Finally! The funny old guy takes on Phantom Menace

[Kegg]

I'd never considered the point about the choreography (though he is of course completely right); but the absence of character to the duel was definitely problematic. Who is Darth Maul? He's nothing. He's literally just a cipher. He didn't need to be complicated, but having a personality would not have hurt - he actually got more lines of dialogue in his character-specific trailer than he did in the entire movie... heck, just include his speech about fear in the movie and he'd already be a little more intimidating and interesting.

Of course, neither Qui-Gon nor Obi-Wan fare a lot better, and they're in the entire movie.

Kegg, sometimes you make absolutely no sense. God bless you.

I'm just the lone sane man in an insane world! Speaking truth to power! 'Power' in this case being cult internet personalities that wouldn't give me the time of day (and rightly so).

I did check out that Rofle link you directed me to last time, honest... but, er, I couldn't stand more than two minutes of the guy.

 

[USS Mariner]

I'd never considered the point about the choreography (though he is of course completely right); but the absence of character to the duel was definitely problematic. Who is Darth Maul? He's nothing. He's literally just a cipher. He didn't need to be complicated, but having a personality would not have hurt - he actually got more lines of dialogue in his character-specific trailer than he did in the entire movie... heck, just include his speech about fear in the movie and he'd already be a little more intimidating and interesting.

Of course, neither Qui-Gon nor Obi-Wan fare a lot better, and they're in the entire movie.

Kegg, sometimes you make absolutely no sense. God bless you.

I'm just the lone sane man in an insane world! Speaking truth to power! 'Power' in this case being cult internet personalities that wouldn't give me the time of day (and rightly so).

I did check out that Rofle link you directed me to last time, honest... but, er, I couldn't stand more than two minutes of the guy.

Heh, no worries.

I'd only be concerned if you somehow hate TPM and love Trek XI, even though they have nearly the same problems.

Hell, the only real difference between them in my book is that the previous Trek films were no where near as great as Star Wars, thus Trek XI could conceivably be seen as miles ahead of them.

 

[Kegg]

I'd only be concerned if you somehow hate TPM and love Trek XI, even though they have nearly the same problems.

I don't hate TPM, really. I don't hate any of the prequel movies, they're just too darn pretty. But, er, yeah, I enjoyed the new Trek film quite a bit - not that I'm oblivious to its flaws, it's just a damn fun ride that hits the right nostalgic notes.

In comparing them, though, I'd agree they both have the same problem regarding ineptly constructed and boring villains whose plans do not bare a lot of analysis, but I'd argue that the new Star Trek has far more interesting lead characters than the bland, vanilla, flatly acted heroes of TPM.

 

[USS Mariner]

I'd only be concerned if you somehow hate TPM and love Trek XI, even though they have nearly the same problems.

I don't hate TPM, really. I don't hate any of the prequel movies, they're just too darn pretty. But, er, yeah, I enjoyed the new Trek film quite a bit - not that I'm oblivious to its flaws, it's just a damn fun ride that hits the right nostalgic notes.

In comparing them, though, I'd agree they both have the same problem regarding ineptly constructed and boring villains whose plans do not bare a lot of analysis, but I'd argue that the new Star Trek has far more interesting lead characters than the bland, vanilla, flatly acted heroes of TPM.

The only reason people think the main characters in Trek XI are "interesting" or "compelling" is because their characterization hinges soley on the audience's own nostalgia. If one looks at how the main characters are presented and act in the film itself, they may not be two-dimensional flesh props like in TPM, but their characterization is on the same level as TPM's plot, i.e. in incoherent mess that falls apart if you glance at it.

Case in point: Kirk. If you ignore the Trekkian "lore" of who Kirk is supposed to be and of his backstory, and just characterize him on what is presented in the film, it's a complete mess.

Kirk starts life as a rebellious asshole for no apparent reason (remember, the backstory of Kirk having an abusive uncle is never presented in the film itself), and continues to be an asshole throughout the rest of the film, regardless of the consequences. From the bar fight, to the brink of him getting kicked out of the Academy for the worst attempt at cheating at a test in cinematic history, he never gives a shit about the consequences. He's still an asshole when Spock (who is characterized as a bipolar maniac who no one dares to question) kicks him onto an uninhabited frozen wasteland to die.

The only reason he succeeds is when he completely breaks character and blindly listens to Spock Prime's instructions. Since when did Cadet Asshole listen to anyone? Remember, in every prior scene where Kirk was in danger, he didn't give a shit.

