The ultimate Revenge of the Sith review

darth-sidious.jpg Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith received a lot of praise from critics happy to finally see a passable new Star Wars movie. But let's face it: it has real failings -- motivation, consistency, tone -- that were obscured by more obvious flaws in the prequel trilogy that we'd already made our peace with. So we focused on the epic tragic awesomeness and let it go. Harry S. Plinkett's NSFW 110-minute review takes that gimme and shoves it where it belongs. In the words of one reader of Roger Ebert, it "doesn't rip Episode III into 1000 pieces so much as completely disintegrate it into dust."


  1. Been dying to watch the review for a few days now, but i’ve been waiting for a friend to get back from vacation to watch it. Loved the past 2 reviews that he did and really looking forward to this new one :D

    1. There’s also the Rifftrax of Episode 3. I’ve literally only seen the movie twice. Once in theaters, and once with Rifftrax (guess which one was more enjoyable?)

    2. I agree with you turtlejet. Those prequels are absurdly bad and these reviews collectively have allowed me such catharsis.

  2. Absolutely great review, just like all his others. This one even toned down the misogyny and violence, for those who were offended by it in his first two Star Wars reviews.

    Really, I just watched the whole thing a second time today, it’s that great. His reviews reignited my affection for the original trilogy and showed me the failings of not just the Prequels but many recent films. Thank you, Red Letter Media!

    Minor correction, Rob: the reviewer’s name is Harry S. Plinkett, like the joke.

    1. “This one even toned down the misogyny and violence, for those who were offended by it in his first two Star Wars reviews.”

      Yes, and considerately replaced it with cat-fucking and killing. And of course, the POV urination shot. He’s so PC now. :)

  3. Validates my decision to give up after the Phantom Menace. Really the third original movie was bad enough. At some point, not watching is the best defense.

  4. I love these reviews. You learn a lot about film and story-telling and how to fake a suicide note.

  5. The Episode I review of Red Letter Media got passed around quite a bit when it came out last year (Simon Pegg tweeted about it). If you’re new to the Plinkett Reviewing Experience, that a day off and watch all three in order. Don’t just jump in on Ep III.

    It really is the only good thing to have come out of those awful prequels.

  6. I must be missing something, I have to be, because everybody gives this guy rave reviews, and it’s like listening to Charles Grodin and Ben Stein having sex. You know there’s supposed to be *something* of interest in there, but the voice puts you to sleep.

    1. Some people just don’t like the voice or the character of Plinkett (don’t get that, myself; he’s not supposed to be likeable.)

      Do yourself a favor, though, and watch part three of this one. It’s pretty devastating.

  7. Awesome! I watched (and re-watched) his review to part I; didn’t even know he’d done II or III.

    Yes, III was really as bad as I or II. That slight lump in your throat you feel at the end, when you see the partially-built Death Star and Luke gets placed on Tatooine, is entirely due to the mythology of episode IV. III got a little credit where very little was deserved.

  8. Two hours? Who has that kind of time to kill for a movie review? Can someone speed it up and Yakety Sax it?

  9. His reviews of the Star Wars pre_mess are not only hilarious but they are really helpful for filmmakers as a great example of what NOT TO DO when making a film… so they have pretty good educational value as well… also I think he might strike terror in future filmmakers cause if you make some crap film he might shred it to pieces in front of everyone 0_0

  10. Sitting there watching these movies the first time round, I couldn’t put my finger on what made them so terribly bad. The action was fun and interesting, but I felt so – disconnected – from the film.

    Watching the review of SW episode III put keenly in focus what took me out of the movie – it’s those stupid shot/reverse shot dialog scenes on green screen.

    CGI has really advanced and is amazing, but it only really shines in a good quality action sequence. Things are moving, motion blurs, our brain doesn’t have time to really study the surroundings and get that “uncanny valley” feeling.

    Sitting there watching two people talk back and forth sitting on a couch in front of a green screen is full of fail. You immediately get this cartoony vibe from the set, largely because there isn’t one.

    Add in horrendously boring and subtle as a brick to the head dialog and you lose all interest in the flick. Every stupid talking scene is the same way.

