It's great that you brought up the fact that the word "sith" is never once used in the entire original trilogy. I think you're the first guy I've ever seen bring that up in a review.
This guy is extremely biased and doesn't know wtf he's talking about. I could nit pick the f**k out of the original trilogy if i wanted to, but i wont because theyre still great, powerful movies, as is this one.
The EU makes Anakin more noble. He saves an entire race of weird hamster aliens in Clone Wars (2D cartoon, not the CGI), he takes an apprentice and makes her a good padawan and his relationship with Obi Wan is more explored.
@walmartian555 yes I can and I would bet money on that if the new 3 films where made first people would slag the eps 4,5,6 . It's just the way people are. Look at the batman fans there's a Loy of them that think if they like any other batman movie than Tim Burton's people would think they are not true fans and I think the same is happening with star wars I like all films no matter what order they where made in evern if the SFX was used for 99% of the movie
@urbantrooper22 first of he said much more. YOU probably didn't watched it. besides that, he said that so often beacause thats what everyone thinks who is watching the movie. I'm 15 and I don't understand ANYTHING! why are they fighting this war? what are the sith? what do they want revenge for? why did oubadouba fall in love with anakin? it makes no fucking sense whatsoever!
@Goombuu okay well i can see how you can be confused if you didn't know the whole back story going into the movie witch they never explained to well in the actual movies. but im a huge star wars fan so i knew what the back story's going into the movie were so it didn't confuse me that much. it could be better more effort could have been put to telling the audience whats going on.what would be great is if peter Jackson remade the new trilogy. cant go wrong with him.
@urbantrooper22 How about Peter Jackson directing with Ronald D. Moore (BSG remake) & J.M.S. (Babylon 5) as Executive Writers that would be a lot better of a remake Than what came out. At least it would have a cohesive story and a lot better lines. and the story structure should have been the same style only a darker over tone. At least that is my Opinion.
@Goombuu and not to mention but lucas totally fucked it up and i hate how he changed so much in the original trilogy. i hate the attack of the clones illl never forgive lucas for that but you have to admit revenge of the sith is much improved over clones but thats not saying much.
there are some things I agree with and some I don't. I think the cgi was great in this movie and I think it's pretty obvious who the sith are. Also but everything else. i think you hit perfectly. the dialogue makes no sense and the acting is awful
@frivilouscakes one problem I think we can both agree on is that having a few real actors in a world made entirely out of CGI made the effects look fake.
Dude you dont know shit about Star Wars u dont know what the war is about and you dont know whats a Sith? so because your stupidity the movie is bad? NO you are a fool
@thisjointisloose your a fucking dumbass, he is saying that these are things that the movie deosnt explain these things, and if the movie deosnt explain them, thats the movies falt. fucking dumb shit
@thisjointisloose He loves Star Wars. The main reason why he hates these shitty movies is because he loves original trilogy so much. And by the way, he made 9 videos explaining WHY he doesnt like these movies, you just wrote "star wars is awesome, you are retard". Grow a brain, dumbass.
Lucase can't learn from his mistakes (of the Phantom and Clones) and make a good Star Wars movie in Sith, just like I can't "try real hard" and become a professional basketball player. The man is an incompetent writer and filmmaker and a New Hope was only good because of the intervention of others. It doesn't matter how much he tried to make Sith good; it turned out bad like the others because he simply doesn't have the talent or storytelling ability.
the only thing I truely hated about the prequels were the introduction of medichlorients. jarjar was annoying but at least he wasn't a giant teddy bear (cough*ewoks*cough) and the actors who played anakin weren't good but I've seen worse. in jake lloyde's case, I've seen child actors who say every sylable like it's a seperate word, but he doesn't. as for hayden christiansen... I've seen tommy wiseau nuff said. over all, I liked them. ep 1 was the weakest but I still enjoyed it
@carollshelby500 WHAT?!? WHAT?!? WHAT?!? U R FUCKING CRAZY............or r u a 11 year old boy who has discovered real filmmaking yet, becuase that is completly untrue, ur opinion, but BULLSHIT untrue
@carollshelby500 WHAT?!? WHAT?!? WHAT?!? U R FUCKING CRAZY............or r u a 11 year old boy who has not discovered real filmmaking yet, becuase that is completly untrue, ur opinion, but BULLSHIT untrue
ROTS was better then the first II. It wasn't great, unless you are a big Star Wars fan like me. They did a decent job with this one compared to the other ones.
@tennispro3782 I think the first 30 minutes of the movie are propably the best, that has ever came out of pre trilogy. The rest of the movie is just as bad as the rest.
i don't think an anakin killing all those tuskin raiders necessarily makes him evil he did it because his mother just died there in his arms and he went into a rage. i think if your mother died you would be pissed as hell too.
@charlesvan13 It's sad but true. Many women, for some reason, are drawn to dark men even when they treat them like trash. But star wars was suppose to be different, like Han and Leia's relationships. In fact, Han was kind of a jerk but he at least he grew, unlike Anakin here =/
Most women just like bad boys because they aren't overly into them. Most women are looking for a guy to just be laid back with. being overly nice repels them away. and the percentage of women attracted to evil men such as serial killers has got to be extremely low. That's not what women want.
A Sith is the evil counterpart of the Jedi and they fought in war against each other before episode 1. The clone wars started because the CIS want's to have complete control of the galaxy so the Republic had to stop them. I didn't even care about the sand people because it's just like killing a monster under your bed they kill and rape people.
@darthdan1000 He knows what Sith is. He just point out, they never actualy said it in the movie.
Sand people are not humans, they are diffrent race. For them, it can be like for them like for us shooting animals. But ok, lets say the deserved it. They did something horrible and they paid for it. Ok.¨
But their CHILDREN didnt rape or kill anyone and they obviously couldnt hurt Anakin in any way.
Thanks Matthew and also Plinket for finally someone saying how bad this movie was it is not as good as people say it is and no were near as good as the originals it may be the best prequel but thats not saying alot
Ok, so i can understand that the two before this one werent the best. But then u go all dumbass in this review. If u ever payed attention to the entire series then it is obvious the triangl shaped ships are the goddamn republic. One question do u think that a little romance in a movie is bad i mean really. Go get a job and stop making these movies look like crap.
You obviously don't know good fuckin movies when you see em, they're great movies, and if you opened the eyes and used the brain God gave you, and paid attention to pervious movies, you'd understand the simple questions you ask, so if you don't like it, keep it to yourself and eat a dick, bye
Well done matthew! I liked how you linked duku and maul as villains who are never developed so there deaths mean nothing to us emotionally. That was something that always bothered me but i never heard it from other fans. And your criticism of the romance dialogue is spot on
I thought episode II and III were pretty good movies and I have watched all star wars movies a thousand times. You could easily do a stupid review of the old episodes and make them look stupid..
Did nobody pay attention to the movies? I was eight when the first movie came out and I could follow along perfectly through the while trilogy. I guess you attention span is only suited to a movie like transformers where the only thing that can get you attention is an explosion.
