Why ‘Phantom Menace’ Sucks: A Brilliant 70-Minute Explanation (NSFW)
by Big Hollywood
–
“Some guy named Mike from Milwaukee, WI put together a 70-minute video review discussing the many reasons why the movie was horrible. And this isn’t your usual fanboy rant, this is an epic, well-edited well-constructed piece of geek film criticism. In fact, the way I learned about the video was from Lost co-creator and Star Trek producer Damon Lindelof, who said “Your life is about to change. This is astounding film making. Watch ALL of it.” Watch the video review embedded after the jump.”
You can see the remaining parts here.
Will we have to wait ten years for the 70-minute review explaining why “Avatar” sucks?
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
165 Comments
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Big Hollywood and Big Tweeting, Mr. Pink. Mr. Pink said: Why ‘Phantom Menace’ Sucks: A Brilliant 70-Minute Explanation (NSFW) http://tinyurl.com/ygjq5gv [...]
Never much cared for the Star Wars franchise after the first one, so singing to the choir but I will take a look.
Wow … almost 11 years after the film's premiere, there's still Phantom Menace Derangement Syndrome.
Now, not only is passing off an opinion as a fact being done, there's a 70-minute "explanation" of why in fact this film sucks.
I really like the picture, but maybe I should watch this because I may be wrong about my opinion.
I liked the first 3. The newer ones I thought were pretty much unwatchable.
The narration is phenomenal; the way he says "protagonist" is hilarious.
O.K. There's no way Episode 1 was going to live up to the hype, but I understand why people hate it.
Love the original, I saw Jedi as many times as I could when it came out. Not the rerelease. I will always love them. I don't even go the movies anymore, but I will always love the original trilogy. Loved Back to the Future and Terminator, too. Though I saw Terminator on cable like most kids. But when someone says Star Wars I always think of the original Trilogy not the new stuff with the prequels or even the animated stuff. It doesn't register.
Yeah, EPisode 1 had problems. A lot of 'em. Hey, the Pod Race was pretty cool, huh?
I watched this. I laughed out loud several times. Very funny.
I can't believe it either.
I love Phantom Menace, and I will defend it until the day I die. Was it perfect? No. But to all the haters still pouting after all this time – It's been ten years! Let it go! If you feel George Lucas has betrayed you or ruined the wonderful memories you had as a kid watching the original Star Wars films, let the healing begin.
; )
"Will we have to wait ten years for the 70-minute review explaining why “Avatar” sucks?"
I just got home from seeing Avatar in 3D at a very high tech theater, and I can tell you, nobody will ever give this movie enough of their time to produce a 70 minute tear-down of it, because there just isn't enough "there" there. The plot so closely follows Dances with Wolves that I wonder if the writers of Dances might have some sort of court case. Military guy goes native, and aids the natives in a fight against his former comrades. Only with Avatar, the acting is filtered through the 3D CGI, which is excellent, but not photo-realistic. Anyone who thinks Avatar is photo-realistic, well, ask for a driver's license, because they'd have to be legally blind. And the plot execution isn't just heavy handed, it's ham fisted. Yeah, the military industrial complex from a dead earth is evil, I get it, so you don't have to remind me every ten seconds of the film. And, Pandora? That's the name of the moon? How about Amazonia? A seventh grader could do better. Why not have the military industrial complex be the good guys and help the natives fight off an even more exotic alien race? That could have been much more "epic." I can not believe Cameron worked fifteen years to lay this turd.
At least I won't have to buy the DVD.
"The cartoon rabbit that stepped in the poopie".
"Space Obama"
Some of us on a major prop board have been going on about it all week.
I thought it was great, the part that made it even better was the guy was right on with his critique.
And he has a lot more.
The ones who liked the movie don't take this so personally, it's hilarious. I watched maybe 15 min of Phantom menace and none of the ones after but I'll probably watch all 70 min of this. I'm sure there's a movie we all like that most would think sucks.