Relying on your audience to write your characters' motivations for you is beyond shitty writing. It's lazy.

 

[Kegg]

Kirk starts life as a rebellious asshole for no apparent reason (remember, the backstory of Kirk having an abusive uncle is never presented in the film itself),

We get a jerky stepdad. Same difference. I was just willing to roll with the idea he was an unfocused, rebellious brat and that had something to do with the absence of a father figure (emphasized by old Spock's talk about how important George Kirk was to the old Kirk later in the picture).

He's still an asshole when Spock (who is characterized as a bipolar maniac who no one dares to question) kicks him onto an uninhabited frozen wasteland to die.

This moment is stupid on so many levels.

The only reason he succeeds is when he completely breaks character and blindly listens to Spock Prime's instructions. Since when did Cadet Asshole listen to anyone?

This actually isn't true. The whole reason he was in Starfleet is because he bought the argument of Christopher Pike, after mulling it over a bit. He later reveals on the bridge when he races in that not only has he read Chris Pike's dissertation about the Kelvin incident and remembered a key detail, he'd instantly put it together with an offhand comment Uhura had made the other night to her roomate while Pine was half-naked on the floor and made a snap conclusion. The character portrayal emphasizes his reckless, feckless, devil may care attitude, but gives him just enough reasoning capacity for the audience to buy him as the hero. In that sense, honestly, he reminded me of John Crichton far more than James T. Kirk... but I like John.

Spock, now, the whole stupid 'off my ship' notwithstanding - the writers really got Spock and what made him tick. They decided to shove him over the edge a lot (and give him 'rock'n'roll', which means his rather pointed rebuttal to the Vulcan Science Academy); but his being bullied on Vulcan and personal struggle to control his emotions are pretty important to how he ticks.

Most importantly, though, these guys are alive. They've performed with great verve and winning, star-making charisma by both Pine and Quinto. Electric chemistry compared to the totally deadweight, 'I'm just reading these lines for my paycheck' performances dialed in by Neeson and McGregor.

 

[USS Mariner]

This actually isn't true. The whole reason he was in Starfleet is because he bought the argument of Christopher Pike, after mulling it over a bit.

Ah, forgot about that. It's the only other scene though where he listens to anyone though, and he only listens because Pike goads him into it by double-dog daring him into it (which comes off as childish, but given who Pike was talking to, is pretty smart.) Also, I hate that scene because it establishes him as some kind of sooper-genius, which is actually used in the next scene you mention, but it doesn't work that way that it was supposed to.

He later reveals on the bridge when he races in that not only has he read Chris Pike's dissertation about the Kelvin incident and remembered a key detail, he'd instantly put it together with an offhand comment Uhura had made the other night to her roomate while Pine was half-naked on the floor and made a snap conclusion.

Ah, but remember what happened before and after that scene. This entire sequence of dialog took place after Sulu's "Alzheimers moment" with the controls, which means that they're far behind the rest of the fleet, which was destroyed by the Narada.

If you recall, Kirk's "sooper genius" moment was to try to convince Pike to raise the shields...because apparently they weren't going to raise shields in response to a entire planet being under attack by an unknown force (which was mentioned in dialog prior to their departure.)

Perhaps Kirk's snap judgement was sort of impressive, but he used that point to beg for a course of action that only the dumbest motherfuckers wouldn't have already thought of in that situation. Besides, the Narada didn't immediately notice their arrival because they weren't looking for other ships, as they would have assumed that Starfleet sent the fleet as one unit. Sulu's Alzheimers moment actually did more to project the Enterirpise than Kirk's "flash of obvious" moment.

That's not clever characterization, that's bullshit. Kirk only comes of as a genius because the rest of the crew is apparently retarded.

Spock, now, the whole stupid 'off my ship' notwithstanding - the writers really got Spock and what made him tick. They decided to shove him over the edge a lot (and give him 'rock'n'roll', which means his rather pointed rebuttal to the Vulcan Science Academy); but his being bullied on Vulcan and personal struggle to control his emotions are pretty important to how he ticks.

I'll admit, I liked the early Spock sequences before we see him getting into Starfleet. That was actually fairly well done.

Most importantly, though, these guys are alive. They've performed with great verve and winning, star-making charisma by both Pine and Quinto. Electric chemistry compared to the totally, deadweight, 'I'm just reading these lines for my paycheck' performances dialed in by Neeson and McGregor.

