Gaffer Tape

Yes, but if we're talking about a supposed ultimate truth, unquestionable, unchanging, would you really be satisfied with the possibility that you were getting a faulty version just because it's something you feel nostalgia for? I mean we are talking about something that has been so heatedly debated, taken so seriously that people have been attacked, shunned, and even died because of it.  I dunno.  That just seems like something I wouldn't leave in the hands of nostalgia.  Seems like something I'd want to get right.

Warbler said:

Gaffer Tape said:

Well, honestly, if you want to look at it that way, the KJV is also an SE.

yeah, I know what you mean, but to me it isn't.  It is the Bible I used all through Sunday School.  The Bible they had me memorize verses out of.  It is not an SE to me.

Strictly speaking, though, if The Bible (original manuscripts) is a divinely inspired work, does your opinion really matter?  Wouldn't alterations/misinterpretations make it less The Bible than it should be?

Well, honestly, if you want to look at it that way, the KJV is also an SE.

Ew.  That sounds like solicitation.  Don't want to hear it.

Bingowings said:

This is obviously wrong.  Every year I was in college, my school, The University of Mississippi, was ranked #2 party school in the nation by Stanford's polls.

Oh, and NOW Frink gets Boy Meets World references... harumph.

This thread is now about...

Wil Wheaton!!!  Why not?  With this new power I have gained, I glanced around my room for inspiration, and the first thing my eyes landed on was his book, Just A Geek.

Okay, too much violence for my virgin eyes.

THREAD IS OPEN!!!

doubleofive said:

You know, I no longer look at Jar Jar as the downfall of Star Wars anymore. It's the rest of the stuff that's so bad.

- The small universe: Chewie and Yoda being BFFs was the last straw
- The lazy ties to the OT
- The things that were simple facts in the OT are now lies or stretches of the truth:
Uncle Owen never thought Anakin should have stayed and not gotten involved, Leia couldn't have remembered her real mother, Obi-wan never directly served Leia's father in the Clone Wars, Yoda wasn't the Jedi Master who instructed Obi-wan
- and more, I'm sure.

Agreed with all of this, and let me just add the fact that George never can figure out if he actually wants these to be prequels or not.

Let's remember (as a lot of people misuse this term) that prequel is short for pre-sequel.  It is a sequel that chronologically comes before its predecessors.  And George sucks the teets of that premise for all its worth.  "Hey, look, it's C3PO as a young, naked man!  I remember him from the original movies!"  "Hey, look, it's Chewbacca hanging out with Yoda!  I remember them from the original movies!"  "Hey, look, it's that ship Darth Vader walked onto in the original movie!"  "Hey, look, it's the Death Star from the original movie!"  The prequels hardly have any life to them that's not leaching from the original films, yet...

George would rather you believe they're not prequels in the first place and instead are just literally the first three movies of the Star Wars saga... totally undermining every ridiculous in-joke and reference he makes in them!

YOU NO MAKE SENSE, LUCAS!!!!

Wow.  What a terrible idea.

Hmm.  I'm going to be riding a plane in about ten days, so I'd be interested to see what's up with that.  I actually did quite a bit of traveling by plane last summer, and that was really my first time to do so since 9/11, and I have to say I didn't find it bad at all.  Certainly nothing on par with what I just read in your post.  Of course I'm not saying you're exaggerating in the least.  I just find it odd that your country seems even more "gung-ho" about the whole thing.  That does sound pretty terrible.

Oh, and just out of curiosity, since this particular parenthetical caught my interest, why would traveling in your kilt be impossible now?

TV's Frink said:

Darth Solo said:

*pant pant pant*

Lol, Gaffer's pic isn't showing up...which makes it look like Darth is panting over the previous picture:

Well, damn.  By that logic, I never posted a picture in the first place and shouldn't be on warning.  Although, I am a bit sad.  I knew I broke the rules, but I was just trying to make a weird, weird man happy on his birthday, so I was hoping CMG would give me a mulligan on that.  That's like giving a guy a ticket for running a red light to get the littlest cancer patient to an amusement park.

Same here.  Whatever audio job is done for the SEs have absolutely no bearing on the real movies, and it certainly won't be enough to convince me to buy them.  I admit I would give them a small amount of kudos if they prove themselves to be actually competent for the first time in a while, though.

