PT Red Letter Media and other Prequel Reviews

Have you guys all seen these reviews? Although parts of them are certainly bizzare, as a whole I think they are pretty funny and in a lot of ways spot on!

Now, I would submit that the Attack of the Clones review was probably the best. I think the Phantom Menace review was interesting, but even with all its flaws the Phantom Menace IMHO holds up. My main issue with the Phantom Menace after seeing it in 3-D is that it doesn't feel like it's the "first" in the series, it was made for people who had already seen the original trilogy.

I also think while flawed, Revenge of the Sith is pretty decent and at least as good if not better than ROTJ. The main flaw I have with Revenge is that there isn't enough dialogue between Obi-Wan and Anakin during the final duel, it didn't have the emptional punch it should have (although after Obi-Wan defeats Anakin he gets some good lines in, I think there should have been more of that). That's the only critique of Revenge the Red Letter Review does that I think is on point, the rest of it is more a critique of the movie in general.

But Attack of the Clones, I think he rightly rips it to shreds. Have you guys seen these? What do you think? Love or hate the prequels, these reviews are funny!

 

They are fallacious and awkward. I'll leave them at that.

 

You won't find many people around here who like or agree with RLM's reviews. I think the dark, over-the-top nature of the Plinkett character's humor, plus the fact that he personally insults everyone who likes the prequels, turns a lot of people off from what he's saying, so they're not as inclined to watch the reviews with an open mind and acknowledge the strength of his argument. But really, they weren't intended to change anyone's mind, just to articulate the problems that RLM had with the movie.

 

The problem with acknowledging the so-called "strength of his argument" is that his argument isn't strong. It's fallacious nonsense and imaginary rules ( broken by critically acclaimed and successful films ) mixed with "look at the monkey" tactics of game-playing and distraction, not to mention factual inaccuracies.

The prequel hate bandwagon is based on emotion, not facts.

 

You hit the nail on the head there. It's all emotion-based - "But that's not what *I* wanted to see.... arrrrrghhhhh!!!!!" and in the worst cases comes across as more of a temper tantrum than any reasonable, objective analysis.

Every filmmaker has strengths and weaknesses, pretty much - whether you're talking about Lucas or Spielberg, Scorsese or Coppola, Ridley Scott or Woody Allen, Howard Hawks or John Ford. If you're mature enough about it, you can enjoy the really awesome things about their respective movies and try to overlook the weaknesses in their films (or their weaker films). You realize they are human, too, and human beings are not perfect; nobody in their right mind expects them to be perfect or to be able to completely please each and every viewer with every single scene of every single movie.

The prequel hate bandwagon doesn't see things that way. They wanted GL to do exactly what was in their mind (whatever that was) and simply can't forgive that he followed his heart and made the movies he thought best captured his vision of Star Wars. For the most part, they're pretty immature about it.

I won't lie and say I like every single aspect of every Lucas movie (or Spielberg or Scorsese). But they're all among the most interesting American filmmakers who are still with us. They all had a huge impact on the movies of our time. I think they deserve a little respect.

 

That seems a bit short-sighted and dismissive. The RLM reviews don't revolve around a single point of contention (except maybe that the prequels needed a better screenwriter and director, I guess); they raise a plethora of arguments, including most of the criticisms that people who didn't like the films have been making since they came out. By summarily dismissing everything RLM says as fallacious and emotion-based, you're undercutting the opinions of everyone who disliked the films for any of the same reasons.

 

So continuing to argue about stuff you didn't like in a movie, 13 years after the movie came out, is not something you would consider an intensely emotional response?

 

I don't see what the length of time has to do with it. If you thought a movie was bad thirteen years ago, there's a good chance you'd still think it was bad today. I don't know what's wrong with articulating that viewpoint.

 

The near-universal acceptance of TESB by these very same SW fans, puts to the lie this characterization of the fan -driven criticisms of the prequels. TESB didn't exactly conform to the expectations of what a SW sequel is 'supposed' to be or do. And yet it largely succeeded with the fans (and some non-fans, too).

 

Because most "normal" people who watched a movie 13 years ago and don't like it don't dwell on it and post in depth analyses of said movie... they move on.

"Jaws 3-D" was quickly flushed from my memory and despite my intense love for "Jaws" and even "Jaws 2" to a lesser extent, I really don't care about it. I don't go out of my way to post 2 hr. "documentaries" about how I despised and walked out of "Treasure of the Four Crowns" (or Clowns as i affectionately call it). My fury over the two "Matrix" sequels does not take away from my enjoyment of the first.

But no, this is the age of the interwebs where everyone has a soapbox to stand on a shout "Here I am!!!! Look at me!!! I'm smarter than you and I have better tastes than you because I said so!!!!"

Most "normal" people who don't like something just walk away. Hate the Prequels??? Well God be with you, go enjoy the OT. But some people just can't let go... it's borderline psychotic at this point.


Yancy

 

Actually, that's quite the myth you're spinning there. There was some backlash against TESB even among the fan community at the time. A lot of fans thought it to be too dark, some thought it was boring, especially the Dagobah scenes. The film got mixed reactions from critics with some like Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert praising the depth of the film. Siskel even compared it to the "Godfather II" as sequel which surpassed the original. But MANY critics had problems with the middle portion of the film and the cliffhanger ending.

