logo Sign In

darth_ender

User Group
Members
Join date
26-Apr-2011
Last activity
8-Oct-2025
Posts
8,815

Post History

Post
#1048509
Topic
Episode IV: A Ridiculous Hope
Time

Probably not very funny, but surprisingly fitting, in my mind. As Vader is leaving Krennic after their little discussion, take the lines between Dagget and Bane from this scene here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pB0imvTpE2Y

In particular, I like the lines:

Krennic/Dagget: Stay here. I’m in charge.

Vader/Bane: (Force chokes Krennic) Do you feel in charge?

If you could fit other lines in there, it’d be kinda cool. “You’re pure evil.” “I’m necessary evil.”

I haven’t seen the movie since the one time in the theater, so I’m not sure about timing, but Ben Mendelsohn and the intimidating synthesized voice seem so fitting for the scene.

Post
#1048274
Topic
The Place to Go for Emotional Support
Time

Abilify is a miracle drug in many ways! Works so well for so many of my patients! It also comes in two different types of long-acting injections if you just want to take your medicine once a month or every six weeks. I’m glad you’ve finally found something that works for you! I don’t always reply, but I follow how you’re doing. Keep it up!

Post
#1048164
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

darth_ender said:

TV’s Frink said:

Hahahahaha.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kentucky-lawmaker-protests-anti-abortion-advocates-with-viagra-bill/

Under a new bill proposed by a Kentucky state legislator, men seeking erectile dysfunction treatments such as Viagra, Cialis, or Levitra, would need to visit a doctor twice and get written permission from their wives before receiving the drugs.

House Bill 369 would also require a man be married and “make a sworn statement with his hand on a Bible that he will only use a prescription for a drug for erectile dysfunction when having sexual relations with his current spouse.”

Rep. Mary Lou Marzian, a Democrat from Louisville, proposed the law last week as a pointed statement to anti-abortion advocates.

“My point is to illustrate how intrusive and ridiculous it is for elected officials to be inserting themselves into private and personal medical decisions,” she told Reuters.

The proposal comes days after Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin, a Republican, signed an “informed consent” law requiring women to receive counsel from a doctor 24 hours before having an abortion.

In December, Rep. Mia McLeod, a Democrat from Columbia, South Carolina, put forth a bill in that state that would require men to wait 24 hours after receiving a prescription for an erectile dysfunction drug to fill it. Women in the state must wait 24 hours before having an abortion.

Other past attempts include a proposed “spilled semen amendment” in Oklahoma that would declare it an act against unborn children for men to waste sperm, and an amendment to a bill in Virginia requiring an ultrasound before an abortion that would mandate men have a rectal exam before being prescribed Viagra.

I never realized that a man’s erectile dysfunction issues ever endangered a separate human’s life.

Republican men legislating women’s bodies endangers women’s lives.

Not all Republicans are men, not all Democrats are pro-choice, men and women are very similar in their views on abortion, abortions are safe (for the mother) and should remain so, and, oddly enough, abortions endanger babies’ lives.

https://spectator.org/30346_do-men-and-women-view-abortion-differently/

Post
#1048120
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Hahahahaha.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kentucky-lawmaker-protests-anti-abortion-advocates-with-viagra-bill/

Under a new bill proposed by a Kentucky state legislator, men seeking erectile dysfunction treatments such as Viagra, Cialis, or Levitra, would need to visit a doctor twice and get written permission from their wives before receiving the drugs.

House Bill 369 would also require a man be married and “make a sworn statement with his hand on a Bible that he will only use a prescription for a drug for erectile dysfunction when having sexual relations with his current spouse.”

Rep. Mary Lou Marzian, a Democrat from Louisville, proposed the law last week as a pointed statement to anti-abortion advocates.

“My point is to illustrate how intrusive and ridiculous it is for elected officials to be inserting themselves into private and personal medical decisions,” she told Reuters.

The proposal comes days after Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin, a Republican, signed an “informed consent” law requiring women to receive counsel from a doctor 24 hours before having an abortion.

In December, Rep. Mia McLeod, a Democrat from Columbia, South Carolina, put forth a bill in that state that would require men to wait 24 hours after receiving a prescription for an erectile dysfunction drug to fill it. Women in the state must wait 24 hours before having an abortion.

