I saw this movie StarWars

LillSnopp · Post by **LillSnopp** » Thu May 19, 2005 5:49 pm

I just saw this movie StarWars.

And its really bad. I mean, first episode was real garbage, some sort of joke movie (i suspect the directors didnt take it seriously), and then the second one seemed more serious, but poor acting.

And now this, its suppose to be the last one if i understood it correctly, and i rarely see such poor acting in a movie. Seriously. Perhaps the actors are new to all of this, i saw a negro which i also seen in Pulp Fiction (one of the few i recognized), and he is pretty good in that movie (Pulp Fiction that is). But in this one, cheeezes, i say.

In any case, perhaps you guys seen this to? I remember the original movies, they where pretty good, but what is this ?

LillSnopp · Post by **LillSnopp** » Sun May 22, 2005 2:40 am

Why is it important to you that humankind survive? Humans are obviously not valuable enough to preserve as many as possible.

I think it is. Around 500 million would be a suitable number (my personal opinion), and considering all calculations, this would be a suitable number.

I think we can evolve even further, we are in a bottleneck which have been put there by, amongst others, religion. I assume you wont debate this (religious issues have slowed science drastically)

You are prepared to make what sacrifice? Are you willing to die?

Yes.

You're willing to kill everyone that believes differently from you, so you and people with your beliefs can rule the planet in a perverted 'peace'?

No, kill all weaklings and ignorants.

I feel so selfish...

Its good that you know that you are. Now you just need to learn to change, and become less self-centered. Be prepared to make sacrifices.

PS: Im going to work, This thread has gone WAY off you know.

foshizzle · Post by **foshizzle** » Sun May 22, 2005 2:49 am

No, kill all weaklings and ignorants.

As of now, this /is/ everyone with a different opinion from yourself. And you still did not answer the question that i requested twice.

How do you know you're enlightened, and others aren't?

How do you know you're opinions and ideals are correct?

Why does being a self-proclaimed enlightened individual grant you the right to call those who differ from your thoughts of reality "weak" or "ignorant"?

Being enlightened seems to coincide with a revelation. Did you have one? If so, what of countless others who have had revelations that differed from your own?

If not, how did you come to realize that everyone but those who's ideals/opinions/etc. coincide with your own is an ignorant, weak individual, worthy of no more than death?

Have you seen the movie "Equilibrium"? You might enjoy it. It's about a society that contains human-robots (basically). They inject a syrum that removes the "dizzying highs and abysmal lows of human emotion". All forms of art and originality are traded for numbing sameness. Those with original thought and actual individuality are hunted down and destroyed.

It seems that you are willing to sacrafice all forms of human expression to ensure our survival.

Why is it so important that we survive? If certain members of our society are not worthy of a continuing life, who are you to say that /anyone/ is?

I would rather die than live under a rule that did not allow me to have my own opinions. Would you?

LillSnopp · Post by **LillSnopp** » Sun May 22, 2005 11:55 am

Have you seen the movie "Equilibrium"? You might enjoy it. It's about a society that contains human-robots (basically). They inject a syrum that removes the "dizzying highs and abysmal lows of human emotion". All forms of art and originality are traded for numbing sameness. Those with original thought and actual individuality are hunted down and destroyed.

Good movie. Obviously the only fault the society has is that they have to TAKE this serum. If it was perfect they would be without emotion from the beginning, or included in the food or anything they ate (so you cant "not" take it).

Its a nice Utopia with some small faults. Else, pretty good. I cant see anyone have anything to object to it, as the society, is perfect. No War, no criminals, enough resources , no poverty and so forth. (The funny thing with you americans especially, is that you say you want a good nice lovely world, yet, you do everything opposite to it, and everyone doing good, helping, making sure there is no poor and so forth, are evil, ironic non?)

Answer the rest later.

foshizzle · Post by **foshizzle** » Sun May 22, 2005 3:47 pm

So your willing to trade the joys of expression, frienship, loyalty, individuality, love, hope, passion, sensuality, sentiments and happiness for a numbing nothingness?

The only achievements of the human race are what was aforementioned. Without these, we are nothing. I see no point in ensuring the survival of the human race if everything that will survive has no characteristics of humanity.

What would be the point of living? If there is nothing in life to enjoy, no reason to continue, why allow any life to continue at all?

It seems as though your assigning human life a numerical value. "I'm willing to sacrifice 3 billion units to assure the continuing lives of 1 billion."

LillSnopp · Post by **LillSnopp** » Sun May 22, 2005 4:16 pm

So your willing to trade the joys of expression, frienship, loyalty, individuality, love, hope, passion, sensuality, sentiments and happiness for a numbing nothingness?

