RedLetterMedia Reviews

[HarryOsborn]

These reviews are impossible not to touch base on when it comes to PT discussions. These reviews are the definitive negative analysis of the prequel trilogy, with each review having a roughly 90 minute run time. Jeremy Jahns, John Campea, and a number of other high profile Youtube personalities site these reviews as the best place to go for an explanation of people's feelings on the prequels in general. Many fans even say they like these reviews more than the movies themeselves. Because of this I'm making this thread to discuss these reviews.

I'm interested to see what people have to say. A lot of big PT defenders get very defensive on this subject and outright refuse to watch them or turn them off shortly after starting. Really besides the whole "I'm right, you're wrong, my opinion" rebuttal, there's not much to room to retort to a lot of this guy's points. He covers everything!

 

[Thoix]

These reviews are impossible not to touch base on when it comes to PT discussions. These reviews are the definitive negative analysis of the prequel trilogy, with each review having a roughly 90 minute run time. Jeremy Jahns, John Campea, and a number of other high profile Youtube personalities site these reviews as the best place to go for an explanation of people's feelings on the prequels in general. Many fans even say they like these reviews more than the movies themeselves. Because of this I'm making this thread to discuss these reviews.

I'm interested to see what people have to say. A lot of big PT defenders get very defensive on this subject and outright refuse to watch them or turn them off shortly after starting. Really besides the whole "I'm right, you're wrong, my opinion" rebuttal, there's not much to room to retort to a lot of this guy's points. He covers everything!

I side with JimRaynor's rebuttal for Red Letter Media's The Phantom Menace review, which has yet to actually be argues against besides being mocked. If all RLM can do is mock someone's rebuttal, then he has proven he has no actual argument.

 

[Lord]

His rebuttal was awful, yeah, he does raise a few good points, but a lot of what he does is picking anything he can to show how wrong RLM's review is. For example, RLM says something like Anakin only appearing 45 minutes into the movie and therefore not being the main character, while JimRaynor just says something along the lines of "no, Anakin appears 30 minutes into the movie", something which is technically true, but doesn't refute RLM's point at all.

He also uses words such as "maybe" and "probably", where he just tries to make excuses based on what was not shown on the film, but how something in the plot would in theory work, even though that means Lucas didn't assemble the plot very well in the first place.

His "rebuttal" is one of my main problems with these kinds of fandoms, when a brand is so popular, fans try to make excuses and s*** on critics. People like RLM and FilmCriticHulk seem to have a good grasp at what makes a story work, and they explain it as well as they can, also using hyperbole in order to make things more entertaining. The defenses i see being used for the Prequels are usualy too fanboyish for me, it ranges from taking a certain point to personaly (like RLM saying Episode I lacked a protagonist, while defenders ignore that he also says not every film needs this, but with Phantom Menace it might have worked better), to fans of the prequels who don't understand hyperbole, and end up feeling offended by the reviews.

RLM didn't mock Jim Raynor's rebuttal because they have more to do than read a 100+ pages, i don't think they think as much about the Prequels as many defenders would like to think, they just seemed to make those videos for fun at first, and then said all they had to say about it. Since then, they have quickly moved on to other movies and seem to want to stay away from having to enter into another Prequels argument against fans. They have a good reason to, since it doesn't matter how much they argument against the prequels, there will always be defenders trying to excuse every single decision made by George Lucas, and ignoring obvious logics regarding structure, plot, etc. in film.

I also am starting to hate a recent notion among fandom that the hate against the Prequels only started with RLM's reviews, too often i see a fan saying everyone loved those films until RLM "brainwashed" them, pretty much ignoring how divisive they have been since day one.

 

[Thoix]

His rebuttal was awful, yeah, he does raise a few good points, but a lot of what he does is picking anything he can to show how wrong RLM's review is. For example, RLM says something like Anakin only appearing 45 minutes into the movie and therefore not being the main character, while JimRaynor just says something along the lines of "no, Anakin appears 30 minutes into the movie", something which is technically true, but doesn't refute RLM's point at all.

Of course it does. A character showing up for the first time 30 minutes in is a a pretty big difference of them showing up 45 minutes into a movie with a running time of around 130 minutes. RLM was not "technically true", he was just plain wrong about this fact and for someone who is reviewing a movie they should really know that.