Pine just came of as an obnoxious fuck the entire time, most especially during the aneurysm-inducing Kobayashi sequence, where he made it so obvious that he rigged the damn thing that there was no point in having an investigation. Now, I'm not sure if that was specified in the script (which I'm guessing it was, given how fucking proud Orci and Kurtzman are of that scene,) but it didn't strike me as particularly memorable.

Quinto, however, is a good actor to start with (and a fellow Pennsylvanian), but like Pine, couldn't really shine to his full potential because of some very bad scenes, like his instantaneous love affair with Uhura. I'm sorry, but one, very short scene in the Academy hangar does not a romance make. Again, part of this working hinged on some of the audience knowing that Spock and Uhura initially had a "thing" going on in early TOS, and part of it hinged on being out-of-the-blue to everyone else, though who else was going to get the girl, now that Kirk is an uncharismatic ass?

 

[Kegg]

That's not clever characterization, that's bullshit. Kirk only comes of as a genius because the rest of the crew is apparently retarded.

True, but the particulars aren't important here, just that he listened and made a snap connection, so his reaction to Spock Prime isn't out of the blue. The film is better at making these character beats (Kirk makes snap leadership decision!) than it is making them make sense.

Pine just came of as an obnoxious fuck the entire time, most especially during the aneurysm-inducing Kobayashi sequence,

Granted, but that's just taste.

To (for some reason) bring this back to James Rolfe, I think the AVGN character is an obnoxious fuck. I think 'a shitload of fuck' is a really stupid catchphrase. I think his review of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III was whiny, tiresome, fanboyish to the point of lunacy and idiotically reasoned, and I think the extended videos of him and the Critic swearing at each other (not the subsequent fights, just the swearing) are annoying in the extreme. He ain't got no chemistry with the guy and it's palpable.

But lots and lots of folk think his shtick is funny, including you. More power to 'em. Now, I can definitely see why people find Chris Pine annoying. He's a backslapping gladhanding fratboy and he doesn't learn much of anything. And I'd agree with the wrong performance Kirk would be a jerk. But to me, you understand, Pine projects a winsome, fresh, confident persona. He's still a fratboy, yeah, but the kind you'd actually be cool having a drink with.

So when he's confidentally grinning, chewing his apple while pulling a prank, I found myself rooting for the guy, while making a mental note I was surprised I was rooting for the guy considering how stuck up I am myself and I'm about as likely to pull a prank as I am to start extemporising in Urdu.

But still, I can see why someone would still loathe that and that's a matter of taste, naturally.

Quinto, however, is a good actor to start with (and a fellow Pennsylvanian), but like Pine, couldn't really shine to his full potential because of some very bad scenes, like his instantaneous love affair with Uhura. I'm sorry, but one, very short scene in the Academy hangar does not a romance make.

Everything in this film is breakneck, but I don't think he has a romantic contact with Uhura until after Vulcan blows up. That scene makes sense to me - there was a latent but unacted on attraction brewing for a long time, and at this moment of personal devastation for Spock, Uhura wants him to know she's there for him, and not just as a friend.

I found the whole pairing rather inspired, but I also geeked out like crazy when Spock said 'Nyota' so my judgement may be compromised here.

 

[USS Mariner]

That's not clever characterization, that's bullshit. Kirk only comes of as a genius because the rest of the crew is apparently retarded.

True, but the particulars aren't important here, just that he listened and made a snap connection, so his reaction to Spock Prime isn't out of the blue. The film is better at making these character beats (Kirk makes snap leadership decision!) than it is making them make sense.

If you can't develop a character in a way that makes sense in the context of the story, that means you can't write.

 

[USS Mariner]

To (for some reason) bring this back to James Rolfe, I think the AVGN character is an obnoxious fuck. I think 'a shitload of fuck' is a really stupid catchphrase. I think his review of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III was whiny, tiresome, fanboyish to the point of lunacy and idiotically reasoned, and I think the extended videos of him and the Critic swearing at each other (not the subsequent fights, just the swearing) are annoying in the extreme. He ain't got no chemistry with the guy and it's palpable.

But lots and lots of folk think his shtick is funny, including you. More power to 'em. Now, I can definitely see why people find Chris Pine annoying. He's a backslapping gladhanding fratboy and he doesn't learn much of anything. And I'd agree with the wrong performance Kirk would be a jerk. But to me, you understand, Pine projects a winsome, fresh, confident persona. He's still a fratboy, yeah, but the kind you'd actually be cool having a drink with.

