XPost: rec.arts.tv, rec.arts.sf.tv, rec.arts.movies.past-films
From: david@block.net
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 10:17:51 -0400, Merrick Baldelli
wrote:
>On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 23:15:18 +0800, "C'Pi" wrote:
>
>>Merrick Baldelli wrote:
>>> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 23:33:15 +0800, "C'Pi" wrote:
>>>
>>>> Merrick Baldelli wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 09:02:40 +1200, Anybody
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [snippage]
>>>>>> Plapatine is winning and confident, suddenly he's "losing" and
>>>>>> "weak", Anakin arrives, suddenly he's again strong and wins.
>>>>>
>>>>> So the whole scarring that he suffered from his own Jedi
>>>>> Lightning Bolts was... Calculated? Ummm, sorry -- not buying
>>>>> because if it wasn't dangerous, he wouldn't continue to look like a
>>>>> misshappened toad 20 years later.
>>>>
>>>> Or that was his real appearance all along. He didn't seem to be
>>>> affected by the change. He didn't scream, "Ohh, you cursed, Mace!
>>>> Look what you've done! I'm melting! Melting! What a world, what a
>>>> world!"
>>>
>>> All right, I'll pick up my hat now.. It's becoming a farce,
>>> and I'm amused (and somewhat frustrated) by it.
>>
>>I didn't make it up. Just because it's the first time you heard about it
>>doesn't make it a farce.
>
> It's actually not the first time I've heard that conjecture. I
>have in fact heard it several times since the Phantom Edit had been
>created. I still think it a farce... And I'll explain why below.
Below what?
>
>>Just means you are unimaginative or ill informed.
>
> Think what you want. I'll continue to comment as I see fit.
>
>>Even the novelization hints at the possibility. And that's all I'm saying,
>>that there is that possibility. It's what I thought happened when I first
>>saw the movie.
>
> You already have my opinion readily available here on this
>thread on the novelization.
>
>>Is that alright with you? Am I allowed to express my
>>opinion on what I think may have happened, or do I have to conform to your
>>views or just not say anything at all?
>
> If you're going to get up on a cross, be prepared when folk
>like me instead of hand-patting you and giving you soothing platitudes
>decide to douse you and the cross with gasoline; so that when one
>throws a match, you go up like a funeral pyre.
>
> For the record, I civilly backed out of this debate given you
>the win, when I said I was picking up my hat. I could've added some
>really good ad hominems if I felt like being uncivil about it. As you
>seem to be trying to throw when you used the words unimaginative or
>ill-informed in my direction.
>
>>>> Maybe he thought it was a good time to drop the dapper gay
>>>> politician look.
>>>
>>> Excuse me, what is it with you kids and thinking that
>>> well-manicured = gay. Am I going to have to naturally assume that you
>>> kids all live in your parents basements? No, I don't think so. Move
>>> along now... And in the future hink carefully on this whole "gay
>>> look" think before throwing it out there and wonder why all of a
>>> sudden you're looking at a jihad that you could've sworn you didn't
>>> start.
>>
>>Wow, you certainly got some issues you need to work out.
>
> Wow... you think those issues? You have *no* idea do you...
>I'm going to safely wager you're a young 20's if that. Allow me then
>to educate you as a 40-something that's seen that word used entirely
>too much.
>
> Swap out the word Gay for Nigger, Spic, Gook, Towel-head or
>some other colorful racial slurs that you can possibly think of and
>see how that sentence reads when you insert those words. The use of
>the word GAY there is connoting a snide and derogatory meaning, one
>that I don't appreciate...
> Gay isn't the N-word of the 21st century, and having been
>fighting for LGBT rights longer than you've most probably been alive,
>I would appreciate it if semi-educated to uneducated folk such as
>yourself who think it's no big deal realize that the use of the word
>"gay" as you're using here carries all the same burdens and social
>misconceptions as using the N-word 50 years ago.
>
>>>> Maybe his face was the result of years a messing around with the
>>>> dark side and had always hid it.
>>>
>>> It's certainly a thought...
>>
>>Well, thank you. At least it's not a farce anymore.
>
> Still a farce though, one that I had only entertained with
>only moderate seriousness for 10 seconds. Again, see below.
>
>>> But I don't buy that either given
>>> that Dooku's been at it for years as well, and he was just.. Well,
>>> old.
>>
>>Lot's of possibilities. One is that Palpatine went especially deep into the
>>Dark Side, far deeper than Dooku. And another possibility is that Dooku
>>also hid any physical signs that he was also delving into the Dark Side,
>>since he was also hiding his identity from those around him.
>
> It's far too two-dimensional, sophomoric and Greek for my
>taste. Why must the delving into the Dark Arts always connote that an
>individual being physically misshapened from those studies? Why must
>those of "evil" nature have to use illusions, phantasms and glamours
>in order to hide their true hideous nature?
> We are supposed to be more enlightened, therefore good and
>evil can come in packages that aren't readily identified by their
>coverings (or thereby the removal of those illusions and glamours) and
>should be discerned by their actions more than their appearance.
>
> If this is indeed Lucas' intent to use such an old-style (and
>*cringe* Old-School) approach to good vs. evil in his universe, than
>I'm greatly disappointed.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