Other past attempts include a proposed “spilled semen amendment” in Oklahoma that would declare it an act against unborn children for men to waste sperm, and an amendment to a bill in Virginia requiring an ultrasound before an abortion that would mandate men have a rectal exam before being prescribed Viagra.

I never realized that a man’s erectile dysfunction issues ever endangered a separate human’s life. I never realized that sperm were genetically unique human beings capable of growth and development in the right environment. Weird.

Post
#1044522
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Ryan McAvoy said:

moviefreakedmind said:

both the far-left and the far-right are every bit as despicable as they claim each other are.

False Equivalence™

I think that the far-left and far-right are both despicable and I think that both are a threat to American freedoms. Maybe in different ways, but both are despicable and threatening enough that I don’t prefer either.

Can you give a common example of something you consider to be “far left” and “a threat to American freedoms”? I ask because I consider myself pretty far to the left, and am not sure who I am threatening.

You can’t be that far left. He’s talking about those who would seek to impose Leftist policies on others, as Marx advocated. There are Leftist ideas that inhibit freedom. Anarchy is extreme Left, but how much freedom is there when there is no law? Don’t be too self-righteous.

Post
#1043848
Topic
Batman vs Superman: DOJ thread? (contains spoilers)
Time

suspiciouscoffee said:

darth_ender said:

suspiciouscoffee said:

darth_ender said:

With the extended version in place, what do people hate about this movie? I enjoyed it so thoroughly, I can’t understand the extent of the trashing!

Ok, don’t get me wrong, it’s not perfect, but it was pretty dang good, particularly with the added scenes.

When I first saw the film, I thought as you do. However, for a while, one line of dialogue was burned into my mind. It was something Superman said to Lois, “No one stays good in this world.” In this moment, Superman, champion of the world and most beloved hero of mine since I was very young, gives up on humanity. He just. Gives. Up. And declares humans as a waste of his time.

Thank you for the excellent reply.

Thank you for the excellent compliment!

I see Luthor much like the Joker in TDK. They both try to break the hero with impossible moral dilemmas. Personally, seeing the inability to solve the dilemma made the story interesting to me. All along, he sees Batman as a vigilante, little better than the criminals he fights. He has already developed a strong opinion about Batman’s flaws. If he has to kill an evil crime fighter to save his mother, he feels he is choosing the lesser of two evils, but he knows he will be branded for life.

But he doesn’t have to kill Batman. He could’ve conveniently said “Martha” before the fight and the issue’s resolved early.

I doubt he knew Bruce’s mother’s name. And in my mind, he initially thought he only recourse to save Martha was to defeat Batman. Once he knew his defeat was imminent, his last thought was of saving his mother, and he pleaded for Batman to show mercy and somehow save her or allow Superman to do so.

After a little while, I realized something else: he already had long before this scene. The very first thing he does on screen is murder someone. Did the victim threaten his girlfriend? Yes, but what should Superman do? Something like this:

But instead, he decides to crush the man’s body through solid walls, giving an eerie smile before he does, as if he derives a sadistic pleasure from killing this man.

His smile was not sadistic. It was a reassurance to Lois that all would be well.

Not how I saw it, but okay.

Should he have snatched the gun as you have shown in your picture? Yes, that probably would have been better, especially to sell the narrative that I am pushing above. That said, the ability to fly fast in one direction is one thing. The ability to instantaneously change directions and fly back would be extremely difficult. Yes, we are talking about Superman, but perhaps in this reality, it is not possible. I see it that he had little choice. I wish they had chosen to do what you describe, but more for the movie’s consistency that for Superman’s perfect morality. But if we just view it as a matter of morality, this Superman is young and inexperienced. He killed how many in Man of Steel while fighting Zod and the gang? But he is developing his moral compass and his abilities, and perhaps this movie is the catalyst that helps him develop his rule of no killing.

If anything, Man of Steel (a movie I hate more than this one) should have been that catalyst. He’s killed Zod, and should realize the toll it should take on his conscience. Instead, this is ignored.

Not ignored. Just not fully developed, I believe.

Later, Superman is seen saving people from various disasters. When he takes a girl from a fire, he glares menacingly at the crowd around him. He treats every good deed he does, everything that Superman should do, as a chore. There is no heart in it, no humanity, but murder? That is something that Superman apparently can get pleasure from now.

