of the previous giant TPM threads that the movie has a fairly solid rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and it did well at the box office.

The hardcore fandom is much harsher on this movie than everyone else is. You are correct that even the Rotten Tomatoes score from professional critics (the type of people who are usually least accepting of popcorn action movies) wasn't terrible.

Instead of only listening to the fanboy revisionist history, people should take a look at some of the facts. TPM only made 15% of its domestic box office in its opening weekend, which is remarkably small. The percentage that the box office dropped from weekend to weekend averaged in 20s. Compare that to numerous other movies, which are considered to do well if they "just" drop by about 50% each weekend.

Aniron wrote:Yeah. The general public seem to like it, which is to be expected. But the hardcore Star Wars fans loathe it. Anecdotally, at the midnight release "party" I went to, everyone I talked to said they hate the prequels, including RotS, which I found completely odd.

I've noticed this too. Fanboys who felt burned by the prequels have now extended their hate and revisionist history to ROTS as well. In 2005, after Episode III came out to highly positive reviews, the general opinion that I perceived was that Lucas had come through in the clutch and delivered worthy conclusion to the saga. I noticed a decline in Lucas/prequel bashing for a couple years. Until 2008, when the fanboys picked Indiana Jones 4 as their new "worst movie ever" and revived all the Lucas hatred.

Now everyone's opinion is different, and people may genuinely feel these things. But when I see people making statements about how Lucas "hasn't made a good film in over 20 years" (lumping ROTS in with their supposed trash heap), or how Lucas has done nothing but "kiddify SW" throughout the prequels (ignoring that Episodes 2-3 have some of the most adult, dark, and even graphic content)? Seems to me that certain people could never let go of their hate, and are making an effort to justify their dissatisfaction beyond what it even was before.

On forums that I've visited, most dislike TPM, and when you defend certain aspects of TPM, you're jumped on by a lot of people who just call you stupid, etc. At least here people use arguments to defend their hatred.

Raynor has actually been a breath of fresh air in its defense ever since that moron from RLM made that 70 minute video, that people, including celebrities, raved about.

I've said it before, but I really do think the RLM videos have taken on a near-religious quality with some people. It doesn't matter that Stoklasa was making crap up and uttering nonsense most of the time. Now, every disgruntled fanboy has a representative, a champion they can point to in order to justify all of their own feelings. Forget the fact that his analysis is poor if not downright dishonest. He's one of them, and his review was too long for anyone to bother picking apart anyway (except for me). There's legitimately agreeing with someone, and then there's mindless adulation. I suspect the latter, especially when I see such try-hard attempts by certain RLM fanboys to defend him. Such as desperately trying to give everything a pass as "stupid comedy" even as they still insist that it's all logically valid as well.

EDIT: quotes

Oni Koneko Damien wrote:Except that it's still pointless. Imagine if 'Top Gun' had a thirty minute scene with nothing but Tom Cruise being in an intense dirt-bike race, with the other characters doing nothing but watching, to establish that he's an awesome fighter pilot. Not only is the connection between A and B ridiculously tenuous, but it's also done in a pointless, ham-fisted way that could have been better spent, I dunno, giving plot and/or character development.

Nice exaggeration. The pod-race is about 9.5 minutes long, from start to finish. Reminds me of how Stoklasa claimed that the Anakin/Obi-Wan duel in ROTS was "45 minutes" when it was really 12, and one of the shorter climatic battles in all of SW.

Except it is a mystery because we don't know why, we only know the what. The Trade Feds want to blockade/take over Naboo. Why? How does it benefit them,

Wow, it's like you telepathically downloaded your thoughts straight out of Stoklasa's review. The Trade Federation with a trade franchise has a problem with taxes on trade routes. Not that complicated. And people throughout history have resorted to force, or threat of force, to protest things like taxes.

and how would it be bad for Naboo if they did?

You're seriously asking "how it would be bad" to be blockaded...please don't tell me next that there was no problem unless a specific, critical supply was explicitly said to be denied. Because most people can see that being blockaded period is a problem.

There's a 'tax dispute', but that really doesn't explain much. Whose taxes, Naboo? If Naboo's a part of the Republic, why would they pay taxes to an entity that's allegedly separate from the Republic?

The Trade Fed clearly had Senate representation.

And if the Trade Feds aren't separate from the Republic... why is the Republic sending agents of the Republic to negotiate with the Republic about an alleged Republic blockade of a Republic world?

Because in the SW galaxy, individual planets or groups of planets have a degree of autonomy and self-government, at a lower level than the galactic Republic/Empire. We see this in ANH, where Leia is a princess and clearly not the Emperor's daughter.

Characterization is more than just 'what', it's also about 'why'. Obi's dead set on following authority. Why? What is it that gives him this 'quirk'?

You're seriously reaching here to come up with a criticism. Following authority and tradition does not have to be a "quirk" that needs explanation. It's called being "conservative." And you know what? You can clearly see why he might have grown up that way. The Jedi Council is portrayed as oppressive, and adheres to tradition. Qui-Gon is the one who's made out to be a maverick and rebel for not listening to them.

