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

You mean uncritical and self serving right? A documentary with expounding of ring theory? No evidence required! Just slanted words and horrible assumptions to explain away issues and expound contrived theories, a bit like the 'rebuttal' in the OP. No Occam's razor required.

There's many levels of irony working here.

 

From what I saw of the prequels strike back documentary,it seemed pretty thoughtful and well-made, and not particularly partisan at all in the pro-versus-anti prequel sense. Here's hoping it gets picked up by Netflix or somebody so it can reach the largest possible audience.

 

Yeah Torib, I think it leaned more towards the pro-pt side of things, but it still featured arguments from both sides.

I say, when it comes to these reviews. You can watch RLM if you don't like the prequels, and you can laugh along. (Or if you are mature enough you can laugh along even though you do like the prequels.)

Aaannnnddd if you love the prequels, like me, the Prequels Strike Back was really quite entertaining.

I mentioned this earlier, but I'll repeat it again.

I thought any thread about RLM would be locked and any mention of RLM discouraged? Have the rules changed?

 

It's so dense. Every single sentence just has so much going on...

 

I'm also sharing your thoughts here.

Let's close this thread...

 

Part 6 ​

0:00
Another section, "11. Please God Make it Stop Make it End" begins.
Plinkett: "Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan go back for no reason"
Uh, they it was explicitly stated that they were going back to help the Queen, and discover more about the mysterious Sith plot.
Plinkett: "and they bring the little kid to a war zone for no reason."
This is a fair criticism. The movie never really justified why Anakin was going with them, despite how dangerous it was for him.
My only guess is that it was because Anakin's status in the Republic was questionable at best, and the Jedi Order had already rejected him. Qui-Gon may have wanted to keep Anakin close to the boy's few friends just in case he died, so that the Jedi wouldn't just send Anakin away somewhere.
But Qui-Gon's actions here are questionable, and the movie should have done some more to show why Anakin was even with them. Perhaps there could have been a scene where Anakin snuck onboard the Queen's ship as it took off back to Naboo.
0:13
Plinkett: "But really what's curious about this is that no other Jedi come back with them. Even though there might be a Sith there."

Some clips of the numerous Jedi who went to Geonosis in AOTC are shown. ​

Plinkett: "There's much more important work for the other five hundred Jedis here. Eh, all the Jedis will just sit here and see who gets elected Chancellor, I guess."
Using an AOTC clip to criticize a TPM scene isn't fair, because TPM came out years before AOTC. Never mind the huge differences in the missions. In AOTC, they sent hundreds of Jedi to potentially fight a Separatist army, with the full backing of the Republic government. In TPM, they sent two Jedi to handle a small planetary matter that was considered controversial by the corrupt Senate. Also, Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan were hoping to bait Darth Maul into showing himself. It's a lot harder to bait someone when you have an entire army of Jedi with you.
0:58
Plinkett: "So everyone waits until they arrive at Naboo to start discussing how they have no plans at all, and no idea what they're doing."
Once again Stoklasa makes a criticism based on a poor reading of the actual movie. The scene in question starts in the Royal starship's cockpit, where the pilot is having fun with Anakin and showing the boy how the ship's controls work. There is nothing but the blackness of space and distant stars around them. We then cut to the rest of the heroes in another part of the ship, talking with the Queen about their plans.
The movie then uses a one of Lucas's favorite techniques, a wipe transition, to show the ship approaching Naboo. Obi-Wan and Captain Panaka are now in the cockpit with the pilot, while Anakin is nowhere to be seen. The pilot says that he can see a Droid Control Ship on the sensors. Time has obviously passed, as hinted by the wipe transition, the different characters in the cockpit, and the fact that the pilot can see enemies on his sensors (in contrast to chilling out with Anakin like he had before).
So no, the movie does not show the characters stupidly waiting until they arrived at Naboo before discussing any plans.
1:10
Plinkett: "All of a sudden the whole blockade is gone too, and there's just one ship. Where'd they go? That's convenient."
Yeah, it is convenient. It's hardly unheard of for heroes in action movies to occasionally receive some favorable breaks, when they would otherwise be up against hopeless odds. This break also makes sense anyway. Maintaining a blockade ties up massive amounts of resources. All the blockading ships could actually be used for shipping, or for maintaining security in other areas. The blockade is also unnecessary, if the planet being blockaded has been conquered and occupied by ground troops.
1:25
Plinkett: "So then they make a plan. The Gungans act as robot bait so that the Queen can sneak into the palace and capture the Viceroy while the fighters attack the Droid Control Ship. So what happens again when they capture the Viceroy?"

Padmé: "Without the Viceroy they will be lost and confused." ​

Brace yourselves. Here comes more stupid extended whining from Stoklasa, yet again trying to create problems that don't actually exist.
Stoklasa switches character to some Star Trek guy, which I assume to be a reference to one of his previous movie reviews.

Star Trek Officer: "Um, excuse me. Hi, how do you know for sure that the robots will be lost and confused without the Viceroy? I mean just by physically capturing him doesn't mean that all the robots will know that he was captured, right? It, it just seems that you're making up a bunch of BS right now. Hey maybe they're programmed to just keep doing what they're doing regardless, until they receive more orders? Hey maybe everyone should focus their efforts on taking out the Droid Control Ship first? ​

At least here, Stoklasa takes on a character who tries to sound like the calm voice of reason, instead of an annoyingly incoherent psycho. It's less unpleasant to listen to at least, compared to all that had come before. But again, the answers to his problems are right there in front of him:
The plan was to capture the Viceroy while also attempting to destroy the Control Ship. In fact, the ground attack on the palace directly enabled the fighter attack on the ship! It's a multi-pronged attack that allows for successful gains even if one part should fail. Taking out the enemy's leadership will obviously undermine their army's coordination. At the very least, that enemy leader won't be able to issue any more orders.
On the issue of the battledroids continuing their current actions until receiving new orders, that's what communication is for. Obviously Padmé could announce the Viceroy's capture and use him as a hostage to make demands. And it's not like the Trade Federation wouldn't have already communicated the capture themselves, since Padmé and her troops had been violently storming the palace.
The idea that the characters should just "focus their efforts on taking out the Droid Control Ship first" is amusing in its simple-mindedness. How does he propose they "focus" on it any more than they do in the actual movie? Does he have any actual plan of his own, rather than a bunch of stupid questions?
The Naboo forces had a limited number of trained pilots, and no fighter ships as of the beginning of the attack. How else were they supposed to take on the Control Ship?
Stoklasa continues the stupid comments, in the guise of a Star Trek character.