    I knew something was fundamentally wrong. Interesting REAL camera work, sets, and conversations, are KEY to a good and memorable movie.

  11. I am now convinced that guerilla filmmakers could retcon the prequel trilogy out of existence by inventing an utterly new story and set of films to replace them.

    One film about Anakin’s rise – his youthful development as a heroic character, training as a member of the dwindling order of jedi knights, whose century long decline is now mirrored by that of the old and rapidly failing Republic.

    One film about Anakin’s growth and struggles – now in the prime of life, Anakin has to make hard choices and is tasked with grave responsibilities. The republic has fully collapsed; war and strife abound; the handful of remaining jedi are weak, conflicted, uncertain, and obsolete. Anakin refuses to stand by and watch the galaxy tear itself apart, breaks with the other knights, joins with a force of freedom fighters, makes a name for himself.

    One film about Anakin’s fall – beaten, battered, and bruised, Anakin begins to falter against the terrible odds. He’s becoming jaded, clinging to his ideals, praying for a miracle he knows won’t ever come, fighting because no one else will. But the price seems too great, too terrible. He watches countless die, fails to stop great evils, feels powerless and torn… and in desperation he starts to make sacrifices. He makes deals, forges temporary alliances, chooses “the lesser” of two evils. The Empire is ascendant, offers peace and stabilitiy, bread and land, survival over sainthood. Anakin Skywalker dies. Darth Vader enlists.

    ~D. Walker

    1. THIS WITH A CHERRY ON TOP. A guerrilla prequel is just what we need. Maybe not exactly as outlined, but yeah, a better story is definitely possible. The constraint of not having the cooperation of a major studio or any original actors will force a lot of ingenuity into the making, for certain.

      but, with what resources? and how do you avoid the legal consequences? if nothing else, the actors’ faces will be visible.

  12. We are talking about a movie in which a woman literally dies of a broken heart (gag), which it caused by her boyfriend being an evil dick, which he is doing specifically to save her life.

    It’s like the gift of the magi, raised to the power of preposterously appallingly dumb and melodramatic. That plot would have been considered hackneyed cheese if it had been starwars fanfic.

    I’m not sure if humorously vicious reviews are the only good thing to come out of that movie, or if that’s just the sunk cost fallacy setting in, making me want to find something of value in the time I worse than wasted on that movie.

    1. For Lucas to write at the level of fanfic he would have to at least be interested in the story as a fan. From the wikipedia article even American Grafiti gets a CGI redo, c’mon does the nerd shoot first this time in Vietnam?
      Ever since Jedi I have always felt like I was watching a long commercial for trademark Kenner toys.
      Letting bits like Jar Jar literally fart and sniff in a movie is strong evidence that story killer Lucas is surrounded by people who are afraid to tell him his farts stink.
      When I talk to kids today(get off my damn lawn) of college age who grew up with Pixar CGI they are completely unimpressed by the Star Wars special effects which shocked us 80’s kids, the are left with a story by a guy with a great non CGI special effects team and mediocre and fading writing skills.
      I enjoy these reviews far more than the actual sad Star Wars prequels and Crystal NumbSkull, it has been a long time since 1977. Lets be fair Lucas is a far better director than I but were it not for going into Star Wars and Indiana Jones with some humility nobody would even remember him; instead he has been surfing the top of the motion picture world on inertia and nostalgia for over thirty years.

      1. When I talk to kids today(get off my damn lawn) of college age who grew up with Pixar CGI they are completely unimpressed by the Star Wars special effects which shocked us 80’s kids, the are left with a story by a guy with a great non CGI special effects team and mediocre and fading writing skills.

        You know what film has horrible special effects? The 1933 King Kong. By modern standards it looks fake and jokey… But only if you look at the effects. In the context of the storytelling it works 100% perfectly. Which is why the original King Kong is still popular, kids and adults like it and 100% nobody bitches and moans about the “realism” of special effects.

        I still marvel at Buster Keaton films. And still love The Red Balloon.

