the only redeeming part of The Phantom Menace...

[YorickBrown]

is that it allowed this 7-part, 70 minute review to be created. seriously, this is one of the greatest things i have ever seen.

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review (Part 1 of 7) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI)

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review (Part 2 of 7) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZG1AWVLnl48)

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review (Part 3 of 7) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdQwKPVGQsY)

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review (Part 4 of 7) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOlG4T1S2lU)

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review (Part 5 of 7) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBvp1r2UpiQ)

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review (Part 6 of 7) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORWPCCzSgu0)

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review (Part 7 of 7) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIWKMgJs_Gs)


enjoy

[Voldecanter]

Well , I am watching the first one right now , but I have to say , I watched it in theaters when I was 10-12 ,and at the time I thought it was fun to watch . When I watch it now , I have to say that yes I find it corny , especially when the Naboo nobility are meeting in the Hall Room "Communications have been jammed" ......"Means one thing...invasion" . Since the movie was aimed at family audiences , a film with good effort , however everyone will examine it , critique it , in their own way .

[Lord Seth]

Well , I am watching the first one right now , but I have to say , I watched it in theaters when I was 10-12 ,and at the time I thought it was fun to watch . When I watch it now , I have to say that yes I find it corny , especially when the Naboo nobility are meeting in the Hall Room "Communications have been jammed" ......"Means one thing...invasion" . Since the movie was aimed at family audiences , a film with good effort , however everyone will examine it , critique it , in their own way .At the risk of sounding like a grammar nut, I should point out that you should put a space after a period or comma, not before.

I'm looking forward to the guy's review of Attack of the Clones, though, whenever he brings it out.

[YorickBrown]

his review of Avatar is pretty good too... not as good as this one tho

[Jerthanis]

The Phantom Menace was still better than Attack of the Clones or Revenge of the Sith.

Seriously, for all its flaws it wasn't as atrocious as either of those thought sewers.

[Haruki-kun]

is that it allowed this 7-part, 70 minute review to be created. seriously, this is one of the greatest things i have ever seen.


70 minute

........

There is no movie I either love or hate enough to watch a 70 minute review of it. Seriously.

[YorickBrown]

it's in 10 minute increments so you don't have to watch it all at once



and it's worth it, imo

[leafman]

Is the marble mouth voice and inability to pronounce "protagonist" supposed to be funny or is it just the way he normally talks? :smallconfused:

[WalkingTarget]

Is the marble mouth voice and inability to pronounce "protagonist" supposed to be funny or is it just the way he normally talks? :smallconfused:

Dunno, but my friends and I get a lot of mileage out of using his mispronunciations (i.e. pro-ta-GO-nist) in unrelated conversations. YMMV I suppose.

[YorickBrown]

Is the marble mouth voice and inability to pronounce "protagonist" supposed to be funny or is it just the way he normally talks? :smallconfused:

it's the voice he uses for all his reviews that i've seen, but as to whether that's how he actually talks i wouldn't know


whatever it is, i find it amusing

[SolkaTruesilver]

He's pretty dead-on regarding the pacing of the movie and the final battles, tho.

His reviews of Star Trek were also very entertaining!

[TheThan]

So here’s a summation of the review:

1: The main characters do no connect with the audience at any level.
2: It has a convoluted plot that makes little sense in and of itself.
3: Not enough background to fill in the convoluted plot.
4: There is no main antagonist in the entire film.
5: The few villains (and their minions) are not a credible threat to the heroes, and therefore cannot be taken seriously.
6: there is no emotion connected to any of the conflicts in the movie.



As a fan, the prequel trilogy really is a letdown. It boggles my mind how these movies got so screwed up.

[SolkaTruesilver]

As a fan, the prequel trilogy really is a letdown. It boggles my mind how these movies got so screwed up.

The concept that fancy CGI would make a good movie in itself?

Seriously. That reviewer is so dead-on about Obi-Wan final battle against Darth Maul. It was a coegraphed dance ballet. Not a rage outburst.

