what was your first Maiden album?
Matk1138
played me this song called The Trooper. I was blown away. I never heard
anything like it. Well, the version I heard was off Live After Death so I
quickly went out and got a copy and within a few months I pretty much owned
every album Maiden put out. I'm still a huge fan and I always look forward to
anything Maiden puts out. It's a shame they aren't going to tour as much after
the dance of death tours. So anyway, what was the first maiden album that you
owned?
lordw...@charter.net
"Matk1138" <matk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030809135622...@mb-m15.aol.com...
My first album was "Piece of Mind" shortly after it was released.
Shiflet
Number of the Beast
Talus
on vinyl (up to Powerslave) at that time. I always liked the cover artwork,
but never had heard a Maiden song. I was shopping at a CD store one-day and
picked up "Live After Death" because it had the most tracks on CD. I fell
in love with it immediately, and soon started collecting everything Maiden
put out.
Scott Peterson
having heard anything by the band. Needless to say, I became a lifelong fan
with that tape, even though it died many years ago.
Scott
DB
"Matk1138" <matk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030809135622...@mb-m15.aol.com...
Godless Fur Trapper
Turboe.
Turboe is a good album.
Beaver pelts and brand new cars.
Oak tree you're in my way....
Purple Haze
Seventh Son.
I caught up late - better late than never though.
Stu
"DB" <Drbut...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3JfZa.9750$pq5.1...@news20.bellglobal.com...
Shaun Baker
wrote:
Same here, I've heard of them when(well sometimes after) Killers came
out since Wrathchild got a little bit of airplay(god I miss the days
of quality radio here in Cleveland). There was a lot of news in the
British press(I got Sounds weekly at the local import store) about
Bruce replacing Paul and when NotB came out I just had to get it - and
started filling in backlog very fast soon thereafter, never got the
Soundhouse Tapes but have just about everything else on vinyl they put
out up through and including SiT.
Shaun
Supernaut
TAP <no...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:none-19E654.2...@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <20030809135622...@mb-m15.aol.com>,
Dec '80, the first album. I was sitting in a friends car it was raining
like hell it was the first day of x-mass from vacation from High school,
and after we burned the biggest doobie he said " dude you gotta check out
this song the bass playing is incredible" He put Phantom of the Opera on the
tape deck and I sat stunned my jaw on the ground at what I was hearing.
Been a fan ever since.
I didn't get to see them till '82 when they opened for the Scorps.
Godless Fur Trapper
wrote:
>Dec '80, the first album. I was sitting in a friends car it was raining
>like hell it was the first day of x-mass from vacation from High school,
>and after we burned the biggest doobie he said " dude you gotta check out
>this song the bass playing is incredible" He put Phantom of the Opera on the
>tape deck and I sat stunned my jaw on the ground at what I was hearing.
>Been a fan ever since.
>
>I didn't get to see them till '82 when they opened for the Scorps.
>
Bullshit, you threw down and up during the Gemini "East Coast tour
03'." Miami Sound Maiden busted your cherry, stop this retro
mythology. Fuckin' WCBO.
Kramer
---------------------
"In Jar Jar We Trust" -Count Bazzu
---------------------
No Prayer for the Dying, and I still quiver and shake because of it. Got a
casette-copy of 7th son the day after, but it took many months before we
liked that one. Still love "No Prayer" the same way I did back then.
"Assassin" and everything.
--
in association with the afsjjbddd cheer-the-hell-up commitee,
--%%-- JAR JAR LOVES US --%%--
©2002 alt.fan.starwars.jar-jar-binks.die.die.die (Endorsed by Ahmed Best)
--
The New Gungan Army: http://www.nivan.net/afsjjbddd/
Heavy Metal Music: http://www.juicy-jane.tk/
----
"The ability to speak does not make you intelligent"
-Qui-Gon Jinn
Shane Penney
Powerslave. Bought it some time in late 1985.
Shane
***************************************************************************
"...KISS won't be around long. Flash doesn't
last". -Seattle Times May 27, 1974
God Guard Thee Newfoundland
GOHABSGOHABSGOHABSGOHABSGOHABSGOHABSGOHABSGOHABSGOHABSGOHABSGOHABSGOHABSGO
***************************************************************************
Les
Daniel Oberle
cause way back then it even got some airplay in Germany
Coincidentally 7th Son was my first CD back in 1988.
Since then my collection went up to 60 CDs (no bootlegs)!
I was about 14 BTW.
Dan
Tony & Carol Howard
damnwindowssucks
don't like that release but I really dig it especially the title track,
be quick or be dead,from here to eternity,and afraid to shoot strangers.
Kramer
---------------------
"In Jar Jar We Trust" -Count Bazzu
---------------------
> My first maiden album was fear of the dark, now I know a lot of fans
Your first Maiden album always has a special place in the heart, no matter
what album it is.
Glenn
Live After Death here as well... borrowed it from a friend after
hearing tracks like 2 Minutes To Midnight and Aces High. Loved it
immediately and it was the equal first cassette that I ever bought
(along with a Clannad tape!)
Glenn
nm156 at ihug dot 777777777 Deadly Sins
co dot nz 7 77 Ways to Win
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~nm156 77 Holy Paths to Hell
Music page: as above + /music.htm 77 Downward Slopes
77 Bloodied Hopes
| 77 Are Your Burning Fires
_|_ 77 Your Desires
| 7 (MOONCHILD Smith/Dickinson)
Willatts
"Glenn" <mstrglenn@.remove.this.yahoo.co.nz> wrote in message
news:46pejvgni535fmtjo...@4ax.com...
