Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Ronn!Blankenship wrote: BIRMINGHAM, Ala. Ford Vox started a religion in his spare time. He calls it Universism, and is recruiting atheists, deists, freethinkers and others who can rally around the notion that no universal religious truth exists, and that the meaning of existence must be determined by each individual. [snip] Obviously a medical student is too busy to actually do some philosophical research. Not only does the name "Universism" sound stupid, but it is superfluous. As far as I can tell from the article it is just a new name for Kierkegaard's Existentialism. -- --Max Battcher-- http://www.worldmaker.net/ The WorldMaker.Network: Support Open/Free Mythoi. Read the manifesto @ mythoi.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
At 03:37 AM Tuesday 5/24/2005, David Land wrote: "Its one thing to put your faith in a religion founded by a real person who claimed divine revelation, but its something else entirely to have, as the scripture of your religion, a storyline that you know was made up by a very nonprophetic human being." "Its a terrible thing, I suppose, for a writer to invent a religion and then discover that he and all his friends are on the wrong side of it." http://www.beliefnet.com/story/167/story_16700_1.html Well, here's someone with a different idea (forwarded from another list): Medical student prescribes a religion ... for freethinkers on an 'alternative' path By Greg Garrison RELIGION NEWS SERVICE June 2, 2005 Religion News Service Ford Vox is the founder of a movement for "the faithless community," which has drawn 7,500 interested people. BIRMINGHAM, Ala. Ford Vox started a religion in his spare time. He calls it Universism, and is recruiting atheists, deists, freethinkers and others who can rally around the notion that no universal religious truth exists, and that the meaning of existence must be determined by each individual. Vox, a University of Alabama at Birmingham medical student, says Christianity, Islam and to a lesser extent other world religions are harmful because they attempt to impose their own version of moral certainty on others. "Religious faith is very powerful," Vox said. "It is so powerful that it is dangerous. It's very difficult to find an alternative to that." Vox said he started Universism in 2003, and has drawn about 7,500 sympathetic souls who have signed on through his Web site, universist.org. It also drew the attention of the evangelical Christian group Focus on the Family, which has studied it as part of a course on different world views. Chris Leland, director of Christian worldview studies for the Focus on the Family Institute, said Vox has become a voice for the latest wave of skeptical deist philosophy. "This group seems to be a neodeistic group in the vein of Thomas Paine," Leland said. "The interesting thing about this group is it has cast a much broader net." Leland has had hundreds of students at the Colorado Springs, Colo., institute analyze Vox's Web site as part of their Christian studies of other philosophies. "Every worldview, every ideology, every perspective has absolutes," Leland said. "There are still some absolutes for even most of the members who log on, whether they admit it or not." But Universism has "brought an amazing diversity of people together in terms of numbers," he said. "The fact they've had Focus on the Family and (scientist) Richard Dawkins as online guests says something." Universist activities include e-mail and online discussions on how to define the relativist philosophy of their "faithless community." "We absolutely reject absolute truth," said Vox, who envisions organized Universist communities like churches. After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, well-meaning non-religious people can no longer stand by and do nothing, he said. They need their own religion, he said, one that opposes absolute truth claims. The Sept. 11 hijackers derived their political motivations from their faith, Vox said. Vox, who expects to earn his medical degree next year, grew up in Tuscaloosa, Ala., as a Presbyterian. He said he sees aspects of religion he likes, such as the sense of community. "They have such great social infrastructure," he said. "Secular people are missing out on that. We'd kind of like to take part." But Vox knocks even open-minded liberal churchgoers. "Unitarian Universalism is belief in anything for the sake of belief," he said. "There are many people in liberal Protestant churches who share this attitude. They continue to prop up the legitimacy of religion, making it seem an OK precept because you have rational people who continue to call themselves Christian." The Bible should be treated as literature, not history or revelation, Vox said. "We would treat it like Shakespeare; people can learn from it like any great story," he said. "We want people to continue exploring in a religious realm, but do that safely an individual sitting down, thinking about his own view of the world." Universists are safe seekers, he said. "They are not the result of reference to a theology, to a prophet, to an outside revelation," Vox said. "You can't share a revelation in Universism. It's your own personal experience." After he becomes a doctor, Vox plans to remain active in promoting Universism. "I definitely want to make this part of the rest of my life," he said. "It's a futuristic-type project. The future has to be different than the way things are today." Find this article at: http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050602/news_lz1c02vox.html -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
