Let's overanalyse stuff

[Professor Smarmiarty]

So the death star.
Why is it called the "death star"? Do you want your populace to know how evil you are? I would call it the "patriotic defence moon" or "super freedom laser".
Attempting to run a galaxy-wide empire on fear is untenable. There is no way you can keep up the kind of constant monitoring and repressive crackdowns needed for more than a very short term. We can't do it on earth, you can't do it in space. Indeed- this is why the empire falls apart on the death of the emperor- a seemingly token gesture- as the entire "chain of fear" is broken- no more are the generals afraid of the emperor, their lieutenants are not afraid of them and so on and so on.

"Oh ho" you say, puffing on your solitary cigarrette.
Counterpoint! (http://www.overthinkingit.com/2011/04/25/star-wars-death-star-economics/) "Smoke ring, smoke ring, you are defeated my cad"
I laugh slowly, chuckle chuckle, haha!
That article is ridiculous and based on a couple of flawed premises. I shall address these in turn.
1) The Roman empire ruled by fear and intimidation. Absolute baloney I say! The reason the Roman empire was so successful where so so so many others failed was that they didn't rule by fear- they ruled by creating a common bond in the populace. They aggressively romanised their territory- they exported Roman citizenship as a reward for good behaviour, they incorporated local beliefs into what it was to be Roman. Everybody else tried to rule by fear and within a couple of generations all their empires collapsed. The same will happen with the empire.
2) Moving on from this point- they treat the Empire as somewhat like the English empire- a few central home colonies of rulers, the other planets being sources of resources and labour- and if you remove the topmost people you are removing consumers without removing producers/resources and productivity will increase across the universe out of fear. This is laughable. It shows no grappling with history where genocide of your own people causes decreases in production, not increases, through resistance- both active and passive- and loss of morale. Secondly the people in the home colonies are organisers, are refiners, are governers- simply removing them from the equation will causes widespread problems for your economy.
Also if this is your goal- blow up coruscant- remove the senate and the PLANET-WIDE CITY which will drain resource like nobodies business.

So in conclusion- the Empire lost not because of the will of the force or the rebel alliance but because they named their defence platform a death star.

[Amake]

Of course they want people to know they're evil. How else would we know they're evil? The Empire are not interested in running the galaxy in a politically or environmentally or even logistically sustainable way; they're not even interested in running the galaxy. Their job is to be as evil, as incompetent and as wasteful as possible, so we don't have to think about who we're supposed to be cheering for as the plucky underdog rebels steamroll them.

Lucas writes a great fable I think, but you're really not supposed to think about things for an hour after leaving the theater, let alone 34 years.

[Osterbaum]

But we are overanalyzing here! Don't bring your movie logic to overanalyses!

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Indiana Jones: What the fuck.

Ok- Raiders of the Lost Ark- We establish in this that at least some of the spiritual accounts in bible are true. The Ark of the Covenant is real and has significant powers, enough to conquer armies. From this it is a reasonable assumption that YHWH exists in some sense and has considerable power. These early accounts of the bible are of a deeply personal God and thus we could consider that this would not overrule the existence of other gods however-
Last Crusade- addresses the actual existence of Jesus and the holy grrail. The big movement of Christianity was the expansion of a localised cult into a worldwide religion. That was really the point of Christianity. The existence of a spiritual Jesus means we cannot accept the existence of the Ark in Raiders as evidence of a localised deity, we must accept him as a worldwide , all powerful entity.
This leads us to:
Temple of Doom- which superficially introduces some "Hindu" mysticism of limited powers (mostly just the stones have any significant power). How do we interpret this? There are a few ways- it is possible to go down a gnostic type route and interpret the powers worshipped here as some kind of intermediary demiurge, or maybe we can go the other way with a sort of Nestorian/Islamic/Arian type interpretation where Jesus is one of many teachers and these mystics fall into this tradition. We could interpret the evil nature of these rights as Satanic. Overall this is not such a problem as it initially appears.
Howeer
Kingdom of the Crystal Skull- Ok, now we have aliens. This places considerable strain on the world-system. It is certainly a minority view that would regulate the existence of Yhwh with aliens. Why is this not mentioned anywhere in any christian texts? How do we correlate this with the seemingly special nature of humanity? Why are they considerably more advanced as a species than us? The other movies lend strong weight to a significant degree of biblical literalism which only weakens the alien theory.

So where are we at? The mythology of Indiana Jones is confusd, patchy and really doesn't make a lot of sense.

[Osterbaum]

Crystal Skull can suck'a deep. That is all.

[Krylo]

Technically they were extra-dimensional beings as opposed to aliens as we normally think of aliens. I'm not sure if that changes anything, though. I guess it might in that YHWH might not be multi-dimensional or something?

[Osterbaum]

They are the Asgårds. A highly advanced alien race from beyond the stars who act as benevolent gods as not to interfere with the development of primitive cultures.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I'm usre if he felt like it YHWH could kick it in every dimension but it's a bit weird that it would never come up.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

I was going to come in here and present a point counterpoint, but then I saw you were taking Crystal Skull seriously and the thread lost all credibility. Seriously, fuck that movie!

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Taking stupid things seriously is the point of this thread!

[Osterbaum]

I think we can make an exception and not take Crystal Skull seriosly though.

[Steel Shadow]

Can we over-analyse why that movie gets so much hate? It wasn't that bad.

[PCD]

My sister is a geologist, which makes watching Crystal Skull with her absolutely hilarious. She doesn't care about any of the stupid alien stuff, she can suspend her disbelief through all of that. But the instant they mention magnetic quartz, she throws her hands in the air and quits the movie because there's no such fucking thing as magnetic quartz. Gotta love scientists in scifi movies.

[Krylo]

Can we over-analyse why that movie gets so much hate? It wasn't that bad.

Indie rode bitch to Shia LeBouf.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

It's alien quartz. Try to keep up.

Casablanca:
We need to get through Nazi occupied lands. So we'll spend the movie trying to obtain letters of transit signed by De Gaulle, head of the opposition French forces. I'm sure that will be real helpful getting around Nazi borders.

[Fifthfiend]

Every time someone mentions Shia LeBouf by name, it's another missed opportunity for someone to have called him Shia The Beef. :(

[Token]

Crystal Skull was the only Indy movie I could bring myself to finish watching. I'm not saying it's a good movie, but it's the best thing Lucas has ever done.

[TDK]

Crystal Skull was the only Indy movie I could bring myself to finish watching.
http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2009/3/26/128825618079407895.jpg



On topic: I might dig through the old threads here and find that ridiculous over-analysis of Safety Dance I did once.

Edit: Yeah, here:

The song. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcOZ6xFxJqg) (And the video, wherein the main guy looks like me, as my friend pointed out. o.O )


First, the name of the band: Men Without Hats. What this implies is that there existed an era where the norm was for men to wear hats.

That is a world I want to live in. Not because of any particular inclination to wear hats (in fact, I rarely wear hats) but because society and fashion having an inclination toward a certain item of clothing (especially the hat, which is a silly and awesome piece of clothing all at the same time and in essence*.) to the degree that it is considered abnormal to LACK that piece of clothing, so that one would have to specify men WITHOUT hats, is awesome.

(Run on sentence FTW. :P)


So in this world, the name Men Without Hats is the rough equivalent of Men Without PANTS.

...And that should be a band name too.


*For those wondering why: It is an item of clothing which, for the most part, signifies some kind of rank or career position (pirate, for example.). In addition to this, you wear it by placing it on your head. If the placing it on your head isn't silly enough, it more often than not represents something in an official capacity. It is a silly piece of clothing.


Anyway, on to the Safety Dance:

The lyrics. (http://www.lyricsfreak.com/m/men+without+hats/safety+dance_20091824.html)


We can dance if we want to, we can leave your friends behind
Cause your friends don't dance and if they don't dance
Well they're are no friends of mine

This guy is very bigoted. Or at least he sticks to his convictions to a very great degree. He is actually willing to end a relationship based on whether or not the potential friend dances or not. This guy is awesome.


I say, we can go where we want to, a place where they will never find
And we can act like we come from out of this world
Leave the real one far behind,
And we can dance

Now with the opening lyrics, the song would appear to be silly and facetious, but as it goes on it appeals more to the free nature of the listener and addresses real issues and things, the way the world should be and what people should do, but it sadly isn't and they do not. And yet he continues to do whatever he likes regardless. In this case, leave the area wherein people are not dancing, find another place where people don't know you and act however you like, be yourself because in this separate area, where people will likely never see you again, you can behave how you like with no long-term repercussions.

This again goes back to the name of the band. Men Without Hats. A deviation from the social norm, the lack of a hat. Having abandoned the place where people do not dance, and finding another where people don't know him, he is free to act how he likes, dance, act silly, and as long as this act, being yourself and being free, is kept up, the rest of the world doesn't matter, its all distant and gone.

And yet eventually, he must go back to the norm, but there are still times when he can escape, dance, act silly and be himself.

To be a man without a hat.

Ah we can go when we want to the night is young and so am i
And we can dress real neat from our hats to our feet
And surprise em with the victory cry

This elaborates farther on the meaning of the previously stated meanings in the song. The escaping of the normal world is done at night, as one might have guessed. And along with the acting silly and dancing, he dresses oddly as well, and surprises the normal denizens of the area he escapes to with a loud cry, possibly a greeting or something.