        And to counter this, I just saw the 2010 remake of True Grit and was blown away. Was it modern tech that improved that made this remake work better (in my opinion) than the 1969 original? Nope. What worked is great acting and excellent direction. The production design wasn’t too shabby either, but without a competent framework to hang it all on, it would have been a crappy film.

  13. You’re so… beautiful.
    It’s because I’m so in love.
    No, it’s because I’m so in love with YOUUUU.
    No, I’m more in love with you, silly!

    Love the laugh track there.

  14. Often overlooked is the editing talents of his wife, Marcia Lucas.

    She edited American Graffiti and Taxi Driver as well, and The first and third SW films.

    Apparently she was one of the few that could tell him “NO, CUT IT” and he would pay attention.

    Lucas has his talents. But without someone to reel him in (as seen from the ‘special editions’) he runs amok pushing every idea into the frame without ‘editing’.

    I honestly think that without her editing American Graffiti and SW V would have been muddled and confusing as Lucas’ later work.

    1. [quote]But without someone to reel him in (as seen from the ‘special editions’)
      he runs amok pushing every idea into the frame without ‘editing’.[/quote]

      There’s a rather fitting term for that.

      “Kill your children.”

      1. The correct, and less creepy, expression is “kill your darlings” (Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch/William Faulkner).

  15. Well, maybe the funny was overhyped, but that was probably the best thing about Star Wars III. That, and “Star war. The backstroke of the west”.

    1. That was really interesting if over-long, thanks. I’m totally prepared to believe Lucas’ first movies were good largely due to the influence of Marcia. I’m AMAZED they were originally going to end *Raiders* without that last scene with Marion, until Marcia told them to.

    2. Thanks for that link. It IS a very long bio, but incredibly illuminating, and while it’s hard to know how much of it is ‘true’, it certainly rings true to me. It really explains a lot of open questions I’ve had for years. Primier among them: how could the writer/director of Star Wars (ep. IV) go on to create such trite, hackneyed, unemotional, boring, overblown pieces of shit?
      Unsurprisingly, Marcia Lucas was clearly the reason. An Oscar-winning intelligent editor, who worked her butt off to put a film together so that it actually flowed and let an audience connect with it. She also clearly had many good ideas that were included in not only Lucas’ films, but also those of Scorsese and Coppola. She’s praised by Walter Murch! And Indiana Jones was named after HER dog, not George’s.
      After reading her bio I think that she must have had a great deal of influence and input in shaping and creating Star Wars. Thank you, Marcia, for that gift to cinema and my childhood!

  16. Lets be fair Lucas is a far better director than I

    He’s only directed three films since 1977, and a total of six feature films in his whole career. I’m not sure that’s a statistically significant sample size. And the three since 1977 were dogs.

    When I talk to kids today (get off my damn lawn) of college age who grew up with Pixar CGI they are completely unimpressed by the Star Wars special effects which shocked us 80’s kids

    When I look at 2001:A Space Odyssey (1968) and Alien (1979), I’m unimpressed by the special effects in the Star Wars films. Hell, the tornado in The Wizard of Oz impresses me more than Jar Jar Binks.

    1. I saw “Transformers” with the 15 year old brother of my girlfriend. He was bored out of his mind, and afterward talked about how CGI was “cheap and easy.”

      By contrast, he loved the LOTR movies, as well as “Nightmare Before Chrismas” and “Coraline”. Those films fooled him. He stopped seeing the green-screen antics and started believing in the world he was presented. All those movies also had deep stories, realized characters and a story to tell.

      That’s the sadness of the prequels, Lucas presented the audience with gorgeous, technically superb, utterly soulless worlds.

      I’m not angry with George Lucas, like many geeks seem to be, I just wish he’d stuck with THX1138 style indie flicks.

  17. You’re kidding me. The last film came out when? Who cares about something that far in the past?

    Most of today’s music and film sucks completely. Time to quit digesting last month’s meal – we’re starving out here. 2011 is the year for renewal. WHo the hell cares about grinding *axes*?????????

    1. Maybe he’ll do Tron: Legacy or even Tron next? Because I re-watched the original Tron and boy, was that a visually arresting journey into stultifying tedium.

