logo Sign In

Star Wars is for children. Adults: Stop being selfish. — Page 2

Author
Time
 (Edited)

You are very quick to dismiss my opinion as worthless back-and-forth just because I don't like the stuff you like. And you really didn't need to send me a PM ORDERING me to respond to this. 

PM - Private Message. Unless I was harassing you, which I was not, why stoop so low as to even bring it up as if I was harassing you?

I pasted the link to this thread, and simply said: "Respond." Yeah, just look at the way I was offensively ordering you around. The only reason I sent you a PM is that I was reminding you of a chance you had in this thread to hold an interesting discussion. For some reason you decided to waste the chance and instead of addressing my specific points, you spoke in generalizations.

"Fuck you. All the star wars movies were excellent. none of them sucked. Also, revenge of the sith is the best."

- DarthZorgon (YouTube)

Author
Time

"Silly rabbit, Star Wars is for kids."

Jar-Jar Binks Haters: "Ahh darnit."

"Fuck you. All the star wars movies were excellent. none of them sucked. Also, revenge of the sith is the best."

- DarthZorgon (YouTube)

Author
Time
DarkFather said:

You are very quick to dismiss my opinion as worthless back-and-forth just because I don't like the stuff you like. And you really didn't need to send me a PM ORDERING me to respond to this. 

PM - Private Message. Unless I was harassing you, which I was not, why stoop so low as to even bring it up as if I was harassing you?

I pasted the link to this thread, and simply said: "Respond." Yeah, just look at the way I was offensively ordering you around. The only reason I sent you a PM is that I was reminding you of a chance you had in this thread to hold an interesting discussion. For some reason you decided to waste the chance and instead of addressing my specific points, you spoke in generalizations.

You need to remember that you've treated me pretty badly on multiple occasions. So you if you do something that can be interpreted as meant negatively then it's likely I'm going to interpret it that way. You should remember that your PM led to a post that called me narrow-minded and implied that my view was worthless. It didn't all give the impression of being friendly. Next time you want to notify somebody of an interesting discussion by PM you might avoid phrasing it as a brusque one-word command. And if you want a good-natured discussion, accusations of narrow-mindedness are best avoided.

And in my post I did address your specific points, very directly, so I don't know wtf you're talking about.

 

Author
Time
What are you talking about? You accused me of being narrow-minded well before I ever accused you of such. All you want to say right now is that Lucas created a mess and the EU needs to excuse it. I've said I actually agree on some instances. But you're not taking into account that Star Wars has always had parts of the story that had to go unexplained for the sake of telling a larger story. At least the EU picks up the slack a lot of the time, and sometimes even gives adequate reasons (which you like to term in a derogatory fashion "excuses") that are thought out. It's not as simple as to say "EU excuses" for Lucas' mess and leave it at that. It's going into extreme territory to do so.

"Fuck you. All the star wars movies were excellent. none of them sucked. Also, revenge of the sith is the best."

- DarthZorgon (YouTube)

Author
Time

And you know what, it's great that you have opinions that you're willing to defend tooth and nail. The problem being as I see it, the vibe from your posts aren't going to act as an easy magnet for winning anyone over to your view. From our discussions that we've had, and the reactions of others around the board to your posts that I see, that vibe is bordering on repulsive.

We're willing to see your views, but you criticize and cry havoc to ours, and then wonder why we're in turn so critical of you. What I'm getting at is that I'm skeptical that the reward you'll get after "battle" for being so insanely rigid in your views will even be worth the effort you put into it.

If you aren't willing to concede anything, if you aren't willing to relent in your views at all, the only reward in that is a self appreciation of a very lonely type.

"Fuck you. All the star wars movies were excellent. none of them sucked. Also, revenge of the sith is the best."