"probably never accomplished anything else in his life"
Perhaps, but at least he has accomplished something of note. Or did I miss the story where the producer of a major motion picture and a hit TV show described something you did as an "astounding film making”?
The guy who did this really does seem to know what actually makes a good story work, plus he's funny. Why is there so much backlash against this video? I wish most film criticism was this spot on.
Have you ever slept with a woman?
Phantom Menace was like a deliberate insult to fans if you ask me. Giving a secular explanation to The Force after giving it such a detailed "spiritual" explanation through Yoda is just like this reviewer points out, it's like giving fans the finger.
I enjoyed the light saber duel with Darth Maul and a few other scenes, but this movie was a major disappointment to me. I saw Star Wars in the theater at age 7 and was really looking forward to what Star Wars could be with first-rate CGI. What I got was basically indefensible. Anyone posting in this thread probably could have written a better prequel just by not being an asshole like Lucas is.
I'm going to have to watch this. I though the later Lucas trilogy was such a disappointment. I'm a big scifi fan and I never saw the last one because I couldn't take anymore.
Wow, so clever :/.
I can't believe this site wasted its time bashing a 10-year-old movie. Geez. No wonder I hardly visit anymore.
Taking Star Wars seriously enough to take it personally when someone criticizes it is so sad, I can't really muster the cruelty to explore the implications.
Don't watch without kleenex. You will be in tears with laughter.
Nice little non-sequitur there. Who are you — this guy's publicist? How weak.
BTW, no, I've never had a PRODUCER OF A MAJOR MOTION PICTURE AND A HIT TV SHOW describe anything I did as "astounding film making", but that's probably because… I'm not a filmmaker (or a publicity whore).
If you're referring to me, then, yes I have, wise ass. Is that your idea of an intelligent argument? Can't you handle the fact that maybe not everybody agrees with you? For shame.
Did any of your seriously-in-need-of-a-life Phantom Menace geeks actually watch more than the first part of this? If not, please go to the site and watch the rest. It's hilarious! It may make you feel less pouty to learn that the narrator/film critic is not exactly what you'd call…reliable.
So, I guess if you have a different opinion than that in the post, you can't offer a response? It seems that when you do, the tired "seriously-in-need-of-a-life" and "have you ever slept with a woman" comments appear.
I could care less if people hate this picture, but I thought BigHollywood's efforts would be better served to fight the culture war in which we conservatives are engaged … not post some pointless attack on a 10-year-old film.
In fact, I'd tell Nolte and his staff to "get a life", rather than pile on with a bunch of entitlement-powered fanboys, who cried when The Phantom Menace wasn't what they wanted it to be.
Then your response is pounded with negative votes — not based on the presentation of your idea, but the idea itself. It happens all the time on this site if you present a different take — it's a nasty little collectivist streak in a place full of my fellow conservatives. Just sayin'…
Touchy…
The main reason why Star Wars "fans" hate the prequels is they are five-year olds who never grew up and stopped worshiping the original trilogy–once they see the prequels or Clone Wars they realize that Star Wars is aimed at little kids, rocking their worlds. Just watch the first video: the guy says that he was disappointed that Obi-Wan wasn't the elder statesman "like he expected"–in other words, Lucas was wrong to make a movie that contradicted his fan fiction about Vader's early days.
For fun some friends and I watched the original trilogy in one sitting in college, and we realized that Star Wars has been aimed at kids for decades, and the plot/characterization problems were only fixed because Lucas did not direct Episodes 5 and 6.
Final parting shot: anyone who defends Empire Strikes Back as the best in the franchise without saying "despite the fact that Luke Skywalker was partying with Muppets on Dagobah" is the real moron.
And for the record, my favorite was Revenge of the Sith, and Phantom Menace was pretty groovy. It's not great cinema, but which Star Wars film is?
Well, if you watched the linked-to video review, you would see there's a ton of well-backed reasons why people didn't like the prequels besides being "5-year-olds who never grew up"–which more accurately describes people who defend the first three movies with phrases like "pretty groovy" as opposed to, you know, actual well-thought opinions one way or the other.
Actually it's hilarious satire. Funnier than Mystery Science Theater by far
Yet, you did visit. And comment to voice your disapproval.
I'm still mystified that Lucas didn't drag Lawrence Kasdan back with a fat (for a writer) paycheck, and at least make sense of a lot of the crap.
One interesting note: Phantom Menace was the best looking of any of the Star Wars movies, probably because it combined blue screen with actual location shooting that added more grittiness and texture to the shots. By Episode III they weren't even building sets in most of the shots, so it looked like everyone was inhabiting a half-assed version of the Matrix.
Did you watch the videos?
I grew up on the first trilogy and bow to no one in my love of them. But with the prequels, the wheels came off early and often, and this guy has absolutely nailed the how and the why. He articulates things I always FELT were wrong, but couldn't quite explain why… starting with the absolute lack of any strong central character, proceeding through the various inconsistencies in logic and tone. My only criticism of the videos is that they're STRONGLY NSFW, and there's a thread of really dark humor throughout that starts to get stale after a while. But they'd be a great addition to any class on writing for stage, page, or screen, as an accessible analysis of what makes a story tick.
De gustibus non est disputandum, and I understand why people still love movies they know are terrible, but I'd like to know if actually watching the videos sways your opinion(s) of the merits of TPM at all.
"…and Kevin Bacon."
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
OK, I should apologize for ad hominem attacks on fellow commenters who happen to enjoy "Phantom Menace." We're supposed to be above that kind of behavior – or at least save it for actual trolls. Besides, as an admirer of the Dan Akroyd/Chevy Chase vehicle "Nothing But Trouble," I don't suppose I have any business impugning other people's taste in movies.
This is a Hoot! warning there is some bad language and captive hooker in the basement, nothing out of the ordinary… Many of his points are right on the line. However, directing this back to politics, rewatch parts 1 2 and 3 and consider the impact of Alinsky and Acorn. Now compare and contrast.
I enjoyed Phantom Menace, but I looked at it as historical filler, not as a stand-alone movie. As a movie it was not great, but it's definitely reasonable to like and enjoy it. I like and enjoy Twilight. Is it a great book? No. But there are enough elements that appeal to me. (SPARKLESSS!!111)
I will always say "Return of the Jedi" is better than people give it credit for.
That was great! I intended to watch only the first part but ended up watching all 70 minutes. Hilarious and on-target, though I could have done without the serial-killer stuff …
I always thought "Phantom Menace" was bad, but hadn't given much thought as to why. This guy nails it.
To me, the prequels are like big-budget versions of Ed Wood's movies. If Ed Wood had been given $100 million to play with, these are the movies he would have made.
Lies! Nothing is funnier than MST3K! Well, maybe midgets… and monkeys dressed like people…
Yeah, and NeoConJedi, I think BigHollywood put it up because it is freaking hilarious and well done. Just finished the whole thing.
Guys, I hate to say it, TPM SUCKED Jar Jar Binks was abysmal. Darth Vadar as a kid in a spaceship like a video game shooting at droids? are you kidding me?
Lucas himself admitted that TPM and AOTC could have been told in the first act of ROTS. That is lame. No good movie could come from that admission.
"The Phantom Menace" to me is the best one of the prequels. The "Duel of the Fates" score by John Williams, the Pod Race, and Darth Maul are the only good things that happened in the Prequels. The lightsaber duel at the end is the best one out of all six films. "Revenge of the Sith" is the worst one in my opinion.
The critique of the movie is hillarious and spot on.
LOL funny and brilliant!
It definitely had the best lightsaber duel of any movie in the series, originals and prequels. The last fight where Luke snaps and starts walloping on Vader is one of the best, most emotionally intense moments in the series.
