PLINKETT REVIEWS-Valid Criticisms Or Stupid Opinions

Dude if you really cantsee how your comment is hateful and toxic then you have to be troiling... but if you insist.

"The average person who can't keep their borrowed opinion to themselves on this subject is invariably a pop-culture junkie "Geek" with a motor mouth and a puffed out chest aiming to dominate a conversation."

You say anyone with an opinion different than yours has a borrowed opinion, you call people pop culture junieis and insinuate they are not really geeks, you say tehy have a motor mouth (which is an insult), then you say they have a "puffed otu chest aiming to dominate a conversation" as if people with different opinions than yourself are domineering mindless animals.

 

"You're still living in 1985 and it angers you that shaky matte lines and rubber puppets don't give everyone else a hard on" "Most PT haters are not very well read or culturally versed". "The truth is that if you're a vocal PT critic you're probably a middle aged white dude from the burbs with a Jr College degree in something or other and you simply didn't get the movies and because of our asshat culture of entitlement you are unable to shut up about this subject" "The average person who can't keep their borrowed opinion to themselves on this subject is invariably a pop-culture junkie "Geek" with a motor mouth and a puffed out chest aiming to dominate a conversation." First you say that you don't care how you come off but now it seems like you're trying to imply that you're not toxic or hateful. You're starting to be a bit inconsistent.

 

Thanks to whoever marked my post "dumb." Glad to know my posts are so valued here.

 

Okay, I've been casually following this thread, and I've bit my tongue up till now... but I think I need to step in and make a few points...

First, we are friends... and we need to remember that. We have all gathered here in this house of pixels built by Viral to share our love of Star Wars. When we debate, and we do so very often, lets stick to the issues and not the person raising the issues. At the point where we begin to go after the posters, and not the posts, we have lost...

Second, the PT. Some love it, some hate it... but like the hated cousin, it's family, it gets to sit at the table with us. I personally liked them. I wasn't particularly impressed by them, but I already knew what was going to happen, in fairly broad terms, so a lot of the enjoyment for me on those levels wasn't there. I didn't care much for Jake Lloyd, but he served the purpose, which was that we were going to present this cure adorable little kid, and watch him turn into the most vile being in the galaxy. He did that... when you look at Jake, he was about as far from Vader as you could get.

The original story, announced in the prelude to the Star Wars novel (in the good old days when it was simply Star Wars, no subtitle) was that Palpatine was a bit of a patsy, his rise to power was a political story and told under the familiar "how does a dictator come to happen" lines... Palpatine wasn't a Sith... we knew the Clone Wars would happen, and that the stormtroopers were clones... the myth of Anakin was that he was a slave, and Kenobi witnesses Anakin's master attempt to punish him by activating his choke collar only to have Anakin use the Force to turn it on him. We also knew that Kenobi fought Vader at the edge of a volcano, and Vader fell in, which is why he was in the suit. We knew these things since 1978/1979.

By the end of RotJ, a lot had changed. Luke and Leia were siblings, Vader was Anakin, and Palpatine was Vader's master, therefore a Sith... Lucas originally made one movie... he had to approach the PT from a very rough angle. If he only told the story everyone knew, the "established history", then it would be boring, and nobody would go see it... but at the same time, the PT was about those events, so there were certain events... fixed points in time, as the Doctor would say, that couldn't be changed... and even then, they could be if you did it right...

The biggest problem with the PT, in my opinion, is that he approached it from the wrong angle... When he first made Star Wars, a lot of the technology needed to make it simply didn't exist. The rise of ILM as the powerhouse it is deservent of a saga in itself... those guys were legends, and they did legendary things... Star Wars, and the OT, were very much "here is what we need to do, let's figure out how to make it happen...

Fast forward to the PT... here, and the mistake, was that his approach was, "here is what we can do, let's figure out a way to use it" Jar Jar, the theoretical "we can make a character totally out of pixels and integrate it so seemlessly into the film that it doesn't insult your suspension of disbelief" is a staggering thing... a monumental step in film making. Jar Jar the actual thing that appeared on screen was a different matter...

But... this is the plate that is put before us. You can love them, you can hate them, but that's what we got... move along... one of you loves vanilla, one loves chocolate... arguing about it doesn't make either of you right. It's called taste... how many grains of salt you take depends on your tollerance...

