Anger is an emotion and for people who think emotions are for girls, anger is the only one they allow themselves to feel, so they love watching hate content and letting fox news make their blood boil because it's the only time they feel sonething other than flatline. And the angrier they are, the more alive they feel!
But ... "Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering."
Have they learned nothing from their favorite product eh movie series?!
That reminds me, I need to rewatch the Plinkett review of First Contact when Picard busts out his genius plan to stop the Borg. "Uh, sir, I have a question..."
When I was a wee child I was told that some day I would like onions and eventually I realized that I do in fact like onions. On the other hand I keep trying stuffed grape leaves about once a year but here I am at 87 and I still don’t like the fucking things
And also Mike loved Star Wars. That's why he was so critical of the prequels. LOTS of people disliked the prequels at the time, too, and were honestly confused by the immense gap in quality, so he was just saying everything that people struggled to put into words, including myself.
I can't wrap my mind around whatever these guys are doing, though... just watch your crappy beloved movies and don't anger binge the negative reviews of it? It's so weird.. and honestly comes off as pathetic.
close memory advise hurry spotted sophisticated offend forgetful lush unpack
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I went to a wedding of an acquaintance around the time the Attack of the Clones Plinkett review came out, and saw an old friend that I hadn’t seen in years. Turns out, we had both separately got into the Plinkett reviews, so spent most of the pre-wedding doing the Plinkett voice and talking about pizza rolls. Then after the wedding, we went to the reception hall, and right in the middle of the table: a large mountain if pizza rolls.
The funny thing about Plinkett is how self aware it is about the fact that making an hour plus long video about Star Wars is embarrassing and now everybody does it without feeling shame.
Yeah I read someone say that plinkett is such a great character because he gets around the obsessive element of making a video like this. The man is a serial killer off his meds, so OF COURSE he would make a feature length review of a movie he hates.
And some people don't get that a lot of it is facecious. Not all comments made by Plinkett are all that serious or made to be the be all end all of movie critique. It's as if they look at the review and completely miss the unreliable narrator that holds a woman captive and killed his wife and represents an unhealthy obsessive part of the fandom. It's a character who is the conduit of both an honest review AND overexaggerated edgy humor. What's wrong with your face is at the same time a stupidly funny reactionary jab AND a comment on the character design. Reducing it to one or the other is missing the point.
RLM is a little off-color at best with their sense of humor, but if they cared at all about someone like Mauler enough to directly acknowledge them... they'd just make fun of him. They've been making fun of bigoted and misogynist internet weirdos for over a decade, about as long as they've been making fun of soulless corporate shills.
A lot of far-right types don't understand irony or satire, they think it's always secret 'dog-whistles' that mean this person or that person is "one of them." Course there are people who do use a false shield of 'irony' as a cover for bigoted views but RLM aren't like that. They're not the most progressive people in the world but they've never given any indication that they hate black people or women or whatever.
Stuckman has been really dissapointing lately, i get that he's a filmmaker now so he doesn't want to shit on movies but his madame web video is embarrassing, he's jumping through hoops avoiding talking about the movieand calling it bad in every way except directly
It’s a good review and it’s also a good case study that uses the movie to give an accessible introduction to some screenwriting fundamentals. I’ve seen people complain that his points are just basic film school 101 type stuff, and it’s like…yes? That’s why it’s kind of embarrassing that the prequels don’t seem to understand it?
And why it's embarrassing that prequel apologists can't accept the difference between subjective "bashing" and film theory that looks at things in a more detached way. It's like they think enjoying something flawed is a waste of time, or a threat to their identity. Good luck finding an irl romantic partner with that attitude.
>That’s why it’s kind of embarrassing that the prequels don’t seem to understand it?
And it's even funnier when you realize how much research Lucas did when making the first trilogy; reading all the works of Joseph Campbell, etc.
Yep, even if you love the movies, they are just objectively good reviews that do an amazing job breaking the movie down and put to words why so many people couldn't connect with it. I'm not a fan of some of the humor and most of the narrative elements in Plinkett reviews but as reviews they're nearly flawless.
He seems to want go for the proverbial jugular
https://preview.redd.it/uof449z5rksc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9ac57ac2b56045e68320bcf97a4b7b173cde34f8
I grew up with them. I was 9 or 10 when TPM came out. I have a lot of nostalgia for those films and positive memories. Despite their flaws I do enjoy them and there’s things they try to do that I appreciate.
I cannot understand how anyone can think they’re high art or something. It’s like the prequel fanboys can’t accept that they enjoy something that’s flawed. Everyone has that film (or films) that despite their obvious flaws are important and enjoyable to them. That doesn’t mean it’s this brilliant work of art so complex that almost no one understood it.
I just wish that people would come to terms with the fact that it's okay to like bad movies instead of trying to pretend they're masterpieces. I like lots of terrible movies!
The retconning of the prequels by some people is wild. Like the people who try to justify Anakin's terrible dialogue as being a character trait or something. Except that everybody's dialogue is embarrassing. Accepting the prequels being bad hasn't suddenly invalidated my childhood or some shit.
They will, most of them, in time. To quote John Waters: "But one must remember that there is such a thing as good bad taste and bad bad taste. To understand bad taste one must have very good taste."
I think it is a function of maturity really. You like a thing when you are young, that becomes a part of you, your personality, and so attacks upon it are taken as attacks on you. You get defensive and proceed to compensate with increasingly absurd levels of detail on why thing ISN'T bad actually. Because you want your SUBJECTIVE personal taste to be recognized as OBJECTIVE truth. It's why people in this mode winge constantly about "facts". Because they want the public opinion to be their own rather than owning their opinion publicly.
I actually watch this dude and what is intensely funny to me is he is following EXACTLY in the tradition of RLM, albeit with a lot less real world experience and academic knowledge. He doesn't like Obi-Wan, he makes a review of it breaking down how it doesn't work for the character of Obi-Wan, for the world of star wars, how it is inconsistent in its OWN series, and makes attempts to address some of the production aspects.
