1. Due to the increased amount of spam bots on the forum, we are strengthening our defenses. You may experience a CAPTCHA challenge from time to time.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Notification emails are working properly again. Please check your email spam folder and if you see any emails from the Cantina there, make sure to mark them as "Not Spam". This will help a lot to whitelist the emails and to stop them going to spam.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. IMPORTANT! To be able to create new threads and rate posts, you need to have at least 30 posts in The Cantina.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Before posting a new thread, check the list with similar threads that will appear when you start typing the thread's title.
    Dismiss Notice

Mr Plinkett's 'Phantom Menace' Review.

Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by Revanchist, Dec 5, 2015.

  1. eeprom

    eeprom Prince of Bebers

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Posts:
    2,769
    Likes Received:
    6,967
    Trophy Points:
    87,467
    Credits:
    6,863
    Ratings:
    +10,331 / 40 / -11
    Jesus, Mr. Plinkett isn’t a real guy. He’s just a character RLM made up as a satire. He’s supposed to represent the type of deranged shut-in that cares so irrationally much about something so incredibly trivial. It’s meant to be taken as entertainment first and actual criticism as a far second. It’s a lampoon directed at both sides of the fandom.

    That anyone has invested so much effort into scrutinizing its content and validity is just mind boggling to me. Should we next dissect the verisimilitude of the Naked Gun series? Perhaps analyze to what degree commercial air travel was accurately portrayed in Airplane!? It’s a spoof that makes biting observations - some legitimate, some simply fastidious. Nothing truly worth getting worked up over.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Great Post Great Post x 1
  2. 2K-D2

    2K-D2 Clone Trooper

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2016
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Credits:
    552
    Ratings:
    +144 / 49 / -29
    They're not satire, they're meant seriously - some of the really gratuitous nitpickery can be attributed to "the character", but overall it's at most a slight exaggeration of their real views.


    Also, what legitimate observations :D
     
    • Clouded Clouded x 1
  3. AstromechRecords

    AstromechRecords Jedi General

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Posts:
    16,794
    Likes Received:
    15,181
    Trophy Points:
    149,777
    Credits:
    20,163
    Ratings:
    +26,536 / 845 / -253
    Yeah meant "Seriously" in the sense of playing along with the character by believing in the satire itself...pretty much a suspension of disbelief..
     
  4. 2K-D2

    2K-D2 Clone Trooper

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2016
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Credits:
    552
    Ratings:
    +144 / 49 / -29
    There's nothing about the Mike interviews that suggests this is satire - and nothing about the video descriptions (on YT), which are out of character, either.

    On the other hand, Cinema Snob is satire - and Brad Jones makes that clear when he's out of character.


    I've also been on their forums, where Rich Evans (co-writer of the reviews) has made various comments showing that the reviews are, indeed:
    -a reflection of their real opinions
    -considered correct, by them
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. eeprom

    eeprom Prince of Bebers

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Posts:
    2,769
    Likes Received:
    6,967
    Trophy Points:
    87,467
    Credits:
    6,863
    Ratings:
    +10,331 / 40 / -11
    In my opinion - viewed only through my own personal, subject prism of experience - which is in no way definitive or factually provable: It’s my belief that the critique of Lucas’s less than imaginative choice of camera angles was a surprisingly astute observation.

    The dialogic exchanges in those movies are prosaic at best, but I never paid much mind as to why in particular they seemed so unrelentingly vapid to me.

    The video highlighted (not this one specifically I don’t think) that Lucas had the routine of arranging his actors in a two camera orientation. One focused on the principle, the other on the secondary. He’d then just cut the scene to be shot/reverse-shot - jumping back and forth between the characters at fixed positions. With this setup, George didn’t even have to get out of his cozy chair or put down his coffee. He could simply say “action”, dazedly watch the players recite his dreadful dialogue, and then say “cut”. Boom! Scene! Count it!

    Whether this is any evidence of lazy filmmaking or not, I see this as a legitimate criticism with respect to the overall directing style of the films and symptomatic of why I, personally, found them to be unengaging. But that’s only my opinion :D

    That’s precisely what a ‘satire’ is. The satirist expresses their genuine opinion, but through the filter of humor in order to be more digestible to the audience. The comedy of this scenario is that this “review” isn’t really a review at all. It’s just the erratic ramblings of a sociopath who only thinks, in his addled mind, that this is what movie reviewing is - hate filled rants shouted at no one in particular. That’s the gag. If you’re treating it as something other than that, then the jokes on you.
     
