A question for prequel hating neckbeards who actually think Plinkett is a good critic:
When Richard Brody at the New Yorker and the respected commentator Camile Paglia praise the prequels, are they just memeing too? When will you recognise that the tide has turned and George Lucas is finally receiving the praise he's always deserved?
There's also a million critics that don't like them. If you desperately need a critic to validate your opinion, and think someone's opinion somehow proves something, you are just as bad as the people who bash the prequels because of plinkett. That being said, in my opinion the prequels are horrendously bad, and I don't need plinkett to tell me that.
He watched them recently, I'm perfectly willing to take an established critic's opinion at face value when it's called an opinion piece in the first place.
Besides, it's also an opinion piece without decades of emotional baggage behind it, unlike other people who write about Star Wars.
that's a horribly generic statement, trying so hard to be bait but failing miserably
again, at this point I'd say spend a couple of weeks on /v/. over there you really see this kind of bait being overused, so you can hone your craft
People finally feel safe enough to admit they like the prequels and want to talk about them, and the old guard of bitter, aging nerds come in shouting that they are memeing.
Those prequel fans find respected critics that actually agree with them, and they get smug, intellectually oppressive posts like this.
There's no winning against this sort of groupthink.
I don't care about the opinions of critics. I'm pointing out that the common accusation thrown around by the Redditors - that true aesthetes who "get" the prequels are just memeing - is obvious nonsense.
if you're talking about that new yorker article that was about how "george ain't called no artist til some gangsta copped he style" then it didn't even praise the prequels beyond calling them deeply flawed but uniquely george visions
It's not surprising that the same people who attack the prequels are always unversed in real film or anything artistic, and that the people who praise the prequels (Zizek, Paglia and Brody) are always literate, educated, and versed in real film.
The fact that everyone points to Plinkett as the authority on why the prequels are bad speaks volumes. Mike Stoklasa is one of the least artistic people on the planet - he can't process movies outside of the conventions of Hollywood films, his approach to narrative is tempered with the same surface-level requisites listed on tvtropes.
Any complaint that people have about the prequels illustrates a weak grasp on film. Their sensibilities for 'good dialogue' in what is intentionally pulp comes from bad pulp, ie, the original Star Wars, the only pulp they've ever seen. They would similarly view any homage-driven art film and miss the entire point.
Lucas' only mistake in the prequels was doing something daring, original, artistic and literate, not realizing that the manchildren conditioned by the original SW trilogy to loathe anything cerebral would lash out against his cinematic risks.
Initial critical reception of The Phantom Menace was positive. Roger Ebert gave it a flawless review.
'Lucas is a hack' became a cliche because manchildren who were obsessed with the original films - which are kids films - couldn't handle Lucas' new, more mature direction and repeated the lie endlessly to the point that it entered the cultural consciousness. Those people will burn in Hell for what they selfishly did to George.
Lucas knows that the medium is the message, and has positioned Lucasfilm as the Empire, in a battle against the rebel pirates that distribute unaltered bootlegs of the original films. The highest level of Star Wars fans reject the expanded universe wholesale, don't buy merchandise, and in fact must actively attack Lucasfilm - and now Disney. What are commonly held as the main tenets of Star Wars fandom are actually evidence that the point has been lost. This is why Lucas produced the prequels as satirical tales of stupid, ineffectual liberals playing at being the heroes in a videogame-universe before being crushed by the machine they helped create.
Legions of dudes with plastic lightsabres play at being Jedi, but treat the force as a vulgar mechanism and show no care for the original films' revolutionary politics. Nerds get angry at midichlorians because they utterly devastate the logic of wookiepedia, by taking it to its natural conclusion. Phantom Menace's midichlorians prefigure Prometheus' essential contrast between positive knowledge and authentic belief. The prequels are anti-fandom, and anti-fandom is the heart of Star Wars.
/tv/ never had a gamergate or a shitfit that resulted in cripplechan
It's all opinion, man. When I post on /tv/ that the prequels are awful, awful, fucking awful movies, that is of course my opinion. When I say they're an unnecessary cash grab, lazily shot in hopelessly sterile CGI environments with no passion or spark of creativity, that is of course my opinion. When I say the actors are struggling to perform with painfully wooden dialogue in a story that not only makes no sense but can't even get you involved on any emotional level, that's of course my opinion. When I say you're probably a fucking retard for enjoying these soulless pieces of trash, that's my opinion. But you should have your own opinion
Let's see your reasons why TPM is bad:
>Phantom Menace is an abomination and on top of that it's painfully boring
which really means
>Phantom Menace is [bad] and on top of that it's painfully [bad]
which is hardly an explanation, but a tautology.
