A Review of the Review: Response to Red Letter Media's TPM review

[Renegade Paladin]

I know Red Letter Media's reviews of the Star Wars prequels are popular around here, so when I came across this (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=IFA1O2BI) earlier today, I quickly realized I just had to come here and post it. I have done as the author suggested and loaded up the review and popped in my VHS (I don't have it on DVD) copy of the movie and went through them as I read (and listening to that droning voice for that long was painful) and you know... he's right. I hadn't given it much thought before simply because the delivery is so horrid that I couldn't bear to listen to it for more than a few minutes and so hadn't seen it through to form an opinion about the actual arguments, but now that I have... wow. How was anyone even remotely convinced by this?

Fair warning, the review of the review is fairly long (clocking in at 108 pages in PDF format), but eminently readable, and not quite so bad as the length would suggest, as it's well-formatted in a slightly large font and includes images. I got through it in about the length of the movie.

[SurlySeraph]

Didn't we have this thread already? Twice? Or am I thinking of another forum?

Either way, what I managed to get through of the counter-review seemed to completely miss the point.

[Tavar]

Didn't we have this thread already? Twice? Or am I thinking of another forum?

Either way, what I managed to get through of the counter-review seemed to completely miss the point.

That reviews should be truthful? Cause, so far, that's what it seems to be saying.

[Comet]

I'm just surprised at how much free time all these people seem to have.

Didn't read all of the counter-review, but the parts I skimmed seemed to be well enough thought out and contained some reasonable points. As did the original RLM review. Good show, guys. I still think that the RLM review was more fun to digest.

[Seraph]

I finally wade through the personal attacks and the pre-emptive self-esteem boosting and the actual review wastes no time in dropping ad-homs.

not a good sign.

[SurlySeraph]

That reviews should be truthful? Cause, so far, that's what it seems to be saying.

Nah. The point of the RLM review was, given that most people think the Star Wars prequels were really bad, to piece together why most people think they were really bad and contrast what they do badly with what the original trilogy did well. The counter-review attempts to argue that the prequels weren't so bad. It primarily attempts to counter-argue that things the RLM review said were unclear or illogical did in fact make sense if you paid enough attention, are sufficiently familiar with Star Wars canon, read enough into them, etc.; it doesn't really engage with how they aren't very good movies, regardless of the logic involved.

I really don't feel like going through the counter-review, but fortunately there are some good examples of what's wrong with it here. (http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-fan-writes-108page-rebuttal-red-letter-medias-phantom-menace-review/)


"It’s not even hard to show why it’s dumb, because some of the things in that review are just really dumb."


"So if any RLM-lover says that I’ve gone too far by doing this, he’s full of crap. Especially if he’s posting from a scifi, fantasy, or comic book forum."

Raynor then goes on to detail exactly how he went through and dissected the RLM review, noting where points were good and where points were completely untrue, etc. Then, finally, on page 12, he goes part by part, point by point, through the entire 70 minute review, refuting and dissecting for the next 95 pages before reaching his conclusion


"He repeatedly makes false or unsupported claims that increase the amount of negativity in his review, which will stick in people’s minds even if he carefully retracts his statements later."

EDIT: RLM's criticizes the prequels for failing to establish the characters' personality well, by violating the "show, not tell" rule of character development; he illustrates this by asking people to describe Amidala without talking about her appearance or job, which none of them manage to do. The counter-review's response?


"'Not long after the Trade Federation's invasion, Darth Sidious [tells] its leaders that "Queen Amidala is young and naive," and that they will "find controlling her will not be difficult.'

[...]

Captain Panaka: 'The Queen wishes it. She's curious about the planet.' - Padmé was curious, because it had been clearly stated before"

That right there is completely missing the point.


"RLM: "So at the start of the film we see that Jedis can run at a super fast speed when the screenwriter doesn't know how to get them out of a situation where a powerful droid [the Droidekas] is shooting lasers at them."

He labels the Jedi's super speed as a cop out by the writer, although it seems to me that it was more of a momentary "cool effect." If the writer wanted the Jedi to run away...then the Jedi would simply run away, super speed or not."

So... he's saying that this isn't bad screenwriting, because the screenwriter could have written it differently? But the screenwriter did write it that way. And it was bad. Which is the point. Which he is missing.


"RLM: "But we never see them run fast again."

Fair point, although you can say that about all the other Force powers. Why don't the Jedi and Sith use telekinesis or lightning at every moment during every fight? The simple explanation is that the Jedi's powers aren't limitless, and you can't just pull out any Force power at any given moment."

But the film provides us with no reason to expect the Jedi to be unable to use their superspeed more often, so their failure to use it at times when it seems like it would be useful is jarring/ unenjoyable. That's not even in the same ballpark as the point.

I don't feel like looking for the quote, but the rebuttal notes that RLM said Anakin appears like 45 minutes into the movie and replies that it was actually 32 minutes in. The point is starting to look like Jimmy Hoffa.

And honestly, I feel the need to repeat:


"It’s not even hard to show why it’s dumb, because some of the things in that review are just really dumb."

[TheArsenal]

I didnt like that it insulted him. Yeah plinket said bad stuff about the Audience....Twice I think.

The Thing is it misses the point....Alot. I felt like the guy was just pulling stuff out of knower. He takes characters out of LINES. Plinket was talking about impression. Yeah, I noticed some of the contradictory lines as well.

By GOD! Its even more nitpicky than Plinkets review....wow, for hating the review that much he does the exactly the same thing.

Some good points but I felt like

One: Super nitpicks (And LOTS of speculation).

There is alot more "Answers" in the review that just create more questions.

God this is boring.


This felt like fanboydome. Plinket Called the movie stupid alot, but he didnt repeatedly (Every five sentences) call them stupid.

But Im a Heavy hater. so Maybe its bais.


Edit: One Sided Petty FANBOY RAGE OVER!

If I did a anti RLM review it would go like this:

It would be a video, and had less anti RLM as much as against the review. It would contain actual movie proof so that we saw the scene and could interpret it. Thats why RDL is MUCH more impact full. It has proof that is in front of him.
In addition Anti Person Hate makes it much harder to appreciate a review;

Mike J made like....a five minute defence video on Indiana Jones 4, and I suddenly realized that it wasnt as HORRIBLY bad. Just bad. If he made an Anti spoony video then it becomes "Hey! he had a point! Stop insulting him!". It also had a much more relaxed tone. So where the RLM reviews.

He did very little to showcase the actual effectiveness of the film he was defending, also very important.

[Renegade Paladin]

I finally wade through the personal attacks and the pre-emptive self-esteem boosting and the actual review wastes no time in dropping ad-homs.

not a good sign.
That would be a bad sign if it actually did, but it didn't. You are confusing insults with the ad hominem fallacy, when they are not the same thing.

To provide a quick and dirty illustration: It is an ad hominem to say that someone is wrong because he's an idiot. It is not an ad hominem to demonstrate why someone is wrong and then call him an idiot for having been wrong (though, depending on whether the incorrect position was one a reasonable person might hold, it could be in bad taste). The ad hominem fallacy need not even be insulting; "Jim is defending the conduct of the police because he's a retiree from the force" is an ad hominem (alleging that he is wrong because of who he is), while "Mary's methods of running the department are ineffective because of X, Y, and Z (where X, Y, and Z are factors demonstrating that her methods are ineffective); how stupid can she be to do it the other way?" is not.

Nah. The point of the RLM review was, given that most people think the Star Wars prequels were really bad, to piece together why most people think they were really bad and contrast what they do badly with what the original trilogy did well. The counter-review attempts to argue that the prequels weren't so bad. It primarily attempts to counter-argue that things the RLM review said were unclear or illogical did in fact make sense if you paid enough attention, are sufficiently familiar with Star Wars canon, read enough into them, etc.; it doesn't really engage with how they aren't very good movies, regardless of the logic involved.
You miss the point. (Ironic, isn't it?) The point of the counter-review isn't to show that the prequels are great pieces of cinema; it's to establish that the review itself is horribly flawed. To do that he doesn't need to show that The Phantom Menace is a great movie; he just needs to show how Mr. Plinkett, in addition to being irritating as all get out to listen to, doesn't make a lot of cogent points and does get a lot wrong. It doesn't engage with how they aren't very good movies because it doesn't need to.

I really don't feel like going through the counter-review, but fortunately there are some good examples of what's wrong with it here. (http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-fan-writes-108page-rebuttal-red-letter-medias-phantom-menace-review/)
I fail to see any glaring examples of what's wrong with it on that page, which in fact seems to be a ringing endorsement.

EDIT: RLM's criticizes the prequels for failing to establish the characters' personality well, by violating the "show, not tell" rule of character development; he illustrates this by asking people to describe Amidala without talking about her appearance or job, which none of them manage to do. The counter-review's response?
...is certainly considerably more than what you just quoted. I suppose it shouldn't be surprising to see RLM's methods used in defense of RLM, but here we go:
Not long after the Trade Federation's invasion, Darth Sidious its leaders that "Queen Amidala is young and naive," and that they will "find controlling her will not be difficult." In Star Wars, being young means being controlled and jerked around by various authority figures, both good-intentioned and manipulative. Anakin was a slave, and Luke was a farm boy with a cautious and fearful uncle who kept him from going out and seeing the world (or galaxy, in his case). In Padmé's case, she was the Queen of Naboo, forced (or believing herself forced) to live under all of the responsibilities, constraints, and formalities that come with that role.

The caged little princess is not a new or unusual idea in fiction. It repeatedly shows up among Disney princesses. Those characters tend to deal with their constraints by sneaking out and seeking adventure and new experiences. And that's exactly what Padmé does in TPM, while posing as a mere handmaiden. When Qui-Gon sets off toward the city on Tatooine, Padmé gets her security guard Captain Panaka to convince Qui-Gon to take her along, not knowing that she is the actual queen.

Captain Panaka: "The Queen wishes it. She's curious about the planet."

Padmé was curious, because as had been clearly stated before, she's young and inexperienced. Seeing Tatooine (as well as Coruscant later) is eye-opening experiences for her, and she's exposed to things that she had never seen during her sheltered life on Naboo. Things such as slavery and dirty politics. But it's during and after her trip to Tatooine where we see bits of the real Padmé. She's sweet and caring, looking out for Anakin and comforting the boy.

Padmé was easily the most inexperienced and least qualified of the movie's significant characters, aside from Jar Jar. Even Anakin, the only character younger than her, possessed more skills and had seen more of the real world than her (never mind his supernatural powers).
There's even more than that, but I think that covers the requirements. The challenge was to describe her character, and pretending that it can't be done when some schmoe on the Internet can come up with several pages is simply disingenuous.

So... he's saying that this isn't bad screenwriting, because the screenwriter could have written it differently? But the screenwriter did write it that way. And it was bad. Which is the point. Which he is missing.
Why is it bad? Because Plinkett said so? They have friggin' psychic powers, among which is the ability to jump several times their own height, for crying out loud; why is running fast supposedly so bad?

But the film provides us with no reason to expect the Jedi to be unable to use their superspeed more often, so their failure to use it at times when it seems like it would be useful is jarring/ unenjoyable. That's not even in the same ballpark as the point.

I don't feel like looking for the quote, but the rebuttal notes that RLM said Anakin appears like 45 minutes into the movie and replies that it was actually 32 minutes in. The point is starting to look like Jimmy Hoffa.
Please. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander; if he's going to deconstruct the review, why shouldn't he do so as thoroughly as the review deconstructed the movie (only more so, because the review, you know, didn't)?
Mike J made like....a five minute defence video on Indiana Jones 4, and I suddenly realized that it wasnt as HORRIBLY bad. Just bad. If he made an Anti spoony video then it becomes "Hey! he had a point! Stop insulting him!". It also had a much more relaxed tone. So where the RLM reviews.

He did very little to showcase the actual effectiveness of the film he was defending, also very important.
He wasn't defending the film, though; he was attacking the review. The two are completely different objectives, which should be (and are) approached in completely different ways.

He also addressed why a text response is superior to video in the introduction, and he's right:
I’ve seen it being said that videos, especially long ones, are a lousy medium for online discussion. That’s because someone often has to watch large parts of a video just to find the few moments that he’s looking for. While a written response such as this one can also be long, it is far easier to skim and quote from using search functions. That increases transparency and makes the truth easier to see.
I would never use video to rebut a 70 minute well-edited video. Why? I'm just not that good a video editor. The qualitative difference would sway audiences even if the rebuttal was completely right and the original was completely wrong, because most people will not engage their brains long enough to get past the shiny. That's the entire reason why he did it in text, and he says it right in the text.

None of this is to say that TPM is a great movie. It isn't. That's not the point. There are lots of ways to legitimately criticize it, but Red Letter Media chose not to use them in favor of gross (and even more galling, unnecessary!) dishonesty. That's the problem.