I've got a theory about why Ep 3 gets so much praise. It wasnt AS bad as the others for starters, and critics refused to accept that all 3 prequels were horrible, so they convinced themselves it was great and used "it was dark" as their justification. Then all the sheeple bought into the fake praise.
Thank you for understanding how bad it was and how on par with the other prequels it was.
@petplatypus ....ok well, if thats your personal opinion, then I wont dispute that. But on a bigger picture, no, it wasnt. It had all the same problems of the first two, just minus Jar Jar binks, stupid kids, and a dumb love story. It still had under-developed one-dimensional characters, incoherent plotlines, miserable "special" effects, and a gag-inducing script. I still dont understand the love for that movie. I really tried to like it, but its no better than 1 or 2.
@zzyzx0788 incoherent plot lines no the whole thing made sense nothing was wrong with the plot and the special effect were GOOD for 2005 not every movie looks like Avatar and Transformers the script had some off lines but the dialogue is still better then the first 2 and the action and dark storyline plus the way it perfectly ties with the Trilogy its a true Prequel most of Matthew's points were him not even understanding the story lines and how are the characters under developed
@petplatypus First of all, try using something called a "period". Its a little piece of punctuation that makes your post not an incoherent rambling mess (ironically like this movie). The plot doesn't make sense, and the characters are underdeveloped (and boring). The CGI is terrible. Its not only overused to shit, but it looks like crap. Look at Jurassic Park and Terminator 2, they came out more than a decade before this and they both still look incredible
Anakin's killing of the sand people wasn't mass murder because sand people are considered animals. If a bear killed my mother I'd go and slaughter a ton of freakin' bears.
@MasterYoda12321 then why did Anakin talk about it like mass murder then, if I went out and killed a pack of dogs I wouldn't talk about it in terms of "women and children" ?
@255ad That's because anakin grew up on tatooine he had kind of grown a connection to sandpeople from living with them. Also, in this episode, he had no motive, younglings aren't ruthless killers. Sandpeople hunt down and destroy anyone who isn't a member of their species.
@255ad Well he talked about it like a cruel act not murder, women and children indicate he killed the weaker lifeforms, if you killed puppies aswrell as female dogs you probably would find it worth mentioning, and there is simpily no other usual term for females and infant. Hecalled them women a childrenb cauise that how uou usualy refer to suich groups of any sort cause there is no other word for it. I mean really how would you call them if you killed the ewomen and children???
@reviewreviewer1 I world say "I even killed the the little ones and the females" if I was talking about animal
also if there just animals to him why would he get so and guilty about it, if I killed..... a troop of monkeys in a violent rage I don't think I'd be rumours stricken that badly about it afterwards
@255ad Well maybe but that just isn`t as natural an impulse to discribe them, the reason he feels guilty is cause itt was crual and merciles it was cruel and even though they might just have been animals and it is forgivefull it still was semiwrong, many people feel guilty of hurting animals and don`t forget he is a Jedi so it is against his believe in discipline he even said I am a Jedi I know I am better then this.
@reviewreviewer1 I can't think of any animal we typically use human pronouns to describe, even ones very similar to us like apes we tend to refer to as male and female
"many people feel guilty of hurting animals" Anakin is from Tatooine, one of the main pass times on Tatooine I shooting Womp rat.... clearly they don't have a problem as a people with killing animals... in fact if you came from such a culture and an "animal" killed your mother what he did would probably be normal (con't)
@255ad Well it is rare to use those words but since the emphasize was on the fact they were children like animals I can imagine him using the word and although Anakin was from Tatoine it is made clear he was always much too kind nfor that place and he bewlieves in the Jedi code.
@reviewreviewer1 like I said chimp children are like human children but we still don't call them that, Luke was kind and believed in the Jedi code too but he still killed Womp rats, and I think that was referring to all the slavery and crime more then hunting rodents.
@255ad Well it depends on how much emphasize you put on the fact they are children, but regarding killing animals, njot everyone is oke with it, my mom, isn`t, and also not everyone is the same, so Anakin can simpily just be kinder in this regard then Luke, Luke isn`t jesus cause there actually are many people who are against killiong animals look at all the protest groups, Anakin can be like that and he is more understanding of the code then Luke was who questioned the Jedi in IV and V.
@reviewreviewer1 it doesn't matter how nice you are, if your come from a culture where killing animals is OK you won't feel particularly guilty about it, how can you feel guilty about something you were never thought was wrong.
@255ad Poeples moral valuas don`t perse depend on howv they grow up, we saw Anakin differet from most of the people on Tatooine and that his mom was different so he can think brutal slaughter is wrong and feel guilty about it.
@reviewreviewer1@reviewreviewer1 they have to get their moral’s from some where Anakin was exposed to nothing but Tatooine growing up, (people do sometimes have instinctual aversion to doing something things but where that the case it would have resulted in much less guilt as guilt is largely based on knowing what you did was wrong) (con’t)
continuation..... you know what's annoys me about your argument it’ that it's based on a bunch of unreasonable assumptions, firstly that the Tusken Raider are only animals and not people, that anakin would for some reason refer to the Tusken Raiders as people even though their not, that anakin in contrast with the cultural norms of tatooine feel guilty about killing animals
P.S also you ignored my question about why do the people of Tatooine not just exterminate them
@255ad No people often have their own moral views, Anakin did, people are individuals and form their own ideas he was muxh kinder and tolerant then other tatoine people.
@reviewreviewer1 "people often have their own moral views" no they don't (especially children) unless there moral philosophers most people just go by what there taught the "good" is,.....and any way being pre disposed to be kind isn't having a different moral code, It doesn't matter how kind you are if you haven't been taught animals are entities with there own feelings you wont be nice to them
@reviewreviewer1 continuation.... which raises another issue if the the people on Tatooine don't mind killing animals, and the Tusken Raider are animals and dangerous why don't they all do what anakin did, and get rid of them forever like you would an ant infestation
P.S also trying to "hurting animals" and trying killing animals are too different things
@255ad Wel the answer is the sandpeople fight back well, and they gnore them aslong as they stay away, since they were agressice they already had a justisfication to whipe them out, the Sandpeople being animals was said by Lars thety might walk like man but deep down thwey are animals, they made it clear in I Anakin DIFFERENTLY THEN MOST PEOPLE ON TATOINE,AND HE DIDN1`T REFER TO THEM AS HUMN BUT WOMEN AND CHildren words which can be used loosely.
how well could they possibly fight back their basically cave men
IS THAT WHERE YOUR GETTING THIS ANIMAL THING FROM? THAT WAS JUST PREJUDICE BECAUSE THEY KILLED HIS STEP MOTHER!!!!! "down they are animals" indeed, things are either animals that behave solely according to there animal nature or not, they can't be animals but only deep down, they either have intellects or not, anakin may be different but it is an assumtion that it is in the animal loving way you are suggesting
@255ad hE WAS A HONEST PERSON AND AGHAINST SLAAVERY A CTIME BY A GROUP[ DOPESN`T MAKE A Good person a racist, oh and sdorry for caps, and Luicass said thsat scene was to estyab;lish the sand[people arem`t completely hnuman on the II dvd commentarry. TYhey are physicly bodyu structirewise humaan nopt mentally this is possible a brain aND SKEL;ETON DONB`T PERSE EVOLVEV EQUALLOY. Again sorry for Caps accident.
