TheBoost

Ghostbusters said:

The Boost said:

"Before I was married I was a consummate ladies man AND managed to watch "Star Wars" all the time!"

I was picking up a little bit of sarcasm there.

Not a bit.

I was a bad tipper, a bad dancer, and my penmanship was awful, but from 13 to meeting my bride-to-be, I never wanted for female companionship. And I've always been a huge 'geek.'

Before AOTC came out I made my then girlfriend watch all the SW movies with me in a row. I used to have my significant other pick me up from my D&D games. I once went clubbing dressed as Dr. Who and got laid that night. Every t-shirt I owned was nerd-themed, and it never got in my way.

There's nothing mutually exclusive about these dweeby things we love, and lovin' the ladies.

Ghostbusters said:

 I'm assuming that most of you here are in the introvert category and probably more on the nerdy/loner/bad with ladies side.

Before I was married I was a consummate ladies man AND managed to watch "Star Wars" all the time!

Bingowings said:

It would tie in with the end of the LOTR film trilogy, where Frodo's story is added to Bilbo's.

The films aren't the books and I don't have too much of a problem with that.

I'm willing to enjoy the framing story. "The Hobbit" film is not only an adaptation of "The Hobbit" book but is also going to be for many people the sequal to LOTR. It's important that viewers understand how the stories fit together.

I'm curious exactly HOW Galadriel and Saruman will fit in. Tolkien DOES have a place for them in the wider tale, so it's not like it's mindless fanwank, but it's not in the book exactly.

I think they all need to be judged on their own merits.

I used to be a real 'remakes are so lame' kinda film snob, until I learned "The Maltese Falcon' is a remake OF A REMAKE! (third version of that story). "The Wizard of Oz" is also a remake.

see you auntie said:

What do you think?

I love that he/you have a (?) grabby-trigger gun thing on the wall nearby. In case you drop the mouse.

I moved back to my home town a year and a half ago to take care of my sick dad (cancer, doin' better now). Couple that with an infant baby (now a 20 month baby) me or the Mrs. haven't had much of a social life. Which was a huge change, because we were social butterflies up in San Francisco where we had been. Things are slowly getting to be a bit more jolly for us. Reconnected with some old mates, actually went out to the pub just last week.

facebook is a great way to find out if girls are single or not. It saves you the embarrassment of having to ask them.

LIES. If a girl wants you to know she's got a fella, she tells you. If she doesn't, it means she's looking to trade up.

skyjedi2005 said:

Anchorhead said:

Besides -  the "Lucas has completely destroyed the future of cinema as we know it" threads are best left to a professional..... 

Peter Biskind in Easy Riders, Raging bulls accuses Lucas and Spielberg of just that destroying the future of cinema by making it about the blockbuster and special effects and not cinema but really just crap kiddie fare.

I always wonder what those people saying "now it's all about SFX and kiddie fare" thought of the 1950's giant bug films, or the endless stream of B-westerns, sword-and-sandals movies, or Poverty Row adventure serials turned out in the Golden Age of cinema.

Other than being really really good, how is "Jaws" somehow fundamentally different from "Beast from 10000 Fathoms" that Spielberg somehow deserves 'blame'?

Was the crime making genre cinema good enough that lots of people wanted to see it?

I might add that since all three prequals made well in excess of half a billion dollars in world wide box office, a lot of people made a lot of money off these bad films.

Bingowings said:

I'm still waiting to find out the Christopher Ecclestone was really the Master driven differently insane by the Time War and traveling around in Paul McGann's stolen Tardis deluding himself that he is the Doctor.

Those were the days.

That would have been SOOOOOOO cool.

twooffour said:

... ...

 

Uuuhm.. Boost... did you even read what I wrote to you? I understand you left most of it out and replaced it with a "..." for clarity purposes, but does the "..." actually stand for "tldr" again? Why the heck did I just waste half a page on you??

Now, if you read between the lines there, he's just ridiculing this lack of exposition and the inexplicable "power reactor" that just pops up in the palace. Playing additionally dumb on an already threadbare, lazy plot, is an effective and obvious ironic device.

 

I've read your posts.

Primarily, I disagree that a lengthy, poorly done, and unfunny review deserves my hard work to 'interpret' and 'read between the lines' and what he might mean. I did my time doing that with Melville in college. If RLM wants me to notice that the Jedi are dressed the same as moisture farmers (I already did) then he shouldn't say dumb shit like 'how did the robot know they were Jedi?' 

 Inventing stupid things to complain about is not a brilliant rhetorical device with biting irony and satire worthy of Oscar Wilde. It's just inventing stupid things to complain about.

And in a movie that has faster-than-light travel, magic powers, a planet covered with a giant city, a large "power reactor" (is that what that is?) under the city doesn't seem that odd, let alone "inexplicable." Why are there bottomless pits in the Death Star and Cloud City? Death Star doesn't even have rails!

Point is, the fact we even have to "figure anything out ourselves" (which, in this case, translates to "guess the script for the scriptwriter"), is the movie's flaw.