He also uses words such as "maybe" and "probably", where he just tries to make excuses based on what was not shown on the film, but how something in the plot would in theory work, even though that means Lucas didn't assemble the plot very well in the first place.

I don't recall how often he uses words like "maybe" and "probably", but I do know that he tends to use information from the movie itself and basic logic to refute many of RLM's points. Honestly, I find a bigger issue when RLM's reviews tends to boil down to him asking "Why does this happen?" "Why do characters make these decisions?" "Why, why, why?" Most of his so called "questions" are easily answered if he bothered to actually sit down and pay attention rather than try to nitpick ways to show how bad the movies are.

His "rebuttal" is one of my main problems with these kinds of fandoms, when a brand is so popular, fans try to make excuses and s*** on critics. People like RLM and FilmCriticHulk seem to have a good grasp at what makes a story work, and they explain it as well as they can, also using hyperbole in order to make things more entertaining. The defenses i see being used for the Prequels are usualy too fanboyish for me, it ranges from taking a certain point to personaly (like RLM saying Episode I lacked a protagonist, while defenders ignore that he also says not every film needs this, but with Phantom Menace it might have worked better), to fans of the prequels who don't understand hyperbole, and end up feeling offended by the reviews.

I've seen plenty of Star Wars fans and Raynor acknowledge there are flaws within the movies themselves (Raynor even concedes on a few of RLM's points in his rebuttal), but when points can easily be refuted of course they're going to provide a counter argument. I tend to find the fans who are blinded by their love for a series to be few and far in-between the more levelheaded fans. That being said, the extremist fans on both sides of the argument ten to be the most vocal. This is the internet, fanboys and the hyperbole they spew always tend to be the more vocal, but they are in fact the minority when it comes to any fandom in general.

I really don't see what makes RLM seem like they have a good grasp on what makes anything in a movie work and I've never even heard of FilmCriticHulk or seen Star Wars fans bring up his work so I don't have an opinion about FCH either way.

As for some fans being offended by RLM's points, well of course people are going to feel offended when RLM outright calls people whole likes certain movies stupid.

RLM didn't mock Jim Raynor's rebuttal because they have more to do than read a 100+ pages, i don't think they think as much about the Prequels as many defenders would like to think, they just seemed to make those videos for fun at first, and then said all they had to say about it. Since then, they have quickly moved on to other movies and seem to want to stay away from having to enter into another Prequels argument against fans. They have a good reason to, since it doesn't matter how much they argument against the prequels, there will always be defenders trying to excuse every single decision made by George Lucas, and ignoring obvious logics regarding structure, plot, etc. in film.

It would be different if RLM acknowledged the rebuttal but said they weren't interested in anymore Star Wars discussions and would like to just move forward. Instead, they full on mock Raynor as a person and presented him to their fans as nothing more than a blind fanboy who offered no real counter argument. Raynor, and other fan, has in fact made it very clear that there are flaws within the PT. Again, the fanboys you are thinking are the minority, but tend to be the more vocal.

Besides, nothing stopped RLM from doing a special TPM commentary when it was re-released in 3D, long after the rebuttal was released.

I also am starting to hate a recent notion among fandom that the hate against the Prequels only started with RLM's reviews, too often i see a fan saying everyone loved those films until RLM "brainwashed" them, pretty much ignoring how divisive they have been since day one.

There are always going to be those who are blinded by their love or hate for something that it keeps them from acting rationally, but they're just the loud, vocal minority. Most fans acknowledge the PT received mixed reactions and are fine with that. Still, I have noticed most prequel fans do have a bone to pick with the RLM reviews, but at least they have a good reason.

I have seen plenty of RLM's reviews, but I have never seen anything from FilmCriticHulk. I will have to look into their stuff.

And I will say this about Raynor's rebuttal, he did have moments when he had a very poor choice of words while he wrote his rebuttal and he even has come out and stated the same thing recently. He acknowledges the rebuttal could have been better written and if he writing it now it would be a bit more level headed.

 

[Brem]

I also am starting to hate a recent notion among fandom that the hate against the Prequels only started with RLM's reviews, too often i see a fan saying everyone loved those films until RLM "brainwashed" them, pretty much ignoring how divisive they have been since day one.

