User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 9 to 15 of 15

Thread: Original star wars

  1. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Posts
    2,154
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well I mean at least fairly accurate. I meant more for the entertainment value. I jsut don't find Star Wars as entertaining as liek when I was 8. The new ones are fairly good but I have only seen them once each and don't paln to again...just to preserve the novelty.

  2. #10
    herenorthere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    almost Hartford
    Posts
    3,785
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I saw the original and none of the later ones. I was around 15 when the original came out and I thought it was great at the time. But ten or so years ago one of the local stations showed 2001 followed by SW. I turned SW off within 15 minutes because it was so lame by comparison.
    Bruce in CT

    Madness is something rare in individuals but in groups, parties, peoples, ages it is the rule. Friedrich Nietzsche

  3. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    747
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (Treaqum @ April 08 2005,2:46)]Well I mean at least fairly accurate.
    csi fairly accurate, thats a pretty good strecth. The methods they use are not very realistic at all, one time i saw them ask for a rush job on a DNA test and expect the results the next day, not possible, unless they have new technology at CSI they are not sharing with the rest of the world. and that one is just the most memorable one, i wont even watch because of the way they do things on that show and how many problems there are with it. Now if you watch it for entertainment, well thats just a personal opinion personally i find star wars much better because at least they try to keep things somewhat accurate.
    "We're terrible animals. I think that the Earth's immune system is trying to get rid of us, as well it should." - Kurt Vonnegut

  4. #12
    Flip_Side_the_Pint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Lartnec Yellav, Ca
    Posts
    1,433
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    why would you judge a movie on it being inaccurate? is SCIFI, FI!!!! as in FICTION!


    [facetious tone]Yea, star wars is soo inaccurate!, like you can really lift a Xwing with the force, every one knows the biggest thing you can lift with the force is an apple![/facetious tone]
    https://www.instagram.com/hull.jess/ (I post pics of my plants there)

  5. #13
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas; USA
    Posts
    2,363
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I love threads like this. What makes anyone think they are in possession of all the facts?

    here are some known 'facts' about the 'tech': The death star's levels are not concentric, (like layers of an onion) they stack one on top of the other, from south to north. This alone precludes a normal gravity well.

    Ships in the Star Wars universe use inertial dampening, and have the ability to create and control gravity.

    Proton Torpedoes are seeker enabled warheads, capable of making right angle turns without relativistic physics carrying them past their intended trajectory, that goofy inertial dampening technology. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile.gif[/img]

    All creatures on earth, with the exception of deep sea critters that live their lives in the abyss, seek an orientation they 'sense' as relative 'up'. It makes sense that this would be true as well for aliens. In space, humans (and other races if they exist) will likely orient themselves to either the galactic north or south... (silly galaxies... so 2 dimensional!)

    All the space battles in the starwars universe so far have taken place in orbit above a planet. Take Yavin for instance, the death star is closing to blow the moon out of existence, the best approach vector for firing would be head on, this would create a 'plane' of combat, i.e. the shortest distance between the death star and the rebel base, this is naturally where combat would occur.

    Also, why would the rebel fleet around endor orient itself in a direction other than at the death star? their whole goal was to engage it, they WANTED to get closer to it, thus, their engines must be facing away. Formations are a nice thing too, you keep a corvette in your blind spot to cover you, and another Mon Calamari cruiser covers the corvette, overlapping fields of fire.

    what else... oh, the trench run. Explained "We have to get below those Turbo Lasers" (or a phrase very similar to it.) there were less guns to deal with in the trench than on the surface, and it limited fighter angle of attacks as well. (though, why a second set of fighters didn't come in behind the first and offer a rear guard is beyond me. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile.gif[/img] ) (Also why are some rebel pilots so fat?)

    My wife says I have a great memory for worthless info. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile.gif[/img]

    Oh, and not to be insulting, but is TURRENT a word someplace else? I see people mis-spell TURRET all the time as TURRENT, and I am just wondering. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile.gif[/img]

    How about not overanalyzing a hallmark of modern american cinema and just enjoying it? I mean, if you want to nit pick it, how about the fact that Lea knows han's name in the garbage mansion yet they haven't had time to introduce each other? Or why a civilization that has been in the stars for 20,000 years even NEEDS a garbage compactor, haven't they figured out matter to energy conversion yet?

    NO, I am not a hueg starwars fan, I just remember everything. :|
    \"Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: \"Mankind\". Basically, it\'s made up of two separate words - \"mank\" and \"ind\". What do these words mean ? It\'s a mystery, and that\'s why so is mankind.\" ~ Jack Handey

  6. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    houston, texas
    Posts
    545
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi,

    Well, one thing is for sure. In terms of acting and directing plus reality and humanity the latest Starwars movies make the original 3 look like Shakespeare. Those last 2 bored me to tears. I found the old special effects from the 70's alot more exciting and believable. Those computer generated cities, characters, armies and actions were as fake looking as a computer game hero running with his back to the screen and just added unnecessary and uninteresting visual detail. Get to the characters, story, relationships and fun and cast some actors who can both act and have a personality. The new ones are as dull as dishwater.

    Bobby

  7. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    NY, New York
    Posts
    342
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    lol..guys its a movie

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •