PhoenixRising

Of course.

a new hope

He's definitely unbeatable.

sum1

Unbelievably bad.

a new hope

I guess that's an accomplishment in itself. Being the best at being bad.

sum1

If you say so.

a new hope

Trying to look at the bright side of this

sum1

Why?

a new hope

To balance out your negative views Like the force. Balance and all.

PhoenixRising

Well, I think that George Lucas was going through a midlife crisis when he did the prequel trilogy. I honestly think that Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi should've been Episodes I, II, and III, because Darth Vader's backstory can be told in a single film. Most of The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones was unnecessary filler. The events of Revenge of the Sith was really all you needed to know.

Remember this? This was the original opening crawl from the 1977 release of Star Wars. There was no damn Episode IV: A New Hope. That was added on in the 1979 re-release to promote The Empire Strikes Back, which was coming out the following year in 1980.

sum1

Thanks for that Alex. Yes, it's Star Wars, not A New Hope. A New Hope is my co-mod, because she was born yesterday. Remember, George's interpretation of "balance" means wiping out the Dark Side, not very balanced at all. Totally doesn't get the meaning of the word.

a new hope

I have a feeling the sequels are going for actual balance.

sum1

Yeah.

PhoenixRising

The sequels are going for political correctness, not balance. And they suck.

You're welcome, sum1. Yeah, I noticed.

Well, the Dark Side being wiped out by the Light Side and the Sith being smaller in number than the Jedi is actually quite consistent with the basic nature of the universe itself, which is asymmetry. Or, more specifically, baryonic asymmetry. It's the reason why the universe even exists in the first place. When the universe began after the Big Bang, nothing existed but pure matter and energy, but matter was divided into two types - baryonic material(matter) and anti-baryonic material, or "antimatter."

Matter and antimatter annihilate each other when they come into contact, creating explosive energy far greater than nuclear weapons, and the resulting annihilation created the most cataclysmic conflict in the history of the universe. But after it was over, matter became the dominant material in the universe and antimatter was scattered to the far reaches of the cosmos. Approximately 16% of the universe is matter, roughly a quarter of the universe is the mysterious substance known as "dark matter," and the majority of the rest of the universe is energy and empty space. Antimatter barely exists at all, very difficult to find or reproduce in a laboratory. Scientists to this day don't understand why the universe even exists or has mass, because according to all their math, data, physics, and science, it shouldn't exist at all. Matter and antimatter should've theoretically annihilated each other out of existence, leaving nothing but energy. But we know that matter still exists and the universe exists. What scientists can't understand is why, and if matter does exist, why is there not equal amounts of antimatter? Why are there no antimatter planets, stars, and galaxies to go along with the ones made of matter? Of course, if there were, they would start annihilating anything they came into contact with that was made of matter and... well, the whole thing would just start all over again.

So the point is that while baryonic asymmetry is the greatest mystery in the universe, it is also a fundamental element of the universe itself, and everything that exists in the universe. Everything is asymmetrical. Your right lung has three chambers while your left lung only has two. The majority of people are right handed while only a small minority are left handed, and an even smaller minority are ambidextrous. Asymmetry is the actual balance in the universe.

a new hope

I hope you're not implying George Lucas thought of all of that, cause I think that's giving him too much credit

sum1

Lucas wasn't looking to represent the basic nature of the universe, he was looking for a situation in which there were zero sith. Total destruction of the Dark Side. Which he considered "balance." No, asymmetry is not "balance", that's a contradiction in terms. Balance doesn't mean the natural order of things, it means balance, symmetry, equal weight on both sides. Which doesn't equate with Lucas's aim of Jedi and no Sith.