You were "awwww" at the nice dance. You were not "KILL THE BASTARD"

[faerwain]

Oh, I don't know. Personally, I think Phantom Menace had other redeeming aspects, too. I had sex after watching it.


Just started the reviews. Amusing so far, but listening his mumbling is really exhausting for a non-native watcher.

[Jerthanis]

The concept that fancy CGI would make a good movie in itself?

Seriously. That reviewer is so dead-on about Obi-Wan final battle against Darth Maul. It was a coegraphed dance ballet. Not a rage outburst.

You were "awwww" at the nice dance. You were not "KILL THE BASTARD"

That's like saying the final fight in House of Flying Daggers was less emotional than the final fight in Black Knight because HoFD was well choreographed and Black Knight wasn't.

[Tirian]

As a fan, the prequel trilogy really is a letdown. It boggles my mind how these movies got so screwed up.

It's no mystery to me. George Lucas believed the hype about himself and concluded that he was too awesome to have any second-guessers on his team. It happens all the time; read some Anne Rice if you want to see how important editors are.

As to the title of this thread, I wish to add that Lego Star Wars wouldn't have been made without the prequel trilogy, so that's one more redeeming feature.

[Fifty-Eyed Fred]

Oh, I don't know. Personally, I think Phantom Menace had other redeeming aspects, too.

Yes indeedy, such as double lightsabres. Double. And the fact that you had sex afterwards too, I guess. Unless of course you're asexual.

[Fiendish_Dire_Moose]

........

There is no movie I either love or hate enough to watch a 70 minute review of it. Seriously.

Doesn't this make it almost as long as the movie?
Isn't that nearly a minute spent whining for every minute of the movie? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a REVIEW!?

[Jerthanis]

Doesn't this make it almost as long as the movie?
Isn't that nearly a minute spent whining for every minute of the movie? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a REVIEW!?

At least 20 minutes of the review are jokes about murdering his wife, so there is that.

[Lawless III]

I've followed redletter cinema for a while, so let me clear a few things up:smallcool:

The voice is a character he does called Mr. Plinket. It came from an extremely strange video involving the old Olsen twin straight to VHS movies. He mainly uses it for scifi movie reviews, though I couldn't tell you now that started.

As for the reviews length, it's well worth it. It goes way beyond a normal review, and it's never whiney. First off it gets into the actual making of the movie and shows interviews with various people. It's actually more like a documentary now that I think about it. Second, it's just good entertainment. I've probably watched it six times by now. Mr. Plinket is just hilarious. He mixes all his real points in with strange and abstract humor. It does not lag. Ever.

Give it a chance, if you haven't yet. Though it probably should be mentioned that the video has some language and themes not entirely appropriate for young and/or impressionable playgrounders.

[Frozen_Feet]

What, the prequel trilogy has another justification for its existence beyond Darths & Droids? (http://www.darthsanddroids.net/)

[TheThan]

It's no mystery to me. George Lucas believed the hype about himself and concluded that he was too awesome to have any second-guessers on his team. It happens all the time; read some Anne Rice if you want to see how important editors are.


You have a point I failed to consider.


But still, most reviews on movies in general are fairly poor. Aside from the fanboys and haters praising/hating on their chosen show, most simply give a synopsis of the film and a brief run down on what they liked and didn’t like about it. Which is fine for a simple unprofessional review. But when I pick up a review from a supposed professional (like say from a magazine or newspaper), I expect a bit more. This guy certainly delivers with that. His deconstruction of the film, from the characterization, to the layout, to the action of the film is top notch, and really shows why this is such a bad film. If more reviewers were like this guy, maybe Hollywood would start working harder to make their films better.

[Lord Seth]

........

There is no movie I either love or hate enough to watch a 70 minute review of it. Seriously.That was my initial reaction when I heard about it and decided not to check it out. Later on I stumbled upon it by accident and gave it a try, and I will say I found it entertaining. The weird voice he does the review in I found to be annoying at first, but it did grow on me after a while.

