Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Mr. Plinkett wraps up his video Star Wars prequels reviews with an epic Revenge of the Sith dissection!

The movie you've all been waiting for is here!  Plinkett's REVENGE OF THE SITH review is up.  Does he kill again?  Will he finally finish his plate of pizza rolls?  Can we at last put this behind us?
In my opinion, it's waaaay too long.  It might actually be as long as a STAR WARS film.
Anyway, I think a lot of it is funny.  Feel free to discuss and critique in the Talkbacks below.





Nordling, out.
Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9 a.m. CST

    Plinkett>most of the clowns on this site

    by k_pilkington

    And that includes you Nordling. Your gushing torrent of geek shit was embarrasing. Plinkett is a god. That is all

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:01 a.m. CST

    his reviews are unfunny and pointless

    by Thunderbolt Ross

    yes let's break down movies for 12 year olds, it's such a challenge

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:02 a.m. CST

    Oh and that animation.....

    by k_pilkington

    For fucks sake Harold. That's worse than the pervy gorilla molestation one from a while back. Take that shit down you sick fuck.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:10 a.m. CST

    Our Only Hope...

    by darfnader

    Is that Lucas (and the dozens of other unreasonably popular 'filmmakers') somehow catches wind and takes a peak at these breakdowns. It would only serve to educate them all on what not to do for future projects. I also hope he doesn't do the same for Tron: Legacy, because I don't want to know how idiotic it is. I enjoy it too dang much. hah!

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:11 a.m. CST


    by the new transported man

    Been waiting for this.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:11 a.m. CST

    oh, and K_Pilkington

    by darfnader

    has got a head like a FUCKIN orange.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:13 a.m. CST

    DAMN IT.

    by the new transported man

    Won't play on my phone, & work is throttling bandwidth. Bollocks.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:13 a.m. CST

    I have moderately enjoyed the prequels, but...

    by Larry Knowles

    Plinkett's reviews are classic. I've watched them time and again and they are stuck in more consciousness. Just reinforces my belief that there is beauty in all things! Even something so average as the prequels has inspired great insight and comedy. Hail Plinkett! Also, Harry, give me a call. Your loving brother Larry

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:14 a.m. CST

    Is this guy a substitute teacher

    by Roborob

    What a voice apart from the drivel he was saying in that monotonous boring voice. I liked all the star wars films, I think they are great entertainment. Nothing more. George did not rape my childhood like some idiots claim. I grew up on Doctor Who with the carboard sets and rubber monsters so why should I dislike the star wars movies.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:23 a.m. CST


    by richievanderlow

    Why bother? an hour and 45 minutes of this? It may be funny, but I guess I'll never know.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:25 a.m. CST

    Plinkett is a tit

    by Mark

    The second he makes anything as good as THX 1138, American Graffiti or Star Wars let me know.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:37 a.m. CST

    Star Trek: Insurrection review is the tops

    by the new transported man


  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:37 a.m. CST

    Harry eating his ass makes Plunkett look classy

    by Larrylongballs

    Fucking revolting to see a fat man eat himself.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:39 a.m. CST


    by Nerd Rage

    The reviews are more entertaining than the prequels themselves.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:40 a.m. CST


    by Tomarru

    So, we can only criticise things if we've made something comparable to the best things made by the director that made the thing we are criticising....made. Yup, not even as good as the thing we are criticising (i've seen "better" things pass from between my ass cheeks than the prequels), but we have to match their best works. Should this then be passed into the argument that we shouldnt be allowed to WATCH ANYTHING they make unless we've made something comparable to their best least then we'd have nothing to moan about as nobody would see anything.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:41 a.m. CST

    ROTS does not exist in this dojo

    by Cobra--Kai

    Funnily enough I watched ROTS just a couple of weeks ago, to see if perhaps it wasn't quite as bad as I remembered from the cinema...<p> It was!<p> The final cherry on the shit cake for me was the closing shot when Obi Wan hands Beru baby Luke...<p> This is a young woman becoming a mother for the first time. Recieving a child. The most amazing thing that can happen to you... and what does Beru do?<p> She glances at the baby for half-a-second then goes over to stand next to uncle Owen who's admiring the Tatooine sunset (obviously he couldn't be fucked to come over and say hello to the guy who just brought them a child).<p> He too glances at his new baby for a split second, and then both of them go back to looking at the sunset.<p> THEY'VE JUST GOT A NEW BABY AND THEY'D RATHER LOOK AT THE FUCKING SUNSET!?<p> THEY'VE PROBABLY SEEN THAT SUNSET A 1000 TIMES AND YET IT'S STILL MORE INTERESTING TO THEM THAN THEIR NEW CHILD?!!<p> Fuck.

  • ...every message board post of the last 5 years, only interrupted by "Lol, I'm a psychopath, isn't that hilarious". Seriously man, stuff like this is the reason why geekdom needs to be destroyed and created new and better, not whatever Patton Oswalt talked about.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:08 a.m. CST


    by HadWoodenTeethChasedMobyDick

    it was a sunRISE, duh

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:10 a.m. CST

    "Latest News"

    by CuervoJones

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:10 a.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Actually, flawed though it was I think THE PHANTOM MENACE looks like a classic next to CLONES and SITH. Those two movies are just so souless, bland and photo-shopped.<p> At least TPM had Qui-Gonn, Darth Maul and Anakin's mother, characters that seemed to have a tiny bit of 'something' about them. A little bit of humanity or truth, whatever you want to call it.<p> Plus the 3-way lightsaber duel at the end was for me the only sequence in the whole of the PT that recaptured the excitement of what Star Wars was originally all about.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:15 a.m. CST

    Is Nordling the only guy working here?

    by D.Vader

    Alongside Quint? What happened to Merrick, Massa, Capone, and that other guy?

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:21 a.m. CST


    by D.Vader

    I took their Seeming indifference to he indicative of how they felt about Anakin and Luke. It's obvious from A New Hope that Owen didn't think too highly of Anakin, nor Obi-Wan, likely a result of the Jedi dumping a mouth to feed on his doorstep. Beru smiled because she's feminine and now had a child to take care of, but Owen probably felt rueful about having to take care of his step-brother's kid bc his step-brother, whom he knew for one day, turned into a homicidal maniac. In light of that, I think his "I'd rather stare into TWO hot suns," attitude was justified.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:28 a.m. CST

    Everybody who looks to this guy for more than a laugh is just blind...

    by lucasdefender

    Seriously. The manner in which you guys have chosen to embrace this guys critique as anything valid is just mind-numbing. This guy's method could be used to destroy a whole host of great cinema. Raging Bull, American Graffiti, Every Fantasy film ever made... The guy forces(along with the most of you losers) what he thinks a character should be feeling, or saying or deciding the whole time. Here is a fact. A person is not always predictable or believable. They do not always make sense or say the things that make the most sense. Star Wars prequels fail because of inherent contradictions between what we may perceive Lucas was attempting to do and what was actually achieved in the end, but not for the majority of reasons this guy lays out as anecdotal that you embrace as serious discussion. Also, if you think that ROTS fails any-worse than ROTJ, then your inability to perceive beyond your own nerd, is apparent. Contend with Drew about it:

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:39 a.m. CST

    If he'd have just stuck to the movies

    by BlueDjinn1

    ...instead of adding in all of the crappy misogynist stuff--and didn't use such a disturbingly slurred voice (is that for real?), I'd say that his deconstructions should be taught in film class. Unfortunately, he *did* include the misogynistic stuff and *does* use a terrible voiceover, which kills half the impact.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:46 a.m. CST

    A nobody online bashing the prequels? No way.

    by shutupfanboy

    Someone is going to sit down and watch this mess. ROTS is what I hoped for since they announced it. Tearing apart the prequels is about as relevant of bitching about Sarah Conner getting shit canned.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 11:09 a.m. CST

    The Millenium Falcon was in Episode III

    by connor187

    So fucking there!

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 11:19 a.m. CST

    "You never see an old man eating a Twix."

    by GWARHOL

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 11:39 a.m. CST

    Since when...

    by maxjohnson1971

    Did Cheech and Chong start doing movie reviews as Uncle Pervy? "Hey boys and girls, come in and take off your clothes! I I I mean, your coats!"

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 11:43 a.m. CST

    More proof that Kevin Smith is a terd

    by GWARHOL

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 11:55 a.m. CST

    "as good as the AVGN"?

    by mr teaspoon

    Seriously, you're going to call Plinkett juvenile while defending AVGN? AVGN's reviews are OK, but every other comment is 'this game sucks my dick shit fuck from a buffalos dick'. Talk about idiotic.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 11:58 a.m. CST

    The prequels were crap

    by bames_jond

    They were very bad idiotic movies that show the well has run dry for Lucas. Although I don't like the guy who did these reviews, when it comes to screen and script logic he is right. He makes good points about not giving the audience any reason to care, poor development of character, and Anakin being a bad seed from the start (evil as soon as he executes the Sand people in eps 2 and Dooku in 3), illustrates that Lucas got it wrong -he put the cart before the horse. Instead of a good guy seduced into doing the wrong thing, Anakin is just morally bankrupt and arrogant from the start = no reason for the audience to care. Yes, the original Star Wars films were good entertainment. Yes they were hokey, but they were fun and didn't contradict themselves. Audiences that can sit through the prequel films and actually call them "good" entertainment even though the story contradicts itself, makes no sense and panders to its audience as if they are idiots, are actually idiot-fools. Lucas is laughing at you cause he has your money. And because there are so many of you who will watch without a shred of criticism is the reason why most movies are disappointing now days. So, give yourself a pat on the back. Yes the Star Wars Prequel films are entertainment, but they are "mindless" entertainment. Oh yeah, that little animated thing that Harry has up is disgusting and inappropriate. Harry you are a pig.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 12:05 p.m. CST


    by 1997-2011

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 12:05 p.m. CST

    cant comment in the Capone TB

    by 1997-2011

    dont know why

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 12:05 p.m. CST

    why would lucas give a shit...

    by alienindisguise

    we all willfully gave him our money to see these flicks..He's rich, we're not. Wanna make a point?..don't pay to see his shit in 3d when it comes out.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 12:25 p.m. CST

    by MikeTheSpike

    Ha ha, you wankers who don't like the Plinkett reviews really get defensive about it, eh? If only I were half as mature as Drew McWeeny!

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 12:28 p.m. CST

    Why was Nordling given this to introduce?

    by Ringwearer9

    He's obviously a whiny Star Wars fanboy "can we finally put this behind us" ... and "it's too long". And then damning it with faint praise "I thought a lot of it was funny."

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 1:06 p.m. CST

    Yeah It's Long

    by Raskolnikov_was_framed

    almost as long as the prequels and 10 times more entertaining...and cost how much less??

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 1:20 p.m. CST

    way too long?

    by frankenfickle

    whatever, genius. this guy should be forced to review every movie ever made going forward.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 1:25 p.m. CST

    The pwnaged is now complete

    by TitusPullo

    The best part to these video reviews are using Lucas' own behind-the-scenes and interview footage as the damning evidence. Lucas pretty much pwn3d himself. "Gee, I better get cracking on the script!" (after looking at all this completed pre-production artwork). And it's uncomfortable and embarrassing to see all these "yes" people quietly standing around Lucas like zombies hanging on his every word. Lucas is the only relaxed person there.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 1:31 p.m. CST

    Let me sum up Plinket's review

    by Ingeld

    The prequels were crap because we don't care about the characters. He is spot on with that criticism. We would forgive everything else--bad editing, poor dialog, inconsistencies and illogical plots, if we actually felt some emotional investment in the characters.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 1:37 p.m. CST

    the reviews are better than the movies

    by SmokingRobot

    But that's pretty faint praise. Dear God, someone please stop GL from ever making a Star Wars ANYTHING, ever again.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 1:41 p.m. CST

    I like his reviews!

    by notcher

    He found a creative way to analyze why our beloved prequels sucked so bad. I don't give a fuck if his reviews have a point or not, I laugh and am entertained. When I watched the prequels, I only laughed. Fuck the haters!!!

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 1:48 p.m. CST

    I'm Done.

    by Lashlarue

    That pretty much sums up how I felt about Star Wars after watching the first five minutes of Revenge of the Sith.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 2:14 p.m. CST

    lucasdefender and cobra-kai well said.

    by KilliK

    Yeah this kind of de-construction that the guy applies for the films which he reviews can be easily used for all the cinematic masterpieces and make them look like z-movie trash. Not that i dont agree with many points which he makes about the SW PT films,but i would be crazy if i was to consider him as a valid film critic with a respected opinion.especially with this kind of psychotic voice-over. Cobra-Kai i agree with what you say about the finale sunrise sequence in ROTS.I can imagine how Luca$' directional mind visioned the scene: "Well lets see Beru and Owen are taking the baby from Obi.They are on Tatooine ofc and the baby is Luke who will grow up in that planet and we will meet him as a teenager in SW1 i mean SW4. Since this finale sequence closes the prequel trilogy and then follows the original trilogy,i want an emotional scene which will connect the two trilogies in a way. But what,what..FUCK i got it.I will use the double-sunset sequence from SW1,shit i mean is iconic,everyone remembers that and it is very emotional and most importantly i fucking written and directed it,not Kersh-fucking-ner. Moreover the double-sunset sequence in both movies apart from being the same sunset in the same planet thus connecting the two trilogies topologically,it also connects them contextually: in both movies it represents the prospect of a new beginning,of the future,of the adventure that lies in front. FUCK i love it.So lets sum up.The sterile couple get the baby from Obi.No need for salutations,they just have a quick peek on the baby and then all together watch the iconic doube-sunset while giggling like they see it for the first time.This way the importance and the iconoclasm of the scene is empasized. FUCK i am such a genius.such a fucking handsome,brilliant and rich genius.FUCK i am hard now."

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 2:24 p.m. CST


    by KilliK

    I think you're more retarded than your posts.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 2:25 p.m. CST

    THE CLONE WARS cartoon makes the prequels watchable

    by Monkey_King

    and makes you wonder what else George has in store for us die-hard-yet-nitpicky fanboys and girls.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 2:28 p.m. CST

    If you hated the movies then you hated the movies

    by seasider

    You don't need to watch some youtube stoner who takes longer than the actual movie to drone on about why he thinks the movie sucks. His reviews are not gonna change minds one way or another. It's like a redneck listening to Rush Limbaugh in the morning.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 2:41 p.m. CST

    AOTC was best of the prequels. ROTS was the worst.

    by Tigger Tales

    That leaves Phantom Menace as the jelly in the sandwich.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 2:55 p.m. CST

    Felt too short

    by Ghostshrimp

    Just finished watching all three vids and it felt like 20 min went by. I never really realized how simplistic all the shots of dialogue were and of people walking back and forth so much in the film, yikes. It was also a shame how obvious the quality of the two trilogies are esp. with him showing so many shots from the original trilogy in the review. The new trilogy did't ruin my enjoyment of the originals, however the originals are far more diluted for me because of them.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 2:57 p.m. CST

    God, I forgot just how terrible these were.

    by Lucasblows

    And it makes me laugh to see them still being defended. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the wheels came off this series as soon as George Lucas took complete control and stopped asking for input from anyone else (and in my opinion this downward spiral began with ROTJ). When you write, produce and direct while also surrounding yourself with people who are afraid to say "George, are you really sure you want to film this shit?" You have no filter for your ideas. And I also know how much money these made. But if you took the "Star Wars" brand away, no one would have bought and made this shit. It's the problem you have when you have so much money you can do whatever you like.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 3:05 p.m. CST

    You are all so fucking stupid...

    by LordEnigma The fact that you can walk and talk at the same time is a testament too all of your pitiful fat chubby asses. Now go eat a donut chubbers and have a good day.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 3:18 p.m. CST


    by Raskolnikov_was_framed

    RLM are anything but youtube stoners...pretty much the exact opposite

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 3:20 p.m. CST


    by Raskolnikov_was_framed

    they were actually making Star Trek reviews WAY before they did Phantom Menace...Jay and Mike of RLM are actually pretty damn talented

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 3:39 p.m. CST

    No, no they are not

    by LordEnigma

    They are a bunch of dumb ass bastards because only a couple of dumb ass bastards would put this online, and expect... hold on. They are dumb ass bastards putting it online for other dumb ass bastards. Hell, that's a brilliant plan! Enjoy dumbasses!

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 3:48 p.m. CST

    darth kong

    by redkamel

    video games are already more engaging than movies. The last few big feature games I played have been better than most of the feature movies of the year. Hell, even some of the indie games are better.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:12 p.m. CST

    its like a time vortex.

    by alice133

    geeks arent dying theyre just trapped in carbonite.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:14 p.m. CST

    I wonder if...

    by redkamel

    I wonder if George Lucas actually watched these. Or if he cares

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:30 p.m. CST

    enjoyable so far

    by sith_rising

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:31 p.m. CST

    but here's my take on the Original Trilogy

    by sith_rising

    since RLM won't ever fucking tackle all the problems and plotholes in the sacred Original Trilogy

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:33 p.m. CST

    part 2

    by sith_rising

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:33 p.m. CST

    I was ready for this to end at th 14 minute mark.

    by darthpigman

    I would rather read Vern's wonderful reviews than hear this angry, long-winded fuck rant for an hour and a half.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:33 p.m. CST

    part 3

    by sith_rising so many problems....

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:34 p.m. CST


    by Marduk

    Time to come in Ryan. The other boys will never like you.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:36 p.m. CST

    part 4

    by sith_rising

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:36 p.m. CST

    lots more to come

    by sith_rising

    soon as I finish the latest RLM vid. so far he's done well...

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:55 p.m. CST

    You're just jealous braindrain

    by Marduk

    RLM is everything RPLocke could have been, if weren't for those facacta shnooks at Warner Brothers.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 4:57 p.m. CST

    So much better than the actual movie!

    by Eighties

    Unlike the 3 prequels, this review was actually entertaining! The prequels are bad movies from any angle.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:01 p.m. CST

    I'm glad this is out

    by mortsleam

    Does this mean we can all stop talking about these movies now and move on to something else? That would be great. I know I stopped thinking about them almost as soon as I walked out of the theater.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:03 p.m. CST

    This dude...

    by Zombiana_Jones

    ...Sounds like the bastard child of Marvin the Paranoid Android and Dr. Zoidberg. And yes, it's still better than the movie itself, even though it also (like ROTS) gives me the unmistakable urge to jump off a tall structure....

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:03 p.m. CST

    It bother me as well that Palaptine was saying so much...

    by HollywoodHellraiser

    and yet no one thought it was odd. Dude wanted to leave Obi-Wan behind, then he knew alot about the Sith, he demanded Dooku to be killed instead of brought to justice. Palaptine just talk and talk talk and yet no one seemed to paid attention to his mutterings. He never hid his intentions. And yet nobody even suspect he might be up to no good til the end?

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:08 p.m. CST

    Watched 20 min so far

    by georgecauldron

    it's funny but too much random shit. Seems a bit unfocused. Not much left to say as the same problems from the first two prequels are in the third and have already been addressed.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:20 p.m. CST


    by Marduk

    I'd wager with some degree of confidence that he makes more money than you Ryan.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:30 p.m. CST

    Who cares?

    by SgtSharki

    Why is this on AICN? This guy is just a witless, unfunny crybaby with too much time on his hands. Remember when this site used to cover actual movie news and review films, not give space to pseudo-celebrities who do nothing but complain?

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:40 p.m. CST


    by Leafy McPlantsalot

    not as focused as his Phantom Menace review - which was sooo freaking spot on - but still really really good and entertaining

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:48 p.m. CST


    by Marduk

    Then hang somewhere else you WATB. It's the fucking holidays. Other people have lives even if you don't. There will be plenty of time for you chuckleheads to rate Transformers: Dark of the Moon as superior to Kubrick's 2001 when they get back.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:50 p.m. CST


    by elsewhere

    I love the reaction of the dude sitting beside Lucas when he talks about Yoda and his tiny laser sword. You know he's thinking "Are you fucking kidding me?" Fuck the prequels. They are not canon as far as I'm concerned.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:50 p.m. CST

    Apply Plinkett's standards of critique to any other film

    by lucasdefender

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 5:52 p.m. CST

    Revenge of the Shit

    by elsewhere

    Yet another great review Mr. Plinkett. Bravo!

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 6:08 p.m. CST

    'Just sit in that chair and watch those monitors'!

    by HollywoodHellraiser

    Fantastic quote for a lazy ass like George Lucas. Seriously that was telling how Lucas is so lazy that he couldn't even be bother to film a "rush" sequence of Anakin and Mace rushing to confront Palpatine.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 6:25 p.m. CST

    RLM Trashes What Needs To Be Trashed

    by Raskolnikov_was_framed

    last time I checked the Saw flicks weren't highly anticipated prequels to one of the most beloved franchises in movie history...I expect Kingdom of the Crystal Skull will be next for Plinkett and Co....that or the Transformers franchise

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 6:32 p.m. CST


    by Marduk

    I'm sure he'll get around to it, Ryan. Saw IV raped my childhood.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 6:48 p.m. CST

    It's General GRIEVOUS.

    by jwhj2007

    I can't tell if this guy is calling him "Grievance" sarcastically or if he really thinks that's his name. And he keeps calling Padme "Padame." Other than those, this long-ass review if really good. Especially when he rags on the opening of "Revenge of the Sith." It IS all over the place.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 7:17 p.m. CST


    by pauduro

    i agree, this guy has a real insite on the narative of movies, and how they have to be made to entertain in a fun and intelligent way, not just with BANGS and BOOMS and pretty colors for the mases the thing is a lot of stupid people dont want that they LOVE the bomm and nice colors an thats it.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 7:18 p.m. CST

    Pizza rolls!!!

    by Thanos0145

    ROTS is the worst of the prequels. Another entertaining review from Mr. Plinkett.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 7:20 p.m. CST


    by Marduk

    He doesn't have to. LOTR didn't suck. Plinkett has used various snippets of LOTR to demonstrate how a story can be told effectively. You're a fucking idiot.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 7:26 p.m. CST

    Man, Lucas got torn a new asshole here.

    by Father

    I hope plinkett reviews the matrix sequels next.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 7:37 p.m. CST

    He had something with Little Han Solo.

    by Audio_of_Being

    I was 100% expecting there to be some scene where they introduced a pre-teen Han Solo who was either rescued from the Jedi temple or helped out some main character, and having it be as contrived as it sounds on paper. Good to know I wasn't the only

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 7:58 p.m. CST

    "Revenge of the Sith is still fucking better"

    by Marduk

    Why is RPLocke still here?

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 8:50 p.m. CST

    The end point is the most important

    by georgecauldron

    Not many memorable moments in the prequels. Something from the OT as simple as, "This one goes there, that one goes there," boosted our liking for the characters, but in the prequels nearly everything is sterile and flat. We didn't relate to Anakin or care for his downfall that much because most of the time he was whiny and unlikable.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:08 p.m. CST


    by Marduk

    Sorry Ryan--I forgot to ask you the particulars of being banned as RPLocke. I'm guessing it had something to do with "man sex" and Michael Bay.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 9:25 p.m. CST


    by Marduk

    Seriously--just name your top three movies and I promise I'll leave you alone.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10 p.m. CST


    by Marduk

    Come on Ryan, you can do better than that. Here's mine: 1) 2001 2) Citizen Kane 3) The Wages of Fear

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:04 p.m. CST

    who funds RLM?

    by Raskolnikov_was_framed for one...I bought Feeding Frenzy for 14 bucks and so did a ton of other people...I support creative people who actually care about delivering an entertaining product

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:04 p.m. CST


    by maxwell's hammer

    If they stopped complaining, they'd cease to exist! There is a little group of about 10 people on this talkback that have built a fantasy kingdom where all their imaginary followers login to the interwebs to gaze at and wallow in thier proclamatory opinions. In this kingdom, everything they say is accepted as the god's given truth and their power is infinite and awful. With their razor-witted insults and defamations, they can even challenge and lay waste to the film empire of the mighty and terrible George Lucas!!!<BR> <BR> Of course, outside of this talkback, their fantasy kingdom does not exist and lots of people actually enjoyed the prequels, but shhhhhh! Don't tell them that! It will ruin all the fun they're having!

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:12 p.m. CST

    His observations...

    by Rebel Scumb

    about composition, editing, character motivation are spot on. Thats what sets these reviews apart. I agree he should not have all the mysognist stuff, more than anything it just feels beneath the incredibly high caliber of how well thought out these reviews are. He doesn't do what 99% of everyone else does 'wah wah I hate hayden christiensen'. It all comes down to engaging the audience Han, Luke, Leia. These were all characters that if given some magical portal to another universe, I would want to hang out with. Who would ever want to be in a room with young obi-wan, anakin, padme?

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 10:18 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    I've often thought the same thing as what he said about the focus on Anakin. The prequels either needed to be a well written and character driven story focusing on the RISE and FALL of Anakin ala citizen Kane (or the godfather) showing him first as an endearing admirable hero, who is then seduced into evil and becomes vader OR He needs to not be the focus at all, and just the B or C story going on in the background. For lack of a better example, the Lando of the story.

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 11:57 p.m. CST

    "wahh wahh wahh...I hate Star Wars"

    by Jobacca

    Bitching about how tired you are of SW is soooo 2010. Get over it the movies and enjoy them or SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!

  • Dec. 31, 2010, 11:58 p.m. CST


    by slone13

    Love Plinkett. And the fact that a shit ton of you turds get all fired up and are utterly clueless to his shtick. Also, his BABY'S DAY OUT review is nigh genius.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 12:24 a.m. CST

    excellent deconstruction

    by The_Cliffster

    very entertaining review, i still quite enjoy the prequels, but they should have been so much better.....

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 12:44 a.m. CST

    After Watching The Whole Thing

    by Crow3711

    The most poignant and telling point is at the very end. There are so many unforgettable, entirely memorable, iconic, beautiful moments in the Star Wars trilogy, and no one can remember a single fucking thing about any of the garbage shit Lucas threw into the prequels. The trilogy is based on wonderful characters and the prequels are built on nothing. There's nothing iconic or memorable about anything in them.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 12:59 a.m. CST

    My Star Wars Holiday Special

    by Coordinate_System

    <P>Happy New Year to all. <P>Over the last several years, when I return home for a visit, I have been taking films from my collection to share with my non-geek family members. Surprisingly, they have been open to my sharing of my "geek culture" with them. <P>This Christmas vacation, I took Star Wars Episodes 1-6 with me. It was time for them to be introduced to that Galaxy, Far, Far Away. <P>I started by showing them Ep 4, and then later in the day, Ep. 5. When the big revelation came, I was watching my family members: one of my Aunt's jaw dropped (literally) and my Grandmother said something to the effect: "He's his father? Oh, My!" It was a hoot! <P>On successive days, we went on to see Episodes 6, then 1,2, and 3. Now, some might question why I would want to expose loved ones to eps 1-3, but I felt that they should see it all: the Good (eps 4, 5, and most of 6), the Bad (a lot of eps 2, and 3) and the (really) Ugly (most of ep 1). <P>Anyway, just thought I'd share. You may return to eviscerating each other.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 1:29 a.m. CST

    his directing isn't bad, those scenes with the girls

    by HadWoodenTeethChasedMobyDick

    were good. i don't agree with everything but this is funny.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 1:31 a.m. CST


    by Raskolnikov_was_framed

    "If this guy thinks the Lucas movies are crap by braindrain I'd like to see him direct and write his own movie" yeah it's called Feeding can buy it on their's far more worth the price of a DVD than any Star Wars prequel

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 1:46 a.m. CST


    by Raskolnikov_was_framed

    I have the taste of their ass on my lips daily...and I'll never have to apologize for it...unlike you who has to explain George Lucas' dried semen stains on your shirt...tide gets that out

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 1:47 a.m. CST

    according to your mom

    by Raskolnikov_was_framed

    yeah I went there and I feel cheap by doing so...hate living in your world

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 2 a.m. CST

    clone wars eases the pain of the prequels

    by HadWoodenTeethChasedMobyDick

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 4:08 a.m. CST

    Great Reviews

    by Todd1700

    It's not just that these prequel reviews are funny that make them great. It's how perfectly spot on and in depth his explanations are of what exactly makes them suck. The behind the scenes footage of Lucas are the most damning of all. It's glaringly confirmed in those clips that Lucas simply couldn't be bothered to give two shits about a plot, character development, dialog, acting, or even how he shoots a non-action scene between two characters. And he has surrounded himself with a bunch of flunky yes men that would hit their knees and let him piss in their mouth if he ordered them to do so. No wonder these movies sucked so bad. Lucas is insane now and the people around him would shit down their pants leg into their shoe rather than tell him one of his ideas (like Jar Jar) sucked. Every dialog scene in these movies looks like it was written by a 10 year old and the actors were given one take with no rehearsal to get them on film. The plots have so many inconsistencies and things that make no fucking sense that you could literally play a college drinking game based on spotting them. And worst of all there isn't a single character in any of the three that I was compelled to give a shit whether they lived or died. I could understand a small child liking these movies (although I wouldn't be impressed with his IQ potential). I could even understand some teen getting caught up in the hype and initially having a higher opinion of these films than they deserve. But I'm sorry, if you are over the age of 12 and still defending these movies this far out then you are indeed a fucking moron who is obviously greatly entertained just by watching the bright flashes made by explosions, light sabers and laser beams.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 5:49 a.m. CST

    What the fuck is the point of this review exactly?

    by southafricanguy

    Im sorry, but what does he say/point out here that he hasnt in the other two reviews? Especially since the prequals all have the same basic problems. I really could nt watch after 20 min or so as I really have had enough of the geek/fanboy crying over this issue. Cant we just Oh I dont know...get the fuck over it? And seriously, the serial killer shit was amusing in the TPM review, but comes across as just stupid now. The guy does make valid points, and he does kind of succeed at putting Lucas "on trial" as it were and getting him declared "guilty". But what is said here that not one of us does nt alrerady know? And this guy also needs to seriously stop pointing out CGI as a flaw. He really seems to believe that CGI=bad. That alone makes it a bit hard to take a lot of what he says seriously. CGI is a tool like any other, its all in wether is used well or not. Lucas's problem was that he used it badly (i.e to give us Jar Jar) not that he used it. And General Grivous (very silly name aside) was one of the few redeeming things in the prequals imho, and is a character that fits in well with the pulp serial/flash gordon origins of SW. Always loved the East European accent too. But this guy just dismisses the character simply because CGI was used to creare it. Give me a break, its the character and the execution of said character thats important, not the technique used. Gollum, Davy Jones, and Neteryi all being cases in point... And finally, while he makes some good points, a lot of what he said is seriouly him projecting his own bullshit, and film philosophy onto things that could just as well be counter argued in an equally valid manner. Shit, you can almost rip any film apart in the way he does because its done in such a subjective way. Someone could make the same type of videos and argue the exact opposite point of view. I think most sane, rational film lovers can recognize that the prequals are nt good, but there is some good stuff in there, some very creative stuff actually, some really mediocre stuff ( a lot actually), and some really WTF? bullshit...