>he thinks this is the meaning of that word
oh boy oh boy
well, sometimes people actually talk about movies and tv here, I know it's rare, but /v/ is a sewer. Just the worst. I used to go there for some kinds of threads, but even the decent ones are just copy pasted again and again
Are you Vincent Canby circa 1980?
>I'm not as bothered by the film's lack of resolution as I am about my suspicion that I really don't care. After one has one's fill of the special effects and after one identifies the source of the facetious banter that passes for wit between Han Solo and Leia (it's straight out of B-picture comedies of the 30's), there isn't a great deal for the eye or the mind to focus on. Ford, as cheerfully nondescript as one could wish a comic strip hero to be, and Miss Fisher, as sexlessly pretty as the base of a porcelain lamp, become (is it rude to say?) tiresome. One finally looks around them, even through them, at the decor.
Perhaps these are criticisms that could be leveled quite plausibly at all of the Star Wars films, even at their time of initial release, and it is in fact not really Star Wars that has changed, but rather the general cultural appetite for such things? It just seems to me a bit like special pleading to suppose that when Canby wrote this back in 1980, the explanation is that he simply didn't "get" Star Wars--but that when prequel critics write nearly identical things about the prequels decades later, it's because they "get" Star Wars even better than GL does himself.
I think a much simpler explanation is that Lucas stayed more-or-less the same and made more-or-less the same kinds of movies with more-or-less the same charms and flaws, while the greater culture evolved to align itself more with the sensibilities of people like 1980's Vincent Canby. I think this is a more reasonable explanation, because in my experience culture tends to change more than individual people tend to change. And it just seems to explain everything so well, without accusing anyone of being unintelligent or of lacking proper taste.
>actors are struggling to perform with painfully wooden dialogue
>"I don't like sand. It's course, and irritating... and it gets everywhere."
Why are prequel fans literally retarded?
As Plato explains in Books V and VI of the Πολιτεία, those who think all things to be mere matters of opinion are the most likely to be hoodwinked by the false utterances of the sophists. You have fallen hook, line, and sinker, for the lies of Mr Plinkett - the biggest sophist going.
>he actually copied the name field and now he's me-fagging.
I take my hat off to you, you're really dedicated to.....what is this exactly...getting replies I guess?
really rarely though, here it's more people being elitists as a defense mechanism, but there's some discussion going. over there it's just mayhem, or maybe it got better since I left, it was bad. I agree that theyre both cancerous though
>Han Solo: That's a good story. I just think you can't bear to let a gorgeous guy like me out of your sight.
>Princess Leia Organa: I don't know where you get your delusions, laser brain.
>[Chewbacca laughs amusingly]
>Han Solo: Laugh it up, fuzzball! [To Luke] You didn't see us alone in the south passage. She expressed her true feelings for me.
>Princess Leia Organa: What? [annoyed] Why, you stuck up, half-witted, scruffy-looking... nerf-herder!
>Han Solo: [in mock offense] Who's scruffy looking? [To Luke] Must have hit it pretty close to the mark to get her all riled up like that, huh, kid?
>Princess Leia Organa: Well, I guess you don't know everything about women yet. [suddenly kisses Luke in front of Han]
Yeah, the prequels had bad dialogue. Just the prequels. Yes, sir.
Do you get a microerection every one of the 15 times you post this kind of shit every day?
How hard did you have to dig for someone praising the Star Wars prequels?
Are you this anal retentive in real life?
Are you missing some part of your brain that prevents you from detecting when a movie doesn't work?
Does broken, detached dialogue make you moist?
The characters are dull and underdeveloped, Obi Wan is literally a blank slate, Qui Gon supposed to be the wise man but comes off as a senile coot, fan favourite Darth Maul is a typical "lol teleports behind u" edgemaster with the dryest delivery ever, Anakin is fuckawful, the dialogue is abysmal, the CGI horrendously overused. The plot is also full of tedious political babble and asspulls galore aka "midichlorians". What bothers me is that Anakin was never ment to be Super Sayian level 3 Hulk Jesus like the movie made him out to be. Fuck off Lucas and fuck your continuity. And fuck Natalie Portman she is fucking terrible too. Actually everyone except Sheev is fucking terrible.
