C3PX

Regarding the tampons, not only were the organic essentials started in 1995, but the picture is very obviously pasted on their.

For starters, Leia is standing under a giant sunflower, which makes NO sense whatsoever. Look at her shoulder, you can see that in the original picture she was behind something or someone as there is a big chunk cut out of her shoulder. Not to mention she is covering up the "R" in the French word "Regulier", which would be a big no no in a real product. The lettering on the box would be ontop of the image, not the other way around.

Hunter6 said:

HotRod said:

Dude, how do you know if it's bad? What's bad to you, might be great to someone else.

Like Dayv said a few pages pack, there's a lot of bitching and moaning...and no one's even seen the bloody thing yet!!

Not being the greatest fan of Star Trek, I'm actually looking forwrd to seeing this flick.

 

O.K....
Here is an I.Q. test for you, HotRod

What about is Movie is making you looking forward to it?

P.s. HotRod, please no dumb answers like I am looking forward because "it is star trek" or "the ships go boom" or "the women are hot".

Come on, things like that are not very fair. As Hotrod said, he is not a big Star Trek fan, and he thinks the new movie looks cool, fair enough. No sense in treating him like he is stupid.

Some of those things in the links satanika posted would actually be amazingly cool. If they tried to make them seem "questionable", IMHO they failed. I especially liked the Jabba bean bag chair the Death Star dart board, and the foosball table. The sun shades would be kind of cool too, though pretty dorky. And I'd love a Darth Vader gumball despenser.

The artist has quite an obsession with Pepsi. A hardcore loyalist toward his beverage of choice no doubt.

IGN has a high res version of this new trailer for download, lot easier to pick out the details.

negative1 said:

skyjedi has commented.

He sure has!

A love triangle could have been interesting. I always felt they should have went with that more in Ep. III, it was the original intention, as you will see if you read the script (Palpatine, pretending he does not know of Anakin and Padme's situation, let's Anakin in on the rumors he has been hearing about Obi-Wan being involved in some sort of scandal with a certain young senator. It is a great scene that really shows Palptine trying to cause Anakin to doubt Obi-Wan and Padme loyalty), but for some reason they cut that scene leaving only small hints of Anakin's suspicions. I think it should have been more clear that Anakin was begining to believe that Padme had been having an afair with Obi-Wan, and that Anakin thought the baby wasn't his, and that the Jedi Counsel were somehow covering for Obi-Wan and working against Anakin (maybe the Darkside is like certain drugs and make you paranoid? :)

However, I am not sure how I'd feel about a real triangle, maybe a something like Obi-Wan liking her, and bigshot Anakin comes in and sweeps her away. But to me, I think more focus should have been on the sense of brotherhood between Anakin and Obi-Wan, in which case, I think they would be less likely to try and steel each others love interests. Could have been that Anakin had been extremely fond of Padme, and really liked her. While being her body guard, Obi-Wan spends time with her and she starts to like him, and he starts to like her too, they would have fallen in love, but Obi-Wan, being faithful to his friend, backs off and acts like he is not interested in her. She is disappointed he did not share her feelings, and after some time falls for Anakin. Then we would have Padme being the someone Obi-Wan truely loved, but forbid himself from, because he did not want to hurt his friend, now Anakin and Padme are married and once Anakin starts acting out of the ordinary, and suspicions of Sith influence arise, Obi-Wan feels the need to protect her, and takes her to a safe place. Anakin hears or sees that they ran away together, and decides they have both betrayed him.

Man, there are SOO many ways to make this work. Get so sick of people saying, "You honestly didn't expect them to be as good as the originals did you? Because that would have been impossible!" Looking at things realistically, there is no real reason why they could not be as good as the old ones, and certainly no excuse for them to have been so over the top awful as they were.

The more rustic looking skull design as seen on much of the media ("posters, book cover, etc.) is interesting. I wonder what promted them to change it from the sleek chrome we are used to. To me the chrome is much more menacing.

