Well, yes, but womp-rats aren't persons. (Neither are stormtroopers, arguably, which is why I make a point of noting the Imperial officers in the grey suits.)
Think, say, of Sgt. York, where the protagonist is (initially) firmly opposed to killing people in battle, but he's a good shot partly because he's grown up hunting animals. The moral qualms that one might feel about killing fellow people don't apply to animals.
0
Star Wars - 30 Year Anniversary
Started by
Overstreet
, May 25 2007 10:11 PM
61 replies to this topic
#21
Peter T Chattaway
-
- Member
- 27,088 posts
He's fictional, but you can't have everything.
Posted 06 May 2010 - 05:26 PM
#22
Peter T Chattaway
-
- Member
- 27,088 posts
He's fictional, but you can't have everything.
Posted 12 May 2010 - 03:36 PM
Not sure about the "baby hole" bit, since the orifice in question IS "a small thermal exhaust port, right below the main port" (for more on that, see the possibly NSFW article I linked to here), but anyhoo...
#23
Overstreet
-
- Member
- 15,988 posts
Sometimes, there's a man.
Posted 12 May 2010 - 05:09 PM
Peter T Chattaway, on 06 May 2010 - 05:26 PM, said:
Well, yes, but womp-rats aren't persons.
I was only kidding... for the chance to quote one of my favorite bits. Perhaps I should have included an emoticon.
Edited by Overstreet, 12 May 2010 - 05:10 PM.
#26
Peter T Chattaway
-
- Member
- 27,088 posts
He's fictional, but you can't have everything.
Posted 14 July 2010 - 12:09 PM
At last, a film that does what Lucas never dared to do: give us close-ups of a stormtrooper's codpiece.
#27
bowen
-
- Member
- 680 posts
Member
Posted 14 July 2010 - 07:07 PM
Peter T Chattaway, on 14 July 2010 - 12:09 PM, said:
At last, a film that does what Lucas never dared to do: give us close-ups of a stormtrooper's codpiece.
Sorry — I obviously missed something here. When did Lucas hire Joel Schumacher to do the next Star Wars movie?
#28
Overstreet
-
- Member
- 15,988 posts
Sometimes, there's a man.
#29
Peter T Chattaway
-
- Member
- 27,088 posts
He's fictional, but you can't have everything.
Posted 23 July 2010 - 10:37 PM
Hey, what happened to Edna Mode's "No capes!" rule? It might've gotten caught on something!! 
#30
Peter T Chattaway
-
- Member
- 27,088 posts
He's fictional, but you can't have everything.
Posted 08 September 2010 - 02:53 AM
#31
John Drew
-
- Member
- 3,157 posts
A vast sponge of movie minutiae... - Jason Bortz
Posted 08 September 2010 - 07:51 AM
The "Luke's Delusions of Grandeur Nearly Spell Doom for the Rebellion" re-edit of the Death Star battle.
"It's just not fair....."
"It's just not fair....."
#34
Nathan Douglas
-
- Member
- 424 posts
Overeager beaver of the sacramental cinema.
#35
John Drew
-
- Member
- 3,157 posts
A vast sponge of movie minutiae... - Jason Bortz
Posted 26 November 2010 - 01:12 PM
Remember the days when movies hung around for a while in theaters?
#36
Overstreet
-
- Member
- 15,988 posts
Sometimes, there's a man.
Posted 26 November 2010 - 02:01 PM
I still have every figure in that picture except the Tusken Raider.
#37
Peter T Chattaway
-
- Member
- 27,088 posts
He's fictional, but you can't have everything.
Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:28 AM
I just touched on this at Facebook, but I figured it might warrant some discussion here, too.
Last night I was watching the original Star Wars with my kids, and, to my mild surprise, my boys (one turns 3 on Friday and the other turns 5 next month) weren't very interested in the film, but my daughter (who also turns 5 next month) watched it fairly intently and was noticeably concerned whenever a spaceship blew up or whatever. They've all seen the film before, incidentally, and when Ben Kenobi first showed up last night, my daughter asked, "Does that man get squished?" I think she was referring to how Darth Vader ends up slicing Ben Kenobi in half and then steps on the robes.
Anyway. Every now and then, I would clarify for my daughter that "the good guys" were doing this and "the bad guys" were doing that, but I had an odd feeling when I referred to Darth Vader as "the bad guy", full stop. I haven't shown my children either of the sequels yet -- I think those films might be just a bit TOO intense for the kids at this stage -- and I'm trying to keep their experience of the original film as pure as mine had been. (For what it's worth, my dad took my sister and me to see the film when I was 6 and my sister was 5.)
But I began to wonder if, in hiding Darth Vader's true identity (or, rather, the identity that Lucas imposed on Vader in the sequels), I was somehow becoming complicit in the lie that Ben and Yoda tell Luke. My wife and I have made a point of letting our kids know that Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are make-believe, not real -- my own parents did the same with me, and I enjoyed knowing that Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy were a "game" that I could play with my parents -- but I wondered if maybe, when it comes to Star Wars, I was setting the kids up for a you-lied-to-me shock of a different sort.
