Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

I'll just leave it with what I tend to answer discussions like this. Opinions will be opinions.

There is only one problem wth this. You can have an opinion based on fact (informed opinion) or an opinion/belief based on a cult or faulty childhood memories.

I totally agree that my conclusion is not a "fact", but it is based on what Greedo stated in the subtitles and the facts of how Han came to be sitting, Jabba deleted scene, Boba Fett's conclusion about wanting Han alive (coinciding with "worth a lot more to me alive), and of course what George decided based upon his proven love for a uniformity where Han'scharacter in ANH is a stark contrast to ESB and ROTJ.

Just like with some 6th sense twist ending, I guess anything is possible and all this is just wrong.

[bobbyh64]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

What does him not having it in the original script have anything to do with what Lucas decided on in the end??? Leia wasn't originally his sister either. SO WHAT. Star Wars was a one off movie at first. Lots of things changed. The cherry picking of some fans is what never made sense to me.

As for Greedo missing on purpose, that is my theory. Greedo made it clear in the orginal script and movie he was bargaining. Taking the ship, and living was an option.

What is clear is that Greedo missed, by A LOT. Fans will exclaim he was a bad shot without thinking for a moment that it could have been on purpose especially when you moments earlier had Hans hand in that spot before!

It is the same ultra stupidity of Han shoots first!!!

Just because you haven't heard that theory doesn't mean it can't be true. Watch the scene, look where the laser goes and learn that Han leaning or not wouldn't change a thing. Greedo would have missed. Wouldn't want to use our heads would we? So if anyone else in any movie fires a warning shot it is accepted, but if Lucas does it then it is sooo different?

Why does someone have to follow a flock to be right? Quit following. Use deductive reasoning.

Yes he missed, but not by A LOT, as you claim. Looks like a few inches. Usually if someone fires a warning shot, they shoot far away from the target, not inches away. Otherwise they might accidentally shoot them. Even if it was a warning shot, Han didn't know that. If he did, why would he move his head in an attempt to dodge the shot?

Also, the dialogue doesn't make sense if it was a warning shot. Han said "Over my dead body" and Greedo said "That's the idea. I've been looking forward to this for a long time." That implies he was intending to kill Han, i.e. He's looking forward to the idea of Han's "dead body." I don't know how someone could interpret this any other way.

And the idea that Han waited to be shot at before firing himself is less important now considering the fact that the length of time between Greedo's shot and Han's shot has gotten smaller over the years, making it seem like Han was going to shoot him anyway.

[Ernest Rister]

"Warning Shot" from the terrific Open Range...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YTJQYGkf-cc

[crissrudd4554]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

There is only one problem wth this. You can have an opinion based on fact (informed opinion) or an opinion/belief based on a cult or faulty childhood memories.

I totally agree that my conclusion is not a "fact", but it is based on what Greedo stated in the subtitles and the facts of how Han came to be sitting, Jabba deleted scene, Boba Fett's conclusion about wanting Han alive (coinciding with "worth a lot more to me alive), and of course what George decided based upon his proven love for a uniformity where Han'scharacter in ANH is a stark contrast to ESB and ROTJ.

Just like with some 6th sense twist ending, I guess anything is possible and all this is just wrong.

Dude drop it already. I'm entitled to believe whatever I want. I said before your opinion has valid points but it's an opinion nonetheless and thus I can disagree with it if I want to. Also you whine that the fanboys won't think outside the box for a change and think Greedo was just a bad shot. The fact that that bothers you and that you're going all this way to point out the 'facts' of the scene proves that you too are a fanboy. Honestly I don't care. I think the change was stupid, it downplays the mystery guy that was Han Solo the smuggler from Mos Eisley, and as far as Greedo shooting at Han's hand, if Greedo wanted to be threatening he could have shot the ceiling or the wall to the side of him. But no he was pointing directly, I repeat DIRECTLY, at Han Solo implying he's gonna collect a reward on this guy dead or alive. I believe this not out of nostalgia or fake beliefs from other fans but from the very action that was being presented. Also the 'over my dead body' part of the discussion comes just a few seconds before gunfire is exchanged. What does that tell you?? Also you also did not note how Han mentions at the start of ESB that 'I got a price on my head. If I don't pay off Jabba the Hutt I'm a DEAD MAN!' But honestly I've gone enough into this discussion as is. As far as backing up your opinion with 'facts', please by all means tell me at what point I did not do the same! I thought my 'opinions will be opinions' remark would be a more dignified way to end this part of the discussion but I guess not.

