logo Sign In

Jedi Council Forum Laughs — Page 3

Author
Time

darklordoftech said:

Here's something on TFN that's sure to make us all laugh: a popular theory there is that "The Tragedy of Darth Plagueis The Wise" is forshadowing that Darth Plagueis will be the villain of the sequel trilogy.

Who is Darth Plagueis?

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time

AntcuFaalb said:

darklordoftech said:

Here's something on TFN that's sure to make us all laugh: a popular theory there is that "The Tragedy of Darth Plagueis The Wise" is forshadowing that Darth Plagueis will be the villain of the sequel trilogy.

Who is Darth Plagueis?

According to a "Sith legend" that Palpatine tells Anakin in Episode 3, Darth Plagueis was a Sith Lord who could have saved Padme, but ultimately was murdered by his own apprentice.

Author
Time

darklordoftech said:

AntcuFaalb said:

darklordoftech said:

Here's something on TFN that's sure to make us all laugh: a popular theory there is that "The Tragedy of Darth Plagueis The Wise" is forshadowing that Darth Plagueis will be the villain of the sequel trilogy.

Who is Darth Plagueis?

According to a "Sith legend" that Palpatine tells Anakin in Episode 3, Darth Plagueis was a Sith Lord who could have saved Padme, but ultimately was murdered by his own apprentice.

Thanks! I barely remember Episode III.

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time

AntcuFaalb said:

darklordoftech said:

AntcuFaalb said:

darklordoftech said:

Here's something on TFN that's sure to make us all laugh: a popular theory there is that "The Tragedy of Darth Plagueis The Wise" is forshadowing that Darth Plagueis will be the villain of the sequel trilogy.

Who is Darth Plagueis?

According to a "Sith legend" that Palpatine tells Anakin in Episode 3, Darth Plagueis was a Sith Lord who could have saved Padme, but ultimately was murdered by his own apprentice.

Thanks! I barely remember Episode III.

you're welcome

Author
Time
 (Edited)

darklordoftech said:


They keep talking about how "Sith is an idea" and the Sith can never be destroyed. Factions have come and gone throughout history, and Sith is a sect, not an idea.


This is definately a direct result of the PT/modern EU's stupid emphasis of the Jedi/Sith dichotomy.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DuracellEnergizer said:

 

darklordoftech said:


They keep talking about how "Sith is an idea" and the Sith can never be destroyed. Factions have come and gone throughout history, and Sith is a sect, not an idea.


This is definately a direct result of the PT/modern EU's stupid emphasis of the Jedi/Sith dichotomy.

 

Exactly what I was thinking. The PT/EU fans are afraid of the Sith being wiped out so they've convinced themselves that Sith is an "idea" in order to reassure themselves that they'll always be another Jedi/Sith conflict.

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Dra--- said: 
darklordoftech said: 
Dra--- said:
darklordoftech said:
Dra--- said:
"Falling in love" is an idea. "Character trait" is an idea.

All ideas are made up of language; all language is made up of ideas. All actions and events are semiotically packed with language. You can't get beyond language and ideas. What you take to be natural are all socially produced constructs (made of language and ideas).

That's why ideology is so powerful and difficult to destroy.
Passions are not ideas. I'm sorry. An animal that's alone its entire life would still have passions.
What you're talking about is a human concept. "Passions" is an idea. In fact, I doubt any biologist would describe animal "drives" or "instincts" that way. It's too human centric. They would use different language and concepts. Over time, these concepts might change.

That doesn't mean that there isn't some real phenomena out there in the world that language aims to describe. But the only way we can talk about "thing-in-themselves" is through language and ideas. Hence, everything is an idea.

All of Western and Eastern philosophy, including science, embrace this concept. Even science talks of "phenomena" rather than "noumena." The noumena are the "thing-in-themselves" that we can only know through human social constructs.
Let's create a planet. Planets are ideas, after all. Let's resurrect George Washington. George Washington is an idea, after all.

You're still not understanding the difference between phenomena and noumena.

Let's say you have planet making technology. You wouldn't be able to make a planet without the idea of what a planet is.

