Geeky Star Wars Loser Thread Episode VII: Attack of the bugnest orgies

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > The Book Barn > Geeky Star Wars Loser Thread Episode VII: Attack of the bugnest orgies

«‹›696 »

Mister Roboto: Jun 15, 2009; I SWING BY AUNT MAY's
FOR A SHOWER AND A
BITE, MOST NATURAL
THING IN THE WORLD,
ASSUMING SHE'S
NOT HOME...

...AND I
FIND HER IN BED
WITH MY
FATHER, AND THE
TWO OF THEM
ARE...ARE...

...AAAAAAAAUUUUGH!

Pththya-lyi posted:

His name is Baron Papanoida and he's the Chairman of the Pantoran Assembly.

Baron Papanoida is an anagram of Paranoia And Bop.

Interpret that as you will.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 06:46

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 06:47

yronic heroism: Oct 31, 2008

RocknRollaAyatollah posted:

I think KOTOR was cut to make way for the bad Old Republic tie in comic. Can't have the kids getting confused now can we?

KOTOR was a tie in comic too, and written by the same guy as is writing the new one. In this case I'm giving him a chance.

Also, the decision wouldn't have been about confusion. From a marketing POV, milking a common name is pretty great. That's why you've got so many different X-Men titles out there. It's more about there only being so much appetite for Star Wars in comic form. Total sales plateau after there are about three or four monthly titles being released simultaneously.

It's the bad Clone Wars tie-in comic that's the problem.

yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 09:44 on Oct 17, 2010

# ? Oct 17, 2010 09:39

yronic heroism: Oct 31, 2008

I feel like introducing some of the personalities of the political subforums of theforce.net, just for fun. Scroll past if you don't care.

Master_SweetPea posted:

Due Process is when someone is accused of a crime.
Protecting the border, whatever force necessary, is a security measure.

Bringing up Due Process is like, bringing up muzzle velocity when talking about landmines....wait that's it, deploy landmines on the border! No bullets needed, just put them out like we do at South Korea! Finally we can stop the flood of lumberjacks terrorists from Canada. So there, I withdraw my "shoot the trespassers" with, deploy landmines like we do in South Korea.
Happy now, Mr. Expert-on-all-things-of-the-universe-especially-civil-liberties-and-libertarians?

Here's Kimball Kinneson, an ex-moderator with a penchant for explaining his Mormon beliefs and his divorce.

Kimball Kinneson posted:

A strict party line vote would have been if you had 0 Republicans on one side and 0 Democrats on the other side for the vote. That only happened in one vote (the Senate vote on HR 3590). In every other vote on the Health Care Reform issue, the Republicans were part of a bipartisan group of Representatives and Senators opposed to it.

Part of the problem over the last two years is that the Democrats haven't really been trying to get that many Republican votes. In the House, they have repeatedly done what they did on Health Care: write it such that they can allow a handful of "defections" and still maintain a majority vote for the bill. In the Senate, they also don't care that much about getting any Republicans votes. Instead, they focus on only getting Scott Brown's vote, or Olympia Snowe's vote, or Susan Collins' vote, because that's the bare minimum that would be required to get cloture.

That essentially gives the Republicans the choice of either completely surrendering to the Democrats on every issue, or maintaining solidarity if they have any hope of having a say. That is especially true in the Senate.

You can point your finger at the Republicans all you want, but in a climate like that, the Democrats have failed to help things as well. The processes that Pelosi and Reid have been using don't do much to include the Republicans, nor do they give the Republicans any incentive to support the Democrats' positions. The Republicans may not be behaving in a bipartisan manner, but the Democrats aren't exactly trying to craft bills that could win bipartisan support either. If anything, the actual voting results show that the Republicans act in a more bipartisan manner than the Democrats do.

Kimball Kinnison

Yep, guy still "signs" his posts. In 2010. But, nonetheless, he is one of their "moderate" conservatives. Then there is his brother, Smuggy, as some call him...

JediSmuggler posted:

And the left side of the aisle hasn't been trying to use the race card (or sexism or claims of bigotry against homosexuals) to silence debate as well? The use of the race card is intended to silence debate. Rather than make the case for Obama's version of health care, people like Janean Garafolo and yourself have all but thrown the race card out there instead.