I say we can act if want to if we don't nobody will
And you can act real rude and totally removed
And I can act like an imbecile
I say we can dance, we can dance everything out control
We can dance, we can dance were doing it wall to wall
We can dance, we can dance everybody look at your hands
We can dance, we can dance everybody takin' the chance
Safety dance

Here he seems to be elaborating further on it, possibly to another party, another potential man without a hat. He specifies, you can act rude or antisocial or stupid, and no one will care, or at least it does not matter in the long run because no one knows you there. He goes on to state several times that dancing is acceptable.

The normal society in this world requires strict adherence to laws, it seems. No dancing, hats are required, etc. A strange distopian, possibly totalitarian society.

However, the statement "everybody taking the chance" indicates that there is a chance of being caught for the transgressions of dancing and acting silly, so perhaps it is a sort of underground movement or clandestine society, where they gather to dance and act silly, as previously established. But contrary to what is initially implied, they may not be safe and in a completely different area or world. Rather, the rest of the world seems to fade away in the euphoria of dancing and acting silly.

The others who are dancing and acting silly are likely other members of the strict society, also escaping to be themselves for a short time. Their identities may or may not be kept secret, it is no implied anywhere in the song, but I find secret identities more likely.

Once the true nature of the society is revealed, one can now see that the first lyrics are not of bigotry, but rather he does not want to risk the safety of the hidden society by including those who would not dance and be silly, or perhaps they are even spies.


We can dance if we want to, we've got all your life and mine
As long as we abuse it, never gonna lose it
Everything'll work out right

This further drags out the meaning of the rest of the world fading away as they dance, everything else seems unimportant, as they are having so much fun and all their worries wash away. However, the tone seems to indicate that this is a false sense of security, and that they are indeed abusing and overdoing it, and it will not, in fact, work out right, and they are going to lose it, they do not have all of "your life and mine".

It takes a depressing turn as they subconsciously admit to themselves that it will not last. In educating the new member, they have a horrible realization that their way of life can't last forever.

The rest of the song is repetition of "Oh yes its safe to dance" "Its the safety dance" and things of that nature.

The reason for the name of the song becomes evident, the dance provides a sense of security and safety, hence: The Safety Dance.

However, it is a false sense of security as noted, and the whole song is perhaps a commentary (by exaggeration) on the social fads and peer pressure of modern society (or rather, 80s society, as that is when the song was written.) and the almost totalitarian nature of social groups and cliques.


It begins silly and evolves (or rather, devolves, depending on your point of view) into a social commentary, or perhaps just a work of fiction, about a world where things are bad and people need to escape. Perhaps with equivalencies and exaggerations to our society, and/or perhaps others, maybe even other fictional ones.

[Archbio]

SMB,

Again with "aliens are incompatible with Jesus?"

I mean, if you want to get down to that argument, any of the pre-Colombian civilizations featured in that movie, human or otherwise, are incompatible with the story of Jesus, since they're on a continent that isn't mentionned anywhere in the scriptures. It's comparably a small roadblock to a kitchensink fantasy world, and as soon as you get over that, having people on other planets is just as compatible.

And more compatible than the endless "Temple of Doom" horrorshow.

Not saying that the alien thing were handled well or seamlessly. Not in the least.

Every time someone mentions Shia LeBouf by name, it's another missed opportunity for someone to have called him Shia The Beef.

It's the worst of many things about that name: it's like a mispelling of the french word for beef. As it is it's not anything, it's just a jumble of vowels.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

SMB,

Again with "aliens are incompatible with Jesus?"

I mean, if you want to get down to that argument, any of the pre-Colombian civilizations featured in that movie, human or otherwise, are incompatible with the story of Jesus, since they're on a continent that isn't mentionned anywhere in the scriptures. It's comparably a small roadblock to a kitchensink fantasy world, and as soon as you get over that, having people on other planets is just as compatible.
The Earth is created in the scriptures- there isn't anywhere a list of all the countries he created, there is no real problem here. However there are no mentions of alien planets of alien lifeforms. Lists of animals don't include them.
Moreover God has a special personal love for humanity. God made a covenant with humanity. Jesus suffered for the sins of humanity. The first creatures and aniamls were all existent on earth. The heavens are modulated in regard to the actions of people on earth, if Joshua needs some more time to smite some dudes we can just stop the heavens moving.
You can't just write "Oh yeah and then there were some aliens" on the last page of the bible. It copletely rewrites the theological tenets of christianity. Where do aliens fit in?
Like it could be accomodted but you need to rewrite major major portions of the Bible and need to reenvision the theology of Christianity to fully accomodate them. Look at like a Milibank who is probably the most adept Catholic theologian these days and his overall thesis is that the power of God is in his suffering through the alienation of God and man. If you chuck some aliens in there, well suddenely you have man alienated from aliens, alienated from God, the whole thing break down. Most theologians have come to this special relationship in different ways but it is hard to escape nd can't just be ignored.