Thanks for posting that -1. I am still looking forward to it. I always felt T3 should have taken place during Judgment Day or during the future war, so I am thrilled this one does take place then, and I am very happy it is not called Terminator 4, means if it is any good, it should fit on the shelf nicely in place of T3 (which I absolutely loathe). Sounds like they are coming up with some complicated plot, and intend to spawn it into a whole new trilogy, which is an idea I am not too impressed with. I'd rather have a stand alone film about John and the resistance. But we will see. Christian Bale playing John Connor ought to be absolutely awesome, but H-wood tends to mess up just about everything these days.

Judging by the comments under the video -1 posted, it seems hating this preemtively is kind of the "in" thing to do.

Vote for the Vader statue in Bristol. http://www.moss247.com/vote-vader-2-w.asp

That was actually a really cool interview. Too bad people like Skyjedi won't listen to it on account of it being from TFN (though I must admit, the over long excessive opening with random clips from various movies is really annoying, but once you get past that bit, it is well worth listening too.

Prowse even talks negatively about the prequels, dismissed the Clone Wars series, talks about George being a strange director, and says he though Hayden did an awful job as Darth Vader and looked like Frankenstein. Prowse said that he actually wanted to do the part and was available to do the part, but it was in Hayden's contract that he could play the role of Vader if he wanted too. It is ashame really, it would have been excellent to have had Prowse in the suit and on the screen again.

Also, I found it cool to learn he was the man behind the suit in Rebel Assult II. I knew it was JEJ's voice, but I had no idea they actually went through the trouble to have Prowse wear the suit.

In all seriousness, I think both sides need to get off of each others backs though. There is nothing wrong with those guys who enjoy the PT or even the Clone Wars CG show, if they enjoy them, then I think that is just wonderful for them. For my part, I really have no interest in those things, SW being something I have been very fond of since I was a kid, it does kind of irk me to see it shifted through such an awkward transformation. But there is really nothing I can do about it. It kind of sucks to see Star Wars fandom split in two, but what can you expect when one side is constantly catered to while the otherside is even denied a proper DVD release of the movies they care about. Out of all the mass of Star Wars DVDs on the market, and their are a zillion of them, the only three films we care about the ones with the single worst quality release of literally any DVD on the market today (save for those $1 crap DVDs you find in the dollar store, and even some of those are anamorphic).

So, I cannot tolerate these idiots who come in here and tell us to shut up and get over it. Yeah, maybe we need to shut up because we sound like broken records, and griping wont solve anything. But it is easy to tell someone else to shut up when you are fat and happy and completely content with the movies you have been given, and we are stuck with leftovers with dog piss on them. Some chick came in here some time ago and told us to shut the fuck up, and preached to us about tolerance. We are not hurting her. There are plenty of sites for her type, this is our turf, you're welcome if you please, but keep in mind, this is where we come to vent our frustration. By coming in here and saying stupid things, worshiping the SW that we see as crappy, and grouching at us for not loving them as you do, just makes us dislike you as much as the PT, SE, and SW.

Unfortunately, I feel with the starting of the Clone Wars TV show, which may very well be a tiny step in the right direction, a lot of us here are really tearing into George and the PT and the Clone Wars far more than necessary. I don't blame fans who are more willing to eat shit (no offense guys, I've eaten my fair share of shit over the years and even liked it sometimes too) for getting irritated at the constant array of Lucas hate (but in all fairness, if it bothers you, you might just want to steer clear of threads titled, "When did the prequels officially suck?"

I know. I travel quite frequently. Most of this is painless, but flights in America are total hell. I always breathe of sign of relief when I am finally boarded on and buckled into that international flight, symbolizing the last of the total crap I'll have to deal with until my return journey. Outside the US I have always been treated with respect by airport workers, while in the US I feel constantly treated with disrespect, I feel like a kid back in kindergarden again, "Uh, do you think we could hurry this up a bit? I am awfully close to missing my flight." "Sir! We will get done when we get done! If you miss your flight, then you miss your flight!" as they thumb through every single page of every book and magazine in my bag.

The whole thing LJ said about the guy asking what the hard drive was, then accepting that when told without further question is exactly right. It almost feels like a big show to reassure us we are safe. What if LJ had had a bomb in his bag, and told the guy it was a hard drive? "Oh, its a hard drive. Okay, cool. Go ahead."

In Europe I sill feel safe, but I don't feel on edge the entire time going through the airports. The whole atmosphere is more laid back. Outside the states I really enjoy traveling. In America it feels like the policy is to treat everyone like a terrorist, regardless. 

