NeverarGreat

Post Praetorian said:

First question:

Is it possible for God to have a sense of humor? If so, what form must it take?

Consider:

Is God able to have a light sense of humor?

1) A light sense of humor may be described as the ability to laugh at one's self or others in a lighthearted manner.

2) Lightheartedness is expressed as being 'carefree; cheerful; [or] gay' 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lightheartedness

3) God cannot be described as the third option above (reference: www.Bible.com)

4) Cheerfulness is described as 'noticeably happy and optimistic' 

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cheerful

5) Carefree is described as 'without cares; free of concern; easy; casual; without difficulty'

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/carefree

6) God is never once heard to sing happily to himself or whistle.

7) God invented Hell.

8) God cannot be considered cheerful (from 4 and 6).

9) God cannot be considered carefree (from 5 and 7).

 10) God cannot be said to have a light sense of humor (from 3, 8, 9).

But which God are we talking about?

God, after all, is only a title for the current president of the universe.

The previous president of the universe is God's political rival, Satan, who was ousted after a particularly clever campaign by Jesus, who sold himself as a political savior who was nevertheless relatable to the common man.

Unfortunately, upon taking the oath of Godhood, Jesus has apparently continued many of the failed policies of his predecessor. Most notably, he has failed to close Hell, where many are still incarcerated due to simple ignorance of official divine policy or of petty offenses such as masturbation or eating shellfish.

Let's just calm down now. If people didn't put up with Hollywood mediocrity, they would be forced to make better movies. And Jackson doesn't despise Tolkien, that's absurd.

adywan said:

I don't want to nitpick a beautiful shot like this, but my first impression is that there is dark blue sky right behind all the trees. Perhaps turning it into a darker gray fog would better sell the illusion of a mysterious forest behind the X-wing.

The closer you get to perfection, the more these details jump out at you ;)

Drcll, cld y pls mk thrd tht Frnk wnt pst n?

;)

DuracellEnergizer said:

Maybe Santa will finally get me that hypertime machine I've been asking him for for the past ten years.

Try skipping forward in time by only small amounts, saving up potential time energy like pulling a rubber band taut. Then the snapback may fling you decades into the past!

Perhaps these are scans of the damage on the surface of the film, to be used in cleanup later.

pablumatic said:

We've seen Tie Fighters, Stormtroopers, X-Wings, and now an obvious Darth Vader clone. I don't think watching these Pequels will be particularly necessary since we've seen this all before.

 Fixed.

But seriously, ROTS had these same things, with TPM having most of the new ships and ideas. I don't see anything wrong with TFA tying the visuals to the OT if it grows into it's own aesthetic with episodes 8 and 9.

But this is the nature of how legends grow. Thirty years after his death, the stories may say that Vader personally destroyed Alderaan, routed the rebels at Hoth singlehandedly, and destroyed the Emperor and then relinquished his physical form out of his own desire, ascending directly to godhood. It would be interesting to see a character who genuinely believes these things, and it doesn't diminish the character of Vader to have someone best him - on the contrary, it may show that physical power is not what makes a character great.

Vader's original armor concept looked oriental, but this new helmet design with the gold around the eyes looks rather ancient Egyptian.

It's astonishing how much shadow detail simply seems to be gone in this print, although the canyon scene was substantially lightened for home video release.

That fanfic is quite a bit more detailed than mine. My idea was that each time the Friz gets her class into the schoolbus, it emits a cloud of psychedelics through the ventilation system and she leads the class through a tripped-out educational program through hypnotic suggestion. Your story is more fun though.

The first thing I thought of when I saw the name 'Caryon' is that it's crayon with two letters switched. Then Carry On. Maybe spelling it Carrieon or Karyon would lessen that connection.

timdiggerm said:

The EEs will certainly be the films off which to base a fan-edit.

But what about the new additions to the Dol Guldur scenes in DOS? Doesn't the EE have different versions of a few shots, or am I making that up?

The blacks will be crushed.

Again.

It looks like a different bandolier as well. Perhaps this is a different wookie altogether?

The top one looks really good as is. Do any of these have color correction?

Is it Black Angel?

And I was just looking at ESB trailers and found this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mz_YWNhKOkM

It has a shot of Lando exiting the top hatch that I don't think I'd ever seen before.

'Twas a joke, Handman.

Well I expect being on this forum may be more embarrassing than porn for some people...

For that matter, has it been said that the Falcon is actually CG? For all we know, they could have shot it practically then added motion blur and contrails later. Point is, after Gravity, I realize that I'm not a good judge of CGI anymore.

emanswfan said:

The droid being revealed to be a real live prop doesn't surprise me.  It certainly did not look like bad CGI to me.  I was more like "that's amazing CGI".  I think I assumed it was CG since I didn't think they'd be able to pull off the design for real.

That said I still severely dislike the CG falcon, but I'm certain it's just poor CGI as they only finished shooting less than 2 months ago!

Also, is it me or do the name cards have slightly different color grading than the trailer?

Now I'm wondering if the X-wings were real miniatures with CG water effects added to them.

adywan said:

So the ball droid (BB-8) isn't CG, but a real prop , as confirmed by Mark Hamill. In bet the whiners on the net that were saying the ball droid was "bad Cg" are going to be a little butthurt about this one ;)

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/mark-hamill-on-playing-with-the-star-wars-the-105015597302.html

This is the best thing I've heard about this movie since the trailer. I was wondering how they'd gotten the antenna to bounce around so realistically!

Is it the opening to the original 1977 Trailer?

Anchorhead said:

NeverarGreat said:

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-the-force-awakens-character-names/

• The “ball droid” is BB-8
• Oscar Isaac is Poe Dameron
• The Sith is Kylo Ren
• Daisy Ridley is Rey
• John Boyega is Finn

 In every measurable category, those names are light years ahead of Plagueis, Sidious, Maul, Dooku, Grevous, and Mace.  Lucas was a complete idiot with his moronic character names.  

Absolutely loving the names, as well as the total awesomeness that is the trading card homage.  Fantastic stuff.

 Any name is better than Dooku.

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-the-force-awakens-character-names/

• The “ball droid” is BB-8
• Oscar Isaac is Poe Dameron
• The Sith is Kylo Ren
• Daisy Ridley is Rey
• John Boyega is Finn