NeverarGreat

The Pain

Good old imgur.

Mrebo said:

That is the gist of it 😛

It’s more profound than one might think at first glance. The idea that the rules of the physical universe bend toward a certain result is compelling. We also might consider it in terms of maximalization: where matter arranges itself on the most fundamental level in order to create the most complex and varied existence possible. I think that sounds more sensible than the idea that stuff just is the way it is because.

The universe already tends towards maximum entropy or disorder.

That sounds like the best solution, if it’s doable.

DuracellEnergizer said:

NeverarGreat said:

If God existed before everything else, then who or what created God? Since nothing else existed, the definitive answer is that nothing could have created God, and its existence is not only ineffable, but logically unsound. Something cannot come from nothing. The universe itself also suffers from this problem. People who posit the existence of God and/or the universe are implying that the very principles of logic are so broken that literally anything follows from an argument. I could say that because some flower pots are red, Australia is made of bricks and it would be just as logical as saying that God or a universe arose from nothing.

Therein lies the problem of saying God “exists”. To exist is to be a part of existence — to be part of the creation. God isn’t a part of existence; God is the ground of existence, or existence itself. Ergo, God doesn’t “exist”.

But that’s only what I’ve gleaned from a cursory reading of Tillich.

Precisely.

If God existed before everything else, then who or what created God? Since nothing else existed, the definitive answer is that nothing could have created God, and its existence is not only ineffable, but logically unsound. Something cannot come from nothing. The universe itself also suffers from this problem. People who posit the existence of God and/or the universe are implying that the very principles of logic are so broken that literally anything follows from an argument. I could say that because some flower pots are red, Australia is made of bricks and it would be just as logical as saying that God or a universe arose from nothing.

And there’s no need to bring higher dimensions into it. Any other dimensions would still be things, and still need explanations like anything else. The entire conundrum is quite simple: If God/the universe actually exists, then logic is at best a passing and local phenomenon, and our existence depends upon the capricious whim of chaos beyond our control or understanding. If however nothing exists, then everything we see, everything we appear to be, is actually an illusion. Yet only in this explanation is logic preserved.

Because of this, I say that God is nothing. It is emptiness, it is Truth beyond logic, it is peace beyond illusion. It was never created, it cannot be destroyed. It is omnipresent, yet always hidden behind illusion. Yet only with illusion can things appear to happen, and this illusion is the source of all misunderstanding and evil.

Now if only the religions of this little world would just get along.

Maybe I’m the only person here who is very interested in seeing the extra Canto Bight material. That part really suffered from overediting.

What does it all mean?

I remember Leia flies through a Supremacy hologram projected on the bridge during her Force floating scene, so it can be implied that they know about the device by this point. I could make it more explicit if I were to use a crawl where Finn tries to warn the Resistance about such a device. He says at one point that he knows where the device is located, so that’s not too much of a logical leap.

It’s definitely something I’m thinking about, but for it to make sense there would need to be some onscreen explanation of how it works, preferably during the holographic Supremacy scene.

Of course, this is at cross-purposes with the idea of cutting the opening scenes entirely, since it would do away with the holographic Supremacy.

There’s a lot of ways to take this edit, so all options are sill on the table. I like your idea of connecting the hyperspace tracker and the Raddus right before the impact.

JEDIT: The Hyperspace crash sequence could be edited to more accurately reflect the idea that the Raddus is hitting just the tracker and not the entire Supremacy. In the first shot, we see the Raddus fly towards the Supremacy then disappear into Hyperspace. Then in the next shot there is a bright line intersecting the Supremacy, slicing it in half.

Perhaps removing the bright line of the Raddus before impact would indicate that it was definitely in Hyperspace at the point of impact. Then, instead of it slicing through the entire ship, the slice started midway through the wing. It looks like the debris from the explosion radiate out from a midpoint anyway.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/16/politics/mueller-russia-indictments-election-interference/index.html

And there it is. What’s Trump gonna do about Muller now?

^

Belated Valentine’s Day

https://omegaunderground.com/2018/02/12/episode-ix-lands-blade-runner-2049-got-art-director-paul-inglis/

Art Director Paul Inglis (Blade Runner 2049) joins the team.

I see some Star Wars movies and I say to myself, ‘That aint very Star Wars’.
Like I try really hard to see where they’re coming from and I get it, but it still doesn’t feel very Star Wars.
And I see some other movies that aren’t Star Wars and I say to myself ‘Hey, this feels a lot like Star Wars’.
Like I know it’s not Star Wars but the moments feel a lot more like Star Wars than many of the movies titled Star Wars.
Then I see the original Star Wars and that’s got the most Star Wars in it because it’s literally Star Wars and cannot have less than 100% Star Wars.

…
Star Wars.
Yeah.

Make the Podrace announcers narrate the Fathier chase.

