thechallenged

Um... I can't tell if your attacking the prequels, defending them, or both. Either way I'm too lazy to read what you wrote ??????

Neither - I recognize that they're generally good, with some minor flaws and some huge flaws, and seem to have the monopoly of sensible arguments at the moment.
If you're too lazy, that's okay - but keep in mind, since my TLDR directly refutes your points, and I'll maintain my ability to refute all of your points even after I've stopped posting, anything you say in this "lazy" state is invalid by default :)

Case in point:

I was trying to present the idea that Padme COULD be the protagonist, but I guess I seemed a little too enthusuastic about it.The Phantom Menace is a terrible movie that IMO shouldn't even be considered canon.

She IS one of the two protagonists, as explained.
You weren't enthusiastic enough about it - but if you could think, you'd be MORE enthusiastic, because that's TRUE.

It's a mediocre movie at very worst, and the fact that the prequels are too inconsistent with the OT to be considered canon has nothing to do with quality.

_____________________

One whole text to establish the difference between art and lower expressions and he comes with "art and entertainment". Thanks for sparing me time in answering.

Oh, that's what your obscurantism-filled essay was there to establish? GEE I'M SORRY.

Sorry no, you made a lot of points about other topics, and those I quoted, I've refuted with my left hand.
The part where I said "art and entertainment" wasn't referring to anything you said that was differentiating between the two - you said "other than art" which definitely wasn't including entertainment, and earlier you said "music, drama and sculpting" which includes both.

So, my use of "art and entertainment" didn't in any way misunderstand anything you said, but hey - feel free to use that as a cop-out. If you actually tried to answer, you'd fall flat on your face. 

Perhaps I should better keep rejoying in my snobbism while Ring Theory suddenly opens our eyes and makes the prequels reach the reputation of Citizen Kane or 2001...or Avengers in case those titles don't ring a bell. 

Just....meh

Well, I didn't "support the Ring theory", in fact I said it belongs in the crack - so there, now YOU didn't get what I said, I know you hoped it was the other way around.

And Kane / 2001 are both osmotic enough that everyone's heard of them, and I didn't say any of that - the only SW films that could compete with those, in terms of quality (i.e. adjusted for the simpler genre) are SW and TESB, the only great films in the series.

___________________

"What's preventing my mind from being blown is that I've tried to look at it that way, or any other way that could give TPM the benefit of the doubt, and the film itself just doesn't support even marginally redemptive viewing strategies."

No idea what a "redemptive viewing strategy" is, TPM is a good movie on a very basic level, no mind-bending "looking this way or that way" bullshit required.

And regarding your reply to me about the protagonist: I guess it depends what is being discussed. The criticism by the plinkett person is that the film has no protagonist. So I'm not sure the best way to contest that is to scratch our heads, wondering, "so who must the protagonist be, if not x?". There isn't necessarily one by definition, and we don't need to upgrade the closest candidate.

I think plinky is right.

No, he's completely wrong. And I'm not scratching my head, I know for sure and can make a case (as anyone with half a brain can - but you tried to look at it from every angle, right).

Feel free to ignore the stronger argument, while reponding to the weaker argument - but that kinda invalidates your stance.

However, I also think it's narrow-minded of him to assume every film needs to be structured in such a boring way with a Campbellian Hero. But that doesn't save TPM. It plays out more like an episode of a television show that allows us to follow various characters and plot lines, while lacking any kind of thoughtful overall structure.

He doesn't assume that, he just says it's "generally good for those genres", and if you deviate from that you should do it well, like all those directors listed.

However... it doesn't deviate, it IS structured in a Campbellian way, and no, it's not a boring way unless you think Star Wars sucks.

It has a painfully obvious, classic and solid structure, it goes straight from A to B. Again, so easy a 5 year old could spot it - not sure what's preventing you.

Same with Sith. AOTC, eh, less so, but still has a good structure.

____________

You say that, and yet I am still left bored, confused,

 and angry by what I see on-screen during the prequels.

Awwwwww. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mghmk3Cs6U

Based on the length of your post it is clear that you put far more thought into this trilogy than Lucas ever did.

Well, 6 hour trilogy > my post, and my post > your post. So, by your logic...

Only a portion of my post actually analyzes the movies, or is even about them (responded to various statements by others).
Within that portion, one sub-portion analyzes what's actually in the movie, i.e. the thought that was put in it; the other points out flaws and the thought that WASN'T put in the movie.

And since those are criticisms, your "but Lucas put no thought" is already redundant.
And no point did I "read convoluted interpretations into it", like the OP, which is where your comment would've been justified.

Anyway, this is just another example of how you people maintain your opininion by a complete inability to think, or make reasonable conclusions.

Both the fanbois over at Appreciation Society and antis like yourself have one thing in common: all you do is stand around in a huge circlejerk, saying nothing but incredibly stupid shite all day long.

_______________________________________________

The prequels don't deserve this many words.

They wouldn't if it weren't for you cultists talking nonsense about 'em.

True. Let's get a mod to lock this thread lol

Scared of challenge :)

I think everything that needed to be said has been said.

Only by me, the rest was mostly nonsense.

The Phantom Menace can't be explained because it only exist as nothing more than a first draft that was written after shooting the film.

There's nothing to "explain" in the first place, there's some violations of logic which are of tertiary importance overall, some holes in the character arcs that don't obscure the arcs themselves, and some unresolved plot points which should've been followed up on in the SEQUELS.

And Lucas' cognitive dissonance regarding whether he was making Terminator or Carebears, but that, again, is a no-brainer.