[ElvisForever]

TO BOTH POSTERS. I got some statements mixed up. Instead of retyping because I am pressed for time, I recognize this. Please forgive me. So if it isn't in your post, understand that it applies to the other person. SORRY

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

Dude drop it already. I'm entitled to believe whatever I want. I said before your opinion has valid points but it's an opinion nonetheless and thus I can disagree with it if I want to. Also you whine that the fanboys won't think outside the box for a change and think Greedo was just a bad shot. The fact that that bothers you and that you're going all this way to point out the 'facts' of the scene proves that you too are a fanboy. Honestly I don't care. I think the change was stupid, it downplays the mystery guy that was Han Solo the smuggler from Mos Eisley, and as far as Greedo shooting at Han's hand, if Greedo wanted to be threatening he could have shot the ceiling or the wall to the side of him. But no he was pointing directly, I repeat DIRECTLY, at Han Solo implying he's gonna collect a reward on this guy dead or alive. I believe this not out of nostalgia or fake beliefs from other fans but from the very action that was being presented. Also the 'over my dead body' part of the discussion comes just a few seconds before gunfire is exchanged. What does that tell you?? Also you also did not note how Han mentions at the start of ESB that 'I got a price on my head. If I don't pay off Jabba the Hutt I'm a DEAD MAN!' But honestly I've gone enough into this discussion as is. As far as backing up your opinion with 'facts', please by all means tell me at what point I did not do the same! I thought my 'opinions will be opinions' remark would be a more dignified way to end this part of the discussion but I guess not.

Heck yes I am a fanboy. But I apologize if I have come off as mean spirited. I agree that opinions will be opinions. No one will ever truly know, but I just find it fun to speculate. I do appreciate that you give me that I could be right. I also understand that you gave me facts. When I refer to "fanboys" mostly it has to do with fans that refuse to even consider alternatives. I am a fanboy to Lucas even if it is a rough ride at times. If I didn't think it was worth debating and you or the other poster was one of those people, I wouldn't trying to state my view.

However, I have heard these points before, and you will excuse me for wrestling the opinion down a little bit, at least understand that few if any do this.

Why does it downplay Han as a "mystery" smuggler? If anything the dodge smooth shot looks like on purpose as opposed to a cornered animal?

As for Greedo, I still think you are missing the dialog. Over your dead body, and that he has been waiting a long time refers to him saying that he is taking Han to Jabba OVER HIS DEAD BODY. In other words, he has been waiting a long time to get this money and he will get Han to Jabba in whatever way possible. Wounding him may be in the cards too.

Why does a warning shot have to be at a ceiling? If I am a trained bounty hunter, I do like I have seen in many movies, wound so close that it actually makes a person bleed! You know like the knife to the ear in Divergent (lol ok, bad example, but still if they can do it....lol).

As for Han, I am not arguing whether he was going to shoot Greedo anyway. That is obviously on the table. I put it to reflex if anything and not that calculated. The John Wayne aspect puts it into question and gets the viewers (that aren't the OT fanboys) to not blame Han for what he did at all, and that it looks smoother, instead of conditioning him to be the cornered animal who just fires on an unsuspecting person who actually let him live and talk it out. Greedo could have killed him immediately if that was the idea. Again, with Jabba waiting outside and Greedo working with him, it is obvioius that Greedo was getting the drop on him and trying to see what Han will do. People forget that this is what Lucas intended all along. I don't think it was ever the intention to have Greedo kill Han.

