Dissecting RLM's Star Wars reviews, the "108 rebuttal" and other responses

[Standardon-Nameaux]

Post 5, Pairt 5























Quigon: "Battle droids."
Obiwan: "It's an invasion army."
Quigon: "This is an odd play for the Trade Federation. We've got to warn the Naboo, and contact Chancellor Valorum. [...]"
Obiwan: "You were right about one thing, Master - the negotiations were short..."

So, which Quigon is this? Judging by the attitude, it's definitely the 2nd one - however, that's not the one who was overconfident about the mission, and Obiwan's now poking fun at for that.



At any rate, this scene roughly marks the transition of Obiwan from an equal lead character into Quigon's supporting sidekick - he'll only really reassume his co-lead status in the duel at the end, just in time to receive the protagonist torch from Quigon.

Around the beginning with Act 3, however, he starts becoming more of an entity again (gradually taking a stance against Quigon, which he then abandons for the sake of friendship), which "does the job" of setting up his more dramatic actions towards the ending.

Before the movie opened I was really excited to hear that Scottish actor “Ewan McDonald” was going to be playing Obi-Wan Kenobi. I thought that was a great choice, and he’d be perfect as the lead of this movie. But he wasn’t really… He just sat on the ship and complained a lot.

Aside from briefly expressing his skepticism at Quigon's podrace plans (though nowhere to the extent that RLM do, and, in fact, later go on to ascribe to Obiwan), his "complaints" mainly consist of his unexplained apprehensive stance about the pathetic lifeforms Quigon picks up along the way.

In what exact ways this then leads to, or sets up his siding with the Council against Anakin, isn't really made clear - whether it's his trust in the council's authority, or his tendency to see more clouds on the horizon / superior psychic alertness despite inexperience (both set up in the very first dialogue scene*) or some mild personal dislike of Anakin, or the jealousy at getting dumped in his favor (set up in the later scenes*, as just pointed out), there's not enough material in the movie to really connect the dots there.


*This is further blurred by the fact that the "Quigon 1" from the first scene and the 2nd half, isn't the "Quigon 2" from (most of) the rest of the 1st half, incl. Tattoine - so, when Quigon 2 sends Obiwan the midichlorian count, both of them are worried;
Obiwan's concerns can be said to carry over to the 2nd half, but Quigon's obviously do not - so the "set-up and pay-off structure" here is very obviously broken.

Also - did Quigon ever tell Obiwan whom those midichlorians belonged to? It happened shortly after he said "there's something about this boy" to him, and there's nothing indicating he tried to conceal anything from him either.
Yet, in the next two scenes between them where Anakin comes up (first the "pathetic lifeform" one, and then the meeting after the ambush), there doesn't seem to be any connection to that earlier conversation, one way or the other - if there was, one would've thought Obiwan'd ask "wait, that boy there was something about? the one with the scary midichlorian count?" or "the boy who won the race for us? he was the one with the scary midichlorian count, wasn't he", and Quigon would throw an ominous glance and then ride off or something.

The two most effective, clear-minded, logical guys [Obi-Wan and Captain Panaka] stay on the ship and wait, while the clumsy idiot, [...].
These two guys probably would’ve had the part by now.

Or would they? Obiwan is apprehensive about the whole betting the ship on the podrace thing, but he's equally at a loss about what else to do - just like Quigon, "finding goods to barter with" is the only other option he thinks of, and all the other "obvious" things like going through even moar dealers, finding a pilot, or someone who'd trade republic credits for local currency, the things RLM claimed "Quigon" was "too dumb" to think of, his "logical clear-minded" learner doesn't either.

Generally speaking, given how strongly their characters often vary from scene to scene, or movie segment to movie segment, and the multitude of ways to read their mindsets/motivations in certain moments due to lacking characterization/exposition, telling which of them is "smarter" at any given point is quite impossible - in this segment, there doesn't seem to be any difference at all: neither see any options left, and Quigon bets on his faith, which is justified by him being there on site, and is vindicated as well.



As for Panaka, he wasn't seen objecting to the queen's decision to send "Padme" to the dangerous city - didn't look particularly enthusiastic either, so this isn't "contradicting" his apprehensive stance about Tattoine from earlier, but Quigon was unambiguously shown to be rather pissed off about "her highness' orders", and for the exact same reason Plinkett shows concern for the attractive vulnerable young woman's safety.