This brings us to Plinkett... I was raised in an era of At the Movies with Siskel and Ebert. Today we have a YouTube generation, and things are a bit different... Plinkett is more of a "stream of consciousness" reviewer... that's his style. We need to start with:

a) Are we discussing how he presents his information, his style and method of presentation (which personally I don't care for)
b) Are we talking about the issues which he raises (in which case I agree with some, disagree with others)

He is one of thousands... perhaps millions... of reviewers out there. Let's remember that part of what and why he does things is because he wants to attract a larger audience, and part of his method is by being controversial... whatever your opinion of him, remember that we have spent 3 pages discussing him and his opinions... mission accomplished there...

Now, all this being said... let's talk about those things... calling people names does nothing but get this thread locked, If your goal is to engage in debate, do it in a way that will not bar the debate... if your goal is to get this thread locked, then you will increasingly find yourself censored until you eventually wander off, or we escort you to the door...

Good form, gentlemen... good conduct... Robert's Rules of Forum Posting are implied, don't make me enforce them...

 

I think some of the issues Plinkett brings up are legitimate points, and there are others which I don't agree with. He's just a guy. One man making his opinions known in his own unique way. No big deal really.

As for his style, I do find some of his presentation style funny, but it does get rather old rather quick. For me Plinkett's reviews are like Las Vegas, a little goes a long way, and they both lose their novelty quickly.

I've made my views on the prequels known here on the site in various threads, so no need to go over all of it again, but suffice it to say, I grudgingly like them, warts and all. They are flawed, but they are Star Wars.

And to finish up, try to remember folks, we are all Star Wars fans here, which means in the bigger picture, we are all on the same side. Sure, we have differing opinions about Episodes of this thing we love called Star Wars. There's nothing wrong with that, and having a spirited debate about our differing opinions is one of the reasons for this website. But at the days end, don't forget we are all still SW Fans, and hopefully, still friends.


PS- I do have to say that Plinkett is totally wrong in his choice of snack food. TGI Friday's frozen Jalapeno Poppers are way better than Jeno's Pizza Rolls.

 

LOL That's not the post you highlighted.

You misread my post, or chose not to read it carefully. I'm talking specifically about the attack dogs who come straight off the RLM videos or similar content to troll and attack other people. Go back and re-read my posts more carefully. The RLM TPM video begins with him telling his listeners to tell anyone who prefers TPM to ESB to "STFU". Well I've seen this happen and have experienced it. I am talking about a specific product of our culture - yes they are "junkies", all they do is absorb pop culture and yes they usually have little to no frame of reference beyond that; I think that makes them ill qualified to be critics I also think it indicates intellectual laziness (or plain lack of interest) and is sad, considering the wealth of information at our fingertips in this day and age. This is only a small and minor element of internet bullying but it's a part of this culture that I advocate calling out and standing up to instead of accepting. There's nothing "funny" about the effect of the completely vacuous RLM videos; and hey, those vids really are uninformed - and simply repeating them over and over makes the person doing that equally uninformed.

Now that was just plain boring, wasn't it?
But I sure got some people's attention the other way . . . maybe RLM is on to something?

I'm going to break the cycle of back and forth and restate my case.


The RLM PT videos do not meet even the lowest standards of formal criticism. They are wrong in so many ways it would take a book to detail everything that is wrong with them.


Let's just take the most red-button topic from his TPM review. RLM asserts that the film contains racist caricatures and therefore the film should be dismissed.


To begin with, his assertions are baseless. Before there was any controversy, promotional materials were prepared for the film. They are not hard to locate and examine. The Trade Federation were given what Ben Burtt thought were “Transylvanian” accents, befitting financial vampires. Andy Secombe gave Watto a voice between a used car salesman and a gruff Italian. Watto was originally a design for the Trade Federation, who were based on the East India Companies, not Arabs or Jews. Jar Jar's chief inspiration was the silent film comedians. Even if you can construe any of that as being consciously or unconsciously racist, the intent of the artists who created the work have to be addressed in order for a real critical dialogue to take place. *


Those facts need not prohibit further debate about what ended up on screen and how audiences reacted to it. But they do have to be taken into account. RLM never does.


There are works of art that I find to be trivial or offensive; yet they receive very serious critical attention. Let me give a few examples.


Lolita is a novel that has experienced an explosion of appreciation. I find the book to be disgusting as well as dull. Many people agree. However, this does not exempt Lolita from serious critical attention. On the surface it appears to be nothing more then pedophile porn. Even I, who dislike the novel intensely, know that it is not that. Many viewed it that way when it was first published but over time many readers found values and qualities in it worthy of their appreciation and critical attention. RLM's rabid followers habitually pop up to loudly proclaim that since the “racism” of TPM has been identified (which isn't even the case) then the matter is closed and any further discussion of any kind is now invalid. This is not the work of a skillful critic opening up new frontiers of analysis, it's an opinion stated in absolute terms repeated by those who agree with it.


