SuperJerk

I'm not concerned with his running speed, I'm talking about his total body movement. He runs fast, but he has to struggle to get over the ledge onto the rooftop. I can't imagine body armor would allow someone to be flexible and lightweight enough to do the kinds of fighting Batman's supposed to be able to do.

I guess they wanted people to tie this in with the other Batman movies, even if it probably contradicts parts of the story from the 1989 film, but I STILL DON'T GET THE POINT OF PUTTING BATMAN IN BODY ARMOR. He's not Ironman, here. He's an acrobat and martial artist. If they're worried about bullets, they make lightweight kevlar that would give him protection. How the fuck is he even supposed to move in that thing, let alone do flips and swing around rooftops?

You're absolutely right. I've been watching parts of the original trilogy ever since I read the ROTSith novelization, and it gives the original trilogy a added depth. I rewatched the scene last night from ROTJedi when Luke tells Leia she's his sister. The acting in ROTSith was at about this level, but the acting in AOTC was much worse. Anytime someone blames the script on the bad acting in these movies, I point to Alec Guiness, Christopher Lee, Liam Neeson, Ian McDairmid, Harrison Ford, Peter Cushing, and Jame Earl Jones as people who still managed to give convincing performances given bad material. A good actor can make anything sound real. I think the cave was part of why he went there, I think the taint of the dark side made it easier for him to keep from being detected. I think all 3 of those things are factors. Since we never see Yoda land of Dagobah in ROTSith, perhaps there's a story about how he discovered the place we'll see at some point in the future (the upcoming TV show perhaps?). Given how Lucas left it intentionally open at the end of ROTSith that there might still be Jedi left alive, I can only imagine how many stories can still be told (Vader hunting down additional Jedi, Yoda looking for a place to hide, the formation of the Rebel Alliance, the possibilities are endless).

Anakin did wear the more traditional Jedi robes at the end of "The Phantom Menace", though.

In 2004, the Supreme Court rejected the argument that people detained at Guantanamo were legally outside of the U.S. and did not have the Constitutional rights in the case Rasul vs. Bush, and ruled that prisoners in Guantanamo have access to American courts, citing the fact that the U.S. has exclusive control over Guantanamo Bay (thus making this example different than the rules established by the Johnson v. Eisentrager case about the treatment and rights of German war criminals after WWII). While the Constitution puts limits on what the American government is allowed to do, it never states that the rules are nullified if non-Americans are involved. In my opinion, the US government must treat everyone the same, regardless of where they were born. Imagine if the Declaration of Independence said "Only American are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights". That'd totally violate the spirit of the document, and yet that's what saying "Only Americans have Constitutional rights" argues for. Whether you believe in a devine power or not, it has been the official position of this nation since its founding that all men should have the same rights (failures to do follow this have led to historic struggles in which freedom has ultimately prevailed). Rights are naturally occurring things, not provisions provided to citizens by their government. (I'd be very interested in reading Justice's thoughts on this topic.)

That rules.

So long as its Perez. George Perez is awesome. I had the opportunity to meet him once. Great guy and seems to really love what he does.

Nitpicking is something you only start doing after you've seen it 3 or 4 times...which only seems to reinforce your "get a life" thesis.

We still don't know everything that happened at Abu Ghraib prison. A lot of the photographs are not being released. Many of those released from Guantanamo Bay (and why would they be released if they were guilty of being terrorists?) have accused the government of torturing them. The fact that the U.S. government argued that people detained at Guantanamo were legally outside of the U.S. and did not have the Constitutional rights (so much for the idea that people's rights are given to them "by their creator") that they would have if they were held on U.S. territory indicates that something unusual is going on there.

credit: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/23/tilman.probe.ap/index.html

INCREDIBLE HULK #82 $2.99 UNCANNY X-MEN #460 $2.50 Anybody got the story on what NEW TEEN TITANS WHO IS DONNA TROY TP is?

That's an...interesting...way of evaluating films you got there.

Same thing happened to me when I rented Chinatown. The only movies in the AFI's top ten that I've never seen are On the Waterfront and Singing in the Rain.

I thought Firefly fans got dicked around, but they've got nuthin' on the way Fox treated Futurama fans.

Lita = EdgeHead

I'm definitely on the "torture is wrong" side. Inhumane and pointless. How do you know the information you're getting is accurate? Maybe the fucker is just telling you what you want to hear so you'll stop torturing him.

I'll admit I missed your point, CheesalaIsGood. Then give them a fair trial, and then put them in jail or execute them.

Source? I thought they were SUSPECTS--meaning we don't know if they're actually guilty or not. If they're terrorists, then what acts of terrorism have they committed? If they are terrorists supporters, what have they actually done to support terrorism? Examples?

$1.99 is still too much for "Batman and Robin".

I don't get your reasoning at all. I'm not saying your wrong, but it'd be nice if those who think Amnesty International is full of crap to enlighten the rest of us who apparently don't have the same information as you to give us more to go on than "they're worthless" and "they're bad because they ask for donations".

But it did somehow translate into what smarks who pretty much hate the product now call 'the Good ol days'. Which confuses me, because like you said, most of it was crap, a lot more then now at least, and yet people praise this era. There were a lot of rough spots, of course with high spots, like Austin storylines, Rock storylines, etc. but then you look at the rest of the card during these same times and its like WTF? Because back then it was new and exciting. They did all that stuff that seemed cool at the time, but it seems dumb now because they've recycled it 100+ times since then. Top face vs. evil owner, for example, put WWE back on the map. Now it seems dumb because after it was successful with Austin, they then tried variations of it with Rock, Mankind, Undertaker, Austin again, Triple H, Angle, Cena, and Batista. Surprise heel turns, run-ins, and worked-shoots have all gone from being cool ideas to recycled garbage due to overuse.

I've been waiting 28 pages for someone to say that.

????? Asking for money invalidates being against torture?????

If anyone on E! ever said this, they were probably talking about American Idol.

I just can't buy that quote as legit.