Now, I am of the mind that you can do whatever you want. Dislike the prequels or love them, I'm really not that bothered.

However this works both ways. You hate the notion that the hatred for the prequels began with these reviews.

I hate the fact that I've had people tell me - near as damn it demand - I watch these reviews to understand why the prequels are supposed to be "bad", and telling me more or less that my opinion is null and void in light of said reviews.

The most recent could not accept that I have little to no interest in watching these reviews, and continued to press that I should watch them - immediately at the time of the conversation, regardless of whether I had better things to do or not - and telling me I'm wrong.

Of late I have seen numerous statements about what "defenders" of the prequels do and say and it is always presented in a negative light.

However I have seen just as bad from the side that dislikes the prequels as well, and they always attempt to pressure people into watching these reviews as though that will ultimately change the minds of those of us who do like them.

You'll always get a bad egg or two on either side of an argument, but frankly I'm getting a bit tired - as a general Star Wars fan - of coming to this website, coming onto this forum and the Force Awakens forum, and almost feeling as though I'm being made to feel inferior - whether I post often or not - simply because I find enjoyment from a couple of films others do not.

Because it's odd, because the complaints of what the "defenders" do seem far more frequent than those that "defend", with the occasional post that may or may not have some venom in it toward those that dislike. Which to be fair, I'm not at all surprised at times because it grows tiresome after a while and when it is the same arguments back and forth it's monotonous more than it is interesting. Considering neither side can seem to have the conversation/debate/argument in a civil manner, too, just creates more tension and more insults and more attacks.

Now, as a fan coming to read news about Force Awakens, not the prequels, I especially find it irritating to see this bull - leak over to that forum as well. I may not post often, so perhaps my opinion on the situation won't hold any stock at all, but at this point I'm just shocked that the people who do dislike the films - and even the people who do - can't see past their own pettiness, and rarely acknowledge the idiocy of their own "side" when attacking the other.

And to end - it gets me too that there are two threads on this particular forum. One for appreciation and discussion, one for what I can only gather is anti-appreciation and discussion. So how on Earth does the appreciation thread also fall apart into anti-prequel discussion as well?

 

[Thoix]

Now, I am of the mind that you can do whatever you want. Dislike the prequels or love them, I'm really not that bothered.

However this works both ways. You hate the notion that the hatred for the prequels began with these reviews.

I hate the fact that I've had people tell me - near as damn it demand - I watch these reviews to understand why the prequels are supposed to be "bad", and telling me more or less that my opinion is null and void in light of said reviews.

The most recent could not accept that I have little to no interest in watching these reviews, and continued to press that I should watch them - immediately at the time of the conversation, regardless of whether I had better things to do or not - and telling me I'm wrong.

Of late I have seen numerous statements about what "defenders" of the prequels do and say and it is always presented in a negative light.

However I have seen just as bad from the side that dislikes the prequels as well, and they always attempt to pressure people into watching these reviews as though that will ultimately change the minds of those of us who do like them.

You'll always get a bad egg or two on either side of an argument, but frankly I'm getting a bit tired - as a general Star Wars fan - of coming to this website, coming onto this forum and the Force Awakens forum, and almost feeling as though I'm being made to feel inferior - whether I post often or not - simply because I find enjoyment from a couple of films others do not.

Because it's odd, because the complaints of what the "defenders" do seem far more frequent than those that "defend", with the occasional post that may or may not have some venom in it toward those that dislike. Which to be fair, I'm not at all surprised at times because it grows tiresome after a while and when it is the same arguments back and forth it's monotonous more than it is interesting. Considering neither side can seem to have the conversation/debate/argument in a civil manner, too, just creates more tension and more insults and more attacks.

Now, as a fan coming to read news about Force Awakens, not the prequels, I especially find it irritating to see this bull - leak over to that forum as well. I may not post often, so perhaps my opinion on the situation won't hold any stock at all, but at this point I'm just shocked that the people who do dislike the films - and even the people who do - can't see past their own pettiness, and rarely acknowledge the idiocy of their own "side" when attacking the other.