So when he's confidentally grinning, chewing his apple while pulling a prank, I found myself rooting for the guy, while making a mental note I was surprised I was rooting for the guy considering how stuck up I am myself and I'm about as likely to pull a prank as I am to start extemporising in Urdu.

But still, I can see why someone would still loathe that and that's a matter of taste, naturally.

One problem with that though, Rolfe isn't trying to sell the AVGN as a hero in the vein of Hercules or Paul Bunyan. Having his character being somewhat off putting is acceptable, because he's not selling himself as someone to ultimately aspire to. Also, he's not selling himself dramatically; the AVGN is more or less a comedic character.

You can't sell a character like Pine's Kirk as a hero and characterize him as fucking asshole, and never have him develop. Honestly, the only difference between Kirk in the beginning and Kirk at the end is the color of shirt he wears and the fact that he doesn't shoot his mouth off as much.

I understand that we might have different tolerances for what constitutes an asshole, but please tell me you agree with that logic, unless I'm missing something.

 

[Kegg]

If you can't develop a character in a way that makes sense in the context of the story, that means you can't write.

It did. The fault is with the story logic rather than the charcter logic - the character is developed in a way that makes sense for the story, but the story itself has parts that do not make sense.

Whether O&K can write is another question. I'm rarely if ever impressed with anything I've seen of theirs, but if nothing else the guys do seem to have their finger on the pulse of teenage moviegoers, what with this movie and the (less good, i.e. not good at all) Transformers pictures.

 

[Harvey]

Look, we can complain about the plot contrivances and character problems in Star Trek (2009) and Star Wars: Episode One -- The Phantom Menace (1999) all day long. And there are plenty of them.

But, for me, what sinks the Star Wars prequels are the performances Lucas fails to extract from actors that are more than talented enough for the material (this is a man who makes Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, and Samuel L. Jackson deliver wooden performances). And what makes Star Trek work is the performances that Abrams is able to get out of his actors. Pine may be playing Kirk as an asshole, but he's also charming, confident, and able to share moments of genuine emotion with his co-stars.

 

[USS Mariner]

If you can't develop a character in a way that makes sense in the context of the story, that means you can't write.

It did. The fault is with the story logic rather than the charcter logic - the character is developed in a way that makes sense for the story, but the story itself has parts that do not make sense.

Whether O&K can write is another question. I'm rarely if ever impressed with anything I've seen of theirs, but if nothing else the guys do seem to have their finger on the pulse of teenage moviegoers, what with this movie and the (less good, i.e. not good at all) Transformers pictures.

To be honest, I'm not so much up in arms over the literal quality of the film as I am with the unfathomable herd-mentality on it's perceived quality.

I love TMP, but there are great segments of it that are total garbage, and the third act is a giant mess. I may not agree, but I sure as hell can understand when people say that TMP is shit.

Why is that so hard for people to say about Trek XI?

 

[Harvey]

The third act delivers serviceable action and a memorable epilogue. I'd say it's the second act that has the most problems. Including Spock Prime's confusing backstory, Spock kicking Kirk off the ship, Kirk being lucky enough to be in walking distance of Spock Prime, Kirk being lucky enough to have a larger creature intervene when he's about to be eaten (and then unlucky enough for that creature to toss aside a much larger meal in favor of little Kirk), and many more...

EDIT: Though, if you organize the film into a four-act structure like Memory Alpha, I suppose all of that is the third act...

 

[Kegg]

But, for me, what sinks the Star Wars prequels are the performances Lucas fails to extract from actors that are more than talented enough for the material (this is a man who makes Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, and Samuel L. Jackson deliver wooden performances). And what makes Star Trek work is the performances that Abrams is able to get out of his actors. Pine may be playing Kirk as an asshole, but he's also charming, confident, and able to share moments of genuine emotion with his co-stars.

This is what I said, only considerably better put. Jackson is at least excusable, though, in that his character in TPM was written as a minor speaking role which he got cast as simply because he'd expressed an interest in being in the new Star Wars and that was one of the few roles still available.

To be honest, I'm not so much up in arms over the quality of the film as I am with the unfathomable herd-mentality on it's quality.

What? I thought you wanted an argument. You did kind of segue the whole conversation to Trek XI, which seemed sort of abrupt to me but hey, I'm game.

