Regarding Plinkett

So do you think his vids about the prequels still hold up?
I'm starting to disagree more about em, especially the complaint about how there's an abundance of lightsabers and Sam Jackson's casting

All red letter media is garbage so there is your answer.

fpbp

what does that even mean still hold up?
it is not the review that is changing, it is you.

/thread

He's correct that they're disjointed messes with horrible dialogue and incoherent plotlines, but they're still better than the soulless nuWars films.

They still hold up as critiques of the films. The only thing that doesn't hold up is their interpretation of George Lucas as a greedy businessman, or a hands off director. He still had the vision and was self aware about his flaws as a writer/director, but was surrounded by a sea of yes men and fans.

I never agree with them, and I don't particualrly agree with most of their opinions (Jay and Josh being exceptions)
Except all Star Wars film always were.
I don't know what the fuck is the deal with liking the OT so much.

reddit letter media was never right

I don't disagree with their old reviews, but I lost all respect for RLM after they treated TFA with kiddy gloves instead of giving it a thrashing it deserved.

>I don't respect them because they didn't share, thus validate, my opinion

A fat person can't even be trusted to take care of their body, why should I trust them anywhere else?

They pretty much roasted the media for being obsessed about Star Wars having a posh white woman as protagonist, being obsessed with the same villain looking for a doomsday weapon to destroy the world plot, adults getting excited over a movie made for kids, and so on. The movie going experience nowadays is based on media hype instead of the actual film.

You're starting to disagree with them because you are a fucking sheep who is easily swayed by retarded prequelfags on this board

If you fail to realize TFA is objectively a garbage movie, you're as much of a brainlet as le 90s kids that defend prequels. This is not up for discussion.

>NOOOOOOO objective facts!! OBJECTIVE FACTS!! THE FIRST OPINION YOU HEARD IS THE OBJECTIVELY RIGHT ONE!!! CLOSE YOUR EARS, CLOSE YOUR EEEEEAAAARS!!!

>I don't understand how opinions work

They still hold up just fine. The only difference is we have nu-wars now which is 1000x shitter so any complaints about the PT seem like nitpicking in comparison.

It was always nitpicking by rabid OT fans.

It was always nitpicking yes. But even more so now that new new films are out. If plinkett were to nickpick those with the same scrutiny that he did with the PT than the video would be 15 hours long.

A New Hope was the first film I can remembering actually understanding as a kid. It's like an introduction to film language. You know who the good guys are, who the bad guys are, and are fully invested in the action and consequences. ESB and RotJ were more complex, but the characters were established and they followed on from one another tying up loose ends and elaborating on them. (Instead of just dumping them for cheap-shot subversive effect like TLJ did.) If you didn't see the original trilogy as a kid, you wouldn't have the same lightbulb moment and sense of ownership (not in the literal financial sense). If I saw the prequel or nu-trilogy films as a kid I wouldn't have a clue what all the politics was about, I'd just like the lightsabres, pod-racing and space battles. They wouldn't have taught me the basics like the old ones did.

>HUUURRRRRR THERE ARE NO BAD OPINIONS

^remember

>I think maybe perhaps
ok bud

I'm glad I started only liking RLM a week ago. I already hate them.

No, I completely agree.
The kids with the sabers and the battle of geonosis arena are absolutely retarded.
Specially when you consider that they are fighting against blasters and 50 jedi are deflecting bolts, which is a sure way to kill each other.

they hold up in the sense that the prequel trilogy is still a fucking mess that gets some fundamental things about filmmaking and storytelling wrong and that george lucas was an incompotent director.
but the worldbuilding and originality that they exhibited is refreshing compared to the recycled toilet paper of nuWars. sure, they are better (TFA was, TLJ is just as bad as the prequels) in a technical sense, but they are so empty.

And then you grow older and realize that the bad guys are actually the rebels

>they got the universal ruuuuules of flickmaking wrong!!
Imagine being this much of an entry-level pleb.

Star wars is Shit
It was aways shit. It will aways be shit.

imagine posting on Sup Forums and not believing there are rules to filmmaking

Considering that 2 out of the 3 prequels are better than 2 out of the 3 original trilogy movies, I'd say no they don't hold up.

No one HATED the prequels until these faggorts came along and then it was suddenly popular to hate of them even though for the most part they are just as good or better than the original trilogy movies

There aren't rules to filmmaking, there are common guidelines that can be subverted or just plain ignored depending on the director's goal.

