PT Jim Raynor's "RLM's Episode I - Review A Study in Fanboy Stupidity"

Tell that to the PT-dislikers who insist on continuing to pick fights over movies they don't think exist/have forgotten, and insist on making Plinkett their hero/spokesperson, then act all wounded and victimized when PT fans dare to talk back.

 

RLM is pretty funny.
I take little notice of the majority of his three PT reviews, it's mostly just subjective comments and things you can see in most movies if you look for it.
They are good for a laugh at least.

 

They're funny guys, and, overall, everyone needs to lighten up about the whole thing.

 

The problem with criticizing RLM is that if you identify something that's wrong or doesn't make sense, it's like, well, that part was just for laughs, you're taking this too seriously, you have no sense of humor.

 

It's all one big joke! Even RLM knows!

RLM reminds me of the tale of the stupid bumbling bard who really is the mastermind of the whole subject...But still a bumbling fool.

Wait a moment...

Bumbling fool....

Creates a massive community(empire) within their own content not by a purpose....

Could RLM be JAR JAR?????

 

That is what Jim states, people try to use the comedy to shield the reviews from any and all criticism. Comedy is a powerful tool for influencing and controlling people, why do you think politicians crack jokes during rallies and public debates?

 

That's true. Everything bounces off like rubber. It's like trying to take a lightsaber to water.

Interesting.

The prequels are also RLM's "Episode II". As they first acquired a small measure of popularity trashing the Star Trek: TNG movies.

 

Personally I view the popularity of negative angry reviewers shows how toxic and immature nerd culture is. Over on SWPAS, Jim once posted he believes most nerds either have emotional issues or are autistic to some degree, I share the same viewpoint with him on this.

 

I believe some of it also ties into bigotry and intolerance. Witness the deluge of hatred toward Jar Jar, for instance, and how the character is psychopathically hated even after all these years. Even the very idea of an explanation of Jar Jar's purpose is offensive to some of these people. And the media has also played into that. All elements of society have, actually.

It's basically "fun", according to some social mores, to lay into and belittle some things, and to disdain difference if it strays too far from an expected or inculcated norm. It also seems, to me, that many people have always wanted Star Wars to be more masculine and serious; from such a perspective, playful elements should be seen but not heard.

There has never been an especially rounded appreciation of the whimsical side of George Lucas' imagination, in my opinion. People still seem to find half of the saga regrettable, and I'm not just talking about the PT. It's like people inwardly despair about the idea Star Wars couldn't keep pace with "Star Trek", or "The Lord Of The Rings", or "The Matrix", or "The Dark Knight" trilogy. From my point of view, Star Wars was never intended to keep pace with any external entertainment; it was intended to be entirely its own thing; as something of an antidote to other fantasy sagas, partly because of the more colourful, cheesy, child-like aspects it wholeheartedly embraces. They're all a bit dour, a bit grey; but Star Wars is an explosion of Technicolor fractals and "home" for the playful, the weird, and the wacky.

In other words, here is an enormous tapestry, of varying tone and intensity. Perhaps some of the negativity we see toward these movies in particular is rooted in a dim recognition of the complexity of that tapestry; perhaps it is a cry emanating from a frustration that some have in their hearts not to be able to love it or believe in it. Perhaps some people feel alienated or dissociated from their former child-like sense of wonder; and perhaps they needed a slightly simpler type of movie (i.e., TFA) to properly lose themselves, or to make them believe they were capable of feeling that wonder again. But yes, the Internet can be a pretty toxic place, especially when you have an opinion on something that isn't commonly expressed. I think the RLM videos undeniably played to some of that hate, too.

Being snide and sardonic and oblique in one's criticisms is often easier than being straight. The former doesn't really cost anything and may earn you some cheap approval (a few "likes", perhaps, or a "retweet" in modern Internet dynamics), while the latter is an increasing rarity in our fast-paced, anti-intellectual, patience-starved world. Being straight and upfront renders a person into a vulnerable state. It could even be considered a sacred act; at least when the desire to be heard is strong but the chances of being dismissed or maligned far outweigh receptivity and acceptance. Hiding behind humour and passive-aggresive smugness is the trait of a bully; it insulates the bully and undermines the psychological confidence of the victim. Perhaps it is no surprise that the RLM material met with such glowing approval, while the Raynor rebuttal was scorned and pushed to one side and written off as the ravings of a kook.

 

Schadenfreude. There's a reason there's so many anti-Trump memes constantly showing up everywhere, it's because he's almost universally despised and so people will dog on something they don't like, especially when they feel it threatens or impinges on something they have a stake in. The bigger stake a prequel-hater has in O.G. Star Wars, the more passionate our rebukes.