C3PX said:

While you may not feel it is a very big deal, it is still providing airport security a image of your naked body, and a lot of people are not going to be comfortable with that. I simply do not think that type of invasion of privacy is necessary. It is taking things way too far.

Akwat Kbrana said:

I think another reason many are less than enthusiastic about this release is that we've been double-dipped by LFL in the past. ("That's like putting your whole mouth right in the dip. From now on, when you take a chip, just take one dip and end it.")

When I say I absolutely will not buy any Star Wars set that doesn't include the OUT, it's not just vitriol; I'm really genuinely not interested in the least to see George's "improved" versions, regardless of resolution, audio compression, or format. Even if the color timing was corrected and the audio mix was, as kenkraly2007 is fond of prognosticating, "fixed," I still couldn't care less. These aren't the movies I'm looking for.

That feeling is just intensified when I remember paying full price for the trilogy on DVD in 2004 only to shell out again two years later when the GOUT was released. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. I'll gladly wait until until a decent transfer of the OUT is completed before buying another Star Wars product. If that time never comes...oh well, it's not like I'm interested in any of the other cheaply-made, soulless, mass-produced Star Wars garbage coming out these days.

I might as well have written this post myself because it's exactly what I'm feeling.  I already own:  the '95 Faces VHS set, the '97 SE VHS set, the 2004 DVDs, a DVD transfer of the '95 Faces Laserdiscs, and the 2006 GOUT (having thrown away the 2004 discs that came with it).  I don't think I own anything else that many damned times.  I have little use for any more versions, especially considering the GOUT is the only thing I still watch, and I sure as hell am not going to free up any shelf space for anything that's not the original version.

C3PX said:

Gaffer Tape said:

1.  Is this some new high-tech "remove clothes" beam rather than the traditional "I'm a haunted house reject" X-ray machine?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/13/manchester-airport-naked-security-scan

Okay, I have to say that article makes it sound much better than I thought.  First off, it's in Manchester, so it's not even an American concern at the moment.  Second, it's entirely optional.  If you want to save time, would rather not be patted down, and don't mind "one officer in a remote location" seeing your goodies "before it is deleted," then you have this option.  I can see the concern people might have in it becoming a mandatory practice, but for the moment at least, it's nothing of the sort.  And since "they cannot be stored or captured in any way," Warbler's jack off material concern is moot.  Not to mention it doesn't really look all that sexy.  So for right now, I really don't see anything wrong with it.  Since it's optional and given a clear alternative, it seems the people will decide how far a system like this gets.

Warbler said:

if you were a female 16-40 or whatever age, would you not be afraid that pics of your body were being used as jack off material? 

You yourself may have no problem with nudity, but surely each person has the right the make up his/her mind about that, don't they?  Especially when the nudity involves his/her body itself. 

Well, again, this is why I'm asking questions.  I still don't know if this is any different from any other X-ray machine.  Because, honestly, there's a philia for everything, and if someone would really feel titillated seeing a photograph of my skeleton used to see if I have a box knife hidden away up in my prostate (oh, wait, I'm a female in this hypothetical scenario, so... other body cavity I guess), well, I gotta say it's really not gonna bother me that much.  It's not as though if that kind of image shows up on the internet, I'm going to get calls from relatives saying, "Oh my gosh, I just saw photos of not only your naked left tibia but your scapula on a paysite!"  So, yes, I still have my two questions:

1.  Is this some new high-tech "remove clothes" beam rather than the traditional "I'm a haunted house reject" X-ray machine?
2.  Do they take photographs to keep on record with this new "remove clothes" beam, or does the image only exist for the duration you're walking through it?

And, yes, I agree.  People do have the right to make that choice for themselves.  I am by no means advocating that my views should apply for everyone (although I personally think if everyone thought like me, the world would be a better, albeit extremely confusing, place =P), but in a way I'm wondering if this doesn't tie back in to our earlier discussion about business freedom.  People can make a choice.  They can choose to find other means of transportation if this methodology bothers them.  It's not like government officials are banging down our doors to make us go through the "remove clothes" beam.  Only those who make the choice to fly.  And if enough people are truly uncomfortable by this thought, airline sales will drop.  Yes, the government does have a much larger hand in airlines than in other commercial businesses.  But, really, I wonder if people just refuse to fly, if airlines could put enough pressure on government to do away with what the majority believes is an invasion of privacy.  Don't know if that's in any way realistic or not, but I'm just throwing that out there for thought.