That’s not at all how I saw it. He was depressed and disappointed at his failure to save them, that so many were injured right under his nose. He was emotional and flew away in sadness and with the knowledge that everyone was judging him for his failure.

I think we’re talking about two different fire scenes. I refer to the one that begins the montage of talking heads.

I’ll have to see it again. I only saw it once (original), plus a few deleted scenes and descriptions of said scenes. I can’t remember which part you’re talking about at the moment.

Superman is dead in this movie, but Doomsday didn’t kill him. Superman was already dead. We have, in his place, a coward. We have a brutalistic tyrant in his place.

This is why Batman wanted to kill him. He is a flawed hero, who I see as on a learning curve. I see a similar flaw with Batman, except at the other end of the curve. Instead of being an idealist, he is now a cynical, old figher. He used to have a no-kill rule. He used to disable, but not maim his opponents. But years of fighting and bitterness have turned him into a ruthless killer. He really is little better than the bad guys.

Which I would’ve liked to see. Instead we rush to Diet-Frank-Miller’s Batman because… Snyder loves Miller.

I would have liked to see more of this as well. Yes, it’s a diet version. But these are adaptations to movies. Batman Begins is a diet of Batman: Year One, The Man Who Falls, and The Long Halloween. The Dark Knight is diet-The Long Halloween and diet-The Killing Joke. And of course, both of these films intersperse their own plots. It’s not going to be exact. It’s not the same medium of storytelling. I like this portrayal of a very dark, very fallen Batman too. It’s actually probably the main reason I like this movie, more than the Superman aspect.

There’s a comic story where Superman meets some new superhumans that call themselves The Elite. They’re mean, and resort to murder often. However, they quickly become popular among the people for getting the job done. Where Superman has those pesky morals that get in the way of dealing with villains permanently, The Elite are seen as the true heroes for the modern world. Superman, sick of the actions of The Elite, decides to face them, and The Elite set up a fight to the death between them and Supes. It’s off Earth, but The Elite have cameras broadcasting it to the world below. Suddenly, Superman’s not holding back anymore, and eventually all except the leader, Manchester Black, is seemingly dead. Black is terrified, and so are the people of Earth. Superman is a murderer now. Black exclaims that Superman is a hypocrite, and that now the people have seen his lies. Superman then says that he knows that everyone saw it, and they were scared. They saw Superman kill without mercy and were shocked. It is then that Superman reveals that he didn’t kill anyone. The Elite are all alive, knocked out, with broken bones and headaches, but alive.

Black then yells at Superman that he’s living in a foolish dream world. Supes’ reply was this:

Superman. Not a killer, like that movie would have you think, but a hero.

EDIT: If you like the movie, that’s fine. I’m just a geek who reads too many comics.

I actually love your comment, so no apology needed.

Thank you. Your comments are good also, even if I disagree.

Thank you for the insight. I think it’s a great demonstration of how Superman could be, and explains why probably many were so disappointed. I personally enjoyed his flaws, but I totally understand the reason for disliking them and preferring the more perfect Superman.

The point that I guess I’m trying to make is that Superman, from the very beginning, has always been someone to not only admire, but to aspire to be. His fight is against cruelty, against injustice, always has been. Now, we, or at least I, cannot look up to him as a symbol against cruelty, he is now its advocate. It especially doesn’t work when Snyder tries to cram Messianic imagery into the movie.

I totally get where you’re coming from. I think Snyder was trying to recreate the success of Nolan in TDK. The Messianic imagery I think is largely to illustrate Lex’s delusions. Sure, there were parallels in MOS, but here it is taken to extremes, extremes that Superman seems to have accepted, until he himself realizes they cannot be true, thanks to Lex’s tricks. Remember what Luthor said, “If God is all-powerful, he cannot be all-good. And if he is all-good, he cannot be all-powerful.” His intent was to put Superman in a position where he would fail, no matter what he chose. I personally liked the shortcoming. I hope they develop him into the hero you describe in future, but for this movie, I found it quite satisfying. I hope they make Batman into a reformed hero, again not so cynical and destructive in future installments, but for now, I liked both heroes’ shortcomings.

