Speculation Mr. Plinkett's review of Episode VII

Discussion in 'Star Wars: Episode VII and Beyond (Archive)' started by Bib Fartuna, Nov 4, 2012.

  1. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 6
    LOL really? [face_laugh] I missed the segment in the thread title where it said "Plinkett fan club--positive Plinkett comments only".

    I don't care about it being "child friendly"--I was 33 years old when ROTS premiered. However, I thought the scene with Anakin drawing his saber on the younglings was absolutely ridiculous and over the top. When have we seen Vader attack a child in the OT? Never. His OT attacks, evil as they were, were all military-based. I thought Anakin choking Padme was ridiculous for the same reason. "I betrayed everyone I know because some old dude told me I needed to do it to save your life, but oh, Obi-Wan is on your ship? Let me try to strangle you to make a point." Beyond stupid. With these scenes, Lucas seemed to be playing the game of "How many super eeevil deeds can I make Anakin/Vader do? Let me count them." It was all arbitrary and pointless to me. And I have heard the argument that Anakin choking Padme was a "self-fulfilling prophecy" with his causing her death by trying to prevent it, but I don't believe in the concept of prophecy so I don't care.

    I liked TPM because it showed how everyone's story began. Obi-Wan was a Padawan to the one Jedi who believed in the Living Force. Anakin was a slave who wanted to free the other slaves and whose only living relative was his mother. Anakin's wife was a child ruler of a planet with no army, and she was the one who was responsible for giving the Emperor his greatest rise to power. I liked the irony there.
    Last edited by anakinfansince1983, Jan 26, 2013
    Darth Chiznuk, Darth kRud and LawJedi like this.
  2. Chainmail_Jedi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 26, 2013
    star 2
    @anakinfansince1983 You just contributed nothing to the discussion. be proud =D= Please post things which do, and if you quote me try to include and address my whole post. That was a minor point at the end of my post, and it is the only part of my post you bothered to quote because it probably burns you deep down inside that alot of people find his reviews to be humurous.

    While this was not the Plinkett fan-club, this was a thread about individuals looking forward to his next review of the upcoming Star Wars VII film, and you are apparently not one of them.
    V-2 likes this.
  3. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 6
    Ah, I see. A post that is personal about other posters as opposed to discussing Mr. Plinkett.
    Darth Chiznuk likes this.
  4. Darth Chiznuk E7 Casting Contest Host

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2012
    star 5
    Hey, look you didn't contribute anything except bashing someone. Be proud of yourself!
    Last edited by Darth Chiznuk, Jan 26, 2013
  5. Chainmail_Jedi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 26, 2013
    star 2
  6. Darth kRud Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 1, 2012
    star 3
    [/quote]

    I agree but, sorry there's a but, not trying to be contrarian here, but....Lucas pigeon holed himself into that scenerio because the previous two films (and hence the third) didnt really set a valid stage or foundatuion for Anakins turn to the dark side. His simplistic back story in TPM and AOTC gave Lucas no other option but to just all of the sudden BAM! make Anakin turn to the dark side and being Vader he had to be made a villain in as little amount of time as possible (the last half of the last film). It shouuld have been a slower more complex turn to the dark side with more realistic explanations and yes, less sudden switch from one day rolling in a filed of flowers and next day murdering children. When I say the prequels should have been darker and more adult themed I don't mean nudity, sex scenes, murdering kids or over the top scences to "prove" the bad guy is bad. In the case of the prequels when I say they should have been darker I mean they should have had a more philosophoical look into human nature. I think they should do this with the new series as well (and they say they are) but for the Vader back story this should have been the focus. Building Anakin as the great man, the great warrior, the great Jedi OB1 said he was in the OT then slowly highlight his inner struggle with dark forces. Looking at it that way TPM was almost entirely useless but like you said it was interesting to see a young OB1 and Vader as a child but that could have been told, along with the entire plot of Attack Of The Clones, in one film (with some re-writing of course, centered on the nuance and complexity of the human condition). A tad more into Palatine/sith motivation (The new book Plagueis did a good job of that), a little more Darth Maul story line and some actual struggle Anakin had to deal with being the focus. Reading Plagueis actually helped The Phantom Menace be a little more consumable but in my opinion the film doesn't stand on it's own. Not as far as telling the story of the Sith and the rise of Darth Vader.
  7. Narutakikun Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2012
    star 4
    See exotic Alderaan: A whole planet with no children!
    darthcaedus1138, V-2 and LawJedi like this.
  8. Darth kRud Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 1, 2012
    star 3
    Ya I was going to bring that up but I felt the child killing was a tad absurd seeing the speed in which his personality changed in ROTS. I'm not against child killing in films as a general rule (that sounds horrible but you get my point) it's just, well, put some decent back story behind such a heinous act ya know? What makes this guy so evil, what? He doesn't want to lose his pregnant wife? He missis his mommy? C'mon man (Lucas).....just c'mon. (*shakes fist in air with one hand, raises pitchfork to the sky with the other, while repeating pumping motion*) The whole torture Leah thing with that needle thing. Torturing Han, choking out all those poor guys in the OT, to be an admiral or captain around Vader was a death sentence. Blowing up planets with millions of children on them.....ya, but, the charter Anakin in the prequels wasn't developed enough to the point where killing younglings made sense. It was just BOOM! Enter the dark side, kill some kids. Here's your sith card Mr Vader. Welcome to the evil. Come again.
  9. Bib Fartuna Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 4, 2012
    star 4
    I think the biggest revelation of the new reviews will be the first name of Mr. Plinkett. I think that he will obviously slip up with revealing this. Then the FBI investigation into his basement escapades can begin...
  10. Vespasian Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 1, 2012
    star 1
    I think the reason why a lot of people here hate Red Letter Media is that when we like a movie, it mirrors our personality. When he tore apart the prequels, fans felt he attacked them too.

    I really liked the prequels and my favorite is Episode I (yeah, I'm one of those weirdos), but I still enjoyed RLM's deconstruction of it. Some his points were even valid, others were petty, but he is an entertainer. Another favourite movie of mine is Jumanji, and from what I can tell, relatively few people like it. You know what? I don't care, critics (for whom I have very little respect for) can say what they want, they have no bearing on what I like.

    You can and should give counter arguments to RLM, but you shouldn't take it so personally IMO! Well, one thing that bothers me about RLM, though I doubt that was intentional, is this: I think they imply that you shouldn't try suspending your disbelief when watching a movie. Or at least reserve it, until you 'rationally' think it through and deem the movie worthy.

    Another thing: I read in a comment on their site that 'Star Trek - First Contact used to be my favorite ST movie, but after I've seen your review, I like it less and less!' Nice, beautiful! Is this the saddest thing or what? How can someone let others overwrite what like they like or don't, and so easily? :mad:If that's the case, then what your personality contains is just a fluffy nothingness which doesn't matter to him/her or anyone else.
    V-2 and Norminator like this.
  11. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Wait for it...

    There's that famous cognitive issue again. No, there's nothing "clever" about it. This speaks to a lowered cultural standard for so-called "cleverness" which reduces the concept to meaninglessness. It is traditionally understood that trying to "have one's cake and eat it too" is cause for criticism rather than adulation. One cannot brush off criticism of RLM, by resorting to the "just joking" excuse used in another context by ********* guys who get in trouble, while simultaneously claiming RLM's points ( you know, the ones that were "jokes" two seconds ago ) are valid. An adage about eating cake seems applicable here... but I hear that kind of thing is considered "clever" these days.

    RLM merely offers people a sentiment which matches their own. Because it feels right, it must be right... right?
    In light of this, concepts like deception, unfairness, and facts have no relevance. Emotion is everything. When facts are abandoned for the sake of emotion, you hear things like "the motivations are not clear" which have no basis in reality.

    Sorry, but if you can't address the logical problems with your stance, or have no understanding of logic, running and hiding behind another poster isn't going to work. RLM is about emotion, not logic, and if you hitch your cart to Stoklasa you're just going to be dragged down with him. Defend your own argument instead of chanting "Naru" in a foolish attempt to insult the logic and reason of others who don't happen to have fallen for Mike Stoklasa's game-playing and nonsense.
    Last edited by Arawn_Fenn, Jan 27, 2013
    Darth Chiznuk likes this.
  12. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 6
    LOL. Nice shot at pigeonholing people, but no. Have you read the thread? I and at least a couple of others have said, sometimes more than once, that our dislike of the RLM videos has nothing to do with his opinion of the prequels themselves and everything to do with the fact that he uses misogynistic stereotypes to make his point--and whether they are intended as humor or not, many of his fans take those offensive stereotypes seriously and use them in arguments.

    @Narutakikun: Way to deliberately miss my point, which was that we never saw in the OT anything resembling Vader walking into a room full of kids and drawing his saber on them as they asked for help. I won't even bother with the discussion about Tarkin making the call to blow up Alderaan.

    @Darth kRud: I think the prequel story would have benefited from either introducing the characters' origins in half a movie, combining TPM and AOTC as you said, or giving us another movie between TPM and AOTC plus a Clone Wars era movie to fill in some gaps. We do have TCW show but not everyone watches and lately it's more about Ahsoka and Maul and Savage anyway.

    I would still find it ridiculous for ROTS Vader to commit deeds he doesn't commit as OT Vader though. His fall would have been better served by having him attack adult Jedi, even duel with them, in the Temple, and have Palpatine kill Padme and frame the Jedi for it. I've been told that Lucas was trying to show Vader as truly evil as opposed to the "cool badass" of the OT, but it didn't work. From what I've seen, the people who thought Vader was a cool badass in the OT, still think so, and just ignore the PT anyway.
    Darth Chiznuk likes this.
  13. Yunners Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 30, 2006
    star 2
    It's 'Harry' ;)
    V-2 and windu4 like this.
  14. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Qui-Gon wasn't the only Jedi who believed in the living Force.
  15. Luukeskywalker Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 23, 1999
    star 4
    So Lucas was supposed reveal EVERYTHING about Palpatine's true end game in TPM just so average joe on the streets could be happy? Yes, the political plot of TPM is complex, it was thought out and does make sense when you pick it apart and look at it. The political plot as presented in the movie is complex, but if you choose to turn your brain off, then you should still be able to understand that the evil Federation has invaded and blockaded Naboo, and the movie is about the Queen and the jedi on a mission to go about putting a stop to it.

    Again, it IS explained. Just that the true end game is not revealed.
  16. Luukeskywalker Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 23, 1999
    star 4
    This issue has been discussed ad nauseum. You can't claim it as as a billiant textbook take down of the films, and then when someone points out inaccuracies in the review, pull the "it is parady" or "it is humor" card. RLM supporters have had this problem since the reviews came out. It is either a brilliant point by point take down of the PT or its just some dude's opinion of the movies with tons of humor, most of which can't be taken seriously. The later scenerio is fine, and there is nothing wrong with it. But it can't be considered a billiant point by point take down, if most of the points are not accurate and put in simply for parady and humor.
  17. Aizakku Rorensu Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 13, 2013
    star 1
    Just to jump in for a second...

    This is precisely why Anakin and Padme worked for me, because that's who they were. They were late teens/young adults, and that kind of behavior is not uncommon when you're that age.

    Therefore their relationship was every bit as believable to me as Han and Leia's. It was just two different sets of characters at two different stages of their lives. One set behaved in a more adult manner, and the other set more like kids (late teens/young adults, whatever).
    anakinfansince1983 likes this.
  18. yggdrasil311 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 7, 2004
    star 2
    Plinketts great, but some of the bits can be repetitive. He is right on a lot of his logic towards certain plot points.
  19. Pfluegermeister Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 30, 2003
    star 4
    Allow me to modify that statement in several points to more accurately reflect the developments of the past two-to-three months since you made it...