And to end - it gets me too that there are two threads on this particular forum. One for appreciation and discussion, one for what I can only gather is anti-appreciation and discussion. So how on Earth does the appreciation thread also fall apart into anti-prequel discussion as well?

 

[Marvolo]

Well a person can like a thing without ignoring the thing's flaws. And considering that RLM's observations are valid and do point out very real flaws in the prequels I don't see the harm in recommending these reviews to people.

 

[Brem]

Well a person can like a thing without ignoring the thing's flaws. And considering that RLM's observations are valid and do point out very real flaws in the prequels I don't see the harm in recommending these reviews to people.

I don't care, though. I enjoy them. I certainly don't go out of my way to tell anyone who doesn't why they should, that they should give them another try and more.

In turn, I don't expect some people to try and cram these reviews down my throat in an attempt to get me to change my mind. I'm not that interested in watching a series of fairly lengthy videos of other peoples opinions and/or views or a dissection of the films when it should be accepted that I enjoy them, regardless.

It isn't that difficult to understand, and yet I've been in more arguments where people have tried to tell me I am wrong, trying to force these reviews upon me, posting numerous links to them and to people who agree with them.



And overall, I think it should be left to the individual - not these reviews - to decide what they do or do not like. If someone watches the prequels and enjoys them, that is their prerogative. If they don't, so be it.

I'd actually feel sick to the stomach if someone watched these reviews based on a recommendation, immediately jumped to the conclusion they didn't like the prequels, but they had never watched them. I can guarantee there are people who have done that, who haven't formed their own opinion based on what they have viewed. That to me is just absurd.

 

[Napoleon]

RLM's reviews of the prequels are better than the prequels themselves, and I can watch them again and again without getting bored.

 

[BatLobster]

Good post Brem.

Personally, I found the RLM reviews very entertaining, funny, and undoubtedly persuasive. I've historically leaned more positively on the prequels than most, though these days I feel more neutral and down the middle about it. I think there are some unique positives that deserve recognition, and certainly plenty of valid criticisms that are easy to make, and most of them have been made pretty thoroughly by now. I would say the RLM reviews did articulate some things that bugged me about the movies and in a way influenced my view of them for the worse, but I also think it's something that probably would've happened eventually just due to getting older and reevaluating them myself over time. But I've watched them multiple times, and despite disagreeing with a few things here and there, I enjoy them and they undeniably communicate their point very effectively.

I will say though, using the RLM reviews to try and invalidate someone's opinion or trying to hold them up as fact...that's lame. Because for as many totally valid points the reviews bring up, there's plenty that's left off the table there. It's far from the cased-closed, discussion-ending mic drop that some make it out to be. There's a better discussion that still hasn't happened yet there IMO. That's not to say that said discussion still doesn't end in an overall negative assessment of the films, but there's a lot more depth that can be mined there than what RLM did- which essentially was just a lengthy but funny way of saying the films were uninspired and dull, and lacking in some rudimentary areas. For fans of the prequels that turn a blind eye to flaws, I think these reviews are something they ought to watch and come to terms with. It's no good to live insulated from the opposing point of view and if they want to be taken seriously in the discussion, blind fanboyism is never the way to go. But for fans who have accepted the flaws and still like/love the movies regardless, it's easy to see where it could get obnoxious when people constantly cite them as some untouchable trump card and act like only an idiot could still like the prequels after watching them.

 

[BadrHari]

RLM reviews are so great, they should be put on dvd.

 

[BadrHari]

And WHO would defend the PT Trilogy ?!?!??!?!!?!?

Why would somone attempt something like that when the writing was so awful. And that is not subjective, that is a fact - the writing was lazy, horrible, dumb.

George Lucas became the character he created in real life - Darth Vader. He started out as Anakin Skywalker, a young great talented film maker, who hated the suits at the studios telling him what to do (Sith) - then he freaking became a studio and caused a lot of harm to his fans (The Prequel Trilogy & Special Editions).

Lets just hope JJ Abrams will be Luke Skywalker, the next generation of filmmakers to bring the franchise back to a being great fun popcorn iconic and epic movies that we loved as children.

 

[BadrHari]

Also, one more thing...I really recommend Confused Matthew's SW Prequel review videos...Very underrated and he goes into other things RLM didnt cover.