- DarthZorgon (YouTube)

Author
Time
 (Edited)
DarkFather said:

And you know what, it's great that you have opinions that you're willing to defend tooth and nail. The problem being as I see it, the vibe from your posts aren't going to act as an easy magnet for winning anyone over to your view. From our discussions that we've had, and the reactions of others around the board to your posts that I see, that vibe is bordering on repulsive.

We're willing to see your views, but you criticize and cry havoc to ours, and then wonder why we're in turn so critical of you. What I'm getting at is that I'm skeptical that the reward you'll get after "battle" for being so insanely rigid in your views will even be worth the effort you put into it.

If you aren't willing to concede anything, if you aren't willing to relent in your views at all, the only reward in that is a self appreciation of a very lonely type.

Why should I "concede" when my view is not mistaken? I don't hold views if I think they're wrong. If I think I'm mistaken about something then I won't argue it. And if I think I'm not mistaken then I will defend my view. There's no point in me conceding when I don't feel I'm mistaken about anything. You seem to be expecting me to be hypocritical just because pretending I think I'm wrong might (in your opinion) make me more popular. I don't function like that.

As it stands, different people react differently to my posts at different times. It's not all one reaction all the time. And if some people react narrowly to my posts, intolerant of somebody who doesn't back down on their views or intolerant of somebody who thinks differently from other people, then that is their problem and it in no way proves that my posts are "repulsive".

As for me crying havoc over other people's views, that is not so. I disagree with other people when I feel it is necessary (and there is no crime in that). I am prepared to be critical of other people's views, as are most people here. I don't object to people criticizing my views. I object to people being rude and mocking and aggressive and getting personal and dismissing my views as ridiculous just because I think differently from them. I can run out of patience with other people's views after a debate has dragged on and my views are not getting a pleasant reception and other people are acting narrow-minded in reaction to my views, but I generally try to avoid giving people trouble unless they have given me trouble first. I am not more critical of other people's views than they are of mine. I do not treat people worse than I am treated. I do not "cry havoc" just because somebody has a different view than mine. Though I may get pretty pissed off if somebody concedes and then goes back on it or if a bunch of people gang up to tell me how ridiculous I am or if somebody gets personal with me.

You in particular have established that you like getting personal and offensive at the drop of a hat. And I've seen I'm not the only one you're willing to pick fights with. 

As for people being willing to see my views, some people are, but sometimes some people are stubbornly unwilling to accept my way of thinking as having any chance of being valid. I would go so far as to say that sometimes some people seem almost allergic to the different mindset evident in my views. I don't mean any offense by saying this, I am just trying to describe my experience as it seems to me.

I've gotten all sorts of shit on this board and it wasn't shit I earned by "crying havoc" about other people's views. It was shit I got for having a very different mindset and having the horrific cheek to hold to my very different way of thinking when other (supposedly wiser) people told me I was wrong. People who are very different are supposed to shut up or go away or apologize for themselves all the time. Human beings have a terrible track record for tolerating difference.

I don't see how I'm being "insanely rigid" in holding to my views. I don't see you conceding all over the place whenever we have a debate. No, you hold to your views because you think they're right. I wouldn't expect you to do otherwise. It's idiotic and unjust to beat me over the head for not going around pretending I think I'm wrong all the time just to win popularity points. I take other people's views quite seriously and when they present some good evidence against mine I consider it carefully, but ultimately my veiws are very well thought-out and usually stand up to such arguments, so I don't have a lot of reason to go conceding.

If we're going to get personal like this about each others' posting behavior, maybe I should note that you seem to me to be a bully and troublemaker who has no restraint about getting personal and aggressive with people. When I first really noticed you, you were picking a fight with somebody. Then the next day you got really personally offensive with me. I seem to be your favorite target. Pick on the guy who's different, what fun. How about you just lay off?

Author
Time

You're being stupid again. "Picking on" someone is when it's totally unwarranted, which only scumbags do because they lack any self-esteem.

I'm not saying compromise your views for popularity points. I'm saying in the face of reasonable proof of any point you make being wrong, you have to be willing to acknowledge when you are wrong. Such as when TheBoost made a comparison of the faces of whats-his-face and Morrison. They have strikingly similar facial features, and all you could do was say "nu-uh" and claim that you have better facial recognition than most other people. WHAT?!

I'm not popular on these boards, and I don't pretend to be. Nor do I try to be. But at least I have an efficient method by which to go about stating my views, and in some instances, it does draw some people in. I didn't do that by being a jackass and stubbornly ignoring sound proof against my arguments. I lock horns with others sometimes, but I've never been stubbornly arrogant while doing so.

"Fuck you. All the star wars movies were excellent. none of them sucked. Also, revenge of the sith is the best."

- DarthZorgon (YouTube)

Author
Time
DarkFather said:What are you talking about? You accused me of being narrow-minded well before I ever accused you of such. All you want to say right now is that Lucas created a mess and the EU needs to excuse it. I've said I actually agree on some instances. But you're not taking into account that Star Wars has always had parts of the story that had to go unexplained for the sake of telling a larger story. At least the EU picks up the slack a lot of the time, and sometimes even gives adequate reasons (which you like to term in a derogatory fashion "excuses") that are thought out. It's not as simple as to say "EU excuses" for Lucas' mess and leave it at that. It's going into extreme territory to do so.

You got offensive with me before I got offensive with you. In fact, you seem to like making unprovoked attacks me on. The ongoing trouble between us was started when you made one such attack that hit me out of the blue. I was shocked and really bothered that somebody was eager to be so malicious. You have continued your bullying of me since then. I don't know who called who narrow-minded first in all the back and forth we've had, but I think there's a very good chance it was you.

All you want to say right now is that Lucas created a mess and the EU needs to excuse it.

 No, what I'm saying is that if the Lucas creates a mess the EU can't excuse it.

But you're not taking into account that Star Wars has always had parts of the story that had to go unexplained for the sake of telling a larger story.

The films should work in and of themselves. Something in a film should not require material outside of the film to make it work. And the prequels all too often seem to need outside material to make them work.

At least the EU picks up the slack a lot of the time, and sometimes even gives adequate reasons (which you like to term in a derogatory fashion "excuses") that are thought out. It's not as simple as to say "EU excuses" for Lucas' mess and leave it at that. It's going into extreme territory to do so.

No it's not going into extreme territory. All too often when somebody criticises some fuck up in the prequels, somebody pipes up with an EU explanation and this EU explanation is supposed to make it all better so that we pretend Lucas never made a mistake in the first place. That doesn't work for me. That's using often lame EU explanations as excuses to defend Lucas's mistakes.

Furthermore, the assumption when people present such EU explanations oftens seems to be that of course everybody acceots the EU as being on the same level as the films and that an EU explanation is thus as good as something in the films. For me and a lot of other people that doesn't work. When people are talking about the film story they aren't looking for the EU story, they're looking for the story in the films. The EU is irrelevant.

Author
Time
DarkFather said:

You're being stupid again. "Picking on" someone is when it's totally unwarranted, which only scumbags do because they lack any self-esteem.

I'm not saying compromise your views for popularity points. I'm saying in the face of reasonable proof of any point you make being wrong, you have to be willing to acknowledge when you are wrong. Such as when TheBoost made a comparison of the faces of whats-his-face and Morrison. They have strikingly similar facial features, and all you could do was say "nu-uh" and claim that you have better facial recognition than most other people. WHAT?!

I'm not popular on these boards, and I don't pretend to be. Nor do I try to be. But at least I have an efficient method by which to go about stating my views, and in some instances, it does draw some people in. I didn't do that by being a jackass and stubbornly ignoring sound proof against my arguments. I lock horns with others sometimes, but I've never been stubbornly arrogant while doing so.

 

DarkFather said:

You're being stupid again. "Picking on" someone is when it's totally unwarranted, which only scumbags do because they lack any self-esteem.

