The MR. PLINKETT & RED LETTER MEDIA Discussion - Page 19

It sound intriguing interesting.

I think a review of ROTS is really just subterfuge at this point. TPM and AOTC rightfully deserve to be torn to shreds but Sith actually works for me. Sure it has its eye-rolling moments of bad dialouge and acting, but overall its a solid sci-fi film that nicely compliments the original films.

ROTS scrapes by with a pass because it finally gets to everything people thought they wanted to see in the prequels after the stalling in the first two movies. So, it may feel better, but it's really just as sloppy and badly put together as TPM and AOTC.

Hey, I like ROTS too. In fact, I do get some enjoyment out of all of the films despite being aware of the crushing number of flaws.

I really do hope Plinkett can find new insightful ways to tear the film apart.

To me the fact that ROTS is the film that most Star Wars fans 'like' from the prequels is exactly why it needs a review. All of Plinkett's points still stand in that film, it's just there's more space battles/light sabre fights to pander to the audience.

Yeah, that's why I wonder he's held back in regards to ROTS. So much of what he's covered with the first 2 movies apply to it as well along with the fact that he's already gotten some good criticism of it in already (long, boring lightsaber fight over a volcano).

I think I've come to dislike ROTS the most because it has all the "meat" of the prequel story, while still executing it all so terribly. Even the lightsaber fights get progressively worse as the trilogy wears on.

Years of Sopranos fandom convinced me that a lot of people are tonedeaf to execution and mostly just respond to whatever happens. They could just as easily read the summary and get the same response, I think. I don't think it remotely works, but its allegedly good because "shit happens".

Yeah, stuff may finally happen in this but everything is so awkwardly executed. Take for example the whole Order whatever montage. It's supposed to be this shocking, tragic moment, the end of an order that maintained peace in the galaxy for millennia but Lucas absolutely fails to wring even the faintest sense of loss.

Not to mention that this movie literally has someone dying from a broken heart.

Order 66 worked for me cuz of John Williams. That's one dude who didn't phone it in for the prequels, at least.

It's kinda like how even the romance scenes from II work on the montage DVD, precisely because it's just pretty vistas coupled with Williams' music.

Yeah, I felt some sense of loss pretty much because of Williams. I was even able to get some emotion out of that silent moment between Anakin and Padme because of his score. Ironic, since that was a moment when they had an entire city planet between them.

Both Sith and Jedi are "satisfying" only in that they pay off stuff set up in the previous films. In pretty much every other department they're garbage.

Well, all things being equal, stories where stuff happens are better than those where nothing happens. The execution of the prequels is pretty uniformly awful, however. It actually gets slightly worse in most respects as it goes on, with only McGregor improving (plus the brief injection of Christopher Lee) as a counter-balance.

That's because the jedi did nothing but bore/annoy me for the duration of the PT. No big loss there.

Protip: if your trilogy concludes with a montage of executions that's meant to invoke loss and a sense of tragedy, try not to portray the characters involved as douchebags you can't help but think deserve all that's coming to them.

ROTS is horrible. I never thought I'd see it a 2nd time, but it appeared on HBO once and I looked. It was even worse than I remembered.

Yup, ROTS is probably the worst of the prequels. The fact that nerds apologize for it because it's got the stuff they thought they wanted to see...sort of...just shows how pathetically off-base certain sectors of fandom have become.

Don't EVEN compare it to Return of the Jedi. That movie at least manages to pay off some of the crucial beats of Star Wars. Also it features characters.

This right here. It's like the Jedi were not paying attention and then they all died. Had they been worried, had they actually been looking for the Sith threat, only to have it revealed it has been in their own midst the entire time, perhaps the wiping of the Jedi Order would have meant something. They were trying and failed. As is, their arrogance killed them, and normally we reserve that for our villains.

The one single cut from Luke looking down at his leather-glove cyborg hand to Vader's smoking wrist stump is better than the entire combined minutes of all the prequels and their making-ofs and special features and deleted scenes put together.

Wow, I literally agree with no part of this post.

Please don't make a case for Jedi on the basis that it has characters. All of the goodwill for those characters comes from the previous films. Taking them strictly on their merits within Jedi, they're as soulless as the Ewoks.