> On 09 Aug 2003 17:56:22 GMT, matk...@aol.com (Matk1138) wrote:
>
> >About fourteen or fifteen years ago I went over to a friends house and he
> >played me this song called The Trooper. I was blown away. I never heard
> >anything like it. Well, the version I heard was off Live After Death so I
> >quickly went out and got a copy and within a few months I pretty much
owned
> >every album Maiden put out. I'm still a huge fan and I always look
forward to
> >anything Maiden puts out. It's a shame they aren't going to tour as much
after
> >the dance of death tours. So anyway, what was the first maiden album that
you
> >owned?
>
> Live After Death here as well... borrowed it from a friend after
> hearing tracks like 2 Minutes To Midnight and Aces High. Loved it
> immediately and it was the equal first cassette that I ever bought
> (along with a Clannad tape!)
Mine was Fear of the Dark, and it was the second tape I bought, coming about
a month after Nirvana's Bleach. I was in the top juniors then.
UP-IN-SMOKE
Killers, but I did not buy it when it came out. Like someone else posted I
really liked the artwork(tshirts-album covers) and when my friend brian
played this music for me I was in heaven and have been a fan ever since. It
was a very stoned time so its all blurry. I know I got piece of mind a few
days later. I did not get to see them live till powerslave in the mid 80's,
I saw the shows in philly and new jersey. I am 35 years old, and just saw
maiden for the first time since seeing them only 2 times in the 80's as a
teenager. I hit the pnc show in nj and the msg show in nyc. I know I
missed too much this band has to offer. I love maiden and was pissed I
missed them on the last tour just a couple years ago when wickerman got
airplay. I liked the song at the time and oh well shit happens, suffice to
say I missed the tour. I will try to never miss them again. They kicked my
ass. The new song really is great and they played it on the radio the other
day here in nj on 105.5 wdha.
sorry to ramble.
willy
willy
Somewhere In Time. All KINDS of people were listening to Maiden and wearing
their t-shirts and stuff, and I had heard a good deal from other people. I was
in 5th grade, and remember not wanting my parents to see the LAD cover. I was
afraid they'd take it away and make me go to more church.
Kramer
> That explains a great deal.
What great deal? The one with the president?
-K
Kramer
"willy" <wi...@willy.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:3F39BB45...@willy.com.invalid...
> First one I bought was Live After Death, but the first real album was
> Somewhere In Time. All KINDS of people were listening to Maiden and
wearing
> their t-shirts and stuff, and I had heard a good deal from other people.
I was
> in 5th grade, and remember not wanting my parents to see the LAD cover. I
was
> afraid they'd take it away and make me go to more church.
Lol! What fucked up parents, not about the church thing, but the creation of
you. Jar Jar should have been your father.
-K
daverite
Second record, first full length album: Number of the Beast
-Dave
Ian Salsbury
> played me this song called The Trooper. I was blown away. I never heard
> anything like it. Well, the version I heard was off Live After Death so I
> quickly went out and got a copy and within a few months I pretty much
owned
> every album Maiden put out. I'm still a huge fan and I always look forward
to
> anything Maiden puts out. It's a shame they aren't going to tour as much
after
> the dance of death tours. So anyway, what was the first maiden album that
you
> owned?
My sister`s boyfriend ran me off a tape of NOTB when I was about 12. This
would have been about 1983 as I remember loving it and going out and buying
POM with my pocket money! A year later the pair of them took me to see
Maiden on the Powerslave tour.
-Ian-
willy
willy
Kramer
> Dude what has posessed you?
Grrr, ok. If you wanna know, since some encounter with a jerk last week, I'm
now taking a stand against anyone who does unprovoced and unpleasant things,
and give them a dose of their own medicine.
I don't care for your out-of-the-blue anti-Jar Jar stuff, and especially
that "That explains a lot" comment, when all I try to do is to discuss
Maiden, and since I had some anger built up, I kinda exploded. Now, all I
really want is for us to be friends, but then you would have to agree to
that, and try and be more friendly in the future. I might even give you an
apology for all my sillyness. Ok?
-K
§eventh §on
> About fourteen or fifteen years ago I went over to a friends house and he
> played me this song called The Trooper. I was blown away. I never heard
> anything like it. Well, the version I heard was off Live After Death so I
> quickly went out and got a copy and within a few months I pretty much owned
> every album Maiden put out. I'm still a huge fan and I always look forward to
> anything Maiden puts out. It's a shame they aren't going to tour as much after
> the dance of death tours. So anyway, what was the first maiden album that you
> owned?
My first Iron Maiden album was The Number Of The Beast, which I just
bought because I'd thought the cover would piss my parents off :-)
And that was it, I suppose....
willy
things I don't(Mr. Binks, Mr. Gers), and vice versa I'm sure, so we insult
those things without being personal or rude. I WAS being friendly. I think
you've mistaken me for an asshole. We agreed to disagree pretty early on, so
since then I've just been joking around. Whoops! Sorry about that.
Anyone wanna sit indian-style and sing Pete Seeger songs?
Shiflet
"Kramer" <obso...@online.no> wrote in message
news:38I_a.20626$Hb.3...@news4.e.nsc.no...
> I don't care for your out-of-the-blue anti-Jar Jar stuff,
Whoa. You got this worked up because he posted something negative about one
of the worst, most despised, and absolute lamest fucking characters ever
created in the entire history of the cinema? Wow.
> -K
Kramer
"willy" <wi...@willy.com.invalid> wrote in message
> Geez, man, I've never been anything but kidding. As in, you like
certain
> things I don't(Mr. Binks, Mr. Gers), and vice versa I'm sure, so we insult
> those things without being personal or rude. I WAS being friendly. I
think
> you've mistaken me for an asshole. We agreed to disagree pretty early on,
so
> since then I've just been joking around. Whoops! Sorry about that.
Oh. Ok, then I'm really sorry too. I guess I've been kind of sensitive
lately, but I've been feeling pretty bad when getting such messages. It's
like you had it in for me, but didn't quite know why!