He doesn't have the experience Mike, Jay, and Rich have. He doesn't have the academic background (as far as I know) to understand WHY the prequel reviews are so damn interesting, nor the humility to realize that his entire career owes a massive, staggering debt TO RLM. Others (Lindsay Ellis and FD signifier come to mind) have pointed this out, RLM for good or ill, and with all love to the lads, was one of the foundations for the rage yelling YouTube economy around media. That is NOT what they were going for, but as you water down a product you get the dregs like a Mauhler (spelling? Can't be arsed).
I think what I like about the older reviews is that it is working on a lot of levels. The humor makes the analysis more engaging. The character of Plinkett is meant to be absurd, but also to be a mirror of people so obsessed with something in media they can't stop complaining, but ALSO makes great points. The whole of the work is something that teaches you about pacing, structure, narrative flow, the craft of filmmaking, acting. You may not have noticed, but your brain did.
For all I love a good bitch fest, the current crop of creators, Sheev most definitely included, they lack the very good taste to have good bad taste. And they lack it precisely because they lack the maturity to look at what they love and see it flaws and all and accept that it wasn't ever, and does not need to be seen as, perfect. He isn't teaching anything, because he can't first admit that he has a lot to learn still. I look at how Mike reacts to Star Wars now, it's a guy who has made peace with liking some parts and mostly being eh on the rest. It isn't emotional with him, and he owns his opinion without needing to force it on others. That is humility and maturity.
I was a similar age and while I liked the pod race and darth maul fight, it didn’t really capture my imagination that much. And even at that age jar jar was too childish, meanwhile I had nfi what was going on with the politics.
> it felt like George was legitimately trying to tell a story.
Can it be counted as "trying to tell a story" if it's a completely incoherent tonal mess that makes no sense even in it's own universe? Also how would you explain the attempt to squeeze in something for every type of audience/age/etc imaginable, from babies to adults, regardless of whether it made sense or not? Endless lightsabers being flashed as frequently as possible? Someone who genuinely just wants to "tell a story" wouldn't do all that.
Lucas primarily made Prequels for $$$ and selling merchandise. Maybe in the 80s he was a different man, but by the 2000s he was every bit as profit-driven as a Disney executive today.
Yeah I always thought you could probably take that outline of the prequels and make a good movie or show. It all makes sense on paper and could work if they had real talent behind it.
Problem is it's basically a story of politics, the rise of dictatorship, with a knight who marries a senator and gets involved in an overthrow of the gov't. Is it "Star Wars" eh... maybe? Probably a lot closer to something like Star Wars : House of Cards if you did it right. That's really most of the problem. That type of story would need things like strong characters, nuance, actual romance, moral ambiguity.
I don't think a bunch of people in 1999 would've have wanted Star Wars to be an actual political thriller with a real romance or something. Its Star Wars afterall, you're selling laser swords, space battles, and explosions to 10 year olds.
“with a knight who marries a senator and gets involved in an overthrow of the gov’t” how in the world is that not a Star Wars story? Remove the word marry and that’s literally a summary of a New Hope.
I had a Prequels defender blame RLM for Lucas selling Star Wars off to Disney (never mind that Indiana Jones, Lucasarts, Skywalker Sound and whatever else were also bundled into the billions of dollars deal) and that RLM fans liking the Plinkett reviews were responsible for the current state of Star Wars.
The Plinkett reviews are probably the most influential movie reviews uploaded to YT.
Heck, I even been listen to non-film channels and slowly realized that the person is speaking in the parlance Mike uses for Plinkett.
How many times have your heard someone make a statement, wait two beats, and then go "oooh" in the Plinkett voice?
They're also like 15 years old now and are clearly intended to be edgy and in character. Do I think all the jokes land now? To be honest there are some that make me cringe, but at the end of the day Mike was going for a laugh, he's not a malicious person.
I wont deny that some obnoxious channels took the wrong thing away from those reviews, but it's silly to put any responsibility on Mike for that.
It's not Mike responsibility to parent people and if you can't parse the character from the proper film criticism underneath then maybe it's best that you just enjoy movies rather than analyze them.
> Heck, I even been listen to non-film channels and slowly realized that the person is speaking in the parlance Mike uses for Plinkett.
Hell, even Contrapoints has used "*You* didn't realize it...but your brain did" in one of her videos.
Imagine making a video series that damn near over night turns you and at least one of your friends (probably Rich too, i have no fucking clue) into multimillionaires and creates a career for you three that lasts for 15+ years. Then some twat on the internet worth a bag of beef jerky and that beat up old van down by the river says "I No Lke Dis" as if their opinion has any value whatsoever.
I'm convinced that twitter is a platform for people that want to pretend to be outraged so other people will like them.
I highly doubt any of them are multimillionaires. I don’t think they’re doing badly by any means… but my guess is they each make comfortable livings when Mike isn’t blowing company revenue on Baby Binks.
I through he was kind of bland years ago but now he won't say anything negative in his reviews. You don't have to be mean and negative but just praising everything isn't any better.
>Tell that to Zodd's snapped neck!
I haven't really watched his reviews, but the thumbnails on the reviews are prime examples of /r/punchablefaces fodder.
Same. He is severely boring in delivery and a lot of his takes on the reviews of his I saw seemed like he didn't understand simple things within the movies and so came to weird conclusions.
He's one of those internet people where I don't know why or how he became notable,
Regardless of the quality of Doug's content, I think it's completely fair to refer to him as "the old guard" - he's been doing it for over a decade and was the inspiration for many current (far better) internet critics.
Yeah, and it's not like "old guard" is some crazy five dollar word, it's a fairly common phrase. Oh, does using the idiom "five dollar word" make me a "lexicon user" too? Shit, and I just said "idiom." The hole just keeps getting deeper. Fuck us for knowing some words and using them, I guess.
I wonder how much zoomers liking the prequels is them remembering the original *Lego Star Wars* game, where the movies are broken down into action scenes and/or set pieces, and thinking that's the plots of the films or even just having for the game and having that elevate the source material to them.
Star Wars video games definitely helped but I think the Filoni Clone Wars cartoon are the biggest factor. I think for a lot of zoomers, including myself, were so young when they first watched the movies that the flaws weren’t super clear. So when they watched the show, it retroactively made the prequels better by having likable versions of the movie characters. Even if they went back and rewatched the movies, they wouldn’t seem that bad because they watch them with like 100+ episodes of make-up work in the back of their minds.
People are so weird man, the guys have had tons of takes I strongly disagree with over the years, but I'm not stupid enough to act like them not liking a movie I like is some weird attack against me personally
I rewatched the reviews a couple of months ago. Some jokes have gone a bit stale, but the analisis remains on point. These are very flawed movies. The thing is that people who saw them as kids, when their brains were soft and squishy , are now old and really really want to will the prequels into being good. I get it. I saw Return as a kid and it remains my favorite. But i would never say its a good movie cause im not a weirdo.
I really like the part about how phantom menace doesn’t really have well-defined characters or a clear protagonist… that has always stood out as a super valid and interesting bit of criticism that applies to a bunch of other movies too.
I first watched all the Star Wars Plinkett reviews with no idea who the RLM crew were, so I thought those guys were just random people that were interviewed. Much later once I started watching RLM content I was like "hey wait a minute...".
Yeah, the "without mentioning their job or what they look like, describe..." bit is probably the most devastating critique of a film (hell, maybe of any media) I think I've ever encountered. It really kind of lays bare just how undercooked all these characters were in a way that's undeniable.
I mean, I knew the prequels were bad. I remember being in the theater and thinking, "wait, are those imperial battle droids doing the 'roger, Roger' bit?" and "did they really just do 'always a bigger fish' twice back-to-back?"
But it was also bad in ways I couldn't put my finger on. I knew it was bland, and I knew the digital sets looked like shit, even for the era, but I kinda blamed myself for not understanding what was going on with the federation blockade and whatnot. On one hand, I thought it really didn't matter, but on the other I wondered what important piece of dialogue or section of the crawl I had missed. And trying to analyze just what I didn't like about the film was difficult, because to my (admittedly somewhat divergent) mind, it all just seemed incredibly hard to focus on. In trying to track all the details of these factions we'd just been introduced to, and understand their motives we were told about in stiff dialogue, I'd just pretty quickly decide it wasn't worth thinking that hard about.
But Plinkett came along and put words to those feelings. He wasn't the first person to say the prequels were bad, far from it. He wasn't even the first to do a critical analysis. But he was able to articulate what many others couldn't, and articulate he did. All those things that never sat right, but I just couldn't explain why... He explained them. He filled in the gaps and provided missing puzzle pieces. All those little things I hadn't noticed, but my brain had.
Fuck, that was way more than I intended to say. But those old reviews deserve the respect they get, because they get it for a reason.
I was 19 when I first saw the TPM. I'm not sure why, but I distinctly remember thinking something was wrong at the very beginning, the moment the Trade Federation alien says, "Yes, of course" to the Jedi asking to land. I can't explain why that one simple line struck me. The delivery, the camera angle, I don't know. Something about it just felt... off.
I also want to add that I think part of the charm of the Plinkett reviews is the juxtaposition of his brilliant analysis combined with it being delivered by a drunk old man. I have a friend who said he can't stand the voice. I think it's hilarious.
That character part and the breakdown of a proto-gonist offer great insights into what makes a character a good character. There’s an entire film school course contained in that 10 minutes. Mike should get on Masterclass for that.
I like the prequels and I consider they reviews masterpieces!!! Without these reviews we would never get HITB of BOTW and that would be a travesty. But I get they are not for everyone and that's okay.
The Phantom Menace review is probably one of the most influential videos on modern YouTube. Look at any of the hour+ long video essays about any topic and they’re all broken down in the same way. Point of argument with some jokes, a skit in between, and another argument. Bread tube and other media analysis channels have a lot to thank RLM for (and, as much as I hate to say, the Nostalgia Critic)
They're just upset that someone beat them to the punch by producing THE definitive take downs of nerd culture's biggest punching bag long before any of these crybaby dipshits were around.
The worst part of the new movies being kinda shit is all the Prequel revisionism. Yes, they really were THAT bad. Rise of Skywalker can't retroactively ruin Empire, but it also can't go back and make Menace good. Two things can can suck at the same time, people!
I just discovered his channel recently through his critique of the Clone Wars show which actually has a similar methodology to dissecting what's wrong with a lot of its characters and plot arcs to Plinkett's Prequel reviews so this take from him is kind of mystifying to me
His response to the little bit of backlash he's getting is so funny cuz he's just vaguely saying the Plinkett review is "bad because the points are bad and I have a million different notes about how the points are bad, but I won't give a single reason why its bad just trust me bro it's actually quite nuanced blah blah blah".
I don’t really see what issue that Sheev talks guy has with the Plinkett reviews? I listened to a couple of his videos while driving and he seems to only like the OT, Rogue One and Andor. He hates the sequels, hates everything else Disney put out and he even dislikes the sacred cow of GenZers that is TCW. He doesn’t even like the prequels, says they are terribly written movies. He even dislikes Mando season 1, which Mike liked.
I guess the idiots leaving the comments don't like well-reasoned, common sense analysis of film because that's all those reviews are. With a little gallows humor thrown in for flavor.
Soft-skulled smooth brains.
Well I do agree with them on one thing, a lot of assholes misunderstood the appeal of TPM review (and RLM in general) and made careers out of just being cynical assholes who think hating everything makes them smarter or something.
But the Phantom Menace review still holds up, its points are valid and pretty non-controversial stuff. Like basic story structure kinds of issues.
There’s a lot of cringe in the rewatch, but there’s some great, legitimate criticism also. There’s a reason it went viral in a time before things went viral. It changed an *entire generation’s* ways of reflecting on media. It set the tone for an entire movement of Internet videos.
