xhonzi

We don't go camping much, but if we had a couple of these, maybe we would...

Here's Geekologie from April 1, also mentioning the $40 price tag.  I don't mean to argue, it's just I don't want you getting my hopes up.

 http://www.geekologie.com/2009/04/awesome_new_products_from_thin.php

I'm just hoping Lola (L-O-L-A) arrives soon so that we can play Yoda (Y-O-D-A).

I thought it was $39.99 on April 1.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/04/tauntaun-sleepi/

This Wired article seems to back up my memory.  I'm afraid the $100 price tag is the $40 Think Geek price + LucasFilm royalty.

Wait, $100??!?!?  The woman will never go for this.  :(

I demand satisfaction!  *slap*

Quick, Man!  Are they in adult sizes or only kids??!?!????

Oh, and my friend won't stop calling them "Porkins and the Came From Behinds."

It's kind of awesome.

I like cheese.  :)

What about Yavin 4?

Can not get your ship out...  wah.

C3PX said:

xhonzi said:

C3PX said:

 True story. I have no idea of the state of the EU today, as I could care less.

Uh-oh!  U meant "couldn't care less"!  -10 Points in the grammar rodeo!  U now have no reason to h8 on those who use 'u' in place of 'you'!

2 bad 4 U!

No man, I have to take those points back. You see, my logic with the whole couldn't care less/could care less thing is as follows: If I couldn't care less about something, I have taken my feelings of not caring as far as they can possibly go. But if I could care less about something, I have potentially taken them EVEN further than not being able to care less about them, but I haven't really taken the time to consider just how much I don't care about them simply because they are not worth my time to to waste it trying to assess exactly how much I do not care for them. Make sense? You see, it isn't the superlative of not caring, because I care about it so little, I do not wish to take the time to figure out the most superlative term to apply to it. Examples: "Dude, that movie really FREAKIN' SUCKED! I cannot even begin to explain how horrendously awful that steaming pile of dog turd of a film was!" Here I am going out of my way to explain how much I disliked this film. I honestly couldn't care less for it, I dislike it to the extreme, and I am willing to really take my time to let others know how much I don't like it. An example of being able to care less would be you and your buddy are talking and he say, "Man, I saw that movie the other day and it really, really, really, really, --" and you interupt him and say, "Dude, you wanna go Applebees and get an onion blossom?" You could probably care less about the movie your buddy is talking about, if you wanted to, but your just that much more content to not even consider it and to just go eat an onion.

Soooo, I'll be retracting that 10 points from the grammar rodeo...

TOO bad for YOU, eh?

 Hmmmm... no, I don't think so.

hmmm... double post.

Vaderisnothayden said:

xhonzi said:

What, no one wants to discuss my wild and baseless accusations?  No one wants to disagree with me?  Surely, VINH will come and tell me I'm wrong?

Why would I get worked up about it? You're just considering alternative ways of doing the prequels.

 But that's not the way OT.com works!  Here, I made another thread about it:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/The-Way-OTcom-General-Star-Wars-Discussion-Works/topic/10868/

Here are my observations, please add yours.  But keep it friendly.

Someone starts a new thread asking others to dig deep into their memories and remember: "What did you think the Clone Wars were going to be about?"

Then someone else comes in and says, "Man did those prequels suck!  George Luca$$ has totally lost it!"

And then someone else will say how good Ewan McGregor was (which he was) and which of the prequels they thought had most potential.

The next post will be about how terrible Hayden Christenson was.  But this person will make a spelling error while saying it.

The next 10 posts will be about the spelling error.

Someone will bring it back, not to the OP's original topic, but back to the prequels sucking.  Someone will say that Hayden stunk worse than limburger cheese, and then the conversation will turn to what cheese people like, and how you're wrong if you don't agree with them.

It goes on like this for three or four pages.  You make an awesome post about cheese, and come back the next day excited to see if anyone responded.  You see the most recently updated topic: "What did you think the Clone Wars would be?" and think that might be an interesting topic, but dangit where is the conversation about the cheese!?!?  You read the topic anyways, and find to your surprise this is the one about the cheese!  But your excitement is soon over when you see that someone replied to a post above yours and several more people have replied to that person, forever abandoning your witicism about cheese to obscurity.

Well, that's about my experience anyways...

So... what did you think the Clone Wars were going to be about?

I realized that was only half my thought (but if you didn't get the parallel before, this probably won't help).

20th Annyiversary Optimus Prime IS the way I remember 1984 Optimus Prime WAS.  Michael Bay OP, Beast Wars OP, or any other modern toy OP is not.

I guess that's a key difference to me between cleaned up FX shots (mattes, transparencies, reflections, etc...) and Special Edition like changes.  Not that the original original original trilogy shouldn't be preserved for education or archival purposes, but if I could get a perfect version, I would like to see the mattes and whatnot cleaned up.

It kind of reminds me of Optimus Prime. 

I was cruising the toy aisle a couple years ago (you know, with my kids...) and I saw this super awesome 20th Anniversary Optimus Prime.  I thought "Wow, it's just like the one I had 20 years ago!" but it was $70.  I happened to be on Ebay later looking at toys (you know, for my kids...) and I saw some 1984 Optimus Primes.  Well, I had apparently grown up since 1984 so the same toy seemed really small and cheap to me 20 years later.  The 20th Anny version looked the same to me in 2004 as the 1984 one did to me in 1984.

If that makes any sense, I for one would like to the mattes cleaned up.

C3PX said:

 True story. I have no idea of the state of the EU today, as I could care less.

Uh-oh!  U meant "couldn't care less"!  -10 Points in the grammar rodeo!  U now have no reason to h8 on those who use 'u' in place of 'you'!

2 bad 4 U!

Oh, give it up, VINH.  Let's argue about something important.

C3PX said:

Well, I guess Star Wars doesn't. Being as we have droids used for war in the PT and for assassinations in the OT.

I can think of many other works that have droids killing people as well. So yeah, I guess there are plenty that don't use the three laws.

Was there ever an indication Lucas actually borrowed these laws? We know it is against Threepio's programing to hurt people, but that seems like just a natural safety feature a responsible manufacturer would put on a droid intended for household use. I personally wouldn't consider adhering to the three laws.

Terminator seems like a good example here too.  And Battlestar Galactica.  And the Matrix.  Blade Runner.  Cyborg 4: The Reckoning.  Soldier.  Austin Powers.

It may just be my opinion.  I'm willing to admit that.

Your mom.

Oh, come on.  You're putting a real downer on my band.

Sorry, Rock Olie.  We just didn't need your particular... talents.

If it makes you feel better, we just took Guitartar Binks out back and shot him after his audition.

In my mind, Obi-Wan learns the truth somewhere between the trilogies even if the audience doesn't.  But yeah, at first he'd feel bad about killing his friend.