    First, it seems fairly clear to me that Disney/LFL have and are making overtures to heal fan relations (and to answer Plinkett's criticisms), particularly by the creative decisions they've been making since the initial announcement was made. I could make a strong case that Plinkett's underlying issues with the PT (the ones that the jokes and the false-mysoginism have largely obscured) are already being addressed in the ST: problems in the writing of the PT are being answered on the ST by hiring an experienced, accomplished and acclaimed writer who can both deliver an exciting story and emotional beats with interesting characters; problems with directing on the PT, and the stylistic choices that come with that, are being answered on the ST by hiring a director who is young, passionate, active rather than passive, who honestly loves the material and, I believe, understands the material in ways that perhaps Lucas himself does not (again, if you accept Plinkett's premise). Heck, it was a director that Plinkett himself personally felt could do a better job on Star Wars than Lucas currently could; so much so, in fact, that he set aside several minutes from a review of a completely different film from Star Wars to state it. Those who have seen his review of the recent Star Trek movie will note that he explains why it works in the very ways that the PT does not, points out that the choice of a director is one of the primary reasons for that difference, and praises Abrams in a way that, from Plinkett, had been unprecedented prior to that point.

    I'll go one further: it is also clear to me that the Clone Wars series itself is attempting to answer Plinkett's criticisms as if they were going down a checkbox one by one. Doubt me? Well, let's go down the list. In the ROTS review, Plinkett claimed that the battle scenes were not emotionally engaging because we didn't know the clones, and therefore didn't care about what happened to them; the series introduced clone characters like Rex, Waxer and Boil, Domino Squad, etc., that you did care about, and when some of them died, it mattered to you. In his TPM review, Plinkett stated that because the battle droids were so ineffective and comic, they made no serious threat; the series kept the droid comedy where it counted and introduced new and more effective droid types, like the commando droids, that made for better threats. In the ROTS review again, Plinkett states that the films don't make the war seem like something that affects anyone's lives in any significant way (no damage to buildings, no signs of privation, etc.); the series has on several occasions addressed the cost of the war to the citizens, at least in dialogue (they are sometimes without water and power, and only get little food; there are bombings in the capital; there are guards on the streets, etc.). These are just a few examples.

    And I'll be fair: none of this specifically means the people at LFL have been watching Plinkett, taking notes, and then specifically addressing them - addressing him, in other words. It could simply mean that the people at LFL were aware of the problems already, and Plinkett just happened to point them out at the same time. I would think that, except for this: In the AOTC review, Plinkett uses a clip of Dexter Jettster and says,"What about this clumsy, fat *******? What if he just happened to be a Jedi? His big, fat hands and his slow, lumbering *** would ******* get killed by Darth Maul." Those amongst you who have seen the reviews will no doubt remember that one, right? And so what does TCW then give us? None other than Pong Krell, a Jedi from Dexter's same species, with the same physiology, only he's in what we presume to be the peak of physical condition for his species and a demon with lightsabers - and not just lightsabers, but Darth Maul-style double-bladed lightsabers; and not just one, but two of them at the same time!

    What am I to make of that? It's simply too specific a thing for me to just dismiss it casually and say, "No one's ever seen these reviews at LFL or even knows who Plinkett is." That's a direct rebuttal; it can't be anything else. The simplest answer is that they're having a good-natured back-and-forth with ol' Plinkett at the studio, going "Oh, yeah? He'd be killed by Maul, would he? Well, watch this!" And I would emphasize that it has to be largely good-natured; Filoni and company have become rather thick-skinned (they have to be; they have us for fans), so I don't think they would bother out of a sense of actual hurt feelings. It seems more of a "friendly rivalry" scenario than anything else.

    Finally, if Mike Stoklasa really was interested in being remembered, wouldn't he have jumped onto the ST-bashwagon by now, particularly when he's under intense pressure from his fans to make comment on it? If anything, he's been casually blase about it all; in his Titanic review he makes a brief comment: "Did you guys hear that Disney bought Star Wars? I don't see what the big deal is; I bought Star Wars - I got it for $20 at Target." And the Abrams development? We already know what he thinks on that; he doesn't need to say more.