Star Trek Officer: "Then you could skip the other two dangerous parts. And you could just walk up to the Viceroy and capture him. Who's in charge here? What's this all about again? Why are we all listening to fourteen year old girl with no military experience?" ​

What the hell does he mean by "walk up to the Viceroy and capture him?" I'm pretty damn sure that the Viceroy wouldn't let them just approach him like that, without heavy battledroid protection. Yet another stunningly bizarre statement, beneath even the simplistic thought processes of children.
The irony is also great. Stoklasa criticizes Padmé for having "no military experience." Judging from the laughable tactics that he has suggested throughout his review, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that he has no military experience either. After all, he's tactical genius who actually thinks that "JUST FIGHT THEM ALL" is a good idea.
After this part, Stoklasa gets rid of the Star Trek character and goes back to his creepy "Plinkett" persona.
2:25

Qui-Gon: "There is a possibility that with this diversion, many Gungans will be killed." ​

Plinkett: "Hey wait Gungans? I thought they were called Gungas?"
A real life clip of George Lucas going over his story ideas is shown. In the clip, Lucas says "Gungas" with no "n" at the end. Ooh, Lucas made a minor adjustment to the name of his fictional aliens, then remained consistent with "Gungans" throughout the actual movie. Big whoop.
2:42

Viceroy: "We are sending all troops to meet [the Gungan army] assembling near the swamp."​

Plinkett: "Why would you meet them? Why not just ignore them? You have a fortified position. Can't you see an obvious ploy to draw away your protection?"
More ignorance from Stoklasa. He has only the vaguest idea of the strategic situation based off of one line (that there's a Gungan army out there somewhere), yet he makes accusations of stupidity.
The Trade Federation army has tanks and superior firepower. Technologically superior armies typically prefer to face their enemies in open, direct combat. If you have superior weapons, then it is sensible to use those superior weapons on the enemy army and crush it right away. It's not a difficult concept
God, can you imagine how a guy like Stoklasa would run an actual war?
As for the city, Stoklasa claims that it's "fortified" with no evidence whatsoever. Sitting inside the city, fortified or not, would allow the Gungans to encircle them. It could prevent the Trade Fed from bringing all of its firepower to bear. And if the Gungans don't throw themselves directly at the city, then staying inside could allow them to run rampant around the countryside. We know for a fact that the Trade Federation is occupying more than just the city, because of the internment camps that were mentioned.
Basically Stoklasa doesn't have any idea about all the details that could be relevant to the strategic picture. So his criticism based off of one vague line has no actual merit.
As for the Viceroy's "protection," it's not like he sent all of his forces out to crush the Gungans. Nobody keeps an entire army tied down for their personal protection. For personal security, people usually rely on...security forces.
Stoklasa also asks more stupid questions while nitpicking another line from this scene:

Sidious: "This will work to our advantage." ​

Plinkett: "How exactly will it work to your advantage? The Galactic Senate doesn't even know what's happening here. What does it matter?"
Obviously, Sidious thought that it was advantageous with regards to the military situation on Naboo. The Gungan army came out in the open where it could be easily crushed.
3:05

Qui-Gon: "Once we get inside, you find a safe place to hide and stay there." ​

Plinkett: "Aw Christ, you brought the kid here too? Hey here's a safe place to hide: Not in the city!"
A fair criticism. I don't know why Qui-Gon brought Anakin there either. The movie should've either forced him to bring Anakin along out of necessity, or have Anakin sneaking in by himself after them.
3:44

Captain Panaka: "The difficulty's getting into the throne room. Once we're inside, we shouldn't have a problem." ​

Plinkett: "If the Viceroy was smart, he would be in a location you would not expect to find him. But since he's clearly a complete idiot, then yeah, he's probably in the throne room. Let's go with that."
Earlier (go back to 2:53 of Part 4), didn't Stoklasa criticize the Trade Federation for not keeping the Queen in the palace, which he seemed to think was the most secure place? Maybe, just maybe the throne room is the most secure part in the palace? It certainly would be more secure right now, after the Trade Federation's army has had some time to pacify the city. More so than it would be immediately following the invasion.
Anyway, it doesn't matter at all for the plot. The Naboo forces obviously did some recon on the Trade Fed's forces before their attack, going by the dialogue. The Viceroy could be anywhere, and it wouldn't change the story in any meaningful way.
Stoklasa goes on to the lightsaber duel between the Jedi and Darth Maul.
4:20
Plinkett: "Oh and then they go from the palace to this room [the place with the bottomless pits]. What is this room? Is this in the palace? I mean I know George wanted the Jedis to fight in a cool place that's really Star Warsy. So, so this is what a power generator? What does it power, the universe? So you're expecting me to believe that the people that built this technological wonder were dying without space supplies after two days?"
No, I don't expect people to believe that, since it was never stated in the movie and Stoklasa basically made it up. We already went over this stupid point earlier in the review. No Naboo had to be "dying" after "two days" of a blockade; the important fact is that they were being blockaded and that's generally not seen as a good thing.
4:44
Plinkett: "So I have another question. If the Sith have been extinct for a millennium, and only Jedis use lightsabers...then why are the Jedis so darn experienced at sword fighting?"
Uh, it's called training and sparring. Another stupid, pointless question. Stoklasa starts breezing through things again, asking a lot of questions like these. Some are OK nitpicks, others are just stupid.
4:57
RLM: "So at the start of the film we see that Jedis can run at a super fast speed when the screenwriter doesn't know how to get them out of a situation where a powerful droid [the Droidekas] is shooting lasers at them."
He labels the Jedi's super speed as a cop out by the writer, although it seems to me that it was more of a momentary "cool effect." If the writer wanted the Jedi to run away...then the Jedi would simply run away, super speed or not. The Droidekas were standing still while shooting; there was no implication at all that the Jedi couldn't otherwise outrun them.
5:06
RLM: "But we never see them run fast again."
Fair point, although you can say that about all the other Force powers. Why don't the Jedi and Sith use telekinesis or lightning at every moment during every fight? The simple explanation is that the Jedi's powers aren't limitless, and you can't just pull out any Force power at any given moment.