Note: I didn't mean anything about those insults/silly comments, I just
wanted to show an example of what it's like to write something completely
innocent, and get an insult in return.
But the only thing that matters for me that you don't/didn't hate me, so now
you can feel free to insult me again, at every opprtunity! (as long as I
know you're joking) :o)
> Anyone wanna sit indian-style and sing Pete Seeger songs?
"Let's smok'em peace-pipe!" -Jerry Seinfeld
-K
Kramer
"Shiflet" <rshi...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:vjou802...@corp.supernews.com...
Well, first of all, he's not that. And second of all, I'm more worked up
about people hating someone because they like this character. And believe
me, there are plenty of people who are really like that, in this world.
-K
Shiflet
> Well, first of all, he's not that.
I know, I was being overly nice, he's actually much much worse than that.
> And believe me, there are plenty of people who are really like that, in
this world.
Yeah, that's pretty bad. But if a person hates another person cause that
person likes Jar Jar, it's at least a little more warranted than say, hating
a person for liking Ash or Jack Burton or Fred Flintstone or someone...
> -K
>
>
Kramer
Yeah, ok. But at least you see my point. :o)
-K
willy
Kramer
If you wanna know....
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E
Jar Jar won't die in Ep. III! So there! :oD
Kramer
> >Jar Jar won't die in Ep. III!
>
The main idea behind a SW movie has always been to be light-hearted
entertainment, and the stories for the prequels are just as old as the
original trilogy, as they were all written at the same time, so it couldn't
have been any different without Georgie being dishonest and "giving" the
fans what they want. He could have done just that, if it was all about the
money. But no, he's not into that. He delivers his story, his vision. His
original vision, unaffected by any out-siders. So the artist integrity of
the whole thing has actually never been stronger.
Just because they're different to the OT, and aren't in sync with your own
vision of how it should be, doesn't mean that they're bad, in fact, if you
took a poll, and asked the people who has seen these movies what they think
of them, 90% would say they liked them. It's the die-hard fans that is the
problem. It always is with old popular things coming back. Just look at
Maiden, most people think BNW totally rocks, but there's always some grumpy,
fan since 1985, that feels the need to criticise because it doesn't sound
like it's 1985 anymore.
Would I have made the prequels closer to the OT, if I was in charge?
Absolutely. But I think it's more interesting to see what Georgie has in
mind, after all, he created this universe. I think nostalgia makes us blind,
like when we go see Maiden, we wanna hear the classics, when we see a Bond
movie, we want suits and hot chicks, but when these prequel movies don't
deliver the same characters that we've had over 20 years to learn to love,
the old fans feels somewhat cheated. It's totally understandable, but I hope
everybody, at one point, will see them as they really are; different films
from a different era.
> Jar Jar didn't help it much either.
>
> That wasn't "spoiler space" that was dissapointement space.
LOL
-K
willy
Kramer wrote:
> The main idea behind a SW movie has always been to be light-hearted
> entertainment,
Somewhat true, but it was written to be much deeper than that.
> and the stories for the prequels are just as old as the
> original trilogy, as they were all written at the same time,
Not really true. Some of the general ideas are pretty old, but many of them
were used in the original trilogy because he didn't know if the others would
ever be made. He writes and rewrites all kinds of stuff before each movie.
Luke and Leia weren't related until just before ROTJ started shooting. He's
still maing it up as he goes along.
> so it couldn't
> have been any different without Georgie being dishonest and "giving" the
> fans what they want.
See above.
> He could have done just that, if it was all about the
> money. But no, he's not into that. He delivers his story, his vision. His
> original vision, unaffected by any out-siders. So the artist integrity of
> the whole thing has actually never been stronger.
Well, the artist has clearly changed. But it's not exactly his "original
vision," simply because there never was a complete original vision in the first
place.
>
>
> Just because they're different to the OT, and aren't in sync with your own
> vision of how it should be, doesn't mean that they're bad,
No, the poor writing, bad acting, and aforementioned digital puppet take care
of that. It's quite obvious the actors don't have a clue what's going on in
the story, or what their environment is supposed to look like. They can't act
well if they can't feel.
> in fact, if you
> took a poll, and asked the people who has seen these movies what they think
> of them, 90% would say they liked them.
Not that that a poll means jack shit, but I bet your poll would get very
different results than you think.
> It's the die-hard fans that is the
> problem. It always is with old popular things coming back. Just look at
> Maiden, most people think BNW totally rocks, but there's always some grumpy,
> fan since 1985, that feels the need to criticise because it doesn't sound
> like it's 1985 anymore.
There are bad songs and good songs on it. The good thing about 1985 was that
Steve had better ideas. Now he's just gotten whiny and repetetive(some of the
time).
>
>
> Would I have made the prequels closer to the OT, if I was in charge?
> Absolutely. But I think it's more interesting to see what Georgie has in
> mind, after all, he created this universe. I think nostalgia makes us blind,
> like when we go see Maiden, we wanna hear the classics, when we see a Bond
> movie, we want suits and hot chicks, but when these prequel movies don't
> deliver the same characters that we've had over 20 years to learn to love,
> the old fans feels somewhat cheated.
I think the lack of a repoire between the actors and the bad dialogue
accomplishes most of that.
> It's totally understandable, but I hope
> everybody, at one point, will see them as they really are; different films
> from a different era.
I think everyone expected that. We're prone to ignoring the flaws of the
original films, but the truth is that these have more flaws. They may look
slicker, but they have more flaws.
What I really have to say is this: Thank god we have Lord Of The Rings to
ease the pain. Otherwise being a closet nerd would be unbearable right now.
Shiflet
>
> > >Jar Jar won't die in Ep. III!
> >
> > No but the artist integrity of the entire trilogy is long dead.