Anakin's, allegedly, an incredible inventor, a great kid, an unbelievable pilot, an oppressed slave, in love with Padme, and a mama's boy. Never mind the two facts that it's way too much to cram into one kid that age...

Never mind that you made up two of those things right there. What makes Anakin an "inventor"? Patching up C-3PO (a common, existing model of droid) or putting together his own podracer doesn't make him that. He's also not "in love" with Padme in TPM.

Oh wow, a talented and precocious kid from a crappy background. Never seen one of THOSE before in other movies.

Why is he all this? What forces, outside or within drove him to it? Because he was a slave? There are plenty of slaves, what made him so special?

Here you go again, demanding that everyone's psychology and backstory be spelled out to a ridiculous degree, just to explain their personality. Movies have to worry about things such as telling a story, moving at a reasonable pace, and entertaining people. If the movie stopped to go into this nitty gritty stuff, it would be worse off for it.

And once again, the movie itself already gives reasons for why Anakin acts the way he does. He grew up poor and exploited. Because of that, he holds on dearly to what little he has (such as his mother), and dreams of righting all these wrongs when finally grows up.

Midichlorians? Well in that case what does that say about his 'character' that it takes a magical micro-organism to grant him all his character traits?

Wow, that's not a total strawman. Midichlorians gave Anakin his Force powers. No one said they covered anything else about him.

Does anyone really fawn over the RLM reviews much these days? I don't really see them mentioned for the most part, even when the prequels are brought up.

Destructionator XIII wrote:I'm amazed anyone actually liked ROTS at all. It was fucking terrible.

How is it terrible? It's competently directed, the dialogue is loads better than the first two films, the acting is loads better, the conflict is greater and more tense, the action sequences are well done and Order 66 is goddamned amazing.

Srelex wrote:Does anyone really fawn over the RLM reviews much these days? I don't really see them mentioned for the most part, even when the prequels are brought up.

A Blu-ray review site I check once a week had a review for TPM and linked to the RLM video.

Man, imagine if people applied the prequel-hater attitude to the original films.

"Why is Han a smuggler? Why is he friends with Chewie? What is the Kessel Run? What exactly happened between him and Jabba?"
"Who's Leia's father? How is she a member of the Imperial Senate AND the Rebels? Why does a princess act so tough?"
"Why does Luke want to leave the farm? How is there even a farm in the middle of a desert?"

Elfdart wrote:

Aniron wrote:Raynor has actually been a breath of fresh air in its defense ever since that moron from RLM made that 70 minute video, that people, including celebrities, raved about.

Which should prove just how utterly stupid they are, since celebrities also rave about Scientology. At least L. Ron Hubbard didn't narrate the audio book versions with the voice of Heathcliff. Maybe someone should turn Raynor's essay into a YouTube video. If he wants, I can do a pretty mean Bullwinkle or Snagglepuss.

Ha, that might work only if you make sure to stroke the fanboys' egos, and make them believe that they really are special and so much better at storytelling than an actual filmmaker.

Meh, ROTS was almost good.
Lucas can write a ripping good yarn but he couldn't direct his way out of a wet paper bag.
And yes I know he tried to get others to direct the prequels and couldn't, doesn't change the fact that he's shit at directing people.
Take Natalie Portman, in AOTC she portrays a go-getting firebrand, shitty teen romance not withstanding, and then in ROTS her character is a characterless clingy wet sponge. WTF?? I know she's a good actress, just watch Leon to see, how could she turn in such a lacklustre performance if not for poor direction?
I really wanted to like ROTS, it was going to be the one that saved the PT but it fell flat like an overdone souffle.

So why is the popularity of the prequel movies a point in their favor, but not one in favor of the RedLetterMedia review? After all, if we are to be consistent, then we should accommodate this for both of them. If TPM was popular for a reason, RedLetterMedia should be popular for a reason too then, shouldn't it? And if the reason is a negative reflection on RedLetterMedia, why should we take the popularity of TPM as a positive reflection on it, then?

Compose a more readable post that isn't a disjointed wreck, please. I'll address it then because what I just attempted to read is like trying to decipher instant messages by a bunch of lazy assholes who can't be arsed to type full words.

Jim Raynor wrote:Man, imagine if people applied the prequel-hater attitude to the original films.

"Why is Han a smuggler? Why is he friends with Chewie? What is the Kessel Run? What exactly happened between him and Jabba?"
"Who's Leia's father? How is she a member of the Imperial Senate AND the Rebels? Why does a princess act so tough?"
"Why does Luke want to leave the farm? How is there even a farm in the middle of a desert?"

You're full of shit.
No one is asking why Palpatine is a Sith Lord who doesn't have any formal connection to the Trade Federation or why Nute Gunray is the leader of the Trade Federation. But once you have established those two things then you do need to explain how the fuck is Palpatine/Sidious dishing out orders to the cowed Gunray from the very start of TPM.

Not really. It's called tension; the movie could have had the audience wondering who it could be, what their motives were, what Gunray thought about it, etc.

I mean, it didn't, because it's a horrible movie. But that's nit to say you can't start a movie without mendaciously explaining everything in detail. Look at Suoerman movies for examples.