But you need to rely on someone else's opinion to validate your like of these movies. You're no better than the strawmen you accuse of just parroting stoklasa's opinions. You can't come up with any valid arguments in their favor because you have none.
You do this to go against the perceived norm and to feel like a special snowflake, not because you honestly believe those movies were worth watching.
You've afflicted this board with your brain damage for long enough, don't you think?
Posts on 4chan have size limits. I do not have the resource here to prove this to you. I suggest you begin reading the ancient authors immediately to correct your naive relativism. You've been bamboozled, bud.
>You do this to go against the perceived norm and to feel like a special snowflake, not because you honestly believe those movies were worth watching.
Most ignorant post of the year.
>hurr people can't like good movies
Missing the point entirely. I'll be the first to admit both films have clunky dialogue
I read your post I just couldn't be bothered to write 'veering awfully close to objectively wrong' when the point I was making was clear regardless (or not, apparently)
Ok, let's begin.
>Obi Wan is literally a blank slate
Obiwan's inconsistent/hypocritical behaviour stems from the fact that he was taught by both Yoda and Quigon. Now he's trying to reconcile their contradictory lessons.
Obiwan believes there is no such thing as truth. There is only plurality of (cultural) viewpoints, and none is necessarily better than any other. This is what allows him to ignore injustice that's right in front of him - because, you know, who is he to question how a certain culture does things? But the Force - as described by Obiwan - is bullshit. That's the whole point of having Obiwan die: the Jedi can't win. Their role in the universe is to inspire people and then fade away. So: “hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.” Lucas proves this point when he has Obiwan kill Grievous with a blaster - out of desperation, because he lost against a cyborg who wasn't even 'force sensitive'.
It's Obiwan who goes off on the whole Jedi Detective adventure where he fights bounty hunters and whatnot, because Anakin wants to stay with Padme. When Obiwan jumps out the window, Anakin is focused on protecting Padme, and he stays behind long enough for her guards to arrive. In Episode III Anakin actually tells Obi-Wan to be patient in a dialogue scene and Obi-Wan freaks. Obi-Wan was always the impulsive one. With Obiwan, the "you were the chosen one!" is his too-late realization that they should never have been 'Master' and 'Apprentice' but brothers. Yet, at the same time, it betrays Obiwan's misunderstanding of the prophecy and his unwillingness to accept responsibility for what went wrong.
>Most ignorant post of the year.
Then come up with something better than an argument from authority, you fucking braindead pustule. Stop posting like a retard and get out of my board.
>Quigon is a senile old coot
The Jedi believe in the 'chosen one' prophecy; Jedi-ism is a messianic religion. However, Quigon is the only one who endeavors to make the prophecy come true. Yoda and the others are concerned with maintaining the status quo:
Yoda: The Chosen One, the boy may be. Nevertheless, grave danger, I fear in his training.
This is Yoda literally admitting that this kid might be Jesus Christ but nonetheless rejecting him - because Jedi indoctrination techniques tend to cause older kids to bug out. Yoda knows that all too well, because he's been in charge of that department for decades. And he's not wrong: Anakin is old enough to have vivid memories of of his mother/Padme, which are ultimately the source of his authoritarian streak.
Quigon, of course, doesn't care about any of that. He's a full-on fundamentalist who believes the existence of God can be scientifically proven. He believes he's directly enacting God's will - and, therefore, he deliberately manipulates the dice in order to take Anakin from his mother and make him into a warrior. Consequences be damned.
And Quigon is also not wrong either, in a sense - because tearing Anakin from his mother is precisely what caused him to eventually become Vader. The 'Chosen One' prophecy was self-fulfilling.
>Darth Maul is a typical "lol teleports behind u" edgemaster with the dryest delivery ever
Don't even have to try on this one. Darth Maul never teleports, and has one or two lines. Next!
This poor thing is copypasting a Plinkett dissertation posted years ago. Watch out, it's like 100 pages long.
Seriously, how desperate do you need to be to get your opinions from some retard with a blog?
Obi-Wan is young and naive, fully believing in the virtues of the Jedi Order and the Republic.
What made Qui-Gon a senile coot?
>Darth Maul is a typical "lol teleports behind u" edgemaster
>dryest delivery ever
Anakin is literally autistic.
>I'm too stupid to follow a simple plot
How are midichlorians an asspull and what did they ruin?
