logo Sign In

twooffour

This user has been banned.

User Group
Banned Members
Join date
8-Jan-2011
Last activity
8-Oct-2011
Posts
1,665

Post History

Post
#462512
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

evan1975 said:

TV's Frink said:

I noticed the ETs in the theater and hated it immediately.  And not only is Anthony Daniels in the Clones bar, but so is Jar Jar the dude who played Jar Jar.

Pisses me off.

With all the problems inherent to the PT, these cameos don't really bother me.

I must admit though, I'm a little worried about someone trying to connect Star Wars and Indiana Jones via the Crystal Skull aliens.

Which really should be Mr. Plinkett's next target, by the way.  The storyline to that movie was totally incoherent.

 

And after that, I demands he does the Matrix trilogy :D

I, like, already drool at the very prospect :DD

Because seriously... Confused Matthew's reviews, while fun, kinda do suck...

Post
#462510
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

Tyrphanax said:

twooffour said:

Kinda like the ETs in the senate, you notice them if you notice them (or get told about it), but there ARE no "ETs" in the senate. ;)

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Grebleips

 Oh... my fucking God :D

Um, so each of those prop monsters from the Cantina has their backstory, right? Probably also a political chronology from their respective homeplanets, too...

What I'd really like to know now, does the EU also... expand upon how many weirdos with tentacles that one hooker chick from Clones humped? Like, is that canon? LOL

 

Honestly, this shit would be so incredibly, incomprehensible stupid, if it weren't kinda tongue-in-cheek ;)

Post
#462509
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

Tyrphanax said:

twooffour said:

Kinda like the ETs in the senate, you notice them if you notice them (or get told about it), but there ARE no "ETs" in the senate. ;)

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Grebleips

 

Oh... my fucking God :D

Like, those random prop monsters from the Cantina all have their biographies and planet histories, too ;)

Does the EU also say how many tentacle dudes that one hooker chick in the Clones nightclub humped? Is that canon, too? LOL

 

This would be so incredibly stupid, if it weren't kinda tongue-in-cheek ;)

Post
#462495
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

TV's Frink said:

twooffour said:

It's like if Lucas' son had been dressed as Han Solo and put somewhere into the opera house for a few hardly visible seconds, it essentially wouldn't have mattered.

He and his daughter were dressed as blue aliens outside the opera house and it was blatantly obvious.  Ugh.

 

I know that, but I think the only time I actually noticed them was when I was watching the commentaries and they pointed out those cameos.

Kinda like the ETs in the senate, you notice them if you notice them (or get told about it), but there ARE no "ETs" in the senate. ;)

Honestly, the Peter Jackson cameos in LOTR were more obvious...

Ben Burtt and some other guy show up at the end of TPM, in that scene where Palpatine congratulates Padme... Anthony Daniels is in the Clones bar... that shit's funny :D

Post
#462477
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

Tyrphanax said:

Did anyone else have a nerdrage moment when he said the 'Falcon wasn't in ROTS? Or was that just me? Or was this already discussed and I'm just tardy to the party?

When he said it wasn't, I believe I yelled at the computer monitor something to the effect of "YES IT WAS IDIOT!"

 

I sort of had, but in my case, it was more of the "alright, now he's gonna make a dismissive joke about that hardly visible easter egg in the corner of the screen, one Lucas himself declared as canon, and "really the actual Falcon that happened to be there at the same day"... wait, now it's coming... now.. the segment's not over yet, now he's gonna... come on.. OOHHHHHH" sort.

 

Then after a few seconds, I realized "he didn't even bother with that", and suddenly, it was awesome.

I mean, come on dude, R2 was floating around in space in Abram's Trek movie. Does that shit matter? The Falcon wasn't in the film, it's coolness wasn't ruined in any way that could've been possible. Just some tiny image floating around in the corner of the screen for a couple seconds...

It's like if Lucas' son had been dressed as Han Solo and put somewhere into the opera house for a few hardly visible seconds, it essentially wouldn't have mattered.