@reviewreviewer1 your either an intelligent being or an animal, there is no mid point "the sand people arem`t completely human" yeah because there aliens, and the DVD commentary is not the film if we could go by stuff that is not the film I could point to all the extended universe stuff that shows the sand people have an sophisticated culture and obviously people.
P.S "estyab;lish the sand[people arem`t" pleas write normally
@255ad .. that if there is nothing established to the contrarry thst if a caracter tell something that is exdtablished as fact, the dvd commentarry just supoort this, snd if you don`t brlieve Lucas when he has caracters say something then when do you believe him, I can also say Luke was wevuil cause the empirewas actually good and the rebels lied that they were evil, so that isn`t fair an commentarikes can support something writers intent needs to be examinded sometimes.
he would discriminate because they killed his step mother, he also said they are animal at their core which doesn't make sense
"sandpeople act animaslistic and mindless" so did Vikings but they where still people
the work should speak for it's self writers shouldn't be allowed to just go and claim what ever about the work retrospectively,....also Lucas supports the idea that the extended universe stuff is cannon a lot of which clearly supports the idea sand people are... people
@255ad You say the work should present itself but you don`t watch it properly you read things into it, not everybody who isangry discriminates espicially not good people. It does make sense being an animal doesn`t mean that yo can`t have human bone structure it is the mind that mattered. Vikings didn`t groal. Also the EU is canion but somertimes inconsistent.
@reviewreviewer1 he wasn't talking about just the way the looked he was referring to their behaviour, and what I was saying is you can't behave a bit like an animal your either animal or person.
"you read things into it" so do you to make it come out good
@255ad They said they were animals you xan be physicly more hukmsnm but mentallty animal the brain and the body are cklearkly seperated. Also yes exactly he discribed their nbeaviour but groupd of people wouldn`t all act the same in predictable ways cause they would all be indoviduals to be able to predict a groups behaviouer they need to be animals, because animals iof a species all act the same cause their actions are instinctive and all instincts of a dpecvies are the same so there. proof.
@reviewreviewer1 he was predicting he was making a best guess based on the odds I.E "Russia is not going to invade mexico tomorrow" just because people can behave anyway they want doesn't mean it's random
""Those Tuskens walk like men, but they're vicious, mindless monsters" it never actually says "animal" you liar, now I present my own quote "They're like animals, and I slaughtered them like animals! I hate them!" not "are" "like".proof
@255ad The dvd isn`t the film but it does martter cayse it is an explanation of what is in the film, it is supporting material and shows intent. Also the scene discrinbes them as animals, you say Laes discriminates but you have no basis for this, how do you know he wasn`t right??? They didn`t establish jim as a discriminative snd showed he was very kind so why woul just diszriminate, why csn`t he be right????? Also the sandpeople act animaslistic and mindless, aklso rule 1. of filmmaking is...
@255ad He ranted about women and children cause it meant they were vanerable, how you talk about animals and their slaughter depewnds per person, Anakin was raised very moralisticly that is why!!!
@255ad The thing is the term childjust comes to mibd the fastest when thinking of well I don`t even know a different word. I can see why you think it was unclear but they established it by fuirst establishing Lars is good person who freed slaves to them have him say that although they walk like animals that they are acrually vicious monsters. A kind man said it so then we know it is the case!!!
@reviewreviewer1 people call the Nazis monsters, but they don't mean their literally animals
imagine you walk into a zoo and find some species of primate you don't recognise, later you describe them to biologist to try and identify them, when you cam to describe the younger member of the species, would you say "children" or "young/little ones"?
@255ad Well he made it clear he meant they were animals by first saying that all that was human of them wa how they walked. I would probably say children, but I think that differs per person.
@255ad Not with a baby but I do woth well a child, amd also he never gave the idea he didn`t mean it, so it could be serious, you can`t assume exposoition isn`t intended, they don`t have language they yell, and being practicly smart does not make obne sentient.
I'm not disputing that he meant "it", I'm disputing what "it" was, I think they where trying to tell us the sand people where just real evil little bastards, not that their full animals
chines just sounds like yelling to me, also the level of complex organisation in their village implies sapient
@255ad No sentient in sentient beings, that is a different word. They made a clear that they weeren`t justy evil by the they might walk like man comment, that actively disputes they are humans, plus gues what George Lucas on the audio commentarry sais this scene was supposed to establish that the sandpeople aren`t completely human!!!!
@reviewreviewer1 I still think that line could just mean they where just evil aliens not animals,
and if where going to bring up cheaters intent (which I don't like doing the work should speak for it's self) what he said doesn't make sense because something can't be more or less a person (unless he just meant they where aliens as I suggest) also he endorses a lot of extended universe stuff as cannon, where the sand people have a complex culture and are obviously SAPIENT
@255ad Sentient is a differet word from sapient. He means with not completely that they do have good weapons and stuff, also you say it coukld just mean they were evil but that is reading things into it, which can ruin a work by your own assumptions and isn`t fair, if you take exposition literally as you ashould it mweans they are animals. The EU although canon is vert inconsistent at many parts!!!!!!!!!!!
what anakin said seems pretty clear to me yet your doing the exact same thing your accusing me of, your reading into what he said beyond the obvious meaning and trying to find one that suits you
@255ad It is because people usually never have to discribe that they are talking about women and children!!!!!! Also he didn`t just say they were monsters but thaty the only thing human of them was how they walked!!!!!!!!
like I said he could just mean their evil aliens or just really cruel
anakin says one thing and your desperate for him not to mean what, what he said means, well your having a go at me for not taking lar's pretty ambiguous comment the way you think it should be taken
@255ad Lars comment wasn`t ambigious he said that although they walk like men, that they arwen`t that they are monsters, so not just aliens, not human, and children doesn`t perse refer to humans that isn`t it officially meaning, officialy speaken monsters is monsters and children as anything which isn`t an andolecent.
@255ad When you look at the fuilm literally Lars sais they aren`t human and Anakin uses a term whic officialy can be used to discribe any nonadolescent any non adolesent!!
