oojason

DuracellEnergizer said:

oojason said:

MalàStrana said:

Mocata said:

Well I was hoping days or longer… ‘we’ve traced the rebel spies’ sounds like a long process not just glancing out at the corvette’s license plate. Comments floating around make it sound like the latter though. I will see how this all holds up on second viewing.

Yep you’re 100% right about that. This all Vader/Leia affair (sic) which ends the movie is a huge continuity mistake. Leia should have never been at this battle; Vader should have engaged charcaters we know and not just random rebel troopers we don’t care about. This clearly shows the limits of fan-service when it doesn’t serve (and even damage) the story. Without its “OT skin” this movie would already be forgotten.

Maybe they are random rebel troopers you don’t care about - though to me, for what they were fighting for, in the situation they were in, for the actions and sacrifice of others to get this far, knowing they were likely going to die - yet still did their utmost to get those plans out of there… I sure did care. I think probably many others do too?

It certainly didn’t ‘clearly show the limits of fan service’ or ‘damage the story’ - in fact, for me it was just the opposite… the everyman characters making a difference too, making their deaths count for something, to contribute to the cause in which they giving their lives for - along with the ‘heroes of the story’ in the Rogue One crew.

Yes, it was a great scene itself with Vader showing his prowess, but the overall message of the film - for me anyway - was that of sacrifice for a better future, or at least a chance of a better future.

Whether that be Galen working for the Empire for years to actually hinder it in the design flaw and to delay it as long as possible, the Rogue One crew & the rebel soldiers on Scarif knowing the situation was likely a one-way mission, to the overall actions of the Alliance when they decide to join the fight.

 

‘Without its “OT skin” this movie would already be forgotten.’ - well, erm… considering the whole film is set in that OT timeline and a big part of that OT story - to the point where the story of the film is embedded in the OT, it is not quite a valid criticism, is it?

You could equally say Return Of The Jedi wouldn’t have been made ‘without it’s OT skin’, no?

Isn’t it nice to see Mala’s critiques still inane as ever?

I’m sure he’ll be back with more of them soon mate 😃

Lord Haseo said:

So that’s really a thing?

having no pickles? Apparently not mate 😃

Jetrell Fo said:

oojason said:

Ryan McAvoy said:

oojason said:

Jetrell Fo said:

oojason said:

Alderaan said:

I will have to revisit this when I’m an old man, but personally I would like to save that kind of leering for younger women.

Give those dames some respect!

Younger women? Are these young enough for you?

https://www.change.org/p/daily-mail-mailonline-stop-the-daily-mail-sexualising-children

8 years old, 12 years old, 14 years old, 15 years old…

Kind of a nasty jab mate, I didn’t get that from what he was saying.

I don’t see it as a jab - it certainly wasn’t meant as one - just a question to highlight some of the content of what the Mail is about. The leering about younger women, thankfully, seems to apply to over 18’s - though not necessarily in the Daily Mail’s (or some of it’s readers) case…

Being from the UK, I immediately knew you were referring to the Daily Mail’s well known reputation for leering after underage girls (while often calling for pedophiles to me burned at the stake on the same page). Outside of the UK, people might not know this paper’s rep and might think you were insulting them, which you clearly weren’t.

For those still unclear, this clip from comedy panel show HIGNFY sums it up succinctly…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPMcJz-jxKk

That is a good point mate - which sometimes I forget posting on here (to many US users, as opposed to the UK).

I apologise to Aldreraan for any offence my question caused.

I apologise to you. I’m not as U.K. literate as those from there so I took it differently than you meant it.

😃

No apology needed from you mate - though thank you anyway my friend.

Sougouk said:

oojason said:

Sougouk said:

oojason said:

^ 😃

and

^ not too far from me

I learned a new phrase today… I like British slang!

Educational and a bit of fun too mate 😃

 

Thanks! 😃
Ever since I visited England years ago, I learned the proper pronunciation on some places/locations.
ie: Thames, Worcestershire, Leicester square.
I remember trying to find a theater in “Lester square”, but kept on finding Leicester. That’s what threw me and my family off.

Spellings and names of locations usually throw geography and English teachers too here mate 😃

Leicester Square in London? Erm… shouldn’t it be erm… Leicester? No - obviously it should be London! 😃

Hope you enjoyed your time here mate.

