Working on notes for my OT Plinkett reviews. Any comments?

Star Wars is garbage and the fact that you would devote any amount of energy towards being 190,273,102,983,123,123 person to ""review""" them is pathetic.

Do you really think that watching 40 year old children's movies is a good way to spend your life?

>>81887125
rude desu

File: Screen Shot 2017-04-21 at 4.25.21 PM.png (468KB, 981x662px) Image search: [Google]

468KB, 981x662px

Mildly expanded edition.

File: Screen Shot 2017-04-21 at 4.52.20 PM.png (475KB, 983x666px) Image search: [Google]

475KB, 983x666px

Another minor tweak.

>>81886751
Make sure to post them a lot here, our community would love to see your reviews

This is so mundane it actually hurts to read it.

what does /tv/ think?

>>81887125
>>81888670
>>81888702
>>81888734
Be sure to read the Yoda point I added to this one.
>>81888634

Basically ruins Yoda's character.

>>81888760
>Be sure to read the Yoda point I added to this one.
No

>>81888798
I think you should.

>>81887125
FPBP

kys op. there is nothing new to be said about these movies, and your sperg-ridden "analysis", whether ironic or not, isn't funny or enlightening. Fuck Plinkett/RLM for making plebs like you think anyone cares about your nitpicks of THE plebbiest film trilogy in existence

>>81888734
>>81888760
It's impossible to tell what the quality of the review will be so far. If you got good comedy and produce it well (you won't, you're a loser) it might be decent. I also don't think you can be too nitpicky with these movies, you need to actually dislike them and have a good reason to do so or you're just another cinemasins.

>>81888888

File: lol dog.jpg (81KB, 546x794px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 546x794px

>>81888922
>you're a loser
And you're not?
I've never seen your trip before this year.

>>81889021
I'm the only one giving you real advice.
You need to learn respect.

>>81889753
yikes

hello