logo Sign In

JediSage

User Group
Members
Join date
22-Mar-2005
Last activity
10-Jan-2011
Posts
2,109

Post History

Post
#102640
Topic
Wait- I know what Lucas needs!
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: ricarleite
I remember seeing the very same alegation in another forum, that what GL needs is sex, since he's being living in celibate since his divorce. I can imagine fans at Celebration III doing this:

"Uh, mr Lucas sir? We, the fans, got together and got a little money together and got you something..."

"What, a present? For me? Thank you!"

"Yeah, well... We didn't have much money, so we paid this 15 dollar whore to get it on with you, we belive you needed more sex..."

"JESUS H Christ, you fans now want to mess up with my sex life?! You freaks!"

"C'mon she's cool, look, her HIV test back in 1988 says she has 75% of chance of being clean, and she never heard of you, mostly because she's from North Korea, so she won't be begging for autographs or anything like that..."

"Are you suggesting that I spend the night with a North Korean whore, so I can write better films? Is that it?"

"Either that, or stop using CGI and messing up with the trilogy."

"*sigh* Send her into my room. Room 104. Tell her to bring pink champagne."


"Oh yeah, and besides the pink champagne, tell her to put on the Jar-Jar ears before she gets here, too"

walks in with the ears on, GL is standing there with Palpatine's cloak on

"Yuzza thinks weza gonna shag?"

"Come, girl...see for yourself." *ziiiiiip*
Post
#102639
Topic
Wait- I know what Lucas needs!
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Bossk
Quote

Originally posted by: Hardcore Legend
George does have love in his life, it's just paternal. He loves his children very much. The original trilogy was written in the same vein as American Graffiti. Reckless youth and hopeful optimism, not worrying about what tomorrow brings. Now he sees life through older, wiser eyes in which the idea of family love, responsibility and practicality are most important. Thus the two divergent tones.


"Older"... yes. "Wiser"... not necessarily.

As for "paternal love"... that same paternal love almost resulted in N*SYNC making cameos as Jedi Knights in AOTC.

The boy needs good, old fashioned poonanny.

'muff... er... 'nuff said.




ROTFLMAO!!!!
Post
#102633
Topic
A New Tactic... refunds????
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
But these DVDs were bought with the knowlege that they weren't the unaltered films. I don't think it could fly unless we were actually shocked and devestated when we saw the Furry Jabba or Greedo Shooting Simultaneously.


There've been many successful lawsuits (McDonald's Coffee, anyone?) for less than this, IMO. It is emotionally distressing to see something we grew up on being radically altered to the point where we felt it was necessary to scream to eachother on this website.

Post
#102614
Topic
The Pope
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Warbler
Quote

Originally posted by: Trooperman

1. Fetus is alive



on this we agree.

Quote

Originally posted by: Trooperman

2. If fetus has 47 chromosomes,



not being a scientist or a doctor, I will have to take your word on this.

Quote

Originally posted by: Trooperman

2. If fetus has 47 chromosomes, fetus is human. This means human life. Not plant life, not reptile life...human life.



so just because it has 47 chromosomes means that is human life? I'll grant you it is turning into a human, but is it a human yet? That is still the question.

Quote

Originally posted by: Trooperman

3. Fetus has done nothing wrong by existing; therefore fetus is innocent.



agreed.

Quote

Originally posted by: Trooperman

3. Abortion- aborts fetus. Ends fetus' life. Therefore kills fetus because it used to be alive.



agreed.

Quote

Originally posted by: Trooperman

4. Since fetus=innocent human life and abortion=end of innocent human life, abortion= murder.



this would be true if your point number 2, "If fetus has 47 chromosomes, fetus is human. This means human life. Not plant life, not reptile life...human life. " were true. But how are we to know for certain?


We know for certain because the child at ANY stage has every body part it will ever have, and has a DNA sequence that is separate and distinct from the mother.

Per one of my previous posts, human life should not be measured as a point of development within a species, it should be measured by being a member of a species. Trying to ascribe rights to someone based on a measure of their physical abilitiy, their iq, etc is dangerous because it would open the way to governments trying to deny rights to people who are in comas, or who have Parkinson's disease, or MS, or whatever.
Post
#102571
Topic
Lucas Info From Celebration III
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: ricarleite
This is what I would have done if I was at that Q&A: I would hold up a photo of Hayden at the end of ROTJ and scream "WHY!!! WHYYYY!!!!"