It also seems the big international airports suffer from a large amount of employees who barely speak English. Even in foreign airports the employees often speak very good English, and even if they don't and I don't speak their language, they are usually patient and willing to use hand signals or gestures in order to help people around the airport or give instructions. The last time I was coming back into America, I came through Washington D.C., as soon as I got off the plane and was heading toward customs, a Chinese woman was all up in my face yelling "bagasheeee! bagasheeeee! bagasheeeee! See yo bagagasheeee!" Had no idea what the hell she wanted. Finally she started waving a baggage claim ticket around and we realized she wanted to see our claim tickets in order to determine who to send to the first of the line so they didn't miss their flights. A while later I heard her talking to another airport worker and she was easy enough to understand even though she had a thick accent, but whenever she'd start yelling she'd start dropping whole syllables and words out of her sentences. It was just frustrating people and making the whole painful process of feeling like cattle while going through customs even more painful. Seems like they should be more careful with that, communication in such a situation is important, and yelling "bagasheee!" at people instead of "We need to see your claim tickets!" is hardly communicating.

To me, the Robot Chicken scene where Darth Vader kills Jar Jar is canonical. Since George was somewhat involved, or since he asked Seth Green to do it, or said he really liked the idea of doing a full special dedicated to SW, or whatever it was, does that make Robot Chicken Star Wars fit into any one of the ridiculously large and tangled quantity of official canon's canonicity?

Vaderisnothayden said:

Why should he not post?...

Why? Because he disagrees with some peoples opinions, that is why! Because he is against, George, and the PT, and the (mostly) finished version of the OT. How can anybody go about their lives and live happily when there are people out there on the internets that disagree with them? The voices of opposition must be silenced! We cannot give up until George's honor has been defended and all tongues concede that he IS the Master Story teller of our age, the ages that have come before us, and all the ages that are yet to come!

Long live the Master Story teller! Long live his wonderful movies and television shows! Long live his great beard and his flannel shirts! Death to his enemies and opposition! Death to the incompleted versions of his films! Death to those who obsess over them and fail to see the light!

Lordjedi said:
I was looking for another entry, where a woman asks about her husband and Jesus asks which one (she'd been married 3 times), but I can't find it.  However, there are plenty of places in the Bible where Jesus reads peoples minds in order to convince them that he is the Son of God.

 

That is the story of Jesus and the Samaritan woman at Jacob's Well, it's in John chapter 4, I think.

Gaffer Tape said:

I have to disagree that Remastered was necessary.  Just because it wouldn't have looked good on an HDTV doesn't mean it had to be updated.  King Kong's effects, even though they were made for film, wouldn't look too good on an HDTV, but they don't need to be changed either.  I don't believe that Star Trek Remastered needed to be done or even should have been done.

You may be right, but I think the original film masters didn't have the effects, as the effects were made for the prints being aired on TV, or something like that. I really have not idea what I am talking about to be honest, it has been a long time since I read about it, but the short of it was something along the lines of everything looking fantastic in HD, because it was filmed in a higher resolution than HD, but the effects having been for tiny TVs would have looked really rough in comparison to the rest of the picture. Maybe Zombie or Chainsawash or someone could step in and straighten me out if they know. I respect them and the changes they made, because it was done in giving a classic series the highest quality modern viewing experience possible, and not that they were making changes for the sake of making changes.

SW SE on the otherhand went through great lengths to make changes for the sake of making changes, to the point of being ridiculous and redundant. We have the Jabba scene repeating information we already got from the Greedo scene, and then we have Han stepping on Jabba's tail as a way of forcing an out of place scene, that simply doesn't work, fit into the film. Had SW SE simple been a remastering of the films, masking some of the old effects (like orange blob under speeder), modernizing some effects (re-retroscoping sabers and lazer blasts), and adding in some lost scenes like meeting Biggs in the hanger before takeoff, then it would not bother me anywhere near half as much as it does (though it would still infuriate me if we didn't have the originals on DVD, something ST fans do have in reagrds to TOS).