Also if Jews are the chosen people why do aliens have spaceships and shit? Why dont we have that. Like would have been easy to escape Egypt in spaceships.

And more compatible than the endless "Temple of Doom" horrorshow.

Plenty of other gods mentioned int he Bible and they are not incompatible with YHWH. No problem.

But I'm bored of this topic,
New topic:
Road Runner-
I've been watching for 20 minutes and this Coyote has fallen off 4 cliffs, had 10 bouders dropped on him and at one point flew a rocket into a cliff wall. How is he not dead?

[Marc v4.0]

Also if Jews are the chosen people why do aliens have spaceships and shit? Why dont we have that. Like would have been easy to escape Egypt in spaceships.

For the same reason other people have anything at all?

Not making the connection between being the chosen people and "No one else can make spaceships but Jews"

[Professor Smarmiarty]

If I was going to give spaceships to anybody I would give them to my chosen people first.

[Archbio]

If I was going to give plumbing to anybody I would give it to my chosen people first.

Lists of animals don't include them.

And we know how exhaustive those are! Wink, wink.

You might as well take issue with the movie for depicting voracious ants and weird monkeys; which aren't included in those lists!

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Proverb 6:6
Go to the ant, you sluggard; consider its ways and be wise!

Kings 10:22
The king had a fleet of trading ships at sea along with the ships of Hiram. Once every three years it returned, carrying gold, silver and ivory, and apes and baboons.

You need work on your overanalysing.

Also the existence of creatures on Earth (when beasts in general are specificially said to be made on earth) has no relation to the creation of aliens on a different planet. Monkeys were made when creatures were made on earth. When were aliens made?
Also monkeys don't undermine the fundamental tenements.
This thread is overanalysing,, not underanalysing.

[Archbio]

Apes and baboons; totally New World Monkeys?

If you want to get with this kind of apologistics on this shit, there's probably some supernatural or otherworldly beings in the scriptures that can be construed as aliens; such as the Nephilim!

Aliens hybrid, freak yeah.

And what fundamental tenements, anyway? We imply lots of unlisted gods, spirits, continents and animals; but aliens are right out? Sounds more like an antifun-damental tenement to me.

Like sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, so are sufficiently advanced aliens indistinguishable from supernatural entities.

[tacticslion]

Stuff
Counter-stuff
Counter Counter-Stuff
Counter-Counter Counter-stuff

Really, there's nothing in the scriptures that gives what is supposed to be an exhaustive list of creatures. At most, one could say the list of pure v. impure is incomplete, or the distinguishing nature of fish v. marine mammals are nonexistent, but then, given the postulate of an all-knowing deity working with a not-all-knowing people group, He would be aware of all that would happen within the intervening time of setting Himself and any given Incarnate of Himself, and the fundamental shift of ways of thinking and NOT bog his people down with laws that would, in the end, have served their purpose and been completed via the mentioned Messiah. Really, they don't NEED to know about all the different places, creatures, and other things of the world because those things would never be applicable to what said chosen people group would undergo while within the constraints of a specific, morally-focused system of personal conduct in waiting for THE TIME when said system would be finally fulfilled.

Further, re: advanced technology, the same thing applies. Once such education started, there'd be no end to it. An all-knowing deity worried about morals wouldn't necessarily bother giving his people uber-tech because, really, why? They don't need it. They simply need to know how to live moral lives.

This is especially true if said Deity knows that the list of laws that they give are for a discreet period of time, they need not bother with paradigm-changing technological innovation: tech will come when it will come, but the basics given to backwater ex-slaves in the desert would apply to everything they'd come across until that point, and before then the Incarnate Avatar would fulfill the law, obviating the need to adhere to it as currently written, but instead allowing it to become a solid guideline for future eventualities.

Further, even if they DID give technological innovation, the problem would be that they'd never STOP giving technological innovation. Why didn't God give them the water mill? Or what about aqueducts? Plumbing? Electricity? Radio? Television? Nuclear Bombs? Cell phones? SMART phones? Personal Computational Devices? Cold fusion? Genetically enhanced "super"-powers?

At what point would the technology-giving stop? Such a dizzying new world-perspective would serve for little but to cause confusion amongst an admittedly backwater group of uneducated ex-slaves. Even if said slaves were 'educated' as well as could be expected during their day, their education would exist of a fundamentally flawed physical view of the world - Egyptians, as far as I'm aware - didn't know the true nature of the sun, moon, planet, and stars, and the relationships between their relative positions and movements. The revelations made within the first few chapters of Genesis were already fundamentally world-view altering.

