logo Sign In

JediSage

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

Post History

Post
#102135
Topic
Favourite film out of original trilogy?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/102135/action/topic#102135
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Anakin's Mannequin
See this is a hard question for me. All three have a different flavor to them.

ANH was epic and had constant movement from place to place, revealing just a dab of every aspect of the universe while showing a great story line that covered up an even greater story line to come.

ESB was dark and expanded on existing characters much more, while introducing some new ones as well. You saw that Darth Vadar was merely human instead of just a two dimensional bad guy (putting his helmet on facing from behind him, and later announcing that he was Luke's father). Lots of tragedy as well as twists and turns throughout.

ROTJ had a more lighthearted feel about it with the Ewoks and celebration at the end, but with all of the battles that took place in it (Jabba's palace, the Death Star, Luke/Vadar/Emperor fight), it definately balanced the tone.

If I were forced to pick one, I'd go with Empire Strikes Back, mainly because I like darker films. But honestly, I still like the other two just as much.


ESB is my favorite, although as my brother says, it's like asking what my favorite ice cream is...they're ALL good.

ANH definitely had many great moments, including the binary sunset with the poignant (sp?) music (what kid hasn't been able relate to Luke at that moment?) and the Battle of Yavin. Although I think overall that it moved quite slowly in the beginning (especially with the droids getting lost on Tatooine).

ESB was almost non-stop from beginning to end. The sense that the Falcon was 1/2 second away from being captured at all times just adds to the excitement, as well as the betrayal at Bespin. The music took a leap forward from being already legendary, especially the scene when Han is lowered into the freezing pit...the music combined with Chewie's screaming ratchets up the agony, and is still emotionally powerful.

ROTJ had some awesome points: The Tiberium Shuttle debut (which got screwed up in the Spec Editions) in the beginning was cool. The saber duel at Jabba's palace was good. The entire sub-plot between Luke and Vader was very cool, and the visuals when they're on screen are extremely polished. The throne room battle scenes are still impressive, and the music when Luke whigs out on Vader is very appropriate somehow. I like the new music from the Spec Editions (take your pick which version), and the celebrations on Curruscant make more sense now that we've actually seen what it looks like. Also, I prefer the ORIGINAL actor in the ghostly trio at the end...not Hayden Christensen.
Post
#102133
Topic
Recent Lucas Comment Regarding Esp. #7...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/102133/action/topic#102133
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Hardcore Legend
While I think alot of the reasons he has decided against a 7-9 Star Wars is the flack he has caught off of Ep 1 and 2, I think if 3 is recieved well.....he might, just might changes his mind. Highly unlikely though.


I think his age may have something to do with it, too. He's in his mid 60's, I think. He was like 27-29 when he made episode IV. And, last time I saw him he did not look like he's aging well.

Post
#102117
Topic
Drawn Together
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/102117/action/topic#102117
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Mostly I find it sort of dull. There is funnier stuff on Nickelodeon any more.

But Drawn TOgether is the cream of the crap. It has nothing but stupid unfunny stereotypes and gross-out humor. A pig crapping on a pizza isn't funny. It's just stupid and gross. Things have to have a punchline to be funny, or be completely incongruent with reality (Like Family Guy's and Futurama's best jokes)


I didn't see that one, although it definitely sounds to be in bad taste, to be sure, and I've seen it all.
Post
#102116
Topic
Under-Rated Sci-Fi Films
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/102116/action/topic#102116
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: starkiller
Quote
Originally Posted by Warbler:
If you ask me ,"The Black Hole" is very underated.
I don't know how well it was received when it came out. I enjoy the movie myself, though don't watch the DVD version...its so easy to see the 'anti-grav' wires in the beginning.

Quote
Originally Posted by Warbler:
Another SF film I consider to be under-rated is Star Trek III. People often say it is one of the worst Star Trek movies, I say it is one the better Star Trek movies.
I consider ST3 to be the best of the odd-numbered. I think the reason it was as good as it was is because it carried the storyline from ST2 and was cotinued by ST4.

