July 15, 2013

To his friend...


20 comments:

  1. ...and the original trilogy barely has anything I would even consider as a war.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They're not "war movies", but there's at least one battle between the Empire and the Rebellion in each film. What more do you need?

      Delete
  2. "Luke Skywalker's Fantastic Adventure: Part 1" Doesn't exactly roll of the tongue.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'd like to announce my new book/movie/comic right here on OVC...

    It's called "Sword Fight" and it's about people with swords, fighting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, great, another Midgets With Rings knockoff.

      Delete
  4. I feel another better title for GoT would be:

    Orgy of Titty Swords

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are correct.

      Delete
  5. Adventures of Luke Starkiller, As Taken From the Journal of the Whills, Saga 1: The Star Wars... Doesn't get much more epic than the original planned title.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BTW...

      In about 2 months Dark Horse Comics will be releasing The Star Wars #1, based on the original treatment of the film.

      You'll have your Starkiller!

      Delete
  6. This is exactly why it didn't take me too long to come to grips with such less-than-epic titles as "The Phantom Menace" and "Attack of the Clones," (though I still laugh at the latter).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Speaking strictly of titles, "The Phantom Menace" is actually better than the others, with the possible exception of "The Empire Strikes Back".

      Delete
    2. To me, "The Phantom Menace" doesn't conjure up the image of an unseen danger so much as it does the image of a kid in purple spandex and a domino mask annoying Mr. Wilson.

      Delete
  7. Game of Thrones suggests, to me, a game of musical chairs-when the music stops, whoever gets their butt into the Iron Throne is King.

    Which, these days, seems a valid political process.

    ReplyDelete
  8. When I first heard the title "Game of Thrones", I expected it to be a religious epic about a struggle among the heavenly hosts. thrones being one of the higher forms of celestial beings. Having more of an agnostic bent, I was inclined to believe it would be preachy, so I was not interested. However, I was told otherwise, and gave it a try, and I was (and still am) glad that I did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "thrones being one of the higher forms of celestial beings."

      Which *everyone* automatically thinks of instead of the big fancy chairs monarchs sit in.

      Delete
    2. Sorry, I can't help what I thought of. The use of "Game" made me think it was an elaborate, complex story, which it is, actually, so at least I was right about that. It just wasn't about the power play I originally thought about.

      I thought my reaction was as valid as someone thinking of musical chairs, which I took as a fun comment. I certainly did not expect to be insulted about it. It was just supposed to be a humorous aside.

      Glad it made you feel superior, though.

      Delete
    3. I thought I was generally well-educated regarding Christian mysticism and mythology, but I do believe that's the first time I've heard of that particular class of angel. I know more now than I did an hour ago; thanks!

      I'd be inclined to watch something like that if it could be done without being either preachy or too over-the-top. Although come to think of it, Supernatural spent some time in that ballpark, and did it reasonably successfully, too.

      Personally, I'm skipping GoT until Martin is done writing. I'm not going through that Wheel of Time nonsense again!

      Delete
  9. I was disappointed that Game of Thrones wasn't a tale of intrigue and back stabbing that goes on in the dark secret world of the toilet industry.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think I might actually be interested in Game of Thrones if it was called Sword Fight.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Does anybody else find it weird that none of the movies have "Force" in the title?

    ReplyDelete

.

.