>
> The main idea behind a SW movie has always been to be light-hearted
> entertainment,
There's a difference between "light hearted entertainment" and "outright
fucking stupidity" though. Jar Jar crosses that line.
> and the stories for the prequels are just as old as the
> original trilogy, as they were all written at the same time,
LOLOLOL, LMAO. He had some general ideas, and that was IT.
> He could have done just that, if it was all about the
> money. But no, he's not into that.
OMFG are you naive. The movies exists only for the money-Lucas has even
ADMITTED putting things in SOLELY to make action figures and video games out
of.
> in fact, if you took a poll, and asked the people who has seen these
movies what they think
> of them, 90% would say they liked them.
I'll call that bluff, prove it. Find me this poll. Even most SW fans I know
think the new ones suck.
> -K
Kramer
> > > >Jar Jar won't die in Ep. III!
> > >
> > > No but the artist integrity of the entire trilogy is long dead.
> >
> > The main idea behind a SW movie has always been to be light-hearted
> > entertainment,
>
> There's a difference between "light hearted entertainment" and "outright
> fucking stupidity" though. Jar Jar crosses that line.
He's a children's character, he's not there for people like you. They didn't
expect you to like him, more than they expected you to like teletubbies. The
whole TPM movie was meant as a family entertainment movie, but mostly for
children. And Jar Jar is in the same vein as all of Lucas' strange
characters, like 3po, jawas, ewoks, tauntauns. If you can't deal with
sillyness, then SW isn't anything for you. Just look at Slave 1, for
example, which is really a re-built lamp, Boba Fett, who has a bucket on his
head, or Jabba, which is a giant snail-gangster.
> > and the stories for the prequels are just as old as the
> > original trilogy, as they were all written at the same time,
>
> LOLOLOL, LMAO. He had some general ideas, and that was IT.
No, no. He's said numerous times, before and after TPM that he had to write
the back-stories of each of the main character, in order to do ESB and ROTJ.
The actual scripts are a different story.
> > He could have done just that, if it was all about the
> > money. But no, he's not into that.
>
> OMFG are you naive. The movies exists only for the money-Lucas has even
> ADMITTED putting things in SOLELY to make action figures and video games
out
> of.
Of course he does. Everybody likes to make money, but the fact remains that
Lucas didn't sell out more now than he did back in the days, and it still is
his own, original story. Like the original SW movie, TPM is a way out of
date, old saturday matiné kind of movie, that really belongs in the 50's,
and that proves that Lucas is still doing the same thing he always has. If
he was just into making money, he would have made a simple modern Matrix
clone, set in the SW universe. Besides Lucas is the last man in the world
who needs more money. These movies are about the same it's always been; push
the visual effects to a limit while telling the original story.
> > in fact, if you took a poll, and asked the people who has seen these
> movies what they think
> > of them, 90% would say they liked them.
>
> I'll call that bluff, prove it. Find me this poll. Even most SW fans I
know
> think the new ones suck.
That's the problem, you talk to SW fans about it, just 10-15 % of the people
who has seen these movies are real fans, while the rest are just
movie-goers, kids and parents, and you can be sure that they never complain.
Every time I've seen a prequel movie in a cinema, the kids have been
cheering of excitement, and everybody has had a great time. In fact, in my
experience, these prequels are more popular among normal people, espcially
girls, who are not into the geeky sci-fi and fantasy aspects you and I are
into.
Even though these prequels had been made *exactly* like the OT, there would
*still* be complaining. "Where is Harrison Ford?", "Why didn't they use
digital effects". There's just no way to stop it from coming. People love to
complain, makes them feel important.
-K
Shiflet
> He's a children's character, he's not there for people like you.
But at least the early ones aren't so blantantly childish. Jar Jar is like
Lucas giving all his fans the finger and saying "fuck you, I'm making shit
and you're watching it anyway".
> If you can't deal with sillyness, then SW isn't anything for you. Just
look at Slave 1, for
> example, which is really a re-built lamp, Boba Fett, who has a bucket on
his
> head, or Jabba, which is a giant snail-gangster.
Well, SW isn't for me, but as I said, there's silly(ie, the things you
mentioned), and there's outright fucking STUPID, which is Jar Jar. They are
not the same.
> No, no. He's said numerous times, before and after TPM that he had to
write
> the back-stories of each of the main character, in order to do ESB and
ROTJ.
> The actual scripts are a different story.
Exactly, he had to write the back stories NOW, ie, he's making it up as he
goes along.
> Of course he does. Everybody likes to make money, but the fact remains
that
> Lucas didn't sell out more now than he did back in the days,
Actually, he has. He's now ignoring the story in favor of marketing
gimmicks.
> If he was just into making money, he would have made a simple modern
Matrix
> clone, set in the SW universe.
Uh, no, he'd make the exact piece of steaming shit he did make.
> Besides Lucas is the last man in the world who needs more money.
So what? Garth Brooks once said "I have more money than my grandkids will
ever spend", but he STILL wants more. Lucas is no different.
> That's the problem, you talk to SW fans about it,
Not die hard fans moron, CASUAL MOVIE GOERS. Most of THEM hate the movie,
and ONLY the die-hard SW fans like it.
> just 10-15 % of the people who has seen these movies are real fans,
Actually, only 10% of the people who have seen the movie are die-hards, and
THEY are the ones who like it. I haven't found ANYONE who is not a total
fucking SW fanboy that doesn't think the movies suck.
> espcially girls, who are not into the geeky sci-fi and fantasy aspects
you and I are into.
I don't know ANY girls who like it, period. I know a few girls who like the
originals, but not a one who likes the new ones.
As for "you and I", phrase differently please. I *hate* the original SW
movies. But compared to the new ones, they are absolute masterworks.