Actually the prequels get into trouble because Lucas retconned a lot of the backstory and when he did it made important story elements in the original trilogy not make sense.
For example, it was critical in the original trilogy that neither Vader nor the Emperor knew anything about Yoda. It was the underlying cause for both of them underestimating Luke's ability to resist the dark side. Remember the "Obi Wan has taught you well" lines?
Also, he turned the whole root cause of the problem on its head. The cause was (up until the prequels) Obi Wan deciding he could train a Jedi even though only Yoda was supposed to. That improper training was the direct cause of Darth Vader. Darth Vader was seduced by the promise of power on the dark side, not duped like a fool over his wife's condition.
<cont>
Then we get to what the dark side is. In the originals the dark side was all about power over others while the good side was not about power over others but about defending those who needed it. All of a sudden in the prequels the dark site became moral absolutism and the good side became moral relativism. This again turned plot elements in both Empire and Jedi on their heads.
So aside from the poor acting and disjointed stories the need to retcon like this was a big issue of the prequels.
You seem young but don't really understand why the Original Trilogy is revered by people. It was ("A New Hope") the first Blockbuster which changed how movie studios produced movies (big movies released in the summertime) . Word of mouth is how the movie became big because there was no cable or internet at the time. What you see today all began because of "A New Hope."
"Empire Strikes Back" in my opinion is a masterpiece. Heroes getting hit in the gut with a cliffhanger at the end. It surpassed the original and is the only SW movie where George Lucas didn't disrupt how Irwin Kirshner directed it. I'm sure it drives George Lucas nuts that ESB is the one that the majority of Star Wars fans love the most.
The prequels are just bad storytelling and directing. Padme losing the will to live? Sure your husband is a bad guy but being a mom to your babies sure is enough of a reason to live. That's lazy, and unimaginative storytelling.The real reason the prequels were bad was because George Lucas was surrounded by YES people. I guess if someone did question George, he probably fired him or her.
Good points.
I didn't watch the video because I'm at work.
The main character in the film is easily Senator Palpatine — he's also the title character. He's the force behind all of the action, and he has the single most defined arc in this particular picture. The saga belongs to Anakin, but this Episode is all Palpatine's.
The main character is Senator Palpatine … The Phantom Menace. I thought that was pretty easy. He drives the action, and will be ultra important in the rest of the trilogy. This is Anakin's saga, so it's worth it for one film to be about the most influential aspect of his life … especially since Anakin doesn't enter the film until the 45-minute mark.
We see the beginning of Palpatine's machinations, and even see him take a blow — the loss of his apprentice.
As for the character that people connect with — that's Obi-Wan. He's in the background enough to observe, and be the audience's eyes. And later he'll be thrust in the middle of the action, and become the heart of the trilogy.
This is definitely not as well-defined as the narrator would like, but it's a small price to pay for one of the most special elements of the trilogy: We literally see Vader's first steps. After six films, we see his complete journey. It's a nice accomplishment — even if it wasn't possible to follow the accepted screenwriting guidelines this guy hoped to see. The three films together actually show more of the arc than just one particular film.
Goodness, where to start?
This is so funny. He is spot on about his commentary. His commentary on the Star Trek films is great too.
Thank YOU! This gives voice to many of the same complaints that I had that made me want to tear Lucas' head off for ruining an entire Trilogy of films….by his crapping writing and directing. Really….it's like he forgot "Filmmaking 101" cause he was too in love with himself to see the crap before his eyes.
So some nobody from Milwaukee who probably never accomplished anything else in his life had nothing better to do than to make a 70-minute-long filmed fanboy diatribe against a 10-year-old movie. Truly pathetic.
Why Big Hollywood thought this drivel was worth linking to is beyond me.