      1. Plinkett revels in dissecting movie failures — films that utterly fall on their face in ridiculous ways, like “Star Trek: Insurrection”. The original TRON is a product of its time, a special-effects showpiece that nobody pretends was a brilliant piece of filmmaking. And since its sequel is a tightly-written fun movie that made millions of fans very happy, I don’t see Plinkett taking it apart.

  18. Disintegrates it into dust?

    Does that mean it has made Revenge of the Sith more powerful than we can possibly imagine?

  19. But could someone tell this guy the whole psycho killer cat fucking subplot is just totally creepy and distracting and undermines everything great about his videos? Maybe we need to make a video analyzing his analysis.

    1. “But could someone tell this guy the whole psycho killer cat fucking subplot is just totally creepy and distracting and undermines everything great about his videos?”

      Someone’s not getting any pizza rolls in the mail.

    2. After review of all of Plinkett’s “reviews”, I disagree with what you call the “subplot”. Obviously all those film reviews are subplots of a greater story.

  20. I wonder why everyone was so surprised about the prequels sucking. Lucas is a hack, and has always been. Just re-watch the original Episode VI, and tell me that wasn’t shite…

  21. The funny thing about the prequels is that while they revealed how poor a writer & director Lucas has become, the SW properties spawned off of the prequels are far better filmmaking than the actual movies. The currently running Clone Wars cartoon, bizarrely, is better-written and better-filmed than anything Lucas did on screen. The folks Lucas employs are brilliant at world-building.

  22. This is really bizarre. I am SURE I watched this movie. In fact, I watched it rather recently – well after it came out, maybe in the last couple years.

    And yet, watching this summary…I simply couldn’t remember ANY of this damned movie. Not a single detail rang even the slightest bell. I remember exactly as much about this movie as I knew before I watched it – the pre-story of Vader, the fall of the empire, etc. All of which I got from reading an essay about the political allegory of the film, a la the war on terror etc.

    The rather shocking conclusion I get from this is that reading a dry essay about the movie was more emotionally engaging and more memorable than the movie itself.

    This review is fantastic, but I had to stop watching halfway through because I simply had no idea about all the minute plot points he was discussing.

  23. That whole Marcia Lucas story is just entirely too sad, but it makes you wonder if what Plinkett said was not the truth…that the original trilogy succeeded BECAUSE of the forces trying to temper George’s judgement. Did the prequels fail because George had the total control he always wanted?

  24. My problem with these reviews is always the same thing: the voice. With vocal delivery like that, the jokes need to be a great deal funnier than, well they are. I remember watching the first review for five minutes, patiently waiting to laugh at something. It felt like watching a Friends episode, you know someone told a joke, yet nothing was funny. Just spit out the marbles and talk normally and maybe it’ll have a chance at being funny.

  25. I don’t care to relive this film, even through a snarky review. This was the most painful of the prequels for me as it seemed the hardest to screw up, but I was so wrong and it was awful. The best criticism of these films I read was pointing out that Lucas’ insistence on following the “almost real time” plots of the original films didn’t work for these. The original Star Wars films all happen over a period of seemingly a few days. The prequels, telling a much larger story, needed some “time spanning”. This would have saved us from an entire movie about an annoying 8 year old and more importantly not just given us a 10 second cameo of Darth Vader at the very end. The only thing I cared about when these sequels were announced were seeing the Clone Wars which were spun off as a cartoon and a young Vader, at the height of his powers hunting Jedi’s. George robbed us of all that.

  26. So the idea here is that this “Plinkett” is really delivering a serious analysis of a movie while at the same time also doing the most annoying, punchable character ever?
    I don’t know about you, but it doesn’t work at all for me.

    The valid points that the reviewer makes are obfuscated by the obnoxiousness of the character, and vice versa.
    It gets downright META around 22 minutes into the review when he starts to talk about how the tone of the film has to have some sort of consistency. That’s where I had to shut it off and take a breather.

    James Rolfe of Cinemassacre has been doing something similar for a couple of years to great critical acclaim, but he only pulls that off because his obnoxious character is, you know, likeable.