You do understand that you are saying that because you have it good, its ok for billions to suffer..... Which shows that I have huge amount of love and respect for the human race, whiles you only think about yourself. I really hope you understand this.

foshizzle · Post by **foshizzle** » Sun May 22, 2005 6:53 pm

So it's better for the billions of people that have opinions different from your own to die?

You said earlier that they would have to, were your government to work.

So, not only would your society not be able to have emotions, they would also be nearly eliminated to choose the "appropriate" citizens?

And again, you avoided the questions that i've asked 3 times since the beginning of this topic. Please answer them.

LillSnopp · Post by **LillSnopp** » Mon May 23, 2005 3:07 am

So your willing to trade the joys of expression, frienship, loyalty, individuality, love, hope, passion, sensuality, sentiments and happiness for a numbing nothingness?
You do understand that you are saying that because you have it good, its ok for billions to suffer..... Which shows that I have huge amount of love and respect for the human race, whiles you only think about yourself. I really hope you understand this.

I am repeating this again, as it seems you do not want to hear this: You are the one thats self-centered. Whiles I want to help humanity, you want it to continue suffering,,, See the difference? (Me Loving, you, lack of compassion and Love)

foshizzle · Post by **foshizzle** » Mon May 23, 2005 6:15 pm

The only lasthing things the human race has achieved are as a result of abstract expressionalism, emotion, creativity, and artistic design (Yes, some of these are included in others, as are all individual achievements). Without this, what's the point of humanity continuing? Just for the sole purpose of survival? A life without the ability to feel is not a life I see as worth living.

You only see your ideas as a good thing because you see the emotions and achievements of man as something that is okay to eliminate to allow the survival of the human race. You are willing to trade beauty, compassion and feelings for bland, colorless mediocrity.

You are the one thats self-centered. Whiles I want to help humanity, you want it to continue suffering,,, See the difference? (Me Loving, you, lack of compassion and Love)

I find it admirable that you want to help humanity (though I consider your methods to be incredibly perverted), but I'm not self-centered in what I want for humanity. I'm not defending emotions out of self-centeredness. I'm defending them because they're valuable to the human race, and the quality of life for those in it. I would be willing to die to preserve this quality even for one person, because I would rather die than live a life without feeling.

Would you be willing to live without emotion?

No love, no loyalty, no compassion, no expression, no joy, no laughter, no companionship, no passion.

Is trading all that for the 'survival of the fittest' really worth it? Those that survived would not be people, but robotic tools of efficiency. They'd do a fine job of living, but the life would not be a life worth living. They would do nothing spectacular, nothing amazing; they would continue a cycle, nothing more.

::EDIT::
I think the difference here is in the value placed on human life. Would I be wrong in thinking you would be open to the elimination of half of the world's population (in any fashion, brutal or not, it doesn't matter) if it were replaced by double what was taken?

I can't shake the feeling that you're assigning numeric value to living, breathing, feeling people
::EDIT::

Regular_Guy · Post by **Regular_Guy** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 3:42 am

I was reading up untill you said palpatine was a good guy and yoda should have been terminated.
Ok first palpatine:
There's actually only one real side of the force. The dark side, the light side everyone mentions is actually really a neutral state of the force. Ok, the dark side of the force is evil. Palpatine was created from pure evil (remember his story?), thus causing an imbalance in the force. The force wanting to straighten itself out created anikin (vader). Remember anikins mother saying he had no father? He was created by the force to cancel out the imbalance. Eliminating the evil to set everything neutral again, got it?

Evil = bad

Ok now for yoda

. How are you going to say the greatest wielder of the force should have been terminated? All he wants is peace and freedom.
__some other stuff from your posts
Then actors aren't bad, if anything the blame lie's directly in the dialogue. Lucas instructed them to act a certain way. That's why most of the SW's movies come off as, Hu? wha?
That's why most people love SW's The empire strikes back. Lucas wasn't really in charge of directing that one. It was someone else who I can't really remember right now. Anyways during the shooting of TESB harrison ford would talk with the director about his lines and others.
Lucas on the other hand directed the others and no one ever "spoke out".
Hence the
"I hate sand, it's coarse and it gets everywhere"
"but not like you, your soft"
I know it's probably old or whatever, but if you had any questions on anything SW's I'd answer them

Corvus · Post by **Corvus** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 3:05 am

Regular_Guy wrote: "I hate sand, it's coarse and it gets everywhere"
"but not like you, your soft"

That is fantastic! I have to try that as a pickup line sometime. Maybe modify it a bit so I can use it anywhere.

"I hate consumerism, it's coarse and it gets everywhere
But not like you; you're soft."

Not sure it works as well.