I kinda liked ep 1, tho' ep 3 was seriously bad. Overall idea was good, so was story in general, but then lots of **** things were made (like Yoda simply running from Palpatine, despite advantage, or too much of Anakin x Padme love story, while too little of Anakin relations with Chancellor). As for ep 2, it was ok, had some bad moments, but generally was ok.
As for acting I liked Dooku, Yoda, Obi-wan and Palp, tho' Padme and Anakin were... more awful than awful.
As for review itself, it was ******, not only guy's voice was freakin' annoying, but he also compares things obviously different. Why didn't he compare C3PO with Jar Jar? And why the heck compare Solo with Qui-Gon, who only appeared in 1 movie and surely was not main char or even close. Not to mention people who described characters were 100% original trilogy hardcore fans, I could say more about both Amidala and Qui-Gon (even if I don't like Padme).
Why didn't he compare beginning of Empire Strikes back with Phantom Manace? They were kinda similar, weren't they?
As we're in the topic of prequel trilogy, did you notice that every piece of republic equipment has Imperial marks? Maybe something has changed since ToR/KotOR, but it looks like a mistake.
Compare C-3PO with Jar-Jar? Sorry, but they aren't even close to being similar. While they both fulfill, somewhat, the roll of comic relief, C-3PO actually has character, while Jar-Jar is just a cartoon rabbit put in the movie to make little children laugh. Seriously. The relationship between C-3PO and R2-D2 is fantastically deep, and well communicated on screen, and one of them only speaks in BEEPS! I don't recall comparing solo with qui-gonn as being similar, perhaps just generally as one lacking characterization.
More importantly though I think he comments on the ENORMOUS plot holes in the prequels speaks to the intended audience: Kids, who don't give a damn about plot holes, or even notice them. Adults usually like their plots to have logic...when its not intentionally made illogical to accomplish 'art.'