> "Robert G. Seeberger" wrote: > >Jim Sharkey wrote: > >> Robert Seeberger wrote: > >>> Jim Sharkey wrote: > Deborah Harrell wrote: > Please...rose or lavender or even puce > (although Teal is the One > True Color)...but *not* pink!!! > >>> How about heliotrope? Or maybe fuschia? Heliotrope is possible. :) > >> Open wide and say > >>"Aaaavacado" Eeuww, that makes me think "70's kitchens." > > No, I prefer periwinkle. Now *THERE'S* one manly > > color! And such lovely flowers! [Although their Dark Side is butt-kicking cancer cells -- with some collateral damage to normal ones.] > Real men prefer pimpernel. > xponent > The Scarlet One Maru Ooh, those _tight_ tights, and form-fitting jerkins... Debbi I'll Have A Flagon Of *That,* Good Fellow Maru:} __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Horn, John wrote: Behalf Of Jim Sharkey You have *no* idea... My last name, though generating a fair share of jokes, wasn't so bad. The first 50 or so times I heard the phrase "Horny Toad", I didn't know what "horny" meant! (I had a sheltered upbringing...) My wife, however, was/is cursed with the last name of "Cleaver". You can only imagine what she went through... Sounds worse than the worst I went through, which was being the human rope in games of tug-of-war with two of my friends shouting at each other, "Leggo my Deggo!" My father, however, had the middle name of Cookman, and one day, one of his roommates said, "Hey, Cook." He thought for a moment and declined to respond, because he wasn't going to go through the rest of college as something sounding identical to "cooked eggs". Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
> Behalf Of Jim Sharkey > > You have *no* idea... My last name, though generating a fair share of jokes, wasn't so bad. The first 50 or so times I heard the phrase "Horny Toad", I didn't know what "horny" meant! (I had a sheltered upbringing...) My wife, however, was/is cursed with the last name of "Cleaver". You can only imagine what she went through... - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Ronn!Blankenship wrote: >Julia Thompson wrote: >>(Nothing like the threat of a repeat lecture!) >Unlike, say, the number of times he heard a play on his name repeated . . . You have *no* idea... Let's just say that I had the misfortune of growing up concurrent with Jaws, CPO Sharkey, Sharkey's Machine, Jabberjaw and more. And of course, every kid acted as if *he* was the first one to have thought of them. :) Jim But I'm not bitter Maru ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
No, Ronn, eye yam lightsaber. I am Mark The average man, who does not know what to do with his life, wants another one which will last forever. -- Anatole France (1844 - 1924, French writer) - Original Message - From: "Ronn!Blankenship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 6:21 PM Subject: Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas... > At 02:31 PM Tuesday 5/24/2005, Mark wrote: > >Warren, do you have a lightsaber? > > > >I am > >Mark > > > You am a lightsaber? > > > -- Ronn! :) > > > ___ > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l > > ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On May 24, 2005, at 9:03 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: Unlike, say, the number of times he heard a play on his name repeated . . . What the fuchsia talking about? Exactly. Do you think it made him see red? -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror" http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
At 11:00 PM Tuesday 5/24/2005, Warren Ockrassa wrote: On May 24, 2005, at 8:48 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: It's a very common spelling mistake, one I made all the time until my mother the linguist told me the etymology of the word, and after that, I spelled it correctly. (Nothing like the threat of a repeat lecture!) Unlike, say, the number of times he heard a play on his name repeated . . . What the fuchsia talking about? Exactly. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On May 24, 2005, at 8:48 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: It's a very common spelling mistake, one I made all the time until my mother the linguist told me the etymology of the word, and after that, I spelled it correctly. (Nothing like the threat of a repeat lecture!) Unlike, say, the number of times he heard a play on his name repeated . . . What the fuchsia talking about? -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror" http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
At 10:22 PM Tuesday 5/24/2005, Julia Thompson wrote: Jim Sharkey wrote: Deborah Harrell wrote: Please...rose or lavender or even puce (although Teal is the One True Color)...but *not* pink!!! How about heliotrope? Or maybe fuschia? Jim Actually, Jim, it's spelled "fuchsia". It's named after a German botonist by the name of Fuchs. It's a very common spelling mistake, one I made all the time until my mother the linguist told me the etymology of the word, and after that, I spelled it correctly. (Nothing like the threat of a repeat lecture!) Unlike, say, the number of times he heard a play on his name repeated . . . -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Warren Ockrassa wrote: On May 24, 2005, at 8:22 PM, Julia Thompson wrote: Actually, Jim, it's spelled "fuchsia". It's named after a German botonist by the name of Fuchs. Which, interestingly enough, means "fox". You'd expect him to be into animal evolution. Oh well. (And it's "botanist", FWIW. ;) D'oh! Thanks, Warren! (I know how to spell that one, not sure how it got away from me -- but it did.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On May 24, 2005, at 8:22 PM, Julia Thompson wrote: Actually, Jim, it's spelled "fuchsia". It's named after a German botonist by the name of Fuchs. Which, interestingly enough, means "fox". You'd expect him to be into animal evolution. Oh well. (And it's "botanist", FWIW. ;) -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror" http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Jim Sharkey wrote: Deborah Harrell wrote: Please...rose or lavender or even puce (although Teal is the One True Color)...but *not* pink!!! How about heliotrope? Or maybe fuschia? Jim Actually, Jim, it's spelled "fuchsia". It's named after a German botonist by the name of Fuchs. It's a very common spelling mistake, one I made all the time until my mother the linguist told me the etymology of the word, and after that, I spelled it correctly. (Nothing like the threat of a repeat lecture!) As I'm neither your mother nor a linguist, I don't necessarily expect you to remember -- but I'm hoping that at least one person who makes that spelling mistake will manage not to do so in the future after reading this. (And if I have to show it to my kids in 10 years to make that happen, so be it.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Jim Sharkey wrote: > Robert Seeberger wrote: >> Jim Sharkey wrote: >>> Deborah Harrell wrote: Please...rose or lavender or even puce (although Teal is the One True Color)...but *not* pink!!! >>> How about heliotrope? Or maybe fuschia? >> Open wide and say "Aaaavacado" > > No, I prefer periwinkle. Now *THERE'S* one manly color! > Real men prefer pimpernel. xponent The Scarlet One Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
At 04:22 PM Tuesday 5/24/2005, Deborah Harrell wrote: > Gary Denton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On 5/24/05, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Let us not disrespect one anothers' pink unicorns. Please...rose or lavender or even puce (although Teal is the One True Color)...but *not* pink!!! > My shrine to Buffy and Willow is helping me process > all my billions of past lives. How I long for a return of the Buffyverse -- ScoobyGang, where _are_ you? > Fictionology is nor just for former Scientologists. Of course, there are really stoopid Fictionologists whose personal daemons are Speed Racer, Underdog or Luke Duke; yet I suppose that they must be tolerated - after all, they are human in somebody's definology. Calling Underdog "human" would seem to be stretching the definology . . . Not Plane Nor Bird Nor Even Frog Either Maru -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
At 02:31 PM Tuesday 5/24/2005, Mark wrote: Warren, do you have a lightsaber? I am Mark You am a lightsaber? -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Robert Seeberger wrote: >Jim Sharkey wrote: >>Deborah Harrell wrote: >>> Please...rose or lavender or even puce (although Teal is the One >>> True Color)...but *not* pink!!! >> How about heliotrope? Or maybe fuschia? >Open wide and say "Aaaavacado" No, I prefer periwinkle. Now *THERE'S* one manly color! Jim ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Jim Sharkey wrote: > Deborah Harrell wrote: >> Please...rose or lavender or even puce (although Teal is the One >> True Color)...but *not* pink!!! > > How about heliotrope? Or maybe fuschia? > Open wide and say "Aaaavacado" xponent Flora Colors Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Deborah Harrell wrote: >Please...rose or lavender or even puce (although Teal is the One >True Color)...but *not* pink!!! How about heliotrope? Or maybe fuschia? Jim ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
> Gary Denton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On 5/24/05, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Let us not disrespect one anothers' pink unicorns. Please...rose or lavender or even puce (although Teal is the One True Color)...but *not* pink!!! > My shrine to Buffy and Willow is helping me process > all my billions of past lives. How I long for a return of the Buffyverse -- ScoobyGang, where _are_ you? > Fictionology is nor just for former Scientologists. Of course, there are really stoopid Fictionologists whose personal daemons are Speed Racer, Underdog or Luke Duke; yet I suppose that they must be tolerated - after all, they are human in somebody's definology. Debbi Leaping Into The Mach V Maru ;) __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On 5/24/05, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On May 24, 2005, at 9:30 AM, Warren Ockrassa wrote: > > > Heh, quoth the Card: > > > > "As a religion, the Force is just the sort of thing you'd expect a > > liberal-minded teenage kid to invent." > > > > As opposed to Mormonism, which was invented by a conservative-minded > > teenaged kid, and therefore is True. > > > > OSC has absolutely no business critiquing anyone else's religion or > > philosophy. Not when he believes in golden plates translated by dint > > of magic goggles. > > Let us not disrespect one anothers' pink unicorns. There are Mormons on > our list, and I credit a Mormon girlfriend back in the '80s for helping > me find my own vision of God. My shrine to Buffy and Willow is helping me process all my billions of past lives. Fictionology is nor just for former Scientologists. "Scientology can only offer data, such as how an Operating Thetan can control matter, energy, space, and time with pure thought alone. Truly spiritual people don't care about data, especially those seeking an escape from very real physical, mental, or emotional problems." -- Gary Denton Easter Lemming Blogs http://elemming.blogspot.com http://elemming2.blogspot.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