D.W. Griffith's The Birth of A Nation is an overtly racist film. It was also an important advance in film technique and remained enormously popular for decades after its release. When Griffith realized what he had done he attempted to redress the situation by making a film called Intolerance. Intolerance is simply not as effective as Birth of A Nation, it was quickly forgotten. To this day, Birth of A Nation is used in film studies classes. It is not screened side by side with Intolerance as a basis for ideological debate. In that particular context, a study of film technique, the racism of the film is irrelevant.


I don't agree with that, I think that the racism of the film should be addressed; but my point is that even the most vilely racist work of art is not exempt from study or debate. Even if TPM was firmly established as a racist film, like Birth of A Nation - and it never has been – but even if it was, in the realm of genuine criticism, it would still be valid to discuss the film. Even a critic pointing out the racism of Birth of A Nation – like Spike Lee – might advocate viewing the film for various reasons (Spike thinks it's an important document of American racism and also an important film in the technical advancement of cinema). That's just one example of how RLM fails to meet even the loosest standards of valid criticism. That's where “setting up a strawman” comes from. He doesn't even address the stated intent of the artists behind the film.

That's just one example of why RLM is not to be taken seriously as criticism.


The only reason RLM and his cult of personality are still around is that the PT remains enormously popular. There is clearly confusion on their part as to why this is and a belief that if they simply point out why no one else should like these films either then the PT will shrivel up and blow away. I think the first question a serious critic would ask in this instance is, “Why are they still so popular?” All you have to do is conduct a Google search to turn up hundreds of examples of the love people have for these films: paintings, drawings, body art, tribute videos, articles, even the ubiquitous “fan edits” are a testament to the enduring interest in these films.


If anyone here disagrees with me about the standards of serious criticism, I invite them to write out their opinion of a movie and submit it to a serious magazine like Film Comment and see what kind of response they get. RLM is nothing but one man's uninformed opinion. As for the cult that surrounds it, they are clearly not to be taken seriously: they cannot spell, have not mastered an even rudimentary grasp of grammar and their frame of reference stops at broad pop culture.


I've seen very little serious criticism of the PT, only personal opinions.


* The derivation of the Trade Federation was clarified later in Star Wars and History.

 

Funny thing about the "racist charicature" species in the films... these are actually common criticisms, but you will notice in the plinkett reviews that he identifies them as different caricatures than most people identify them as, which shows that the races these aliens are supposedly caricatures of is not entirely clear. And if its not clear what race something is a caricature of... then can it really be said to be racist at all? If you cant identify explicitly what race is being insulted, it follows that no race is being insulted and that its just mindless venomous hatred.

There are also a lot of parts in the reviews that he is being willfully ignorant, because he refuses to take a single second of critical though to the film. I think the best example of this is in his comments towards the beginning of "revenge ofthe sith" where he comments that he has "no idea who is who, what is what, and who is firing at who"

Which is hilarious, because anyone with half a brain could figure out that... all the red painted ships that are similiar shapes are on one side, and all the blue ships of similiar shapes... are on the other. And that since red ships have clones in them and are similiar in shape to thet jedi ships that... these are probably the good guy ships.

He literally shuts his basic cognitive reasoning abilities because he is pre-determined to be mad at the movie.

 

Yup. And it's of no avail to go point by point since it's been done now umpteen times and it has zero impact. But I said what I had to say. If anyone wants to understand these films better, crack a book! And I'm just saddened by the herd mentality and lack of literacy in "fandom" these days. SF/F used to be where the smart kids went to be different. Now it's just another "brand" that megacorps use to make money. Even SW is that now. Just another fan-pleasing brand.

 

i think mr. stoklasa is a smart decent human being but i simply cant stand the humor and mockery like making fun of people who were beat up and disfigured like he did in one of his reviews. it simply is not funny and it gives us a sense of how "passionate" he is.
keep in mind george did his absolute best with what ever tools he used in 1999.

 

Okay now dude you have gone and pissed me off, I was willing to be civil with you but... Being a pissy petulant child because you dont want people in fandom or enjoying science fiction because they are different form youk, because you dont want other people in your inclusive little club...

People have a right to enjoy stuff, they shouldnt have to do homework to understand a damn movie.

You are bitching about megacorps, and brands, and how star wars is popular like some kind of god forsaken conspiracy theorist. What the hell movies were you watching with the originals? they were accessible and easy to watch for everyone, they went above and beyond the genre. Just because people outside of a fandom can enjoy something doesnt mean its leass important, or off less quality.

you sound like a damn conspiracy theorist, get the hell out of here. This isnt an exclusive club that only allows what you define as teh freaking "cool kids" this is a place where anyone and everyone can get together and discuss Star Wars, and if you are going to insult people for not being as literate as you, and because its not an inclusive club then seriously freakign leave.