Exactly. I agree — it's not a perfect film, but I think there's much to like about it, notably the music, the fantastic performance by Ian McDiarmid, (aesthetically, at least) the best duel in the saga.
I think Natalie Portman needed replaced; and the script needed a polish, but structurally and thematically it was sound. And years later, I appreciate its lighter tone as a contrast to Episode III.
Haha! I thought the same thing! John Nolte has a jihad against this film, and it seems personal somehow.
If BigHollywood wants to be taken seriously, it needs to stop linking to this kind of stuff.
Queen Armadillo is the Woodrow Wilson of Star Wars. Be worried, do nothing. OK Gerald Ford also works.
It's a link. To a video. That has nothing to do with Nolte and Big Hollywood spending time on anything. Unless you think it takes 5 hours to type up a few sentences and add a link to a YouTube video. You really do need a life if you're going to complain about something that took 30 seconds to put up on a website.
What is your opinion? I don't see how you're countering anything substantive that's offered in the video. Because you didn't watch it. Unless you're going to now tell us who you thought was the main character of the movie and why, and also explain away all the plot holes and horrible story-telling that took place in Episode One, I don't see how anyone should take your opinion seriously.
I can call you an idiot. That's my opinion. I should be able to voice that right? No matter how ill-informed it is. It's my opinion and it's valid because I say so, right?
Someone needs to do one of these about Obama's forst year in office.
I actually consider Attack of the Clones to be the series' low point, more so than Phantom Menace, at least. That said, I stuck with the franchise until the advent of a character named "Stinky the Hutt."
OMG I LOVED THAT! I hope to see more serial killer movie reviews.
For the record, I don't think "Phantom Menace" is a GREAT film — I actually think it's mostly mediocre, with some flashes of brilliance that hint at what it COULD have been. However, I also don't think it deserves all the over-the-top hatred it gets, & I think this piling-on 10 years after the fact is ridiculous. I also don't think that Lucas (and anyone who defends him) "deserves" all the nasty personal attacks — anymore than, say, George W Bush or Sarah Palin "deserve" the attacks against them.
I DO enjoy "Attack of the Clones" & "Revenge of the Sith", so if people want to attack me for that, then have at it.
"Will we have to wait ten years for the 70-minute review explaining why “Avatar” sucks?"
No, John. You're a filmmaker, dammit, find a torrent and get on the ball!
A very funny review of a really bad movie. In fact the review was orders of magnitude more entertaining than the movie itself. The kicker in all of this is that Lucas, not content with totally screwing the Star Wars franchise, decides to do screw over the Indiana Jones franchise as well, although he had a lot of help from Spielberg on that one.
I dont think we could limit that to 70 minutes.
And here I thought I was the only one that like that film.
A sprinkling of good, basic points of criticism but too much the ironic semi-retarded affect and sidebars about his sad life. "Brilliant"? Hardly. I like the idea of deconstructing a movie like "Phantom" but there's a better and more entertaining way to do it than this.
waaa waaa waa I'm a bleeding puss lieberal douche and I can't stand that someone doesn't think the way I do.. waaa waaa
Grow a pair and grow up, Mary..
"If you're referring to me, then, yes I have, "
YOU LIE!!
But Young Obi-Wan would've worn an Ermine stole..
What a jackass. It never ceases to amaze me how the haters line up to slag Lucas, yet ALWAYS give Spielberg accolades for ANYTHING he does. And please don't tell me that, warts and all, Phantom Menace was not better than Minority Report, A.I., Jurassic Park, Jurassic Park 2, Indy 4….
If you never saw the last one (the best of the prequel trilogy, you forfeit your right to intelligently discuss the prequels. See also: the Star Wars movies aren't "sci-fi".
I'd like to give people who say they're Star Wars fans but think they're clever by slagging on it constantly "the finger": anyone paying attention to the films knows the following:
The biological explanation for the Force was needed to explain how Anakin went from being one of the most powerful Jedi anybody's ever seen to a thug who had to take orders from politicians and other middlemen and unable to kill Palpatine.
