Gaffer Tape

User Group: Members
Join date: 2-Jun-2005
Last activity: 13-Nov-2019
Posts: 7,996

Post History

Post: #254003
Topic: Star Wars most inconsistent plot point, in my opinion: Star Wars Lethal Alliance game
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/254003/action/topic#254003
Time: 29-Oct-2006 11:10 PM

Originally posted by: Nanner Split

Chewie was given the pieces of C-3PO by Darth Vader in ESB!

huh? That makes no sense at all. We clearly see Chewie stumble into the incinerator room and grab the big box of parts.

That's actually referring to how Chewie got them back, rather than how he found them in the first place. Remember that he left the parts in Leia's room before Lando took them to Vader. Then they were imprisoned. So the question always was: how did Chewie get the pieces back after that? I suppose I could see Lando doing that. That's the only thing that makes any sense to me.

Post: #253826
Topic: Star Wars most inconsistent plot point, in my opinion: Star Wars Lethal Alliance game
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253826/action/topic#253826
Time: 28-Oct-2006 3:41 AM

Before we get totally railed for this descrepancy by Go-Mer, let me just point out that Sith has, indeed, been around since the beginning. It was never used in the movies until the prequels (just like the name Palpatine, for example), but the term Sith has been used in Darth Vader character descriptions since before the movie even came out.

Post: #253669
Topic: Forgotten Films
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253669/action/topic#253669
Time: 26-Oct-2006 11:44 PM

Weird. Oliver and Company has had at least two releases in my lifetime, one of them only a few years ago, I believe. I love that movie.

Post: #253668
Topic: Star Wars Wall Paper I Made!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253668/action/topic#253668
Time: 26-Oct-2006 11:43 PM

Heh, that sucks, but it's really funny. Couldn't he have specified "full word" rather than occurring within another word?

Post: #253618
Topic: Star Wars Wall Paper I Made!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253618/action/topic#253618
Time: 26-Oct-2006 8:18 PM

Yeah, the whole giant "I" marketing campaign of that movie was huge. We didn't know the title until about six months before it was released.

Post: #253616
Topic: Revenge of the Nerds OR Punk is Dead...
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253616/action/topic#253616
Time: 26-Oct-2006 8:14 PM

Funny stuff, but I'm kinda surprised. All the punk people I know are much nicer than that and most of them are nerds themselves. It's weird seeing them act like they're cool.

Post: #253612
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253612/action/topic#253612
Time: 26-Oct-2006 8:05 PM

Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I don't think Lucas will make it to 91 years old, but even if he did want to change them further, I'd still want to see them.

And by the way, I have been collecting all of his versions that he has officially released, so if he ever happens to put howard the duck into one of the versions, I'll just go back to my 2004 DVD if need be.

So in other words, you just admitted that it is possible for him to do something to the movies that you wouldn't like and wouldn't accept as canon?

Post: #253545
Topic: Hyperspace: Yep, I Think that Something is DEFINITELY up for '07!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253545/action/topic#253545
Time: 26-Oct-2006 2:49 PM

I don't know, though. I think he may have shot himself in the foot with the oversaturation of the Star Wars market. For the 20th, he had managed to nicely bring Star Wars back into the mainstream but not overdoing it, so that when he announced the special editions and theatrical re-releases, everybody jumped on the bandwagon. But for the 30th, we just finished years of the prequel trilogy as well as ad infinitum releases of the original trilogy. It's not exactly the best time for a "revivial."

Post: #253544
Topic: McCallum on Jar Jar & Kids before TPM came out
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253544/action/topic#253544
Time: 26-Oct-2006 2:47 PM

Honestly, I find Jar-Jar to be a decent character as well. It was a funny article, though, especially with the MST3K commentary that just pointed out all the flaws in what Rick was saying.

Post: #253521
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253521/action/topic#253521
Time: 26-Oct-2006 12:50 PM

Are you satisfied, though, with the prospect that he might never be finished? Are you willing to buy every single version until he does? And are you so willing to discard every previous version along the way? If so, I just don't and can't understand that.

Post: #253451
Topic: Video Games - a general discussion thread
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253451/action/topic#253451
Time: 25-Oct-2006 11:35 PM

Well, I got the first part, I think, assuming it's, "You speak Japanese, too?" After that, I'm lost...

Post: #253449
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253449/action/topic#253449
Time: 25-Oct-2006 10:57 PM

And I, of course, feel it would be better to leave well enough alone. It's fine the way it is.

Post: #253428
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253428/action/topic#253428
Time: 25-Oct-2006 9:41 PM

I think rumors have been posted here in the past that Williams was interested in inserting the Imperial March into the first movie... which is insane.

Post: #253397
Topic: my memory isn't that bad, is it? (in SW '77 - Luke misses with the grappling hook?)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253397/action/topic#253397
Time: 25-Oct-2006 7:38 PM

Here's an idea. Take a CD of the complete score and try to figure out whether the extra time needed to throw the cable twice would be accomodated by the amount of music. If it doesn't fit, it doesn't exist.