Nope. I'm standing up to the bully who's picking on me and keeps picking on me.

 

DarkFather said:

I'm not saying compromise your views for popularity points. I'm saying in the face of reasonable proof of any point you make being wrong, you have to be willing to acknowledge when you are wrong. Such as when TheBoost made a comparison of the faces of whats-his-face and Morrison. They have strikingly similar facial features, and all you could do was say "nu-uh" and claim that you have better facial recognition than most other people. WHAT?!

In other words I should admit I'm wrong whenever DarkFather thinks I'm wrong? Have you considered that maybe you might ever be wrong about thinking I'm wrong about something? Like that example you give, classic case. You just are not prepared to even consider that I could possibly ever be right about those faces. You've never even considered it. Obviously I MUST be delusional or something or just refusing to concede, right? Ok, get this, I have been working on faces for many years. My ability in face study surpasses that of the vast majority of people. That has been proven again and again. I know what I'm talking about in the case of Morrison and Logan's faces. Those two actors do not have "strikingly similar facial features". They have some distinct similarities, but they also have very distinct differences. Their faces are of a different sort. TheBoost's posted pic did not prove they were so similar. It demonstrated their difference as much as it demonstrated any similarity they have. So, no there was not reasonable proof that I was wrong. It only appeared to you to be reasonable proof because you can't see the major differences between those two faces. But I can. TheBoost proved nothing. There was no good reason for me to concede anything.

See, this is not me refusing to concede when I should be. This is you refusing to even consider that somebody could have abilities you don't have or that thinking that's different from yours could actually work or be right. Look to yourself for unreasonableness before you look to me.

I didn't do that by being a jackass and stubbornly ignoring sound proof against my arguments. I lock horns with others sometimes, but I've never been stubbornly arrogant while doing so.

I would have to disagree with that.

And quit with the "stubbornly ignoring sound proof" nonsense. Just because YOU think something is sound proof doesn't mean it is.

Author
Time
Vaderisnothayden said:

I don't hold views if I think they're wrong. If I think I'm mistaken about something then I won't argue it.

You think other people don't feel that same way? Why would anyone hold a view they think is wrong? If someone says that a certain view is wrong, then quite obviously, they don't hold it.

Why would anyone argue something, if they felt they were mistaken? The whole point of arguing is because you think you are right and the other person is wrong. There is a place for some debate, but when it becomes clear you're not convincing anybody, it is time to fuck off and agree to disagree. You tend to press it to the point of, "Well clearly you are wrong because you suck at this, and I am quite good at it" or "You're wrong and only arrive at your point of view because you are suffering from denial".

Sometimes it is prudent to consider the possibility that you might just be wrong, or at the very least that your view isn't as water tight as you thought it was.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time

You just are not prepared to even consider that I could possibly ever be right about those faces. You've never even considered it.

Of course I considered it. And if I actually offended you during our discussions, don't act like I've never made an effort to be nice to you.

You got offensive with me before I got offensive with you. In fact, you seem to like making unprovoked attacks me on. The ongoing trouble between us was started when you made one such attack that hit me out of the blue. I was shocked and really bothered that somebody was eager to be so malicious. You have continued your bullying of me since then. I don't know who called who narrow-minded first in all the back and forth we've had, but I think there's a very good chance it was you.

Actually, it was you.

No, what I'm saying is that if the Lucas creates a mess the EU can't excuse it.

Well the EU has, is, and will continue to reason and excuse whether you like the idea or not.

The films should work in and of themselves. Something in a film should not require material outside of the film to make it work. And the prequels all too often seem to need outside material to make them work.

I agreed with this. Stop reiterating to compensate for lack of substance.

