His opening statement makes it clear that he intends to defend the TLJ and that he looks down upon YT'ers who produce videos too quickly. He wanted to wait for the Blu-ray release and informs us that he takes his time with creating videos. Then he voices his disappointment with SW, it has now become part of a larger 'culture war' (tongue in cheek, as if he is not aware of or does not participate in said 'war').
Having shown multiple videos criticising TLJ in his intro (and saying he has watched some), he sums up a list of the most common arguments people have with the movie: Rey = Mary Sue, Snoke remains a mystery, Rose & Finn subplot goes nowhere, Holdo's plan is bad, Luke Skywalker is handled badly ("the most incorrect one"), Rey's parents reveal was disappointing ("it wasn't, it was great"), too much diversity (easy targets ahoy!), the movie was anti-man (again, easy target) and needless politics in a SW movie.
He responds to the last argument by conflating the use of certain aesthetics (stormtroopers, Nazis) and terminology (rebels vs empire, two opposing ideological factions) with actual political messaging, as if a band of ragtag heroes vs a great and mighty empire is necessarily political and isn't simply obvious good vs. obvious evil.
I'll agree that the prequels WERE political, considering that was a huge part of the story but to think that SW using certain imagery and terminology automatically makes it political is retarded.
It's almost as if these people are reading too much into epic space operas.
Next, he makes the observation that ESB and TLJ have similar story beats, although he misses the mark 3/5 times:
"The young hero goes off to train with the reclusive and reluctant master, who isn't the hero they were expecting."
Luke barely teaches Rey anything in TLJ, whereas we get an entire training montage in ESB + Yoda is what Luke was expecting (wise, powerful, skilled) after he drops his initial act as some garbage space creature.
"The characters travel to a new planet where they meet a character who double-crosses them."
True, except Lando's motivation and character were tied with the fate of his city and his relationship with Han, not blatant opportunism and self-interest.
"The young hero abandons their training early to rush off to save their friends and they learn a shocking twisttruth about their parents."
Luke isn't training Rey whatsoever after her first and only lesson, Rey goes off to save Kylo Ren (the antagonist and definitely not her friend) and Rey's revelation isn't shocking in the slightest, as she should know her parents aren't coming back for her and it all ends up being nothing.
Up next: "Rian Jonhson made this movie with a real understanding of what made ESB great, in my opinion."
He then claims this movie doesn't simply emulate ESB but tweaks it in such a way that it makes sense;
his example being Rey's parents. He then explains why the twist in ESB is good ("It takes Luke from a very certain place, to a very uncertain place) and why the inverse works in TLJ (Rey wants someone significant to be her father, ends up getting no one significant).
This ignores how it changes the overall story (absence of parents was important in TFA, in TLJ their identity is important) not to mention that Rey, besides losing a character flaw, doesn't change at all. She still does good for the sake of good, kicks ass, saves the day, beats the big bad and succeeds in protecting what she loves.
Following this, he makes a fatal mistake: "Many of the criticisms applicable to the ST can be applied to the OT, as well." A claim he doesn't back up well enough throughout his video (Most of it centred on ROTJ's first act).
He says Rey isn't unrealistically overpowered for a SW-character his evidence: Luke being able to pilot an X-Wing at the end of ANH "just because he's the protagonist (despite the audience being told multiple times he is a skilled pilot and him even planning to attend the Imperial Academy), Leia being able to fight stormtroopers (gee, it's not as if she could have trained basic combat skills while she was part of the Rebellion), Leia being able to choke out Jabba (he's a fat blob with stubby arms) and Anakin being able to podrace as and pilot as well as he does in TPM (correct).
Then, Shaun defends the Canto Bight subplot by pointing out Han Solo's journey and capture in ESB as well as Luke heading off to save his friends and failing "There are no material differences besides Han being captured and Luke losing a hand." This ignores that Finn and Rose's trip did nothing to evolve their characters, that Canto Bight was very much virtue signalling heaven, that Luke's attitude towards Vader changes and he becomes a better Jedi because of his defeat, or that Han being captured is the sole reason the first act of ROTJ exists.
Rose and Finn may as well do nothing since the escape pods are visible from Snoke's bloody throne room and it takes hours for The Resistance to reach Crait, not to mention that TFO apparently had an anti-cloaking scan available, why wouldn't they just use it when they see this big ship cruiser so close to a planet?
Lastly, the plan in TLJ turns out to be: send the remaining rebels to Crait, not hyperspace to safety.
A smaller segment follows, where he says: "The characters and their experiences matter, not searching around for plot holes to nit-pick." He then brings up small editing errors in both TLJ and ROTJ, and while I agree with him here, he seems to be waylaying any criticism or discussion about greater plot holes entirely.
Such an attitude is incredibly dismissive, to say the least.
We then get to Holdo's plan: he didn't like it on his first viewing, but appreciated it more so on the next and advises people to watch it again, as he thinks many will appreciate TLJ more.