Alderaan said:

Thank you. Apology accepted mate.

Thank you for accepting my apology mate.

(and big thanks also to Ryan McAvoy for explaining it better than I ever could)

Ryan McAvoy said:

oojason said:

Jetrell Fo said:

oojason said:

Alderaan said:

I will have to revisit this when I’m an old man, but personally I would like to save that kind of leering for younger women.

Give those dames some respect!

Younger women? Are these young enough for you?

https://www.change.org/p/daily-mail-mailonline-stop-the-daily-mail-sexualising-children

8 years old, 12 years old, 14 years old, 15 years old…

Kind of a nasty jab mate, I didn’t get that from what he was saying.

I don’t see it as a jab - it certainly wasn’t meant as one - just a question to highlight some of the content of what the Mail is about. The leering about younger women, thankfully, seems to apply to over 18’s - though not necessarily in the Daily Mail’s (or some of it’s readers) case…

Being from the UK, I immediately knew you were referring to the Daily Mail’s well known reputation for leering after underage girls (while often calling for pedophiles to me burned at the stake on the same page). Outside of the UK, people might not know this paper’s rep and might think you were insulting them, which you clearly weren’t.

For those still unclear, this clip from comedy panel show HIGNFY sums it up succinctly…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPMcJz-jxKk

That is a good point mate - which sometimes I forget posting on here (to many US users, as opposed to the UK).

I apologise to Aldreraan for any offence my question caused.

Alderaan said:

oojason said:

I’m surprised anyone takes it seriously - even more that anyone still buys it.

Don’t celebrities pay them for publicity? Whenever I’m on that site, the headline seems to be about someone and their sex tape.

I wouldn’t know - I’m rarely, if ever, on their website.

I imagine some of the celebrities’ agents are on friendly terms with the editorial staff (or those who decide what goes in or not) and spinning the mutual PR agenda to push sales/exposure further - and also that of the ‘celeb’ involved.

For me it’s on a level with The S*n, Express and Star (and Channel 5 tv) in the UK. Definitely ‘media’ to avoid.

Jetrell Fo said:

oojason said:

Alderaan said:

I will have to revisit this when I’m an old man, but personally I would like to save that kind of leering for younger women.

Give those dames some respect!

Younger women? Are these young enough for you?

https://www.change.org/p/daily-mail-mailonline-stop-the-daily-mail-sexualising-children

8 years old, 12 years old, 14 years old, 15 years old…

Kind of a nasty jab mate, I didn’t get that from what he was saying.

I don’t see it as a jab - it certainly wasn’t meant as one - just a question to highlight some of the content of what the Mail is about. The leering about younger women, thankfully, seems to apply to over 18’s - though not necessarily in the Daily Mail’s (or some of it’s readers) case…

Alderaan said:

oojason said:

What is so hard to understand about the word “women”?

Are you illiterate? Is English not your primary language?

No, not illiterate, and being English - yes, English is my primary language.

As stated before, with the Daily Mail, you never know.

Warbler said:

oojason said:

Alderaan said:

I will have to revisit this when I’m an old man, but personally I would like to save that kind of leering for younger women.

Give those dames some respect!

Younger women? Are these young enough for you?

https://www.change.org/p/daily-mail-mailonline-stop-the-daily-mail-sexualising-children

8 years old, 12 years old, 14 years old, 15 years old…

I am going to hope he meant women that were at least 18 years of age.

Me too. Though with the Daily Mail you never know.

Alderaan said:

I will have to revisit this when I’m an old man, but personally I would like to save that kind of leering for younger women.

Give those dames some respect!

Younger women? Are these young enough for you?

https://www.change.org/p/daily-mail-mailonline-stop-the-daily-mail-sexualising-children

8 years old, 12 years old, 14 years old, 15 years old…

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Also this.

I could be wrong, but I don’t think that article will please the feminists.

In my opinion, it’s from a hate-filled, divisive, classless, racist, vile rag - that specialises in sexism, hypocrisy, sexism, paedophilia, with previous support of Nazism, and hate speech.

It’s owner, Rothermere, inherited his father’s non-domicile status, which Private Eye reports he has used to channel hundreds of millions of pounds in dividends from the Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT) through a company called Rothermere Continuation Ltd, registered in Bermuda, then back into a trust fund for himself and his family.

I’m surprised anyone takes it seriously - even more that anyone still buys it.

^ 😃

A general discussion thread for ‘Star Wars: Droids - The Adventures of R2-D2 and C-3PO’ - the 1985/86 animated tv series

a thread nobody wanted, a thread nobody asked for - yet here it is… 😉
 

The Premise:-

Droids follows the adventures of R2-D2 and C-3PO as they face off against gangsters, criminals, pirates, bounty hunters, the Galactic Empire and other threats. During their adventures, the droids find themselves in the service of successive new masters and in difficult situations as a result.

The series was retroactively placed four years after Revenge of the Sith and fifteen years before the events of Star Wars (1977).

Intro Video:-

Star Wars: Droids Cartoon Introduction (1985) - at the Galactic Voyage youtube channel. (1 minute)

Information Pages:-

IMDB Page : Wikipedia Page : Wookieepedia Page : RebelScum.com Home Video Releases Page on ‘Star Wars: Droids’
 

The ‘Droids and Ewoks’ website: http://droidsandewoks.weebly.com (with Episode Guide, Comic Info, Images, Figures etc)

A few online articles on ‘Star Wars: Droids’:-

StarWars•com articles: The Droids Re-Animated, Part 1 & The Droids Re-Animated, Part 2 (2013)

StarWars•com article : 25 Years of Collecting Droids and Ewoks! (2010)

Den Of Geek article: Star Wars: The Droids Animated Series Time Forgot (2019)

RebelScum•com article: Droids & Ewoks - A Home Video History

SyFy•com article: Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About #Star Wars: Droids’ (2018)

Dork Side of the Force article: Remembering Star Wars: The Droids Animated Series (2019)

IGN article: Star Wars: Droids Turns 30 - A Look Back at the Animated Series (2015)

StarWarsMaven article: Boba Fett in Television & Movies IV: Star Wars Droids episode, “A Race to the Finish” (2014)

Star Wars Insider article: A Star Wars CELibration (re Ewoks & Droids) - by Jon Bradley Snyder (via the LucasFan website)

Decider article: Put the Star Wars Holiday Special and the Ewoks Movies on Disney+, You Cowards! (2019; inc ‘Star Wars: Droids’)

‘Ewoks and Droids promo montage’:-

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nkzhg1W6-ks - a 10 minute video at the Richard Woloski youtube channel.

‘Star Wars Droids & Ewoks UK VHS Promos’:-

www.youtube.com/watch?v=im0DAhg-QOs - a 5 minute video at the MovieMoan youtube channel.

Mocata said:

Well I was hoping days or longer… ‘we’ve traced the rebel spies’ sounds like a long process not just glancing out at the corvette’s license plate. Comments floating around make it sound like the latter though. I will see how this all holds up on second viewing.

Princess Leia Organa: [smirking] Darth Vader. Only you could be so bold. The Imperial Senate will not stand for this. When they hear you’ve attacked a diplomatic–
Darth Vader: Don’t act so surprised, Your Highness. You weren’t on any mercy mission this time. Several transmissions were beamed to this ship by Rebel spies. I want to know what happened to the plans they sent you.
Princess Leia Organa: I don’t know what you’re talking about. I am a member of the Imperial Senate on a diplomatic mission to Alderaan–
Darth Vader: You are a part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor! [to the Stormtroopers] Take her away!
[Leia is taken away]
Imperial Officer: [to Vader] Holding her is dangerous. If word of this gets out, it could generate sympathy for the rebellion in the Senate.
Darth Vader: I have traced the Rebel spies to her. Now she is my only link to finding their secret base.
Imperial Officer: She’ll die before she’ll tell you anything.
Darth Vader: Leave that to me.

I think the full context of the conversation Vader has with Leia - and then the Imperial Officer - may be of use. There is a fair bit of exposition in there.

For me the ‘traced’ line doesn’t seem to indicate a long process (unless taken as referring to his overall mission to destroy the Rebellion which could well have been ongoing for some time) - more of that she is the latest, and now only, link in a chain to him finding that Rebel base - especially the ‘Now she is my only…’ part of the line.

just my two penneth on it.

MalàStrana said:

Mocata said:

Well I was hoping days or longer… ‘we’ve traced the rebel spies’ sounds like a long process not just glancing out at the corvette’s license plate. Comments floating around make it sound like the latter though. I will see how this all holds up on second viewing.