    1. I just watched a two-parter review on Cinemassacre, but I don’t know if it was what you were talking about. He didn’t really have anything of substance to say, I’m afraid. In fact, he called Attack of the Clones “pretty good” and Revenge of the Sith a “homerun” because they were both “cool” and so he kind of lost my attention.

      Plinkett made me look at Revenge of the Sith in a whole new way…certain elements that really had been tugging at my thoughts, but I could never really express.

      Just the bit were he dissects how poorly framed and pedestrian the dialog scenes were is worth the time to watch it. I was never a film student, just a Star Wars geek, so maybe this is old hat to some of you.

      1. No, that’s not at all what I was talking about. Not even close.
        My point is that the Cinemassacre reviews very consistently put comedy first, reviewing second, wich is what justifies the guise of a potty-mouthed fictional critic character.

        “Plinkett”s review, on the other hand, actually IS a probing, thought-provoking analysis wich I agree DOES make you think about Star Wars in whole new way – that is, if you can stand his makeshift superfake southern drawl and unfunny tacked-on gross-out tangents for two goddamned hours.

        It seems that the point of the exercise actually was to review Revenge of the Sith, and nobody is gonna watch something that goes on this long just for the luls, so the entire comedy routine is just a big unnecessary annoyance.

        1. I gotcha. I just didn’t see the Cinemassacre guy trying to be funny in his Star Wars reviews. Maybe that’s not typical of his reviews or I watched the wrong thing.

          I enjoyed the asides this time around…certainly less outlandish than previous efforts. To be honest, I don’t think this guy (that is, “Plinkett”) would have caught on if it weren’t for the gross-out humor. The movies he reviews are 5-10 years old, after all. On the other hand, I’d like to see a “straight” dissection of the movies that weren’t either dry or too fanboyish.

        2. Plinkett’s psycho “Buffalo Bill” character and ongoing side story has been built during many of his reviews. Some of the older ones are hilarious. You’d have to watch them all to get the context.

      2. “Just the bit were he dissects how poorly framed and pedestrian the dialog scenes were is worth the time to watch it.”

        Completely agree. The whole discussion of composition, cutting patterns, and blocking absolutely makes the review.

        After this, there’s just no way to hang onto the idea that “Sith” is in any sense superior to the other two prequels.

        1. Have to agree there too. It’s those insights that make the review. Along with seeing Lucas sitting in a chair drinking coffee in almost ever behind the scenes video, pretty much forcing that style of lazy TV soap shoots.

          Something I hadn’t realised before is just how limiting green screen can be. I understand now why I really don’t like the TV show Sanctuary, despite loving fantasy and sci-fi and having nothing against the actors or story lines. It’s the whole were all acting in front of a green screen and can’t really go anywhere problem that ruins it. It’s static and boring.

          As highlighted elsewhere, these reviews should be required viewing for all budding film makers

  27. Once it has been seen it cannot be unseen:

    The angle of the light saber in the picture for this article is all wrong. It makes it look like he is holding a light saber that is bent at the hilt.

  28. something i wondered when plinkett’s last review came out, and something i find myself wondering again – has lucas seen these reviews? the last one was a pretty big deal on the internet, and got a lot of attention.

  29. You’re living up to your name Eeyore. I don’t know what your sense of humor is, but know that 1) it actually is hilarious and 2)nobody is going to watch 2 hours of critical analysis of a mediocre film without levity. Also, realize that his character has been developing over the course of several reviews.

    The tone of these reviews is also obvious, it’s humor first informative second. The fact that he’s figured out a way to do that beyond the quickly becoming old method of just having exaggerated reactions to flaws in things they are reviewing.

    The fact that you bring up James Rolph as your example of doing this well only shows you as the one not getting it. Rolph plays a game, points out a flaw, and then swears, at the end he has some related set piece like fighting Bugs Bunny. This can be entertaining, but it’s nothing as impressive as this review.

    This review has more entertainment value than the movie it’s reviewing, that’s impressive.

  30. The Plinkett character is probably meant as a comic relief. The review itself is interesting and effective, but its sheer length would try the patience of even the most dedicated film student, if it didn’t have just a little bit of built-in distraction.

