Mr March

WOW! She has a cute nose

I too am at a loss. The debate now has turned into a petty squabble over semantics with arguements raging over the very definition of the word planned, considered, and intention. Neither you, nor anyone else in this thread can say for absolute certainty at what point the 9-12 film saga was considered, pondered, and ultimately rejected by Lucas himself. And given the mounting demand for proof, I suspect that even the day of week, the hour, the minute, and whether or not Lucas was in the bathroom when he made this decision would not satisfy. The point made by my original posts was to simply defend my statement that during the early years, there was a plan/consideration/intention/statement to produce more than six films, however fleeting and transitory those plans/statements/considerations/intentions ultimately became. The point was also to debunk those who are continually saying the 9-12 film history is some invented myth that never had any basis at all, which is an outright lie. I have sourced numerous material which no one has bothered to even inquire about. Will leading bread crumbs directly to the BTM script analysis on RoTJ Scene 61 Script notes strike the point home or will directing you to Vaz and Hata's book page 114 provide enough "definitive" evidence? Shall we go on debating the evidence in the Cinefantastique interviews, the Rolling Stone interviews, The Insider, and whatever else I can possibly find that I remember reading about this subject over the years? I think not. This discussion will continue driving into territory that is serving no purpose other than to fill this thread with text. I also have no intention of spending time doing your research for you or anyone else here. I can only hope you will take the time to read the material I've sourced in this thread and at least consider the possibility. I also hope that you will come to understand that what Lucas said in a 2005 interview has no bearing on what he said years ago when my point is that the nine films were once planned/stated/considered/intentioned. The 2005 Lucas interview would only invalidate my arguement if I said "Lucas is still planning nine films despite what he's saying now in 2005 interviews"...which is something I have never written here and I do not subscribe too. Further, I am not and never have held out any hope for more films beyond the six. The possibility of nine films has been solidly dead since at least 1999 as far as my research can prove (which can be sourced to numerous publications, including the no infamous Empire interview) . Any one of you here that has attempted to paint me with the brush of fandom myth that I hold hope for the production of three more films will continue to be in error and I have no hope of convincing otherwise. Why this preconception even came into this arguement, I cannot fathom. My only guess, from past experience in online discussion, is frustrations you've had with fans that beleive such...preconceptions which you are projecting upon myself and my posts. This is not stopping, so I have no choice but to continue to ignore this character evaluation. I am going to continue on in this thread elsewhere discussing more approriate topics. Thank you for your time.