My suggestion is to check it out, and if you don't like it, just stop watching.

[LurkerInPlayground]

I ran across this some time back. I'm getting blue balls waiting for the review to Clone Wars.

He does have an Avatar review though which is also quite nice. It is also a review made of win.

My favorite part is the line about smothering a hooker that's trying to escape from him. You use the stuff in the blue can. The low-irritant fast kill one.

[factotum]

I thought the only redeeming part of The Phantom Menace was the end credits...it meant the torture was finally over! :smallsmile:

[J.Gellert]

Actually, such a scene-by-scene deconstruction reminds me of another thing...

Do you know what it's like, having sat down with a bunch of friends to watch a film, and you have that one friend that simply won't shut up criticizing everything?

Yeah, you must know the feeling. Doesn't matter if it's a good or a bad movie, anyone can completely destroy any film if he tries.

:smalltongue:

I dislike reviewers in general, but this guy... Man, if you need 70 minutes to explain why this is a bad movie, then maybe it isn't? Or maybe you need to learn how to be concise and to the point? And anyway, making it funny doesn't help me at all.

To me, reviewers are just people who get paid off of other people's hard work (you know, acting, or producing actual movies...). For doing nothing.

Meh, this post ended up longer than I had planned. Anyway. For the history, I will say I enjoyed the Phantom Menace. Sure, I was only 13 at the time, but I don't buy it being too cheesy compared to the old trilogy. I only hated Jar Jar, but one bad comic-relief character doesn't ruin a movie for me.

[Jerthanis]

I also take issue with his "proof" that Episode I characters are worse than Episode IV characters, because when he asks his test panel who Han Solo is, we get, "He's a charming roguish scoundrel" repeated 10 times with different words. When asked to describe C3P0 they just say "Prissy comic relief" over and over.

Then he proceeds to complain about how Qui-Gon was a guy who didn't abide the wishes of the council, created his own path and had no compunctions about using his powers to get what he needed, even cheating in legitimate games. At his core, he has faith that the Force will see Anakin, and by extension him, through, so he sees fit to gamble against ridiculous odds. Gee, that sounds like a character to me. The very things he complains about with Qui-Gon's character are more deep character traits than the stereotypes or narrative roles people can think of when they think of the characters from Episode IV.

He's got legitimate complaints about the story, pacing, narrative structure and so on, but he also has a tendency to say, "This is bad." with such confidence that it makes you forget that, actually, that part of the movie wasn't one of the movie's many bad aspects.

[bosssmiley]

What, the prequel trilogy has another justification for its existence beyond Darths & Droids? (http://www.darthsanddroids.net/)

I'd have said the "Spaced" episode where Simon Pegg keeps weeping for what Lucas did to his childhood (Bill Bailey: "Come on man, it's been six months now..."). :smallamused:

But, yeah, Darths & Droids too.

[Dienekes]

A lot of this is subjective. I think Spider-Man 3 and Prisoner of Azkaban are the worst movies in those franchises.

Well that's because they were. It's the rule of movies, the third one never works or is the start of a decline. Godfather III, RotJ (going great until the Ewoks, not ruined, but not as good as the first two. And look what it's led to since.), Batman Forever, X3, Superman III, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (though I stand by that 2 wasn't great either), so on and so forth.

[Amiel]

Wait, you guys think Prisoner of Azkaban was one of the worst movies in the Harry Potter franchise? It is easily one of the best, if not the outright best directed Harry Potter film to date.


Also, I mehed at Episode I, it wasn't as horrifically horrible as it was made out to be, but it was unspectacular; very much so. It was woeful in its execution.

[T-O-E]

To me, reviewers are just people who get paid off of other people's hard work (you know, acting, or producing actual movies...). For doing nothing.


He does something he enjoys about something he is knowledgeable about, and doesn't get paid for it (I believe.)
Is that a crime?

