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

I did think RLM was the banned topic here; so I must just say...

Good on The Goat!!!

 

Does 2-4 calm postings constitute a swarm? LMAO.

Your tiresome depiction of Plinkett fans as religious devotees is both insulting and wrong-headed. Painting with such a broad brush is inherently intellectually dishonest.

The irony of the Plinkett review makes it even more delicious, to be honest.

"Gospel." LOL

You just hate that Plinkett is more popular than the PT on the nerdy places of the internet, don't you?

 

Yes and no.

No, ridiculous. I didn't hear any buzzing.

Yes, it kind of does. Four people against one harmless poster, working to a particular aim, and obviously interrupting him with naysaying, sort of constitutes a swarm. At least, in my eyes.

 

Hyperbole is an effective rhetorical tool, I just think it was a big stretch in this instance.

 

Could be.

I admit to some conflict on this matter. Not least because, in part, I agree with you folks.

I think, in some ways, it is time for everyone to "move on" from the RLM material, and stop pretending it is definitive or crafting replies (e.g., the rebuttal) as if shouting at a hilltop with a can of beans atop that have "The Prequels Suck!" written on the side.

 

seventhbeacon

Exactly what I mean. One more post of this style and the thread goes down

 

I'll tone it down. Sorry.

Btw, RLM's best content, imo, is actually the short video "Ultron California." Though, I'm a big James Spader fan, so....

 

What great points? Almost all of the points in the RLM review are highly questionable (to put it nicely) and easily refuted which Jim demonstrates quite nicely. The main thing is no film can stand up to the level of RLM's nit picking, you could just as easily show how "awful" any of the OT films are using the same tactics they applied to the PT. Many cite the RLM review as so great that it should be used in film making classes I kid you not. Personally I think it should be used to show how not to make a review. There is also alot of editing and cherry picking, and Stokasa himself has boasted what a great master editor he is, that he can edit anything to be funny in his own words. Editing is also a great and long used tool for manipulation. The review also uses alot of strawman arguments, and other shady tactics. Again, Stokasa himself said he refuses to ever watch either THX1138 or American Graffiti, not sure why he said that but maybe he does have a bias

As I said before, PT detractors still bring the reviews up all the time all over the net, PT fans criticizing the reviews on this board is a tiny drop in the bucket for RLM promotion DD, any PT fan going on the net will quickly be bombarded with RLM links from PT detractors. I had no idea about PT hate until I went online, and first heard of RLM from PT detractors talking about it. Personally I think the RLM crew are a bunch of hacks riding on the coattails of real filmmakers, like pilot fish which holds true for all these angry internet reviewers.

 

No, he refutes very few, if any of the points.

That's a very good summary. Thanks for posting that.

 

Nope, he refutes many of RLM's deeply flawed so-called "points." As for the rebuttal of Jim's rebuttal, it is laughably bad and weak and doesn't refute much of Jim's rebuttal. The whole RLM review is IMO asinine and everything afterward is silly.

 

I don't get it. Why would the thread go down?

 

I mean, I won't deny that RLM's opinions are just opinions. They're not gospel. But, off the top of my head, one point I agree with is the inability to connect with the characters. Now, I realize that many people do connect with the characters, which is why I'm conceding that what RLM says is just their opinion. With that being said, Raynor's rebuttal is simply his opinion about their opinion.

So does he really "refute" said opinions? Well, he provides an alternate viewpoint & even pokes holes in some of Plinkett's nitpicks. But as for Plinkett's main points, I think they're just a core set of opinions that many people who generally like the reviews agree with. For example, many would agree that a lot of the characters were uninteresting and that the plots were uninteresting. And that can't really be "refuted" any more than it can be "proven" to be true. But I for one appreciate the comedic & in-depth manner he took in articulating said points (even if this depth resulted in some exaggeration & nitpicking). It's a funny & entertaining review, even if I don't agree with his assessment that TPM is the worst thing since Plinkett's son.

 

Summary of this thread:

PT defenders: RLM sucks! Many of their points of criticism are invalid.

PT detractors: RLM rules! Many of their points of criticism are valid.

Same old, same old. Time to move on people!

 

The fact you need to resort to irrelevant derogatoriness shows how little weight is actually behind Raynor's points. It's already been demonstrated in this thread that he deliberately ignored statements from the review, misrepresented scenes and ignored facts shown in the actual film.
There's nothing in the way of evidence leading to a conclusion in his arguments.

 

I agree that Skoaka is entitled to his opinions. He did state that his reviews were meant to preach to the choir (PT haters), not to change peoples' minds which is probably lost on many people on both sides, maybe even RLM themselves later on. The big problem is the "cult" that pushes these reviews down PT fans' throats. Not sure if these pushers are really RLM fans or just PT detractors that don't really watch much of RLM outside of their SW reviews. About the only thing somebody can really refute are misrepresentations of some of the objective story elements of the film present in the review. I agree that subjective interpretations and opinions can't really be refuted.

