Hurin

Yes! I especially liked the part where Qui-Gonn dressed in all-black and Force choked Watto!

How about if I modify my new rule to respond in only fifty words or less, since that's all it takes. . . since I can alway just refer back to where what you've said has already been refuted (repeatedly). Yet your memory of it is faulty. Feel free to read the rest of what I wrote. Funny how you don't quote that back and respond to it. Could it be because you are trolling? Nah! P.S. You realize that if you weren't an old-timer, you could get in trouble for this type of trolling, right?

Sig.

Had Jabba said: "Okay, I will take money for Solo". . . do you think Luke would have still killed him? No. But it would also have been a much more boring movie. Keep saying that. Doesn't make it true. He's merely stating that Jabba has a choice of living (and profiting!) or dying. . . but keeping Solo is not an option. You can put your hands over your ears, close your eyes and repeat: "It's a death threat! It's a death threat!" as many times as you want. But, well, it's obviously hot. And were I to actually believe that you believe half the stuff you're writing and weren't just trying to antogonize, I'd think you're quite stupid at this point. But, you're not, you're just trying to get a rise out of me. Luke is no more arrogant towards Jabba than Obi-Wan is with Grievous when he confronts him (twice) in EpIII. Because he's really part Sith!?! Oh my God! You're right, dude! Now it all makes sense! Luke is a Jedi/Sith Hybrid! And, as such, he represents Balance in the Force once all the Jedi and Sith are extinct by the end of the movie! Oh, wait. . . Anakin wore all black leather too in EpIII as a Jedi Knight before he went evil. Oh, and maybe he Force choked those Guards because it looks cool and moved the story along quickly while demonstrating at the outset that Luke has grown pretty darn powerful. . . oh, and he didn't have his lightsaber on him at the time. One might also point out that he didn't Force choke them to death. He merely got them to not attack him or waylay him. If you really think that Lucas was putting in supporting evidence for your pet theory about the "balance prophecy" way back in RotJ. . . I can't help you. But it's comical that you think so considering you are now contradicting yourself (for the umpteenth time). I wonder if you'll be able to figure out how. Here's a hint: You argued on a prior occasion that Lucas didn't start subscribing to your pet theory until after TPM. Which would make it hard for him to put all this "supporting" stuff into a movie over a decade earlier. Not that I think that you'll give it any thought. You'll just troll some more by coming up with an irrelevant quote that is easily dismissed, while posting it in a triumphant tone. It's obvious you are either functionally retarded and don't know how to actually make an internally consistent, cogent argument (or address the arguments of others). . . or you really don't believe in anything you type, but are just trying to annoy (to those new to this, trust me, it's been obvious to even casual observers in other SW threads). So, no, I'm not calling you retarded. But, I am saying that I no longer wish to gum up threads pointing out the huge holes in your "arguments", their inconsistency, and their contradictions. I think I've demonstrated pretty clearly over about ten billion words (to your five) that you're full of crap. And worse, you know you're full of crap and are only typing because you want to annoy me and possibly cause me to lose my temper. So you just keep posting the same refuted "arguemnts." So, this will go in my signature as under: "Why I no longer take the time to speak to Duke Togo about Star Wars. Your goal is not to persuade. . . your goal is merely to get me to type a lot (oh no!) and annoy me. H

Six movies contradict this. Luke was "defending" because Jabba attacked him and his friends. As soon as Jabba says: "Put him in" (to the Sarlaac), Luke is acting in self-defense (and the defense of his friends). In the same way Obi-Wan was "defending" against General Grievous when Obi-Wan attacked and killed him (all the while using the Force to enhance his abilities despite the fact that he used them to kill Grievous). Yet, Obi-Wan went to that planet to kill/capture Grievous. So, is Obi-Wan behaving "un-jedi-like" there? No. Because even though he's heading somewhere to capture/kill, he's doing so in defense of the Republic. A Jedi would never use the Force willingly in the service of an aggressive war (as a Sith would do). But he would use the Force as a soldier in a war to defend the Republic. Indeed, they all did. Even though, in the end, the war was a ruse of which they were unaware. H

It's not a death threat to say: "Look, you can't keep Han. And if you do, I'll be forced to use force. You can't win if I use force, and you will be killed. I'll even give you money for him. Be reasonable." Dude, he was negotiating with Jabba the Freakin' Hutt. He couldn't afford to show weakness or use nice diplomatic language that would only be interpreted by the galaxy's most vile gangster as weakness. Luke knew that Jabba would never negotiate. But, like a Jedi, he still had to try. Knowing that Jabba would never negotiate, Luke and the rest put together a plan that came off very well. First, Lando arrived and took up position. . . then Luke "gave" R2-D2 and Threepio to Jabba as a diplomatic gesture (but R2-D2 had Luke's lightsaber, because they know Jabba won't negotiate). Then, they get Chewbacca and Leia in there (and get Leia very close to Jabba himself) while also getting Han defrosted and more mobile. Finally, Luke arrives and it's showtime. All that complexity, however, makes me wonder if Luke used the Force a bit to see the future. Because it otherwise would have been difficult to know how the execution would have gone down. . . unless it was widely known that Jabba likes to use the Sarlaac pit. But, even with all that planning. Even knowing he would never agree, Luke, at the edge of oblivion, still manages to give Jabba one last chance: "Free us, or die." It's pretty much the only way to deal with an a-hole like Jabba. Well, other than killing them. . . which is what Luke had to do. Is this where everyone starts talking about how Jabba was shown in the prequels to be not such a bad guy. . . like some other OT villain? H