>No one HATED the prequels until these faggorts came along
get off my lawn

...

Ok, the rules may not be set in stone but you cant just go out and film random bullshit for 2 hours and expect that to be a movie

Pretty much

Yet I still ended up a Hutt

I see you never watched Baraka, just how much of a pleb are you?

They never held up in the first place. And RLM, like most notable Youtube reviewers are shitty parasites who allowed fame to get to their heads.

Jackson was fucking horrible casting. He's so out of place it's ridiculous. Mace Windu is entirely forgettable.

On the topic of RLM, who does Jay think he's fooling with that giant quaff? It doesn't make you look any taller or make your gigantic forehead look any smaller.

I just hope Mike has the balls to pull TLJ apart. It deserves the scene-by-scene shredding that the prequels got.

No. Revenge of the Sith was a masterpiece.

>No one HATED the prequels until these faggorts came along
This is what millennials honestly believe. I suppose this is why any criticism of the prequels is deflected with "yeah I saw the Plinkett reviews too". Mike really did a number on the poor kids that grew up with and developed an actual attachment to garbage.

He still looks a lot better than he used to. I watched an earlier episode the other day and he almost looks like a different person.

i think current jay is pretty handsome. he pulls off the beard in a way that most modern youtuber males cant, ie he doesnt look like a soyboy.

you've seen him before he used to just keep it all down and look like simple jack now he's going with the trend from the early 2000's and spiking it

Imagine waking up in the morning and deciding that spending your time criticizing the hair of a minor internet celebrity on Sup Forums would be a good use of your time.

I don't think anybody wakes up and makes any decision to do anything like that. It's just something you might say if the thought occurs. Calm down and have a drink of water.

NO KILL YOURSELF

You wish

Sam Jackson was terrible casting. Should have cast Ken Watanabe

He won't do a Plinkett on this one at all.

I assume he still likes money so he most certainly will.

That's why he won't do it, he most likely got bribed by the mouse.

I think their all pretty dead on. A review of a movie doesn't really age like an actual movie does. I agree completely with him about too many lightsabers and Jacksons casting. It would have been more interesting to see lot sof different Jedi weapons, the EU and the TLJ with Praetorian guard and their varied weapons proved it. Jackson isn't well suited to a character like Mace Windu who spends most of the movies sitting on his ass talking in a dull monotone. He should have been a cool criminal badass or something, maybe even a recurring of some kind villain instead.

>He still had the vision and was self aware about his flaws as a writer/director, but was surrounded by a sea of yes men and fans.
This is a total contradiction.

yes
i can rewatch the reviews endlessly and still enjoy the hell out of them

t. contrarian

Going by recent videos they all seem to really dislike it, other than fucking Jack of course, so I wouldn't be surprised if he shits all over it. I'm more excited for that review than any Star Wars film now.

>baby's first unreliable narrator

No. The prequels honestly made me hate star wars.

A funny analogy from my childhood was that I pored over the "Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels" books. I practically memorized them.

But when the equivalent book came out for The Phantom Menace, it was a terrible quality book that literally fell apart in my hands. That is the best metaphor for my experience with the prequels compared to the original movie.

In their immediate review it was pretty fucking clear they hated it, they just weren't going into hysterics the way a lot of people here were. I'm not sure what they were expecting, HitB rarely goes into a lot of detail about a movie, they usually make specific videos for that (namely, Plinkett reviews). But their general first impression was clearly a negative one, Mike even described it as "a nightmare."

The Plinkett reviews for the prequels hold up pretty well, they were able to address and mock both major and minor flaws, plus they did a pretty good job of predicting arguments against what was being said. The people saying Lucas was some visionary with no concern for money are just delusional.

Why can't those people differentiate between their actual selfs and the Plinkett character?
Even though they love tfa, Plinkett should have torn it apart! And Plinkett was the only interesting thing they did.

Are you retarded? Mike is Plinkett. Plinkett's opinion is Mike's opinion.

ANH was the same way in its first rough cut.

Plinkettt and by extension RedLetterMedia is inherently dishonest and anti-factual. Rather than presenting facts and then building opinions on that, RLM instead spouts an opinion and then cherrypicks information and misleadingly post quotes that support that opinion. Even though taking the information in context means something completely different, RLM doesn’t care. They need to support their razor-thin arguments with near falsehoods.