So I'm supposed to stay up all night trying to decode what RLM's reviews mean, but watching this movie nothing can be implied, it all must be  (wait for it) SPELLED OUT TO ME?

Lets take a look at what's implied but not stated in the OT.

• Ben lives near Luke to look out for his friends son.
• Boba Fett guessed where Han was going and beat him there.
• The Death Star can't blow up the gas giant Yavin.
• Mon Mothma is a leader in the Rebellion
• Long-Nose in Mos Eisley probably got paid for selling out the heroes.

In 33 years has anyone ever asked "Why did Long-Nose guy sell out the heroes? Why wasn't his relationship with the stormtroopers more clearly defined?"

Could you honestly not figure out why the TF would want an investigation sent to Naboo by the Senate?

I actually don't even remember if I ever brought that up. Where did I say that?

Just something else RLM said, I assumed you agreed with. One of the 800 ridiculous points he raised.

If you mean the motivations of the main villains and the sense behind the whole plot of the movie, then, um, no, it's actually one of the FUNDAMENTAL flaws of this movie.

Lets pretend for a moment that the motivations of the villains aren't perfectly clear in every respect.  Let's say that it's not explicitly stated in the movie (which it is) that the cowardly TF made a bargain with the shadowy Sidious to blockade and invade Naboo. Lets pretend that we don't plainly see that it directly results in Palpy/Sidy increasing his own political power and also that we have no idea what possible benefit the TF could get from being allied with a powerful politician.

Seriously, if there were that 20 seconds of dialogue where Sidy says something like "As you know Nute, we had agreed previously that if you use this blockade, which is effective since much of Naboo's economy is based on exporting wheat, as a ruse to invade and deliver this signed treaty, I will use it to promote my own political goals, secret to you along with my identity, but I will arrange the lifting of the taxes you find so objectionable and help you in other ways. Anyways, here is my apprentice Darth Maul."  (info I and an 8 year old understood through implication) you think this would have suddenly been a FUNDAMENTALLY better movie?  You would have been FUNDAMENTALLY more satisfied? Would one person in the whole world have actually liked TPM better because of it?

DuracellEnergizer said:

I thought that Palpatine was a self-taught darkside sorceror instead of a Sith Lord.

 My thoughts too. Never imagined "Sith" meant 'anti-Jedi.'

Vader was Lord of the Sith, which meant something wicked, I don't know.

Palpy was just evil, and did evil hoodoo. He forsaw the future and could zap lightning, which I thought meant he clearly was NOT anything like the Jedi.

I remember when I was an avid bodybuilder and ate six or seven meals a day.

Looking back with nostalgia it was great.

In reality I seem to recall loathing steamed fish and poached chicken breast (my staples at the time) and hating having to pee constantly from drinking 124 oz of water a day.

Sluggo said:

 

Boost, I don't feel that sorry for you.  Do you ever cook things on your own?  That may be your only hope.

But, yeah, I get ya.  Sometimes a dudes got to have a white bread sandwich.

 I cook breakfast on weekends, but dinner is the wife's job (and she hands out the jobs).

The only option is to have my wife cook dinner, then go make my own... which would also result in sleeping on the couch.

And I don't expect to be felt sorry for. That's the problem: that the problem is so unproblematic, I have no skills to deal with it .

And to the OP:
Just had a bowl of leftover herb mashed potatoes and spinach and a cup of green tea.

I figured Yoda had been on Dagobah way longer than the Empire had existed. I used to figure he had lots of little Jedi there getting training all the time,. and therefore I never thought he and Empy had any relationship.

I gotta vent.

My wife is an excellent cook. She's constantly mastering new skills and 99% of what she makes is delicious.

But sometimes I just want a sandwich. Two slices of whitebread, bologna, and individiaully wrapped yellow cheese slice.

Not only do we not have these ingridients, when she makes a sandwhich it's on freshbaked bread, with sliced turkey, a homemade aloe spread and heirloom tomatoes. Delicious, appreciated, but sometimes a dude just wants a whitebread sandwich.

Case in point, I'm sick so she asks me what I want for dinner. I ask for tomato soup and a grilled cheese... comfort food from my youth.

I get home from work and she serves up a focacia-bread cheese-spread fingersandwich thing, and a tomato/beet bisque substance. All wonderful and delicious, but just not the same.

Ive never said nothing, because how does one address the problem "honey, you work too hard and are to exceptional at your household duty." And she's so (rightfully) proud of her work, I don't want to hurt her feelings.

Is there actually any measurably decrease in person-person interaction in the real world? Or is it simply a new layer of digital communication layered over it?

I work at a high school. The kids see as much of people as they always seem to have. They still get together on weekends, after school. They're just always ALSO interacting via the netweb with texts and stuff.

Yeah there are lonely people who spend too much time online, but I dont think that, if the net didn't exist, all of them would suddenly be social butterflies (not denying that the net might be an enabling factor to such things though). Yeah I play "Civilization IV" with pals online, but given our busy lives if we didn't play online the alternative was not playing at all.

