1990osu

MathUser said:

Fuck you.

Huh?  I thought this was OT.com...what forum is this?

I'm not saying slavery didn't play a part in the war, I'm saying that the war was about something fundamentally DIFFERENT: Whether we were fundamentally a collection of states, or whether we were one iron-clad country.

TV's Frink said:

1990osu said:

That's crazy.  Of course we have been to the moon.

Yes, *that* was crazy.  But your previous post was completely sane, right?

What is insane about the facts?  It's a fact that England was going to side with the South before the Emancipation Proclamation came out.

That's crazy.  Of course we have been to the moon.

Look, it's quite simple:

The north had slave states.  There were riots in New York where northerners killed black people.  The only reason the north didn't have as big a slave industry was because of the weather.  The northerners would have rebelled if they thought that they were all dying to free the slaves.  No, they were fighting to "preserve the union".  And likewise, southerners were not fighting to keep their slaves.  As mentioned, the vast majority of them did not own slaves. 

The Emancipation Proclamation was a great publicity stunt by Lincoln to try to make the war about slavery.  Why?  Because he didn't want Europe to jump in on the southern side, which it was about to do. 

But what did the Emancipation Proclamation actually do?  Nothing!  If Lincoln had really wanted to free slaves why didn't he free the Northern slaves?  Why "free" the southern ones he had no control over? 

It was a great publicity stunt by Lincoln, and ever after it has made a good simplistic "white knight black knight" tale for the history books and public schools- but it just isn't correct. 

The war was not about slavery, but about economics...as most wars are.

I actually think the composer is a disproportionate part of the success of a Star Wars movie.  I am worried about John Williams- like Spielberg, I love him but he is not hungry in the same way.

Spielberg declines:

http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/news/a437122/steven-spielberg-i-wont-direct-star-wars-episode-7.html

At these talks, Arndt always tells attendees that Star Wars’ enduring appeal has to do with resolving its protagonists goals’ nearly simultaneously, at the climax of the movie. In the comments section of a discussion about a Star Wars talk Arndt gave at the Austin Film Festival in 2010, one attendee of the seminar notes, "Arndt stated that if a writer could resolve the story's arcs (internal, external, philosophical) immediately after the Moment of Despair at the climax, he or she would deliver the Insanely Great Ending and put the audience in a euphoric state. The faster it could happen, the better. By [Arndt’s] reckoning, George Lucas hit those three marks at the climax of Star Wars within a space of 22 seconds."

Indeed, in the third act of Star Wars, as Arndt explained to his young screenwriting Padawans at the 2009 Hawaii Writers Conference, its central characters' main goals all are met on pages 89 through 91 of the original Lucas script: At the crescendo of Star Wars, a spectral Obi Wan urges, “Use the Force, Luke,” and he does, thus reaching his inner goal (fighting self-doubt to become a hero). Han Solo reappears (meeting the philosophical goal of overcoming selfishness with altruism) to shoot down Darth Vader, which allows Luke to use the Force to mentally guide his shot and blow up the Death Star (outer goal and inner goals simultaneously met).

http://www.vulture.com/2012/11/star-wars-episode-vii-may-have-found-its-writer.html

I want 1980s Spielberg to direct. 

zombie84 said:

doubleofive said:

I'm looking forward to R2 freaking out and EVERYTHING COMING RIGHT AT ME!



(Truthfully, I'm not giving any more money to Lucas unless its for the OOT)

(And yes, they replaced his chest area panel with CG so it could flip out better)

Is that a photoshop job or is that the 2011 BD? No, seriously.

I have a theory that the computer techs at Lucasfilm got the list of changes and deliberately made the CGI look as bad as possible because secretly, they didn't like the idea of their favorite childhood movie ROTJ getting butchered.

I think he is an extremely good choice.

First screenwriter ever to be nominated for both the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay and Best Adapted Screenplay for his first two screenplays.

"Oscar-Winning Scribe Michael Arndt Penned Treatment For Next Three ‘Star Wars’ Fims"

"He's part of the celebrated Pixar Brain Trust, who scrutinize and deconstruct all the movies they have in development. Moreover, he's a big fan of the franchise, lecturing frequently, specifically about the the end of "Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope" and why it's so satisfying creatively."

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/michael-arndt-writes-star-wars-episode-vii-treatment-spielberg-abrams-brad-bird-expected-to-take-a-look-20121108

http://www.deadline.com/2012/11/next-star-wars-films-get-treatment-by-hunger-games-sequel-scribe-michael-arndt/

http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captured/michael-arndt-has-already-written-a-star-wars-episode-vii-treatment

http://www.flix66.com/2012/11/08/steven-spielberg-brad-bird-and-j-j-abrams-expected-to-read-michael-arndts-star-wars-episode-7-treatment/

Funny.  My favorites are still Vader Sessions, Darth Schwarzenegger, and Darth L. Jackson.

This is the black and white version with Han making out with the girl in the cantina, right?

(deleted)

In theory, any state should be able to secede.  A lot of states wouldn't have even signed onto the Constitution if they thought they could never excuse themselves.  They thought they could secede- and even then they took a lot of convincing to sign. 

So any state should technically be able to secede.  But as we all know, when states actually tried it, things got bloody (see 1861-1865).

But yes, Texas actually has as a condition of the deal that they could secede at any time. 

So in theory, if Texas was to secede, the federal government should let that happen . In theory.

Wasn't "Star Wars" criticized for casting only white people and supposedly having a hidden eugenic message?  I think that's how Lando ended up in "Empire", because they wanted to deflect criticism.

Yeah, over at TFN they are suggesting Justin Bieber for Episode 7.  More than one person.  I kid you not.

I think to make any progress in this discussion we have to step back and look at how America is supposed to work. 

We talk about the people on welfare and fearing a government that would coldly "kick them to the curb." 

But is that really the right mindset? 

What if people turned not to the state, but to other people to help them?  To me it's much more cynical to think that people are so cold-hearted that they must be forced to be generous through government taxes.  It represents a lack of faith in human goodness. 

Is government really the one "giving the rich a tax break" or "withholding funding for Planned Parenthood"? Is government the benevolent benefactor who hands out checks, or is it us who gives our money to the government and frankly would like some of it back to do with as we please, as a free people? 

Do you trust the goodness of government?  Or the goodness and generosity of the human heart? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arOGHY27JwI

This is a dark night for America.

I know I'm setting myself up for disappointment again, but I can't help it!  I know it's going to be good this time.

I have been hearing that the new Bond movie "Skyfall" is EXCELLENT... by far the best Daniel Craig Bond.

I agree that Brad Bird is the only true heir of old-school Lucas and Spielberg style filmmaking. 

I would support Spielberg himself, but still think that Brad has just as much talent but also brings that passion and youthful energy to the table.