logo Sign In

Lord Haseo

This user has been banned.

User Group
Banned Members
Join date
19-Apr-2013
Last activity
2-Oct-2017
Posts
4,841

Post History

Post
#970231
Topic
Rogue One * <em>Spoilers</em> * Thread
Time

Peter Cushing’s and most of Harrison Ford’s performance would be totally fine in the modern age because the the line delivery is literally timeless. But certain parts of Hamill and Fisher’s performance have line delivery that was abundant in that time. The dialogue doesn’t help much either as some of it has a 70’s vibe to it. But it’s not as though SW is the only film in the OT with that problem; ESB has it to. The whole “Why you half witted scruffy looking nerf herder”…“Who’s scruffy looking” exchange wouldn’t work in the present.

Post
#970229
Topic
Rogue One * <em>Spoilers</em> * Thread
Time

MalàStrana said:

Lord Haseo said:

The only other thing they could do to connect it to STAR WARS is by having 70’s style acting but I would hate that.

What about 70’s style haircut and british accent ?

I don’t see why not. No need for half measures.

DuracellEnergizer said:

What the hell is “'70s style acting”, anyway?

This and this. I also forgot to mention there should be some 70’sish dialogue in there to.

EDIT:

There’s also the “Not this ship sister” line which is drenched in 70’s

Post
#970086
Topic
Religion
Time

Jeebus said:

I think it’s funny when two people go at each other calling each other mad.

“Why are you so mad, dude, calm down.”

“I’m not mad, you’re obviously mad and projecting your madness onto me, just calm down dude.”

“Woah dude, calm down, no need to get so mad.”

Well technically I called him sensitive not angry. He reminds me of Drake (rapper)

Post
#970070
Topic
Religion
Time

darth_ender said:

Lord Haseo said:

darth_ender said:
I appreciate you at least starting to use that noodle of yours, since you’re obviously so much more intelligent than the ignorant morons who profess a belief in the divine.

Unwarranted assumption is unwarranted. I have never said or even fucking alluded to any of that so you are once again pulling things from ass.

However, are you obstinately devoted to your view?

Nope. Like everything my view is subject to change. In this case it is very very unlikely that someone could convince me that a book the calls for the death of everyone who is not a straight believer of Yahweh, demeans women, is a perversion of reality as Science has so clearly pointed out etc. is anything worth while in this day and age.

Are you intolerant of religion (and by extension, its adherents)?

This is the part where I say I hate Religion and not it’s people due to the fact I have had a multitude of friends and former girlfriends who are religious and my family members who I love dearly are nearly all religious. And then you’ll pull out that “so you hate sin and not the sinner” and to that weak argument I have only this to say.

That’s like me saying that someone who hates GoT must hate all of it’s fans by proxy which is shows you have the inability to accept other people’s opinions regarding what you’re fond of. Something like that is akin to a mindset of a child which is rather sad because there’s a good chance you are far older than I am.

Furthermore, that baffling argument is not even comparable to something like murder, rape or thievery which are truly detestable acts and simply being religious is not even close.

Are you expressing prejudice based on your perspective and a limited sample?

If I hadn’t of said that there were good things about the Bible and just fixated on the negative then yes. But on the other hand I have also said those things can be found in other mediums.

Are you singling out a particular group?

A book is a group. Since when?

Have you expressed hatred towards that group?

^

The answer to each question is yes. And then you have the audacity to say that the definition doesn’t support my accusations.

Most humorously, however, is your insistence on my sensitivity. While at times I’ve become quite upset on these very boards for what some have written, I have not even had my pulse quicken. I may have been harsh in my wording, but such was not out of anger. I actually can see decent conversations with an atheist like Jeebus. I have enjoyed many conversations with CP3S in the past, a very adamant atheist. But you literally offer nothing useful in your debates thus far. And you literally, in very definition, are a bigot. I’m sorry, but this you have demonstrated quite vividly, and your sensitivity to my use of the term only further highlights the reality of that bigotry in your heart.

Sensitive ass lol

EDIT:

darth_ender said:

Lord Haseo said:

True that. I would prefer intolerance over violence any day.

Yes, you’ve well established your preference for intolerance many times.

^

I guess Star Wars isn’t the only subject that reverts the minds of seemingly mature people into that of entitled, sensitive, pompous and irrational children.

Well, I literally am out of time. But I can’t help but laugh at your (over)reaction. Mark my words, I’ll give you a good reply. But meanwhile, rest assured that I am calm, and you are not, which is an indication of who is truly overly sensitive.

Note to ywhx, this last bit is ad hominem, as it does not address the issue, but merely attempts to defeat argument by attacking the man. I point this out to you because you, feeling like Lord Haseo, would not point out his faults. To really hold a legitimate point of view, you must be willing to challenge your own views. I do not see you as willing to do so.