And yes, Sith is not good. But Attack of the Clones takes the prize. And even that is still better than Return of the Jedi.

Just to make this 100 percent clear...

You think Attack of The Clones is a better movie than Return Of The Jedi?

Is that an argument even worth having? Or is it like arguing over which ball it's better to be kicked in?

I enjoy "It's a trap!" unironically dammit.

Ewoks though, Christ.

That's the facts, Jack.

Clones doesn't even have character goodwill from Phantom.

ROTS worst of the prequels? What are some of you smoking?

As a kid I loved Return of the Jedi, and it was my second favorite of the series after Empire. I haven't seen it since I was a kid so I can't say whether my opinion has changed, but it's always discouraging when people poo-poo all over it. To even compare it to the prequels is an insult to the people who worked on ROTJ.

But maybe I'd change my mind if I saw it again. Who knows?

And ROTS is just as bad as the other two prequels. I haven't seen any of them since they were first released, but ROTS was just as soulless and inert as the first two. It bored me to tears.

Worst because of the shitty payoffs.

At least at the end of the first two prequels, there was always the possibility (slight thought it may have been) that things could've gotten better.

We're smoking the good shit. Which is the exact opposite of Revenge of the Sith (or anything related to Star Wars in the last 10 years or so, really).

The first time I saw ROTS, I thought it was great. The more I watched it the more flaws I saw. Now I still think the beginning is well done. You actually see Anakin as a hero, not as a whiny pain in the ass. Also you see Kenobi and him as friends. Everything else sucks. I at least got two dollars when I sold it at CD Warehouse.

Yeah, that was me.

This review is going to create the best arguments to read. The fans who are still into Revenge of the Sith are always really thuper-therious about it.

Honestly, I have never understood the ardent defenders of Revenge of the Sith. It is every bit as dull, staid, poorly paced, and flat-out awful as the two that came before it. Every moment just rings completely hollow, and there is nothing to hang an emotional investment on. The fact that it delves completely into self-parody by the end (Padme dying of a broken heart, and Vader's "NOOOOOO" moment are just silly beyond belief) nails home the fact that Lucas had forgotten about telling a story by that point, and was simply interested in playing with (and selling tons of) new toys.

Honestly, I will never understand people who defend that movie.

I would kind of like to see Greg David make a video about why Return of the Jedi is worse, though. Or at least a couple paragraphs.

Yeah, same here. It's probably my nostalgic feelings for the original trilogy as a whole, but I just can't hate Jedi. Sure the Ewoks suck, and the characters do stuff that is totally out of character, but it's still charming and fun, which are two things that don't apply to any of the Prequels (or the animated series, or the comic books, or really any of the tie in stuff of the last decade and change).

That doesn't negate my point, though, which is that both Clones and Jedi have equally weak character development. People give Jedi a pass because Empire did it so well that they enjoy the taste of the leftovers. I just don't cut Jedi slack for being part of the holy trilogy.
Well, movie related. There have been some great games.

Well, I think I've been over this before (possibly in this very thread), but my problems with Jedi are actually very similar with my problems with the prequels. My contention for years has been that everything people lay at the feet of the prequels really started in 1983.

First, and most importantly, there's almost no plot. The narrative stands still for nearly two hours, both that within the film, and the over-arching story of the trilogy. Literally nothing important happens until Luke surrenders to Vader and confronts the Emperor; that's the moment that the story left over from Empire picks up again. (Note: the rescue of Han isn't story, it's simply an episodic adventure on the way to the story; the story is about Luke and his birthright).

Admittedly, this is roughly equal to Clones. And to be fair, it's very nearly true of Empire as well. But Empire puts so much focus on character that the lack of story movement manages to work.

Second, Jedi marks the moment that Lucas decided to throw verisimilitude out the window. Star Wars and Empire were both drenched in it, and a great deal of behind-the-scenes talk is devoted to how much effort went into creating a believable, lived-in universe that defied the bright, shiny look of classic sci fi worlds. Even when the aliens looked cheap, enough design work went into making them detailed and believable that the universe hung together as something that made sense.