> -K
>
>
Kramer
> Not really true. Some of the general ideas are pretty old, but many of
them
> were used in the original trilogy because he didn't know if the others
would
> ever be made. He writes and rewrites all kinds of stuff before each
movie.
> Luke and Leia weren't related until just before ROTJ started shooting.
He's
> still maing it up as he goes along.
A lot of it is made up, yes. But the main plot, where Anakin comes from
etc., and how he'd want to do the first 3 movies to be, has always been in
the back of his head. It's his job, of course he's thought of it. Probably
to the point where it almost drove him insane. But that's why he decided to
call it Ep. 4, because he had a general idea of what he wanted, but couldn't
do it back then.
> > Just because they're different to the OT, and aren't in sync with your
own
> > vision of how it should be, doesn't mean that they're bad,
>
> No, the poor writing, bad acting, and aforementioned digital puppet take
care
> of that. It's quite obvious the actors don't have a clue what's going on
in
> the story, or what their environment is supposed to look like. They can't
act
> well if they can't feel.
The acting *is* strange in these movies, and that goes for the OT too. But
that's what I would like to call "naturlistic style". It isn't perfect, like
it wouldn't be in real life either, but combined with the over-the-top
performances of Mr. James Earl Jones and Mr. Christopher Lee, you have a
winner. The stupidest thing I see is the Leo DiCaprio kind of actors that
walks around and delivers Hamlet type of performances, in a movie that's
supposed to portray just a normal person.
> > in fact, if you
> > took a poll, and asked the people who has seen these movies what they
think
> > of them, 90% would say they liked them.
>
> Not that that a poll means jack shit, but I bet your poll would get very
> different results than you think.
A poll *can* mean jack shit, because if you ask them straight out LOVE/HATE,
and you get 90% love, you know that 'Hey, people love this movie', which is
one of the main goals. Reviews by single persons, like in newspapers,
though, are mostly meaningless.
>
> > It's the die-hard fans that is the
> > problem. It always is with old popular things coming back. Just look at
> > Maiden, most people think BNW totally rocks, but there's always some
grumpy,
> > fan since 1985, that feels the need to criticise because it doesn't
sound
> > like it's 1985 anymore.
>
> There are bad songs and good songs on it. The good thing about 1985 was
that
> Steve had better ideas. Now he's just gotten whiny and repetetive(some of
the
> time).
As far I'm concerned, there were just as many 'bad' songs on the old albums,
except maybe on SIT and SSOSS. But at least I can listen to BNW all the way
through, without skipping, which is more than I can say about 'Piece of
Mind' or 'Killers', for example.
> I think everyone expected that. We're prone to ignoring the flaws of the
> original films, but the truth is that these have more flaws. They may
look
> slicker, but they have more flaws.
I can agree too that, and I wouldn't say they're as timeless as the OT. Even
*I* don't wanna see the prequels over and over again like I do with the OT,
but knowing that they're part of the original idea, and a story that's been
laying around since oh before I was born, is what really makes them
interesting, knowing that they were not completely new stories, written for
a new time/audience.
> What I really have to say is this: Thank god we have Lord Of The
Rings to
> ease the pain. Otherwise being a closet nerd would be unbearable right
now.
I don't think I'll ever be into LOTR, god knows I've tried.
-K
Kramer
>
> But at least the early ones aren't so blantantly childish. Jar Jar is like
> Lucas giving all his fans the finger and saying "fuck you, I'm making shit
> and you're watching it anyway".
That's just your opinion. There isn't anything stupid with Jar Jar, it's
just your own opinion, which in this case is meaningless. You can throw all
the insults and cheap shots you can at him, but we are still millions who
love him, wether you like it or not.
> > Of course he does. Everybody likes to make money, but the fact remains
> that
> > Lucas didn't sell out more now than he did back in the days,
>
> Actually, he has. He's now ignoring the story in favor of marketing
> gimmicks.
No, he's not. Maybe a little with TPM, with the pod-racers scene (which was
the most popular scene in the movie) but certainly not with AOTC.
> > If he was just into making money, he would have made a simple modern
> Matrix
> > clone, set in the SW universe.
>
> Uh, no, he'd make the exact piece of steaming shit he did make.
Yes, thank you Mr. movie expert.
> > Besides Lucas is the last man in the world who needs more money.
>
> So what? Garth Brooks once said "I have more money than my grandkids will
> ever spend", but he STILL wants more. Lucas is no different.
Well, he can be.
> > That's the problem, you talk to SW fans about it,
>
> Not die hard fans moron, CASUAL MOVIE GOERS. Most of THEM hate the movie,
> and ONLY the die-hard SW fans like it.
Lol! I believe you are the moron here, mister. Because I didn't call them
'die hard fans', and you, yourself, called them 'fans' -->"Even most SW fans
I
know think the new ones suck."
> > just 10-15 % of the people who has seen these movies are real fans,
>
> Actually, only 10% of the people who have seen the movie are die-hards,
and
> THEY are the ones who like it. I haven't found ANYONE who is not a total
> fucking SW fanboy that doesn't think the movies suck.
Well, look again. You are WAY off here, sorry to say.
> > espcially girls, who are not into the geeky sci-fi and fantasy aspects
> you and I are into.
>
> I don't know ANY girls who like it, period. I know a few girls who like
the
> originals, but not a one who likes the new ones.
Absolutely *all* SW fan-girls I've ever known, on net/real life love them,
except maybe one. And she was a unpleasant master-bitch.
> As for "you and I", phrase differently please. I *hate* the original SW
> movies. But compared to the new ones, they are absolute masterworks.
Then we've got nothing more to say. It's like me discussing Blind Guardian,
and comparing it with grunge, which are two things *I* hate.
