moviefreakedmind

Easterhay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Easterhay said:

I was five when I saw Star Wars in 1977 (although it's been called A New Hope since 1980 so I think we can get over that now)

No one referred to it as a New Hope in 1980. Every single commercial, VHS tape, laserdisc, and betamax up until I believe the early 2000's referred to the movie as Star Wars, and all the interviews referred to it as Star Wars as well. Look at that documentary tape called from STAR WARS to Jedi. A New Hope was included in the crawl but the movie was not retitled by any means because no one called it A New Hope (and the credits on the back of the VHS tape boxes said the title was STAR WARS)

What did it say in the opening crawl of the film? I notice you've missed that out completely. Quite tellingly missed it out.

I didn't miss that. I mentioned it in my comment. You're denying facts if you pretend that the movie instantly ceased to be called Star Wars in 1981. Every single re-release up until after the Phantom Menace referred to the film as Star Wars. Most of the boxes (except for the faces one) don't even have the words "A New Hope" on the box. And even the faces box referred to the title as Star Wars, but they just had a small subtitle underneath it, and not even on the front of the tape box, just on the spine.

Easterhay said:

I was five when I saw Star Wars in 1977 (although it's been called A New Hope since 1980 so I think we can get over that now)

No one referred to it as a New Hope in 1980. Every single commercial, VHS tape, laserdisc, and betamax up until I believe the early 2000's referred to the movie as Star Wars, and all the interviews referred to it as Star Wars as well. Look at that documentary tape called from STAR WARS to Jedi. A New Hope was included in the crawl but the movie was not retitled by any means because no one called it A New Hope (and the credits on the back of the VHS tape boxes said the title was STAR WARS)

RicOlie_2 said:

I don't recall anyone named "darth with a red lightsaber"....

 Don't worry I fixed it

darklordoftech said:

I'm just worried that the ST will continue certain prequelisms.

Like all bad guys being named darth, all bad guys using red lightsabers, ridiculous coincidences and everyone being connected somehow, jedi not being allowed to love, and stupid space prophecies?

darth_ender said:

moviefreakedmind said:

how do Mormons believe you get to heaven?

 In greater detail, but still briefer than would be just, we believe that all men fall short of the glory of God.  As sinners, we do not deserve to enter the perfection of heaven.  But through Jesus Christ, we can be forgiven of our sins.  We must accept him and his atonement, acknowledging that we cannot make it on our own.  But while this may sound very much like Protestant doctrine, we do differ in this particular: we do believe good works are necessary.  Protestants have called us non-Christian for this, but we believe that we accept Christ's grace through faith on our part, and that faith and good works are tied together.  If someone does not exercise good works, they are not exercising enough faith to truly accept Christ.  Thus, a believer may have accepted Christ and lived a good life, only later to turn against what he knew to be true and live a lifestyle of sin, inconsistent with God's commandments, and lose the salvation he had before already secured.  But it must be remembered at all times, at no point does anyone deserve or earn his or her salvation.  It is the gift of God through our relationship through Christ, and if we are sincere in our desire to maintain that relationship, we must live a good life.

 Thanks for the response. 

Just curious actually. All religions seem to have a different answer

how do Mormons believe you get to heaven?

imperialscum said:

The sun goes around the moon. It all depends on where you put the reference frame.

 What? 

Jeez, why don't you just say the 97 special edition is better than the OUT while you're at it?

Were there even any puppets left in Jedi after the SE? Except for salacious crumb and jabba of course.

I would compare them more to the Star Trek reboots. Both are inferior to their originals, but they're both at least fun to watch, even if they are frustrating at times. For me anyway, the prequels were just a time and energy suck in every way.

lordsidi said:

As I consider myself an old timer seeing that I was around 10 when STAR WARS first came out and lived and loved my childhood memories of the Original trilogy, I can honestly say I'm just not excited about Episode 7.  It's not actually about the fact the Prequels failed my expectations. I just feel like since Disney took over the flame of excitement I had when the prequels were announced and seeing the first trailers with such happiness is gone.  I am a big fan of J J Abrams new Star Treks, but Star Trek is not Star Wars.  Is anyone else here having my feeling? 

