The Phantom Menace Review

Although there is a lot of humor, which can often been extremely dark, you can tell very clearly that the main goal of the review isn't to make you laugh, it's to inform you. The humor serves as an effective way of keeping you interested and engaged for 70 minutes.

Stoklasa clearly has a great knowledge of film and he displays it here by thoroughly breaking down every element of the film to convey why he believes it was so awful.

It's entertaining and informative.

These are of course the infamous documentaries that truly put into words in pretty good fashion what the problems with the prequels were.

It might appear odd to review a Youtube documentary on IMDb, but I feel that it went a bit beyond that and actually delved more into the professional docu/mockumentary area.

It can of course appear to be a little too spiteful, which I don't really condone - but at the same time, Redlettermedia brilliantly made it a character so that they could really maximizd the satire and go overboard with the hate - whilst still providing some good points.

I would not say it reallt showcases any things I didn't already believe oe know about the problems in the film, but that shouldn't be the point. Make up your own mind.

All in all, however, Stoklasa provides some very entertaining commentary mixed with mockumentary and satire.

Like other views on the subject, it can get a bit extreme, but if you like me are not a big fan of the prequels - I suggest you give this a watch anyways. It's well crafted and all around pretty funny.

Mr plinkett is a hack who ruined online criticism to satisfy his unexplained hatred for George Lucas. This video is nothing more than a pretentious, slandering hit piece designed to ruin George Lucas' reputation and make the film sound worst than it is. He nitpicks the littlest things, has gross segments in between his reviewing and insults people for liking the movie which I cannot stand. His sense of humor is so unfunny and obnoxious I don't know how anyone can laugh at this crap. Most of the stuff he says are blatant lies that anyone can look up to see the truth about. All he does is pander tot he popular opinion and tells haters what they want to hear instead of being nuanced. The fact that people like Critical Drinker, Mauler and Nerdrotic worship him like a god and believe everything he says astounds me. Honestly, I will never understand how this review became popular as it is a total hateful hit piece that should not be taken seriously at all.

All things considered, 1999 was indeed one of the best years for film in recent memory. The Matrix shot into the vocabulary of pop culture like a bullet. M Nyt Shamalon's The Sixth Sense delivered one of the most famous endings in history. David Finch's Fight Club quickly obtained cult status. American beauty went on to sweep the Academy, and the sorely missed Stanley Kuberick delivered his final work with Eyes Wide Shut.

In hindsight, it can be seen that all of the goodwill for movie-making on display that year was undone by a film, considered so disappointing that it permanently turned one of the most powerful men in the world into a publichate figure.

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, is one of those films that really showed a lot of promise in the years leading up to its release. All three films in the Original Trilogy (A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back and Return of The Jedi) were landmark films that forever changed the filmmaking landscape when it came to blending storytelling and special effects. Between ROTJ and TPM, were monumental leaps in CGI, courtesey of films like Toy Story, Jurassic Park, and Terminator 2. With CGI rapidly advancing, taking it back to the series that rapidly spearheaded the development of special effects- seemed like a natural idea. In the years following TPM, fans have constantly argued about its racist characterisations, the ever-so annoying jar jar binks and the ruining of the Force with scientific explanations.

But few have ever been able to look at it through a filmmakers eye, and that is where the beauty of Mr Plinkett's The Phantom Menace review begins. Mr Plinkett is actually a character written and portrayed by Mike Stoklasa who was a film school graduate and boy does it show. Right off the bat when you watch the reviews opening segment when Plinkett describes just how disappointing The Phantom Menace is , you'll know you're in for something special.

Let it be reiterated here that Stoklasa is from film school, and uses the character of Plinkett to voice his expertise on filmmaking with horrifying spades of dark humor. During the first 10 minute segment, Plinkett deals swift blows to the films narrative structure, revealing the Phantom Menace's lack of relatable characters, and more importantly the lack of a protagonist who can act as a bridge between the audience and the films political plot. This is only the beginning of the review which lasts for 70 minutes in length. Combined with Plinket's reviews for Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith, makes for a 4 hour undertaking. Rest assured though, not a minute is wasted. Ever wanted to know what was wrong with the films plot. Plinket quickly points out that it is never revealed to the audience why The Trade Federation is following Palpatines orders. More to the point though, he argues that Palpatines entire plan constantly foils itself- to the point where his eventual success in overthrowing the republic is just one gigantic fluke made out of flukes- not his own cleverness.

Perhaps the bizarre aspect of this review is how Stoklasa creates a narrative within Plinket's reviews and ever so cleverly, Plinket's development reflects his own critiques on TPM's narrative. I now know its possible to have more sympathy for a schizophrenic murderer then any of the characters in the Star Wars prequels. Plinket himself is a joke on the length of the reviews. To analyse and understand Star Wars enough to do three feature length videos of film criticism, you must be a psychopath. One Star wars fan missed the joke and sadly wrote a 108 page rebuttal over the course of six months, defending the films internal logic but completely ignoring its narrative problems.

When Plinket discusses the film's climatic sequence wherein Qui Gon Jinn and Obi Wan Kenobi fight off Darth Maul, he shows just how forgettable the fight is, and compares it against the iconic duels featured in the Original Star Wars trilogy. This is actually a very moving moment, when you realise that the best fights in films are not about the fighting but the internalisation of the characters. ITs points like that make Plinkets reviews special, they absolutely transcend being reviews of the Star Wars prequels and make for an eye opening lesson in film criticism and movie making.

A must watch for any film fan.

What we have here is an amateurish, purile, biased, incompetent, bordering on parody with a bad voice-over and interspersed with horrid "sketches" video posing as an in-depth analysis of an actual professional film by a bunch of wannabe filmmakers who could never write, direct or act in anything remotely praiseworthy.

The video is full of lies, be it clips taken out of context and edited to suit the narrative, interviews with their best friends acting as "random fans" to support the false narrative, and genuine ineptitude to properly analyse films that are beyond their artistic means. The critiques are pure drivel from a bunch of cinematically illiterate YouTuber reviewers, and NOT real film critics.

The coward "acting" in the role of "Mr. Plinkett" is also a Star Trek fanboy and not a Star Wars fan, so keep that in mind. And the whole premise of these Prequel-bashing videos are totally invalidated by watching the behind-the-scenes featurettes, not to mention the blatant praise given to the cashgrab, artistically bankrupt, retro reboots that makes up the Sequel Trilogy that "Mr. Plinkett" loves.