OBI-WAN37 said:
Yoda: How feel you?
Anakin: Cold, sir.
Yoda: Afraid are you?
Anakin: No, sir.
Yoda: See through you we can.
Mace Windu: Be mindful of your feelings.
Ki-Adi-Mundi: Your thoughts dwell on your mother.
Anakin: I miss her.
Yoda: Afraid to lose her I think, hmm?
Anakin: What has that got to do with anything?
Yoda: Everything! Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. I sense much fear in you.
I think that example of how the prequels have some awesome dialogue speaks for itself...
Yeah, riveting stuff.
Whoever wrote this dialogue with Yoda has no idea how Yoda actually talks, and instead based his speech pattern on a caricature. Kinda like what would happen if I were to make a biopic about Arnold Schwarzenegger and have the protagonist talk like "Yaaagh yaaagh fantastik! Mariaaahhh Get to da choppa!!!". It's a bad impression of Yoda.
All this guy can write is "it speaks for itself" and chants "fantastic movies", "awesome dialogue" and "terrific action" over and over again, like a broken record from the band "Too Rough Over Lonesome Louie".
This thread didn't deserve nor need reply one.
Also, still no comments about the "handsome demigod Christensen"?
Those reviews are far too dark,
It's comedy. If you're fixated on the "dark" aspects, it's because you're too busy putting your fingers in your ears while the mad psychopath (it's a character!!) drones on and in the meanwhile he's making a perfectly sane analysis of these movies, ripping them apart and feasting on their rotten carcasses. So, really, the Plinkett character may be insane, but managed to make complete and utter sense, while there are other people around that insist on telling us they are sane and all that comes out of their mouth is fart noises.
and besides, whenever reviewers like that criticize the prequels, they never note anything positive about the films,
could it be because they can't find anything good in them???? the mind boggles.
and when they do, it's always along the lines of "sure, this was okay, but this was awful", when in truth the thing that was "okay" was actually awesome and the thing that was awful was actually just a small flaw.
To clarify, when you say "in truth", do you mean
- "in your head"
- "in cuckooland"
or
For example a prequel-hater might say, "sure the action was okay, but the acting was awful", when in truth the action was fantastic and the acting wasn't bad enough to outweigh the other positive things
Same question as above.
