This user has been banned.
NeverarGreat said:
Had to look up 'cromulent'.
My god these kids.
Such ignorance.
It's almost like:
H: Who's on first.
D: Sure is.
H: Yup.
D: On first.
H: That's what I said.
D: I know.
H: Well good.
D: Happy to oblige.
H: First.
D: Yes.
H: Who.
D: Oh yeah.
Handman said:
Roger Ebert agrees: http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/lucas-demonstrates-potential-of-digital-video-with-attack-of-the-clones
He seems to claim that AOTC's fuzziness on film was part of Lucas's agenda to push digital projection.
The craziest part is that it's perfectly plausible, knowing Lucas's pathological M.O.
Right now I'm listening to the Gideon's Bible in my hotel room tell me about all the stuff it's seen go on in this room.
Is that normal?
And are all codices of sacred text so foul-mouthed and smut-minded?
TV's Frink said:
Ok...another conservative.
Wait...WHAT?
I resent your insinuation! I'd sooner go to the Democratic National Convention than tolerate being lumped in with those filthy conservatives!
Eewwwww.
Definitely my immediate reaction too.
Oh I think Koryo is actually quite open about his conservatism.
It's called "self-referentiality," Frink. I would think you'd be familiar.
...
To the solipsistical megalomania, that is.
Gorgeous photos and illustrations!
Now if only some enterprising person would invent the technology necessary to convert oral conversations into written text form!!!!!
Guess I'm just a dreamer, too...
Hey don't blame me. I think it's Norwegian. The "G" is silent.
Wait--we're not supposed to say "apologists" anymore?
Booooo.
Well there does tend to be a lot of overlap between the following classes:
Defenders of the SEs/PT
Complete Idiots
So you do the math.
Heero Yuy said:
Almost as idiotic as trying to retroactively make Star Wars all about Darth Vader.
Oh yeah, and you know that "Clone Wars" thing to which Star Wars alludes?
All about Boba Fett.
...
WTF?
The abject failure of the SEs and PT is as much about misguided fan service as it is about megalomaniacal solipsism.
George Lucas = "Luk'-ee Ta'-lent-less Hak"
With a story by George Lucas...and executive produced by George Lucas...
Blech! Double blech!
I'm just going to answer the OP's query by channeling my inner Vadur:
ahem--
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
What kind of demented weirdo would call Star Wars "A New Hope"?
If you said to someone, "Hey I watched A New Hope last night," no one would have any idea WTF you were babbling about--it sounds like some kind of Christian self-help show from a women's-oriented little-known cable channel.
If on the other hand, you said "Star Wars," I suspect there's only one goofball in the world who would pretend not to know what you were talking about...
I can't believe people are defending the "livelier" Mos Eisley.
An establishing shot of two weightless cartoon droids slapping each other like Stooges? Cartoon dinosaurs that completely distract from the actual action of the plot? [By dwarfing the Stormtroopers. Now when C-3PO says, "I don't like the looks of this," the only rationale reaction by the viewer is: I guess he is scared of giant dinosaurs.]
AntcuFaalb said:
2. It's not about "better" or "worse". It's about preserving film history.
For me, it's pretty much about better and worse. To belabor your metaphor,. the SEs aren't as if Leonardo "improved" a masterpiece with incongruous elements--it's more as if Leanardo's deranged uncle scrawled a bunch of crude pornographic day-glo doodles all over it.
You know who doesn't give a shit about "canon"?
Everybody involved in the production, marketing and distribution of anything in the Star Wars franchise. It's all just made up as they go along.
The only people who care about "canon" have no official position or affiliation with the actual creators of the unending river of schlock. In other words, there is no "official canon". The only people who try to foist a "canon" interpretation are obsessive, completest fanboys who, much like students of theology, will always have an enormous, incoherent, internally contradictory morass of bullshit to engage, in a vain and goofy quixotic mission to make meaningful that which is meaningless.
Ever since Stale Bores - Episode the First: The Random Premise, the whole "universe" has been hopelessly inconsistent and intertextually irreconcilable.
There is no canon--only more nonsense.
Plus, I'm sure stalker means it would parallel "The Force Unleashed," but for 99.9% of the potential audience, it would just sound like a clumsy past tense [The Force [then] Awakened, contra the Force [that has been] Awakened], which would be inconsistent with all the other titles.
Fang Zei said:
When you think about, that must've been a cool, clever way of surprising everyone. It's like "oh, by the way (like it's nothing), this is Episode V, not Episode II."
I wonder what all the fanzines and newspapers (and, heck, the nascent internet) made of it in the days after Empire hit theaters.
It was definitely the most "post-modern" piece in ESB, which had otherwise jettisoned the nostalgic pastiche of SW.
I would think it was a fantastic idea to this day, if Georgie hadn't screwed the pooch so badly by trying to retcon in three whole failures of movies just to justify and elaborate that sly wink in 1980.
Undecided. Guess it will depend on how well it suits the mood and premises of the new flick.
TV's Frink said:
You guys spend way too much time thinking about Star Wars.
Pot calls kettle black.
Is objectively accurate.
For Force's sake no VIRGINAL CONCEPTIONS or any similar ham-fisted "myth-making" derived from boring-ass Catholicism or Christianity, two of the least interesting, least compelling and downright pathologically perverted goat-herders' ghost stories ever.
That means no resurrection (of Vader, Luke, or anyone else!), no messianic prophesies, no stigmata, no angels (I'm picturing some kind of celestial space-mermaid materializing to give guidance)...