-K
Count Bazzu
>
>Whoa. You got this worked up because he posted something negative about one
>of the worst, most despised, and absolute lamest fucking characters ever
>created in the entire history of the cinema? Wow.
Someone posted something negative about Frodo!?
--
Count Bazzu
Your Plastic Pal Who's Fun To Be With!
http://nivan.net/bazzu - Homepage
http://60sCF.tripod.com - My (un)humourous flash series
Count Bazzu
>> took a poll, and asked the people who has seen these movies what they think
>> of them, 90% would say they liked them.
>
>Not that that a poll means jack shit, but I bet your poll would get very
>different results than you think.
>
I agree with Kramer. You may think that *everyone* hates the prequel trilogy,
but the fact is, the ones that do hate it are just loud-mouthed jerks that
want/need attention, the majority of people like the prequel trilogy are just
quiet, and don't find it necessary to shout it down the rooftops.
Sure, some people don't like the prequel trilogy, but some people don't like
Iron Maiden, but they don't keep on ranting about it, so why must people
complain that the prequel trilogy is rubbish?
If you don't like it, don't watch it, simple as, though I get the feeling
you'll be watching Episode III with the rest of us.
Count Bazzu
>
>But at least the early ones aren't so blantantly childish. Jar Jar is like
>Lucas giving all his fans the finger and saying "fuck you, I'm making shit
>and you're watching it anyway".
I'll admit, there were a few Jar Jar scenes that were *too* slapstick and
annoying, but is Naked Gun a bad movie for that? No, so why should Star Wars
be?
On the whole, Jar Jar Binks is a pivotal character in Star Wars, perhaps one of
the most pivotal new characters in the prequel trilogy, of course, they could
have had a boring, dull, character to move things along, but instead, George
Lucas decided to make something for the kids to enjoy, and still allow the plot
to move on for the adults.
It's hard to make a movie for adults and for kids, kids will get bored easily
if the politics is strong, and George has balanced it very well IMO.
The Threatener
Agreeness. He is the fun chararcter putting in the needed comical element for
younger viewers, as the droids R2 & 3PO did in the films before. But like them,
he also perfoms a very important role.
>> But at least the early ones aren't so blantantly childish.
And how old were you when you saw them? My dad took me in '77 when I was four
for the first one, because lots of other children were going.
>>Jar Jar is like
>> Lucas giving all his fans the finger and saying "fuck you, I'm making shit
>> and you're watching it anyway".
I really don't think so. And if you step back, take a look and listen to
yourself, I think your find that you don't really mean that.
>That's just your opinion. There isn't anything stupid with Jar Jar, it's
>just your own opinion, which in this case is meaningless. You can throw all
>the insults and cheap shots you can at him, but we are still millions who
>love him, wether you like it or not.
IAW Kramers P
--
...so be it, Jedi!
My homepage: http://members.aol.com/nealskywalker
AFSJJBDDD homepage: http://afsjjbddd.tripod.com/
...the ability to post does not make one intelligent. (I should know)
Shiflet
"The Threatener" <nealsk...@aol.comm> wrote in message
news:20030816080229...@mb-m11.aol.com...
> And how old were you when you saw them?
Mid-teens.
> I really don't think so. And if you step back, take a look and listen to
> yourself, I think your find that you don't really mean that.
No, I really mean that. I've read interviews with the guy. The only way he
could more clearly tell the fans "fuck you" was if he out and out said it.
It's already clear he feels it.
Shiflet
"Count Bazzu" <bazb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030816063840...@mb-m10.aol.com...
> of course, they could have had a boring, dull, character to move things
along,
Yeah, that's much worse than having one of the stupidest characters ever
created.
Shiflet
> but we are still millions who love him, wether you like it or not.
Millions? LOL! Find me 5 besides yourself and I'll be impressed.
> Well, look again. You are WAY off here, sorry to say.
Nope, sorry. The only people I know who like them are the dedicated SW
fanboys. The casual SW fans I know, the casual moviegoers who don't care
about the SW series...they don't like them. Literally every single person I
know who likes the new movies are the clowns who are fanatical about the
series and dress up in SW costumes to go see the movies and such.
> -K
>
>
Neil Colepsy
Are you going to dress up like Ripper Owens when Iced Earth comes around?
Supernaut
Neil Colepsy <neilc...@yahooa.com> wrote in message
news:BPu%a.25710$vo2....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
This wins the Supernaut LOL post of the day award..... Your certifcate is
in the mail.
>
>
Kramer
>
> Millions? LOL! Find me 5 besides yourself and I'll be impressed.
Sure, everybody I know, except one of my cousins, likes him, you can visit
pages like: http://www.nivan.net/afsjjbddd and
http://www.imperialsenate.co.uk , and you'll find a good bunch. And most
importantly, you forget all the kids that's seen these movies! I can
gurantee that most of them like/accept him, and they are the ones who are
supposed to like him. The rest of us just worship him for fun! :o)
-K
Shaun Baker
wrote:
>
>> >Jar Jar won't die in Ep. III!
>>
>> No but the artist integrity of the entire trilogy is long dead.
>
>The main idea behind a SW movie has always been to be light-hearted
>entertainment, and the stories for the prequels are just as old as the
>original trilogy, as they were all written at the same time, so it couldn't
>have been any different without Georgie being dishonest and "giving" the
>fans what they want. He could have done just that, if it was all about the
>money. But no, he's not into that. He delivers his story, his vision. His
>original vision, unaffected by any out-siders. So the artist integrity of
>the whole thing has actually never been stronger.
Actually the artistic integrity took it's first big blow when they
'fixed' the first movie so Han Solo no longer shoots Greedo
first(thank god the Indiana Jones edit fears appear to have been not
needed). I also doubt much more than a basic plot for the first
three episodes was done in advance, hell 5 & 6 wouldn't have been much
more than plots when Star Wars was done because no one knew there
would be any more(and 7-9 have fell by the wayside).