Pointing a gun directly at Han has nothing to do with this. People point guns to get people to do things. Yes to a degree they intend to kill if they have too, but Greedo not knowing about what is under the table is another story.

We can agree to disagree, but I just don't see any case whatsoever that Greedo meant to kill Han. Him missing. I never believed it was a miss, and the first time an OT fanboy screamed it, I thought? Why??? I put my finger on the screen and yes 6 inches (AT LEAST) where his hand is is astronomical! How the hell would anyone be able to see to find Han if they couldn't hit from that close? Gee, maybe...just maybe he didn't intend to hit him at all????

Also another thing I noticed. Greedo's gun is tilted. It is off target right before the shot, kinda kills that whole "directly" argument.

Originally Posted by bobbyh64

Yes he missed, but not by A LOT, as you claim. Looks like a few inches. Usually if someone fires a warning shot, they shoot far away from the target, not inches away. Otherwise they might accidentally shoot them. Even if it was a warning shot, Han didn't know that. If he did, why would he move his head in an attempt to dodge the shot?

I think it is a lean in the final version. Lucas is an artist, and CGI gets better as time goes on. Han "dodging" I take as a "flinch" since Greedo wasn't shooting him. As time goes on it became more smooth as it should be.

Also, the dialogue doesn't make sense if it was a warning shot. Han said "Over my dead body" and Greedo said "That's the idea. I've been looking forward to this for a long time." That implies he was intending to kill Han, i.e. He's looking forward to the idea of Han's "dead body." I don't know how someone could interpret this any other way.

See above. I don't think you understand the dialogue. I think it is pretty literal. Han's to Jabba and tell Jabba himself (money..more stalling??), Han to Jabba and offering his ship, Han to Jabba and likely killed by Jabba, or finally if he has to Greedo will kill him, but likely will only wound him. This is the LAST option because if it was the first, Greedo would have killed Han already. Greedo was being nice to him. Han would have been another blood smear if Greedo would have wanted it. He allowed Han to talk. Even the staunchest OT fans would have to bend to this fact.

And the idea that Han waited to be shot at before firing himself is less important now considering the fact that the length of time between Greedo's shot and Han's shot has gotten smaller over the years, making it seem like Han was going to shoot him anyway.

I have never argued whether Han was going to shoot him anyway, the question in the new versions is when.

Flinch or lean is the new version. However yes, a shot and seeing Greedo's gun off target would annoy anyone.

Look, I can't help it if Lucas planted those new seeds. Yeah it sucks that things change sometimes, but you have to look at the new clues and understand what the artist intended. OR you can be someone who refuses to even look and stick to what you thought 30 years ago instead of what is put on the screen NOW.

Lucas had clues years ago that didn't make it into the film, but the main that cannot be denied is that Greedo at the least, and at the very least, spared Han his life and was willing to negotiate by threatening Han and trying to scare him into paying. If he thought Han was such a bad ass he would have killed him immediately. Greedo overestimated how much of a cornered animal he would act like.

Even Han with the "I bet you have" remark is being a a cocky ass because Greedo could have killed him then. If I intended to kill would I wait to let this punk act like a smart ass leaning in on me talking back? The warning shot could scare anyone...anyone that didn't hide his gun under a table.

Hey people don't have to agree with me, but I am presenting evidence as to what actually happened in the scene.

Pointing a gun at someone being the intention to kill is a weak argument. People point guns all the time, and people pointing guns are stupid if they think that this isn't upping the chance of killing, but facts are facts. Guns are also weapons of intimidation as well as weapons of absolute killing. Everything lies in the hands of the wielder, and in this case those hands are in someone who was willing to negotiate. What Greedo wasn't willing to do is carry a message which Han clearly wants when he says "Tell Jabba". That is ultra stupid. If someone had a gun on me, I wouldn't be telling them to do anything.