If you're trying to avoid drawing attention to yourself, then why are you taking Jar Jar Binks into the city with you?

That however doesn't apply to Jar Jar, whose presence can't really be blamed on any character considering it wasn't shown which character was guilty of that - but, again, none of the "logical clear minded" guys were seen, or even implied to be objecting to that, either, so...

So for no reason, Obi-Wan is the one who does not want to defy the Council.
He’s not a risk taker and he complains all the time like a woman.

I think Obiwan's a pretty cool guy, eh also snarks a lot.

Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon both talk about how Anakin is 'dangerous' when he's standing right there.

So in this scene he escalates his (already priorly voiced) misgivings, even to a slightly aggressive/douchey level - this is fresh from just having been "dumped", and shown visibly angry about it.

You had no problems doing it before, *******.

And in this scene, he feels guilty about his behavior and abandons those misgivings in order to reconcile (whether this is him levelling down to a vegetable, or just having changed into a different kind of vegetable having been previously driven by blind faith in the council, or petty jealousy/whatever, is kind of not entirely clear).

and Yoda says “Grave danger I fear in his training!”
“I gave Qui-Gon my word.” Oh… You gave Qui-Gon your word. I suppose it’s better to rely on that than rather the whole prediction of GRAVE DANGER.

That's the decision he made in this scene - whereas previously, he was going with the whole grave danger thing.

Instead Obi-Wan, who seemed totally irritated with Anakin the whole movie, suddenly wants to train him at the end, only because Qui-Gon said to.

Yes, and you can pinpoint the exact scene where he abandoned this total, well, actually at most mild irritation - or, to be more accurate, his siding with the council against Anakin, which itself could've been partially motivated by this mild irritation.

But when a film analysis only considers "arc-relevant key scenes" like this in order to poke tangential plot holes in them, it can easily miss things like that - but, at least, the plot hole finding was valid.

You had no problems doing it before, *******.

Oh wait it wasn't - they failed to persuade Boss Nass to assist the Naboo back there, and only "used their power" and succeeded in getting the submarine.

So in that sense, it's not clear what he means by "cannot use our powers to help her" (to sway the gungans) - an actual inability to persuade him into agreeing to a full-on war, or ethical problems reaching critical level at that point.

[Standardon-Nameaux]

Post 5, Pairt 6a

So we’re back with the three guys we know nothing about, fighting each other in a scene we have no interest in.

Darth Maul is a mysterious, silent assassin - you're not supposed to "know" that much about him, he primarily needs a strong, intriguing presence in the movie.

Plinkett seems to be on the case, though:

Now comes the Duel of the Fates - I've already talked about the emotional part, now I'm gonna talk about the logical part!
There's no emotional or logical meaning - this movie has nothing in it!

Maul is eager to face them in battle, despite having been instructed by Sidious to let the Jedi make the first move – that's fine, he's eager: he wants to prove himself in battle.

But I can't understand what the Jedi's motivations are - what's going on inside their heads?
Here are several possibilities, not contained in the movie but purely speculative:

So aside from the bold part, which is a misconception, that middle paragraph is correct.

So we’re back with the three guys we know nothing about, fighting each other in a scene we have no interest in.

What's happening at the end of Phantom Menace? Three guys we don't care about are fighting each other over... something.

"We" know nothing about? "We" have no interest in? "We" don't care about? Lots of subjectivity and wiggle room in these kinda phrases - what matters is here is whether the movie shows or tells anything about the characters or not, gives them traits/personalities as well as plights/agendas to make the viewer root for them or not, and whether it does anything to make the "scene" interesting or not.

And the only way to determine any of that, is by examining the movie, and all the relevant/central/key scenes from the movie featuring these characters - for beliefs/convictions they might hold, the goals they might be pursuing and the obstacles they might encounter, their attitudes towards the situations they find themselves in, or other characters they interact with; their dynamic, internal or external conflicts, and the larger roles they play in the overall narrative.


All of the relevant statements from the review+commentary about these 2 characters, have now been quoted and dissected - no such thing was done; this verdict is unsupported.

What's happening at the end of Phantom Menace? Three guys we don't care about are fighting each other over... something.