Both sides do it. Until your side is willing to stop playing the race card, then why should the right NOT seek a similar weapon for use against the left?

JediSmuggler posted:

Let's look at the "falsely accusing" part: In the alleged barrage of N-words, at least two videos have disputed the version of events set forth by members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Since the dust-up last month, some more videos have emerged, none of which support the claims made by Andre Carson and John Lewis. Congressman Cleaver's claim the Capitol Police arrested a protester who spat on him was disputed by the Capitol Police at the time - and he has, by my understanding, disavowed the claim he was spat on. There is only one conclusion: They have lied about the incident in question. FreedomWorks has also reported on a smear campaign being waged against a Republican lawmaker in Arkansas.

The evidence is open-and-shut: There is an attempt to falsely label the tea party movement as hospitable to racism, and among those willing to do so is a civil rights icon.

And that is not the only such case where false claims have occurred: The Duke Lacrosse case, Tawana Brawley, nooses that were planted by the purported victims of racial incidents. The false allegations have been numerous.

Why? Political advantage/gain seems to be the motive. Obama is facing a very tough mid-term: Approval is below 50%, the Dems are down by 6 on the generic congressional ballot, and 56% of Americans want the health care law repealed.

And it isn't just the tea party - those who back Arizona's law are being accused of backing racial profiling, never mind the law's actual text, which says it is only during the course of a lawful arrest, detention or stop AND said that race/nationality was NOT sufficient to create "reasonable suspicion." So why, when racial profiling is explicitly prohibited in the text of SB 1070, do Obama and Holder still claim Arizona law enforcement will resort to racial profiling to implement it? Again, I can only conclude that they are lying for political gain. (As an aside, on immigration, there are some racists - Pat Buchanan is one of them in my opinion. But the Arizona law was not aimed at Mexicans, it was passed in response to a drug war that has badly spilled over the border. What resulted in the passage of the law were incidents like a rancher being killed and cops being attacked by gunmen. I backed Bush's approach, and it was partially due to the paleo-cons like Buchanan. But when a drug war spills into the US, that has to be brought under control before we do anything else. That means no "comprehensive reform" and no raiding workplaces until that spillover is stopped, and the situation is under control.)

So the race card is coming out - either to excite Obama's left-wing political base, to try to intimidate those who disagree with Obama on immigration and/or health care (or other issues), to make Democrats look more appealing to blacks and Hispanics, or some combination of the above motives.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 10:17

mojo1701a: Oct 9, 2008; Oh, yeah. Loud and clear. Emphasis on LOUD!
~ David Lee Roth

Angry Midwesterner posted:

I feel like introducing some of the personalities of the political subforums of theforce.net, just for fun. Scroll past if you don't care.

Here's Kimball Kinneson, an ex-moderator with a penchant for explaining his Mormon beliefs and his divorce.

Yep, guy still "signs" his posts. In 2010. But, nonetheless, he is one of their "moderate" conservatives. Then there is his brother, Smuggy, as some call him...

Is it the simplistic black-and-white/good guys vs. bad guys nature of Star Wars that attracts these kind of people?

# ? Oct 17, 2010 19:11

haitfais: Aug 7, 2005; I am offended by your ham, sir.

mojo1701a posted:

Is it the simplistic black-and-white/good guys vs. bad guys nature of Star Wars that attracts these kind of people?

That's the popular hypothesis. Add an increased likelihood of poor socialisation (neckbeard shut-in variety), and you have a perfect recipe for well-reasoned political discussion.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 19:20

Nckdictator: Sep 8, 2006; Just..someone

Hey a excuse to post the website of the crazy guy who wrote the old Lando novels

http://www.lneilsmith.org/

Abraham Palpatine

quote:

The American Lenin
by L. Neil Smith
lneil@lneilsmith.org

It's harder and harder these days to tell a liberal from a conservative -- given the former category's increasingly blatant hostility toward the First Amendment, and the latter's prissy new disdain for the Second Amendment -- but it's still easy to tell a liberal from a libertarian.

