pavonis

Pong, my point is that complaining about people who complained and got something changed is stupid. Things only change when people complain. The fact that they're Muslims asking for something different rather than, say, hipsters is meaningless. If the vocal group weren't god-botherers, would you care about this event? Would it even be "news"?

"Atheist as-holes force Subway to serve puppy meat!" would be news. Muslims asking for halal meat is not.

Change is always driven by vocal minorities. Quiet minorities don't get any attention, and the majority of people are indifferent and apathetic.

No, I think she's saying that the UK will cave to loud minorities, responding to them as if they are majorities. But that's always true. The loudest, most annoying squeaky wheel gets greased.

What's the larger story here? That a profit-driven business caved to a vocal segment of its customer (or potential customer) base? Is it bad if the change is driven by Muslims, rather than any other god-botherers?

What - I'm expected to read that crawl stuff? When did Star Wars turn into fancy foreign films? GAWD!

Her plan was good, I think, but it didn't go off flawlessly. The cops couldn't hold Ward (she should've expected that), and Skye couldn't get herself arrested without assaulting another cop. Then she still had to get away from Ward in a cop car, rather than be taken into protective custody, which was her goal!

Is it possible to think too much about Star Wars, on a Star Wars-oriented board? I think not. And if carbonite is used to transport a Jedi across the decades, I'll walk out and ask for my money back, then start a boycott of Episodes VIII, IX, and X! Yes, there will be an Episode X. Count on it.

Yeah, near-lightspeed travel is effective travel into the future at more than 1 second per second. Seems unlikely, though.

I hesitate to ask, but is carbonite a proven long-term hibernation technology in Star Wars? The point of freezing Han was to test that it wouldn't immediately kill the subject. If it had killed Han, Vader would've compensated Fett (or maybe not - who trusts a Sith at their word?). Vader wanted to use carbonite to make transporting Luke to Sidious easier - no fussing during the trip. Since there was some question as to the ability of a human to survive the process, that means that it is not a standard activity. Lando's carbonite freezing chamber was usually used to freeze tibanna gas, wasn't it? Forcing a human to freeze was not standard procedure, I take it. So, how often would it happen, and how long would a carbonite-encased individual last? Would a Jedi from 55+ years ago last to Episode VII? If hibernation is a common procedure in the galaxy far, far away, carbonite freezing is not the standard method apparently.

Whaaa? Am I going to have to watch the new cartoon to understand the new films? I didn't even watch the Clone Wars. Why would I watch "Rebels", when they're not including the real Rebels - Han, Luke, Chewbacca, Ice Cream Maker Guy, and Leia?

 

Not the Sith, not the Sith. Not even someone claiming to be Sith. Something new.

Are Klingons played out yet?

 

NuTrek Bling-Klingons might be fun in a Star Wars romp. Better than a Sith, anyway. Unless it was a Klingon Sith (a Sithon?)!

I think most loud-mouth gun-rights activists are a little crazy, but whatever. They want guns, they have the right, I don't care. I do wonder if they really believe that they are the first or last line of defense of our independence, or whether they just use it as an argument because it sounds noble. It sounds brave and noble that they'd fight the government for our rights, guns blazing, never surrendering, etc, etc, but it's unrealistic, I think.

The world is becoming a less violent place in general, but that just makes isolated acts of violence more prominent in the news and scary to people who are otherwise rational about their daily lives.

Hard to believe that a Jedi sat out the Purge, the Rebellion, and then another 35 years, and then felt like popping up again. What kind of Jedi would do that?

Not the Sith, not the Sith. Not even someone claiming to be Sith. Something new.

Well, Dench's M was hardly the Prime Minister. It was not completely implausible for her to go into the field, especially since she was the bait. It would be highly implausible for Mon Mothma to start carrying a blaster and aiding in her own defense. Besides, is that character even expected to be in the film?

Can't have a story where a leader of the rebellion becomes the most pivotal and beloved figure for a new government, strong, intelligent, proud, a leader striving for peace and prosperity. Can't write a story for that leader where their tiresome and noble efforts have made them the target of a villain. Can't do it, because the leader has a vagina.

 

Who's being ridiculous now?

Is Mon Mothma the remaining female lead to be cast? I heard a rumor that Dame Judi Dench was being considered. Why Caroline Blakiston couldn't reprise her own role is unclear.

