Father Skywalker

Wexter said:

Father Skywalker said:

Wexter said:

Father Skywalker said:

I aint sure if cloning is immoral or moral, that depends on what the laws/government says and what your religion says.....

Then i am glad we have the constitution and The Bible, otherwise I would just walk around killing people without thinking twice about that.

Cloning is not immoral in and of itself (by that logic, having twins and triplet babies is immoral and evil and wrong!!!!!); it's is only wrong if it violates the laws and rules of the nation/country that you live in, or it goes against your faith or spirituality or religion the god that you love and trust and believe in.........

I appreciate your sarcasm though!!!!!

 

I am just saying that the idea of manufacturing human beings for fighting and dying in battles would not generally be considered alright. It is a prime example of how the prequel star wars galaxy (and apparently you as well) is removed from general humanity and common sense.

Good observation, good point.......

Also, how can I quote more than one other user in a single post???? I hate, I can't stand, double posting and triple posting!!!!

Bingowings said:

Father Skywalker said:

In other words-the Old republic had child soldiers.........

Hmm, that sounds so moral and nice and alright and good!!!!!!!!

Technically speaking yes and if we are meant to care for Artoo and Threepio were should also care for the sapient machines in the Confederate Army too.

They are programmed to kill they have no choice.

Yet we are supposed to cheer the Jedi (with their brainwashed child warrior monk novices) as they slice them into bits while they make weird comic sounds.

It's really hard to like the PT Republic.

Sapient machines??? They were just droids and robots, disposable objects . I have a theory that George Lucas made the Confederacy of independent systems (oh, such an American Civil War allegory-they wanted to leave the Union/USA-oh, I mean the galactic Republic), have an army of droids and robots so that he didn't actually have to show real people/soldiers getting killed in war, to make it light-hearted for the little kids/children who watch star wars, they just see people fighting robots, cartoonish fantasy violence, not like the true horrors of war......

adywan said:

Father Skywalker said:

I don't like episode 5 because of all of the totally confusing and random plot holes, like, no mention of any planets that the second death star had destroyed yet, or was planning to destroy........

Have you even seen these movies or are you just trolling? I'd say the latter because no one can be that stupid

I aint trolling..... Trolling is when u type in stuff for the sake of getting other users pissed off and annoyed for the hell of it.... I have no reason to do that, i aint in the mood to do that now, and even if I was, I wouldn't do it, because I dont want to get banned. I was banned off of Jedi Council Forums, and halo forums by the mods there, and the ratchet and clank insomniac forums too, so, even if I wanted to, I would not troll anywhere, especially in a fun site like this one......

I am just confused at the star wars storyline..... For instance, the Death Star's usage, etc......

1990osu said:

Now you're pushing it;)

No, i just don't understand the storyline......

Bingowings said:

There's the bit where Obi-Wan is being shown around the cloning facility by that New Zealand supermodel.

You see the babies in little lightbulb things and she explains they use accelerated aging and education machines to get the troops to be mature enough to fight in a short period of time.

So yes it's a production line just like the droids.

In other words-the Old republic had child soldiers.........

Hmm, that sounds so moral and nice and alright and good!!!!!!!!

Bingowings said:

There's the bit where Obi-Wan is being shown around the cloning facility by that New Zealand supermodel.

You see the babies in little lightbulb things and she explains they use accelerated aging and education machines to get the troops to be mature enough to fight in a short period of time.

So yes it's a production line just like the droids.

In other words-the Old republic had child soldiers.........

Hmm, that sounds so moral and nice and alright and good!!!!!1

NeverarGreat said:

Getting the thread back on track a little, I couldn't disagree more with the review of ESB. That it is said to have "no character development", "no plot", and "no emotional or philosophical point to make" makes me think that the guy didn't even see the movie. To me, ESB is the soul of the Star Wars story:

"For my ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us, and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around you!"

"I don't believe it!"

"That is why you fail."

This is a far more emotional and philosophical angle than the dry exposition by Obi-wan in the original movie, and I think that it really guaranteed the immortality of Star Wars. As to having no plot or character development - what about having Han and Leia fall in love, or having Luke confront the idea that his worst enemy may be his father? Makes me think that the reviewer was just trying to get a rise out of people.