For what it's worth, they confirmed in their forums that they knew about the easter egg, but that wasn't what their point was about, and they didn't bother bringing that up ;)

Post
#462029
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

Not that I'd be radically opposed to seeing Monkey Eye with Stoklasa' perfect McDiarmid impression or anything (although the "cleaner" voice there matches the "cleaner" face better than McDiarmid's "dirty" voice matches his decrepit appearence), but in the end, you'd still have a monkey-eyed Emperor that looks nothing than "the" Emperor, with only half of the illusion provided.

I dunno man... I've got nothing against this or anything, but this just accentuates the inherent pointlessness of all these "fan edits" - they can do only so much to the "problems" they're out to solve.

 

But I got the point :)

Post
#462019
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

Kenobius Prime said:

evan1975 said:

That Palpatine voice was really good.  Is Adywan still working on ESB?  He could get that guy to deliver Palpatine's pre-DVD lines in the Ian McDiarmid voice and dub them over the pre-DVD "monkey-eyes" Emperor.

 I like your thinking.  Anything to do away with the original voice in a convincing manner.  I don't want that scene to be one that I skip over when TESB:R comes out.

 

So you'd all be perfectly fine with the monkey-eyes Emperor speaking in an Ian McDiarmid voice, but can't stand an Ian McDiarmid Emperor speaking in an... Ian McDiarmid voice?

Um, what's wrong.. who's fucking... what??!!!?????

How about you leave Monkey Eye completely in tact?

Post
#462017
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

TheBoost said:

twooffour said:

TheBoost said:

I still stand you have to be "retarded" not to "understand" the plot of this film on the first "viewing".

He understood and mentioned what there was, and explained how the lack of any additional information made a deeper understanding IMPOSSIBLE.

I honestly don't know what kind of 'deeper' meaning you're looking for.

Should Nute Gunray have done a PowerPoint to explain to the audience how taxes effect his business? Should the Queen have explained to her councellors why a blockade was bad for them? Should Qui-Gon have worn a t-shirt that read "Protaganist?" Should the protocol droid have said, "I'm mostly sure they're Jedi because they looked and acted like Jedi and had lightsabers and Jedi-brand boots"? Would these things have helped you reach that deeper understanding you so crave?

 

So you kinda admit the fact that the movie provides no information on those aspects, while simultaneously criticizing RLM for (intentionally?) "not understanding" those aspects? ;)

At the end of the day, you're pretty much painting yourself into a corner because what little understandable "plot" there was (i.e. Sidious using a trivial McGuffin for his own goals, which, in the movie, is nothing more than getting his alter ego promoted to chancellor), RLM acknowledged, and all the absent elaborations were criticized for not being there, rather than "purposefully not understood" (hint - by your admission, the movie didn't provide any of those details for anyone to "understand). ;)

So your entire accusation that the reviewer "acted dumb" by "not understanding the plot" falls flat on its face for being sheer nonsense.

 

The main problem in the movie being that it's ENTIRELY about the "irrelevant" McGuffin and only marginally about the truly "important" plot, and it doesn't actually elaborate sufficiently on the McGuffin... which is, even according to the review itself, THE ENTIRE MOVIE, which basically results in the plot not elaborating on its MAIN PLOT. What the viewer is left with is a bunch of lazy, empty NOTHING.

No, Nute didn't need to put up a chart of financial balances - but the movie left the viewer completely in the dark even about WHAT THEY WANTED at all, or their relationship to Sidious.

Based on the little info in the film, we don't know whether

1) the Trade Federation was motivated by their financial loss due to the "taxation of trade routes", accepting the help of Sidious, or

2) used that as a pretext while actually following orders from Sidious, in order to achieve some entirely different goal (like political favors? additional financial favors?) he promised them in return (for something we're never told about, if it isn't actually that same very pretext of targeting the Naboo / protesting against the taxation laws).

