PREVIOUSLY ON AS THE DEATH STAR TURNS:
C3PX and Xhonzi split up over Xhonzi's non commitment to Fallout 3. Meanwhile in a shocking revelation, Negative -1 claims to be carrying Zombie84's child, but can't seem to get in touch with him to break the news...
Fink has officially sold out! Every thread is a plug for his edit.
I was just thinking about the term "actual LOL" that invaded the internet a few months ago and has now replaced "LOL" (which in itself was already an incredibly annoying term); and I realized how comical it is that "LOL" has become so lightly and frequently, that someone felt the need to distinguish when they were actually laughing out loud, and when they were just saying "LOL" to indicate that something was funny, even if it wasn't funny enough to cause them to really laugh.
Even more amusing is the fact that "actual LOL" seems to be well on its way to replacing "LOL" outright, which will make us ask the question, I wonder if this is a real actual LOL?
And how about those people who verbalize the term "LOL" in actual verbal conversation? One day my reflexes will get the best of me and I'll end up getting into a lot of trouble for smacking someone.
LforLiving said:
I didn't see the US version of LOM, I heard it was quite bad though.
That WHAT?!? US version of Life on Mars? That is ridiculous! Life on Mars is a fantastic show, who in their right mind would ever think of making other versions of it? Not even the Americans would do something that dumb; that would be like someone repainting Mona Lisa because they think she should be blond, or that she would be better received among a Nordic audience if she were blond.
No, fortunately LOM is only a show from the UK. Wait... This pretending the parts you don't like don't exist joke is getting kind of old these days, isn't it?
Bingowings said:
The ending of the UK LOM is a good example of a 'not explaining it all' ending.
Agreed, as much as I enjoy A2A, the ending to the UK LoM is perfect. It doesn't explain it all to you and leave a lot open for interpretation, but over all it is an extremely satisfying ending. I had always hoped Lost would kind of go that path and leave a lot of mysteries a bit vague.
^ Not because he used it, but because his use of it was as irrelevant and nonsensical as his use of the term "nigga-rich".
I find myself feeling much the same way as 005 on this topic. I'd much rather side with the little guy than the giant money making entity, but in this case it does feel like LFL should own the rights to the design. I actually agree it would be pretty cool to own a Storm Trooper helmet made by the guy who manufactured the original ones, but it also sounds like he uses a bit of dishonesty in his marketing (original molds, which would truly be something, but simply isn't true), but even so, he should be paying royalties like everyone else who manufactures and sells replicas. He didn't even design the thing in the first place, really doesn't feel like he should have any claim whatsoever on this.
I used to work in home construction, I worked on a few houses that used the same blue prints, I even made a few "deliberate creative decisions" along the way, adding my own signature to those houses, but it doesn't mean I have the right to go build that exact same house today. I have no claim to those blue prints, which are copyrighted material and belong to the contractor I worked for. If I went out and built a house on my own using his design, he'd have every right to sue me. In the same way, a guy who works at McDonald's for several years has no right to quit and go into business on his own making and selling his own Big Macs, even though he spent years "manufacturing" the things. A similar two patty hamburger under a different name would be just fine, but using the McDonald's trademarks to sell his burgers wouldn't.
If this guy hadn't been blatantly using LFL copyright logos and calling them the LFL trademarked name, I don't imagine we would ever have heard about this story, and even if we did, I think the guy would have had decent legs to stand on.
twooffour said:
Oh, don't get your panties in a bunch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKd35EmCIx8#t=75
My panties aren't in a bunch; while I am not a huge fan of the term, my question mark is because you used it COMPLETELY wrong. Presumably just so you could use the word "nigger" and sound cool.
I am really excited about seeing any remnant of the wampa scene that exists on this new set. I've been an obsessive wampa fan ever since I first saw The Empire Strikes Back, and the cut wampa subplot has always been my favorite bit of behind the scenes Star Wars lore. I never really thought I'd ever get to see parts of it in motion though.
twooffour said:
And we know who.
;)
Well, all but one of us knows who...
They get VATs on that thing and I am enlisting the very next day.
Today is a bit of a stretch too.
twooffour said: the company already got nigga-rich...
?
twooffour said:
A Wizard Did Cumming.
Are you just going to keep repeating variations of that sentence?
Can the term "meme" really be used here? Isn't it more of just a small inside joke within the community?
Feels like that term gets used more and more loosely all the time.
Ah, I should have figured it be some sort of a fail.
danny_boy said:
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
danny_boy said:
The 1080/24p Attack Of The Clones was blown up to fill an IMAX screen which has a bigger surface area than the conventional 70mm screens (that the 35mm Star Wars was blown up to**)----with no complaints.
My friends and I saw pixelization in the theater during AOTC on a normal sized movie screen.
12/03/02 10:15 PM
I just saw Attack of the Clones on IMAX and here is my question:...But I looked and damned if I could find ANY pixelization, vertical or horizontal. How do they do this?
That solves it them, Puggo and his friends definitely didn't see any pixelization.
twooffour said:
TV's Frink said:
twooffour said:
... Whatever
"NO PICS OF GUYS IN THIS THREAD."
Sounds like someone may have tripped over the dancing fat kid while masturbating.
twooffour said:
TV's Frink said:
Fink, I think you made him get a little assinjured.
twooffour said:
Also, why are you so sure that post is about my "magnificence" if you didn't read it? :p
Never read a short post from you that wasn't, so I am just assuming your longer posts are just heavier doses of the same shit.
But I could be wrong. In fact, it is very likely I am just embarrassing myself right now.
twooffour said:
Exactly :D
Unless you'd like disagree with any of the above? ;)
Well, actually I didn't read any of it. *snicker* I just think it is really funny when you write massive posts that prove how magnificent you are that nobody will ever bother reading.
twooffour said:
Oh, you don't like that? How about "8yr old"?
I still vividly remember these kinds of tactics from 2nd grade mobbing and schoolyard "arguments", from both sides of the fence:
-Taking a random word, or stock expression, of the opponent, and repeating it with an OTT "mocking" voice and face expression.
It doesn't have to be actually risible, or snobby, or anything, to be spoofed as if it were.
-Stupid Sarcasm. Same as above, just with strawmen (or paraphrases) instead of direct quotes - say something that is supposed to represent the opponent's position, accentuated by phrases like "of course" or "you see" or "not at all!".
The sarcasm encryption mode is the simplest there can be - "sentence"="opposite of said sentence; it's dumb".
-Repeating the same identical insults or dismissive remarks when they don't fire the first time. Or the second time. Or the third.
So if you have any interest in not coming off as an 8 year old child or stereotypical blonde bimbo (who is mad and angry), watch out for those dead giveaways.
Seen this kind from you guys quite a bit in the recent weeks, and it's always pretty damn hilarious :D
Yay! I love this part! This is the part where twofortwo explains in great detail just how wrong everyone else is while he manages to be the epitome of perfection.
Nope.
When I upgraded my VHS set to my fullscreen 2005 THX Faces box set I remember feeling blown away.
doubleofive said:
So, yes to "2004 version" (they would have shown new effects by now), and possible yes to "colors messed up in a different way".
Kind of funny, for the first time I've felt that more changes couldn't be anything but an improvement at this point; which may actually be the first time ever that no real content changing meddling is done.
Too bad Lucas wasn't feeling this lazy back in the mid nineties.
TMBTM said:
So you pretty much want to see everything eccept the sand storm scene, Ken.
E-c-c-e-p-t is now my new preferred spelling of both "accept" and "except".