[Caseyscott]

Greedo couldn't have come in and tried to shoot him immediately because the point of the scene was to establish Han's character by providing some exposition and also show how he deals with situations.

The argument isn't about what's different in the special editions, obviously that's what Lucas wanted when he made the changes, the debate is what makes a better story.

The original is objectively better because it gives Han Solo's character a stronger emotional arc.

It's manipulative to blame nostalgia while ignoring the craft of storytelling.

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by Caseyscott

Greedo couldn't have come in and tried to shoot him immediately because the point of the scene was to establish Han's character by providing some exposition and also show how he deals with situations.

The argument isn't about what's different in the special editions, obviously that's what Lucas wanted when he made the changes, the debate is what makes a better story.

The original is objectively better because it gives Han Solo's character a stronger emotional arc.

It's manipulative to blame nostalgia while ignoring the craft of storytelling.

The better story is without the sequels. The change helps makes the stark transition to Empire make more sense....helps. Imho. I don't get this being bad story telling, it is just another story. Some fans don't like that.

To understand how that works you have to be someone that doesn't know about the change or watch with unprejudiced eyes. I understand this is very difficult to do.

[crissrudd4554]

This is hopefully my last post on the subject. For the record, I firmly believe Han Solo shot only in the original cut. Why?? So to establish that he is an antihero, neither a good or bad guy. Keep in mind he initially did not want to rescue the Princess or battle the DS. He doesn't give a crap. Much of this IMO is rendered moot when Greedo takes the first shot. Again this is my opinion. You don't have to view him that way (judging from your comments you don't).

As far as the dialogue goes yes I am listening. Did you ever possibly consider that Greedos 'I've been looking forward to this for a long time' is his fancy way of saying 'I've been waiting a long time for Jabba to do away with you??' This could imply death or something else. Going back a few lines he said 'Jabba's through with you' which some could translate as 'you've screwed up too many times and now you're really gonna GET IT!'.

Point is there's more than one way to interpret something. In the end neither one of us has the correct conclusion because we can only present theories on the matter. I don't discredit your view of the scene but at the same I don't share the same view. And that's fine. I'm entitled to.

Case and point, I could move into a house that's painted completely red and you might say 'oh you must really love red'. Maybe I do, maybe I don't. Maybe I like the structure and interior?? The color I can change if I want to.

As far as the John Wayne thing goes, well it's your opinion to believe that but I'm only partial to do so. Again it's one of those explanations that's only been given out in recent years so I tend to question the credibility on the subject. Plus how often does John Wayne in a showdown fully pull out his gun and actually wait for the enemie to take fire before returning fire?? He draws AND fires when the time to fire back is appropriate.

Han Solo fully removed his blaster and was waiting for an opportunity for something. You can look at it two ways 'kill the guy and get on with my day' or 'just sit here with gun in hand and wait for him to take fire and pray to God I miss it then kill him'. The latter IMO just sounds stupid when you look at it that way. Plus if Han wasn't anticipating Greedo firing at all why draw your gun and wait??

If you want to take the deleted Jabba scene seriously I think Greedo firing first screws this up too. Jabba says 'Why did you fry poor Greedo?' and Han says 'Look Jabba next time you wanna talk to me come see me yourself. Don't send one of these twerps'. Listen to how he says this. He's speaking in a tone as if to say 'Jabba I could easily dispose of your little 'goons' so next time come talk to me personally'. Again this works a hell of a lot better with the notion that Han killed Greedo right then and there. To me it almost sounds like he's almost threatening Jabba. Seriously! His vibe is very 'I might owe money but don't mess with me'. Again ANTIHERO!