Jedi tossed that design aesthetic right out. Suddenly, it was more important to make things bright and colorful, detail was toned down, and things became cuddly. The extensive use of puppetry wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, but the attention to detail was no longer there. Characters like Max Rebo and that cackling thing on Jabba's belly wouldn't look out of place on the Muppet show. They're simple, over-the-top designs, never meant to evoke any kind of realism or believability. Compare Jedi's character designs to Empire's Yoda. There's a clear shift of focus.

And this is where Clones trumps Jedi. Like the alien designs or not, they aren't cuddly or friendly. The Geonosians, while not particularly original alien designs, are not something that a five-year-old would want a plush toy of. They're detailed, they suit their environment, and they belong in the universe. Even some of the more cartoonish designs of Phantom at least pack in some impressive detail. There's a lived-in quality to them. Sadly, none of this extended to the spaceship or set designs.

Jedi is also where the extensive focus on new toy designs came into play. Would the final space battle have been any less impressive if the fighters had been limited to X-Wings, Y-Wings and TIE Fighters? Certainly not. Regardless, we got at least three new fighter designs in that battle, for no story reason whatsoever. Was there any real reason that the original vision of Wookiees holding back the Empire couldn't have worked? No. But we got Ewoks anyway, because they could sell those.

Really, every charge that's leveled at the prequels can find their genesis in Return of the Jedi. And Jedi's lack of interesting design sense helps bury it for me.

So that was more than a couple of paragraphs. I blame Patrick for getting me started.

I'm not even much of a Star Wars fan. But c'mon.

Your problem with the narrative is understandable, but you're problems with the aesthetic aren't supportable. Jabba's place is ugly, not at all cute and cuddly. The Rancor is not cute. The Sarlacc is not cute. Ackbar and Nien Numb are only cute in the same way Eric Stoltz from Mask was cute. Ewoks are cute, but they don't represent creature design for the entire picture.

This is also the film where Luke wears black. If nothing else, the execution of Luke's arc works emotionally. His fight with Vadar is all kinds of great. Not because it's super fast and on a lava river, but because Luke is pissed. You're not told the emotion, you're shown it. And it's cool to watch the little twirp from the first film suddenly look badass and scary. A fight with emotion, any emotion, is automatically better than a fight with lava, any lava.

There's absolutely zero emotion in ROTS. Or, rather, we're told what emotions the characters feel but don't get to feel it ourselves. There's no human elements in the final big fight. There's no one to root for, and half the time they aren't even humans. Maybe the Ewoks fight in a lush, beautiful forest. I find that infinitely more cool than a CG river of lava. At least I understand trees. With trees I don't have to wonder how they keep from burning to death. Or sweating.

Saying any prequel is better than any original trilogy film is a Glenn Beck-level misrepresentation of reality. I think you just hate Ewoks.

RotJ has problems, but at least it exists in the moment.

Sam, all that you say about Luke is true...and exists for about fifteen minutes of the entire film. The finale of Jedi is solid. Everything leading up to it is the very definition of time-wasting.

Also, comparing opinions about Star Wars with Glenn Beck maybe shows that you have a bit more emotional investment in this than you let on. "Come on" indeed.

I'm truly not trying to be a dick, but I'm not sure what you're even saying here.

The problem with The PT is that by the time you get around to ROTS, it's already a waste of time. I didn't need to know any of it, and there's so much bad stuff that whatever good moments there are are undone by the bad ("ULTIMATE POWER FRISBEE!") RotJ has problems, but it exists as a conclusion, and was done in a timely fashion - the wait for the next chapter (or even now) it exists within that universe - it feels a part of that world. Good and bad, it fulfills the need for conclusion. Luke faces his father, Han is freed, the empire is defeated, etc. Though it could be done more gracefully, it has a reason to exist, which gives it a leg up. It is - for all intents - a story that should have been told.

Respectfully disagree: The subplot of rescuing Han was drastically important to audience members because we cared. To single this out as a one piece of one film doesn't do it justice because we've been invested since moment one in A New Hope. Hans capture is part of what made Empire great, and the events of Jedi are what we need to see due to our passion for these characters and the characters that love them. Maybe I'm just looking at this through nostalgia-colored glasses, or maybe I'm arguing to see the original trilogy as one cohesive unit and not individual films, but that's my humble opinion.