Further, moral ordinances for new technologies would have to be instituted, as well as for all existing techs (for they were currently in a desert, and wouldn't have a home for several years). That'd make the already nearly overwhelming list of texts far larger. Further, given the human propensity of worshipping objects with power (as demonstrated within the scriptures reference the Ark of the Covenant used aggressively without divine decree against enemies and the Bronze Serpent succumbing to iconoclasm by priests due to idol-worship involving it), concrete power to conquer other people contained in physical objects would quickly become more revered than a non-corporeal divinity. And it would be pointless, because, outside of the direct act of said deity granting that tech from seemingly nowhere, the people would never have acquired it in the first place. The laws gave no technological advancement. At most, they made people who received them aware that the world was a mite bit larger than previously conceived (as mentioned about the days of Peleg) and that, unbeknownst to most, there was a single Super-Creator, i.e. YHWH, who'd had His divine hand over his people, making sure they never became extinct no matter the circumstances elsewhere. The laws were simply a codex of how to live in a way that distinguished people as His until He sent Himself to the Earth.

And as far as extra-dimensional beings are concerned... well, there's nothing that says they don't exist, and it's quite possible within the context of seemingly-bizarre end-of-world revelations (such as found in Daniel and especially Revelation) that are presumed true in a cosmology such as Indiana Jones', that much of the non-normative things presented within them are, in fact, bleeding elements from other dimensions. Where do spiritual creatures come from? Heck, where, precisely, is Sheol? Another dimension would be a perfect concept to hold such things. That's how D&D handles it and, while I would never use D&D to explain reality, such a concept could easily work with a mesh of realities that Indiana Jones purports.

And Nephilim aren't extra-dimensional beings! Their half-extradimensional beings and half-human beings! Duh!

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Apes and baboons; totally New World Monkeys?

If you want to get with this kind of apologistics on this shit, there's probably some supernatural or otherworldly beings in the scriptures that can be construed as aliens; such as the Nephilim!

Aliens hybrid, freak yeah.

And what fundamental tenements, anyway? We imply lots of unlisted gods, spirits, continents and animals; but aliens are right out? Sounds more like an antifun-damental tenement to me.

Like sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, so are sufficiently advanced aliens indistinguishable from supernatural entities.

The fundamental content- Earth is the primary concept and Humans are the primary species, they have the special relationship with God.
What is the relationship of aliens to god? Where did the aliens come from? How does the existence of aliens relate to the narrative of the fall of humans, their subsequent trials, Jesus' sacrifice. It messes everything up by adding in an entire new race of intelligent creatures and we have no idea how they relate to God and how this changes our relationship to God because previously we were the special race, we were the chosen race and now we dont know.
We know animals relationship to God. We know our relationship. We know our relationship with animals with reference to God. With aliens we don't know shit and it brings into question the things we already do know.




And as far as extra-dimensional beings are concerned... well, there's nothing that says they don't exist, and it's quite possible within the context of seemingly-bizarre end-of-world revelations (such as found in Daniel and especially Revelation) that are presumed true in a cosmology such as Indiana Jones', that much of the non-normative things presented within them are, in fact, bleeding elements from other dimensions. Where do spiritual creatures come from? Heck, where, precisely, is Sheol? Another dimension would be a perfect concept to hold such things. That's how D&D handles it and, while I would never use D&D to explain reality, such a concept could easily work with a mesh of realities that Indiana Jones purports.

And Nephilim aren't extra-dimensional beings! Their half-extradimensional beings and half-human beings! Duh!

So what we're saying is that aliens are some kind of demons escaped from hell? They're locked up hard out.

Like I could have accepted it if they retroactively revealed Jesus and Moses to be aliens as well but they didn't. Those stand as relatively literal interpretations of scripture and then suddenely we get thrown a situation which requires a completely offbase scriptural interpretation bringing in either alien planets or other dimensions. There is no cohesion.
And there is no real question raised that these guys are anything but alien- there is no hint that they are crazy escaped demons or anything.

[Magus]

What I could never understand is why Zordon wanted kids with attitude to become the Power Rangers but then pretty much every episode had a moral thrown in about not making hasty decisions or not losing your temper or not doing something mischievous when in fact those are all things that kids with attitude would probably do all the time. Zordon is probably the worst judge of what makes a good Power Ranger possible; clearly someone else should be in charge of handing out superpowers. Also he maintains a sinecure for Alpha in the bumbling fretful robot sidekick position, which is clearly a waste of the spare resources he has at his command. Surely the energy put into keeping Alpha powered could be put into maintaining his stasis tube or into creating new and more powerful weapons for the continuing battle with Rita Repulsa. Zordon is also clearly a racist, as he assigns the Black Ranger Power Belt to the African American character and the Yellow Ranger Power Belt to the Asian American character. One of those might have been a coincidence but both? I think we can safely say Zordon is a bigot.

