All I can say is that I hope retailers will help pressure George Lucas to release the original versions of the OT in high quality. Will they? I have no idea, but I hope so.
Death is a difficult issue for the world to deal with. Is it good or is it bad? Lucas has decided that it's good and natural. Love which tries to deny (and thus transcend) death is therefore an evil or "selfish" kind of love in his mind. It's pretty simple.
I wouldn't say this is an "awful" message, so far as the world's market of ideas is concerned, but it is one I disagree with in an ultimate sense. It's definitely in contrast with the traditional Jewish and Christian idea of resurrection. Under that system, we are not to value our lives more than God, but, if we value God, we will see our lives as good and desirable. ("whoever loses his life will keep it.") George wanted a more simplistic philosophy it seems.
GhostAlpha26 said:Its relative, how you remember something 5 years after you initially experienced it and after 25 years are not necessarily going to be the same or unchanged. Especially when that memory is of a film that has gone through countless alterations.
I know that memory is subjective in practice, but I was speaking in terms of the "ideal" past (as C3PX sort of explained). Naturally if you had a wonderful childhood and you learn that your loving father was, in fact, a child-molesting, psychopathic murderer, that will obviously sour your memories by making you question the reality of the past. But, I don't think the changes to Star Wars or George Lucas' weird behavior is any reason to question or alter my enjoyment of a piece of art he made before all of that. So, if people are having their childhoods "raped" by what George Lucas has done, I guess they're free to do so, but I see no direct rational behavior in that. I can understand it, but it's overly negative in the sense that it does not accurately reflect reality as best as possible. Star Wars was an awesome movie in its time and I see nothing that has happened since which can make me question that fact.
Nanner Split said:I'm thinking of dressing up as Burgess Meredith's Penguin just as a "fuck you" to the rest of them. :P
I don't think people will "get it."
skyjedi2005 said:He is still Raping peoples Childhoods, and crapping all over their memories.
I'm sorry to pick out this point, but I've never understood that argument. As far as I'm concerned that's not really possible.
What George Lucas is "raping" and "crapping" on are great works of art. My memories and childhood are static, unchanging moments in the past (ideally).
sean wookie said:Some people say skimpy Halloween costumes are a bad thing but I think they are great!
They look great but my problem is wondering why hot girls don't dress that way all the time.
Hmm, advanced GPU coding enhancements for games? It won't come out until 2010? Not worth waiting. I need a new computer now and I've been saving for over a year. I would like to see service pack 2 before I get Vista, though.
You have a point, but it's definitely twisted.
I'll be working.
skyjedi2005 said:You know the most moving thing emotionally about Lucas and Spielberg's Films is John Williams Music. I Don't think he gets nearly enough Credit what would Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Or Jurassic Park be without his music.
I basically agree with everything you just said in your last post. Pretty much the only thing I like from the Special Editions would be the new music John Williams did for them (that and I guess the additional footage of the snow beast still seems neat to me). However, at the same time, the special editions screwed over the great music at parts by making it too quiet.
All in all, music is yet another one of the finer aspects that simply serves to show how George Lucas doesn't really care about fine things.
I can agree that Mario64 was a fantastic translation of Mario style gameplay to 3D, but on the basic level of fun games as a whole set, it loses a lot of its importance for me. So I finally tracked down a copy of Castlevania: Symphony of the Night on eBay, and it should be here in a day or two. Is this awesome? Y/N
Nanner Split said:
Yes. That is one of the games I own that I would never part with.
Gaffer Tape said:but a lot of games that are still considered "the best of the series" came out on the N64, like Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time.
Mario 64 cannot compare with either Super Mario Bros. 3 or the amazing gem that was Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island. It was a neat "3D" game but it was easy and not very complicated at all.
I liked watching the original series in reruns as a kid, but I never really got into Star Trek until the later seasons of TNG got me hooked. There are many brilliant episodes from that period of the show. Still, Star Trek TOS is good fun.
Just so you know, I haven't been getting this problem lately, so if you fixed something it was a good fix.