And please don't trudge out Rotten Tomatoes ratings for the film as it's well known they also published a piece using published film reviews from 1980 and TESB actually got a 52% from critics at the time.

There's a reason TESB made the least amount of money among the OT at the box office. Audiences wanted a happy ending with the good guys winning in the end. Kind of ironic that mainstream audiences seemed to enjoy ROTJ more than TESB when ROTJ, in 1983, would have received at Tomato rating of 31%. But as usual Star Wars defies critics perceptions.


Yancy

 

Gallandro, I have responded to yours and Catherine's posts above........

Then again, the original versions* of "Jaws" and "Jaws 2" are not being suppressed/barred from release on decent media formats......

*are there/were there "Special Edition" versions of these films, out of curiosity?

I don't think that the majority of any one of us here "go out of our way" to post 2 hr. "documentaries" of said subject, either.

Can I be confident that you would also direct your disdain towards the the interwebs "soapbox" of those who 'gush' over the films, and gloat about how "smart" they are because they "get" the films and others* don't?

*to be sure, really just an updated version of the game that sci-fi fans (I was one of them) in the 80's used to play in response to non-sci-fi fans: "Those dolts think that because these movies are SET IN outer space, that means that these movies are ABOUT outer space!!"

"Go enjoy" which OT? The original theatrical version(s) that are yet be released on decent media (ie, not from 1993 laserdisc transfers)???


- Steve

Hold on. I didn't not say, ALL critics, ALL fans, ALL moviegoers liked TESB. Just that enough of them did, which defies the PT criticism talking point that you made above (I'm sorry, but that's what the whole 'expectations' thing is - a talking point). Taking your above caveat into consideration, it's pretty safe to say that by 1999 - the year of TPM and the first 'grumblings' of fans (if you don't count the 'grumbling' directed towards the SE's....) - TESB's "place" in the SW 'pantheon' was pretty secure - among SW fans at least.

 

quote]The RLM reviews don't revolve around a single point of contention (except maybe that the prequels needed a better screenwriter and director, I guess); [/quote]


Except i'd be willing to bet if there were Star Wars films made without any Lucas connection the new argument would be "Well they're not really Star Wars."

People pull that argument all the time when a franchise changes directors or a band changes members....

In 1999 they may have been some legit arguments against The Phantom Menace, as well as AOTC in 2002 and ROTS in 2005. However any such complaints by the "hatecrew" have, in my opinion, long since devolved into some kind of sick form of entertainment centered around acting unhappy in order to make people who enjoy the films feel unhappy.

 

"Suppressed???? So we are going there. The OOT was released on VHS and laser disc. Both were more than "acceptable" media formats for their time. Whether or not you get them in glorious HD is not for you to decide. Go watch your ripped DVD of a laser disc scan... not really George's problem.

Never said you did, but as the topic was Red Letter Media's Prequel reviews I thought that was kind of what we're talking about here???

With the exception of sites like The Prequel Appreciation Society or acertainpointofview.net I really don't see "Gushers" going out of their way to diss "Bashers," and even in those cases the sites are meant as "havens" for fans of the PT or the Saga as a whole. But it's usually the other way around. For example just go to any one of the threads here about the TPM 3-D release. Now you would think with the exception of fans of the PT and maybe new Star Wars fans you would hear very little from people of a more anti-PT bent.... Ohhh no. You get a number of "I went to TPM 3-D, I hated it back in 99, still hate it."

Seriously, if you hated it why on Earth are you subjecting yourself to it again? Either you're a fool or you're simply baiting people.


Yancy

 

How so? Most, if not all of his arguments are fallacious. Not only he presents them as facts (which they aren't), but he judges the movie based on imaginary criteria thus showing his double standards. People are free to dislike the movie, but their opinion shouldn't be passed out as a fact. Nor should he offend the people who like the movie.

 

If you concede that back in 99/02/05 such legit arguments existed....then those arguments are still 'legit'. The passage of time and or notional 'de-evolution' of some of the fan base wouldn't change that. Then again - and maybe I'm just spit-balling here - but some of the "hatecrew" folks would happily 'walk away' from the PT if they got the OOT in decent format to enjoy.

 

Um, first of all, the ORIGINAL OT has been released on DVD, it was the 2nd bonus disc on one of the DVD releases. I would know, because I have them. I'll never get why people complain that they're not on Blu-Ray - you realize that what you're complaining about, the original OT from 1977, was NEVER in digital, right? So if it were 1080p, it wouldn't be the "OMGORIGINALOT!!!" that people scream about.