RLM operates much like those liberal talk shows where the audience is well aware of how biased and unfair the host is but continue to consume it. Why? Because it is conveyed through humor. People are willing to swallow lies and falsehoods so long as it entertains them. That’s exactly the crowd RLM goes for. The type who suffer too much ADD to read actual reviews but are still big enough losers that they feel the need to possess some sort of smugness and hate towards what their circlejerk deems is bad.

RLM spent three Plinkett reviews badmouthing George Lucas. They cherrypicked quotes, presented them out of context and then robbed him of all of his accomplishments and made him the sole culprit of all he did wrong. This is not only factually incorrect, but it is also morally disgusting and shows that they’re willing to completely fuck directors over so long as they can entertain their audience of miserable 20 or so losers who want to feel like they’ve accomplished something in life because their RLM overlords told them they could do it better. Well now you’re stuck with Disney Marvel Wars and RLM will never ever point out just how awful they are because they’d be forced to both admit they were wrong and that their legion of Reddit fanboys are clueless sheep for swallowing TFA like it was good.

Plinkett is the divergence into this savage, hostile and malignant timeline.

>In their immediate review it was pretty fucking clear they hated it, they just weren't going into hysterics the way a lot of people here were. I'm not sure what they were expecting, HitB rarely goes into a lot of detail about a movie, they usually make specific videos for that (namely, Plinkett reviews). But their general first impression was clearly a negative one, Mike even described it as "a nightmare."
They also inexplicably said that the fans were all basement dwelling manchildren who deserve to suffer.

>They also inexplicably said that the fans were all basement dwelling manchildren who deserve to suffer.
What the fuck are you talking about? No they didn't.

RLM needs to apologize to Lucas, especially now.

I don't remember that line specifically but it's not untrue. Manchildren do deserve to suffer.

They never said that, were you hallucinating? However, if they said that they'd be right.

>So do you think his vids about the prequels still hold up?

Yeah, they're still the youtube gold-standard for spending an inordinate amount of time ripping a bad film a new asshole.

The quality of the prequels will never change regardless of how good or bad these new films are. Things that are actual problems like Episode I's story making zero fucking sense, or Episode II's romance segments playing out like a highschool play rendition of romeo & juliet starring the sociopath that drowns cats in the janitor's closet, and Episode III's desperate break-neck rush to wrap up the whole story, do anakin's turn, and slot every character into their start positions for Episode IV to complete a bullshit circle for no reason. You also have bad framing, poor green screen choices, terrible fucking scripts, and bad edits to chew over even if you just want to take them apart as mediocre to badly made movies.

>but the prequels did new things and were original!

This was actually addressed in one of the plinkett reviews, I think the AotC ones where he goes over how most of the shit in the prequels is just recycled from the originals, scenes, dialogue, props, etc... But when new stuff does appear it's often cringy and stupid like jar jar, and dexter jetster's 50's diner. The stuff that really felt out of place in a star wars movie. So yeah, they did take risks and went outside of the mold, but those risks failed, often. If you were a child at the beginning of the 2000's and you had no real concept of star wars before the prequels all of this feels more minor because "well this is how star wars was when I got started" but for someone like me who's first introduction to star wars was the special editions in theaters and all the toys and video games and books that came out in the mid 90's the prequels felt like a punch in the face, probably similar to the punch you're feeling now with the disney movies.

>But when new stuff does appear it's often cringy and stupid
This is blatantly false though. They cherrypicked two instances where it didn't work but ignored the countless where it did work. Classic case of RLM doing shit research to support their ass pull arguments. The prequels made Star Wars much richer in world. It's in fact pretty hard to imagine a Star Wars world without the prequel additions now.

We had it for years, it was the old EU.

>makes fun of soyboy consumerists everyday
>defends star wars fanboys

most of the arguments they used against the prequels can also be used against the OT, Samuel L. Jackson? what about sir Alec Guinness? too many lightsabers? what about too many blasters and laser weapons which was all the rage in futuristic films at the time? hate Jar Jar Binks and think he was out of place? what about the stupid bumbling robot and the vacuum cleaner sidekick? oh, according to him his fallacy can be written off because of nostalgia and personal taste

>what about sir Alec Guinness?
How was he miscast? And if you had actually watched the videos you would see that all the arguments he makes were broken down and explained, it wasn't about nostalgia and personal taste. It's not like the Plinkett reviews have high standards for movies, it's just a question of basic competence.

>Samuel L. Jackson? what about sir Alec Guinness?
What does this even mean?