The "what're they fighting over" question has already been dealt with (or is yet to be dealt with by RLM, as the audio commentary came out way later - badly) - the short version is that it's staged like an epic fight against an ancient evil that returned after eons to threaten and challenge them and they're trying to defeat it; however, the plot context is that they're on different sides of this Naboo battle, and the council wanted them to try and find out something about him.

Their flawless choreography lacks all humanity and emotion.

Really? If anything this would be a more accurate description of the much "smoother" fighting style from EpII - the moves in this one are rather aggressive and ferocious.

But then something happens:
Qui-Gon dies, and Obi-Wan is pissed. Hey, maybe this will finally get good - maybe I'll get emotionally involved.

Things started "happening" way before that, as that moment is built up throughout the sequence:
-Maul was displaying increasingly aggressive mannerisms, "culminating" in a rather gleeful grin after a supposedly "defensive" leap away from the Jedi's "attack" - implying that he was kinda having (or leading) them exactly where he wanted them
-Obiwan gets separated and has to run and catch up to Quigon who seems to be on a "winning streak" and overconfidently charges at Maul, further and further away from Obiwan - the sense of danger further increases throughout the meditation inbetween the laser walls
-the highly suspenseful combat scene that leads to Quigon's defeat, focusing a lot more on close-ups, pauses and fast cuts than "the choreography"

So at the start of the film we see that Jedis can run at a super fast speed when the screenwriter doesn't know how to get them out of a situation where a powerful droid [the Droidekas] is shooting lasers at them.

The screenwriter doesn't know how to get them out of that situation? Really? They could've forced pushed them or dropped the ceiling on them, or cut through the floor or something - the "superspeed escape" was self purpose, to give them another "cool superpower", and round off that particular scene with a punchy finisher.

But we never see them run fast again.

Having Obiwan run with superspeed here would've definitely destroyed the suspense, and the sort of nightmare-typical scenario of trying to reach somebody but never quite getting there - and most likely replaced it with flash.

If one of those were to be sacrificed at the altar of logical consistency in a fantasy superhero movie, it would've definitely had to be the first one - but what this essentially is, is two scenes with their own, entirely different creative/aesthetical designs (one a snappy action scene with dry humor, the other a prolonged dramatic climax), clashing with one another logically.

[Standardon-Nameaux]

Okay, so the forum inserted a hyperlink ("get some head space") into the word "meditation" above - had nothing to do with me; might've happened to other words in earlier posts as well, also got nothing to do with me.

[Standardon-Nameaux]

Post 5, Pairt 6b

You see Obi-Wan is pumped. He really wants to kick this guy's ass - and then BAM! Oh... that's right back to highly choreographed fighting.

It’s like it was planned ahead of time.

Hey remember when Luke Skywalker got really pissed and snapped when Vader was taunting him? Remember how worked up and emotional he got? He just started wailing on Vader. There was no grace, or complex choreography. He was just pounding him into submission. Filled with rage.
When you're worked up with emotion you begin to lose your composure and control. You expose your humanity a little. Obi-Wan should've done that, just a bit.
I guess that’s the director’s fault, huh?

This reviewer doesn't seem to understand the concept of "controlled fancy stylized combat" still leaving plenty of room for emotional expression (through body language etc.) and "humanity" - it's like, either you're an emotionless dojo drone, or you lose fine motor control?
Whatever happened to "filled with rage, but knowing fully well if you slip only once you'll get hacked to pieces"?


You see, there are different views on combat, perhaps when distinguishing between specific situations, or in general - sometimes, some argue that determination and ferocity are 80% of winning, and anyone with "training" and "technique" should seriously look out for someone just throwing themselves at them with pure unhinged aggression.
At other times, it is known that an accomplished fighter in fulll control of his faculties, is going to easily and swiftly defeat a chaotic hothead just throwing themselves at them, flailing their arms probably exposing a vulnerable body part in the process.

Both concepts certainly aren't foreigners to, and are entirely compatible with basic escapist fantasy - incl. being enhanced with supernatural, magical properties, while still remaining "relatable" precisely because it reflects reality, or conceptions about reality, in those ways:

1) "I think I'm getting the hang of this!" - Samwise Gamgee, LOTR1.
2) "You would've fought bravely and died quickly." - Zorro, Zorro.
Both are simple swashbuckling escapism, but they channel different fantasies - that of stabbing and shooting scary bad guys being "easy" and even exhilirating, and that of training with a master to acquire the fine arts of combat, in order to finally defeat the hated foe after many setbacks.