[J.Gellert]

Wait, you guys think Prisoner of Azkaban was one of the worst movies in the Harry Potter franchise? It is easily one of the best, if not the outright best directed Harry Potter film to date.

Yeah, I heard that "3rd movie fails" about Spiderman, but I am pretty sure Prisoner of Azkaban is thought of as one of the best Harry Potter films. The same goes for the book. At least for me and most people I know, this is the point where the story started getting interesting.

[YorickBrown]

please do not get me started on Spiderman 3, this is not the thread nor the time for me to start my rant about how awful that piece of drek was


and for those questioning whether or not the review is worth it, try it out. he starts with the funnies pretty early & often

[faerwain]

Yes indeedy, such as double lightsabres. Double.

Okay, granted, I give that to Episode One. Especially because it led to wielding one in Jedi Academy. :smallcool:
Oh, and no, luckily I was fully able to appreciate it.

Watched the whole review and found it entertaining, he put at least a lot more work into it than the many internet reviewers (critics of webcomics are especially bad at this) who simply write "f***" a hundred times and then congratulate themselves on how edgy they are.

And I still havent' seen Spiderman 3 ...or any Harry Potter movie completely, for that matter. :smalleek:

[Solaris]

I would've gone with Qui-Gon as the only redeeming part of the Phantom Menace, but that's just me.

[YorickBrown]

I would've gone with Qui-Gon as the only redeeming part of the Phantom Menace, but that's just me.

one of my favorite lines from the movie is when he says (paraphrased) "the characters of Qui Gon Gin and Obi Wan Kenobi could've been combined into an entirely different character called Obi Wan Kenobi"

:smallbiggrin:

[TheThan]

I also take issue with his "proof" that Episode I characters are worse than Episode IV characters, because when he asks his test panel who Han Solo is, we get, "He's a charming roguish scoundrel" repeated 10 times with different words. When asked to describe C3P0 they just say "Prissy comic relief" over and over.

Then he proceeds to complain about how Qui-Gon was a guy who didn't abide the wishes of the council, created his own path and had no compunctions about using his powers to get what he needed, even cheating in legitimate games. At his core, he has faith that the Force will see Anakin, and by extension him, through, so he sees fit to gamble against ridiculous odds. Gee, that sounds like a character to me. The very things he complains about with Qui-Gon's character are more deep character traits than the stereotypes or narrative roles people can think of when they think of the characters from Episode IV.


The point is that none of the people he interviewed could describe Qui-Gon Jin at all. In fact, one had to ask who he was. While everyone could give a description of Han Solo, sure it was all the same, but that’s the point, everyone knows what his character is like; they didn’t have to think very hard on it.

Now with Qui-gon Jin, he is supposed to be a wise mentor figure, nothing he says or does is wise at all and very little makes common sense. He is willing to gamble with people’s lives (literally, as Anakin could have died in the pod race, and if he lost, they would have been stranded on a barren, unfriendly and inhospitable world). Now consider he was trying to help those very people get off the planet, doesn’t seem very wise to me. He even is willing manipulate everyone around him and cheat at a game to get what he wants, not exactly a good role model for the younglings huh.

His wise sayings are summed up in this line “the force will guide us”. He’s not exactly spouting sagely advice to the young plucky heroes here. Aside from this, he’s a forgettable character, and completely replaceable with Obi-wan, which would fit in with some of the dialog from episode V, thusly meshing the two trilogies together better. Which we don’t see anything connecting the two series together until around the end of episode III.

In fact, you could say Qui-Gon Gin was a cheating manipulative bastard with delusions of grandeur, and you wouldn’t be far from the truth.

[Jerthanis]

In fact, you could say Qui-Gon Gin was a cheating manipulative bastard with delusions of grandeur, and you wouldn’t be far from the truth.

If that's the way you want to interpret him... YES!

And that's at least as complete a character as "Charming Scoundrel with heart of gold"

It's not my fault some random idiots in front of a camera can't remember one and can remember the other.

[YorickBrown]

If that's the way you want to interpret him... YES!