 

I think you are out of line... and being too sensitive.

@DaceDiath didn't say you had to crack a book to enjoy the movie... you can enjoy it or hate it at your leisure. He said if people wanted to understand it better... and in this, I think he has a fair and valid point. Cole Horton has written an entire series of articles for StarWars.com that reference the political and historical references that underlay the saga, for instance, giving light to there being a much deeper and more subtle movement in the background of the plot than is visible on the screen...

Lucas had a theme he was trying to bring forth, and of course the main element is Vader, and how a simple lovable little kid can grow up to be this evil being filled with hate... and of course, what can take someone who has become this hateful being and bring them back to redemption. This is all very Campbell and Hero's Journey. There are other themes that get played out, however, and one of them is how a just republic can fall into being an evil empire...

Nazi Germany is what will come to everyone's mind, but that is not a very good fit, and I will explain why... The socioeconomic conditions in Germany following World War I, and leading up to the rise of the Nazi party, were abysmal. The country was literally starving under the treaty limitations imposed on them. Had something not been done, the country... the PEOPLE... would not have survived. This, among many other factors, opened to door for more radical ideologies to be considered provided they put a chicken in the pot.

The Republic of the SW PT era wasn't suffering... they were bloated. It would be more in tune with the decadence of the Roman empire. The "phantom menace" very specifically lines up with Caesar's conquest of Gaul, in which he relied on the petty bickering of tribal rivalries to portray to the Roman senate a threat that did not, in truth, exist... he then exploited this foothold to achieve military success in campaigns that were questionable, reaping him political clout and financial gain.

You can take the movies at their face value, an entertainment venue providing a momentary distraction... however, this thread is not about momentary distractions, it is about critical analysis... specifically the reviews of Plinkett. In that, @DaceDiath has a point, in that he does not feel that Plinkett's analysis passes the bar of being critical (as the man is a critic, after all) and worse, that Plinkett's offhand and casual analysis, while being entertaining for its shock value, is actually damaging to the SW community on the whole, as trolling kiddies (who are usually far more interested in being loud and being heard than making any fair and justified point through the things that they say) regurgitate the quips put forth by Plinkett, further muddying the waters for those who do wish to take the whole topic a bit more seriously... and in that, I think @DaceDiath has an excellent point.

However, I do feel that @DaceDiath falls into his own trap, so to speak, when he paints his picture with too wide of a brush... to label anyone who dislikes the PT with the same brush, or even to put them on the same canvas, is an injustice perhaps to them as well. I, for example, am not a huge fan of the PT, for reasons that I have put forth already, but also for the fact that they totally failed to live up to their potential. In that, I suffer a little from the, "the greatest sin you can ever commit is to fail to live up to someone else's expectations" syndrome... there was just so much that it could have been, and to see the potential reduced to, "Jake Lloyd and Jar Jar Binks" makes meesa so sad.

Part of it, again, was that Lucas painted himself into a corner. When he renamed Star Wars to Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope he committed that whatever happened, it needed to happen in three episodes previous to this. The entire subject was just too rich, and could have been mined so much more. This, in part, is what made Clone Wars so successful, in that all of the minor nuanced backstory could be presented, and through it we gain a much deeper understanding and appreciation of what is going on. The Darth Bane/Yoda arc, for instance, presents (and canonizes) aspects we have long speculated on, and still debate in other forums.

So... I am one of those who is a PT critic, and I daresay we cannot call me uneducated, and I do hope I am not considered an idiot. I can, however, critically analyze the PT for its merits and faults (and it does, in truth, have both, as most things do) so not everyone who is a critic of the PT is an illiterate oaf, and in this, I can see where @Ralok-one, and others, have issue with the statements made by @DaceDiath. Perhaps it takes an Irishman to appreciate the sarcastic irony that the members of this forum are playing out the very satire they seem to be debating... and in that, I will point to the emotional level of the participants having been raised to the point where statements are being taken out of context, and the general inclination is given to like or dislike a posting prior to reading it for its merits simply based on the past history of the person who is making the statement... we are not critically analyzing each others ideas, we are responding to the menace of the poster, and in some cases, in my opinion, that menace is a phantom...

 

he did have a point, but when he started spouting conspiracy theories about megacorporations and complainign that other people are interested in Star Wars now, like the fan base should remain inclusive and not wwelcome newcomers, is just dowright insulting in every way shape and form.

