 | | Re: Jar Jar will probably be back —Terry Keller
|
| | | (...) lot of gore. And I swear that when OWK slices DM in half, there is a brief flash of red on the screen - like a subliminal suggestion of blood spatter. Besides, doesn't the "Phantom Menace" refer to Senator Palpatine and his secret life? -- (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jun-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Jar Jar will probably be back —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | (...) secret (...) IMO, the 'Phantom Menace' is the Trade Federation. Their attack on Naboo was just a ploy so Palpatine could become Chancelor(?). After the Trade Federation's attack is stopped, most people (except Mace and Yoda) think everything (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jun-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Jar Jar will probably be back —Terry Keller
|
| | | | | | (...) Menace the Trade Feds might be, but phantoms they are not. Out in the open, they are. (1) And the attack was a ploy on Palpatines part, for sure. And at the very end, all seems well with the Republic, except for the phantom menace of the Sith, (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jun-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Jar Jar will probably be back —Ryan Dennett
|
| | | | | | | (...) <Dragonelf1@aol.com> wrote: (...) Palpatine and his (...) attack on Naboo was (...) Trade (...) Yoda) think (...) in the open, (...) the very end, (...) of the Sith, in (...) Ah, Terry you shoulda said "Yoda-speak seem I to be using" :) Ryan (25 years ago, 23-Jun-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Jar Jar will probably be back —Terry Keller
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Nah, that is what I (don't) pay you for. Fixing my mistakes. :-) -- Terry K -- (25 years ago, 23-Jun-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Jar Jar will probably be back —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | | (...) Ah, but something out in the open can still be a 'phantom'. A phantom is 'something existing in perception only', and the Sith are a very real menace. The Naboo thought the Trade Federation was the threat to them and the republic, so the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jun-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Jar Jar will probably be back —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | | (...) So you're saying George could have called this movie "The Feint"? Steve (25 years ago, 23-Jun-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Jar Jar will probably be back —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | | | (...) republic, (...) Sure. Of course, it is his movie, so he could've called it anything just about anything. :) Jeff (25 years ago, 24-Jun-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Jar Jar will probably be back —Geoff Hardy
|
| | | | | | some spoiler below..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (...) Ah... but it's not! Part of the purpose of this movie was to demonstrate how ineffective and weak the Republic was. This was wonderfully shown in the Senate Chamber (...) (25 years ago, 28-Jun-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Jar Jar will probably be back —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) Agreed. (...) Yep. I noticed that the second time I saw the movie. But I also wondered if it might have been DM's light-staff, just below the screen. (...) I don't know. It seems like George Lucas thinks the meaning of "the phantom menace" is (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jun-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | |
