Phantom Menace Review...Everything you were thinking and more!

[neosporing]

i love his assessment of the behinds the scenes footage after the first screening. his editing married with the v.o. looks spot on for what everyone was silently thinking.... and the 'finger pointing' scene made me fall out of my chair.... conspiracy me think this guy actually lives in and works in l.a. and masks his voice so he can say what he really thinks of the people he works with...

 

[PHArchivist]

I agree. The voice and the intentional mispronunciations and errors are unnecessary, and detract from the overall effect. Othewise, he's pretty much spot-on.

Seems to me his voice and the mispronunciations were his method of emulating what a bumbling idiot Lucas was in his approach to the prequels.

For example - its his way of communicating further that he feels Lucas has no idea what a good protagonist should be.

In a weird and slightly estoteric way, his Reviewer Character (least so it seems to me) is his method of "channeling" or otherwise representing Lucas, and George's out-of-touch and moronic "vision" of the film.

iconspiracy me think this guy actually lives in and works in l.a. and masks his voice so he can say what he really thinks of the people he works with...

I've only watched the first one, and my gut reaction - based on how he talks (not his style, but what he is actually saying and how he structures his verbiage, especially when being more technical and less sardonic) - was that this guy is likely somehow tied to the industry. Perhaps tangentially, such as a faculty member at a film school perhaps, but tied nonetheless. Just my impression...

 

[nickytea]

I'd love to see someone put this much effort into breaking down why something was good.

 

[Thrawn]

He uses the character in a lot of his other reviews prior to this one though, even if you've never seen Nemesis go watch that review, bloody hilarious :thumbsup

By the way, just how many ex-wives has he killed...?

 

[Goonie]

I'd like to see a review for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. :lol

 

[darth_myeek]

Seems to me his voice and the mispronunciations were his method of emulating what a bumbling idiot Lucas was in his approach to the prequels.

I didn't hear the narrator's voice as a slam on Lucas's ability. His voice implied that even folks with mental deficiencies had problems with TPM.

He did seem to be pretty well studied in film. Click on his info button on youtube. It explains in one of them chapters that he owned a film company or something along those lines.

-DM

 

[Too Much Garlic]

I'd love to see someone put this much effort into breaking down why something was good.

It's much harder to say why something is good than why something is bad.

 

[cayman shen]

Especially with TPM, frankly.

 

[PHArchivist]

On video two, now...

On the opening of Star Wars (the first one)
"In fact this is SO genius I think George Lucas had nothing to do with it..."

lol:lol

 

[Trooper_trent]

I'm glad this is getting such good response. I was hesitant, at first, to post it, because I was affraid the 7 links, language, and the time it takes to get into it might have turned people off to it.

 

[cayman shen]

I actually might assign my creative writing class watching this. I wish I could show it in school. Man, dead on.

 

[nickytea]

It's much harder to say why something is good than why something is bad.

The difficulty is equal when you're making legitimate criticism.

Proving that a movie doesn't operate with same narrative structure as another movie doesn't say much about it. The Jospeh Campbell monomyth, the hero's journey, the three act structure, whatever you'd like to call it, is NOT the only viable narrative construct.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

The difficulty is equal when you're making legitimate criticism.

Proving that a movie doesn't operate with same narrative structure as another movie doesn't say much about it. The Jospeh Campbell monomyth, the hero's journey, the three act structure, whatever you'd like to call it, is NOT the only viable narrative construct.

And doesn't he mention that? I recall him speaking loads about that. And it was explained pretty well why the lack of that similar structure helped make TPM a mangled mess of what's going on and who's the main character again?

 

[Megamicrofish]

Whats wrong with your face ?:lol

 

[Dave Ward]

I'd love to see someone put this much effort into breaking down why something was good.

When I was a teenager, I used to love the intros Alex Cox or Mark Kermode would give to movies they loved. Really sets you up to enjoy the piece.

 

[Commander Max]

I'd love to see someone put this much effort into breaking down why something was good.

When that happens it's more like sitting in a class, it isn't as fun as pointing out the mistakes.
But he did provide examples of what was good, in this sort of narrative you need examples of both to contrast the point. Without that perspective, it doesn't make the point, and is really boring.

 

[blewis17]

Well, the reviewer is definitely channeling Mike Verta.

OK, nothing more to see here. Move along.

 

[CTF]

When I was a teenager, I used to love the intros Alex Cox or Mark Kermode would give to movies they loved. Really sets you up to enjoy the piece.

They all pale in comparison to Mortimer Young.

 

[cayman shen]

When that happens it's more like sitting in a class, it isn't as fun as pointing out the mistakes.
But he did provide examples of what was good, in this sort of narrative you need examples of both to contrast the point. Without that perspective, it doesn't make the point, and is really boring.

I disagree. I love reading gushing biographies, ecstatic CD liner notes, glowing reviews, hearing reverent DVD commentaries, viewing impassioned retrospectives. Positive reviews aren't like sitting in class (as if that's inherently bad in and of itself; a good class, though rare, is exhilirating).

 

[anakin]

I love it........"how does the shield generator get hit while the shields are up?" lollol


I had a great time watching this