C3PX

Whoa! I did a double take when I saw this thing had resurfaced.

Sean, you have countless threads, the most recent of which is the brilliantly named, "Please Answer My Question Thread".

Hmm, very well Nanner. Ask me for some advice and I shall despense. The hot.like.C3PX advice center is officially open. Advice seekers be warned!

CO had a former life?

What is "TPM"? I am not sure I have ever even heard of this film. ;)

Whoa! Now the real advice starts. I'd listen to Stinky, Sean. He got two (2) invitations for loving from Miss Blessing. This makes him the ultimate ladies man in these parts.

TheBoost??? Seriously, bubalove! TheBoost? What does he got that I don't? Huh? I mean, I can see you giving Don Gaffer the skip, but the 3PXster? You've got no idea what your missin' out on sweetheart!

I bet this is because Bkev questioned my masculinity earlier this week, and bestowed doubts about me into Miss bubalove. Damn you Bkev! Now even Ziz, with his prostetic metal dick is getting in on this action and I am left loney. Oh so lonely.

dark_jedi said:

ALL systems have good and bad to them,none are perfect,that is why I got all 3.

Sky if you were indeed calling both(Microsoft and Sony) or all 3(Nintendo) having "fanboys" then I agree with you whole heartedly.

Sky said just as much in his post. He explicitly stated that all consoles have things worth owning on them.

Even after commenting on the PS3 not being worth the money, especially for someone without an HDTV, he turned around and said he'd like to play MSG4 and GOWIII.

Saying a console has fanboys isn't an insult, nor should it ever be taken as one. It just is. It is a matter of reality. They exist for everything. You have them with cars and shoes ("I only drive Ford, I only wear Nike, everything else is crap!") and ever other kind of product you can imagine.

Never played it. And for some reason I just don't feel interested in it.

skyjedi2005 said:

I think all three systems have games worth owning. 

...

The one system i have not played at all is the PS3 way too expensive and i don't have an HDTV.  No one in my family does.

If i had one i would definetely have Metal Gear IV though that game is frickin amazing the cinema scenes almost look like live action.

Oh yeah and i would probably play god of war III when it comes out, if i had a PS3,lol.

Same for me, I was considering a PS3, but the 360 was far less expensive, had more games I wished to own, and since it has been out longer it has a much larger library of games, and typically a much larger selection of cheap used games to choose from (and I am all about spending as little on gaming as humanly possible while still enjoying it).

The only two PS3 exclusive games I hold any interest in presently are MGS4 and God of War III. I decided I can live without MGS4, and I just saw the E3 video for GOWIII and it really just looks like more of the same, which is fine and I am sure I'd still enjoy it, but definitely not worth the extra cost. Plus, I have really enjoyed the DLC for Fallout 3, which is presently 360/PC exclusive.

On the Wii there are only two games I am really interested in playing, Umbrella Chronicles and Resident Evil 4.

dark_jedi said:

skyjedi2005 said:

I always see the debate online by Microsoft and Sony fanboys

 

What an ass,what a way to start out a conversation,Microsoft and "Sony Fanboys",what friggin Microsoft has NO Fanboys? Wii has NO Fanboys? JEEZ this shit gets very OLD fast.

I have all 3 so am I an all 3 FANBOY?

It seems Sky you hate everything nowadays don't you?

"Microsoft and Sony fanboys" would mean "Microsoft fanboys" and "Sony fanboys". If I say, "DVD and VHS players" I mean "DVD players" and "VHS players" and am in no way suggesting that there are no DVD players but only "VHS players".

Sky was simply pointing out that both Sony fans and Microsoft fans often call the Wii shovelware, and he was saying it isn't "shovelware", and that it and the other two consoles all have good games on them. 

Since you own all three consoles, I would have thought you'd agree with him, and am kind of surprised you reacted the way you did. Just because he suggested that fanboys exist (fanboys: overly obsessive fans who are loyal to their preferred brand to the point of being ridiculous), doesn't mean he was calling everyone who owns that console or considers themselves a fan of it one of them.

