C3PX

Vaderisnothayden said:

DarkFather said:Vaderisnothayden, there is no dishonor in throwing your hands up and admitting you are wrong, when you are plain as day: dead wrong. Just ask C3PX.

Why do you assume I'm wrong? Because you're less good with faces than me and can't see that those two guys actually have quite different faces? Most people are hopeless with faces. I'm not. I know what I'm talking about.

That is kind of  funny argument. Essentially what you are saying is that nobody else here has a right to an opinion (or at least their opinions have to be wrong) on this because, we are all clearly horrible with faces, and you are a self proclaimed face expert.

Using the same sort of argument, I could do as followes:

Why do you assume you're right? Because you are less intelligent than me and can't see that I am right and you are wrong? Most people are hopeless with their intellect. I'm not. I know what I am talking about.

Blah. I'd flame my own self if I went around making assinine claims like that.

Whether you think you are brilliant with faces or not, it doesn't matter. To some of us, they look strikingly alike. To the people who did the casting, they must have looked strikingly alike. It is good enough for most of us. For you it is a disaster, but that is fine if you feel that way. Some of us don't agree, you'll just have to tollerate our opinions.

Sorry for making fun of you, the whole situation came off as very humerous to me, and it felt good for a few laughs. Meant nothing against you personally. Notice even Dark Father and I disagree sometimes and poke fun at each others opinions, it doesn't mean I don't respect his right to an opinon.

You were right in saying it doesn't seem like I respect your opinion when I made fun of it. I have already made clear how I feel about what your opinion is on this matter, which proves I have no respect for that exact opinion. I guess what I meant when I said that I respect your opinion is that I respect you and your right to have an opinion, I don't think any less of you for your opinion, but I still think your opinion (being the idea that they look so different we ought to assume George left out parts of the story explaining some conspiracy) is rather silly. Make sense?

Let's say I believed Hitler could read the minds of dogs and communicate with them, and present you with some loose evidence that makes me draw this opinion, and I go on to tell you that it was actually a cockerspaniel name Lucy who was responsible for the atrocities of WWII that are credited to Hitler. You see, Lucy was the mastermind behind it all, and she hated the Jews, and wanted to conquer the world. Hitler was actually a decent fellow, but was manipulated and fooled by Lucy into doing the things he did... Shall I go on? I doubt you could have any respect for this opinion, and would find it over the top BS, which it very well is. You could tease me about it, and show disrespect for the whole idea, even teasing me a little about it, and still value me as a friend or aquaintance and respect the fact that I have every right to believe Hitler was a good guy and Lucy was essentially Satan in dog form.

All this to say, I respect you as a valued member of this board, I do very much enjoy having you around, I don't hold anything against you for the Boba Jango theory even though I think it is a stretch, and I am sorry if I offended you here, I will try hard to refrain from making fun of your ideas in the future.

Anchorhead said:

Take off the rose-colored glasses fellas. That scene is as well-written as anything that's come before.....

*switches to Scotty voice*

.....aye, and a damn sight better than some of 'em too.

_____________________________________________________________

 

....

 

I really didn't see anything particularly terrible about most of the quotes you posted. You took them out of context, which has the ability to make a lot of things sound dumb. I have always loved Khan's insane ramblings, I thought the one you quoted was quite good.

That cramps line is just Bones sense of humor. Even if these lines represent the worst of the old Trek movies dialogue, then I feel good knowing not one of them is half as bad as, "I like this ship! It is exciting!".

see you auntie said:

Obi Wan in the prequels has a mole on his forehead where Alec Guinness' Kenobi does not. Zomg Conspiracy. The original Kenobi must has died on Tatooine post episode 3 and some older dude (that would explain the age discrepancy) must have taken his identity. Maybe some evil jedi who planned o lure Luke to the dark side through lying to him about his father!

Hey! That's my conspiracy! I came up with it first!

And actually, I am going to have to agree with TheBoost, the more I look at it and think about it, the more amazed I am at their impressive casting job.

