Akwat Kbrana said:
Vaderisnothayden said:
Expanded universes are an idea that exists outside Star wars. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanded_universe We can thus acknowledge the existence of a Star wars eu without having to follow Lucasfilm's definition of it.
And you go by wikipedia's definition of eu? How follow-the-herd.
No, they go by mine.
Vaderisnothayden said:
Akwat Kbrana said:
And you go by wikipedia's definition of eu? How follow-the-herd.
No, they go by mine.
Davnes007 said:
Man.....this whole thing concerning VINH sounds familiar to me for some reason.
Exactly.
Chewtobacca said:
Vaderisnothayden said:
It wasn't phrased as a neutral factual statement.
Oh yes it was. Writing a word in capitals has nothing to do with how it is phrased. Phrasing has to do with the words used, not the orthography.
Vaderisnothayden said:
The stress on the "is" indicated that I was arguing a contentious point, some that needed to be defended and fought for, rather than merely providing information.
Using capitals usually means the opposite. Example: You ARE wrong. I'm certainly not trying to signal that this statement is contentious, quite the opposite: it comes across as, "I know better and the capitals emphasise the fact."
Neither I, nor TV's Frink, nor anyone else read your post as anything other than a factual statement meant to correct the person you quoted. If you wish to provide clues, you might you might wish to be clearer in future, for those of us who don't share your obscure writing style.
Vaderisnothayden said:
It wasn't phrased as a neutral factual statement.
Oh yes it was. Writing a word in capitals has nothing to do with how it is phrased. Phrasing has to do with the words used, not the orthography.
Now that's getting pedantically literal. You know what I meant.
Using capitals usually means the opposite. Example: You ARE wrong. I'm certainly not trying to signal that this statement is contentious, quite the opposite: it comes across as, "I know better and the capitals emphasise the fact."
Putting it in capitals indicated I had a reason to stress it. If it were merely a matter of informing somebody Lucasfilm considers the PT to be EU then I would have no need to stress anything. I could merely state it neutrally. That I stressed it hinted at the fact that I had something personal I was pushing, not merely info on Lucasfilm's views. In reading posts you need to learn to pick up on subtleties.
Neither I, nor TV's Frink, nor anyone else read your post as anything other than a factual statement meant to correct the person you quoted.
How do you know what everyone else who's read this page thought? Have you done a poll? And actually I'm not so sure Frink interpreted it the way you did. He indicated above that he that he knew that I knew the official definition of the EU, so, unlike you, he did not think I was making "a honest mistake" (as I think you put it) and that I simply did not know the official Lucasfilm position. If I knew the official Lucasfilm then obviously I wasn't just making a factual statement.
If you wish to provide clues, you might you might wish to be clearer in future, for those of us who don't share your obscure writing style.
What I said was clear enough. If we're going to go telling people to be clearer we'd have to do it to everybody, because everybody is misunderstood on internet boards. On any one thread I repeatedly have to work hard to make sure I've got the right interpretation of various posts when there could be more than one interpretation of what they meant. So don't go lecturing me.
Vaderisnothayden said:
And actually I'm not so sure Frink interpreted it the way you did. He indicated above that he that he knew that I knew the official definition of the EU, so, unlike you, he did not think I was making "a honest mistake" (as I think you put it) and that I simply did not know the official Lucasfilm position.
You are correct, I did not think you were making a mistake (although I do appreciate being defended, Chewtobacca).
What about this Star Wars thing the kids are talking about?
I hear it's rather popular.
Vaderisnothayden said:
Oh yes it was. Writing a word in capitals has nothing to do with how it is phrased. Phrasing has to do with the words used, not the orthography.
Now that's getting pedantically literal. You know what I meant.
No; I didn't know what you meant. You said it wasn't phrased as a factual statement, and by the laws of English grammar it was. I can't think of a more clear-cut case of having been proven wrong.
Vaderisnothayden said:
So don't go lecturing me.
No; I won't. You defend yourself over-aggressively, so I've no wish to talk to you further. You're on my ignore list from now on. No doubt you'll do the same, so that's an end to the matter.
Vaderisnothayden said:
TPM IS eu.
I think the problem here is we've all misinterpreted this post.VINH is actually saying a sentiment most of us agree with.
TPM IS "ewwwww"
meaning a cause of disgust and unpleasantnesss.
I almost typed up an argument to your first two sentences. Nice one :-)
Interview: http://www.heebmagazine.com/blog/view/2491
There's an official site. http://redlettermedia.com/
Also seems to be the individual behind 'The United States of Noooo!!!'
Cripes! he looks almost exactly how I imagined Anakin would look like before the PT came out (only minus the full beard).
I imagined Leia got her dark hair from her father and Luke got his blond from his mother (going by Seb Shaw's eyebrows).
His head shape and jaw line pretty much fit, stick him down the gym and shave a few years off (going by the Feeding Frenzy trailer) and he could have been a contender.
I'd much rather have seen someone like him be Anakin than some pretty boy with the personality and charisma of chipboard.
Actually, I think the clipboard would probably make a more convincing Anakin...
Every 27th customer will get a ball-peen hammer, free!
Chewtobacca said:
Vaderisnothayden said:
Oh yes it was. Writing a word in capitals has nothing to do with how it is phrased. Phrasing has to do with the words used, not the orthography.
Now that's getting pedantically literal. You know what I meant.
No; I didn't know what you meant. You said it wasn't phrased as a factual statement, and by the laws of English grammar it was. I can't think of a more clear-cut case of having been proven wrong.
Vaderisnothayden said:
So don't go lecturing me.No; I won't. You defend yourself over-aggressively, so I've no wish to talk to you further. You're on my ignore list from now on. No doubt you'll do the same, so that's an end to the matter.