 

Which is exactly what RLM also did with the PT films, he ignored facts from the film and misrepresented many aspects of them and has been discussed many times by Jim, Bryan, me, Cryo, Mike, etc, over many threads. Pretending RLM didn't pull some shady moves doesn't make it go away.

Funny thing is Jim did post he regrets putting insults in the rebuttal as he wrote it back when he was "young and angry." He has said if he were to write it today he would leave out the RLM insults and go direct to refuting. Sadly I think you don't want to see the flaws in the RLM review which the rebuttal clearly points out.

 

Which only adds a further query on this thread. Did JimRaynor55 want this re-posted now under his name? Was he even asked?

 

Incidentally (with the exact structural details being neither here not there), no structural (or otherwise) element is an excuse if people feel it harms their ability to enjoy the movie.*

I'd have thought that this was pretty obvious by now.

*And please don't winge or spit at me because you enjoyed it on some level. You know such a sentiment is widespread enough.

 

Well, Stoklasa responded to this rebuttal, didn't he? As pointed in a quote above, thestarwarstrilogy.com obviously has some issues with it also (with the PT as well). The article about it tries to make the author basically an idiot (he's whiny like a seven year old (yes, personal insults are the best, man!), often angry, it's written by someone who calls himself that and that. No remarks about someone who calls himself Mr. Plinkett), and the closing paragraph is very hypocritical because Raynor's conclusions are questionable, and Stoklasa's review of TPM is great... As seen in an article right next to this one.

Stoklasa's PT videos are made for the sole purpose of making him famous. Yes, all right, do whatever you want, but be fair. How can I watch reviews of just the half of the saga? I feel that the OT fans are deprived of some genuine satire and pure fun. Just think the joy of seing their three wonderful movies being torn apart by overly exaggerated dissecting and making them brainless kids for loving those movies.

I have yet to see his TFA video. Even that one couldn't be without some pathetic one hour (or more) review of the PT (now an 11 or more years old movies!), and, as I understand, he was pretty gentle to the movie. I guess we're lucky we got that one, but when a movie was a huge hit and has such a loyal fans that forgive it's ANH rehash thing, that's OK, it won't hurt his popularity.

Anyway, this rebuttal is a good thing. There are some passive aggressive things going on here (like, Stoklasa's videos are just fun, why are you posting Raynor's rebuttal here, you're giving RLM and their videos more popularity, has Raynor approved this) that try to hide it from the rest of the world, but it all comes down to the basics, the PT is bad, how dare you defend it?!

I dare.

 

No....

You seem to know nothing of Plikett fans...

They treat Plikett like a god(and RLM) as gods. RLM itself is great content, but it's the fans. A lot of them are in fact, smaller version of plikettor similar to 4chan users at times. The only good RLM fans are the ones that rarely talk, and when they do, you'll notice how there is no worship or complete bias.

 

Yes he did, right here.

 

RLM just conveys what people felt about the PT. He said it multiple times. His reviews weren't really "reviews" more so iterations of the fans's displease done in a different/comedic style..

pretty much Every complaint, criticism and what not, I have heard already before watching his videos. He took film school I guess so he adds some technical babble about the shots buuut in essence, I've still heard them being said before.

And I'll keep saying this over and over again if I have to on this god forsaken subject:

RLM: You are all pawns. We make fun of each and every one of you. You are the butt of the joke! We got you!


Why isn't this thread locked? We've aaalll been over this in the last thread not even a week ago! Sometimes I wonder if the boards are getting better or more frustrating to be in....

Same arguments being said, no changed tune or tone.....Plain white sauce....

 

Those reviews weren't poking fun at fans who disliked the PT, as much as you'd like to think so. They represent Stoklasa's opinion even when he's not doing the Plinkett character.

Also, what this rebuttal failed to confront are all of Plinkett's film-making & directorial criticisms. What it spends its time "rebutting" are the criticisms of the movie's internal logic & content. Which is far less interesting. It's really just 108 pages of nerd rage. The pointless nit-picking of someone else's nit-picks, & not even the most interesting ones.

 

And it sums it up pretty well. All bluster, no substance.

 

Yes I know about his opinion, I can go watch RLM or Half in the bag. The rebuttal, while commendable and monumental, wasn't something I agree on.

But that is not my main point. Watch his videos again. He might take "pins" on the PT, but he takes big "pins" on people that dislike them...He literally states a line in the video, then downplays it with a joke, as if hiding the fact that it's true.

"It's really just 108 pages of nerd rage"

One nerd complains about the movie, the other writes a rebuttal about the complaining.

Whats the difference? Plikett knows how to edit well, which in all honesty, is why it's very popular....The editing is what made it not the jokes themselves.

If anything, it's just two nerds on a movie....