Plus the smooth way Han walks away after gunning Greedo down just doesn't work with the notion that Greedo fired and Han killed him accidentally. I don't think it fully works with Greedo firing first PERIOD! Again he followed the 'kill or be killed' notion of the situation, killed the guy and just casually walks away. This works with the Jabba scene too. When he says 'Jabba you're a wonderful human being' to me this is his fancy but subtle way of saying 'You WISH you owned me!'

But I digress (again). Again opinions will be opinions and we can agree to disagree. In the end neither can accept defeat or victory. It's a matter of listening and respecting the views of others. I can only chip in my $0.02 (probably up to $5 at this stage hehe) and hope people will listen with an open mind and respect as I can only do for them in the same situation.

[Caseyscott]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

The better story is without the sequels. The change helps makes the stark transition to Empire make more sense....helps. Imho. I don't get this being bad story telling, it is just another story. Some fans don't like that.

To understand how that works you have to be someone that doesn't know about the change or watch with unprejudiced eyes. I understand this is very difficult to do.

The transition happens IN Star Wars, that's the point, that's how you write a story. Without it, even if you consider the sequels, (or especially if you consider the sequels) the impact of his character is diminished.

You can't keep accusing people of being "prejudiced" or blinded by childhood memories when they're presenting well thought out arguments that you continuously dismiss, that has no place in this discussion.

[StingingVelvet]

I'm not even sure what the heck you guys are debating despite reading your posts. Obviously he was a morally grey character who got more good over the course of the trilogy, though Force Awakens shows he went back toward grey afterward. Obviously the original bar scene was supposed to highlight his moral greyness and pirate style, which was obviously toned down in the special edition to make him more good off the bat.

These things are fairly obvious. I'm not sure what the debate there is.

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by Caseyscott

The transition happens IN Star Wars, that's the point, that's how you write a story. Without it, even if you consider the sequels, (or especially if you consider the sequels) the impact of his character is diminished.

You can't keep accusing people of being "prejudiced" or blinded by childhood memories when they're presenting well thought out arguments that you continuously dismiss, that has no place in this discussion.

I have asked repeatedly, how is the character diminished when he was a man that runs from trouble and only acts when cornered?

How am I blinded by childhood memories? If anything I have adapted and used evidence to back my claims. Prejudice means you are unwilling to look at or aknowledge evidence. I am not the one saying I won't debate or discuss. Let us have it if my evidence diesn't stacm up.

@StingingVelvet. My debate is that his character arch doesn't make sense. He is night and day from Star Wars to Empire. I have never believed what Han became.

However, my debate goes back to the shot being a "miss" or a warning shot. Also I feel Greedo never intended to kill Han and the dialogue is clear from the first movie.

I don't think anything was "toned down" it actually was aligned more towards what Lucas wanted with mutiple films as opposed to 1.

We are in agreement on his grey area. I think one could almost cut out all the movies in between the Force Wakens and it makes more sense if you don't include digital change. The Han in VII rings more true...if you go back to the original cut.

[Caseyscott]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

I have asked repeatedly, how is the character diminished when he was a man that runs from trouble and only acts when cornered?

How am I blinded by childhood memories? If anything I have adapted and used evidence to back my claims. Prejudice means you are unwilling to look at or aknowledge evidence. I am not the one saying I won't debate or discuss. Let us have it if my evidence diesn't stacm up.

@StingingVelvet. My debate is that his character arch doesn't make sense. He is night and day from Star Wars to Empire. I have never believed what Han became.

However, my debate goes back to the shot being a "miss" or a warning shot. Also I feel Greedo never intended to kill Han and the dialogue is clear from the first movie.

I don't think anything was "toned down" it actually was aligned more towards what Lucas wanted with mutiple films as opposed to 1.

We are in agreement on his grey area. I think one could almost cut out all the movies in between the Force Wakens and it makes more sense if you don't include digital change. The Han in VII rings more true...if you go back to the original cut.

I didn't say you were blinded, I said you accused people of being blinded by childhood memories.