Post
#1043494
Topic
The Place to Go for Emotional Support
Time

Oh, I do too. I just don’t like the stereotype. It would do well for him to not be fed a perception that may not be true. I would hope his new classmates might not be judgmental. He doesn’t need anyone to convince they will be before he’s even had the chance to attend class. In the end, he and you may have been exactly right. Maybe not. Maybe your and his anticipated reaction of the class members will taint his view of what they were truly thinking.

Post
#1043454
Topic
Batman vs Superman: DOJ thread? (contains spoilers)
Time

LuckyGungan2001 said:

I didn’t like it because the pacing, acting, characterisation, action, script and overall story all sucked hard.

Pacing I understand. Acting I thought was pretty dang good. Characterization was controversial, I admit, but see my quote above for my justification for appreciating it. Script was imperfect, and I wish they excluded Doomsday, but as he was, I was surprised at how I didn’t mind him. Story was generally well executed in my mind, improved with the Ultimate Cut. I actually thought the whole story was remarkably complex, and when fleshed out in the UC, was surprisingly satisfying.

Post
#1043451
Topic
Batman vs Superman: DOJ thread? (contains spoilers)
Time

suspiciouscoffee said:

darth_ender said:

With the extended version in place, what do people hate about this movie? I enjoyed it so thoroughly, I can’t understand the extent of the trashing!

Ok, don’t get me wrong, it’s not perfect, but it was pretty dang good, particularly with the added scenes.

When I first saw the film, I thought as you do. However, for a while, one line of dialogue was burned into my mind. It was something Superman said to Lois, “No one stays good in this world.” In this moment, Superman, champion of the world and most beloved hero of mine since I was very young, gives up on humanity. He just. Gives. Up. And declares humans as a waste of his time.

Thank you for the excellent reply. Let me share with you why I don’t find these things bothersome. First of all, I like flawed heroes. I like the internal conflict. Also, I have not read much of the comics. Most of my exposure has been through the cartoons or movies. There are different iterations with different abilities or thoughts. So let me address the above point: “No one stays good in this world.” He is in a truly difficult moral dilemma. He wants to save his mother, and only sees one way. Is he truly evil? No. He just knows if he does this, he will have crossed a line, and that regardless of how good he tries to be, he will be seen as evil in the eyes of the public.

I see Luthor much like the Joker in TDK. They both try to break the hero with impossible moral dilemmas. Personally, seeing the inability to solve the dilemma made the story interesting to me. All along, he sees Batman as a vigilante, little better than the criminals he fights. He has already developed a strong opinion about Batman’s flaws. If he has to kill an evil crime fighter to save his mother, he feels he is choosing the lesser of two evils, but he knows he will be branded for life.

After a little while, I realized something else: he already had long before this scene. The very first thing he does on screen is murder someone. Did the victim threaten his girlfriend? Yes, but what should Superman do? Something like this:

But instead, he decides to crush the man’s body through solid walls, giving an eerie smile before he does, as if he derives a sadistic pleasure from killing this man.

His smile was not sadistic. It was a reassurance to Lois that all would be well. Should he have snatched the gun as you have shown in your picture? Yes, that probably would have been better, especially to sell the narrative that I am pushing above. That said, the ability to fly fast it one direction is one thing. The ability to instantaneously change directions and fly back would be extremely difficult. Yes, we are talking about Superman, but perhaps in this reality, it is not possible. I see it that he had little choice. I wish they had chosen to do what you describe, but more for the movie’s consistency that for Superman’s perfect morality. But if we just view it as a matter of morality, this Superman is young and inexperienced. He killed how many in Man of Steel while fighting Zod and the gang? But he is developing his moral compass and his abilities, and perhaps this movie is the catalyst that helps him develop his rule of no killing.

Later, Superman is seen saving people from various disasters. When he takes a girl from a fire, he glares menacingly at the crowd around him. He treats every good deed he does, everything that Superman should do, as a chore. There is no heart in it, no humanity, but murder? That is something that Superman apparently can get pleasure from now.

That’s not at all how I saw it. He was depressed and disappointed at his failure to save them, that so many were injured right under his nose. He was emotional and flew away in sadness and with the knowledge that everyone was judging him for his failure.