Just ask about either Amendment.

If what you get back is a spirited defense of the ideas of this country's Founding Fathers, what you've got is a libertarian. By shameful default, libertarians have become America's last and only reliable stewards of the Bill of Rights.

But if -- and this usually seems a bit more difficult to most people -- you'd like to know whether an individual is a libertarian or a conservative, ask about Abraham Lincoln.

Suppose a woman -- with plenty of personal faults herself, let that be stipulated -- desired to leave her husband: partly because he made a regular practice, in order to go out and get drunk, of stealing money she had earned herself by raising chickens or taking in laundry; and partly because he'd already demonstrated a proclivity for domestic violence the first time she'd complained about his stealing.

Now, when he stood in the doorway and beat her to a bloody pulp to keep her home, would we memorialize him as a hero? Or would we treat him like a dangerous lunatic who should be locked up, if for no other reason, then for trying to maintain the appearance of a relationship where there wasn't a relationship any more? What value, we would ask, does he find in continuing to possess her in an involuntary association, when her heart and mind had left him long ago?

History tells us that Lincoln was a politically ambitious lawyer who eagerly prostituted himself to northern industrialists who were unwilling to pay world prices for their raw materials and who, rather than practice real capitalism, enlisted brute government force -- "sell to us at our price or pay a fine that'll put you out of business" -- for dealing with uncooperative southern suppliers. That's what a tariff's all about. In support of this "noble principle", when southerners demonstrated what amounted to no more than token resistance, Lincoln permitted an internal war to begin that butchered more Americans than all of this country's foreign wars -- before or afterward -- rolled into one.

Lincoln saw the introduction of total war on the American continent -- indiscriminate mass slaughter and destruction without regard to age, gender, or combat status of the victims -- and oversaw the systematic shelling and burning of entire cities for strategic and tactical purposes. For the same purposes, Lincoln declared, rather late in the war, that black slaves were now free in the south -- where he had no effective jurisdiction -- while declaring at the same time, somewhat more quietly but for the record nonetheless, that if maintaining slavery could have won his war for him, he'd have done that, instead.

The fact is, Lincoln didn't abolish slavery at all, he nationalized it, imposing income taxation and military conscription upon what had been a free country before he took over -- income taxation and military conscription to which newly "freed" blacks soon found themselves subjected right alongside newly-enslaved whites. If the civil war was truly fought against slavery -- a dubious, "politically correct" assertion with no historical evidence to back it up -- then clearly, slavery won.

Lincoln brought secret police to America, along with the traditional midnight "knock on the door", illegally suspending the Bill of Rights and, like the Latin America dictators he anticipated, "disappearing" thousands in the north whose only crime was that they disagreed with him. To finance his crimes against humanity, Lincoln allowed the printing of worthless paper money in unprecedented volumes, ultimately plunging America into a long, grim depression -- in the south, it lasted half a century -- he didn't have to live through, himself.

In the end, Lincoln didn't unite this country -- that can't be done by force -- he divided it along lines of an unspeakably ugly hatred and resentment that continue to exist almost a century and a half after they were drawn. If Lincoln could have been put on trial in Nuremburg for war crimes, he'd have received the same sentence as the highest-ranking Nazis.

If libertarians ran things, they'd melt all the Lincoln pennies, shred all the Lincoln fives, take a wrecking ball to the Lincoln Memorial, and consider erecting monuments to John Wilkes Booth. Libertarians know Lincoln as the worst President America has ever had to suffer, with Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and Lyndon Johnson running a distant second, third, and fourth.

Conservatives, on the other hand, adore Lincoln, publicly admire his methods, and revere him as the best President America ever had. One wonders: is this because they'd like to do, all over again, all of the things Lincoln did to the American people? Judging from their taste for executions as a substitute for individual self-defense, their penchant for putting people behind bars -- more than any other country in the world, per capita, no matter how poorly it works to reduce crime -- and the bitter distaste they display for Constitutional "technicalities" like the exclusionary rule, which are all that keep America from becoming the world's largest banana republic, one is well-justified in wondering.

