|
Btw Alamo drafthouse still hadnt put up the tickets for the ot (special edition) marathon yesterday, their Facebook said they are "busy working behind the scenes" on it.
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:00 |
|
|
Neurolimal posted:The real sogn of adulthood is when you learn to buy the boxes of Snickers icecream bars instead of the TMNT sticks with the asymmetrical eyes I rly like strawberry popsicles (the ones with the strawberry chunks inside), highly recommend
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:I rly like strawberry popsicles (the ones with the strawberry chunks inside), highly recommend Ya fruit bars are pretty great, I love the coconut ones. Frozen Greek Yogurt sticks are pretty great and hecka healthy, but cost a silly amount. Like Dippin' Dots.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:I don't get why people want to act like there's nothing more to be gained from paying attention to stuff than there was when they were children. Like don't u think ur smarter now?? Now that u have the power 2 buy popsicles whenever you want??? It's a defense mechanism like w/ that lizard that sprays blood from its eyes when threatened.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:It's a defense mechanism like w/ that lizard that sprays blood from its eyes when threatened. Did you see that X-Files Episode?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
cartoons and kid stuff is often good, the amzing world of gumball is a funny show
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
Jerkface posted:http://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-day-surprise-hear-the-full-version-of-jabba-flow-from-the-force-awakens This is a good song
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
Alden Ehrenreich cast as young Han Solo: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/young-han-solo-found-alden-877328?utm_source=twitter He was pretty good in Hail, Caesar! They could have done much worse.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
If only it were so simple.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
This is one of those times I think Harrison Ford should've been the one to decide who gets to play a younger him.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:This is one of those times I think Harrison Ford should've been the one to decide who gets to play a younger him. I seriously doubt he gives a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
Imagine Harrison Ford playing young Harrison Ford but they don't try to make him look young or nothing.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
Picard Day posted:I seriously doubt he gives a poo poo. That would make it better. He'd just randomly pick a name from IMDB and suddenly Bobby Moynihan is Han Solo.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 06:59
|
|
|
Barack Obama for young Han Solo sign the petition Whitehouse.gov
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 07:04
|
|
|
Clint Howard is the superior choice.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
that whole casting process was hilarious because thr put all the finalists' pictures up with the story and it was a cavalcade of bland white guys, thanks to hollywood refusing to greenlight decent tentpole scripts that would churn out bona fide stars
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 08:31
|
|
|
No Han Solo movie, we want 'Black Star Warrior'
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjTkqg8QFd4
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 13:11
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:"Fear will keep the other systems in line. Fear of this battle-station" It's a superficial comparison. Cold War era US foreign policy only makes sense in a bi-polar context.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:It's a superficial comparison. Cold War era US foreign policy only makes sense in a bi-polar context. Nobody is saying Lucas was making some deep, complex statement. That's the point, its so close to the surface that it becomes super obvious.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
 The Rogue One trailer wasn't on my Civil War IMAX showing. 
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:It's a superficial comparison. Cold War era US foreign policy only makes sense in a bi-polar context. post-cold war imperialism proves this argument false
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:post-cold war imperialism proves this argument false And an insistence on bi-polar foreign actors, see: unflagging support of Turkey.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
Speaking of foreign policy, it always feels like large aspects of readings ITT are reliant on a "Shock and Awe" approach to imagery; establish a strained point, reveal image comparison for less radical points that still surprise the reader, then insist that the comparison only serves the initially established reading (which the reader accepts as a result of being persuaded on lesser points, instilling credibility in the creator of the interpretation). "Both sides field large sphere guns that blow up spheres" is used to leap towards "both sides are bad and aim for the same corrupt governance" instead of the more obvious "both sides are not dissimilar in their methods, but instead in how and when they use them" "Both armies march in unison and accept orders unquestionably" leaps to "both sides are slave armies, the first slave army is gooder" instead of "both sides exhibit fascist traits, dehumanizing sentient soldiers in their war" That's not to say that the original statements are impossible to support, only that the imagery presented requires a bias towards that reading to arrive at said reading of the scenes, instead of the more natural conclusions. It calls to mind Cnut's belief that Mike intentionally misguides the viewer by dishonestly narrating BTS footage; while the belief that this is done intentionally or that Mike himself lacks faith in these beliefs is absurd, the effect of making Mike's conclusions on the footage more believable through the use of surprising-yet-mild observations still happens. After all, the best 'lies' are the ones that hold some truth.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 18:31
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Speaking of foreign policy, it always feels like large aspects of readings ITT are reliant on a "Shock and Awe" approach to imagery; establish a strained point, reveal image comparison for less radical points that still surprise the reader, then insist that the comparison only serves the initially established reading (which the reader accepts as a result of being persuaded on lesser points, instilling credibility in the creator of the interpretation). Those aren't more natural conclusions, unless you're biased because of some insane grudge over internet forums, or a severe case of disembrainment.