C3PX said:Janskeet said:Nobody cares what you think by the way. Flaming is against the TOS and going to get you banned in a nano second. I have been here awhile and this board is full of conservatives not very tolerant of newbies and ignorance.
That is all a bunch of BS. As you can see, Janskeet is obviously not very tolerant. We do care what you think, newbies are more than welcome and as long as you obey the rules, you are not going to get banned. You don't get banned around here for stating your opinions. This is a pretty laid back place, and great place to hang out and discuss whatever you like.
However, you are not going to get anyone to rally with you to sue Lucas. You'd have no case for starters, and it just isn't the right way to go about things. As much as me and others here think Lucas is wrong in not releasing a restored OOT, he is well within his legal rights.
I actually agree with the critique Janskreet has made of this thread. I agree with you that his specific statement there was overboard, but I can overlook that in light of what he was specifically responding to in that instance. KillLucas was clearly trying to flame him.
As a vegetable I doubt I'd care too much at that point, but yeah, pull the plug.
Mielr said:I don't give a crap about how many awards SW won. I don't need a film to win awards for me to like it. Of all the stuff in Puggo's post that I quoted, why did you decide to pick on that one line?
I also quoted:
Puggo wrote:
...It also represented the state of the art for special effects at that time. As such, every cultural, historical, and artistic sensibility that I know of demands that it be preserved in its original form. Students of the history of cinema should be able to study it, for example. IF a real preservation was done, as it should be, nobody here would mind if GL or anyone else wanted to make updates and release those too. However, since GL is actively stopping it from being preserved, it is natural for film lovers to be angry.
With that in mind, as I've said many times before, it isn't that we "hate" the SE. If anything, some of us sort-of "resent" it, because it has "replaced" the original iconic film. The improvements would be way cool, if the original were also preserved. This has nothing to do with what scenes I prefer, and everything to do with preserving historically significant film art. Until the original is preserved, like virtually every other major motion picture is, the SE will serve as an annoying reminder of what still hasn't been done, may never be done, and the gap that exists in the cinematographic historical record.
Mielr, negative one is simply a jackass out to provoke people with brainless arguments and offensive accusations. My suggestion is to simply not respond. :)
Obviously Star War's awards are important for the sake of its notoriety and respect in our popular culture. But, as you say, the people who actually like the film are more important. Considering how many of us would love to see it have a decent DVD/Blu-ray release, the profit to be gained from either project would be more than large enough to cover any costs. In light of the resources that George Lucas has available, it's outright unethical of him to keep the film as suppressed as he does.
Anyone who disagrees with the sensible opinion I just outlined in the above paragraph doesn't even deserve to be given the time of day.
Time (the magazine) is stupid.
I hate assholes who have nothing better to do than attack and mock other people just because those other people want to have and discuss what they consider to be a good thing.
I don't purchase any of Lucas' shit and even if I did that would have no bearing upon what people are complaining about on this forum. As vbangle so brilliantly said in another thread, something with the name "Star Wars" can still be shitty. In like manner, something that is "owned" by George Lucas is also capable of being shitty. If you want to worship the man as some infallible deity and visciously attack anyone who doesn't follow that religion of yours, you can go right ahead and do that, but all us normal people with look at you and think you're an idiot.
As for me, I would like George Lucas to release a decent version of the real Star Wars on Blu-ray, but if he doesn't it's not the end of the world for me. In the meantime, it's fun to discuss how George Lucas has bungled the management of his property. I know that makes me a weirdo in terms of popular culture, but at least my weirdness isn't designed to bother or degrade my fellow human beings.
Jay said:Just keep reading the link I posted and eventually it'll sink in.
Hint: McCain's Freddie/Fannie money primarily came from lobbyists. Is that somehow better than Obama's private contributions by company employees?
Your link is not about lobbyists but campaign contributions and therefore its numbers make no sense. Maybe the New York Times was getting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac confused with some other company?