And that's at least as complete a character as "Charming Scoundrel with heart of gold"

It's not my fault some random idiots in front of a camera can't remember one and can remember the other.

but that again goes to shoddy writing/character development in the movie. Qui-Gon Jin was not memorable at all for most people b/c he was a bland, emotionless character who didn't resonate at all with most viewers of the movie.

the point of the exercise was to show how poorly Lucas crafted the story and characters of this movie in comparison to the brilliant way he did the same things in A New Hope

[Jerthanis]

but that again goes to shoddy writing/character development in the movie. Qui-Gon Jin was not memorable at all for most people b/c he was a bland, emotionless character who didn't resonate at all with most viewers of the movie.

the point of the exercise was to show how poorly Lucas crafted the story and characters of this movie in comparison to the brilliant way he did the same things in A New Hope

This doesn't attack my point that Qui-Gon is at least as nuanced a character as Han Solo at all. It just says that people don't remember him well. I say that's the fault of the viewers. I don't think characters should always conform to iconic stereotypes so that people can remember them without thinking about them.

There's a lot at fault with The Phantom Menace, and I'll agree that Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan filled overlapping narrative roles, I will contend fiercely that they were even remotely similar characters, or that Qui-gon was a weak or inconsistent character.

[Dienekes]

Just wondering then Jerthanis, how would you describe Qui-Gon then?

Cause really to me he only seemed like a random teacher figure who didn't teach anything, merely doing what the plot requires. (That said, I still liked whatever character he was supposed to have better than just about any other character in that movie, if you want to call them that)

[Jerthanis]

Just wondering then Jerthanis, how would you describe Qui-Gon then?

Cause really to me he only seemed like a random teacher figure who didn't teach anything, merely doing what the plot requires. (That said, I still liked whatever character he was supposed to have better than just about any other character in that movie, if you want to call them that)

He's an *******. He's never listened when someone told him what to do, and he has perfect confidence in everything he does. His is the practicality of a lifetime spent doing things, which sets him apart from the council and from his student. He also has absolute conviction in the Force and its fated course of history/ for the future.

Obi-Wan in Phantom represented the traditional Jedi for Qui-Gon to be juxtaposed to.

Amidala was pretty stock, but her stock was "proud politician damsel in distress who has a surprising amount of chops when it comes down to it." which is a minor variation on Princess Leia, so I see that as intentional.

Anakin was poorly acted, but I honestly believed he was supposed to come off as "Creepy psycho kid" and that did get a little traction for me.

[kpenguin]

Well that's because they were. It's the rule of movies, the third one never works or is the start of a decline. Godfather III, RotJ (going great until the Ewoks, not ruined, but not as good as the first two. And look what it's led to since.), Batman Forever, X3, Superman III, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (though I stand by that 2 wasn't great either), so on and so forth.

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.

[hamishspence]

I liked the Darths & Droids take on Episode I, though.

Yoda to Qui-Gon "Hmm. Remedial course on Jedi ethics, you need." :smallbiggrin:

[Dienekes]

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.

Every law has it's exceptions.

[Trazoi]

one of my favorite lines from the movie is when he says (paraphrased) "the characters of Qui Gon Gin and Obi Wan Kenobi could've been combined into an entirely different character called Obi Wan Kenobi"

:smallbiggrin:
I loved that line too. :smallbiggrin:

From what I remember about the film, the problem with Qui Gon Gin was that he was less of a character and more of a plot enabler. On the surface he seemed to be meant to be the wise mentor character, but in action all he did was shuffle the movie from one scene to the next, even if the shuffling didn't make any sense. Unfortunately most of the cast in the film have a similar problem.

That's why I don't have a particular antipathy to Jar Jar - sure he was annoying, but at least he was memorable. Apart from him, Obi Wan and maybe Watto no-one else really was a character. Plus the film had much deeper problems than Jar Jar.
Edit: And thinking about it, if I were to regard just Episode I I'm not sure Obi Wan counts either.


Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.
Also Back to the Future III. And Goldfinger was the third James Bond film. :smallwink:

[Sholos]

Amidala was pretty stock, but her stock was "proud politician damsel in distress who has a surprising amount of chops when it comes down to it." which is a minor variation on Princess Leia, so I see that as intentional.

Except that while Leia was cool and spunky, Amidala was just boring to the point of never wanting to see her again. Pretty big difference there.

[Lord Seth]

The point is that none of the people he interviewed could describe Qui-Gon Jin at all. In fact, one had to ask who he was. While everyone could give a description of Han Solo, sure it was all the same, but that’s the point, everyone knows what his character is like; they didn’t have to think very hard on it.To be fair, though, Qui-Gon Jin was in one movie, Han Solo was in three. It's easier to describe a character when you have more to work with.

[Tirian]

You have to know a movie's story before telling whether it's the second or third movie that is going to suck.

If a movie became a big surprise success and then the producers would sign a contract to extend it into a trilogy, with the scripts for the last two movies made at the same time. And then the second movie will tend to be weak because it's just a long bridge for the climax, and the third movie will return to the magic of the original movie except with a bigger budget. We'll call that the Back to the Future pattern. You've also got Die Hard, and I'd put forward a case that both of the Star Wars trilogies are also in this group. (People love The Empire Strikes Back, but it's not clear to me that anything at all is happening for about 75% of the movie.)

Then there are cases where people have the cache to make two movies at the same time, and they are both outstanding, maybe the second just edging out the first. And then people are so excited that the producers try to go back to the well, except that it's empty because they did such a great job telling a complete story. This is the Godfather pattern, which also covers Superman and Spider-Man. All signs indicate that the current Batman franchise is headed in this direction.

Finally, you've got a hodgepodge where the director makes a great movie, tries to tell a sequel in a darker tone which disappoints audiences, and then all bets are off as to what happens next. For Indiana Jones, they pulled out of the slump and then did the Godfather cash-in twenty years later. For the original Batman franchise, they switched directors and plummeted to previously uncharted levels of awful movies. For the Harry Potter series, they change directors for nearly every movie and the quality sort of hovers at mediocrity.

I won't classify The Matrix, because I'm repressing the memories enough to care about which of the sequels was worse.

[TheThan]

Personally I think that the kid that played Anakin did the best acting out of the whole cast (Watto is close, but since he’s an animated character, I’m not going to count him). The other actors can only be described as wooden, they had no interest in anything they did, and no emotion in any line they delivered. I think this is partly from the lack of actual props, scenery and other actors to act against. That is the drawback of fully CG and blue screened movies.

If you notice the acting in the second and third movies greatly increases in quality, particularly by Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan. By that time, I think he’s gotten enough experience acting against nothing, that he’s able to pull it off.

[YorickBrown]

Personally I think that the kid that played Anakin did the best acting out of the whole cast (Watto is close, but since he’s an animated character, I’m not going to count him).

this is sarcasm, right? i mean, this has to be a joke...

[SolkaTruesilver]

this is sarcasm, right? i mean, this has to be a joke...

Kid's acting is actually very, very, very hard to properly criticise. Seriously, most of them are very bad, and it's been some time since I saw one child actor seriously pull off realism.

[Solaris]

In fact, you could say Qui-Gon Gin was a cheating manipulative bastard with delusions of grandeur, and you wouldn’t be far from the truth.

That's what made him so much better than all the rest.
I'm just pretending it was intentional.


Personally I think that the kid that played Anakin did the best acting out of the whole cast (Watto is close, but since he’s an animated character, I’m not going to count him). The other actors can only be described as wooden, they had no interest in anything they did, and no emotion in any line they delivered. I think this is partly from the lack of actual props, scenery and other actors to act against. That is the drawback of fully CG and blue screened movies.

Only because he was so much younger than the rest of them and therefore had an excuse. Anakin had an awful, awful actor in all three movies of the Prequel Trilogy, but the first was the worst.