If I had to rate the Star Trek movies, they'd be in this order:
2, First Contact, 4, 3, 6, Generations, Insurrection, Nemesis, 1

As for my own thoughts on the subject:
- You have to give some points to Stargate. The movie was kind of predictable, but look at the show that it spawned.

- Its kind of a kiddie Sci-Fi, but I enjoyed Flight of the Navigator enough to buy it on DVD.


Dude, totally agree about Stargate. Forgot about it. Cool flick. I watched about 3 episodes of the tv series...right up until Amanda Tapping beat the crap out of some barbarian warriors. Then I never tuned in again.
Post
#101996
Topic
Under-Rated Sci-Fi Films
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101996/action/topic#101996
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Granted, mostly.

Still, the real Data his dead. Before can't ever really be Data even if he has Data's play-list in his mind. Also, the 11th Startrek movie has been confimred, so Nemisis isn't really the last.


Would that be the Pre-Enterprise movie? That seems to be their preferred time frame now so their not held to anything done in the originals in terms of continuity. I hope it doesn't get made...at least with the current "creative" team. ST died for me after DS9 ended.

Post
#101993
Topic
Drawn Together
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101993/action/topic#101993
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Sometime's it is funny. Sometimes I can't stand it.

I'm no fan of SouthPark, but I may watch it if there's nothing else on.


South Park seems like it strikes a good balance between "shock" and jabs at pertinent situations and people. Nobody is safe. I truly think its brilliant at times.

Post
#101971
Topic
Drawn Together
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101971/action/topic#101971
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
I disagree.

It's sole "joke" seemed to be its controversy. It's like the pig craps on the pizza. That's gross, but it isn't funny.
Then there's that gay guy.. I mean... How is that funny? Is it funny just because he's gay? "HA HA! HE'S GAY! THAT'S HILARIOUS!" Things aren't funny just because someone finds them offensive. There has to be a puchline. From what I saw of DT, it's entire appeal came from SHock value, but shock value alone good comedy does not make.


Actually, I think Reality TV fans can more easily relate to it. Xzandyr (sp?) the Video Game boy is funny to me because I believe it's a clever jab at the Legend of Zelda character Link. I think Foxie Brown is funny because she's loosely based on a real person from a real reality show I'm familiar with.

Do you like South Park? I'm just curious
Post
#101956
Topic
The Pope
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101956/action/topic#101956
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
Quote
Originally posted by: Asha
As far as I'm concerned, speculating about a scenario in which homosexuality is so commonplace that humans can only reproduce through artificial means to avoid extinction ... that's pure science fiction. It ain't gonna happen. Unless you believe most men would PREFER to be gay were it not for social pressures. Last I checked there were ample heterosexuals to keep this planet overpopulated.


You were the one who attempted to prove the "naturality" of the situation by observing farm animals. However, let's take it out of the realm of "science fiction", and I guess posing a hypothetical question qualifies as science fiction, let me risk another that hopefully will be less offensive: Which sexual orientation is best prepared to propogate the species? Going to another debate I've had recently, using the part of Darwin's theory that many choose to ignore (ie: Survival of the Fittest), if homosexuality were naturual, would not Darwin's theory dictate that it must be the dominant orientation in order to survive?


I think you are qualifing "homosexuality" as a genetic distinction, like color of the skin. If so, there would be no homosexuals, as their parents obviously had sex with the opposite sex. It's not like that, it's not apt to the netural selection as it's almost "random". If 5% of the birds ramdomly lose their abilities to reproduce, would birds vanish from the Earth after some generations? I think not.


That's exactly my point. It can't be considered genetic or "natural", or it wouldn't exist. Anyone who's taken Behavioral Psych 101 will tell you it's a learned behavior that can and has been changed in the past.


I agree. I agree. But calling that an "abnormality" and treating homosexuals as their were not humans is WRONG. I have homosexual friends, and I like them as much as my heterosexual friends. They are normal people. If I hear someone badmouthing homosexuals, saying they should all die or something, I get on my feet and say "Sieg HEIL! Sieg HEIL! Sieg HEIL!"