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Those aren't more natural conclusions, unless you're biased because of some insane grudge over internet forums, or a severe case of disembrainment. I'd say that, within the context of the rest of the films, "the Death Star and the Hoth Cannon are both round and fire lasers" more naturally leads to the conclusion "the sides are not rigidly evil or good, but in how they utilize these methods" than "the Rebels want to make a new Empire". Especially within the context of how Luke is defeated in ESB. Similarly, i'd happily argue "the Republic is becoming corrupted into a fascist state" is more natural a conclusion from "both sides are amoral goose-stepping soldiers with no regard for their humanity" than "the Republic is using a slave army to stop slaves from rising up and freeing themselves". Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 18:52 on May 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 18:49
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I'd say that, within the context of the rest of the films, "the Death Star and the Hoth Cannon are both round and fire lasers" more naturally leads to the conclusion "the sides are not rigidly evil or good, but in how they utilize these methods" than "the Rebels want to make a new Empire". Especially within the context of how Luke is defeated in ESB. Oh, I have no doubt you would say that. The question is, is it objectively a more natural conclusion? Anyways, even if these are the natural conclusions, to hell with nature. I've slain "nature" at least four or five times in video games, preparing me for the work of a psychoreader. Why should we treat "the ends justify the means" and "soldiers are the cause of their own dehumanization rather than the military superstructure" as the "true" meanings? What does that profit us?
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Oh, I have no doubt you would say that. The question is, is it objectively a more natural conclusion? O....kay.....
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:06
|
|
Neurolimal posted:O....kay..... Dog, if you're going to put these readings forward, you gotta defend 'em.
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Dog, if you're going to put these readings forward, you gotta defend 'em. When it involves actual attacks sure, not responding to "this is a more reasonable conclusion from this imagery" with "I am the King of Nature!"
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:11
|
|
Neurolimal posted:When it involves actual attacks sure, not responding to "this is a more reasonable conclusion from this imagery" with "I am the King of Nature!" Kid, not everything is going to be a placid paradise of line-by-lines and dull essays. Sometimes, you'll have to deal with verbal haymakers and snap kicks. So, to reiterate, why are "the ends justify the means" and "soldiers are inherently dehumanizing" preferable readings to the alternatives? Why are they the natural, objective conclusion that you've gotta be "biased" to deny?
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Kid, not everything is going to be a placid paradise of line-by-lines and dull essays. Sometimes, you'll have to deal with verbal haymakers and snap kicks. Its not "the ends justify the means", it's that the Empire is not a unique entity that holds sole domain over Evil; that the Rebels could just as easily become the Empire if they lacked moral guidance and the will of the people. It's like someone were to say "We breathe the same air as Hitler"and were responded to with "oh so the ends justify the means eh?". Where do you even go from there?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:18
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Its not "the ends justify the means", it's that the Empire is not a unique entity that holds sole domain over Evil; that the Rebels could just as easily become the Empire if they lacked moral guidance and the will of the people. What you actually said, instead of keeping inside the echoey confines of your skull, is that the methods don't matter (in order to get away from the idea, present even in EU material, that the Ion Cannon represents the increasing "Imperialization" of the Rebels), only the intent matters. The ends justifying the means. So, concession accepted! Your new argument is itself fascinating, in that it presumes the Rebels have der Wille der Volk, which doesn't actually seem to be in evidence anywhere except in the special edition of ROTJ, and to a lesser extent in ROTJ. I am sure you have very rarefied intellectualism to bear on this, and a good explanation for why you dodged the other question, probably having to do with your gosh-darn total inability to communicate ideas at all.
