[ SECRET POST #2743 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2743 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 077 secrets from Secret Submission Post #392.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[cushlamochree]

The RLM reviews (really, their whole deal as a channel) are really annoying - especially anything that tries to deal with a dumb metaplot - so I can get why you couldn't get through them.

But I think they also make a lot of compelling points. They're legitimately insightful and they do point out a lot of reasons why people found the prequels disappointing on a level that's much more nuanced than just saying that they sucked and Jar Jar was awful. I don't agree with everything they say but it's a shame they add all the exaggerations and the Mr Plinkett charater stuff because the other parts, the actual review parts, are decent.

So I guess I'm saying is I get where you're coming from.

[sarillia]

I wasn't impressed by some of the arguments they were making either. I remember them pointing out that there was no clear protagonist. Okay? Can you spend a few minutes talking about why that's a bad thing instead of taking it for granted that it's a negative?

I may be remembering wrong though. It was a while ago, and that stuff you're talking about really was so annoying so that's what I remember most. But I do remember thinking that I wasn't impressed by the analysis that I saw either. I'm sure if I kept watching there would have been plenty that I agreed with too though. There is plenty to complain about in the prequels, even if I like them.

[cushlamochree]

The stuff about the lack of a protagonist is part of a broader argument, which is that the emotional and character lines of the movie don't make sense and are unsatisfying. It's a problem in combination with a lot of other things they go into. Which TBH is probably the part of their argument I agree with most, for whatever that's worth.

On some level, really, the thing that's most valuable about them is that they provided a level of criticism that's at least more than fanboy ranting. That's useful. It just sucks it had to be surrounded with the other stuff.

[sarillia]

Fair enough. There is a lot that could be said about that and I'd be interested to hear it from someone less annoying. Occasionally I feel like I might want to try rewatching the review because it's so highly regarded and I'd like to know what else they have to say, but then I just can't do it.