Personally, I agree with C3PX's line of thought that putting armed federal marshals on planes would just be the simplest way to deal with all of this nonsense.

C3PX said:

Gaffer Tape said:

but I have to say it doesn't really bother me if a bunch of strangers want to use their machines to inadvertantly find out what undies I'm wearing or if I'm circumcised or not.

Or if your seven year old son is circumcised or not, how perky your fourteen year old daughter's titties are, whether or not your sixteen year old son is sporting a boner, and what shaped breasts your wife has. I see no reason why this should bother anyone...

Well... in all honesty I doubt anyone would need an X-ray machine to make out the shapes of breasts or spot a boner.  Oh, and I take exception to you referring to my non-existant daughter's breasts as titties.  Just seems rather rude. ^_~

I just don't know.  I don't consider nudity to be a big deal.  I certainly understand that some people do.  But didn't you just say that airports have always been X-raying people?  As I asked, is this some new method of X-raying put into place now that JUST sees through people's clothes rather than showing bone?  And most importantly:  are they keeping these images as photographs?  See, I don't see a problem with someone getting a brief glimpse of me and then forgetting about it in the onslaught of thousands of other passengers.  If airport security has access to "nude" pictures of everyone, though, and could access them at any time, THEN I could definitely see that being an invasion of privacy.  I'd love it if you could throw some info my way on the subject.

The porcelain never made any remarks to the contrary about itself, though, did it? =P

Sluggo said:

We never really got to see 3PO using Bocce to program binary load-lifters.

Really, Sluggo?  That was what you were waiting for with bated breath to see?  ^_~

Ah, okay.  It is a cool picture.  But I did certainly see a bit of this in it:

So, I dunno.  I guess I just inadvertantly called you a girl.  If that offends you, I apologize, but then again, she is Robin, so I don't really see how you can complain too much.

Hey, bkev, is that Carrie Kelly in your avatar?

C3PX said:

Glad I am not the only one disturbed by those machines. When they were first talked about by the media, it seemed most people were perfectly cool with them, because ultimately they would make them safer, and they felt suffering being in a free peep show was a fair trade off. It is okay I don't mind being sheered, so long as it somehow helps keeps the wolves away.

I dunno.  I can't really say the thought of it bothers me.  Personally, I was under the impression they always used X-ray machines, even before 9/11.  Or is this some newer, high-tech version that really "shows off the goods" so to speak?  But it doesn't bother me because of the whole "trading liberty for a bit of temporary safety" shtick.  Maybe it's just because I don't really hold that kind of modesty in high regard, but I have to say it doesn't really bother me if a bunch of strangers want to use their machines to inadvertantly find out what undies I'm wearing or if I'm circumcised or not.  It's just not something that embarrasses me.  Maybe I should have been European. =P

Obviously this scene was supposed to show the training the Rebel pilots had in grasping their joysticks... for their X-Wings.

Whoops.  Or are you saying that the prevelance of SEP caused the hijackers to assume that the passengers would never do anything?  If so, then, yeah, you have a good point. 

RE:  Bingowings in Post 26 (Internet connection is ass, so I have no idea if anyone else has replied in the time I've had to wait to actually post this message I wrote several minutes ago, so bear with me if I'm covering anything that's already been addressed) EDIT:  Welp, seems I'm in the clear. =P

Yeah, but the point here is that they DID fight back and relatively successfully.  I was actually planning to use the same basic argument you just did but for the hijackers.  That being in their stressful situation kept them from thinking as logically as they might have.  But your point works too.  They were subdued easily at the beginning, and that would have been the hijackers' opportunity to silence them permanently rather than give them a(n hour's) chance to, as C3PX eloquently put it, grow grapefruit-sized balls.  I think Flight 93 is an excellent example of citizens acting heroically and daringly, not an example of them being too easily cowed and defeated and victims of SEP.