 

Whether

1) Sidious had orchestrated the taxation crisis, or

2) used it opportunistically.

 

Whether

1) they suffered tax losses from decreased taxation of the trade routes (being part of the government), or

2) suffered a financial loss from having to pay increased taxes (being an independent company).

 

Whether

1) the Neimoidians followed up on an offer by Sidious, or

2) agreed to cooperate with him based on a threat (considering how afraid they are of him).

 

The Neimoidians with Sidious in the background are going to be the main villains and plot point for the duration of the entire movie, and we know NOT A BIT about the set-up, or their relationship to each other, or their motivations, what Sidious wants aside from getting Palpatine promoted (apparently, the whoe thing kinda does grow into the Separatist thing later on, right?), what the Traders THINK he wants, aside from the threadbare "Sidious uses Traders, Traders obey him; Sidious is manipulative and looks like the Emperor, Traders might be greedy/afraid/ambitious".

All things that would've made the "evil chancellor manipulates financial/political interests of others in order to take over democracy" infinitely more interesting and engaging and challenging to write, and the lack of which gives off a clear impression of sheer laziness.

Then with all those elements left unexplained, we're furthermore confronted with actions ordered by Sidious of which we have no clue how they're supposed to achieve his supposed goal, except somehow the unpredictable effects of them leads to him achieving his goal. How was invading the planet and capturing the queen gonna help the queen escape by the Jedis' help and tell the senate about the invasion? How was ordering to kill the Jedi who ended up helping the queen escape, helpful to his goal of... having the queen escape to Coruscant?

How could he count on the Traders failing to kill the Jedi / failing to prevent the queen from escaping without any direct control over the situation? Or did he have alternative plans that had nothing to do with how it played out? Was it something about killing the queen? Or letting her escape? Were the events of the movie according to his plan, or did they just happen to achieve the same results he had planned for?

What were the Traders' plans? Did they plan to kill the queen? Or just make her make the invasion legal? What then? Why the invasion?

And again, the movie just throws the "everything that happens is part of the evil chessmaster's plan - by definition" formula at the audience without bothering to explore what the parties involved want, or what they do, or why hey do it. Which kinda takes the excitement out of a supposed "intrigue plot", and reveals extremely lazy writing that equates the "intrigue plot" it decided to go with instead of a "bad guys attack good guys" to... "bad guys attack good guys".

 

Everything in the plot that isn't explained, doesn't make sense, and everything that doesn't not make sense, isn't explained. It's a horrible mess, and there's nothing to understand about it apart from the obvious cliff notes formula that takes a line to sum up.

And you trivialize all these glaring problems to Nute not putting up a chart?!

 

 

Should the Queen have explained to her councellors why a blockade was bad for them?

That was the least of the problems. The reviewer just complains that the movie fails to create an emotional connection by completely glossing over whatever problems the Naboo gets because of the supply blockade. He also acknowledges the threadbare implication that "people are dying".

These plots are completely obvious in the movie, and so threadbare they don't get more than a few lines of mention.

 

 

Should Qui-Gon have worn a t-shirt that read "Protaganist?"

The reviewer never denied him being one of the main characters. And he's certainly NOT "the protagonist" of he film.

 

Should the protocol droid have said

She didn't get to see their lightsabers, though, and you just made up a bunch of shit about Jedi trademark boots. Point is, it was just two guys in robes.

And that threadbare assumption made them (and Sidious) risk their entire plan. Or maybe accerate it. Why should they have to accelerate their invasion just because the Chancellor sent Jedi for negotiations? Why did the Neimoidians think it was a good idea? Did they plan to start the invasion later? Or did Sidious orchestrate the Jedi mission in order to give them an excuse to start the invasion prematurely? Why was that needed? Why should he have a problem with Jedis being sent to negotiate? What if the Senate kept sending more Jedi negotiators, or investigators their way, would the invasion help anything? If there were no invasion, would it be more difficult for them to fend off he investigators/negotiators?