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 6:14 a.m. CST

    "some good stuff in the prequels"

    by elsewhere

    Please point them out. I'm curious. Surely it's not characters and plot, they're a fucking mess. Remember how everyone used to and still does to some degree, bag on Return of the Jedi? Yeah well that film kicks the shit out of EVERYTHING in the prequels. That one moment where Luke throws down his lightsaber at the very end says more about his character than what three fucking films failed to say about one character. Also the space Battle of Endor kicks the shit out of EVERY space battle in the prequels. You Lucas defenders are seriously grabbing here.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 6:53 a.m. CST

    Plinkett's review fails...

    by Zombiana_Jones

    ...Ultimately, because he fails to take into consideration three important facts about the film: 1. It's Dark. 2. It's Edgy. 3. It has Brawndo. And Brawndo's got electrolytes. 'Nuff said. That seems to be enough for like 95% of the populace.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 7:01 a.m. CST

    elsewhere.....relax dude, and chill out.

    by southafricanguy

    I have no idea why you are automatically labelling me a "Lucas Defender" as I do not defend Lucas in my post, simply point out some of the absurdities of some people going gaga over these reviews and just lapping them out without stopping to think if Plinkett is himself making any sense. I am firmly in the camp that believes Lucas to have lost his mind and his film making instincts a long time ago. Im just simply not obsessed enough with both Lucas and Syar Wars to get so damn worked about a review that is just a continuation of the same whining thats been going on for years now. How about you actually read what I wrote, instead of getting all huffy because I dont hate/despise the guy and the prequals like you do? But then perhaps my childhood, and life had/have more important things in them than a series of films. people get old and change (just look at Mel Gibson) and clearly Lucas has. He obviously was nt the same dude that made the OT. And I never said the prequals were good did I? Just that there is some good stuff, and if you can stand back and be objective about, instead of a typical geek/fanboy that only sees everthing in absolutes, then maybe you would understand what im saying. Imho, the good things would be the lightsaber duel between Obi wan and Darth Maul (simply a very well filmed, and edited action scene), the aforementioned General Grievous, Ian McDiarmind's performance as Palpatine in ROTS (not Oscar worthy or anything, but fun and possibly the only actor that almost makes Lucas's bad dialoge work), the Jedi purge done Godfather style (thanks for bending Lucas's ear Francis), Yoda's showdown with Palpatine (again, nothing great, but cetainly a fun moment for the character), and I guess maybe the end battle in AOTC (just because its the one and only time we get to see an army of Jedi engaged in a battle. Not much I guess, but then the prequals are full of more mediocre and bad than good....

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 7:03 a.m. CST

    The tired arguement of people like Braindrain...

    by Rebel Scumb

    That in order to have the right to critize star wars, you have to first go make a movie as successful as star wars, cuts 2 ways. So for all of you defending the prequels, you also have to go make a movie as successful as star wars before you can defend its quality. Otherwise, your opinion is just as invalid. At least according to the insane rationale you're purposing to those with some critisism of it.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 7:09 a.m. CST

    The defense of these films would work better...

    by Rebel Scumb

    if you guys actually provided specific examples as to how Plinkets observations are in correct. Say what you want about the relevance or comedic value of his videos. But I think it would be impossible to deny that he is very specific in his critical analysis. He breaks scenes, characters, story arcs (or lack there of), directing and editing techniques down into very specific criteria. He's not making vague blanket statements. For example, look at how he takes apart the entire 'Greivous kidnaps Palpatine, so anakin can kill dooku, but grievous doesn't know that palpatine is sidious' segment. He very thoroughly points out why the primary motivations and plan of the series MAIN antogonist make no sense whatsoever, and could fall apart if even one variable does not go exactly the way it did. If anyone can actually say something beyond 'starwars is awesome, your a bitch', and actually provide some sort of intelligent rationale for the inexplicable behaviour of the characters, then it would be a lot easier to take that arguement serious.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 7:15 a.m. CST

    ultimatly as far as Im concerned, the prequals

    by southafricanguy

    were never going to be good because prequals by their very definition suck as a result of them showing us stuff we should never see to begin with. We did NOT need to, nor should we have, ever be shown Vader's origin. No matter how it was done it would only ever demystify the character, and ruin him. The mystery about Vader was a big part of his appeal. Nolan got this with the Joker in TDK, thus the reason why he never explains the Joker but instead has him tell several lies about his past. Its exactly the same reason why we DO NOT need to ever know the origin of the xenomorphs from the Alien films. The mystery of their origin adds to their appeal. Thus the reason why I have no faith in the upcoming Alien prequal, there is no way that whatever they put forward as their origin will ever match up to what we have all imagined it to be in our heads.....same thing with Vader when we first saw him as kid... Other than that, of course there are script problems, bad dialoge, and plot holes galore that only serve to sink the prequals more, but Lucas had talent back in the day, and while he has clearly "lost it" no-one can ever lose all their talent or creativity 100%, thus there is some good/interesting stuff there. IMHO there is an interesting attemmpt to show how democracy is corrupted, that is meant to mirror how Anakin gets corrupted, and some good attempts at being deeper and more intellectual than the OT.. Its just too bad none of it works as Lucas botches most of it, and one could argue that depth and intellect were never part of the appeal of SW to begin with. Frankly I think Lucas should have made sequals to SW before Hamill, Ford, Fischer et al got too old and set them post ROTJ so that anything could have happened and the possibilities would have been endless as there is another huge problem with prequals by their very nature...we already know how everything will turn, and who will live or die (i.e we always knew Padme would die at the end, so it never mattered when she was in danger, and we alwau=ys knew obi wan would never die, and what Anakin's ultimate fate was, thus fuckall suspense....) Anyway, thats my two cents for what they are worth....

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 7:17 a.m. CST

    Well put southafricanguy

    by Rebel Scumb

    For me, I don't see the plinket reviews as really being about continued complaints about starwars, afterall he also reviewed avatar and the past 5 star trek movies, and I think a few others. I see it more as an inditement of the overall sloppiness and lack of imagination, and exploitation of beloved story properties that we see over and over again in recent blockbuster history, and he chooses his targets as the most high profile big offenders. But his observations apply to a lot of films, and I think he is pretty even handed that when he likes something he'll happily point it out. Look at his review of the JJ abrams trek. He gives that movie plenty of praise, and even debunks a lot of the critism that fans on these types of sites like to gripe about, but is still able to offer an intelligent critism of the things that are shoddy in the story and character. Like his brilliant point about movies today, having to constantly point out that characters are not gay, or having a case of 'the not gays'. Or making everyone on the enterprize into super genius, etc. That kind of thing crops up in all sorts of movies now, he's just picking prime examples to make his point. Just like a show like.. the simpsons makes fun of a lot of things, but will obviously focus on the biggest most well known things to make its jokes. Also the reviews are funny. I would take out all the serial killer stuff. But for me, his actual delivery, and edits that cut off his own tangents, and what not are hilarious, regardless of the subject matter. Or his point of if the Navi in avatar looked like the garbage pale kids, that made sam worthington wouldn't have changed sides in the conflict to help the natives. Thats gold. At least in my opinion.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 7:48 a.m. CST

    First of all...

    by fettitular

    I loved TELEMARKETER'S brilliant psychoanalysis of Braindrain... lmao Fucking classic! Poor Drain... i kinda feel bad for the poor lil fella. :-(

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 7:55 a.m. CST

    So i was gonna post this long-winded essay...

    by fettitular

    ...singing the praises of the GENIUS that is Mr. Plinkett. (That appears to be lost on a few of our fellow chaps: Lucasdefender - nice handle by the way... southafricanguy, and tallboy - who is beyond hope at this point...) I think it really speaks for itself... and a good number of posters already covered everything i was gonna talk about, especially Rebel Scumb. Well fucking said, man. All in all, i loved this one just as much, if not MORE than the others... and i will definitely support and seek out all future endeavors from the great "Mr. Plinkett" and his RLM cronies. Beautiful job Mike, once again :-)

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 8:02 a.m. CST

    And furthermore...

    by fettitular

    His deep, thoughtful, critical analysis of film just makes my balls wet. (lmao @ Neil Patrick Harris, aka Neil Poon-Handler...) Watching this guy's deconstructive abilities gives me a fuckin BRAIN-BONER. Shit, i thought i was damn good at that kinda stuff, but Plinkett fucking owns me... He should definitely do the Matrix sequels next... followed by Terminator 3 and/or 4, take a stab at the Dark Knight, and ASS-RAPE the shit factory that was the last couple of seasons of LOST. THAT would be fucking gold...

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 8:04 a.m. CST

    All of those aforementioned films/tv shows...

    by fettitular

    suffered from EXACTLY the same types of storytelling blunders (as well as other aspects of film-making...) which is why if you support any single one of those pieces of shit... you are in fact, a HYPOCRITE. Lookin' at you, Crow... ;-)

  • The one that gets my goat the most is this: "Well, you could just do what he does to ANY movie and make it seem stupid!" To that i say... WHAT IN THE NAME OF FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT YOU STUPID COCKSUCKERS?!? Do you honestly believe that? If you do, then you need to find a new fucking hobby, because clearly, film (and probably all art in general...) is not your strong suit. There is no conceivable way you could deconstruct a film like Citizen Kane, for example, the way that he does with the shitty prequels. And now i know... you dumbshits are thinking to yourselves "Dude... star wars isn't trying to be Citizen Kane" (although, ironically, Plinkett compares ROTS to that flick, and there are more similarities than you might imagine...) But take a film like The Princess Bride, even. You can't knock that flick for half the shit the prequels do wrong! That's the thing here folks... The prequels have GLARING, and ALARMING film-making 101 blunders that you simply don't see in great movies... or even MEDIOCRE ones for that matter... So you just absolutely cannot say that the same criticisms that Plinkett makes for the prequels could be done in the same fashion to any classic films. Shit, he even uses footage from many other films to show how they do it CORRECTLY. Hell, he even used footage from the Last Starfighter! The Last Fucking Starfighter for Godsake! So fuck those who say he's some elitist film snob or some such nonsense... He is simply a smart, thoughtful, analytical, critically minded lover of art. Like me :-)

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 8:30 a.m. CST


    by fettitular

    Fuck you clowns who are talking shit. Go actually WATCH the damn things and then get back to me. THEN try to formulate a rational, OBJECTIVE critique of his reviews... and argue like a fucking man. Try it. I dare ya...

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 8:36 a.m. CST

    Rebelscum and Fetticular....but you see therein

    by southafricanguy

    lies my issue with plinkett. Does he make very good points about what is wrong with the prequals? Absolutely, he breaks it down well and does make a very damning case for his argument. But then you mention his trek review, and what a huge steaming pile of hypocrisy that bullshit was. oH he points out how dumb the script is, and all the plot holes etc...but then he sweeps it all under the rug through constant defence of it as it was exactly what it needed to be??!! What the fuck type of self-serving bullshit is that? Then by exaclty the same token, why cant someone argue that the prequals are just being exactly what they needed to be? This is the fundamental issue I have with Plinkett, his double standard regarding how he rips into SW, but then lets all the stupid shit in Trek slide because "its what it needed to be" And then he manages to contradict the shit out of himself in his Avatar review when lets not forget that many of the things he cited as the flaws of TPM (over complicated story, no clear character arcs) are then the things he has issue with in Avatar. How about he make up his fucking mind? Or barring that show some fucking critical consistency in his reviews? Finally, the last major issue I have is when he makes comments like you mentioned about the Navi looking like garbage pale kids. Ok, so whats the point exactly? Thats the type of broad ridiculous generalizations that can be made about absolutely every film for fucks sake. Useing that logic, I can criticize his beloved ANH by "pointing out" that Luke would nt have gone off to save Princess Leigh if she looked like Rosie O Donnel..ha ha ha. Or Bruce Wayne could never succeed as Batman were he not mega rich Or James Bond would never accomplish his goals if he looked like Tom Arnold etc..etc... You cant criticize those things because those are the building blocks of what make those things work. That is not valid film criticism, its just making fun of suspension of disbelief that is required to make all sci-fi/fantasy/genre films work to a certain degree. Anyone idiot can do that (as I just proved lol), and to any damn film no matter how good it is.... So while I dont really like the prequals, and I think Lucas does indeed have umerous weaknesses as a film maker these days (not so much back in the day when he was the real deal), I dont automatically have to just slurp up whatever shit Plinkett puts forth and declare him a genius.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 8:45 a.m. CST

    If his particular opinions happen to match exactly

    by southafricanguy

    with yours then cool beans. But no-one has to accept what he says as correct when at least half of what he says is opinion, and nothing more. Especially when he injects inane fanboy whining onto things as if its fact. The other half of the time when he actually deconstructs things and focuses on the plot holes, scripts issues, bad acting, narrative structure know? Objective, quantifiable arguments...thats when he can be quite good and effective in making his points.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 8:54 a.m. CST

    Fetticular......calm down dude, you are going

    by southafricanguy

    to hurt yourself. We get that you have serious love for Plinket. But you really dont need to take other people not thinking hes the second coming of film criticism so seriously. My reasons for not liking him are just as valid as your reasons for liking him. Just becasue he points out why the prequals are bad does not make him revolutionary. Last time I checked the general critical consensus was that they were bad years ago when they were released. And there is nothing he says that I have nt heard before from others, or thought about already for myself. ...

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:08 a.m. CST


    by fettitular

    That's precisely why i like him so much. Sure, most of the stuff he says, has already been deduced by us "smarter folk"... but it's the WAY he did it. You can't argue that his editing abilities are pretty fuckin' impressive for some anonymous internet yahoo. His comedic timing is also pretty spot-on... He's pretty damn eloquent when he's trying to be serious too. This dude is class, no questions about it... and i'm sensing a little bitterness from you? Jealousy perhaps? I don't know what it is exactly that you find insulting about his "method", but whatever... But i do agree with you on his Star Trek and Avatar reviews. Those were actually pretty awful, especially the Avatar one. Which helps reinforce my "opinion" that Avatar is a pretty stand-up flick. FAR better than the disastrous prequels... It's definitely not an OBJECTIVELY bad film. So yeah, he was definitely reaching with that one... So i really have only enjoyed his prequel reviews. But that's enough, really... 'Cause those damn things are a work of fuckin art, if you ask me.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:19 a.m. CST


    by fettitular

    I think the thing that i liked the most about it was the fact that, for some inexplicable reason, ROTS received the most praise of the prequel trilogy. Which i personally found revolting. I've insisted, since '05, that ROTS was not only just as bad as the previous 2, but in fact WORSE. MUCH worse... All of the flaws from the prior 2 were in this one, but they were actually magnified. It was like a snow-ball effect with the prequels. Too many terrible creative choices and such just kept adding up until the shit completely hit the fan with ROTS. I loved how people would try to defend it as being "darker", "more mature", "action packed", etc. That the opening space sequence was AMAZING! And that Opera scene monologue... WOW, impressive work there! And they even tried to defend the abominable final duel between obi and ani... WTF?!? So i'm glad this finally came out to silence those dumbfucks and put 'em in their place. Beautiful deconstruction... don't think i coulda done any better myself ;-) The only thing i'll give ROTS was the score (still probably 2nd best to TPM, but it's definitely debatable...) That's IT. Phantom Menace clearly is better in terms of narrative structure (relatively speaking, of, the pacing, and especially the acting (Shmi, Liam Neeson, fucking Watto even, and Ian Mac gives his 2nd best performance of the series here, obviously trailing ROTJ...) The music, and the final duel definitely puts this over the top when ranking the 3 films. So finally, ROTS got the ASS-WHOOPIN' it most assuredly deserved... Now, star wars can finally R.I.P. :-)

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:22 a.m. CST

    And somewhere...

    by fettitular

    "Turd Has Risen", cries himself to sleep...

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:25 a.m. CST

    For those confused by my last post...

    by fettitular

    Turd was a RAGING DOUCHE that thankfully fell off the face of the earth when his hero, d.vade got banned... he was a punk-ass prequel/luca$ defender that just loved him some ROTS. And myself, CHOPPAH, BrightBoy, and a couple others laid the SMACKDOWN on him once in the most EPIC star wars debate that has ever graced the AICN pages. Ahhhh the good 'ol days...

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:37 a.m. CST

    Fett...nope, no bitterness here my friend. As I said

    by southafricanguy

    I dont take films as over seriously as some clearly do. In fact you and I seem to mostly agree (that his trek and Avatar reviews were both quite bad), and that he deconstructs the prequls quite well for the most part. I think we just mostly differ in terms of how much we like/respect what he he does and the way he does it. But I do concede that you are right about him putting and editing his videos together quite well.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:38 a.m. CST

    If anything I hope he turns his attention to truly

    by southafricanguy

    bad films that really deserve this kind of treatment ala Revenge of the Fallen, the last Airbender etc....Now that would be entertaining...

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:41 a.m. CST

    Btw Fett.....where are all the old regulars? Where

    by southafricanguy

    the hell are Asimovlives, Rouge66, Cobra-kai, Turd, Kwis, etc....It really seems like this place died somewhat these last few months.... I ve been away for a while due to being super busy at work and in my personal life, so ive not been hanging around or posting here for at least 2-3 months. Just what the fuck happened around here?

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:47 a.m. CST

    Btw not sure exactly why ROTS got the

    by southafricanguy

    most praise, to be honest I think all three films are bad, mostly for the same reasons. I can only speak for myself, but for me ROTS felt the most like the OT in terms of pace, emotion, and it having things like Chewbacca, Vader, the Emporor etc.... I guess thats why it seemed "better", but I have to admit that in some ways it really isnt any better. But while im on the same page as you Fett, I still can find things to enjoy, and there is some good stuff as I mentioned before. But again, the mistake was always making prequals instead of sequals to SW in the first place.....

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:49 a.m. CST

    And the other mistake was obviously Lucas

    by southafricanguy

    directing all three, especially after TPM showed that he had really lost touch with whatever creative instincts and skill he had that made him such a good film maker in the 70s/early 80s. Has there ever been a director that has so badly "lost it" like Lucas? Maybe M.Night? ....

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:53 a.m. CST

    Can only watch in small doses...

    by Dranem

    But I managed to at the same time like the Prequels and see the humor in the reviews and get a good laugh every now and then. This is not so much about how "bad" the Prequels were, but the humor comes in from how he over analyzes them. Its like that Simpsons were Comic Book Guy declares he hated Galaxy Wars Episode I so much, he was going to see it five more times to make sure. A hour long plus review of a five year old movie? Comedy gold!

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 10:41 a.m. CST

    We've recieved news from Qui-Gon Jinn.....

    by cookylamoo

    He's discovered the secret of immortality. Wow, that's important news. Much more important than all this Anakin Skywalker crap. Yes, he discovered you can life forever. Terrific! As a ghost! Oh.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 10:52 a.m. CST

    My biggest gripe with the films

    by cookylamoo

    Is that the Jedi go from having skill and some mild telekinetic abilities in Star Wars to having out and out super-powers in the prequels. Watching Obi fight Grievous is like watching Spider-Man fight Doctor Octopus.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 11:09 a.m. CST

    Can somebody remember the exact date

    by Keith

    ...when we passed the tipping point on this site where a crucial 60% of the contributors were ignorant, whining, self-congratulatory Gen-Y assholes? I think maybe it was sometime in 2008.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 11:10 a.m. CST


    by Keith

    "Has there ever been a director that has so badly "lost it" like Lucas? Maybe M.Night?" You could make a case for John Carpenter as a candidate.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 11:16 a.m. CST

    Prequels vs sequels

    by Keith

    "But again, the mistake was always making prequals instead of sequals to SW in the first place....." Not sure I agree. There could have been some brilliant prequels. Unfortunately, Lucas didn't make any. I actually think ROTS is quite a watchable movie...far more than the other two prequel abortions. It's flawed and has several terrible scenes, and the key element - the moment of Anakin's point of no return in Palpatine's office - is mishandled. But it does have a handful of nice scenes. Actually, one genuinely good scene: the dialogue-free moment in which Anakin is pondering whether or not to go after Windu, and Padme senses it across the city. Very nicely done. But this sits cheek-by-jowel with "I will do whatever you ask", "NOOOOOO!" and the rest.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 11:22 a.m. CST


    by Jared

    Yeah, the Jedi's abilities were handled poorly in the prequels. One second they're mowing through 100s of battle droids and the next minute they're getting killed by stray blaster shots.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 11:50 a.m. CST

    Right Tenebalm

    by cookylamoo

    But when the characters can drop hundreds of feet, move at super-speed. and leap like giant fleas, you don't identify with them anymore. I had the same problem with the supposedly human characters in The Watchmen.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 11:58 a.m. CST

    Funniest Part

    by BackwardGalaxy

    The funniest parts of this review are the clips of actual movie. This was not Plinkett's best, but a lot of his points are spot on. Episode III was horrid crap and the worst movie going experience of my life.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 12:06 p.m. CST

    todd1700 said it well enough

    by TitusPullo

    might as well lock the thread after that post.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 12:12 p.m. CST

    I think Grievous should have been Darth Maul.

    by Smashing

    Or what was left of him, I also thought Jango Fett should have been played by Harrison Ford, it would just have so worked, still the films are uneven enough I guess, my ideas of genius would have been out of place.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 12:26 p.m. CST

    This guy ROCKS!!!!

    by Weapon M

    I'm going to be checking out his reviews from now on. Thanks for posting this! Man this for sure is a clinic in movie making and what makes movies work and what @#$%s them up. Wow, you know if Lucas' ego wasn't so big- he would have had other great writers look over his Star Wars and give him tips and help him make sure its right. I mean damn. Empire Strikes back was one of the best Star Wars movies ever- maybe one of the great movies in history- and Lucas was having difficulties and beef with the film maker he hired to make it. The director of the film was having difficulty with Lucas. If only Lucas could have appreciated what came out of the creative process. Making movies- creating anything amazing is difficult. If it's easy your not doing it right...

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 12:34 p.m. CST


    by seasider

    It's got nothing to do with knowledge of film and art. It's all about presentation and misdirection. Politicians and media pundits do it all this stuff all the time. Listen to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck every morning and you'll swear Obama is either a black Hitler or the devil incarnate. Listen to Air American and you'll come away thinking he's modern day messiah. While Plinkett makes good points, he's nothing more than an entertainer and prequel bashing pundit catering to his base of fans who already hate these movies to begin with.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Sith needed more Count Dooku.

    by cookylamoo

    If you've got Elvis, let him sing.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Watched this last night

    by TheUltimateMathTeacher

    He was dead on on a lot of his views. His stupid side notes about pizza rolls and killing people were pretty much gone. The last piece was great. I was nodding along with a ton of it. This was the best of the three reviews IMHO. Watch it before you say how stupid it is...

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 12:56 p.m. CST

    Behind-the-scene footage suggest a lazy director.

    by HollywoodHellraiser

    who only showed interest AND spark when talking about the visuals and sfx of SW! Anything else and Lucas wasn't interested. Lucas did the prequels a disservice and should have removed himself from the director chair. Dude, just looks like an uncaring slob who had no energy and was even bored staring at the monitors. Geez, a more pumped-up director would have given the films more energy.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Plinkett's review confirms

    by deelzbub

    and gives bullet points to most of our gut reactions to the prequels. My brother-in-law gave me a copy of TPM a couple of years ago, and I accepted it as a gift, but have never re-watched it since seeing it in the theatre. And now I've decided it no longer belongs in my DVD collection. I don't want my kids watching that crap. Out of the three prequels, I did like the pod-race, and the hillbilly sand-people taking pot-shots with their rifles at the racers.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 1:07 p.m. CST

    I knew someone would fall for the Grievance thing

    by FrodoFraggins

    This was by far the least entertaining of Plinketts reviews. But I'd gladly rewatch any of his reviews before rewatching any of the prequels. I thought he did a good job comparing the OT's set filming with the crappy green screens of the prequels. Plinkett already drove his point home on the character issue with TPM review though.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 1:13 p.m. CST

    I hastily admit that I kind of liked PARTS of episode 3

    by beane2099

    I liked Obi-Wan's Birdosaur, the opneing sequence, Palpatine throwing senate pods at Yoda, and Nute Gunray sounding like Hank Hill right before he buys it (play it back, you'll see what I'm saying). What I don't get is why people are knocking the "Plinkett crew" for having an opinion. Ain't that what the internet is all about? I see people posting their opinion-as-fact on this and every other website in creation. It's the cornerstone upon which the internet is built (Not this whole ease of sharing information business that's been bandied about). I enjoy Plinkett's reviews, m'self. I don't agree with everything he says, but I ain't got the wherewithal to make a video of my own.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 1:55 p.m. CST


    by elsewhere

    I guarantee the Wachowski's didn't sit on there ass the whole time it was being filmed, particularly during the action sequences. The only time Lucas moved his fat ass was to get a cup of coffee, no wait I take that back, he has some spineless dipshit yesman do that for him.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 2:02 p.m. CST

    wtf does that even mean?

    by elsewhere

    I guess Lucas succeeded in appealing to knuckleheads.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 2:57 p.m. CST

    He raises great points

    by David Cloverfield

    Stuff "mainstream" reviewers never mention.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 3:24 p.m. CST

    Makes Cop Dog look like Cop Out...what does that even mean?!

    by DynamixRo

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 4:25 p.m. CST

    Here's an idea: Watch something before you comment

    by venkmanx

    So many of you freely admit you didn't watch the entire review, and then bash it anyway. That's intelligent. For the person who said the reviews are anti-CGI, there is a sequence where Plinkett clearly shows great examples of CGI in other movies. For those who insist that this guy is "sucking the fun out of everything..." and that assumes that these prequels were in way "fun"... Look, I seriously don't know how you can reconcile the glaring plot inconsistencies that these reviews keep pointing out in brutal fashion. Just watch the entire takedown of what are the characters thinking and what is the plan behind the entire opening sequence. What's Palpatine's plan? What's Grievous' plan? What was Dooku's plan? And most revealing, Plinkett exposes Lucas as a hack filmmaker when it comes to blocking shots. His whole shot, reverse shot, get up and walk, then turn around; or get up and walk to the window... I'm sorry, that's damning evidence. I don't see how you can possibly defend Lucas or the prequels when confronted by such overwhelming evidence. The movies stunk. The Plinkett reviews are hilarious. They're legitimate film criticism. And I wonder if Lucas has the guts to watch them, or if he realizes just how creatively bankrupt he's become? Or does he just dismiss them without really listening to them, like so many talkbackers here have?

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 6:10 p.m. CST

    I can't believe

    by FSJGuy

    people are defending Lucas, he spits out the crap prequels that Plinkett PROVES make no sense. It's not over-analyzing it is simply true...who do you care about in the prequels? who are you cheering for in the prequels? no one...that right there makes bad movies. Not to mention the other 1000 things Plinkett points out. Can't take away his successes but Lucas is still responsible for these 3 crappy movies.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 6:55 p.m. CST

    So far I've watched the first two videos and I'm enjoying it...

    by _Venkman

    The Emperor bit at the end of the 2nd video felt more Star Warsy the the entire prequel trilogy.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 6:56 p.m. CST


    by batman713

    This guy sounds like an obese and retarded american reviewing the Star Wars prequels while he's mowing down some McDonalds burgers.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 8:02 p.m. CST

    "Who cares how dark it is? My STOOL is dark!"

    by Amazing Maurice

    Fucking pissed myself.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 8:02 p.m. CST

    Pinkett's review > Lucas's 2 hour toy commercials.

    by Flip63Hole

    At least Pinkett has talent. See dictionary, look up "hack", see picture of Lucas. Mourn him well...

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 8:10 p.m. CST

    Braindrain =

    by Flip63Hole

    Strong argument as to why there should be a minimum age for internet use. Children + communication to the outside world without constant supervision = bad idea.

  • Really, that one did give all the apologists ammunition to tear into his Star Wars reviews by him glossing over every massive logic gap in Abram's film. I agree with him that Star Trek still ends up a positive experience due to its energy and appealing characters, but it's hard to defend his laborious attacks on the logic gaps of Star Wars when he barely gives mention to the moronic story beats of Abrams Star Trek. He's on much firmer ground when he deals with specific filmmaking techniques and story structure in general, such as the editing of dialog scenes or the lack of urgency in anything that happens. But his dissection of Grievous and Palpatine's planning is the exact kind of thing that his shrugged and forgave in Star Trek.

  • Granted.. there are tonal problems throuhout the PREQUELS.. and personally.. all the CG really just.. makes the film look weird compared to the originals.. BUT. Plinkett makes some really just flat out STUPID comments. 1. He points out that something along the lines that "oh its SOoooo horrible Anakin murdered children .. he NEVER did anything AWFUL in the original films!!!" umm.. striking down an OLD fart who had more or less YIELDED.. mind choked some twat.. and.. probably has killed quite a few by MIND CHOKING them.. they didn't exactly look SHOCKED when he did it.. so I doubt it was a FIRST, at all. also.. he pretty much says Anakin was EVIL after Attack of the Clones.. but.. granted.. he did kill the Sandpeople.. but he ALSO, unlike later on, DID actually regret and show REMORSE.. contrast that with AFTER he massacred the Younglings.. He was probably in part in shock.. but.. he definitely didn't REGRET it. Oh.. so its BAD to have some regard for someone.. I mean granted they are CLONES.. but does that mean you just let them die? That's kind of a tough call .. but can they have kids? never really covered at least in the films.. couldn't that clone have had a kid and wife? who the *%)* knows. I like that he does point out a few of the REAL problems.. but they are the OBVIOUS ones, at best. But at the same times.. he picks apart how STUPID the movies logic is. when. He obviously did NOT read the friggin opening CRAWL!!! Not saying they were great films.. the first one was just.. meh.. the second one was.. better.. not great.. but addressed the LACK of Jar Jar.. and the third.. the last 45 minutes was actually quite a good Star Wars film.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:04 p.m. CST

    Plinkett's STAR TREK review was SARCASTIC

    by Ringwearer9

    When he says "They did what they needed to do" he adds "from a marketing perspective". Whenever he praises STAR TREK for doing something right, he adds "to appeal to the most people and make the most money" (intercut with a picture of grossly obese slobs sitting in a theater with huge tubs of popcorn). He acknowledges that it's a "smart" movie for hitting all the beats necessary to be successful, while still mocking it for being soulless and stupid. His praise is the faintest praise possible. How can you watch his review of STAR TREK and not realize that he's savagely tearing it apart while he's "praising" it?

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:37 p.m. CST

    Mmmm, feel that closure...

    by Laserbrain

    I'm glad he went to town on the incompetent blocking in those bloody prequels. I do agree with the sentiment that this one wasn't nearly as funny as the previous two but it was enjoyable and cathartic nonetheless.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 9:48 p.m. CST

    It wasn't as funny as the previous two ...

    by Ringwearer9

    But what could he do. It was, like he said, something we all went to just to see how it ended. Everything he made fun of in the previous two movies was there in the last one. It kinda got boring, and there wasn't much that could be done with it. I did love the focus on the lousy camera work, with people sitting on couches.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 10:30 p.m. CST


    by HadWoodenTeethChasedMobyDick

    the clone wars tv show episodes have focused a clone or 2 that have said screw the war and left the battle to raise a family instead.

  • Jan. 1, 2011, 10:47 p.m. CST

    it just makes me sad really

    by HadWoodenTeethChasedMobyDick

    the movies could have been so awesome. probably should have been made in the 80's or 90's before any corruption of greenscreen and cgi overhaul. they probably would still be cheesy and boring, but very well could have been accomplished and would be by now in 2011 be quaint and nostalgic enough to be considered good. the part where Plinkett talks about having Coroscont degrade and become war torn would have been genius. Bottom line Lucas should have written these over and over and stop to think about the drafts and condense, rewrite and look at it from different angles, simplify the story and make it a faster pace and, like a 3 year period with Anakin older the whole time, and ofcourse find someone that the audience really can enjoy to play the good Anakin, someone with a heap of personality.

  • ...was savagely tearing Abram's Star Trek apart. Or at least hearing what you wanted to hear. He genuinely liked the film, and offered the "it was what it needed to be" defense honestly, in the same way someone might say "yeah, he stole the money, but his mother really needed that operation..."

  • If aryou're going to review something, I think there are really only 2 purposes that are worthwhile... 1) To bring awareness of the existence and the quality of a project to a wider audience. This is your average review, usually fairly brief and spoiler-free, done when a project is new enough for the review to be worthwhile to the uninformed audience member looking for help in deciding on entertainment. 2) To thoroughly examine the work in an effort to forward the medium in general by identifying the strengths and failings. This is the much more scholarly approach, often done years after a work has premiered. There is a third purpose that I personally find to be mostly bullshit, and that is: 3) To campaign to increase or decrease regard for a work among the general audience. The valuable parts of Plinkett's reviews are in category #2. I might have been able to give him credit for all of his reviews as being part of that approach, were it not for his Abram's Star Trek review, which quite clearly dipped into category #3 often. It was not interested in actually examining the faults of Star Trek, but rather in offering up reasons and explanations to forgive those faults. As a result, I can't give Plinkett the benefit of the doubt when he dips into more subjective criticisms of the prequels. At some point, you have to admit that he has an axe to grind against those projects specifically. I contrast him with Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw of Zero Punctuation reviews who will savage the bad parts of good video games equally with the bad parts of bad video games. With Croshaw, I feel the point of his excessively negative reviews is a desire to see the eradication of these bad habits and ideas from video game development altogether. I don't get the impression that he cares which video game is more highly regarded than another so much as we can all agree that poorly done storytelling/gameplay/graphic feature "X" is a blight that should never be repeated, regardless of what title it showed up in. I think Plinkett is right in that the prequels suck, and largely for the reasons he outlines... but I also feel there's a lot of fanboy fuel behind his rantings now.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:02 a.m. CST

    i think of this more as a star wars fan film

    by HornyForHarry

    some offshoot mutation like troops or one of the others

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:20 a.m. CST


    by fettitular

    Sorry about that man! Didn't mean to bail on ya earlier, but i had to get some sleep... Anywho, yeah this place has definitely become a ghost town. Were you hear during the D.Vader incident? That's when all this shit started, and most of the regulars bailed at that time, or soon after. Especially when the fucking site went A-WOL... Hell, i think i'm even about to throw in the towel on this place lol

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:28 a.m. CST

    You know what the prequels SHOULD have been??

    by fettitular

    Check out the first 2 trailers (especially the first) for the new pc game coming out called "The Old Republic"... Holy Fuckin SHIT. THAT's what im talking about. That is the very best star wars related creation since 1983, hands down (film/books/tv show/video games/anything...) That brilliant 4 minute teaser, for what i assume is the opening cinematic for the game, is 1,000 times greater than anything in the prequels. The creativity on display... the "cinematography", blocking, framing, shot composition, etc... the fight choreography, the editing, the "acting" even! And most of all, the STORY. You learn all you need to fucking know in those beautiful 4 minutes. And you actually CARE... the death of that Jedi and the beginning of the end for coruscant almost brings a tear to my eye! And that voice-over by Darth Whoeverthefuckthatis, is absolutely awesome. That motherfucker has PRESENCE... I could just imagine that fucking cinematic as the opening scene to a new trilogy of star wars films. If only...

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:31 a.m. CST


    by fettitular

    Haha... wow.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:36 a.m. CST

    Well said CHOPPAH

    by fettitular

    Brilliant ANALysis as usual! ;-)

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:44 a.m. CST

    On a related note...

    by fettitular

    RYAN smells like armpits and old bath-water. 'Tis true...

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:45 a.m. CST

    Why does this guy sound like Dr. Zoidberg?

    by mikeysquirrel

    Seriously, he does. ...and c'mon folks, picking on Star Wars, saying stuff like Lucas raped my childhood.. it's getting SOOOOOOOO old. Let up on it. The SW prequels are still better than 75% of the "re-imagined", recycled, pathetic crap that Hollywood churns out every year. Seriously.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:48 a.m. CST, no prob dude. No, I still dont know

    by southafricanguy

    what the fuck happened to DVader. Only that he somehow got banned under strange circumstances, and then somehow Rougeleader66 (one of the flat out most stand up guys on the TBs imho) also got banned. Do you know what all went down Fett? Shit, it just does nt feel like it used to around here at all....

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:51 a.m. CST

    oh and btw are so 100% damn right

    by southafricanguy

    about that those Old Republic video game trailers. Holy Shit and then some. If the prequals had had an ounce of that passion, skill, and emotion that gets conveyed there in just 4 short minutes...... But then again in all fairness, the computer game companies are way ahead of the curve compared to Hollywood imho....

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:59 a.m. CST

    So damn right, southafrica!

    by fettitular

    You're definitely ok in my book, for even knowing about, and admiring the hell outta those trailers! Aren't they something else?! God, what i would KILL to get that turned into a feature length film... I know... I'll start with... RYAN. Duh duh DUUUUUHHHHH

  • aka BrainDrain, RPlocke, Lockesbrokenleg, Ryan, etc. By the way, he really hates it when you call him "Ryan", his real name... ;-)

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:05 a.m. CST


    by fettitular

    You are so right about the state of video games compared to the state of hollywood today. Just check out those trailers for Mass Effect 2, Starcraft 2, Bioshock 2, Fallout 3, Fable 3, Left for Dead 2, Call of Duty: Black ops, Kane & Lynch 2, etc... Video games are absolutely wiping the floor with hollywood today.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:11 a.m. CST

    Oh, i must have missed that Ry...

    by fettitular

    But you still hate it when people call you RYAN, correct?

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:17 a.m. CST

    Oh SNAP!

    by fettitular

    BRAINDRAIN (of all people...) just questioned MY taste in film and video games. I think i may have a cry over this one...

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:18 a.m. CST

    I think i made it angry...

    by fettitular

    Must've hit a nerve with that RYAN stuff... I'll be good now, Drain. I promise ;-)

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:21 a.m. CST

    Oh shit, almost forgot...

    by fettitular

    That new D.C. game trailer was fucking impressive too! Forgot what it was called though... It was some post-apocalyptic thing with superman, wonder-woman, and batman teaming up with lex luthor or some shit. The "camera work" and the fight choreography were pretty amazing...

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:25 a.m. CST

    This oughta be good...

    by fettitular

    Braindrain apparently doesn't like my taste in video games... lol So you're gonna go on record as saying that... Mass Effect, Bioshock, Fallout, Call of Duty, etc. are all... "shit"?? What about Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Half-Life, Knights of the Old Republic, Soul Calibur, Just Cause, and Dead Space? You gonna say those "suck" as well?? Choose your next words carefully son, as this may be the final nail in the coffin for your non-existent credibility here...

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:33 a.m. CST

    Me? An "ass"?!?

    by fettitular

    Whatever are you talking about, Ryan? You must have me confused with someone else... And where did this "terrible taste" in film come from? Was that when you mistakenly accused me of liking Kick-Ass and Scotty Pilgrim?? So it must be because i hate the prequels and i think tron 2 was quite weak? Those seem to be perfectly valid arguments in my book...

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:36 a.m. CST

    Look what you did Ryan...

    by fettitular

    You went and scared away southafricanguy. We were having a nice conversation, man... and you blew it. I hope you're happy, mate.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:39 a.m. CST

    lol anyway... southafricanguy

    by fettitular

    All i know about the AICN situation is that once D.Vade and a number of others got banned, there was a mass exodus here... Beaks apparently went on a banning spree and pissed off most of the regulars. Then the damn website started crashing, as there was apparently a "HACK" on the site from someone over seas... and the new format was pissing off the remaining few members here and they jumped ship as well. So here we are now...

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:42 a.m. CST

    Alright guys, i'm out for a bit...

    by fettitular

    Gonna watch The Assassination of Jesse James by the blah blah blah... I don't know why it's taken me this long to watch it, 'cause i hear it's "da bomb". Although RYAN probably dislikes it... you little contrarian you.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 2:05 a.m. CST

    Plinkett annoys some because....

    by Kenny8

    ....they are given a lesson on how little they know about film making. Constantly they are shown what went by their own personal critical faculties.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 4:41 a.m. CST


    by fettitular

    Very good point kenny! I think you hit the nail on the head. That would definitely explain the weird animosity and jealous vibe they give off when they're ranting and raving about him...

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:48 a.m. CST

    Not funny

    by Golden_Ux

    Anyone who thinks this review is funny must get a life. I could only cope with 5 minutes of this guys voice, if the material was humerous maybe I would've lasted the full slog. I can't believe people still think it's funny to bash the prequels. The films were poor, just let it go. I'm as disappointed as the next Star Wars geek but come on, releasing a 90 minute review about a film that came out 5 years ago? It's not even a review anyway it's just a scraping at the barrel trying to muster original jokes to throw at George Lucas. If you're gonna take the piss let's see some more Crystal Skullribbing, watched it for the 1st time yesterday after I saw it on release day in the cinema and it's one of the worst big budget films ever made.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 11 a.m. CST

    My 2 cents in this conversation

    by Sprinky

    I don't agree with the "GL raped my childhood". I had a happy childhood and there are far more worse things in live than GL ruining that. But i don't enjoy the Prequels. As some pointed out there are some nice scenes in each prequel movie. But they are far and wide apart and i end up fastforwarding every time. As a bigger picture i understood where Lucas was going but the way the whole plot infolded read: how and why the empire came to power and the rise of Vader was mediocre at best. Everyone says ROTS was the best of the Prequels. That maybe so but the impact of it could've been even greater in someone elses hands. For instance, I was dissapointed Plinkett didn't touch on the Padme thing in ROTS. Did she really have to die? She received the Force choke from her husband but dies of a broken heart?? Uh?? She gives birth to 2 healthy babies but essentially refuses to live in contrast to the 2 movies before where we are shown that she's a strong gal and is willing to fight. So why did she die?? Convenient storytelling?? Why is this so important? Because the whole thing started with Anakin's dream losing her and turning to the dark side would help him save her?? Uhh what?? Most of the time the Prequel saga feels to me like it's a one long April fool's joke from Lucas. As simplistic and flawed the Originals have this straightforwardness to them where most of the time do what we expect them to do. You don't have to be Einstein to understand them and they're relatable to you and me.. much more than the Prequels ever would.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 11:10 a.m. CST

    You have to feel sorry for...

    by Dancingforever

    The people still defending these movies. They come off like roobs on the back end of a Ponzi scheme, still defending the con man till the end telling everyone else they just don't understand. Plinkett has done the impossible and given us something positive to take away from the prequals. To me, the most fascinating moment was after the crew, including Lucas, sets in a dark room reacting to the first viewing of TPM. There is a stunned silence as everyone seems to be waiting for the reaction from Lucas, to see if maybe they all can finally admit the emperor has no clothes. Lucas manages to say, "Maybe I went to far..." Indeed George, indeed. I also find it beyond hilarious that so far, the biggest defense anyone here has mounted against Pinkett is....his review of Star Trek blows. Wow, I guess that really shuts down his opinion of the PT eh?

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST

    Darth Kong!!

    by maxjohnson1971

    You had me worried there for a minute!! (Unless you are a chick that is!) Yeah, Stacey Keach as a weed smoking lizard is way scarier. Not to mention Reubens as the hamburger guy complaining that Springsteen fucked it all up. I could take care of most of the bad guys in the prequels with a battery and some reverse charges. Keach as a pot smoking lizard? Forget it.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:27 p.m. CST

    Second that Darth Kong...

    by maxjohnson1971

    T2 = greatest action movie ever. T3 = least needed third installment ever. I'd love to see MST3K (yeah, I know they aren't around anymore. I'll take Cinematic Titanic or Rifftrax) send up T3. Or Predators as well. What a POS that was. And my hopes were so high.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 12:43 p.m. CST

    Plinkett's STAR TREK vs. his Prequels reviews

    by Ringwearer9

    In his Prequel reviews, he constantly harps on how Lucas didn't understand how to make the story interesting, exciting. In his STAR TREK review, he praised it for managine to at least pay attention to making the movie SUPERFICIALLY interesting. He points out that STAR TREK managed to do that right, and, in fact, that STAR TREK deliberately aped the feeling of Space Fantasy of the original STAR WARS. So he praises STAR TREK for being superficially entertaining in a Star Warsy manner, while bashing the Prequels for FAILING to be entertaining in a Star Warsy manner. Plinkett, in his Star Trek review, also savages the film for being very un-Trek-like, and for pandering to homophobes by making sure every character expresses their heterosexuality clearly. But the main point is, there is no contradiction between the two reviews.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:01 p.m. CST

    If he reviewed Empire braindrain...

    by Rebel Scumb

    It would probably be positive, because like 99% of the world he clearly loves that movie. What exactly would he dig into? The well paced story, the charming characters, the FX that still hold up well over 30 years later, the sweeping operatic score, the memorable quotable lines, the unique ending, the great revelation that shocked an entire generation of movie-goers, the muppet that gives an oscar caliber performance, the riveting action, the quiet character moments, rich atmosphere created by the cinematography and sound design, the careful classy directing? Or are you one of those people who think Empire is "the boring one"?

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:06 p.m. CST

    Some of you Lucas defenders are ridiculous.

    by Lucasblows

    George could put out a movie of himself donkey punching your mom, slap a Star Wars logo on it and, not only will you love it, but you'll run out and buy the action figure as well. It's sad really.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:08 p.m. CST

    Mr. Plinkett is a weird bird

    by AsimovLives

    He spent a whole video which amounts to nothing but an evisceration and a proof of the wrongness and dumbness of Jar Jar Abrams' SHIT TREK, and in the end he says he likes it and it's good because of no particular reason whatsoever. Who understands this dude?

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:10 p.m. CST

    The Prequels suck so I'll watch 6 hours of Youtube Reviews about it

    by BlacksOnBlondes

    or make them for that matter.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:11 p.m. CST

    Prequels don't work because "we already know what happens'...

    by Rebel Scumb

    Is a really weak arguement. By that rationale, nobody would ever watch the same movie twice. Or bother with any movie that has a sequel. "Hmmm, they made like 20 of these james bond movies. So I know he doesn't die in the first one... probably no point in watching them" With most movies, especially popcorn/adventure films. We "know" what is going to happen anyways, if only on a subconscious level, that the hero will face adversity, but in the end will most likely defeat the antagonist and get the girl, or achieve whatever goal they set out to achieve, and hopefully evolve as a character a little along the way. Its the "how" and "why" that make it interesting. Likewise no one would see historical films if the whole "we already know what happens" arguement . People were still invested in '127 hours' 'titantic' 'apollo 13' 'braveheart' (to name just a few popular examples, regardless of any of those films quality). There isn't any reason a prequel can't be done well. TV shows, books, comics, movies etc all utilize flashbacks to flesh out the backstories of their characters, and they are often the most compelling parts of their given stories. A flashback and a prequel are pretty much the same thing with a different name. Now if you want to argue, as Plinket actually did at one point, that the story of the prequels is just not a story that really needed to be told, and everything we needed to know about the backstory of Anakin/Vader + Obi-wan was already summed up in the originals effectively. That is entirely valid. In hindsight I would agree that starwars was probably best left as it was, as a trilogy, with a rich backstory that we learn the same way Luke (our surrogate) does. As a story passed down to him in bits and pieces. BUT, if prequels were to be made of episodes 1,2,3, they certainly could have been done much better. Regardless of whether or not we knew who was going to live or die. Hell, on that note, every starwars movie has been a prequel for me, since I saw JEDI first, then Empire, and not ANH until a few years later. And I still loved those movies as a kid, and EMPIRE was also the movie that inspired me to get into filmmaking, and is STILL my all time favorite movie.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:15 p.m. CST

    You all do realize that Plinkett is a character right?

    by Rebel Scumb

    I keep hearing people complain about his voice and personality as though he's a real person. You do realize he's playing a character. Just like Charlie Chaplin is not really 'the tramp'. His Palpatine impressions are pretty awesome, some I'm presuming who ever plinket really is he's good at doing impressions and voices. But thats clearly not his real voice. I'm surprised at how many people seem not to grasp this. If anything the persona is in place to make fun of basement dwelling talkbackers.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:21 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Exactly. Infact he even points out that he thinks JJ Abrams should of made the starwars prequels instead of star trek. Also in his ROTS review he points out that he would happily overlook all the glaring plot holes if at least the characters were engaging and likeable and the story could draw him in. Which is exactly true. We're all willing to suspend our disbelief for all sorts of absurd things in movies IF the movie gives us a compelling reason to do so. and the main way to do that is make us care about the characters and their struggle. I loved The Dark Knight, but I'll be the first to admit the plot of that movie often makes no sense under any level of serious analysis. But that movie offered me so much in the way of entertainment and a story and characters that I could get wrapped up in, that I don't really care how the Joker put those bombs in the hospital, or who the '5 dead, 2 of them cops' are suppose to be.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:42 p.m. CST

    This is so good...

    by ufoclub1977

    It takes a lot of energy to put these many cultural/visual/audio "rimshot" jokes into a l-o-n-g piece but still retain the character concept (love the lazy slow voice, the "set", the personal details) and also be bitingly critical. This is great stuff. And it is new in my opinion. It's not like a normal movie review... this is a character performance piece that happens to also be a movie critique that touches on a lot more than just the movie. It's kind of like coming form the Kevin Smith mode... but more radical because it's using the DIY blog + bootleg montage type of vibe. And the constructed funny moments are... funny. I like the use of silence... lol

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:44 p.m. CST

    If he did one I'd watch it

    by Rebel Scumb

    I'm not sure how easy it is to get much comedy out of just pointing out that a masterpiece is a masterpiece. I think its clear from his 3 star wars reviews, and his 5 star trek reviews though that when he touches on the classic 3 sw and classic 6 st, that he admires them quite a bit. His bit in the abrams st review showing the specture of star trek, with the motion picture on one (cerebral and boring) and JJ abrams trek at the other end (dumb but entertaining) and everything else falling in the middle, was pretty inspired. The notice that star trek can either work as dumb entertainment, or thought provoking intelligent scifi, but just not both at the same time was an interesting thesis. And the TNG movies clearly fall right in the middle of that spectrum of neither being intelligent enough to overlook sluggish pacing, or entertaining enough to overlook dumber elements of the plot. Personally I'd rather see the transformers or pirates movies get reviewed as I think a lot of good comedy could come from that. and they are also big budget franchises, that have made a ton of money, but are pretty dumb overall. Hell, I'm a big fan of LOST, and I actually really liked the finale (my only substancial issues with the show, are with season 5) but I would love to see him tackle that, just because there's a lot to work with, And for me LOST fits into the same area as Star Trek (as a franchise) for me, in that its something I love, and I think highly of, but I do think it is ripe with reasons to make of it.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:47 p.m. CST

    It's relatively easy to pull a Plinkett

    by AsimovLives

    and you can turn every good movie into a piece of crap following Plinkett's tactics. Literally anything.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:47 p.m. CST

    agreed ufoclub1977

    by Rebel Scumb

    The citizen Kane shot by shot comparison alone must of taken a great deal of effort to put together the sitting on couches, one person gets up, or two people walking, then stops montage is also really great.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:50 p.m. CST

    rebel scumb

    by AsimovLives

    Probably idiots thibnk that ST:TMP is cerebral but boring. However, people with a bit of a brain in them can find that movie engagging and entertaining. Meanwhile, people need to engage his inner retard to find any entertainment "value" in Jar Jar Abrams SHIT TREK.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 1:55 p.m. CST

    "make fun of basement dwelling talkbackers"

    by Marduk


  • Jan. 2, 2011, 2:02 p.m. CST

    There needs to be a Plinkett set of reviews for...

    by ufoclub1977

    The 2nd and 3rd Pirates of the Caribbean movies... those completely suffer from plots that make no dramatic or storytelling sense in such a complicated way that it's like watching some giant, multi-limbed, naked emperor march by while around you, the entire town applauds his wonderful new robes!

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 2:02 p.m. CST

    AICN Extra Stuff User Script issues?

    by SK229

    Anyone else having problems where it stops reformatting the TB's after a certain point on the page and you lose the white background in the TB box... so that the text is just floating against the ID4 background? Hope I'm not the only one, this script is the only thing making the site bearable anymore. Nothing in this 'update' has made the site better... only installing the user script did that for me.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 2:13 p.m. CST

    Does Lucas really care?

    by Sunhawk7

    I think he does, but his total lack of energy in directing live action made me question it too. Sure, the CGI is where it's at, but if you don't care about the characters it's all meaningless when you cut to the CGI action. When I think of the passion this man brought to American Graffiti and Star Wars, and then to see him at work on the prequels is depressing. Plinkett may be making fun of him, but unfortunately, he's right about a lot of things that aren't so funny. I noticed this myself. Lucas shoots like he's covering a soap opera. He spends way too much time showing characters sitting around talking than actually carrying the narrative in a compelling manner. And his editing has never been good. This was talked about by many people who saw his first cut of Star Wars. Luckily Marcia came in and saved his bacon. But the thing about the prequels that has stuck with me is exactly what Plinkett says. I was left not carrying about a single character. There are great lessons to be learned here, but very few people are going to listen.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 2:28 p.m. CST


    by Marduk

    The Pirates of the Caribbean series was never meant to be understood. That is the primary key to its enduring popularity.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 2:35 p.m. CST


    by SK229

    I don't think he went light on Abrams Trek, I think he presented a well balanced opinion that gave the movie props for at least managing to be entertaining to a wide swath of the audience (what was needed to revive the movies, I guess) and being somewhat coherent as well as having decent performances. I mean... I liked the movie the first time I saw it, but I've never been a big Star Trek fan. After going back and seeing it again recently, I found that it felt more like dumbed down studio trash than I remembered. I also hated the 'hip' vibe that oozes from everything J.J. gets his hands on. I actually understand where you are coming from with your intense hatred of what Abrams did. I largely agree with all of the vile you spew at Abrams for everything else he does as well. HOWEVER... I'll give it at least a few points over the prequels, which are fucking horrid. I think Plinkett is, in a sly way, saying that what Abrams did is not really Star Trek. Do I think he could have used the same prequel sledgehammer when saying this about Abrams Trek? Yes, I do. Do I think any of this invalidates his prequel critiques? No motherfucking way. And I'm sorry, I don't buy at all that you can do the same to any movie. Plinkett DOES give the prequels credit in the very, very few areas in which it deserves it, but he says the movie fails largely because of three things... first and foremost #1 - Lack of compelling, interesting characters that the audience can relate to and care about. He says over and over again that a lot can be forgiven in a movie if we just care about the characters and what happens to them. This criticism is beyond reproach regarding the prequels, imho. Again and again and again he solidifies his arguments, such as the section in the TPM review where he asks people to describe the OT characters followed up by them doing the same for the PT characters. #2 - Overuse of FX and CGI. Many say that he's anti-CGI, but I don't see that at all. I'd say he's against the use of it in place of story or just throwing a shit-ton of FX on the screen to make it seem interesting and 'busy' but really there's nothing going on and when there is, nobody can tell what the fuck is going on anyway. Had Return of the Jedi been one of the prequels and that graceful, awesome, beautiful shot of the Falcon joining the Rebel Fleet been done in CGI, I believe he would be fair and heap praise upon it. #3 - The films dialogue scenes are boring, horribly acted, and unimaginatively shot. This is some of the most damning criticism that RLM has leveled at Lucas and I'm glad it waited until this last installment. He provides MANY examples from MANY different movies wherein the framing, juxtaposition and size of objects/people in the frame help to tell the story. Then you see the prequels and it's... people on a couch... wide and then go into the shot, reverse shot coverage. It's as though Lucas just gave the fuck up whenever it came to dialogue scenes and felt that he only needed to have characters deliver the lines in order to get the information across that would propel us into the next gigantic CGI set piece. Look... if you enjoy these movies, I don't want to rain on your parade... but I think Plinkett's critiques are about 80-90% valid criticisms. The only time I don't think it's invalid is when he goes too far into the plot holes, because that is the one area where I think you are right and that one can pick apart any movie in the same manner. Great movies can have glaring plot holes, but they make up for it with bravura filmmaking, interesting characters, and consistency of tone. This doesn't change the fact that the prequels have plot holes that are not only holes, they actually don't make any sense even on a surface level of following the story. The opening space battle and fight with Grievous that he savagely tears apart in Sith is a perfect example. There are no clear motivations, constant shifts in tone, we have no clue what the fuck any of these people want or why we should care... it's a clusterfuck of epic proportions. While people will say you can pick apart a movie like TDK in the same way, we're never unsure of what The Joker wants, where his allegiance lies, and that he'll do anything he can to fuck with the head of Batman and the people of Gotham. So while you can go, "But how can The Joker be all-seeing, all-knowing, etc.," it's a valid criticism of the actual plot, but when you're watching the movie, the consistency of tone, excellent performances, and interesting, GOAL DRIVEN (and they're goals we're aware of) characters make up for plot inconsistencies. While it may be dubious that such events could take place in the real world, we always know WHY they're taking place and what the motivations are behind them as well as where the characters are at in relation to one another. Anyway, that's my two cents... I'm glad he finished up his prequel critiques, and I'm happy that in the last two years, I've been able to go back and still see what I loved about the originals.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 2:51 p.m. CST

    so really...

    by ufoclub1977

    Who is Plinkett? How do you contact him?

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 3:06 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Well Plinkett cites ST:TMP as his favorite of 11 movies. And that it is the most like the old show of any of the films. I think its a good movie, and entertaining. But it IS slow. Thats part of its charm. and personally I like things that take their time to unwind. But objectively speaking, most of what makes TMP long/slow is the presentation, not the content. They went for a 2001: a space odyssey (another great) type tone to the movie. But that same script could of been made into a 90 minute movie without losing any of the content. The JJ abrams trek, is a fun movie. Not particularly bright, but its fun, moves at a good pace, likeable characters. They're different movies, and good for different reasons. And both are to the extreme end of the specture of what science fiction movies often fall into.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 3:13 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Thanks for restoring my faith that there are people still out there who can provided a thoughtful, polite response, and discuss their views without resorting to insults, pointless swearing or rape metaphors, while (and here might be the rarest of all) ACTUALLY addressing the other persons points, instead of just giving a blanket retort of utter disagreement as though you never read the other comment in the first place. Kudos.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 3:42 p.m. CST


    by elsewhere

    Wins the talkback. Congrats sir.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 3:42 p.m. CST

    He said in his JJ ST review that it is his favorite

    by Rebel Scumb

    But also listed one of the things that he liked about it is he can start watching it, then go drop his daughter off at school, pick up his laundry and groceries, then come back and the same scene is still going.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 3:43 p.m. CST

    Shut up Ryan

    by elsewhere


  • Jan. 2, 2011, 3:46 p.m. CST

    Thanks Rebel Scum...

    by SK229

    for noticing the civil/informed tone of my rebuttal. I came back to post something else, though... Ya know, something about this site just isn't like it used to be, and I don't just mean the technical issues. I still love the TB's and its inhabitants, but I don't know... I think many of us are getting this overall feeling that the people running the site are EXTREMELY LAZY, simply do not give a fuck, 100% ignore criticisms, and never own up to doing anything wrong. I think it's actually starting to have an effect on the traffic, something I and many others have been predicting for a while (but was, again, ignored). I'd love to see them turn it around, but I don't think it's going to cleanse the palette of the bad taste this whole thing has left. My favorite piece of talkbacking on this subject is actually in the Patton Oswalt story and it's the obit written by Xiphos (I think) and reposted by Stuntcock_Mike. I also like Six Demon Bag's TB 'last post'. Both sum it all up pretty well I think.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 3:47 p.m. CST

    I'll give Plinkett this...

    by ISmith70

    His reviews are the most cogent arguments I've heard - moreso than on any talkback I've seen here or anywhere else - about why he thinks the prequels are bad. That having been said however, I think he's still a guy who overanalyzes and overthinks things and has far too much time on his hands. Like someone else here said, if you don't like the movies, you don't like them. Fine. They're probably not for you. And even though I found his review interesting, it still doesn't change my mind about the prequels. I still enjoy them in spite of whatever flaws they may have. Why? Simply put, it's because I'm a fan of Star Wars. To me, to be a fan of something means you embrace it warts and all. Too many times I keep hearing that the prequels suck. To a lesser extent I've also heard that A New Hope and ROTJ aren't that great either. The only one that everybody holds up as the best Star Wars film (and rightly so) is Empire. But if there are a total of six Star Wars films - and out of them only one you consider to be any good - then I'm sorry, but you have no business being a Star Wars fan. I'll concede that Lucas isn't a very good director; and that like Plinkett said, he favors controlled environments and doesn't direct actors very well. What I'm surprised at, though, is that he acts like he discovered this fairly recently when Lucas has been on record for decades having said that he always wanted complete control from start to finish. It's pretty much borne out whenever he talked about his experiences filming in Tunisia and nothing worked right and the weather was giving him problems. It's why he relinquished directing to Irvin Kirshner and Richard Marquand and left the screenwriting to Lawrence Kasdan for the other two sequels. Lucas has said before that if he had his way, he would have done all three movies himself. All the technological innovations he's pioneered over the years were to that end. What's in the prequels was the logical result of that. Also, Lucas has never been about subtlety, which again is why the stories in the prequels feel so simplistic. To him, Star Wars had always been intended to be a modern-day version of the Saturday matinee serials he watched as a kid, which were also very simplistic. So for someone to say that only a two-year-old would find them entertaining, or that these movies were made for kids (which they weren't, really) is disingenuous. He paints everything with a broad brush. And either you get with that and go along with it, or you don't. Yeah, on examination, Palpatine's machinactions seem like one big Xanatos gambit, but if you actually pay attention (and have at least seen Genndy Tartakovsky's Clone Wars series), it does make sense if you know anything about the Sith and how they operate. Essentially, his long range goal was to 1) Get control of the Senate and 2) Get Anakin as his apprentice (And no, Dooku didn't know or have any say. If you were going to fire your old suboordinate for someone who was younger and more capable, would you tell them?) And he had the leaders of the Separatist Army gather at Mustafar so Vader could kill them because they were loose ends and had served their purpose. The grand purpose of the Clone Wars basically to kill as many Jedi as possible, so that when they finally did get wise to him, there wouldn't have been enough of them to mount an effective resistance At the same time he would establish his own personal army in the clone troops (which were later supplanted by recruits and conscripts). As to Plinkett's assertion that the Senate could have invoked powers to curb Palpatine's ambitions, he assumes the Senate in the SW universe works exactly the same way ours does, which apparently it doesn't. Besides, it was already established that the Senate had become corrupt, selfish and indifferent by the the time the prequels started. Anyway back to my point. The thing is, for all the talk Lucas had of studying Joseph Campbell, Star Wars was meant to be nothing more than light entertainment. If you're angry at him or the prequels, then you're attaching greater meaning or significance to Star Wars than it merits. I personally never saw Star Wars as something to base my life around. And I realized a long time ago that George Lucas was a man who had faults just like the rest of us. Could the prequels have been better? Possibly. But what's done is done. On the whole, for what they are, I think they're fine. That's my two cents on the whole matter.

