Quote:
Originally Posted by A. Lively 
For myself, I think Mr. Plinkett is brilliant; it's always fun to have a bad movie taken apart by someone who can quantify exactly why it was so bad.
The prequels just happen to be a set of bad movies that virtually all of us have seen, and are closely connected with probably the most universal cultural touchstone of the last half century.
|
Dingdingding. Are the prequels the worst special-effects blockbusters to grace the big screen in the last 20 years? No. But they are the most instantly recognizable to the largest cross section of audiences. Just looking at the MB numbers, it's the simplest way to get people talking about the structural minutia of genre flicks, which is the kind of thing that gives me a raging nerdboner.
Whether the prequels were a symptom or catalyst or cause, we're living in an age of lazy, pandering, progressively less satisfying genre sequels/prequels/remakes/re-imaginings. Anything that gets people thinking critically about how the source material is way less important than the presentation is fine in my book. And clearly, an exhaustive analysis of
Attack Of The Clones does that more effectively than a similar take-down of
Star Trek: Nemesis.
Also, the reviews are the best example I can think of to show how completely comedy is defined by editing. Okay, yeah, there's
Annie Hall, but you get the point.