[Tavar]

Yeah, one reason I like SFdebris is that it's short. I can watch a ten minute review, afterwards know about where each point was made.

[Lord Seth]

Yeah, one reason I like SFdebris is that it's short. I can watch a ten minute review, afterwards know about where each point was made.That's not quite a fair comparison though. Most of his reviews are of episodes, during which there's not as much to talk about. He talks for much longer in his movie reviews; for example, Wrath of Khan was four videos (about 40 minutes) as was The Final Frontier. Granted, those were longer than the others (because he really loved Wrath of Khan and really hated Final Frontier) but he talks a lot longer during the movie reviews.

Plus his reviews have a completely different person, he's more of a recapper whereas RedLetterMedia gives direct critiques.

[WalkingTarget]

The first thing that bugs me as I glance through this review thing is the 2+ pages that he puts into the "describe Qui-gon" thing.

One guy says Qui-Gon is "stoic," and then acts as if he's struggling to think of anything else. The girl pretends that she doesn't remember who Qui-Gon is, despite how much of TPM is spent following him. Yeah, right. More of Stoklasa's amateur actors (oops, I mean friends and regular people) put on a show to supposedly support his claim that Qui-Gon is a nothing, a blank slate of a character who can't be described in any way. It's one thing to think that the original trilogy characters were superior to the prequel characters (not an outrageous opinion at all), but to act as if you can't come up with a single descriptive word is just over the top. Not a single adjective...except for one guy who displays an ignorance of vocabulary by laughably labeling Qui-Gon as "stern." Qui-Gon Jinn, a stern man...

and another few pages while the author goes on about how he can describe the character and takes it as a given that the people in the RLM review couldn't possibly not know all of this about the character. I dunno about you guys, but I know more than a few people who have either not seen any Star Wars movies at all or have only seen them once. Really - if you saw TPM once 10 years ago and weren't particularly invested in the film/franchise wouldn't it be believable that you didn't remember it particularly well.

I mean, The World is Not Enough came out the same year. I haven't seen it more than the one time (and I'm generally a Bond guy) and I couldn't describe the characters original to that film right now.

This guy is making assumptions about the people interviewed in Plinkett's review - assumptions which are the only means of backing up this portion of his review.

The proper way to pick apart this portion of Plinkett's review would be to request that we know something about these people being interviewed. Are they generally fans of Star Wars? Was the OT a part of their childhoods but not so much the PT (and so they've had a lot more exposure to, say, Han Solo as a character throughout their lives, but not so much the characters unique to the newer films)? The OT characters have 20+ years' head start for cultural osmosis to happen.

The control group for this would have to be: take people who have never seen any of the films (and are generally agnostic towards them) and show them individual entries in the series and then ask them about characters that appeared in that film and see if there are trends in their abilities to characterize them based on a single viewing. This guy's method of using his personal knowledge of a character is not any better than Plinkett's method. He's using a flawed method of refutation as he's in the process of going over the film in fine detail as opposed to being asked to come up with a response on the spot - all he proves is that he can find characterization of Qui-gon if he tries.

[Lord Seth]

All right, read it. I started writing up a response as I was reading it but ultimately gave up halfway through because it was getting too long and the only fictional thing I'm really ready to debate to the death over is why I didn't like season 3 of Avatar. So here's a summary of the problems:

1) Constant insults on Mike Stoklasa, far more than Plinkett ever leveled on Lucas. This is especially troublesome when you remember that Mr. Plinkett is a character, and thus we can regard the insults as exaggerated for comic effect. The author of this response (a quick look on the RedLetterMedia forums seems to indicate it was someone named Jim Raynor, which they should've put in the document itself) cannot claim. One of the most annoying parts is when he accuses RLM of using "amateur actors" for the character section without actually giving any evidence of this claim.

2) Many times he misses the point of what RLM is arguing. Let's take the character portion, where the reviewer writes for a while about the characters and proclaims triumph that he proved RLM wrong. The thing is, if you actually look at his "exploration" of the characters, it's pretty much all him talking about what the characters did. That's not characterization. Despite writing for several pages on Qui-Gon, the only thing I really got out of it was that Qui-Gon is kindhearted. That's it.

To give an example, what Jim Raynor does is equivalent to me talking about Spongebob's personality. I could say he's stupid and then give a lot of examples of his stupidity, but at the end the only characterization I've ended up with is that he's stupid.

3) Speculation, speculation, speculation. When RLM points out that Palpatine's plan doesn't really make sense, Jim Raynor rushes to try to defend it by pointing out what Palpatine might have done if things had gone differently. That's speculation unsupported by the movie itself. We know from the movie that things worked out for Palpatine, but the problem is that he only became chancellor because his plans apparently failed. If this was a case where he wanted the good guys to escape, that would be one thing and actually show he's a smart chessmaster, but we never see any evidence of this, and in fact the films seem to contradict that, given that they barely make it out of Naboo. This is possibly the biggest problem in it.

I also have to quote Confused Matthew on something: If you had to think of it, that means the filmmakers didn't. If Jim Raynor has to make excuses, that means they weren't handled in the film. For example, RLM mentions that the blockade is gone without explanation. Jim Raynor engages in some more speculation on why, which again doesn't change the fact that the movie never explains it.

Not quite part of the speculation, but it's something that stood out at me: An especially odd part is when he tries to justify the "fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering" on pages 102-103. In it, he invents a few scenarios. And his point is...what? If you were to randomly reverse the fear/anger/hate/suffering bit, you could also make up some imaginary situations. Yes, fear can lead to anger and anger can lead to hate and hate can lead to suffering, but Yoda goes beyond that in saying they do lead.

4) Nitpicking. Yes, I know RLM did some of that, but not as much as this. One of the most confusing ones I found was on pages 30-31, when Plinkett says that the Senate wanted to send an investigation team. Jim Raynor goes on a rant about how the Trade Federation was the one who suggested it and how it was all part of their plan...apparently missing the fact that the Trade Federation is part of the Senate and that the Senate seems to agree. Also that wasn't even really a criticism of the film. So he objects to something that's not criticizing the film and seems to miss the fact the statement was correct. Huh.

5) Complaining about obvious jokes. For example, on the top of page 100 he complains that Stoklasa is "playing mind-reader" on Rick McCallum when it's obvious that it's an exaggeration for comic effect.

A few points, like I said, are valid. His complaints about Plinkett saying the Jedi should fight "all of them" on pages 39-41 are accurate. He's correct on pages 71-72 that Plinkett's apparent confusion over the bet is silly when it's pretty simple.

One final problem is that I found RLM's review far more entertaining than this response (yes, Plinkett's voice is a bit annoying at first but it did grow on me and now I really like it). That may not have anything to do with whether the points are good or not, but it is something I think is true.

So ultimately, it makes some valid points, but most of it is unnecessary insults (at least Plinkett's were usually funny and weren't done as much), speculation made to try to justify errors in the film, or nitpicking beyond the nitpicking done in the original review.

Did Mike Stoklasa ever make any statement on it yet? There's a thread (http://z10.invisionfree.com/RedLetterMedia/index.php?showtopic=1096&st=0) in the RedLetterMedia forums but I don't think he's posted in it yet. (hey, if anyone's going to No Brand Con, he'll be there and you can ask...)

[0Megabyte]

Here's the truth: I showed the Plinkett review to my step-father, who had no real vested interest in The Phantom Menace other than taking me to watch it back in 1999, and probably seeing it once or twice since then, and not really liking it.

He was laughing almost immediately, and didn't stop. This is because the review is effective as entertainment. It also makes cogent points about The Phantom Menace. Is it perfect? No. Are some of the points a little exaggerated? Yes! Is the whole "character" bit early on more hilarious rhetoric than anything else? Perhaps! Etc etc ad infinitum.

It's good. It's enjoyable. The character and the exaggeration are amusing, at least they're amusing to a big enough audience. Of course, even the best story in the world will have detractors, and there are people who dislike even amazing things. (I am not implying this review IS that thing, btw.) It's natural for there to be people who the thing doesn't work for, for any number of reasons.

Again, this is natural. But just because some people dislike something doesn't make it bad. I didn't enjoy the classic movie The Graduate. Was it a good movie? Yes. But it's not my type of movie, or at least it wasn't my type of movie at the time, for various reasons.

In the end, the existence of this thing is worthwhile. Some people won't like it, but some people do. This argument also works on Twilight, which is why I don't seriously diss it, even if it isn't my thing, and even if I don't think it's very good. (And even if I do riff on it in private with a couple of friends playfully sometimes.)

This thing was good entertainment. At least, it entertained me and people I care about. In the end, that's all that matters, not the vitriol of some other guy. There's a whole website dedicating to hating the webcomic xkcd, for example.

(It would be hypocritical for me to say that this thing has no place, considering what Plinkett's review is. But I never said it shouldn't exist either. Just that Plinkett's review should.)

Though personally, you know what this reminds me of, from what people keep saying about this? The counter-review of the famous review of FATAL. Yes, the creator critiqued the review of FATAL. With such stunning gems as, in response to them calling it a "date rape" rpg, stating "there's no dating in it!" It was epic.

[TheArsenal]

In Basics:

RLM Reviews are dark comedy movies

This Review is a 108 Pg long essay.


I can go into debating the stuff, but the essay just BORES me so much I dont want to.

[Renegade Paladin]

... A 108 page long essay that's well written and easy to follow; I read it in an hour or so. There's not a lot of difference between that and listening to Plinkett's horridly irritating voice for an hour and ten if you're literate. I don't have a lot of sympathy for "tl;dr." If you can't be bothered to even read it, how can you say it's wrong? Don't want to delve into it? Fine, but why make a bunch of posts about it, then?

[TheArsenal]

... A 108 page long essay that's well written and easy to follow;

That is your opinion.


I read it in an hour or so. There's not a lot of difference between that and listening to Plinkett's horridly irritating voice for an hour and ten if you're literate.

Thats your opinion. I loved the voice, it spiced up the review every once a while.


I don't have a lot of sympathy for "tl;dr." If you can't be bothered to even read it, how can you say it's wrong?

OH I read the thing alright. I just found it SO boring. I just dont feal like reading it again to review it.


Don't want to delve into it? Fine, but why make a bunch of posts about it, then?

Well This is a discusion thread after all. If You ask me, I will provide.

[Julian84]

There isn't much of an easy way to say this, so I'll make it quick. I think y'all are beating a dead horse. Lord knows that here on the playground some people liked the prequels, some didn't, some like RLM, some don't. It's been rehashed a lot from what I can see, for no purpose whatsoever beyond giving people a reason to argue.

I'm not trying to be judgmental, mind, I'm just saying that I don't think there's much place for this debate on the playground. I could be wrong. But it's just my opinion.

[SurlySeraph]

You miss the point. (Ironic, isn't it?) The point of the counter-review isn't to show that the prequels are great pieces of cinema; it's to establish that the review itself is horribly flawed. To do that he doesn't need to show that The Phantom Menace is a great movie; he just needs to show how Mr. Plinkett, in addition to being irritating as all get out to listen to, doesn't make a lot of cogent points and does get a lot wrong.

Most of what I recall from the rebuttal was arguments that that the film's logic did in fact make sense; but you read it more recently and more carefully than I did, so I cede the point.


Not long after the Trade Federation's invasion, Darth Sidious its leaders that "Queen Amidala is young and naive," and that they will "find controlling her will not be difficult." In Star Wars, being young means being controlled and jerked around by various authority figures, both good-intentioned and manipulative. Anakin was a slave, and Luke was a farm boy with a cautious and fearful uncle who kept him from going out and seeing the world (or galaxy, in his case). In Padmé's case, she was the Queen of Naboo, forced (or believing herself forced) to live under all of the responsibilities, constraints, and formalities that come with that role.

The caged little princess is not a new or unusual idea in fiction. It repeatedly shows up among Disney princesses. Those characters tend to deal with their constraints by sneaking out and seeking adventure and new experiences. And that's exactly what Padmé does in TPM, while posing as a mere handmaiden. When Qui-Gon sets off toward the city on Tatooine, Padmé gets her security guard Captain Panaka to convince Qui-Gon to take her along, not knowing that she is the actual queen.

Captain Panaka: "The Queen wishes it. She's curious about the planet."

Padmé was curious, because as had been clearly stated before, she's young and inexperienced. Seeing Tatooine (as well as Coruscant later) is eye-opening experiences for her, and she's exposed to things that she had never seen during her sheltered life on Naboo. Things such as slavery and dirty politics. But it's during and after her trip to Tatooine where we see bits of the real Padmé. She's sweet and caring, looking out for Anakin and comforting the boy.

Padmé was easily the most inexperienced and least qualified of the movie's significant characters, aside from Jar Jar. Even Anakin, the only character younger than her, possessed more skills and had seen more of the real world than her (never mind his supernatural powers).

So the characters say what she's like, *and* she sneaks out once and is nice to Anakin. I still don't see much character establishment.