  • In your opinion, but I don't think thats a universal truth. To me being a fan is enjoying something, but wanting it to be the best it can be, and has proven itself to be in the past. Holding it to the standards it sets for itself I like star trek. I grew up watching TNG, and loved deep space 9. But I think Voyager is pretty terrible. I didn't buy the voyager dvds just because I own the TNG and DS9 ones. I won't accept star trek just because its star trek. I want GOOD star trek. I loved wrath of khan, but hated Nemesis. Likewise, I love all 3 original star wars. And of the prequels I think phantom menace is by far the best. It has its share of flaws, but at least its a real movie, with a story, and an arc. AotC is the worst in my books, and RotC isn't much better. They're just collections of scenes. But enough has been said about their flaws already in this thread. My point is, that its not wrong to hold the things we love to some standard. I love the Pixar movies, I think 9 out of 10 of them are great. It doesn't mean I'm going to rush out and see Cars 2, just because I think UP is a masterpiece.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 4:06 p.m. CST

    Actually Braindrain no it doesn't.

    by Smashing

    It proves he understands cinema, something you've managed not to prove endlessly well in this thread.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 4:20 p.m. CST

    I respect your opinion, rebel scumb

    by ISmith70

    Obviously we all have different tastes and hold things to different standards. For me, I don't expect the Star Wars movies to be anything but entertaining. And by and large they all are. If I want to watch a deep,thoughtful, complex movie, I'll go watch something like Inception. I don't even consider the Star Wars movies to be in the same league as other, more serious Science Fiction films. If they were food, the Star Wars movies would be cheeseburgers while Inception would be a filet mignon. Obviously, you hold the Star Wars movies to a much higher standard than I do. Which is fine Like I said earlier, I never thought of them as anything more than fun adventure stories. So obviously I wasn't as disappointed in the prequels like some others were. That's all I'm saying.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 4:46 p.m. CST

    Fair enough ismith70

    by Rebel Scumb

    I respect your opinion to. And I do agree with you to an extent. I don't see the star wars movies as high art, Empire is my favorite film because of nostalgic reasons, where as I can cite "better" films. But I do think, for what they are, ANH and ESB are "perfect" movies, in terms of what they are trying to be. As plinkett says its not fair to compare RotS to Citizen Kane. But just using another example, I look at it like comparing one of the better Pixar movies to say... pokemon. Both are kids movies, and both are meant to be a bit of animated fun to excite kids. And for the most part, probably both achieve this with their intended audience. A cheeseburger is a cheeseburger. But I still think there's a difference between a homemade cheeseburger my dad would make on the barbeque with real ground beef from the store, and a cheap macdonald's happy meal. I'm not saying everything has to be gourmet (this metaphor is making me hungry) but I think if we aim high, and hold our standards high, then even if the results all short, they'll end up higher then if we aim low. Thats just my personal philosophy. If it was pirates of the caribean part 4, I wouldn't care. But star wars defined a whole style of movie, and is an iconic part of popculture. Lucas waited 20 years to make the second trilogy, and loads of time to either write a good script himself (something he's proven with american graffitti and starwars) he is, or at least was capable of doing. Or highering someone else to do so, something he has also proven capable of doing. Its not that I want the films to be something they're not, but it just feels like with even a shred of more effort and common sense they could of been expentially better. And thats not a lot to ask from a movie that a) literally millions of people around the world were eager to see and b)for a movie that was 100% guarenteed to be financially successful. Even just the few little suggestions plinket makes, as to alternate ways the films could of gone, are not groundbreakingly different, but are just enough to nudge the movies in a direction that would of pleased many of the people who were dissappointed, but still kept everyone who liked them happy. Suggestions like: -don't have quigon, give his part to obi-wan to develop the friendship in part 1. -make anakin a likeable, good, heroic guy, so his fall to evil is an actual shift, instead of going from creepy jerk to slightly more evil then he already was -make the stormtrooper recruits, have the clones be the threat instead of droids, and just make them some sort of scary alien clone army etc right off the bat, the trilogy would be 10x better with just those minor changes. Anyways, you get the point. and to be fair, I do enjoy the movies on the 'there's aliens and robots shooting lasers at each other level' I jsut think that ultimately the original films true achievement is its lovable memorable heros and villians, and the prequels did not deliver any of those, and managed to take a few great established characters like Obi-wan and Yoda, and turn them into complete douche bags.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 5:31 p.m. CST


    by JediWuddayaknow

    The difference between RLM and everyone else attempting these reviews, joke or not, is that he knows how to present them. He's made his visually appealing, and they are VERY well polished. It's not JUST some nerd ranting into his computer mic throwing a few pictures up here and there. And while I agree the whole Plinkett character being some crazy homicidal maniac is annoying, his are actually funny to people other than himself. Everything else comes off as spiteful and AT him rather than honest opinion of these movies. I made it through the first half of your first video before I got completely bored, and then didn't bother checking out the others, but somehow, I doubt you picked up any sort of production value. And to be clear, while I agree with pretty much everything the RLM reviews have said, I realize they're supposed to be satirical to a certain point. It's entertainment and as such, it does it's job. But of course, this is AICN so there HAS to be the pretentious assholes who think they're smarter and have better opinions than everyone else, so they'll proclaim that we're sheep or some bullshit for enjoying these funny little reviews. And I love you fucking tools screaming "WHO CARES?" like you have the fucking pulse of pop culture and everyone else is just some out of touch asshole. Who cares? Judging from the amount of people watching his reviews? A whole FUCKLOAD of people care, you dismissive, smug cunts. And you people trying to dismiss these reviews with the tired, pointless, argument of "YOU make something like ROTS better!" Shut your retarded mouths. His JOB, the thing that he was given MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of dollars to do...he fucking failed at for a HUGE amount of his audience. If you're willing to settle for the shit that the prequels turned out to be, that's just fine, but I, and a HUGE segment of fans expected more after waiting so God damned long. Pretend George Lucas is a god, or whatever, but be prepared to defend WHY you think so when asked. I have yet to see anyone effectively come back at these reviews with ANYTHING to prove him wrong. Just half-assed attempts at hate-fucking the Original Trilogy out of spite.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 5:51 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Well put. And RLM is obviously poking fun at itself within the reviews themselves. With Plinket constantly getting character and actor names wrong (another thing a lot of people on here don't seem to grasp is intentional). Obviously he knows its Ewan McGregor and not Ewan Macdonald. He's doing this as a wink wink nudge nudge of 'okay gang lets try and have fun here' and I think the other thing that saves these reviews from pretention.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 5:59 p.m. CST

    The ending where Luke blows up the Prequels was genius!

    by Orionsangels

    I'm over defending the prequels. I realized over time I was defending them as a way to defend Star Wars as a whole, but there's no reason to do that. So the prequels suck! It's kind a sad it turned out that way, but aw well. No one can away from me the original Trilogy. It forever lives in my heart and soul. No one can take that away! Not even the shitiest of SW prequels. So those that convinced themselves the prequels were good. Wake up and realize you're only fooling yourself.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 6:01 p.m. CST

    Scumb does not exist in this dojo

    by Cobra--Kai

    "And of the prequels I think phantom menace is by far the best. It has its share of flaws, but at least its a real movie, with a story, and an arc. AotC is the worst in my books, and RotC isn't much better."<p> My thoughts exactly.<p> Rebel, you're making some smart posts in this thread. I have to ask out of curiosity tho why scumb with a b?

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 6:08 p.m. CST

    Thanks Cobra-Kai

    by Rebel Scumb

    The 'b' in the scum is a very old joke between me and my brother. Its not particularly interesting or amusing except to him and me, but basically it goes back to the old comicbooks we made when were kids. And there was one where an asshole billionaire ceo villian type says to one of his underlings whose failed him 'I won't give you a crumb, scumb", before killing him. It was just a 10 year old spelling error, because we wanted the line to rhyhm. But for some reason we always found it amusing in hindsight. Then back when the prequels were coming out, my handle on was rebel scum, but it had been taken already, so I added the 'b' as an inside joke. I started my aicn account around the same time, but for some reason the talkback would never show my posts. So I didn't bother trying again until about a month ago, when some article (I don't even remember what) I felt I really needed to comment on. and alas, like all bad habits it continued from there.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 6:24 p.m. CST

    TPM also had a good main character in Qui-gon

    by Rebel Scumb

    Something the other prequels lacked. The only problem with quigon is that he never should of existed in the first place. Or he should of been the same character and just called Obi-wan. People get caught up in bashing TPM because of easy targets like Jake Lloyd and Jarjar. And yet I don't either is the real problem with the movie. Jar jar, for all of his faults, at least has an arc. Something obi-wan never had in THREE movies! And No matter who they cast as anakin, it wouldn't overcome the fundemental flaw of making Anakin so young. And not even just because kids are annoying, or it feels "unstarwarsy', but because it prevents the first film from establishing the friendship between Obi-wan and Anakin the way Han and Luke were so effectively set up in ANH. Old Ben: "and he was a good friend" That should of been TPM. Paying off that line. A good fun adventure with these two budies, getting in and out of trouble (ala luke and han on the deathstar). The other thing having Anakin being about 17-18 in TPM would of done was get a lot of the romance out of the way in the first film (and obviously in a better way then it was done in AotC). I also think that if Lucas' missed a great oppurtunity right under his nose. If he wanted to have a CGI alien comic relief character in the TPM, he should of had it be Watto. Watto was really beautifully realized in cgi, so much so that he looks like a muppet in a few scenes. His few little quips with Quigon, although far from the greatest writing, or acting in the history of cinema, do reflect a unique occurance in the prequels, of a "han solo type" character who is scruffy and corrupt and calls the jedi on all their aloof snootiness. If Watto or some variation of him had been the 'chewbacca' character of the prequels, I think Lucas, or more likely a better writer could of mined some comedy gold out of him sniping back and forth with Obi-wan. Not fart jokes and slapstick. But some witty back and forth. Just my 2 cents.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 6:27 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    I didn't claim it was interesting or cool. Its about as inconsequential a bit of information as you could ask for, be he asked why the 'b' and I believe in being honest, regardless of how it reflects on me.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 8:07 p.m. CST

    At least he touched on that Yoda scene

    by Chief Joseph

    at the end. So fucking pointless and just got a WTF reaction from 99% of the audience. It was George's sad attempt to put a band-aid over the "why didn't Qui-Gon disappear when he died?" plothole he dug himself in Ep.1. Well guess what fat-neck, nobody except hardcore nerds cares about that. And then George cut the scene about the formation of the Rebel Alliance to make room for this stupid scene.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 8:44 p.m. CST

    Excellent review by Plinkett

    by Hat Man

    Anyone thinking about writing should watch these Star Wars prequel reviews. All the jokes and whatnot besides, he sums up so well why these movies failed to satisfy fans as well as casual viewers. As an aspiring writer, I know how challenging it is to create characters that people will care about as well as plots etc. It is very easy to just say "Oh well this happens because of this bullshit reason, no one will notice how little thought I spent on that, they will be too excited by all the action sequences." So many people said that they hated the prequels, but they often couldn't articulate WHY they were so disappointed. I remember a docco about Australian Star Wars fans all waiting excitedly to see Ep 1 and the camera filming them leaving afterwards. They looked baffled, like they knew they should be wildly fulfilled but just felt tricked. Even just watching the small clips from the originals, I remember all the excitement and emotional investment that went with them. All the stuff in the prequels was just dead or laughable. The shot of Lucas obsessing over an Ep 1 background alien character's costume says it all really. Dude, WRITE your damn movie first!

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 8:55 p.m. CST

    its all about a good foundation

    by Rebel Scumb

    The way I look at it, a good script is like laying a solid foundation to a house. Without a good foundation, it won't matter if you have a 60" plasma screen tv in your living room, because it won't be worth shit if the whole house collaspes on you. And thats certainly not exclusive to star wars, but any movie where the filmmakers focus more on the icing then the cake. But hey, some people would eat just icing if they could, so what do I know.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 9:57 p.m. CST

    Too many people are under the false assumption that EVERYONE

    by Coughlins Laws

    hated the prequels. I think that's just not true. Yes, a large chunk of people that watched them hated them or at the very least were disappointed with them. However, according to rottentomatoes, imdb, and boxofficemojo, more critics and moviegoers liked the movies than disliked them. I agree, there was a lot of bad in these movies. <p>But to say there were no good parts or memorable parts to these movies? Really? I'd say all 3 of the prequels had better action scenes than anything in Jedi and all 3 prequels had better lightsaber battles than Episodes 4 and 6. I've seen Plinkett's first to reviews and agreed with alot of what he had to say. But I don't 100% agree with him on everything. He is WAYYYY to nitpicky. And alot of what he says is his personal opinions that not everyone agrees with.<p>As far as the whole beginning not making sense as a logical plan for Palpatine, how do you know? What if the whole thing was a test to see if Anakin really WAS as strong as everyone thought? If he wasn't and Dooku could still kick his ass, he would've stuck with Dooku. It's just like people deconstructing The Joker's plan in TDK being so convoluted. I believe he would've just rolled with whatever outcome happened. I really think some people look WAYYYY too hard into some of this shit...

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:17 p.m. CST


    by Chief Joseph

    Yeah, Vader's body didn't disappear either. Who cares, that's all I'm saying. Some guys on the internet made a big deal about Jedi disappearing and so George was forced to shoehorn in an awkward scene "explaining" force-ghosts and disappearing. He should have just left it for the EU guys to sort out, it was such a clunker of a coda/epilogue in the film.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:27 p.m. CST

    His Palpatine voice was really good.

    by Chief Joseph

    Amazingly spot-on, in fact. I'm sure this guy must be on George's "Banned from the Ranch" list like Moriarty, but he really should get over it and hire this guy to voice Palpatine in the cartoon and games.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:32 p.m. CST

    Lucasdefender, Cobra-kai, killik…

    by ufoclub1977

    Lucasdefender, Cobra-kai, killik… I believe you are all wrong on thinking you could apply his same scathing criteria to similarly rip apart a movie like Star Wars, Superman, Jaws, Close Encounters, or even the first Pirates of the Caribbean, The Matrix, District 9, The Ring, The Others, Black Swan, Conan the Barbarian, Excalibur, Star Trek II, ET, Poltergeist, Halloween, etc etc etc… He is basically applying the most basic critique in the most detailed manner… the script and dynamics of scene must hold up and function as an entertaining linear story. In other words it needs to make sense if you told the plot around a camp fire. Without any visuals. Does it still work? Is it still cool? Do you feel it? All of the above would still work. When a movie can;t work as campfire tale… then it really isn't working as a standard adventure/fantasy/horror film. The way he illustrates this with a moment by moment / element by element dissection is real actually quite intelligent. They should be showing this shit in film schools! And anyway, this is a fucking performance piece in the voice of a fictional character he has made, and I personally think it's hilarious* But if you just took his actual movie critique and shaved off all the funny bits, sick asides, and his "voice"… you would have a more constructive piece of filmmaking instruction than what most experience getting a university film production degree. If I were to write a script, I would make sure it could pass an imagined Plinkett reading. I think if a Lucas,or any studio, actually took to heart the basic gist of all this info and made a new fantasy movie that jumped these hurdles, we would have something great to become obsessed with. *The only parts I think are actually worthless are the little mini-movie scenes with woman trying to get him. That stuff sucks.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:39 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    I don't agree about the lightsaber battles being better in the prequels, for exactly the reason that Plinket points out in either his TPM or AotC review (I think it was TPM). There's nothing personal or emotional at stake in any of the battles. Its just a well staged fight, with no meat to it. Sure the Ben vs vader battle in ANH is a not particularly visual or dynamic, but the guts of the battle is there, we feel what is at stake for these two, and it has a big impact on the story, and lukes motivation going forward. Darth Maul, dooku and grievous are just such 1 dimensional nothing characters that we've had no time to get to know, or care about. The palpatine yoda battle is ridiculous and over the top, and beneath those two characters and how they were presented in the originals. Anakin and obi-wan would be good, except it goes on way too long, has all the ridiculous lava surfing stuff, and the tone of the scene is wrong. Obi-wan should be trying to turn anakin back to good, not just chastising which is all he's done since the first film anyways. Plus since they botched up setting up the friendship before hand anyways, there's no sense of impact of what is lost between them. Compare that to the thought of Luke and Han at each others throats, and think about how earth shattering that would of been. And the mace palpatine battle is just all around bad, the worst of the sage I think.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:47 p.m. CST

    this guy is right on the money...they are bad

    by FleshMachine

    sure you can poke fun at eps 4-5-6 (esp 6) but 1-2-3 are TOTALLY different movies....plots that make no sense, terrible acting (hamill's luke is oscar worthy in comparison) THE WORST EDITING EVER! just awful editing. they got worse and worse. i actually thought the titles were the best thing about them. lucas fucked up so bad....the original films meant a lot to people (like me) thats why we are STILL AND FOREVER SADDENED!

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:48 p.m. CST

    forever saddened about the prequels.

    by FleshMachine

    i will rue them when i am old.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:49 p.m. CST

    i wish that somehow somehwhere some fan filmmakers

    by HadWoodenTeethChasedMobyDick

    will try to make a better prequel that sums up what everyone wants in the story and puts it up on the internet.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:49 p.m. CST

    better action? who cares! no heart, no drama.

    by FleshMachine

    action without drama is nothing.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:51 p.m. CST

    TPM is best (even tho bad) cuz it only went downhill after...

    by FleshMachine

    PM holds up best from that standpoint.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:53 p.m. CST

    D.Maul should have had 3 movie arc: a pre-vader.

    by FleshMachine

    but no..lucas made disposable villains.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 10:55 p.m. CST

    OT were movies EVERYONE liked: PT was for little kids

    by FleshMachine

    and what do they know? but even most kids i know dont like them much.

  • Jan. 2, 2011, 11:02 p.m. CST

    Fleshmachine... on Darth Maul...

    by ufoclub1977

    Damn straight, that was one great character that deserved a 3 movie arc... a serious villian that was cool and had potential. Damn. Me and my friends were onto that lost possibility before Clones had even come out. Compared to the boredom fest/dead dynamics of the robot guy who wielded four sabres... or even Boba Fett, Maul was so much more interesting and mythical.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:03 a.m. CST


    by FleshMachine

    yep...i expected him to come back half mechanical in pt2...healed and rebuilt by the emperor... it would have been perfect to foreshadowing of what would become of anakin. then maybe have anakin kill him and replace him as a sith. but nope.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 3:05 a.m. CST

    One of the things I will never forget...

    by Dancingforever

    Is walking out of the TPM after seeing it opening day. A friend and I were on some wonderful LSD that was floating around and both of us thought we would pass out from laughing so hard. The look on Darth Maul's face when Obi Wan cut him in half sent me into hysterics I could hardly recover from. That being said, exiting the theatre, one could witness a somber silent crowd standing in the lobby, heads down, people almost weeping. It was like being at a wake, the only difference being people were wearing Star Wars shirts instead of suits. One rather lanky and tall fellow walked outside and threw his imitation light sabre violently toward a TPM poster hanging from the outer wall and yelled "Fuck Me." Now over ten years later we can all look back and discuss these things rationally, but at the time who could have known TPM would be the best of the PT, not the worst? After TPM all sound minded fans grossly lowered their expectations so the shock factor was gone. Not enough has been said or written about that first night, and the reaction had by all. For our generation it was equal to the Kennedy assassination in terms of having a broad wide reaching effect on millions of people who unexpectedly watched a horrific event take place that seemed impossible. On that day, Star Wars died. It took a shot to the head from Lucas himself. It had the effect of replacing Oswald with Joe Kennedy to compound the atrocity. I will never forget opening night of the TPM and the great sadness that permeated through multiple age groups and demographics as we all realized that whatever magic the OT held, was stone cold dead and gone. It was an amazingly empty feeling that to this day I can still remember vividly.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 6:44 a.m. CST

    Bravo Plinkett

    by Darth Thoth


  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:01 a.m. CST

    Darth Maul

    by Rebel Scumb

    An even better (in my opinion) approach was to have Maul, or someone like him be Sidious' master, not an apprentice (obviously they would have to be older then Maul was). Some crazy terrifying alien sith master who wants to take over the galaxy on a purely invade and conquor technique using his army of clone monster soldiers, with Sidious as his apprentice that he is using to stall the senate from acting. The sith master also has designs on replacing sidious with Anakin, but is too short sighted to see that Palpatine is much smarter than him, and is using his position as "senate spy" to create the empire, recruit the massive stormtrooper army, and seize total power. He tempts anakin the way vader tempted luke in ESB, but succeeds in bringing him before his master, the sith master expects Anakin to kill Palpatine, but instead he kills the master, and Palpatine becomes the new sith master, with anakin secured as his apprentice. End episode 2 that way, the clone wars are over, its seemingly a victory, but unknown to the jedi anakin has turned evil. The third film the jedi want the emperor to end his reign and disband the stormtrooper army, but instead he uses it to launch an attack on the jedi. They suffer a huge loss in the surprise attack in act 1 of the 3rd film. Then the rest of the movie is the jedi on the run, with Vader and the empire hunting them down. The way I see it, the prequels should be the reverse of the originals. The first film should be like ESB, bad guys win. The second film, the good guys win, and then the third film the bad guys win again. So the entire 6 film saga would go bad/good/bad/good/bad/good. So episode 2 should be more of a big epic climax ala ANH and ROTJ. Where ep1 and 3 should be more like ESB.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:10 a.m. CST

    the PT has been salvaged through fan edits

    by GavinVanDraven

    http://fanedit. org/10797/ this one of episode 3 is tightly paced, loses much of the bullshit and makes Anakin's turn much more believable. its amazing what can be cone by cutting useless scenes (R2D2 slapstick, buzzdroids for example) and keeping the bare bones. as for the rest of the films, browse the site and seek them out. the ones (ep 1 & 2) done by magnoliafan (who some say is kevin smith) and adigitalman (who did edits of 1,2 & 3) are very good cuts. magnoliafan's versions even go so far as to overdub Jar Jar as a smartass cocky mutherfucker, and changed most of the alien's dialouge into creature noises with subtitles (ala Jabba) and gave the films a completely different subtext. the trade federation dealing in slavery.... comes to mind, just for example. and with some deleted scenes such as the birth of the rebellion making it back into episode 3.... this is highly reccomended. so quit yer bitchin. sure Lucas failed, but when you remove the cheesy fluff and kiddie crap... theres some good film left behind

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:14 a.m. CST

    dancingforever, really? The JFK Assassination? Really?

    by Coughlins Laws

    I think you take movies a little too seriously...

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:19 a.m. CST

    the fan edits do make inprovements

    by Rebel Scumb

    I did one of ep2 and ep3, 2 especially is much better with some changes, since I think next to script, the next biggest problem with that movie was the editing. I love Ben Burtt for sound, but Lucas never should of let him edit the movie. But there are still a lot of things that the fan edits can't improve upon, because they require additions, and not subtractions. I have wondered if any fanfilmmakers would attempt to 'redo' the prequels. Its not entirely out of the question, given the production values some of them have, it would more just be the length of the finished product which would make it more of an undertaking.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:24 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Yeah lets not get carried away. A movie and a murder are 2 different things.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:27 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Next time you try for an argument, don't do it based on bullshit. Nobody will take you seriously.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:38 a.m. CST

    Well Lucas approves of fanfilms.

    by Rebel Scumb

    He's actually spoken pretty highly of them. And since you go so out of your way to disagree with everyone about everything, perhaps having people eat your shit is a fantasy of yours?

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:39 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    A balanced review of ABRAMS TREK is one whihc points everything which is wrong with that movie, which is everything. A balanced review doesn't mean that you have to find good things in it there aren't there. Balanced review means to criticise with something other then just "it rocks/it sucks". And if one is moderatly thoughful, then ABRAMS TREK falls apart imediatly, it can't stand the minimum amount of scrutiny. Mr Plinkett did pointed out many things wrong with ABRAMS TREK, stuff that even i couldn't be bothered to criticise and point out, like how long it takes to cross the Enterprise on a lift. I don't care about that, that's true nickpicking which in my mind serves no useful critical porpose. But he excused the movie on things which shouldn't be excusable, the thing that effectively makes a movie good or bad, and he dismissed it as "but so what, the movie is teh fuuun!!" So, in that regard, Mr Plinkett's review, however long it was, it still missed the mark. As for the prequels, while i have no love for any of those movies, and excluding THE PHAMTOM MENACE, methinks the lady doth protest too much. The criticisms leveled as the prequels i could make a similiar case agaisnt the oroiginal trilogy. Pulling a Plinkett, i could demolish the original movies as well with the same arguments. I wonder if, some years from now, the young kids who loved the prequel movies will one day arise and arive and say their piece of the subject and the movies will gain a new appreciation. It has happned woith THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, once the least loved movie of SW. Time is a funny thing, can make what was once gold into shit and what was once shit into gold. Or at least copper.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:45 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    You think the originals: lack memorable moments and imagry? Have unlikeable unrelatable characters? Can draw up direct visual comparisons of how the same basic blocking technique is used over and over again? That too many of the scenes are people sitting on couches? That there is no protagonist? That the characters don't evolve over the course of the story? Poor editing diminishes the effectiveness of the story? That the composition of the shots are lazy and lack visual flare? Is the only way to defend the prequels is to bash the originals?

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:49 a.m. CST

    rebel scumb

    by AsimovLives

    I think it's possible to make a 90 minute version of ST:TMP and not lose any of the plot points. but you would lose something which makes or breaks a movie: the mood. Too often today i see movies which are all about plot but forget to spend a minute establishing mood. And all of them suffer from that. ABRAMS TREK is a good example of that. If filmmakers and fans can't understand why a ST movie needs to build mood and why it's so important to the telling of it's tale, then they have nothing to do with ST. Abrams was a terrible choice to make a ST movie. If he wanted to make a space adventure movie, he should had created his own material, and do his own version of FELICITY IN SPACE, and not force it into an already existing franchise. I think many people mistake what's pacing in a movie. A good paced movie doesn't mean that the editing is super-fast. Good pacing has to do with the proper pacing that a story needs to tell it's story well. This is why 2001 works very well with a slow pacing style. That is good pacing, because it's completly apropos to the story being told. SW needed a faster pacing to tell it's story well. That's good pacing. To merely over-edit a movie to shit so it cna look flashy and fast is not good pacing in itself. ABRAMS TREK is one of the worst paced movies i ever had the displeasured to watch. It is a very fucking boring movie because it's so fast paced and nothing stays to jake a proper emotional impact that the end result is just pure boredom. Fast "pacing" of the ABRAMS TREK's kind is the clutch of filmmakers with no storytelling talent whatsoever.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:57 a.m. CST

    That's funny, saying someone has to "defend" the prequels...

    by Coughlins Laws

    Look, a movie can have flaws and you still like it. A movie doesn't have to be perfect in every way to like it. There are things I agree with Plinkett on in his reviews, but it doesn't make me hate all three prequels the same way he does. I can watch Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith and enjoy the movies. I can skip over scenes I don't like. I can agree that the normally decent actors in these movies gave stiff performances because of the bad directing too much reliance on green screens. However, it doesn't make me hate the movies. Sorry. I liked alot of what I saw and it makes me a little disappointed because of the missed opportunity...

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 10 a.m. CST

    I agree to an extent

    by Rebel Scumb

    But to be fair, nothing else in all of star trek is paced the way TMP is. Personally I agree that star trek should be slower paced and more thought provoking. its why I don't like any of the TNG movies, because they don't feel anything like the show, which was never action oriented and always involved a discussion of ethics to resolve the dilemma. But I think what plinket says in his JJ review, and I do agree with this is, the movie is a good action adventure film, its just doesn't feel like star trek. But his proposal that JJ should of made the star wars prequels is a pretty good suggestion, especially since he is a much bigger starwars geek then he is a star trek one, and the pace he applied to Star Trek would have fit nicely with star wars, which at its best has always had a wonderful brevity.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 10:07 a.m. CST

    Abrams Star Trek shouldn't even be called Star Trek

    by Coughlins Laws

    It has nothing to do with Star Trek, except for using the same names. It's one of those movies where I don't really remember anything about it after I left the theatre, except for the ridiculousness of Scotty beaming Kirk back aboard the Enterprise from Light Years away while in warp drive. If that was possible with such a young science, why does Starfleet even need Starships? I always thought the range was limited. But it seems to me with what they showed, you can apparently transport someone from Planet to Planet in different solar systems...

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 10:14 a.m. CST

    But thats the whole point

    by Rebel Scumb

    It was star trek made to appeal to people who are not trek nerds. And so to the general public beaming, and warp speed and all that is all the same technobabble. The movie was carefully calculated to appeal to as many people as possible.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 10:16 a.m. CST

    I know, but it wasn't Star Trek. They should've just made

    by Coughlins Laws

    a movie that didn't have the Star Trek name.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 10:20 a.m. CST

    Regarding the prequels...

    by AsimovLives

    ... i do believe the ladies doth protest too much. The original movies have been put unto such high standards that people forget they are not the begining and end of cinema as we know it. That's the problem that Sw has been sufferring since it became a popularity phenomenum back in 1977: people have been over-hyping it to impossible heights. And now the prequels, flawed movies they are, are now seen, in comparison, as this bunch of impossibly terrible movies. Which they aren't. The prequels aren't the terrible movies the geeks make them out to be, the same way non of the original SW movies are the perfect magnificent movies they make them out to be. And i can't say when finally a ballanced view about the whole of the SW saga movies, both the original and the prequels, will come to be, but it's not today.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 10:28 a.m. CST

    I don't think it's just technobabble, though. If you use

    by Coughlins Laws

    any kind of logic at all, you'd see Kirk was left stranded for hours and the Enterprise was in Warp drive that entire time. Up until now, and for the centuries of stories after this movie took place, the trasporter was never used for distances much farther than just in a planet's orbit or from ship to ship that were just next to each other, and the ships were never in motion as far as I remember. Now, all of a sudden, the transporter can trasport you Light Years away perfectly placed on an object moving at more than Light speed. One milligram off could've put him in a wall or halway through a floor. The point is, if this kind of transporting was possible, I would think that the thought would occur to even the most casual movie-goer that starships aren't really needed if you can really transport that far through space...

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 11:32 a.m. CST

    ANyone who hasn't seen Pinkett's TPM

    by MurderMostFowl

    You shouldn't be watching this... so much of his rants, critical references and even jokes are call backs to his previous reviews. Also, despite the extermely poor taste of some of his "b story" jokes, he also has some *extremely* beautiful reference & visual arguments that you don't get because you're either a) not paying close enough attention and thought it was a throw away line, or b) not realizing the historic, Star wars or cinematic reference he's calling out. And I think Plinkett also exposes Lucas's central flaw with his "all cgi movie in a box" philosophy... you have unintended limitations and consequences. This is something James cameron figured out, but for some reason Lucas didn't. Of course to give Lucas credit, he was the pioneer, sio he's bound to make mistakes.... why not make those mistakes on some unknown movies first, though? oh well... Star wars is forever tarnished, but ironically I think it elevates the original movies to a reverence it never would have had, had the prequels been good.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 11:45 a.m. CST


    by FleshMachine

    i agree...most disapointing thing ever for our generation.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 11:48 a.m. CST


    by FleshMachine

    yes they are impossibly terrible movies. and the OT are all very good films. the difference is night and day. even jedi stands head and shoulders above them. they had heart. the new ones are (in terry gilliams words) dead things.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 11:50 a.m. CST

    new Star Trek was fun and exciting: if flawed and dumbed down.

    by FleshMachine

    it had heart and character. plot holes? oh yeah. but it was also fun as hell. brainy? no. but not all trek was brainy. some was downright dumb and shallow. i look forward to the next chapter...i hope it goes to a higher level intellectually.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 11:55 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    I agree. I'm just assessing it on what it is.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 11:57 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Your response to me suggesting you might have a fixation on imagining people eatting your shit, is telling me to eat your shit? Wouldn't it be better to have a discussion/debate using actual information, and polite rebuttals?