Perhaps in the long run Digital Social Networking and crap will have more visible effects on first world societies, but now I don't think it's made much of a REAL effect on the simple ammount of people-on-people contact.

haljordan28 said:

 

the only pieces outside of the OT films I have enjoyed are  Rebel Mission to ord mantel

 Which one? I think there are three.

twooffour said:

TheBoost said:

twooffour said:

TheBoost said:

I still stand you have to be "retarded" not to "understand" the plot of this film on the first "viewing".

He understood and mentioned what there was, and explained how the lack of any additional information made a deeper understanding IMPOSSIBLE.

I honestly don't know what kind of 'deeper' meaning you're looking for.

Should Nute Gunray have done a PowerPoint to explain to the audience how taxes effect his business? Should the Queen have explained to her councellors why a blockade was bad for them? Should Qui-Gon have worn a t-shirt that read "Protaganist?" Should the protocol droid have said, "I'm mostly sure they're Jedi because they looked and acted like Jedi and had lightsabers and Jedi-brand boots"? Would these things have helped you reach that deeper understanding you so crave?

 

So you kinda admit the fact that the movie provides no information on those aspects, while simultaneously criticizing RLM for (intentionally?) "not understanding" those aspects? ;)

At the end of the day, you're pretty much painting yourself into a corner because what little understandable "plot" there was (i.e. Sidious using a trivial McGuffin for his own goals, which, in the movie, is nothing more than getting his alter ego promoted to chancellor), RLM acknowledged, and all the absent elaborations were criticized for not being there, rather than "purposefully not understood" (hint - by your admission, the movie didn't provide any of those details for anyone to "understand). ;)

... ... ...

 

So um yea, not sure if you're trying to defend the movie, or just try to put down RLM's review for the sake of it, or because you didn't watch it properly and missed out on like 90% of its content, but basically, TPM fails and so do you.

 By my admission!?!??! Wow, you've backed me into a corner Columbo! Here I am admitting the film doesn't waste time dealing with answers to questions you keep asking that I maintain are stupid and don't need to be answered or even addressed.

Are you honestly unable to grasp that a planetary blockade is a bad thing for Naboo? Were you honestly confused when the two men in robes turned out to be Jedi? Can you honestly not figure out how a shady politician like Sidious/Palpatine might be manipulating the TF without it being spelled out to you? Could you honestly not figure out why the TF would want an investigation sent to Naboo by the Senate? Your hero, RLM apparently couldn't.

TPM has many flaws. These are not them. These are stupid.

Oh yeah, epic pwnz on you.

doubleofive said:

I believe, yes we are. They have the same face and voice, and are credited as the same actor. The dead giveaway for anyone with doubts is the end of TPM, where Mace asks "but who was destroyed? The master, or the apprentice" and the camera pans to Palpatine.

And the whole cheesy "we will watch your career with great interest!"

 Agreed.

Even watching the PT first, you're plainly meant to realize it, at least by the end of TPM.

Well, I finished Mr. 108's responce. It would be a lot shorter with reasonable size font, but that's neither here nor there.

I think he does a fine job pointing out where RLM TPM review is based primarily on willful stupidity and intentional misrepresentation.

I think the RLM TPM review is almost entirely snark and fanboy-rage (using that term with full acceptance of it's dismissive nature). The flaws in that film are so much deeper than stupid comments like "Why does the Queen have a gun in her armrest?"

The RLM AOTC and even moreso the RLM ROTS are better reviews that I don't think could be so totally torn apart in this manner. In ROTS, RLM actually gets into the fundamental failures of the film as a storytelling device, rather than just making up reasons to be mad at plot points.

Thanks Quackula (great name btw) for the email.

Gee, JediTray/Kenobius is kinda a butthole.

On an unrelated note, yesterday when I saw the new name for the ANH:R thread with "2016," I thought it was this thread, and ESB:R was due out in 2016.

My first thought was "damn, that Wampa is going to be impressive."

twooffour said:

 

Before everyone starts complaining about how long the rebuttal is, just because "of a movie"

 You are aware of what site you're on right? There's an 800 page thread going over ESB frame-by-frame, and we claim to LIKE that movie. :)

PS
And seriously, if anyone would email me this, kick me a PM. Thanks.

TV's Frink said:

Octorox said:

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-fan-writes-108page-rebuttal-red-letter-medias-phantom-menace-review/

 

Not going to read it anytime soon but somebody provided a 108 page rebuttal to RLMs TPM review.

A letter uploaded to Megaupload = the very definition of tl;dr

 A short novel rebutting a video review of a movie that's 2/3 as long as the movie itself. This is getting surreal.

I can't get megaupload at work. Anyone wanna send this thing to me? :)

Moth3r said:

TheBoost said:

Moth3r said:

You should go and correct Wookiepedia. They have it all wrong.

 Dear God. I tried to out-ridiculous the EU and failed.  

I suppose you contributed the part of the article about the female ronto in heat?

 If I was tripping on acid I couldn't have imagined something like that. No, a well paid EU writer came up with that brilliance no doubt.