But hell, the new Star Trek is far from perfect - just from an entertainment level now I found the action boring and the frenetic pace gets to me come the third act. I can definitely appreciate why people wouldn't care for it at all and I don't hold any malice over that. It's not like hating 2001, which is a sin unforgivable in the eyes of geekdom.

However, the herd mentality boils down to the film hitting the right nostalgic buttons and for many Trekkies, including me, and it's the best bit of Trek to come out in a long, long time. It's also the only bit of Trek in the half-decade region. We just had a damn blast at the cinema, or at any rate I did.

That said:

I love TMP, but there are great segments of it that are total garbage, and the third act is a giant mess.

Hey!

...I like the third act.

 

[USS Mariner]

I love TMP, but there are great segments of it that are total garbage, and the third act is a giant mess.

Hey!

...I like the third act.

It would have been nice if they had the time to properly draft a third act that didn't jettison the rest of the cast in favor or Ilia and Decker. That's my biggest problem with most of the film, really. Because it was adapted from the Phase II pilot, it naturally focuses on the new characters to establish their presence for what would have been the rest of the series. However, since they wanted Spock alive at the end of the film, both Decker and Ilia had to go. It just feels odd to have "our" cast do so little in comparison to Decker and Ilia.

Again, I'm sure they're was a way to have our cast be more involved in the ending and still have it make sense, but they simply didn't have the time in '79.

To be honest, I loved this roundabout with you on Trek XI, given it's really the first time I could have a constructive conversation about it's traits without my opponent claiming "It's just a fuckin' movie" and "You just don't like it because it's not the same!" It's like we're both confident in what we're talking about, and both of us understand English. What are the odds?

However, this is a topic on how terrible TPM is...and there's really nothing else to say about that.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

the last part is up

 

[Kelthaz]

If you can't develop a character in a way that makes sense in the context of the story, that means you can't write.

It did. The fault is with the story logic rather than the charcter logic - the character is developed in a way that makes sense for the story, but the story itself has parts that do not make sense.

Whether O&K can write is another question. I'm rarely if ever impressed with anything I've seen of theirs, but if nothing else the guys do seem to have their finger on the pulse of teenage moviegoers, what with this movie and the (less good, i.e. not good at all) Transformers pictures.

To be honest, I'm not so much up in arms over the literal quality of the film as I am with the unfathomable herd-mentality on it's perceived quality.

I love TMP, but there are great segments of it that are total garbage, and the third act is a giant mess. I may not agree, but I sure as hell can understand when people say that TMP is shit.

Why is that so hard for people to say about Trek XI?

Because Trek XI isn't shit. It makes no sense, the villain is terrible, the characters act out of character, and the science is crap. But the movie is great for one reason -- fun. A quality that a disturbingly large number of Trekkies don't look for when they watch a movie. The plot problems may be somewhat similar between the two movies, but "fun" is the difference in why TPM is hated while ST XI is loved.

The Phantom Menace is boring.
Star Trek XI is fun.

 

[The Evil Dead]

Thanks for posting this, I love reviews in the vein of Spoony/Nostalgia Critic so now I'll spend the rest of the night catching up on this guy's videos.

 

[USS Mariner]

Because Trek XI isn't shit. It makes no sense, the villain is terrible, the characters act out of character, and the science is crap. But the movie is great for one reason -- fun. A quality that a disturbingly large number of Trekkies don't look for when they watch a movie. The plot problems may be somewhat similar between the two movies, but "fun" is the difference in why TPM is hated while ST XI is loved.

The Phantom Menace is boring.
Star Trek XI is fun.

How does one define "fun"? That entire statement makes no sense if you can't define the elements that are "fun." Is fun quantified by the effects, or the colors, or the action?

In that light, wouldn't TPM be just as "fun" as Trek XI?

BTW, the last video is incredibly insightful about the behind the scenes events surrounding TPM. No wonder it was a disaster.

 

[Kegg]

BTW, the last video is incredibly insightful about the behind the scenes events surrounding TPM. No wonder it was a disaster.

Yes, very. I had read the Kurtz interview he quoted, though, and it's worth googling for (he says some interesting stuff about the original planned second trilogy - whose plans were sorta scuppered by ROTJ.)

Also, I think we'd all prefer a pizza roll to tell us to murder its family rather than have Anakin ask Padme about angels.

This is precisely the sort of sentence I doubted I'd get an opportunity to write, ever.