The troubling truth is that, more than anybody else's, Abraham Lincoln's career resembles and foreshadows that of V.I. Lenin, who, with somewhat better technology at his disposal, slaughtered millions of innocents -- rather than mere hundreds of thousands -- to enforce an impossibly stupid idea which, in the end, like forced association, was proven by history to be a resounding failure. Abraham Lincoln was America's Lenin, and when America has finally absorbed that painful but illuminating truth, it will finally have begun to recover from the War between the States.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 19:23

Casimir Radon: Aug 2, 2008

mojo1701a posted:

Is it the simplistic black-and-white/good guys vs. bad guys nature of Star Wars that attracts these kind of people?

I think I should make an account and try to convert them to Zoroastrianism, "We did it first, and we did it better :smug:

# ? Oct 17, 2010 19:24

Captain von Trapp: Jan 23, 2006; I don't like it, and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it.

mojo1701a posted:

Is it the simplistic black-and-white/good guys vs. bad guys nature of Star Wars that attracts these kind of people?

Can't be. Traviss if anything bent the morality lines the hardest in her novels, and I think it's her fans who generally get accused of wacky politics.

But really the posted TFN excerpts are pretty tame. It's wildly right-wing by SA standards, but SA needs to get out more.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 19:37

Der Luftwaffle: Dec 29, 2008

Nckdictator posted:

Hey a excuse to post the website of the crazy guy who wrote the old Lando novels

http://www.lneilsmith.org/

Abraham Palpatine

Not to turn this into a political debate, but he's not all wrong in that article.

I still like him and his books :3:

# ? Oct 17, 2010 20:12

Casimir Radon: Aug 2, 2008

Der Luftwaffle posted:

Not to turn this into a political debate, but he's not all wrong in that article.

I still like him and his books

I thought he was insane during my brief teenage flirtation with libertarianism. The Lando trilogy is still good though.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 20:15

Nckdictator: Sep 8, 2006; Just..someone

Casimir Radon posted:

The Lando trilogy is still good though.

"Outside, a braid of raspberry red, lemon yellow, and orange orange twisted through the heavens, across a constellation the locals called the Silly Rabbit"

# ? Oct 17, 2010 20:28

Casimir Radon: Aug 2, 2008

There's no Jedi, no Sith, No Mandolorians, and no emo bullshit. It's just Lando flying around being awesome.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 20:43

Nckdictator: Sep 8, 2006; Just..someone

Casimir Radon posted:

There's no Jedi, no Sith, No Mandolorians, and no emo bullshit. It's just Lando flying around being awesome.

Point taken; that's why I love those pulpy,old Han Solo books.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 21:14

Chairman Capone: Dec 17, 2008

The last thing I saw of L. Niel Smith's was an alternate history webcomic where Texas remained an independent country/libertarian utopia because they won the battle of the Alamo and as a result they expanded into the southwest and so were able to claim the technology of the Roswell crash and use it to fight against evil socialist Mexicans and communist New Englanders, and there were also lots of naked women. It was basically what a teenager just exposed to Ayn Rand and Ron Paul would fantasize about, it made Liberality For All and Orson Scott Card's Empire seem like nuanced political satire by comparison. It was just embarrassing.

That out of the way - so would those of you who read it recommend Knight Errant? I liked the KOTOR comic for most of its run, but I really thought for a long stretch in the middle it was kind of meandering and plotless. And since from what I hear, the plot of Knight Errant is basically similar in structure to the middle of KOTOR (a single wandering Jedi on the run doing good deeds with smuggler friends while running from Dark Jedi during a war) it makes me a bit nervous.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 22:19

Casimir Radon: Aug 2, 2008

This is a guy who's so libertarian he thinks the Articles of Confederation are better than the Constitution which he considered fascistic. He wrote another book about a parallel universe where George Washington was executed for trying to put down the Whiskey Rebellion, and then gorillas demanded equal rights :psypop:

. I'm pretty sure the Alamo one had the Lindbergh baby as president of Texas, and made a bunch of excuses for his dad's Hitler sympathies.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 22:35

RocknRollaAyatollah: Nov 26, 2008; Lipstick Apathy

Chairman Capone posted:

That out of the way - so would those of you who read it recommend Knight Errant? I liked the KOTOR comic for most of its run, but I really thought for a long stretch in the middle it was kind of meandering and plotless. And since from what I hear, the plot of Knight Errant is basically similar in structure to the middle of KOTOR (a single wandering Jedi on the run doing good deeds with smuggler friends while running from Dark Jedi during a war) it makes me a bit nervous.