There had to be an explanation of that: since he lost his biological connection (midichlorians in his body) to the Force (which IS an energy field) he wouldn't have the abilities he had. The biological connection to the Force is also why everyone can't be a Jedi, why it runs in family bloodlines, etc. So it's not contrary to what Ben says in Ep 4.
But for most people it's easier and more satisfying to belittle.
Bravo, man. Totally.
Don't be a twat and throw the L word around just because someone disagrees with you. Maybe, just maybe the respondent is a Star Wars fan, not a "liberal douche".
Nick1970 · 17 hours ago
So some nobody from Milwaukee who probably never accomplished anything else in his life had nothing better to do than to make a 70-minute-long filmed fanboy diatribe against a 10-year-old movie. Truly pathetic.
Why Big Hollywood thought this drivel was worth linking to is beyond me
ABSOLUTELY. Bravo, Nick.
Totally, NeoConJedi. People bust all over the sequels, yet think Jurassic Park or Minority Report is sheer cinematic genius.
I have yet to me at TRUE SW fan who can honestly (and intelligently) say the previews are "unwatchable".
Totally.
"I watched maybe 15 min of Phantom Menace and none of the ones after …"
So that puts you in a great position to slam everything about those three films, right?
I saw 6 of 7,( for some reason the 7th is still buffering) This is great in so many ways but maybe the best is that he is just a guy who rip apart an icon? Or better yet unmasked the icon.
Agreed. The script needed work. Lucas was never a great screenwriter. But as far as setting up the story of the entire saga by introducing us to the Republic when the Jedi were in charge and things were peaceful, Phantom Menace has plenty of high notes.
And I will freely admit, Jar Jar was not one of them.
; )
Nope we got that from Nolte before it was released!
OMG Nick those right wingers have opinions that are different from you.
You should buy a gun and shoot …. oh that's right gun control well you can get a steak knife and really stab … oh wait a minute "meat is murder". What offensive things can you do with a spatula again…. if you were JAckie chan that would be easy …. Never Mind – you'd have to have grown up in a chinese acrobatic troop sleeping on mats and working 14 hours a day.
I know you can make petulant insulting comments on a blog and tell them all what poopi heads they are.
That'll get im
Thank you Guy from Milwaukee.
I have always thought these movies were terrible and was angry at Lucas for eFFin up such a great thing. You have explained in detail exactly why I feel that way and have enlightened me. I thank you, I'd say you are a God but then people would confuse you with Barack Obama so I'll stop the fanboyism there before it gets weird.
Seriously though I think the reason the characters are drawn so cripticly is that in Lucas's mind they were not meant to be actual persons with thoughts and dreams unique to the condition of sentient creatrues. Rather they were meant to be political allegories for what is wrong with the American political system. He forgot that personified political concepts tend to be one sided and forgot to add the personalities.
So if I am coming down a road and I see three fresh turds and I smell the first one and it smells bad. I then doublecheck and smell the second and man it smells bad too.
Do I forfeit my right to state that turds smell bad just because I passed on smelling the one that smelled the least bad. Trying to follow the point of your logic here.
Star wars is Science Fantasy but hit has many elements of softcore science fiction. This is science fiction where the science behind what is being done is not explained but is potentially able to happen (Hyperspace travel). Science Fantasy probably cannot (feeling the force accross light years of space instantaneously) Hard Science Fiction is likely and provable. The works of Robert Forward (Indestiguishable from Magic, Camelot 3000K) or the movie Gattaca being good examples.
"It surpassed the original and is the only SW movie where George Lucas didn't disrupt how Irwin Kirshner directed it."
Exactly–Empire was the best because Lucas wrote the story and let other people write and direct it. The problem with saying the prequels are bad because Lucas wrote/directed them is Lucas wrote/directed all of A New Hope, and was heavily involved with Return of the Jedi, which means that those movies have to be bad too.
