Or, what if it ends with them failing? They weren't the ones who saved the day. Rebels had already cracked the code/gotten the plans, and they were trying to steal them to throw the Empire off!
The smart money is on "They send the plans to Princess Leia and Darth Vader murders the entire team afterwards." The only exception is if Jyn is Rey's mother or something equally weird.
I love the small trivia that they cast Mon Mothma during episode III, cut her scene, and have stuck with same actress for all Mon Mothma content since.
I have such complicated feelings about Red Letter Media right now. The most recent Plinkett review had moments of the great insight and humour I remember them for, and I still for the most part enjoy their perspectives on movies in Best of the Worst and Half in the Bag. This video as well I feel like I agree with the general sentiment they're going for (e.g.: critiquing the overly safe, nostalgia-reliant direction Disney is taking for the Star Wars franchise; sending up certain styles of YouTube hype commentary).
However, good moments aside, that new Plinkett review was mainly just very unfocused and not that well-written compared to the previous ones, and more importantly, it seems like the guys behind RLM have been embracing a more bro-y, GG-er type sensibility than they ever have before. I mean it's not like they've never used humour in bad taste before, but very rarely did their humour edge into actual "What the hell, dude?" territory for me, mainly because they tended to constantly remind the audience "Plinkett and these other hack frauds are horrible human beings whom you're not meant to empathize with".
However, ever since they took the GGer position on the Ghostbusters reboot (weird Sony conspiracy theories and all), it seems like that GG-type perspective has really ramped up in the rest of their work as of late. First in some of their spin-off videos, then in that Plinkett review, and now in this video where they basically straight up say "Casting a female lead is pandering, and so is including Donnie Yen and Forest Whitaker." And especially in this new video, they mean for the audience to agree with them on that point, not to see those words as part of a character or a bit of irony or anything like that. "Diversity, right? What a joke!" is basically the vibe there.
Again, I agree with a lot of the rest of the video's sentiment -- that a lot of movie hype is hollow, reliant on nostalgia, and tends to feed hype itself rather than the things being hyped. But man, I just can't deal with seeing them go down the GG path like this anymore. Or rather: I'm getting super depressed to realize that RLM was probably always like this and I was just naive and chose not to see what I didn't want to see. I mean, just because someone says something "ironically" or with a veneer of "But it makes this person look more despicable, right?" doesn't necessarily make it okay to go ahead and say certain things or make certain kinds of jokes. I really probably shouldn't have justified those kinds of things to myself in the first place.
I have no qualms watching their content even if I don't really see eye to eye on some of their opinions. Those points you bring up are valid, and Its tough to ignore, but I dunt have the energy to really dig into their views and be bothered to cross examine their intent. The way I interpret it, and maybe like you it's a bit of overlooking the bad to justify the rest, but my takeaway of their perspective is they seem to understand that the changes made aren't bad, the movies aren't made worse, nothing is ruined, and ultimately the movies succeed or fail on their actual content. But still they do seem concerned that the marketing is highlighting the diverse casting, which I can agree on some level isn't so organic as to feel natural and obvious for the series. I chalk it up to good intentions meeting the pains of change and applaud it... but I also can ignore without outrage those who have to point it out.
To be fair I've completely igored their review of Ghost busters and I have ignored the movie itself, but I never saw the original and I'm not interested in Ghost Busters in the first place... so at first wind of controversy it was easy to just divert my attention to anything about it. AND so maybe their opinion on whatever that movie was is more telling.
But on Star Wars, I take it for, well, the opinions of some dudes on YouTube: which is usually insightful on one axis, but not perfect or refined or palatable on others. They are fallable and imperfect like anyone else... plus they are hack frauds.
Times change, people change. GG definitely put visible faultlines in the internet community. Some people became more socially aware, other decided to double down on their position to maintain their "core" audience.
I haven't watched the Plinkett video, but with that opinion of Donnie Yen and Forest Whitaker he can fuck right off. Both of them are really good actors in their respective areas, calling them "plays for diversity" is just insulting.
Their newest Plinkett review is the worst Plinkett review they've ever done. It has moments where it's funny, but it sounded like they caved to fan demand and wrote a review of a movie that didn't really require a full on analysis. That's why only half the video is about the movie, mostly complaining about modern day nostalgia moneymakers and reboots. I love Force Awakens but acknowledge its flaws. There's really no point in reiterating that part over and over. (Especially since Kylo Ren and Finn are actually new forms types of characters/plotlines not done in the original trilogy) Seriously, 20 minutes of that video was spent doing a rant about Ring Theory. Why give so much credence and attention to such unimportant fan bait? Then they weird positions on diversity, the lack of sex, and how children "don't care about representation" is very backwards and unnecessary to the overall point. You could cut 50% of that review and make it so much better.