A clip is shown, of Obi-Wan not being fast enough to rejoin Qui-Gon before an energy shield cuts him off. ​

But Stoklasa also doesn't mention the factors leading up to the specific part that he's complaining about here. Obi-Wan is kicked in the face by Darth Maul. He then falls several dozen feet down, slamming hard into another walkway below him which he barely grabs hold of in order to avoid falling even more. Obi-Wan then pulls himself up, before using the Force to leap high up again. So excuse him for not using the Force again several seconds after just using it, and not long after taking some hard hits.
Now, this part wasn't a big deal. But it's yet another tiresome example of Stoklasa making a nitpick without mentioning the easy explanation that already exists.
5:19
Sidious: "Wipe them out. All of them."

A clip of the droid army rounding up surrendering Gungan troops is shown. ​

Plinkett: "If the orders were to wipe them out, all of them, then why are they taking prisoners?"
True, the Trade Federation didn't completely wipe the Gungans out. But a few general words about wiping out the enemy does not mean that you can't take prisoners. Prisoners can be interrogated or put to use before being destroyed anyway. Who cares.
5:29

Padmé: "I will not condone a course of action that will lead us to war." [clip from the beginning, before the Trade Fed invasion] ​

A few brief clips from the battle at the end of the movie are shown. ​

Oh yeah, real clever there. He really took it to the movie by pointing out a huge inconsistency...oh wait he's just being stupid again and ignoring everything that happened between the beginning and the end.
5:40
Plinkett: "Yeah, you're such a peaceful people that you keep guns in the armrests of your throne. Yeah, peaceful and paranoid?"
So a leader having some personal security measures means your society can't be peaceful...I get that Stoklasa is trying to be sarcastic and funny, but he's still not making any clever observations here.
5:55
Another section, "12. Obi-Wan Gets Mad and Then I Do" begins. It goes deeper into the climatic lightsaber battle.
Plinkett: "Their flawless choreography lacks all humanity and emotion."
Now, this is obviously a subjective statement of opinion that can't be flat out refuted, unlike a factual assertion. All I would say to this is that if this lightsaber fight sucked for having too much choreography, then he must hate every martial arts movie out there. Because I'm not seeing how the choreography was too excessive compared to many other movies. Obviously there is choreography, but the action remains fast and in the moment. There is no slow-motion, nor are there extremely conspicuous camera movements or elaborately drawn-out acrobatics. I wouldn't say that TPM's lightsaber battle was particularly stylized compared to most contemporary action movies.
6:08
Plinkett: "But then something happens: Qui-Gon dies, and Obi-Wan is pissed. Hey, hey maybe this will finally get good. Maybe I'll get emotionally involved. You see Obi-Wan is pumped. He really wants to kick this guy's ass...and then BAM! Oh. That's right back to highly choreographed fighting.
In the movie, Obi-Wan charges and jumps at Darth Maul, swinging while still in the air. The two then slash at each other. Again, the level of choreography is a matter of opinion, though I've seen far more in many other movies. But then Stoklasa steps away from pure opinion, and decides to make a comparison to ROTJ:
6:32
Plinkett: "Hey remember when Luke Skywalker got really pissed and snapped when Vader was taunting him? Remember how worked up and emotional he got? He just started wailing on Vader. There was no grace, or complex choreography. He was just pounding him into submission. Filled with rage. When you're worked up with emotion you begin to lose your composure and control. You expose your humanity a little. Obi-Wan should've done that, just a bit."
He doesn't mention that Vader and the Emperor had been pushing Luke's buttons for an extended period of time before that, trying to piss him off and tempt him into joining the Dark Side. The whole point of that scene wasn't that Luke was just experiencing some natural anger, but that he was on the verge of turning evil. He was losing control of himself and on the verge of being forever corrupted.
Not only is Obi-Wan not Luke, but he wasn't set up as being tempted by the Dark Side either. He shouldn't have been filled with anywhere near such uncontrollable rage. And it's not like a well-trained warrior has to forget his skills and training if enraged in the middle of battle. I find it funny that Stoklasa seems to think equate "expose your humanity" means to lose control.
As a matter of opinion, someone wouldn't be wrong for saying that they would've liked Obi-Wan or the fight if there was more explicit emotion. But comparisons should still be appropriate.
Anyway, RLM spends the next couple of minutes analyzing the lightsaber duels in the original trilogy. He actually makes some good points about the meaning and themes behind those fights.
7:16
Plinkett: "There's a lot going on between the two characters [in TESB] outside the fact that they were swinging swords at each other. There is even a lot more going on at the end of Jedi. Luke was realizing that he was kinda becoming his father and taking his place. And the Emperor was proving a point that hate and anger can be a powerful ally. You got things like temptation, anger, revelation, defiance, sacrifice, and redemption. What's happening at the end of Phantom Menace? Three guys we don't care about are fighting each other over...something."
See, now THIS is more like it for a change. Stoklasa stays within the safe realm of opinion, and actually supports his opinion here with observations from the movies. He provides some meatier commentary about important things like the themes of the movies, instead of nitpicking every little thing to hell and getting most of it wrong along the way.
I think most people will agree that TPM didn't have as much emotion and meaning compared to the other Star Wars movies. This is a fair point by Stoklasa. Too bad it comes so late, after a ridiculous amount of dimwitted nitpicky garbage.
8:00
Plinkett: "So if you've ever said that the duel at the end of A New Hope was the worst one because it had bad fight choreography, and it was like a old guy, and a guy in a mask who couldn't see what he was doing, so they were just awkwardly hitting him with swords, then I'm afraid you missed the point entirely. It's really about moments like this."