Why is it bad? Because Plinkett said so? They have friggin' psychic powers, among which is the ability to jump several times their own height, for crying out loud; why is running fast supposedly so bad?

It's not bad that they run fast. It's bad that they run fast once, and never again. Especially in situations like the final battle with Darth Maul where it would have been extremely useful to run fast due to those force fields. Establishing that they have a power and only using that power for them to briefly look cool and never again is sloppy writing, and it creates plot holes (like, you know, why Obi Wan didn't run fast through the forcefields to save Qui Gon).


He also addressed why a text response is superior to video in the introduction, and he's right:

A text response is incapable of illustrating relevant moments with film clips, which is quite helpful when you're talking about movies. It's also less entertaining than video.

Also, could I have some examples of RLM being dishonest? I haven't seen any yet.

[TheArsenal]

Also, could I have some examples of RLM being dishonest? I haven't seen any yet.

A few: Fighting all the droids IS a bad analogy and the bet ISNT that complicated. Qui Gon is still an characterless slate, a nameless goon with a name. The Movies logic is still bad.

[Dr.Epic]

So you did a review of a review and now people are going to look over and comment on what you said making this a review of a review of a review. I'm pretty sure space/time just imploded somewhere there.

[Dienekes]

Wait... someone wrote a 100 page review of a joke review?

And people are seriously paying attention to this obvious display of lunacy?

[Comet]

So you did a review of a review and now people are going to look over and comment on what you said making this a review of a review of a review. I'm pretty sure space/time just imploded somewhere there.

Yo dawg.

Anyway, I read the whole thing now, in small increments over a couple days.
There's a lot of passion there. A lot of passion that, unfortunately, undermines the points he's trying to point out. It's a 108 page epic that tries to be all academic and respectable, but it's too obvious that he's very pent up about all this and, as such, not quite the objective champion he would like to be.

He's got anger, is all I'm saying. If Plinket is Jar Jar Binks, this guy is Darth Maul. While, in movie continuity, I would gladly watch Maul maul Jar Jar, here I'm going to have to go with the somewhat funny guy over the guy with all the crusading fury.

And the prequel movies themselves were pretty okay, except for the middle one.

[TheArsenal]

So you did a review of a review and now people are going to look over and comment on what you said making this a review of a review of a review. I'm pretty sure space/time just imploded somewhere there.

You have entered. The Twilight Zone (Too Doo Doo Dooo).

[John Cribati]

So We're reviewing a review of another review.

YO DAWG I HEARD- *shot*

Edit: Ninja'd.

[snoopy13a]

Anyway, I read the whole thing now, in small increments over a couple days.
There's a lot of passion there. A lot of passion that, unfortunately, undermines the points he's trying to point out. It's a 108 page epic that tries to be all academic and respectable, but it's too obvious that he's very pent up about all this and, as such, not quite the objective champion he would like to be.

He's got anger, is all I'm saying. If Plinket is Jar Jar Binks, this guy is Darth Maul. While, in movie continuity, I would gladly watch Maul maul Jar Jar, here I'm going to have to go with the somewhat funny guy over the guy with all the crusading fury.



108 pages is a lot. Especially when the original source material is only a couple of movies. I'm guessing it isn't exactly concise.

Anyone ambitious enough to come up with a Cliffs Notes version for me :smallbiggrin: ?

[Dr.Epic]

You have entered. The Twilight Zone (Too Doo Doo Dooo).

What? I've been there that one time I was on a plane with a gremlin while I was the last person on earth and my glasses broke but it turned out I was dead and I got everything I wanted which was meant to be eternal punishment and I was actually one of the worse dictators of all time.

[The Glyphstone]

What? I've been there that one time I was on a plane with a gremlin while I was the last person on earth and my glasses broke but it turned out I was dead and I got everything I wanted which was meant to be eternal punishment and I was actually one of the worse dictators of all time.

You forgot that you were also a doll, and that the aliens wrote a cookbook.

[Sillycomic]

Cliff Notes version seems simple enough.

RLM's review revolves around the prequels sucking for very specific reasons. 1. There's no real characters in the movie. 2. There's no real story in the movie. 3. The plot makes no sense.

The response essay goes through all of these points to counter them. Yes there are characters. Yes there's a real story and yes the plot makes sense.

1. No characters.

RLM argues that, compared to the original trilogy, the new characters of Star Wars are paper cut outs. There's nothing awesome or amazing about them.

Raynor disagress with that. He says it's obvious that there are good decent characters and characterizations in the movie. Such as:

Qui Gon is a father figure who thwarts authority and has an easy going attitude and plays fast and loose with the rules.

Obi Wan is a young bright and naive character who focuses a little more on the future than what's at hand.

The Queen is a 14 year old girl who is bravely trying to save her people and do the right thing, despite feeling trapped in her traiditional role as queen.
2. No story

RLM argues that the story is about taxation of trade routes. This is a silly concept for a Star Wars movie. There is no clear villain, which makes it hard for the audience to understand what the bad guys are doing. The good guys seem to keep doing things that don't make any logical sense and sometimes seem hurtful to their cause rather than helpful.

Raynor counters that the story does make sense if you just look at what's going on.

The taxation isn't important because it's just a macguffin. It's just there to start the characters into the plot so obviously the movie doesn't go into details.

There's no clear villain because the villains are trying to be mysterious and behind the scenes.

The good guys are doing what they can with what they have. Everything from Qui Gon's bet in the pod race to the Queen thanking R2D2 for saving them seems consistent within the characters and their cause.

3. The plot.

I won't go into everything RLM says about the plot (it's a 70 minute long review for a reason) but I'll touch on some big points and then say why Raynor thinks they are wrong.

RLM: Why is the Trade Federation unahppy about taxes on trade?
Raynor: The trade federation is being taxed so they are setting up a blockade as protest.

RLM: Why are the Jedi sent in to negotiate? Are they experts on trade law?
Raynor: No, but they are good at negotiations. And the blockade is illegal. In fact the Nomodians (or however they are spelled) are almost ready to drop the blockade once they realize the Jedi are here until Sidious convinces them to kill the Jedi.

RLM: Why kill the Jedi in such a stupid manner?
Raynor: They don't understand how Jedi's work and they think a few droid robots and some poison gas should be enough. What, the bad guys can't underestimate the good guys?

RLM: Why don't the Jedi just take out the entire droid army when they're still on the ship?
Raynor: What... are you insane? 2 Jedi versus 2 billion droid fighters, when they just ran away from the rolly polly droids not 5 minutes ago?

RLM: Why go to the Gungan city if your mission is to warn the Naboo about attack?
Raynor: Maybe because the Gungans have a way to communicate with the city, or transport to get them there faster?

RLM: Why didn't the Trade Federation force the Queen to sign the treaty once they captured here?
Raynor: Because she refused to sign it. So they're taking her to a camp to watch her people suffer. Maybe then she'll change her mind.

RLM: Why is forcing someone to sign a treaty make it valid?
Raynor: It just helps the process, plus Sidious said he could help validate the treaty. Also, we aren't sure what Sidious ultimate plan is. This could be his plan, forcing the queen to sign the treaty and then having the queen question the validity of the treaty to the Senate. Then she would want the council to act against this corruption, but the chancellor won't do it because he's corrupt and the Trade Federation has already gotten to him... at which point the queen will ask for a vote of no confidence... and we're right back to Palpatine becoming the new Chancellor.

RLM: How does one ship make it through the blockade?
Raynor: They know the queen is on the ship so they can't destroy it. They take out the shield generator and then try to take out the droids fixing the shield generator. They are interested in crippling the ship so it can't jump to hyperdrive, not destroying it.


That's about as far as I got.

I think Raynor does make some fair points, but I also think most of his points are speculation. He gives a lot of answers that make sense, but those answers aren't in the movie... such as the Trade Federation not wanting to kill the queen and trying to cripple her ship as they run the blockade.

Just put in one scene of the Nimbloideans saying to target the engines so the queen can't escape would have solved that entire problem... but no. We as the audience are just supposed to assume what's going on in the scene.

Red Letter Media put a face on the flaws that are the Phantom Menace. He tried to create flaws where there weren't any in a few places and Raynor called him on it, but most of RLM's points (at least in my opinion) are still valid.

Aside from that... almost every argument that Raynor makes you can counter argue with, "If that is true then why didn't they show it in the movie!"

Which is where I think Raynor's essay truly fails. A lot of his counter arguments are just speculation. Some of it is good speculation, mind you, but I don't want to watch a movie where I have to guess what's going on behind the scenes most of the time.

[Psyren]

*snip*

This post pretty much summed up my opinion.

Raynor, and fans like him, seem convinced that the reason RLM and fans like me dislike the prequels, is because there is no explanation for the plotholes. They then come to us (or write 108-page responses) and say "See! There ARE explanations! You can stop disliking them now!"

The real problem is that the movies themselves do a very poor job of providing these explanations. Take the Jedi super-speed thing. The movies never give us any kind of limit or expectation as to how much they can use this power, how often, anything. It could even be as simple as having the jedi look worn out right after doing it, or during a fight - some labored breathing, a stumble or two, something. But no, they keep right on with the lightsaber ballet and wisecracks as though they're completely peachy. So why would I expect them not to be able to do that on command?

Ditto for the vanishing blockade and the Confused Matthew quote. We're not saying Star Wars in general is bad (at least, I'm not.) We're saying the three prequel movies are bad.

[TheArsenal]

I think Raynor does make some fair points, but I also think most of his points are speculation. He gives a lot of answers that make sense, but those answers aren't in the movie... such as the Trade Federation not wanting to kill the queen and trying to cripple her ship as they run the blockade.

What If they accidental destroyed the ship? Oops. You have Fighters that aim Much better, and could have captured the ship.


Just put in one scene of the Nimbloideans saying to target the engines so the queen can't escape would have solved that entire problem... but no. We as the audience are just supposed to assume what's going on in the scene.

Red Letter Media put a face on the flaws that are the Phantom Menace. He tried to create flaws where there weren't any in a few places and Raynor called him on it, but most of RLM's points (at least in my opinion) are still valid.

Aside from that... almost every argument that Raynor makes you can counter argue with, "If that is true then why didn't they show it in the movie!"

In addition to raising more questions:

It is actualy pretty smart to have sensors in the ventialtion shaft. That means that you could just lead droids to where thier trying to escape. Problem? NO SENSORS ANYWHERE ELSE! The Army should have turned and started firing at the jedi.


Which is where I think Raynor's essay truly fails. A lot of his counter arguments are just speculation. Some of it is good speculation, mind you, but I don't want to watch a movie where I have to guess what's going on behind the scenes most of the time.

I just found a lot of BS in it. Like for Example: Why are the Traders Bad? They Take over a City (Not a Planet) with only trade something in intent. There is no blood, even the queen gets to keep her guards. Sure the Eu says DEATHCAMPS FOR NO REASON! And other than killing Jedi (A Stupid act-Will attract even more attention-Will destroy your plan) who where trying to stop them. And on the other Spektrum: Qui Gon is Not the main character.

At the very least we should know who the character is (Unless its all SPOOKY and Mysterious). Who is Qui gon? Sure you may say: He is just a Jedi from the Temple, then that doesnt solve the problem. It makes it that it was a bad idea to make the Jedi Emotionless space monks, not a rag tag team of defenders (All with families, hopes, dreams) that just generally meet in their secret club house to discuss stuff. Like the Justice leage.

I CAN Argue that Qui gon Doesnt believe in anikin. He Believes in a Profecy. We dont know qui gon. He could be trying to get his bonus for all we know. Yes he tries to place Anikin in the Space Cult Program, he doesnt try anything else other than save a passerby. He doesnt simply- Jedi Mind trick the Parts, Anikin, and his mom. He Cheats (To give the apearance of a good man) and instantly forgets about the mother.

In addition it shows him as a Reckless guy who cares nothing for the well being of a child. Why bring Anikin along? No reason. Why Defy the Jedi Order? Paycheck? Blind belief in a one sided Profecy? They sensed Darkness, and instead of making a think-full study to ensure all is well with the child, he crams knowledge into his face. I Trust my Doctor. I dont say I know better than him.

Qui Gon Also Saves jar Jar. Why Not? Just kill the couple of Droids. Learn information from him. His Final wish is: Train Anikin. Not: Free all slaves on Tatooine. His Goals all can be interpreted as Obedience to the force.

We have No Reason To Root for him. What If Annies Chlorians where low?

Edit:

Padme is....Vanila. A Disney Princes. We dont see her screeming " Let them go you bastards!" or Pronounce those words very monatonly with tearfull eyes. Just sort of Meh. And meh again. Every Scene is meh. Shes just like anybody who would meet a little kid: Aw how cute. Not "I must shelter him". She gives a very Meh, disney impression. Never is she Realy sad, or realy happy. Just in Between. Even after she becomes a senator she never sighs, or stuff like that. Only "Meh".