Ah - the puppetry of the 70's and 80's. To me they all felt perfectly in-tune with the Star Wars universe. Your Muppet Show reference is almost exactly the reason why - these character designs were always fun, over the top, and part of the universe. We knew the guy who did Yoda did Miss Piggy, too. That's what made it great! Why was there a werewolf in the cantina? Hammerhead, Greedo, Max Rebo, and the garbage eyeball thing work right along with Salacious Crumb, Ewoks, and Admiral Ackbar. Maybe Yoda stood out because Empire had fewer muppet-type creatures? Maybe giant worms couldn't live on an asteroid? It sure was fun, though!!

But they don't. Computer generated creatures don't feel right in Star Wars, not after 20 years of viewing a puppet/costume/animatronic universe. I understand the need to upgrade based on the decade we're in, but would it have really been that hard (or more expensive) to hire a good practical effects team to whip up some Geonosians to stand next to Kenobi? Just because it CAN be done doesn't mean it SHOULD. Next thing you know Lucas will go back and put CGI stuff in Return of the . . . ohhhhhhhh.

Agreed, but that Ewok Treehouse Playset was AWESOME. My buddy Chris had it but he got mad when I tried to have He-Man play with the Ewoks. It's all good though because I wouldn't let him play with Ecto-1.

I've said this before, either here or in the "I Still Like Star Wars" thread: aside from holding Harrison Ford to his contract rescuing Han seems like a low priority. He's literally not going anywhere. Tatooine doesn't appear subject to any immediate Imperial threat, and Jabba could give a shit about either the Empire or the rebellion. And once freed Han doesn't do anything that couldn't be accomplished by any other character.

The way it plays out, three heroes of the rebellion keep the fleet waiting (and give Death Star II time to become operational!) while they tend to personal business.

Sith was the biggest disappointment to because all the convncing I tried on myself during TPM and AOTC that it was all leading to something just didn't fly anymore. You knew this was all it was ever going to be, it wasn't "setting you up for the good stuff", and grim reality set in.

19 pages on this guy, huh? Is he that funny or is it just an undying fan urge to try to continue to SOMEHOW draw entertainment from the SW universe? Honest question.

I imagine the page length has to do with the fact that there's hardly anyone who HASN'T seen the prequels, so when he does these reviews, it's something everyone can comment on. Plus, Star Wars discussion, what do you know, it draws crowds.

I think his Clones review was brilliant because, as Dre pointed out way way back, it's not just about that film, but the wrong-headed way blockbuster films are made in general. I also think it's the first video-review I've to really take advantage of the medium. I've seen a few other folks try their hand at video reviews, but it's never this slick and well-presented. And the humor almost always falls flat with most of them, but Plinkett has the Eye of the Tiger.

The feature-length can be daunting, and I'm not sure we need a Sith review, since his Clones review was more of an attack on the prequel trilogy than just the second film, but I'd say his Clones review is definitely worth watching.

Whoa, on-topic! For me, it's about the airtight quality of his analysis (in the TPM review, anyway-- the ATC runs a bit long and gets sidetracked by specific geek issues). The humor I can take or leave, though it does signal that Mr. P acknowledges on some level that arguing about Star Wars is inherently silly.

Who could imagine Empire without Han? It's like the "Raiders without Indy" argument, sure it's technically possible, but then why bother making the movie? Look at the end of Hellboy II - Liz could have said no to saving HB because it's logical, but she's human, and the end had more impact because of it. Han saved Luke in a New Hope, they're buddies, and we (as the audience) love them. We want Han to be rescued. It's not about "it didn't have to happen". It DID have to happen, because we wanted it to.

He's that funny. If he wasn't why did I laugh so hard? It wasn't because the Plinkett reviews are laughably bad! It's not just Star Wars, either, I enjoy all the reviews, Star Wars and otherwise.

I think the point is that it could have been made to happen in a way that lent it more importance, and was more organic and intrinsic to the plot. It wouldn't have even been all that difficult; just hinge the big mission on something that only Han can do. In the end, he really doesn't do much of anything. They inexplicably gave the Falcon to Lando, which left Han being a ground soldier. John Ratzenberger could have done that.