    #45 eeprom, Sep 29, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2016
    • Like Like x 2
  6. 2K-D2

    2K-D2 Clone Trooper

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2016
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Credits:
    552
    Ratings:
    +144 / 49 / -29
    Ah, yes - of course.
    Probably the strongest and most valid+observant segment of all 3 reviews - which, considering it's confined to only one section in one review, doesn't say the best about their general track record.

    However, still: the thought process is so erratic and disorganized, and the conclusions so off the mark, that this doesn't amount to much more than:
    -some valuable observations, i.e. raw material that can be used for further analysis
    -half-baked points that could be enhanced and made to say something of value, by someone else

    What's "prosaic"?


    That was the third one, the "language of cinema" segment (i.e. the one with the Kane comparison).

    He called it the "most basic" way of shooting dialogue - usually it's 3 cameras though, at least 1 for showing both.

    So in itself, this isn't much of a criticism - some music (even jazz) uses very basic drumming that doesn't do much more than keep time; saying the drumming is basic isn't sufficient criticism, you need to go the extra mile to explain how it's bad, or lacking, in this specific case.

    Saying it doesn't look adventurous while the action scenes do, doesn't count - particularly when the dialogue scenes have an emphatically quiet/intimate tone to them that serves as a contrast to those same action sequences with the sweeping camera movements.


    He goes out of his way not to compare these dialogues from I-III (of which only some are brought up, not all - for example, the scene where Amidala departs to Naboo in EpI has more creative blocking and use of camera, which should've been brought up as a counterweight among others) to... comparable dialogue scenes from, say, the OT; explain how the "Bensposition" scene, or cantina etc., are better or less static.

    Instead he starts going through "images that stick with us", such as Shining twins or Alien queen (again, no dialogue scenes from Alien 1/2 are cited - rather, the action climax), which should've been much rather juxtaposed to similar moments from I-III (such as Sidious kneeling down on Mustafar etc.).
    Citizen Kane is only talked about in very vague terms, after the initial breakdown of the plot similarities.

    The only OT dialogue scene that's actually brought up, is a rather unique and not particularly representative scene from ESB where Vader's sitting in his alcove - those where he's talking to the admirals while standing next to each other, aren't cited in order to analyze how they're superior.
    And that particular scene would've been much better juxtaposed with various hologram scenes from I or III, rather than good guys talking in rooms.

    "If this was a prequel they'd just shoot in front of green sreen and then put asteroids in the background"? Wtf? When has there ever been a scene in any of these movies where the background/exterior was this disconnected, or at all disconnected from the content?
    If the asteroids had been put into windows, it probably would've been closer to what they did in the opening scene of 3 - hovering in front of the windows, being giant and imposing, and enhancing the atmosphere in one way or another.

    So it's good when you've got sets and props and things to work with, huh? Why not start by using scenes from 1-3 where props are used in dialogues as a counterweight, and then compare those to the other scenes and reach some kind of sensible conclusion?
    Clearly a movie series that uses props in talk scenes, doesn't require a 101 lecture on how good it is to use props in talk scenes; at most an advice to have done it more.


    So basically he sucks at juxtapositions, and he sucks at collecting various different examples in order to reach an accurate conclusion - instead opting for comparisons that don't work at all, and selective... selections that undermine the point that's being made, by their very nature.



    The most interesting observation here is undoubtedly the "striking similarities" between the specific scenes - the whole "they stand up and walk towards the window at almost the same point" thing, which supposedly makes it look like an actual coneyor belt production.
    2 factors were left out of the picture, though:

    1) sometimes, characters talk, then go through some story changes, and return to the same place to talk again - similarities in set up etc. can actually be there to accentuate a pattern;
    this happens a lot here, as undoubtedly doesn't need explaining.

    2) Even if characters in two scenes stand up from a couch and walk to a window and then turn around at almost the same point, that doesn't mean that those movements weren't actually enhancing the individual scenes in question, accentuating character dynamics or generally working with the content - if you're gonna make grand sweeping statements about "pacing" or "connection with the audience", not analyzing that and instead just settling for pointing out "parallels", is criminal.