In addition Every "Nitpick" would end the plot:

Jedis Run again through red lazers? Qui gon not dead. Proper Shields for Battle Cruiser? Annie Dead. Darth maul knocks Obi wan over? Obi wan Dead.

[snoopy13a]

Cliff Notes version seems simple enough.

RLM's review revolves around the prequels sucking for very specific reasons. 1. There's no real characters in the movie. 2. There's no real story in the movie. 3. The plot makes no sense.

The response essay goes through all of these points to counter them. Yes there are characters. Yes there's a real story and yes the plot makes sense.

That's about as far as I got.

I think Raynor does make some fair points, but I also think most of his points are speculation. He gives a lot of answers that make sense, but those answers aren't in the movie... such as the Trade Federation not wanting to kill the queen and trying to cripple her ship as they run the blockade.

Just put in one scene of the Nimbloideans saying to target the engines so the queen can't escape would have solved that entire problem... but no. We as the audience are just supposed to assume what's going on in the scene.

Red Letter Media put a face on the flaws that are the Phantom Menace. He tried to create flaws where there weren't any in a few places and Raynor called him on it, but most of RLM's points (at least in my opinion) are still valid.

Aside from that... almost every argument that Raynor makes you can counter argue with, "If that is true then why didn't they show it in the movie!"

Which is where I think Raynor's essay truly fails. A lot of his counter arguments are just speculation. Some of it is good speculation, mind you, but I don't want to watch a movie where I have to guess what's going on behind the scenes most of the time.

Thanks. Now I don't have to read the 108 page report because the essence of it was summed up in a few paragraphs (see the value of conciseness :smallsmile: ).

I suppose a counter-argument to the "too much speculation" conclusion would be that if everything in the movie was explained fully then the movie would drag on (even more so in The Phantom Menace's case :smalltongue: ). Or am I the only one who thought the pod-race took way too long?

My biggest concern with reviews such as these is that they often fail to take into account dramatic irony. The characters are not always as well-informed as the audience. The power of the Jedi is a great example. Opinion of their power ranges from that of powerful demi-gods to Han Solo's view in early Star Wars (the first movie, I don't call it by its "new name") that the Force is a myth. Thus, Solo must have believed that the Jedi Knights were frauds and charlatans or something of that nature.

Obviously, the audience has watched the original trilogy so they know Jedi capablities. Unfortunately, the Neimondians did not :smallsmile: . So, the Neimondian leader underestimates the Jedi with the ineffectual gas trap while his lieutentant overestimates the Jedi and believes that they are doomed.

[Trazoi]

Eh, I'm skimming the doc but it's hard to take his rebuttals seriously. I'm only a few pages in but it's fairly clear he's waaaay into the movie, to the point where I doubt he can get into the mindset of someone watching the film for the first time. I'm up to the point where he calls the people who RLM questioned about the characters lying actors because they can't rattle off his own personal interpretation of Qui-Gon. Yeah, right.

Plus it doesn't help that he titled his thesis "A Study in Fanboy Stupidity". With a title like that I'm half-suspecting it's all an elaborate troll.

[TheArsenal]

The Problem with The Prequels is deeper than just including fixes for the plot holes. Its that thier whole creation made a poor backstory. We needed no explanation on why stuff happened in 456 (Yes holes existed, But MUCH MUCH MUCH LESS!). Every scene could destroy the entire film:

What If They Made Her Sighn the Treaty Right away? Film Over. What the droids fired at the ship BEFORE it put up shields flew and away? Film Over. No Super Speed? Film Over. The Waited Until After they decided to kill them to serve them tea (And if the dont want no tea, just gas the room for 5 hours)? Film over.

[Gray Mage]

The Problem with The Prequels is deeper than just including fixes for the plot holes. Its that thier whole creation made a poor backstory. We needed no explanation on why stuff happened in 456 (Yes holes existed, But MUCH MUCH MUCH LESS!). Every scene could destroy the entire film:

What If They Made Her Sighn the Treaty Right away? Film Over. What the droids fired at the ship BEFORE it put up shields flew and away? Film Over. No Super Speed? Film Over. The Waited Until After they decided to kill them to serve them tea (And if the dont want no tea, just gas the room for 5 hours)? Film over.

I don't think I understand your point here. Are you saying that the possibility that things happened differently is a problem? Because a lot (if not all) movies would have that problem. :smallconfused:

[Dr.Epic]

You forgot that you were also a doll, and that the aliens wrote a cookbook.

And a two headed alien made me the strongest man in the world.

[Tavar]

What If They Made Her Sighn the Treaty Right away? Film Over. What the droids fired at the ship BEFORE it put up shields flew and away? Film Over. No Super Speed? Film Over. The Waited Until After they decided to kill them to serve them tea (And if the dont want no tea, just gas the room for 5 hours)? Film over.

What if the imperials had blown the escape pod up? What if they didn't let Obi Wan and Luke by? Etc.

[Dienekes]

What If They Made Her Sighn the Treaty Right away? Film Over. What the droids fired at the ship BEFORE it put up shields flew and away? Film Over. No Super Speed? Film Over. The Waited Until After they decided to kill them to serve them tea (And if the dont want no tea, just gas the room for 5 hours)? Film over.

Now, I hated the prequels as much as the next guy but this is ridiculous.

Counter example: A personal favorite of mine The Good the Bad and the Ugly.
What if Blondie was caught freeing Tuco? Film over. What if Bill Carson had died before giving the whereabouts of the gold? Film over. What if Blondie shot Tuco during the recapture scene? Film over. What if Angel Eyes hired competent guards to take Tuco out back and shoot him? Film over.

[TheArsenal]

What if the imperials had blown the escape pod up? What if they didn't let Obi Wan and Luke by? Etc.

You got me. The Jedi Mind Trick was a introduced plot device. They Should have shot the pod. A Shield for the Hole for the reactor, Ewoks Sucked, Luke was lucky he didnt fall to his death.

Ahh! Im ruining things for myself!

Edit:

I meant that they should have totaly been different movies.

And Although my point was this happens rapid fire throught the sequels. I meant that The super speed was just a plot device that was never used again (As apposed to jedi mind trick). There are a lot of little constant enemy underestimation, and stupidity for the plot convenience. It just happens so Rapid Fire, from the very first shot of the movie, that it just annoyes me heavily.


I knew about all of the above. I am VERY biased.

[Trazoi]

I don't think I understand your point here. Are you saying that the possibility that things happened differently is a problem? Because a lot (if not all) movies would have that problem. :smallconfused:
It's not so much "things happening differently", it's characters acting bizarrely against their own interest because if they acted sensibly it would ruin the plot. Films often have a handful of moments like this, although usually subtle so you don't realise it until you think about the movie afterwards. But TPM has a conga line of these moments one after the other and it derails the whole film. It's especially bad right at the beginning, which makes the film start off completely on the wrong foot. (RLM covers this in his review.)

[Sillycomic]

I suppose a counter-argument to the "too much speculation" conclusion would be that if everything in the movie was explained fully then the movie would drag on (even more so in The Phantom Menace's case )

I would say if it's done wrong, and you just fill the Phantom Menace with boring scenes in which exposition is rambled off explaining why various things did and did not work it would be boring (well, more boring than it is now)

But, that's the job of a good writer. You explain what's going on in your movie and you do it in a way that's fun and pushes the story forward.

In the original Star Wars everyone needs to know that there's a weakness to the Death Star and only a small ship running down this small trench can blow it up. Explanation done in an interesting way that set up the situation for the audience and gives a bit of insight into Leia's character (cause she put her life on the line protecting this secret for this very purpose, and some other characters by complaining how hard it is, and Luke's character by saying he's done stuff like that before at home)

The new one just misses these super important scenes and expects us to either know it or figure it out when stuff like that comes up.

Perfect example. When the Queen arrives at Naboo, she hears that the Chancellor is sympathetic to their cause and he's eager to talk with her.

We see him asking if the Queen is all right. The next scene she is talking with Palpatine about how useless the Chancelor is. The next scene is her in the senate and the Chancellor unable to send troops to help her, asking if she will delay until a committee is sent to figure more stuff out. And at that point she calls for a vote of no confidence.

RLM brings up a wonderful point. Why isn't the Chancellor asking the Jedi to validate these claims from Naboo? He has first hand knowledge... so there's no point for him to ask for a committee.

Raynor argues that the Trade Federation has the Chancellor in their pocket, so he's making more political moves so that he makes no decision.

And my counter argument would be.... WHAT? Are you kidding me? The Chancellor is corrupt and the Trade Federation is making back room deals? This kind of stuff isn't important to show in the movie?

How is the Trade Federation pulling the Chancellor's strings? What happened when the Chancellor spoke with the Jedi about what happened in Naboo? That seems like an important conversation I would have loved to see. They didn't put it in the movie cause it's boring? A supreme leader speaks with two spies about what's happening and then can't tell the senate he sent two spies because he is being pulled by corruption from another council member?

That is... in all honestly, more tense, dramatic and exciting than any pod race. Why isn't that in the movie?

At one point in the Council meeting one blue guy leans over and begins speaking to the Chancellor in quiet murmurs. Palpatine shows this to Queen Amidala as proof that the Chancellor will do nothing because he can't.

The movie doesn't think it's important to let us hear just what the Blue guy is whispering in the Chancellor's ear? Maybe something like "we know where your daughter is sleeping," or "Wouldn't it be a shame if someone knew about that dummy bank account you set up?" or "Are you sure you want those photos to go out all over the council just because of some silly queen's little planet?"

Any of that is much more interesting than a blue guy whispering in another guy's ear.

This is why the movie is so counter productive to what it's trying to do. The tense dramatic pull of this scene actually happened offstage with all of the backroom dealings happening, but we aren't allowed to see any of it. All we see is the end result...

which makes me feel like Lucas just wanted to hurry through it so he could keep showing us more pod racing and light saber fights.

[Renegade Paladin]

Perfect example. When the Queen arrives at Naboo, she hears that the Chancellor is sympathetic to their cause and he's eager to talk with her.

We see him asking if the Queen is all right. The next scene she is talking with Palpatine about how useless the Chancelor is. The next scene is her in the senate and the Chancellor unable to send troops to help her, asking if she will delay until a committee is sent to figure more stuff out. And at that point she calls for a vote of no confidence.

RLM brings up a wonderful point. Why isn't the Chancellor asking the Jedi to validate these claims from Naboo? He has first hand knowledge... so there's no point for him to ask for a committee.
For the same reason you don't call field operatives to testify before the Senate today. You don't want to admit they were there in the first place. Imagine how that would go: "Hey, fellow Senators, I, your leader who you don't like and think is corrupt, am sending my personal thugs around to intimidate member organizations on the Rim! See, here they are to tell you about it! This'll sure make you not think I'm corrupt!" :smallsigh:

[snoopy13a]

Perfect example. When the Queen arrives at Naboo, she hears that the Chancellor is sympathetic to their cause and he's eager to talk with her.

We see him asking if the Queen is all right. The next scene she is talking with Palpatine about how useless the Chancelor is. The next scene is her in the senate and the Chancellor unable to send troops to help her, asking if she will delay until a committee is sent to figure more stuff out. And at that point she calls for a vote of no confidence.

RLM brings up a wonderful point. Why isn't the Chancellor asking the Jedi to validate these claims from Naboo? He has first hand knowledge... so there's no point for him to ask for a committee.

Raynor argues that the Trade Federation has the Chancellor in their pocket, so he's making more political moves so that he makes no decision. And my counter argument would be.... WHAT? Are you kidding me? The Chancellor is corrupt and the Trade Federation is making back room deals? This kind of stuff isn't important to show in the movie?

How is the Trade Federation pulling the Chancellor's strings? What happened when the Chancellor spoke with the Jedi about what happened in Naboo? That seems like an important conversation I would have loved to see. They didn't put it in the movie cause it's boring? A supreme leader speaks with two spies about what's happening and then can't tell the senate he sent two spies because he is being pulled by corruption from another council member?

That is... in all honestly, more tense, dramatic and exciting than any pod race. Why isn't that in the movie?

At one point in the Council meeting one blue guy leans over and begins speaking to the Chancellor in quiet murmurs. Palpatine shows this to Queen Amidala as proof that the Chancellor will do nothing because he can't.

The movie doesn't think it's important to let us hear just what the Blue guy is whispering in the Chancellor's ear? Maybe something like "we know where your daughter is sleeping," or "Wouldn't it be a shame if someone knew about that dummy bank account you set up?" or "Are you sure you want those photos to go out all over the council just because of some silly queen's little planet?"

Any of that is much more interesting than a blue guy whispering in another guy's ear.

This is why the movie is so counter productive to what it's trying to do. The tense dramatic pull of this scene actually happened offstage with all of the backroom dealings happening, but we aren't allowed to see any of it. All we see is the end result...

which makes me feel like Lucas just wanted to hurry through it so he could keep showing us more pod racing and light saber fights.