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:06 p.m. CST

    Asimov, the prequels are easy targets

    by MattmanReturns

    I watched them over Christmas vacation again, on Spike... and goddamn they are bad. The dialogue is just so horrendously stilted it makes me cringe. Some family members were watching it with me (girls) and are mostly unfamiliar with Star Wars, and they both started laughing at the dialogue (especially when we got to Episode II). The third film is much better, but still has a few too many awkward scenes. Then I started watching New Hope and it just flowed so much better. It's like a completely different director. I don't think anyone would take a severe trashing of the originals seriously... ...except maybe Braindrain.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:10 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Agreed. Star trek at its best is pretty high minded, but a very large percentage of it (shows and movies) is pretty sill stuff. Its one of those things that has endured because its more than the sum of its parts. I think the big difference with star wars is for the bulk of its existence, there were only 3 movies and nothing else. all of which are very beloved. Although a lot of people consider Jedi the weakest, and to some a dissappoint, there are just as many people out there, who consider it the best of the saga. But with the release of the prequels effectively doubling the amount of starwars content out there, and with so many people disliking the prequels, it effectively went from a series where a great many people consider "all" of starwars great, to now only thinking 'half' is great, and the other half terrible. A 50% drop off in overall quality in just a few short years. Where as with star trek I think there's just so much of it, that there are people who discount entire tv series out of what they like, but there is such a muddle of debate as to what is good and what is bad in trek that it doesn't have the same impact. Trek is also not really the work of a single person, Roddenbury started it, but in the grand scheme of things, most of star treks content has been made after his death, by many different writers/producers/actors etc. People can argue all they want about the JJ star trek, but it is in many ways the most widely popular thing thats ever been added to the trek canon. I remember when it came out, people at my office who have never been into trek beforee, of all ages, genders, races went to see it multiple times in the theatre. And many of them are now going back to the dvds of TNG, TOS, DS9 etc. And in the years to come trek will go through many other interations, just like James bond, batman, doctor who, sherlock holmes, robin hood. Or any of the other fictional characters/stories that transcend the need to be tied to their original creator, and can be viewed through a different lens. Like when a new artist takes over a popular comic book, and the style changes dramatically. With somethings (batman being a good example) this works. Because starwars is currently so tied into the 6 movies, all rooted in george lucas, with no likelihood of any more being made or remade in the foreseable future by anyone else, its not the same kind of entity. But keeping with the batman example, you have the adam west batman and the christopher nolan batman. And despite the fact that they are the same thing, they also couldn't be more different. I think trek has just reached that point where it wasn't working anymore the way it was. 4 bad TNG movies, Voyager and enterprize both very dismal attempts to try and recapture the glory of the earlier series/movies. Its just a different take on the same concept.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:16 p.m. CST

    "brainy" Star Trek

    by MattmanReturns

    Yeah, the latest Trek is not the most intellectual entry... but that isn't necessarily the reigning perquisite for a good Star Trek movie (otherwise Star Trek 5 would be the best one). Wrath of Kahn isn't exactly an intellectual powerhouse (the plot of Moby Dick has been borrowed many times), and has huge plot holes people are willing to laugh off ("Checkov! I never forget a face!"), but none of that matters because it's so well done. The characters are entertaining, the pacing is great, and we're invested when tragedy strikes. The Motion Picture is good though and gets unfairly shat upon. It's got some beautiful imagery in it, and a very creative antagonist.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:19 p.m. CST

    thats a good way of putting it mattmanreturns

    by Rebel Scumb

    I can't really think of any scene in the prequels that I could say "this scene is better than scene x from any of the originals" I'm willing to give Lucas the benefit of the doubt, that he set out to make good movies, I'm sure he thinks the prequels are great. I hope so because he had unlimited money, time and creative freedom to make them exactly as he wanted. I don't buy the logic that he just wanted to make some quick cash and didn't care about the movies himself, because if that were true he could of been making star wars sequels and prequels for the past 30 years since jedi, even just stamping his approval on movies commissioned to other directors, and been raking in the cash all these years. There could be just as much star wars out there now as there is star trek. But he didn't do that. And doesn't seem to have any interest in making any more now. I just think on a fundemental level his approach to the new ones didn't work. And that happens to all artists. And I think its not unique to lucas at all. Most artists, of any medium reach a peak in their work, and then show a steady decline as they get older. There really are barely any musicians/novelists/classical artists/filmmakers that i can think of where their best work was towards the end of their life (unless they died young).

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:19 p.m. CST

    That being said...

    by MattmanReturns

    I would like to see a more intellectual Star Trek for the second film. Now that they've set everything up, it's time to raise the stakes. An intellectually stimulating AND entertaining Star Trek film would be amazing.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:22 p.m. CST

    you nailed it mattman

    by Rebel Scumb

    because we're invested in the characters in khan, we can overlook all sorts of things, that movie is not really intellectual on any level, its an action film, and as you said lots of references to moby dick, as well as the hornblower/aubrey+maturin novels. But it is stiring and involving, and emotionally relevant.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:24 p.m. CST

    rebel scumb, prequels

    by MattmanReturns

    Yeah I never bought the "Lucas is a greedy fucker" argument. I think he really thought he was making good films, and I think he made the films he wanted to make (with the exception of the first one, which even he admitted "went too far").

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:26 p.m. CST

    rebel scumb, same goes for First Contact

    by MattmanReturns

    Easily the least "brainy" entry of the Next Gen films... also the best. Go figure.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:35 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    But even that 'I may have gone too far' quote has to be taken in context. Its from the first viewing of the edit. Apparently after that he made some changes to the final battle sequence as a result. But then before the release switched them back. Personally I never saw the 4 way intercut between the different parts of the battle as really the issue with TPM. One of the strangest things to me is, that aside from TPM having the best cinematography and more real locations and sets then the other two prequels, which gives it a more tangible feel, it also strangely (at least in my opinion) has the best CGI, as I think a lot of the animation actually has aged better then the stuff in AotC and RotS. I think ultimately though, George Lucas sees star wars through a different lens, then a lot of the people who are fans of the originals. Even just his logic that people have been dying to see Yoda finally use a lightsaber, when I don't think that was something ANYONE was waiting for, and really was a big part of what ruined Yoda in the prequels. Likewise, he tried to get back to the coolness of Boba Fett with Jango, but then didn't seem to grasp any of the things that made Boba Fett cool to begin with. His air of mystery, all the texture and wear and tear to his costume, when matched against Jango Fett's shiney perfect costume. Despite the fact that jango actually does a lot more "bad ass" things in aotc then boba ever does in the original (which is pretty much just stand there, then eventually fall in a hole) Jango just fails to capture the imagination of the audience.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:40 p.m. CST

    by GulDucati

    I would bet my life it would be better than all three prequels.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 12:55 p.m. CST

    rebel scumb

    by MattmanReturns

    Yeah the effects in Phantom Menace seemed to have more care applied to them. II and III look more synthetic to me, maybe because they are filmed digitally (when the format was in its infancy). And probably because Lucas started relying too heavily on CG sets. All the Naboo sets look great in TPM. And I agree the final battle is not the main problem with that movie. In fact, it has one of the best saber fights of the entire series. Another issue I have with the prequels is the lack of a single apprentice villain character. First we get Darth Maul, who should have remained until the beginning of the 3rd film. We didn't need Dooku thrown in there. It would have been much cooler to follow a single apprentice through all 3 films, instead of just the elusive Sidious, who changes apprentices way too easily.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:04 p.m. CST

    This guy needs to take a look at Nolans' flicks

    by Trenox

    I´ve thoroughly enjoyed Plinkets reviews, since they are both highly entertaining and informative. Sure it would be fun to see him take a bite out of Bay movies and other disasters, but i would fint it a lot more interesting to see him dissect (imo) overrated movies such as Inception and The Dark Knight. He even teases the latter one in one of his clips.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:11 p.m. CST

    trenox, dissecting Inception only makes it better

    by MattmanReturns

    I've seen it several times, and most of the so called "flaws" are simply things the viewer didn't understand.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:13 p.m. CST

    coughlins laws and the rest,DONT try

    by KilliK

    to make any sense with the internal logic of physics and technology in the NuTrek movie,because at the end the BOBORCI and co hacks didnt even bother to study the basic rules of how things work in the TNG/TOS series. I have mentioned it in another talkback and it is my fav example: in the prequel comic for the NT movie which was written by BOBORCI and co and it was set in the TNG era,there is a scene where Nero supposedly tricks the Federation Starships by allowing them to transport him and his crew aboard their ships in order to be saved from their damaged mining ship but instead he sends them some kind of mining mine equipment (!) which detonates when it arrives in the transporter rooms of the 3 federation ships. The problem is that there are numerous episodes in the TNG episodes where the transporter room of the Enterpirse was used as part of the episode's plot and where it was established that the Transporter Room was equipped with various fail-safes and filters which were used so that nothing threatening could enter the ship through the transportation either it was a virus,a weapon,a dangerous ray and so on. Fuck i remember a TNG episode where O'Brien transports Data back to the ship,but before he materializes him,the computer monitor informs him that Data is holding an armed phaser,then O'Brien disables the weapon and after that he materializes Data in the Transportation Room where Picard was waiting him. But nooo in the NuTrek Rebooted Universe created by the super-hacks BOBORCI and Co,the transporters and the crew of the federation ships are so fucking stupid that they just allow everyone and everything outside of the federation to enter their ship without some kind of security search/scanning first. After all everyone in the Federation is "one,big,happy family"as Khan so sarcastically says.Jesus..

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:18 p.m. CST

    RIP Anne Francis

    by KilliK

    damn :(

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:19 p.m. CST

    "flaws" are simply things the viewer didn't understand."

    by KilliK

    yeah over-exposition and shallowness is something that you didnt understand.In reality it doesnt exist in the movie,its not a fact,it's only a creation of your imagination.riiiight..

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:22 p.m. CST

    Killik, Star Trek has always contradicted itself

    by MattmanReturns

    That's nothing new. There are plenty of YouTube montages showing all the contradictions. If you're going to argue the new movie sucks because of contradictions, then you'd have to believe that Star Trek has always sucked. Otherwise you're simply giving everything that has come before a free pass.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:24 p.m. CST

    killik, shallowness?

    by MattmanReturns

    Nothing shallow about the love story between Cobb and his wife. I'd argue that was one of the most interesting, gut-wrenching love stories I've seen in a long time (without resorting to melodrama).

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:28 p.m. CST

    Well, if you look at the rest of Plinkett's reviews, you can tell

    by Coughlins Laws

    he really is a film student and pays alot of attention to the technical side of the business. His takedown of The Phantom Menace was really spot on. However, with his next two reviews of the prequels, he recovered alot of the same ground and then delved more into opinion. I found I parted with him on his opinions on alot of things. He seemed to really hate what I actually thought were the best parts of the prequels, like the Obi-Won vs. Jango Fett fight, the Yoda vs. Emperor fight, and the whole General Grievous character in general and everything that surrounded him. I liked alot of that. But where he starts to lose me is the Star Trek: TNG movies. He had some valid points (like Picard turning from a stoic, reasoned leader in the series into an overemotional sociopath in the movies). However, I can't get past that he thought that Insurrection was the best of the lot and that he really seemed to like the Abrams Trek, which was kind of fun to watch but holds up to no kind of scrutiny whatsoever on repeat viewings. His best review, I think, was his Avatar review. He was really dead on with that and it was impressive the amount of footage from the movie he was able to put in the review considering that it was still in movie theatres and not yet out on DVD...

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:32 p.m. CST

    that's only an excuse mate.Not a reason

    by KilliK

    for creating a universe where basic rules dont follow the common sense. I will ask you this simple question: You have a spaceship traveling around the visit the surface of unknown planets and you transport back to the ship where at least 1000 people live and work. Is it logical for not taking into account the risk of someone of the away team to contract a virus while he is on the planet,and then when he arrives to carry it to the rest of the crew? Wouldnt you want the transportation procedure to be as secure as possible in order to eliminate this risk? Because last time i checked,there a whole dramatic sequence about this thing with the Nostromo crew...

  • Star Wars Prequels had a love story i guess they werent shallow as well.execution people,execution,the way of how you tell/show things not of what you have to tell/show. (although that does matter in some extent).

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:39 p.m. CST

    Prequels resorted to melodrama

    by MattmanReturns

    You quoted me yet didn't bother to read the quote?

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:42 p.m. CST

    I actually agree that insurrection is the best

    by Rebel Scumb

    Its the only one that sort of feels like the TNG series. Although that its the biggest critism against that movie is it just feels like a tv episode then a movie. I think if they had shot the paradise planet stuff in Hawaii or some other exotic location, it would of felt a lot more cinematic. I still don't think its a great movie, but I do think in terms of feeling like ST:TNG that insurrection is best. As a movie in and of itself, I think first contact is better, but doesn't feel at all like star trek. RE: Inception. I like inception a lot, but I agree it is overrated, but thats more the fault of the fans hyping it up then the movie itself. As summer movies go, its hard to ask for more than Inception.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:43 p.m. CST


    by Trenox

    Oh im not talking about "flaws" in the movies logic (altough some things definitely seemed off or just not explained well enough). also i actually really liked the ending of the movie. No my main beefs with Nolan is that when he try to make scenes that are exciting, they fall flat. When he try to be funny its not. When he try to make intimacy it feels contrived. His overtly bombastic use of the brilliant score even in quiet scenes. His movies always evokes selfimportance to a degree that is imo completely not deserved. He insists on action for a great part of a movie that tries to be "clever" and it just isnt on par. So what im talking about is not the "flaws" but, you know, the important stuff.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:48 p.m. CST

    I still believe that if Lucas just got an outside screenwriter

    by Coughlins Laws

    and/or a director, these movies would've been really good instead of just meh to OK. All Attack of the Clones would've taken was some better, believable dialogue in the middle and I think it would have gone WAYYY up in most people's estimations. As far as The Phantom Menace, someone really should have said something to him after reading the first draft....

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:49 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    That's a SW fanboy talking. Thankfully i'm not one of those, so i can see clearly the amount of mindless gushing and adoration that is bestowed to what amounts to highly competent movies but hardly the pinacle of cinema. Amd as SW originals are not the top of cinema, nor are the prequels the bottom. Thinking so is folly and madness.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:50 p.m. CST

    Thats the thing, they're first drafts.

    by Rebel Scumb

    Most movies, even the best scripts usually are pretty weak in the first draft. But usually there are several drafts AFTER that.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:51 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    And another thing: any movie that is flawed and dumbed down shouldn't be considered as fun and exciting by people who actually have two working brain cellls. If that is true for the SW prequels, then should be as true for Jar Jar Abrams' RETARD DUMBED DOWN TREK.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:51 p.m. CST

    Any popular movie will suffer the "overrated" criticism

    by MattmanReturns

    The term "overrated" is overrated. It has no meaning anymore, as its just been abused to death. Anything that makes a pile of cash, gets good reviews, and is talked about (in other words, a success) is "overrated." If I genuinely feel Inception is a great film, how is that an overrating? That's how I feel about the film. That's how a lot of people feel about it. I don't think Avatar is all that great, but a lot of people do, and they're not wrong. They're not overrating it... they loved the film. Good for them.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:56 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Boring stilted dialogue? I see loads of that in any of the original SW movies, even the much beloved EMPIRE STRIKES BACK. You know what is the real reason why many people in here and fans about the world dislike and have issues with the prequels? The real main reason? It's because when the first prequel came, you were 30 YEARS OLD ALREADY!! You grew up! That's what you don't want to admit. That's it. It's about time that you geeks start to realsie that despiste you have lived your whole life worshipping SW, you have outgrew it. but your target will not be the object of your nostalgia, you can't do such an extreme cognitive dissonance to soemthing that has been a part of you for so long. so, you bash the prequels. The prequels get the punches that the original trilogy should be getting as well. It's funny, that's what it is.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 1:56 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2 p.m. CST

    mattmanreturns at least that melodrama was something

    by KilliK

    in Inception the love story had nothing to offer.that's what i am saying. BTW am i the only one here who considers the most emotional scene of Inception,the one where Scarecrow meets his dying father in the dream?

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:08 p.m. CST

    I watched inception last night...

    by Rebel Scumb

    and then today find out pete postelwaite actually did die yesterday. Sad.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:09 p.m. CST


    by MattmanReturns

    I was a late bloomer on the Star Wars thing. I didn't really get into them until around the time the special editions came out, which means I was around 18. So it wasn't really a nostalgic thing for me... I just recognized them as great movies. Not so much with the prequels (though i did dig the last one). Episode II is a nauseating experience for me. The dialogue in that film is painful for me. I can't say that of any one scene in Empire Strikes Back. I'm not saying Empire has great dialogue, but it is well delivered, doesn't sound stilted, and is far from "soft like sand" and "I'm haunted by the kiss you should never have given me" painful. If anything, Empire's dialogue is far more simplistic and to the point. Episode II just goes over the top trying to sound poetic or something. It kills me, and I don't have a nostalgic investment in Star Wars.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:11 p.m. CST

    And as for Episode I

    by MattmanReturns

    That film could be better if trimmed down, and Anakin were replaced by a better actor. That kid was grating, and unfortunately the entire movie hinged on his performance. Ugh.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:19 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    You said that ABRAMS TREK isn't the most intellectual entry of the ST movies. That's totally incorrect even as an ironic understatment. ABRAMS TREK is THE ONLY ST movie that doens't even has an atempt at an idea or a theme. You incorreectly said that themes or some intellectual elements are not prequisits of ST. In fact, they are. It is one of the things that made Star Trek Star Trek. It's one of the things that made it unique. Even among the movies which tried to go more action oriented, like all of the TNG movies. Still, they remained true to the basic core of the idea of what's Star Trek. They had ideas in them, evne the usual kciked down dogs of the series, like STAR TREK 5 and MEMESIS. Even those two, whihc are undoubtly the weakest entries of the olders Trek movies, they still show themes and ideas and a desire to stay true to the spirit of STAR TREK. Which is completly absent in Abrams's abomination. It's something that i can't really understand is how completly dedicated to makingsuch big efforts to always defend adn try to obfuscate the obvious problems found in ABRAMS TREK, in how you people keep on pretending they aren't there, that they are of little important, always dismissing them, when previously you have bashed mercilessly other dumb movies like ABRAMS TREK for the very faults it has. ABRAMS TREK has the same problems and dumbed down idioticies that other stupid dumb movies like TERMINATOR SALVATION or CLASH OF THE TITANS. Movies which few people in here dare defend. But for ABRAMS TREK it's time out. For Abrams, youmake exceptions. for Abrams! What in the fuck does that Abrams hack has a pull on you, in what way does he has an hold on you that you forgive him the unforgivable? What hold does he has on you? Where does that shit comes from?

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:19 p.m. CST

    So when's his ROTJ review coming!??

    by darthwaz1

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:22 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    I guess in this era where total retard shitty bullshit like ABRAMS TREK can be mistaken as good entertaiment and gain a loyal following, woyuld such truly very good proper movies like INCEPTION and THE DARK KNIGHT be mistaken for over-rated. Sometimes i think you geeks don't deserved it as good. You deserve the fucking shit like ABRAMS TREK. Sad.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:23 p.m. CST

    ASIMOV, Slow down. Chew your food.

    by KilliK

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:26 p.m. CST

    A lament to betrayed geekdom

    by AsimovLives

    The geeks have betrayed geekdom, the moment when they praise and enjoy retard bullshit like any Mickey Bay or Jar Jar Abrams bullshit, but rate over-rated such fine and great movies like TDK and INCEPTION. Geekdom is tainted with Jar Jar Abrams-like mediocrity, and the geeks who collaborate with it. Sometimes i feel like i belong to la resistence, fighting the good fight against the evil tyranical rule of the pure cinematic mediocirty of Abrams and Bay and their geek collaborators. This is a time of tears and sorrow.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:30 p.m. CST

    TDK and Inception are over-ratted

    by KilliK


  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:34 p.m. CST

    Asimov, you put a lot of words in my mouth there...

    by MattmanReturns

    Not really sure how to respond... I never said the movies shouldn't have an overall theme. Nor did I say they shouldn't be intellectual. I simply said the best Star Trek movies aren't necessarily the most intellectual of the films. First Contact is first and foremost an action film. Same with Wrath of Kahn.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:38 p.m. CST

    Killik, there were too many rats in TDK and Inception?

    by MattmanReturns

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:46 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Your fact is lacking in facts.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:52 p.m. CST

    Killik's like a stubborn five year old

    by MattmanReturns

    No matter how many times you tell him the sky is blue, he just keeps shaking his head and saying, "Nope."

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 2:55 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    I'm not going to bring ST:TMP to the table, but i'm going to bring THE WRATH OF KAHN, which is a VERY THOUGHFUL movie. That movie has a lot ot though to it. The movie deals with it's themes from start to fonish. In fact, if you reawatch the movie again, you will notice that most of the screentiome is devoted to dialogue and not action. In fact, if you really watch the movie again and really notice it, you will see that the adventure part of the movie, as perceived as action, is actually a minority of the screentime of the movie. Even during many of the action stuff, there's still an heavy insistence on dialogue and character moments. No, you got it the other way around, the best ST movies have been the ones which have been about the exploration of the themes, which they never let go while they run. ABRAMS TREK is the only ST movie ever made in the whople history of ST that doesn't have a single theme to it, it's all just action. ABRAMS TREK is like NEMESIS if made by complete total retards. The best Star Trek have been, always, the ones that have intellectual elements to them. And i'm talking about THE BEST. And not about the movie which make the in-the-closet nancy-boys moist in the ass with pure gay delight exitement because the movie features terrible editing and a pussy ass version of Kirk getting an extreme homoerotic beatdown from the girliest version of Spock ever imagined by a mentally deficient ape.

  • Such a beautifully constructed insult that I can't even offer a reply... I'm laughing too hard

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 3:09 p.m. CST

    Star Trek, for me, has always been about the characters

    by MattmanReturns

    I don't care if they got the transporter wrong or some nerdy shit like that... that's never mattered to me (because they contradict themselves all the time anyway). If you actually hold the science up to scrutiny, it's ridiculous. Star Trek has always been a bit intellectually full of itself (in a good way). Yes, Abrams dumbed that side of it down a bit, and I understand why that would piss off a hardcore Star Trek fan. However, he nailed the characters of TOS, and this is a Star Trek movie... not a Star Trek The Next Generation movie (which was far more intellectual than TOS). He brought back what was great about that original crew, and TOS. It wasn't at all perfect, but I enjoyed it. I let some things slide (like that stupid middle section) because I was invested in the characters. Yes, I want a little more brain stimulation in the next film... but as far as re-introducing us to the characters we know and love, I felt he did a fantastic job at that. Does that make me stupid? Well, maybe. Other talkbackers are telling me I'm stupid for finding deep-rooted themes in Inception, so I really can't win. I'm stupid either way, apparently.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 3:18 p.m. CST

    Insurrection was a piece of shit

    by MattmanReturns

    There's no defending it. Horrendously lazy effort from all involved. How is Abrams Trek the worst when films like Insurrection, Nemesis, and Star Trek 5 exist?

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 3:46 p.m. CST

    Diox... lol

    by MattmanReturns

    In that case maybe I *would* like Stargate Universe.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 3:59 p.m. CST

    He KNOWS

    by Kremzeek

    Uh, pay attention. He KNOWS its not "Grievance". He says the name right a couple times and then starts to say it wrong on purpose. He does the same thing with "Padme" vs. Padame". If you're the type that got pissed off by him purposely saying it wrong, then you're exactly the person he's making fun of. These reviews are spot on as far as what's wrong with the foundation of these films. They are fundamentally flawed from the get-go. More time and effort was needed to polish them up (this includes Phantom). I can see why he annoys some people, and I don't like any of his supposed "comedy" scenes, but anyone who's ever been involved with writing a script would know he's absolutely right in regard to *why* the prequel scripts are awful and make no sense. The bottom line is the characters are all forgettable and their "peril" is never felt by the audience. It's not just a problem with the prequels, but a lot of modern movies who use effects over story and character development.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 5:03 p.m. CST


    by gutshot

    cardboard sets and rubber masks are not the problem. the original starwars has sets and rubber masks. you should be worried if doctor who starts doing what happened in the prequels. effects for effects sake, punctuated with back and fourth shots of people talking in various standing and sitting positions. Doctor who is continuously filled with quick witty writing/characters/dialogue. they say and do smart things, and for the most part are drivin by the story and interesting characters you care about. Rustle T Davies did get a little lucas crazy by the end of his run on the show, but he has been replaced by someone better. something im sure a lot of us wish would happen with lucas. just imagine a starwars movie by guillermo del toro

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 5:54 p.m. CST


    by ZodNotGod

    Give the baby his bottle so he'll shut his fucking gob! What is with this douchebag's voice? I might be willing to concede a point or two, but with a dumb-ass voice like that and his trivial horse shit complaints that add nothing and make no sense- nope! All of these critics of this and any other ilk have been dead-fucking wrong.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 5:56 p.m. CST


    by ZodNotGod

    Abrams Trek was about destiny, discovering who you are; DUH!

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 5:57 p.m. CST

    Guy's an idiot, and his 15 mins are up

    by Krinkle

    SITH is pretty well-liked, isn't it? It got good reviews, and even the fanboys like it. I think its the best of all 6 films, personally. But anyway, why do a 90-minute takedown of a movie that isn't bad? Or how about this knucklehead does the same thing to the OT now? Why not? He could make the same points if he was of a mind to...-

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 5:57 p.m. CST


    by ZodNotGod

    It's that line taken from Trek 2 said by Spock to Kirk. "Captaining a Starship is your first, best destiny. Anything else, is a waste of material."

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 6:01 p.m. CST

    Enough of Episode 1...

    by ZodNotGod

    Frank Darabont was invited to Skywalker Ranch to read the script. After he was done, Lucas asked him his thoughts, suggestions; Darabont said, "I wouldn't change a thing." Blame him if you must. Crybabies.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 6:16 p.m. CST


    by ZodNotGod

    "Hey look everybody! There's a wagon with a band on it. Let's check it out!"

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 6:38 p.m. CST

    Spielberg is Lucas' best friend...

    by Rebel Scumb

    and has also lost most of his talent since the early 90s. I don't care if he thinks its great or not. This is the same guy who replaced the guns in ET with walkietalkies, and said if he had it all to do over again he would of never made close encounters.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 7:01 p.m. CST

    Braindrain, I thought Phantom Menace was awesome

    by MattmanReturns

    The first time I saw it. Then I saw it again, and realized I was an idiot.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 7:06 p.m. CST

    rebel scumb, to Spielberg's credit

    by MattmanReturns

    He also made Minority Report and Munich, which for my money were both awesome for different reasons.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 7:45 p.m. CST

    baby luke

    by George Homewood

    THey're dreaming about their Tattoine-funded food stamps and Empire Welfare bucks

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 7:47 p.m. CST

    Hey, Lucas made Red Letter Media Popular

    by George Homewood

    no doubt. still derivative of someone else's work

  • movies I've ever seen. The villians plan makes no sense. He frames Tom cruise without actually doing anything. He hires a guy to sit in a random apartment with a bunch of photos of kids in hopes that Tom cruise will randomly find him and kill him in error. The only reason Tom cruise ever found his way there, was that he accidently saw the minority report after image, and then got framed for murder, and then broke the telepath out of the police station, went on the lam with her across town, and through her visions found his way to the apartment where he is suppose to kill the guy. How could Max Von Sydow have ever figured out that that would of happened? There's some interesting visuals in the movie, but they're ruined by spielberg ridiculous sense of humour (the same thing that ruined saving private ryan, among other films). Also the telepaths having a rosy happy ending in a cabin with a beautiful sunset, was hoaky nonsense. Especially since we were told at the start of the movie they would go insane with images of murder in their dreams every day, but somehow that was forgotten from earlier.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 9:36 p.m. CST

    I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't like Minority Report

    by successor

    <p>That film has one of the worst idiot plots ever. All John Anderton had to do was go lock himself in a room for a day, then come out and go get the bad guys. Or he could just go to his Pre-crime buddies and say, hey, I'm going to kill somebody in a day. Could you lockme in a cell for one day for my own protection, then we can go find the bad guys who framed me? Of course not. And when he's in the hotel, does he turn around and leave--even though he's seen what he'll do and swears that the Precrime system is perfect? Of course not.</p> <p>Not to mention the towering idiocy of not changing Anderton's security code after he's on the run. Or how Anderton is fooled by an obvious frame up with the pictures in the hotel room. Even Inspector Clouseau wouldn't buy that bullshit.</p> <p>The plot holes in MR make the ones in Abrams' Star Trek look minuscule by comparison.</p>

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 10:46 p.m. CST

    RLM taking on Star Wars Prequels =

    by Smack_Teddy

    people vocally opposing the gradual decimation of tibet & what it represents, in its own way. The Guys reviews are great and spot on, it doesnt matter if they made "Welll, heh, kind of a good movie" this time. He manages to turn negative energy or feeling, arguably created by Lucas & those movies, into something positive, constructive & funny as hell. Sorry, but suck it up.

  • I think building the Letterman Digital Arts facility and making it so that Star Wars is a perennial favorite among children's toys were prime movers in his decision to film the prequels. He said time and again that during the late 80's and early 90's, his staff asked him repeatedly to go back and make more Star Wars and Indiana Jones movies so that they could fill the coffers. The reason he waited is very plain to see in Plinkett's Sith review... the man is lazy when it comes to directing and digital technology allowed him to be lazy while directing Star Wars... it was also far more cost effective to shoot green screens than build real sets and let's not forget he used HIS OWN MONEY to finance them. He has always maintained that he doesn't enjoy directing. About shooting Raiders and dealing with the snakes, he said something like, "That's one of the reasons Steven directed the movie and I didn't. I didn't want to be standing around dealing with the snakes, etc., I'm just way too lazy for that." Visually and editing-wise, Lucas CAN be brilliant, but I think he wanted to take the path of least resistance with the prequels... the shortest and easiest road to refilling the Lucasfilm coffers. Thousands of jobs and livelihoods rest upon this man's shoulders, so it's silly to even suggest that making shit-tons of money and reviving Star Wars, possibly forever, was of chief importance. And ironically, this is exactly what he has done with the prequels being a road to The Clone Wars cartoon series. Kids LOOOOVE that show and it opens a door to them watching the OT and the PT. Sure they may grow up and realize the PT is shit, but by then they've already spent hundreds, possibly thousands of dollars of their parents money on Star Wars merchandise. And I'm not even begrudging Lucas this, at some point or another, in order for the many companies to remain solvent, Star Wars had to be revived in such a way that it wouldn't fall back into a fallow period as happened shortly after Jedi. By any indication, Lucas has accomplished exactly that. Lucasfilm very likely now has a multi-billion dollar cash cushion that grows exponentially with every move he makes regarding Star Wars or Indiana Jones... I suspect it won't be but five years or so before we see some kind of hat-trick pulled with Indiana Jones where it becomes a much more consistent cash cow (meaning year-in/year-out over at least a decade). I don't buy the 'nostalgia clouds your vision, Empire and ANH have as bad dialogue, etc., it's just acted better.' The dialogue might be clunky at times, but it doesn't even approach the realm of the PT dialogue where no actor, not Olivier, not Brando, could have said some of those lines and made them sound authentic or NOT awkward and stilted. I do agree, however, with Coughlin's Laws that all it would have taken was two or three rewrites of what wound up on the screen and perhaps Lucas taking more time to film the dialogue scenes or make them more visually interesting and these movies could have been very good. I think that the ideas and some basic elements of the structure were there, it just would have taken a much better writer (or one that cared more) than Lucas to pull it off. But the movies made billions and revived Star Wars so... what the fuck do I know, right? Only other thing I want to say is that I think Lucas' real legacy is as a visionary that forced (pun intended) the industry to move forward technologically. Hell, as an editor in television, I very likely owe my job to him for providing the seed money to forward non-linear editing and a host of other digital filmmaking technologies. You may hate the proliferation of reality shows, but they probably couldn't happen if we were still editing on fucking tape decks. I always recommend this book for being the ultimate bible of the change that Lucas, Coppola, Steve Jobs, Atari, Alexander Schure and the New York Institute of Technology, and a TON of others engendered and, best of all, it's told in an entertaining, comprehensive way. You actually feel as though you're making these discoveries alongside them. But don't take my word for it... go to amazon and check out the reviews - Ben Burtt and Alvy Ray Smith among them.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 10:58 p.m. CST

    Haha... meant 'greedy' of course...

    by SK229

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 11:07 p.m. CST

    And I forgot the book's title...

    by SK229

    it's late and I'm tired. That's the title. No, just kidding... it's called Droidmaker: George Lucas and the Digital Revolution. It's worth buying the actual book too, as it has tons of asides and indented bits of information that go into more depth regarding things that the regular section of the book mentions only in passing. I never realized how much Coppola was trying to accomplish many of the same things, only coming at them from another angle. Of course he didn't have $10 million a year coming from action figures alone.

  • Jan. 3, 2011, 11:33 p.m. CST

    rebel scumb / successor

    by MattmanReturns

    Do you think Back to the Future is a bad movie because it has a glaring, idiotic plot hole that the entire movie hinges upon? Why don't Marty's parents remember him (the man who fucking got them together), Calvin Klein, Darth Vader from the Planet Vulcan, or Rock and Roll? Are we really supposed to believe that they'd forget ALL these life-altering events? And don't get me started on the sequels. Why is Ripley in Alien able to magically override science-officer's-eyes-only protocol with an emergency security code when she talks to MUTHUR? Wouldn't the "fucking company" take precautions against that, when they've declared the crew expendable? Secondly, why would the company allow the self destruct to work? They didn't plan things out very well. Why did the machines in The Matrix design a virtual reality with computers that would allow the humans inside to hack their world? None of the machines thought, "Hey, maybe we should put this reality in the 20s or something, before there were computers"? A lot of sci-fi movies have plot holes (they're difficult to avoid if you want an interesting story to progress).