@reviewreviewer1 "Lars comment wasn`t ambigious he said that although they walk like men, that they arwen`t that they are monsters" if he's said they are "animals" it wouldn't be ambigious
no they do refer specifically to people, puppy cannot literately be called a child, and word woman even has an abbreviation human in it
P.S "sais" "fuilm" your key broad broken or something
@255ad monsters and animnals are te same isn`t ambigious cayuse he first saiud they weren`t human makung clear that what he ,meant was that they weren`t human. The owrd child doesn`t need to be used for humans,
@reviewreviewer1 their not human because their aliens, and "monster" has very broad meaning
"The word child doesn't need to be used for humans" that's the correct usage in the English language, I can call my Nintendo DS "the purple spotted fart machine" but that doesn't change the fact the correct name for it is "Nintendo DS"
@255ad Not human mean not human like and it was followed with mondters not aliens that combination mskes it clear not human but something monsturious!!!!!
@255ad No because he before that saisd that they might walk like men do he indicated that they are not human,m meaning not human!!!!!!! Also a monster is an animal and since he befoere thuis mafe it clear he didn`t mean they were evil but that thee weren`t human it is clear he means they animals!!!
@255ad Well in a galaxy where you live among many different specieses which all sre lijke humans except forwhen it comnezs to their appearance, human means human like, obviously!!!!!!!!!!
@reviewreviewer1 IT'S SAPIENT!!!!! and no it doesn't in star trek they very clearly use the term human to refer to just humans, typically the "humanoid" is used for what you suggesting
@255ad SENTIENT IS A DIFFERENT WORD FROM SAPIENT, now and human it`s more logical sense means human like, and mosters are animals even in a literal, senwse and Lucas said they were animals!!!!!!!!!!
@255ad No not human and monster obviously means not sentient a monster almost never is sentient and not human usually means not human like a child isn`t technicly preserved for humans!!!!!
@255ad there is no official term really so dependin on yoye knowlege of the species you will either use the yerm specificly for the species or the word whic fahstest comes to mind!!!!!!!!!
@reviewreviewer1 people don't just use any word though, I've never heard people call young animals "children" just because they didn't know to say "pup" or whatever
@255ad It is probably because you never had to talk about the wel uh females and whatever did you hear people talk about specificly the women snd children of animals before????????
@reviewreviewer1 as a child I use to get quite obsessed with biology and dinosaurs as a child and I use to talk to people about animals all the time, I can't ever remember so one calling them women or children when the talk back to me
@255ad But you knew lots of bioligy Anakin is jusrt a guy who doesn`t even know the oficial term and wants to focus on the fact that they were insert word here and insert word here.
It's great that you brought up the fact that the word "sith" is never once used in the entire original trilogy. I think you're the first guy I've ever seen bring that up in a review.
limmywinks 3 days ago
This guy is extremely biased and doesn't know wtf he's talking about. I could nit pick the f**k out of the original trilogy if i wanted to, but i wont because theyre still great, powerful movies, as is this one.
emjcohen 3 days ago
@emjcohen Go ahead and nit pick, these are general criticisms.
pat5168 2 days ago
I actoully thought this was the best of the Prequels.
Osvath97 3 days ago
Darth timefiller!!! LLOOOLLL
I have never laughed so much in my life!!!
Thank you!!!
I have to say that I am actually a big fan of Ray Park but this is too funny!!!!
Cheburashka207 1 week ago 2
The EU makes Anakin more noble. He saves an entire race of weird hamster aliens in Clone Wars (2D cartoon, not the CGI), he takes an apprentice and makes her a good padawan and his relationship with Obi Wan is more explored.
TheMusicThrasher 2 weeks ago
@walmartian555 yes I can and I would bet money on that if the new 3 films where made first people would slag the eps 4,5,6 . It's just the way people are. Look at the batman fans there's a Loy of them that think if they like any other batman movie than Tim Burton's people would think they are not true fans and I think the same is happening with star wars I like all films no matter what order they where made in evern if the SFX was used for 99% of the movie
kapowreviews 2 weeks ago
General Wheezy
Darth Time Filler
Ooba Dooba
Guardians of Peace and Justice my ass
I love these reviews!
Cap285 2 weeks ago
I like all star wars films yes a lot of the line are bad but I can move past them and enjoy the films for what they are
kapowreviews 3 weeks ago
@kapowreviews lol you dont see the difference between the old and new
walmartian555 2 weeks ago
The original are great. Period. Not the GCI bullshit ones.
scottieman2 3 weeks ago
lmao bad review. Saying movie is crap is to far its good film as good as episode 4-6.
brandoncooper17 3 weeks ago
wow i have never seen such a shitty review you have no idea what the hell your talking about you fucking moron!
urbantrooper22 4 weeks ago
@urbantrooper22 he probably has more idea, of what he is talking about, then you.
Goombuu 3 weeks ago
@Goombuu that makes no sense, did you even watch this review? it was just him saying repeatedly i don't know whats going on.
urbantrooper22 3 weeks ago
@urbantrooper22 first of he said much more. YOU probably didn't watched it. besides that, he said that so often beacause thats what everyone thinks who is watching the movie. I'm 15 and I don't understand ANYTHING! why are they fighting this war? what are the sith? what do they want revenge for? why did oubadouba fall in love with anakin? it makes no fucking sense whatsoever!
Goombuu 3 weeks ago 2
@Goombuu okay well i can see how you can be confused if you didn't know the whole back story going into the movie witch they never explained to well in the actual movies. but im a huge star wars fan so i knew what the back story's going into the movie were so it didn't confuse me that much. it could be better more effort could have been put to telling the audience whats going on.what would be great is if peter Jackson remade the new trilogy. cant go wrong with him.
urbantrooper22 3 weeks ago
@urbantrooper22 How about Peter Jackson directing with Ronald D. Moore (BSG remake) & J.M.S. (Babylon 5) as Executive Writers that would be a lot better of a remake Than what came out. At least it would have a cohesive story and a lot better lines. and the story structure should have been the same style only a darker over tone. At least that is my Opinion.
Crusnik2000 2 days ago
@Goombuu and not to mention but lucas totally fucked it up and i hate how he changed so much in the original trilogy. i hate the attack of the clones illl never forgive lucas for that but you have to admit revenge of the sith is much improved over clones but thats not saying much.
urbantrooper22 3 weeks ago
@urbantrooper22 Until you make a video review explaining why Matthew is wrong, shut the fuck up fanboy.
ShadowGunner82 2 weeks ago
there are some things I agree with and some I don't. I think the cgi was great in this movie and I think it's pretty obvious who the sith are. Also but everything else. i think you hit perfectly. the dialogue makes no sense and the acting is awful
frivilouscakes 1 month ago
@frivilouscakes one problem I think we can both agree on is that having a few real actors in a world made entirely out of CGI made the effects look fake.