I think you just illustrated the danger with arguments based on interpretation.

Raynor alleges that the chancellor is corrupt. Well, my interpretation has always been that he is incompetent but well-meaning. After all, he's the one who sends the Jedi in the first place to investigate. I always took his slowness in fixing the solution to either be: 1) Apprehension of the political and military power of the Trade Federation which induces him to move slowly; or 2) A natural tendency to use bureaucratic solutions (such as committees) to address problems even when direct action would be more appropriate.

My gut reaction was always #1 and that testimony by Qui-Gonn would go something like this:

Qui-Gonn: The Trade Federation is illegally oppressing Naboo. My apprentice and I saw it ourselves.

Trade Federation Senator: Jedi, Isn't it true that the chancellor himself sent you?

Qui-Gonn: Yes.

TFS: So, are you telling the truth or is this a nefarious plot by the Chancellor and the Jedi to bring discredit upon the Trade Federation?

Consenus of the Senate: Perhaps more investigation is needed....

Still, as you pointed out, we're dealing with hypotheticals and interpretations here so unless one can read George Lucas' mind we'll never really know for sure.

[Sillycomic]

Personally I didn't even think about the Chancellor's decisions on what he did and didn't do all that much... because his character is so small. He has like 10 lines in the movie? We barely see him for three scenes?

We have more knowledge and depth and scene time with Watto the parts dealer than the supreme chancellor trying to stop an all out civil war within his own Republic.

And what he does in the movie could mean that he's corrupt, or that he's just inefficient at his job, or that he'd rather have someone else (like Jedi's) solve the crisis, or that he's just as much a cog in the wheel as anyone else.

However... showing us in the movie ANY ONE OF THOSE CHOICES would be character development and let us either sympathize or empathize with the character and his decision.

Personally, I would have loved to see the Jedi argue what happened on Naboo and see the Trade Federation or someone else shoot all of their stuff down due to bias. To me it would show the corruption of the Trade Federation and prove the "I'll make it legal" promise that Sidious said to the Trade Federation in the beginning of the movie.

It shows us soo much more! It explains several different things while belittling the Jedi and turning the Republic into a quagmire of laws and committees.

Perhaps that's the point of Red Letter Media's argument. Movies should show us and not tell us.

Raynor's counter-essay is saying that everything is there in the movie.

But it being there isn't the point. The point is that the movie tells us important things that happen, and then shows us pod races and light saber fights.

[Renegade Paladin]

It does show and doesn't do near enough telling, though. Palpatine says the Chancellor is corrupt in so many words (for his own reasons, of course), but it goes beyond that - the Senate was ready to overwhelmingly boot him out of office at the very first call for a vote of no confidence, not a mark of a well-liked leader. The fact that he allows his underlings to openly change his policy decisions right in front of everybody on the Senate floor doesn't help the impression.

[hamishspence]

Raynor alleges that the chancellor is corrupt. Well, my interpretation has always been that he is incompetent but well-meaning. After all, he's the one who sends the Jedi in the first place to investigate. I always took his slowness in fixing the solution to either be: 1) Apprehension of the political and military power of the Trade Federation which induces him to move slowly; or 2) A natural tendency to use bureaucratic solutions (such as committees) to address problems even when direct action would be more appropriate.

And in the books (Cloak of Deception, Labyrinth of Evil), it mentions where the accusations of corruption come from- and that the whole thing was a frame-up job.

[TheArsenal]

Looking over all of the above I noticed how little I care.

The Senate Is Corrupt.
The Jedis are stupid.
Characters are bland.
The bad guys using slavery is offset by the slavery on Tatooine which the senate allows.
The Whole this is fought about taxes...or some crap.
Robots Vs Clones
Jedis Are Creepy sterile guys.
Nobody has any family attachments

Ironicaly, I find myself rooting for Palpatine. At least he is doing SOMETHING! Something not muddled in space politics. But not in the "Go get em tiger" way. In the "Just get it over" way.

Wouldnt it be great to see the corruption happen?
Anybody with me?

[Trazoi]

Ironicaly, I find myself rooting for Palpatine. At least he is doing SOMETHING! Something not muddled in space politics. But not in the "Go get em tiger" way. In the "Just get it over" way.
Well, I am a huge fan of the old TIE Fighter game...

I got the impression from the prequels that the Star Wars universe is in general chaotic mess of dangerous idiocy. At least the Emperor brought some stability for a couple of decades. :smallwink:

[Psyren]

Looking over all of the above I noticed how little I care.

The Senate Is Corrupt.
The Jedis are stupid.
Characters are bland.
The bad guys using slavery is offset by the slavery on Tatooine which the senate allows.
The Whole this is fought about taxes...or some crap.
Robots Vs Clones
Jedis Are Creepy sterile guys.
Nobody has any family attachments

Ironicaly, I find myself rooting for Palpatine. At least he is doing SOMETHING! Something not muddled in space politics. But not in the "Go get em tiger" way. In the "Just get it over" way.

Wouldnt it be great to see the corruption happen?
Anybody with me?

I am rolling Empire on SW:TOR for this very reason.

The prequel jedi at times seemed more emotionless to me than all the clones and droids.

[TheArsenal]

Well, I am a huge fan of the old TIE Fighter game...

I got the impression from the prequels that the Star Wars universe is in general chaotic mess of dangerous idiocy. At least the Emperor brought some stability for a couple of decades. :smallwink:

Wouldnt it be great to see the breakdown of the Senate? How it falls apart? This would be a increasingly sadder story. Instead of Corrupt-Corrupt.

The Muddled Politics are a BORE! They make you confused who is doing what. And even if you get it, you find yourself bored and underwhelmed.

Sorry to Be Such a attention whore but read my version: Here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=191727)

I tried to make it disconnected from the Originals entirely. I tried fixing what I could fix.

[Welf]

My biggest concern with reviews such as these is that they often fail to take into account dramatic irony. The characters are not always as well-informed as the audience. The power of the Jedi is a great example. Opinion of their power ranges from that of powerful demi-gods to Han Solo's view in early Star Wars (the first movie, I don't call it by its "new name") that the Force is a myth. Thus, Solo must have believed that the Jedi Knights were frauds and charlatans or something of that nature.

I think it's just a case of a villain holding the idiot ball to let the heroes look good. That Han doesn't know about the jedi's power is understandable. He is an smuggler from the outer rim, the jedis had been purged out for several decades and the empire probably had some massive propaganda campaign running. The viceroy oth was living and acting at the height of the jedi orders power. It was a very likely consequence of his actions that some jedis would meddle, so he should be prepared. He should have hired spies and consultants to gather information about them. Not that it was necessary since Palpatine could have given him first hand information. And equipping the Viceroy with that information at least at a basic level would have been in Palpatine's interest since it meant more dead jedi. And Palpi hates those meddling jedis.
Of course we can assume that the powers of the Jedi are mysterious and even powerful actors don't know much. But that's in direct contrast to what the movie shows us. On Nabbo Qui Gon tries the jedi mind trick on that Watto, and he immediately recognize that trick. Which means that the powerful Viceroy who reasonably could expect a jedi inquisition doesn't know about a highly visible force technique like running fast, but a used parts trader from a backwater planet who never had seen a jedi instantly knows about a extremely subtle technique.
All that is explainable. But in the end the simplest answer is bad writing. It's supposed to make the heroes look good, but instead it destroys the credibility of one of the main villains.

[Sillycomic]

To be fair the good guys spend a good while holding the idiot ball as well.

Seems like a long back and forth. Ahh prequels. How interesting.

[Lord Seth]

How was anyone even remotely convinced by this?I feel I should respond to this question, even if it's a bit late.

First off, that's blatant question begging on your part, but let's never mind that. The reason people were and are convinced by RedLetterMedia's review is that he's correct on most of the things in it. Jim Raynor's response, on the other hand, is pretty weak for the most part. The funny thing is, if Lucas had thought as hard about his movie as Jim Raynor did, then it would've been a better movie. So many of the justifications Raynor thinks up for the plot holes should have been in the movie. (and as a note, I think he still should've put his name on the document)

For example, let's take Palpatine's plan, which is a great illustration. It's extremely vague in the movie and isn't ever really explained. Things do end up working well for him, so it may have been, as RedLetterMedia assumed (but it was clear he wasn't sure) that his plan was to have Padme cast the vote of no confidence in order to make him chancellor. The problem is that the things he does seem counter to that. It would've been interesting if he had set things up to make it so that Padme would have escaped from Naboo, but we see no evidence for this. Raynor does speculate that they got through the blockade because the bad guys were trying not to destroy the ship, but if true that should have been in the movie. That actually would've been great for the idea of Palpatine letting them go, by having Darth Sidious order them to avoid destroying the ship on the basis they need Padme alive. But this is not present in the movie.

Raynor also tries to give reasons why things would work out for Palpatine if Padme and the others never made it off Naboo, but it's complete speculation. If this had been explained in the movie or the other prequels, he'd have a point, but as it is it's just him making up justifications. And if the film had shown Palpatine to have back up plans, that would've been a cool thing, as it would show how much he planned ahead. Instead, we're left with a plan that isn't explained and from what we can piece together about it, doesn't make much sense.

Again, as I believe Confused Matthew said, if you have to think of it, that means the filmmakers didn't. There's plenty of things I disagree with Confused Matthew on, but I think he was pretty correct with that. And this is a problem that is in a very large portion of the response.

Maybe the title "A Study in Fanboy Stupidity" title actually referred to the response itself? That would actually make a lot of sense.

[Sillycomic]

I completely agree. The movie that the fanboys wish they saw... so much that they try to argue it through the interwebs, is actually a pretty decent movie. It has political intrigue, dramatic tension, and all revolves around a Xanatos gambit that Palpatine pulls off with style and grace.

I wish Lucas had made THAT movie. It would have been much more enjoyable.

I do agree with Confused Matthew about the beginning of the movie:

"So, the Republic (the Senate) is sending the Republic (Jedi's) to negotiate with the Republic (Trade Federation) over a blockade on the Republic (Naboo)."

The Senate, the Jedi, the Trade Federation and the planet of Naboo are all part of the same government, the Republic. If this is how the government works in Star Wars... it wouldn't have taken all that much planning for Palpatine to bring it down.

One thing I still don't get. Why does Amidala's vote of no confidence actually count in this Senate? Wouldn't that be like the Governor of a state going up to the Senate in Congress and asking them to vote on something?

[Tavar]

Who said the Trade Federation is part of the government? In fact, how is that so hard to fathom? The US has mediated disputes between, say, the coal miners and the coal industry before(look at Theodore Roosevelt). Both are entirely comprised of people who were US citizens. Yet the government couldn't just order one around out of hand.

On the other hand, yeah, one problem with the movie is that it has a rather high amount of knowledge that you'd need to know before hand in order to really make sense of it. For instance, more information about the internal structure of the government, or the lead up to the dispute. And, really, that information is more along the lines of fixing a rather lackluster movie.

What I do take issue with is some statements that put too much import on certain things. Yes, there are problems with the movies. Big problems, that rightly make them lackluster(they seem worse because the originals are really good). But sometimes it seems that people like to pick apart things that actually make sense, to try and drag the movie down further.

In other words, I dislike the fanboys, and the haters.

[Sillycomic]

The trade federation has one of those floating seat thingies in the senate. So they are senators to... something, just the same as Naboo.

And... if that's not true, then they should have put something in the movie that made more sense. Because I see the Trade Federation in a floaty thing and I see Palpatine in a floaty thing and I think they are obviously of equal standing in the Senate.

[Trazoi]

One thing I still don't get. Why does Amidala's vote of no confidence actually count in this Senate? Wouldn't that be like the Governor of a state going up to the Senate in Congress and asking them to vote on something?
Honestly, I suspect they allow anyone to walk in and say whatever they want. It's the most logical explanation I can think of for all the shenanigans that go on in that Senate chamber over the course of the prequel films.

Now I come to think of it, the status of Naboo in the galaxy doesn't make much sense. In the first film, the Senate starts off acting like they're prepared to let Naboo go hang rather than step in. But then they're prepared to axe the Chancellor on the single vote of the Queen of Naboo and appoint the Senator of Naboo as his replacement. Then in the second film, they allow a single speech from some random Naboo Gungan who walked in as a stand-in for the Senator for Naboo in order to grant war-time powers to the Naboo Chancellor. Why do they even bother having the government in Coruscant when it clearly should be in Naboo City? :smalltongue:

[Tavar]

Those were the Nemodian(or whatever) Senators, though they did have ties to the Trade Federation. Still, businesses having ties to government is hardly a new concept, is it?

Edit:


Honestly, I suspect they allow anyone to walk in and say whatever they want. It's the most logical explanation I can think of for all the shenanigans that go on in that Senate chamber over the course of the prequel films.