If you would please explain how I'm not being consistent or my standards are changing, I'd appreciate it. I'm not even sure what you mean here. First, he is saying now, unequivocally, that he never intended to make the latter episodes. And he even comes clean about letting the press think that he did and even encouraging the myth as it grew. From here: I would be thrilled if you could find me a quote of Lucas himself saying: "I originally planned on nine films." Though, really, I'm not sure what that would prove other than he. . . well. . . once planned to do nine films. I merely brought up the nine films myth because it shows just how nebulous this whole idea was that he has some wonderful notebook in which the history of a Galaxy Far Far Away is written, and he merely consults that when he creates his films. What the heck are you talking about? I never said that he never intended to make any other movies beyond original trilogy. I fully believe that he had a vision of what took place before the OT, since he dreamt up the world in which it took place. I just don't believe in the "notebook" myth that all six (or nine) were written at the same time and are now coming out on film untouched by the years or Lucas's changing worldview(s). Which bring us to. . . And I would appreciate it if you calmed down and stopped acting like all this offends you personally. Also, kindly explain how I'm "playing spin." Yes, that's what the trilogy is about now. And if you recognize that this retroactively changes what the OT originally meant, that's fine. And we can debate whether it is a good or a bad change. But what troubles me are the people who come up with odd ways of looking at things such as the "balance prophecy." When they are given one interpretation that still fully fits with all six films but instead choose one that really contradicts the OT and merely assert that the prequels supercede the OT. . . that's where problems arise. At that point, someone is essentially saying: "I don't have to take the interpretation that fits into all six movies because the newer movies are the newer, better, final views of the author that supercede what he did before because he is now simply revealing to us what the OT was supposed to mean all along. It's not that the themes or meaning of the OT have changed, it's just that we understand them better now because he's finally revealed the whole story to us." I find that outlook problematic because it buys into the idea that the notebook myth is real, and that the OT never really meant what it said. We were just ignorant all along for the last twenty years as to its true intentions, themes, and meanings. I don't believe, when Lucas wrote The Return of the Jedi that he then intended to portray the Jedi as essentially unsympathetic (and I'm not even sure now that he intended to do so in the prequels, but the prequels have had that effect). I don't think, when the Empire was ended and Palpatine killed, that he intended for us to believe that this was actually a restoring of "balance" to the force. I don't think, when he introduced Luke in ANH that he intended Luke to be only a tool for furthering the story of Luke's father. I think that the always wanted ot flesh out the "back story" more through films. But that "back story", in my view, would have been dramatically different had he written it twenty years ago. If someone understands all this, great. But saying that the OT always meant this in Lucas's mind and we're now just finally getting a true understanding of his grand vision is. . . again. . . problematic. And, Mr. March, you come perilously close to explicitly stating this when you say: "The story of Star Wars hasn't changed, only the amount of information we are given has altered in the past 20 years." Uh. . . okay. Late Edit: Re-reading your posts to find some common ground (because I think we're actually misunderstanding each other quite a bit), I was struck by this: You keep referring to "sequels". . . but normally sequels take place chronologically later than the original in the fictional timeline. As such, they really don't have as much impact on the original as a prequel, which is what we are discussing. And, in prior non-SW "prequels", care is usually taken to make it entirely episodic so that it doesn't change or spoil the first movie which it fictionally preceds (think Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, though I've always wondered why Indy would claim he's not superstitous in Raiders after seeing all that crazy sh*t go down!). These prequels have a much greater impact on the OT than the average sequel would in any other given movie series. And therefore, I don't think you can use the same sequels change things, that's what they do, perspective so easily. I think intepreting prequels demands that you give the original movies just as much respect and authoratativeness as the new ones. Or, to put it another way, we have to be careful in interpreting them. Some might argue we need to be more careful in interpreting them than Lucas was in writing them. Hurin, I have never said, nor implied that all these supposed 9 films were "already written" in some magical book of the Lucas lore. Idea, concept, treament, and script are all radically different things. Planning at one point in the development of a story to do 9 films, then changing your mind to do only 6 in no way implies that there was NEVER any intention to do 9 films. Lucas once considered doing 9, he's done 6, and now has said he will never do any more. That's it...that's the point I made...nothing else. This is spin. An attempt to take what I wrote and equate it to "Lucas had all 9 stories written out in a book back in the 1977 and Mr March thinks so." So once again, I ask that these assumptions upon my own case be sent to where they belong...in a conversation with someone who actually thinks that way. This is what I mean by standard. You are using a current interview in an attempt to debunk the creative process through which Star Wars travelled decades ago. You say "This is what Star Wars was in 1977" but you are using an interview conducted in 2005 to prove it. In the 70s, Star Wars was once considered to be nine parts. So once again, if you're debating what Star Wars means in 1977, 1985, and 1999, use what Lucas said and what he considered in those years as proof of your claim, not what Lucas says in 2005 (especially when said quote by Lucas contradicts what he said in the past). This is a nice attempt to get the conversation on some "common ground" I'll ignore this for now in the hopes you actually want the discussion to get better.

I'm going to use this post as an opportunity to clearly state my position, since many attempts are being made to debunk my original post with incorrect information or simple misunderstanding. I'll spell out my case specifically from beginning to end. Not even George Lucas knew what path the Star Wars story would take when he first started writing back in '72. When he did start, he had so many ideas, that numerous incarnations of the Star Wars stories created the possibility for many chapters and in turn, many stories. Creative realities, limitations of technology, and ecomonic factors all acted to prevent all of them from becoming a reality, at least early in Lucas' career. So Lucas created a six part saga and chose to make episodes IV, V, and VI. But that's just the beginning. Not only were nine films at one time considered by Lucas, early interviews quote him as saying the possibility for as many as 12 films existed, with Lucas stating "three trilogies and three spin offs". I source BTM. Nowadays, Lucas has no intention of doing more Star Wars films and has currently declared ("currently" meaning 1999 to present) that episodes VII, VIII, IX don't exist and have "never existed". I source Empire Magazine. Moving along, the statement "There has never been any intention of nine films and Lucas has never stated such" is a falsehood and error. Lucas stated in the 70's that there were the possibility for 9 or 12 films and has stated in the 90's that there never was any plans for 9 films. Whatever fashion in which you choose to personally reconcile what Lucas said in the early years compared to what Lucas said in the present is your business. For my part, Lucas has said there were plans for nine films, then changed his mind years later. No big deal to me, but it means that at one time, long ago, there were "PLANS" and Lucas "STATED" them. Regardless, I have defended my original post regarding the 9-part saga and I'm content.

They can't hear ya, March, they have their fingers in their ears. I'll defend my posts as usual. Nothing more. If some choose not to listen, the loss is theirs.

Incorrect. Creative concessions and the reality of a viable story on film does NOT preclude the fact that Lucas originally planned a 9-part saga. In fact, the very source you quote has Lucas indicating as much and the reasons why he chose episode IV to VI.

This is about as much truth about the nine episode saga as can be said for certain.

The "nine episodes" angle is a myth, and Lucas himself has said so: And this really validates a lot of what the more realistic people out there have thought all along. Lucas never had all "nine" (or even six) episodes written down as even fully developed outlines with characters. Heck, it's pretty friggin' obvious that Leia wasn't even Luke's sister when ANH was shot. The guy was flying by the seat of his pants back then (and well, I might add) and just liked perpetuating the myth that he had it all figured out ahead of time. And, if you believe that there were nine episodes. . . how can Star Wars then be about Vader's birth, rise, fall, and redemption if he's dead for the last three films? You are aware that it was originally just "Star Wars" and they actually changed the name and the opening crawl to add "Episode IV" to it after it was successful and sequels became inevitable. Right? Actually, Star Wars was the story of a Galactive Civil War and principally about the heros of that war (Luke, Han, Leia). . . until Lucas decided to change the focus and make it all about Anakin. Now, he can do that if he wants. But we have the right to bemoan it too. I don't think he's duping anyone. He's altered things openly. I just think people are duping themselves if they think that what we're getting now is what he "always envisioned." If you really think that Lucas had the plots and details of the prequels (and even the mythical episodes 7-9) written down and fleshed out, and that these new films represent his complete and full vision of Star Wars as he originally had it, I can't help you. Yes, it's a pity that he waited twenty years to complete it, and thus there are such dramatic, and jarring discontinuities in tone and meaning between them then, isn't it? Or do you really think that this is how he envisioned it as he wrapped up filming on the original movie in 1977, or even RotJ? H The nine episodes is not a myth Hurin. If you're debating about what Star Wars means in 1977, 1985, and 1999, why don't you try at least being consistant with your own standards. Right now, Lucas is saying no more planned films. HOWEVER, Lucas did very much consider doing nine episodes at numerous times in the history of the film franchise. Using your own "original trilogy time period only" standard, Lucas, AT THAT TIME, still had nine episodes planned/considered. Behind the Magic, From Star Wars to Indiana Jones, The Insider, and Lucas's own original writing all declare, from his own words, that nine stories were planned/considered many times from 1975 onward. You should be aware Lucas ALWAYS wanted "Episode IV" in the opening crawl, but the studio objected for reasons of audience confusion. Hence, the title was cut. Not because only three films were ever planned, not because the 9-part saga is a myth, not because Star Wars was about the rise and fall of Vader, nor any of the other attempts you'll make to give this trivia credence to an "OT only" theory. I would appreciate if you handle what I write specifically and stop playing spin. Of course all nine episodes were NOT all fleshed out, written, and planned in 1985 and I never wrote as such. Lucas had his treatments and notes and Lucas ALWAYS wanted to do the sequels, even BEFORE the first Star Wars was made. His own contract for the original movies and sequels stated such. Finally, Star Wars is about Darth Vader's fall and redemption now. If three more films were made, our perception (theres my point again) would change yet again and no doubt Vader's role as the driving force behind the 9-part saga would have even more meaning as Vader's son fulfills the creation of a new force using society. Though this is speculation at best...as is "how can a nine part saga be about Vader?" Funny that. As for everything else in your post, I'll treat it as frustrations you've no doubt launched at others for whatever reasons you may have. The key word being "others" as in, does not apply to me or what I've written here on MW.