DARTHPIZZAROLL 3 weeks ago
lucas is fucking for all etenity. Even if there's nothing left to fuck anymore.
qwuezalothus 1 month ago
what you said was funny but fuck you
sanderflop 1 month ago
Plinkett owes you a lot of pizza rolls.
daftrok 1 month ago 11
ok first of u listened in the movies u will know whats going on
SiikToxiiCzZ 1 month ago
Dude you dont know shit about Star Wars u dont know what the war is about and you dont know whats a Sith? so because your stupidity the movie is bad? NO you are a fool
thisjointisloose 2 months ago
@thisjointisloose your a fucking dumbass, he is saying that these are things that the movie deosnt explain these things, and if the movie deosnt explain them, thats the movies falt. fucking dumb shit
dareason4happyness 1 month ago
@dareason4happyness fuck that. this guy is just a lil whiny bitch. this its not a review its just him complaining like a baby star wars is awesome
thisjointisloose 1 month ago
@thisjointisloose He loves Star Wars. The main reason why he hates these shitty movies is because he loves original trilogy so much. And by the way, he made 9 videos explaining WHY he doesnt like these movies, you just wrote "star wars is awesome, you are retard". Grow a brain, dumbass.
Ikarosus 1 month ago
Lucase can't learn from his mistakes (of the Phantom and Clones) and make a good Star Wars movie in Sith, just like I can't "try real hard" and become a professional basketball player. The man is an incompetent writer and filmmaker and a New Hope was only good because of the intervention of others. It doesn't matter how much he tried to make Sith good; it turned out bad like the others because he simply doesn't have the talent or storytelling ability.
WastedPo 2 months ago
the only thing I truely hated about the prequels were the introduction of medichlorients. jarjar was annoying but at least he wasn't a giant teddy bear (cough*ewoks*cough) and the actors who played anakin weren't good but I've seen worse. in jake lloyde's case, I've seen child actors who say every sylable like it's a seperate word, but he doesn't. as for hayden christiansen... I've seen tommy wiseau nuff said. over all, I liked them. ep 1 was the weakest but I still enjoyed it
Arthus850 2 months ago
Ha! You listen to CRITICS!!
SuperSurinder123 2 months ago
Comment removed
SuperSurinder123 2 months ago
wow you are just plain ignorant and live in a box. this movie is amazing the BEST star wars movie there is PERIOD. so get out of your mothers basment
carollshelby500 2 months ago
@carollshelby500 WHAT?!? WHAT?!? WHAT?!? U R FUCKING CRAZY............or r u a 11 year old boy who has discovered real filmmaking yet, becuase that is completly untrue, ur opinion, but BULLSHIT untrue
superhuman295 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@carollshelby500 WHAT?!? WHAT?!? WHAT?!? U R FUCKING CRAZY............or r u a 11 year old boy who has not discovered real filmmaking yet, becuase that is completly untrue, ur opinion, but BULLSHIT untrue
superhuman295 2 months ago
Matthew, you should have thought a bit...
Episode 3 is better than 1 and 2... Is that saying anything?
June28July 2 months ago in playlist More videos from confusedmatthew
The guy doing this review is more annoying then Jar Jar Binks
Cameron13A 3 months ago
@Cameron13A nope just annnoyed about half way through...just annoyed
Cameron13A 2 months ago
ROTS was better then the first II. It wasn't great, unless you are a big Star Wars fan like me. They did a decent job with this one compared to the other ones.
tennispro3782 3 months ago
@tennispro3782 I think the first 30 minutes of the movie are propably the best, that has ever came out of pre trilogy. The rest of the movie is just as bad as the rest.
Ikarosus 2 months ago
are you nots
JRAYDABEAST 3 months ago
i don't think an anakin killing all those tuskin raiders necessarily makes him evil he did it because his mother just died there in his arms and he went into a rage. i think if your mother died you would be pissed as hell too.
dawg098 3 months ago
This review is spot on.
Except, from my experience, women fall in love with evil assholes all the time.
There is actually a phenomenon of women who are attracted to serial killers.
It doesn't make any sense to me but I'm not a woman.
charlesvan13 3 months ago 5
@charlesvan13 It's sad but true. Many women, for some reason, are drawn to dark men even when they treat them like trash. But star wars was suppose to be different, like Han and Leia's relationships. In fact, Han was kind of a jerk but he at least he grew, unlike Anakin here =/
Jade1157 3 months ago
@charlesvan13
Most women just like bad boys because they aren't overly into them. Most women are looking for a guy to just be laid back with. being overly nice repels them away. and the percentage of women attracted to evil men such as serial killers has got to be extremely low. That's not what women want.
dawg098 3 months ago
A Sith is the evil counterpart of the Jedi and they fought in war against each other before episode 1. The clone wars started because the CIS want's to have complete control of the galaxy so the Republic had to stop them. I didn't even care about the sand people because it's just like killing a monster under your bed they kill and rape people.
darthdan1000 3 months ago
@darthdan1000 He knows what Sith is. He just point out, they never actualy said it in the movie.
Sand people are not humans, they are diffrent race. For them, it can be like for them like for us shooting animals. But ok, lets say the deserved it. They did something horrible and they paid for it. Ok.¨
But their CHILDREN didnt rape or kill anyone and they obviously couldnt hurt Anakin in any way.
Ikarosus 3 months ago
Everything this guy says is right but he annoys the shit out of me. How many times is he gonna say "ubaduba?" Plinkett's reviews are far superior.
BRM1905 3 months ago
-:(
lukeman61497 3 months ago
Thanks Matthew and also Plinket for finally someone saying how bad this movie was it is not as good as people say it is and no were near as good as the originals it may be the best prequel but thats not saying alot
12skolvikings 3 months ago
Ok, so i can understand that the two before this one werent the best. But then u go all dumbass in this review. If u ever payed attention to the entire series then it is obvious the triangl shaped ships are the goddamn republic. One question do u think that a little romance in a movie is bad i mean really. Go get a job and stop making these movies look like crap.
The123epic321 3 months ago
go watch plinketts review. This is nerd semen.
ColossusShade 4 months ago
You obviously don't know good fuckin movies when you see em, they're great movies, and if you opened the eyes and used the brain God gave you, and paid attention to pervious movies, you'd understand the simple questions you ask, so if you don't like it, keep it to yourself and eat a dick, bye
bassgxx15 4 months ago
@bassgxx15 Simple question number 1: Why is Anakin such a unsympathetic cunt?
Benubenusus 4 months ago
the second movie sucked ass but the third and first were awesome.
coolistmo 4 months ago
@coolistmo I was going to hate on you but then again its your opinion.
savitsky54 3 months ago
duku you ass!
SkittleE275 4 months ago
u expected to much
SkittleE275 4 months ago
3 and 6 are the best.
95coulthard 4 months ago
i loved episodes 3 and 5 the most in the star wars saga
TheTwilightSagaSucks 4 months ago
@TheTwilightSagaSucks
same here. Also I agree completely with your username.