The idea that people shouldn't be allowed to enjoy what they enjoy because they dont follow some superficial standard of being a nerd is just... That is.... i cant even describe how arrogant and selfish that is.

MAybe I am being a little over sensitive, but... man that is just rude...

 

As I said... I think people are reacting on emotion and not the items on the table... and I think that is a bit true on all sides at this point

 

Let me clarify (again) I didn't say that anyone who criticizes the PT is illiterate etc. I said that anyone who adopts an opinion they saw in a video wholesale and just keeps repeating it is intellectually lazy. And if you can't spell or construct a sentence you are in a shocking state of low literacy and should be concerned. If your cultural literacy extends only to what you are exposed to in mainstream media you are also culturally illiterate. This is deeply dismaying to me and it has come to dominate our culture and especially our little subculture. To take offense at the suggestion that a little learning might enhance your enjoyment of the arts is a symptom of a prevailing attitude of "Give it to me now and if it isn't 'perfect' and easy to understand I won't pay attention."

I was not espousing any conspiracy theories. The SF genre - and to an extent its close companion Fantasy, as well as mediums that contain them like comics and films - had already reached an inclusive mainstream presence. SF by the 1970's was being taken seriously and crossing boundaries. By the mid-late 1980's comics had also reached that level. Things were going swimmingly until publishers started trying to compete with Hollywood and TV, ultimately aping their promotional strategies and eventually narrowing the scope of theme and content to a point that is relatively stupid compared to what it was a few short decades ago. The triumphal myth that somehow "geeks" have "made it" by getting H-wood to dump $$ into franchises is - in my opinion - dead wrong. We've lost far more than we've gained by trying to penetrate the mainstream on the same level as everything else. I can see this effect all over the place and it saddens me.

When the OT first came out most serious SF authors derided it. They were barking up the wrong tree since SW is more fantasy than SF but there's an irony in that when GL started porting more of the content of serious SF/F into SW he lost so much of his original audience. When SW is too challenging for self proclaimed "geeks" something is way out of whack; this should be child's play. But I see again and again the assertion that doing more work than passively watching a movie is "boring" and irrelevant. So I'm old enough to remember when this community was all about new ideas, not endless fan pleasing retreads. Not that there isn't room for the warmth of nostalgia, ongoing series, or varying levels of "pop" sensibilities in the genre but it's been completely overtaken by those things. Hollywood is banking on your memories, quite literally. I think it's depressingly low-aiming and has all but killed off the vibrant, forward thinking element of the community.

RLM is a banner for the "think for me" faction that has been drawn to the genre by targeted marketing, on the lookout for the next "cool" and "badass" thing. If someone started from RLM and developed their own unique critique, however negative, that would be something. To just repeat it as gospel is nothing. But we're being spoon fed so aggressively in our culture that many people are all to happy to let someone else do their thinking for them. When the source is as ignorant and biased as RLM I don't that speaks well for the people who are swayed by it. When they demand to be taken seriously without earning it, I draw the line. Come back when you have a cogent and valid debate to offer.

The name of this thread is not "let's discuss the PT in a civilized manner" it's "Plinkett - valid criticism or stupid opinion". I didn't just pop in and say "stupid opinion", I've actually explained why I think that's so. In short: it's a sign o' the times and the times ain't good.

And while waxing lyrical about the good ol' days I'd like to add that once upon a time genre fans were not branded. Geek, nerd - these were labels applied by people who didn't understand the appeal or worth of the genre or pursuits like science or literature etc. The notion of embracing a "brand" - like cattle marked for slaughter - gives me chills. It almost comes with a freaking uniform at this stage, you can spot 'em a mile away. It used to be that you'd never see a more diverse group than those who shared a love for SF or other esoteric subjects. Individuality was the point. It's very much like what happened to rap music after the record companies took over and created an "image" for the genre. If you want to pass for "cool" in Geekdom just trash talk the PT, extra points if you quote RLM! No thanks, I won't be sipping that particular brand of Kool-Aid, thank you.

 

Maybe instead of trying to retcon what you had previously said, you can apologize for being an intolerant jerk.... I think you will find I largely agree with you on certain things, but your attitude is so god forsakenly offensive that you are alienating people who just want to talk with you, and in most cases want to agree with you.

Can we just get back on topic please

 

Okay this thread is just a hate fest.
Locked.

 

I agree with @Link Voxx...

@DaceDiath you did too call people idiots... right here:

and @Ralok-one I just got things calmed down and posted in pretty severe language to DEBATE THE POSTS BUT NOT THE PERSON POSTING and you call @DaceDiath an intolerant jerk...

I wish I had two corners and I could put you each into one...