Then GL would get up and say "This interview is over! Insolent pricks! Guards, kill'em all!"


LOL...actually, I can kind of picture him say something like "Well, I had some thoughts about this, and it's all being taken care of in the 2007 boxed set. Let me show it to you", then some LucasFilm flunkies in uniforms quite reminiscent of the nazi khaki uniforms from Raiders show up and are bringing in a box that looks like the ark...they open it up...the spirits come out...Lucas standing there..."It's beautiful!!!"
Post
#102479
Topic
Girl Problem
Time
Speaking as someone who did most of his dating after highschool, and was well acquianted with getting hurt: Be cautious. A girl going into college (assuming she's going to college) in the fall will have lots of opportunities ahead, and when she's in the middle of a conversation with her friends about their boyfriends there will be akward moments when they say "Yeah, I'm dating this guy from the frat house down the road" , or "I'm dating a law student" then "Well, my boyfriend's a junior in high-school still...". It doesn't feel good to hear this, I know. But you've got to be realistic, meaning that a short term relationship may be viable, however in a year or two after you've invested your heart and soul into the relationship, the lightbulb may go on in her head and she may think she wants something different. It'd be different if she was younger than you. I don't mean to be blunt, but I've had this knife plunged into my heart before.
Post
#102469
Topic
Under-Rated Sci-Fi Films
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: starkiller
Quote

Originally posted by: Bossk
Quote

Originally posted by: greencapt
Its weird- I always think of that film as 'Saturn 5' too instead of 'Saturn 3'. Maybe it just has a better ring to it. Must be a flashback to the Apollo missions or something (and for the younger readers out there I don't mean Apollo from Battlestar Galactica!)


Most of them are too young to even remember Apollo from Battlestar Galactica. Sad.
Depends on which Apollo. You'll still here the 'name' used on the new series.

Sci-Fi channel runs daily marathons of shows from 8-4 every day...Battlestar Galactica (original) was on yesterday.

Since you bring up a TV show though, how about some underrated TV shows?
How about Sci-Fi channel originals First Wave and The Invisible Man?


Never watched First Wave, although anything with Traci Lords in it has got to be good. What about Earth: Final Conflict? I watched the first two seasons, but lost interest after that.

Post
#102447
Topic
The Pope
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Asha
A poster claimed that homosexuality was unnatural. I mentioned the prevalence of homosexuality in animals to show that it is indeed natural. Not all male and female animals produce offspring, and many primate species are built on the notion that only one male out of like every five mates. Therefore, homosexuality has no bearing on the survival of the species.


I believe my last question was which orientation is BEST suited towards the propogation of the species. Which you did not answer. And at some point the male primate does mate with a female, correct?

Occurance in nature of homosexuality does not make the behavior prevelant. It's an abberation, the exception rather than the rule. Occurance of certain behaviors or physical mutations in nature does not mean the rest of the species will adopt those behaviors or will become mutated in the same manner as the others. For instance...there was a case in the last 5-6 years somewhere in the US (I can't remember where) of a large number of small frogs who were being born with only 1 leg. The people investigating could not identify an environmental cause (ie: No chemical pollution). This did not indicate a condition that would affect the rest of the species.

Quote

As for being “hard-wired” into a genetic makeup, well, I doubt my peacock has a homosexual gene. It simply likes roosters. I don’t know why, but the peacock’s happy and the rooster doesn’t seem to mind, so who does it harm?


Again, sexual habits/orientation are LEARNED. I did not say they were genetic. Refer to one of my previous posts...I said anyone who's ever taken Behavioral Psych 101 will say the same thing. That's why people who were formally homosexual have changed and become heterosexual. It does happen.

Quote

Bottom line: calling homosexuality "abnormal" is not a judgement based on any reality ... you're basing it on taste. You might also be basing it on an interpretation of the bible, but I think such interpretations are sketchy at best (re: was Sodom really destroyed because of homosexuality, or the fact that the townspeople wanted to rape an angel?). Now, if you're the sort of person who can't see behavioral similarities between mankind and the animal world ... have fun living in your oblivion.


No, actually I'm basing it on what is being proven...it's not genetic, it's not natural. It's learned. To observe your peacock and make the leap that the behavior is "prevelant in nature"...now who's living in oblivion?

Quote

Being pro-choice means that I believe every woman can make up her own mind if the cells in her body are conscious. After all, the cells will essentially be a parasite consuming the woman's resources for nine months if she so chooses. If the woman chooses not to provide the resources, the cells can not grow into a human being. If a woman chooses not to provide nourishment to her newborn child, the child can still live if someone else provides the nourishment.