 

[BatLobster]

And WHO would defend the PT Trilogy ?!?!??!?!!?!?

Why would somone attempt something like that when the writing was so awful. And that is not subjective, that is a fact - the writing was lazy, horrible, dumb.

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. There's no need for that attitude. First of all there are many aspects to a film. One can appreciate the overall story arc of the movies, the themes and symbolism, the scores, certain characters, visuals etc. while acknowledging that the movies fall short in some obvious areas. There's a difference between saying "you are all poo poo heads and the prequels are flawless masterpieces!" and saying "Hey, these movies aren't completely worthless, they're flawed but there's some stuff I legitmately appreciate about them." Is the latter really such a problem? The difference is some people are holding onto more anger about the movies than others, hence all the indignation about it. That's really what it comes down to.

George Lucas became the character he created in real life - Darth Vader. He started out as Anakin Skywalker, a young great talented film maker, who hated the suits at the studios telling him what to do (Sith) - then he freaking became a studio and caused a lot of harm to his fans (The Prequel Trilogy & Special Editions).

Wow, that's the first time I've ever heard someone make that analogy. Oh wait, that's been pointed out constantly over the past decade or so. Even Lucas himself has observed that irony and has said in no uncertain terms that the story of Star Wars is basically the story of his life.

To me though, Lucas had his "throwing the Emperor down the shaft" moment- when he sold his company (and gave half the money to charity btw). He gave up control of his baby, and everything we're about to get we're getting essentially because he was finally willing to let go and pass the torch. A lot of people, myself included, thought that would never happen. So I say, go Lucas. He created something much bigger than himself that will outlive him (the goal of any artist), and all of us. Sure, the controversy will always be there regarding certain decisions he made, and he's always going to be a punching bag for his writing/directing weaknesses, but at the end of the day you can't take what he accomplished away from him. If you remove Star Wars and Lucasfilm from existence, it's like we'd be living in an entirely alternate reality...and probably one not as good as the one we've got, if you're a lover of blockbuster filmmaking.

 

[CFE]

I'm interested to see what people have to say. A lot of big PT defenders get very defensive on this subject and outright refuse to watch them or turn them off shortly after starting. Really besides the whole "I'm right, you're wrong, my opinion" rebuttal, there's not much to room to retort to a lot of this guy's points. He covers everything!

And WHO would defend the PT Trilogy ?!?!??!?!!?!?

Why would somone attempt something like that when the writing was so awful. And that is not subjective, that is a fact - the writing was lazy, horrible, dumb.

Star Wars Ring Theory: The Hidden Artistry of the Star Wars Prequels

 

[Marvolo]

Star Wars Ring Theory: The Hidden Artistry of the Star Wars Prequels

This ring theory that some defenders try to push forward as if it's some sort of trump card doesn't change the terrible dialogue, bad plotting, poor machinations, bad editing, flat uninspired cinematography, overuse of cgi environments, gratuitous choreography, poor character arcs, and weak character development.

This cyclical poem style of repeating motifs and visuals Lucas employed isn't even that artistic. He did it in the most obvious lazy ways copying shots and moments from the OT verbatim. "Oh look at the opening of TPM! It's a mirror of ROTJ's opening! Isn't it cool?" "No, George, it's lazy." Any semi intelligent kid can make one line rhyme with another line, but you wouldn't call that kid an artist. And that's essentially what George has done here. The visual equivalent of a bit of elementary school poetry.

 

[BatLobster]

Ring theory is far from any sort of trump card, but it's a very cool way of reading the saga IMO. The parallels definitely go far beyond just visual rhyming too. From a mythological standpoint it's pretty great actually. It doesn't make up for the prequels' shortcomings as films, but if you're interested in analyzing Star Wars as mythology it's a must-read.

 

[TheDreamMaster]

I've never watched the RLM reviews and I don't care too. For a lot of normal thinking people, they can back up someone's hate or give different perspective to people that still like them. But way too many people take these as THE final word on the films, and won't take any other argument. I enjoy the prequels, I know they have some major flaws, and I don't need anyone else to tell me that, especially after defending them sicne I was 10 in 1999.

 

[javisbc]

I dont know who would in his right mind make a review longer than the actual film itself. I never saw those reviews cause frankly the voice of the guy annoys me to no end, among other things. Its easy to go frame by frame with a finished movie and just go frame by frame ,just taking away the bad things.