>Anakin is fuckawful, the dialogue is abysmal,
I'd like a dialogue scene now, tying in with my Obi-Wan stuff earlier. So, let's look at the dialogue in the speeder chase:
Obiwan: What took you so long?!
Anakin: Oh you know, Master. I couldn't find a speeder that I really liked...
Obiwan: There he is!
Anakin: ...with an open cockpit, and the right speed capabilities...
Obiwan: If you'd spend as much time practicing your saber techniques as you do your wit, you would rival Master Yoda as a swordsman.
Anakin: I thought I already did.
Obiwan: Only in your mind, my very young apprentice.
[Anakin points the speeder straight down, and starts accelerating towards a building.]
Obiwan: Pull up Anakin! Pull up!
[Anakin laughs at Obiwan, and ramps the car off the building's roof.]
Obiwan: You know I don't like it when you do that.
Anakin: Sorry, Master. I forgot you don't like flying.
Obiwan: I don't mind flying, but what you're doing is suicide! [foreshadowing]
This is, again, extremely good writing that fans just tuned out. Obiwan is the one single-mindedly focused on the mission, complaining that Anakin isn't taking things seriously ("What took you so long?! There he is!"). Anakin's pissed, and his 'joke' about finding a cool car is bitter sarcasm that means "fuck off, I know what I'm doing." Obiwan insults him, and then Anakin endangers them both just to assert his power. This entire 'comical' exchange is bubbling with animosity.
So, we get a sense of the characters: Anakin is not reckless. He's (trying to be) cool, confident, and authoritative - because he sees Obiwan as lame, fearful, and bossy.
Anakin doing this stuff - taking his time, and cracking jokes - because he's self-assured. He's trying to piss Obiwan off, because why should he have to listen to this scared little guy? Anakin already knows he's the stronger one. Obiwan is a terrible at being an authority figure.
Incorrect. Try finding any of my words in that thing; they won't be in there?
Incidentally, why is that long "disseration" bad on its length alone but Plinkett's even longer video reviews a-OK?
Simple logic and reasoning would lead to the conclusion that there is no objectivity in any art form. The modern and working definition of art as we understand it today is "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination ... producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power." The emotional resonance of that art has is dependent on the person or people observing it.
Why am I even replying to this
>the CGI horrendously overused
Do you remember that gif on reddit a few days back of Jedis in a huge bluescreen room? It's like, ha ha, they're flailing at nothing!
But the finished scene looks like this:
By removing the context, it makes it look like bad sword-fighting, when the characters are not in a sword-fight at all. They're blocking random projectiles coming in from all directions. The gif also obscures the basic geometric relationship between the jedi and the droids: the jedi are in a circle, creating a wall. So though each character is moving 'randomly' (because the attacks from outside are random), there's a clear, unified plan. The actors were obviously told that they have to act as though they're surrounded and being peppered with random projectiles. And they are. This whole sequence would have been heavily storyboarded.
>How are midichlorians an asspull and what did they ruin?
You don't need this explained to you, you're avoiding the discussion altogether. You're simply not up for this.
>This is, again, extremely good writing
See, posting delusional bullshit isn't helping your case. Go have your mental breakdown elsewhere, and stop bothering people.
>This is, again, extremely good writing
no, it's unnatural stilted and forces dumb ideas into bad spots
"i don't like it when you do that"
when he does what, ramps speeders off roofs? this is commonly happening? ...really?
Are you familiar with the teachings of an Aristotle or a Kant? Or a Schiller? Have you ever studied aesthetics for any meaningful period of time, or are you just memeing like you've been memeing that Plinkett isn't a total retard?
Plinkett's reviews analyse the prequels from a filmmaking standpoint. The dissertation is composed of knee-jerk reactions to the aforementioned analysis, and not based even remotely on the movies themselves.
You can't review a movie by proxy. Sorry, champ, you lost this argument the instant those movies came out terrible.
>The plot is also full of tedious political babble
I'm going to repost something I've posted here before. Let's look very briefly at the script:
Trade route(s): 2
Regardless, the bulk of the movie's actual content has nothing to do with those things. It's about lightsaber battles and podraces and spaceships exploding. A New Hope is about an armored space station which was built to do away with the civil bureaucracy and put local governors directly in charge of various territorial jurisdictions as a means to greater consolidate power within the central government. To say that the bulk of the movie's story revolves around this political intrigue would be 100% accurate, but also incredibly misleading.