Of course, Star Wars doesn't dominate my kids' imagination the way it did mine, back in the day. So I might be fretting over nothing. But anyhoo, there it is. I wonder how other parents have dealt with this, or if any other parents have felt "complicit" in the lie, etc....?
Last night I was watching the original Star Wars with my kids, and, to my mild surprise, my boys (one turns 3 on Friday and the other turns 5 next month) weren't very interested in the film, but my daughter (who also turns 5 next month) watched it fairly intently and was noticeably concerned whenever a spaceship blew up or whatever. They've all seen the film before, incidentally, and when Ben Kenobi first showed up last night, my daughter asked, "Does that man get squished?" I think she was referring to how Darth Vader ends up slicing Ben Kenobi in half and then steps on the robes.
Anyway. Every now and then, I would clarify for my daughter that "the good guys" were doing this and "the bad guys" were doing that, but I had an odd feeling when I referred to Darth Vader as "the bad guy", full stop. I haven't shown my children either of the sequels yet -- I think those films might be just a bit TOO intense for the kids at this stage -- and I'm trying to keep their experience of the original film as pure as mine had been. (For what it's worth, my dad took my sister and me to see the film when I was 6 and my sister was 5.)
But I began to wonder if, in hiding Darth Vader's true identity (or, rather, the identity that Lucas imposed on Vader in the sequels), I was somehow becoming complicit in the lie that Ben and Yoda tell Luke. My wife and I have made a point of letting our kids know that Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are make-believe, not real -- my own parents did the same with me, and I enjoyed knowing that Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy were a "game" that I could play with my parents -- but I wondered if maybe, when it comes to Star Wars, I was setting the kids up for a you-lied-to-me shock of a different sort.
Of course, Star Wars doesn't dominate my kids' imagination the way it did mine, back in the day. So I might be fretting over nothing. But anyhoo, there it is. I wonder how other parents have dealt with this, or if any other parents have felt "complicit" in the lie, etc....?
#38
SDG
-
- Moderator
- 8,196 posts
Catholic deflector shield
Posted 12 January 2011 - 11:48 AM
Peter, I'm not following your scruple here. Vader's identity is a secret and later a surprise, but I don't see how you're "complicit in a lie," unless you say something like "Darth Vader is a bad guy because he killed Luke's daddy." Certainly Vader is one of the "bad guys" here, no ambiguities about that.
#39
Peter T Chattaway
-
- Member
- 27,088 posts
He's fictional, but you can't have everything.
Posted 12 January 2011 - 12:01 PM
Well, you know what a fact-checker I can be. When Obi-Wan sits there and says "he betrayed and murdered your father" and I say nothing to correct this false impression, it kind of makes me complicit in the lie, does it not?
#40
Peter T Chattaway
-
- Member
- 27,088 posts
He's fictional, but you can't have everything.
Posted 12 January 2011 - 12:20 PM
One line that has always kinda bugged me, though I can sort of see why it's there:
And yet, I can sort of see what's going on here.
First, it's comic-book dialogue. Comic books, especially back then, were always full of dialogue in which people described or commented upon the action in ways that were quite unrealistic. When you're in the middle of an all-out city-wrecking brawl with a supervillain, you simply haven't got time to verbalize everything the way that Spider-Man or whoever generally did.
Second, the film needs to remind us that the Millennium Falcon's escape from the Death Star is by no means assured, and indeed, I like the way the film highlights for us that Han Solo is AWARE of how tenuous his imminent escape really is.
Thankfully, Harrison Ford sells it. He's already established Han Solo's fast-talking, skeptical attitude, and he spits out that line as fast as he can, and in a way that indicates Solo isn't sacrificing any of his efficiency in doing so. I don't know how often Lucas needed to tell him "faster, more intense" on THIS line, but he speaks the line just about as well as it CAN be spoken, all things considered.
"I sure hope the old man knocked that tractor beam out of commission, or this could be a real short trip. Okay, hit it!"
Han is saying this, remember, in the midst of making a speedy getaway from the Death Star. At a time when he should be ACTING in a certain way, he is TALKING and arguably distracting himself from the urgent job at hand.And yet, I can sort of see what's going on here.
First, it's comic-book dialogue. Comic books, especially back then, were always full of dialogue in which people described or commented upon the action in ways that were quite unrealistic. When you're in the middle of an all-out city-wrecking brawl with a supervillain, you simply haven't got time to verbalize everything the way that Spider-Man or whoever generally did.
Second, the film needs to remind us that the Millennium Falcon's escape from the Death Star is by no means assured, and indeed, I like the way the film highlights for us that Han Solo is AWARE of how tenuous his imminent escape really is.
Thankfully, Harrison Ford sells it. He's already established Han Solo's fast-talking, skeptical attitude, and he spits out that line as fast as he can, and in a way that indicates Solo isn't sacrificing any of his efficiency in doing so. I don't know how often Lucas needed to tell him "faster, more intense" on THIS line, but he speaks the line just about as well as it CAN be spoken, all things considered.