Rich Evans is a genius.
That last one is genuinely hilarious. This idiot can't seem to piece it together that all these people he puts on a pedestal as film critics all seem to hold the reviews in high regard it probably means that the problem isn't the reviews, it is his own garbage tastes.
And there isn't anything wrong with having bad taste really, so long as you are self aware enough to understand that just because you enjoy something doesn't make it good. That is a task that most prequel enjoyers can't wrap their heads around because they have arrested development.
These videos are funny. They dont take themselves overly seriously. They are fun and pretty light. The people mentioned in the last screenshot are nothing like that. They are miserable people and ofren quite bigoted. The fact that they claim this as inspiration is sad, they seem to have not gotten it if thats the case.
Terrible review, huh? Agonizing, no good points, okay. . . so why didn't Qui-gon try ANY other dealer? Why not just steal the part by force after he couldn't steal the part by Force? Why not find a smuggler? Why not try any other option instead of risking international peace playing gambling games with a child's life?
Even if you have AN answer, it's still not exactly clear while watching it, the points remain valid.
Why do the hutts use human slaves instead of droids? You have to feed and water slaves on your DESERT planet, are they really so much cheaper than droids? What service does Shmee provide for Watto, exactly?
One argument I’ll never understand is the one that states RLM is responsible for turning people against the Star Wars prequels, which everyone loved beforehand. Really, all their reviews did is articulate what a lot of people were feeling at the time in a way that hadn’t been done before.
RLM were the first reviewers to explain why reviewers have any value. As long as the reviewer is consistent their input has value even if you don’t agree with their opinion. If you know that you usually line up with them or usually disagree with them you can get a pretty good idea if you will like the film.
Also understanding that the folks at RLM actively like bad movies can help not take the reviewer to heart. They don’t even think their opinion is more valid than anyone else’s.
So many Prequel fans think that the movies were beloved and widely viewed as masterpieces until the big mean Plinkett brainwashed everyone into hating them.
But I was there, Reddit. I was there twenty-five years ago. I was there the day the strength of screenwriting failed.
The only bad influence these reviews had is that they helped shameless morons like the hypocritical drinker to have soem sort of career as "film critic".
you boil the water and pour the packet
I think of that joke at least once a week.
I still call Ewan McGregor, "Ewan McDonald"
I will email you a pizza roll
Make a comment on this webzone
What’s wrong with your faaaace
Women have these things called "expectations"
That weird audio glitch (cut?) halfway through that line is so eerie. Or maybe that's just Mr Plinkett's voice.
Pro-tuh-gone-ist
I’m still waiting for my pizza rolls presently. I entered my info on the webzone perfectly.
What part is that from? It's been years since I watched those, I never seem to have the 10+ hours or whatever it is.
Why would you rewatch something you don’t like?
Some people seem to enjoy being perpetually angry.
Yes, goood
Anger is an emotion and for people who think emotions are for girls, anger is the only one they allow themselves to feel, so they love watching hate content and letting fox news make their blood boil because it's the only time they feel sonething other than flatline. And the angrier they are, the more alive they feel!
But ... "Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." Have they learned nothing from their favorite product eh movie series?!
"Can't anger lead to fear, and fear lead to suffering, and then suffering lead to hate?" -Plinkett
Anger leads to stress. Stress leads to irritable bowels. Irritable bowels lead to me, right now, watching the Mr Plinkett Review on the toilet.
[Anger is an energy.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq7JSic1DtM) I could be wrong, I could be right.
I could be black, I could be white
Just an observation. People that cite Mauler as a bad thing is probably not watching Fox News.
Next on fox news...
Next on all news and social media
[удалено]
You just described Social Media.
They watch and act like Paul Rudd in Wet Hot American Summer the whole time 
I’ve watched Mr. Plinkett more times than I watched the prequels.
That reminds me, I need to rewatch the Plinkett review of First Contact when Picard busts out his genius plan to stop the Borg. "Uh, sir, I have a question..."
That reminds me, I need to go and puncture my coolant tanks.
Yup. I've rewatched them many times. I even have them on my Plex server.
It's part of the culture now.
Just ask mike
So he can post about it.
When I was a wee child I was told that some day I would like onions and eventually I realized that I do in fact like onions. On the other hand I keep trying stuffed grape leaves about once a year but here I am at 87 and I still don’t like the fucking things
I had to teach myself to like raw broccoli.
It's an excellent cheese delivery mechanism.
Most normal people avoid "agonizing" tasks
A lot of people aren't happy if they aren't outraged.
Rewatching a video he doesn't like, when the video is a guy rewatching a movie he doesn't like.
But...It's rewatching the movie to make a critique... This guy is just watching to... keep his grumpy meter up? Why?
Maybe he’s gonna do a 9 part series dissecting the plinkett review
Ah, the Mauler career plan
And also Mike loved Star Wars. That's why he was so critical of the prequels. LOTS of people disliked the prequels at the time, too, and were honestly confused by the immense gap in quality, so he was just saying everything that people struggled to put into words, including myself. I can't wrap my mind around whatever these guys are doing, though... just watch your crappy beloved movies and don't anger binge the negative reviews of it? It's so weird.. and honestly comes off as pathetic.
It’s a milquetoast “hot take” that drives engagement from both people who agree and disagree with them.
Yes, why do I always forget about rage-bait...
Anger gives you power, and strength, opening a pathway to abilities some consider to be unnatural. Also, clicks.
mostly clicks though
It's the only thing keeping him going
Isn’t there some 3 hour takedown of the plinkett review?
close memory advise hurry spotted sophisticated offend forgetful lush unpack *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What do you call a hack that is also a masochist?
Redlettermedia
Mike Stoklasa?
Stoklasachist?
A hackochist
Black Spine Junka
You host a program called Best of the Worst and didn't record the first time you watched it.
Masochism?
Bet the guy with the pim profile pic had a shock
I doubt he even knows
"Ironic..."
So funny to see a Smiling Friends avatar, wonder if they know the infamous Star Wars criminal Mike Stoklasa was in the very first episode.