In fact, the opening of TPM involves the characters expecting to do boring diplomatic stuff, but then we almost-immediately see diplomats getting assassinated and a full-on robot invasion.
"I understand it but I just find it boring" is something I've seen posted, on /tv/, about 2001: A Space Odyssey. It's as invalid there as it is here.
Midichlorians are not actually an effective mechanism for measuring force-sensitivity. You are such a poor reader of texts. The entire concept is a satire on positivistic scientism and you are too unsophisticated to understand that its inclusion in the film is a critique of the technocratic excesses of the Old Republic and Jedi Order. This feeds into the prequel trilogy's overarching commentary on the fall of the Weimar constitutional liberalism.
With the midichlorians (and showing the 'actual' Clone War, and showing the 'actual' Jedi Order, etc.) the prequels confront fans with their desire, fully materialized in a horrifically literal fashion. The point is to break them away from the fantasy of total knowledge and (hopefully) spur them towards authentic appreciation of the original films as pop mythology.
The true lesson of the midichlorians is that Qui-Gon is a shitty Jedi and that the true path of the Jedi is in belief in the force, not in vulgar knowledge of it. The message to fans is, likewise, that Wookiepedia is garbage and anathema to what Star Wars is actually about.
>Anakin is superpowered, etc.
No he's not. The only true superpowered dudes are in the 2D cartoon everyone professes to love. But the refrain that the movies should be more like the cartoon basically says that the cartoon isn't satisfactory. The cartoon isn't good enough to stand alone.
I walked out of the theater in 1999 trying to convince myself the movie was good. Later, I tried to convince myself it seemed bad because it was just setting the groundwork for the next two. When AOTC came out, I tried to rationalize that it was at least better than TPM, and that the third movie was all that really mattered. After ROTS, I gave up on Star Wars. I wasnt even excited when a seventh movie was announced. Instead, I had a feeling if dread. After seeing TFA, I feel it does not give the same sense of wonder of the original trilogy, but it is an entertaining movie on its own and is light years better than the prequels.
Here is what an actual Star Wars video game of that time (KOTOR 2, from a few years LATER, to give you the benefit of the doubt) actually looks like:
See if you can spot the differences.
>Do you remember that gif on reddit
Jesus, they're not even trying to hide it anymore.
That image has altered contrast and the game engine wasn't exactly renowned for its visuals. KotOR II's strength was in its writing, which ironically was much better than the prequels.
Here's a screenshot of a Star Wars game from 2001: Rogue Squadron II
>you are just as bad as the people who bash the prequels because of plinkett.
This pro-prequel nonsense again
If you bash prequels because Plinkett actually made good points regarding how poorly they were written, shot, directed, designed, and basically how every aspect of them is fucking garbage, you are not bashing them *because* of him, you are agreeing with his assessment of WHY they are garbage.
I disliked the prequels before I ever saw "Plinkett," those reviews didn't change my opinions that much. For example when I saw episode I at 9 years old I still thought jar jar binks was unfunny. The "it's for kids!" excuse is just that - an excuse for failure to engage the audience.
>Lucas stayed more-or-less the same and made more-or-less the same kinds of movies with more-or-less the same charms and flaws
I mean as a whole I agree with your overarching point, but there are some definitely differences, the prequels were more fantasy movies in space with a huge emphasis on the adventure of it all, whereas the prequels were a lot more politically focused and action-y. I don't think that's inherently a worse kind of movie or anything, but they have a very different feel and I think, more than anything, that's what people dislike.
>This is Yoda literally admitting that this kid might be Jesus Christ but nonetheless rejecting him - because Jedi indoctrination techniques tend to cause older kids to bug out.
Nonsense. He rejects him because he sense grave danger in his training.
>Roger Ebert gave it a flawless review.
3.5 out of 4 is flawless now?
He gave exasperated praise but it was hardly flawless.
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU ON ABOUT.
Do you honestly think any of that informed Lucas's script rather than being a post-hoc ass pull by an obvious autsit.
>le you can't criticize something unless you make something better meme
Dumbest shit ever yet people keep saying it.
What if you go to a haughty restaurant and are served a literal piece of cat shit on a plate and when you refuse it, your date says "Hey when you become a chef in a 5 star restaurant then you can criticize the food!" It's just fucking asinine.
>avant garde films
I saw Red Tails, does that count?
>that you will never see.
I wish he had kept Red Tails under lock and key too.
>Have you ever heard George Lucas speak?