Its not at all impressive and that its a problem i have with critics in general, they are just frustrated filmmakers at heart that dont have the talent or the sacrifice to do things and just criticize what other people do. Is the PT perfect? no of course not, but its the OT perfect? not at all, but i love them both as they are and see the story as a whole thing.

Some people has some crazy hate towards the whole thing, i understand if you dont like a movie, but when they cross the line of just hating and bashing a person for no reason, and wishing him and his children horrible things , then that for me is just too much

 

[jonathancrane]

The entire prequel trilogy IS an absence of critical thinking. Lucas made them to replenish fortunes after the divorce.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Hmm, I wonder if our "new" poster really thinks we think they are "new".

 

[Batsfan1]

Well a person can like a thing without ignoring the thing's flaws. And considering that RLM's observations are valid and do point out very real flaws in the prequels I don't see the harm in recommending these reviews to people.

The only one I watched was ROTS and that one wasn't right in a lot of ways.

God bless you! God bless everyone!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The only one I watched was ROTS and that one wasn't right in a lot of ways.

God bless you! God bless everyone!

Can you give us an example of what they got wrong?

 

[Batsfan1]

Can you give us an example of what they got wrong?

There isn't backtracking with Anakin. Anakin wasn't shown to be pure evil. He was shown to take revenge. Him doing that doesn't make him pure evil. Just like him having troubles with the jedi doesn't make him evil. The original trilogy didn't say that Anakin was a great noble amazing person. But someone doesn't go from that to being evil just by seduction. They had to lay his anger, vengeance, desire for power and fear of loss character groundwork Yoda says in the empire strikes back that Anakin had much anger in him.

It's clear that Palpatine didn't tell anyone what his plan was. Killing Palpatine wouldn't end the war. Why wouldn't Palpatine know what a sith is? The jedi confirmed that the sith had returned. They would have no reason to keep that secret from the chancellor.

The characters weren't static and boring. The jedi is killed. That's consequences. Why would there be an attack on coruscant? That's where Palpatine lives. That wouldn't make sense. The effects of the war on the people weren't felt that much in the original trilogy either.

Obi-Wan going off on his own isn't pointless. Obi-Wan going after general grievous is what will end the war, which separates Obi-Wan and Anakin, leaving him open to Palpatine's manipulations. Palpatine manipulated the jedi into coming after him. That's why he let Anakin know who he was, so he would tell the council about it and they would try to kill him, so he could say that they were trying to take over.

Yoda expresses doubts several times about Anakin and his emotional state. They don't say Palpatine's power clouds people's minds. They say that the dark side clouds their view of the force. Obi-Wan says that the jedi were the guardians of peace and justice for a thousand generations, not that the republic that they defended was for a thousand generations. Lunging at grievous would have been dishonorable. They had challenged eachother to fight. A gun is for cowards. People can't protect themselves against guns. They're unfair. That's why they're uncivilized. But Obi-Wan says that the lightsaber was a more elegant weapon of a more civilized age. They don't send Anakin because they don't trust him and because Palpatine suggested that they send Anakin. They didn't just send one guy. They sent Obi-Wan and an army. Yoda was already with the wookies. They need cause for all of what you suggest, especially the attack or being arrested, otherwise the jedi would look bad. Anakin allows himself to be manipulated, because Palpatine is giving him what he wants. Why would Anakin ask Palpatine how he knows about the separatists leaders? He already knows that Palpatine is the bad guy behind the war.

The death star isn't important in the grand scheme of things. The sith taking over the galaxy is. If vader is unimportant then his character turn at the end of return of the jedi isn't important and neither is Luke and his decision to turn away from the dark side. There is a larger story. Anakin having a central role doesn't change that. The fall of the jedi and the rise of the empire are things that are occuring along with Anakin becoming darth vader.

A lot of it is just him not liking what they did, which is fine, but it doesn't make it bad.