I quite like hearing other viewpoints, however. Everyone needs to let Father Skywalker alone. It's viewpoints like his that give these forums some life, otherwise it would just be people agreeing with each other all day. You have to remember that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view. Father Skywalker is a good friend.

I don't like episode 5 because of all of the totally confusing and random plot holes, like, no mention of any planets that the second death star had destroyed yet, or was planning to destroy........

adywan said:

Father Skywalker said:

Cloning is not immoral in and of itself (by that logic, having twins and triplet babies is immoral and evil and wrong!!!!!);

Are you serious? They are two completely different things. One is created  by nature while the other, cloning, is created by science. Not the same at all.

You gotta obey the laws of the land; if the law forbids cloning-then don't do it!!!!!! Other than that, it's is the same concept-clones and twins-genetically identical organisms!!!!!

Wexter said:

 

 

Father Skywalker said: 

I'm am still very confused on why you dislike the prequels..... 3 of my friends are prequel-fans....2 of them love all of the prequels equally, one of them says that he loves episode 3 but he finds episodes 1 and 2, as just merely ok, and meh......Do you hate/dislike the prequels trilogy because they ruined the mystery of the originals trilogy??? Do you believe that the prequels trilogy was ireedemable, and regardless of how it could have been better or improved, it's existence, is, in and of itself, bad, and it ruins the originals????  

RESPONSE: 

 

 

I believe the prequel trilogy could have been done well, but it would require some clever, inspired and creative writing. Unfortunately, the only creative impulse that went into the writing process was "faster, more intense!". Then there was the execution. The actors were mediocre to terrible, the effects were done mostly digitally, which may have been a great idea back then, but now they mostly seem terribly dated. And that is just scratching the surface.

 

Father Skywalker said:
The noble Old Republic used armies of clones; why is that wrong???  

 

RESPONSE:
Is this even a serious question? How about the same reason we haven't yet cloned a human being? Because it doesn't seem right. Basically the Clone Wars were about Republic pitting their artificially manufactured disposable human beings against the armies of disposable machines. And everyone was so degenerated that it didn't even strike them as a moral dilemma. Now if "Clone Wars" (which was established as soon as Episode IV) was in fact about this dilemma - and the bad guys would be in favor of such policy - that would make an interesting conflict.

Another thing; going to war with the Seperatists was a stupid idiotic decision and unjust war, let them leave your nation/country, they aint hurting anybody????

Hey, check out the redletter media plinkett mike stolkassa revenge of the sith review, the entire review is funny and awesome (yes, he does make some vulgar comedy too), but it's is mostly comedic and satirical, with some good serious points about the prequels trilogy, though..... A mixture of both; he made a good point that the clones should've been cloned monsters from a mysterious planet in outer space, created by Darth Sidious and Darth Tyrannus (aka count dooku) that attack the galactic republic and start a war.......

Coruscant looked all peaceful and shiny during the prequels; it's is a friggin war!!!!!!! I apologize for the euphinisms profanity if anybody here is offended by that!!!!! During the second world war, entire cities (yes, with civilians) were destroyed and worn-out!!!!!!

Or, my original idea, is that the clones should've been extragalactic beings!!!!!!!

Wexter said:

Father Skywalker said:

I aint sure if cloning is immoral or moral, that depends on what the laws/government says and what your religion says.....

Then i am glad we have the constitution and The Bible, otherwise I would just walk around killing people without thinking twice about that.

Cloning is not immoral in and of itself (by that logic, having twins and triplet babies is immoral and evil and wrong!!!!!); it's is only wrong if it violates the laws and rules of the nation/country that you live in, or it goes against your faith or spirituality or religion the god that you love and trust and believe in.........

I appreciate your sarcasm though!!!!!

Bingowings said:

You have seen the prequels right?

Yes, Yup, Yeah!!!!!!

Wexter said:

Father Skywalker said:

Wexter said:

Pffffffss... blonde Natalie Portman. What's next, yellow Sam L. Jackson?

Stop making racist jokes!!!!

Now liten, you stop telling me what I can or cannot say. I wasn'? being racist in any way. Would this joke be okay if Samuel L. Jackson was caucasian? Well, he happens to be black.

Viva political correctness. Now we have African-American Jedi Knights.

OK, i apologize, politcal correctness is stupid and idiotic, i'll will give you credit on that, I misenterpreted you, I apologize..... I didn't know you were making a general joke about a person with yellow skin, regardless if they are a caucasian/white or black/african american person.........

U R correct there, people need to stop interperting racial/racist inuendos into everything!!!!

adywan said:

Father Skywalker said:

Yes, but how do you know that moff tiaan jerjerrod was on it when it blew up?? Remember that the guys were evacuating on it at the ending; nothing ever confirmed whether or not grand moff tiaan jerjjerod escaped!!!!

Check the deleted scenes on the blu-ray. They were about to blow up the moon of Endor when the Death Star was destroyed, so no, he didn't escape

Key words here-deleted scenes-=Non canon........

George Lucas or Lucasfilm had never stated if deleted scenes or scripts are canon or not.....Either way, please send me a link of that........

That contradicts the movie/film..... Darth Sidious was too busy dealing with Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker to order the second death star to fire on endor; remember how they were just seconds away from forming the laser to destroy Yavin IV when grand governor moff tarkin died during the explosion???? There was not a scene like that, even in the deleted scenes, for Mr. jerjerrod or during episode 6, correct me if I'm am wrong on this detail..... Where did that name come from anyways; the movies/films or the novelizations/books???

Wexter said:

Father Skywalker said: I'm am still very confused on why you dislike the prequels..... 3 of my friends are prequel-fans....2 of them love all of the prequels equally, one of them says that he loves episode 3 but he finds episodes 1 and 2, as just merely ok, and meh......Do you hate/dislike the prequels trilogy because they ruined the mystery of the originals trilogy??? Do you believe that the prequels trilogy was ireedemable, and regardless of how it could have been better or improved, it's existence, is, in and of itself, bad, and it ruins the originals???? RESPONSE: I believe the prequel trilogy could have been done well, but it would require some clever, inspired and creative writing. Unfortunately, the only creative impulse that went into the writing process was "faster, more intense!". Then there was the execution. The actors were mediocre to terrible, the effects were done mostly digitally, which may have been a great idea back then, but now they mostly seem terribly dated. And that is just scratching the surface. Father Skywalker said: The noble Old Republic used armies of clones; why is that wrong??? RESPONSE: Is this even a serious question? How about the same reason we haven't yet cloned a human being? Because it doesn't seem right. Basically the Clone Wars were about Republic pitting their artificially manufactured disposable human beings against the armies of disposable machines. And everyone was so degenerated that it didn't even strike them as a moral dilemma. Now if "Clone Wars" (which was established as soon as Episode IV) was in fact about this dilemma - and the bad guys would be in favor of such policy - that would make an interesting conflict.

How exactly did they make clones??? Those Jango Fett clones looked like middle aged, like 40 year yr old men. By that logic, Anakin Skywalker should have aged decades at the end of episode 2.......How did they make the clones so fast??? Like a factory assembly line??? Sorry, I apologize if me asking all of these questions and opinions is annoying to you, but I just didn't pick up on that in the movies.......

I aint sure if cloning is immoral or moral, that depends on what the laws/government says and what your religion says.....

TV's Frink said:

Father Skywalker said:

I apologize if my extreme punctuation annoys you or anybody else too, it's is just an OCD habit; if it gets annoying I'll will stop it.........

Did he survive the explosion of the second death star or not???

a) It's annoying - please stop

b) Of course he didn't survive.  It blew up.  You know what happens when something blows up?  Everything ends.

xhonzi said:

And then the DSIII blows up.

THE /END.

Yes, but how do you know that moff tiaan jerjerrod was on it when it blew up?? Remember that the guys were evacuating on it at the ending; nothing ever confirmed whether or not grand moff tiaan jerjjerod escaped!!!!

Im gradually trying to cut down on the punctuation thing......

Bingowings said:

What's racist about that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????????

Next you'll be saying Darth Maul is racist against black and red skinned people with bad teeth and horns.

