logo Sign In

Superweapon VII

User Group
Members
Join date
30-May-2022
Last activity
25-Apr-2025
Posts
849

Post History

Post
#1643899
Topic
What do you HATE about the EU?
Time

darklordoftech said:

Spartacus01 said:

darklordoftech said:

The BBY/ABY calendar existing in-universe.

Why do you hate it? I do not mind it.

Why would the New Republic establish a new year 0? Isn’t that something totalitarian regimes do? Why not use whatever year 0 the Valorum-era Republic used?

My problem is that the Battle of Endor makes a more logical start for a Year 0 than the Battle of Yavin.

Post
#1639173
Topic
GOOD things about the prequels?
Time

JadedSkywalker said:

But i have the same problem with them i do with the DIsney trilogy they don’t look used universe. They look too new and shiny.

I’ve never understood this complaint about the prequels. Now, I think the art direction for the PT is definitely off in many regards; there should’ve been a more retro-futuristic/fantasy aesthetic than what was presented. But being set before the dark times, things should look new and shiny.

Post
#1639167
Topic
Superman 2025
Time

Yeah, sorry, no. This movie’s not for me.

I’m a big Superman fan, but with this caveat: My favourite versions of the character are the original Siegel-&-Shuster Superman and the “Triangle Era” Superman from the comics; the further away any other version of the character are from that baseline, the less I like them. And I have a particular dislike of the pre-Crisis Earth-One Superman and Donnerverse Superman, which is what this movie’s clearly cribbing the most from. The moment I saw Krypto, my eyes glazed over. And don’t get me started on the shared universe noise they continue to shove down our collective throat.

Clearly, there’s an unbridgeable gulf between what I want in a Superman movie and what Hollywood’s willing to dish out.

Post
#1637843
Topic
Before The Prequels were made, what the Jedi were supposed to be like?
Time

Channel72 said:

I agree the Jedi should use lightsabers more sparingly. Although, the “defense only” thing is hard to salvage even with the OT alone, given that Kenobi was supposed to be a war-time General. Even in A New Hope, Kenobi violently murders those two alien thugs in the Cantina. It was self-defense, obviously, but Kenobi could have handled them in some non-lethal manner, presumably. I mean, he could have tried to “mind trick” them into leaving Luke alone, for example.

To play devil’s advocate, we don’t know from screen evidence alone that Ben killed either of them. We only see a severed limb. It’s only the screenplay and novelization which have them mortally wounded, IIRC.

Post
#1634712
Topic
Before The Prequels were made, what the Jedi were supposed to be like?
Time

JadedSkywalker said:

Warriors that can put down rebellions and can end conflicts but don’t seek them out because they are peacekeepers. And negotiators. Their entire bodies and minds are sharp and honed like a weapon, but they only use a lightsaber in defense, never for violence as its own end. The Sith use violence and intimidation to rule.

One thing I would’ve like to have seen in the prequels is the Jedi relying on martial arts to non-lethally dispatch their foes, utilizing their lightsabers only in kill-or-be-killed situations.

Post
#1632896
Topic
Muxing up Movie quotes
Time

“Come in, Booji Boy. You’re late. Have you got the papers the Chinaman gave you?”

“Here it is, Dad. Is it a surprise?”

“Yes, Booji. In the past, this information has been suppressed, but now it can be told. Every man, woman, and mutant on this planet shall know the truth about de-evolution.”

“Oh, Dad, we’re all DEVO!”

Post
#1631250
Topic
<strong>Star Wars (1977)</strong> - a general <strong>Random Thoughts</strong> thread
Time

G&G-Fan said:

I’ve heard several stories about how the reason for the Death Star II in ROTJ is because Lucas originally wanted to save the Death Star for last, but didn’t think he’d be able to make more then one movie.

That just leaves me to wonder: what would it even be like if he had stuck with that plan, saving the Death Star for the 3rd film in the trilogy, and thus ANH was without the Death Star? A huge chunk of the plot revolves around it. It almost seems impossible to imagine the film without it. In that case, what was he thinking the movie would be about?

Some possibilities:

  • We’d have seen an incomplete Death Star (possibly resembling the Death Star II).
  • Instead of being obliterated by the Death Star, Alderaan would’ve been nuked from orbit by the Devastator.
  • Leia’s imprisonment/rescue would’ve been staged on the Devastator instead of the Death Star.
  • The movie would’ve been shorter, ending an a cliffhanger with the Falcon’s escape.

Presumably the events of TESB could’ve happened sooner, days or weeks after SW, with Vader remaining subordinate to Tarkin, who would’ve survived to the end of the trilogy.

Post
#1627231
Topic
General Star Wars <strong>Random Thoughts</strong> Thread
Time

Hal 9000 said:

Did all the humans in Star Wars have a common ancestor on a planet or did at least some of them develop independently?

I used to go with the former, but now I prefer the latter. I’d rather the SW Universe operate on fantastical laws than futilely try to shoehorn realistic physics into it.