It worked by itself to me. I never "required" information on the material when it came to Anakin's breathing. Only when running across the EU reasons for Vader's breathing pecularities did I even see that the answer to the "issue" aligned with everything I had assumed from seeing the film, only given more detail. In the film, we see Vader drenched in rage, with his eyes aglow while. Therefore, I drew the connection myself that the dark side played a part in his ability to survive such horrible injuries. There's that, and the fact that I know even from that film alone that his destiny might have been to be the Chosen One. "It was said that you'd bring balance to the Force, not leave it in darkness." The Will of the Force, the dark side, and a destiny all played a role on keeping him alive on Mustafar. And I saw him in the Medical Chamber being rebuilt and suited up. The medical droids obviously had something "up their sleeves" so to speak, to help him breathe without the mask in those moments.

 So it didn't "require" an explanation to me, Vaderisnothayden. The explanations provided are a little something extra, and they work for me personally. You've made it clear it will never work for you.

"Fuck you. All the star wars movies were excellent. none of them sucked. Also, revenge of the sith is the best."

- DarthZorgon (YouTube)

Author
Time
C3PX said:
Vaderisnothayden said:

I don't hold views if I think they're wrong. If I think I'm mistaken about something then I won't argue it.

You think other people don't feel that same way? Why would anyone hold a view they think is wrong? If someone says that a certain view is wrong, then quite obviously, they don't hold it.

Why would anyone argue something, if they felt they were mistaken? The whole point of arguing is because you think you are right and the other person is wrong. There is a place for some debate, but when it becomes clear you're not convincing anybody, it is time to fuck off and agree to disagree. You tend to press it to the point of, "Well clearly you are wrong because you suck at this, and I am quite good at it" or "You're wrong and only arrive at your point of view because you are suffering from denial".

Sometimes it is prudent to consider the possibility that you might just be wrong, or at the very least that your view isn't as water tight as you thought it was.

 

You tend to press it to the point of, "Well clearly you are wrong because you suck at this, and I am quite good at it" or "You're wrong and only arrive at your point of view because you are suffering from denial".

I only do something like that after people have been unpleasant to me and tried my patience past breaking point.

Sometimes it is prudent to consider the possibility that you might just be wrong, or at the very least that your view isn't as water tight as you thought it was.

 

I do that all the time. But when I've acted on that by testing my view very carefully and found that my view still works and doesn't seem to be wrong, then I will continue to defend my view against arguments I don't find convincing.

However what you just advised there is what some people seem totally incapable of doing in reaction to my views.

The whole point of arguing is because you think you are right and the other person is wrong. There is a place for some debate, but when it becomes clear you're not convincing anybody, it is time to fuck off and agree to disagree.

Just because I'm not convincing whoever I'm debating with doesn't mean that my argument won't convince some lurker or poster who reads my post now or any time in the future. And if it's such a good idea to quit debating when it looks your opponent won't be convinced, why doesn't everybody do that, instead of keeping up debates with me going on and on and on and generally getting nastier as they go on? 

Author
Time
DarkFather said:

"Silly rabbit, Star Wars is for kids."

Jar-Jar Binks Haters: "Ahh darnit."

 

 that is the scariest thing i've ever seen. i might as well be watching a freak'n horror movie.

Author
Time
Vaderisnothayden said:

Mustardfart

 

 LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

sorry if this looks like spam, but that's classic!

Author
Time
 (Edited)
rcb said:
DarkFather said:

"Silly rabbit, Star Wars is for kids."

Jar-Jar Binks Haters: "Ahh darnit."

 

 that is the scariest thing i've ever seen. i might as well be watching a freak'n horror movie.

Heheh. Worse than Freddy Krueger's burns. :P

They were definitely on the far bounds of PG-13 in the same way The Dark Knight was with Two-Face's graphics burns. That's okay in and of itself, but to have that and meanwhile claim that the Star Wars saga is aimed just at children is really weird. Ah well. I think when PT fans really started spouting that line left and right, they were defending the antics of Jar-Jar Binks and the character's domination of TPM.

"Fuck you. All the star wars movies were excellent. none of them sucked. Also, revenge of the sith is the best."