Collipso said:

https://twitter.com/starwrsarchive/status/948000275847172097

^ something about the new guns just looks so fake.

I think that’s because it looks more like a generic sci-fi blaster than a repurposed WWII gun.

Phantom Menace probably had more miniatures, whereas TFA probably had more animatronic creatures and props.

The idea is that the Supremacy’s hyperspace tracking device acts as a static hyperdrive itself when active. It’s static in that the Supremacy enters hyperspace with this device but doesn’t move, allowing it to use its sensors to find other ships in hyperspace.

I’m thinking of it like a periscope on a submarine - part of the sub must leave the water for it to work. To continue the analogy - if a speedboat were to hit the periscope, it would damage the sub, whereas if there were no periscope the boat would pass overhead with little disturbance.

Batman Vs Superman: Dawn of Justice

ChiefWamsutta said:

7 – Change the title of the movie to remove the word ‘Jedi’ altogether.

We should apply that to all the movies.

The Phantom
Attack of the
Revenge of the
A New
The Empire
Return of the
The Force
The Last

Collipso said:

chyron8472 said:

I saw a Youtube video that posited that Holdo calculated to hit the ships at the moment before the ship entered hyperspace, when the ship was travelling at relativistic speeds, and applies physics to it to explain why it makes sense (and yet sort of doesn’t).

Nerdist: The Physics Behind The Last Jedi’s Coolest Scene! (Because Science w/ Kyle Hill)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1M95njhovw

With regard to how it doesn’t makes sense, he says that if the math works out, her ship hitting the fleet at relativistic speeds should have atomized the entire fleet rather than merely breaking the ships in half.

I guess that the scene established that the GFFA doesn’t obey this specific law of physics, and at the same time it does. I mean, it obeys it, but the result is only a fraction of what the actual result IRL would be. I guess that also means that the power of the impact any Rebel cruiser could create on the Death Star wouldn’t be enough to destroy it?

Anyway, I remember leaving the theater and overhearing a considerable amount of people (even the people who I went to watch it with) asking “why didn’t she simply lightspeed herself into the FO before? Or why have they never done that before? It’s so useful and overpowered…” So even if I don’t have a problem with that I totally understand why some people would.

The way I understand hyperspace working is that it’s a dimension weakly coupled to normal space, so that ships traveling through hyperspace would still need to ‘avoid’ masses but a crash would primarily affect the object in hyperspace. Under this theory, any ship going to Hyperspace would damage that ship far more than the target.

But what if the hyperspace tracking technology used by the Supremacy means that the ship is always partially in Hyperspace? After all, some part of the ship would need to interact with this dimension at all times for it to work. Under this theory, the First Order is undone by its own technology and hubris rather than an overpowered exploit of the ill-defined rules of the universe.

Sir Ridley said:

NeverarGreat said:

Ever since I was a wee lad I wanted to see every Robin Hood movie ever made. It’s not a burning desire so much as a sustained curiosity. According to Wikipedia, there are a whole lot of them to see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_and_television_series_featuring_Robin_Hood

However, I’ve limited myself to only Robin Hood movies released in theaters. From that list I own the following, annotated with their best quality:
The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) - The best Robin Hood, period.
The Story of Robin Hood and his Merrie Men (1952) - The best Maid Marion.
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991) - The best outlaw hideout.
Robin Hood: Men in Tights (1993) - The best Errol Flynn since the original.
Robin Hood (2010) - The best rendition of a realistic England.

Furthermore, I have seen and wish to own:
Walt Disney’s Robin Hood (1973) - The best Prince John, Friar Tuck.
Robin and Marian (1976) - The best old man Robin (sorry, Russel Crowe).

This leaves me with quite a few movies yet to see, mostly from the 20’s-60’s era. Does anyone have a recommendation of a version of the tale (TV or film) that I simply must see?

There’s a short Swedish cartoon movie from 1975 which is shown on TV every Christmas Eve called “Christopher’s Christmas Mission” in English. It’s not about Robin Hood, but about a boy who works at the post office and idolizes Robin Hood. One Christmas he decides to take all the outgoing packages for rich people and hand them out to poor people. It’s a real classic in Sweden and a favorite of mine. I guess it doesn’t really fit your criteria, but it’s a nice little film anyhow.

Interesting, I’ll see if I can find it.

A well conceived crawl. After thinking about it, I agree that the brother/sister angle is unnecessary. I like how evocative ‘war hero Leia Organa’ is, but I would wonder why she seems to have so little power given that everyone we see has a high opinion of her.

Calling Snoke a ‘mysterious leader’ makes it even more apparent that we should learn more about him during the movie, which of course never happens. I feel like going in the other direction and making him simply a power-hungry warlord would be the best option, that way nobody expects a twist that never arrives (unless JJ pulls something in Ep 9).

Other than that, it’s a propulsive and exciting crawl.