What was the purpose of the invasion from their point of view? Was it still in the context of protesting against the taxation in front of everyone? Or was that part of a hidden agenda we're never told about, considering they're trying to keep that secret? Or did they plan to reveal the invasion in front of everyone after it becoming "legal", after blatantly denying it all that time? Would that, like, increase the stakes for future negotiations? Would Jedi have no more possibility to "force" a resolution on them at that point? Are we supposed to just guess all of these important plot points (like the purpose behind the main plot crisis) for the movie?!

What RLM might've missed out on was that Palpatine might've known about the mission anyway, and would've found some kind of reason to order the kill. Except of course, we're not told that the attempted kill was a necessary part of the plan. Or why he ordered them killed in the first place.

The whole thing really reverts back to the stupidity of the Tattoine desert robes somehow becoming the Jedi uniform.

 

 

So um yea, not sure if you're trying to defend the movie, or just try to put down RLM's review for the sake of it, or because you didn't watch it properly and missed out on like 90% of its content, but basically, TPM fails and so do you.

Post
#462002
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

TheBoost said:

twooffour said:

TheBoost said:

I can't believe that this tool and Confused Mathew are actually not clear about the plot of this flick. My 8 year old nephew understood it just fine. Are there some holes, yes. Are there points that can be nitpicked, yes. But to act as if you plain dont understand the plot is ridiculous.

No, there is nothing to "understand" about this plot. RLM is completely right. The "relevant" plot is that Palpatine uses the Trade guys to advance himself politically, and that apparently this Naboo crisis somehow grows into the Separatist crisis (with no more information given other than Sidious is the chessmaster behind both, and the Trade guys are on board again).

Plinkett got that, and mentioned it repeatedly in his review. The complaint was that this "irrelevant" scheme was THE ENTIRE MOVIE, and nothing was told or shown about the Traders' motivations. And the fact that this movie was basically necessary because Palpatine happened to be a Senator on Naboo, pretty seals the deal on the plot of TPM being a complete total turd.

I wonder what your "8 year old nephew" "understood" about a whole bunch of superfluous nothing.

I still stand you have to be "retarded" not to "understand" the plot of this film on the first "viewing".

 

Except Plinkett (the character in the review) actually understood everything there was to understand, and your kid didn't have any material to understand to begin with.

He understood and mentioned what there was, and explained how the lack of any additional information made a deeper understanding IMPOSSIBLE.

Post
#461999
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

Vaderisnothayden said:

I already did that for myself after watching the review. I have no need to do it to prove anything to you. That said, I may change my mind and come back and do it. We'll see. But I don't think other posters recognizing characters has anything to do with it or should be part of it.

Oh what the heck... Qui Gon is wise, underhanded, compassionate but a little ruthless, independent-minded, determined, a little arrogant maybe at times, something of a chancer.

TPM Padme is passionate, strong, crafty and prone to subterfuge, determined, commanding when she chooses to be, gentle when she chooses to be, an odd mixture of maturity with girlishness, devoted to her people, and is into guys two-thirds her age.

That's how it was done in the review. Just pick the character and describe them, no guessing games about who the character is. And no need to include characters from both sets of movies, just the relevant ones.

 

 

 

 

 

And no need to include characters from both sets of movies, just the relevant ones.

So in a comparison between the characters from both trilogies, picking relevant characters from both "sets" for direct comparison is wrong how??

I'm saying this as someone who has a minor issue with that segment somewhat downplaying Qui-Gon's personality (he's mostly just stern and stoic, but shows personality during single moments) myself - what you just wrote is apologetic fanboi poppycock.

 

You are somewhat right about Qui-Gon, but those personality traits are visibly turned down in comparison to even the bumbling robot side-kick from the OT, and despite the slight polemics, RLM drives this point home well enough.

Qui-Gon, like, frees Jar Jar, and lays his hand on Shmi... guess he's compassionate.

Mostly, though, if you proceed from his facial expression and delivery, 80% of the time he's really just "stern and stoic", but sometimes he'll put up a coquettish phony smirk when shitting over Watto, or give off a fatherly smile towards Anakin, or make like an annoyed face at Obi Wan or something, and basically show life-signs of still being a human being.

So I'll grant you that one. Maybe the interviewees really just had seen the movies a while ago, and in that case, them not remembering Qui-Gon's personality would actually say a lot about the characterizations in both trilogies.

Obi Wan sometimes has that fratboyish cocky expression on his face, too, and gives off some snarky one-liners. Although that kinda doesn't tie into the story whatsoever. From what it looks, George might've tried to somehow capture the image of young Obi-Wan being "over-eager" or "youthful", as hinted in EpV, despite doing everything he could to make him the conservative, reserved contrast to his daring, nonchalant mentor.

 

Padme's character in TPM is, indeed, boring and monotone and THAT'S IT. Even MORE SO than in the sequels, where she actually shows some personality and humanity in comparison, rather than being even BLANDER than in I (and doesn't pull it off well).

She makes an annoyed face at Qui-Gon a couple times, looks kinda bit trembling when kneeling before Blessed (or when looking at the hologram broadcast), and smiles and blushes a couple times, but that's it, she's just a cardboard cutout for the entire duration of the film, saying her lines, and all the traits you listed are threadbare cliff notes that are only there because the plot says so.

 

Passionate how?

Strong? Well yea, she's like, an action girl and gives exposition dialogue for the operation. The plot pretty much spells it out, and she still does it all in a horribly monotone manner.

Crafty and prone to subterfuge? Whaaaat?

 

Another deep trait of her personality is that she's a pacifist, but understands that sometimes one needs to fight. Wow. RLM would've made a better point by citing those characterization cliff notes and contrasting them with the OT characters, rather than just focusing on her virtual lack of personality, but really, she was a boring, monotone drone for 99% of the movie and that segment drove the point home. It's like he couldn't even be bothered by Padme's character being obviously "determined to help her people", because she's such a monotone bore.

The ultimate irony in your point is that this same character shows a whole bunch of more so-called "character traits" in II and III, except acted out with noticeably more humanity (one of them being that she's in love with Anakin but realizes they can't do that... then she wants to escape with Anakin instead of ruling the universe with him... she remembers that they need to hide while Anakin's being a hat about that... she doesn't like him murdering the youglings I guess... lol), and apparently you just gloss over all of that to make the absurd point that she had more personality in TPM.

Sorry, I think you're just being nonsensical and controversial for the sake of it.

 

 

__

 

As for your huge issue with the "misogyny", well... you say those things are often covered up in satire and role-play in order to conceal / cowardly expess actually bigoted views. Fine.

They also often aren't, and actually have nothing more to them than being plain ol' jokes. Is there any point in theoretizing about Stoklasa' hidden motives, when on the surface of said reviews, they're really just that... comic relief?

 

No, as far as I'm aware, they don't "satirize" anything. They're just comic relief. In form of comedy that thrives on being "dark", and "shocking". Never pretending to be some kind of profound social commentary. Does that deprive them of justification? Especially in the obvious context of being weird and shocking for the very sake of being weird and shocking comic relief?

At any rate, all of this comes down to whether one appreciates the common phenomenon that is called "black humor". It's humor dealing with dark subjects that actually are as far from laughing matter in real life as possible, yet ends up being funny (to some) in this form.

If you have a problem with it, you should be appalled by RLM just as much as about Chaplin's "Gold Rush" (which plays horrific nightmare fuel material for slapstick), or that gag from the Simpsons where a guy makes jokes about being impaled in an iron maiden. Appalled more by the very notion of black humor rather than RLM specifically. And be appalled by Plinkett being a MURDERER far more than a misogynist.

What if he murdered males in some sort of bizarre parody of Saw or Sea of Love (as opposed to the common trope of serial killers killing women, as in Silence of the Lambs - and you'd have to be a complete ass not to notice the obvious similarity between Plinkett's voice and Buffalo Bill), he wouldn't be a misogynist anymore, but just as much of a monster. Are random misogynistic remarks about "complaining like a woman" really that much of an issue in that light?

 

Which brings me to a related form of humor: Fratire. It's a form of satire / comedy that plays the concepts of manliness, gender stereotypes, misogyny and chauvinism for laughs. Mostly, it's done using a character who is overbearingly manly, misogynistic and all in all a huge asshole.

With those "laughs" derived straight from just how wrong and stupid those things are - the amount of disagreement with / disgust towards character's displayed views and actions is directly proportional to the amusement derived from the material. Exactly BECAUSE it so relies on the "wow, that's so WRONG" sentiment upon reading it.

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=oil

Would you say you have a problem with that kind of humor? Because it's played for laughs without any profound intent (other than maybe making fun of people like that), and there's no indication anywhere that the author actually shares a trace of this attitude. It's just fun.

Whether you can find it funny or not depends on your taste, however, at any rate, it's such a common and widespread type of humor that is NOT used to cover actual bigotry and sadism that your criticism of RLM's humor should've really just boiled down to "he uses black humor; don't like".

 

The main point, however, is that the humor in the RLM review is derived from the seemingly absurd contrast of "nerd picking apart Star Wars" and "disturbing murderer", and how casually the latter crawls its way into the former.

The murders and abductions are seemingly downplayed in their seriousness by being in a Star Wars review (i.e. the woman being confused by the abductor talking about Star Wars) and treated with a casual attitude (the abductor seemingly ignoring the woman being in the middle of his Star Wars review... on Youtube nonetheless), and the "geeky film review" gets a sinister edge from being done by a creepy monster.

The contrast and absurdity of it, and the way it's executed, is what makes up the humor - NOT just the fact that the character abducts women and it's "shocking", but the juxtapposition of the "wrong and shocking" to the "lighthearted and nerdy", and the way it's timed and executed.

 

 

PS:

Can any of that serve as a cover for real bigotry, or real sadistic fantasies? At the end of the day, of course, but the ironic twist is that the same thing that applies to jokes and comedy also applies to non-humorous entertainment ranging anywhere from pure tense entertainment to hamfisted art with serious social messages.

Who's to say James Cameron didn't secretly act out his desire to blow up a bunch of bumbling, helpless Natves, by making the badass villain of his latest one do exactly that, in sequences with lots of fun 'splosions?

How about the annoying smartass that gets killed in Die Hard, sure it's there to establish how bad of a prick the villain is, but the whole movie is also pure entertainment we derive tension and enjoyment from, and even that very scene is done in an entertaining and humorous fashion, while simultaneously being brutal and terrifying.

Who's to say the makers / viewers live out some secret fantasy of shooting an annoying smartass in the head?

How about stuff like American X (a movie interpreted as pro-Nazi by a bunch of idiot heads) with that tough, muscular ass-kicking, eloquent villain protagonist, wouldn't that be a perfect opportunity for the director to disguise his bigoted views in an anti-Nazi film?

Or what about simple comedy routines that make fun of ethnic and gender stereotypes in a lighthearted manner, without any dark or disturbing edge to it? They may not serve as a cover for bigotry, but sure for some stupid, boneheaded prejudices on the part of the comedian.

What if that metal band that assures playing its Satanic, gory theme for entertainment / cheese, actually has a secret fascination for devil worshippers and carnage? Why not?

 

Not to say this kind of paranoia is completely unjustified, but it's no more applicable to RLM than Scary Movie or Event Horizon, or any piece of entertainment that somehow deals with something sinister.

Even exploitation films can sometimes be just that - entertainment. And I don't particularly like exploitation films.