> "d.brin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For Eps I & II I was very mild mannered. I urged > people to go matineee after waiting 2 weeks... but > otherwise enjoy the crap because it's GORGEOUS crap. > Lucas subsidizes 10% of the best artists on the > planet. > > This time tho... I just can't do it > gah! It's like he wants us to not only worship a > nazi > mass murderer, but also evil green oven mitts... > while losing all hope. feh. I thought Himself's previous rants about Yoda were over-the-top...then I saw EpII (which I hadn't bothered to see at all until it came on TV this past weekend, b/c I detested EpI so very much). Ugh. Nasty, tricksome stealer of one's precious [mother, in Anny's case]! I wanted to smack Amidala (shades of a RL older woman marrying a boy), shove Anakin out the nearest airlock at the next whine (Luke's early whining was funny, and then he wised up), and force Obiwan to listen to his mouthings on continuous loop tape... Unless others think ROTS is worth seeing in the ($2) theater, I'll pass on this one. Debbi Please Find Some Real Dialogue Maru>:P __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On May 24, 2005, at 12:31 PM, Mark wrote: Warren, do you have a lightsaber? Let's see ... no, though I've got an old Darth Vader helmet, a more or less complete collection of the smaller-version TIE toys (fighter, bomber, advanced, etc.), several Eagles from Space: 1999 (Dinky versions) and TOS and TNG version tricorders. I think about the only way I'd want a lightsaber would be if it was a *working* one. That would be tha' shizznit. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror" http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On May 24, 2005, at 11:05 AM, Dave Land wrote: On May 24, 2005, at 10:47 AM, Warren Ockrassa wrote: On May 24, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Dave Land wrote: I think Mr. Card's main point was that Mormonism (as well as, I suppose, Islam, Christianity, et al) was at least intended to be taken seriously as a religion by Jos. Smith, while Jedism is just another sci-fi plot device gone horribly, horribly wrong. Um, well, how seriously it was meant to be taken is also in doubt, or I think it is anyway. I half suspect it was meant as seriously as Scientology, FWIW. Right after I decided that I wasn't going to choose my relationship with God based on my feelings for a cute blonde from New Jersey, I went through a fairly strong anti-Mormon period. I was kind of an ass, really. I recall seeing some suggestions that Joseph Smith's writings were more or less science fiction, and that some others decided to turn it into a religion, but I had largely discounted it as just so much more Mormon-bashing. That wasn't exactly what I was thinking of -- Harlan Ellison has stated that he was around when Hubbard first came up with the idea of Scientology, that the man wanted to come up with an SF-based church as a kind of joke-cum-social experiment. Ellison apparently kept waiting for the shoe to drop. It didn't. Hubbard either got sucked into his own theology or became so enamored of the money and power that he refused to admit the lie. Years later he stuck by his religion, for whatever that might be worth. My thinking is that Smith -- if he wasn't just fantasy prone and charismatic enough to convince others to follow along -- did something somewhat similar, inventing a religion, then loving the power of it. Of course he was shot, which might suggest he wasn't actually planning things to happen as they did, which might indicate it's the first explanation that's more likely. (I know there's another explanation, of course. I don't buy that one either, even though it made perfect sense to me when I was twelve.) Anyway, your pot-kettle comparison is apt. If Mr. Card was the Right Rev. Orson Scott Card of the Foursquare Gospel Church of the Five-Syllable Je-hee-huh-sus-uh or Father Orson at Our Lady of Perpetual Emotion, your comments would be equally on the mark. It was in that spirit that I rushed to the defense of Mr. Card's particular shade of Pink Unicorns -- as a God-guy myself, I'm not in a position to ridicule others' faiths. Oh, he can have his unicorns, that's fine. Anyone can. It's when those unicorns start trying to gnaw my patch of sward that I get huffy, or of course when someone says someone else's unicorns is tha' wrong culla. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror" http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Warren, do you have a lightsaber? I am Mark - Original Message - From: Warren Ockrassa To: Killer Bs Discussion Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 10:30 AM Subject: Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas... Heh, quoth the Card: "As a religion, the Force is just the sort of thing you’d expect a liberal-minded teenage kid to invent." As opposed to Mormonism, which was invented by a conservative-minded teenaged kid, and therefore is True. OSC has absolutely no business critiquing anyone else's religion or philosophy. Not when he believes in golden plates translated by dint of magic goggles. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On May 24, 2005, at 10:47 AM, Warren Ockrassa wrote: On May 24, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Dave Land wrote: I think Mr. Card's main point was that Mormonism (as well as, I suppose, Islam, Christianity, et al) was at least intended to be taken seriously as a religion by Jos. Smith, while Jedism is just another sci-fi plot device gone horribly, horribly wrong. Um, well, how seriously it was meant to be taken is also in doubt, or I think it is anyway. I half suspect it was meant as seriously as Scientology, FWIW. Right after I decided that I wasn't going to choose my relationship with God based on my feelings for a cute blonde from New Jersey, I went through a fairly strong anti-Mormon period. I was kind of an ass, really. I recall seeing some suggestions that Joseph Smith's writings were more or less science fiction, and that some others decided to turn it into a religion, but I had largely discounted it as just so much more Mormon-bashing. Anyway, your pot-kettle comparison is apt. If Mr. Card was the Right Rev. Orson Scott Card of the Foursquare Gospel Church of the Five-Syllable Je-hee-huh-sus-uh or Father Orson at Our Lady of Perpetual Emotion, your comments would be equally on the mark. It was in that spirit that I rushed to the defense of Mr. Card's particular shade of Pink Unicorns -- as a God-guy myself, I'm not in a position to ridicule others' faiths. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
I think Mr. Card's main point was that Mormonism (as well as, I suppose, Islam, Christianity, et al) was at least intended to be taken seriously as a religion by Jos. Smith, while Jedism is just another sci-fi plot device gone horribly, horribly wrong. I think Orson missed the boat on the whole "Jedi religion thing..." Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: Ertl's TIE Fighter -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date: 5/17/2005 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On May 24, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Dave Land wrote: On May 24, 2005, at 9:30 AM, Warren Ockrassa wrote: Heh, quoth the Card: "As a religion, the Force is just the sort of thing you’d expect a liberal-minded teenage kid to invent." As opposed to Mormonism, which was invented by a conservative-minded teenaged kid, and therefore is True. OSC has absolutely no business critiquing anyone else's religion or philosophy. Not when he believes in golden plates translated by dint of magic goggles. Let us not disrespect one anothers' pink unicorns. There are Mormons on our list, and I credit a Mormon girlfriend back in the '80s for helping me find my own vision of God. The point wasn't to vilify Mormons. The point was that Card is not qualified to play pot-and-kettle. Pretty much all religious thought has at its core some suppositions and assumptions that can look -- well, silly. It seems to me that someone who aligns with a faith developed in the 1800s by a teenager really isn't in a position to criticize the choices of others who want a more relativistic outlook. Unfortunately three pages of ranting almost totally overshadow the significance of the final graf, which poses a very interesting question. Put another way, Card was disrespecting others' pink unicorns; I was just pointing out he ain't wearin' no clothes. I think Mr. Card's main point was that Mormonism (as well as, I suppose, Islam, Christianity, et al) was at least intended to be taken seriously as a religion by Jos. Smith, while Jedism is just another sci-fi plot device gone horribly, horribly wrong. Um, well, how seriously it was meant to be taken is also in doubt, or I think it is anyway. I half suspect it was meant as seriously as Scientology, FWIW. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror" http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
In a message dated 5/24/2005 10:08:59 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Warren Ockrassa wrote: >OSC has absolutely no business critiquing anyone else's religion or > philosophy. Yeah. And he never explained why he gave Columbus a telescope, as well. Vilyehm ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On May 24, 2005, at 9:30 AM, Warren Ockrassa wrote: Heh, quoth the Card: "As a religion, the Force is just the sort of thing you’d expect a liberal-minded teenage kid to invent." As opposed to Mormonism, which was invented by a conservative-minded teenaged kid, and therefore is True. OSC has absolutely no business critiquing anyone else's religion or philosophy. Not when he believes in golden plates translated by dint of magic goggles. Let us not disrespect one anothers' pink unicorns. There are Mormons on our list, and I credit a Mormon girlfriend back in the '80s for helping me find my own vision of God. I think Mr. Card's main point was that Mormonism (as well as, I suppose, Islam, Christianity, et al) was at least intended to be taken seriously as a religion by Jos. Smith, while Jedism is just another sci-fi plot