Ghostbusters really brought out the worst in them. And here's the thing, the review they did for Ghostbusters is actually really funny. They make jokes about the nostalgia and pandering done while legitimately criticizing the movie's humor (Which is split for people) It's the most negative review I've heard for the reboot, but I thought it had a genuine point. What's BULLSHIT is the follow-up post they did where "Scientist Man explains Ghostbusters Hate" that feeds more into Sony's conspiracy theories suggesting they fabricated and overblew the hate people had for the movie and how the amount of misogynist trolls were a super small percentage. They also make a weird tangent to Leslie Jones leaving Twitter that never comes up again (Because we know that was because of Milo Y) and they reference another famous anti-feminist named ArmoredSkeptic in their Re:View of the original Ghostbusters. Even the new Plinkett review takes shots as Ghostbusters of what's wrong with modern Hollywood.
I've gone from watching whatever RedLetterMedia does to now only watching Best of the Worst/Wheel of the Worst. It's important to remember that only Mike writes the Plinkett reviews. They work at their best as a group with Jay, Rich, Jack and the guest stars.
Ghostbusters really brought out the worst in them. And here's the thing, the review they did for Ghostbusters is actually really funny. They make jokes about the nostalgia and pandering done while legitimately criticizing the movie's humor (Which is split for people) It's the most negative review I've heard for the reboot, but I thought it had a genuine point. What's BULLSHIT is the follow-up post they did where "Scientist Man explains Ghostbusters Hate" that feeds more into Sony's conspiracy theories suggesting they fabricated and overblew the hate people had for the movie and how the amount of misogynist trolls were a super small percentage.
That is true, and it reminds me that I did agree with them on some points in their Half in the Bag review. I watched it after seeing the movie myself, and while I very much disagreed with them about it being the worst thing ever, I agreed with some of their more nuanced points about how the jokes and structure don't quite work. I went in to the movie expecting to be mildly entertained and came out mildly disappointed, mainly because I felt like many of the jokes either didn't follow properly or were too ham-handed, and because the ending didn't feel earned. However, I did find enough little bits sprinkled throughout to enjoy that I didn't feel like it was a wasted afternoon either, and I certainly didn't feel like it was endemic of some sinister Hollywood conspiracy or whatever. So while I agreed with the RLM guys that the jokes and plot structure were weak, I was also surprised by just how negative they were being, and I was pretty much crestfallen when they released the Scientist Man video, which as you said played into all the GG talking points and conspiracy theories about the movie and its marketing.
Sigh. Anyway, to bring it back around to Star Wars: I really will be curious to see what they think of Rogue One after it actually comes out. They all seemed to really like TFA when it came out, but now they seem to have entrenched themselves more firmly in being critical of the direction Disney is taking with the franchise, and with their comments about the casting for Rogue One... I know I shouldn't care what a bunch of fat white internet dudes think about Star Wars, but damn it, up to now these were some of my favourite fat white internet dudes. I'm genuinely disappointed that they've gone as far down this hole as they have.
Ever since the Auralnauts', er, I mean Kylo Ren's, first Rogue One response video, I do wonder why they didn't have viable A-AT-AT missile systems on Hoth.
Ever since the Auralnauts', er, I mean Kylo Ren's, first Rogue One response video, I do wonder why they didn't have viable A-AT-AT missile systems on Hoth.
Possible that it was too cold and windy for anything other than blasters, maybe? Also they were evacuating the base, so the infantry were pulling back to the transports as the walkers got closer.
Going for IMAX which go on sale at 9:01 PM that day.
It's been so hard ignoring trailers. I've only seen the first one. The week of the movie, I'm going all in with watching the trailers so I can be on super hype train. Choo-choo.
Bought tickets to Cinerama last night, then when I came into work today and checked my mail it turns out part of our Xmas party is going to see the movie in IMAX.
Midnight screenings of Star Wars. I was too young/not born for the original trilogy. I saw Phantom Menace pretty early but never even considered doing an early viewing of any of the other prequel movies. Last year I think I was working so only saw The Force Awakens the day of or day after.
In the future, with a movie every year, opening day midnight showings are going to be less and less special, I'm guessing, so I've got to get one in now for it to mean anything.
Also now I live a ten minute walk away from the main premiere theatre of Germany at the Sony Center Potsdammerplatz, which is also the main original language version movie theatre (non-dubbed of OV in the local lingo).
So this will be it, my first and probably last midnight showing of Star Wars, I'm guessing with the assembled nerds of Berlin.
Some heavy-handed script. 3D not good. Will watch it in 2D when Juliane and I see it next week. Who let Michael Giacchino near a Star Wars movie? Holy shit, can that guy ruin a movie soundtrack.
This movie is legit. They learned from their mistakes in the last prequels. It did all of the things that I wanted it to, without leaning too heavily on fanservice and winks to nostalgia. (The few things they did weren't heavy-handed)
Somewhere, the blue ghost of high-school me, who went to the theater just to be disappointed in the prequel trilogy, is looking on and nodding in approval.