You should have stated "some" though rather than paint all prequel-dislikers with such a broad brush. Most likely most prequel-dislikers are content not to chat about SW on the internet or even venture into these forums.

What you said! Also, Raynor's whingey takedown piece does read pretty poorly. I do absolutely agree, however, about the rarity of sincere intellectual discourse on the internet, so when you do find people willing to address themes and the artistic/historical/etc importance of something, it pays off to keep in touch with them.

So they can continue to make us believe they are "normal, relatable human beings" when they aren't any of those three things.

 

At least you admit to having a stake in the original saga. Some have pretended to be above such things and that their personal lives are in no way tied to the fortunes of a popular entertainment franchise.

That isn't meant sarcastically. I've just had it thrown at me before. By people who spent a long time rubbishing the prequels, just as I spent time defending them. Some people are so estranged from their emotional investments that they "Other"-ize their opponents all too easily.

Yes. We've all given into some form of "Other"-izing here. However, what you've said also applies in reverse. Some prequel fans are also content to not engage in chat. I feel this is worth pointing out, as people with an axe to grind against these films sometimes pretend this PT forum is a rarity (it is), because it contains all the ardent prequel fans on the planet (it doesn't). You could even make a case that unhappy people are those who shout the loudest. So it could well be that prequel-dislikers (to use your milder term) are busy beavering away at their keyboards more often than prequel fans, who have chosen a quieter path (and may partly be in retreat -- some really are -- due to being worn down by incessant criticism and hate).

Good observation. Everyone looks for substance in something; and so it's worth grabbing onto when it appears. But, generally, there is a tide of anti-intellectualism and people want "the facts" over anything of real depth and understanding. Some of the confusion concerning the alleged "objectivity" of the RLM videos' points probably arises from this mixing-up of "facts" and "factoids" (or the perception thereof) with true substance and serious critical analysis (and the fact that, ultimately, the "worth" of a given work of art remains subjective).

Fair enough if you think the Raynor document is a poor read. I don't fully agree with every observation or the cogency of the approach. I think Jim is a bit too angry and could have written it from a more stoic mindset. I also think, in places, he goes on at length (yes, irony!), and the document suffers from a bit of an identity crisis: Does it want to be a "pure" rebuttal of distilled commentary from a secondary source; or is it sometimes trying to defend TPM more generally and give us Jim Raynor's own views on the characters, story, and themes?

Obviously, such a document cannot help being a bit personalized and subjective (e.g., Jim Raynor's lengthy descriptions of Qui-Gon and Amidala as important characters in their own right), but it strays more into panegyric territory in places, IMO. I mean, I got a kick out of that, but maybe he could have taken a leaner and sparser approach. That said, a part of me thinks, no matter what he wrote or how he wrote, he would have been dismissed just as easily.

Alas...

More or less.

 

Hehehehe....that made me laugh harder than anything has in a long time. No really, I'm not being snide. Bravo, Quantum.

 

True, along with how people usually don't want to disagree with those they find humorous, even if deep down they do disagree.

 

On that note......

 

I think it's simply to do with the reality, that a lot of people who loved Star Wars, put it's creator on a pedestal, and got caught up in the hype were very disappointed with the final result. Many simply felt they were "bad" movies, and had difficulty dealing with these feelings of disappointment. Considering many of these people's two decade obsession with Star Wars, you can imagine that these emotions can be very powerful. Many of these emotions were channeled through the RLM reviews, which is why I believe they became so popular. People needed an explanation why they felt the way they did.

I watched the PT dozens of times, and one of the reasons I did, is that I really wanted to love these films. Yet, after a while I had to admit, I just didn't love them. In fact there were many aspects I disliked. To add insult to injury GL continued to mess with the part of Star Wars I still really loved (and still do), trying to bring them more in line with the films I had no particular love for (although I didn't hate them), and that really p****d me off to be honest. It appeared that Star Wars wasn't "my" Star Wars anymore. Along came RLM, who provided a perfect outlet for those frustrations.

 

To some regards, I can understand why some people felt disappointed with the PT and everything Star Wars related for the last 20 years. But still, it was Lucas' work and creation...

But as I said before, where things went terribly wrong with these RLM reviews was when some people or heavily disappointed and frustrated fans tried to impose these reviews to others in order to prove that their views of the prequels and evreything Star Wars related were "wrong". That is totally unfair since you are only alienating people and fans who grew up and liked the prequels and discovered Star Wars with the PT, or through the SE or The Clone Wars series for the first time...

 

Best post in this thread.

This dead RLM horse has been beaten to the point I can practically see it's bones.