Finally, if Rita Repulsa's base of operations is on the moon, why did he not equip the Zords with at least some sort of booster technology originally and thus increase the likelihood of finally bringing the war to a close? Not until Power Rangers in Space did we see the Rangers finally attempt at actually taking the battle past the stratosphere. Is Zordon simply the most shortsighted alien ever, or is there more at work here?

Perhaps it was Zordon's strategy all along to maintain a permanent stalemate with Rita Repulsa, in order to prevent his position as alien guardian of all that is good from becoming pointless and maintain his powerbase. Or perhaps his motives are even more sinister, base, and perverted: perhaps he just liked keeping a bunch of nubile young teenagers around. That's right, I said it: Zordon was most likely a perverted, lecherous pedophile.

[YHWH]

And there is no real question raised that these guys are anything but alien- there is no hint that they are crazy escaped demons or anything.

I put the Crystal Skulls there to test your faith.

[Archbio]

Those stand as relatively literal interpretations of scripture[...]

With a Holy Grail that literally gives physical immortality when you drink from it.

Yes.

Lifted straight from the pages of the Bible.

What is the relationship of aliens to god? Where did the aliens come from?

Welcome to the magic of Imagination.

The problem is that basically, your analysis-through-variably-strict-theology is bogus. It's more overcomparison than overanalysis.

The series says nothing about Genesis, and it really says nothing about how literally universal its versions of YHWH and Jesus are. So the aliens (and Shiva) contradict nothing in any of the films themselves.

[The Sevenshot Kid]

I put the Crystal Skulls there to test your faith.

What about dinosaurs? Are the fossils there just to fuck with us too?

[BitVyper]

I put the Crystal Skulls there to test your faith.

You did a shitty job faking them then.

[Jesus]

I totally pissed in a real nice pot one time, ya'll should fetishize that for a couple of thousand years.

[Archbio]

The tape in The Ring puts an electromagnetic imprint in the brain of those who watch it, since Samara's power is to project stuff electromagnetically (foreshadowed by the discussion of the girls at the beginning and by Samara's pre-death artwork.) No ghost comes to get the victims when their time is up, they're just carrying the charge that kills them (by fright) inside their head the whole time.

That's why their pictures get warped.

[BitVyper]

I totally pissed in a real nice pot one time, ya'll should fetishize that for a couple of thousand years.

Does your pee count as sacrament?

[The Sevenshot Kid]

Does your pee count as sacrament?

Please don't tell me you're even bringing up the idea of drinking someone's piss.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

With a Holy Grail that literally gives physical immortality when you drink from it.

Yes.

Lifted straight from the pages of the Bible.
So nothign that is not directly and explicitly mentioned in the Bible is incompatable with a literal Christianity. Good luck with that one.



Welcome to the magic of Imagination.

The problem is that basically, your analysis-through-variably-strict-theology is bogus. It's more overcomparison than overanalysis.

The series says nothing about Genesis, and it really says nothing about how literally universal its versions of YHWH and Jesus are. So the aliens (and Shiva) contradict nothing in any of the films themselves.

My analysis is based on probability and how much of the scriptures you would have to COMPLETELY REWRITE if YHWH and aliens coexist. You seem to treat anything that is not expressely ruled out in the Bible as equally likely to exist which is a ridiculously trolly argument.
That is me saying- well we don't know how gravity works so it isequally like to be gravitons or magic unicorns or everything in the universe wants to bone everything else so they move together but they all love fatties.
You are also saying that because there is no ruling out that YHWH in this universe is some crazy little local demigod then it could happen. I mean yes it could happen but there is nothing in the films to support this. He is referred to as YHWH, nothing in the films contradicts this image, there is no suggestion that he is anything but the one we know of.
Whenever you watch say a biopic of Napoleon do you go "Hmmm, this character is called Napoleon and all his actions fit those of the historical napoleon but because there was no 20 page disclaimer at the start and list of references I think this is about another Napoleon who really lived in 31 century France, which looks just like 19th century France." I mean it could happen but using that argument every interpretation of every film is equally valid.

And that's all I have to say on this as you are making same ridiculous "It's not expressly ruled out so of course its comptable" arguments over and over.

I totally pissed in a real nice pot one time, ya'll should
fetishize that for a couple of thousand years.

Not cool bro. Not cool.

New direction:

Labyrinth!
On the surface they don't appear to be in a labyrinth- there are indeed multiple paths, millions of paths. However the Labyrinth is the journey of the viewer, and in a way Sarah, as we progress our mind is changed, adapted, there was only one path all along nd this path lead us to the preordained truth, through the stages we needed to be.
It is not indeed a maze, but forever and utmost a labyrinth.