TheSoundwave129 4 months ago
Comment removed
TheTwilightSagaSucks 4 months ago
i love the prequel films alot
TheTwilightSagaSucks 4 months ago
@TheTwilightSagaSucks Love your comment and your username.
starwarsman107 3 months ago
i hate prequel haters, fuck all of u
18conor 4 months ago
@18conor Go watch Garbage Pail Kids to see what makes a film truly bad.
starwarsman107 3 months ago
Well done matthew! I liked how you linked duku and maul as villains who are never developed so there deaths mean nothing to us emotionally. That was something that always bothered me but i never heard it from other fans. And your criticism of the romance dialogue is spot on
nhall022 4 months ago
I thought episode II and III were pretty good movies and I have watched all star wars movies a thousand times. You could easily do a stupid review of the old episodes and make them look stupid..
roccoxxxx1 4 months ago
I love this movie, but this review was great :D
quinnly23 4 months ago
Palpetine- KILL HIM! Anikan- No i shouldnt then again why not then he cuts his head off lol!
kenneth2051 4 months ago
i understand where he is comming from. but it wasnt a bad movie. the review is funny btw.
00AnimeSamme00 4 months ago
Did nobody pay attention to the movies? I was eight when the first movie came out and I could follow along perfectly through the while trilogy. I guess you attention span is only suited to a movie like transformers where the only thing that can get you attention is an explosion.
tuxedoman127 4 months ago
"Unarmed" literally!
RadarKat73080 4 months ago
I've got a theory about why Ep 3 gets so much praise. It wasnt AS bad as the others for starters, and critics refused to accept that all 3 prequels were horrible, so they convinced themselves it was great and used "it was dark" as their justification. Then all the sheeple bought into the fake praise.
Thank you for understanding how bad it was and how on par with the other prequels it was.
zzyzx0788 5 months ago
@zzyzx0788 its not bad its a damn good movie and the best of the prequels its on par with the original trilogy
petplatypus 4 months ago
@petplatypus ....ok well, if thats your personal opinion, then I wont dispute that. But on a bigger picture, no, it wasnt. It had all the same problems of the first two, just minus Jar Jar binks, stupid kids, and a dumb love story. It still had under-developed one-dimensional characters, incoherent plotlines, miserable "special" effects, and a gag-inducing script. I still dont understand the love for that movie. I really tried to like it, but its no better than 1 or 2.
zzyzx0788 4 months ago
@zzyzx0788 incoherent plot lines no the whole thing made sense nothing was wrong with the plot and the special effect were GOOD for 2005 not every movie looks like Avatar and Transformers the script had some off lines but the dialogue is still better then the first 2 and the action and dark storyline plus the way it perfectly ties with the Trilogy its a true Prequel most of Matthew's points were him not even understanding the story lines and how are the characters under developed
petplatypus 4 months ago
@petplatypus First of all, try using something called a "period". Its a little piece of punctuation that makes your post not an incoherent rambling mess (ironically like this movie). The plot doesn't make sense, and the characters are underdeveloped (and boring). The CGI is terrible. Its not only overused to shit, but it looks like crap. Look at Jurassic Park and Terminator 2, they came out more than a decade before this and they both still look incredible
zzyzx0788 4 months ago
@zzyzx0788 JUMP OFF A CLIFF!!!!!
starwarsman107 3 months ago
women love evil assholes
dp100eboggan 5 months ago
Anakin's killing of the sand people wasn't mass murder because sand people are considered animals. If a bear killed my mother I'd go and slaughter a ton of freakin' bears.
MasterYoda12321 5 months ago
@MasterYoda12321 then why did Anakin talk about it like mass murder then, if I went out and killed a pack of dogs I wouldn't talk about it in terms of "women and children" ?
255ad 5 months ago 2
Comment removed
MasterYoda12321 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@255ad That's because anakin grew up on tatooine he had kind of grown a connection to sandpeople from living with them. Also, in this episode, he had no motive, younglings aren't ruthless killers. Sandpeople hunt down and destroy anyone who isn't a member of their species.
MasterYoda12321 5 months ago
@255ad Well he talked about it like a cruel act not murder, women and children indicate he killed the weaker lifeforms, if you killed puppies aswrell as female dogs you probably would find it worth mentioning, and there is simpily no other usual term for females and infant. Hecalled them women a childrenb cauise that how uou usualy refer to suich groups of any sort cause there is no other word for it. I mean really how would you call them if you killed the ewomen and children???
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 I world say "I even killed the the little ones and the females" if I was talking about animal
also if there just animals to him why would he get so and guilty about it, if I killed..... a troop of monkeys in a violent rage I don't think I'd be rumours stricken that badly about it afterwards
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad Well maybe but that just isn`t as natural an impulse to discribe them, the reason he feels guilty is cause itt was crual and merciles it was cruel and even though they might just have been animals and it is forgivefull it still was semiwrong, many people feel guilty of hurting animals and don`t forget he is a Jedi so it is against his believe in discipline he even said I am a Jedi I know I am better then this.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 I can't think of any animal we typically use human pronouns to describe, even ones very similar to us like apes we tend to refer to as male and female
"many people feel guilty of hurting animals" Anakin is from Tatooine, one of the main pass times on Tatooine I shooting Womp rat.... clearly they don't have a problem as a people with killing animals... in fact if you came from such a culture and an "animal" killed your mother what he did would probably be normal (con't)
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad Well it is rare to use those words but since the emphasize was on the fact they were children like animals I can imagine him using the word and although Anakin was from Tatoine it is made clear he was always much too kind nfor that place and he bewlieves in the Jedi code.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 like I said chimp children are like human children but we still don't call them that, Luke was kind and believed in the Jedi code too but he still killed Womp rats, and I think that was referring to all the slavery and crime more then hunting rodents.
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad Well it depends on how much emphasize you put on the fact they are children, but regarding killing animals, njot everyone is oke with it, my mom, isn`t, and also not everyone is the same, so Anakin can simpily just be kinder in this regard then Luke, Luke isn`t jesus cause there actually are many people who are against killiong animals look at all the protest groups, Anakin can be like that and he is more understanding of the code then Luke was who questioned the Jedi in IV and V.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 it doesn't matter how nice you are, if your come from a culture where killing animals is OK you won't feel particularly guilty about it, how can you feel guilty about something you were never thought was wrong.