[TheThan]

Well considering everyone else in the movie was supposed to be a professional, the kid’s acting is quite good, I suggest everyone go back and see for yourself, you’ll be surprised. Also keep in mind this is a kid with essentially no training and experience in front of the camera. As far as Anakin’s acting in episode II and III, yeah no excuses there, its just… well bad.

[Solaris]

Well considering everyone else in the movie was supposed to be a professional, the kid’s acting is quite good, I suggest everyone go back and see for yourself, you’ll be surprised. Also keep in mind this is a kid with essentially no training and experience in front of the camera. As far as Anakin’s acting in episode II and III, yeah no excuses there, its just… well bad.

Yeah. I've still seen better acting at the local elementary school's productions.

[Dienekes]

I don't really agree with Than as I thought the kids acting wasn't that great (not as terrible as some make it out but not anywhere near good) but I remember some of the lines that he was given as being just terrible.

[SolkaTruesilver]

I don't really agree with Than as I thought the kids acting wasn't that great (not as terrible as some make it out but not anywhere near good) but I remember some of the lines that he was given as being just terrible.

The writing was the problem, not the acting. With good writing, you can keep the suspension of disbelief even with a bad child actor, because people will be willing to give the extra mile for that.

But with that kind of writing.. it just came of as lame. Seriously. Having Anakin just leaving the gift to a (seemingly) sleeping Padme in the ship, without any words, would have been more powerful, less akward for everybody, and less cheesy. Hell, it would have been a little cute, and made the kid seem a little less arrogant, as he would have come of as.. shy.

[The Big Dice]

The kid's acting is beside the point. What you have in Episode 1 is a 9 year old kid who hotrods cars and races them. Which is just too big a pill to swallow for me. A teenager doing that I can accept. I knew people when I was 15 that did exactly that, buying near write off cars for next to nothing, get them running and then race them at the local grass track circuit.

Plus he doesn't look that much older than the younglings in Episodes 2 and 3. Which makes the "too old to start the training" line more forced and awkward than it needs to be from a story perspective.

[Amiel]

Wasn't he chalked up as a child engineering prodigy? He managed to build C3PO as well. From scratch; out of spare parts.

[Dienekes]

Wasn't he chalked up as a child engineering prodigy? He managed to build C3PO as well. From scratch; out of spare parts.

Well, it makes you wonder why slavery is so terrible when they have enough time/energy/resources on hand to create the universes version of a racecar that works as good if not better than professional ones. As well as an effeminate robot that would still be in fine working condition 30-40 years later.

And from a purely cinematic point it is hard to swallow all at once.

Qui-Gon= I have just met this boy, he seems strong in the force.
Ani=Please come home with me.
Pandme= Nice house, for a slave. Really this place is great. It has an upstairs? Cool
Jar-Jar= and fresh fruit! Sweet!
Ani= please, let me tell you all about myself. I'm a super genius kid who in his free time builds a flippin' robot! Also, I drive podraces! And I'm the only human in the entire galaxy that can do it! And I'm soooo awesome I built my own podracer, come I'll show you! Just don't tell Watto I had it, as a slave I'm not really allowed, but we've managed to hid it in this ridiculously large house!
Qui-Gon= The boy has... quite an imagination.
Shmi- I think it's from reading all that Calvin and Hobbes junk. I think it's a bad influence on him.

My un-funny joke aside. He was given too much awesome too fast and it was all passed over with too little questioning to look anything but ridiculous.

[Fiery Diamond]

This review was amusing until it started with all the "killer who locks up prostitutes in his cellar" stuff. It got worse as it went on. I wasted about 40 minutes or so. The rest was funny.

[LurkerInPlayground]

To be fair, though, Qui-Gon Jin was in one movie, Han Solo was in three. It's easier to describe a character when you have more to work with.
Han Solo is fleshed-out pretty well in a single movie. He shoots Greedo and dodges Jabba the Hutt. There's a higher moral cause that he initially chooses to ignore because he is "quite the mercenary" but swoops in to help the Rebellion at the last second. By the time the second movie rolls around he's firmly in the Rebellion camp.