A yellow-skinned samuel l jackson is racist because it is pointing out that he is a black guy with brown colored skin; whoever wrote that (forgot the user's name) was making a racistl joke.......

Wexter said:

Pffffffss... blonde Natalie Portman. What's next, yellow Sam L. Jackson?

Stop making racist jokes!!!!

Wexter said:

Father Skywalker said:

I worded my opinion the wrong way, I apologize, not for offending anybody here, but for my own stupidity in expressing my opinion (s).........

I meant, I enjoy the original trilogy far more knowing the storyline of the prequel trilogy, knowing that the two are connected to each other; on their own they're are nowhere near as awesome as they are combined, on its own the Original trilogy is awesome, yes, I didn't mean to deny that..........

 

You didn't offend me, just saying that knowing the so-called backstory may actually make me enjoy the originals less. Just from the top of my head - Darth Vader was actually originaly a whiny idiot, the noble Old Republic used cloned armies to fight their war for them. I prefer to purge every memory of the prequels from my head before watching the original trilogy. 

 

Father Skywalker said:

Did he survive the explosion of the second death star or not???

Of course he did, he is made of naquadah.

I meant, was grand moff Tian Jerjerrod on the second death star (DS2) during the explosion??? I'm am still very confused on why you dislike the prequels..... 3 of my friends are prequel-fans....2 of them love all of the prequels equally, one of them says that he loves episode 3 but he finds episodes 1 and 2, as just merely ok, and meh......

Do you hate/dislike the prequels trilogy because they ruined the mystery of the originals trilogy??? Do you believe that the prequels trilogy was ireedemable, and regardless of how it could have been better or improved, it's existence, is, in and of itself, bad, and it ruins the originals????

The noble Old Republic used armies of clones; why is that wrong??? Another thing, I have no clue how they make clones in the star wars prequels, in real life, a clone has to grow in his mother's uterus/belly like any other ordinary baby does in a pregnancy, and then it ages and grows up normally, not like you get a machine and get a complete adult clone within a matter of days/weeks........ 

Bingowings said:

Return Of The Jedi is approaching the lack of quality shown in TPM .

Make Mark act as tired as Harrison and Ian as limp as Moff JarJarRod and it would be on the PT naughty step.

Whaddya mean by that???

Bingowings said:

Return Of The Jedi is approaching the lack of quality shown in TPM .

Make Mark act as tired as Harrison and Ian as limp as Moff JarJarRod and it would be on the PT naughty step.

Who do people call him grand moff Jerjerrod??? That sounds like such a goofy name!!!!! It sounds a suspicous lot similarity to Jar Jar Binks!!!! Where was that name ever mentioned???

I apologize if my extreme punctuation annoys you or anybody else too, it's is just an OCD habit; if it gets annoying I'll will stop it.........

Did he survive the explosion of the second death star or not???

Wexter said:

Father Skywalker said:

In my opinion, you people are all very biased against the prequels because you are very nostaglic about the good ol days of the originals trilogy; however, in my opinion, neither trilogy is all that good on its own, but when combined together, the star wars saga and series is awesome and it's is my favorite science fiction/sci-fi story of all time!!!!

OK, I gotta be serious for a moment, because I strongly disagree. While the movies may not be flawless, the original trilogy works perfectly on its own. On the other hand, if it weren't for the OT, a decade later the prequels would be completely forgotten, or at best remembered as an example of terrible blockbusters, such as Battlefield Earth or The Independence Day. 

I worded my opinion the wrong way, I apologize, not for offending anybody here, but for my own stupidity in expressing my opinion (s).........

I meant, I enjoy the original trilogy far more knowing the storyline of the prequel trilogy, knowing that the two are connected to each other; on their own they're are nowhere near as awesome as they are combined, on its own the Original trilogy is awesome, yes, I didn't mean to deny that..........

Tyrphanax said:

Well the "Empire-as-Good" theory is just for fun or playing devil's advocate.

