skyjedi2005 said:

They totally missed the boat on that one.  No prequel images, no jar jar, no hayden, no nuked fridge and shia in indiana jones, or aliens.  What were they thinking.

Um, is this guy for real?

skyjedi2005 said:

Quackula said:

skyjedi2005 said:

They totally missed the boat on that one.  No prequel images, no jar jar, no hayden, no nuked fridge and shia in indiana jones, or aliens.  What were they thinking.

I didn't know that the Star Wars prequels and Indy 4 were part of your childhood...

I disagree i think they would be very relevent conisdering the oot is buried, star wars has been sullied and destroyed.  Lucas has tarnished his legacy.

 

The page was on images that would destroy your childhood pretty much the same as Indiana Jones IV and the Prequels.  Not the behind the scenes stuff like the Rinzler book that made me love the oot version of empire even more and made me even angrier that it is ruined by Lucas and not restored.

Okay, I still don't get whether you're for real, or just trolling for everyone's entertainment, but the article's theme clearly, unambiguously was behind-the-scenes facts, not shitty sequels.

There are enough other cracked articles for that. Also for "almost classics" ruined by some shitty element, like T2 by the kid, and so on. Go browse that website. Stop demanding prequels bashing from any article you read - for that, go watch the RedLetter Media reviews.

I don't know how about you, but if anything is capable of "disillusioning" me on the perception of some movie, it's indeed stuff like the actor being a complete dick (i.e. Charlie Sheen) or the image of the Rancor with a pole up his ass - not some stupid movie that came 20 years later.

That's kinda the image I had gathered so far xD

Not with this guy apparently :DD

Hey, buddy, quit whining so much, okay?

Here's something that might help:

Feeling better? Hopefully? :(

I've been called a troll numerous times by various people, as well, and mostly with a lot less justification than here.

For all it's worth, I didn't say he was a troll, I said "I'm not sure whether", which means as much as "this behavior suspiciously looks like trolling", and by "this behavior", I mean jumping onto some random Cracked article that had a bit of Star Wars in it, and complaining how it didn't also rip apart his behated prequels and Indy 4.

I mean, the FRIDGE, Lucas, THE FRIDGE... how'd it get nuked, how'd it get NUUUKED??!!

And I've seen a couple of this guy's earlier posts, as well - knowing damn well that if I started hopping into every discussion to shove down everyone's throat how "the OT had so many plot holes", no matter how appropriate in the context of the topic, I'd be quickly labelled as a POSSIBLE troll by quite a lot of people.

In a bit of whacky "fridge brilliance" here: you know, in a way, a guy who ends up behaving somewhat like a troll without any intentions of doing so... in a way, is much more of a troll than an actual troll! Think about this... a guy who unintentionally becomes a victim of his own obsession about something... an obsession that grows and metastasizes, and causes him to "grow and metastize" his obsessions all over the world... to a point until he's consumed by his anger, and obsession, and it grows and grows until it becomes a monster within... the person isn't a troll... he BECOMES the troll!!!!! From within!!!!!!!!

...

...

Nah, just kidding around here... hey skyjedi, in case you're reading this, no harm meant, I'm just rambling! :D

The point was, the article wasn't about shitty sequels. Full stop xD

TV's Frink said:

^I'm not sure if you are a troll or not, but your behavior suspiciously looks like trolling.

No, it looks like suspiciously pulling your leg.

Gaffer Tape said:

Anyway, the point Frink is trying to make here is that, like it or not, online forums, and any social circle for that matter, have something of a pecking order.  New people who come in have to earn their place in the community, develop a rapport with the locals.  And when you have, then the occasional "calling people out" can be seen as more tolerable, depending on the circumstances.  But there's little that ruffles a social circle's feathers more than for the new guy to harass one of their own.  Even if it's justified, it's not at all a way for a newbie to earn his stripes.  Just like making a sexually charged comment to a close friend is funny but saying that same thing to a stranger might get you arrested.  It's all about building relationships.

Thanks for your input. However, you see, I just so happen to cyberlive by the philosophy that this kind of "unspoken social rules" shouldn't apply on anonymous online chatboards, or at the very least, shouldn't be taken particularly seriously there.

Yes, we have our inherent human instincts that we spray everywhere we happen to pass by, and online forums often show the same kind of irrational, dumb herd behavior that we can find equivalents of in real life (like jumping on the bandwagon of harassing some perceived "forum dork" or whatever) - but on here, we are all just anonymous walls of text, having giant flatscreen monitors (and anonymity) to shield us from any kind of considerable emotional injury by others, and above all, united in talking about some movie franchise - not a group of real, vulnerable people living in the complexity inter-human relationships, complete with emotional attachments, and complete personal exposure to the outside environment.

... I know I am.

That's why I don't mind casually calling people morons for saying something silly on the intertubes, while certainly refraining from doing anything of that kind in real life, knowing fully well that it can lead both to escalation (especially when strangers are involved) and actual emotional injury (when friends are involved).

That's why, when being insulted on tah intarwibz, I just casually shrug it off and playfully write back a vitriolic response, while lightheartedly continuing a civil discussion with the same guy on another thread - and in the rare case of receiving some kind of serious insult from someone I know in real life, I might as well turn away and write off the person as one I don't want to waste time with anymore.

That's why, on the internet, "trolling" is usually ascribed to brainless basement teenyboppers with way too much time on their hands, while in real life (or celebrity spotlight), successful "trolling" will inadvertedly earn some respect for personality and successful real-life acting.

And in a case of hilarious irony, that's why I'll mostly shrug off any kind of "trolling on the intertubes" as some kind of fun pasttime by some dude somewhere, who enjoys leading some other dudes on the internet by the nose a bit, while in real life, such a person can very easily verge into the "manipulative jerkhole" territory depending on the context. 

And that's why, when coming on an internet board (especially one dedicated to movies, and not some kind of "lonely friends circle), I openly couldn't give a wet crap about some kind of "unwritten social circle rules", save for the Forum Rules of Conduct (although I can sure forget myself on occasion and post an image response or something), or whatever some butthurt, self-proclaimed "veteran" of said social cybergroup has to say to me about " having to know my place as a newbie in this community".

You know, fuck that crap - I've seen a few of that guy's posts, seen this one, and posted what I always post in comparable situations: an incredulous rebuttal starting with a formulaic "not sure whether you're trolling, but..."; why do I do that? Well, in part because, in case the individual happens to be a troll, I don't want to look stupid to said troll by showing them that I fall for their theatrics :D

Sorry if it offends anyone ;)

Hey, what's that? Don't want long walls of text, don't provoke me :DDDD b)

twister111 said:

Lame article, was Lame.


Title of

17 images that will ruin your childhood

Not fulfilled. Article is epic fail. BTS pics =/= ruined childhood. Showing years later pics =/= ruined childhood.

@Article writer

 

That made me LOL :DDDD