A clip of Obi-Wan's sacrifice is shown. ​

OK, although I would point out that this fight wasn't exactly at the end of ANH (it occurred about three-fourths of the way through). And while I'm not one to bash the lightsaber fight in ANH, I would say that if you're trying to defend it then pointing out the sacrifice that comes isn't a very strong argument. Arguing like that suggests that the fight's merit comes not from the fight itself, but something that happened only happened after the actual fighting.
Remember this part though, it comes up shortly later in RLM's review.
8:45
Stoklasa goes outside of his stated scope of reviewing TPM, by spending time to criticize the final battle between Anakin and Obi-Wan at the end of Episode III.
Plinkett: "You might be thinking that the duel between Anakin and Obi-Wan had some kind of depth to it because they were former friends. [Some garbled words] this indeed had a little more going on than

A clip of the lightsaber fight in TPM is shown. ​

Plinkett: "nothing and"

A clip of the lightsaber fight in AOTC is shown. ​

Plinkett: "even more nothing. This duel [in ROTS] didn't need to be 45 minutes long."
Fact checking time. Approximately 12 minutes pass between the moment when Anakin and Obi-Wan take out their lightsabers and the moment when Obi-Wan hacks Anakin apart. These 12 minutes aren't even entirely devoted to their fight either, because they share that period of time with Yoda and Palpatine. We see Yoda and Palpatine talking to each other before having a big fight of their own. We see Yoda escaping the Senate chamber with the help of Senator Bail Organa as well.
So now a few minutes of fighting comes out to "45 minutes?" Even if he was just speaking casually, that number is so off that his statement is completely ridiculous.
And while you might not know this due to Stoklasa's biased statement, the final battles in ROTS in fact took less time than the final battles in other Star Wars movies. I quickly checked the other movies as well to see how long their climatic battles lasted. Now I admit that this part gets a little dicey, because the way that some of the battles started and finished weren't clear cut. For example, TESB's final battle nearly doubles in length if you include the Millennium Falcon's escape from Cloud City. AOTC has have several distinct battles not placed too far apart from each other. All of the below running times are approximate. I will state when I started and ended my counting each movie's "final battle" to make things more clear:
Episode IV: A New Hope Began: The Rebel fighters dive toward the Death Star. Ended: The Death Star explodes. Length: 11 minutes
Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back Began: Luke pursues Boba Fett and the Stormtroopers through the halls of Cloud City. Ended: Vader cuts off Luke's hand. Length: 12 minutes
Episode VI: Return of the Jedi Began: Han's commando team breaks into the shield generator building. Ended: The second Death Star explodes. Length: 30 minutes
Episode I: The Phantom Menace Began: The Trade Federation engages the Gungans. Ended: Obi-Wan kills Darth Maul Length: 18 minutes
Episode II: Attack of the Clones Began: Mace Windu and the other Jedi reveal themselves at the arena. Ended: Count Dooku escapes. Length: 20 minutes
As you can see, ROTS's final battle was far shorter than the final battles in three of the other movies. It was about as long as the final battles at the end of the first two celebrated movies. Once again, one of Stoklasa's claims is refuted with simple fact checking.
Once again, he's been caught bashing a prequel movie while giving passes to the original trilogy movies for doing the same thing.
9:02
Plinkett: "The ultimate point of everything was that Obi-Wan defeats Anakin. Having them fight in the most ridiculous of places only to wind up on a tiny hill at the end was overindulgent. This fight could've lasted 3 minutes in one location and still have the same impact in the story. The whole thing ends up going on so long that it actually becomes boring despite the amazing visual effects."
As I proved above, the final battles of ROTS were not long at all by the standards of the Star Wars series. And the ultimate point of everything is to entertain the audience.
Now, granted everything he says in this paragraph is opinion. But his claim of the fight lasting "45 minutes" is ridiculously exaggerated. If his opinion is based on that wildly incorrect belief, then it's a stupid opinion. And Star Wars is an action adventure series. I'd venture to guess that most of the audience wanted a big epic duel to conclude the saga with, rather than a much smaller fight that lasts "3 minutes in one location."
Can you imagine that? Ending the movie series with the smallest scale and most unspectacular final battle of them all? A final battle that, at "3 minutes" long, would last a small fraction of the times that the other final battles went on for? The audience would walk out unsatisfied, feeling like the movie could've ended with so much more. I guess this is why George Lucas is a billionaire who makes successful blockbuster movies... and Mike Stoklasa is not.
9:25
Plinkett: "The ultimate irony is that this fight [Obi-Wan vs. Vader in ANH] between the same characters years later is much more interesting than this one [the duel in ROTS].
This is pure opinion that Stoklasa is entitled to. It's also an opinion that I think a lot of people out there would disagree with. The ROTS duel has a far bigger scope, better music (an epic score as opposed to a few brief dark notes at the beginning), and faster action. It is the culmination of everything in the prequel trilogy, instead of a short fight three-fourths of the way through ANH.
But what about the emotion? Stoklasa previously stated that emotion was such an important part of a fight, and criticized the lightsaber battle in TPM because Obi-Wan didn't get pissed off like Luke did in ROTJ. Well, the big fight in ROTS certainly showed a lot of emotion from both combatants. The fight in ANH, not so much. In ROTS both characters were living through a tumultuous time and grappling with the betrayal of the other (real or perceived). In ANH, not so much. Old Obi-Wan and Old Vader literally had decades to cool off since their previous conversation. They had accepted everything, and remained quite calm throughout the fight in ANH.
It's ultimately the guy's own decision as to which fight he likes better, and there's nothing to "prove" here either way. But a lot of people, including myself, have a different opinion. But Stoklasa isn't being fair and consistent in the way that he criticizes ROTS.

 

