chyron8472

How very mature of you. -.-

Don’t act like you’re superior to me. I tire of your condescending tone.

I do not possess the edit. I examined it to determine if I wanted to possess it. If I wanted to possess it, I would follow then by obtaining the official release. But I don’t want to possess it.

And pull the stick out, please. The point is to keep the studio from losing money from people acquiring a film that they ought to have purchased but instead got for free. I do not have the film. I just watched it once to see if I wanted to have it.

I do not have or keep edits for movies I don’t own.

TV’s Frink said:

Have you not seen the original or something?

Yes. The first one was the best one, primarily because Vanessa attempted to hold him to being respectable.

What did you expect?

See above:

chyron8472 said:

…Why did I watch this?

And I sure hope you own the original.

I would purchase the official release if I liked the edited version enough to keep the edit. I didn’t keep it. I certainly don’t like the official release enough to buy it on its own merit. Should I have rented the official release at the time that I watched the edit?

Matt Lauer was fired from his job because of sexual misconduct allegations. Even if what he did was not illegal, and even if (hypothetically) he held a belief system that said he was not only allowed to, but also correct in, acting that way—he is legally allowed to believe that and to say so but his employer is not required by law to employ him any further when it makes them look bad.

Well, seriously. People have this thing where one person may wonder if another can get away with something, to which the other person says “It’s a free country.” Our country is free from the oppression of tyranny in government. If you are at school and start spouting Nazi propaganda, the school can detain, suspend, or expel you. You are not protected from disciplinary action from your place of education or employment when your behavior is contrary to their guidelines.

I’m talking about behavior, not opinion. One can have whatever opinion they want, but when they share it, they open themselves to criticism. If criticism of you can cast a bad light on your employer by association, your employer is under no obligation to tolerate that.

Warbler, people have been fired from their jobs because they posted pictures of themselves drunk on Facebook. The Constitution of the United States does not protect people from that.

Warbler said:

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”

Warbler, laws protecting you at your workplace are different from laws protecting you from the government. If you routinely don’t come dressed appropriately for your job, you can get fired. If you make a public statement that potentially can make the company look bad and thus hurt sales, you can get fired.

The First Amendment gives the right to freedom of speech, association, assembly, and the press. It does not inherently protect you at your job. We do have laws (not amendments) in place to protect people from being fired based on race or gender, but that’s not this. And you would have to prove that was the only reason for the firing.

Having an opinion is one thing. Posting it in the newspaper is something else.

ray_afraid said:

Warbler said:

ray_afraid said:

Seeing MLK association mentioned as equal to Nazi association makes me sick.
Having to say “Nazis are bad” makes me sick.
Why do I ever click on this thread?

I DID NOT SAY MLK WAS EQUAL TO THE NAZIS!!!

ffs

Your post makes it seem as though you think hating Nazis is as antiquated as hating MLK supporters. Or that Nazi Hate should change for the same reasons.
And you certainly seem to think that there’s nothing wrong with a “peaceful” Nazi.
And I disagree. Hard.

I think “peaceful Nazi” is a contradiction in terms. Being a white supremacist is one thing, but being a Nazi is a higher echelon of wacko.

Again, Warbler, someone can be fired for other reasons which being a Nazi contributes to. We have no idea what the official reason given was for his being fired, but it doesn’t have to be “because he’s a Nazi.”

I think my sarcasm detector is malfunctioning.

I just really hated the Austin Powers character, and no amount of editing can apparently fix that for me.

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

As far as I know, this guy hasn’t killed anyone or committed any acts of violence. Until he breaks some law, he has as much right to be a nazi someone does to be a member of BLM. That is the way America works.

You can absolutely be fired for your political beliefs in America – that’s how America has worked every day since its inception. Whether that’s a good or bad thing, and whether we should change the way America works so that you can’t do this, is open for discussion.

Again, being a Nazi isn’t equivalent to being a member of BLM, in the same sense that being a cannibal is not equivalent to being a vegetarian.

The way America works is if you can be fired by being a Nazi, you can also be fired for being a member of BLM.

You don’t have to be fired specifically for being a Nazi (or BLM). You can be fired or other reasons, like creating an uncomfortable working environment for other employees or clients/customers, or for a personality conflict. And that’s to start with. It might be shaky, depending on the individual circumstances, but an employer isn’t absolutely obligated to employ someone if they are disruptive in some way.

Austin Powers: Sanitized

…Why did I watch this? The edits were good, but the film was not. Austin Powers is just altogether extremely puerile, and I found no humor in the endless dick jokes.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Yeah, and Harrison said the same thing about Han once upon a time.