Yep you’re 100% right about that. This all Vader/Leia affair (sic) which ends the movie is a huge continuity mistake. Leia should have never been at this battle; Vader should have engaged charcaters we know and not just random rebel troopers we don’t care about. This clearly shows the limits of fan-service when it doesn’t serve (and even damage) the story. Without its “OT skin” this movie would already be forgotten.

Maybe they are random rebel troopers you don’t care about - though to me, for what they were fighting for, in the situation they were in, for the actions and sacrifice of others to get this far, knowing they were likely going to die - yet still did their utmost to get those plans out of there… I sure did care. I think probably many others do too?

It certainly didn’t ‘clearly show the limits of fan service’ or ‘damage the story’ - in fact, for me it was just the opposite… the everyman characters making a difference too, making their deaths count for something, to contribute to the cause in which they giving their lives for - along with the ‘heroes of the story’ in the Rogue One crew.

Yes, it was a great scene itself with Vader showing his prowess, but the overall message of the film - for me anyway - was that of sacrifice for a better future, or at least a chance of a better future.

Whether that be Galen working for the Empire for years to actually hinder it in the design flaw and to delay it as long as possible, the Rogue One crew & the rebel soldiers on Scarif knowing the situation was likely a one-way mission, to the overall actions of the Alliance when they decide to join the fight.

‘Without its “OT skin” this movie would already be forgotten.’ - well, erm… considering the whole film is set in that OT timeline and a big part of that OT story - to the point where the story of the film is embedded in the OT, it is not quite a valid criticism, is it?

You could equally say Return Of The Jedi wouldn’t have been made ‘without it’s OT skin’, no?

Jetrell Fo said:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/27/us-facial-recognition-database-fbi-drivers-licenses-passports

Thanks to oojason for the suggestion. This article is very insightful.

No worries mate - I do find they often have articles not covered elsewhere - or as in much detail (on various topics in the UK and around the world).

And as they don’t feel commercial pressures like many other media outlets, they don’t have to just cover the more ‘popular’ stories. Or do click-bait articles or have misleading headline titles when the actual content is somewhat different (youtubers - I’m looking at you! 😃)

CatBus said:

oojason said:

CatBus said:

The collapse of the media was a global phenomenon, but it was a little more spectacular in the US. Consider the BBC–yeah, it has a bit of a stodgy conservative editorial bias, but it generally avoids the strident ideological stuff that’s common in the US. Plus you get to read about Big Cat sightings on occasion, so you get that 😉 Der Spiegel (yes, there’s an English version), kinda the same strain as the BBC really, so pretty nice. The Independent (UK) is pretty lacking the editorial restraint department, but it’s a good left-of-center counterbalance to the Beeb. Honestly wish there was a large left-leaning news source with good-quality editorial control, but haven’t found one. In the US, the Washington Post seems to be trying to stake out their position as the only large centrist media outlet, with pretty decent editorial control too, but we’ll see how long that lasts.

I’d recommend The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/uk) as a decent alternative source to the BBC (and the BBC News’ kowtowing down to the Conservative Party in recent years - likely for fear of cuts to it’s licence fee by them).

The Guardian is fairly unique in the UK media as it is owned by a trust and not run for profit (and any profit is invested back into the newspaper - instead of going to it’s owner or shareholders). This is to help keep a certain journalistic freedom and maintain the values of The Guardian - free from commercial or political interference.

If you really want a view from ‘left-field’, as it were, I occasionally opt for the Morning Star (http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/ & https://twitter.com/M_Star_Online), but they have a very limited budget - and whilst many pieces are written with good factual standards, obviously pieces are written from a very certain point of view 😉

Thanks, it’s been a while since I’ve browsed around. Back in the Iraq invasion days, I didn’t honestly see much difference between the Guardian and the Beeb, but that was a long time ago, the issues were very different then as well, and the Conservatives weren’t in power.

Also, a big advantage of the British media over American media. You get a whole new continent with news happening in it every day – Africa! We seem to have misplaced it over here.

There is, in my humble opinion, a big difference between the BBC & Guardian now. Sadly, I don’t think the BBC News will change soon, especially not whilst the likes of Laura Kuenssberg and cronies are there - amongst some weak BBC management.