Post: #253396
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253396/action/topic#253396
Time: 25-Oct-2006 7:37 PM

I doubt that. And I doubt Williams wants to bother enough with Star Wars anymore to completely rescore three films he scored 30 years ago.

Post: #253372
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253372/action/topic#253372
Time: 25-Oct-2006 5:34 PM

Because it wasn't there originally. Case closed.

Post: #253368
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253368/action/topic#253368
Time: 25-Oct-2006 5:04 PM

Hell, I thought A New Hope wasn't added until 1981!

Post: #253227
Topic: Star Wars Wall Paper I Made!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253227/action/topic#253227
Time: 24-Oct-2006 7:35 PM

Well, as long as we're on the topic of posters, I know that a lot of people have expressed their affinity for the SE posters. And I agree that they're good-looking posters, but they, as well as the '04 covers, have the same thing going on: they represent the three movies visually as a trilogy. And, yeah, it sounds good when I put it that way, but it doesn't honor them as individual movies. For example, think of the original poster artwork. Each movie had the main cast in the look and situations they would be in that movie. Also, since they're right here, take a gander at the prequel posters. Each one has the main cast of the movie in an image that reflects the movie. Now look at the '97 and '04 artwork. For Star Wars, both have the main cast of Luke, Han, Leia, and Obi-Wan. All is good. But then you get to the sequels, and it seems like they feel compelled to use all the new characters and all the characters that weren't pictured previously. Neither ESB cover has any of the three main stars on it. Can you imagine a movie poster for any movie that emphasizes the cast but doesn't feature the stars of the movie? And while I don't mind the '04 covers as much as most of you here seem to, I have to admit that the ESB cover has a particularly weird assortment of characters: Vader, Lando, and Yoda? Granted they're all major characters, but if you hadn't seen these movies before, you'd think that the star of ESB was Vader, and that he has a whole new cast of adversaries to fight against. I just felt that's something I wanted to add to this discussion.

Post: #253222
Topic: Star Wars most inconsistent plot point, in my opinion: Star Wars Lethal Alliance game
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253222/action/topic#253222
Time: 24-Oct-2006 7:28 PM

Well, I'm in the process of re-reading the Zahn trilogy, and the backstory for the prequels that was used there was much preferable to what we actually got. I particularly enjoy Mara's line about how Vader lost his right hand as a punishment for letting the Death Star be destroyed.

Post: #253196
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253196/action/topic#253196
Time: 24-Oct-2006 5:16 PM

Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen
Oh, hahaha, yeah that's why I just edited out the double-post part.

But, um, it was there, and Gaffer Tape is not a raving lunatic.

Okay, now I'll have to double post and say that, as I was writing that "lunatic" post, I thought it would be funny if you went back and altered that part out, and how similar it would read to the change in The Hobbit, where there is an answer for a mistake that no longer occurs. And you played right into that. ^_~

Post: #253194
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253194/action/topic#253194
Time: 24-Oct-2006 5:14 PM

You know, I almost added in my last post that somebody would say something about the amount of time in between CE3K's changes and Star Wars's changes. Uncanny.

Post: #253190
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253190/action/topic#253190
Time: 24-Oct-2006 5:11 PM

Thanks to me, you didn't double-post. Problem solved.

Post: #253188
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253188/action/topic#253188
Time: 24-Oct-2006 5:09 PM

Because that's apparently the way it is around here lately. Only George is the devil. Everybody else has "legitimate" reasons or "inoffensive" changes that "actually improve" the movie, while George's changes are horrible and wrong because of our subjective stance and love for Star Wars.

Just wait. Within five minutes, somebody's going to post something in Spielberg's defense about E.T., which is always the same defense. For the last time, people, if you're against changes being made in movies (or any type of art) be consistent! You can't just say one man's changes suck simply because you think they suck. A change is a change is a change, and if you don't like one of them based on that principle, you can't seriously be in favor of others.

Post: #253037
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253037/action/topic#253037
Time: 23-Oct-2006 8:21 PM

While I am not exactly commending Darth_Evil for that Lucas death wish, I have to play semantics with you, Go-Mer, and point out that he said "one of these days", hence the future, hence not any of those time frames you mentioned.

Post: #253035
Topic: Here's my stance
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/253035/action/topic#253035
Time: 23-Oct-2006 8:14 PM

It's silly to compare novels to textbooks and encyclopedias. And if you are, then it seems like you're quite in favor of revisionist history, since those kinds of books are frequently revised, and for good reason. But to say that one branch of fiction is free to be edited and re-edited while you bitch and complain about another branch of fiction being edited and re-edited just makes you sound wishy-washy. It's all the same thing. And like Obi Jeewhyen and I have already said, Tolkien had already covered his bases by saying that The Hobbit was Bilbo's lie. To change The Hobbit after that was counter-productive to that plan and is very much in line with Lucas's idiotic changes, in my opinion.