Now I come to think of it, the status of Naboo in the galaxy doesn't make much sense. In the first film, the Senate starts off acting like they're prepared to let Naboo go hang rather than step in. But then they're prepared to axe the Chancellor on the single vote of the Queen of Naboo and appoint the Senator of Naboo as his replacement. Then in the second film, they allow a single speech from some random Naboo Gungan who walked in as a stand-in for the Senator for Naboo in order to grant war-time powers to the Naboo Chancellor. Why do they even bother having the government in Coruscant when it clearly should be in Naboo City? :smalltongue:
Remember when I said the movies seem to expect you to have a bit of background knowledge to gloss over some of their oddities? This is one such thing. A book goes into detail about how the Chancellor was connected to some extremely shady dealings, and had been hemorrhaging support for some time. In fact, other sources go into how the Jedi he sent weren't an official delegation, but a favor that the council did for the Chancellor(because, the Jedi and the Republic totally aren't connected. Another thing the movie doesn't explain). The whole Trade Federation thing lost him more support, as many felt he wasn't doing anything. But, calling him out/moving for impeachment would be very risky politically. Having the victimized child/ruler of the country do it? Simple side-step. Palpatine simply had cut many, many back room deals to cement himself as the obvious next in line.

As for the Gungan, he's the official substitute senator; like the US's vice president. Giving the speech, well, he has the support of those in power. They put him in the right time slot, he gave the speech, and again, back room deals. Plus, the fact that the official substitute of the leader of the pacifist faction so publicly switched sides, well, what do you think would happen.

Note, these are explanations of why it makes sense, if you look deep enough in the material. That doesn't make the movie good, or excuse the fact that it doesn't explain this stuff in the movie.

[Derthric]

I seem to recall that Palpatine was actually a Senator representing a Star Cluster or Sector, not just Naboo itself. And as far as Amidala speaking to the Senate goes, I always throught of the Senate as more of a General Assembly of the UN style than US Senate style representative body. The Heads of Government of the various Nations stand in at the body when present but its usually an Ambassador that does it for them, in the movie's case it uses a Senator title. But of course that is all neither here nor there when it comes to judging the movie based solely upon its merits. Very little is explained and we are simply left to care about these things because the movie tells us "Those people over there are the protagonists. You will like them!" And it does the same to Naboo, Padme, Anakin, and the Republic itself. Luke had more characterization in that one scene looking at the setting Tatooine suns than anyone in the prequels received.

The Republic makes no sense, people hold it up in a nationalistic sense yet it has no hallmarks of nationhood but rather an international association. Its called a Democracy when its Senators are appointed, as Amidala states in episode 2. The Jedi, unelected and of no direct relationship to the Republic are its prime law enforcement and Military leadership, but there seem to be no standardized galactic laws or military. In fact the government seems so disconnected from the day to day lives of even the "powerful" on planetary scales that the change in power, from the republic to the empire, probably barely blips with anyone on the street.

As far as Raynor's review of the review; the fact that he took the time to attack RLM's review and its faults instead of doing a positive review of TPM, says something. A proper response would be a rebuttal of specific points raised and then doing his own interpretation on why it was still a quality film. He seemed more interested in refuting RLM than making his own case, reverse legitimizing the messenger does not mean the points he raises are less legit. TPM attempted to run on the rule of cool but that couldn't overcome its failure at suspension of disbelief or weak story.

[Renegade Paladin]

I feel I should respond to this question, even if it's a bit late.

First off, that's blatant question begging on your part, but let's never mind that. The reason people were and are convinced by RedLetterMedia's review is that he's correct on most of the things in it. Jim Raynor's response, on the other hand, is pretty weak for the most part. The funny thing is, if Lucas had thought as hard about his movie as Jim Raynor did, then it would've been a better movie. So many of the justifications Raynor thinks up for the plot holes should have been in the movie. (and as a note, I think he still should've put his name on the document)

For example, let's take Palpatine's plan, which is a great illustration. It's extremely vague in the movie and isn't ever really explained. Things do end up working well for him, so it may have been, as RedLetterMedia assumed (but it was clear he wasn't sure) that his plan was to have Padme cast the vote of no confidence in order to make him chancellor. The problem is that the things he does seem counter to that. It would've been interesting if he had set things up to make it so that Padme would have escaped from Naboo, but we see no evidence for this. Raynor does speculate that they got through the blockade because the bad guys were trying not to destroy the ship, but if true that should have been in the movie. That actually would've been great for the idea of Palpatine letting them go, by having Darth Sidious order them to avoid destroying the ship on the basis they need Padme alive. But this is not present in the movie.
Oh, please. Anyone whose brain was even remotely engaged during the first half of the movie would know this, because if they wanted the queen dead, they would have shot her when they captured the palace. Instead, they not only kept her alive, but tried to get her to do something that was critical to their plans (that is, sign the treaty), which she had not yet done. In what way is it not blindingly obvious that they want her alive?

Besides, this rather misses the point, which is not that The Phantom Menace is a good movie (it isn't), but rather that Red Letter Media lied, distorted, and misrepresented its way through the review rather than doing an honest critique, and this inaccuracy-filled seventy minute droning monologue is frequently cited as an authoritative source on the subject it lies about. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to make of the movie. Suggesting that the Jedi should fight the entire droid army on the ship when they just ran away from two members of that army (when that ship was one of many landing troops, so even if they miraculously succeeded they'd barely put a dent in the landing force anyway) is not one of them. Just to name one of the more blatant examples.

[Lord of Rapture]

Oh, please. Anyone whose brain was even remotely engaged during the first half of the movie would know this, because if they wanted the queen dead, they would have shot her when they captured the palace. Instead, they not only kept her alive, but tried to get her to do something that was critical to their plans (that is, sign the treaty), which she had not yet done. In what way is it not blindingly obvious that they want her alive?

Besides, this rather misses the point, which is not that The Phantom Menace is a good movie (it isn't), but rather that Red Letter Media lied, distorted, and misrepresented its way through the review rather than doing an honest critique, and this inaccuracy-filled seventy minute droning monologue is frequently cited as an authoritative source on the subject it lies about. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to make of the movie. Suggesting that the Jedi should fight the entire droid army on the ship when they just ran away from two members of that army (when that ship was one of many landing troops, so even if they miraculously succeeded they'd barely put a dent in the landing force anyway) is not one of them. Just to name one of the more blatant examples.

That's not the point. The point is that Palpatine and his cronies seemed to have done everything in their power to keep Padme from reaching the Senate, where she could have cast the vote to oust Valorum from power, which is what Palpatine wanted.

Hmm... as a person who actually liked the Phantom Menace, I really don't see any inaccuracies in his review. I certainly don't remember him saying the Jedi should fight the army on their own, only that battle droids really suck at fighting them, which is why they shouldn't be the only ones guarding the queen when they know the Jedi are alive and moving about.

[Renegade Paladin]

I certainly don't remember him saying the Jedi should fight the army on their own, only that battle droids really suck at fighting them, which is why they shouldn't be the only ones guarding the queen when they know the Jedi are alive and moving about.
Had you read the review, you'd know that it comes with convenient citations of the RLM video with timestamps, allowing you to rapidly find exactly where he said precisely this. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdQwKPVGQsY#t=6m22s) :smalltongue:

[Lord of Rapture]

Had you read the review, you'd know that it comes with convenient citations of the RLM video with timestamps, allowing you to rapidly find exactly where he said precisely this. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdQwKPVGQsY#t=6m22s) :smalltongue:

Well, in this case, the review mentioned they had done so when they ran the entire blockade using one ship. And succeeded. With no weapons of their own that could effectively fight back. Basically, this makes fighting a small army platoon of battledroids, ones that they cut down like hot knife through butter, but a possible option.

[Renegade Paladin]

Well, in this case, the review mentioned they had done so when they ran the entire blockade using one ship. And succeeded. With no weapons of their own that could effectively fight back. Basically, this makes fighting a small army platoon of battledroids, ones that they cut down like hot knife through butter, but a possible option.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/RenegadePaladin/Star%20Wars%20evidence/Episode%201%20Review/Rambo1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/RenegadePaladin/Star%20Wars%20evidence/Episode%201%20Review/Rambo2.jpg

:smalltongue:

[Lord of Rapture]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/RenegadePaladin/Star%20Wars%20evidence/Episode%201%20Review/Rambo1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/RenegadePaladin/Star%20Wars%20evidence/Episode%201%20Review/Rambo2.jpg

:smalltongue:

Darths and Droids does not count. You know common sense is not a part of Star Wars. :smalltongue:

[Renegade Paladin]

Again, I pulled that straight out of the review that it is becoming increasingly apparent you're discussing without even looking at. :smallwink: Darths and Droids did not address RLM.

[Lord of Rapture]

Again, I pulled that straight out of the review that it is becoming increasingly apparent you're discussing without even looking at. :smallwink: Darths and Droids did not address RLM.

Fair point. However, I'm not addressing the review, so much I'm addressing the points you raise, so the point is moot.

And my point is, that in the movie, they do have the protagonists fight the entire army by themselves, and succeed without one of them dying. The point is that the movie can't stay consistent within its own internal story logic, not that it makes logical sense.

[Renegade Paladin]

And my point is, that in the movie, they do have the protagonists fight the entire army by themselves, and succeed without one of them dying.
...

I'm beginning to think you didn't watch the movie either. Because no. They did not. In fact, getting the bulk of the army out of Theed so they wouldn't have to fight it by fielding the Gungan army as bait was a major plot point of the final arc.

[Lord of Rapture]

...

I'm beginning to think you didn't watch the movie either. Because no. They did not. In fact, getting the bulk of the army out of Theed so they wouldn't have to fight it by fielding the Gungan army as bait was a major plot point of the final arc.

And I'm beginning to think you didn't watch the review.

I'm talking about how they got past the blockade.

[Renegade Paladin]

And I'm beginning to think you didn't watch the review.

I'm talking about how they got past the blockade.
Then you shouldn't say the army; you should say the blockade. Which they ran, not fought. We've been talking past each other; the proposition made by Mr. Plinkett was for the Jedi to make a frontal assault against the droid army as it massed in the hangar, and then steal a ship after defeating all the droids (an unlikely prospect, since they just ran from two of those droids and would have to face thousands in open ground in the hangar) which has little to nothing to do with their ability to run a blockade in a fast ship (not a lumbering troop transport) while in the company of a high-value target that the commanders of the blockade want alive, at a future point that does not figure into their decision-making at this stage.

[Lord of Rapture]

Then you shouldn't say the army; you should say the blockade. Which they ran, not fought. We've been talking past each other; the proposition made by Mr. Plinkett was for the Jedi to make a frontal assault against the droid army as it massed in the hangar, which has little to nothing to do with their ability to run a blockade in a fast ship (not a lumbering troop transport) while in the company of a high-value target that the commanders of the blockade want alive, at a future point that does not figure into their decision-making at this stage.

I admit my words were rather poorly chosen, so for that I apologize.

But at the same time, I see at most around two hundred battle droids in that hanger, no droidekas present. The Jedi had their weapons and had demonstrated their ability to take out battle droids with ease. If they can run their stupid little ship past the blockade when they don't have anything but their shields to defend against (which go down for a while because of the blockade's weapons), they can afford to take out a few battle droids, hijack a ship, and go down to the planet.

[Renegade Paladin]

I admit my words were rather poorly chosen, so for that I apologize.

But at the same time, I see at most around two hundred battle droids in that hanger, no droidekas present. The Jedi had their weapons and had demonstrated their ability to take out battle droids with ease. If they can run their stupid little ship past the blockade when they don't have anything but their shields to defend against (which go down for a while because of the blockade's weapons), they can afford to take out a few battle droids, hijack a ship, and go down to the planet.
Why do that when they can hide on a ship and go down to the planet? :smalltongue: Saves the whole alerting the Trade Federation to their exact location part. Besides, that wasn't what Plinkett suggested either; he said to fight all the droids, steal a ship, and go to Coruscant. When we don't even know if the drop ships are hyperspace-capable.

As for there being no droidekas in the camera's view at that particular moment, do you think it would take them long to arrive? Or heck, that there necessarily aren't any out of view, since the POV from the camera is limited?

[Lord of Rapture]

Why do that when they can hide on a ship and go down to the planet? :smalltongue:

When it lands on the opposite side of the planet that they want to be on. :smalltongue:


Saves the whole alerting the Trade Federation to their exact location part. Besides, that wasn't what Plinkett suggested either; he said to fight all the droids, steal a ship, and go to Coruscant. When we don't even know if the drop ships are hyperspace-capable.

Well, we don't know they aren't, do we? :smallbiggrin:

[Tavar]

Except a reasonable assumption is that when a ship is needed to another ship around, the second ship isn't capable of long range flight.

Moreover, the ship would have to take off. Remember that the federation are perfectly able to destroy ships inside their ship, and it would take time to destroy the droids. Perhaps time enough for Droikia to come onto the scene.

