"Your Father wanted you to have this..."
#61
Posted 02 June 2005 - 02:55 AM
We see Leia kneeling down before R2D2, programming him. We do not see exactly what programming she is giving him, no, no precise directions. Nevertheless the inference that she gave R2D2 directions to find Obi-Wan in that scene is a clear and obvious one. It is not "offscreen" as you carelessly assert.
The supposed moment where Anakin tells Obi-Wan to give his lightsabre to his son, by contrast, has no clear or logical place in the movie. You can point to no moment in Episode III and say, "aha, it must have happened here." The imaginary event lies completely outside the bounds of the movie and only in the heads of handwaving gushers who've convinced themselves that just because Lucas gives not one frickin' onscreen clue as to the occurrence of an important event doesn't meant it didn't happen.
And you must know your argument is weak, Dunedain (why do you have a plural name?), because you give a second one, at odds with the first. In one place you assert that Anakin must OBVIOUSLY (uh huh) have told Obi-Wan at some unspecified time between movies to give his lightsabre to his son. In another you argue that the statement, "Your father wanted you to have this," is completely metaphorical and therefore there's no need for Anakin to have said anything at all about the disposition of his lightsabre. Which is it, hm?
No contradictions, that's a laugh. Leia's memories of her real mother? "Your father was already a great pilot"? Yoda's instruction of Obi-Wan? Owen's inexplicable forgetfulness about his droids? You can - and will, of course - construct elaborate masterpieces of special pleading to explain why the prequels don't actually have to show us any of these things. At what point, Dunedain [sic], do you decide that you've done enough of Lucas's work for him?
#62
Posted 03 June 2005 - 01:47 PM
I personally think "Pinkos" might be a fun word to call them. Because, lets face it, at least some of them are dirty communists.
#63
Posted 03 June 2005 - 01:55 PM
Battle for the Galaxy--read the "other Star Wars"
All I know is I haven't seen the real prequels yet.
#64
Posted 03 June 2005 - 02:07 PM
SO Bashers doesn't work...
But Pinkos... well that's nicely insulting. Pinkos like to undermine good things and generally cause a rukus for no good reason. And if you wear the title Pinko with pride, well then, quite frankly, you are a threat to this nation's well being, and probably need to be stopped.
#66
Posted 03 June 2005 - 02:22 PM
And yes, I'm a member of the vast Right wing conspiracy.
how about "mean people who pick on poor widdle GL :angry: "
But I think the people who defend the prequels would tend to think of GL as a strong powerful figure. So that wouldn't work either, Despondent!
But I think Pinkos could still work. But alas, I shall leave it to the defenders to come up with a good name.
#67
Posted 03 June 2005 - 03:32 PM
who the fuck would honestly say "you're breaking my heart." to someone who was doing something wrong...
You're right. No female would ever say "You're breaking my heart". What was I thinking? I forgot Aeschylus' first maxim of theater: Never have a female say "you're breaking my heart" to her male significant.
#68
Posted 03 June 2005 - 03:42 PM
We see Leia kneeling down before R2D2, programming him. We do not see exactly what programming she is giving him, no, no precise directions. Nevertheless the inference that she gave R2D2 directions to find Obi-Wan in that scene is a clear and obvious one. It is not "offscreen" as you carelessly assert.
Hey genius, she was putting the Death Star plans into the r2 unit. It's stated flatly in the film. No "directions to Obi-Wan's". Not even "assumed directions".
In the same area with "Leia gave r2 directions to Obi-Wan's".
Hey genius, it can be one or the other. That's the point. There are multiple possibilites, get it? Say it with me: multiple possibilites.
I suggest a course (a few) in logic so you understand what the word "contradiction" means.
#69
Posted 03 June 2005 - 03:54 PM
Oh well. I tried. Good to see you again, Rory.
#70
Posted 03 June 2005 - 05:18 PM
Um number one please stop using the term "hey genius."
Boy did that get old quick.
Also please stop using the notion that the small problems of the original trilogy justify the huge problems of the new trilogy.
Now you're LOOKING for hidden flaws on the OT, just combat the obvious flaws in the PT.
It doesn't work that way, genius (notice I didn't say "hey").
And if the flaws in the OT are so evident, why haven't people been discussing them for the last 30 years? Most of these "flaws" didn't pop up until the Lucas lovers of the world desperately needed something to divert attention from the fact that the new Star Wars movies really suck. It's a desperation move and it smells cheap and obvious. You're can't defend the PT against all the complaints, so in an attempt to distract people- you lash out at the OT. Well say what you want about the OT, it's still 10,000 times better than the PT. The OT has problems as all movies do, but to compare it to the problems of the PT is like the difference between shooting a bullet and tossing one.
No matter how many times you throw out these lame, obvious defenses of the PT or the lame obvious examples of flaws in the OT- it's not going to change the fact that George dropped the ball this time around. You can do all the fancy footwork you want, but in the end, a crappy trilogy is a crappy trilogy.
#71
Posted 03 June 2005 - 08:25 PM
Once again, there was no plot hole in R2 finding Obi-wan. To back up your arguement you're making up plot-holes where there are none.
Nope. Its plausable that Leia gave Directions to R2. Would your mother send you to the store to buy milk without directions? It is not playable that Anakin mentioned anything about giving his child his Lightsaber to Obi-wan, or anyone for that matter.
Sure - it's possible that a big rock could have hit Obi-wan on the head, and by the laws of chance the rock could have said "Anakin wanted Luke to have his lightsaber."
Is it ridiculous though? Yes. Like your arguement.
contradiction
n 1: opposition between two conflicting forces or ideas 2: (logic) a statement that is necessarily false; "the statement `he is brave and he is not brave' is a contradiction" [syn: contradiction in terms] 3: the speech act of contradicting someone; "he spoke as if he thought his claims were immune to contradiction"
con•tra•dic•tion Pronunciation Key (kntr-dkshn)
n.
1.
1. The act of contradicting.
2. The state of being contradicted.
2. A denial.
3. Inconsistency; discrepancy. ( )
4. Something that contains contradictory elements.
http://dictionary.re...q=contradiction
This post has been edited by Veer: 03 June 2005 - 08:33 PM
#72
Posted 03 June 2005 - 09:37 PM
And 'hey, genius' is getting tired. Bury the dead horse.
#75
Posted 04 June 2005 - 08:36 AM
Tell us to be open-minded about these PT's when they can't even be open-minded about how they COULD'VE BEEN, or rather how they SHOULD'VE BEEN!
Battle for the Galaxy--read the "other Star Wars"
All I know is I haven't seen the real prequels yet.