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad Poeples moral valuas don`t perse depend on howv they grow up, we saw Anakin differet from most of the people on Tatooine and that his mom was different so he can think brutal slaughter is wrong and feel guilty about it.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 @reviewreviewer1 they have to get their moral’s from some where Anakin was exposed to nothing but Tatooine growing up, (people do sometimes have instinctual aversion to doing something things but where that the case it would have resulted in much less guilt as guilt is largely based on knowing what you did was wrong) (con’t)
255ad 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1
continuation..... you know what's annoys me about your argument it’ that it's based on a bunch of unreasonable assumptions, firstly that the Tusken Raider are only animals and not people, that anakin would for some reason refer to the Tusken Raiders as people even though their not, that anakin in contrast with the cultural norms of tatooine feel guilty about killing animals
P.S also you ignored my question about why do the people of Tatooine not just exterminate them
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad No people often have their own moral views, Anakin did, people are individuals and form their own ideas he was muxh kinder and tolerant then other tatoine people.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewreviewer1 "people often have their own moral views" no they don't (especially children) unless there moral philosophers most people just go by what there taught the "good" is,.....and any way being pre disposed to be kind isn't having a different moral code, It doesn't matter how kind you are if you haven't been taught animals are entities with there own feelings you wont be nice to them
255ad 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 continuation.... which raises another issue if the the people on Tatooine don't mind killing animals, and the Tusken Raider are animals and dangerous why don't they all do what anakin did, and get rid of them forever like you would an ant infestation
P.S also trying to "hurting animals" and trying killing animals are too different things
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad Wel the answer is the sandpeople fight back well, and they gnore them aslong as they stay away, since they were agressice they already had a justisfication to whipe them out, the Sandpeople being animals was said by Lars thety might walk like man but deep down thwey are animals, they made it clear in I Anakin DIFFERENTLY THEN MOST PEOPLE ON TATOINE,AND HE DIDN1`T REFER TO THEM AS HUMN BUT WOMEN AND CHildren words which can be used loosely.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1
how well could they possibly fight back their basically cave men
IS THAT WHERE YOUR GETTING THIS ANIMAL THING FROM? THAT WAS JUST PREJUDICE BECAUSE THEY KILLED HIS STEP MOTHER!!!!! "down they are animals" indeed, things are either animals that behave solely according to there animal nature or not, they can't be animals but only deep down, they either have intellects or not, anakin may be different but it is an assumtion that it is in the animal loving way you are suggesting
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad hE WAS A HONEST PERSON AND AGHAINST SLAAVERY A CTIME BY A GROUP[ DOPESN`T MAKE A Good person a racist, oh and sdorry for caps, and Luicass said thsat scene was to estyab;lish the sand[people arem`t completely hnuman on the II dvd commentarry. TYhey are physicly bodyu structirewise humaan nopt mentally this is possible a brain aND SKEL;ETON DONB`T PERSE EVOLVEV EQUALLOY. Again sorry for Caps accident.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 your either an intelligent being or an animal, there is no mid point "the sand people arem`t completely human" yeah because there aliens, and the DVD commentary is not the film if we could go by stuff that is not the film I could point to all the extended universe stuff that shows the sand people have an sophisticated culture and obviously people.
P.S "estyab;lish the sand[people arem`t" pleas write normally
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad .. that if there is nothing established to the contrarry thst if a caracter tell something that is exdtablished as fact, the dvd commentarry just supoort this, snd if you don`t brlieve Lucas when he has caracters say something then when do you believe him, I can also say Luke was wevuil cause the empirewas actually good and the rebels lied that they were evil, so that isn`t fair an commentarikes can support something writers intent needs to be examinded sometimes.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1
he would discriminate because they killed his step mother, he also said they are animal at their core which doesn't make sense
"sandpeople act animaslistic and mindless" so did Vikings but they where still people
the work should speak for it's self writers shouldn't be allowed to just go and claim what ever about the work retrospectively,....also Lucas supports the idea that the extended universe stuff is cannon a lot of which clearly supports the idea sand people are... people
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad You say the work should present itself but you don`t watch it properly you read things into it, not everybody who isangry discriminates espicially not good people. It does make sense being an animal doesn`t mean that yo can`t have human bone structure it is the mind that mattered. Vikings didn`t groal. Also the EU is canion but somertimes inconsistent.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 he wasn't talking about just the way the looked he was referring to their behaviour, and what I was saying is you can't behave a bit like an animal your either animal or person.
"you read things into it" so do you to make it come out good
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad They said they were animals you xan be physicly more hukmsnm but mentallty animal the brain and the body are cklearkly seperated. Also yes exactly he discribed their nbeaviour but groupd of people wouldn`t all act the same in predictable ways cause they would all be indoviduals to be able to predict a groups behaviouer they need to be animals, because animals iof a species all act the same cause their actions are instinctive and all instincts of a dpecvies are the same so there. proof.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 he was predicting he was making a best guess based on the odds I.E "Russia is not going to invade mexico tomorrow" just because people can behave anyway they want doesn't mean it's random
""Those Tuskens walk like men, but they're vicious, mindless monsters" it never actually says "animal" you liar, now I present my own quote "They're like animals, and I slaughtered them like animals! I hate them!" not "are" "like".proof
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad He said vicious animals. Also he said it about the species in general.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 no he said "mindless monsters" I checked on Wookieepedia, and your ignoring my quote
255ad 5 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 no he didn't and YOUR IGNORING MY QUOTE
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad Finbe monsters monsters are animals.
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewreviewer1 no their not, people call Hitler a monster, and don't cats, "YOUR IGNORING MY QUOTE"
255ad 5 months ago
@255ad The dvd isn`t the film but it does martter cayse it is an explanation of what is in the film, it is supporting material and shows intent. Also the scene discrinbes them as animals, you say Laes discriminates but you have no basis for this, how do you know he wasn`t right??? They didn`t establish jim as a discriminative snd showed he was very kind so why woul just diszriminate, why csn`t he be right????? Also the sandpeople act animaslistic and mindless, aklso rule 1. of filmmaking is...
reviewreviewer1 5 months ago
@255ad He ranted about women and children cause it meant they were vanerable, how you talk about animals and their slaughter depewnds per person, Anakin was raised very moralisticly that is why!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 a puppy is vanerable but that does'nt make me think of it as a child
anakin was talking seriously about what he did, I can't think of anyone who would seriously describe an animal as person
and even if your right it's very very unclear
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad The thing is the term childjust comes to mibd the fastest when thinking of well I don`t even know a different word. I can see why you think it was unclear but they established it by fuirst establishing Lars is good person who freed slaves to them have him say that although they walk like animals that they are acrually vicious monsters. A kind man said it so then we know it is the case!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1
the term I would use if I was talking about the young of a species of which I did not know the name would be either "young ones" or "little ones"
Lars said "monsters" not "animals"
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Monsters is animals, little ones is just not something which jumps to mind that fast.
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 people call the Nazis monsters, but they don't mean their literally animals
imagine you walk into a zoo and find some species of primate you don't recognise, later you describe them to biologist to try and identify them, when you cam to describe the younger member of the species, would you say "children" or "young/little ones"?
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Well he made it clear he meant they were animals by first saying that all that was human of them wa how they walked. I would probably say children, but I think that differs per person.
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 people say stuff like that about people like Nazis and rapist that way but it does'nt mean you think their literally animals,
listen the sand people have language and complex tools & equipment their obviously sapient
either your either lying just to be contrary or your just weird, you honestly think "child" when you see a baby monkey?
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Not with a baby but I do woth well a child, amd also he never gave the idea he didn`t mean it, so it could be serious, you can`t assume exposoition isn`t intended, they don`t have language they yell, and being practicly smart does not make obne sentient.