It's already been stated how his character arc is diminished several times; when he makes the decision to shoot Greedo before Greedo can do anything it provides information to the audience as to who he is as a character, mainly that he only cares about his own well being. This is a theme that's repeated throughout the film, but each time it comes up he's moving closer and closer to becoming the person he is at the end of the film, and when his big moment arrives he has to choose between himself or the greater good. It lessens the impact of his final decision if he doesn't kill Greedo the way he does, and the scene then only serves as expository.

In fact, the scene is pointless as it plays out in the SE because the exposition is basically covered in the Jabba scene anyway, and since shooting at someone who is already shooting at you is what every character would do it tells you nothing about who Han Solo is. It's wasted screen time.

People are hung up on this change not because they have nostalgia for it, but because it's such a well written scene! Han Solo's existence as a character is first established at the table scene with Luke and Kenobi, then his character is explained in his next scene with Greedo. That is how you write!

Luke was introduced as a character when the droids were being sold, then his character was fleshed out as he talked to the droids while cleaning them. You can see this progression with all of the main characters!! If Han isn't a badass and doesn't skillfully dispose of Greedo under the table before Greedo can even get a shot off it's not telling us as much as if he just reacts to being shot at (missed shot or not is irrelevant.)

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by Caseyscott

I didn't say you were blinded, I said you accused people of being blinded by childhood memories.

It's already been stated how his character arc is diminished several times; when he makes the decision to shoot Greedo before Greedo can do anything it provides information to the audience as to who he is as a character, mainly that he only cares about his own well being. This is a theme that's repeated throughout the film, but each time it comes up he's moving closer and closer to becoming the person he is at the end of the film, and when his big moment arrives he has to choose between himself or the greater good. It lessens the impact of his final decision if he doesn't kill Greedo the way he does, and the scene then only serves as expository.

In fact, the scene is pointless as it plays out in the SE because the exposition is basically covered in the Jabba scene anyway, and since shooting at someone who is already shooting at you is what every character would do it tells you nothing about who Han Solo is. It's wasted screen time.

People are hung up on this change not because they have nostalgia for it, but because it's such a well written scene! Han Solo's existence as a character is first established at the table scene with Luke and Kenobi, then his character is explained in his next scene with Greedo. That is how you write!

Luke was introduced as a character when the droids were being sold, then his character was fleshed out as he talked to the droids while cleaning them. You can see this progression with all of the main characters!! If Han isn't a badass and doesn't skillfully dispose of Greedo under the table before Greedo can even get a shot off it's not telling us as much as if he just reacts to being shot at (missed shot or not is irrelevant.)

But what I don't get is how is he a "bad ass"? Watch this for a better explanation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQDb...ature=youtu.be

You see this is the thing. I get your point, I really do...within the confines of ONE Star Wars movie.

Han caring about his own well being is powerful, but guess what, I don't think he changed anymore than Rick did at the end of Casablanca. That is the best comparison I have. Rick, like Han will separate from the cause and go back to being Rick, only knowing he did a good thing and let go of his past anger. Did you catch where Ha says to Luke "you think I would let you get all the reward?".

What I hope people see is my point that Han coming back in the special edition is him truly back to a cause. Not to help just himself, but to truly nose dive into being the help to the rebel cause and having the skill to back it up.

The new scene even changes the Chewbacca scene to me. It changes from Chewbacca making Han feel guilty when he whines, to knowing that Han will change his mind...because he knows Han.

I think the change was masterful, if you understand the scene paired with the deleted scene.

Lucas made the change to fit a bigger picture that obviously bothered him. I can relate. It isn't bad story telling, it is different story telling (to me).

[crissrudd4554]

Can't we just agree there's more than one way to look at the 'big picture' and not particularly one that's more right then wrong??

