haxxiy said:
RLM dissected it in a way that can applied to almost any fiction work with the same results. I tried it once with great success on Game of Thrones, the first book of A Song of Ice and Fire alongside a friend who's a literature major. We exposed the results to the fans... and they weren't happy at all with us. Except for Phantom Menace, whose plotholes are very hard to overlook, most of the criticism directed at Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith could be explained in-universe or are not problems at all and are fallacious e.g. attacking the straw man, appeal to ridicule etc. Except the romance of course. It's valid to criticize that one. It was completely crap from the beginning and it felt like to me that Padme found Anakin so hot she pretended his failed flirtation had any effect on her. That's my headcanon at least. |
I think you are wrong for example I haven't read the books (only watched the show) but for me the main problem of the prequels is the main virtue of Game of thrones, the characters.
Its not really about the plot holes great movies have plot holes the prequels are just rotten to the core.