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 5:38 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    I'm not saying Lucas is devoid of greed or financial motivation. He's clearly a savvy businessman who has milked starwars to the nth degree. But I just don't hold with the idea that he sat down one day and said "I'll just phone in some prequels and make a few more billion". If he wanted to do that easily, he could of just hired a writer director, put his stamp of approval on it and left it at that, and he would of done it a lot sooner. I think in his mind, he was making the best movie he could, the way he wanted to make it. I just think over the years he's lost sight of how to do that, and also become lazy as you mentioned. But I don't see him as some cold calculating machevelli who puts on a big act for 9 years of his life and pretends to care about making star wars again just to sell toys. I mean, yeah the prequels suck, but I'm sure Lucas is a sweet guy in real life, he adopted 3 kids on his own, and does a lot for childrens charity. He just seems like someones goofy dad. Whatever critism I have of his films or his ability to make them to the standard he set for himself years ago, I don't think ill of him as a person.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 5:45 a.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    Not for Alien. And in Back to the future, its clear that his parents DO remember all that stuff, as his dad wrote a book about an alien bringing people together. He might simply believe gene roddenbury and george lucas were met by the same alien, or stole his ideas. Not to mention that movie is not really meant to be taken seriously, its a fun family comedy. Its a fairy tale not science fiction. You can't change the past either, and if you did there wouldn't be a dissappearing photograph. But the movie is fun, the characters and dilemma engaging, so I don't really care that the actual "science" or whatnot is a load of hooey. Its more of a 'its a wonderful life' type movie. And the matrix, while entertaining, is a pretty dumb movie overall. Why not just put cows in the matrix? They'd produce more electricity, and no pesky rebelllion. I would put the matrix in the same category as JJ trek, or Tron, or the First contact, its a fun ride but dumb overall.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 8:52 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Abrams didn't got the TOS characters right with his so-called Star Trek movie. He got none of them right. None! Rewatch the TOS shows and then rewatch the movie and you will see they are compeltly different characters altogether. The oly way you can "match" is Bones because half his lines in the Abrams' movie are almost direct quotes and paraquotes from the TOS shows. But while the quotes kinda match, the character doesn't. All this talk that ABRAMS TREK is true to the TOs characters and whatnot is mere publicity stunt. It's not in the movie. Many people were add by the ad advertizements. And it's all nonsense. All of it. If anything, ABRAMS TREK works both as a complete re-writing of the characters and a hate-letter to them. And the 3 who get the worst is Kirk, Uhura and Spock. Too many words have been writen about what an absolute miserable fucking piece of shit is the NuKirk. Nukirk's constant beatdowns can be seen as Abrams and pals doing a major take that on a character they really hate. It also works as homoerotica for the audiences. Nukirk is not Kirk. He's the Tom Cruise character from TOP GUN who found himself in space 4 centuries into the future. No, Kirk was not an asshole, never was, not evne in his earlier days. Picard was the asshole youth, not Kirk. Kirk was the stack of books with legs, kirk was the nerd who manned up, not the asshole who suddently became competent due to an extreme dose of deux ex machina. Uhura stoped being the smart, courageous and very professional naval officer she was in TOS and now became a whimming bitch with delusions of princess of the cool space kids. Her bitching for not being in the enterprise, the cool kid's ship, is legendary in it's clueness as what a miserable bitch she became. She's only there to give a plot point to NuKirk (and in the process makes Uhura dumb because she couldn't use info she was privvy to actually help the Federation in an emergency) and to be Spock's cum receptacle. If people compleined that Uhura was doing nothing in TOS, she's doing even less in ABRAMS TREK. And then there's Spock, demoted from the coolest (in more then one sense of the word) alien ever shown into an emotially wreck of a mommy boy. And worst, how un-alien Spock is now. The point of spock is that he was AN ALIEN! Now he's not, he's just some over-emotional emo-boy. And people, including reviewers and critics, considered that a good thing!! Yeah, let's make the cool different guy into just another one of the crowd. That shit is supposed to be good? ABRAMS TREK fails miserably at the most important things, and this include the characterizations. Specially the characterizations. ABRAMS TREK fails wholesome.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 8:57 a.m. CST

    rebel scumb

    by AsimovLives

    The last thing that THE MATRIX is is dumb. By the way, i have noticed that many people seem to not actually pay attention to Morpheus when he talks about the world the humans are now living in the film. Morpheus doesn't say that the humans are the only sourse of energy for the machines. Morpheus says that the humans's generated electricity, TOGETHER WITH A FORM OR NUCLEAR FUSION, is what is powering the machines. Basically, the human's generate electricity is like a spark-plug in a car engine, that kick-starts and mantains the nuclear fusion running and going. If you are going to piss on a really smart movie like THE MATRIX, you better start paying attention. you can't watch a smart movie like THE MATRIX with the same attitude as if you were watching a dumb stupid one like ABRAMS TREK, you know?

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 9:24 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Since when there's destiny in Star Trek? Certainly there is none of that in TOS. The very point of the show was the exact opposite. It was about people making choices, moral choices when the easy thing would be to compromise and sacrifice humanity and humanism. And the weight of said decisions on the shoulders of those who had to made them. The destiny crap is the shit that Abrams and pals pulled out of their asses and shoved into their stupid movie, whihc should rather be called DEUX EX FUCKING MACHINA, because those assclowns can0't make a story without tit. They may call that crap destiny until they get blue in the face, but in true it's just a bunch of incompetent storytellers pulling deux ex machinas into every plot dead ends of their stupid movie.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 10:13 a.m. CST

    Calling ABRAMS TREK a fun ride!!

    by AsimovLives

    How can anybody call fun to such dumb stupidity?How can anybody find fun in a dumb movie made by filmmakers who think audiences are dumb and stupid? People love to be insulted, is that it? If i call somebody retard for 2 hours, will they also call that fun? And will they pay me?

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 12:57 p.m. CST

    He has a lot of good points

    by SithMenace

    The serial killer stuff is just a distraction from the bits that are really funny, tearing apart the prequels and the director Lucas has become.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 1:48 p.m. CST

    Asimov, you have a different view of the characters

    by MattmanReturns

    I'm very familiar with TOS. Kirk was never a nerd. Kirk was tech savvy enough to reprogram the Kobayashi Maru (although we're never told how he did this), but that was only to get his way. Nerds don't fuck every alien piece of ass they encounter, along with half the enterprise, which Kirk was clearly doing. He always was Tom Cruise from Top Gun, before Tom Cruise even was! And how can you call Uhura from TOS a strong character? She's not. She did nothing that entire series. She's far stronger in Abrams' version actually (GASP!). She fucking holds Spock together after the destruction of Vulcan. She knows exactly how to get what she wants (as demonstrated in the scene in which she forces Spock to assign her to the Enterprise). And I'm willing to bet we'll get a lot more of her in the sequel. And McCoy? Dead on. How you can even call him different is baffling to me when he is nearly a carbon copy of the original. Spock? Yes, they changed some things there. But not by much, if you're paying attention. Spock has always fought his emotions... they simply played up that angle. Also, the alternate timeline allows Spock to go through something far more gutwrenching than the original Spock ever did... therefore his emotions are boiling just beneath the surface for the entire final act of the film. The more I analyze the characters, the more I like the film. Sorry man.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 1:54 p.m. CST

    rebel scumb, The Matrix

    by MattmanReturns

    The Matrix may be based on a flawed idea when you actually start thinking about it, but that doesn't make it dumb. It's still an insanely creative idea. Most sci-fi falls apart if you analyze it, but that doesn't make it dumb. I'd say the same of Minority Report. You do have to stretch credulity sometimes to get the plot moving. And btw, the ORIGINAL Back to the Future was not some goofy comedy. It was funny and endearing, but it also attempted a degree of realism in order to suspend disbelief... which went completely out the window with the ridiculous second movie.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 1:57 p.m. CST

    Asimov, Kirk

    by MattmanReturns

    If anything, Kirk was a cowboy. He even owned a ranch, for Christ's sake. What kind of nerd owns a ranch and fucks hot alien ass?

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 2:37 p.m. CST

    Can't do it.

    by blackwood

    I watched his ATTACK OF THE CLONES rip, in its entirety, and came out with a smile. But ten minutes into this it feels as dull and asinine as the stuff he's dissecting. Just don't care anymore Plinkett. Nothing has been added to the debate. I feel that the notion of 'debate' with these films doesn't exist anymore, if it ever did. There is the Defense Force, who believe they are fine. There is the Opposition, who believe they are shit. And the growing faction are the Indifferent, who just can't give a shit anymore. I'm always open to the possibility of more Star Wars. Regardless of how these films or any other property has failed, the universe remains interesting. I hold out hope that something will come along that uses these toys really, really well. But I'm not going to be crushed when it doesn't happen. Because it doesn't matter.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 2:42 p.m. CST

    Glad to see Asi is still banging that drum

    by D.Vader

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 2:44 p.m. CST

    AsimovLives, have you WATCHED Plinkett's Star Trek Review?

    by Ringwearer9

    Or are you just repeating lines from other people about how Plinkett gave it a pass? Plinkett's review follows several reviews of "Next Generation" movies, and compares the new STAR TREK favorably .... to THEM, and THEM ONLY. In other words, he's saying "compared to the Next Generation Movies, it's actually got a little life and verve". But could you actually go watch his STAR TREK review before you go on again about how he gave it a pass? Could you notice that whenever he says that it did something right, he simultaneously puts up a picture of grotesquely obese rednecks stuffing their mouths with fas food, sitting in a theater? Did you notice that the character of Plinkett is pretending to like the same things those hideous obese redneck slobs like (while incongruously puncturing that image by intelligently analyzing and nitpicking and underlinginthe new STAR TREK for its logic holes, and one-note insistence on non-stop action). The Plinkett reviews are multi-faceted. Because the CHARACTER of Plinkett says he likes STAR TREK doesn't mean that the people of Red Letter Media who created him actually like it (the Plinkett voice is an actor, not the writer(s) of the review). Get your head out of your ass. "AssimovLives"

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 3:56 p.m. CST

    Ringwearer9, Rebel ScumB (forgot the b last time)

    by SK229

    Exactly what I was trying to tell Asimov about Plinkett's Abram's Trek review. I said he didn't use the prequel sledgehammer, but the criticisms are there... I went back to watch it and I actually enjoy the subtlety of that one more now. As for Lucas being a money hungry whore, believe me, I think saying that implies that he has this voracious, crackhead appetite for money in which he'll do anything to get it and that's not what I was trying to portray him as at all. I actually think he's just an extremely smart businessman and that he has a HUGE responsibility to a great many people... I think that responsibility played no small part in his decision to make the prequels. I do believe that HE thought he was making great movies, like you said, but I think part of the reason he obviously didn't do many rewrites (if he did, that's even sadder) or try very hard with shooting the dialogue scenes, is because he truly believed that any criticism is a result of people not 'getting it', as was basically the case with the first film all the way up until the minute it unspooled in front of an unspoiled audience. I think that he also believes CGI, green screen, and shooting digital are so obviously better than not using them that he just can't see what others DO NOT see in it. One of Lucas' obvious faults as a filmmaker and artist is that he DOES have a tendency to always think he's right no matter what. But I'm sure that many of us would feel that way if we were proven right after so many thought we were wrong not once (american graffiti), not twice (Star Wars), not three times (no studio wanted Raiders at first), but FOUR times (cause hey... the prequels made shit-loads of money, didn't they?)... I'm guessing this repeated emotional roller coaster that he's been on his whole life has an opiate-like, dulling effect on the brain after you've been through it so many times and on such a grand scale. Imagine you've ALREADY gone through American Graffiti being called unreleasable, doubting yourself to no end, then seeing it become the biggest film of all time with regards to ROI... now you've got Star Wars, probably the oddest duck of a film ever to be released by a major studio, pre-Williams score, everyone is so sure it's a turkey that they've convinced you as well so you find yourself on a beach in Hawaii with the competition... now imagine that while keeping your distance from the film's opening (something the theaters had to be forced into), that distance is pierced by phone calls telling you that the movie is the biggest ever. 'That kind of experience tends to isolate a person', as Peter Biskind once said about Coppola and Apocalypse Now, I believe the same is true of what Lucas went through on ANH. I just think that has a long-term effect on a person's personality, one of which would be that you begin to believe in yourself even when, perhaps, you shouldn't. I think he feels an untouchable air about his own opinion of his work and uses a strong sense of instinct... and ultimately, this is what EVERY artist must learn to rely on. The problem comes with as you get older, your instincts stop serving you as they did when you were younger yet you rely on them anyway. But again, it's almost impossible to make a film like Star Wars (or really, any film that seems 'out there' at first) and NOT realize, very quickly, that in order to keep your sanity, you have to search your soul and realize where and when you are right, despite people thinking you're wrong. Lucas is someone I admire very much for what he has done in his life... for me, no matter how much I dislike the prequels and what he did with them, I could never let that outweigh my admiration for everything else he's done. He's a maverick in every sense of the word... a giant in the history of the film industry, and he also seems like a pretty decent human being. The ONLY thing that truly pisses me off about him is that he fucks with the original films as well, although I'm sure he believes it's all necessary and good.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 4:07 p.m. CST

    Aargh you Plinkett-haters NEVER say anything smart!

    by Dead_Kate_Moss

    1. 'You could rip apart any movie including the OT the way Plinkett does' - No you couldn't you morons, he explains often how other movies use the rules of cinema correctly and Lucas cannot anymore. 2. 'It's just nostalgia, you were 7 when you saw the Ot, that's why you prefer them.' - Fuck off, the prequels are just shit and ADULTS enjoyed the OT at the time. 3. Waaaah, he doesn't like Star Wars, we get it, leave it alone then.' - He LOVES SW - just not the prequels - and his reviews are about far more than SWs they are pretty much a masterclass on how to make any movie work/suck. not that you will take this in, like you never take in the same points I just made by others who bothered to do it more eloquently than me (and with paragraph breaks) - you are like religious zealots who cannot betray your beloved Lucas no matter what he does. Also you have no taste and probably IQs below 80.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 4:14 p.m. CST

    I watched about 20 minutes of this...

    by Jaster

    It's just completely retarded. It's nothing but a string of straw man arguments.</p><p>I watched both the previous ones and neither were very good, but he did make one good point, which doesn't even really matter. That was that in the opening crawl of TPM Obi-Wan is referred to as a "Jedi Knight" when he was a Padawan at the time. But that could just be how they are referred to in that universe. Sort of like saying Police Trainees are Police Officers. They wear the uniform, they perform all the same duties, for all intents and purposes they are Police Officers.</p><p>But really, Plinkett is just a whiney, fat bitch with literally nothing better to do.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 4:24 p.m. CST

    Rise of Fett, you know that "Plinkett" doesn't exist, right?

    by Ringwearer9

    He's a fictional character. He isn't real. You're a moron.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 4:36 p.m. CST

    Thanks for proving my point Fett

    by Dead_Kate_Moss

    You know it's nothing but a string of straw man arguments (which it isn't) after watching just 20 minutes of it.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 5:03 p.m. CST

    Oh I forgot one, thanks turd

    by Dead_Kate_Moss

    'You can't criticise anyone unless you've done what they've done' - All critics now please retire. and thanks for reminding me that ;strawman argument' is now officially the most misused phrase on the internet. Let me giveyou an example - Plinkett points out how many dull dialogue/exposition scenes are walking or involve couches, where the OT would involve some visual metaphor or take place during a memorable sequence (Luke's training on the Millenium Falcon, or Degobah for example). How is that a strawman argument?

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 5:43 p.m. CST

    turd, at least you bucked the trend

    by Dead_Kate_Moss

    of most Plinkett-critics never bothering to respond to the points made to them, so kudos for that. But to reduce complaining about the all-important talent of 'execution' as 'carping' and attempting to negate Plinkett's informed knowledge of what tends to make good cinema as a 'laundry list to be rattled off' is unfair. You may like the shift in tone to a political machination style plot - that's fine, those bits had real potential - but but Plinkett's point that they were so often shot so very blandly and repetetively, and made a shit load of non-sense were valid. Plot-holes can be forgiven of course, but to have so many, in a film that relied on a devious plan coming together, was one of the prequels many failings. For the record, I agree with him that the biggest problem with the prequels, more than everything else put together, is that the characters were just unlikable.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 5:59 p.m. CST


    by Dead_Kate_Moss

    Yes, all of those characters were boring or annoying in the prequels.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 6:55 p.m. CST

    Fair Enough

    by Dead_Kate_Moss

    I liked Palpatine ok in the prequels. He had more to do than in the OT I guess, and is a great actor. But of the new characters/stuff - Jango Fett, General Grievous, the spaceships, the space-fights, the light-sabre duels, the imperial droids... all left me underwhelmed. Plinkett cues up just a few memorable scenes from the OT and they are magical - and I really can't remember any scene I liked (or can even remember much without his reviews) in the prequels. And that's not bashing... that's genuine disappointment.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 7:27 p.m. CST

    Palpatine WAS awesome in the prequels... I will give them that

    by MattmanReturns

    Great character. Both over the top (turning Anakin) and subtle at the same time (the opera scene). Lucas did a great job with him on all three films. Credit where credit is due. Obi-Wan was decent (although a little too forced at points). Anakin was mostly terrible, except for the opening and ending of Episode III. Padme was easy on the eyes, but boring. Yoda seemed like a caricature of himself. Mace Windu was a stubborn asshole who got the whole jedi order killed (stay here, Anakin!). Jar Jar was a brainfart. Qui-Gon was kinda cool only because he's Liam Neeson (not because of Lucas's writing).

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 7:29 p.m. CST

    Oh and Jango and Darth Maul were cool

    by MattmanReturns

    Not sure why Jango gets so much hate. He was a badass. He does more and even got a much better sendoff than Boba does.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 8:17 p.m. CST

    "And then I f*** my cat"

    by ReportAbuse

    LOL. It's so wrong it's right.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 8:37 p.m. CST

    Turd ....

    by Ringwearer9

    "All levity aside, and while I'm hardly a fellater of Uncle George - who the fuck is Plinkett/Mike/Red Letter Shit to criticize a legendary and groundbreaking artist such as Lucas?" Um ... that's classic fellating of Uncle George right there. Assuming you aren't just a troll, taking the piss, what is it about Uncle George that makes you want to fellate him so badly? I mean, I loved Star Wars and Empire, and I just assumed that the name "George Lucas" associated with those films meant that he truly cared about the same things that made them so magical for me. But he clearly doesn't, and it looks like the many other people who worked on the films and helped him out were what brought that magical brew to a boil back in the late 70's and early 80's. But there are people still willing to defend him like he was the Pope of Star Wars. Why? Do you really feel reverence towards him as if he were the Pope, as if he had some mystical connection to The Force himself? Or are you one of those semi-autistic Star Wars nerds who never socialized until you went to a Star Wars convention around the time of the Phantom Menace, or suddenly found a huge brotherhood of Star Wars fans/friends online when it first came out, making you feel like part of a family for the first time? Is that why this rabid refusal to see George as anything but your benevolent Daddy figure that you never had in real life? The Daddy of all your Star Wars loving online and convention pals? Well, that's kinda pathetic, if understandable. Clouds your judgement, it does. A false idol is this Lucas. Wean yourself from this false religion and join the adult world where you can enjoy something and not worship it as if it were a Religion.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 8:42 p.m. CST

    "When Plinkett writes and directs THX 1138 ..."

    by ReportAbuse

    "When Plinkett writes and directs THX 1138 or A New Hope, get back to me...." Except that Plinkett didn't criticize those great films of Lucas. He criticized the crappy ones. If anything, Lucas has LESS excuse for making crap than a less renowned director would. Doing great work THIRTY years ago doesn't give him a free pass for all time to make any kind of crap he wants to.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 8:45 p.m. CST

    and Turd, Plinkett addresses the "Tone" of the Prequels

    by Ringwearer9

    ... in his review. Points out that Sith, particularly, is all over the place in tone, mixing slapstick and scenes of beheading and murder in the same story. He points out that there were many ways to go in telling the story, but that Lucas screwed up all of them. Or did you bother to watch the entire Plinkett review (he addresses "tone" in the Sith review, and if you'd bothered to actually watch it, you'd KNOW that.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 9:06 p.m. CST

    Someone enlighten me...

    by SK229

    how is pointing out the FACT that all the dialogue scenes are shot boring and unimaginatively a straw-man argument? That's a fact, not some made up bullshit. Maybe you don't find dialogue scenes shot this way boring and you love watching Days of Our Lives and General Hospital to boot... but most people would agree this is a lousy, unimaginative way to shoot expository dialogue scenes. And that's just one tiny bit of what he's saying... how is it straw man to point out the discomfort and palpable awkwardness after the initial TPM screening? Rick McCallum is a yes-man... it's obvious that everyone around Lucas won't voice any contrarian opinions. It's pointed out yet again when Lucas says, "Everyone's always wanted to see Yoda do his thing with the light saber," and the ILM guy, John Knoll I think his name is doesn't really say anything, he just looks at the ground like 'holy shit, this guy is off his fucking rocker and I'm going to have to supervise this Yoda rape.' Maybe we're reading into it, I'll give you that, but I'm pretty sure a body language expert would tell you the same thing. Anyway... I'm done with all of this, that's the end of that and I'll never comment on the prequels again in any manner. You prequel lovers can have 'em, I won't begrudge anyone some cinematic enjoyment.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 9:24 p.m. CST

    The matrix

    by Rebel Scumb

    Its just a fun action movie, but people take it way too seriously. There's nothing deep in it you couldn't get from a first year philosophy class, mixed with some anime/kung fu movies, and the same basic formula as star wars. Its hardly a bad movie, its actually pretty great in terms of a summer blockbuster expirence. But I wouldn't categorize it as "smart".

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 9:45 p.m. CST

    Plinkett didn't love insurrection

    by Rebel Scumb

    he just felt it was the only TNG movie that sort of felt like the tv show.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 10:14 p.m. CST


    by successor

    <p>BTTF had plot holes, yes, but they didn't sink the film. Also, it was thirty years earlier. How much can you perfectly remember from thirty years ago? Marty's parents might have forgotten his appearance or chalked it off to a coincidence.</p> <p>As for Alien, Ripley might have been smart enough to put a backdoor in the computer or use a self-made program to override Company blocks. And deactivating the self destruct would be foolish, especially if the Nostromo were to be taken over by other hostile forces who wanted the alien or about to slam into a planet or space station. And even if the Company deactivated it, Ripley could still conceivably set the ship to fly into a sun or crash into a planet.</p> <p>Minority Report is flawed from the outset. All Anderton had to do in the film was nothing. If he did nothing, then there would be no murder to prevent. Every decision he made in the film merely served to perpetuate the idiot plot.</p> <p>As for Plinkett, the ROTS review wasn't as good as the other two. But I still liked it a lot. Especially his point about the blocking and camera work. I'm just surprised that Plinkett didn't bring up all the silly flipping in the prequel trilogy.</p>

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 10:17 p.m. CST

    Plinkets point about the lightsabers battles...

    by Rebel Scumb

    in his TPM review is pretty spot on. About the emotions vs fancy choreography

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 10:26 p.m. CST


    by SK229

    Like I said, you can have the films and please continue to enjoy them. I won't comment on them anymore. I can laugh at your description of my first time seeing TPM because it's so far from true. By the time TPM came out, I was actually a little burnt out on Star Wars having gotten back into it when it was still way nerdy (around '89/90?). I've said repeatedly that I still respect and admire George Lucas... I think I pretty much owe my career to whatever spark his work ignited in me as a child. I also saw The Shining, Raging Bull, and of course Jaws before I was old enough to even remember, because my insane parents let me watch anything, but Star Wars definitely put me over the edge.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 10:53 p.m. CST

    Plinkett on ST: Insurrection

    by ReportAbuse

    "Star Trek Insurrection sucks my balls." That's the opening line of Part 1 of his ST: Insurrection review on youtube. "It's got cheap styrofoam sets, lame production values, and a budget smaller than an episode of 'Alf.'" That's the second sentence. So, even if you just watch the first ten seconds of his review it's clear how he feels about the flick. Though he also says "it's not all terrible," he spends most of his review eviscerating it in great detail.

  • Jan. 4, 2011, 11:17 p.m. CST

    Turd, Did you actually watch the section where he discusses it?

    by Rebel Scumb

    His point is that the battles are not about the choreography, but the emotions that motivate the battles to begin with. You really don't feel its more important to have relatable palpable emotions motivating and underlying the conflicts in the films, instead of just "cool well choregraphed" action?

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 1:13 a.m. CST

    dancingforever, JFK assination analogy...

    by Chief Joseph

    ...isn't quite right, but you are on to something. The fact we're still talking about The Phantom Menace 12 years later says something. Maybe more akin to the Beatles breaking up for the baby boomers, where something they loved as their youth is snuffed out due to ego and greed. (Lennon being shot permanently killed off their fantasy of a reunion, "killing their childhood".) I witnessed something similar to "The Childhood rape of '99" when Metallica released their Load album. This deluded metalhead, in 100% seriousness, was telling me that Load was just a practical joke on everyone and that Metallica was going to confess their prank and release the REAL new album is a few months.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 1:20 a.m. CST

    After over 200 posts...

    by nico_laos

    ... of which I'll never read completely (no offense to talkbackers, it's just too fucking much), I'm sure someone has mentioned this. But I'll point it out anyway..... The Millennium Falcon WAS in Revenge of the Sith, despite this guy's gleeful proclamation that it wasn't. Very astute geeks noticed it, and I'm almost ashamed to admit that I spotted it on the first viewing. Almost.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 1:27 a.m. CST

    millenium falcon......

    by vicmackey1268

    can be seen flying up and leaving the airport looking space dock thing in the movie...its small and towards the bottom of the screen on a landing pad.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 6:07 a.m. CST

    millenium falcon

    by Rebel Scumb

    thats great in a 'where's waldo' ET in the senate sort of way. But I think what he's refering to is it wasn't showcased in a 'anakin built c3p0' sort of way. Or Chewbacca knew Yoda. Maybe a few of you spotted it somewhere in the mishmash of the background. Great. There were tie fighters and x-wings on coruscant in episode 2. So what. His point, which he was really clear about, is that it wasn't exploited as a piece of popular iconic imagry from the original trilogy and put in a prominent part of the film, to help the new films feel more like the originals. Also, I've never really understood the 'raped my childhood' stance, and it seems a really ridiculous way to describe these movies. Again just more thoughtless, tasteless angry response, instead of actual intelligent criticism.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 9:22 a.m. CST

    Thunderbolt Ross

    by hst666

    Assuming Revenge of the Sith is for 12 year olds, I do not believe in talking down to children. Or to put it another way, any good children's entertainment should be enjoyable by adults. The Wizard of Oz and Pixar's films come to mind.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 11:09 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Rewatch the TOS episode SHORE LEAVE anbd see how Kirk describes hismelf back at the early days of the academy. Kirk was a nerd who manned up. If anything, that's a much better character developement then the pussy ass bullshit we got in ABRAMS GAY TREK. If you prefer Kirk to be a bad carbon copy of Tom Cruise's character from TOP GUN, so be it. But that asshole is not Kirk. Uhura was a stronger character in TOS because she was her own woman. Her characterization didn't depended on who's she's fucking with. Uhura had her own valour by herself. In ABRAMS SHIT TREK, she is determined by who she is fucking with so she can get acess to the coolest ship. If anything, Jar Jar Piece Of Shit Abrams and his two monekys who wrote the script went back on feminist 40 years. Uhura is now a fucking whore. That's good writing? that's progression? The hell it is. In ABRAMS RETARD TREK, McCoy/Bones is not the same guy who was in TOS. He just repeats paraquotes, nothing else. In all else, Bones is a fucking cypher. There's more characterization in bones in any single episode of TOS (which last 40 minutes) then in that fucking horrinble retard shitty fucking movies made by Abrams which lasted more then 2 hours, for my sins! As fpor Spock, he wasn't changed a bit, he was changed beyond all possible recognition. what Abrams and his twoo assclowns Orci and Kurtzman did was a total complete FUBAR on Spock. Spock might as well start callimg himself FUBAR in the new movies to be, because Spock he has nothing. Let me put this straight, it's not the fault of the actor, but of those stupid asses Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman. ABRAMS RETARD PIEC EOF SHIT TREK is a movie made by people who hate Star Trek with a passion. The plot they crated for the movie, the why they fucked up the universe and the characters is more then proof of that. One need to be deliberatly blind to that to not see it. I see a lot of that deliberate blindness about the Jar Jar Abrams fans. fuck if i ever understand the loyaly the geekry has to that fucking shitty hack.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 11:51 a.m. CST

    neo-asimov is about to E-X-P-L-O-D-E

    by jack black

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 11:53 a.m. CST

    but asi well said in everything as NuTrek is concerned

    by jack black

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 12:24 p.m. CST

    As for what he reviews next

    by Dead_Kate_Moss

    Yeah, he could do The Matrix movies, or POTC... but I'd rather he just picked random movies that just piss him off and deserve a critical mauling for their cinematic retardosity. (like Baby's Day Out). My personal pick would be Brick. I hate that fucking movie and even wrote a vaguely Plinkettesque review of it. Here it is if you are bored. I hope I do the paragraphs right.[p] BRICK This movie somehow has its fans, but people are mostly dumb fucks, so that explains that. Brick is about a young nerd who improbably has a hot-but-nice blonde ex gf, who gets killed because she gets caught up in drugs and cool people. Its the ultimate pussy fantasy/fears made celluloid. It might have well been called 'Milhouse solves a crime'. [p] The main character, played by the long faced kid off Third Rock From The Sun, will appeal to losers who have not actually had an angelic blonde ex-gf, but who know a thing or two about obsessing about and/or stalking them.[p] The jock character is a laughable stereotype that ends up killing the pusher dude who dresses like Jack The Ripper for no fucking reason. To the scaredy cat boffin types, these muscle guys are just animals, so it doesn't seem ridiculous how his punching a guy a few times is equal to Wolverine's beserker rage. Luckily our hero manages to run away from this fight.[p] Throughout the film everyone does as the pussy tells them to, when in real life they would say 'shut it poindexter' and he would cry.[p] He finally works out that the chick from Heroes is evil, and his ex was a poor little angel who only hung out with the cool kids because they were like cool and stuff. And they got her addicted to 'dupe' or 'tug' or whatever stupid ergot they invented for this film. Every line is incomprehensible, with talk of 'every bull in the burg being on their shadow if the 9th line goes bong-bong' or somesuch.[p] The evil chick gets hers when four-eyes reveals he has put a letter under the sheriff's door telling him to search her locker where the drugs are. The perfect nerd solution - run away from every confrontation, then tell the teacher.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 2:13 p.m. CST

    prequel vs. ot villains

    by Darth Thoth

    The prequel definitely had cool villains but I still give that edge to the OT. Jango was never as cool as Boba. Sure, we saw more of Jango but that doesn't necessarily equate to better. Boba > Jango. Palpatine was in both series so he balances out. Again, sure we saw more of him in the prequels but he was the epitome of evil in Return. Maul was definitely cool but he was criminally underused. His role in Phantom pales in comparison to the grim evil of Grand Moff Tarkin in A New Hope. Edge- OT. Dooku was great- Chris Lee is the man. I can't think off hand of anyone in the OT to compare him to. That said, similar to Palpatine, we see Vader and Jabba for instance, in both the OT and prequels. And clearly both characters were better in the OT. Throw in Storm Troopers cooler than Clone Troopers. Also throw in OT bounty hunters and all the various empire commanders. Oh yeah, and Greedo too. All in all, I give the villain edge to the OT.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 2:53 p.m. CST