As for your question about having all three and if that makes you an "all 3 fanboy" obviously not. By definition fanboys are the type who do nothing but diss the consoles that they do not own. "Oh, you have a Nintendo, that sucks for you, because Nintendo really sucks and has no good games. I have SEGA!!! Sonic is awesome. He runs fast! And he is blue! Is Mario blue? No, didn't think so! He is red. Red is for losers! SEGA rules!" This is a classic example of the SEGA fanboys that plagued my Nintendo loving life as a child. Does this sound like the type of person that would own both a SEGA and a Nintendo? Absolutely not! He'd probably love to have a Nintendo setting beside his SEGA, but his mom and dad wouldn't buy him one, so he bitches and moans about how absolutely awful the Nintendo is and how he wouldn't want to go near one out of risk of being infected with some sucky system virus in order to make himself feel better.

Microsoft and Sony fanboys tend to bash the Wii and talk about how much better their respective console is. This is a bit like saying, "I have a bigger penis than yours, so it doesn't matter if you are banging hotter women than me and enjoying it more while I am sitting at home beating my meat." Who cares what size your penis is, just focus on having fun and pleasing your women so they'll be back for more. In this analogy DJ, you having all three consoles would be akin to the massively hung guy who is constantly getting laid by three women at a time. Some of us have got it all, others are very pleased with our monogamous console relationships (like me and my 360), and others are in monogamous console relationships and secretly resent those who get to participate in a console ménage à trois whenever they wish too.

I know a lot of Sky's posts are exhaustingly complaint filled, but this one had some good points and I felt it was very insightful.

Quite frankly Mr. Dinkins, you don't deserve her! She is attracted to you for your witty quips and your foul oder, but beyond that what do you have to offer her? Abolutely nothing, and you know it! She deserves better than you!

Quadrangle? This things got so many angles they don't even have a name for it.

Stinky-Dinkins said:

Keep in mind you motherfuckers that I just didn't get one Bubalove message, not just one, but two. Two Bubalove messages.

I don't want to cause any tensions between myself and the rest of the forum but it's pretty fucking clear which one of us is Bubalove's favorite, so step the fuck off.

Son of a bitch! I am feeling really undesirable right now. I have been rejected by a girl (or most likely a man) whom I have never met, and it has cut me real deep. Real deep.

You know, it's almost as if this isn't legit.

No, this chick is just has it hot for OT.com guys (especially Stinky). Just not me or Gaffer, and appearently you Vote_for_Palpatine (your jealosy shows, you feel as hurt as Gaffer and I in not having recieved an invitation for love from this linguistically challenged person who claims to be female, and so now you are trying to step on the buzz of the guys who did by trying to convince them it isn't legit). Seriously, take it like a man, and mope like me and Gaffer.

Uh oh, StormtroopersAreBetter, looks like your new girl is already being unfaithful and Zizing it up behind your back.

LOL. This is disappointing. Why don't I get weird psycho women trying to spark romatic online relationships with me while severely struggling with the English language?

I've got to go check out StormtroopersAreBetter's profile, it must be pretty impressive to have made such an impression... maybe I should add some more personal information to mine? Maybe something along the lines of "Likes cat" or "Likes babies" would make me more desirable to lonely women searching the web for love. Not that I'd really care to have a relationship with them, or even talk to them. I'd just be nice to be considered once in a while, you know. I guess two-deminsional cylons just don't hold a candle to close ups of Stormtrooper helmets in terms of sex appeal. Oh well.

EDIT: Just checked out your profile, "Jedi Wannabe (comes before Padawan" damn that is hot! No wonder she is head over heels for you. ;)

I dunno what ***** Pills are, can't think of a five letter word that would need bleep out, but I think I might be interesting in buying some. Mrs. Blessing, you reading this?

CO said:

C3PX said:

As for the Matrix, that is its whole thing. It tries to be as confusing as possible with the intention of the audience mistaking it as being deep and profound. And boy did it work! Every time I hear someone call it "a thinking man's sci-fi trilogy" I start weeping inside.

 

 

 I respectfully disagree.  The Original Matrix is an innovative thinking man sci-fi movie, but I will admit the sequels were trying to be too much of a thinking mans movie, and they become overbloated.

Even though I highly disliked the first film, I can completely see people liking it. The story is interesting enough, and it has tons of mind numbing over the top action scenes that many people totally get off on.

I just can't for the life of me figure out what earns it the title of "thinking man's sci-fi". All of its philosophical ponderings that are supposedly incredibly deep and profound come off to me as typical LSD tripping Whooooa BS. I think that is why I have come to dislike this film so much, perhaps far more than it deserves. Simply because so many people find it inspiringly profound, when it seems to me only slightly less shallow than most other shoot'em ups.