No, the MPAA is the Motion Picture Association of America. They are to the film industry what the BSA and the RIAA are to the software and record industry, respectively.

Rating movies is just one of the things they do. Between rating movies, they take time out of their busy day to moan about fire sharing, which causes well made high quality films like 2003's Hulk to bomb at the box office (no doubt, had the film not been leaked onto firesharing sites two weeks prior to its release, it would have been quite successful).

PSYCHO_DAYV said:

WHY NOT BOTH THE MPAA AND RIAA? 

 FF mentioned video files, so naturally I mentioned MPAA.

But yeah, in my conspiracy the MPAA, the RIAA, and the BSA have all joined forces to carry out these dirty deeds.

Vaderisnothayden said:

It seems like you believe that if you don't agree with the thinking in a particular viewpoint then it means there must be no reason in the viewpoint. That strikes me as a narrow view. People's views don't have to be to your tastes to have any sense to them.

Far, far from the truth. I think I have demonstrated that plenty on these forums. I may have an unfortunate tendency to express my opinions rather strongly, but I realize my opinions are just that, opinions, and I have a good deal of respect for those of others.

My point was that it is unreasonable to suggest that they go about anaylizing every aspect of an actors face to make sure every little thing matches up to the point of being able to truely convince someone that one actor is the other actor when he was a kid (but only when they appear on screen together, otherwise they can look as glaringly different as Hadyen and Loyd or McGregor and Genius). Sure, when casting such a role I expect them to make it believable enough, which I feel they did just fine. I also find it unreasonable to take a poorly done casting decision and use it to conclude that some character in the story was lying, because you in real life were not convinced actor B makes a good young version of actor A.

I liked the Boost's comment on Obi-Wan getting rid of the original Anakin and replacing him with some other teenage boy sometime between Ep. 1 and Ep.2. Likewise, regardless of what Lucas intended for the story, I am convinced that sometime between Ep.3 and Ep.4, Obi-Wan must have been discovered and perhaps killed, and an undercover agent of the Sith was put there in his place (which is the Obi-Wan we see in Ep.4). His job was to get Luke to leave Tantooine and go to the Death Star to get captured. Probably he was never real? An illusion made by Vader, which is why he vanished suddenly when Vader touched him with the lightsaber.This must be true, because it is obvious Ewan and Sir Alec are two different people. They don't even share the same moles on their faces.

I have nothing against your opinion in the matter, I simply disagree with you and think you're being rather unreasonable in your efforts to nitpick this film, which is quite frankly such an awful pile of crap of a film that it hardly deserves the honor of having someone pick its nits,

Vaderisnothayden said:

Reason works fine in this one. As my second post demonstrates. There is plenty of reason in my viewpoint. It seems like you believe that if you don't agree with the thinking in a particular viewpoint then it means there must be no reason in the viewpoint. That strikes me as a narrow view. People's views don't have to be to your tastes to have any sense to them.

Meanwhile we have two distinctly different looking guys pushed at us side by side while we're being told one's a clone of the other. Now THAT doesn't make sense. 

The bottom line is that it is a movie. Those are the actors they chose to play those too roles, and by the script one is a clone of the other. Maybe they were way off on casting. I personally am not bother by them being played by two different people. They look well enough alike to me, there are so many giantic flaws in that film, I can't possibly care too much about this issue, which to me seem like a nonissue.

Ask youself this, if the film has been smack you in the rear end fantastic, would this still bother you?

If young Boba had been blond haired fair skinned, then I'd be right there with you. But they got a kid with the same complexion and hair color as Morrison, and I think the kid is plenty passable for a younger version of the older actor. Far more so than Hayden is to Loyd. Or Puppet TPM Yoda to ESB and ROTJ Yoda. Covering the kid's face the entire movie would be nonsensical (about as nonsensical as having Boba Fett in the story to begin with, actually), I think it would be dumb of them to do that just out of fear that a few viewers are going to come to the obvious conclusion that the two characters are not played by the same actor.