Star Wars as it stands alone is a very black-and-white film (which is proven in the opening scenes of Star Wars by the black contrast of the imposing, inhuman, armoured, obviously-evil Darth Vader against the stark white walls of the Tantive IV and the "soft", feminine, human, obviously-good Princess Leia in her white dress; because of that, you instantly know who's good and who's evil). It's very simple: the good guys are the good guys, and the bad guys are the bad guys. The good guys don't have to show remorse, because they're killing bad guys; it's like in movies where they kill Nazis, you don't have to show remorse, because Nazis are just evil, no other explanation is required.

Also there's really no cause for them to kill Owen and Beru, or to blow up Alderaan over some stolen plans; that's hardly an eye for an eye. Plus the Empire did the whole "Great Jedi Purge" thing which was pretty evil just to be evil, Anakin was murdering little children and stuff; that's not really a "good guy" thing to do.

Grey areas only enter into it when you get into the EU, but the films themselves are pretty cut-and-dried as far as who the good guys and bad guys are.

From my religious point of view, "bad guys" dying, even if they are evil Nazis or imperial stormtroopers, like the ones in Star Wars, is a very sad and tragic thing; because, exactly, they're are evil. Evil people go to hell and suffer for all of eternity, and THAT is the reason that I am against the idea of "war is glorious war is awesome, fighting bad guys is fun and awesome"!!!!!! If they had lived and repented of their evil ways, they would turn good and have a happy eternity in heaven......Anyways, religion, spirituality, isn't all that relevant to this topic, or the main point that I'm am trying to prove....... I just mentioned that, because, it was my opinion on wars........

I find that/it very hard to believe that the Rebellion Alliance is fighting the Galactic Sith Empire because "Darth Vader dressed in black armour and has a scary, imposing samurai helmet and a deep voice and deep scary breathing" and that the "Princess Leia is a very pretty feminine looking pretty young lady"........

Here's is your reasons on why the Sith, and/or the Galactic Empire is evil.....

Killing Owen and Beru Lars

Destroying Alderaan with the first Death Star

The Great Jedi Purge

And here are my responses to you.... Everything evil that the "bad guys" had done was a response to the Rebellion Alliance. 

True, yes, that was very evil. However, would that have ever happened if the rebellion alliance had never existed??? No.

Again, the same concept and idea as what I had written above..... If the Rebellion alliance had never existed, Alderaan survives and no destruction of billions of people!!!!! I will quote the official Star Wars website to prove this!!!!!

The Death Star was the code name of unspeakably powerful and horrific weapons developed by the Empire. The first Death Star was an immense space station that carried a weapon capable of destroying entire planets. The Death Star was to be an instrument of terror, meant to force rebel worlds into surrender under the threat of destruction.

While the massive station is evidence of the evil nature of the Empire, it was also proof of the Empire's greatest weakness -- the belief that technology and terror were superior to the will of beings fighting for freedom. The Rebel Alliance was able to defeat the Death Star threat, as well as a second battle station constructed after the first's destruction.

The Great Jedi Purge. Again, it was a response to the Jedi, who were perescuting the religion of the darksiders, and were a threat to his power, because they were persecuting him......

Maybe I'm am wrong on that last point. Didn't Darth Sidious want to exterminate the "Jedi" for revenge, for vengance??? What was that all about??? The movies don't say why they wanted revenge (like darth maul mentioned in episode 1, or the tite of episode 3 itself.... I don't get that!!!!! Can you please help give me some answers/explanation on the meaning of "The Revenge of the Sith"......

Besides, I'll will most certainly agree with you on that, Order 66, operation knightfall, and the great jedi purge were all not only evil atrocities, but would have happened anyways without the existence of the rebels....

However, that was 20 years ago, the quadrillions/trillions of imperial citizens don't want a war to be waged in which their millions of stormtroopers families member will die to enact vengeance on that, many of whom had nothing to do with that..... The Great Jedi Purge was done and over with, during the time of the original trilogy!!!!!!

They only destroyed one planet with the death star; they had no plans to destroy other planets on a mass scale, they never did that!!!!

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Father Skywalker said:

Darth Vader was once a handsome, long-dark-haired man, and that sounds pretty kickass and awesome in my opinion......

The story as portrayed in the OT is:  Anakin was a great Jedi, a kind and trusted friend, who was lured by the dark side and sadly became the cold-hearted villain named Vader.