Edit: also, comparing a top of the line craft like the Queen's cruiser to what is essentially a cargo ship is a bit disingenuous.

[shadow_archmagi]

Having glanced through, I think that

1. RLM makes a lot of valid points

2. The counter-review, by and large, completely misses those points.

For instance, take this debate about the droid army thing. Regardless of whether 'fight all of them' was really a valid statement, which descends into arguments about the relative quality of battle droids and federation ships and whatnot.

The fact is that joining an invasion ship for the specific purpose of arriving before an invasion is self-contradictory.

[Renegade Paladin]

Having glanced through, I think that

1. RLM makes a lot of valid points

2. The counter-review, by and large, completely misses those points.

For instance, take this debate about the droid army thing. Regardless of whether 'fight all of them' was really a valid statement, which descends into arguments about the relative quality of battle droids and federation ships and whatnot.

The fact is that joining an invasion ship for the specific purpose of arriving before an invasion is self-contradictory.
How do you miss points when you go through the whole thing point by point? :smalltongue: The droid army didn't make a hot landing right on the Naboo population centers; it is entirely conceivable that two Jedi might be able to achieve higher mobility than a ponderous army and get to the target first. That they didn't was mainly a factor of circumstance and delays; as it stands, they still arrived at right about the same time despite having to deal with ludicrous sea monsters along the way.

[Lord Seth]

Oh, please. Anyone whose brain was even remotely engaged during the first half of the movie would know this, because if they wanted the queen dead, they would have shot her when they captured the palace. Instead, they not only kept her alive, but tried to get her to do something that was critical to their plans (that is, sign the treaty), which she had not yet done. In what way is it not blindingly obvious that they want her alive?All that showed is that they were reasonably interested in keeping her alive and weren't trying to kill people if it was unnecessary. There's a difference between that and not shooting down the ship that's trying to escape. And as Lord of Rapture pointed out, it all comes back to the fact that Palpatine's plan (what little of it can even be figured out) seems to be something he's actively working to thwart, and certainly not something he seems to be at all actually working towards.

If his original plan was something different and he adjusted it upon Padme escaping to the whole bit about the vote of no confidence, that would be something interesting...but it's never indicated or even suggested that that's the case at all, nor explained what the "original" plan was. Palpatine's actions just don't make sense.


Besides, this rather misses the point, which is not that The Phantom Menace is a good movie (it isn't), but rather that Red Letter Media lied, distorted, and misrepresented its way through the review rather than doing an honest critique,"Lied" is a fairly heavy accusation that I don't think was ever really confirmed in the response, outside of a few vague speculations or taking obvious jokes seriously. I've never claimed RLM was right about everything, but I hardly think he "lied."


and this inaccuracy-filled seventy minute droning monologue is frequently cited as an authoritative source on the subject it lies about.Again you throw out the term "lies." Throwing out inflammatory language in order to try to make your argument look better is a debate topic I'm not particularly fond of.


Suggesting that the Jedi should fight the entire droid army on the ship when they just ran away from two members of that army (when that ship was one of many landing troops, so even if they miraculously succeeded they'd barely put a dent in the landing force anyway) is not one of them. Just to name one of the more blatant examples.That's (1) not lying (maybe exaggeration or a mistake, but hardly lying) and (2) I believe I stated earlier in this topic that I did agree with the response on that point. However, being correct on that point (and a few others) doesn't change the fact that the response is constantly trying to justify errors in the movie by speculation, missing the point of a critique RLM made (see the characters section), being unduly insulting, and getting things wrong itself in more cases than RLM ever did.

[Lord of Rapture]

How do you miss points when you go through the whole thing point by point? :smalltongue: The droid army didn't make a hot landing right on the Naboo population centers; it is entirely conceivable that two Jedi might be able to achieve higher mobility than a ponderous army and get to the target first. That they didn't was mainly a factor of circumstance and delays; as it stands, they still arrived at right about the same time despite having to deal with ludicrous sea monsters along the way.

The droid army has tanks and flying bikes. Even if they did land near the palace, the army still can move faster than the Jedi on foot.

[Renegade Paladin]

The droid army has tanks and flying bikes. Even if they did land near the palace, the army still can move faster than the Jedi on foot.

The tanks and flying bikes kept pace with the slow troop carriers, however. An army's mobility is dependent on the slowest unit in the formation, not the fastest. Plus organizational delays inherent in getting a group of beings that large moving in the same direction. :smallwink: An excellent plan for the Jedi would have been to steal a pair of flying bikes.

[Lord of Rapture]

The tanks and flying bikes kept pace with the slow troop carriers, however. An army's mobility is dependent on the slowest unit in the formation, not the fastest. Plus organizational delays inherent in getting a group of beings that large moving in the same direction. :smallwink: An excellent plan for the Jedi would have been to steal a pair of flying bikes.

Oh, so now it's fine that the Jedi can fight against the entire army once they are on the ground, when there are a lot more droids to fight and they are (even more) surrounded?

[Renegade Paladin]

Oh, so now it's fine that the Jedi can fight against the entire army once they are on the ground, when there are a lot more droids to fight and they are (even more) surrounded?
Kindly point out where I said to fight the entire army. The bikes were acting as outriders; in fact one chased Obi-Wan without the entire army coming down on his head. Isolating them would be easy, and would not require a frontal assault on the column.

[Lord of Rapture]

Kindly point out where I said to fight the entire army. The bikes were acting as outriders; in fact one chased Obi-Wan without the entire army coming down on his head. Isolating them would be easy, and would not require a frontal assault on the column.

You still are going to attack a large number of droids to get those bikes. A number just as large as those in the hanger, with droidekas, tanks, and other weapons to back them up.

[Tavar]

You still are going to attack a large number of droids to get those bikes. A number just as large as those in the hanger, with droidekas, tanks, and other weapons to back them up.
That's not what Renegade Paladin is saying. You don't have to attack the force, as the scouts are a distance away. Thus you can hit them, then flee before slower elements can catch up.

Kindly point out where I said to fight the entire army. The bikes were acting as outriders; in fact one chased Obi-Wan without the entire army coming down on his head. Isolating them would be easy, and would not require a frontal assault on the column.

[shadow_archmagi]

Also, it seems to me that it's pretty silly that they're able to stow away in a troop carrier. I mean, shouldn't that logically end with them being right in the middle of all the droids? Even if the droids INSIDE the carrier are powered down, you'd still think the external weaponry would obliterate them.

[Sillycomic]

Those were the Nemodian(or whatever) Senators, though they did have ties to the Trade Federation. Still, businesses having ties to government is hardly a new concept, is it?

How am I supposed to know that? Nemodians are different than the Trade Federation? When I saw the Nemodians at the Senate I honestly thought they were the same guys as on the Trade Federation ship.

Is that racist that I think all Nemodians look alike?

Plus, is the Trade Federation a private business? I thought it was more like a public utility, which is why it had so much sway in the Senate. So it’s ok for a private business to have a militia working for it and will throw up a blockade whenever taxes are raised that they don’t like?

In either case, it still doesn’t make sense to me.

Plus… we’re looking at this from the aspect of having watched the whole movie, and all the other movies and read lots of novels and comics.

How about this?

Let me take you back to 1999. You’re in your seat with your popcorn and your drink. The previews come and you’re excited for all the new movies coming out, but then the lights fade and that cool blue Surround Sound logo comes on that says the Audience is Listening.

Then Star Wars hits the screen! You laugh and scream and cry! And then you start reading the opening scroll.

Turmoil has engulfed the
Galactic Republic. The taxation
of trade routes to outlying star
systems is in dispute.

Hoping to resolve the matter
with a blockade of deadly
battleships, the greedy Trade
Federation has stopped all
shipping to the small planet
of Naboo.

While the congress of the
Republic endlessly debates
this alarming chain of events,
the Supreme Chancellor has
secretly dispatched two Jedi
Knights, the guardians of
peace and justice in the
galaxy, to settle the conflict...

First it says, Turmoil has engulfed the Republic… which causes me to think everyone involved is part of the republic. If anyone isn’t part of the republic then this is an act of war by a foreign people. (or if Naboo isn’t part of the republic, then why would they care so much? It’s a small planet that can’t even support their own people without space supplies.)

If you watched movies 4 5 and 6 you know the Jedi were part of the Republic back in the day. The Supreme Chancellor is obviously the head of the Republic. This is a big deal because Naboo is part of the republic. Trade Federation is also part of the republic

Back to my original statement: The Republic has sent the Republic to negotiate with the Republic over a blockade against the Republic.

There might be a little more information given to us later in the movie, but how are we as an audience supposed to look at the first five minutes of this movie and not be confused about what’s going on?

[Bobikus]

There were inaccuracies in the RLM review, but every excerpt and argument I've seen from this written review seems to have the mindset "A few things RLM said were inaccurate, so obviously he's an idiot and everything is wrong!"

[Bobikus]

Remember that the federation are perfectly able to destroy ships inside their ship

Unless of course the ship is piloted by Anakin and is sitting near something that could destroy the entire ship if shot at.

[Tavar]

How am I supposed to know that? Nemodians are different than the Trade Federation? When I saw the Nemodians at the Senate I honestly thought they were the same guys as on the Trade Federation ship. Honestly, I didn't have that problem. I thought there was a connection, yes, but not that they were the same thing. Probably corrupt politicians helping out the evil corporation.


Plus, is the Trade Federation a private business? I thought it was more like a public utility, which is why it had so much sway in the Senate. So it’s ok for a private business to have a militia working for it and will throw up a blockade whenever taxes are raised that they don’t like?
Why would you think that? Seriously, I don't see the logic. It's much easier for a private entity to gain influence in government, at least in one that has a relatively light fist, as there tend to be many, many rules that restrain public entities, and not private ones.

Also, I don't think the movie ever presents it as ok that they're doing this. At least, not morally/ethically. Just that they're twisting the law to be able to do it.


If you watched movies 4 5 and 6 you know the Jedi were part of the Republic back in the day. The Supreme Chancellor is obviously the head of the Republic. This is a big deal because Naboo is part of the republic. Trade Federation is also part of the republic
Not sure what you're getting at here, never mind that some of it seems to be wrong.

Back to my original statement: The Republic has sent the Republic to negotiate with the Republic over a blockade against the Republic.

Except the Trade Federation isn't part of the republic any more than Ford is part of the UN. Plus, can you quote exactly where it states that the Jedi were an institution of the Republic?

[Sillycomic]

Why would you think that? Seriously, I don't see the logic. It's much easier for a private entity to gain influence in government, at least in one that has a relatively light fist, as there tend to be many, many rules that restrain public entities, and not private ones.

I think it’s just speculation to say the Trade Federation is a private company when they could easily be a number of things and it’s never really said in the movie what they are. They could easily be a private company or a public utility, or they could just be another part of the Republic such as Naboo or the Jedi.

You saying they’re a private company is as much speculation as me saying they’re a public utility.



Except the Trade Federation isn't part of the republic any more than Ford is part of the UN. Plus, can you quote exactly where it states that the Jedi were an institution of the Republic?

The Trade Federation is part of the republic. This isn’t Ford against the UN… you’re just speculating that it is. You have it stuck in your head that the Trade Federation is a corporation. I’m saying that’s speculation unless you give me some proof that is isn’t. If you don’t have proof, then my speculations are as good as yours.

ASIDE from that, The Trade Federation is assured from Sidious that what they’re doing is legal. So, despite whether or not they’re a corporation, utility, planet, union or whatever… they have to work within the rules of the republic. That means they’re part of the Republic.

Quotes that the Jedi are part of the Republic:

Wikipedia:
The Jedi High Council was a group of twelve wise and powerful Jedi Masters elected to guide the Jedi Order, as well as serve as an advisory body for the Supreme Chancellor (a sage governance)

Obi Wan says this is Episode 4:
For over a thousand generations the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic. Before the dark times. Before the Empire.

Wookiepedia: The Jedi were the guardians of peace and justice in the Galactic Republic


Aside from all of this, the Jedi are being sent by the Supreme Chancellor. He is asking them to go for him to solve this. So they are working on behalf of the Chancellor’s wishes. Even if you don’t believe that the Jedi are part of the republic, at this moment in the movie they are. They are, at worst, negotiators hired by the Republic.

[Lord Seth]

Except the Trade Federation isn't part of the republic any more than Ford is part of the UN.Then why do they have representation in the Senate?

[Tavar]

I think it’s just speculation to say the Trade Federation is a private company when they could easily be a number of things and it’s never really said in the movie what they are. They could easily be a private company or a public utility, or they could just be another part of the Republic such as Naboo or the Jedi.

You saying they’re a private company is as much speculation as me saying they’re a public utility.