Our proximity in Europe to events, mainly in North Africa, means we cover Africa a fair bit more than I imagine the US does, as well as more a direct line to former colonies, our history (of fucking up the continent and installing/strengthening dictators) and more recent immigration to here, mean it is likely of more interest…

Yet we struggle for news from Central and South America - unless it linked to corruption or sport - or both of those 😉 Where I imagine you may get more news of what is going on there?

Alderaan said:

oojason said:

I’d recommend The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/uk) as a decent alternative source to the BBC (and the BBC News’ kowtowing down to the Conservative Party in recent years - likely for fear of cuts to it’s licence fee by them).

I’m just an American, so it’s hard for me to comment on the British press, but I agree about the Guardian. I started reading Glenn Greenwald there (and although he left) I try to never miss anything he writes.

The Guardian’s own investigative journalism is not afraid to go to places where it may find itself in trouble - as you say with Greenwald’s journalism - and a load of Spooks turning up to destroy evidence at its offices!

(I must give The Intercept https://theintercept.com/ more reading time)

Unfortunately, not a lot of UK news media seem to do it’s own investigative journalism anymore - and also shies away from topics like Hillsborough, Orgreave, and of course News International hacking scandal - which the Guardian has led the way on.

I’d also give a mention to The Telegraph - yes, it is right-wing based - but, like The Guardian - it will attack it’s own side when it feels necessary or if it has overstepped the mark (or through gross incompetency).

Also, like The Guardian, the Telegraph also has guest writers from the ‘other side’, along with environmentalists, scientists and liberals - as well as experts in the field (ie, if the subject of an Education Bill comes up they will give column inches to teachers, headmasters - even children - people who may actually know more than the politicians!) giving them a welcome platform to put their views across for consideration.

For us Brits, Channel 4 News (tv) is also worth a mention - impartial and will ask the hard questions, sometimes uncomfortable (as it should be), and not afraid to take on those in power. Far more fearless than the BBC - and doesn’t have to pander to commercial pressures like ITV.

It used to be quite stuffy or aloof - though that has changed in recent years - for the better too 😃

https://www.channel4.com/news/ & https://twitter.com/channel4news

CatBus said:

The collapse of the media was a global phenomenon, but it was a little more spectacular in the US. Consider the BBC–yeah, it has a bit of a stodgy conservative editorial bias, but it generally avoids the strident ideological stuff that’s common in the US. Plus you get to read about Big Cat sightings on occasion, so you get that 😉 Der Spiegel (yes, there’s an English version), kinda the same strain as the BBC really, so pretty nice. The Independent (UK) is pretty lacking the editorial restraint department, but it’s a good left-of-center counterbalance to the Beeb. Honestly wish there was a large left-leaning news source with good-quality editorial control, but haven’t found one. In the US, the Washington Post seems to be trying to stake out their position as the only large centrist media outlet, with pretty decent editorial control too, but we’ll see how long that lasts.

I’d recommend The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/uk) as a decent alternative source to the BBC (and the BBC News’ kowtowing down to the Conservative Party in recent years - likely for fear of cuts to it’s licence fee by them).

The Guardian is fairly unique in the UK media as it is owned by a trust and not run for profit (and any profit is invested back into the newspaper - instead of going to it’s owner or shareholders). This is to help keep a certain journalistic freedom and maintain the values of The Guardian - free from commercial or political interference.

One day they’ll get enough for a decent spellchecker too - often the Guardian is referred to as the Grauniad due to some very strange spellings and use of words over the years 😃

If you really want a view from ‘left-field’, as it were, I occasionally opt for the Morning Star (http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/ & https://twitter.com/M_Star_Online), but they have a very limited budget - and whilst many pieces are written with good factual standards, obviously pieces are written from a very certain point of view 😉

some Rogue One variant posters here - https://imgur.com/gallery/lKuy6

^ from https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/61twtf/custom_rogue_one_posters_with_variants/

^ I was thinking that from the ‘newness’ look / colour of the shot - though am not too sure.

Tobar said:

Well this is a fun video:
Rogue One and Star Wars Original Trilogy - visuals recreations comparisons

^ that is one cool video - ta for posting.

btw - around 3m 24s into the video there is a shot of an Imperial Shuttle leaving the Death Star - do you know what film that is from?

(I can’t remember seeing it before - though the old memory is not what it once was 😉)