And Hunter, that was a good post. I agree with you. Just as we can go through history and look at vehical designs and see how they changes over the ages and for what reasons they changed, style, practicality, rising gas prices, shortage of material due to war, or needing to use cheaper material due to economic decline. It makes since for Starships to go through these phases as well. In First Contact we see the Pheonix has a design very similar to TOS ships. the Pheonix represented bringing mankind out of the ashes of its old civilization, which had at this point all but been destroyed by constant warring, and bring it into a new age of science, technology, and discovery. Basically we are looking at a technological boom coming out of a post-apoctaliptic Earth. I think that simple, practical, submarinesque design of the original is a good representation of this. And as the series goes on, we see the designs changing styles, from the TOS design, to what we see in the STMP refit, to the Enterprise A to the Excelsior style Enterpise B, eventually getting to the more bulky designs of the Entrprise C and D as seen in TNG, to the more sleek and stylish Voyager and Enterprise E. I think ST Enterprise kind of messed this up a bit, since the NX-10 (that what it was called right?) is much closer to the style of the Voyager and the Enterprise E, in my opinion, and yet it is suppose to fit between the Pheonix and the original Enterprise.

I do, however, like how Enterprise used the exact old designs for everything, instead of trying to modernize them in any way. That episode was a lot of fun to watch.

Okay, so I went back to read the part where Lordjedi drove this discussion into the realm of insanity by defending himself against Tiptup accusing him of wanting to commit terrorism. Come on Tip, you are just being ridiculous on this one!! This exchange is NOTHING like you are making it out to be.

Tiptup said:
"So, you believe, then, that all your actions are completely in line with a supreme model of daily perfection? I understand you're a person that generally take things seriously, but, if you were to honestly analyze every action and attitude of your life, you don't believe that there is even one tiny change that you could make with yourself to potentially be even better? :)"

Lordjedi's response:
"Of course not, but I don't go around planning and executing attacks on people simply because of where they're from.  Hell, I don't plan and execute attacks period.  There's plenty of people I disagree with, but I would never wish death on them or try to kill them myself.  I don't believe these actions are in line with daily perfection.  I believe these actions are in line with a civilized society."

Lj simply said that he is not in line with a "supreme model of daily perfection" but that he is also not the one commiting the acts of terrorism, so whether or not he is living his life perfectly, has nothing to do with the fact that terrorist attacks are taking place in the world, because he and his actions have nothing to do with the attacks taking place. He also adds that even though he disagrees with people, he would never dream of wishing death on them, which has nothing to do with perfection, but with being civilized. In other words, the terrorists are the ones being uncivilized, they will keep doing the same kind of attacks again and again, whether or not he reads about it in the paper each and everytime wont make a bit of a difference.

I also might add that a "supreme model of perfection" is a really odd thing to bring into the discussion? Does somebody have to read every news story and weep for every death in order to live a perfect life? After all, what is a "supreme model of daily perfection" and who sets the standards for it? And when did the notion of "perfection" or "purity" become such a pivotal part of this discussion? After the above quoted exchange took place, and the topic changed to definitions of purity and perfection, the thread kind of crashed and burned, and became a long winded argument that I am still not clear as to what it is an argument about. If there is still a need to prove where this thing went off-topic, I'd say your misunderstanding of LJ's comment (which was clear as day to me) and the mention of a "supreme model of perfect" is the precise spot, but who really cares?)

I read your response to my post about Mother Teresa and serving others. Wow, you have a very messed up view of Mother Teresa. Sounds like you've been watching some seriously biased documentaries (possibly anti-Catholic in nature) bend on making her out to be a total twisted psychopath. From the way you talk about her, you'd think she was Elizabth Bathory or something.I have never even heard the slant on her story you going off on. I'll search the internet to find your side and where it comes from when I have a little more time. Maybe you youself should look at some sources on her coming from the other side. She did a lot of good in her time, and while she wasn't perfect (she never claimed to be) she inspired many others to live selflessly and go around doing good. I have never seen any evidence that she was selfish or had a deep fixation on death or some sort of fetish that made her desire to watch people suffer and die. I never knew her, I have no idea what she was really like, all I can go by is what has been writen and recorded by others. But the account of the extremely disturbed woman you talked about, I have never heard, and even after a brief google search (I'll try harder later), I turned up nothing. 