The Trade Federation is part of the republic. This isn’t Ford against the UN… you’re just speculating that it is. You have it stuck in your head that the Trade Federation is a corporation. I’m saying that’s speculation unless you give me some proof that is isn’t. If you don’t have proof, then my speculations are as good as yours.
Kinda. First off, you normally want to go to the simplest solution possible. My mind naturally went to corporation. You know, since they're a trade organization at all. Why do you think they're a part of the Republic's government?

As for proof of them being a corporation that's not part of the Republic(as in, and organ of goverment), see Cloak of Deception (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Cloak_of_Deception).

ASIDE from that, The Trade Federation is assured from Sidious that what they’re doing is legal. So, despite whether or not they’re a corporation, utility, planet, union or whatever… they have to work within the rules of the republic. That means they’re part of the Republic.
Ford has to work within the laws of the United States, at least when it operates here. Or, better example, the coal mining companies around 1903 did as well. And, yet, the goverment still negotiated with them. It's almost like, I don't know, the goverment isn't all powerful or something....:smallsigh:


Quotes that the Jedi are part of the Republic:

Wikipedia:
The Jedi High Council was a group of twelve wise and powerful Jedi Masters elected to guide the Jedi Order, as well as serve as an advisory body for the Supreme Chancellor (a sage governance)

Obi Wan says this is Episode 4:
For over a thousand generations the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic. Before the dark times. Before the Empire.

Wookiepedia: The Jedi were the guardians of peace and justice in the Galactic Republic


Aside from all of this, the Jedi are being sent by the Supreme Chancellor. He is asking them to go for him to solve this. So they are working on behalf of the Chancellor’s wishes. Even if you don’t believe that the Jedi are part of the republic, at this moment in the movie they are. They are, at worst, negotiators hired by the Republic.
Huh. Did not realize how closely the Republic and the Jedi were tied. I can't see what the problem is. Having people go to other's that you're having a disagreement with to try and solve it is confusing? Are our standards really that low?

Then why do they have representation in the Senate?
Except they don't. At least, not directly. The Neimoidians have representation in the senate. The Trade Federation at the time was closely tied to the Neimodian government, though. Essentially, yeah, the Trade Federation had representation, but that was because it got to determine who the Neimodian Senator was. Not because they were given representation.

[Sillycomic]

First off, no one said there was a homework assignment. I was not aware that I had to read a bunch of other books that explained things were happening in the movie. You found a random book that proves the Trade Federation is a corporation? Good for you…

Now, prove to me in the first 5 minutes of Phantom Menace where I would understand this? Oh… it’s not there? Huh. Weird. I imagine if we’re supposed to know something important that it might, you know, be in the movie.

Aside from that the book you’re referring to was written in 2001. So, 2 years after the movie was released there was a book that explained things? Yeah… I wonder how anyone was confused about this.

See, you’re mixing your metaphors now. First you say it’s like Ford company versus the UN. Now it’s the Ford Company versus the United States Government?

Well, that’s easier for me to understand. However, the United States has laws saying what companies can and can’t do. And any company that works and operates for the United States is part of the United States.

I’m sorry, Coca Cola is mad that there’s a 5 cent tax on all of their cans so they decide to set up an armed militia around the state of Kansas? And I’m supposed to look at this and understand what’s going on? Are you kidding me?

But, we’re not talking about the United States. We’re talking about the Galactic Empire. I have no idea what their laws or the loopholes of those laws are… so why make a movie about the laws and loopholes of a government I know nothing about? Especially if the movie never states what any of these laws or loopholes are, just kinda moves along and expects me to pick them up.

I don't know the rights of the Trade Federation... only that what they're doing is kinda technically legal. I don't know the rights of Naboo, except that Palpatine really can't do anything to help. I don't know the rights of the Senate except that they don't like what's going on. And I don't know the rights of the Jedi, who seem to think if everyone just sits and talks about it the Trade Federation won't be mad about their taxes anymore.

Plus, I don't know anything about the taxes, who agreed to the taxes, why the taxes were there in the first place... and why the Republic has no army to enforce their own laws in the first place.

But, all of that is kinda irrelevant.

Once more, I would like to point out that my scenario is for a person of average intelligence who is sitting down and watching Phantom Menace for the first time. I’m letting him see the 4th, 5th and 6th movies before he sees Episode 1. He is not allowed to watch any other movies or read any other comic books or novels that help explain the movie.

If you have no proof that involves the original trilogy or the first 5 minutes of Phantom Menace, you are only speculating. And that’s what any movie goer would be doing when they watched it.


Having people go to other's that you're having a disagreement with to try and solve it is confusing?

Having people negotiate for you is not confusing.

Having the army on behalf of Obama go negotiate with Coca Cola becuase Coke set up an armada all around the State of Kansas because the price of cans went up 5 cents is the most confusing thing I've ever heard of in my entire life.

[Tavar]

First off, no one said there was a homework assignment. I was not aware that I had to read a bunch of other books that explained things were happening in the movie. You found a random book that proves the Trade Federation is a corporation? Good for you…

Now, prove to me in the first 5 minutes of Phantom Menace where I would understand this? Oh… it’s not there? Huh. Weird. I imagine if we’re supposed to know something important that it might, you know, be in the movie.

Aside from that the book you’re referring to was written in 2001. So, 2 years after the movie was released there was a book that explained things? Yeah… I wonder how anyone was confused about this.
You brought in other sources to prove that the Jedi were a part of the Republic's goverment. Sorry, I guess I thought that doing the same thing was allowed.

As for in the movie, I don't know. They mention that the TF is concerned about trade and protesting unfair taxes. Governments tend not to tax themselves. Also, can you provide any reason at all that you'd think they're a government run organization? Cause, so far, everything the movie shows us implies that they're a corporation. What would have convinced you that they're a corporation? Them just stating directly into the camera that they are one? Then they'd get flack for telling, not showing.


See, you’re mixing your metaphors now. First you say it’s like Ford company versus the UN. Now it’s the Ford Company versus the United States Government?

Well, that’s easier for me to understand. However, the United States has laws saying what companies can and can’t do. And any company that works and operates for the United States is part of the United States.
Wait, Ford's a goverment run institution? Wow, we really have become a socialist state!:smallsigh:

In other words, no, you're wrong, those words don't mean what you think they mean.

Also, you're deliberately missing the point. It's that just because a corporation follows the laws of a place does not mean that the corporation is part of that place. Example; Toyota follows the laws of Japanese manufacturing while in Japan, and those of the US while in the US. Neither country owns Toyota, however. Because the corporation isn't part of the government. It's outside it. Otherwise, the countries would be practicing slavery, as they would now own every single citizen.



I’m sorry, Coca Cola is mad that there’s a 5 cent tax on all of their cans so they decide to set up an armed militia around the state of Kansas? And I’m supposed to look at this and understand what’s going on? Are you kidding me?

But, we’re not talking about the United States. We’re talking about the Galactic Empire. I have no idea what their laws or the loopholes of those laws are… so why make a movie about the laws and loopholes of a government I know nothing about? Especially if the movie never states what any of these laws or loopholes are, just kinda moves along and expects me to pick them up.
How about because the movie isn't about them. They're a macguffin. By stating that they exists, the Movie tells us all that we need to know. Or, at least, would if Fanboys weren't determined to prove that a mediocre movie is actually the spawn of satan and responsible for ruining everything forever.

I mean, I don't hear people screaming about how can the One Ring control all the others, or how the Wardrobe works in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. That's because they're a framing device. We don't need to know how such an event came about. Just that given the laws/taxes in place, the Blockade of Naboo was legal.

Also, regarding the situation you mentioned, well, that situation itself hasn't happened, but thing very similar have. Can't go into details due to forum rules.


I don't know the rights of the Trade Federation... only that what they're doing is kinda technically legal. I don't know the rights of Naboo, except that Palpatine really can't do anything to help. I don't know the rights of the Senate except that they don't like what's going on. And I don't know the rights of the Jedi, who seem to think if everyone just sits and talks about it the Trade Federation won't be mad about their taxes anymore.

Plus, I don't know anything about the taxes, who agreed to the taxes, why the taxes were there in the first place... and why the Republic has no army to enforce their own laws in the first place.

But, all of that is kinda irrelevant.

Once more, I would like to point out that my scenario is for a person of average intelligence who is sitting down and watching Phantom Menace for the first time. I’m letting him see the 4th, 5th and 6th movies before he sees Episode 1. He is not allowed to watch any other movies or read any other comic books or novels that help explain the movie.

If you have no proof that involves the original trilogy or the first 5 minutes of Phantom Menace, you are only speculating. And that’s what any movie goer would be doing when they watched it.
So. Prove how it's confusing. Right now, the story is that having negotiators go on your behalf to settle a dispute is confusing, which I say is ridiculous. The trade dispute is framing, simply telling us that there's a reason for the dispute. The Trade federation is identified as villainous, so in the first 5 minutes I simply cannot believe that you'd connect them with the Republic. The Jedi, similarly, are only vaguely associated with the Republic. After all, having a third party arbitrate disputes is a pretty simply idea.


Having people negotiate for you is not confusing.

Having the army on behalf of Obama go negotiate with Coca Cola becuase Coke set up an armada all around the State of Kansas because the price of cans went up 5 cents is the most confusing thing I've ever heard of in my entire life.
Except it's not presented like that. First off, no army is mentioned. Yes, the Jedi are represented as guardians of peace and justice, but that doesn't make them and army. It would more likely make them equivalent with police, but even then there isn't necessarily a direct connection between the Jedi and the Republic. I always saw it as more the connection between, say, the Red Cross and the Government.

[Sillycomic]

You simply asked me to provide you proof where the Jedi are part of the republic. Apart from using lines in Episode 4, (which is within my scenario of average movie goers watching Episode 1) I provided you with several others.

You didn’t say you were using my scenario as well. I’m glad you are, but my argument still holds up.


Also, can you provide any reason at all that you'd think they're a government run organization?

Nope, I can’t… anymore then you can think they’re a private run organization. Like I said before (again and again) we’re both just speculating about what they are.


What would have convinced you that they're a corporation?

How about saying it in the opening scroll? Episode 4 had a wonderful opening scroll. It tells us the rebels are small, but good. The Empire is huge and evil.

It also tells me what the rebels are doing and what the Empire is doing.

It also tells me what the Death Star is, and why the rebels want to take it down so bad. And it gives me the stakes of everything involved should Princess Leia fail. I have all the information I need to watch the rest of the movie without asking any questions.

That’s what the opening scroll is for, to share with us the information we need to find out who everyone is and what’s going on. Unfortunately, the opening scroll for Episode 1 only tells me that there is a Trade Federation, not what kind of entity they are and whether or not they’re part of the Republic.

Considering that the opening scroll says the Republic is in turmoil, that makes me think everyone involved is part of the Republic.


Wait, Ford's a goverment run institution?

Did I say that? Nope. You can go back and read what I did say… go ahead. I’ll wait.


Because the corporation isn't part of the government.

Depending on where you live (and the laws you live under) a corporation is a legal entity that is created under the laws of a State designed to establish the entity as a separate legal entity having its own privileges and liabilities distinct from those of its members.[1] Wikipedia.

It is a legal entity recognized by the government. So yes, it is part of the government in the same way that a citizen of a country is part of the government.


Also, regarding the situation you mentioned, well, that situation itself hasn't happened, but thing very similar have

In recent history, no corporation has ever taken military action on citizens because of a law or tax that they didn’t like. I’m sorry forum rules won’t allow you to bring in examples to counter this… perhaps you can PM me with them.


They're a macguffin.

That’s fine with me. Like I said, I don’t understand the Galactic Empire because I don’ t know how things work. But when there’s a good 20 minutes of a movie that show the political comings and goings of the Republic, am I just supposed to sit back confused thinking to myself that this is all just part of a macguffin and I really don’t need to know about it… because we’re going to back back to light saber fights and pod racing here pretty soon?

It doesn’t work both ways. Either the entire politics of the government don’t matter and let’s just use them as an excuse to have cool space fights… OR they are part of the movie and should have some internal logic behind them. You can’t hand wave the politics and policies of a government away when it’s a third of the movie.


So. Prove how it's confusing

I already have. The republic sent the republic to negotiate with the republic over a blockade against the republic. That is confusing.


Yes, the Jedi are represented as guardians of peace and justice, but that doesn't make them and army.

Meh, you’re just arguing semantics at that point. They’re a military faction. I say army more than police because police have jurisdiction within states and counties… whereas the army goes wherever they are needed.

But if it makes you happier, sure.

Obama sends in The Police to negotiate with Coca Cola because they have a blockade around Kansas.

Still confusing.

[Lord Seth]

Personally, I saw the Jedi as as more analogous to the FBI than a police force or army.

[Renegade Paladin]

Nope, I can’t… anymore then you can think they’re a private run organization. Like I said before (again and again) we’re both just speculating about what they are.
Governments tax private corporations.

Governments do not tax the operations of their own departments.

Ergo, the Trade Federation is not a governmental department. QED.

[averagejoe]

The Mod They Call Me: Locked for review.