The Phantom Menace Review

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.

This ninety-minute review of the disaster that was The Phantom Menace carries more entertainment value than all three of the soulless, joyless prequels combined. I watched The Phantom Menace once and that was more than enough. I've come back to watch this review about once a year since it was released. Hilarious every time, dead-on accurate every time, exposing George Lucas for the bloated ego-sotted tub of cloistered hackery he has become every time. The "Plinkett is a serial killer" angle of the reviews started to wear thin with the sequels, but it's not overdone in this one and adds some good, if tasteless humor, on top of the criticism.

The only way it could be better is if it came with a deluded fanboy that you could force to watch it.

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.

Before I start this, I feel the need to reflect and marvel at the very concept of what I am currently doing with my life. I am currently writing a review... about a review... by a fictional character... about a fairly flawed (and real) film.

Wow. I can safely say my mind has been thrown for a loop.

Created by Mike Stoklasa of Red Letter Media, "The Phantom Menace Review" is a thoroughly informative, in-depth look at George Lucas's "Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace." Mainly focused on exploring and explaining the various issues behind the film and its production, and delving into why it was such an unsatisfactory experience for many movie-goers and fans of the "Star Wars" franchise. However, unlike many internet-based reviews, this one comes with an intriguing and generally hilarious set-up- the review is being performed by the fictional character "Mr. Plinkett." (Voiced by Mike Stoklasa) A disturbed elderly individual who embodies all sorts of "colorful" quirks, including murder, kidnapping, conspiracy, an affinity for pizza-rolls... you know. The usual.

The charm and appeal here comes from this character, and his logical deconstruction of the film alongside of consistent hints of his psychotic nature. The review is filled to burst with not only valid arguments against the film, but plenty of gut-busting humor thanks to Stoklasa's expert delivery of dead-pan dialog and witty writing. It's really no wonder that Stoklasa's take on "Plinkett" (a character who also appears in other incarnations, and even portrayed by a different actor, in other Red Letter Media productions) has become such an icon of the internet age. He's a well-defined character that is endlessly likable and enjoyable to watch, even when he's such a ludicrous, perverted, violent nutcase.

The review itself is also incredibly solid from the standpoint of healthy debate and reasoning. Every point brought up has a purpose, and there's always plenty of logic behind the arguments put forth. Whether it be pointing out the ridiculous nature of Jar-Jar Binks as a character, to the deconstruction of the way specific scenes are shot, to in-depth explorations of dialog and scene-order, this review really gives the audience a sense of not only how the film went wrong, but also how films function in base, fundamental ways. I easily see this review (and its two follow ups) becoming essential viewing for indie filmmakers, first-time writers and even experienced directors, because the information contained is not only valid- it's valuable and gives great insight into the very idea of "filmmaking" as an art form.

What Stoklasa has done here is commendable and quite genius. While internet critics are quite popular these days, and there is a lot of wonderful humorous work being done in the area of film and television reviews (just look at the brilliant work of people like "The Nostalgia Critic"), Stoklasa does things his own way, and it makes the final product all the more important and valuable for it. There's nothing else out there quite like Stoklasa's Plinkett reviews. And I'm glad I discovered them, as well as Red Letter Media's other content.

This is easily a perfect 10. And it's worth seeing for many people, for many reasons. It has and will continue to draw debate over the film, and the art of filmmaking as a whole. And it has and will continue to supply some of the best laughs available online to audiences again and again. Phenomenal.

Now, I just gotta get me some of those pizza-rolls. Those things look pretty good.

Mr. Plinkett is a film-fluent yet socially-ignorant critic whose obsession with cinema is totally contrasted by his take on reality and his hilariously out-of-touch perspective on society and respect; it's made funnier when we see how his knowledge on stories and beats gives him certain wisdom that he willingly ignores in life. He picks this infamous film apart: right to the bone, everything ranging from the story to the characters and development over the movie's run-time are analyzed and dissected to the nth degree.

I love this review: it holds a single film up for judgement against modern cinema itself and clearly shows how The Phantom Menace simply doesn't hold up to its cinematic predecessors, Star Wars or otherwise. While I enjoyed the movie when it came out, even I can admit and willingly point out things wrong with the movie. That's the fun of criticism; you can still be critical regardless of whether the targeted work is good or not and still say something meaningful in the end. This review is one of the most entertaining, sincere and outright hilarious things I've ever seen. It's a masterpiece not just of internet culture and fandom itself, but also film criticism and how self-awareness, and awareness of other's mistakes, leads to learning stuff you never knew you wanted to know at all: in this case, how a fictional serial killer knows more about story structure than late-90s Lucas did when he made the prequels.

I LOVE this review and the series which follows is equally brilliant. It's fantastic filmmaking, criticism and a thorough analysis of cinema that even Roger Ebert (a man who rated The Phantom Menace 3.5/4 stars) praised for its open-ended dissection of 'The Hero's Journey'.