So now it's a utilitarian consideration? Convenience trumps life?

Quote

Not all women think as I do, either. People are different... kinda like how some mothers believe her baby is smiling and other think the babe's just passing gas. It’s still good to have choices.


This is pure relativism, which is part of the larger problem. If one person considers the unborn child alive, and the other doesn't, it's ok to have an abortion? Perhaps you should watch the film "The Silent Scream" and tell me if the unborn child is alive.

Quote

Personally, I think the most responsible route to choose is that of birth control if one wants to experience sex without reproducing. I’ll also admit that late-term abortions when the mother’s life is not at stake leave me uneasy. Yet I don't believe abortion is especially irresponsible .... it's more responsible than bearing a baby you will not love and are not willing to provide care for.


You've heard of adoption, right? However, I too believe birth control is a good alternative. Partial birth abortion can never be justified. The entire basis for the anti-life position collapses under the weight of this issue. They cannot say that life begins at birth, and then have the "right" to terminate life at this point.

Quote

"Better off is the one who has never existed, who has never seen the evil activity that is done under the sun."


Assuming that life begins at birth, which is not the case...and this seems almost like the evil of abortion will somehow make the world a better place...

I was going to let this thread go....oh well.
Post
#102290
Topic
The Things We Hate And Love Thread .
Time
Originally posted by: Bossk
Originally posted by: Warbler
I hate the fact that the Phillies totally suck right now!!!


Meh. My Cubbies are in the same boat. We have a great hitter in Derrek Lee and we still can't do jack. Yeah, we are at .500 and in second place. And that's not that far off from where the Phillies are at 8-11. But we're in second and you're in last. Go fig, eh? Says a lot more for the competitiveness of your division as opposed to ours, eh?


Go Mets!

Post
#102327
Topic
Lucas Info From Celebration III
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: greencapt
Quote

Originally posted by: JediSage
Yeah, I've done the convention thing many times and have had "cringeworthy" moments when some ja-moke would ask William Shatner what the combination to Captain Kirk's safe was. Just want to smack them.


Wait... what IS the combination to Kirk's safe?


LOL...In Shatner's own words: "Get a life!!"

Post
#102323
Topic
Lucas Info From Celebration III
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: TheSessler
I was there for the last of his three shows, but during our Q&A these people asked the stupidest/most obvious questions in the world, like a guy that was dressed up as Jack Sparrow asked "Why aren't there any more pirates in Star Wars" and "How did you come up with the title 'Star Wars.'"

But at least I didn't have to wait in line to see him, I got there 5 minutes before the show started and heard the call "If you want to see George Lucas, go up the stairs and all the way down the hall." I got fifth row on the column right next to the stage and I wasn't crazy enough to stand in line since midnight.


Yeah, I've done the convention thing many times and have had "cringeworthy" moments when some ja-moke would ask William Shatner what the combination to Captain Kirk's safe was. Just want to smack them.
Post
#102283
Topic
For Transformers Fans
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Bossk
That was cool, but I think it would've been cooler if they got the guy walking in the background to run like hell away or have some car crash on the street behind the bug. But still pretty sweet.

I wonder if that's how it will look for the movie?

The thing that I'm wondering about regarding this movie is that one of the sites I've read mentioned that Transformers have been fighting here on Earth unbeknownst to us for some time. Or at least that's how the movie may be working itself out. It said the wars may even be dating back to Biblical times. So, if Transformers are made to look like modern mechanical objects (VW Beatles, handguns, big rigs, tape players, etc.), how do they justify their appearances back in Biblical times as none of that stuff existed? Are they going to try and say that Transformers can evolve their appearance? If this is the case, then we start to wonder why the Transformers don't just morph into whatever the hell they want on an as-needed basis? If they can evolve their transformations, why not just become whatever suits you best when you need it? And, what the hell did they transform into back in Biblical times? A rock? The Holy Grail? Noah's Ark? Just brings up a whole new area of questioning regarding the movie.


Yeah, that does sound kind of weak. Reminds me of AvP, which although I didn't see sounded like a lousy premise, IMO. I like the idea put forth in the originals...they crash landed, slept for millions of years, were repaired, resumed the battle in modern times, etc; That's the only way the need for disguise makes sense. Can you imagine: "Autobots, transform and take shape of...a horse drawn carriage!!"