In this case, we've got different concepts playing out in the same franchise - although, the combat in this trilogy being so vastly different in style and... everything else really, "same franchise" is perhaps not the most apt description of it:
1) Luke overwhelms with pure rage - this "rage", by implication, imbued with a supernatural power, i.e. "the dark side", that has "made him strong", and hence overmatched Vader's §psychic power" that'd been making him unbeatable until that point.
(In TDKR, which obviously ripped this off, a similar scenario happens - except instead of supernatural power, it's simply "primal determination", the drive of survival, and the other concepts that were explored there.)
2) Obiwan has to maintain control, and put in the best of his abilities in order to have a chance against this foe, in complete control of his abilities - his body language channels rage, as well as a certain "rookie eagerness", and something that could be called a "laboured" concentration on technique and footwork etc.
I guess what's "missing here", at least in the context of this comparison, is a psychic zen concentration thrown into that mix, though that one comes shortly after.




However, "combat concepts" aside, there are very obvious differences between these character pairings and the situations they're in - which could very well mean that there isn't even any plot holes here, as it were:
1) Luke was a master at that point, though inferior to Vader still (while also holding back) - this was at the end of a long arc, and he had to "grow beyond Vader", by means of developing a more potent mindset / emotional state, in order to finally defeat him.
2) Obiwan had masterful skills, sure, but he was basically a capable learner, and certainly a "rookie" in spirit - he was facing a ferocious enemy who, effectively, had been training his entire life to kill Jedi, and had to "rise to the occasion".

1) Vader had miscalculated the amount of rage goading Luke about his sister would send him into, and bit off more than he could chew - appropriate for a hero in the last stage of his arc.
2) Maul was in complete control, and was calmly gloating about defeating the enraged Obiwan in a few moments, just as easily as he did his superior master.

1) The point was to convert Luke to evil and make him lose control - so, the way he moved when they succeeded (albeit at Vader's expense, unintended by Vader), was... appropriately, out of control.
2) Maul's goal, visibly, was to beat the Jedi's feeble skills with his own mysterious, evil, unbeatable ones - so Obiwan launched at him with his full skillset, and still lost.

1) Evil.
2) Obiwan converting to the drak side as a result of this (unlike even Ventress' death from the 2D CW), is never a point here - why? No idea, but it was kind of portrayed as righteous fury / justice: so, he remained in control, and watched with kind of a gleeful satisfaction, but not exactly malicious or hatred.

The way things went, he first started winning with his "controlled rage" thing, but then ultimately lost (either due to ultimately inferior skills and Maul catching himself, or due to a burst of premature arrogance) - it's only when he calmed down, "meditated", and used the surprise element against the now himself overconfident Darth Maul, that he prevailed.




So, I'm not gonna bother trying to bring all of this into some kind of airtight, structured comprehensive comparison - the general point made here is simply that you can't just start complaining about two scenes looking differently from each other, while failing to take into account the actual vast... differences between what's happening.

Just as one can't validly criticize the lack of drama while failing to grasp the concept of "necessarily controlled rage" and its dramatic potential/power (see Equilibrium for a more obvious example of just that).
And a reviewer who doesn't understand that all kinds of emotions can be expressed in combat through body language (and face expressions, of course) without compromising motor control or fanciful elaborate MA moves - or, getting obviously bloodied and sweaty and unkempt while destroying the entire scenery, for that matter - can't really have a valuable opinion on whether a particular fight scene of that sort lacks emotion of humanity.

In Empire, there’s also very little complex choreography – Luke was just barely keeping up in this fight with Vader. Vader’s just toying around with him, he could kick his ass at any moment but he holds back.

The same thing actually applies here... he takes the kid gloves off at a very specific moment.

You see, this is their first duel. There's a lot going on between the two characters outside the fact that they were swinging swords at each other.
There is even a lot more going on at the end of Jedi. Luke was realizing that he was kinda becoming his father and taking his place. And the Emperor was proving a point that hate and anger can be a powerful ally. You got things like temptation, anger, revelation, defiance, sacrifice, and redemption.

What's happening at the end of Phantom Menace? Three guys we don't care about are fighting each other over... something.

Well, anger, grief and revenge have already been acknowledged; replace "revelation" with something like "ancient mystery" or "first glimpse of great conspiracy" or maybe something shorter and snappier to that effect - then, if you're gonna incorporate the scenes before and after, add "death and inheritance" into the mix, and you've already got quite something there don't you.

Thing is, this is inherently a very different type of conflict than in 4-6, or 3 for that matter - everything that had to do with Vader, way down to his very origins and backstory, had always been tied into relationships between characters and deep personal history.
Here, it's a foreign, mythical evil reemerging from the past and spelling everyone's doom - it's pronouncedly impersonal (at first), with Darth Maul representing the larger mysterious threat that he... represents rather than being there as an individual - even seeing himself as part of the Sith tradition/cause more than anything else.


In order to really drive this kind of scenario home, the protagonists confronted with this menace would have to be shown to dedicate a good deal of thought/emotions to this plot element throughout the movie, preferably with a structured "arc" to it - and, as previously examined, this part of the narrative is highly incomplete, only coming up in a few key scenes and otherwise completely forgotten about and neglected.

Having that said... they're called "key scenes" for a reason, and overlooking those in order to force a "there's zero drama" conclusion kind of completely invalidates a film critique.

[Standardon-Nameaux]

Post 5, Pairt 6c

I really gotta stress the point that lightsaber duels have less to do with the fight itself, but moreso with the internalization of the characters.

Internalization? Sure it's not externalization? Or who knows.

So if you've ever said that the duel at the end of A New Hope was the worst one because it had bad fight choreography, and it was like a old guy, and a guy in a mask who couldn't see what he was doing, so they were just awkwardly hitting them with swords well then I'm afraid you missed the point entirely.

Why concede this stupid criticism in the first place?

It's really about moments like this:

So here, Ben's sacrifice, "I'm your father", and "fulfill your destany", are juxtapposed with random bombastic saber twirling from the first 2, and Grievous from the 3rd one.


Every lightsaber duel in the 6 movies can be broken down into the following elements:
-a character-focused, usually calm prelude in which the participants meet, and prepare to fight
-the actual fighting - most of the time, the moves and body language continue to channel the personalities and emotional states of the characters, as well as the dynamic between them
-breaks and pauses inbetween the fighting, in which characters talk or stare each other down
-a poignant "finisher", usually followed by a dramatic character/dialogue scene


I know what I'd juxtapose if I were out to make some kind of valid point or comparison - and this has nothing to do with it.

You might be thinking that the duel between Anakin and Obi-Wan had some kind of depth to it because they were former friends. [And while it's true that] this indeed had a little more going on than…

…nothing, and

…even more nothing, this duel didn't need to be 45 minutes long.

So the second "more nothing" there refers to Dooku from II - it was preceded, albeit in that case by about 20 minutes, with a scene that contained: temptation, revelation, dubiousness, conspiracy, defiance, duplicity...

By the time the actual fight begins, Dooku has already dropped the mask, and is now taunting Obiwan about their earlier conversation, his master, and his hopeless inferiority - later, when talking to Yoda, this sort of expands into how he went away to learn the ways of the dark side, and thanks to that acquired more power than any do-gooder could hope for... until he's eventually proven wrong about that part.

Lots of nothing going on in that scene.

The ultimate point of everything was that Obi-Wan defeats Anakin - having them fight in the most ridiculous of places only to wind up on a tiny hill at the end was overindulgent.

So in other words, it had the character/dramatic substance just like the previous two, but it forgot to say god bless you when it sneezed.

This fight could've lasted 3 minutes in one location and still have the same impact in the story. The whole thing ends up going on so long that it actually becomes boring - despite the amazing visual effects.

This might've called for a non-bogus comparison with another fight that wasn't mentioned anywhere here, Palpatine vs. Mace, which didn't go on for long, and in one location.

One of the things that made it different (as well as the Dooku confrontation from the beginning, which contained things like: temptation, anger, rationalization, seduction, moral dissonance...), is that it's not at the end the movie.

This fight could've lasted 3 minutes in one location and still have the same impact in the story.