Watching your video or not will not end the debate. Here me out. I shared a video I made a few years ago comparing the audio to the VHS and BD audios of Frankenstein because I truly felt the VHS sounded far superior (still do). However I got a so so response which I've learned to live with. You can't win them all.

However, you seem to be egging this to the point where you want us to accept your theory as fact simply because you base it off facts and because it's 'Lucas' vision'. When I had put 'opinions will be opinions' you said:

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

There is only one problem wth this. You can have an opinion based on fact (informed opinion) or an opinion/belief based on a cult or faulty childhood memories.

I totally agree that my conclusion is not a "fact", but it is based on what Greedo stated in the subtitles and the facts of how Han came to be sitting, Jabba deleted scene, Boba Fett's conclusion about wanting Han alive (coinciding with "worth a lot more to me alive), and of course what George decided based upon his proven love for a uniformity where Han'scharacter in ANH is a stark contrast to ESB and ROTJ.

Just like with some 6th sense twist ending, I guess anything is possible and all this is just wrong.

Basically you're implying that because you based your view on 'facts' I should accept your whole theory as true. Doesn't work that way. I too have given valid points in my counterpoint but also remembered to remind everyone it's strictly my own view.

You said yourself that most OT trilogy won't look at other scenarios. Perhaps they don't because they don't feel they have to?? I'm not the first person to make the 'Han was an antihero/badass' type argument yet you keep questioning us why we feel that way when at the same time we've extensively have already told you why we feel that way! So frankly where is this going?? Are you gonna hose this down until we feel your view is correct and the view that's been shared by many has been wrong all this time??

As far as Lucas' vision goes, the guy has changed his so called 'vision' so match in the past 20 or so years I don't even bother with it. So it was truly his vision to have large rocks block R2-D2?? To have Anakin revert to his younger self in spirit form?? To have Vader yell 'Noooo' when killing the Emperor?? Those first two he coulda easily done in 1997, or even the original films for that matter. He didn't so I ain't buying this 'vision' crap. Again you are entitled to your opinion but exactly where you are going with this I don't know.

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

Can't we just agree there's more than one way to look at the 'big picture' and not particularly one that's more right then wrong??

Watching your video or not will not end the debate. Here me out. I shared a video I made a few years ago comparing the audio to the VHS and BD audios of Frankenstein because I truly felt the VHS sounded far superior (still do). However I got a so so response which I've learned to live with. You can't win them all.

However, you seem to be egging this to the point where you want us to accept your theory as fact simply because you base it off facts and because it's 'Lucas' vision'. When I had put 'opinions will be opinions' you said:



Basically you're implying that because you based your view on 'facts' I should accept your whole theory as true. Doesn't work that way. I too have given valid points in my counterpoint but also remembered to remind everyone it's strictly my own view.

You said yourself that most OT trilogy won't look at other scenarios. Perhaps they don't because they don't feel they have to?? I'm not the first person to make the 'Han was an antihero/badass' type argument yet you keep questioning us why we feel that way when at the same time we've extensively have already told you why we feel that way! So frankly where is this going?? Are you gonna hose this down until we feel your view is correct and the view that's been shared by many has been wrong all this time??

As far as Lucas' vision goes, the guy has changed his so called 'vision' so match in the past 20 or so years I don't even bother with it. So it was truly his vision to have large rocks block R2-D2?? To have Anakin revert to his younger self in spirit form?? To have Vader yell 'Noooo' when killing the Emperor?? Those first two he coulda easily done in 1997, or even the original films for that matter. He didn't so I ain't buying this 'vision' crap. Again you are entitled to your opinion but exactly where you are going with this I don't know.

I have never said to accept my opinion as fact, but when you say people want to believe how they want to believe without even looking that is a different story. Yes the video could change minds. Why couldn't it?

You said that people have explained how he is a bad ass...where...when...how??? People have exclaimed he is a bad ass...yeah I have seen lots of that. I see chicken ass Han who dug his own situation with his risky career screwing over gangsters while chilling in bars.