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1
OK your just weird
I'm not disputing that he meant "it", I'm disputing what "it" was, I think they where trying to tell us the sand people where just real evil little bastards, not that their full animals
chines just sounds like yelling to me, also the level of complex organisation in their village implies sapient
P.S "sapient" is the correct term, not "sentient"
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad No sentient in sentient beings, that is a different word. They made a clear that they weeren`t justy evil by the they might walk like man comment, that actively disputes they are humans, plus gues what George Lucas on the audio commentarry sais this scene was supposed to establish that the sandpeople aren`t completely human!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 I still think that line could just mean they where just evil aliens not animals,
and if where going to bring up cheaters intent (which I don't like doing the work should speak for it's self) what he said doesn't make sense because something can't be more or less a person (unless he just meant they where aliens as I suggest) also he endorses a lot of extended universe stuff as cannon, where the sand people have a complex culture and are obviously SAPIENT
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Sentient is a differet word from sapient. He means with not completely that they do have good weapons and stuff, also you say it coukld just mean they were evil but that is reading things into it, which can ruin a work by your own assumptions and isn`t fair, if you take exposition literally as you ashould it mweans they are animals. The EU although canon is vert inconsistent at many parts!!!!!!!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 what lars said is in conclusive
what anakin said seems pretty clear to me yet your doing the exact same thing your accusing me of, your reading into what he said beyond the obvious meaning and trying to find one that suits you
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad How is what Lars said inclusive, a caracter gave exposition, the use of the word children or young ones actualyy depends on the person!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 it's much more reasonable to describe a person as monster, then an animals as woman and children
"it depends on the person" you keep saying that but I have never met any one who in serous conversation uses human pronouns for animals
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Also how is it weird that I just the proper word children, nota disiscription???????
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@255ad It is because people usually never have to discribe that they are talking about women and children!!!!!! Also he didn`t just say they were monsters but thaty the only thing human of them was how they walked!!!!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 "refer to then" not "discribe"
like I said he could just mean their evil aliens or just really cruel
anakin says one thing and your desperate for him not to mean what, what he said means, well your having a go at me for not taking lar's pretty ambiguous comment the way you think it should be taken
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Lars comment wasn`t ambigious he said that although they walk like men, that they arwen`t that they are monsters, so not just aliens, not human, and children doesn`t perse refer to humans that isn`t it officially meaning, officialy speaken monsters is monsters and children as anything which isn`t an andolecent.
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@255ad When you look at the fuilm literally Lars sais they aren`t human and Anakin uses a term whic officialy can be used to discribe any nonadolescent any non adolesent!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 "Lars comment wasn`t ambigious he said that although they walk like men, that they arwen`t that they are monsters" if he's said they are "animals" it wouldn't be ambigious
no they do refer specifically to people, puppy cannot literately be called a child, and word woman even has an abbreviation human in it
P.S "sais" "fuilm" your key broad broken or something
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad monsters and animnals are te same isn`t ambigious cayuse he first saiud they weren`t human makung clear that what he ,meant was that they weren`t human. The owrd child doesn`t need to be used for humans,
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 their not human because their aliens, and "monster" has very broad meaning
"The word child doesn't need to be used for humans" that's the correct usage in the English language, I can call my Nintendo DS "the purple spotted fart machine" but that doesn't change the fact the correct name for it is "Nintendo DS"
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Not human mean not human like and it was followed with mondters not aliens that combination mskes it clear not human but something monsturious!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 unless he specifically says "animal" it's ambigious
where as what anakin said has one literal meaning for the the sand people's nature,
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad No because he before that saisd that they might walk like men do he indicated that they are not human,m meaning not human!!!!!!! Also a monster is an animal and since he befoere thuis mafe it clear he didn`t mean they were evil but that thee weren`t human it is clear he means they animals!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 I'll say it again not human could just mean evil aliens
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Well in a galaxy where you live among many different specieses which all sre lijke humans except forwhen it comnezs to their appearance, human means human like, obviously!!!!!!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 in the star wars verse human has only ever been used to refer to actual humans
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad They never used the term human that much and the term human in sci fi usually means a sentient species!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 IT'S SAPIENT!!!!! and no it doesn't in star trek they very clearly use the term human to refer to just humans, typically the "humanoid" is used for what you suggesting
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad In most films not human really means not like humans, and SENTIENT IS A DIFFERENT WORD FROM SAPIENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@255ad SENTIENT IS A DIFFERENT WORD FROM SAPIENT, now and human it`s more logical sense means human like, and mosters are animals even in a literal, senwse and Lucas said they were animals!!!!!!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 NO IT IS'NT, how can using a word in the wrong context be more logical? no he said they weren't quite human BIG DIFFERENCE
to be honest I suspect Lucas chose that wording because he himself wasn't sure of their nature
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad monster are non sentient beings, so animals and not human usually means nmot in any way like humans!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1
"monster are non sentient beings" no necessarily
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Well no but almost always yes and this along eith the line that all that is human of them is how they walk makes it clear what he means!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 not it doesn't, it could mean any number of things
where as what anakin said has one literal meaning
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad No not human and monster obviously means not sentient a monster almost never is sentient and not human usually means not human like a child isn`t technicly preserved for humans!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 that is not the only meaning of those two stamens however obvious you seem to think it is
a child in prepubescent person, not an animal
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad a child is pre adult being and nio human probavbly mean nt human like an monsters almost never a senbtient!!!!!!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 their are many many sapient monsters in fantasy and science fiction
no it means pre adult person
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad No just pre aduklt the same way adult is ba being in it`s later state!!!!!!!!!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 "adult" does mean that but "child" only refers to people
you can insist otherwise as much you want, but you'll still be wrong
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Child is simpily isually used for a children if you were right there would be a diufferent word for it fior animals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 and that word would be "infant"
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad Infant is even younger.
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 only when used to refer to humans, an infant dog is a puppy of any age bellow adulthood
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad No not true there is no term for that except every specific term per species!!!!!!!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1
"there is no term for that" but you've been arguing that there is and it's "child" (which it isn't)
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad there is no official term really so dependin on yoye knowlege of the species you will either use the yerm specificly for the species or the word whic fahstest comes to mind!!!!!!!!!
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 people don't just use any word though, I've never heard people call young animals "children" just because they didn't know to say "pup" or whatever
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad It is probably because you never had to talk about the wel uh females and whatever did you hear people talk about specificly the women snd children of animals before????????
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 as a child I use to get quite obsessed with biology and dinosaurs as a child and I use to talk to people about animals all the time, I can't ever remember so one calling them women or children when the talk back to me
255ad 3 months ago
@255ad But you knew lots of bioligy Anakin is jusrt a guy who doesn`t even know the oficial term and wants to focus on the fact that they were insert word here and insert word here.
reviewreviewer1 3 months ago
@reviewreviewer1 I meant the people who spoke back to me didn't say "women" or "children"
255ad 3 months ago