I agree, although my first experience with watching Star Wars was an old late 80's VHS tape rented from blockbuster, but still, I was blown away by it as well. I also have no anticipation for the new trilogy. I will see them, but only if they release the unaltered films in a quality I find acceptable (and I have pretty low standards so it shouldn't be too hard), but I honestly wouldn't be troubled if I didn't see the new movies in their theatrical run. It's not like I'm dreading these films either, I'm sure they'll be fun, but I just have no desire to see them, or at least not enough to spend money on them. 

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I saw something neat at the book store yesterday. It was a book with all three original books of the OT in one book called the "Star Wars Trilogy". Also, they called the first book Star Wars, not a New Hope, and I know that the title of the original Star Wars book was changed to A New Hope. This means they've changed the title back to Star Wars, which I think is really awesome, even if it is just for the original 1976 book.

I've got an older edition of that book published in 1993, and inside it says the First Trade Edition was published in 1987, so this isn't actually a new book; it's just a newer edition of the same old book.

 Still though, the name of Star Wars was changed to A New Hope, and in this book, they didn't alter the title. The sticker on the front of the book also said, "Includes Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi". 

The fact that they did not feel the need to emphasize A New Hope, or episode numbers for that matter, is a great sign for me.

I saw something neat at the book store yesterday. It was a book with all three original books of the OT in one book called the "Star Wars Trilogy". Also, they called the first book Star Wars, not a New Hope, and I know that the title of the original Star Wars book was changed to A New Hope. This means they've changed the title back to Star Wars, which I think is really awesome, even if it is just for the original 1976 book.

Erikstormtrooper said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I can't believe there are people out there who still care about figuring out what happened in the prequels

Yep. There's a whole generation of 'em.

A family friend was recently telling me her 8 year-old son is a huge Star Wars fan. (She mentioned he loved Jar Jar - Gulp!) She said he has lots of questions about the movies, and she doesn't know enough to answer them: things like what happens, what it means, motivations, etc.

Being the chief Star Wars nerd in my social circle, I offered to have him over to have a movie marathon with my kids and talk it out. To be honest, I'm glad they haven't taken me up on my offer yet.

That actually really surprises me. I don't know of anyone born after Revenge of the Sith who cared about Star Wars. My cousin's children are all into Marvel and superheroes and whatever the hell is popular now.

I can't believe there are people out there who still care about figuring out what happened in the prequels

I'm not sure if there's development yet. There isn't a whole lot that can be done until he has the 35mm sources, which I don't think he does yet, but I don't know all of the facts by any means, so I may be wrong.

It all comes down to whether they decide to do it or not. Absolutely nothing is preventing them from that, it's just going to be up to the people in charge now. 

RicOlie_2 said:

Besides, didn't Columbus oppose the slavery, at least to some extent...or was that Queen Isabella? Sometimes things get confused in my head.

I don't know about Columbus, but I do know that Isabella opposed mistreatment of the natives because she wanted them to be converted to Christianity.

Ender is right. I don't want to pretend Columbus was a Saint, but it'd be naive to deny that if he hadn't landed in America when he did then the world would be much different today

If he were such a bad navigator then I highly doubt he'd have made it to America and back as many times as he did

One time I got so angry at Goldeneye 007 for N64 that I shot Natalya to death during a mission (who hasn't?)

AntcuFaalb said:

I don't see any changed-for-the-SE material in that ad. Am I missing something?

 I didn't see any either, unless it's something completely minor. 

As for the teal Attack of the Clones thing, we have to keep in mind that no one cares about unaltered Attack of the Clones, and it's stuck in 1080p anyway, so there's no reason to release anything but the blu ray for that, at least that's what I think

Jeez, that article is still hung up on that whole, "Fox refusing to ever sell these movies again" thing 

I think it means that they're going to re-release the films in some form.

darklordoftech said:

Adding in references to the Sith.

 Kinda shocked they didnt add that to the new Emperor dialogue