Part 7​

0:00
The seventh and final part of this review of TPM begins with a section called "13. The Ending Multiplication Effect." Stoklasa states that the conclusion of each succeeding Star Wars film leading up to TPM has been made up of more and more sub-conflicts:
ANH: 1. Luke and some other pilots fly against the Death Star (in Stoklasa's stated opinion, "The story is flawlessly built up to the final conclusion").
TESB: 1. Luke duels Vader. 2. Leia and the others fight Stormtroopers and escape from Cloud City.
ROTJ: 1. Luke duels Vader again. 2. The ground battle on Endor. 3. The space battle against the Imperial fleet and the second Death Star.
TPM: 1. Jar Jar and the Gungan army battle the Trade Federation's droids. 2. The Jedi fight Darth Maul. 3. Padmé and her team try to capture the Viceroy. 4. Anakin and the Naboo pilots try to destroy the Droid Control Ship.
This is true, the ending battles from ANH to TPM do get more dispersed and complex. However, Stoklasa doesn't really explain why this is a bad thing in and of itself:
1:02
Plinkett: "This was one of the major mistakes made in Episode I. Ironically the simplest endings, to the first two movies, with the least locations and events, are vastly more interesting because the plot is built up to them and we can focus on the one thing."
Now, I'm going to talk about the subject of multiple locations/events in the same battle. It's not necessarily the same thing as the execution of each separate event, and I had my problems as well with the execution of some parts of TPM's concluding battle.
Dispersed battles composed of more than one sub-conflict allow for each member of an ensemble cast to play a part. Notice how in ANH, which had the simplest and most focused conclusion, Luke is the only one who really gets to do anything. Han and Chewie take the Millennium Falcon and disappear, coming back only as a last second surprise to save Luke's butt. It's a triumphant surprise, but we never see the critical moments when Han grapples with his morality and decides to go back to fight.
R2-D2? He's reduced to a prop sticking out from the back of Luke's X-wing. Leia? She stands silently in the Rebel command center. She waits around with nothing to do, except to possibly die. Same thing with C-3PO.
So was ANH's conclusion really so "flawlessly built up," as Stoklasa thinks? I don't think so. I've read before that screenwriters try to separate their battles so that each member of an ensemble can have something different to do. And that idea seems to be something that George Lucas followed himself, since "The Ending Multiplication Effect" started way back in the original trilogy. Just as he did when he glossed over the fact that Luke doesn't even show up in ANH until 17 minutes in, Stoklasa looked at the ending of original movie through rose-tinted glasses.
Now, why are multiple simultaneous battles even such a bad thing, in and of itself? Stoklasa doesn't really explain all that much. He claims that in movies with single ending battles, "the plot is built up to them." But the plot in TPM built up to its fights as well. Stoklasa also said that it's easier "to focus on the one thing." I'll give him that, although not having any sub-conflicts comes with its own problems, as I explained above.
And you know what seems odd to me? Stoklasa was so caught up thinking that he was smart and insightful for pointing out the multiple simultaneous fights, that he seemingly forgets to criticize the clearly dumb things that actually happened in the movie. Anakin improbably being taken into the space battle by his ship's auto-pilot? Very briefly skimmed over. Anakin's lack of fear and tension during the space battle? Not a word. Jar Jar's excessive bumbling? Not covered either. Rather strange, coming from the guy who spent 40 minutes covering the first 29 minutes of the movie, who liked to harp on such insignificant details as tea drinking or circular starships.
Brace yourselves again, because the next part just gets ugly:
1:15

Clips of George Lucas and his employees sitting down to view a rough cut of TPM (which I assume were taken from the DVD extras) are shown. ​

Plinkett: "After the rough cut screening of the movie for the first time, everyone in attendance looks just as baffled at the cluster**** as we were."
Stoklasa keeps showing clips from this DVD extra with Lucas and his employees stressing over how to edit the rough cut. He uses a few choice quotes to support his claims, but he also mutes some clips so that he can talk over them. Stoklasa claims that the footage shows that Lucas and his employees hated the movie themselves, and didn't know what they were doing. As you will see, Stoklasa twists and exaggerates things.
1:29
Plinkett: "The [movie's editor] then attempts to explain pacing, and why four scenes with totally different emotional tones don't work well together."

Editor: "In the space of about ninety seconds, you know you go from lamenting the death of, you know, a hero, to escape, to slightly comedic with Jar Jar, you know, to Anakin returning...[muted by Stoklasa] ​

Plinkett: "But he kinda realizes he's wasting his time so he stops."
Actually, it looked like he kept talking but Stoklasa silenced him to give us his own version of what happened.
Look closely at what the editor is saying though. "The death" sounds like Qui-Gon's death scene after Maul is killed. "Jar Jar" is self-explanatory; the only thing it could be is Jar Jar's clumsy antics during the ground battle. I assume "Anakin returning" is Anakin happily celebrating as he escapes from the Droid Control Ship, after dealing a fatal blow from the inside.
Lucas and his employees were stressed out from the way that a few specific parts flowed into each other, within a short period of "about ninety seconds." They didn't hate the entire movie, or even the "four scenes" (battles) as Stoklasa is trying to make it look like. To be fair, I did think the tones in some of the battles didn't mesh well with the others. I thought Padmé and the Jedi's parts were great, while the light and comic tone in Anakin and Jar Jar's parts detracted from the tension. But Stoklasa is still overplaying his hand here.
1:51
Plinkett: "Rick McCallum is frozen in utter shock at how horrible the movie was. Internally, he regrets not challenging Lucas on some of the things he was worried about."
Nice of him to play mind-reader, and make up a bunch of things that Rick McCallum was supposedly thinking about.
2:33
Plinkett: "No one looks like they know what's going on, and they all look like they're about to start pointing fingers. But that's just my interpretation of this footage. I wasn't there."
The level of dishonesty here is disgusting. Once again, Stoklasa relies on the same trick. He keeps saying negative things that are unproven or even untrue, then admits that it's not the case or that he can't confirm it. Hammering negative feelings into people's heads, knowing that almost none of them will ever fact check his statements.
Go to the actual finished version of the movie. Qui-Gon has his sad and dramatic death scene. The movie then moves to the streets of Naboo, in a scene that's all business. Queen Amidala and Captain Panaka send the defeated Viceroy off, telling him that he's finished. Palpatine shows up and it's said that he won the election and is the new Chancellor. Yoda and Obi-Wan talk about training Anakin, in a serious scene where Yoda worries about "grave danger." The movie then switches to another grim scene, where we see Qui-Gon's funeral pyre. Yoda and Mace Windu worry about the other Sith who must still be out there. An eerie closeup tells everyone that that other Sith is Palpatine, in case they didn't realize that yet. It's not until after that, in the last scene showing the victory celebration, when the movie takes on a happy tone again. "Anakin's return" and any scenes with Jar Jar? Nowhere to be seen here, but instead shifted into other parts of the movie.
So it looks like Lucas and his people figured out the editing problem that they were worrying about, and drastically reduced the clashing tones from the rough cut. Not that you realize that if you go by Stoklasa's portrayal of things.
2:43
Stoklasa skims over the ending of the movie within a few seconds, rambling and pointing out useless things. Nothing worth talking about.
2:54
Plinkett: "And then later on, or earlier or something, Yoda and Obi-Wan are talking in the castle, and and Yoda says"

Yoda: "Grave danger I fear in his training." ​

Obi-Wan: "I gave Qui-Gon my word." [that he would train Anakin] ​

Plinkett: "Oh. You gave Qui-Gon your word. I suppose it's better to rely on that than rather the whole prediction of 'grave danger.'"