Yes, he appears to be highly weird and autistic.
Fans of the originals were disappointed by the prequels but still liked many elements of them... until the Plinkett reviews made it fashionable to tear them apart. Now prequel haters universally share Plinkett's opinions because RLM put those ideas in their heads. Many of those ideas are biased nonsense but people think they agree with them and go off repeating them.
The prequels were made for all ages and not just the existing fanbase. The "love" stuff in cringy, casting a child actor was a mistake, Jar-Jar is annoying, some of the dialogue is terrible... But they're not bad movies. And millenials saw them as kids and liked them a lot and still do.
Simple fact is that the prequels take a stronger mind and an appreciation of Shakespearean style to be enjoyed...many today have to have split second satisfaction and TFA satisfied that mindset, you can see this in TFA's editing which jumps from shot to shot at an ADHD style pace...it approaches storytelling and character building at the same frenetic pace, so scared of genuine engagement that it can't focus on a face for more than half a second, so scared of storytelling and world building it simply throws new names on old entities and leaves it at that. Substance less schlock. The prequels are flawed but engage with serious artistic meaning, far more than the weak numale mind of Abrams is capable of
Has anyone ever watched all of the prequels at once? Presumably while drunk?
film "critics" are a fucking joke
>Fans of the originals were disappointed by the prequels but still liked many elements of them... until the Plinkett reviews made it fashionable to tear them apart.
And you can't defend those pieces of garbage without resorting to the plinkett reviews. It's pathetic.
>the prequels were good because uhmm... hi redit and uh... you're just parroting plinkett
Fantastic film analysis right there, you just changed my mind, you brain-damaged cocksnot.
For a long-time professional critic like Ebert to give The Phantom Menace a 3.5/4.0 rating just goes to show that Ebert cannot be fully trusted in all of his reviews. For whatever reasons, the man did have his blind spots.
There is no way in hell TPM rates 3.5/4.0. Ebert rated TPM equal to Total Recall (the original), which was a far, far more entertaining and better movie than TPM.
At best, TPM rates a 2/4 if we assume 2/4 is equivalent to a C letter grade (average.)
Being a good critic doesn't automatically make you right. Everyone has opinions and movies are subjective. He's as right as you choose to believe.
When idiots can be right from time to time.
Plinkett isn't an actual person, but a personification of people's nerd rage. I'd say don't take it seriously, but he IS right.
>Yeah, the prequels had bad dialogue. Just the prequels. Yes, sir.
Let's parse this, line by line.
>>Han Solo: That's a good story. I just think you can't bear to let a gorgeous guy like me out of your sight.
Han Solo is a smug, arrogant, rebel. The above line is quite natural and is something a person with Solo's personality traits would say.
>>Princess Leia Organa: I don't know where you get your delusions, laser brain.
Leia is an independent woman. The above line is also natural for a person with such personality traits to say. The "laser brain" put-down is unnatural but could be considered natural in a world such as Star Wars.
>>[Chewbacca laughs amusingly]
Chewbacca has evidently been associated with Solo for a long time and knows Solo's M.O. His laughing is entirely natural as he is tickled by the fact that Leia is calling Solo on his bull shit.
>>Han Solo: Laugh it up, fuzzball! [To Luke] You didn't see us alone in the south passage. She expressed her true feelings for me.
Again, Solo is like the jock in high school who claims he had sex with lots of women and who also thinks that all of the cheerleaders want to have sex with him. When presented with conflicting information, he concoct a lie to counter the truth. Dialog seems quite natural.
>>Princess Leia Organa: What? [annoyed] Why, you stuck up, half-witted, scruffy-looking... nerf-herder!
Natural reaction on the part of Leia. Her insults are stilted, though. This could be the result of bad writing, limitations of a PG rating, or an attempt on the writers to imagine what insults would be like in a society like Star Wars. If most of ESB had lines similar to this, we'd be ripping on ESB as we do the prequels.
>>Han Solo: [in mock offense] Who's scruffy looking? [To Luke] Must have hit it pretty close to the mark to get her all riled up like that, huh, kid?
Running out of space but this is also natural. Solo is a good reader of people.
It is time to kill the "Prequels are good" meme.
If you really don't understand why the prequels are garbage, you have autism.
If you're just meme-ing, you have autism.
If you're just pretending to have autism on the internet, you have autism.
You don't. They're academics in all but name and are totally out of touch with reality.