Could it have been anticlimactic, and still had the same impact in the story?

The ultimate irony is that this fight…

…between the same characters years later is much more interesting than this.

Because it has even more substance? Or because it isn't as long?
Oh I guess no case has been made to support this "conclusion".

You see, we need a deeper meaning to things – without it, none of it really matters, does it?

Without deeper meaning, or, with the deeper meaning being too long, nothing really matters.

“Special effects are just a tool, a means of telling a story. People have a tendency to confuse them as an end to themselves - a special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing.”

What special effects, without a story, where? The lava? But that one does have a story: the fire gets out of control, and starts consuming and eroding the structure they're on; the environment crumbles around them, reflecting what's going on in the wider world, until they're plunged into a hell river that carries them toward doom.

Another story aspect that's present, but severely lacking there, is Obiwan's "arc" from trying to hold back to finally deciding to end it and show his former friend no mercy - but that one's got nothing to do with any "special effects", though it does have a focal point, and hence nigh-fatal flaw, in the "tiny hill" conclusion.




While early Lucas is saying "special effect without a story", three frames are shown as ironic counterexamples: the ROTS opening shot, the Utapau battle (a focal point in the narrative - the faux "victory" that leads to and is immediately followed by the trap snapping), and Obiwan's swashbuckling duel that continues and eventually concludes a personal enmity with Grievous that had been established in the opening.














So "special effect without a story" has now been covered - but what about another important aspect that'd been briefly touched on, "special effect without aesthetics"?

The new movies are about shoving as much crap into each shot as possible.
This is part of the reason why I find the Special Edition so fucking offensive. Cause you’re into what’s happening in the movie, and they keep shoving more **** on the screen to distract you - it reminds me of a child waving his arms in the background for attention. Doesn’t Lucas realize that cluttering the frame up with **** is NOT what makes Star Wars good?

As examples, the video shows bits from the following sequences:
-the gungan battle from TPM
-the arena battle from Clones

In both cases there's a field with a multitude of combatants filling up the screen, in a disorganized way and overall looking rather messy - aside from a few shots / key moments, the vast bulk of these two sequences is like this, and they stand out in that way, in the 3 movies:
not representative of the trilogy's overall action style, let alone the rest.

So this [...] is a small example of the overall styles of both films.

Most, if not all other times, when the frame contains a lot of detail or objects, it's aesthetically composed - unlike these two "examples".

[Standardon-Nameaux]

Another comparison that had to be made in this context, but wasn't, would've been to the EpVI opening - unquestionably the one of the 3 that EpI's was directly shaped after, its directly comparable similarities include:
-being an extended arrival sequence of a shuttle on board of a large battle station
-"asking for permission to land"
-action music, increase of pace etc. after said permission

Unlike the EpI opening, however:
-its dialogue (during the arrival itself) is purely technical and carries no dramatic or narrative weight - the whole thing is essentially moody "military procedural porn", an evil version of the Zion landing sequence from Matrix 2
-while the SD being shown in an almost identical fashion as in SW doesn't seem to carry any particular significance, the very first shot does reveal the eerie, haunting, "uncertain feeling" image of the half-completed death star - setting up the film's climax and the Emperor's trap



A comparison of these openings could've been insightful (given proper execution).

So the TFA review came out and included a cliffnote version of this in the "ring theory" section - if it can even be called that.

I was having certain "concerns" leading up to its release, thinking it might contain some entirely new set of arguments, some of them perhaps even sensible - but, turns out I was way ahead of them a month ago.



Anyway, while I've never been particularly enthusiastic about it, I'm kind of starting to think more and more that the structure I went with here, is complete total ****e - but starting from scratch and making the same points in a different order (and shorter posts) would be even more stupider, so I guess we'll see.

[wjowski]

Is it that time of year where we try to pretend the prequels were decent movies again?

[Standardon-Nameaux]

Is it that time of year where we try to pretend the prequels were decent movies again?

What part of this 5 page long boring hack piece that I just wrote looks like "trying to pretend" to you?

[Totoro Man]

What part of this 5 page long boring hack piece that I just wrote looks like "trying to pretend" to you?

never mind all that. just keep on writing. this is what you should have done the moment you became a registered CBR forum user.

[Standardon-Nameaux]

But then I'd've finished by now