Let's say you have cloning technology. You wouldn't be able to make a George Washington without a whole range of linguistic and ideational data about what his "identity" was made up of. Identity is a social construct. You could produce an exact clone of GW, but if you didn't fill his mind up with the same ideas and language, you wouldn't have GW.

Anyway, if you really want to argue this position, take a philosophy class. Just because you don't understand a well-accepted concept, I shouldn't have to be your teacher. :)
Author
Time

He says he is not, but I'm still pretty sure this is Sam, just a little better behaved.

Author
Time

darth_ender said:

He says he is not, but I'm still pretty sure this is Sam, just a little better behaved.

 Not sure what that conversation has to do with Sam.

Author
Time

darklordoftech said:

Dra--- said: 
darklordoftech said: 
Dra--- said:
darklordoftech said:
Dra--- said:
"Falling in love" is an idea. "Character trait" is an idea.

All ideas are made up of language; all language is made up of ideas. All actions and events are semiotically packed with language. You can't get beyond language and ideas. What you take to be natural are all socially produced constructs (made of language and ideas).

That's why ideology is so powerful and difficult to destroy.
Passions are not ideas. I'm sorry. An animal that's alone its entire life would still have passions.
What you're talking about is a human concept. "Passions" is an idea. In fact, I doubt any biologist would describe animal "drives" or "instincts" that way. It's too human centric. They would use different language and concepts. Over time, these concepts might change.

That doesn't mean that there isn't some real phenomena out there in the world that language aims to describe. But the only way we can talk about "thing-in-themselves" is through language and ideas. Hence, everything is an idea.

All of Western and Eastern philosophy, including science, embrace this concept. Even science talks of "phenomena" rather than "noumena." The noumena are the "thing-in-themselves" that we can only know through human social constructs.
Let's create a planet. Planets are ideas, after all. Let's resurrect George Washington. George Washington is an idea, after all.

You're still not understanding the difference between phenomena and noumena.

Let's say you have planet making technology. You wouldn't be able to make a planet without the idea of what a planet is.

Let's say you have cloning technology. You wouldn't be able to make a George Washington without a whole range of linguistic and ideational data about what his "identity" was made up of. Identity is a social construct. You could produce an exact clone of GW, but if you didn't fill his mind up with the same ideas and language, you wouldn't have GW.

Anyway, if you really want to argue this position, take a philosophy class. Just because you don't understand a well-accepted concept, I shouldn't have to be your teacher. :)

I'm guess this has something to do with the "Sith is an idea" thing. I can't make heads or tails of what the hell the argument being made is, though.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I'm really glad I've kept my scope as limited as I have.

The 'falling in love' rule is one of the most tedious things to happen in the whole of the prequel trilogy.

It's a way of providing a cheap reason why Anakin and Padme can't just immediately hook up and leave it at that. Instead half of their conversations just stop because of the 'rule' that persists and doesn't make much sense, either. 

If they weren't allowed to love, they might as well go the complete monk route and cut off all relations, because some relationships are so strong that they can constitute love. And yet the Jedi are seen with personal ties to each other and strong bonds, which is rather contradictory to Yoda's lessons.

Keep in mind, I'm one of those people who tries to be optimistic about every film I see and think of one good element of it. These films just have some deep-seated flaws which stem from a man who should have retired long ago.

EDIT: Read through the rest of the forum. I think these guys are solely comprised of modern comic-book writers.

I’m just here because I’m driving tonight.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I've felt for sometime now that if there had to be a "forbidden love" aspect to Anakin's characterization, then it should have been because the Jedi weren't allowed to fall in love with people outside the Order, not because they weren't allowed to fall in love period. Making them chaste warrior-priests just added to the dehumanization of the Jedi in the prequels.

Author
Time

That there is a reason I think the screenwriting job should have been given to someone else. 

What did that take you, like, half a second? George throughout the whole making of the film (3 years) never took himself back and said "Maybe a small augmentation's in order." and came up with such a simple, but still sensible, conclusion as your own.

I'd question why no one ever spoke up to him about it, but considering what seems to have been leaked of Lucas' hostile work environment, I wouldn't be surprised if everyone just feared for their jobs if they dared to question him. 

I think he might be far worse than Shyamalan in terms of his "artiste" mindset.