To be fair there is only one issue so far. The plot isn't them running around doing good deeds, it's a plot with her trying to survive in a galaxy overrun with Sith warlords and the Republic is a small, ever shrinking portion of space. It takes place about 30 years before the whole Jedi vs. Sith, Darth Bane events.

The main character is a member of a Jedi raid on a mining planet. The raid goes horribly wrong when a rival Sith Lord shows up to destroy much of the planet. The main character throws a monkey wrench into this Sith's plans but everyone else gets killed. It ends with her coming to in the rubble and being told she's the only Jedi left. The next 5 issues seem to be about her taking out the guy who killed her master and allies.

I honestly felt it was better written than The Old Republic, the MMO tie in, but then again it's only the first issue. The plot of Old Republic really doesn't make any sense and it is hard to follow at times.

Also,
The treaty is never broken and Shan goes on to be Grand Master of the Jedi Order. This has already been established apparently.

EDIT:
I really kind of ignore most sci-fi authors as opinionated people. As long as their politics aren't so overtly apparent, I usually can ignore them. For instance I enjoy The Moon is a Harsh Mistress but I'm very far from libertarian.

RocknRollaAyatollah fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Oct 17, 2010

# ? Oct 17, 2010 23:21

Casimir Radon: Aug 2, 2008

Heinlein wasn't crazy yet when he wrote that. Most of his later stuff is however unreadable poo poo where he rambles on for chapters about vague concepts and nothing of meaning ever happens.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 23:27

Chairman Capone: Dec 17, 2008

Also when he gets fixated on what a great idea it would be if twelve year old girls seduced their fathers.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 23:38

RocknRollaAyatollah: Nov 26, 2008; Lipstick Apathy

Most science fiction writers seem to end up being really weird or human cesspools. Sometimes they start out normal and go down hill or other times where they just start out crazy and fall farther. Look at Orson Scott Card.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 23:53

Casimir Radon: Aug 2, 2008

He was raised Mormon, never had a chance.

# ? Oct 17, 2010 23:56

Pththya-lyi: Nov 8, 2009; THUNDERDOME LOSER 2020

Casimir Radon posted:

This is a guy who's so libertarian he thinks the Articles of Confederation are better than the Constitution which he considered fascistic. He wrote another book about a parallel universe where George Washington was executed for trying to put down the Whiskey Rebellion, and then gorillas demanded equal rights . I'm pretty sure the Alamo one had the Lindbergh baby as president of Texas, and made a bunch of excuses for his dad's Hitler sympathies.

In the Roswell, TX continuity, Hitler himself ended up leaving the Nazis, moving to Texas, becoming a famous muralist, and having a daughter who grew up to be an even more famous sculptor and President of Texas. The most untoward thing he ever did was get drunk at his daughter's inauguration and embarrass himself. :psyduck:

# ? Oct 18, 2010 00:17

Slantedfloors: Apr 29, 2008; Wait, What?

Casimir Radon posted:

There's no Jedi, no Sith, No Mandolorians, and no emo bullshit. It's just Lando flying around being awesome.

And when faced with the one evil wizard in the books, Lando just shoots him. And it works.

Awesome.

# ? Oct 18, 2010 00:17

Rough Lobster: May 27, 2009; Don't be such a squid, bro

Pththya-lyi posted:

In the Roswell, TX continuity, Hitler himself ended up leaving the Nazis, moving to Texas, becoming a famous muralist, and having a daughter who grew up to be an even more famous sculptor and President of Texas. The most untoward thing he ever did was get drunk at his daughter's inauguration and embarrass himself.

For Godsakes man, I need the name of this book!

# ? Oct 18, 2010 01:40

Casimir Radon: Aug 2, 2008

Rough Lobster posted:

For Godsakes man, I need the name of this book!