His reasoning as to why Holdo does not tell Poe the plan is "Because he wasn't that person at that point in the story.", citing that the Rebels follow him at the end in order to retreat from TFO and fight another day.
This ignores how Poe would have had to leave the bombers for dead in the opening if he did follow Leia's orders (they were too slow to make it back to the Raddus in time), how Poe simply asks if Holdo has a plan, how Holdo refuses to tell Poe even when they are literally boarding the transports in the background and how Poe decides to retreat when the only viable way for any Rebels to survive on Crait at that point (as nobody knew Luke would show up and save the day) is to suicide themselves into the cannon.
A weak and cursory glance at the criticisms levied against this plotline, by now this is a recurring theme in many of TLJ defenders' videos.
Afterwards, Shaun bashes the first act in ROTJ in order to make TLJ look better. He is correct in his criticisms, yet makes the argument that you can't claim that Disney, Johnson or feminism destroys the old movies because the OT is "exactly the same" (lack of evidence).
Again, he ignores how the state of the galaxy is effectively rebooted to ANH levels of Empirial rule with 2 minutes of backstory provided for 30 years of history. The progress made at the end of ROTJ is nullified, the galaxy is worse of than ever, TFO is still extremely powerful despite losing Starkiller Base, Snoke & Phasma, a good amount of Star Destroyers not to mention half of their flagship.
This really does solidify his ignorance and narrow-minded approach to his subject matter (see his video on Rome, having read multiple books about the fall of Rome, his conclusion is ridiculous when there are multiple historical documents directly contradicting his narrative).
He then tackles Snoke's non-existent backstory, and adds he does feel like this new series is kind of a soft reboot of the originals. He says his backstory hasn't been told yet. (Snoke is dead at this point, he matters not to the overall story now).
His fan theory revolves around his take on SW: OT is liberalism vs fascism, PT is fascism emerging from liberalism (casual mention of Hbomb) and as far as TLJ is concerned this backstory doesn't matter.
He then compares Snoke to the Emperor, forgetting that Palpy only had a prominent role from ROTJ onwards, while Snoke is introduced in TFA and that these movies are SEQUELS, you don't get to skip backstory after jumping forwards this much, 10 minutes of backstory spread out across TFA and TLJ would be more than enough to give the audience a frame of reference and an update as to the current state of the galaxy.
How retarded does one have to be think this does not matter?
Then he says: "You do know what you're asking for when you say you want Snoke's backstory filled out, don't you?" As if basic backstory must be delivered in the form of 3 more movies, for Pete's sake.
Following this, he blames Snoke not having a backstory on TFA, as if TLJ is absolved of explaining stuff just because of its predecessor.
Lastly, he voices some subjective opinions and says he looks forward to the next movie to see where they go with Kylo being in charge of TFO. Funny, considering that is the sole reason I will likely see IX.
He then strawmans people who complain about diversity in these new movies (you know, diversity for diversity's sake) and rebuts people complaining about the anti-male messaging by showing Leia in the OT.
Again he ignores, the on the nose handling of characters like Holdo (no explanation necessary) and Rose Tico ("... saving what we love.").
I actually agree somewhat with people who complain about this, as more than one journalist and critic (including some native to my country) have come forth with the progressive message that males need to keep their testosterone in check while the females need to remind to be calm and collected (even though it makes no sense story wise).
Moving on, he then present his take on Luke Skywalker.
He posits that the legend of the Jedi (guardians of peace) does not compute with the reality (Obi-Wan and Yoda lying to Luke to make him kill his own father). He does not consider they may want to keep him in the dark as to not traumatise/hurt him.
Then he compares Rose & Finn being appalled by slavery on Canto Bight vs. Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon ignoring the problems on Tatooine. A laughable comparison, since Rose & Finn's actions likely cause more trouble for the oppressed than not, furthermore he expects the Jedi to not be distant from a system of oppression completely out of their control.
He confuses being emotionally distant with not feeling bad about objectively horrible practices.
Not to mention, he conflates being the 'guardians of peace' with ensuring everybody on every planet ever has a good life, as if you won't have to make compromises across a galaxy with millions of planets.
Later, he complains about the Force being used as a purely practical tool in the prequels (partially correct) and the Jedi hoarding it selfishly. As if having an established institute of force-users with an overall positive goal is somehow bad.
He goes on about how the movie literally explaining its theme and message in the story is somehow 'not ham-fisted'.
Then, he says Luke's death mirrors Obi-Wan's, completely disregarding that Obi physically confronted Vader and rose to the call to action the moment he was shown Leia's message.
Overall, he seems to ignore any legitimate criticism of Luke's arc whilst straw manning his opposition.
Finally, he finishes his video by listing of some of things he liked in the movie, his final thoughts on how TLJ rejects prophecies, bloodlines, established Force-rules, etc. show he likes this rejection of consistency and he seems to be aware that this movie is almost designed to piss off hardcore fans.