Jay said:http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/07/fact-check-did-obama-get-second-most-money-from-freddie-and-fannie/
That article is simplistic and the quote from the New York Times makes no sense at all with what it says at the beginning. Here's the actual data on who got money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac:
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html
The Center for Responsive Politics is a non-partisan group and I'd trust anything they say over the New York Times (which is out to sell papers and not to tell the truth). This information was updated on September 2nd of this year so I don't where the hell the numbers of McCain getting "$169,000" and Obama getting only "$16,000" comes from (sounds made up to me). Also, I'm surprised that the person who wrote that article doesn't don't know what a PAC is; while companies can't donate money directly, their employees are still able to donate in big groups.
The truth is, Obama directly supported what Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was doing. His campaign even trusted the corrupt, ex-CEO of Fannie Mae (Franklin Raines) enough to ask him for advice about the housing market despite the fact that the guy knows nothing about the housing market and lied to steal money from his company. It's just a fact! Obama is an idiot.
That's not to say McCain isn't an idiot in his own ways either, but for people to go around blabbing about McCain having a "cemetery of skeletons, blah blah blah" is absurd. McCain has actually had a strong record of resisting influence and apposing earmarks. While he's definitely an incredibly stupid, hot-headed jerk, making him out to be some corrupt guy that owes a lot of bad people favors is just laughable. Considering how Obama, by comparison, has only been around for two years, he's been involved in far more corruption in the form of favors, bad people, and, worst of all, support for stupidly foolish policies.
Bah, generally it seems like people just disappoint me every time. I don't know why I keep expecting better. People just don't care about the truth as I continually hope they would. I don't care who wins some worthless race. I care about people and ethics. The fact that John McCain and Obama are our choices is pathetic and the fact that people seem to worship either candidate is more pathetic. Elections have been reduced to fucking sports games. (Yayz, kick der football!) People just pick their stupid little teams and stop caring about anything real. Grow up.
thebigguy said:Ditto
Very funny, Rob. :)
Jay said:
Obama has surrounded himself with genuinely smart people, his message has stayed mostly positive, and he'll carry that intelligence and positivity with him to the White House.
Yes, Obama surrounds himself with smart people like Warren Buffet, a guy who got rich selling insurance to people so they could avoid paying the criminally high death tax and by purchasing bussinesses from families trying to avoid the pain of that same tax, who then turned right around and said we need to keep the death tax high. He also recently invested a ton of money in the stock market and stands to see an increase on his investment now that the 700 billion dollar bailout of Bush, McCain, and Obama has been passed.
Oh and let's not forget the other "genuinely smart people" like the corrupt CEOs who got "golden parachutes" after ruining their companies, the unrepentant terrorists, and racist preachers. :)
Ahh, yes, and Obama has a mostly positive message too! We have the hope of higher taxes! We have the hope of more government regulation! We have the hope of punishing productivity and rewarding negative investments! We have the hope of giving out more corporate welfare to Obama's rich friends! It will be wonderful! I can't wait! :)
Oh well, soon this bullshit will cause our economy to fall apart. The recent "bailout" solution will only make the problem worse when the shit finally hits the fan. At this point it will be better to have a person who actually supports the socialism that will destroy our country in office when it happens (as apposed to people who claim to support free market economics but then turn right around and enact the programs, regulations, and monetary policies of the socialists he or she claims to appose).
So was the debate as painful for McCain as people say? I heard he kept trying to use the random attack approach that his stupid advisors had clearly prepped him to use in the first debate. I didn't watch it because I already know that McCain can't be counted on to be someone I can support on the basis of the issues he's currently chosen to discuss. He also killed my motivation to support him after supporting the bailout plan.
Why attack Obama about the financial mess if you can't offer a clear explanation for what caused it and how to solve it? McCain is a fool. Divine intervention is all that will be able win the race for him at this point. Time for classical liberals, libertarians, and conservatives to buckle up for an Obama presidency.
The first two questions don't have a suitable answer for me. I found the website by typing "original trilogy" into Google. I joined the forums to discuss and get news/details about "GOUT." I stayed because I'm interested in discussing things with the various people here.