Of course a story can be written where the leader has a vagina. It just doesn't follow that she'd have anything to do, action-wise. Unless watching Mon Mothma sit in protective custody for 2 hours would be your idea of fun.

The real question is - when will the Slave Leia outfit reappear? And will we regret it if it does?

Perhaps Episode VIII will feature more diversity.

Do alien characters count towards "diversity" in the cast? How many of these leads might end up covered in latex or CGI? Serkis probably will. Potentially any of them could, I suppose. Even Max von Sydow.

Because films of this nature are using superhero characters. This is not The Matrix.

I don't understand. It's not sufficient to translate a superhero from page to screen? It has to be 100% faithful to the detail, or it's an insult to the character and/or fans, somehow?

 

Wrong. What put the super in superhero is the ability, not the look. And some, if not all, of these comics outfits worn by superheroes are absolutely ridiculous.

Why is the latest screen Spider-man not wearing coveralls or gym tights? If the character's heroic nature was limited to ability alone, it would not matter (even from a creative standpoint) what he wears.

 

I don't know. Why isn't Spider-man not wearing coveralls and gym tights? He could, couldn't he? He'd still stick to walls and be super-strong, wouldn't he? He'd still be motivated to protect Aunt May and Mary Jane in coveralls and gym tights. Isn't Spider-man the one who has gone into battle wearing a sack over his head? The Amazing Bag-Man, eh? How many versions of Spidey's costume have there been in the comics? Which one is the authentic one? Which one is right?

I don't really get your point, and I honestly would like to understand your position. I can appreciate that you don't think the producers are being respectful of the character, but I just think you're stuck on the visuals when the character's abilities and personality are what define the character, not their costume.

I'm not a comics reader. I don't know anything about them beyond what I can gather from pop culture and skimming of Wikipedia. Of the two of us, I'm the one the movie producers are aiming to get into the theater. The comics fans will see the movie regardless, even if only to disparage it thoroughly. You're a built-in audience, so pandering to you won't attract more viewers, while not pandering to you won't appreciably hurt sales. I'm far less likely to see these comic book movies if the trailers and commercials make the characters look subjectively "goofy", though. Imagine The Dark Knight with Christian Bale playing Batman in a bright blue spandex tights version of Batman's costume. I'd not have bothered seeing the film at all, much less purchasing a DVD of it. "Authentic" or "iconic" comics costumes look pretty goofy in live action, so they're changed for the medium.

Luke, sans beard in Ep VII? That's fake. I'm sure that Hamill et al. slimmed down, toned up for the movies (standard procedure, ain't it?) but that linked photo is old.

There's a lot of people out there who think their shit is valuable because it's their shit and they think the sentimental value can be translated into monetary values directly.

What do mint-in-box original Star Wars action figures go for these days? Not that I have any - I actually played with mine. I went through three Yodas in my childhood; kept losing him because he was so small. Broke one Darth Vader because I thought I could get his helmet off (must've tried after ESB). Strangely, there was no human head underneath the helmet. Then I lost Vader's cape, and broke off half his saber. He wasn't much of an intimidating Sith Lord after that.

I see. Well, yes, it would be a shock if Simmons were Hydra. And yet, the actress has done such a good job of portraying a technobabbly geek with the complete inability to lie effectively (witness her lie-babbling at Sitwell many episodes back) that it would be incredibly difficult to buy her as a mole. I guess that speaks more to the Ms. Henstridge's acting than the character, though. It would be a shock for Fitz, but then we wouldn't have our FitzSimmons fixes anymore. Fitz would probably just die of a broken heart if Simmons betrayed him.

Ward, a triple agent? What, is there some need to retain the character as a bland hero? Why would Simmons be a mole (she's already a "spy" technically, since she worked for SHIELD)? What would that do for the character?

Rather like real life, in that way. What is that the neighbors always say to the reporters? "Oh, he was such a nice, quiet man. No one suspected he could do such a horrible thing!" Sometimes things just come out of left field, no warning, no foreshadowing, no obvious reasons. They're just random events.

Of course, fiction has to be plausible, whereas reality isn't constrained by something so trivial as believability.

What was his point, then?

Abraham Lincoln was real. The Falcon is not. Neither are defined by their clothing, anyway.