[Archbio]

You are also saying that because there is no ruling out that YHWH in this universe is some crazy little local demigod then it could happen. I mean yes it could happen but there is nothing in the films to support this. He is referred to as YHWH, nothing in the films contradicts this image, there is no suggestion that he is anything but the one we know of.

Actually, in the movies there's Shiva, there's Kali and there's aliens from another dimension. In the movies, as they are written and filmed. That does heavily suggest that a cosmology that is compatible with aliens and Shiva and Kali should be favoured in analyzing the film.

Therefore if you can imagine a version of Yahweh that is not incompatible with Shiva and Kali (and that's not wild, arbitrary imaginings; as you stated yourself in the thread early characterizations of Yahweh are quite compatible with Shiva and Kali,) it would be in bad faith not to interpret the references to him that way.

The same thing goes for the aliens. When there are interpretations that allow for no contradictions between the elements of a setting, it's bad analysis to reject those interpretations.

Why do the aspirations of Christians in conceiving their religion as universal need be true in the deepest, most extensive sense in the setting because the existence of a supernatural Jesus is implied within it?

And if it was true in the context of the films, why couldn't the aliens belong to a different part of creation than humankind? Not subject to salvation or damnation? It would make them as irrelevant to the subject matter of the Bible than black holes apparently were. And theologically inconsequential.

Other interpretations would be perfectly viable following the simple assumption that in the movies, the Bible isn't the inerrant, literal word of God, or a comprehensive guide to universal divine matters despite it being right about Jesus being supernatural, and that aliens can exist and fill any theological niche they damn well please, since they can just have been omitted from those ancient texts. Hey, maybe alternate dimensions/alien planets have their own alternate Jesuses (or is that Jesii?) Or maybe they're just waiting to be evangelized by mankind. Possible explanations abound, any way you look at it.

And that's all I have to say on this as you are making same ridiculous "It's not expressly ruled out so of course its comptable" arguments over and over.

That's pretty much what "compatible" means.

So nothign that is not directly and explicitly mentioned in the Bible is incompatable with a literal Christianity. Good luck with that one.

Weirdly enough, I consider that the Holy Grail, a relic linked with Jesus, isn't like any old thing.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Archbio-
Misses the point of threads.

Heman and the masters of the universe-
What exactly is a "master of the universe"?
That implies one of three things:
Physical control/domination of the universe
or
Ability to manipulate the universe in significant ways
or
A masters degree in the universe
Both of these are inherentely implausiable.
Let's look at the masters of the universe.
First you have the guys like man-at-arms and Teela. Normal humans with some good weaponry.
Then you got people like Mekanek, Stratos and Orko have some cosmic powers, this could conceivable be "mastering the universe" in the sense that they sculpt the raw material of the universe into their desire.
It is not clear if Hemanis a master of the universe- he could be associated with them or their leading member. He has extreme cosmic power.
The sorceress is of similar unclear origin.
There really is no unifying set of abilities to justify the title "Masters of the Universe" on the basis of their abilities. Indeed the forces of darkness have equivalent powers and masters of the universe is an exclusionary title that does not apply to the evil guys so we can rule out being able to get your powers from manipulating the universe.
What about control of the universe?
UNlikely. They can barely hold castle Greyskull let alone the universe. Hordak rules a whole planet, Skeletor rules a mountain, Horde Prime concievably rules lots of places (as Hordak is his minion and Hordak rules a whole planet). The masters of the universe have no greater control than the forces of evil.

So what we are left with- degrees in the universe. This is plausiable. There are clearly majors inside this degree- some study the physics of the universe with a technical framework allowing them to create super weaponry beyond the ken of the civilisation they live in. Some study the more mystic forces of the universe allowing them more "magical" powers.
However this leads the question of why there are no post-docs or professors running around? There is seemingly no heirachy which exists in any academic setting. While there is group collabration there is seemingly no specialisation in projects- everyone seems to have the same goal. There is no teaching, no undergraduates around, no term times. Who pays the grants?
Ultimately I have to rule this out too.

So what are we left with? Masters of the Universe is seemingly an arbitrary title- they could have been lords of the universe, kings of the universe, emperors of the universe. However none of these acronymise to Motu- the maori word meaning to be cut free/to sever/ escape. MOTU is a revolutionary group, trying to overthrow the evil control of Skeletor and Horde Prime. Their name reflects this, their aspirations to sever his control, to cast off his rule. They call upon the struggles of another oppressed minority to give them strength, using their language to give themselves strength.

[Archbio]

For the pot Jesus urinated in to work as a Holy Grail analogue it would probably require you to urinate into it in order to tap into its mystical powers, and not drink anything from it. Since a cup is made from drinking, and a pot is made for urinating into.