[LurkerInPlayground]

This review was amusing until it started with all the "killer who locks up prostitutes in his cellar" stuff. It got worse as it went on. I wasted about 40 minutes or so. The rest was funny.
No see, the killer part was funny too. He's a geriatric who sends pizza rolls in envelopes through the mail who also happens to give insightful movie reviews.

[Wreckingrocc]

I love how greasy the envelopes are :smallbiggrin:

Indiana Jones II was awful. I think that's the only trilogy I've seen that's failed, then turned around and redeemed itself spectacularly.

I don't really remember the first one, on account of seeing it when I was... 6. Damn that was long ago. Back when I saw it, I wouldn't know a good movie if it hit me in the face; I liked the action sequences, and that was it. I was easy to entertain. I loved the wacky antics and fights, and ignored the plot entirely... Though for months I did have nightmares about that talking pizza roll.

Looking back, the fact that they had to aim at such a young audience is a problem in itself. Why not just make a damn cartoon and save everyone else the pain?

The third of the prequel trilogy I felt was just god-awful, though, moreso than the first two. The fact is, they didn't even try to write here. They just asked, "How do we bridge this gap?" And they did. No surprises, nothing interesting, just content to drive a plot everyone knew.

[Dr.Epic]

I thought the guy made some great/hilarious points but the whole "I'm a serial killer/disturbed maniac" thing may have been pushed a little too far. Sure I laughed at those jokes but I think some weren't necessary.

[Jan Mattys]

This doesn't attack my point that Qui-Gon is at least as nuanced a character as Han Solo at all. It just says that people don't remember him well. I say that's the fault of the viewers.

Missing a target is never the target's fault.

[Jerthanis]

Missing a target is never the target's fault.

I don't know how I can possibly further explain how Qui-gon was a good character when my whole opposition is defined by, "Well, he can't have been a good character because I said so."

[Dienekes]

I don't know how I can possibly further explain how Qui-gon was a good character when my whole opposition is defined by, "Well, he can't have been a good character because I said so."

I thought that your opposition was that he was bland, and generic, seemed to have no set personality just moving from scene to scene in an inconsistent manner doing what the plot requires, his rationality for his actions made no sense and were also inconsistent.

[Jerthanis]

I thought that your opposition was that he was bland, and generic, seemed to have no set personality just moving from scene to scene in an inconsistent manner doing what the plot requires, his rationality for his actions made no sense and were also inconsistent.

I've been writing about how this is false for a while, but it's easier to say, "He was generic" and then say, "He was generic because..."

I mean, I get that you don't like the movie, but for gosh sakes, there were cool things about it, and Qui-Gon was one of them. (Even if, still I admit he could've been Obi-Wan without throwing anything off... but that's a testament to how Obi-Wan in the originals was so consumed in his 'wise-mentor' role that he had few disqualifying features to merge his character)

[SolkaTruesilver]

I've been writing about how this is false for a while, but it's easier to say, "He was generic" and then say, "He was generic because..."

I mean, I get that you don't like the movie, but for gosh sakes, there were cool things about it, and Qui-Gon was one of them. (Even if, still I admit he could've been Obi-Wan without throwing anything off... but that's a testament to how Obi-Wan in the originals was so consumed in his 'wise-mentor' role that he had few disqualifying features to merge his character)

It would have been nice to seen the, oh, I don't know, CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT of Obi-Wan during the course of these 3 prequels.

You know.. he starts as the youngish Jedi. When he assumes the role of mentor, he sees his own youngish actions in the young Anakin.. he thinks to let them pass, as he went trough the same thing.

Until he realise that Anakin is not him. Anakin is not merely doing "youngish and foolish" actions, he became a murderer, and has to be stopped.

Yay, I just made up on the fly a good character development arc that would justify Obi-Wan's bitterness during RotJ about Vader's redemption.