|
jeeves posted:My wife and I got talked into seeing it again with some friends who had not seen it and REALLY wanted to. We both regret giving them money again.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
jeeves posted:My wife and I got talked into seeing it again with some friends who had not seen it and REALLY wanted to. We both regret giving them money again. "Sorry, I saw it once and didn't really like it, can we see something else instead?" seems a lot more reasonable than paying ticket prices twice for a movie you hate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:
Does that guy in the back have the same staff as Rey?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Who even cares about the OT? There are only two Star Wars that matter anymore: the prequels, and the speculation about the ones that aren't out yet. Yes, I realize you hated TFA but that shouldn't have any bearing on the OT.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
Has anyone made a joke about preferring the Old Testament to the Prequel Testament yet? It seems apt with two meanings of OT floating around on the same page, but I didn't want to rehash
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:Has anyone made a joke about preferring the Old Testament to the Prequel Testament yet? It seems apt with two meanings of OT floating around on the same page, but I didn't want to rehash I did make the joke about calling Episodes 7-9 the "New Trilogy".
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:Has anyone made a joke about preferring the Old Testament to the Prequel Testament yet? It seems apt with two meanings of OT floating around on the same page, but I didn't want to rehash I honestly was glossing over the conversation and very briefly got confused at the use of OT there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
greatn posted:Does that guy in the back have the same staff as Rey? Nah. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:"Sorry, I saw it once and didn't really like it, can we see something else instead?" seems a lot more reasonable than paying ticket prices twice for a movie you hate. It was more along the lines of us going "well, it seemed really underwhelming. Maybe give it another chance because everyone I know is going crazy about it?" That didn't turn out so well, and it really hammered in the fact that the main McGuffin of the movie is just bizarre. Plus there were no movie theaters still playing Fury Road for me to give my money to! I do have to say that it is not at the same level of insulting terrible as Prometheus though. It's just that this movie kind of reminds me too much of the super bland Transformers for its own good. I don't know what I should have been expecting though, after Into Darkness.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
jeeves posted:Prometheus, Transformers, Into Darkness. lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
I think I subconsciously wanted to tempt fate by writing a single post with all of those together. I wonder how many words Mechagodzilla will spew now that those three have been mentioned?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
jeeves posted:It was more along the lines of us going "well, it seemed really underwhelming. Maybe give it another chance because everyone I know is going crazy about it?" That didn't turn out so well, and it really hammered in the fact that the main McGuffin of the movie is just bizarre. Plus there were no movie theaters still playing Fury Road for me to give my money to! Fair enough!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
People like the movie because that characters were good and likable. It's not that hard. It also had some neat visuals and fun adventure stuff and an authentic atmosphere and it wasn't painful to look at or horribly offensive like Jurassic World. You're not surprising anyone when you say "it's basically a retread of a new hope with a few changes", everyone already knows that.
Augus fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Jan 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
jeeves posted:I think I subconsciously wanted to tempt fate by writing a single post with all of those together. Thanks for playing CD bingo! Now it's time to "discuss" "cinema" I thought Awakens was all right, but fairly disappointing as an Abrams/Star Wars joint. It definitely felt too safe, and not crazy or weird enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
jeeves posted:It was more along the lines of us going "well, it seemed really underwhelming. Maybe give it another chance because everyone I know is going crazy about it?" That didn't turn out so well, and it really hammered in the fact that the main McGuffin of the movie is just bizarre. Plus there were no movie theaters still playing Fury Road for me to give my money to! Prometheus is a great movie. Into Darkness is a fun ride if nothing else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Black Bones posted:I thought Awakens was all right, but fairly disappointing as an Abrams/Star Wars joint. It definitely felt too safe, and not crazy or weird enough. I got a blu-ray player and Episodes I-VI for it over the holidays, and watched The Phantom Menace (my third time seeing it). I am one of the prequel-likers, but even I was struck with how weird and "not safe" it was compared to The Force Awakens. Child actor, relatively complex politics, Padme's dual identity, Palpatine's obscured role, sympathetic enemies (I found the Trade Federation droids and the Neimoidians much funnier this time) . . . The Force Awakens is at the shallow end of an already shallow Star Wars pool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:
Oh, so that's where Rey got her staff!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:This is pages back, but as someone who (as an amateur) likes to read about this stuff, this is an astonishingly ignorant post. Yeah, it's pretty absurd. I'm an atheist and still believe Jesus was a revolutionary figure, and messianic in that he "saved" christians from rear end-backwards aspects of the old testament mixed with the worst aspects of roman culture. Being born without a baby daddy had nothing to do with it, and if we're going to be real here: he wouldn't have had any followers whatsoever if he wasn't such a great guy, baby-daddy or not. "Anakin is jesus and deserves jesus levels of grandiosity when he becomes a dick" doesn't really work when the only comparison between the two figures is "an uneducated slave on a planet full of unique alien physiologies casually suggests that she had a son without a father", and even if it's granted it's still an incredibly shallow reason to believe Anakin was going to be an amazing guy but got corrupted by monks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
I'm not religious but it does seem Jesus' primary role in Christian religion is how he is God and the son of God and will have a relationship with you if you ask, rather than as a historical figure who did specific things in a specific place. He is valued because he is the divine sacrifice, not because he threw the moneylenders out of the temple or hung out with the poor, diseased and despised.quote:Being born without a baby daddy had nothing to do with it, and if we're going to be real here: he wouldn't have had any followers whatsoever if he wasn't such a great guy, baby-daddy or not. This seems rather naive!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:I'm not religious but it does seem Jesus' primary role in Christian religion is how he is God and the son of God and will have a relationship with you if you ask, rather than as a historical figure who did specific things in a specific place. He is valued because he is the divine sacrifice, not because he threw the moneylenders out of the temple or hung out with the poor, diseased and despised. Considering Jesus was born at a time where a million shucksters and false-prophets were declaring themselves sons of god, I don't believe it's that naive. Jesus commands respect among many religions and among the non-religious because of his deeds. His marketing beat the others' because he was willing to follow through on his beliefs. If jesus had been a horrible jerk, christian history wouldn't be "our messiah had came, but he was a total rear end in a top hat", it would be "our messiah has yet to come". Even in your own attempt at describing a contrary view of Jesus you acknowledge his tolerance. E: keep in mind that my argument is not "Anakin wasn't meant to be a christ figure", it's "the prequel trilogy made poor work of establishing Anakin as a christ figure corrupted by wizards". Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Jesus didn't fulfill the prophecies of the Messiah, though. That's a big part of the Pauline sections of the New Testament, that Jesus was the exact opposite of the Messiah. He was never anointed as king, he was beaten and humiliated, killed in a cursed way, associated with the lowest of society, and was from a one-horse town in Galilee. There was an effort to rework the prophecies of the Messiah to fit Jesus in, but what he offered was not a revived and eternal Kingdom of Israel, but a new covenant with God, for all people, men and women, slave and free, Gentile, Jew, barbarian or Roman. He also offered an overturning of injustice and evil, not through mustering armies, but through the unveiled wrath of God, the "Son of Man, coming in clouds, with great power and authority." This all before he became understood as the son of God, and later yet, as God himself.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
I think we can attribute the success and spread of early Christianity to factors other than "Jesus was a nice guy".
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Considering Jesus was born at a time where a million shucksters and false-prophets were declaring themselves sons of god, I don't believe it's that naive. Jesus commands respect among many religions and among the non-religious because of his deeds. His marketing beat the others' because he was willing to follow through on his beliefs. You're again approaching this from the perspective of a non-Christian, which is natural given your stated background. You also seem to be relying on the curious assumption that being a good person means you'll be better supported. In reality, plenty of good people are forgotten by history, and plenty of terrible people are known and respected. And then of course there's the elephant in the room: People knew Jesus was the Messiah not because of what he did (as in morally righteous acts), but what he could do. His abilities (walking on water, exorcising demons, etc) marked him as being touched by God.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
I'm really sick of people basing every story on Jesus or the bible, or analyzing everything like it came from Judaeo-Christian myth because it's just so trite and boring, at this point. Completely unoriginal. Both in terms of content and criticism I think there should be an English Language Wide moratorium on Christ analogies because holy poo poo, enough is enough. Find another stupid book to rip off all your ideas from, terrible writers. Find another book whose dick you can suck, critics. God forbid any sort of symbolism or perspective exist in the world other than that which is rigidly defined by the narrow lens of your ancient alien love cult. Let Star Wars be Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:Yes, I realize you hated TFA but that shouldn't have any bearing on the OT. I don't hate Force Awakens. I think it is 'decent.' bad day posted:I'm really sick of people basing every story on Jesus or the bible, or analyzing everything like it came from Judaeo-Christian myth because it's just so trite and boring, at this point. Star Wars has always been based on a mix of Christianity and Buddhism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
I think it's pretty clear about all the movies happening a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away..