And George also said the same thing about the Sequels not too long ago either.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I’ve really come to hate the use of “gay” as an insult.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7Myff5xAZM&t=10s

Warbler said:

chyron8472 said:

Warbler said:

chyron8472 said:

I once had a conversation about Star Wars with someone at a board game group I had attended. He disputed my saying that Padme dying in Episode III is a plothole for Leia remembering her, by saying Leia was referring to her adoptive mother–Bail Organa’s wife.

I can’t have discussions with people IRL about Star Wars when their information is inherently flawed. I mean, it obviously wouldn’t be appropriate to prove to him then and there that he didn’t know what he was talking about. If I had a conversation about it on the web, I could link a Youtube video that proves my point, but in real life that would create awkwardness.

Please link to this vid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k-3AIIiHF8

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”
“Just a little bit. She died when I was very young.”
“What do you remember?”
“Just images really. Feelings.”
“Tell me.”
“She was very beautiful…kind, but sad. Why are you asking me this?”
“I have no memory of my mother. I never knew her.”
[…]
“The Force is strong in my family. My father has it. I have it. And… my sister has it.”

Obviously Leia’s “real mother” refers to Padme Amidala, not Queen Breha Organa. Also, Queen Breha was alive until 0 BBY, where she was killed when Alderaan was destroyed. So Leia thinking Luke meant her makes no sense.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Breha_Organa/Legends

Is that source official canon? Nothing in the movies themselves says when Bail Organa’s wife died.

Luke says “Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?” which obviously would refer to Leia’s biological mother. If one were to assume that Leia did not know she was adopted, and that she thought Bail Organa and his wife were actually her biological parents, then it would be more of a shock to her to know that her foster parents were not biologically related to her at all (ie. they lied to her), than just to come to know the identity of her biological father.

When Luke says that Vader is his father, she is revolted at the idea. When he says he is her brother, she says she always knew. She does not dispute any claim that the Organas may not be her real parents or that Vader is her real father. And if she somehow always knew that Luke was her brother, then she also somehow always knew that the Organas were not her biological parents. Therefore, asking her who her real mother is would not invoke a response from her referring to the Queen of Alderaan.

Also, in the context of Luke proclaiming himself to be her brother, and asking Leia if she knew her mother, the viewer should obviously infer that he meant their mother.

It makes much more sense, in the context of the conversation alone, and considering just the Original Trilogy by itself, before the Prequels were created, for Leia to understand him to mean her and Luke’s biological mother—unless you’re willing to retcon the OT to fit the Prequels rather than the other way around, but most people round these parts frown upon such a practice.

https://www.google.com/search?q=define+retcon
ret·con (retroactive continuity)
noun
"(in a film, television series, or other fictional work) a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events, typically used to facilitate a dramatic plot shift or account for an inconsistency."

So unless you want George to make yet another (albeit indirect) change to the OT, Padme dying in Episode III is straight up a plothole. Canon or not.

Warbler said:

chyron8472 said:

I once had a conversation about Star Wars with someone at a board game group I had attended. He disputed my saying that Padme dying in Episode III is a plothole for Leia remembering her, by saying Leia was referring to her adoptive mother–Bail Organa’s wife.

I can’t have discussions with people IRL about Star Wars when their information is inherently flawed. I mean, it obviously wouldn’t be appropriate to prove to him then and there that he didn’t know what he was talking about. If I had a conversation about it on the web, I could link a Youtube video that proves my point, but in real life that would create awkwardness.

Please link to this vid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k-3AIIiHF8

“Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?”
“Just a little bit. She died when I was very young.”
“What do you remember?”
“Just images really. Feelings.”
“Tell me.”
“She was very beautiful…kind, but sad. Why are you asking me this?”
“I have no memory of my mother. I never knew her.”
[…]
“The Force is strong in my family. My father has it. I have it. And… my sister has it.”

Obviously Leia’s “real mother” refers to Padme Amidala, not Queen Breha Organa. Also, Queen Breha was alive until 0 BBY, where she was killed when Alderaan was destroyed. So Leia thinking Luke meant her makes no sense.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Breha_Organa/Legends

DuracellEnergizer said:

TANYA ROBERTS

I thought the purpose of makeup was to make ones beauty look natural, as though you’re not wearing any makeup. She definitely has too much makeup on.

TV’s Frink said:

TV’s Frink said:

The obvious lesson is never have a discussion about anything.

WISHS

/thread?
/forum?

TV’s Frink said:

Mark’s Down On Your Syntax said:

It’s not often I encounter somebody who talks to me about Star Wars in real life. The man I met today has made me very grateful for this.