    The very idea of Plinkett being forgotten is based on the notion that he wants to be remembered in the first place. His very behavior demonstrates that he isn't interested in riding Star Wars to fame, and never was, and a sober examination of it all would reveal that. He was trying to accomplish nothing with the TPM review (analysis of the film itself set aside), other than to stretch himself and to top his previous and extremely low-profile reviews of the ST:TNG films. He obviously saw the film as a greater challenge than those, and so it was longer and more elaborate than his earlier reviews. If he was trying to impress people, it was his small existing fan base and no one else. The people that gave the Plinkett PT reviews the chance to become famous were two people he was never connected to and could not directly influence: Simon Pegg and Damon Lindelof (whom Stoklasa subsequently thanked, by the way, by running the plot holes of Prometheus over the coals, LOL); the general public made it famous from there, obviously because it met a niche in the market which was already there - regardless of what those among us who genuinely liked and appreciated the PT feel, there are indeed a segment of fandom out there that feels quite differently. Pegg and Lindelof, and the subsequent explosion in popularity of the reviews themselves, are clear evidence that the "disgruntled fan-rancor" phenomenon was there before Plinkett; all he did was give it a voice, one of several. And when he did so, he made no effort to stay at the forefront of a mass movement of some kind; he always phrased it as "bringing closure to everybody, so we can all move on."

    And move on is exactly what Stoklasa himself has done. Yes, he wasn't going to leave LFL behind until he'd properly put a period on the end of the sentence by skewering Crystal Skull, but he then takes a break from Plinkett altogether to start the Half in the Bag show (which gave Red Tails a proper shellacking for good measure), and when he returns he's largely aiming at James Cameron, not George Lucas. I sometimes think his fans now have obligated him to make at least one Lucas joke per review, and he does in order to make them happy, but he isn't building his career strictly off of Lucas' failings like some bottom-feeder; he's building his career as a defender of traditional filmmaking where everything isn't done in the computer, where actors consistently deliver outstanding performances, where the script is intelligent and well-thought-out - films where the audience is moved and/or challenged. Shockingly, this appears to be harder and harder to accomplish in Hollywood these days - including, as Plinkett has made clear to us, from directors who have themselves become cinematic institutions by making those very kind of films.

    In short, Mike Stoklasa probably doesn't care about being remembered because he's busy doing his job, and it's not being a Star Wars basher; it's being a film critic, and a damned good one.
    V-2 and Vespasian like this.
  20. Vespasian Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 1, 2012
    star 1
    Then I stand corrected.

    I'm not sure what 'misogynistic' means though, I've got to look that up, no? :D
  21. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    The franchise didn't just jump from TPM to TCW; there was some stuff in between. In AOTC the ineffective and comic battle droids had already been supplanted by super battle droids which were neither. So the film series had already addressed that complaint of TPM well before TCW or Plinkett came along.

    Learn up on the production of the PT sometime. You will be amazed!

    Look, I like STXI as much as the next guy. Okay, I probably like STXI more than the next guy.

    But this seems somewhat delusional.
    Last edited by Arawn_Fenn, Jan 27, 2013
    The-Eternal-Hero likes this.
  22. The-Eternal-Hero Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2012
    star 4
    You said it for me.

    To add to your comments: I don't think JJA will do SW "better" than GL. He'll do what needs to be done right now, which is make a movie that doesn't require a PHD in GL/SW to get into. But I don't see the PT as a failure, it's actually a huge success, a great work with faults.
    Darth Chiznuk likes this.
  23. Luukeskywalker Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 23, 1999
    star 4
    To say JJ Abrams understands Star Wars better than Lucas, even if its just in certain "ways" is laughable at best. Come on. No one understands Star Wars like Lucas. I am excited about Abrams, but one of my fears about him is that he does not fully understand the mythology in a way it takes to effectively tell the story with all of the interwoven motifs. Thankfully Arnt and Lucas have already fleshed out the story before JJ came on board, so alot of the mythology is already in there very likely. Say what you will about the prequels, but Lucas brilliantly made those movies like a moving piece of artwork in kind of an old fashioned yet classical and operatic way. Will Abrams follow that style and do it well or will he make it more like Star Trek? If he makes it like Star Trek and less like the prequels, I may be dissapointed.