God, what a friendly person.
No; I didn't know what you meant. You said it wasn't phrased as a factual statement, and by the laws of English grammar it was. I can't think of a more clear-cut case of having been proven wrong.
Again, being too pedantic and literal. If you're going to take that sort of approach no wonder you didn't understand what I was saying, this time or the original time.
none said:
Interview: http://www.heebmagazine.com/blog/view/2491
There's an official site. http://redlettermedia.com/
Also seems to be the individual behind 'The United States of Noooo!!!'
He seems to hold to the conventional view that ROTS was the best of the prequels. It was the worst and considering it better is giving Lucas too much credit.
I found his humor often distasteful and misogynistic.
Thanks for the links, none. :)
none said:
Interview: http://www.heebmagazine.com/blog/view/2491
There's an official site. http://redlettermedia.com/
Also seems to be the individual behind 'The United States of Noooo!!!'
Thanks for the links!
I absolutely love his humor on the reviews, but the guy lost me on the his other productions.
Good interview, really puts a personality behind the mayhem.
Vaderisnothayden said:
Chewtobacca said:
You defend yourself over-aggressively, so I've no wish to talk to you further. You're on my ignore list from now on. No doubt you'll do the same, so that's an end to the matter.
God, what a friendly person.
Jeez, Chewtobacca, you are so unfriendly. You don't do anything around here except help people track down Ady's AVCHDs. You should be more friendly by insisting your opinion is fact, taking everything personally, lashing out whenever you are questioned, and so on.
Now, back on topic...
I finally watched the review and I really enjoyed it. I will say that the problems and failures of TPM have been well documented, and while his analysis was usually well done, I wasn't really that interested in that part of it. I mean, we get plenty of discussion on the failures of the PT here, right? What I really liked was the humor. I was never bored and when it was over I actually was surprised how fast it went by. However...
Vaderisnothayden said:
I found his humor often distasteful and misogynistic.
I agree with this (well, at least the misogynistic part, unless you want to argue that being misogynistic is distasteful, which I agree with, btw...where was I?). I didn't have a problem with most of the humor, but there were a few parts that were misogynistic and I would have liked to see that removed. I know they were part of his "character" but I still could have done without those bits.
Finally, I was surprised to find that I actually enjoyed his vocal treatment as well. Having heard just a bit of it previously, I didn't know if I could take it for 70 minutes. But for whatever reason, his voice grew on me the more I watched the review.
I hated this review. He took an unfair shot at Ric and Ric.
TV's Frink said:
Jeez, Chewtobacca, you are so unfriendly. You don't do anything around here except help people track down Ady's AVCHDs. You should be more friendly by insisting your opinion is fact, taking everything personally, lashing out whenever you are questioned, and so on.
Thanks for the advice, TV's Frink. :-) I'll try not to take it too literally.
Finally, I was surprised to find that I actually enjoyed his vocal treatment as well. Having heard just a bit of it previously, I didn't know if I could take it for 70 minutes. But for whatever reason, his voice grew on me the more I watched the review.
I experienced the same thing. The voice makes the review funnier and gives it an almost train-of-thought feel, which I find quite enjoyable. I'll try to take in more of his reviews, when I have the chance.
Chewtobacca said:
Finally, I was surprised to find that I actually enjoyed his vocal treatment as well. Having heard just a bit of it previously, I didn't know if I could take it for 70 minutes. But for whatever reason, his voice grew on me the more I watched the review.
I experienced the same thing. The voice makes the review funnier and gives it an almost train-of-thought feel, which I find quite enjoyable. I'll try to take in more of his reviews, when I have the chance.
His Trek reviews are great, putting clips of the TNG TV characters next to their contrasting TNG movie characters (ie, the same characters acting completely different). They made me dislike the TNG movies more, which I view as the Prequel Trilogy of the Treks (though I do like the actual "prequel" Trek, but that's neither here nor there).
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
You know, Frink, you're like one of these little dogs that follow people around barking frantically at their heels. Following me around the boards trying to get my attention.
Vaderisnothayden said:
You know, Frink, you're like one of these little dogs that follow people around barking frantically at their heels. Following me around the boards trying to get my attention.
I wonder why, VINH. Perhaps your leg looks like a fire hydrant? Whatever the reason is, it probably has nothing to do with your attitude.
Back on topic again, I'll mention one of the things I found hilarous in the presentation. I love the purposeful mispronouncing of names and words, as well as the poor editing. And even though it's an easy joke, I always enjoy the "oh wait, never mind" bit as he shows a clip that contradicts his supposed point.
Oh god, now he's trying to hump my leg. Somebody call the dog catchers.
See, there you go, you're starting to get a sense of humor about yourself. Frankly, I think you were asking for it, walking around with your leg uncovered and all.
Admit it, for just a brief second as you typed your response, you had an image of Professor Frink humping your leg.
Not really. I don't watch Simpsons so I don't know this professor Frink. I was thinking more of a Frink-dog. And my leg was well-covered. Some dogs are just determined.
The humour is only misogynist if he is being serious, which clearly he isn't.
As to bad taste that's subjective (just like his opinions).
As I said earlier there is a difference between Warren Mitchell playing a bigot and Warren Mitchell being a bigot.
Bingowings said:
The humour is only misogynist if he is being serious, which clearly he isn't.
As to bad taste that's subjective (just like his opinions).
As I said earlier there is a difference between Warren Mitchell playing a bigot and Warren Mitchell being a bigot.
Certain types of things are misogynistic even when they're meant as humor. The humor here is clearly misogynistic. Clearly he is not being serious about keeping women tied up in his basement, but putting it forward as a joke is misogynistic. And humor is often used as cover for bigotry, such as in various comedians' routines -fake bigotry that really is real bigotry.