Don't let the fancy degrees and fancy job titles deceive you. Most, if not all, of what they say is balderdash.
??? I am not defending the prequels. I was showing the Ebert giving a film 3.5/4.0 stars does not mean that the film is good.
I'll admit that I was very generous saying that TPM would rate at best 2/4 stars. If I were to give TPM a letter grade, it would be a D or D-, or in star parlance, 1/4.
I wouldn't give it an F (0/4) because the production values were good and it did have a somewhat understandable story.
But the acting, pacing, and use of racial stereotypes was just terrible.
I recently watched part of TPM again and saw the scene where Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan meet Jar-Jar. When Qui-Gon saves Jar-Jar, Jar-Jar says he is Qui-Gon's servant or something like that. When Qui-Gon saves Jar-Jar again, Jar-Jar says he is now Qui-Gon's servant twice over.
With the Step-n-Fetch-It language Jar-Jar uses, he might as well have said, "Wen yousa first saved me, meesa your house nigger! Now yousa save me second time, massa, meesa your field nigger!"
Terrible. Just terrible.
/tv/ before TFA:
>prequels are trash!
>lel RLM so based
>can only mean one thing!
>basically nonstop prequel memes and bashing and RLM ass-sucking
After /tv/ got BTFO over TFA:
>th-the prequels are great!
>RLM sucks, fucking hacks
>prequel haters don't understand film
>nonstop prequel ass-sucking
If you ever needed evidence of what /tv/ is all about, the past few months have provided all you need
i don't care if you did or didn't like episode 7, but the prequels are lousy and unworthy of revisionist praise. anybody who does this is an aspie faggot contrarian who should seriously rethink their life.
My opinion of the prequels have changed since TFA was released.
The prequels are garbage.
The prequels are still garbage. However, I have to give the prequels credit for at least somewhat trying to do something new, tell a new story even if it ultimately failed.
>him, you are agreeing with his assessment of WHY they are garbage.
That's not true either. Rather than making a specific point they'd rather defer to Plinkett blindly. "Watch this, then you understand." is not articulating a point.
>You're suggesting the original trilogy was mature?
No. You fuckers are the ones suggesting the prequels are mature.
>Are you autistic?
That would be George. Try to keep up.
This is a generic opinion but the only movies in the franchise I like are A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back.
Return of the Jedi had powerful scenes but the entire Endor section is the beginning of the downfall. From the first time I saw it as a kid to this day it has baffled me. Who thought it would be great to have a final climactic battle of the trilogy to turn into slapstick comedy with teddy bears?
As for prequels ultimately my biggest gripe is the light saber. Yeah, Plinkett said it as well and he was spot on in it. It is used too often, the action doesnt have any weight in it and it was a complete mistake to have Yoda and Emperor wield one.
TFA is the third best SW movie. The saber fights had some good choreography with powerful swings. The problems here are the characters. Rey is good at everything and everyone likes her, it is a boring character. Finn could have been good with an arc of coward to brave, but he was obnoxious, loud and ridiculous throughout the movie. I was actually shaking my head in disgust when he was yelling at Phasma "YEAH IM IN CHARGE NOW WHOO" or something along those lines.
Poe was good, and Kylo was great.
Plinkett is a good entertainer not a good critic. His YouTube videos mostly just expose plot holes.
The big problem with the prequels is that the more you know about them, how they were written, how they were cast, how they were filmed and what choices were made the worse and worse they get. If you ever sit down and try to work out the story and character motivations from TPM to RotS you quickly realize what a mess it is. If you know cinematography and scene blocking and pacing films like RotS serve as examples of everything gone wrong.
The more you know the worse they are.
>use of racial stereotypes was just terrible.
Can you explain why that is terrible? Is it because you are a nigger, an arab, or a chink, and didn't like the mirror being held up to show you and your failings in great detail?
>No. You fuckers are the ones suggesting the prequels are mature.
It's funny that you Plinkett tards can't even get your attacks straight. Half the time you say the prequels aren't mature enough, and the next minute you're crying about how you don't understand what a trade blockade is.
A question for prequel loving neckbeards who actually think Richard Brody is a good critic:
When dozens and dozens of film critics shit on the prequels, are they just memeing too?
>defending the prequels is a /tv/ meme now
get off your high horse you self-centered conceited prick. pic related is probably you.
>Is it because you are a nigger, an arab, or a chink, and didn't like the mirror being held up to show you and your failings in great detail?