You've always felt this way? Or you've felt this way since TPM when the prophecy regarding balance was first mentioned and the end of RotJ was changed from "Luke ends the Empire and the Jedi return when Vader kills the evil Emperor" to "Balance is restored to the force." I like Uxi's explanation as it retains the original meaning to the end of the RotJ. That was a fantastic post, Uxi! The story of Star Wars hasn't changed, only the amount of information we are given has altered in the past 20 years. And yes, Lucas had always invisioned a saga of nine parts and the original trilogy itself went through countless drafts in which entire character arcs and storylines were added and removed. This would include three earlier chapters. To use your own debating standards: Hence the name, "Episode IV" Regardless, Star Wars (and RoTJ specifically) was always about Darth Vader's fall from grace and his redemption. But you don't realize this until one watches the prequels. If the prequels were about Han Solo as a child and growing up, our perception of the original trilogy is again expanded and embelished, but the material in the original trilogy is still there. Han grows, turns back on his criminal ways, falls in love, and eventually becomes the man who destroys both Death Stars. However, Han is a harder sell between prequel and OT because he is a secondary character, unlike Darth Vader who is and always has been the primary Star Wars protagonist/antagonist throughout ALL the Star Wars films...in 1985 and now. Sequels change our perception of the original film or films. They are sequels. They embelish and expand. Sorry for saying so, but in your attempt to claim Lucas has somehow dupped us only proves that you are putting your head in the sand. You may ignore the prequels if that is your choice, but the saga is complete and must be examined with a unifying theory, not piecemeal. Incidentally, this is why people (especially fandom in general) are so enraged by bad sequels. A poor sequel infringes upon the original product which fandom consider sacred. Regardless, the universe at a whole is examined once further product is released. One can plug their ears and hum real loud in protest, but ALL the franchise films as a whole is the true, complete story.

I've always felt the imbalance in the force was all the force users with the exception of Qui Gon Jinn. Everyone, including the Jedi order, Palpatine, Dooku, Maul, Ben, and Yoda are all using the force for their own ends. Usually, this revolves around preserving the Old Republic or supplanting it. But the force itself is change and it seems of all the Jedi, only Qui Gon understood this. The Republic was stagnating as was the all the races living within it. In the force, the Jedi had held a monopoly for centuries and none of them delved into the living force nor followed it's path as Qui Gon did. In order for there to be growth and change, a balance had to be brought back into the fold. Anakin was the key to that change, first destroying the Jedi in the prequels (thus destroying the static monopoly of force theology) and then destroying the Sith in the original trilogy (removing an equally static monopoly that served no growth in the force). It then left both the force in a new found balance and the galaxy itself in a stage of rebirth, politically and culturally. Personally, I love the idea of the force as an allegory for humanity. Despite every step humanity has taken to keep itself static and rigid (whether it's laws, oppressive/stagnant government, or religion), humanity will always change and grow in spite of itself. Unless humanity destroys itself, through the death of birth or elimination of all life, it will continue to change and grow toward some end in spite of everything done to contain it.

I couldn't have said any of that better myself. I never really felt any sympathy for Vader, but after seeing Episode III I had a lot of sympathy for him. The guy was only doing what he thought was best at the time for Padme out of love, which turned out to be the wrong thing to do. How could you not be sympathetic to that? I really enjoyed the movie...more so cause of how it evoked emotions...most movies don't do that for me. The only thing I disagree with you on, Mr March, is the love story. I didn't think it was bad at all. But yea...I saw it tonight and loved it...and I'm not much of a Star Wars fan either...so that says something to me at least. Thank you Oihan. Actually, the love story in both AoTC and RoTS wouldn't have been nearly that difficult to stomach if the dialogue wasn't so bad. All that would have been required was a rewrite and it would have been acceptable. I feel it's the dialogue and the actors having to try to convincingly deliver such poor dialogue that hurt the whole story arc. However, in Sith, we get to see the end of Anakin and Padme's relationship and the dialogue was spot on. This redemmed much of the third film IMO. I'm pretty much a hardcore Star Wars film fan, so I loved AoTC and RoTS. Don't really care for the EU, but I do like some of the PC games and I often buy ever book I can that features info on the spaceships. So I'm hooked. It's nice to hear that other less-ardent fans thought Episode III was great too

Some of the texts are actually well written character studies. Quite impressive actually. Thoughtful and true to the character. Strange to see a website like this, but quite interesting nonetheless.

I vote bsu legato's post above be engraved into a plaque and a legible jpeg of it to be posted on the front page of MacrossWorld. Love ya bro!

As long as you can accept the differences between film and reality, I don't think your knowledge will ruin any film with sword fights. My own knowledge has highlighted weaknesses in many films I enjoy, but overall the themes worked and the film was a quality product. At the very least, your criticism means you're thinking when you watch film and that's actually better than the average audience

I know I'm going to catch hell for this, but Duke Togo is absolutely right. Star Wars is a throwback to the melodramatic stories of film decades past in more ways than just the story. Star Wars has always had cheesy, contrived dialogue, Return of the Jedi being the worst offender of the original trilogy. I can honestly say that the prequels are no different. Now, if you want to say the love story in the prequels was weak compared to the original trilogy, or that more jokes fell flat in the prequels than episodes IV to VI, or Jar Jar Binks was the biggest character failure among all the Star Wars films, then I'd say you're on the right track. But the prequel dialogue somehow being a marked divergence from that established in the original films? Sorry, but it just isn't so.

I'd just like to address your concerns, since these criticisms often arise. Please understand that film is first and foremost art and entertainment. As a visual medium, film is meant to be aesthetically pleasing to the viewing audience. Ultimately, filmmakers will always choose what is visually engaging as opposed to following strict reality. What you may find visually engaging is simply not as exciting to most everyone else. Keep in mind, you are a specialist watching a film made for the general public; for the layman. A rocket scientist watching Ron Howard's Apollo 13, a lawyer watching Rob Reiner's A Few Good Men, or a soldier watching Micheal Mann's Heat will always find fault in the subject matter. As good as films get, they can never stand up to intense scrutiny by specialists who know what they are talking about. I don't beleive you're being overly critical. However, I do believe you are forgetting what kind of person you are and you what you know. Star Wars isn't going to stand up to someone such as yourself watching the fight scenes with a critical eye. Besides, filmmakers couldn’t do it right even if they tried. They are filmmakers, not rocket scientists, lawyers, and soldiers

I couldn't agree more. After watching Revenge of the Sith, the urge to watch the original trilogy is intense.

