Originally posted by Nephthys
Also Raynor's arguments were bad.
The moment you can provide a cogent, believable argument for Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon's ability to take on the Trade Federation occupation force singlehandedly within the confines of the flagship, I will accept this.
Until then, there's at least a single good one. excellent
Stealth is their best bet. They've already hidden themselves successfully and shown that they can get around via ventilation shafts etc. All they need to do is pull off the old Ben Kenobi tricks a la the Death Star and it shouldn't be hard.
Sneak into the control bridge and take control. They don't need to run in guns blazing. Maybe cut through a wall or ceiling to get there. I doubt there's blast doors everwhere.
Or, sneak over to the control ship and disable all the droids at once, as shown at the end of the movie.
lol @ you actually trying
Originally posted by Nephthys
Stealth is their best bet. They've already hidden themselves successfully and shown that they can get around via ventilation shafts etc. All they need to do is pull off the old Ben Kenobi tricks a la the Death Star and it shouldn't be hard.Sneak into the control bridge and take control. They don't need to run in guns blazing. Maybe cut through a wall or ceiling to get there. I doubt there's blast doors everwhere.
Or, sneak over to the control ship and disable all the droids at once, as shown at the end of the movie.
They tried to take the bridge and failed courtesy of two (as in one plus one) droidekas. How would they have succeeded when Gunray would have undoubtedly doubled security at that point?
Furthermore, Stoklassa specifically says the Jedi should have been able to outfight the droids and take it by force. You're to defend that position, not a stealth route which bypasses said fighting.
Actually, I did mention the parameters specifically:
Originally posted by The_Tempest
The moment you can provide a cogent, believable argument for Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon's ability to take on the Trade Federation occupation force singlehandedly within the confines of the flagship, I will accept this.
Conquest through stealth is not the same as conquest by force (aka "taking on the occupation force singlehandedly"😉.
The point stands, son.
Originally posted by The_Tempest???
If you're referring to Shelley's poem, I've never heard an audio version.
If you're referring to the character from the über-lame superhero movie, I'mma slap you.Since neither Raynor nor myself are trying to lead you to that conclusion, I'm not sure why this is relevant.
His petulant rage or lack thereof has absolutely zero bearing on the merit of his argument, but it's pretty obvious that you're disinclined to hear the other side out on this issue.
Which only furthers my point about objectivity's fleeting role in these discussions.
And given the absurd amount of time and effort Stoklassa spent in scripting and filming these elaborate (and very long) criticisms, I'm not sure you're in a position to assess what constitutes a "goddamn serious" effort and what doesn't.
This is actually a pretty stupid conclusion, Canadian. And a false equivalency. Setting aside the fact that Raynor openly acknowledges that evaluation of TPM as a good or bad film is entirely subjective (a fact of which I have reminded you already), one need not oppose a conclusion in order to attack the argument.
To provide a recent example, Arhael posted an argument here. I object to his reasons and find them silly; but in fact I agree with his conclusion.
Obviously Raynor disagrees with Stoklassa on the quality of TPM, but his approach is less concerned with "proving" TPM is a 'good' story than he is rebutting Stoklassa's provided reasons to the contrary.
No, what Raynor does is respond to the various reasons why Stoklassa derides the film, which is an entirely valid approach. For example, Stoklassa criticizes Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan for not taking the Trade Federation capital ship by force; Raynor explains that this approach is untenable because the Jedi were forced to flee from two droidekas of the [presumably] thousands aboard the ship. You might not agree, but what he's actually doing is entirely reasonable despite attempts of Stoklassa and others to discredit it.
Says the guy who's spent how many years arguing and debating hypothetical brawls between fictional characters? All of us here stand guilty of taking light-hearted things seriously at one point or another. Whether or not you take the argument seriously should be determined by the merits of the argument. It might be different if you had a history with Raynor by which you could reasonably conclude he's an emotionally-stunted rage!tard, but you don't to my knowledge.
How many times need I clothesline you before you get off the high horse, you Canadian Mountie bastard.
Submit.
I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and just say you utterly misread the tone and intention of my last post, but I have a feeling that you're just looking to be antagonistic.