As for the discussion with LJ, I didn't read your last two posts, just skimmed over them. I must have totally missed the part where LJ thought you accused him of being a terrorist, sounds like and amazingly humerous misunderstanding, maybe I will eventually go back and see if I can find it.

I dunno man, but it seems like sometimes you just feel like locking horns with some of us, finding something to nitpick the hell out of, and going at it until the other concedes to your views or does hours and hours of research to refute your every claim and meet your every challenge ("I challenge you or C3PX to prove that my replies have been longer, or more off topic than yours have been"). I don't really care to go around doing a word count on every post or coming up with some standard to judge off-topicness. The point is you drug this discussion off into some bizzare realm pointlessness, seemingly just to fill your own need to argue, insult, and triumph. You may enjoy it, but when it comes down to using sentences like, "I've gone out of my way to try and simplify your worthless crap and bring you back to my basic, starting question (the one I think you keep purposely misunderstanding)" a lot of us lose interest in the discussion. If LJ views are just worthless crap to you, then why the hell should he waste his time writing more of what you will simply dismiss as more worthless crap for the sake of continuing this discussion? I, for the life of me, am pretty confused as to where you are trying to take this, I seem to get the vibe LJ feels the same way. Maybe it is time to consider the fact that your posts and purpose are not as clearly represented as you'd like to think they are.

I agree with you on the idea that discussing things on the internet is not completely pointless. FF is a good example of someone who uses the internet to educate and spread his ideas. Often times when some political issue comes up, he makes a post clearly describing the problem and asking people to do their part it working against it. You mentioned the bloggers and their successful mass effort in supporting Obama. I think those bloggers have their game down pretty good. A good example would be the soldiers throwing the puppy off the cliff. If I have my facts straight, in that case people posted the soldier personal information online, and his family got continuous phone calls about what an evil son they raised and how it would be good if he was KIA, which in turn earned the incident a lot of coverage. I could very well be mixing my facts up from multiple stories, but my point is, these guys often manage to take issues that concern them and pull them into the mainstream by being very vocal and going through lengths to do things like provide contact information for where people can contact somebody and let them know how they feel. 

With my original post, I intended to get discussion going about the differences between America's youth and youth of a place like Uganda, and how the one in a seemingly hopeless plight manages to be hopeful, and the one with a whole world of opportunities open to them manage to be depessed, suicidal, and hopeless. I made this thread because it was something I had been considering in my own mind for much of the evening, and was interested to hear what others thought on the topic. Had I been more interested in spreading knowlegde and increasing awareness of the situation in northern Uganda and the Sudan, I would have taken the lead of guys like FF, and made a well written informative post giving the most important details of the situation, then informing people of how they could help, who they could contact, or what website to go to to find out more information and make donations. Even in just one or two of us had gone to that site and donated a couple of bucks, it would have made a difference. Five years from now someone could be google searching the Uganda and come across my post, read that information, and go to the website and make a donation themselves, making another small difference.

So yeah, I most certainly think discussing things on the internet can make a difference and increase awareness. BUT, I don't think most of our discussions would make a difference to anyone, it is just mindless speculation and considerations spiced up with a heated argument here and there. I don't think anyone could go into our politics thread, read through all the pages, and come out the other end saying, "you know what, these guys are right, modern liberalism is stupid, I am going to be a libritarian or a conservative from now on." Our methods simple do not promote this sort of a conversion. Had we spent time discussing Mumbaj, it wouldn't have given anyone out there anymore information on the matter, they could easily read yahoo news and get more information than we would provide here, all they would get would be our views and opinions on the matter, which would not be likely to sway their own views regarding the matter.

Tiptup said:

... tries to pretend a "vow of poverty" (and worthless Mother-Teresa-style shit like that) has any value in the sight of God. Hard work aimed at wise productivity in a free market is far more pure and helpful than some supposedly high and lofty individual that spends her life obsessed with death and suffering (as apposed to someone who works hard to alleviate and heal death and suffering). You know this and, as such, running off to India would not be a righteous use of your energy and time (you would be doing what you know to be wrong).

I resent that comment. I have no idea why "Mother-Teresa-style" selfless living for others should be called shit. Sure it isn't for everyone, but to me it is just unbelievable that you'd claim a life is better spent living for youself and your family, working hard and productively in a free market society than it is living your life for others. Even more stupid is that you claim it has no value in the eyes of God.