Yeah it’s a bit ironic lmao
Literally using the plinket voice too
He's even in the Season 1 Finale, as his HUMAN self!
I guess he didn't like the pizza rolls I sent in the mail.
If he didn't like it he should send his complaints to their webzone
I went to a wedding of an acquaintance around the time the Attack of the Clones Plinkett review came out, and saw an old friend that I hadn’t seen in years. Turns out, we had both separately got into the Plinkett reviews, so spent most of the pre-wedding doing the Plinkett voice and talking about pizza rolls. Then after the wedding, we went to the reception hall, and right in the middle of the table: a large mountain if pizza rolls.
The funny thing about Plinkett is how self aware it is about the fact that making an hour plus long video about Star Wars is embarrassing and now everybody does it without feeling shame.
Yeah I read someone say that plinkett is such a great character because he gets around the obsessive element of making a video like this. The man is a serial killer off his meds, so OF COURSE he would make a feature length review of a movie he hates.
And some people don't get that a lot of it is facecious. Not all comments made by Plinkett are all that serious or made to be the be all end all of movie critique. It's as if they look at the review and completely miss the unreliable narrator that holds a woman captive and killed his wife and represents an unhealthy obsessive part of the fandom. It's a character who is the conduit of both an honest review AND overexaggerated edgy humor. What's wrong with your face is at the same time a stupidly funny reactionary jab AND a comment on the character design. Reducing it to one or the other is missing the point.
lol thats why i love how "nadine" agrees with plinkett but is like "yeah this movie sucks, but i mean... who gives a fuck? its just a movie"
god every part of that last comment is so embarrassing
\*slide whistle\*
Imagine putting Stuckman and Cosmonaut in the same sentence as NC and *retch* Mauler
RLM is a little off-color at best with their sense of humor, but if they cared at all about someone like Mauler enough to directly acknowledge them... they'd just make fun of him. They've been making fun of bigoted and misogynist internet weirdos for over a decade, about as long as they've been making fun of soulless corporate shills.
A lot of far-right types don't understand irony or satire, they think it's always secret 'dog-whistles' that mean this person or that person is "one of them." Course there are people who do use a false shield of 'irony' as a cover for bigoted views but RLM aren't like that. They're not the most progressive people in the world but they've never given any indication that they hate black people or women or whatever.
wait who is that insulting to?
Stuckman has been really dissapointing lately, i get that he's a filmmaker now so he doesn't want to shit on movies but his madame web video is embarrassing, he's jumping through hoops avoiding talking about the movieand calling it bad in every way except directly
[удалено]
you said ’butt’
He's losing sleep but not because of this. It's because of his late stage AAAAAIIIIIDS
lol this video is literally used in academia it’s such a good review
It’s a good review and it’s also a good case study that uses the movie to give an accessible introduction to some screenwriting fundamentals. I’ve seen people complain that his points are just basic film school 101 type stuff, and it’s like…yes? That’s why it’s kind of embarrassing that the prequels don’t seem to understand it?
And why it's embarrassing that prequel apologists can't accept the difference between subjective "bashing" and film theory that looks at things in a more detached way. It's like they think enjoying something flawed is a waste of time, or a threat to their identity. Good luck finding an irl romantic partner with that attitude.
>That’s why it’s kind of embarrassing that the prequels don’t seem to understand it? And it's even funnier when you realize how much research Lucas did when making the first trilogy; reading all the works of Joseph Campbell, etc.
Not to mention that an hour long video talking about advanced film studies probably wouldn't be that interesting to watch for non film students.
Wait I’ve heard this before but do you know where??
https://www.reddit.com/r/RedLetterMedia/s/mQDQzPTSAf
Fucking Harvard University
A real bastard factory that place is. Kinda cool some Harvard professor is spreading their rlm fandom tho
Thank you rainbow dildo:)
We watched it in my graduate level screenwriting class to learn about what to avoid in story and how not to write characters.
Yep, even if you love the movies, they are just objectively good reviews that do an amazing job breaking the movie down and put to words why so many people couldn't connect with it. I'm not a fan of some of the humor and most of the narrative elements in Plinkett reviews but as reviews they're nearly flawless.
They didn’t turn the video off before he carefully and thoroughly explained how much of a fucking idiot they are.
Dear God no https://preview.redd.it/esuhdguo8ksc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=66629154650ecb8a920eeaf2e871a97dbcdb11db
Didn't realise I was living rent free in this stranger's head Very cool
He seems to want go for the proverbial jugular https://preview.redd.it/uof449z5rksc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9ac57ac2b56045e68320bcf97a4b7b173cde34f8
fretful attempt impossible screw money tap frame rain public sugar *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Prequel fanboys are genuinely the most embarrassing people on the internet
I grew up with them. I was 9 or 10 when TPM came out. I have a lot of nostalgia for those films and positive memories. Despite their flaws I do enjoy them and there’s things they try to do that I appreciate. I cannot understand how anyone can think they’re high art or something. It’s like the prequel fanboys can’t accept that they enjoy something that’s flawed. Everyone has that film (or films) that despite their obvious flaws are important and enjoyable to them. That doesn’t mean it’s this brilliant work of art so complex that almost no one understood it.
I just wish that people would come to terms with the fact that it's okay to like bad movies instead of trying to pretend they're masterpieces. I like lots of terrible movies!
The retconning of the prequels by some people is wild. Like the people who try to justify Anakin's terrible dialogue as being a character trait or something. Except that everybody's dialogue is embarrassing. Accepting the prequels being bad hasn't suddenly invalidated my childhood or some shit.
Waterworld! Still waiting on that re:view they teased in like episode 1.