Maybe if you urinate blood into it, the pot heals your kidneys? No, wait, that's not right.

---

Archbio-
Misses the point of threads.

I'm pretty sure I overanalyzed the hell of that unexplored question in that adventure movie. Movies are stuff. Sorry! Point: achieved.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I'm going to overanalyse y our post

Title: A fine Quest for Lancelot.

This is clearly a reference to the fact that Lancelot could not reach the grail because he was "impure" and could only briefly glimpse it. Therefore you are implying that a urinating vessel is less pure than a drinking vessel.
The grail legend was mostly penned in the middle ages when the four humors were still fairly dominant as a theory. In this theory urine is produced by the liver (when producing the humours) and the blood (when producing food).
Urine is thus a left over product so would seem to be less sacred than blood, which was one of the life giving and moist humours. However blood is also associated with sanguinity- extroversion and outwardness which strongly contradicts the orthodox (as opposed to orthoprax) nature of christianity and inne contemplation. However the urine could be said to have been rejected by the body of Christ and thus is less worthy so I'm going to call this acceptble.

For the pot Jesus urinated in to work as a Holy Grail analogue it would probably require you to urinate into it in order to tap into its mystical powers, and not drink anything from it. Since a cup is made from drinking, and a pot is made for urinating into.

Maybe if you urinate blood into it, the pot heals your kidneys? No, wait, that's not right.

---
This ties back to what was before. Blood was the main lifegiving humor, it makes sense that blood of the Healer, the ressurection would heal your wounds, bring you back from death. The urine vessel would allow you to cast aside worldy concerns and bodies as the body casts aside urine, as Christ cast aside his mortal form.
The analogies between drinking and pissing are well-founded however, and we can conclude that useage of the pisspot is by pissing.



I'm pretty sure I overanalyzed the hell of that unexplored question in that adventure movie. Movies are stuff. Sorry! Point: achieved.
The definition of overanalysis that has been used is ripped straight from New Criticism- to analyse the text solely in itself, to only talk about what is expressely inside the text.
This has two major flaws 1) The problems with New Criticism and 2) The questionable "over" in this definition of "overanalysis".
1) New Criticism is pretty widely discredityed these days and for good reason. New Criticism relies upon objective turths, unchanging humanity, the absolute status of language. Allof these ideas rely upon outdated knowledge on how language works at a neuronal levels and how it evolves. It also relies upon numerous axioms of objectivity which have little relation to both science and modern philosophy
2) The very appeal of New Criticism relies in its shutting down of discourse- there is only one correct interpretation and that is generally that of an old rich white man. Therefore by appliyng the tents of New Criticism you cannot be overanalysing you can only be analysing- there is one correct path of analysis and you cannot go down it too far for it is the absolute correct path and going down it further only makes your analysis more correct.

[BitVyper]

Please don't tell me you're even bringing up the idea of drinking someone's piss.

Obviously it would be SYMBOLIC piss. Unless you think the wafers and wine are actual skin and blood.

This isn't exactly unprecedented. Just ask Zeus.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Drinking urine is far safer and healthier than drinking blood.
It even a form of alternative medicine.

[Archbio]

This isn't exactly unprecedented. Just ask Zeus.

Hey, that's not fair, Zeus totally didn't know what Lycaon put in his food.

This is clearly a reference to the fact that Lancelot could not reach the grail because he was "impure" and could only briefly glimpse it.

Actually, it's a vulgar pun referring to urination. Also, Lancelot is a dink.

The definition of overanalysis that has been used is ripped straight from New Criticism- to analyse the text solely in itself, to only talk about what is expressely inside the text.

I think the name you meant to give to the thread was "Let's Misanalyze Stuff."

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I know a new critic when I encounter one. I can smell them.
Used to get 8 citations for everyone I popped on the head.

[Jesus]

Please don't tell me you're even bringing up the idea of drinking someone's piss.

Yeah, that's totally more gross than eating my flesh and drinking my blood.

[Krylo]

Speaking of, you still coming over for dinner, tonight? I have this new recipe I want to try.

[Jesus]

Don't be silly, Krylo.

I'm already there.

I'm EVERYWHERE

[Jesus]

Yea for then Krylo said, but Big Jezr, look at that time I was going through all that bad shit, there is only one set of footprints!

And I was like, yes my son, for those were the times when I carried you.

But really I had just been getting a snocone.

[Krylo]

Yeah, great, man, but unless your bodily presence is around everyone is gonna be pretty hungry.

[Archbio]

Is that a fat joke?

[Krylo]

It's a mass joke.

[Archbio]

Cannabalism is when you eat someone who just consummed marijuana.