The story as realized in the PT is:  Anakin was a whiny, egotistical, immature, narcistic, moral-less untrustworthy jerk, who became a seriously badass dude in a cape and mask named Vader who can strangle people with the force.  Frankly, I might even trust Vader more than Hayden.

I personally prefer the first version.  That's why I don't care to see Hayden in ESB, ROTJ, SW, ANH, or anywhere else in the OT.  Sebastian Shaw's Anakin was a kind and trusted friend.  Hayden's Anakin was a twit.

(that's not a knock on Hayden - he is capable of good acting)

Exactly; I can at least agree with you 100% on that-even though he looked exactly like young Darth Vader (pre-suit) should have looked (in Episode 3, yeah), how the hell/heck can his story be a "tragic Hero" or a "fallen hero" storyline, without the "hero" aspect???? When Hayden Christensen smiled, he looked like a kind man, he could pull that off, yet, his personality had none of those traits in episodes 2 and 3.........

Don't blame Hayden Christensen for the bad acting, blame George Lucas, he wrote the script, Hay Chris just chose to go along with that!!!!!

Imagine if Hayden Christensen was given a far better script and character storyline as a kind, compassionate, friend and young Jedi!!!!!!!!!! Ahh, the perfect and ideal dream, but too bad that never happened.......

Let me ask you one question... Would U be fine with Hay Chris if he wsa given a better dialogue script and Anakin Skywalker was given a better personality like was stated during/in the original trilogy???? I would!!!!

Tobar said:

Hayden Christensen's performance in the prequels was below subpar. It was simply dreadful.

Just his acting is enough to condemn his casting but since we're now discussing looks.

They should have cast someone that looked like a young Sebastian Shaw. Which means he should have had dark hair like Leia which would have left Padme with blonde hair.

But that error can be traced back to their casting during TPM when they were comparing child headshots to publicity photos of Hamill as Luke.

Are his looks relevant or totally irrelevant to your negative opinion of Hay Chris as the actor playing the young Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader??? If so, I'm am much more willing to listen to you......

A blond Natalie Portman playing Luke and Leia Skywalker's mother??? Meh, nah.. I liked the brunette padme amidala in episode 3... Hayden Christensen had dark hair, just like his daughter!!!!

Tyrphanax said:

I did read your post, and I don't agree with it.

I cringe because I don't like the Prequels and his face reminds me of them, and the disappointment he was as Anakin Skywalker, and I don't want to think about the crappy Prequels when I'm watching the good Original Trilogy. Him being "pretty" doesn't enter into it; I'd rather it have been someone ugly who had played the part better (though this is largely the fault of Lucas being a bad writer/directer and relying too much on greenscreen instead of practical effects rather than Christensen's acting, which I have heard is at least passable in other films).

Regardless of that, the Anakin Skywalker I grew up seeing in Return of the Jedi was Sebastian Shaw, not Hayden Christensen.

Do you hate/dislike Hayden Christensen's portrayal as the young Darth Vader because he was very good-looking, in like a pretty kind of way, but still very handsome and tough and "badass" with long dark hair and evil eyes looking kinda way (like a warrior or a heavy metal singer(, or because of his acting???? My brother would agree with you, he is not a big fan of Hayden Christensen, but according to him, it has nothing to do with his looks or his face, that is totally irrelevant to him, he even admitted that Hayden Christensen is a handsome man, but that doesn't matter to him-his acting was terrible and basically crap, in his opinion....... 

Well, you wanted an ugly Anakin Skywalker actor???? By my brother's logic, that is totally irrelevant either way; he likes and enjoys good acting, he doesn't care if an actor/actress is good-looking or fugly ugly!!!

If I'm am that shallow as to judge male (or female too) actors by mere physical appearence and externals, I would judge Hayden Christensen on a very high level; I had this debate with other users on another, a different Star Wars forum message board website-the Jedi Council Forums......

Darth Vader was once a handsome, long-dark-haired man, and that sounds pretty kickass and awesome in my opinion......

My question is-why all of this hatred and dislike and cringe-worthy attiude towards Hayden Christensen????