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
bad day posted:I'm really sick of people basing every story on Jesus or the bible, or analyzing everything like it came from Judaeo-Christian myth because it's just so trite and boring, at this point. I can sympathise but this kind of feels like telling a carpenter to stop using his hammer quite so much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:I can sympathise but this kind of feels like telling a carpenter to stop using his hammer quite so much. Everything looks like a nail, sigh. I mean, it's just boring. Especially in horror movies, where they wind up being about the bible. Which makes them Christian movies, essentially.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:I think we can attribute the success and spread of early Christianity to factors other than "Jesus was a nice guy". Maybe all of the factors that people are talking about actually played a role, instead of it just being one aspect of the Jesus package that did all the heavy lifting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:35
|
|
bad day posted:I'm really sick of people basing every story on Jesus or the bible, or analyzing everything like it came from Judaeo-Christian myth because it's just so trite and boring, at this point. Unfortunately, it's a huge part of Anglo-European civilization now.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
computer parts posted:You're again approaching this from the perspective of a non-Christian, which is natural given your stated background. You also seem to be relying on the curious assumption that being a good person means you'll be better supported. In reality, plenty of good people are forgotten by history, and plenty of terrible people are known and respected. And plenty of good people are remembered, and plenty of terrible people are forgotten (or never even noticed). You're disregarding the reasons Jesus amassed his followers in favor of a false "life isn't fair, everything is terrible" blanket approach. It is even possible to argue that Jesus' unique position as a powerful Good Egg contributed to his deification and immortalization. quote:And then of course there's the elephant in the room: People knew Jesus was the Messiah not because of what he did (as in morally righteous acts), but what he could do. His abilities (walking on water, exorcising demons, etc) marked him as being touched by God. And plenty of prophets of the time claimed to have moved mountains, pacified beasts, and amass fortune from the sky itself. Why do you suspect Jesus' claims, who as been noted did not fit the prophecy, were adopted but not those prophets? Lt. Danger posted:I think we can attribute the success and spread of early Christianity to factors other than "Jesus was a nice guy". You're moving the goalposts. We were not discussing how Christianity achieved success (conquest and conversion), we were discussing why Jesus was accepted by his followers, why he is well regarded both within and without christianity, and how Anakin works as a corrupted christ figure with these in mind (where I argue the contrary). It is true that few would know of Jesus if christianity hadn't achieved bloody success, however that does not explain why Jesus became such an integral figure in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:
Christians would argue because they actually happened.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Christians would argue because they actually happened. And the followers of those prophets would argue the same. Why was Jesus the more attractive figure? Do you believe christians would Invoke jesus to such an extent in modern times if his teachings were "slavery is the holiest act, those of stained skin are forever damned, women are to lay with beasts until required", or do you think he would be confined to the bin of forgotten/unknown bible figures that many Old Testament characters reside? What does this say about the importance of water shoes and male-less reproduction?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:And the followers of those prophets would argue the same. Why was Jesus the more attractive figure? Constantine, mostly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Constantine, mostly. Do you believe Jesus was the only prophet to be publically killed? Why did Constantine build a church at Jesus' tomb, and none of the others?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:26
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Do you believe Jesus was the only prophet to be publically killed? Why did Constantine build a church at Jesus' tomb, and none of the others? Probably because he had a vision that lead him to believe that the God of the Christians was backing him.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Probably because he had a vision that lead him to believe that the God of the Christians was backing him. Personal question for you: do you genuinely believe that was his real reason?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:36
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Personal question for you: do you genuinely believe that was his real reason? Yes, because it's a fairly common thing people did in the ancient world. They would conclude for various reasons that a particular god was favoring them, and move to honor that god in return. Constantine doesn't appear to have made it up because his patronage brought a massive shift in Christian iconography, from the fish to the Chi-Rho and crucifix, that suggest his story of seeing the Chi-Rho symbol in a dream and then seeking out what god had that as a symbol is likely to be true. Especially given that Christianity wasn't dominant at all until Constantine and his successors made it the official religion.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Yes, because it's a fairly common thing people did in the ancient world. They would conclude for various reasons that a particular god was favoring them, and move to honor that god in return. Constantine doesn't appear to have made it up because his patronage brought a massive shift in Christian iconography, from the fish to the Chi-Rho and crucifix, that suggest his story of seeing the Chi-Rho symbol in a dream and then seeking out what god had that as a symbol is likely to be true. Especially given that Christianity wasn't dominant at all until Constantine and his successors made it the official religion. So you believe that he believed a vision told him Jesus, specifically, was the truest messiah of the street messiahs worthy of reverence?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:40 |
|
Neurolimal posted:So you believe that he believed a vision told him Jesus, specifically, was the truest messiah of the street messiahs worthy of reverence? That's not what I said, is it? Again, the story written down was that he had a dream to have his soldiers put the Chi-Rho on his shields, and he did so, and won a major victory, and concluded it was the result of divine favor, and then he learned about Christianity after this incident, as a result of searching for a god with that symbol.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:56
|
|