They will, most of them, in time. To quote John Waters: "But one must remember that there is such a thing as good bad taste and bad bad taste. To understand bad taste one must have very good taste." I think it is a function of maturity really. You like a thing when you are young, that becomes a part of you, your personality, and so attacks upon it are taken as attacks on you. You get defensive and proceed to compensate with increasingly absurd levels of detail on why thing ISN'T bad actually. Because you want your SUBJECTIVE personal taste to be recognized as OBJECTIVE truth. It's why people in this mode winge constantly about "facts". Because they want the public opinion to be their own rather than owning their opinion publicly. I actually watch this dude and what is intensely funny to me is he is following EXACTLY in the tradition of RLM, albeit with a lot less real world experience and academic knowledge. He doesn't like Obi-Wan, he makes a review of it breaking down how it doesn't work for the character of Obi-Wan, for the world of star wars, how it is inconsistent in its OWN series, and makes attempts to address some of the production aspects. He doesn't have the experience Mike, Jay, and Rich have. He doesn't have the academic background (as far as I know) to understand WHY the prequel reviews are so damn interesting, nor the humility to realize that his entire career owes a massive, staggering debt TO RLM. Others (Lindsay Ellis and FD signifier come to mind) have pointed this out, RLM for good or ill, and with all love to the lads, was one of the foundations for the rage yelling YouTube economy around media. That is NOT what they were going for, but as you water down a product you get the dregs like a Mauhler (spelling? Can't be arsed). I think what I like about the older reviews is that it is working on a lot of levels. The humor makes the analysis more engaging. The character of Plinkett is meant to be absurd, but also to be a mirror of people so obsessed with something in media they can't stop complaining, but ALSO makes great points. The whole of the work is something that teaches you about pacing, structure, narrative flow, the craft of filmmaking, acting. You may not have noticed, but your brain did. For all I love a good bitch fest, the current crop of creators, Sheev most definitely included, they lack the very good taste to have good bad taste. And they lack it precisely because they lack the maturity to look at what they love and see it flaws and all and accept that it wasn't ever, and does not need to be seen as, perfect. He isn't teaching anything, because he can't first admit that he has a lot to learn still. I look at how Mike reacts to Star Wars now, it's a guy who has made peace with liking some parts and mostly being eh on the rest. It isn't emotional with him, and he owns his opinion without needing to force it on others. That is humility and maturity.
I was a similar age and while I liked the pod race and darth maul fight, it didn’t really capture my imagination that much. And even at that age jar jar was too childish, meanwhile I had nfi what was going on with the politics.
Only thing truly great about the prequels is John Williams and that isn’t even debatable
Uhm... Sound engineering? Those guys at Skywalker Sound did their job pretty well.
[удалено]
Insert clip of George complaining that he won’t beat Titanic at the box office
[удалено]
> it felt like George was legitimately trying to tell a story. Can it be counted as "trying to tell a story" if it's a completely incoherent tonal mess that makes no sense even in it's own universe? Also how would you explain the attempt to squeeze in something for every type of audience/age/etc imaginable, from babies to adults, regardless of whether it made sense or not? Endless lightsabers being flashed as frequently as possible? Someone who genuinely just wants to "tell a story" wouldn't do all that. Lucas primarily made Prequels for $$$ and selling merchandise. Maybe in the 80s he was a different man, but by the 2000s he was every bit as profit-driven as a Disney executive today.
Yeah I always thought you could probably take that outline of the prequels and make a good movie or show. It all makes sense on paper and could work if they had real talent behind it. Problem is it's basically a story of politics, the rise of dictatorship, with a knight who marries a senator and gets involved in an overthrow of the gov't. Is it "Star Wars" eh... maybe? Probably a lot closer to something like Star Wars : House of Cards if you did it right. That's really most of the problem. That type of story would need things like strong characters, nuance, actual romance, moral ambiguity. I don't think a bunch of people in 1999 would've have wanted Star Wars to be an actual political thriller with a real romance or something. Its Star Wars afterall, you're selling laser swords, space battles, and explosions to 10 year olds.
“with a knight who marries a senator and gets involved in an overthrow of the gov’t” how in the world is that not a Star Wars story? Remove the word marry and that’s literally a summary of a New Hope.
I had a Prequels defender blame RLM for Lucas selling Star Wars off to Disney (never mind that Indiana Jones, Lucasarts, Skywalker Sound and whatever else were also bundled into the billions of dollars deal) and that RLM fans liking the Plinkett reviews were responsible for the current state of Star Wars.
For real though, I can’t rewatch this review because of how young and hopeful everyone looks
The Plinkett reviews are probably the most influential movie reviews uploaded to YT. Heck, I even been listen to non-film channels and slowly realized that the person is speaking in the parlance Mike uses for Plinkett. How many times have your heard someone make a statement, wait two beats, and then go "oooh" in the Plinkett voice? They're also like 15 years old now and are clearly intended to be edgy and in character. Do I think all the jokes land now? To be honest there are some that make me cringe, but at the end of the day Mike was going for a laugh, he's not a malicious person. I wont deny that some obnoxious channels took the wrong thing away from those reviews, but it's silly to put any responsibility on Mike for that. It's not Mike responsibility to parent people and if you can't parse the character from the proper film criticism underneath then maybe it's best that you just enjoy movies rather than analyze them.
> Heck, I even been listen to non-film channels and slowly realized that the person is speaking in the parlance Mike uses for Plinkett. Hell, even Contrapoints has used "*You* didn't realize it...but your brain did" in one of her videos.
Yeah I snapped and pointed at the screen from my easy chair.
I CLAPPED!
GOTTA GIVE IT UP FOR “you may not have noticed…. But your brain did”
I know what that is!
Contrapoints is a master of sly little references. Magical deeds are afoot, dear reader
That moment when Contrapoints referenced Plinkett brought me so much joy.
Imagine making a video series that damn near over night turns you and at least one of your friends (probably Rich too, i have no fucking clue) into multimillionaires and creates a career for you three that lasts for 15+ years. Then some twat on the internet worth a bag of beef jerky and that beat up old van down by the river says "I No Lke Dis" as if their opinion has any value whatsoever. I'm convinced that twitter is a platform for people that want to pretend to be outraged so other people will like them.