The film was a fine addition to the Star Wars saga and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Of all three prequels, I can safely say the best is Episode III Revenge of the Sith. Going even further, I firmly believe RoTS is better than Episode VI Return of the Jedi, but weaker than A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back. Episode III will definitely enjoy more viewing on DVD J Praise Battle of Coruscant – This is easily my favorite capital ship space battle of all the six Star Wars films. Modern special effects have finally allowed a clear and more precise picture of what capital ship warfare looks like in Star Wars. Never before have capital ship brawls looked this good, easily eclipsing the battles in Babylon 5 (IMO, the previous title holder). The journey of the two Jedi Interceptors was a brilliant way to follow the battle. In particular, the opening scene introduces the battle in both an immediate and extremely dramatic way as the two Jedi Interceptors literally dive in. Visually, the entire sequence was a milestone. Even the fighter dogfights were amazing (though the Battle of Yavin and Jango vs. Ben still hold the trophys for best Star Wars dogfight IMO). All it lacked was the compelling, narrative climax of the fleet engagement in Return of the Jedi. However, the Battle of Coruscant was not the same kind of battle and never pretended to be. It did things on it’s own terms and did it better IMO. Duels – Good gawd this film has a lot of action! Ben&Anakin vs. Dooku, Ben&Anakin vs. Grevious, Ben vs. Grevious, Mace vs. Sidious, Yoda vs. Sidious, and Ben vs. Anakin. Not to mention Anakin, Ben, and Yoda all featured in numerous scenes carving up droids or clones. Not only were the saber duels numerous, but almost every fight was unique. Ben&Anakin vs. Dooku was again a chess match with some damn fine upward stance fighting, Mace vs. Sidious was a down-and-dirty brawl, the two slugging it out with little near zero force powers to cloud the fight. Watching Ben systematically smackdown Grevious’s blade-spinning meat grinder was thoroughly enjoyable. Yoda really showed off some power as did Sidious in the Senate duel. Lastly, Ben and Anakin fighting was so amazing and easily the most emotional duel of the film. I loved every duel and the pacing of each one was almost perfect. Rarely did they feel overly long and even more amazing was the freshness of each duel, especially in light of the number of duels. Genuinely Emotive – This is probably one of the best Star Wars films for evoking some true emotion from the audience. The previous two prequels did little to convey any convincing drama or have the audience actually feel for many of the characters. Episode III certainly gave an effort to create some tense drama and truly tragic developments. Yoda gave perhaps the most emotional performance of the film, with both Ian Mcdiarmid and Ewan McGregor also adding well needed doses of stronger acting. Anakin himself was also a source of good drama. Christensen’s performance wasn’t outstanding, but the story itself allowed the audience to feel a true sense of pity for the character, a reaction equally surprising given that the character is generally unlikable. Locales and Technology – Given the grand scale of all the Star Wars films, it’s rather unusual that the RoTS film feels like one of the most epic in scope. The many different planets and sets really grant a great sense of the grand universe of Star Wars. Mustafar, Kashyyyk, Utapau, and the Coruscant locales were all thoughtfully created and visualized to perfection. Each world was a believable and fully realized place, done with the proper style and theme needed for each scene. Episode III also featured a fanboys delight of amazing technology. From the big space ships, to the ground vehicles and new weapons, there was plenty to enjoy. The energy staves of Grevious’s entourage, the wheel bike, and Grevious himself were some of the best new displays of Star Wars technology yet seen in the series. The clones continued to play a great role and the film featured a broad diversity of different clone troops in all kinds of specialized roles (including camoflauge armor, what a concept!). The world of Kashyyyk was a welcome sight given the prominence of Chewbacca in Star Wars. Merging with the Original Trilogy – More than the other prequels, this third film successfully merges the prequels and the original trilogy together in numerous inventive ways. The design lineage of the Venator Star Destroyers (including the removal of the red Republic colors in the final shots), the Correlian Corvette making appearances (including the delightful white corridors making a shot), the role of Bail Organna, the closure of Ben and Yoda’s characters, the death of Padme when both the twins were born, and naturally Anakin’s dismemberment and return as Darth Vader. By the time you get to the end, you’re ready to watch episodes IV to VI. Criticisms Extraneous Scene – The entire battle of Kashyyyk (great to hear this name pronounced at last) felt very extraneous. As a fanboy, I have no real complaints and I loved seeing the wookies in battle. As a fan of film, this entire sequence could have been cut, leaving in just the sequence that shows the murder attempt upon Yoda. The time could have been put to better use developing more characters, adding more to Anakin’s downfall, or any number of more important story arcs. Dialogue – Once again, Star Wars stays true to all that it is, even the faults. At many points the dialogue was again weak and certainly could have used some re-drafting and editing. Especially in the first half of the film, there were several moments that made even the most ardent fan cringe. Luckily, the love story between Padme and Anakin, though weak once again, was infinitely more beleiveable and tolerable than in AoTC. Minor Quibbles – I wanted to see Qui Gon’s apparition speaking to Obi-Wan Kenobi. It would have been a tidy way to give Ben’s character more closure for the prequels. I also would have liked some more history on Sidious and Yoda. These two characters feature so much in the entire story arc, yet we know so very little about where they came from, their history, or even what race Yoda is and how Palpatine learned the dark side powers. There are some other complaints, but I’m becoming a nitpicking fanboy at this point. I hate concentrating on the negative, especially when I genuinely loved the film, so I’m going to stop here. I'd easily give Episode III Revenge of the Sith 9 out of 10. One of my top favorite Star Wars films.

I watched Revenge of the Sith at midnight. The film was fantastic. Easily the best of the prequels and I enjoyed it far more the Episode VI Return of the Jedi. The space battle alone is worth watching this movie. It totally eclipses any Star Wars space battle to date. The duels were amazing, each one was exciting, and there were so many! Can't really say much more without going into spoilers, so I'll leave it at what I've already written. Needless to say, RoTS is an action packed, science fiction extravaganza and a surprisingly emotional story. You actually feel genuine excitment, sadness, and shock at a Star Wars story again. This one is certainly a win in my books...a big win.

New pictures look even better. The sculpt seems to be improving. I've noted the new DYRL? style hands as well. Very nice!

Sounds encouraging!

I'll be attending the 12:01 showing tonight. No need to call in sick or take a day off. The long weekend is coming so I'll have plenty of time to recover

Bottom line is, that killer app. If your favored console doesn't have it, you're not getting my money

The missiles at least have to be a removable block. The old pictures that featured just the tips of each missile looked terrible. I agree that as a fan, there obviously isn't any choice. It's either buy this new Dropship or go without. But really, at this price I expect more. And quite frankly, I've gone without for a long time. It's much easier to continue going without that to buy a half-assed product. You hear that Aoshima? You gotta work for my bucks As long as my self control is still working anyway

Love it! Great work. The curves are REALLY working for me