 

Having all that said, whether by themselves or in reaction to complaints, RLM have changed their style and turned these borderline-realistic depictions of violence into hammy, parodistical B movie schlock. The prostitute from the basement has since escaped, put on a leather suit with a hood, acquired a katana and is out to murder Plinkett in a hammy over-the-top manner while pushed by the voice of Emperor Sidious. Whatever controversy there may have been, it's pretty much a thing of the past by now :)

Post
#461987
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

TheBoost said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

Oh what the heck... Qui Gon is wise, underhanded, compassionate but a little ruthless, independent-minded, determined, a little arrogant maybe at times, something of a chancer.

TPM Padme is passionate, strong, crafty and prone to subterfuge, determined, commanding when she chooses to be, gentle when she chooses to be, an odd mixture of maturity with girlishness, devoted to her people, and is into guys two-thirds her age.

 My favorite moment in TPM is when QuiGon and Padme are walking in the desert.

PADME: The queen would not approve

QUI: The queen trusts my judgement

(sneaky bastard knows she's the queen and is practically ribbing her)

PADME: (Little pout): Well I don't approve.

(She's stuck and doesn't like it)

Good actors playing a nuanced little moment. I totally get both characters.

 

Thanks for bringing those up. I felt those two interactions between the two characters were among the very few actually cool character moments in the whole film.

Most of the dialog in TPM is just hollow, boring exposition (save for Palpatine, of course), and that whole thing with Qui-Gon apparently seeing through Amidalun's whole decoy plot and teasing her about it has a nice touch of ambiguity and subtlety.

Post
#461984
Topic
RedLetterMedia's Revenge of Nadine [TPM 108 pg Resp. [RotS Review+RotS Preview+ST'09 Reveiw+Next Review Teaser+2002 Interview+AotC OutTakes+Noooooo! Doc.+SW Examiner Rebuttal+AotC Review+TPM Review]
Time

TheBoost said:

Finally watched some of this.

What the FUCK is wrong with this dude's voice? He sounds like the lawyer from "Idiocracy."

I can't believe that this tool and Confused Mathew are actually not clear about the plot of this flick. My 8 year old nephew understood it just fine. Are there some holes, yes. Are there points that can be nitpicked, yes. But to act as if you plain dont understand the plot is ridiculous.

This dude pulls five minutes out of the idea that the Trade Federation had no way of knowing that Qui-Gon and Obi were Jedis. In a decade I've never heard anyone with their head far enough up their ass to suggest this was even an issue that crossed their mind.

That's when I gave up on it.

 

I know it's been a while and there were responses to this comment, but what the hell.

No, there is nothing to "understand" about this plot. RLM is completely right. The "relevant" plot is that Palpatine uses the Trade guys to advance himself politically, and that apparently this Naboo crisis somehow grows into the Separatist crisis (with no more information given other than Sidious is the chessmaster behind both, and the Trade guys are on board again).

Plinkett got that, and mentioned it repeatedly in his review. The complaint was that this "irrelevant" scheme was THE ENTIRE MOVIE, and nothing was told or shown about the Traders' motivations. And the fact that this movie was basically necessary because Palpatine happened to be a Senator on Naboo, pretty seals the deal on the plot of TPM being a complete total turd.

I wonder what your "8 year old nephew" "understood" about a whole bunch of superfluous nothing.

 

I have issues with some of his minor points (like the fact that Sidious DOES let the Neimoidians know about his political influence without giving away who he is, so him promising them political favours is a valid option), but he's right on the money with the general picture and the majority of the details.

The part with the Jedis was still right about the absurdity of the WAY the Traders concluded the ambassadors were Jedis beyond any doubt, and additionally made fun of the fact that the desert clothes from Tattoine are now the official Jedi uniform. Even moreso, there's a very subtle ridicule of the Jedi appearing to disguise their faces on their way to the waiting room only to take off their hoods in a cool fashion to proceed not disguising their faces. "Maybe it's not a disguise but whatever".

A brilliant little segment (that went on for maybe 20 seconds, nowhere near 5 minutes) about a small detail in the film, among segments focusing on other small details and large plot points. The fact that you even "gave up on it" because of that on your first viewing doesn't speak very highly of you ;)