My dear friend Togo, I'd say they mean: When someone comes back to a defunct thread after a long absence and baits someone into a discussing something that is no longer relevant or that has already been settled. Most likely as an attempt to annoy, rather than sincerely discuss. We covered this here. It's not that the Dark Side controls you. It's that you cannot let go of the power that it provides you. . . to control others and have your will be done through your use of the Force rather than doing the Force's will as its vessel. You become "consumed by the Dark Side" when you become corrupted by the power it gives you to such an extent that you can't let it go. The power that the Dark Side provides, once unleased, is overwhelmingly seductive. H

No, Luke tells Jabba that keeping Han Solo, his friends and himself (Luke) captive is not an option. If you watched it this morning, I'd think you'd remember these two lines: That is someone giving an enemy one last chance to avoid their own destruction. Or, from another angle, it's a Jedi making one last effort to rescue his friend(s) without bloodshed. Or do you think that allowing Jabba to keep Han was an acceptable option?

Actually, he didn't warn him, he flat out threatened to kill him. Very un-Jedi like. "I'm taking Captain Solo, and his friends. You can either profit from this, or be destroyed. It's your choice. But I warn you not to underestimate my powers." He's offering to pay off Jabba. That's some threat! H

I believe he's supposed to be 16 or 17 at the time of ANH. I think the Rebel High Command would disagree, what with his destroying the Death Star and all. . . And that was when he was untrained. Now that's just silly. I'm sure you realize that he was disgusted with Luke's refusal to turn to the Dark Side. If anything, the Emperor was impressed with Luke at that point, since he'd just kicked the crap out of Vader. H

Isn't that "acting cynical"? Seems vaguely appropriate for a cynical smuggler sort... unless there are certain character expression that don't actually count as "acting" now, or the ability of a lesser actor to reproduce a reasonable facsimile automatically disqualifies any further similar work from being considered "acting" henceforth. I think Max's point is that the role isn't very demanding. So therefore Campbell could handle it. H

i don't, i blame the both of you....reading comprehension buddy, 1-800-ABC-DEFG, get hooked on it! that by definition is the meaning of being a troll. i dunno? maybe the dude that don't know how to have a nice cold glass of STFU? browning points? from the community? yeah thats what i'm after, thats how i plan to take over the world! thats why you see me on the site all the time...don't know if you noticed but i don't really come here anymore because i could give a ratass about 99% of its members....and BTW, you're in the 99% group. if you're gonna be condescending, just do it, no reason to hide behind one of these. i thought you changed for a while there but your back, 100 times strong and about 1000 times gayer. and as far as my newly acquired zen, i found it as soon as i stopped reading your posts. but now i'm on the verge of losing it because i was actually stupid enough to read this one. you happy now? actually its just Bsu who's done, you're still talking smack at your butthole, as usual. you can but i doubt he gives a rat ass what you got to say....like the teacher from Peanuts whahwhwhahahhwwhhhahahahah. but if he does ban me, oh well.....i think i'll live. yeah i know i could've PM'ed you but it wouldn't have half as fun as this. in closing.... SUCK IT! i haven't lost my temper here in a long time, all i was trying to do is chill you guys out, then you have to come at me with your cocksucker attitude leaving me no choice but to be a dick to you. it also doesn't help that i quit smoking so my patience(especially for you) is nil. G Edit: Okay, I was going to leave it alone. . . but I just can't resist! i don't, i blame the both of you....reading comprehension buddy, 1-800-ABC-DEFG, get hooked on it! Man, that's just perfect. Please note that I'm not responding in any other way. Just quoting for giggles. I'm not even touching that "definition" of the word "troll." It has been a long time since I've seen an overreaction of this magnitude. "Musta hit pretty close to the mark to get her all riled up like that. Huh, kid?" Very, very Late Edit. . . haterist: Hurin, even though we have a prior history of conflict, let me explain to you over the course of several posts why I find you annoying and why you need to shut up. Hurin: Well, haterist, I've cordially responded to your concerns a few times, but may I suggest that I sorta consider what you are doing here annoying as well. . . and that you do it quite often. haterist: How dare you!?! I shall now write a long, semi-coherent post filled with profanities!