I just can't see it for anything more than sci-fi action with postmodern philosophy (I believe the literal definition of postmodern philosophy is "bullshit", for those of you who are unfamilar with it) thrown in for flavor. Perhaps if I were able to see what others find so profound and thought provoking about it, I could hold it in much higher regards than I do. But postmodern philosophy does nothing but evoke laughter in me (one of the many reasons I love Douglas Adams so dearly, the man knew the stuff was funny).

Reminds me of IGN April fools prank for 2008.

There is usually a reason so many video games to film don't make things 100% like the game. I still maintain that while Link looks really cool and heroic in the game, no one in the real world could ever dress like him and look anything short of silly.

I once checked a players guide for the first Zelda game out from the library. It was an unofficial guide, so it didn't use Nintendo's cartoon Link from the manual on the cover. The cover it did have I found incredible intriguing, and that is when I had first wished they would make a Zelda movie. It was just you typical farmboy like character decked out in a simple brown leather mail, curly blond hair, no hat, carrying a sword in one hand and a candle in the other as he decended a spiral dungeon stairway. To me that cover captured the feel of the original Zelda game perfectly.

If a Zelda film adaption is ever to be successful visually, IMHO, it has to ditch the familiar Zelda imagery which just looks goofy in real life, and aim for the essence of the series. Which is ultimately exploration mixed with adventure, not knowing what is around that next corner or through the next door.

Knightmessenger said:

I think though the biggest problem is the fact they carry the label of "Star Wars." An above average trilogy is greatly hurt by high standard of its predescessors. Same thing with Indy 4. I honestly thought it was one of the better movies of 2008. Did I think it was as good as the other three. Not close.

In other words, movies these days overall kind of suck. Does anyone else think Hollywood needs something like the next Star Wars to get it going again?

I still think the whole, "Well of course they're no good when unfairly measured by the standards of the original!" line of thinking to be complete BS.

Sure, it sounds good, but when you really look into it and think about it it doesn't stand. This is all just speculative, that is all it can ever be, but had the Phantom Menace been its very own film, first part of a brand new series, no prior franchise fame to fall back on, I'd have a really hard time seeing it get two sequels. A really hard time! My mind could not even fathom it. As I am not in the habit of going to see children's sci-fi films, I am sure I never even would have seen it to begin with. It certainly wouldn't have had people lined up around the block to see it opening day. And we certainly wouldn't be discussing it now.

As a film on its own, I can't fairly judge it, because as I mentioned, I am not big on children's sci-fi. Perhaps you could say it was above average rather than completely awful. But I would still have a hard time imagining it pulling off a sequel on its own merits. 

Same thing for Indy 4, on its own merit it was a completely awful, terrible, film. I have often called it a parody of its own franchise it is so utterly ridiculous and over the top on all levels. That film makes shit like the first two Mummy movies look like epics (two films that a lot of people considered to be Indiana Jones knockoffs).

In both of these cases, my feelings are that the movies were only ever given the time of day because of material they were sequels/prequels to, and would have vanished into five dollar bins and obscurity by now had they had nothing to stand on but their own legs. Fortunately for them, they stood upon a very high pedestal, and were given undue attention, and are even forgiven their many short comings by some fans, simply because they felt the pedestal is unfair. In reality, the pedestal is the very reason for their existence.

Hollywood definitely needs something new. They have become stuck in this rut of sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots, and comic book/book adaptions. Name one big summer movie in recent years that wasn't part of some franchise with an already existing fanbase? Anything? Probably, but I can't think of it.

This year we have Wolverine, Star Trek, Terminator, Transformers, G. I. Joe, Harry Potter. We've seen all these things before, they have been in our lives for years. Of course movies are crappy these days. We are perfectly happy to blow our money on Hollywood doing the same thing over and over again. They don't even have to try anymore.

Matrix was too confusing for me and I hated the desaturated color timing for Lord of the Rings.

I think Lord of the Rings was one of the few really well done series in the last several years. I am a huge fan of Tolkien's books, and have always judged the LOTR films rather harshly against its source material. But on their own merit, this films hold up fantastically. If they had one flaw, it was extreme overdose. For three years straight they were hyped like mad, and now you rarely hear them mentioned, I think most people burnt out on them. 

As for the Matrix, that is its whole thing. It tries to be as confusing as possible with the intention of the audience mistaking it as being deep and profound. And boy did it work! Every time I hear someone call it "a thinking man's sci-fi trilogy" I start weeping inside.

You just made my head hurt. Wow, what a mess.