device gone horribly, horribly wrong. Dave "In IDIC We Trust" Land ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On May 24, 2005, at 1:37 AM, David Land wrote: "It’s one thing to put your faith in a religion founded by a real person who claimed divine revelation, but it’s something else entirely to have, as the scripture of your religion, a storyline that you know was made up by a very nonprophetic human being." "It’s a terrible thing, I suppose, for a writer to invent a religion and then discover that he and all his friends are on the wrong side of it." http://www.beliefnet.com/story/167/story_16700_1.html Heh, quoth the Card: "As a religion, the Force is just the sort of thing you’d expect a liberal-minded teenage kid to invent." As opposed to Mormonism, which was invented by a conservative-minded teenaged kid, and therefore is True. OSC has absolutely no business critiquing anyone else's religion or philosophy. Not when he believes in golden plates translated by dint of magic goggles. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror" http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
"It’s one thing to put your faith in a religion founded by a real person who claimed divine revelation, but it’s something else entirely to have, as the scripture of your religion, a storyline that you know was made up by a very nonprophetic human being." "It’s a terrible thing, I suppose, for a writer to invent a religion and then discover that he and all his friends are on the wrong side of it." http://www.beliefnet.com/story/167/story_16700_1.html ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Damn you George Lucas. Chinese actress Bai Ling shot a small role in Star Wars 6 as "Senator Bana Breemu". Ling told one interviewer that "Senator Bana Breemu helps put Padmé's mind at peace when she's in trouble." In another interview, she described her character's costume: "I'm all naked with tattoos on my body. You have to find out why when you see the movie." But alas, the Breemu character's scenes were cut from the final release version. That's right — George Lucas apparently shot a scene in which naked Bai Ling comforts troubled Natalie Portman, then decided not to use the scene. Hot intergalactic girl-girl action is sitting on a shelf somewhere, but we won't get to see it. Between filming and release, Bai Ling posed nude for Playboy, which put her on this month's cover billed as "Star Wars Sexy Alien". Last week Bai Ling sparked a mini-scandal by claiming that George Lucas deleted her role in anger over the Playboy spread. Lucas denied it in an Access Hollywood interview: "She was cut out of the movie very early on. My daughter's in that same scene. My daughter was cut as well. My other daughter was in another scene and that was cut as well." Will we get to see an unrated DVD version? http://www.dazereader.com/24000842.htm -- Gary "busy lately - election tied - runoff early voting starts Wednesday" Denton Easter Lemming Blogs http://elemming.blogspot.com http://elemming2.blogspot.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=1824&p=.htm After starting the day with $16,912,367 from midnight shows alone, Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith closed Thursday with $50,013,859 from an estimated 9,400 screens at 3,661 theaters. That's the biggest day ever for a single movie in history. Shrek 2 previously held the single day record with $44.8 million on its fourth day of release, a Saturday last May, while Spider-Man 2 had the opening day record at $40.4 million, posted on June 30 of last year. Revenge of the Sith soared past them both with a gross beyond the rosiest of industry expectations. "When I consider it's a Thursday with kids in school, I'd figure it can't do that," distributor 20th Century Fox's head of distribution, Bruce Snyder, told Box Office Mojo. "I did not think we could do $50 million. I was thinking maybe we could catch up to Shrek 2 on Saturday. I'm as surprised as the rest of the world." For further perspective, the biggest opening weekend of the year thus far had been Hitch's $43.1 million, and Revenge of the Sith blew past that in one day. Sith's gross is surprising, in part, because the previous Star Wars installment, Attack of the Clones, had an opening day on par with The Phantom Menace and ultimately made significantly less. In 2002, Clones grossed $30.1 million on its way to $310.7 million, while Phantom earned $28.5 million en route to $431.1 million. Despite the immensity of its opening day, Revenge of the Sith is not a lock to break Spider-Man's $114.8 million opening weekend record. "It's a tough call," Snyder noted. "I don't think that we'll have the 3-day weekend record. I guess if you take Thursday, Friday and Saturday, we'd be bigger. If we opened on Friday, we'd have the weekend record. But after this, you gotta drop. For the 4-day, we'll be the biggest ever." The current four-day champ is The Matrix Reloaded, which nabbed $134.3 million in May 2003. That picture quickly burnt out and ended its run at $281.6 million. Snyder noted several reasons for Revenge of the Sith's success. "For one, it was the culmination of the series," he explained. "The buzz on the picture has been extraordinary in stories and on television, and we were quite a bit wider than Attack of the Clones in terms of number of theaters and prints. And I do think we are getting the adults who had seen the original trilogy." Revenge