Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review (Part 1 of 7)

Overview

The video is a harsh, comedic review of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace (Part 1 of 7). It argues the film is fundamentally flawed—especially disappointing because the Star Wars prequels are now permanently part of the franchise.

Main Critique / Plot Framing

• The reviewer claims the movie’s story “doesn’t make any sense,” describing it as an incoherent mess and implying the script lacks logic or proper revision.
• They argue the film fails because its characters don’t function as effective “protagonists.” In their view, there’s no strong central character with clear goals and stakes that the audience can easily latch onto.
• While Jedi are present, the reviewer says the film isn’t truly about them. They also claim that Anakin is introduced too late to drive tension effectively.

Highlighted Issues (With Jokes / Bitters Reactions)

• Characters are framed as the biggest and most glaring problem. The reviewer uses this as the main organizing point of the review.
• They mock the idea that the franchise audience would automatically accept the prequels as “instant hits,” joking that it should have been easy not to mess things up.
• They repeatedly insult the writing quality—at one point suggesting the dialogue/script logic feels suitable for a child—and complain that actions and stakes don’t feel connected.

“Protagonist Structure” Rant (Teaching Moment)

The review pivots into a mini “film school” explanation:

• Audiences need a relatable protagonist who faces obstacles, hits a low point, and then overcomes them.
• The reviewer lists examples from other films to illustrate this “arc” (hero struggles, pushes forward, often wins, sometimes ending with “the girl” as icing).
• They then argue that The Phantom Menace doesn’t follow this pattern effectively, particularly due to unclear focus and timing.

Audience–Character Description Challenge (Comedy Segment)

The reviewer runs a humorous “real people” challenge: describe famous Star Wars characters without describing what they look like, what they wear, or what their job is.

Examples include:

• Han Solo: described as arrogant, charming, roguish, and having a “dark streak / heart of gold”—which the reviewer says is surprisingly accurate.
• C-3PO: described as prissy, anal-retentive, and comic relief, with the reviewer reacting as if this matches the stereotype.
• Queen Amidala: the attempts to describe her turn into a joke about her being hard to characterize beyond vague “normal makeup,” with several awkward or inconsistent responses—supporting the reviewer’s complaint that the movie’s character work is thin.

The segment ends with the reviewer teasing that it will continue in the next parts.

Key Takeaway

Overall, the video argues that The Phantom Menace fails due to:

• confusing writing, and
• ineffective, unrelatable character focus.

It backs up the critique with both “educational” mock breakdowns of story structure and a comedic character-description test.

Personalities Appearing

• Main reviewer/host: an angry, sarcastic critic running the review and the “character description” challenge.
• Interviewees / “real people”: viewers who attempt to describe characters briefly on camera or via audio.