Obviously Yoda was originally intended to be Obi-Wan's master and Lucas messed it with Qui-Gon and had to retcon it all with the flimsy "Ah, but Yoda was his Kindergarden teacher" BS. No sense in defending it. It is lousy storytelling defined.

Good post Gaffer, exactly some of the stuff I was going to say, but you beat me to it.

No, I meant the MPAA.

Sigh

I'm not trying to defend the prequels, I am just trying to defend reason. Looks like me and reason lost big time on this one...

Perhaps they should have shaped it like a cube, and called it the Planet Destroyer 5000.

Dude, I think you need to realize that these are movies, and that there needs no proving that Daniel Logan isn't a clone of Morrison. I agree with you though, Lucas was pretty lazy in the whole thing, he should have just gone the whole way and had Morrison cloned, and used his real life clone to play the part of the young clone troopers and little Boba...

So, I guess your theory also includes the clone troopers not being clones of Jango either, since the child clone troopers shown in the movie are portrayed by Daniel Logan. But then again, the adult clone troopers look exactly like Morrison. Hmm, complicated stuff. I bet there is some conspiracy where there are actually two clone armies being made, one as clones of Jango Fett and an entirely different army cloned from Boba Fett (who may or may not be Jango's son).

Perhaps next you should see if you can get Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher to do a DNA test to prove once and for all that Luke and Leia are not siblings. Because that is something I'd really like cleared up, been bugging me since I first saw Jedi.

I don't feel that it is lazy story telling. It is not like they did the trench run again, it was a new design with new flaws, and the story around it was done completely different. Would it have made a difference to you if it had been a doomsday weapon with a different shape and name? As far as superlative weapons go, the Death Star is a pretty sweet one, what better way to end the trilogy.

I always hate these stories where the bad guys have a really good idea on their hands, then abandon it 100% just because the good guys luck one time and put an end to it. If I were in charge of the Empire I'd accept the loss with the first Death Star, and get at least to more into production immediately and throw whatever money necessary at keeping their construction quiet. 

Using the Death Star as bait in ROTJ in order to draw the rebels out squash them was a pretty good plan actually.

I'd keep absolutely nothing, not even the things I like. I'd have the whole thing redone from scratch.

It be hard to make a decent remake of the original trilogy, because they have always been such well known and famous movies, but rather than make another SE of them, I'd say go ahead and make an entirely new saga from the start on. The originals would still be around and entirely untouched, I'd rather have my guys do a remake than glue bits and pieces onto old films to try and make them look new.

You missed the point, Boost. It isn't a charity thing on Lucas' part, it is a contractual (and therefore legal) obligation which he is getting out of by claiming that Return of the Jedi (one of the most sucessful films of all time) has yet to turn a profit. Just because other studios do it does not make it right.

It is also no secret that George has a thing against Prowse, so, as Mielr already asked, is Prowse the only one being told this, or are all actors getting the same treatment.

The whole old Spock contrived bit of continuity management annoys me to no end though.

It would be like Casino Royale, if Casino Royale had felt the need to explain why Bond was going on his first mission in modern times, when he has been a kickass spy since the 50s. It was a reboot, didn't need to be explained. We knew we were starting over from scratch, back at the beginning, none of that stuff from the other films has ever happened.

I was excited back when I thought it was a straight up reboot, but this whole alternate timeline bit is dumb, and makes more problems than it fixes.

Imagine this scene at the beginning of Casino Royale.

Pierce Brosnan as Bond: What do you have for me this time R?

John Cleese as R: For you next mission 007, we will be sending you back in time to re complete your for mission for... (insert long winded and contrived reason here) ...the only catch 007 is that you will not be able to return to this time.

Bond: You're joking! Your sending me back to the 1950's to re complete my first mission as a 00 at the Casino Royale? What about the young version of me? Won't I just get in his way?

R: Well here's the thing 007, you WILL be the young you, and you wont be in the 1950's, it'll be now... it is complicated, don't make me explain, just do you job, will you?

Brosnan Bond steps through glowing portal and comes out the other end as Daniel Craig. Bond theme plays loudly in background.

Hunter6 said:

From:

http://chud.com/articles/articles/18883/1/STAR-TREK-THE-WRATH-OF-A-REVIEW/Page1.html

Tonight was the world premiere of JJ Abrams' Star Trek in Australia... or so everybody thought. Paramount actually secretly brought the film to the Alamo Drafthouse in Austin, Texas, where a crowd had assembled for what they thought was a free screening of Wrath of Khan. When the show let out excited reactions hit Twitter; while I've been highly and vocally skeptical about this rebootquel, the responses - especially from a couple of other skeptics - have me heartened.

I'd be so pissed, thinking I was going to get to see the Wrath of Khan on the big screen for free, only to witness Abrams pulling his pants down and taking a giant crap on the big screen before my very eyes.

Okay, so I am just kidding. Even though I have my doubts about the new film, this is really cool that they did that. That was an obvious outreach to fans, as they would be the only ones taking up the offer for a free screening of The Wrath of Khan. Really cool way to have a free, ST fan only, exclusive screening of the new film. Had they announced it was the new playing, hoards of folks outside fandom would have invaded, including the media. Whoever was behind this whole idea, very impressive stuff.

Dude, the AT-AT could have been sleeping, or just resting its head, large all terrain armored transports get tired too you know.

I never really saw the throne room as "set-like", but maybe it is.

Return of the Jedi does have a number of silly flaws. One of the biggest ones is the explosion Han and Chewie set off. The come running out of the bunker and stand clear, watching and waiting for the explosion, and BOOM. The thing explodes, camera zooms out, and we see the thing exploding big time, Han and Chewie shoudl have come out of their charred, hairless and in little pieces. Too busy making a huge and attractive explosion to realize what a dumb logical error it was.

So yeah, I very much agree with you. Many little things like snuck by in that film.

DarkFather said:

It means I watched it, and I liked it. Period.

Holy shit! Out of this incredibly pointless argument/discussion/whatever, these amazingly profound words were written!

I hope everyone realizes that these words can be used for Return of the Jedi as well. I watched it, I liked it. IMDB and DarkFather's opinion both be damned as far as I am concerned.

I paid to see the Dark Knight, I was really excited about it, only to find myself fighting to stay awake during a really shitty movie. DarkFather obviously disagrees with me on this. And I don't care. I hated Dark Knight, loved ROTJ. What does this really say about either film?

Absolutely nothing!

Gaffer Tape said:

Well, it just depends on the time frame of when the movie was made.  If it's Star Wars, then Vader's the evil, young apprentice.  If it's Return of the Jedi, then Vader's the old contemporary of Obi-Wan (which is why he's Sebastian Shaw).  And if it's through the lens of the prequels, then both of them are suddenly pretty young.  That's what happens when you make it up as you go along.

For some reason I have always had the impression that Anakin was younger than Obi-Wan. Just the whole, "he was a pupil of mine" thing has always made me think of him as younger. Even in Return of the Jedi, Vader being Obi-Wan's evil young apprentice was true, only now it has been revealed that Anakin and the evil young apprentice were one and the same.

There was no reason for Obi-Wan to make up the evil young apprentice thing, which would ultimately not be true by any point of view or stretch of the imagination if he was referring to his friend who was the same age as him.

I think the type of relationship we needed to see in the prequels was two young men who had such love and respect for each other that they were like brothers. Instead, we got the irritated father and resentful son sort of thing going on. You never get much of an impression that Anakin cares all that much for Obi-Wan, even when Obi-Wan is captured in Ep2 it is Padme who wants to go rescue him, while Anakin was content to follow orders and sit and sulk (my goodness those are awful movies!!! even just drawing up memories of them is painful!)

The Bob Dylan song made no sense at all, they obviously just wanted to put that song in the show, but it is pretty contrived. The fact that the ancient gods came from stories past down by our distant Colonial ancestors worked well enough for me, and actually made more sense than anything else would have. But why would Bob Dylan have written a song in the 1960's identical to one written by some one else millions of years before?