I haven't heard anyone call for their deaths. I have no trouble with homosexuals. I won't treat their orientation as being normal, either.
Post
#101934
Topic
Under-Rated Sci-Fi Films
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101934/action/topic#101934
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Are you kidding? The Enterprise was gutted, Riker and Troi left the ship, Data was killed...

Nemisis changed more than any other Star Trek movie.


The issue with Data is that they just happened to find a complete duplicate that they could transfer his memories to. False jeopardy, making the entire last few minutes where we think Data is gone totally superfluous. Can't argue with the rest of the movies, with the exception of Generations where Kirk is actually dead (not taking into account the books).

Riker and Troi: If it weren't the last movie (thank God) I'd say that doesn't fly because of the way they shuffled Worf in and out.

Post
#101933
Topic
The Pope
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101933/action/topic#101933
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
Quote
Originally posted by: Asha
As far as I'm concerned, speculating about a scenario in which homosexuality is so commonplace that humans can only reproduce through artificial means to avoid extinction ... that's pure science fiction. It ain't gonna happen. Unless you believe most men would PREFER to be gay were it not for social pressures. Last I checked there were ample heterosexuals to keep this planet overpopulated.


You were the one who attempted to prove the "naturality" of the situation by observing farm animals. However, let's take it out of the realm of "science fiction", and I guess posing a hypothetical question qualifies as science fiction, let me risk another that hopefully will be less offensive: Which sexual orientation is best prepared to propogate the species? Going to another debate I've had recently, using the part of Darwin's theory that many choose to ignore (ie: Survival of the Fittest), if homosexuality were naturual, would not Darwin's theory dictate that it must be the dominant orientation in order to survive?


I think you are qualifing "homosexuality" as a genetic distinction, like color of the skin. If so, there would be no homosexuals, as their parents obviously had sex with the opposite sex. It's not like that, it's not apt to the netural selection as it's almost "random". If 5% of the birds ramdomly lose their abilities to reproduce, would birds vanish from the Earth after some generations? I think not.


That's exactly my point. It can't be considered genetic or "natural", or it wouldn't exist. Anyone who's taken Behavioral Psych 101 will tell you it's a learned behavior that can and has been changed in the past.

Post
#101912
Topic
I have to write a Letter to George Lucas...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101912/action/topic#101912
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleite
OK, things you can ask him:

* R2D2 can fly? Since when?!
* Midchlorians?! WTF??
* What were you SMOKING when you thought of Jar Jar?
* So, uh, when are you planning to further ruin the OT?
* So, uh, wasn't THX1138 good enough? You had to ruin it too?


OK, seriously:

* Who are your biggest influences and favorite movie directors?
* Can technology always help the story told by the director in his movie, or can it have the opposite effect? (good one, eh?)


AWESOME question about technology

Post
#101908
Topic
The Pope
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101908/action/topic#101908
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Asha
As far as I'm concerned, speculating about a scenario in which homosexuality is so commonplace that humans can only reproduce through artificial means to avoid extinction ... that's pure science fiction. It ain't gonna happen. Unless you believe most men would PREFER to be gay were it not for social pressures. Last I checked there were ample heterosexuals to keep this planet overpopulated.


You were the one who attempted to prove the "naturality" of the situation by observing farm animals. However, let's take it out of the realm of "science fiction", and I guess posing a hypothetical question qualifies as science fiction, let me risk another that hopefully will be less offensive: Which sexual orientation is best prepared to propogate the species? Going to another debate I've had recently, using the part of Darwin's theory that many choose to ignore (ie: Survival of the Fittest), if homosexuality were naturual, would not Darwin's theory dictate that it must be the dominant orientation in order to survive?

Quote
And by the way, the 'fetus' is a blobby cluster of cells for a good long while before birth ... no heartbeat; no brainwaves. Ever know a woman who miscarried in the first month or two of pregnancy? I have -- there's no loss of human life involved. A lot of women would notice a broken nail before they'd notice they miscarried.


