[Helena]

I found this on ruthlessreviews.com. Not as detailed or elegantly written as Chefelf's list, but quite funny nonetheless.

[Despondent]

crude, but pithy: "Plot holes spice things up at this point."

thanks, Helena. That really was a good laugh. I didn't investigate. has he done others?

[Helena]

No more lists, as far as I know. He wrote a review of Episode II but seemed to like it slightly better.

[Supes]

I liked this one:

31. When Qui-Gon goes into Mos Isely looking for an engine or whatever, why would he take Jar Jar, a creature indigenous to Naboo, if he didn't want the Queen to be found? All ten thousand of his annoying traits aside, Jar jar is certainly not inconspicuous. Especially since Lucas went out of his way to explain that Gugans are aquatic beasts and tattooine is a fucking desert.

Don't think this one was included in your list Chef. The rest are basically summarised in your other points though.

Good laugh all around.

[Despondent]

I liked that one a lot too.

However good that list was, they glowingly endorse ROTK. (Appears *somebody* thought Legolas' AT-AT attack was great stuff.)

Chef's lists aren't reliant on four-letter words.

[Gleffnork]

crude, but pithy

This list goes beyond mere crudeness, it is an outrage! How dare the writer go and credit his absolute WASTE of time and energy to the noble pursuits of Martin Luther?!! :angry: This person needs desperately to have his mouth washed out with soap! The 95 points of his are not only repetitive and childish, but obsessive and, quite frankly, despicable. He so readily criticises George Lucas for making this film, yet I have not seen this joke on humanity attempting to create a better film! People are so quick to degrade someone else's hard work and imagination when they themselves work even less labouriously, if at all! :angry:

Now I am not saying that "the Phantom Menace" was particularly the most excellent film that I have ever seen, especially when compared to Lucas' other "Star Wars" films, but one ought still to have the decency to at least acknowledge the fact that he is trying, andd he is out of practice as well! I am sure that by now Lucas has realised what errors he has made with the "first" two films-- and that is probably the reason for the delayed release of the third installment. However, these "blunders are not a license for bad-mouthing and slander of an honest hardworking man.

We should endeavor to silence dunder heads like the author of that website!



"Carthago delenda est!"

[HK 47]

Laughed out loud a few times, like it's written by this very, very pissed off kid who really doesn't have the vocab to write well. 90% of it is quite accurate though.

[Ferris Wiel]

crude, but pithy

This list goes beyond mere crudeness, it is an outrage! How dare the writer go and credit his absolute WASTE of time and energy to the noble pursuits of Martin Luther?!! :angry: This person needs desperately to have his mouth washed out with soap! The 95 points of his are not only repetitive and childish, but obsessive and, quite frankly, despicable. He so readily criticises George Lucas for making this film, yet I have not seen this joke on humanity attempting to create a better film! People are so quick to degrade someone else's hard work and imagination when they themselves work even less labouriously, if at all! :angry:

Now I am not saying that "the Phantom Menace" was particularly the most excellent film that I have ever seen, especially when compared to Lucas' other "Star Wars" films, but one ought still to have the decency to at least acknowledge the fact that he is trying, andd he is out of practice as well! I am sure that by now Lucas has realised what errors he has made with the "first" two films-- and that is probably the reason for the delayed release of the third installment. However, these "blunders are not a license for bad-mouthing and slander of an honest hardworking man.

We should endeavor to silence dunder heads like the author of that website!



"Carthago delenda est!"

Umm, did you actually watch TPM? No. I don't believe that, in any way, George Lucas was "trying" to make a good story. He was, perhaps, "trying" to generate an "exciting" FX rollercoaster, but nothing more. He was also "trying" to create a merchandising behemoth that never came to fruition (Q: How is Skywalker Ranch like Suncoast Video? A: Little Boys Jar-Jar Binks Boxers 1/2 off).

--FW

[Despondent]

actually what I've had come to mind are all the stickers, magnets and curtains with that wonderful image (you'll remember this) of Jake Lloyd; pod-racer's head with goggles, helmet and gritting teeth.


besides the 32 collectible pepsi cans and the 96 taco bell/pizza hut/kfc toys.

[Chefelf]

There are some good points there (i.e. the Jar Jar/Naboo/Tatooine thing is a very good point). It is a little on the crude side. As much critical writing on the Internet tends to be. If you put the word "fuck" in your review a few dozen times it's a better guarantee of getting cheap laughs.

Actually I just went back and counted. "Fuck" appears 15 times.

[Despondent]

Obe quiet