And I don't think Lucas cares if people like Empire the best, because the Star Wars empire is practically Disney Jr. He knows that little kids made the first film a success, so he will keep the series juvenile as long as humanly possible. His friend Speilberg is also in the same boat–and if you don't believe me, can you tell me what happened to the guns in ET? The best part about Star Wars is its ability to cross generations–you have the prequels and Clone Wars to hook in the new generation, and you have the books to keep the Original Trilogy fans hooked. Think how much money Lucas makes from older Star Wars fans who hated the Prequels (but still went), and bought the entire Legacy of the Force series?
The prequels aren't Lars Von Trier-style horrible; they're just skewed for a young audience. That's why Anakin is a little boy in Phantom Menace–where he's the audience surrogate character like the Batman comics' Robin.
2nded. I once watched the movie by fast forwarding thru every scene containing Padme and Anakin alone–the movie lasted 20 minutes, and it was *awesome*.
Lol!
According to fan boy logic I *have* to watch the third one no matter how much I disliked the other two. But, fortunately, I don't let fan boys do my thinking for me.
[...] else has already linked to the viral epic YouTube deconstruction of the Episode One of the Star Wars series [...]
LOL! I kept referring to her as Queen Alameda!
What do we call it? The Liberal Menace? Attack of the Drones? Revenge of the Socialiths?
70 minutes! I don't need to watch it to find out why Phantom Menace sucks. It sucks because it isn't any good.
I hate to break this to you, Individualist, but :
1) I am NOT a liberal — I stauchly support both George Bush & Sarah Palin, and have voted Republican nearly my entire adult life — and I also commented on Libertas & Dirty Harry's blog
2) I DO own a gun & have fired it, and I OPPOSE gun control
3) I LOVE meat — it's vegetables I can't stand =)
So so much for your idiotic straw man arguments.
And as for making "petulant insulting comments on a blog" telling people "what poopi heads they are"– gee, project much? All I did was express MY OPINION on the video. I'M not the one who started in with all the smartass personal attacks. So maybe YOU are the one who can't handle people having different opinions than you.
You're an absolute waste of space. And I'd like to see you go up & say those things to someone's FACE.
(BTW, I'm NOT a liberal…)
Can't you handle the fact that maybe not everybody agrees with you? For shame.
Mirror, look in.
Did you watch it, Stephen? Maybe the answer lies in actually seeing the thing you hate.
No, Nick. You expressed an opinion about Big Hollywood featuring this video in a post. That's where the vitriol comes from. I doubt anyone would give you a hard time if you just said "I don't think it's funny. The guy seems like a dork." Then it would be your opinion. Instead you disparaged the poster because he chose to highlight it. Big diff.
I believe you're not a liberal. But you're still complaining that someone is expressing a different opinion than your own.
NCJ, it's not that you defend the movie. It's that all the fans of the movie are so wee-wee'd up they're disgusted Big Hollywood would make a post about it. That's the problem. Defend the movie, but don't say others can't disagree with you and even to a strong degree. As I told Stephen, please, by all means, love the movie enough to make a 70 minute video defense of it. Or don't. Just don't go around telling everyone else what they can and cannot like/do.
It's not worth getting worked up about anyway. It's a movie. And the guy who made it got a healthy paycheck and continues to make $$ off it. It's all good.
Well said, Bugs.
That was surprisingly well made, informative and entertaining. Many thanks for the heads up.
Stephen, I don't give Spielberg a pass at all. However, of the movies you cited, I've only seen the first two Jurassic Parks and they were both better than The Phantom Menace, IMO.
IMO = "in my opinion" by the way.
I agree. I like Return. The only thing that ruins that movie for me is those stupid cheesy Ewoks. How I wanted the Empire to crush them into some admixture that could be then be served as a Mcdonald's hamburger.
You must be logged in to post a comment.