    AsimovLives, all your complaints are made by Plinkett too.

    by Ringwearer9

    He points out that Uhura seems to be sleeping her way through Starfleet, that Bones has nothing to do except mouth callback lines, and much more. Do tell us that you've finally WATCHED his review.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 4 p.m. CST


    by Thunderbolt Ross

    Whether or not they're enjoyable is beside the point

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 5:02 p.m. CST

    Regarding Minority Report

    by Raskolnikov_was_framed

    Anderton just locking himself in a room until the clock ran out wouldn't have changed the fact that in their world once you are seen committing a crime by the precogs you're guilty...locking himself in a room and coming out after the clock ran out he would still be arrested for murder. His only option was to try and discover why he was shown killing someone...just sitting in a room until the clock ran out is the same as being arrested and in jail and not committing the crime...either way he would get arrested

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 5:09 p.m. CST

    And why the FUCK are these things so long???

    by Thunderbolt Ross


  • Jan. 5, 2011, 5:45 p.m. CST

    minority report

    by Rebel Scumb

    that doesn't change the fact that max von sydow framed tom cruise in a way that makes no sense. All he actually did, was put that guy in a room with pictures. How could he possibly have known all the many random crazy things that would have to occur in order for Cruise to find his way there? Sydow did absolutely nothing to guide him there, which seems like a pretty lousy plan if your hell bent on framing someone.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 5:55 p.m. CST

    Plinkett's review had excellent suggestions...

    by Hat Man

    ... on how the films could have been improved, which is one reason I like his Star Wars critiques so much. His description of how Coruscant should have decayed over the course of the war, the human/alien cost of the conflict, what the clones could have been, and the over importance of Vader were all well observed. This was covered very well in eps 4, 5, 6 in the worn detail of rebel equipment, the tension of the escape from Hoth, etc. As an audience member, you aren't thinking about that, but its there and it helps suspend your disbelief. I was initially drawn in by the new films (at least Phantom Menace), I think because of the spectacle. I was surprised to hear how much it quickly gained a reputation as a stinker, Jar Jar Binks aside. Then Ep 2 arrived and the mood turned ugly. I still didn't want to face facts, that battle at the end was awesome, wasn't it? I also really wanted to like them. The small screen was what revealed them to me (at last) what a lot of people knew sooner. They were BORING, bland and badly done. Eps 4-6 still work well on TV, even now, except for some of the crappy new bits (Hayden C in the end of Jedi). Oh well, they killed that BS ewok song. No film is perfect and going to please everybody, but it's the clear lack of understanding of what he and others created originally that makes Lucas's prequels suck so bad. Plinkett makes it exhaustively clear why. If even half the things he complains of had been fixed, the films would have pleased enough people.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 6:42 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    I'm sure he likes plenty of stuff. His reviews sure show a fondness for the original trek films, the original starwars. To be fair, there haven't been much in the way of decent scifi films in recent years, some smaller scale stuff like Moon have been good, but most of the scifi in theatres these days tends to be shlocky stuff like transformers (if you can even count that), Hollywood seems to mostly equate scifi with big summer action movies, so there hasnt been much stuff lately in the vein of bladerunner, although I thought Inception was good. He might like the Matrix, in his TPM review he used Neo among his list of examples for classical protagonists along with marty mcfly, and others. Personally I feel there's a bit of a shift in recent years where the higher quality content (not just scifi) seems to be on tv instead of the theatres. There was a point about 10 years ago where I didn't think there was much of anything worth watching on tv, especially when all the reality shows took over. But between HBO and some other good stuff there seems to be a bigger emphasis on quality writing on tv lately. Where as theatrical movies seem to be being dumbed down more and more. Much of it merely because making movies has become so expensive Hollywood is pandering more than ever to the lowest common denominator. I thought Children of Men and The Fountain were pretty great.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 6:43 p.m. CST

    braindrain likes to fuck his cat too.

    by jack black

    but you already knew that.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 7:34 p.m. CST

    I understand now why the acting in the prequels sucks

    by ReportAbuse

    I always wondered why Lucas always got such shitty, wooden acting out of otherwise great actors like Ewan McGregor and Samuel Jackson ... it's obvious that it's totally Lucas' fault from three angles: the scripts, the non-setting, and his authoritarian control over everything that requires actors move around like pieces of furniture on the "set." Seeing Plinkett's commentary along with the snippets from the behind the scenes features on the prequels makes it pretty clear that Lucas leaves his actors with NOTHING (literally) to work with by shooting 90% of the prequels in an empty soundstage with a bluescreen. It's no wonder none of the actors gave anything near their best work in the prequels. And I realize I've been unfair to Christensen and Portman by blaming their acting when Lucas deserves most of the blame for their wooden performances. We saw last year that if you give Portman some good material (Black Swan) she actually CAN act, and even the much-hated Christensen has done better stuff since the prequels. Lucas did his actors no favors ... it's a testament to Harrison Ford's talent that he was able to have a career at all after the original films (mainly because he insisted on ACTING whether Lucas liked it or not.) The behind-the-scenes shot in the prequels of a fat Lucas sitting in his chair with a cup of coffee watching a bunch of monitors while the actors tried to work against a featureless blue screen on an empty stage tells you a lot.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 7:34 p.m. CST

    Stupidest thing in the Prequels....

    by Amazing Maurice

    Yoda with a lightsaber. There's only a 20 year gap between the PT and the OT. Are we supposed to believe that Yoda went from being a ninja-bouncing-ball badass to a useless old fart in the last 20 years of his 900 year old lifespan? Judging from the prequels, Yoda could have fucked up Darth Vader in about 2 seconds.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 7:34 p.m. CST

    Rebel Scumb

    by Autodidact

    That's all Von Sydow had to do... thanks to the precogs he knew Tom Cruise would be in that room at that time. All he had to do was have the cops ready to strike whenever Cruise's character showed up.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 7:36 p.m. CST

    There's About One Great Sci-Fi Movie Per Year

    by Autodidact

    For my $ it's hard to beat Sunshine (2007). It's the best and "hardest" outer space sci-fi since 2001.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 7:48 p.m. CST

    That still doesn't work, Raskolnikov

    by successor

    <p>If the clock ran out and he didn't commit the murder, then he can't be arrested for it because the act never happened. Once the time passed without the murder occurring, the Precogs' visions are invalidated. Also, you can't arrest and convict a person for murder when the alleged victim is still alive and can be brought into court as a witness. To murder someone, they have to be, you know, actually killed.</p> <p>Furthermore, the concept has other problems. Like do the Precogs just prevent murders or can they sense other crimes? The film doesn't say. What if you deliberately put somebody in a permanent coma but don't kill them? Can the Precogs detect that? What about war and genocide? How can they detect all those crimes? What about rape or torture without death? Can they detect that? What if somebody kills in self defense? Will they still get haloed for defending themselves? Great system. The more you think about the film, the more holes you can find.</p> <p>As for Plinkett, I hope he covers Alien 3 sometime in the future. Now there's a terrible film that deserves a real working over.</p>

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 7:51 p.m. CST

    braindrain.. Danny Boyle's Sunshine

    by Autodidact

    Sunshine is most definitely a sci-fi movie. You might be getting it confused with the other Sunshine which I've never seen but looks like some kind of romance.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 7:51 p.m. CST

    But the precogs...

    by Rebel Scumb

    ...made the prediction AFTER Sydow set his plan in motion.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 7:53 p.m. CST

    I haven't seen Sunshine yet

    by Rebel Scumb

    Keep meaning to get around to it. Is it worth checking out?

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:04 p.m. CST

    I'm really surprised the Jack McDevitt novels haven't been adapted

    by Rebel Scumb

    Into a show or movies, definitely an oppurtunity to do something unique with the space genre, the books are fairly well regarded from what I understand. I've only read the first 3 of the 'Hutch' series, but I enjoyed them all. I really wish HBO would do a scifi show, its the one genre they haven't touched, and it would be interesting to see what a writer of scifi could do with the creative freedom and large scale production values of cable could do. Someone like JMS, or another veteran of scifi.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:08 p.m. CST

    Sunshine Is The Hardest Sci-Fi in Space Since 2001

    by Autodidact

    This is an entirely true statement. (if we're talking about big budget studio releases). It's also not a statement putting them on the same level.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:14 p.m. CST

    Sunshine is Good, But..

    by Autodidact

    .. Like a few of Danny Boyle's movies, it takes a major turn for the worse in the last 20 minutes. But the movie is so good up to that point, and so serves my appetite for realism in filmic depictions of space travel, that I give it a pass. It's full of hypnotic moments or moments of hard sci-fi-ness that are probably underappreciated by anyone who's never sat down with an Arthur C Clarke novel. The music is so good it has become something of a standard in movie trailers. It came out mid-summer 2007 to zero fanfare and almost no screens. I had to drive to some obscure theatre in Toronto to see it. I don't know if it even got a review on AICN... nobody I know has seen it. Meanwhile I've literally seen it ten times.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:22 p.m. CST

    That 20yo gap between OT and PT always bugged me

    by jack black

    in SW4 and SW5,i always had the impression that the Jedi and the Force were things long time forgotten in a far away past. Kenobi recalling the "good old days",the scene with the officers in the Death Star where the young officer calls the Force an "ancient religion" in front of Vader while Vader mentions the Force in a way that looks like the officers there dont have any clue what the fuck he is talking about. Then you have Yoda who is 800yo and i believe the Emperor was also that old because it looked to me like the antithesis of Yoda. They both were very old and were living in a world of technological wonders,and also they seemed to be the only ones (together with their apprentices who had survived ofc) who regarded the Force as something metaphysical,something beyond the human understanding but also very powerful than anything human made. The above antithesis of Yoda and Emperor being old and talking about metaphysical stuff in a technological era,made them look like two people which were last of their kind of an older,forgotten era where "religions" like the Force were more prominent and more wide-spread and well-known to most of the people around the Galaxy. And then there is the mention from Kenoby that the Jedi were protectors of the Republic for 1000 generations.Surely that is something that you cant forgot that easily and remember it as ancient religion,unless ofc the generation gap is more that 20 friggin years. I mean young Luke remembers of hte Clone Wars but an older officer doesnt remember the Force and the Jedi Knight who defended the Republic for 1000generations? talk about loss of historic memory.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:23 p.m. CST

    I liked Yoda with a lightsaber but then again

    by jack black

    i like watching Braindrain fucking his cat.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:23 p.m. CST

    I'll have to check it out.

    by Rebel Scumb

    I've been very hungry for some new scifi lately. My cousin just recently gave Star trek a try after never watching it all his life. He's plowed through TNG and DS9 in a few months, and hearing him talk about it all from the point of view of a new fan, has really made me crave a good space adventure

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:31 p.m. CST

    autodidact what about Avatar? have you read

    by jack black

    Copernicus review and the reviews from other scientists who watched the film and were impressed by how well established was the science in the film? yeah there were some very obvious unrealistic things like the floating mountains (JC explains that in the SE version,but it contradicts the fact that the strong magnetic fields there would have killed the Humans/Navi),but the scale and the detail and the work (somewhere i read that JC hired 20scientists as advisers for the film) that was done so that the science of the film's world will be as realistic as possible,is at least astonishing.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:35 p.m. CST

    Remembering the Jedi

    by Rebel Scumb

    I think a big part of the problem is how the Jedi were portrayed in the prequels. They are basically just the official police of the republic, which is never what I imagined, and really seems pretty dull to me. I think it would of been better if the republic had a standing army or law enforcement of its own, perhaps the govenors (before they had any direct control), and the Jedi would be more like Batman. Half a folkstory, mostly unconfirmed and conflicting accounts and legends to the average galactic citizen. The senate would have some interaction with them ala Commish Gordon, but no temple on Coruscant. No taking babies from their parents and raising them as jedi since birth. No 'not allowed to love bullshit". and certainly not numbering in the tens of thousands. Maybe 20-30 Jedi total, maybe only a dozen. More like the knights of the roundtable, or robin hoods merry men. Journeymen protectors roaming the galaxy, righting wrongs, many of them with families, passing down their traditions and their lightsabers to their sons and daughters when they come of age. Yoda should of not even been in the prequels, or just been a cameo. He should of just always resided on Dagobah, and some Jedi, perhaps the most challenging students (like Kenobi) would be sent to Dagobah without further instruction (as Luke was) to be trained. To the republic at large, and maybe even to many of the Jedi, Yoda would just be a myth. I think if the Jedi were portrayed like that, instead of just a bunch of smug assholes who have a lot of meetings, then its completely plausible that the Jedi would be so forgotten by ANH. Because many would just believe they never existed to begin with. I do agree that it seems like it took place longer ago then just 20 years. Part of the problem with the prequels, that is not in anyway the fault of George Lucas' execution is that if you assemble all the facts given in the originals about the prequel era, and then also try to fit them into a 3 movie arc, its tough to get it all to add up. Like Kenobi switching from Obi-wan to Ben, BEFORE Luke was born. But you get the impression that he would of gone into hiding around the same time Luke and Leia were hidden and Anakin turned to evil.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:39 p.m. CST


    by Rebel Scumb

    I do think the only real problem with that movie is just how predictable the story is. But judging it otherwise I liked it. It felt more like a scifi novel to me, where he really took the time to explore the world he created. I always assumed that the mountains floated because of the same mineral all the corporate guys were trying to mine from the planet. Afterall when Giovanni Ribisi showed a chunk of it to Sigorney (and to provide the exposition to the audience) the piece of it was floating in the jar. I assumed thats why it was so valuable, an element that defies the laws of physics. I hope that with the sequel he can take the same world and tell a less conventional story.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:39 p.m. CST

    rebel scumb good points there mate.

    by jack black

    Now that i read your descriptions,the JK from the prequels looks more to me like the Judges from the 2000AD Judge Dredd comics !! they even have the same "love is forbidden" shit.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:46 p.m. CST

    Thanks Killik

    by Rebel Scumb

    I think the thing with the Jedi in the films, is they seem less interesting the more of them that there are. The arena scene in ep2 being the best example. But if there were say maybe 12-15 Jedi in the prequels, each played by interesting character actors or a neat alien, and given at least some opputunity to be an interesting character, even to the degree of say... Wedge Antilles, Admiral Piett, General Riekeen, etc. Then the purge would seem like a bigger deal to. Plus I do agree with Plinkett both that having kids in episode 2 in the jedi temple was annoying (plus its creepy that the jedi force kids to be jedi), and also because anakin killing kids just feels... to harsh for the starwars universe, and harder to accept his redemption as deserved. Also, if we accept that the force runs in families, whether we accept midichlorians or not (I personally think it was a dumb addition) then why would the Jedi forbid breeding/love amongst their ranks, when that seems like the most likely way the force sensitive would keep their numbers large. I would of really liked a John Rhys davies Jedi to be in there somewhere. Also, they could of had Mark Hamill play Anakins father, and get killed in episode one, as the 'qui-gon' or 'old ben' type character.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 8:59 p.m. CST

    And i agree with your suggestions about the JK

    by jack black

    they should have been portrayed as Buddhist Monks or something similar.They were followers of their Force religion but they were also trained in combat in order to defend themselves and enhance their abilities and understanding and use of the Force.Like the Buddhist Monks do. The JK should have been peaceful and neutral,they never meddled with the affairs of the people outside of their religion but as individuals they allowed themselves to help someone who was in need and in some occasions they assisted as an officially Ally the Republic whenever a major crisis threatened the whole Galaxy like ie the Clone Wars. Instead Lucas made them look more like the Crusaders,holding the cross in the one hand and praying,while holding the sword and killing in the other hand in the name of their God and their King ofc. The whole political fuckfest is what ruined the Prequels.I read somewhere that Lucas had already written the basic ideas of the prequels during the Vietnam war and basically he wanted to make a political statement about the Vietnam War with SW,but he finally did that years later with the Prequels but instead he made a political statement about 911 and the war on terrorism and how the government exploited the fear of the USA citizens and tricked them to lose their basic rights and live in a fascist state of fear. which is all nice and well,but what the fuck has to do with SW? just make a political movie if you want to be political mr Lucas.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 9:05 p.m. CST

    rebel scumb yeah Jake gives the same explanation

    by jack black

    in the Extended edition.the mountains are basically giant magnets.the contradiction is that if the magnetic fields are so strong that can lift giant mountains,then the humans would have been killed because the iron of their blood would have left their body because of in the Prison Escape scene in XMEN2 with Magneto. But Big Jim said: Fuck it,i want to see floating mountains.heh.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 9:10 p.m. CST

    ahhh yeah, that would be bad for the blood!

    by Rebel Scumb

    I guess its one of those pesky problems like the vapourizing machine in Batman Begins, that would of made humans explode just like the pipes since we're full of water. Probably for the best then that the explantion was left out of the theatrical movie, and just that the mountains float some how, but they didn't really delve into it.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 9:29 p.m. CST

    Jedi Knights

    by Rebel Scumb

    Yeah the politics were a bad idea, the senate sounded cool when we heard about it in ANH, but to actually see it, really took a lot a way. Although until we did see it that wouldn't of occured to me. At most I think we needed just one senate scene of Palpatine declaring himself emperor. If I were making the PT, I would of only had coruscant in the second film, I didnt like all the repeat visits to naboo and coruscant and tattooine in each prequel. Part of what I like in ANH and ESB is they're always going some place new, and you got a sense that it took a long time between destinations, and there didn't seem to be any mass communication in the galaxy. It seemed old fashioned, like travelling by sea in the napoleonic era. You'd hear things like "word has reached us of an invasion on alderaan by the mandelorians" or "there's rumour of war in the outer rim". But all these holograms back and forth in the prequels seemed too... everyday and dull, and every planet seems to be around the corner from Tatooine and naboo. Anyways, I would of had Anakin go to Corscant to mirror Luke going to dagobah. Instead "I'm not picking up any cities or technology", it would be the polar opposite, with the huge metropolis. And we could have some good scenes in the middle of the film of palpatine tempting anakin. So palpatine would be like the Yoda of the prequels. Only in it a bit, but having a huge impact. I also wouldn't of had Anakin come from tattooine, or Padme be royal. I would make Anakin the kid who grew up roaming the galaxy with his Jedi Father, hot shot pilot, youngest graduate ever of the academy, the alpha male rising star captain america type kid that everyone expects big things from (again the opposite of Luke). Maybe almost an Ivy league type kid. He craves disipline and order though, but Obi-wan is reckless (more the way quigon was portrayed) and doesn't give anakin the structure and disipline he so desperately needs. And then with Padme I would of made her come from tattooine and been Owen Lars sister. midway through film one, anakin and obiwan end up there, and anakin has the option to settle down with her on the moisture farm, start a family. Owen wants him to stay, but Obiwan convinces him to go along and fight in the clone wars. Padme goes with him. That way she could be the rough around the edges Han Solo type character the prequels so desperately needed. We get to see anakin and obi-wan form a great frienship over the course of the first film, and anakins piloting prowess If they needed a royal damsel in distress character, why not have Prince Bail Organa, and play against the stereotype. He's Obi's buddy, a sort of Prince William type, heir to the throne, dashing, and always wanting to go along on the adventures with his old chum the jedi knight. Leave R2 and C3PO in the originals, but have two alien peasents or something to fill the comedic relief role. Hell, use Watto and Nute Gunray, as Obi-wan or Bail's servants pulled along for the ride (just as a crude example). Then one Sith master as the main nemesis, who wants to take over the galaxy using the clone army. Palpatine is their apprentice, meant to stall the senate, but is craftier then his master. Uses his position to recruit the storm trooper army, sway anakin to his cause. Gets anakin to kill his master. He becomes the new sith master, anakin his apprentice. The Jedi end up on the opposite side of the conflict, realizing what palpatine really is (and not missing all the clues over and over again like in the actual prequels). The clones and the old sith master defeated at the end of ep2. Ep3 the jedi think anakin is still with them, they begin to plan along with bail, mon montha, ackbar, etc to remove Palpatine. Anakin betrays them though and the empire deals the jedi a 'pearl harbour' style crippling surprise attack. Maybe the jedi were all convening on a lava planet when the attack comes. Have a battle of hoth style first act. The Jedi suffer a bad defeat, but anakin and obi-wan have their duel, he ends up in the lava, and then the vader suit. Then the rest of the movie the remaining rebels and jedi are on the run from vader and tarkin and the new imperial army. Something like that. It seems basic, and I'm just scribbling that out. But if they had gone something along those lines. and the dialogue had been fun and quotable (doesnt need to be oscar worthy) like the originals were, and the stormtroopers were actually guys in costume instead of animated. Really, would anyone of complained? Would we all even be having this debate now? I'm not saying I have all the answers, but I mean really, isnt that more or less the kind of thing we wanted? Or even if not, would that have really bothered anyone, even if you did like the prequels as is?

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 9:37 p.m. CST

    Killik, re: buddist monks, etc

    by Rebel Scumb

    You brought up a good point I hadnt thought about before. It goes back to part of why I never liked Yoda with a lightsaber. In the originals, I never really got the impression that becoming a jedi, and learning the force culminated in being an expert swordsman. More just that if a Jedi was going to use a weapon, it would be a lightsaber. Afterall in some of the original lucas drafts, and the old Mcquarrie drawings, didn't everyone use sabers? like the stormtroopers and whatnot? It was more just the weapon of the old era. But regardless, to me being a Jedi would just make you more intune for everything. It wasn't that the jedi knew some studied fencing technique or martial arts, its just that their instincts were very good. After all in ANH, its really all about Luke pulling off an amazing bit of piloting in the end, he doesn't even have a lightsaber battle until the second film. It seemed like Obiwan was just using the lightsaber as a means to teach Luke to trust his instincts and listen to the force. Likewise, Yoda was also just teaching Luke to become aware of the force. Nobody actually ever taught luke to swordfight, its just that listening to the force made him naturally more able to respond to vaders attacks. But with Jedi jumping around like spiderman, and surviving these huge falls (or what about Padme dropping like 40 feet and landing pussy first onto the back of that rhino thing?? OUCH!!!) It just seems to outlandish to me. I like the jedi being the way Luke was in RoTJ, just slliigghttly above a normal human, it makes the force feel like it could almost be a real thing.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 9:41 p.m. CST

    sorry, just realized I've been adding an extra 'l' into Kilik

    by Rebel Scumb

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 10 p.m. CST

    I think that Plinkett doesn't realize..

    by darthwaz1

    That Palp doesn't necessarily declare himself Emperor in ROTS, he says he's going to re-organize the government into an Empire to combat all the current threats (war, jedi rebellion). The senate stays intact for another 20-30 years, Palp doesn't disband the senate until ANH. I'm sure he lets them think they have an importance still. So I guess the public thinks of it more of a heightened state of security at first, a more military government. If Palpatine had come out and said "I'm emperor now, fuck you all." I don't think they would've applauded him..

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 10 p.m. CST

    If you're questioning the logic in the PT...

    by MajorFrontbum

    ..then question the logic in the original films as well. I always thought it was poorly set up, the way Luke Skywalker went from being a simple farm boy, who had never set foot off world, to flying a Rebel space ship with no space flight experience and then destroying the Empire's Death Star. I don't care who the fuck you are, pilots train for YEARS. It's not like hopping onto a scooter and going to the corner store for a can of soda and a bummie. I never understood how a Lightsaber worked either. How does a beam of laser light, turn into a solid object? Through crystals? Why doesn't any body question that? Or how come nobody's questioning the moves and hair pin turns space ships make and the sound of explosions in the vacuum of space? How is that giant slug able to survive in deep space in an asteroid field? What's he eating? His own shit?? How did he get there? Does he own a washing machine, or does he wash his clothes in the river, the same way they do in India? Why was there gravity on that asteroid anyway? That makes absolutely no sense at all. How does the Falcon manage to get to Bespin without it's hyperdrive functioning? Without lightspeed travel, it would take them YEARS to reach another planet. After the first Death Star is destroyed, the Empire decides to build another one, and doesn't take precautions so no idiot Rebel can fly inside and take it out a second time? And why would a space craft need an exhaust vent, how is the fucking thing powered? By coal?

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 10:19 p.m. CST

    The science of starwars never made sense...

    by Rebel Scumb

    majorfrontburn, I dont think anyone is suggesting otherwise. Its not really science fiction in the strictest sense. I think even Lucas said "scifi is what COULD be, fantasy is what could NEVER be' But none of those details are really important to the what made starwars enjoyable in the first place. I think all that techno discussion and whatnot is more of a startrek thing, and even there i don't really care about it that much. Star wars is meant to be like a campfire story, basic elemental archetypes. A magical myth. I don't care that Han solo would not be able to breath in the vacuum of space wearing only an asthma mask in ESB, and I don't care in the prequels that General grevious could go out into the vaccuum either. What bothers me, and what Plinkett is mainly addressing in his reviews, is in the BIG picture of character arcs (or lack there of), proper motivations. Engaging filmmaking, consistent behaviour of the protagonist.. hell just even having proper protagonists, is the real issue. A good example is how he points out the role reversal. How in aotc, when obi-wan jumps out the window after the assassin droid, how really it feels like that was suppose to be anakin. As Lucas presented the characters, that seems like what would of happened. Anakin would jump out the window, and Obiwan would shake his head, make some pithy comment then go after him. Or Palpatine being an evil genius is unsatisfying because all of the heros (and other villians) are so devoid of common sense and basic intelligence, that decieving them isn't any kind of achievement. No personal conflicts between Dooku and anakin/obi-wan, or with grevious, or Maul. The climaxes fall flat because nothing is really at stake for the characters, except abstract concepts that have been sort of explained to us. As opposed to "if luke doesnt make this shot, and destroy the deathstar, then Yavin will blow up. Leia, and ALL the rebels will die" or "If Leia can't catch Boba Fett before he leaves cloud city, then the man she loves might be lost forever" or "holy shit, darth vader is my father, EVERY SINGLE thing I ever believed, about myself, and my family, and everything that was ever told to me by my mentors and surrogate fathers is a LIE" family, love, death, these are palpable relatable things that anyone in the world can be engaged by, they are the core of good drama. As oppose to taxation of trade routes, the trade federation must be stopped because they are occupying Naboo, and maybe people are dying but we're not sure, because we haven't seen anything about it, and we don't really know why the federation wants the planet to begin with, and what possible value it holds to them, and I don't really care if the heroes die because I don't really care about any of them anyways.

  • Jan. 5, 2011, 11:04 p.m. CST

    rebel scumb

    by MajorFrontbum

    The taxation of trade routes & invasion of Naboo was simply a ruse set up by Darth Sidious. Sidious obviously bullshitted the heads of the Federation so they'd give him what he wanted; access to their infantry and he promised them control over the Naboo system. Seems like a fair deal to them; they get control over another world and all they have to do, is supply a few thousand battle droids, of which they have an infinite supply of. The whole point to the invasion of Naboo, was simply to take the senates eyes off what was happening on Coruscant and divert their attention to Naboo. While this was going on, Palpatine could put the next phase of his plan into motion in the senate; to get rid of Valorum and have himself elected as Chancellor of the Republic.

  • Jan. 6, 2011, 5:22 a.m. CST

    I know it was just a ruse

    by Rebel Scumb

    But the trade federation did not. What was so valuable about Naboo? Why risk their entire organization, and the investigation with the senate? Why did Sidious tell them to kill the Jedi when they arrived, when sending them back to Coruscant to tell valorum that there would be no negotiations would of expediated Palpatines plan to make himself chancellor Why did he send Darth Maul to Tattooine? If the jedi were killed, and the queen taken back to Naboo to sign the treaty, then the crisis (the "ruse" you mentioned) that was INTEGRAL to Sidious' plan to force out valorum and gain enough sympathy for him to be elected chancellor, would be over. Why did Palpatine continually pressure the federation to make sure the queen signed the treaty. If the invasion is made legal, then the crisis is over, and Palpatines plan has failed. What if Amidala had caved at the first wave of the invasion, and signed the treaty in order to save her people. Palpatines plan would of all been for nothing. The best possible situation for Palpatine was for the crisis to escalate as much as possible, and for the queen or the jedi to get back to coruscant to communicate this to the senate. Why would the federation care about controlling Naboo? What threat were the people under? We see no signs of hardship, no one dying, or suffering, infact we dont see any naboo citizens at all aside from 15 pilots and half a dozen bureacrats. Why did the federation conviently send away its entire fleet? If unravelling the mystery of the sith was so important to the jedi council, why only send back quigon and obi-wan, why not send... at least one more Jedi, or like a dozen? If this was the most important thing to them, you would think they would take it more seriously. I could go on and on, and all of this is in Plinketts TPM review anyways. The AotC "climax", and I use the term loosely, as normally the climax is the culmination of the story we've seen so far brought to a head, is even worse. Does Obi-wan face off and finally defeat his nemesis for the entirety of the film, Jango Fett? The man who has defeated him both on land and in space, already in the movie? No. He gets beheaded like a chump by Mace Windu, and 3rd string character. Do we have any investment or sense of what the strategy of the battle is? No. Apparently the plan is to capture Dooku, but Dooku is in the stadium, standing in plain sight, Yoda and the clones don't attack him. Instead they fly off with the jedi and then march all of their forces in THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION away from the stadium, even though, from what we are shown, Dooku and the entire leadership of the seperatists is in a bunker inside the stadium, where all the jedi are now going as far as possible from. Do we engage with our main heros in the battle and feel their plight? No, because we barely see them except for one part where they watch the battle from a ship, then order one of the clones to fire a missle. When anakin and obiwan attack dooku, do they have any personal conflict at all that will make this fight satisfying to the audience? Has Dooku even really been established as a palpable villian? he's been in the movie for only the last section, and all he has done is conduct a conference, then watched while the geonosians tried ineptly to kill the heroes. He doesn't present any air of menace other than the fact he's played by christopher Lee. How does the final battle resolve? Our heroes lie on the floor like chumps, as Yoda, a 2nd tier character who has not been involved in any of the main story or journey in this or the previous film then fights dooku. And aside from the fact of how dumb all the frog ninja stuff is. The fight, like EVERY SINGLE FIGHT in the movie is a stalemate, and again, there is no palpable emotional reason for us to care about the fight on anything other than a visual level. A throwaway line 2 seconds before the fight about Dooku being Yoda's padawan does not suffice. Thats not a history. Its not a revelation, and neither Dooku or Yoda are main characters. Infact, at this point the only reason we even care about Yoda, is because we've seen ESB and ROTJ, otherwise he's just some douche who has a lot of meetings with Mace and Kenobi, and despenses terrible advice. Compare that with ESB, where we've had 2 movies of buildup between Vader and Luke. We know Luke is in great jeoparody of being turned to the darkside. He also believes that vader killed his father, and he knows vader killed Ben. We intercut with Leia, a main character we know and love, trying to save, Han a character we also love, and she does to. Then we end with an earthshattering revelation.

  • Jan. 6, 2011, 8:06 a.m. CST

    rebel scum...

    by darthwaz1

    Forward those questions to Lucas... Only he has the answers!!

  • Jan. 6, 2011, 10:20 a.m. CST

    compare / contrast

    by Thunderbolt Ross

    I think the first thing you have to acknowledge when comparing and contrasting the two trilogies is that each has different goals in mind. The prequels are more epic in scope and the story reflects that. Whether or not that was a good decision or was executed effectively is another matter, but since Lucas set out to make a slightly different type of movie, enumerating the differences in approach as if they are some error is beside the point. Also it helps to remember how mediocre Return of the Jedi is. The distance in quality between Empire Strikes back and Jedi is far greater than that between Jedi and The Phantom Menace. It's funny because Jedi suffers from a lot of the same problems: lame creatures, bad acting, redundancy.