    ; - )











    While the word "satire" may have meant something concrete a long time ago, its meaning has since been stretched and misused to a similar extent as President de Curval's nether region, and anything that's not meant quite seriously basically gets to be called satire nowadays.

    So these semantics are pointless: as I've said earlier, you've got NC, and you've got Cinema Snob.
    The first is just an exaggerated opinion of Doug Walker.
    The second is a critic parody by Brad Jones, whose opinion on the reviewed movies is most of the time diametrically opposed.

    So which one is this one? The anwer is, it's the first one, not the second one.
    But you can still call it satire :D


    Well, then why are you treating it as something other than that ^^^^^^
     
    • Clouded Clouded x 1
  7. Darth Ezra

    Darth Ezra Clone Commander

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2016
    Posts:
    90
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Credits:
    737
    Ratings:
    +218 / 1 / -0
    the biggest thing to understand about RLM is that they aren't critics, but hack frauds that like making funny internet content. the plinkett reviews just started out as a side project where mike, a giant trek nerd, made a video about what he felt was wrong with star trek generations. and then god's gift to the internet, rich evens, saw it and convinced him make more. the prequel reviews were the natural evolution from this. and while they take shot after shot at the films and lucas its still just one of millions of opinions out there. further, it seems at times like we as star wars fans can be the most sensitive to criticism of any fanbase. just because they or anyone else don't like it doesn't invalidate your enjoyment.
     
    • Wise Wise x 1
  8. 2K-D2

    2K-D2 Clone Trooper

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2016
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Credits:
    552
    Ratings:
    +144 / 49 / -29
    The cause behind these reviews being nonsense (whether it's "satire", or "nerd hackery", or actual pretentious bias) isn't as relevant as the fact that they're nonsense and should stop being deferred to by everyone.

    Having that said, they've been filmmakers and film fans since way before the Generations review came out - and whether they were "critics" at that point or not, they certainly grew into such by the the time the new ST review was made; accomplishments such as that one, the ones that came out later, and many of the HItBs, certainly give them a good amount of credibility as critics.

    And, this can't be stressed enough, whether they've bought into their own hype or always thought the same, they don't consider it to be satire - or, at most, there's a certain amount of cognitive dissonance there.
    Just like with the fans, who'll claim they're criticism gospel one moment, and then go for the "humor" route when challenged.


    Well - as long as it's established that they don't hold up as the former, everything's great ;)
    --- Double Post Merged, Oct 1, 2016, Original Post Date: Oct 1, 2016 ---
    Haha the wink smiley on this forum is CREEPY!

    ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  9. vinsanity

    vinsanity Rebelscum

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Posts:
    125
    Likes Received:
    235
    Trophy Points:
    1,669
    Credits:
    885
    Ratings:
    +366 / 2 / -6
    I find those reviews more entretaining than the prequels itself
     
    • Like Like x 5
  10. 2K-D2

    2K-D2 Clone Trooper

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2016
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Credits:
    552
    Ratings:
    +144 / 49 / -29
    This certainly is a phrase that gets passed around a lot - and the response to it is, that this is entirely compatible with them also failing as reviews and generally making little sense ; - )
     
  11. vinsanity

    vinsanity Rebelscum

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Posts:
    125
    Likes Received:
    235
    Trophy Points:
    1,669
    Credits:
    885
    Ratings:
    +366 / 2 / -6
    well that's your opinion.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Wise Wise x 1
  12. 2K-D2

    2K-D2 Clone Trooper

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2016
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Credits:
    552
    Ratings:
    +144 / 49 / -29
    Well a founded opinion ennit
     
  13. vinsanity

    vinsanity Rebelscum

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Posts:
    125
    Likes Received:
    235
    Trophy Points:
    1,669
    Credits:
    885
    Ratings:
    +366 / 2 / -6
    whatever, if that makes you feel better.

    speaking of the devil:

     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. 2K-D2

    2K-D2 Clone Trooper

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2016
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Credits:
    552
    Ratings:
    +144 / 49 / -29
    Considerably.



    Also, I was gonna finish before this was released - but it was all ready, I was just working out structure.
    And this post is obviously valid proof of that.