Better yet you don't even have to pay for it. Take that how you will.

EDIT: Also for some reason all the Nazi's are horrible gay stereotypes.

Casimir Radon fucked around with this message at 01:44 on Oct 18, 2010

# ? Oct 18, 2010 01:41

Nucleic Acids: Apr 10, 2007; Can't post for 18 hours!

Nckdictator posted:

Abraham Palpatine

It's really hard for me to want to go and reread his old Lando books when he's writing poo poo like this.

# ? Oct 18, 2010 03:44

Azzmo: Jul 2, 2007; STUPID MINORITIES ALWAYS MAKING ME FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE TO BE A WHITE MALE

Nucleic Acids posted:

It's really hard for me to want to go and reread his old Lando books when he's writing poo poo like this.

Luckily you get to choose whether you care more about the story or the storyteller. I've always been at about a 100/0 story/storyteller ratio and so I can argue that the Republic Commando books were great while acknowledging Traviss' stupidity and later failures in the franchise. Just choose not to care about real world factors; sci fi books are supposed to be an escapist experience anyway.

# ? Oct 18, 2010 04:14

Mister Roboto: Jun 15, 2009; I SWING BY AUNT MAY's
FOR A SHOWER AND A
BITE, MOST NATURAL
THING IN THE WORLD,
ASSUMING SHE'S
NOT HOME...

...AND I
FIND HER IN BED
WITH MY
FATHER, AND THE
TWO OF THEM
ARE...ARE...

...AAAAAAAAUUUUGH!

mojo1701a posted:

Is it the simplistic black-and-white/good guys vs. bad guys nature of Star Wars that attracts these kind of people?

Seems pretty obvious that it does. Complicating things (like politics) with shades of grey and different perspectives is for human being Libera--I mean, cowardly Sith.

# ? Oct 18, 2010 05:37

Jervas Dudley: Feb 18, 2007; Bro and Maplehoof: Go beyond the impossible!

Casimir Radon posted:

Heinlein wasn't crazy yet when he wrote that. Most of his later stuff is however unreadable poo poo where he rambles on for chapters about vague concepts and nothing of meaning ever happens.

Have you read For Us the Living? Heinlein's first novel written in 1938. He never wanted it to be published. It more or less shows that he didn't really go crazy, he was kind of always crazy. I still really like him. Kind of hard not to, he was too big a part of my childhood.

mojo1701a posted:

Is it the simplistic black-and-white/good guys vs. bad guys nature of Star Wars that attracts these kind of people?

Lord of the Rings has a white supremacist following. Fantasy worlds tend to appeal to people with extreme non-mainstream views. It's like if a bunch of flat earth people got really into Discworld. The world is constructed (or can be construed) so that they're right. There is objective good and evil in both and in the case of LotR, the evil is a different race.

Captain von Trapp posted:

Can't be. Traviss if anything bent the morality lines the hardest in her novels, and I think it's her fans who generally get accused of wacky politics.

But really the posted TFN excerpts are pretty tame. It's wildly right-wing by SA standards, but SA needs to get out more.

I think Traviss gets a pass because of the strong military themes. That leads to a lot of support from the same people who thought Starship Troopers was good model for society. In case anyone is confused, I'm pretty sure Heinlein thought of Starship Troopers as at least somewhat dystopian. If you've only seen the movie, he probably would have thought the movie version of human society was fascist and horrible.

# ? Oct 18, 2010 06:14

Shimrra Jamaane: Aug 10, 2007; Obscure to all except those well-versed in Yuuzhan Vong lore.

What the gently caress happened to this thread? :psyduck:

This is one thread where I can get away from my constant anger at crazy right wingers. You guys are ruining it!

# ? Oct 18, 2010 06:16

Faerunner: Dec 31, 2007

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

What the gently caress happened to this thread? This is one thread where I can get away from my constant anger at crazy right wingers. You guys are ruining it!