Well, Lucas is in a unique position because he has decided to "finish" his series of movies after a twenty year gap. So, it does become somewhat relevant if some believe that he has "lost his touch" during that twenty year gap. . . But, on the whole, I agree with you. I just think that Star Wars (and possibly soon, Indiana Jones) are in a unique situation. But I don't mean to start up the whole "Did he lose his touch" debate again here. There's already threads for that. H

haterist, I don't "blame" just him for arguing. Because I don't see anything wrong with arguing. And about 99% of our arguing has been on-topic and we've had good, honest debates. But, do you know what's more annoying than the two guys arguing? The guy who always (without fail) swoops in and tries to score brownie points with the community by acting as the "let's all get along" monkey. I swear, you're everywhere we are, trying to bring peace and prosperity with your voice of reason. Where did you aquire this new zen state? Does it come in pill form? In case you hadn't noticed, bsu and I are done. . . for now. (cue brooding, creepy music) Now, can I ask for the re-instatement of the Roy Foker ban on our communicating? H P.S. You could have PMed that too, ya know.

Hey, I never said I was proud of that. It just seems to be the only way to discuss anything with you sometimes. Why would you want to? H

Again, it's like you don't even read your own posts. . . I suggest you scroll up. I see a lot of quoting. People who start screaming: "Stop arguing with me! You argue to much!" while continuing to argue themselves are the height of hilarity. Haterist. We all know how much I value your opinion. But seriously, having read his posts every time Star Wars and/or George Lucas is mentioned for the last year, it's hard not to read a tone in them than may or may not be there in this case. H

No, you're absolutely right. Lucas executive producing "Land Before Time" is undeniable proof that he's t3h suxorz. The fact of the matter is that he was essentially semi-retired from film since '83. His only projects were mainly to assist some of his filmmaking buddies, such as Spielberg, Howard and Willard Hyuck. And just what does that prove? Not a heck of a lot either way, I'd say. Oh goodie. We agree then. Can we stop now? Doesn't seem very one-sided to me. You're still here! Despite the fact that I'm the one who has the problem with arguing. Listen, I posted a list of movies he has been involved with in order to clarify a misconception. You, as usual, came at that list with guns blazing and with your usual mocking tone towards anyone who says anything the least bit "fan-boyish" around here. I merely pointed out that your points about the list do not address the opinion that Lucas hasn't done much of any real value since SW and Indy. You seem to have a problem with that. And, more importantly, you seem to have a problem with me. If you don't care for the conversation, feel free not to perpetuate it. I don't. Edit: It's like you don't even see your own posts. Scroll up.

Uh, yeah! And I was pointing out that you seem to be offended by it. I'm not confused by who said it (obviously), I'm confused at your reaction to it. Especially because I'm now noticing what might be the beginning of a pattern where you seem to become very excited over the use of rather innocuous words. Irony. We're talking about movies since Star Wars and Indiana Jones. At least, I was. I thought that was implied. Didn't know about it. Apparently, I'm not as intimately aware of everything he has done. Oh goodie. This again. Fair enough.

If someone suggests that Lucas hasn't done anything decent since Empire and Raiders, it makes sense to look at what he has indeed done. Pointing out that he wasn't as involved in those later projects doesn't do anything to address the charge that he hasn't put out anything decent. You're essentially just arguing that Lucas has been lazy, not that he's done anything good or up to his earlier standards. Why not provide a Lucas-related film in the last two decades that you can proudly point to as great?

Once again, I can't help it if you yet again choose to become oddly offended at a harmless choice of words. Well, feel free to post one of his movies that isn't in that list that you think is wonderful. But, again, I was merely pointing out that haterist was mistaken in asserting that Lucas hasn't done anything. I didn't criticize each one. I merely gave a list of what he's done other than SW and Indy. Yes, but I'm still not sure I see the relevance in asserting that Ford is nothing without Lucas in that there is nothing mutually exclusive between that and saying that Lucas is nothing without Ford.

How about the fact that it was a weak-ass remake, and not a very good movie? Or should there have been a sarcastic smiley at the end of your post? What actor doesn't put out an occasional dud? At least the guy got tired of doing the same action hero character and every once in a while took some chances. . . I just find it funny that, where others reflexively bash Lucas, you reflexively defend him. . . even going so far as to redirect the bashing towards an actor: Harrison Ford. I'm actually not much of a Harrison Ford fan. Ever since I saw Regarding Henry, I see that confused/dumb look in his eye no matter what role he plays. But I don't see any reason to tear him down or claim that he's nothing without Spielberg/Lucas. Which is just clearly not the case. Feel free to bash his flops. Doesn't change the fact the he has a long list of hits. H P.S. Julia Ormond = Good Movie. Late Edits

The sad thing about Ford is that for every Fugitive there's a Sabrina and a Six Days, Seven Nights. What's wrong with Sabrina? Not enough things blowing up and/or gunplay? H

You mean like The Empire Strikes Back?

How many of those did he actually write and direct? And while you're at it, why don't you analyse Ford's less than stellar non-Lucas/Spielberg resume. Or are you a closet "Regarding Henry" fan? Whoa there! I wasn't analyzing anything. Haterist asserted that he hadn't done anything else. . . and I provided a list of the things he's done. As for Harrison Ford. . . Witness Blade Runner Jack Ryan Series The Fugitive Presumed Innocent Frantic The Mosquito Coast Again, a (very) partial list of blockbusters and/or critically well-regarded films.