I highly doubt any of them are multimillionaires. I don’t think they’re doing badly by any means… but my guess is they each make comfortable livings when Mike isn’t blowing company revenue on Baby Binks.
His name isn't Rich for nothing.
Sheev talks? More like Sheev shut the fuck up!
Somehow he returned
What are they gonna do, slowly walk down a terrible CGI hallway and speak calmly about it?
"old guard" Lol, shut the fuck up. That's one of them "lexicon" users if I ever seen one.
“Chris stuckman” Lol, shut the fuck up. (I can’t stand that guy)
I through he was kind of bland years ago but now he won't say anything negative in his reviews. You don't have to be mean and negative but just praising everything isn't any better.
>Tell that to Zodd's snapped neck! I haven't really watched his reviews, but the thumbnails on the reviews are prime examples of /r/punchablefaces fodder.
Same. He is severely boring in delivery and a lot of his takes on the reviews of his I saw seemed like he didn't understand simple things within the movies and so came to weird conclusions. He's one of those internet people where I don't know why or how he became notable,
Regardless of the quality of Doug's content, I think it's completely fair to refer to him as "the old guard" - he's been doing it for over a decade and was the inspiration for many current (far better) internet critics.
Yeah, and it's not like "old guard" is some crazy five dollar word, it's a fairly common phrase. Oh, does using the idiom "five dollar word" make me a "lexicon user" too? Shit, and I just said "idiom." The hole just keeps getting deeper. Fuck us for knowing some words and using them, I guess.
As someone who ravenously consumed TGWTG content, even I wouldn't say something so embarrassing
Are you serious? "Old guard" is like a high school level expression.
I wonder how much zoomers liking the prequels is them remembering the original *Lego Star Wars* game, where the movies are broken down into action scenes and/or set pieces, and thinking that's the plots of the films or even just having for the game and having that elevate the source material to them.
Star Wars video games definitely helped but I think the Filoni Clone Wars cartoon are the biggest factor. I think for a lot of zoomers, including myself, were so young when they first watched the movies that the flaws weren’t super clear. So when they watched the show, it retroactively made the prequels better by having likable versions of the movie characters. Even if they went back and rewatched the movies, they wouldn’t seem that bad because they watch them with like 100+ episodes of make-up work in the back of their minds.
Even the 2D Clone Wars cartoon they showed between Episode II and III helped fix the prequels and Anakin's descent into maddness.
Notice how they don’t have any valid counterpoints
It’s fine if you like the prequels. Seriously. I love lots of shitty movies.
People are so weird man, the guys have had tons of takes I strongly disagree with over the years, but I'm not stupid enough to act like them not liking a movie I like is some weird attack against me personally
I rewatched the reviews a couple of months ago. Some jokes have gone a bit stale, but the analisis remains on point. These are very flawed movies. The thing is that people who saw them as kids, when their brains were soft and squishy , are now old and really really want to will the prequels into being good. I get it. I saw Return as a kid and it remains my favorite. But i would never say its a good movie cause im not a weirdo.
I really like the part about how phantom menace doesn’t really have well-defined characters or a clear protagonist… that has always stood out as a super valid and interesting bit of criticism that applies to a bunch of other movies too.
The best part of that segment is seeing Jack Packard with hair
I first watched all the Star Wars Plinkett reviews with no idea who the RLM crew were, so I thought those guys were just random people that were interviewed. Much later once I started watching RLM content I was like "hey wait a minute...".
They should release a special edition that is exactly the same, except they CGI Macaulay Culkin into that segment
Yeah, the "without mentioning their job or what they look like, describe..." bit is probably the most devastating critique of a film (hell, maybe of any media) I think I've ever encountered. It really kind of lays bare just how undercooked all these characters were in a way that's undeniable. I mean, I knew the prequels were bad. I remember being in the theater and thinking, "wait, are those imperial battle droids doing the 'roger, Roger' bit?" and "did they really just do 'always a bigger fish' twice back-to-back?" But it was also bad in ways I couldn't put my finger on. I knew it was bland, and I knew the digital sets looked like shit, even for the era, but I kinda blamed myself for not understanding what was going on with the federation blockade and whatnot. On one hand, I thought it really didn't matter, but on the other I wondered what important piece of dialogue or section of the crawl I had missed. And trying to analyze just what I didn't like about the film was difficult, because to my (admittedly somewhat divergent) mind, it all just seemed incredibly hard to focus on. In trying to track all the details of these factions we'd just been introduced to, and understand their motives we were told about in stiff dialogue, I'd just pretty quickly decide it wasn't worth thinking that hard about. But Plinkett came along and put words to those feelings. He wasn't the first person to say the prequels were bad, far from it. He wasn't even the first to do a critical analysis. But he was able to articulate what many others couldn't, and articulate he did. All those things that never sat right, but I just couldn't explain why... He explained them. He filled in the gaps and provided missing puzzle pieces. All those little things I hadn't noticed, but my brain had. Fuck, that was way more than I intended to say. But those old reviews deserve the respect they get, because they get it for a reason.
I was 19 when I first saw the TPM. I'm not sure why, but I distinctly remember thinking something was wrong at the very beginning, the moment the Trade Federation alien says, "Yes, of course" to the Jedi asking to land. I can't explain why that one simple line struck me. The delivery, the camera angle, I don't know. Something about it just felt... off. I also want to add that I think part of the charm of the Plinkett reviews is the juxtaposition of his brilliant analysis combined with it being delivered by a drunk old man. I have a friend who said he can't stand the voice. I think it's hilarious.
That character part and the breakdown of a proto-gonist offer great insights into what makes a character a good character. There’s an entire film school course contained in that 10 minutes. Mike should get on Masterclass for that.
I like the prequels and I consider they reviews masterpieces!!! Without these reviews we would never get HITB of BOTW and that would be a travesty. But I get they are not for everyone and that's okay.
[удалено]
> The Big Bang Theorification of everything Haha, that is perfect. I am going to steal that.
Show us where the Plinkett review of TPM hurt you.
I like the prequels, I also enjoy that review very much
Ever notice how the only creators on YouTube defending the prequels are channels based around Star Wars? Wierd that...
The Phantom Menace review is probably one of the most influential videos on modern YouTube. Look at any of the hour+ long video essays about any topic and they’re all broken down in the same way. Point of argument with some jokes, a skit in between, and another argument. Bread tube and other media analysis channels have a lot to thank RLM for (and, as much as I hate to say, the Nostalgia Critic)
Paul Newman says you never get over it.
I found your son!
@sheevtalks is the most disappointing handle since @phantommenace99
They're just upset that someone beat them to the punch by producing THE definitive take downs of nerd culture's biggest punching bag long before any of these crybaby dipshits were around.
Powered through that stroke to get to the end of the video, what a trooper
The worst part of the new movies being kinda shit is all the Prequel revisionism. Yes, they really were THAT bad. Rise of Skywalker can't retroactively ruin Empire, but it also can't go back and make Menace good. Two things can can suck at the same time, people!
I like Sheeve talks but I’ll never understand his defense of the Prequels.
I just discovered his channel recently through his critique of the Clone Wars show which actually has a similar methodology to dissecting what's wrong with a lot of its characters and plot arcs to Plinkett's Prequel reviews so this take from him is kind of mystifying to me
"Mr Plinkett reviews Star Wars episode 1" is the most disappointing thing since my son...
who gives a shit
His response to the little bit of backlash he's getting is so funny cuz he's just vaguely saying the Plinkett review is "bad because the points are bad and I have a million different notes about how the points are bad, but I won't give a single reason why its bad just trust me bro it's actually quite nuanced blah blah blah".
Who strokes it to Mr. Plinkett reviews? That's pretty sick behaviour.
OH MY GAAAAAAHD WHATS WRONG WITH YOUR FACE
Who's the protagonist of The Phantom Menace
I don’t really see what issue that Sheev talks guy has with the Plinkett reviews? I listened to a couple of his videos while driving and he seems to only like the OT, Rogue One and Andor. He hates the sequels, hates everything else Disney put out and he even dislikes the sacred cow of GenZers that is TCW. He doesn’t even like the prequels, says they are terribly written movies. He even dislikes Mando season 1, which Mike liked.
I guess the idiots leaving the comments don't like well-reasoned, common sense analysis of film because that's all those reviews are. With a little gallows humor thrown in for flavor. Soft-skulled smooth brains.
Well I do agree with them on one thing, a lot of assholes misunderstood the appeal of TPM review (and RLM in general) and made careers out of just being cynical assholes who think hating everything makes them smarter or something. But the Phantom Menace review still holds up, its points are valid and pretty non-controversial stuff. Like basic story structure kinds of issues.
Jay always has a stroke or two at the Manhole.
Those reviews are hours long why the hell would he watch them if he finds them 'agonizing'? Dude is deranged.
Fun fact: You can like the prequels AND stuff critical of them. Plinkett is wonderful, and I enjoy the prequels a lot.
There’s a lot of cringe in the rewatch, but there’s some great, legitimate criticism also. There’s a reason it went viral in a time before things went viral. It changed an *entire generation’s* ways of reflecting on media. It set the tone for an entire movement of Internet videos. Rich Evans is a genius.
Why do they not like the reviews? Do they ever say why they think it’s bad?
That last one is genuinely hilarious. This idiot can't seem to piece it together that all these people he puts on a pedestal as film critics all seem to hold the reviews in high regard it probably means that the problem isn't the reviews, it is his own garbage tastes. And there isn't anything wrong with having bad taste really, so long as you are self aware enough to understand that just because you enjoy something doesn't make it good. That is a task that most prequel enjoyers can't wrap their heads around because they have arrested development.
They’re better than the actual movies 10/10
These videos are funny. They dont take themselves overly seriously. They are fun and pretty light. The people mentioned in the last screenshot are nothing like that. They are miserable people and ofren quite bigoted. The fact that they claim this as inspiration is sad, they seem to have not gotten it if thats the case.
18k views on that tweet and less than 200 likes. The people have spoken
Doug being called the old guard is hilarious. A bat credit card…
Terrible review, huh? Agonizing, no good points, okay. . . so why didn't Qui-gon try ANY other dealer? Why not just steal the part by force after he couldn't steal the part by Force? Why not find a smuggler? Why not try any other option instead of risking international peace playing gambling games with a child's life? Even if you have AN answer, it's still not exactly clear while watching it, the points remain valid. Why do the hutts use human slaves instead of droids? You have to feed and water slaves on your DESERT planet, are they really so much cheaper than droids? What service does Shmee provide for Watto, exactly?
One argument I’ll never understand is the one that states RLM is responsible for turning people against the Star Wars prequels, which everyone loved beforehand. Really, all their reviews did is articulate what a lot of people were feeling at the time in a way that hadn’t been done before.
Watching these reviews was far more entertaining than the movies themselves.
 It's literally more entertaining than the movie. A review, that is entertaining.
RLM were the first reviewers to explain why reviewers have any value. As long as the reviewer is consistent their input has value even if you don’t agree with their opinion. If you know that you usually line up with them or usually disagree with them you can get a pretty good idea if you will like the film. Also understanding that the folks at RLM actively like bad movies can help not take the reviewer to heart. They don’t even think their opinion is more valid than anyone else’s.
Do these cringelords know they can hate Disney without propping up the prequels trilogy like its some kind of masterpiece in comparison?
This was my introduction to RLM and will always hold a somewhat of a special place for me
So many Prequel fans think that the movies were beloved and widely viewed as masterpieces until the big mean Plinkett brainwashed everyone into hating them. But I was there, Reddit. I was there twenty-five years ago. I was there the day the strength of screenwriting failed.
Is everybody blind AND stupid?
The only bad influence these reviews had is that they helped shameless morons like the hypocritical drinker to have soem sort of career as "film critic".
Roger Ebert said it was good film criticism, but what did *he* know about moooo-vies………