Ok

Post
#970027
Topic
Rogue One * <em>Spoilers</em> * Thread
Time

yhwx said:

Jeebus said:

I’m sure the movie will be fine, I just think it’s a cheesy line. A New Hope had plenty of cheesy lines, but the overall tone of the movie allowed for it because it was a cheesy movie. Rogue One is trying to pass itself off as a gritty war movie set in the Star Wars universe, and if that’s what they’re going for, there’s no room for cheesy lines like that.

The Empire Strikes Back was a pretty serious movie. It also had its fair share of cheesy lines. I hate to say this, but also see Revenge of the Sith.

“I am not a committee!”

Post
#970011
Topic
Religion
Time

darth_ender said:
I appreciate you at least starting to use that noodle of yours, since you’re obviously so much more intelligent than the ignorant morons who profess a belief in the divine.

Unwarranted assumption is unwarranted. I have never said or even fucking alluded to any of that so you are once again pulling things from ass.

However, are you obstinately devoted to your view?

Nope. Like everything my view is subject to change. In this case it is very very unlikely that someone could convince me that a book the calls for the death of everyone who is not a straight believer of Yahweh, demeans women, is a perversion of reality as Science has so clearly pointed out etc. is anything worth while in this day and age.

Are you intolerant of religion (and by extension, its adherents)?

This is the part where I say I hate Religion and not it’s people due to the fact I have had a multitude of friends and former girlfriends who are religious and my family members who I love dearly are nearly all religious. And then you’ll pull out that “so you hate sin and not the sinner” and to that weak argument I have only this to say.

That’s like me saying that someone who hates GoT must hate all of it’s fans by proxy which is shows you have the inability to accept other people’s opinions regarding what you’re fond of. Something like that is akin to a mindset of a child which is rather sad because there’s a good chance you are far older than I am.

Furthermore, that baffling argument is not even comparable to something like murder, rape or thievery which are truly detestable acts and simply being religious is not even close.

Are you expressing prejudice based on your perspective and a limited sample?

If I hadn’t of said that there were good things about the Bible and just fixated on the negative then yes. But on the other hand I have also said those things can be found in other mediums.

Are you singling out a particular group?

A book is a group. Since when?

Have you expressed hatred towards that group?

^

The answer to each question is yes. And then you have the audacity to say that the definition doesn’t support my accusations.

Most humorously, however, is your insistence on my sensitivity. While at times I’ve become quite upset on these very boards for what some have written, I have not even had my pulse quicken. I may have been harsh in my wording, but such was not out of anger. I actually can see decent conversations with an atheist like Jeebus. I have enjoyed many conversations with CP3S in the past, a very adamant atheist. But you literally offer nothing useful in your debates thus far. And you literally, in very definition, are a bigot. I’m sorry, but this you have demonstrated quite vividly, and your sensitivity to my use of the term only further highlights the reality of that bigotry in your heart.

Sensitive ass lol

EDIT:

darth_ender said:

Lord Haseo said:

True that. I would prefer intolerance over violence any day.

Yes, you’ve well established your preference for intolerance many times.

^

I guess Star Wars isn’t the only subject that reverts the minds of seemingly mature people into that of entitled, sensitive, pompous and irrational children.

Post
#969980
Topic
Rogue One * <em>Spoilers</em> * Thread
Time

Jeebus said:

I’m sure the movie will be fine, I just think it’s a cheesy line. A New Hope had plenty of cheesy lines, but the overall tone of the movie allowed for it because it was a cheesy movie. Rogue One is trying to pass itself off as a gritty war movie set in the Star Wars universe, and if that’s what they’re going for, there’s no room for cheesy lines like that.

Doesn’t mean it has to be that way for the entirety of the movie. It still has to feel something like Star Wars.

Post
#969958
Topic
Religion
Time

darth_ender said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Christianity (or at least Christianity based solely on the Bible) is inherently “anti-gay” in the sense that it claims homosexual relations are ungodly. I don’t see how any churches can honestly get around the fact that it’s made clear in both New and Old Testaments.

If you interpret it as the literal word of God as it fell flawlessly from his lips to parchment, then it is. But many faiths actually hold more liberal interpretations. I’m sure you don’t believe women shouldn’t speak at all in church.

Or have authority over a man. That’s pretty important too.

Post
#969950
Topic
Rogue One * <em>Spoilers</em> * Thread
Time

Jeebus said:

Lord Haseo said:

Jeebus said:

It’s just a little to on-the-nose for me. I would prefer if it went something like

“This is a rebellion, isn’t it? That’s what I’m doing.”

I think “This is a rebellion, isn’t it? That’s exactly what I’m doing.” would have been better

Yeah, for sure.

But back to the overall topic at hand. You can’t gauge the quality of the script based on a line or two. Overly opinionated teenagers on youtube be damned.

Post
#969940
Topic
Rogue One * <em>Spoilers</em> * Thread
Time

ZkinandBonez said:

Me neither.
Are you saying it’s a bad line?
I’ve hear a lot f people complaining about that line and I don’t get it. It makes perfect sense in the context/conversation. The trailer just emphasizes it in a somewhat over-dramatic way.

This. The initial bad taste some had when they heard that line will be washed away when we actually see the scene in it’s entirety.