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:What you actually said, instead of keeping inside the echoey confines of your skull, is that the methods don't matter (in order to get away from the idea, present even in EU material, that the Ion Cannon represents the increasing "Imperialization" of the Rebels), only the intent matters. The ends justifying the means. "Only intent matters" and "the ends justify the means" are two very different ethical formulas. Methods might not matter because only intent matters, or because the end justifies the means.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:31
|
|
porfiria posted:"Only intent matters" and "the ends justify the means" are two very different ethical formulas. You're right, the former one is much less defensible. What a kind person I am, for giving Neurolimal the benefit of the doubt and not assuming the worst.
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Its not "the ends justify the means", it's that the Empire is not a unique entity that holds sole domain over Evil; that the Rebels could just as easily become the Empire if they lacked moral guidance and the will of the people. Republic became the Empire with moral guidance and by the will of the people.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
Kid,
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:What you actually said, instead of keeping inside the echoey confines of your skull, is that the methods don't matter (in order to get away from the idea, present even in EU material, that the Ion Cannon represents the increasing "Imperialization" of the Rebels), only the intent matters. The ends justifying the means. Not exactly; the Hoth Cannon is unique in that its method of defending the Rebels makes it useless for anything but defending the planet against military targets that invade Hoth. The Death Star, by comparison, fends against percieved threats by obliterating suspicious civilian threats. Both act from deterrence, but one aims at hostile military targets, whereas the other executes human shields. They are not the same means, only that they hold enough similarities that one could become perverse and the other righteous. It's commentary about the malleability of morality, especially with regards to War. This is heavily emphasized in the climax of the film; Luke attempts to murder a defensive Vader, and is soundly defeated mentally and physically by nonlethal action. Vader momentarily becomes the Moral Superior and prevails, whereas Luke only survives as Luke Skywalker by taking the only moral action in his situation. quote:Your new argument is itself fascinating, in that it presumes the Rebels have der Wille der Volk, which doesn't actually seem to be in evidence anywhere except in the special edition of ROTJ, and to a lesser extent in ROTJ. I am sure you have very rarefied intellectualism to bear on this, and a good explanation for why you dodged the other question, probably having to do with your gosh-darn total inability to communicate ideas at all. This isn't a new argument; I used it heavily against moral interventionism and coups earlier. You cant govern morally without the will of the people, because without it you must take immoral actions. We see contempt and fear of the Empire throughout the galaxy; among Luke and his family, among smugglers, among rebels, even partially from Vader himself (although his solution is to install himself as The Good Emperor). This is without considering RotJ, which heavily depicts the Will of the People deposing of the Empire.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
homullus posted:Republic became the Empire with moral guidance and by the will of the people. They were decieved morally, which becomes the Empire's undoing. Palpatine holds the peoples' approval, which is why he rules the galaxy for as long as he does.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:00 |
|
Neurolimal posted:Not exactly; the Hoth Cannon is unique in that its method of defending the Rebels makes it useless for anything but defending the planet against military targets that invade Hoth. The Death Star, by comparison, fends against percieved threats by obliterating suspicious civilian threats. Both act from deterrence, but one aims at hostile military targets, whereas the other executes human shields. What the gently caress is this bullshit? "Human shields" ?Randomly Capitalizing Nouns? Your basic argument is that we should absolutely prioritize plot function over anything else. The problem is that this completely fails when we apply it to something like poetry, so it can't be the obvious and objective theory of art, so your argument fails completely and totally before we get to your difficulty understanding things. quote:This isn't a new argument; I used it heavily against moral interventionism and coups earlier. You cant govern morally without the will of the people, because without it you must take immoral actions. The only actual support for your argument is just begging the question, so it fails too.
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 19:55
|
|