Now that I am thinking about it, it doesn't make sense that both races would have a bird theme going on with their vessels. They all ready had a confusing and messed up think going on here. I've got to give the new movie credit for screwing this up even more than it already was. Let's give a nice big round of applause for Mr. J. J. Abrams!

Looking at this page, http://home.comcast.net/~ststcsolda/klingons/klingons.html (scroll down until you get to all nice little pictures) that Bird of Prey design looks completely out of place among all the other Klingon ships. They all have a certain look to them, and that one particular design just doesn't match. Now seems very obvious to me that it was originally intended to be a Romulan vessel.

And I was wrong in my previous post about Warbird = Romulan; Bird of Prey = Klingon. Both Warbird and Bird of Prey are originally Romulan, as FF said. But that one model of Klingon ship is called a Bird of Prey. There was never a Klingon Warbird until J.J. Trek (except for what was fully admitted to be a writing error found in the Enterprise pilot).

The fanboyesque explaination for the Klingon ship being named a Bird of Prey and looking Romulan is that Romulans and Klingons traded technologies, which is also why the Klingons have Romulan cloaking devices. I am usually not a big fan of contrived fanboy-explain-away-every-inconsistency explaintions, but this one works quite effectively IMHO.

Bird of Prey has always been the Klingon ship. Warbird has always been the Romulan ship. I am pretty sure this is the first time I have ever heard a Klingon Bird of Prey called a Warbird. Never watched much of Enterprise, so I didn't know that the mistake had been made at least once before. Of course there is a difference between an episode of a tv show and a big budget feature length film. I have a feeling that from now on they will be called Klingon Warbirds. Why? I dunno, but I am pretty sure the official reason will simply be, "Nero did it".

Another dumb continuity error (NERO DID IT!!!) is that they mention the Warbirds decloaking in during the simulation. Yet in TOS I seem to remember them making a huge deal about the discovery of the Romulans' ability to cloak their ships. Why would they have been so shocked and awed at the very idea of Romulans having cloaking devices, when they already knew the Klingons had that technology? And why were Kirk and friends so intrigued and confused by the cloaked Bird of Prey in Trek III? Perhaps Klingon "Warbirds" with cloaking devices are pretty standard, but a Romulan Warbird or a Klingon Bird of Prey with a cloaking devices is absolutely unheard of.

The strange things that happen when people who don't even like Star Trek make a Star Trek movie.

If it is the bit I am thinking of, then yes it was.

It is at the part where the droids are being taken down to meet EVE99 to be given jobs.

LOL. I was just going by your comment on dating American girls in Sean's thread.

TheBoost said:

 I've spent all morning watching those films of his on YouTube. I want desperately to by this man a beer... or at least a big hello kitty plush doll, whichever he prefers.

That was the most awesome thing I have heard anybody say in a very long time. I'd like to buy him a hello kitty doll or two myself.

Watching them on youtube? I take it you don't have the DVDs? Bet you could talk someone into sending you a set. I get the impression you live in PAL land? I live in NTSC land and have the NTSC discs, otherwise I'd be more than happy to fire a set your way. Well worth having around.

What I'd do, at the risk of seeming childish (from what you said about her, she seems the sort that would find that charming) would be to get the plush toy and fix the flower in its hand somehow (rubber band, twist tie, or string).

I don't think you'd come off as desperate, but that also depends on how you present it. Since it is something you know she likes, I think the only thing you risk coming off as is thoughtful.

Boost's "I missed you more than I thought I would" for her return is a great line. I'd use it.

"plus all the girls I worked with said the plush would be a good idea"

I have never found taking advice from other girls to be an entirely bad idea. Especially if they are friends of hers or know her personally. They know sides of her you have never seen, and can offer excellent insight or suggestions. You just don't want them, or her, to get the impression you are incapible of coming up with ideas on your own. Personally, I'd think of them a bit like "training wheels", serving a purpose until I got to know her better.

I love Jambe Davdar; he is greatness. I remember when he used to have popularity somewhat akin to adywan, now he is all but forgotten... Been a while since I have Returning to Jedi, watching that youtube clip of it has me interested in giving it a rewatch.

bkev said:

Sorry c3!  I think there was a female member who shared your old ewok avatar back in the dark days of no custom avatars... or I could be wrong =p.  Still sorry!

Nah, I've been around a couple of years longer than you, and I have never once seen anybody else use that avatar, which is the reason I'd use it. Probably still thinking of my dumb h.l.c3px joke.