The OT has been nitpicked to death as well, but they generally hold up as better made movies with better characters and scripts than the PT films which is why they don't get as much shit.

The new movies have an entirely different problem where they have this corporate-shallowness and blatant meta quality to them that like someone with a bee-sting allergy either makes them slightly annoying to watch or utterly kills the films for you depending on your disposition.

It would have been really nice if they had just been brave enough to forge a new direction instead of spending a half dozen films jerking off the OT.

>No one HATED the prequels until these faggorts came along
I was 10 years old when Phantom Menace came out. Saw it in theaters and hated it. Please kys.

The last part of his Phantom Menace review is so beautiful. The dramatic music and his wrapping it all up

literally every one of your "comparisons" makes no sense, kid.

had that book too user. what a classic.

Bitch, prequels were hated from day 1. Watch "The People vs. George Lucas".

Alec Guinness was cast in part to appease the suits at fox because all the rest of the cast was nobodies and guinness added some name recognition and respectability to the project. Plinkett's argument is that Sam Jackson was cast because he was the "cool black guy" actor of the period that would draw in a bigger audience. Guiness was well cast for his part, while it took a lot of disbelief suspending to buy a wooden, not well written mace windu as played by sam jackson. That character was actually fucking amazing in the now non-cannon prequel novels, but on screen, yikes.

the videos are enjoyable and make very good points in addition to filler nit picking.

Any movie can be nitpicked if you look that closesly. Despite this, the prequels are still a failure, but at least george tried something new. The new sequels are a mix of straight up rehash and some gratuitous fuck you to the original characters.

So

Star wars: one of the great Movies
Empire strikes back: one of the great Movies
Return: good but the dark influence of the george the dumb is starting to show

Prequels: silly and stupid, but the heart of dumb George Lucas the dumb was in the right place

New star wars: worthless rehashes with some silliness (mary sue main character) and some gratuitous fuck you (for no reasons) to Luke

I was 12, the playground consensus was "this is neat but it doesn't feel like star wars, let's go back to playing with our action-fleet x-wings and a-wings and tie-interceptors, these new ships are stupid."

>Samuel L. Jackson? what about sir Alec Guinness?
So Alec Guinness was included in the OT to appeal to the urban market?

>too many lightsabers? what about too many blasters and laser weapons which was all the rage in futuristic films at the time?
Blasters aren't lightsabers. Blasters are the standard weapon for the "military" in the OT, which is why lightsabers are rare and connected to something more ancient and mythical. What point are you even trying to make?

>hate Jar Jar Binks and think he was out of place? what about the stupid bumbling robot and the vacuum cleaner sidekick?
Plinkett barely even mentions Jar Jar Binks aside from in passing because the Phantom Menace has much deeper story and structure problems than a bad comic relief character.

Your entire post is fucking awful and filled with false equivalencies and yet you're trying to complain about Plinkett's arguments? Fucking hilarious.

OT is flick garbo that aged horribly, liked by asinine whiners
PT is pure kino that aged perfectly, like fine wines

Yes, but I still enjoy TPM.

The new sequel movies are really well crafted, it would just be nice if they would get off the rehash wagon, hire some good writers, and do something fucking new with all this quality film-making.

>but for someone like me who's first introduction to star wars was the special editions in theaters
I'm sorry to hear that user.

>The new sequel movies are really well crafted

I didn't know any better at the time so it was all good, later on I got a better appreciation for just how how badly the new additions fucked the edit of the original film, and just clashed tonally for all the rest of it.

It was neat to get a giant surge of new merch and toys for those releases tho, had all the micro machines and the bigger models, and we got shadows of the empire around that period as well as a Lucas-approved EU multimedia addition.

You don't see anyone bitching about the sets, lighting, framing, compositing, editing, props, puppets, or the sound in these TLJ threads. It's always the writing, the acting, the character choices, and occasional bad greenscreen stuff.

Just about everything is bad in the prequels by comparison.

What are youtube channels that aren't garbage?
I know Every Frame A Paiting but I need more

I'm pretty sure I remember TFA threads complaining about the extremely bland sets, pros, and JJ signature garbage like stupid lens flares everywhere, disorienting closeups and jump shots.

It's just a poorly done movie in almost every aspect, the sound design was cool in some parts but the music was completely forgettable.

You can't just call an authorial narrator something else because you want to, go back to middle school. Star Wars was as deep as a puddle, you must be plagued by cognitive dissonance if you seriously try to justify that the story was any deeper than it appears to be at first glance.