I also think that he is aiming both trilogies for roughly the same age
group - the problem is that the big fans of the first trilogy are now
quite a bit older(hell Star Wars came out before the first Maiden
album<got to stay on topic somehow> and the juvinile stuff is a lot
more irrating to us. We've also had way longer to imagine what
happened and as is often the case, movies rarely come out ahead to the
imagination.
I'm curious to see how he will end the series(release wise) on such a
downer note, episode 4 opened with the bad guys in control and that's
how three will have to end.
Shaun
Shiflet
"Neil Colepsy" <neilc...@yahooa.com> wrote in message
news:BPu%a.25710$vo2....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Not if I can avoid it.
Supernaut
Shaun Baker <Endle...@att.net> wrote in message
news:nhlsjvgn1lnsh75k2...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 23:19:34 +0200, "Kramer" <obso...@online.no>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >> >Jar Jar won't die in Ep. III!
> >>
> >> No but the artist integrity of the entire trilogy is long dead.
> >
> >The main idea behind a SW movie has always been to be light-hearted
> >entertainment,
Alright.. this Jar-Jar thread has got to be the lamest thing I have ever
read on usenet and I subscribe to arrmo. It really doesn't matter how lame
JARJAR was because both those movies sucked slayer size hippity hop balls. I
walked out 1/2 way through he first one and rented the second one and
turned it off half way through. Star Trek movies are better than that drivel
and that aint sayin' much.
Neil Colepsy
"Supernaut" <Fog...@boogie.net> wrote in message
news:bhmuse$ufcm$1...@ID-192768.news.uni-berlin.de...
That's all well and good but if Danny can't help himself he'll be baseball
capped leather jacketed Ripper when Iced Earth buses into town.
Neil Colepsy
Maybe stay home and dress up like you were really there since you don't like
live music?
Shiflet
> That's all well and good but if Danny can't help himself he'll be baseball
> capped leather jacketed Ripper when Iced Earth buses into town.
I don't wear hats of any sort(no baseball hats, no cowboy hats either). I
don't own ANY leather clothing. I wear slacks, not jeans. My hair is short,
I have no piercings, and no tattoos. If you saw me on the street, you'd have
no clue I even listened to metal, unless you caught me in one of my 2 band
shirts(that's 2 band shirts out of maybe 15 shirts total, not counting my
work clothes). So really, find a new topic, cause this one just shows how
totally clueless you really are.
Godless Fur Trapper
wrote:
CLASSIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I love you, man!!!!
SLACKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Me too!!
Beaver pelts and brand new cars.
Oak tree you're in my way....
Godless Fur Trapper
Put on some pseudo-slacks, relax. Danny style.
Shiflet
"Godless Fur Trapper" <viva...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:np6ujvo8nlfththvo...@4ax.com...
> CLASSIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I love you, man!!!!
>
> SLACKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Me too!!
Go buy White Mansions. Then, to quote one of the most unintentionally
hilarious NG posters of all time, "report back to this newsgroup"
Neil Colepsy
To tell you the truth, we've gotten into your opinions on metal and now your
fashion sense so I'll bet you one quarter to your dime you use
anti-bacterial soap with some type of generic shampoo. Guaranteed your
toothbrush gets changed quarterly also.
Godless Fur Trapper
>Plates and Gates
Plates, gates, and slacks. Sung to the tune of "Gypsies, Tramps, and
Thieves."
Godless Fur Trapper
<neilc...@yahooa.com> wrote:
> Guaranteed your toothbrush gets changed quarterly also.
When I was in the Navy there was this Latino jerkoff second class
petty officer named Garcia. He was this crybaby narc who lived for,
like many Navy dudes, the prospect of getting other people in trouble.
He was such a fucking prick, always riding my ass for one ridiculous
thing or another. I couldn't just smack his head into a bulkhead due
to military restrictions pertaining to true justice, so I had to
figure out something better.
He kept his toothbrush in his shower kit. This hung next to
his bunk. So... I would take his toothbrush and stick it a couple of
inches up my ass, then put it back in his shower kit. Then I would
tell several people and we would go in and watch him brush his teeth
and die laughing.
So even a quarterly toothbrush change isn't going to protect
someone from some REAL germs. Gingivitus? If you're lucky.
<<<>>>
.......yeah, but you forgot the girlfriend part. He has a girlfriend.
You've heard him mention the girlfriend, right? The girlfriend definitely
doesn't like live music. The girlfriend much prefers Matt Barlow as well.
<<<>>>
15 shirts on a Shiflet's slacks.....
yo ho ho ho and a bottle of rum.
<<<>>>
"TAP" <no...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:none-E19C8D.1...@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <bho9hg$1g50d$1...@ID-139729.news.uni-berlin.de>,
Word.
willy
Kramer wrote:
> A lot of it is made up, yes. But the main plot, where Anakin comes from
> etc., and how he'd want to do the first 3 movies to be, has always been in
> the back of his head. It's his job, of course he's thought of it. Probably
> to the point where it almost drove him insane. But that's why he decided to
> call it Ep. 4, because he had a general idea of what he wanted, but couldn't
> do it back then.
In the original release it wasn't called Episode IV. He didn't add that
until it became a hit, because by then he was sure he'd be able to make a whole
saga. He had a very rough sketch in his head, but if you've followed it he's
still writing this pretty much from scratch. To take parts of a story that
have bounced around in your mind and put them into a 2 hour movie form is
difficult. There's an interesting book you ought to check out-- I have it
somewhere but I don't know where. I think it's called Star Wars: the Annotated
Screenplays. It's kind of hard to read--it's just the dialogue from the
films--but it's thoroughly footnoted with all sorts of notes about what Lucas
changed and what was cut out and who was going to be what, etc.