I’m just here because I’m driving tonight.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Tack said:

What did that take you, like, half a second? George throughout the whole making of the film (3 years) never took himself back and said "Maybe a small augmentation's in order." and came up with such a simple, but still sensible, conclusion as your own.

I think Lucas just decided to rip off Titanic's main storyline and combine it with some of his own Buddhist sentiments without thinking about how it would all turn out in the end.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Padme, for reasons of Naboo custom (or politics) not being able to love Anakin openly would have made slightly better sense.

Jedi not being able to marry and crank out more Force babies is pretty ridiculous when you think about it. Factor in some parents might not even want their kid to run off and join up, and you have one heck of a recruitment shortage.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

darklordoftech said:

Dra--- said: 
darklordoftech said: 
Dra--- said:
darklordoftech said:
Dra--- said:
"Falling in love" is an idea. "Character trait" is an idea.

All ideas are made up of language; all language is made up of ideas. All actions and events are semiotically packed with language. You can't get beyond language and ideas. What you take to be natural are all socially produced constructs (made of language and ideas).

That's why ideology is so powerful and difficult to destroy.
Passions are not ideas. I'm sorry. An animal that's alone its entire life would still have passions.
What you're talking about is a human concept. "Passions" is an idea. In fact, I doubt any biologist would describe animal "drives" or "instincts" that way. It's too human centric. They would use different language and concepts. Over time, these concepts might change.

That doesn't mean that there isn't some real phenomena out there in the world that language aims to describe. But the only way we can talk about "thing-in-themselves" is through language and ideas. Hence, everything is an idea.

All of Western and Eastern philosophy, including science, embrace this concept. Even science talks of "phenomena" rather than "noumena." The noumena are the "thing-in-themselves" that we can only know through human social constructs.
Let's create a planet. Planets are ideas, after all. Let's resurrect George Washington. George Washington is an idea, after all.

You're still not understanding the difference between phenomena and noumena.

Let's say you have planet making technology. You wouldn't be able to make a planet without the idea of what a planet is.

Let's say you have cloning technology. You wouldn't be able to make a George Washington without a whole range of linguistic and ideational data about what his "identity" was made up of. Identity is a social construct. You could produce an exact clone of GW, but if you didn't fill his mind up with the same ideas and language, you wouldn't have GW.

Anyway, if you really want to argue this position, take a philosophy class. Just because you don't understand a well-accepted concept, I shouldn't have to be your teacher. :)

I'm guess this has something to do with the "Sith is an idea" thing. I can't make heads or tails of what the hell the argument being made is, though.

 Don't worry about it.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The Jedi being  celibate monk's came from the rough draft screenplay from 1974.  People don't have to like it but it was not created in 2000 or whenever Lucas started episode II.

Yeah its based on like a single throwaway line when Anakin Starkiller gets in trouble for having sex with some girl in a closet but its there.

In fact i don't have a hard time believing a lot of the prequel ideas came from already jettisoned stuff from those first prototype scripts.

The overly boring politics stuff. The stuff about a queen etc. The Kiber Crystal  reminds me of  midi clorians.  Its a way to quantify the force.  Kurtz suggested Lucas abandon it.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

If Splinter of the Mind's Eye had actually been filmed, with the Kaiburr crystal concept front and center, Jim Henson's The Dark Crystal might have been a very different film.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

darth_ender said:

He says he is not, but I'm still pretty sure this is Sam, just a little better behaved.

 I agree.  Wook, can't you check IPs?

Also, this thread is about laughs, not discussion.

Author
Time

Another laugh: "If there's no Sith in episode 7 I will leave Star Wars behind."

Author
Time

^If only it made me laugh. A head shake and a facepalm are my only responses. 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DuracellEnergizer said:

^If only it made me laugh. A head shake and a facepalm are my only responses. 

 I agree. I was using the term "laugh" because of the thread title.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Another laugh: "If there's no Sith in episode 7 I will leave Star Wars behind."

faceplam

I’m just here because I’m driving tonight.

Author
Time

Tack said:

Another laugh: "If there's no Sith in episode 7 I will leave Star Wars behind."

375.jpg

 Link fail.