    I'll explain later.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. CTrent29

    CTrent29 Rebel Official

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Posts:
    1,503
    Likes Received:
    1,511
    Trophy Points:
    6,192
    Credits:
    2,608
    Ratings:
    +2,411 / 394 / -178

    Pardon me if I question your taste in entertainment.


    Frankly, I'm wondering why some are regarding this review as worthy of a discussion.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  16. vinsanity

    vinsanity Rebelscum

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Posts:
    125
    Likes Received:
    235
    Trophy Points:
    1,669
    Credits:
    885
    Ratings:
    +366 / 2 / -6
    you're the one with a avatar of two actors who gave some of the most wooden performances in any star films, so I can say the same thing.

    Maybe is because is the most known reviews of a Star Wars movies, for better or for worse.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  17. eeprom

    eeprom Prince of Bebers

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Posts:
    2,769
    Likes Received:
    6,967
    Trophy Points:
    87,467
    Credits:
    6,863
    Ratings:
    +10,331 / 40 / -11
    Google it.

    The critique attempts to answer the question: Why am I so detached to the character interactions in these movies? Well, possibly because the director himself was detached while filming them. If you disagree with the basic premise of the critique, then of course you won’t find any merit in its conclusion.

    I feel this burns up a good deal of whatever intellectual currency you may have here. You’re effectively attempting to invalidate the crux of my position based on your own perverse misconception of what satire is.

    I don’t know if you’re confusing me with someone else, but my core position was (and continues to be) that these “reviews” are intended as entertainment and not to be taken in earnest. Any attempts to discredit something that has no claim to credibility in the first place is fruitless and nothing beyond an academic exercise in futility.
     
    • Great Post Great Post x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Darth Ezra

    Darth Ezra Clone Commander

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2016
    Posts:
    90
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Credits:
    737
    Ratings:
    +218 / 1 / -0
    this was very amusing. i knew they had a generally positive, though not glowing, response to TFA so it was unlikely they'd rip it apart for two hours. but i wasn't prepared for the straight savagery that they sent out in all directions. it felt like mike had been collecting an enemies list since the last star wars review and put it all out in this one. his attack on the neo prequel defenders is especially timely considering the release of that pro prequel doc recently. i wonder how much of a fresh S-storm this will kick up...
     
    • Wise Wise x 4
  19. 2K-D2

    2K-D2 Clone Trooper

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2016
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Credits:
    552
    Ratings:
    +144 / 49 / -29
    They didn't include me in their enemies list, even though I refuted their reviews on their forums, all the usually arrogant regulars couldn't say a thing in response, and even Jay Bauman whined about it before deleting the one or other post ;)

    Of course mere days later, one of those neo prequels came out, the AVClub one, and they all started circle jerking again about this new pathetic attempt to scratch at their established position viewpoint :D :D

    So they basically pick the weakest responders, while being equally weak themselves.
    On the other hand, all things considered I am quite obscure ; - )
    --- Double Post Merged, Oct 3, 2016, Original Post Date: Oct 3, 2016 ---
    Okay look, you either say things like "the review attempts to answer the question", or you say "it's all jokes and not supposed to have credibility" - an actual "ONE OR THE OTHER".

    And no, I'm not confusing you with someone else, I'm confusing you with your alter ego who wrote the part of your post that come before the ---------- ;)



    Anyway, annoying bravado aside, I just wrote a rather substantive post up there, and if someone thinks I was wrong, the option exists to refute said post.
     
    #59 2K-D2, Oct 3, 2016
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2016
    • Clouded Clouded x 1
    • Pessimistic Pessimistic x 1
  20. eeprom

    eeprom Prince of Bebers

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Posts:
    2,769
    Likes Received:
    6,967
    Trophy Points:
    87,467
    Credits:
    6,863
    Ratings:
    +10,331 / 40 / -11
    At this point, your profound myopia is either intentional or inescapable. The two elements aren’t mutually exclusive. Not in the least. It isn’t “one or the other”. The videos are a farce that include some redemptive features. You wanted an example of one and I provided one. It isn’t any more complicated than that.

    Stand-up comedians, for example, make valid points in their acts from time to time, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to start taking everything they say as candid declarations.

    Well, first off, I didn’t wink at you. Turns out those are pretty creepy :) Second, if you were maybe more inclined toward logical discourse instead of aimless pontification, you’d probably recognize the simple position I’m promoting.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Wise Wise x 1
Loading...

Share This Page