[The words 'Grave Danger' are put onscreen for emphasis] ​

Plinkett: "So it seems like the Jedi Council reluctantly agrees to let Obi-Wan train the boy for no real reason."
No reason? Let's hear the logic behind that statement...
Plinkett: "Hey remember, this is not like some board room of company executives making a decision about apple sauce packaging. These are Jedi Masters, whose entire existence is based on 'The Force,' 'Feelings,' 'Premonition,' and 'Prophecy.'"
Plinkett: "When they ALL feel weirded out and predict 'grave danger,' you'd think they of all people would follow their own instincts. But instead for no reason AT ALL, they allow the training."
Yeah, no reason such as the boy probably being "The Chosen One" as predicted by prophecy? The kind of "prophecy" that RLM thinks the Jedi should adhere to? Never mind the fact that Qui-Gon believed in Anakin, or that the Jedi Council never even put their foot down before and said that Anakin would absolutely not be trained.
On Coruscant, the Jedi sensed fear in Anakin which isn't good but also isn't anything out of the ordinary coming from a young boy in a situation like that. When they informed Qui-Gon of their initial decision not to train Anakin, the only reason Mace Windu could bring up was a half-assed "He is too old." Qui-Gon, another Jedi Master himself (who was explicitly said to be qualified for the Council, if only he would fall in line with the others), disputed that. Even Yoda admitted that Anakin's future was "clouded" and difficult to see. The Jedi Council decided to defer their decision on Anakin's future until later, since they still had the Naboo crisis on their hands.
So the Jedi Masters, who admittedly weren't even sure before, eventually decided to trust Qui-Gon's judgment and grant his dying wish? Uh, okay. Not seeing a problem there.
3:55
Plinkett: "Yoda's supposed to be really wise, right?"

Yoda: "Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." ​

Plinkett: "Wait, what did he just say? Maybe he isn't that wise, because that don't make a lick of sense. 'Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.'"
These words from Yoda, which are very true, state another one of the Star Wars saga's main themes. That theme is how poisonous and insidious hatred can be, and how it can change who you are for the worse. It is what happens to Anakin, and what Luke resists in ROTJ. It's astounding that Stoklasa would take issue with these words. But he has already shown an ignorance for this movie, and this saga's themes. His explanation for why these words "don't make a lick of sense" is just idiotic:
RLM: "Can't anger lead to fear? And fear lead to suffering? And then suffering lead to hate? You see when you have three totally interchangeable emotional states, that can't really be arranged in a certain pattern of logic."
This guy must be a complete moron if he can't see the logical order of things. Let me plug in a few words to make things perfectly clear for the slow and stupid people out there who can't seem to get it:
"Fear [for your future] leads to anger [at people you think are holding you back]. Anger leads to hate [for those people]. Hate leads to suffering [because you fight with people or push them away]."
That's what happened to Anakin, though it could easily apply to anyone else.
Now, was that so hard to understand? Give me a break. Of course Stoklasa revels in his idiocy and proposes his "funny" alternative of chicken leading to food leading to feces.
4:37
We're finally at the last part of this lousy review, titled "14. The Aftermath." Stoklasa doesn't really make any new points in these last five minutes. He does, however, suggest and insinuate a lot without any actual proof. He starts by restating that TPM was the biggest disappointment ever. Who does he lay the blame on?
4:57
Plinkett: "Well, I guess you could say it was everyone involved in the production. Mainly the producers and those higher up on the food chain. Sure, it's easy to blame George for the script and doing everything wrong, but those people who didn't challenge Lucas on some of the questionable ideas, they also carry some blame."
If your opinion is that some of the people around Lucas should have spoken up or thought differently than him (for all you know they could have genuinely agreed with his ideas), then fine. Nothing wrong with that. But the way Stoklasa elaborates on this initial position gets worse and worse.
5:17
Plinkett: "To quote Gary Kurtz"
The following quote is displayed onscreen:
"I think one of the problems...is the fact that he (Lucas) doesn't have more people around him who really challenge him."
For those who don't already know, Kurtz was a producer who worked with Lucas on the first two Star Wars movies. He left after TESB following disputes with Lucas over the direction of the story. Instead of the happy ending to ROTJ that we got, Kurtz wanted a bittersweet one where Han Solo is killed in the middle of the third movie, Leia is left carrying her new burdens as queen, and Luke walks off alone. Personally I think the movie that we did get sounds a lot better, but whatever. Since then, Kurtz has become a rallying point for disgruntled fans on the internet who dislike what Lucas has been doing with Star Wars.
Again, there's nothing wrong with the idea that someone can do better if he's receptive to advice from other people. But Stoklasa keeps digging himself deeper and deeper...
5:24
Plinkett: "You can really see this in the behind-the-scenes videos [a few clips are shown]. People look scared around George...they laugh at his bad jokes. When he comes into the room there's like silence, and fear, terror. Every so often you'll catch some looks of confusion and mistrust. You gotta wonder what some of these people were thinking."
Wow. Seriously wow. It's one thing to go off of documented disagreements like what Gary Kurtz has said about his split with Lucas. It's quite another to act like a paranoid conspiracy weirdo, claiming that you see "terror" and "mistrust" in people's eyes from some benign behind-the-scenes videos. Videos released by Lucasfilm itself. If Lucas's employees looked that freaked out, then why the hell would that video be released? Even in the clips that Stoklasa uses (and his editing has been pretty selective and biased throughout his entire review), I don't see the supposed "fear" that he's claiming. Because it's ridiculous:
...yeah, truly the faces of terror, and not just normal people standing there with normal looks on their faces.
And you know what? Stoklasa himself admits that he doesn't have anything to base these wild claims on:
5:50
Plinkett: "Now again I must stress: I wasn't there and I can't pretend to know all the goings-on behind the scenes."
That's right. He says that to cover his butt. But he doesn't fully retract what he just said either. He's happy to keep on speculating, making assumptions, and flinging mud on Lucas's image...
Plinkett: "But it all seems pretty obvious when you think about it. Lucas has always been a rogue filmmaker who hated the studio system. He always seemed to want total control on his projects, which I can understand. And while a director should have control on the project, filmmaking should also be a collaborative process."
Besides that unsupported statement about how "obvious" it is that things were horrible behind the scenes, this part isn't that bad. He brings up the writers, producers, and actors who have all contributed to Star Wars.
6:36
Plinkett: "I think all this can be summed up with the expression 'Art from adversity.' The original Star Wars was plagued with problems. Nothing worked right, things were rushed I guess, but it ended up being a great movie."[clips of some primitive droid props and costumes are shown]
If he's saying that physical production problems help the movie, then I don't know what to say.
Plinkett: "When you can make a movie entirely in a computer, and then shoot everything against a blue screen in some kind of a sterile laboratory,"

[clips of prequel actors in empty rooms, without CGI scenery, is shown] ​

Plinkett: "well, some of the magic is lost."
Man, working in animation must truly be a soulless occupation then, since none of that is physically real. Or how's about all those other CGI heavy blockbusters? Again, Stoklasa assumes things about how people felt during a production that he played no part in.

A clip of someone who worked on Episode II is shown: ​

LFL Employee: "When Obi-Wan is walking around in Kamino, George showed him concept paintings of okay, 'now you're walking down the hallway and you're seeing cloning facilities,' but there's nothing for him to see." ​

The employee is just pointing out that Ewan MacGregor was walking in an empty room, and had to be given artwork to show him what he was supposed to see. Big deal.
7:51
Plinkett: "Now I ain't gonna say much more here. I don't know all the facts."
Once more he admits the truth. If he wasn't there, then why does he talk so much about how things might have happened? It doesn't matter if he eventually admits his lack of knowledge, because he has already done the job of smearing Lucas's image and giving viewers the impression that he wanted.
The last couple of minutes is an irrelevant segment where Stoklasa, playing his psycho murderer character, pretends to lose his mind before getting into a confrontation with the police.
So ends a stupid review, that had all of a few decent general observations mixed into a vast sea of lies, distortions, and stupidity.

 

Conclusion ​

That was really something, wasn't it? And definitely not in a good way. I don't know how anyone can read this and still think that Stoklasa made good points in his review of TPM. Actually, I don't know how anyone thought he made good points in the first place. Throughout his review, Stoklasa relies on the same few tricks again and again. He asks stupid questions which the movie has already answered. He denies simple truths that were made clear to everyone. He repeatedly makes false or unsupported claims that increase the amount of negativity in his review, which will stick in people's minds even if he carefully retracts his statements later.
He also nitpicks the most insignificant details, while strangely not mentioning far more important things. Stoklasa doesn't seem to be aware of the basic themes of TPM. Yet he saw fit to criticize and suggest stunningly bad alternative stories for the movie that would've stripped it of much of its heart and meaning. This guy quite simply does not know what he is talking about.
Too many people have been swayed by his lousy arguments and deceptive tricks. I believe that the monstrous length of his review has protected it from criticism. At seventy minutes long, it at once appears daunting and authoritative. Any counterpoints to it appear selective and incomplete in comparison; RLM supporters can and have claimed that its detractors "haven't looked at the big picture" of what Stoklasa is saying. Well now, you have a rather complete "big picture" summary of the whole damn thing. Now, almost all of his points have been laid bare for everyone to see.
Writing this response took patience, as well as too much time. But it didn't take any special skills. Just a critical mindset that sought to verify any claims that were being made. If only more people took the time to check up on things that they read or hear.

 

(Alright, it's finally done. As I said in the opening, I'm posting this only because I wanted there to be a place that could be easily linked to, since literally everywhere on the internet prequel haters link to the RLM reviews as a way to shut down anyone not hating them. This reason this thread hasn't been locked is because I already requested permission from the admins to do this. It would have been nice if people had waited until it had all been posted, but as is seen, the troll eagerly jumped in to naysay before even chapter one could be posted. If the thread gets locked, that's fine with me. I personally will not be participating in any discussion about the content, as even I don't agree with everything in the essay. The only thing that I will say, is the people claiming that RLM is "satire", are outright liars.)

 

Plinkett is satire, but the review/points made are sincere. It's a fusion, really.

So.... you did or did not get the original author's blessing to post this?

 

In other words he is doing exactly as Raynor says, RLM wants to have a sincere review while using comedy as a sheid to to deflect criticisms. I agree with Jim that you can't have it both ways and that RLM can't take what they dish out. In fact, making a argument overly long is a well used tactic to ward off criticism which RLM used. Jim posts on Prequel Apprecation Society from time to time and he is a pretty cool guy. He has expressed regret about being so insultive towards RLM because he was young and angry at the time he wote the rebuttal, and that if he wote it today he would leave out the insults. I don't agree with everything in his rebuttal but I think he is more fair than RLM ever was. There are even some points Jim missed about the problems in RLM, such as how the TF langing ships were landing all over Naboo, not just near Threed and the Jedi had the bad luck landing on the opposite side of the planet. At the time the RLM review came out, and even to this day PT detractors link to his videos to prove PT fans are wrong. Earlier this year on a firearms forum we were talking about Star Wars and somebody had to link RLM. Darth Downunder is quite wrong, PT detractors bring RLM much more often than PT fans, especially on nerd sites like TGWTG and Rifftrax.

Jim's rebuttal was on a free hosting site that was shut down, and the only other plce to view it was on a pay per view hosting site, so it is good to have it someplace free again. There are several other rebuttals to RLM around. There is a decent rebuttal video that brought up a great point. RLM complains about how TPM doesn't have a single main character, a protagonist, and how all stories must have a single protagonist and how TPM's structure goes against basic sole protagonist structure, but the rebuttal video points out that RLM is igoring the Elephant in the room, ensumble structure which is a very old and well accepted form of story structure. Bryan Young over at Big Shiny Robot also made a RLM rebuttal several years ago, here is a link. http://www.bigshinyrobot.com/12257/swanks-phantom-menace-review-rebuttal-part-1-of-7/

Just for fun but NSFW, https://encyclopediadramatica.se/RedLetterMedia

 

Thanks, will check that one out. This one is pretty unreadable as it stands. As for RLM being harsh, oh yeah, no argument there. I mean, I love it, but I also get that it's harsh a.f.

 

I feel like these Plinkett reviews, at their core, make some good points that I agree with. However, if the review were composed of only these points, then it would be a pretty short review; there's only so many ways you can say that you weren't invested in the characters and plot. And so, the review is padded out by a lot of nitpick-style critiques & exaggerated points, some of which I agree with and some of which I don't. All of it is pretty funny to me though.