- DarthZorgon (YouTube)

Author
Time
Gaffer Tape said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Yeah!  it's just a kid's show...

happy scene

 

Come to think of it, this has always made me wonder... what exactly did the Empire do to them anyway?  I mean, when we see Stormtroopers, they're usually just firing blaster rifles.  They singe a little bit... but this?  I mean, even Darth Vader walked away from a near lava dip in better condition than this!

 

 If I was to write my own revisionist back story, I'd say that Anakin developed psychological compulsion that he had to burn (or have all his victems burnt) because of some tramatic event he experienced as a young man.  Like a serial killer.

Author
Time
Gaffer Tape said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Yeah!  it's just a kid's show...

happy scene

 

Come to think of it, this has always made me wonder... what exactly did the Empire do to them anyway?  I mean, when we see Stormtroopers, they're usually just firing blaster rifles.  They singe a little bit... but this?  I mean, even Darth Vader walked away from a near lava dip in better condition than this!

O just showin kids the consequences of playing with matches. Either you set urself on fire or stormtroopers light up the living sh!@ inside you. Normal kids stuff

 

Author
Time

that's always a good life lesson u should teach your kids. that and not to TALK to stormtroopers.

Author
Time
Docta Nick said:
Gaffer Tape said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Yeah!  it's just a kid's show...

happy scene

 

Come to think of it, this has always made me wonder... what exactly did the Empire do to them anyway?  I mean, when we see Stormtroopers, they're usually just firing blaster rifles.  They singe a little bit... but this?  I mean, even Darth Vader walked away from a near lava dip in better condition than this!

O just showin kids the consequences of playing with matches. Either you set urself on fire or stormtroopers light up the living sh!@ inside you. Normal kids stuff

 

Receiving stolen goods, engaging in unregistered adoptions, restricting the ambition of potential conscripts, the Perps had it coming!

 

Author
Time

i got the clone wars/a galaxy divided dvd which includes five episodes from the series, i'be been watching it and the footage in rising malevolence is pretty graphic for a kids station. i've yet to see a cartoon that mentions that people are dead, or have bodies hanging out of escape pod windows.

just the fact that a blaster hits someone kills them is really different for a childs show. its not like in batman when he throws is baterang it just hurts them.

so star wars is not entirely for children. i'd pull images up, but the stupid dvd doesn't have an image file.

Author
Time

Did anyone else think the burnt Anakin was a bit much?

Author
Time
Bingowings said:
Docta Nick said:
Gaffer Tape said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Yeah!  it's just a kid's show...

happy scene

 

Come to think of it, this has always made me wonder... what exactly did the Empire do to them anyway?  I mean, when we see Stormtroopers, they're usually just firing blaster rifles.  They singe a little bit... but this?  I mean, even Darth Vader walked away from a near lava dip in better condition than this!

O just showin kids the consequences of playing with matches. Either you set urself on fire or stormtroopers light up the living sh!@ inside you. Normal kids stuff

 

Receiving stolen goods, engaging in unregistered adoptions, restricting the ambition of potential conscripts, the Perps had it coming!

 

They were in a fire, but there wasn't enough time for their bodies to decompose. I wonder how they got that way then? Luke must have come up at most a few hours later. Maybe their bodies were eaten by decomposers, but it's the desert-there aren't any! Or the stormtroopers could have done the blaster torture thing where they essentially shoot off your flesh using a low power setting.  Ouch!

 

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time
Janskeet said:

Did anyone else think the burnt Anakin was a bit much?

 

 when i look at the pic of him burnt, yea it is graphic.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Whenever I I leave food in the oven too long and let it get burnt badly I say "It's gone all Hayden Christensen." Which puts me right off it.

That dates back to a time when I was studying ROTS on dvd and watching the Mustafarted scene and forgot I had fish fingers cooking and they got all Hayden-ized. I didn't want to eat them after I'd made that association.