  • Jan. 6, 2011, 12:46 p.m. CST

    Would Love To See a No-Jedi SW

    by Autodidact

    I agree with the 20 year gap between OT and PT settings being too short compared to how different the eras feel. And I always felt like the coolest part of Star Wars was the Death Star, the giant capital ships, the AT-ATs and landspeeders, the inside of asteroids, etc. i.e. the "sci-fi" trappings. Lots of sci-fi/fantasy franchises have such things but the Star Wars approach is so unbound and detailed on the design front that it could pretty much do without the jedi. As a kid first seeing Star Wars, I missed most of the jedi stuff. To me it was all about the mind-boggling concept of a space station that was the size of a moon and could destroy planets. Some of the imagery was so nazi/WWII inspired and really drove home the overwhelming technological might of a galactic empire run by evil fucks. The force and all that shit got more important in the next two films but they still kept on having aweome tech/sci-fi stuff throughout.... the probe droid... the carbonite freezing process... Seriously let's have a third trilogy or just one movie where the jedi are only background characters. Make the main character a man who starts out a stormptrooper (not a clone trooper, jesus christ they're boring) and maybe does a stint as a bounty hunter before joining the rebels. Maybe he meets Luke or even flies in the attack on the death star. That would be bad-ass.

  • Jan. 6, 2011, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Spotted Cow

    by lloyd008

    Classy choice. Good work.

  • Jan. 6, 2011, 7:58 p.m. CST

    Prequel trilogy more epic?

    by Rebel Scumb

    Is it though? It feels more to me like a tv show, with every "episode" (tehe) being very status quo, constantly going back to Naboo, coruscant, Tatooine. Space travel feels easy and convient. The jedi don't even change into space suits. There's no sense of going on a journey, or bold character arcs. The prequels are definitely more complicated, but I'm not sure thats really a compliment

  • Jan. 6, 2011, 8:19 p.m. CST

    I will say this...

    by Rebel Scumb

    Just to not seem completely cold hearted. I do love that TPM is such a bright and colourful movie, especially since when it came out everything was like the Matrix, with black leather and cynical. TPM doesn't even try to be "cool" or edgy. It feels more like the wizard of Oz, or something in that vein, and I do appreciate that about it. Lucas very easily could of made a movie that was "all darth maul' in tone, and people would of lapped it up, so I give him credit for trying something different. and in terms of FX and overall visuals i think TPM holds up pretty well, and is a good blend of practical and digital fx for the most part. AOTC to me is just all bad, there isnt anything in that movie that couldn't be 10x better with even just a tad more effort and RotS to me feels very bi-polar. Its doing well for a bit, then all of a sudden something comes along to completely derail the quality of the movie, then its bad for about 5 minutes, then recovers a bit for a few more minutes, then bad again. TPM is still weaker then any of the originals, but as a movie I think it holds the best under scrutiny.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 3:51 a.m. CST

    Could HAVE ... Should HAVE ... Would HAVE

    by ReportAbuse

    Not could of, should of, would of ... Oh my fucking God. Every fucking time. (Note to "rebel scumb")

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 5:38 a.m. CST

    rebel scumb, the prequels are more epic in scope

    by AsimovLives

    The amount of different planets and settings that happens in the prequels far out-number the so-called original trilogy. And the battles are bigger, specially the land battles. You might dislike the prequels to your heart content, but there is a bigger sense of scope and it's more epic then the so-called original trilogy.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 5:41 a.m. CST

    The prequels just prove that SW is not perfect

    by AsimovLives

    Not even the so-called original trilogy. And many geeks are having a hard time accepting that. so they hailed the original trilogy to impossible heights whihc doesn't belong while putting down the prequels to depths it doesn't belong. Not even THE PHANTOM MENACE, a movie i disliked, is the bad crap the geeks claim it is. The geeks are just having a hard time accepting reality: that SW was not the end all of all things as they mistakenly have believed all this years. Welcome to reality, boys. Hell, SW is not even Lucas' own best movie he ever made!

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 5:46 a.m. CST

    How bout...

    by fettitular

    Coulda, shoulda, woulda? That work better for ya, BITCH? On a more serious note... good work Rebel Scumb! I'm not sure where you got the time to type up those ESSAYS, but i'm glad you did... Said exactly what i would OF, But with less cursing and more civility ;-) It's funny that after all that OBJECTIVITY, LOGIC, and RATIONAL THOUGHT you exhibited... some still choose to fight it. Such is the way of things, i suppose...

  • He's my goddamned hero :-)

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 5:49 a.m. CST


    by fettitular

    If he'd only set his sights on the Matrix Sequels, The Dark Knight, and the last season of LOST. I'm hoping for the latter ;-)

  • That would be the opposite of "fun". :-(

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 5:52 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Actually, that's incorrect. The hardest SF movie i ever seen after 2001: A SPACE ODDYSSEY is a japanese movie made in the 1980s which, in portuguese at least, was called SANCTUARY IN SPACE. The movie was set in two setting,s one in a giant orbital LaGrangian spacestation called Island 5, i think, and the second setting was in a very polluted Earth, Blade Runner style. The movie thus a mixture of Blade Runner and 2001 on a budget and shot in video. The budget was very low, that much was obvious, but the movie had ambitions, not just in the story but then in the scope of it's story. The movie might look cheesy to many, but i really liked it. I could see it's qualities beyond the lack of budget and dodgy special effects. I have tries to rewatch it ever since, but i haven't found it yet.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 5:53 a.m. CST


    by fettitular

    In the last subject header... meant to say "doesn't show up AGAIN". Not that it really matters... It would OF made a little more cents though. Teehee...

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 6:07 a.m. CST

    I respectfully disagree

    by Rebel Scumb

    Sure there were more planets, but so what? There are bigger land battles, but are there any that are main characters are directly involved in? Do any of them effectively portray a sense of strategy or objective, or consequences? Ep3 had a ton of planets, but many of them were just glimpses and between each trip somewhere else we have to add "and then back to coruscant" The galaxy seems tiny, because going from coruscant to kaminio (supposedly beyond the outer rim) feels like taking a bus uptown for a few hours. Actually for starwars movies, we spend very little time... in outer space in these films. And the originals made good use of, whether it was due to technical limitations or just good storytelling, what they didn't show. The senate just being briefly talked about, made the galaxy seem even bigger, because there was the sehse that the universe of starwars was so big, you couldn't possibly show all of it in the movies. That senate was so far away it could only be discussed. Instead of just cutting to some senate scene where palpatine disolves the council. In the prequels, I feel like I've seen all there is to see in the GFFA, and it feels a lot smaller as a result. In the originals we have a small band of heroes in one small ship wandering from one strange place to another, a tiny fish in a vast ocean. Everything feels big and dangerous. But for obi-wan its just another day at the office "swing by utapau and kill general grievous, and Kenobi, pick up some starbucks on your way back. we have a meeting at 3pm"

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 6:12 a.m. CST

    The originals aren't perfect, I agree

    by Rebel Scumb

    No movie is. Nor do I expect them to be. But I think as adventure films go, ANH and ESB are pretty spot on in delivering quality entertainment for all ages, with memorable relatable characters, and a sweeping story that people can get drawn up in. I mean there's a reason starwars has been around for so long, and continues to capture the imagination of each new generation. One of my exgirlfriends has 2 sons, and they both love starwars, one of them is only 6 so he was born after episode 3 came out. No new content to lure them in, but they love it just as much as kids have since 1977. Its impressive when compared to how many things are dismissed and forgotten after their 15 minutes of fame, That said, I'm not saying the prequels need to be perfect, but they should of at least held to the standard set by the originals, otherwise why even bother making them.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 6:16 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    I watched Plinkett's review when it came out. I also noticed that despiste his constant criticism, he's very easy on the movie and still says dumb stuff like "but it's fun, but it's entertaining, but it's fast-paced" and other such nonsense. With all his acutilate observations, she still mistakes that shit for entertaining and fun. Which is not. The whole barrage of criticism he does to the movie, his end review should read "the movie is the the worst Star Trek movie ever mad,e it shouldn't even be called Star Trek, it makes Nemesis actually looks good". That's what he should had said, instead of what is, in the end, a brainless appologetic bullshit for a movie which he spent 90% of the time pointing out it's total retardness and imbecility. Plinkett's review was observante, but in the end he failed to reach the logical conlcusion. Even Plinkett feels the big need to conform.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 6:28 a.m. CST


    by fettitular

    Your mistakening CONVOLUTED and CLUTTERED/BUSY with terms like "epic"... BIIIIIIIIG difference, my friend.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 6:32 a.m. CST

    In other words...

    by fettitular

    There is most definitely "more going on" in the prequels, plot wise... But it's incredibly contrived, convoluted, and the foundation is incredibly flimsy. There's no SUBSTANCE to the prequels. Unless you count plot-holes, inconsistencies, and horrible exposition as "substance"...

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 6:33 a.m. CST

    The OT kept it short...

    by fettitular

    ... and sweet. Lean... focused... passionate. The prequels were NONE of these.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 7:22 a.m. CST

    My favorite idiotic apologist "argument" is...

    by fettitular

    the one about Plinkett, and other "haterzzz" not having a valid opinion until they've created something artistic themselves. Which is hilariously retarded in and of itself... but in this case... guess what, chumps? Mr. Plinkett actually DID. He created a BRILLIANT, HILARIOUS, INSIGHTFUL, SCATHING DECONSTRUCTION of the widely loathed and despised cinematic after-birth, known as the Star Wars Prequels. He created something that TENS OF THOUSANDS of people are viewing and enjoying to a high degree. Can YOU say that? Nope. He has created a work of art. Which is more than you can say about Mr. Luca$ over the past 30 years...

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 7:29 a.m. CST

    I think that deserves a...

    by fettitular

    CHOP. If i may say so myself.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 7:45 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    So you just admited that you fuck your own cat? Ballsy thing to say in a public forum.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 7:54 a.m. CST

    'Tis true, asi...

    by fettitular

    It's the closest thing to "pussy" he'll ever fuck.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 8:07 a.m. CST

    braindrain, Sunshine is not Science Fiction?

    by AsimovLives

    Are you stupid? You cannot complain about people calling you stupid when you say stupid shit like that, man.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 8:26 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Make no mistake, i really like SUNSHINE. Filmmakingwise, it's a very well made movie. The characters are all very interesting and worth spend time with through 2 hours of our time. The premise of the film is interesting. and for once, in a futuristic Sf movie set in our solar system, a voyage toward an object "relatively" close as our Sun is treated as a very long travel, which it would. The Sun might be "close", but it's still 150 million miles away, which in our human scale is a hell of a lot. Also, the mvie rightly treats the Sun and it's close vicinity as a harsh and dangerous place even for the standards of space. Those are good things. And then there's the fact there's a subtle atheism running through the movie, thanks to the influence of two very smart atheists, screenwriter Alex Gargland and science advisor Dr. Brian Cox. The later was instrumental in turning Cilliam Murphy into an atheist, which means he's full of win and awesome. However, SUNSHINE comets some crass scientific mistakes, specially for a movie that wants to be taken as hard SF. To wit: 1- The gravity inside the ship is all over the place. It's hard to understand what is the cause of the Earth-like gravity inside the ship. The characters run the full lenght of the ship, that's what the design of the ship is understood by watching the scenes. Yet the astronauts are not inside a torus which rotates to great gravity through centrifugal force. It's said in aditional material at the anti-matter cube at the bow of the ship has mass equivalent of the Moon and according gravitational pull, but it still dosn't add up to what we seen in the movie. If the cube had been the sourse of gravity, then walking about the whole ship would be like being inside a very tall tower, with the bottom pointed out to the cube and up would be the opposite direction. It doesn't happen like that. 2- A personal peeve of mine is the perpectuation of the misunderstanding of freezing in space. The movie claims that in the shadow of the solar shield the local temperature would be about minus 220 celcius. Which sounds about right. but the goof, the unexcusable goof the movie make sis to make people instantly frezzing when they get exposed to the vaccum in the shadow. This is pure bullshit. Vaccum is a vaccum. it means there's no medium for people to lose heat to. Thus, in a vaccum, the only way to lose heat is through irradiation, with the is the slowest way to lose heat in the universe. A person would take days to freeze in contact with space vaccum. We can freeze almost instantly on Earth because we lose heat through transference, be it to cold air or cold water. In space, that doesn't happen at all. I mean, think about it: why you think thermo flasks have vaccum inbetween the inner and outer walls? Precisely because how slow it is to "transfer" temperature in vaccum, and that's why stuff mantains cooled or hot inside a thermo for hours. Think about it. You could say this is just minor peeve complains from me. But the thing is, SUNSHINE is suppposed to be a hard SF movie. Such type of mistakes are unforgivable. There's more to be hard Sf then just to pretend it's one because the interior design of a ship look kinda plausible and astronaits are sweaty, if you know what i mean. SUNSHINE is a fine movie, but it could had been a contender.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 8:28 a.m. CST

    Bill Erwin obit??

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    I thought I'd give it a few days. It's the new year. We got Ann Francis. Where the hell is the Bill Erwin obit? If you don't know the name, you know the face. This great character actor has been in everything. He lived every geeks dream by being in a movie with JCVD. Everyone oohs and aaahs over his appearance on Seinfeld. I never cared for that show or saw the episode. His career peak was starring with Christopher Reeve, Christopher Plummer, and Jane Seymour in Somehwere in Time. That's a movie. Although I guess technically he wasn't in the movie with Plummer and Seymour.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 8:49 a.m. CST

    Good Points Asi

    by Autodidact

    Hey great comment bud. True, the gravity on their ship doesn't make sense, and yes you don't freeze instantly in space. In fact if you were locked inside a sealed spaceship with no active cooling, you'd be cooked by your own body heat due to the lack of dissipation medium in a vacuum. They definitely faltered there but the huge mass of the bomb almost makes up for it, especially given the bomb is much more dense than the moon.. the best part of the shitty climax is when they fall off the bomb only to slide to a stop halfway down one face, as you would given that you're being pulled towards the center of mass.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 10:18 a.m. CST

    New Glarus Ale?

    by DrPepperPHD

    The Oriental Theatre on Farwell Ave? This douchebag must be from Milwaukee. We can add him to a list of our greatest achievers: Liberace, Zucker, Abrahams and Zucker, Dahmer, Heather Graham, that one chick from Gossip Girl, and now.....Plinkett. That's quite a list. <p> But Plinkett, really man, do you have to use so many cuss words?

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 10:45 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    The sliding down on the Cube is an interesting sequence because it does look weird and strange and yet it's very accurate scientifically, as you very well pointed out. This is why i think that if SF movies specially those set in space were more scientifically accurate, they would present bigger and more amazing spectacle. The stuff in real life surpasses the imagination of any writer, unless they are scientists themselves. The cooking inside the ship coment you made is also very accurate. Seems you have read those coments from real astronauts concerning their esperiences with spacesuits. It was always a big problem for astronauts not the cold but the accumulation of heat, form the astronauts themsvels, but more importantly from the Sun. It has always been a major headache for spaceship and spacesuits designers how to get rid of excessive heat. It's great to see that you also genuinely love and know about space stuff. Too many geeks claim to be Sf nerds, but too few of them actually bother to know a bit about the real stuff about the realities space. I think that a SF geek that has little interest about the realities of spacefaring is not a real SF geek. This goes beyond preferences and goes into the very core of the love of the genre. Or it might just means i'm a child of the 70s and of 70s SF.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 10:47 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    I loved your THE BIG LEBOWSKI's reference. It brough a smile to my face, as all things LEBOWSKI do.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 11:17 a.m. CST


    by REDD

    Almost six years since the movie came out...timely!

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 11:44 a.m. CST

    The guy doing the voice of the Emperor in Plinkett's kitchen...

    by Royston Lodge

    ...sounds a HELL of a lot like Ian McDiarmid. Is there any chance that Plinkett convinced McDiarmid to make a cameo, since Plinkett admits that the Emperor is the only thing he likes about the prequels?

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 12:54 p.m. CST


    by Autodidact

    .. the guy froze to death instantly because he was caught in the swirl of air that was escaping from the first ship (The Icarus One?). That's what I choose to believe!

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 3:58 p.m. CST

    Contend with Drew?

    by Subtitles_Off

    Suck my dick! Shot. Reaction shot. Shot. Reaction shot. Sitting on a couch in front of a large window. Shot. Reaction shot. Say something stupid. Silly looking animated shit. Shot Reaction shot. Say something stupid. You can apply those --- indisputably valid --- criticisms to all cinema, huh? HA!

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 6:14 p.m. CST

    Lucas did create a trilogy that defined a generation...

    by Rebel Scumb

    The original trilogy. But the same can't be said for the prequels.

  • Jan. 7, 2011, 6:22 p.m. CST

    re: coulda,woulda,shoulda...

    by Rebel Scumb

    Well people are saying that people who don't create something as successful as starwars can't say starwars is bad. Which is pretty much like saying that you can't critisize the president unless you have been the president of a country. But then maybe you guys actually believe that. Nothing would surprise me at this point. Anyways, if I had hundreds of millions of dollars at my disposal I certainly would take a stab at it. And there's no arguing Lucas has been very successful, that doesn't make him immune from making mistakes. After all there are plenty of bad movies that have made a ton of money, and plenty of very talented actors/directors/writers who have made some truly awful movies. And I'm sure there are plenty of talented people out there who due to bad luck, or other circumstance have never found a wider audience for their work. But at the very least I don't feel its fair to critisize the prequels if I'm not going to at least offer up some suggestion of my own of how they could (in my opinion) have been done instead, and leave for all of you to judge if my suggestions are better/worse/the same as what Lucas did. Since you only seem concerned by my grammer (hey someone asked how I knock out these long posts quickly, thats how!) and the fact that I'm actually taking the 'what if instead' approach. Then actually addressing if my suggestions have any actual validity, then thats fine. But I feel its only fair to offer something as an alternative. And if my ideas are no good, then thats fine to.

  • Jan. 8, 2011, 11:25 a.m. CST

    Dooku dying...

    by darthwaz1

    I'm sure Palpatine had an alternate plan for him to die in captivity had Anakin not acted, I think the novel may have mentioned this...

  • Jan. 8, 2011, 11:59 a.m. CST

    Plinkett style dissection of ANH

    by Rebel Scumb

    A lot of people who like the prequels seem to think poorly of the originals, or that they wouldn't hold up to the same scrutiny that Plinkett applied to the prequels. I disagree. and while I have no idea the man hours that go into the videos he makes, I'm not willing to undertake that venture just to prove a point. But by way of a stream lined example. If we look at just one of his primary concerns, CHARACTER MOTIVATION. Is there any point in ANH where Luke, Han, leia, 3P0, R2, Chewy, Ben, Vader, Tarkin, Uncle Owen or Aunt Beru act in anyways contrary to common sense or their established motivations? -Imperials chasing rebels, they need plans back. -Rebels flee the imperials, because they don't want to die, and need to deliver the plans. Secondary objective, bring Kenobi to Alderaan to assist in the rebellion. so far so good. -R2 and 3P0, basically slaves/civilians who have no stake in the conflict, since even the good guys treat them as property. main motivation: stay alive! -Imperials storm the ship, avoid diplomatic incident, kill or capture all aboard. Find the plans! -Leia, must get plans off the ship before inevitable capture, only one who can take the plans, R2. If leia goes the pod will be destroyed, or they will know she is missing and follow her to the surface. -Vader, keeps Leia alive for questioning. She has vital info. -Droids: stay alive. and for R2 deliver plans to kenobi -Luke, wants to go off and be a pilot. Owen wants him to stay and be safe. (I'm assessing ANH as a standalone movie, since it was made before the prequels or sequels were ever planned. By Lucas' own admission at the LOST finale event, that he did have no master plan, and made it all up as he was going) -Owen: erase droids memory, to avoid luke wanting to talk to old ben. -R2. escape from lars homestead, continue mission -Luke find r2 before he gets in trouble from uncle -ben: save Luke, try and continue Leia's mission, help the rebels. Luke might make a good jedi, and he's getting too old. Luke's father wanted him to be a jedi, but uncle wouldn't allow it, Ben decides to help honour his dead friends wishes -Luke, although dreams of another life, filled with adventure, has grown up with uncle who has instilled defeatist attitude. does not want to cause trouble, so does not want to go -Imperials want to complete their battlestation, confirm status as galactic rulers, wipe out last resistance -Stormtroopers kill jawas in effort track droids, cover their tracks, leads them to Lars homestead, kills them to for same reason. -Luke worried about surrogate parents. -Vader tortures leia for info he needs -Luke, accepting that his ties are now severed, ventures out into the world to find his destiny -Ben/Luke: find a ship! -Han: needs money, is heavily indebt to dangerous gangster -Greedo: collect bounty -Han: avoid being killed or captured -Han/Luke/Ben/etc: avoid imperials and escape to stay alive! -Tarkin: threaten to destroy alderaan as last resort to get leia to talk. destroy it anyways because he's an evil prick and wants to make an example, so he can rule by fear -arrive at death star. objectives: 1) stay alive, 2) escape 3) rescue the princess -Ben senses he will not leave alive, sends Luke along a different path -Luke is generally a good guy, thinks leia is pretty, wants to rescue her. Han wants money, and is motivated by that -Vader wants to settle old grudge with Ben -Ben sacrifices himself so luke and others can escape -TIE fighter attack: present the appearance of an attempt to prevent them escaping -Rebels: destroyed genocidal deathstar station before it wipes out all good people in the galaxy -Imperials: wipe out the rebels -Han: payoff bounty, look out for himself -Rebels/Imperials: both fighting for their lives -Han realizing that he now cares about Luke/Leia and their plight, comes back Thats a really rough breakdown, but I don't think I missed anything. Are there any glaring problematic motivations like Plinkett points out with pretty much every character in every situation within the prequel films????

  • Jan. 8, 2011, 2:20 p.m. CST

    I love Sunshine

    by MattmanReturns

    Too bad the latest Playstation 3 update made the Blu-Ray unwatchable.

  • Jan. 8, 2011, 5:58 p.m. CST

    that 'mirrors' link that fella posted above

    by Smack_Teddy

    is very tight, and brings to the surface alot of the great subtext and imagery analogy etc. if you like that is about the one genuinly really good thing the prequels have going for them...everyone should get exactly why Lucas decided to depict the Jedi the way he did, even if they do not like it...but its everything else that stands to reason in Plinkets etc criticism, those things that completely smothers this and ruin it...sorry but the prequels, they are not the Star Wars equivalent of the Holy Mountain, interesting imagery symbolism and subxext all the same.... the same reason everyone felt let down with the Matrix sequels....expanding its ideas and philosophies and what it was ultimatly trying to probs, yes some found it pretentious...gave many film-philosophy students really fun essays to get into, and so on...but tying or weaving this as a blockbuster peace of entertainment to what you show & tell, present on the surface as a artform-craft... absolutely ballsed up, so much worse than the Matrix sequels for many i think. <p> But if people are willing to staunchly defend the prequels for the reasons stated in that link above they just sure as fuck better not be the same people who think Inception is an empty, soulless ptetentious load of crap with nothing to say or going on substance wise when it comes down to it.

  • Jan. 8, 2011, 6 p.m. CST

    The 'mirrors' link that fella posted

    by Smack_Teddy

    is very tight, and brings to the surface alot of the great subtext and imagery analogy etc. if you like that is about the one genuinly really good thing the prequels have going for them...everyone should get exactly why Lucas decided to depict the Jedi the way he did, even if they do not like it...but its everything else that stands to reason in Plinkets etc criticism, those things that completely smothers this and ruin it...sorry but the prequels, they are not the Star Wars equivalent of the Holy Mountain, interesting imagery symbolism and subxext all the same.... the same reason everyone felt let down with the Matrix sequels....expanding its ideas and philosophies and what it was ultimatly trying to probs, yes some found it pretentious...gave many film-philosophy students really fun essays to get into, and so on...but tying or weaving this as a blockbuster peace of entertainment to what you show & tell, present on the surface as a artform-craft... absolutely ballsed up, so much worse than the Matrix sequels for many i think. <p> But if people are willing to staunchly defend the prequels for the reasons stated in that link above they just sure as fuck better not be the same people who think Inception is an empty, soulless ptetentious load of crap with nothing to say or going on substance wise when it comes down to it.

  • Jan. 8, 2011, 10:28 p.m. CST

    Good point smackteddy

    by Rebel Scumb

    And just for the record, I actually really love the the Clone Wars cartoon, I mean not every episode is amazing, the padme/senate ones are dull, but overall its a really good show, that actually makes me like Anakin as a heroic character, and they do some cool things with the clones as characters. Plus its feels a lot more inline with the originals, even with just some of the little aesthetic touches. I also think Asoka strangely enough adds that Han Solo type element of the character who speaks up against all the snooty jedi mumbo jumbo and allows the audience a window in. So for the record I'm not just out to hate anything in the prequel era, I think the cartoon proves that that time period, even within the manner George Lucas choose to portray it, can be executed well, provided the stories are written well, and the characters are engaging.

  • Jan. 9, 2011, 8:52 a.m. CST

    these reviews

    by mynamesdan

    i just watched everything on his webzone. The dude makes me belly laugh. love it.

  • Jan. 10, 2011, 4:26 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    You will notice that in SUNSHINE the astronaut dies a full 20 to 30 seconds after he is ejected from the airlock. It means by then he was surrounded by absolute space vaccum. There would be no atmosphere ot transfer his body heat, therefore he couldn't instant freeze. Whatever atmosphere molecules could still surround him, they would count merely on the dozen per square meter. It's totally negligeble. The Moon's and Mercury's atmosphere is like that. Yes, the Moon and Mercury has atmospheres, but they are so thin that it's as if it's vaccum on a human scale. One thing that movies get wrong about space is when there is fast decompression. They extrapolate what happens with airplances to space. Which is wrong. In airplane,s the real reason why people are sucked out of an airplane when there is a breach is not so much due to the difference in air pressure from the inerior to the exterior, but because of how fast the aiplane goes. It's the drag that pulls people out of the airplane. In space, explosive decompression would be a far less dramatic. There would be a suddent rush of air escaping to spac,e but it would last a second or so. Mostly, what people would experience would be a very suddent air pression drop, form normal to vaccum. Basically, people would die from suffucation, and not like most space movies tell us, from instant freeze or blowing up from vaccum exposure. My problem with SUNSHINE is that it tries to sell itself as a hard SF movie, but it makes the many of the typical space Sf movies that don't bother with research. If SUNSHINE had done the research and stuck with it, it would had been a movie for the ages.

  • Jan. 10, 2011, 4:36 a.m. CST

    rebel scumb, let me tell you something about the prequels

    by AsimovLives

    Regarding ATTACK OF THE CLONES and THE REVENGE OF THE SITH, i find them to be pretty enjoyable adventure movies. And i rather watch those then to watch any of the retard dumbass bullshit made by hacks that are constantly hailed by AICN, fuck asses like Mickey Bay and Jar Jar Abrams. At least Lucas still knows how to edit a movie, the same cannot be said about those two hack i aofrementioned, which never learned the basic lesson of film editing. So, yeah, i have good things to say about the prequels, or at least two of them. Whenever is ee anybody pissing on those two prequels and yet love the bullshit made by Bay or Abrams, i know i'm looking at somebody whose opinion i shouldn't give any credence whatsoever.

  • Jan. 10, 2011, 4:42 a.m. CST

    rebel scum

    by AsimovLives

    "Well people are saying that people who don't create something as successful as starwars can't say starwars is bad. Which is pretty much like saying that you can't critisize the president unless you have been the president of a country." I agre with you on that, however. All that thing about people saying that unless you can't do soemthing you have no right to criticise is a bit stupid. How amny of us can't build a car, and yet it doens't take a car engineer to know if a car is good or bad. As for movie,s it's the same thing. We don't need to be filmmakers to know when a movie is good or bad. We don't actually need to know how to make them to be critical. We are paying consumers, that alone give us a right to criticism. The real point of contention, to me, is if our opinions and criticisms are well founded and more then just mere emotionalisms, like the typoical "it sucks/it rocks". Like there are good and bad movie,s there is also good and bad criticism and opinions.

  • Jan. 10, 2011, 4:17 p.m. CST

    On that we can both agree asimov

    by Rebel Scumb

    I've actually defended the prequels to people when their rationale is simply "jar jar sucks" or "hayden christensen ruined the prequels" or stuff like that. Or even more subjective less specific complaints. I don't need them to be high art, I just feel that all movies should aspire to a basic level of craft, and characters and story should come first. Especially when its a filmmaker who has proven himself capable of making two of the most beloved franchises in history. I do agree bay is garbage also, I would watch the prequels over any of his movies. JJ abrams I think is so-so, I think he understands a lot more about movies then many modern directors, and he did direct the pilot for LOST which regardless of how people may feel about how the show turned out, is definitely one of the best pilots for a show ever, especially given that even most great shows have shitty pilots.

  • Especially since Plinkett's reviews are merely larks! Somewhere out there in Milwaukee Plinkett has to be enjoying this last laugh over so many people tied up in so many knots over his reviews.

  • Though I'll confess to having a soft spot for Bay's "Armageddon"; but, it's purely a guilty pleasure for personal reasons (oil drillers saving the Earth from total annihilation is a fun concept for me since I work in the oil industry) and I'd never defend the flick as being anything other than a risible piece of loud escapism.

  • ...came out liking it more than he wanted to. As a result, Plinkett clearly was unable to reconcile those two feelings, and it shows in his muddled contradictory review of the film, which not coincidentally was the worst one he's made to date. He was off his game. Plinkett's only at his best when we can feel the hate flowing through him.

  • Jan. 12, 2011, 9:09 a.m. CST

    Now that I think about, Mr. Plinkett is the evolutionary Mr. Cranky.

    by ExcaliburFfolkes

    Movie reviews with even more deranged anger.

  • I may be the only person interested in that part of the reviews (and judging from this talkback board, I am), but I am dying to find out how that confrontation will work out. Will she ever get revenge on Plinkett? Does he have something else devious planned for her, instead? Unfortunately, the story obviously seems like it will be an ongoing thing spread out through future Plinkett reviews.

  • Jan. 12, 2011, 10:01 a.m. CST

    Huge love for the Oriental Theater in Milwaukee.

    by ExcaliburFfolkes

    I all but applauded when it turned up as the location for last scene in the ROTS review. For those who don't know, the Oriental is a massive old 1920's era movie palace on the north side of Milwaukee that runs as a true art house cinema. The theater has an Indian theme with many large gold Buddhas along the walls and a herd of jewel encrusted elephants holding up the ceiling. It has a two-story lobby, a huge balcony, a vintage Wurlitzer organ that they play for silent movies, and lots of other great stuff. The colossal theater held something like 1400 seats with rows that seemed to go on and on and on forever, before they sort of sub-divided it into three screens back the late 1980's. The main theater is mostly still intact, though, and is amazing to behold (the two new screens are located discretely underneath the balcony). I attended many a movie there back in the late 80's and early 90's. Great memories. I hope Plinkett actually shoots some scenes inside the place. Besides the aforementioned public spaces, ths Oriental also posesses extensive backstage chambers and make-up rooms (they used to occasionally host live concerts, stage acts, comedians, etc.) as well as cavernous seemingly unending basements, sub-basements, and boiler rooms that spread out every which way under the entire city block surrounding the theater. It's the kind of the place the Phantom of the Opera would feel right at home in. Even the roof is amazing. There are a lot of good places in the Oriental Plinkett could film at.

  • Jan. 12, 2011, 7:47 p.m. CST

    trek review

    by Rebel Scumb

    I actually really liked his trek review, I didn't see it as contradictory, I think it just shows that he will give credit where credit is due, and if he like ssomething in a movie he will say so and not just bash for bash sake. Also his bit about 'uh oh... someones got a case of the notgaaaayyysss!" and everything is TOOOO THHHEEE EEEEEXXXTTTTRRREEEMMMEEE!!!" both made me laugh a lot. A real review should be even handed, its possible to like part of a film, but not another film.