> The acting *is* strange in these movies, and that goes for the OT too. But
> that's what I would like to call "naturlistic style". It isn't perfect, like
> it wouldn't be in real life either, but combined with the over-the-top
> performances of Mr. James Earl Jones and Mr. Christopher Lee, you have a
> winner. The stupidest thing I see is the Leo DiCaprio kind of actors that
> walks around and delivers Hamlet type of performances, in a movie that's
> supposed to portray just a normal person.
Frankly, sounds like denial(please note that I would put a smiley face here
if I believed in doing that). The dialogue in the original trilogy is
definitely hokey, but at least they're talking to each other. Half the time
these actors are delivering monologues in front of a blue screen, and you can
flat out tell. It's not naturalistic; it's awkward.
> A poll *can* mean jack shit, because if you ask them straight out LOVE/HATE,
> and you get 90% love, you know that 'Hey, people love this movie', which is
> one of the main goals. Reviews by single persons, like in newspapers,
> though, are mostly meaningless.
My point was that poularity doesn't correlate to quality. But you wouldn't
get 90% love, nor 90% hate. You never get 90% in any poll. As for the
"getting people to love this movie" being one of the main goals, you've
contradicted yourself. George has said plenty of times that that doesn't
matter to him anymore. He wants to make what he wants to make.
>
> As far I'm concerned, there were just as many 'bad' songs on the old albums,
> except maybe on SIT and SSOSS. But at least I can listen to BNW all the way
> through, without skipping, which is more than I can say about 'Piece of
> Mind' or 'Killers', for example.
I think we agree to disagree here. Sure, there were bad songs on the old
albums(Back In The Village, anyone?), but usually only one or two per record.
From my count, based on my opinion, BNW had 4, VXI had what, 8(okay, let's be
generous and say 5), and X Factor had 4 or 5. A pretty marked decline. If
you're into polls, ask how many people can listen to BNW or VXI as compared to
Killers or POM. Now THAT poll might get you your 90%.
>
>
> > I think everyone expected that. We're prone to ignoring the flaws of the
> > original films, but the truth is that these have more flaws. They may
> look
> > slicker, but they have more flaws.
>
> I can agree too that, and I wouldn't say they're as timeless as the OT. Even
> *I* don't wanna see the prequels over and over again like I do with the OT,
> but knowing that they're part of the original idea, and a story that's been
> laying around since oh before I was born, is what really makes them
> interesting, knowing that they were not completely new stories, written for
> a new time/audience.
Yeah, they're interesting to watch. Ep II was better. But Anakin's stiff,
and the love story is way forced. Or at least the climax of it is. These
characters haven't seemed to really be motivated. The first films were better
because, essentially, the group of actors worked well together. They seemed to
really be friends. Episode III does have a good chance to be good, but I'm not
holding my breath.
>
>
> > What I really have to say is this: Thank god we have Lord Of The
> Rings to
> > ease the pain. Otherwise being a closet nerd would be unbearable right
> now.
>
> I don't think I'll ever be into LOTR, god knows I've tried.
>
I never read the books, but slowly got into the movies. I thought the
second one was fucking great. It's actually got me reading the books now, and
I don't usually read much. Extremely well-composed and complex. The books are
an astonishing feat, even if you don't dig them.
willy
Count Bazzu wrote:
> I agree with Kramer. You may think that *everyone* hates the prequel trilogy,
Never said that.
> but the fact is, the ones that do hate it are just loud-mouthed jerks that
> want/need attention,
?
> the majority of people like the prequel trilogy are just
> quiet, and don't find it necessary to shout it down the rooftops.
? How the hell can you make either of those claims?
>
>
> Sure, some people don't like the prequel trilogy, but some people don't like
> Iron Maiden, but they don't keep on ranting about it, so why must people
> complain that the prequel trilogy is rubbish?
Well, who does? I didn't start anything. Kramer and I may exchange the
occasional playful jab, but I don't see a lot of people shouting from the
rooftops about hating Star Wars. Maybe I'm just in a quieter neighborhood.
>
>
> If you don't like it, don't watch it, simple as, though I get the feeling
> you'll be watching Episode III with the rest of us.
Geez, dude, who pissed in your cornflakes? Never said I hated them, they're
just not great. And Mr. Binks had a lot to do with that in the first one.
willy
Kramer wrote:
> That's just your opinion. There isn't anything stupid with Jar Jar,
Ummm.... How about his CONSTANT high-pitched baby-talk, unneccessary
dialogue, and humorless clumsiness?
> You can throw all
> the insults and cheap shots you can at him, but we are still millions who
> love him, wether you like it or not.
Dude, you're horrible with numbers.
willy
The Threatener wrote:
> >> > He's a children's character, he's not there for people like you.
>
> Agreeness. He is the fun chararcter putting in the needed comical element for
> younger viewers, as the droids R2 & 3PO did in the films before. But like them,
> he also perfoms a very important role.
He takes the childishness to an awkwardly exaggerated level, and too often
makes it the main focus. There's a difference betewwn light-hearted and
childish. The first films had that element, but it was secondary or tertiary
humor. They appealed to everyone, not specifically and intentionally just to
children. He does have what turns out to be an important role, but his functions
could have been easily accomplished without him.
willy
Ranko Cop
> My point was that poularity doesn't correlate to quality.
A good example is Iron Maiden vs. the MTV lot. I think all has been said
about this subject so I won't repeat the same stuff again.
> Yeah, they're interesting to watch. Ep II was better. But
> Anakin's stiff, and the love story is way forced.
The guy that plays older Anakin really is stiff... In my opinion not a good
actor.
--
?gniht eht dias oh tahW
.dnatsrednu t'nod uoy sgniht eht htiw elddem t'noD