He began his lecture (based on us being on nodding terms and my often wearing Star Wars clothing of some kind) with the old “I hate Disney” routine but followed it up with something quite novel. He educated me on the fact that all of Disney’s recent output was just stolen from George Lucas!

The Force Awakens was a straight-up copy of the original film and all they did was swap a boy for a girl in the lead role. The whole plot of stealing the Death Star plans was taken directly from a game and they only changed one word in the title (he was referring to The Force Unleashed.) Somehow he’s mashed together TFA and Rogue One in his mind.

He also believes the next film is the final one. This he knows because it has the word “last” in the title.

He’s amazed more people haven’t figured this whole thing out. As for me, I’m just amazed.

I’m amazed people like this exist in real life, I assumed they only spent time here.

I once had a conversation about Star Wars with someone at a board game group I had attended. He disputed my saying that Padme dying in Episode III is a plothole for Leia remembering her, by saying Leia was referring to her adoptive mother–Bail Organa’s wife.

I can’t have discussions with people IRL about Star Wars when their information is inherently flawed. I mean, it obviously wouldn’t be appropriate to prove to him then and there that he didn’t know what he was talking about. If I had a conversation about it on the web, I could link a Youtube video that proves my point, but in real life that would create awkwardness.

Possessed said:

I’d like to think Jesus Christ, who was supposed to be the epitomy of a perfect human being, would have thicker skinned than that. I mean we are made in God’s image, so would not God have a sense of humor also?

I didn’t say Jesus was offended. I said I was. Well, annoyed is a better word.

Warbler said:

AveKender said:

I do not doubt for a second that the Civil War centered around slavery.

But countries come and go. A more decentralized, non-capitalistic model of socio-political/econonic organization is whats needed for the people here. I do not advocate for reaching towards any sort of utopia, as down that road lies a heap of atrocities regardless of the specific vision to which the utopianists in question aspire. I simply think that the US 50 state model has outlived its usefulness and that it is about time for world history to proceed under the aegis of the Eastern powers, China and India.

AveKender said:

I do not pay attention to this daily dithering about with what this Congressman said or what that party chair said or did, as such things are just losing sight of the forest for the trees. We are seeing the death of the capitalist model and its replacement with something more equitable.

*rolls eyes*

Yep.

Jim Smith said:

ZigZig said:

ray_afraid said:

ALL the Star Wars movies are dumb. 😉

I respectfully disagree. All SW movies are dumb, except SWHS.

The Star Wars Holiday Special is indeed not as bad as everyone makes it out to be.

Not even a Rifftrax can make it watchable.

Jim Smith said:

chyron8472 said:

Q2’s Fall of the Jedi Trilogy fanedits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HesmWVhuTg4

• “Chosen One” nonsense is removed;
• Droid anachronisms are removed (in fact, the droids themselves are almost entirely cut);
• Anakin’s fate at the end of Episode III is edited, leaving ESB revelation intact;
• Padme’s fate at the end of Episode III is altered, leaving Luke’s ROTJ revelation intact and allowing his conversation with Leia on Endor to make more sense;
• Anakin is far less whiny;
• Obi-Wan is far less argumentative;
• Anakin and Padme don’t fight their feelings;
• VERY little dialogue and antics from Jar Jar;

…and that’s off the top of my head.

The one thing that I would change in the Star Wars prequel trilogy would definitely be getting rid of jar jar binks. That actually goes without saying.

Yep. In my opinion, I do not see why so many people still claim The Phantom Edit among their favorite TPM edits. It just does not cut enough Jar Jar out, and that’s only to start with.

moviefreakedmind said:

chyron8472 said:

I’m tired of the Angry Video Game Nerd. It was amusing for a while, but then he moved from crass to offensive, and the whole angry nerd schtick has long since worn out its novelty. I like James’ more mellow stuff, but not the Nerd anymore.

He’s not offensive, unless you’re offended by potty-humor

You forget Super Mecha Death Christ 2000 B.C. Version 4.0 Beta.

ohhh… Creepy Puppet Yoda.

I tried googling “CPY Star Wars” before asking, but it didn’t return anything useful.

AveKender said:

It bugs my bones that Americans associate separatism with white supremacist ideals and slavery. I wholeheartedly believe that sooner rather than later this country will split into an increasing number of successor republics. I am certain that some of those, particularly the states that emerge in the Southeast, will be pretty much like apartheid states, even more so than the US is currently. However I would expect better of the states that arise in the North and the West.

Tl;dr, some Americans want to secede for non-shitty reasons.

http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Politics-2-Electric-Boogaloo/id/53003/page/551#1135869