Also, don't mix up your mythologies, Johnny. The "prophecies" and the gods all turned out to be total bunk. In the end it was the Cylon's one true God that was calling all the shots and pulling all the strings. So all of Roslin's stuff with the Priestess, the scriptures, and the gods is meaningless superstition in the over all story, none of that contributed to them finding earth. 

According to Ronald Moore in one of his podcasts, the original intention was that Sam wrote All Along the Watchtower and played it for Tori. Not clear on all the other details of how it lead them to the old Viper (I guess the official explanation is "God did it"), but that is why it lead them to Earth I instead of Earth II. 

If you think about it, it wouldn't make any sense for it to lead them to Earth II, because at this point it has nothing to do with Earth II, as Bob Dylan won't be born for a very long time after Galactica's chronology. It was a song from their past lives on Earth I.

The whole idea was that those bits of Earth culture were passed down from our Colonial and Cylon ancestors.

Obviously the 12 constellations were made up and named by people. Nature provided the stars, but it took human minds to see figures in them and build stories behind them.

My list, in the order I was exposed to it in life,

I am a fan of all three OOT movies, ROTJ very much included. For me it is original or nothing, I don't watch the SE or any fanedits of it. Adywan's stuff is kind of fun to watch once or twice, but it would never come anywhere close to replacing the real thing.

I love a lot of the old games, spent countless hours playing them, Star Wars and The Empire Strikes back for the NES, X-Wing, Tie Fighter, Dark Forces, and yes, even Rebel Assault 1 and 2.

When I crack open an old mid nineties issue of Insider or Star Wars Galaxies and see all those ads for (then) upcoming novels, comics books and other merchandise, it reminds me how much I really loved some of that stuff back then. To me, back in the nineties the good far out weighed the bad. I don't see the need to hate it all just because some of it sucked. So many fans give the Trawn trilogy a hard time because it has Luke drink a cup of hot chocolate. Yeah, sure, that wasn't the best idea to include a popular earth drink in the book, but it was hardly a major plot point and very easy to ignore considering the series was as good as it was.

I enjoyed some of the comic books as well. Particularly the stuff that had to do with other facets of the galaxy other than the Empire, the Rebellion, the New Republic, or the Jedi. There was a one-shot Tales From Mos Eisley comic book which I thought was fantastic, it was a collection of short little Twilight Zone esque stories told by patrons of the Cantina. I loved them, because the only thing they had to do with Star Wars, was they took place in that universe.

I really liked the Dark Horse Droids comic books too, for much the same reason as the above, it showed a whole new perspective of the SW galaxy, that of a young boy rich boy (R2 and 3-PO are his care takers) whose parents own a company that builds space ships, and are trapped in a fued with a dangerous and dishonest rival. No Empire, no Jedi, good stuff. Didn't care too much for the later issues though, the first six part arc was the best. 

Boba Fett is the other comic series I liked a lot. It wasn't the Boba Fett we knew from the movies (though we really didn't know him that well anyway), and if the second issue was not humorously titled "When the Fat Lady Swings" (showing a picture of large brute of a creature swinging an axe Boba Fett on the cover), and if I had not found it in a bargain bin for 99 cents, I never would have even considered reading them. I ended up liking that first one I bought well enough that I went ahead and nabbed the first and third issues, as well as a few other one-shot Fett comics, which turned out not to be very good.

For me, the EU stuff started to get old and I began loosing interest in the late nineties, and by the 00's I really had no interest in Star Wars at all beyond a few video games, an eventual DVD release of the original trilogy (which, being the GOUT, barely turned out worth waiting for), and the two upcoming prequels (which didn't turn out to be worth waiting for).

Mielr said:

skyjedi2005 said:

Too bad you have to be a member.  I am never paying to use Lucas online ever again much less ever resubscribing. 

 

Sky, I don't have a Hyperspace membership anymore- and I was able to take the survey (?) 

It tells us to please login to take the survey. I guess you can get a free non-hyperspace account.