    As for the age of the movies, well… they’re Star Wars, so they’ve stayed relevant this whole time. The new Star Trek is brand new, though I think we’ve all collectively brushed the TNG movies under the rug. I have no explanation for Baby’s Day Out, though, as it’s not only old, but I don’t think anyone really saw it.

  31. Just watched the whole review. What stands out for me more than anything is how every scene from the old Star Wars conjured up memories of it and what exactly happened, even what was said. Every, and I mean every scene of the new Star Wars movies, I couldn’t even remember seeing them. That’s coming from someone who considers themselves a big Star Wars fan.

    These reviews are just great, I loved the first one and this just carries on giving. I’d love to know that Lucas has watched at least some of it and cringed but I guess sitting in his mansion counting his money, he’s not going to be worried for too long.

    One more thing I’d like to bring up. Long videos are OK! I watched this whole review, as I did the others in one sitting. I didn’t need help from my mom, I didn’t need to be reminded 10 minutes in what had just happened in the last ten minutes (I’m looking at you factual TV shows like Mythbusters!) There are details here in this review that you could never have put together without it being so long. There’s a depth to the whole series that is simply lacking in every other review I ever read or watched. Now maybe I’m missing out on some great insightful reviews elsewhere but I think the popularity of these reviews shows that there are a lot of us who still want some real in depth analysis and this series delivers that.

  32. It was interesting to view the Star Trek movie review, as he actually LIKED that movie. He has criticisms to be sure, but it was refreshing not to see him stomp a movie into bits.

    The Baby Day Out review was pretty funny. I hadn’t seen the movie prior to the review, but he gives a pretty good overview of it. My theory is that he needed a break between the 2nd Star Wars movie and the 3rd and BDO served that purpose. I don’t begrudge him needing a break because goodness knows I couldn’t do such a comprehensive review of the movie.

    I read the link above about Marcia Lucas, and it strikes me that the Citizen Kane sequence in the RotS review is even more apt than I previously thought.

    1. My theory is that he needed a break between the 2nd Star Wars movie and the 3rd and BDO served that purpose.

      Well, that and Nadine used that during her escape.

      I was amused that he actually reviewed it. Others, not so much.

  33. “We are never shown the most important character developments moments in a film that’s almost exclusively about a character. All we do is learn about why he’s angry.”


  34. When you are finished focusing on RedLetterMedia’s Plinkett review of the Revenge of the Sith movie, how about spending some time focusing on how the media landscape from that time period was equally as troubling. From Star Wars’ fan attacks on subcultures to FBI/ICE joint operations sending people to jail, the months around the release of Revenge of the Sith were interesting times, not just for Star Wars fandom but for issues like freer internets, the mispronunciation of Sith, intercultural and cross international boarder expression and much much more. %20’s, THEE BACKSLACPKPING WITH MEDIA, condenses the hundreds of hours of individual to corporate media into a 3.5 hour documediamentary which you can choose to spend as little or as much time as you want.

    Think you got it? then watch some:

    Confused? Then here’s a piece of a review:

    Quote: “As you probably have guessed, this is not your typical fanedit. It’s a documentary about Star Wars, yet that is not its mission. It’s a mashup yet its goal is not necessarely the entertainment value usually associated with such edits. The best way I could describe this thing is that it’s a commentary on the current state of the media. No wait – it’s a mockumentary on the way we perceive media. No, that’s not exactly it. It’s an extrapolation on how media will be fed to us somewhere down the line in 20, 30 years. Actually, it is all these things.

    Thee Backslacpkping With Media is a meticulously assembled piece of art which has so many levels of depths that it is almost impossible to review in a conventional way. It is rather meant to be analyzed, deconstructed and talked about endlessly. It is meant to make us simultaneously examine the impact Star Wars has had on the way movies are marketed; the way the media has handled the hype surrounding the prequels; the way we assimilate information; the current state of the internet and where it’s headed; how corporations are shaping modern copyright laws; how we perceive art and what is “stealing” and what is “hommage” and what is derivative work and… too many questions that I will not go into here, because that is not the purpose of this review.”

    FAQ: (now with more FBI/ICE FOIA Documentation!)

  35. Those who can’t stand Plinkett’s voice and bizarrely violent cut-scenes: just do a “phantom edit” of his review and add a new voice over. And add some Yakety Sax.

  36. What’s amazing about this reviewer is, when you first hear him
    you’re like “whaa? this guy’s got the worst delivery I’ve ever
    heard! can’t he at least _try_ to enunciate?” but 5 minutes into it,
    not only do you appreciate his idiosyncratic delivery, you’re
    appreciating his unique voice and thinking noone could have done
    this better.

  37. I watched for about 5 minutes, and I did laugh. BUT…the movies were bad. I can’t comprehend spending close to 2 hours watching videos to reinforce that belief.

  38. Go Mahler! (Adagietto from the 5th symphony is used at the end of part III of the Sith review.)

    Anyway, I *like* the bored, droning voice, and *hate* the misogynistic serial killer stuff. It’s not such a subtle distinction to make. :) Anyone with me?

    1. I’m with you, endymion. No way these videos would go viral the way they have if he were just a dry academic. Nobody would sit through movie criticism videos this long if not for some levity*. But that being said, the serial killer stuff just isn’t funny. It’d be excusable if it were funny, but it isn’t, so this is what we’re left with. It’s almost as if it’s one man having total control over content without somebody telling him what to cut out leads to some very flawed productions…. hey WAIT A MINUTE! I’m sensing a parallel!

      *Conversely, these videos aren’t anywhere near funny enough for people to sit through just for the humor, or even primarily for the humor. They watch them primarily for the points he makes about the Star Wars movies. The humor helps out, but the stupid psychopath stuff holds it back.

  39. It’s not so much that he’s bored and droning. It’s that he’s monotonous (I mean that in the literal sense, his voice is a monotone), mealy mouthed, mumbling, and devoid of any spark of interest. I’ve tried listening to several of his videos, and only made it through part one of Insurrection, and that left me wishing I’d not done so. I admit, he’s got some good points, but it’s like taking social advice from South Park… even if they have a good point, it’s not worth suffering the banality to get there.

    1. I don’t think his voice is monotonous, he’s trying to play a character who’s both a creepy serial killer and a movie buff. I think the voice is his “serial killer” voice.

      There are many moments where he becomes very animated, manic even. But I can see where you’re coming from, it’s a very dead pan delivery on the whole.

      While his voice is nothing like Noam Chomsky’s, I always get that feeling you’re describing, listening to him. Like I’m going to nod off if he doesn’t inject even a tiny bit of passion into his very long talks. But just like here, it’s worth sticking with for the insights. That is if you’re interested in the mechanics of film making.

      Perhaps the real fault of these videos is in the titles. Calling them reviews doesn’t really sit well with what’s in them. They are much more about the film making process than the comedy or review aspect.

  40. I think the voice is funny, reminds me of a cross between Butthead (from Beavis &) and Strong Bad, both characters I not coincidentally find very amusing. And I think the serial killer stuff is funny too as long as they don’t spend too long on it, how can you not laugh at a bunch of human bones in a giant Titanic-themed popcorn bucket? But YMMV obviously!

    Agree with those who said the best part was the dissection of the horribly boring staging of all dialogue scenes. I never noticed that consciously, but now I can’t unsee it. The line about the scenes being staged like a soap opera was really spot on.

  41. This post sparked an argument between my housemate and me, about the quality/enjoyability of Jedi. (we both agree that the prequels sucked.)

    And what really annoys me about all of this, is that I still care one jot, after 34 years!

    If stories have the potential to help us grow up, be more mature in our aspirations, then what would it take to let go of the awfulness and move forward with something better?

    Maybe it’s just as well that Firefly was canceled before it could suck. And we’ll always have the first two seasons of Battlestar Galactica.

    I’m going to go play with my ST:TOS Lego sets now.

  42. (Just like to note that I feel very dumb thinking that this was the guy’s actual voice. Sure it was obvious that the “backstory” of him killing his wife was just that, but after doing the google, it’s interesting to find that his voice is an intentional construct. he thought (i think, correctly) that he gets a better payoff if it’s a marble-mouth spouting movie criticism, than normal-guy.)

Comments are closed.