Yeah, not everyone on the right end of the spectrum is nuts. Talk about Star Wars, not Glenn Beck

# ? Oct 18, 2010 06:30

Clemen: Jul 29, 2010; by Fistgrrl

Faerunner posted:

Yeah, not everyone on the right end of the spectrum is nuts. Talk about Star Wars, not Glenn Beck

Shhhhhh you'll stir up D&D

# ? Oct 18, 2010 06:39

Dave Syndrome: Jan 11, 2007; Look, Bernard. Bernard, look. Look. Bernard. Bernard. Look. Bernard. Bernard. Bernard! Bernard. Bernard. Look, Bernard! Bernard. Bernard! Bernard! Look! Bernard! Bernard. Bernard! Bernard, look! Look! Look, Bernard! Bernard! Bernard, look! Look! Bern

Mister Roboto posted:

Baron Papanoida is an anagram of Paranoia And Bop.

Interpret that as you will.

I always saw it as a way to call him the father (papa) of all nerds (noid).

Edit: Heh. According to the discussion page, his Wookieepedia entry once stated that the name stood for "Papa no idea."
I like it.

Dave Syndrome fucked around with this message at 10:50 on Oct 18, 2010

# ? Oct 18, 2010 10:47

RocknRollaAyatollah: Nov 26, 2008; Lipstick Apathy

Dave Syndrome posted:

I always saw it as a way to call him the father (papa) of all nerds (noid).

Edit: Heh. According to the discussion page, his Wookieepedia entry once stated that the name stood for "Papa no idea."
I like it.

Avoid the noid, he ruins movie franchises!

# ? Oct 18, 2010 11:29

Captain von Trapp: Jan 23, 2006; I don't like it, and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it.

Mister Roboto posted:

Seems pretty obvious that it does. Complicating things (like politics) with shades of grey and different perspectives is for human being Libera--I mean, cowardly Sith.

Not a lot of gray in that opinion either, no?

The great strength of the moral view of the original Star Wars films is not that it's black/white or entirely gray. There's good and evil, but there's also aspects of the story that are more complicated. The strength is that the movie isn't trying to sell us a moral framework at all - it simply tells a story.

One of the places where the prequels come off the rails is where it tries to make that kind of a sell in both directions at once:

Obi-Wan: "Only Sith believe in absolutes!"
Anakin: "Well actually there's shades of gray and my perspective is more complicated..."
Obi-Wan: "You're absolutely wrong!"

# ? Oct 18, 2010 21:30

Captain Splendid: Jan 7, 2009; Qu'en pense Caffarelli?

Thought I'd post some more of Fractalsponge's attemtps to model one of the Dark Empire ships.

Sum total of his references:

(The ship on the right, about halfway down)

What he's done so far (click for big):

Click here for the full 1600x360 image.

Click here for the full 1024x420 image.

Click here for the full 1024x768 image.

[EDIT]

On an unrelated note, I've thought of a brilliant Halloween costume idea that somehow combines these items:

Click here for the full 378x840 image.

Captain Splendid fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Oct 18, 2010

# ? Oct 18, 2010 22:22

Casimir Radon: Aug 2, 2008

I wish the stories from the comics were as interesting as their art.

# ? Oct 19, 2010 00:28

RocknRollaAyatollah: Nov 26, 2008; Lipstick Apathy

That cruiser is pretty well designed, they actually partially covered those shield generators.

# ? Oct 19, 2010 00:49

haitfais: Aug 7, 2005; I am offended by your ham, sir.

RocknRollaAyatollah posted:

That cruiser is pretty well designed, they actually partially covered those shield generators.

They're not shield generators, they're communication towers. The timing of that line in Return of the Jedi is coincidental.

# ? Oct 19, 2010 01:47

RocknRollaAyatollah: Nov 26, 2008; Lipstick Apathy

Chaos Hippy posted:

They're not shield generators, they're communication towers. The timing of that line in Return of the Jedi is coincidental.

According to the old Essential Guide to Vehicles they're the deflector shield generators. The communication tower is the bar between them in the center of the command tower.

# ? Oct 19, 2010 02:00

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 06:47

Casimir Radon: Aug 2, 2008

The X-Wing and Tie Fighter series' agree :colbert:

# ? Oct 19, 2010 02:07

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > The Book Barn > Geeky Star Wars Loser Thread Episode VII: Attack of the bugnest orgies

«‹›696 »