There's a big difference between a miscarriage and an abortion, and again, personhood should not be measured with a scale, or with an iq test, or by a court.

Quote
And enough with the "why can't we all get along" stuff ... this "discussion" went on for pages without only a scant few people willing to disagree, and with no opposing opinions the conversation devolved into comments like the "spread her legs" crap. I'm sure some people find tha enjoyable, but it's not at all pretty to look at from an outsider's perspective.


Debate is a good thing, however there comes a point for everyone, whether on a BBS or in person, when it becomes uncomfortable. A person can choose to withdraw when they wish to (I know I said I would, but you've inspired me to stick around for a while) or plead for everyone to make nice nice.

Love and Kisses


Post
#101892
Topic
Under-Rated Sci-Fi Films
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101892/action/topic#101892
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Akira isn't a startrek film, darn it! OR Underrated!!!

And Nemesis is seriously under rated. Well. The whole Troi-Viceroy 'violation' scene was bad....
But that's it!


Huuhhhh...GOD. Yeah, I was really impressed with the Romulan super-weapon. The victims REALLY had to co-operate. "Well sir, the Romulans are deploying their super weapon. ETA Till it's ready: About a half-hour". Plus the whole thing with Data was ridiculous, just like the tv series: hit the reset button, everythings oooooook.

Post
#101873
Topic
The Pope
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101873/action/topic#101873
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Shimraa
In my opinion life begins once an organium can begin to preform all of its internal opertation independantly, that is if it were to be left alone and no one aided it life by getting food or would starve to death. that is why i consider a baby life and a fetus a fetus. if you were to leave a fetus alone it would not be able to function properly with out the aid of a mothers womb. to grow a fetus needs already digested food, to function a fetus needs a blood supply that is not its own. that is why i dont consider contraception the begining of life. the birth is, thats why we celebrate birthdays not contraception days, cus your birthday it is the anniversary of your life begining. your only commiting murder if you forcefully take a life of something that would have been able to survive by itself had you not acted upon it. thats jsut the way i see it.


Can a newborn baby survive on it's own if left on the street? While it is true the unborn child depends on the mother for food and blood, it is a completely different life, possessing from the moment of conception every organ it will ever need, and a completely distinct genetic code from the mother. It possesses a measureable heartbeat and brainwave pattern."Personhood is defined by membership in the human species, not a stage of development within that species" - Alcorn.

Celebrating birthdays is a tradition that goes back thousands of years, before any real knowledge of when a child is conceived was known. Your statement about celebrating birthdays instead of conception days is misleading. Taking this stance a bit further, and using your statement about an entity that cannot survive on its own, would a person just waking from a coma have a new birthday? I mean, they could not survive on their own previously, did they become more of a person now that they've woken up?
Post
#101872
Topic
The Pope
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101872/action/topic#101872
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Warbler
it is unfortunate that we can't discuss these kinds of topics without getting upset at one another.

JediSage: I just read Titus Chapter 1 verses 5 through 7 from the Kings James Version of the Bible. There did not seem to be anything there that would prohibit female clergy.

As for Abortion, wheither someone its somone who had unprotected sex or rape, the real question is when does life begin? If it begins at birth, than abortion is not murder. If life begins at conception, then abortion is the taking of human life and (imho) would be wrong wheither or not the conception was rape. When does life begin?...I can't answer that one. But that is the question that needs to be answered.


"....and ORDAIN elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: If any be blameless, the HUSBAND of ONE WIFE, having children..." emphasis mine.

I had really hoped to withdraw from this, because I don't want us to be upset with eachother. However, even if there were uncertainty about when life begins (which there's not), should we not choose to protect life? For example, if you're driving on a dark road one night, and see a shape in the road that may or may not be a person, should you speed up? Or try to avoid hitting it?
Post
#101844
Topic
Under-Rated Sci-Fi Films
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101844/action/topic#101844
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Commander Courage
Well it looks as if I OVERRATED Equilibrium. I agree about the emotion stuff, but despite that I found it a powerful commentary on the dangers of a "utopia". And the action wasn't bad either. I still like it better than the Matrix; especially the lack of two horrible sequels.

Quote
Originally posted by: Warbler
Another SF film I consider to be under-rated is Star Trek III. People often say it is one of the worst Star Trek movies, I say it is one the better Star Trek movies.

Yeah, the whole notion of the odd-numbered Star Trek films being bad and the even ones being good is flawed. Sure 1 was a bit sub-par, but the Director's Edition DVD is a vast improvement. 3 is awesome and my personal favorite of the bunch. 5, again, was a little weak, but Shatner got screwed over by the studio who wanted to keep things cheap. The Final Frontier is probably the most underrated of the Trek films, as it actually is closer to the spirit of the original series than any of the other movies. Generations is alright, but they botched Kirk's death and the premise of the Nexus horribly. Insurrection was a disaster. That said, all the even-numbered films up to Nemesis were indeed excellent.


I agree on ST III, I think it is under-rated. I think V wasn't great, but had some great "character" moments, like with the camp scenes and when the Big Three have to overcome their inner demons. Generations also had some great character moments, like the scenes with Data and the emotion chip, Kirk and Picard. I still get bleary eyed in the beginning when Chekov asks if anyone was in deflector control, and Scotty just looks out and says "Aye"............Excuse me I can't go on!! I don't think they've made a good one since First Contact. Insurrection and Nemesis blow cheese, IMO.
Post
#101824
Topic
For Transformers Fans
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101824/action/topic#101824
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Bossk
Even more Transformers info at Yahoo! Upcoming Movies

I dunno. I loved The Transformers. But I think it's just too late in the game and I just don't see how this could possibly be good. Then again, movies I've downplayed usually turn out decent.


Have you been watching any of the newer series? I grew up on the old stuff...hard to get into the newer ones.
Post
#101823
Topic
The Pope
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101823/action/topic#101823
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Asha
The line is from Exodus ... I'm on my way out the door, or else I'd drudge up the exact verse #. The line has the potential to relate to the definition of human life in that the termination of the pregnancy does not demand a "life for a life." I say "potential" because, like most of the good book, you can find lines in the bible that will provide a flimsy pretext to support just about everything. Although I'm afraid nothing in the bible is quite as flimsy as using speculative science fiction as a way of framing a discussion on homosexuality.


*sigh*...I've gone back on what I said earlier. I'm outta here.
Post
#101822
Topic
The Pope
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101822/action/topic#101822
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Asha
The line is from Exodus ... I'm on my way out the door, or else I'd drudge up the exact verse #. The line has the potential to relate to the definition of human life in that the termination of the pregnancy does not demand a "life for a life." I say "potential" because, like most of the good book, you can find lines in the bible that will provide a flimsy pretext to support just about everything. Although I'm afraid nothing in the bible is quite as flimsy as using speculative science fiction as a way of framing a discussion on homosexuality.


Who's using SF to frame the discussion?


Post
#101805
Topic
The Pope
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/101805/action/topic#101805
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Asha
Quote
"And if men struggle and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise."
Quote


That's really the closest thing to a reference to abortion in the bible, and clearly, only the woman's life is considered true human life. The destruction of the fetus is only worthy of a fine, while harming the wife demands "eye for an eye" revenge. Using this example as a guide, if a fetus is "innocent" it's only because it's not a human yet.

And surely you don't actually believe that homosexuality will EVER lead to the extinction of the human species. Look around you: there's no shortage of humans. If half of the world population turned gay tomorrow, the human race would still survive.


I'm curious to know the chapter/verse you got that from. It is interesting. Taken at face value, it still prescribes punishment in the event of a terminated pregnancy, and makes no distinction between what is "true human life" and what isn't. If a life wasn't terminated, then why prescribe a punishment?

Yes, but if it went to 51% it might be a different story. The race would survive however it would need to resort to measures outside the true natural order of procreation, ie: Cloning, in-vitro fertilization, etc;