    I am excited about Abrams helming it because right now I am just of the mindset that I have confidence that Abrams will make the movie with respect for how the existing 6 movies were done, and assuming he will mimick that style. If he thumbs his nose at Star Wars' classic style in terms of cinematography, editing, and pacing I will be sorely dissapointed in him.
    Last edited by Luukeskywalker, Jan 27, 2013
  24. V-2 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 10, 2012
    star 4
    You are ADORABLE.
    x
  25. Pfluegermeister Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 30, 2003
    star 4
    If anything, I'm amazed at you, for assuming that I paid no attention whatsoever to the production process on the PT. I'll assume right back that you're just making a quip and leave it there. :p

    And even if you weren't, I think you know what I'm referring to nonetheless: the visual effects in AOTC particularly, as LFL transferred from traditional filmmaking techniques to digital ones, were so obviously unconvincing that to me they failed utterly. Back in TPM, LFL was still doing things largely traditionally with some digital help; by ROTS, they were beginning to figure digital effects out properly, and so the effects in that film looked both somewhat more realistic and more emotionally involving; but on AOTC the effects were so obviously digital that they were given away at a glance. Plinkett, of course, points it out himself, but even if he never existed, I could never have missed it unless I was legally blind. It's not that the effects were new and non-traditional (ANH's effects were the same thing for their time, rememeber); it's that they were done badly - because I could tell they were effects. I could not possibly care less if the production process says otherwise; the result on the screen is what matters to me, and the result is more than eloquent enough for me to reach my conclusions.

    Now, one could make the case that this was bound to happen as special effects firms like ILM, experienced in traditional techniques, transitioned to the digital medium; I'll be the first to admit that could have been the case. But that is a symptom of the transition process that still has no place in a Star Wars film; it needs to happen in cheap films I don't care about, not important ones that I do care about; then you take the lessons learned and apply it to your big films. But that didn't happen: a simple shot of Mace Windu standing in a desert on Geonosis in AOTC looked like nothing more than a man against a green screen; a similar simple shot of Obi-Wan Kenobi in a desert on Tatooine in ANH looked like a man in a desert. They're both fictitious characters in fictitious deserts on planets that don't really exist, so what's the difference between shots? The latter was actually shot in a desert; the former was shot against a green screen. That problem in that one shot in AOTC alone could have been avoided had they just gone to a desert and then digitally extended the landscape with extra rock outcroppings, if they'd gone halfway, rather than all the way, with the digital. There would have been enough real elements in the shot that the unreal elements would have been accepted.

    Which brings me to Abrams: whatever else one can say, he keeps digital effects in their proper place. Star Trek's alien environments were shot in actual locations with heaps of real elements included, so I believed those environments. If anything, one can say that Abrams' fault is in going too far in the opposite direction, going real for real's sake alone, what with shooting the Enterprise engine room in a beer factory and all, but that was a money-saving measure that I don't expect to rear its head this time, with Disney paying the tab. His over-use of lens-flares was also in part to make it feel more real, because lens-flares happen in real life when you shoot films (light bounces around in the camera and all that; Doug Trumbull figured that out decades ago and used it to spectacular effect in Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Blade Runner), but that's something I expect will be reeled in for Episode VII because it wasn't a signature element of the other six films. Plus, Star Trek was shot on film rather than digital video, and that counts; the difference can be clearly seen when you go too far. Ask anyone who's seen The Hobbit. I assure you it's you who will be amazed. ;)

    And finally, I'll conclude by discussing what Plinkett actually said about Star Trek in relation to the PT: "In my opinion, where the prequels utterly failed, Star Trek excelled. Star Trek is really engaging; it's fun, adventurous, fast-paced; heroes are heroes, abnd villians are villains; and at the very least, you know what's happening. It's everything we did not get in the prequels. At no point were we totally bored and confused." I couldn't say that about parts of the PT. In a universe where I feel like I got all these elements Plinkett just listed, things that are vital to a Star Wars movie, in a film that wasn't Star Wars and wasn't made by the guy who made Star Wars, and where I feel like I didn't get those things in a Star Wars movie made by the guy who made Star Wars, then yes, I stand by my statement that Abrams understands Star Wars in ways Lucas didn't when he made the prequels. That's not being delusional; that's being observant.
    Vespasian and V-2 like this.