of the Sith has been seen as the jumpstart to get people back into the moviegoing habit after an uninspiring spring, but it will take more than just one movie. "The answer is if the movies behind it are good," Snyder said. "If there's something that's not interesting behind it, the box office will stall again." xponent Early Money Reviews Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Damon Agretto wrote: I believe this is spoiler free. But if you're utterly in the dark, read no more... At this point, the film is as predictable as excrement from a dog. I laugh at spoiler warnings. It's like the spoiler warnings before the movie Titanic came out. Anakin becomes Vader, Palpatine is revealed as Sidious, Luke and Leia are born. If *ANY* of that comes as a surprise after 5 movies, someone needs a doctor. Here's a real spoiler for the movie: It's really long and tiring. IMHO, I agree the dialogue needs improvement, but I think it was better than Ep.II. There were some parts that were utterly forgettable, but the rest worked in its own way, even if it wasn't as quotable as the original trilogy. Are you kidding me? The entire dialogue was cringingly vomit worthy. The only resonable dialog was the cliched fight dialog. What's more, Lucas further shoved his foot in his mouth and proved that he really doesn't understand what Democracy _is_. This film plays out entirely like a bad Aeschylus or Sophocles play... and we can't blame the poor use of language on a bad translation. Thought the pacing was uneven. The 1st half was pretty much a "why is this significant?" but the second half really picked up and made up for the 1st. I felt entirely the opposite. What little is watchable in the new film is the "new" stuff... the insignificant battles with Grevious and the Droids. Everything else is just "prophecy" happening and I found myself over and over wondering "why the hell is this scene dragged out so long?". Furthermore, I decided that I wanted to shoot the editors of the film. The movie suffers from some of _the worst_ film techniques that any good Director is going to trash. Beyond Lucas' long overuse of wipe seques, there is the simple fact that not a single damn action sequence plays out in its entirety without cutting to some interruption. It gave me a headache. The Vader bit at the end was utterly unconvincing, and really broke the character. They should've used FAR less dialogue in this scene, and shown Vader's reactions indirectly. Would've been far more effective, IMHO. I think that it ultimately proved the character was broken to begin with! The Mysterious Vader of Episode 4 has now been completely replaced with the Whiny Anakin of Episodes 1, 2, and 3. My Mom died from natives of crappy planet! My wife is going to die in childbirth! The Council won't let me be a "Master"! The other Kindergartners won't share their toys! If that's "The Dark Side", then no wonder the Jedi try so hard to get kids as young as possible! One bad Elementary school and you have a Darth Lord on your hands. -- --Max Battcher-- http://www.worldmaker.net/ The WorldMaker.Network: Now more Caffeinated! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
I believe this is spoiler free. But if you're utterly in the dark, read no more... IMHO, I agree the dialogue needs improvement, but I think it was better than Ep.II. There were some parts that were utterly forgettable, but the rest worked in its own way, even if it wasn't as quotable as the original trilogy. Thought the pacing was uneven. The 1st half was pretty much a "why is this significant?" but the second half really picked up and made up for the 1st. The Vader bit at the end was utterly unconvincing, and really broke the character. They should've used FAR less dialogue in this scene, and shown Vader's reactions indirectly. Would've been far more effective, IMHO. Damon. Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: Ertl's TIE Fighter -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date: 5/17/2005 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Oh come on- it was way better than the preceding two, and only a little worse than ROTJ. But I saw this article in USA Today and I have to pass it along: apparently some people think Lucas is a liberal and it reflects in ROTS (incidentally Brin, I am a little surprised you didn't pick up on the whole 'senate voting Palpatine emperor- it seems to fit in perfectly with your shtick. "Politics creates a disturbance in the Force" By César G. Soriano, USA TODAY Since early screenings of Episode III: Revenge of the Sith began last month, film critics, commentators and Internet bloggers have been debating whether filmmaker George Lucas is comparing President Bush and the Iraq war to the Dark Side of the Force. The conservative film site Pabaah.com has called for a boycott. The topic even made NBC's Today show. http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2005-05-17-sith-politics_x.htm http://tinyurl.com/cmzso (The theme of the article has been echoed many other places as well. Left as an exercise to the reader.) ~Maru On 5/19/05, d.brin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > David Brin replies: > > For Eps I & II I was very mild mannered. I urged > people to go matineee after waiting 2 weeks... but > otherwise enjoy the crap because it's GORGEOUS crap. > Lucas subsidizes 10% of the best artists on the > planet. > > This time tho... I just can't do