Secondly, on the subject of RLM - honestly, the guy's an idiot, plain and simple. A bitter, angry fanboy that has nothing better to do than sit around and shoot HOUR LONG reviews about something he, supposedly, hates. Who the hell does that?! I actually had an argument with him over Youtube, and he actually blocked me because I kept refuting each one of his review's "points". His videos are filled with shallow, prequel hating propaganda. He edits scenes to make it look like something completely different, like the shot of Rick, George and his Assistant Director in the office. In the original scene from "The Beginning" documentary (which I just watched with my girlfriend), Rick McCallum was listening intently at what George and his A.D. were saying, but fanboy leader Mikey RLM Stoklashahahahawhatever re-cuts it to make Rick look like he thinks George is crazy. It's appalling the lengths people go to to try and make their point known, going so far as to lie and skew the truth. I can literally (and I already have) go through all his reviews, and refute each point and showcase how dumb and inaccurate it is.


Look, if you dislike TPM, that's your right, I'm not saying you HAVE to like it just because I love it, but to go through all this trouble? It's disgusting. Besides, like I said in the other thread - after all his reviews, and hatred, and "fans", what did he accomplish? NOTHING. TPM is in theaters right now, housing packed cinemas across the world. I guess all RLM's "hard work" didn't make a difference!

 

Yes, but they are a port of the Laserdisc versions.

What do you mean?

 

That may be true, but the RLM reviews don't argue that Lucas should have had nothing to do with the prequels. If anything, they acknowledge his talent as an imaginative "big idea" man. Lucas came up with the story for Empire, then passed it on to a different director and screenwriters. I think that is the level of involvement many people dissatisfied with the prequels would have preferred Lucas had.

 

The thing about RLM's reviews is that they are extremely fallacious and emotion-based. I've done something that most people, including RLM's own supporters, haven't done. I watched his entire TPM review from end to end, and actually fact checked him. Almost the entirety of his review is based on the fabrication of false problems, the omission of facts, or even lies.

This is a guy who claimed that the Jedi had no reason to think that the Trade Federation was invading Naboo, after being attacked themselves and seeing the invasion force land. Who spent the better part of two minutes whining about how R2-D2's repairs were useless, because the Naboo Royal Ship wasn't hit with lasers (his own video clips show that to be false). Who criticizes the Jedi's tactics, even though his own suggestion, and I quote, was to run into a docking bay full of thousands of battle droids and "just start fighting all of them" (a minute after they were unable to defeat just two Droidekas). Who argues that Qui-Gon is an idiot who completely forgot his objective of helping the Naboo, because Qui-Gon decided to seek help from the Gungans along the way (apparently it would've been smarter to walk through miles of enemy-occupied forests on foot).

Yes, he actually says all of those things. It's that's surreal. If you read all of that and wondered how any of it even matters to the plot of the movie, you're not alone. That most of RLM's arguments are plainly wrong is just the half of it. The guy doesn't even spend most of his time talking about the movie's story, or anything that matters. He literally goes around selecting little pieces of nothing, which should be utterly noncontroversial because there's simply no issue to discuss, and fabricates his own made-up problem about it. Qui-Gon can't even say that R2 has a list of needed ship parts, without this RLM guy making up some bogus problem about it. Yes, he went there and was wrong again, not that I would've even cared even if he were right on such an insignificant point.

And I mean it when I say his own supporters don't even seem to have watched the whole thing through. The YouTube views of each successive part of the review decrease, and the last few parts were only seen by a fraction of the people who clicked the first part. When RLM fanboys have argued against me, most of them aren't even aware of most of the problems that I've pointed out in his review. They generally focus on the first few minutes, which I found faulty as well but were at least better in that they were more about his subjective feelings. The RLM supporters hardly talk about the bulk of the review, which makes incorrect factual points against the movie...Doesn't stop them from claiming that the review is totally smart and factually correct though.

Problem is that even devoted fans of a movie will often go years between seeing it again. Hardly anybody watches the movie first, then watches the entire 70-minute RLM review soon after with the knowledge to fact check it fresh in their minds. That requires effort, and most of the trolling internet is lazy

 

Yes. "Acceptable" in 1993 , but not in 2006 , for (what I hope are) obvious reasons.

You mean like other franchises? Blade Runner, with all (5?) versions available on DVD? Close Encounters? E.T. with both special edition and original 82 version on DVD (and no, the '82 version is not from a laser-disc transfer done in the early 90's)?

As for it being "not for YOU to decide" - nice confusion of the "is-ought" dilemma, there. The argument has to do with how SW compares with other franchises in this regard, and whether or not fans have a reasonable expectation of parity of presentation, NOT whether it's up for any of the "ungrateful rabble" to decide or not......

Thanks for making my point for me....

being that it's quite unique to George vis-a-vis all other film makers, it is indeed "George's problem".


I bolded what I think you missed, here:

For the record, I went and saw it (yesterday).

Two reasons:

1. I have never seen a 3-D movie in the theater before.
2. TPM is the ONLY one of the PT films that I would go back to to theater to see.

As I showed above, there's a little more nuance involved. Do I "hate" the film? No. Do I like it as much as the OT films? No.

 

Absolutely!! Anything originally in 35mm film will have a far greater resolution than plain old 1080p. Even the so-called "high-definition" isn't as good as good, old-fashioned film.

 

Anakin_Darth is dissembling pure and simple, Yancy, with his "OMGORIGNALOT" straw-man. He knows what "original" means - pre-SE version(s). However, your point about 4k resolution is well taken.

And then........

Are you SURE about that? ALL these people? LOL indeed.