God bless you! God bless everyone!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Those are mostly opinion. I thought you meant they got facts wrong. Here is an example of what I mean:

There isn't backtracking with Anakin. Anakin wasn't shown to be pure evil. He was shown to take revenge. Him doing that doesn't make him pure evil. Just like him having troubles with the jedi doesn't make him evil. The original trilogy didn't say that Anakin was a great noble amazing person. But someone doesn't go from that to being evil just by seduction. They had to lay his anger, vengeance, desire for power and fear of loss character groundwork Yoda says in the empire strikes back that Anakin had much anger in him.

I don't quite know what you are talking about here. In RotS, Anakin turns on the "evil" switch right after the scene with Sheev and Mace. He goes around mean mugging and slaughtering kids.

Anakin doesn't show great anger, he shows a great ability to whine. He isn't Luke at the end of RotJ trying to protect his sister, he is Luke in Star Wars whining, whining and more whining.

And the OT did say Anakin was a good man, a great pilot and Jedi Knight. Obi-Wan looks back on him fondly.

It's clear that Palpatine didn't tell anyone what his plan was. Killing Palpatine wouldn't end the war. Why wouldn't Palpatine know what a sith is? The jedi confirmed that the sith had returned. They would have no reason to keep that secret from the chancellor.

Why would Palpatine know what a Sith if he isn't a Sith? They have been gone for a very long time (over a thousand years), and any knowledge of them belongs to the Jedi.

The characters weren't static and boring. The jedi is killed. That's consequences. Why would there be an attack on coruscant? That's where Palpatine lives. That wouldn't make sense. The effects of the war on the people weren't felt that much in the original trilogy either.

I am completely confused by this, over then the first sentence and the last one. I will just say, I found the characters static and boring outside of Obi-Wan, Maul and Qui-Gon.

The effects of the war were clear in the OT, as this small band of Rebels are forced to movie to the outer reaches of the galaxy to keep their war going. Living on Hoth didn't look like a picnic. Look at what happened to the Ewoks because the Empire decided to building a Death Star near their home. The Stormtroopers land on Tatooine and murder the Jawas and all Luke's family, just because. Look at how the Empire takes over Bespin.

Obi-Wan going off on his own isn't pointless. Obi-Wan going after general grievous is what will end the war, which separates Obi-Wan and Anakin, leaving him open to Palpatine's manipulations. Palpatine manipulated the jedi into coming after him. That's why he let Anakin know who he was, so he would tell the council about it and they would try to kill him, so he could say that they were trying to take over.

Killing Grievous would not end the war, because all the leaders of the Separatist are somewhere else.

Obi-Wan leaving makes little sense, because it is clear plot convenience. Heck, the exist of Grievous is a plot convenience. He exist only to move Anakin.

Yoda expresses doubts several times about Anakin and his emotional state. They don't say Palpatine's power clouds people's minds. They say that the dark side clouds their view of the force. Obi-Wan says that the jedi were the guardians of peace and justice for a thousand generations, not that the republic that they defended was for a thousand generations. Lunging at grievous would have been dishonorable. They had challenged eachother to fight. A gun is for cowards. People can't protect themselves against guns. They're unfair. That's why they're uncivilized. But Obi-Wan says that the lightsaber was a more elegant weapon of a more civilized age. They don't send Anakin because they don't trust him and because Palpatine suggested that they send Anakin. They didn't just send one guy. They sent Obi-Wan and an army. Yoda was already with the wookies. They need cause for all of what you suggest, especially the attack or being arrested, otherwise the jedi would look bad. Anakin allows himself to be manipulated, because Palpatine is giving him what he wants. Why would Anakin ask Palpatine how he knows about the separatists leaders? He already knows that Palpatine is the bad guy behind the war.

There is no "view of the Force". They see things through the Force. That would including sensing how someone else feels.

The rest of this is really odd. You should add context to your points. Like the blaster thing and attacking Grievous when that is what Obi-Wan showed up to do.

The death star isn't important in the grand scheme of things. The sith taking over the galaxy is. If vader is unimportant then his character turn at the end of return of the jedi isn't important and neither is Luke and his decision to turn away from the dark side. There is a larger story. Anakin having a central role doesn't change that. The fall of the jedi and the rise of the empire are things that are occuring along with Anakin becoming darth vader.

Again, I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

A lot of it is just him not liking what they did, which is fine, but it doesn't make it bad.

It makes it bad to him, which is the point no?