Anyway, in case people want to read this rebuttal as a single pdf document (which includes pictures), thestarwarstrilogy.com actually put it up on their site. It can be found by clicking here.

That site also did a review of the rebuttal (which makes it a review of a rebuttal to a review), which can be found by clicking here. In case you don't want to read the full review (it's only 3 pages...aka: 2.78% of the actual rebuttal's length), here's the closing paragraph, which sums up the author's thoughts:

 

Plinkett has been treated as a mini-celebrity and a definitive authority for much too long. It is nice to a have a ready link to Jim's rebuttal. As for those who claim that the only ones who bring up Plinkett's video(s) are PT fans, that isn't true AT ALL. I have lost count of the times I have seen PT-dislikers bring up the videos on sites that have nothing to do with SW. Plinkett's TPM video, in particular, has been treated like gospel since it started infecting the web. PT-dislikers think it so potent that they merely have to link to it and anyone who is "stupid" or "tasteless" enough to like TPM will "see the light," or at least back down. And the Plinkett fans have bragged that "there is no rebuttal" to the video, when in fact there are several rebuttals.

Plinkett's fans have dismissed Raynor's essay, calling it "obsessive." But they don't seem to think likewise of Plinkett's video itself -- of a video put out by a person who hates TPM ferociously but still devoted an exorbitant amount of time to so-called "analysis" of it. They never see the irony. Similarly, Plinkett fans talk about him in terms that are, if not worship, pretty close to it -- while also calling anyone who likes the PT of being a Lucas-worshipper (and often far less polite things).

 

Agreed, all of Plinkett's reviews including the PT ones include alot of great points & alot of questionable ones. That's the case with most in-depth reviews.

This rebuttal on the hand is an utter waste of time IMO. Someone could easily write a rebuttal to this rebuttal & make a complete mockery of it. All it does achieve is to place the Plinkett review on such a pedestal, on such important exalted ground as to be worthy of someone spending countless hours of their time on it. Like it's as significant as Marx's Communist Manifesto. A 108 page rebuttal still being plastered around the internet is the greatest Plinkett promotional tool I've seen. All it serves to do is re-stoke discussion in a fading 7 year old online movie review. Can't overstate how much Stoklasa & company would love this sort of thing going on all of these years later. Talk about playing into the hands of the enemy. Yet in this case we can hardly criticize the author. When is Jarren_Lee-Saber going to tell us if he gained Jim Raynor's permission to re-post this & to use his name in the thread title?

 

I doubt this forum gets enough traffic to bump RLM's profile up a notch.

 

Is there a busier PT forum on the internet? If so there'd be very few. In any case it's the principle of the thing. You'd think PT fans would want to give these reviews as little oxygen as possible. Otherwise they'll still be discussing & debating them in another 10 years. I know which option the RLM crew hope they choose. Keep rebutting & arguing please.

 

I love the PT and I don't consider RLM the "enemy." He can direct Episode VIII for all I care. Likewise, I'm cool with someone reposting a rebuttal if that's what they feel like.

 

On my part, I stopped caring about the RLM reviews. They are only some very old videos published many years ago, like something that I've only heard once that has little to do with me and my passion for Star Wars at all...

heels1785 Seagoat Shouldn't this thread be locked before things go out of control?

 

This thread managed to revitalize discussion of these reviews on this forum, as did RLM's recent "The Star Wars Awakens" review (a topic which I thought was actually against the rules). And I guess the thread's purpose was to serve as a convenient way to counter people who cite the reviews. But what people will find when they come here will simply be more discourse on the validity of both the review and rebuttal.

 

Well, good on you, when all is said and done, Jarren_Lee-Saber, for sticking to your guns and seeing it through.

Yes, very revealing that you were swarmed upon within hours of posting, before you'd even gotten halfway.

I mean, I still think this RLM shtick -- pro and con -- is a bit long in the tooth, now, but I do commend you for this effort to bring the rebuttal back into the light; and to give it a proper home on TFN.

Yes, you two are right about that.

I had almost forgotten how rapacious some fans were when the reviews came out; but, when I cast my mind back, I do remember.

For a long time, they were used to shut prequel discussions down. A link would be posted, or a reference to RLM made, and it was as if anything a PT fan said, or thought of saying, was automatically invalid.

Such is the nature of discourse around these movies. Forget discussion, forget debate. Just latch onto the nearest "authoritative" analysis and make out anyone with a different view is intellectually inferior and going against the true nature of the universe.

Yes, indeed. These RLM-lovers would sneer at prequel fans for being sycophants and apologists and "Lucas lovers", without seeing any contradiction whatsoever in their idol worship of Plinkett. Further, as you say, the TPM video ran for seventy minutes: about half the length of the film. Yet these people had zero problem with that, while slamming the rebuttal and mocking the author for having no life and composing a "novel".

I'll tell you something else I recall from that time:

People deriding Jim Raynor for writing a rebuttal "so long" after TPM came out; even though the very "review" they were in love with came out more than ten years after the release of TPM. And, compared to that considerable gap, JR actually responded in a fairly timely manner -- the rebuttal was put out in 2011. In effect, those people just said anything they could to put down a serious counter-defence; rather than having the maturity to acknowledge an equally valid pro-TPM, anti-Plinkett response.

I would like to say, I think we're a bit past all of that, now. But then, judging by some of the responses in this thread, maybe not. Prequel fans are still being denigrated for not conforming and for being "obsessed" with the very thing bashers showed an extreme obsession with for years. It's a very tired routine; a little surprised to still see it occurring. Prequel fans can't be left alone, even here, on a supposedly gusher-dominated prequel board. Interesting.

 

Same here.

 

True, all I know is if I hadn't yet watched the reviews & I saw that someone wrote a 108 page rebuttal of them I'd consider them a must-watch. A response of that magnitude is a great advertisement for the RLM reviews.

My two cents (for what that's worth) is that the thread topic is fine...as long as it's been established that the fellow JCF member (Jim Raynor) has given his consent for this. Imagine if I went & created a thread in the name of Cryogenic or someone else without their permission. There'd be hell to pay, & rightly so.

 

Here we go again....

 

We're on pretty tight leash here as it is, guys

I sense potential here. Just let's take advantage of it and not go too crazy