 

That's what I've been thinking/saying for a long time. The RLM reviews were co-opted by the PT-bashers (yes, I will use that term) as a weapon, a bludgeon, a way to "prove" what they insist is a fact no matter how many times they're reminded it's an opinion: the prequels are bad. RLM has achieved an "authority" status with the bashers, and with fandom at large because the bashers are the noisiest part of it. When the TPM review first came out, the media couldn't report on it fast enough, and trumpeted it all over creation, complete with gushing praise from "prestigious" personages such as Simon Pegg. (Don't get me started on that loathsome jerk. I may never stop.) It was treated as absolutely above reproach, and like it was so irrefutable and such potent proof that all a basher had to do to silence anyone who was still foolishly living "in denial" about the prequels' -- specifically TPM's -- badness was to link to it in online conversation, or mention it in offline conversation.

This smug, smirky, unearned air of superiority (of possessing the so-called "truth") that the bashers adopted, started to rub PT fans the wrong way. I wouldn't think that would be surprising, but the bashers themselves seemed quite shocked when the PT fans fought back, and when Jim Raynor wrote his review. Naturally, the bashers dismissed said review, not caring how hypocritical or faulty their arguments were. (Just as they uncritically accepted everything in RLM's review.) And yes, I am generalizing, but I don't think I'm generalizing that much. Bashers, and people who simply dislike the PT but aren't necessarily passionate about it, don't see the superior tone, the smug smirking, the self-satisfied use of the RLM reviews because they agree with it, at least to some extent. So it seems normal to them...again, at least to some extent.

I've seen many bashers say they can accept that some people disagree with them. But most of the time it's just mouthing the words, because they CAN'T accept it, as evidenced by the way they are still seeking "proof" of what CAN'T BE PROVED. Some of them try the fake psychology route and smirkingly say to PT fans, "If the prequels really were good, you wouldn't feel the need to defend them so strongly." Of course, the reverse isn't true in their estimation: that if the prequels really were horrible, they wouldn't feel the need to trash them so strongly, to seek out "proof" of their badness.

PT fans have been bullied, insulted, mocked, patronized, treated as insignificant, if not nonexistent, and hounded (yes, hounded) for going on 20 years now, from all possible angles -- message boards, the overarching media, the perceived "common wisdom." It's gotten old. In fact, it got old long ago. And none of the self-appointed authorities of taste and coolness in the media (online or off, nerd-centric or general) takes the bashers to task as to why they are still obsessively hating on the prequels after so much time has passed, and after they, effectively, "won": they got the SW movie they wanted in TFA, Lucas is no longer involved in SW, so he can't "mess it up," etc. It is treated as "fact" that the prequels are bad; even reportage that is only marginally linked to SW and SW fandom reports it as fact. As I said elsewhere, many PT fans have simply given up trying to discuss the prequels out of exhaustion, which gives the ever-vociferous bashers even more room on the stage, so to speak.

 

Sure, but it goes both ways. The argument PT Apologists use is that the folks who didn't like the PT are somehow close minded or don't understand art.

Both arguments are weak and should be retired.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Yep, and I don't seem to see anything in this thread that isn't already being discussed on the Pt Criticism Thread, and from what it sounds like the OP just wanted this here as a reference and hasn't really engaged in the discussion. So, if there's a vote, I'll add my +1 for locking.

 

I suppose that if the mods haven't locked this thread it's because the discussion has been respectful so far, even if I haven't followed all of it.

For example, DrDre and I on the posts above have been argued respectfully... Let's try to stay on that way...

 

Arguably more.

My point was that it was just as much as if not more.

Whichever way one likes it works either way.

TFA certainly fits on so many levels far better into the entire saga of SW rather than the one some fans thought they would get that "ignored" the prequels. Like this was ever seriously going to happen. The SW universe as we know it and from which everything it's built on in it's current form comes from the PT which reshaped the overall narrative of the OT.

Just the very fact alone that TFA did decide to remake ANH like TPM and ROTS did (albeit with far greater style and originality than TFA managed) interlinks it's narrative track to the pattern set down in the saga itself.

So really just going along lines that Lucas placed himself.

So TFA set itself up to link into TPM and ROTS and so it does.

 

It really might mirror the whole original saga more than we thought. What if this trilogy is the fall of, say, Rey to the Dark Side, to be redeemed in the next trilogy? That would be bolder than I thought Disney capable of when it comes to taking stories and characters someplace darker (no pun intended).

And yeah, Disney paid a lot of money for Star Wars. There's no way they're going to invalidate the PT. That's like throwing away perfectly good money. The work has already been done.

Granted, I could see them rebooting all of the original 6 films in 20 years when they've run out of road. Ugh, I don't even want to think about that.