Look, the very fact that you are throwing a fit instead of tackling anything I said, shows this is not a discussion anymore.

The fact that you are bringing other things in also shows you are running from the discussion. Lucas putting a rock in is obvious...so what???

Stick to the subject. You don't have to feel as I do, but to ignore what Greedo said and how I said it relates is pretty weak.

It comes down to "because I said so" instead of using facts as I have.

I can't tell you how to feel, but when someone says that Greed intended to kill first..it is just plain wrong. It is as pathetic as saying that it is proven he missed. While I never can prove he did a warning shot, I can prove that it is possible.

Missing on the other hand doesn't follow the fact that Greedo never intended to kill or shoot to kill as a first choice in any version.

By the way...yes Anakin in youngerself makes sense in the 6 movie version and old self makes sense in the 3 film version. Artist change their work all the time. Nothing wrong with that in regards to Lucas once the movies were filmed, he molded a more concise vision...Nooo included. This idea because it wasn't done in 1997 before he made the 6 films makes no sense. Really?? So he should make an Anakin ghost before he even cast the person. Perhaps he should put a title card thst says younger version here???

Dude, it is business, and Lucas made movies from the first one to finance his bigger story as he went. Is this not obvious???

[crissrudd4554]

Yet you insist that I am not 'listening to the dialogue'. Clearly you did not read post #60160 where I very clearly quoted parts of the dialogue and gave my own thoughts. I seem to remember even mentioning quotes in one of the posts that the site deleted last night. And yet you ignore my claim that I said that your post had valid points but that I shall respectfully disagree with it. My point is you discredit us when we counterpoint your argument that Greedo did not intend to kill. To your credit you did prove that's a possibility but only that. You did not prove a fact. As far as 'when did we argue Han was a badass', uhh what do you think the point of posts #60160, #60161, #60162, and #60164 was?? To establish to you what you insist we are not explaining to you! Now clearly you see the scenario very different from us and again that's your business but you are in no place to question our own views on the matter when we have given our own respective responses while all you have done is prove that you have a detailed theory that is credible. However, you admitted you can't prove that your scenario is the real deal, no more than i can prove mine is, only credible so again where this is going?? You have a credible theory. Nothing else.

[ElvisForever]

@Crissrudd4554

You are right. I did not see #60160. That one interests me. I don't have time now to look it over. I missed the post because I was at an event.

I am not seeing your point on the others though. There are no explanations just exclamations.

Please be patient. I like the DISCUSSION.

[WhySoBlu?]

I can't believe you guys are still feeding the troll...

[crissrudd4554]

Originally Posted by ElvisForever

@Crissrudd4554

You are right. I did not see #60160. That one interests me. I don't have time now to look it over. I missed the post because I was at an event.

I am not seeing your point on the others though. There are no explanations just exclamations.

Please be patient. I like the DISCUSSION.

It's fine. I'm not trying to bicker or be smuggish. I just don't know what you want me to say that I haven't said already. You want us to at least consider your view of the scene. Like I said your view is credible but a theory nonetheless so I'm not in the wrong to think otherwise as you are to my viewpoint. If both sides of the argument can be supported with reliable evidence, in both our cases they can be, then the bickering is rather moot.

[ElvisForever]

Originally Posted by crissrudd4554

It's fine. I'm not trying to bicker or be smuggish. I just don't know what you want me to say that I haven't said already. You want us to at least consider your view of the scene. Like I said your view is credible but a theory nonetheless so I'm not in the wrong to think otherwise as you are to my viewpoint. If both sides of the argument can be supported with reliable evidence, in both our cases they can be, then the bickering is rather moot.

I am not trying to bicker and I want to make a comment to your post when I get time.

Calling me a troll as the other poster did is way out of line.

I am certainly not trying to get you to say anything. You have for the most part treated the discussion with respect. I am currently occupied though. Lol