I'd find it terribly inappropriate for somebody to leave their family in such an effort, but I find it indescribably admirable when someone who has no other family obligations (like a guy out of college, or a single individual) gives up their Xbox, their internet and their cell phones to go live and work with orphans in African villages without electricity or running water. When they see beyond their own lives and decide to live serving others. Please explain to me the part where that is shit? Or better yet, don't. Because I probably don't even want to hear it.

How exactly are you working hard to alleviate and heal death and suffering by working a 40 hour a week job and collecting a pay-check every two weeks? Do you think that kind of life has merit in the eyes of God? Taking care of family is something even animals do, why should doing what is natural to do be such a high and mighty thing to do? While we can say it is wrong to abandon your family in order to move overseas and help people, what is wrong if a whole family decides to move overseas to do something like this? Are they wrong in not contributing to the precious free market of American economy? Unrighteous because they are living off of the donations of others? BS!

Of course I see no merit in the self righteous actions of guys like Sean Penn or Bono, those guys are just ridiculous. If you are going to go help others with camera crews chronicling your every move and capturing your every "selfless" actions on film for people to gawk at and praise you about, then your motivations are pretty obvious.

The Trawn trilogy was early '90s, and yeah, it was quite good. I think there was a lot of early EU stuff that wasn't half bad. There was also a lot of it that was total crap.It was fun because it was based off of Star Wars, and gave you a way back into that universe, sometimes with stories not even involving Han, Luke, or Leia. You could take what you wanted and leave what you didn't. I'd check them out from the library, usally two or three at a time, since some were ridiculously silly, if I started reading one that was crap, I could just put it down and grab the next one. After a while most of us learned which writers were worth reading and which ones were not.

So, I myself would not condemn everything post 1983, because I have enjoyed some of it very much.

I most definitely have to side with lj on this whole thing. Can hardly believe the retardedness of a lot of what I am reading. He said nothing wrong, but for some reason you are really pounding him into the ground and being a dick. I just don't get it.

"... scruffy looking-- nerf herder!"

"Hey! Who's scruffy looking?"

I always recall that one getting some pretty good chuckles out of people. Sure, nobody knew what a nerf was, but easily got the idea that it was a made up farm animal. That little quip, besides being funny, went a long way in displaying Han's personality. He has just been delivered a whole mess of insults and the one and only insult he responds to his the one relating to his looks.

I cannot even begin to see how sorcerer's ways and hokey religion ended up on that list. If you are going to include those two, I am surprised you did not add "ancient religion" in there, and for good measure, "farm boy", "old man", "ya old pirate" should probably be on their too. They'd make about as much sense being on that list as many of the ones you did put on their. You really are reaching. "Sorcerer's ways" is obviously referring to the use of magic and giving us an idea what the general population feel toward the orders of the Jedi and Sith.

I also don't see anything wrong with "hung of junk". "Walking carpet" was a pretty funny line, but almost unfitting for the kind, caring, diplomatic figure Leia would come to be known as, it is pretty much the equivalent of a racial insult.

And I also always thought the line "bantha fodder" was pretty cool. Bantha is obviously a common animal on Tantooine, and we have already been introduced to one in the first film. Growing up, we'd always use the line pig fodder, since pigs will eat anything, including human flesh if given the chance, and more than one of my friend's families owned pigs. "I've gotta be home by 9, or I'll be pig fodder!" (my mom will be so mad she'll feed me to the pigs if I'm not home by nine).

Wow, did they really? What episode and how? I might have to watch that one...

Tiptup said:

lordjedi said:

Other than that, it's yet another terrorist attack.  What more can be said?

That if the world were a better place . . . we might care a little more? :)

I don't think it is an issue of mankind as a whole (or the world), caring is something that has to be worked out on a more personal level.

Yeah, I freaken loved "The Cage", it is one of my all time favorite bits of Star Trek. I even have a model of Pike's Enterprise.

As for Clone Wars acknowledging the OT much more than the PT did, that most certianly seemed true from the few episodes I watched. I'd say this is due to the fact that many other creative minds are involved in the story telling process, rather than just a single certian individual.