Superman is dead in this movie, but Doomsday didn’t kill him. Superman was already dead. We have, in his place, a coward. We have a brutalistic tyrant in his place.

This is why Batman wanted to kill him. He is a flawed hero, who I see as on a learning curve. I see a similar flaw with Batman, except at the other end of the curve. Instead of being an idealist, he is now a cynical, old figher. He used to have a no-kill rule. He used to disable, but not maim his opponents. But years of fighting and bitterness have turned him into a ruthless killer. He really is little better than the bad guys. This is why Superman wants to kill him.

So here we are, with two very flawed heroes, both perceiving the other as dangerous and evil. Only through their fight do they realize their own flaws, and hopefully make plans to improve their methods. Yes, I know Batman killed some more after this fight, but I believe he will reform his ways and return to a nobler ideal. At least, that is my hope with this movie.

There’s a comic story where Superman meets some new superhumans that call themselves The Elite. They’re mean, and resort to murder often. However, they quickly become popular among the people for getting the job done. Where Superman has those pesky morals that get in the way of dealing with villains permanently, The Elite are seen as the true heroes for the modern world. Superman, sick of the actions of The Elite, decides to face them, and The Elite set up a fight to the death between them and Supes. It’s off Earth, but The Elite have cameras broadcasting it to the world below. Suddenly, Superman’s not holding back anymore, and eventually all except the leader, Manchester Black, is seemingly dead. Black is terrified, and so are the people of Earth. Superman is a murderer now. Black exclaims that Superman is a hypocrite, and that now the people have seen his lies. Superman then says that he knows that everyone saw it, and they were scared. They saw Superman kill without mercy and were shocked. It is then that Superman reveals that he didn’t kill anyone. The Elite are all alive, knocked out, with broken bones and headaches, but alive.

Black then yells at Superman that he’s living in a foolish dream world. Supes’ reply was this:

Superman. Not a killer, like that movie would have you think, but a hero.

EDIT: If you like the movie, that’s fine. I’m just a geek who reads too many comics.

I actually love your comment, so no apology needed. Thank you for the insight. I think it’s a great demonstration of how Superman could be, and explains why probably many were so disappointed. I personally enjoyed his flaws, but I totally understand the reason for disliking them and preferring the more perfect Superman.

Post
#1043435
Topic
The Place to Go for Emotional Support
Time

I actually am very interested in this conversation and with answering your questions, darthrush. In spite of what some may say, or how others may act, many Mormons do not simply ostracize those who fall away. I have a feeling that nothing I say will ever restore your faith, and so that is not my intent. However, I am not uninformed on the topic or unintelligent. I tend to be very straightforward and honest, and may ask you to look at yourself a little in this process. But if you are truly interested in getting any answers, it might be worth your time to engage me in conversation.

I admit, as always, that I am a busy guy. I may not answer you for a little while, especially if your answers require lengthy responses. I will try to always answer your questions. My intent is to show you that we do not always shirk from answering hard questions, and that perhaps there is room for improvement on your end as well.

Without further ado, I introduce you to my thread. I have addressed the Letter to a CES Director in there to pretty good extents. I will answer questions there, should you choose to ask them.

http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Ask-the-member-of-the-Church-of-Jesus-Christ-of-Latter-day-Saints-AKA-Interrogate-the-Mormon/id/13442

I like you, darthrush. The first time you mentioned you were Mormon, I was pleased. The second time was a reminder, as I had forgotten, and I realized that you had lapsed. Your words that time kind of annoyed me, as I felt you were being condescending towards your seminary teacher. Over time, I have come to realize that you are a good guy, inside or outside my faith, and so I want you to know that I will not judge you for not having faith in the same things I do. But I do love my church, and so know that I will defend it with vigor. Hope you are up to the challenge. 😃

Post
#1042927
Topic
If you need to B*tch about something... this is the place
Time

Darth Id said:

Lord Haseo said:

So I just broke my audio technicas after falling on my sister’s shitty bike. Serves me right for biking with anything other than shitty fucking headphones.

I really think for safety reasons you should not wear any headphones while operating a bicycle.

This has been a Darth Id Safety Tip.™ “Govern yourself accordingly.” ™

Please note, this is the first time Darth Id has demonstrated that he cares about the well-being of anyone else. I’m not crying; I swear it’s just allergies!