it. > > The point that no one seems to raise re Star Wars is > that only two out of six have happy endings. > > Sure, that CAN be okay. Everyone agrees that the one Lucas > did NOT write - The Empire Strikes Back - was by far > the best. Its downer ending was magnificent, brave, > hopeful elegiacal. But episodes I,II, and III? You > know in advance that every decent and brave and heroic > act will be futile, futile futile futile futile futile > futile futile futile! > > gah! It's like he wants us to not only worship a nazi > mass murderer, but also evil green oven mitts... while losing all hope. feh. > > If you refer anyone on line to rants about this, > here's one recent very colorful one in the New Yorker: > > http://www.newyorker.com/critics/cinema/?050523crci_cinema > > And of course my own series about this idiocy: > http://www.davidbrin.com/starwarsarticle1.html > > (I don't have any love for the New Yorker editors. The guy > obviously likes good SF, but they always lop off all > the contrasts in order to give an impression that this > garbage represents the field.) > > Oh, want some subliminal clues? Try STAR WARS backwards? > RAW RATS > > Now try the initials of the new film: > STIII ROTS. > > Squint a little at RAW RATS STIII ROTS > and just say it out loud. > > What can this clue mean? > > Here is my eerie-romantic-horror tale interpretation. > > The George Lucas who brought us Indiana Jones and Eps > IV & V is still in there! Shouting for help! Like > Anakin trapped inside Vader... ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Dave Land quoted: > > On Yodish: > > Deepest mind in the galaxy, apparently, and you still express > yourself like a day-tripper with a dog-eared phrase book. "I > hope right you are." Break me a fucking give. > Stupid this quote is. The right and old galactic standard Yoda speaks. The rest of the galaxy wrongly speaks. Monteiro Alberto ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
On May 19, 2005, at 2:53 PM, d.brin wrote: If you refer anyone on line to rants about this, here's one recent very colorful one in the New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/critics/cinema/?050523crci_cinema This is a damn fine piece of writing. Overall impression: The general opinion of "Revenge of the Sith" seems to be that it marks a distinct improvement on the last two episodes True, but only in the same way that dying from natural causes is preferable to crucifixion. On Yodish: Deepest mind in the galaxy, apparently, and you still express yourself like a day-tripper with a dog-eared phrase book. "I hope right you are." Break me a fucking give. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Revenge of the REAL George Lucas...
Former brineller Stefan Jones sent this about seeing the new SITH flick: -- My manager surprised everyone on the development team with free tickets to _Revenge_. All of my testing was on automatic today, so why not? Wonderful eye candy of course. But . . . God. The dialog and acting and characterization were hideously, egregiously, graceful-as-a-engine-block-tumbling-down-a-spiral-staircase AWFUL. Anakin / Darth and "Padme" in particular. The only actor who earned his pay was the guy playing the slimy Chancellor / Emperor. Virtually no humor beyond a few moments of slapstick early on. Now, there's something particularly revealing about the ending, in which (no surprise) things get set up for episode 4. It's really portentious and full of gravity . . . an admission, I think, that this tedious pre-trilogy was a heap of stink and the REAL fun and genuine adventure begins with the first, innocently goofy entry. Never see this again, I will. SJ -- David Brin replies: For Eps I & II I was very mild mannered. I urged people to go matineee after waiting 2 weeks... but otherwise enjoy the crap because it's GORGEOUS crap. Lucas subsidizes 10% of the best artists on the planet. This time tho... I just can't do it. The point that no one seems to raise re Star Wars is that only two out of six have happy endings. Sure, that CAN be okay. Everyone agrees that the one Lucas did NOT write - The Empire Strikes Back - was by far the best. Its downer ending was magnificent, brave, hopeful elegiacal. But episodes I,II, and III? You know in advance that every decent and brave and heroic act will be futile, futile futile futile futile futile futile futile futile! gah! It's like he wants us to not only worship a nazi mass murderer, but also evil green oven mitts... while losing all hope. feh. If you refer anyone on line to rants about this, here's one recent very colorful one in the New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/critics/cinema/?050523crci_cinema And of course my own series about this idiocy: http://www.davidbrin.com/starwarsarticle1.html (I don't have any love for the New Yorker editors. The guy obviously likes good SF, but they always lop off all the contrasts in order to give an impression that this garbage represents the field.) Oh, want sopme subliminal clues? Try STAR WARS backwards? RAW RATS Now try the initials of the new film: STIII ROTS. Squint a little at RAW RATS STIII ROTS and just say it out loud. What can this clue mean? Here is my eerie-romantic-horror tale interpretation. The George Lucas who brought us Indiana Jones and Eps IV & V is still in there! Shouting for help! Like Anekin trapped inside Vader... Ah symbolism. Ah ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