Comments
Mon Mothma up in this bizzzzzzzzzzz
However, good moments aside, that new Plinkett review was mainly just very unfocused and not that well-written compared to the previous ones, and more importantly, it seems like the guys behind RLM have been embracing a more bro-y, GG-er type sensibility than they ever have before. I mean it's not like they've never used humour in bad taste before, but very rarely did their humour edge into actual "What the hell, dude?" territory for me, mainly because they tended to constantly remind the audience "Plinkett and these other hack frauds are horrible human beings whom you're not meant to empathize with".
However, ever since they took the GGer position on the Ghostbusters reboot (weird Sony conspiracy theories and all), it seems like that GG-type perspective has really ramped up in the rest of their work as of late. First in some of their spin-off videos, then in that Plinkett review, and now in this video where they basically straight up say "Casting a female lead is pandering, and so is including Donnie Yen and Forest Whitaker." And especially in this new video, they mean for the audience to agree with them on that point, not to see those words as part of a character or a bit of irony or anything like that. "Diversity, right? What a joke!" is basically the vibe there.
Again, I agree with a lot of the rest of the video's sentiment -- that a lot of movie hype is hollow, reliant on nostalgia, and tends to feed hype itself rather than the things being hyped. But man, I just can't deal with seeing them go down the GG path like this anymore. Or rather: I'm getting super depressed to realize that RLM was probably always like this and I was just naive and chose not to see what I didn't want to see. I mean, just because someone says something "ironically" or with a veneer of "But it makes this person look more despicable, right?" doesn't necessarily make it okay to go ahead and say certain things or make certain kinds of jokes. I really probably shouldn't have justified those kinds of things to myself in the first place.
To be fair I've completely igored their review of Ghost busters and I have ignored the movie itself, but I never saw the original and I'm not interested in Ghost Busters in the first place... so at first wind of controversy it was easy to just divert my attention to anything about it. AND so maybe their opinion on whatever that movie was is more telling.
But on Star Wars, I take it for, well, the opinions of some dudes on YouTube: which is usually insightful on one axis, but not perfect or refined or palatable on others. They are fallable and imperfect like anyone else... plus they are hack frauds.
I haven't watched the Plinkett video, but with that opinion of Donnie Yen and Forest Whitaker he can fuck right off. Both of them are really good actors in their respective areas, calling them "plays for diversity" is just insulting.
Ghostbusters really brought out the worst in them. And here's the thing, the review they did for Ghostbusters is actually really funny. They make jokes about the nostalgia and pandering done while legitimately criticizing the movie's humor (Which is split for people) It's the most negative review I've heard for the reboot, but I thought it had a genuine point. What's BULLSHIT is the follow-up post they did where "Scientist Man explains Ghostbusters Hate" that feeds more into Sony's conspiracy theories suggesting they fabricated and overblew the hate people had for the movie and how the amount of misogynist trolls were a super small percentage. They also make a weird tangent to Leslie Jones leaving Twitter that never comes up again (Because we know that was because of Milo Y) and they reference another famous anti-feminist named ArmoredSkeptic in their Re:View of the original Ghostbusters. Even the new Plinkett review takes shots as Ghostbusters of what's wrong with modern Hollywood.
I've gone from watching whatever RedLetterMedia does to now only watching Best of the Worst/Wheel of the Worst. It's important to remember that only Mike writes the Plinkett reviews. They work at their best as a group with Jay, Rich, Jack and the guest stars.
Sigh. Anyway, to bring it back around to Star Wars: I really will be curious to see what they think of Rogue One after it actually comes out. They all seemed to really like TFA when it came out, but now they seem to have entrenched themselves more firmly in being critical of the direction Disney is taking with the franchise, and with their comments about the casting for Rogue One...
It's been so hard ignoring trailers. I've only seen the first one. The week of the movie, I'm going all in with watching the trailers so I can be on super hype train. Choo-choo.
So I think I might return those Cinerama tickets.
Unless the movie is good enough to see twice.
In the future, with a movie every year, opening day midnight showings are going to be less and less special, I'm guessing, so I've got to get one in now for it to mean anything.
Also now I live a ten minute walk away from the main premiere theatre of Germany at the Sony Center Potsdammerplatz, which is also the main original language version movie theatre (non-dubbed of OV in the local lingo).
So this will be it, my first and probably last midnight showing of Star Wars, I'm guessing with the assembled nerds of Berlin.
Things that let it down:
Some heavy-handed script.
3D not good. Will watch it in 2D when Juliane and I see it next week.
Who let Michael Giacchino near a Star Wars movie? Holy shit, can that guy ruin a movie soundtrack.
That is all until a spoiler thread exists.
We finally got it, you guys--a good Star Wars prequel.
Somewhere, the blue ghost of high-school me, who went to the theater just to be disappointed in the prequel trilogy, is looking on and nodding in approval.