ST Supershadow: Why Old Timers Are Skeptical About Rumors

Ah, man. Supershadow brings back memories.

 

LOL! Did he really say this?? Hilarious.

 

Wow, Supershadow. There was one person who used to spam the AICN with these elaborate story treatments in the talkbacks during the prequel period under a different ID. I wonder if it was him in retrospect. Something about a fleet of dreadnaughts or such. Now I'm going to have to track it now and see if it still there.

 

Back when the Internet was in its infancy I remember printing off these plots and reading them. I will die laughing if we end up with Vader-like sith with jet packs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

SuperShadow. Very koala tea.

 

I remember that! I thought it was ridiculous at the time but that really brings back memories.

 

I had never heard of supershadow before this thread so I checked him out on the wayback machine. The guy sounds like a North Korean propagandist.

Today's rumor mills sound like the AP compared to this guy.

 

Yeah, you couldn't make that stuff up. Well, I guess you actually could.

 

I read a 7-page (yes, 7 pages) "interview" Supershadow had with George Lucas back before Episode II came out. Amazingly, he got some things right. He said Yoda would face Palpatine in Episode III (at the time I didn't think this would happen), and he said Padme would die at the end of Ep.III, which was also up for debate. Much of it was poppycock though.

 

Supershadow is a lot of fun. All that outlandish nonsese...pffff

 

I did kind of like his idea of cloning Luke and Darth Vader at first as the plot of the entire trilogy he proposed until I realized doing that would just make them as average as anyone else that was created.

 

omg! it's all coming true!

 

Supershadow Strikes Back! heck I'd take some of the crap he was shoveling at his site over this severed Luke hand nonsense.

 

I'm in total agreement!

 

Black suits, and jet packs, and hands, oh my!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

George was actually a Sith and SuperShadow was his Sith Apprentice, spreading lies, half-truths, falsehoods......

The truth is finally out.

 

This is an interesting bump.

I'd argue that Supershadow should be an example as to why old-timers should absolutely NOT be so skeptical about rumors, because they've had more than a decade to notice how things have changed since then, including themselves.

Supershadow was a god-level troll, with a hint of legitimate satire thrown in as well. That's all he ever was. He shouldn't be held up as an example of anything but that, unless you want to use him as an object example of how, to quote Qui-Gon, your focus determines your reality.

You focus on b.s. all the time, you're going to think everyone's trying to b.s. you. It's a matter of knowing what to focus on, and you do that by reading, paying attention, and thinking before you post. This post I wrote over in the most recent rumor thread kinda gets at this in more granular detail.

It takes time. Which is why old-timers should absolutely know better by now, because they've got about a decade's worth of it under their belt.

 

I wouldn't have thought that anyone need to be told why people are skeptical about rumours from unproven sources!!!

 

I didn't know anything about Supershadow and still am extremely skeptical of rumors. There is zero reason to take them as fact, since people can never reveal how/why/if they really got the information. But, I'm starting to just tune out all this anyway and just wait on the movie, because the discussions here surrounding rumors get into some completely insane logic and stupid ideas and it taints the enjoyment of just being surprised by it.

 

I appreciate your meaning, but Supershadow's infamy wasn't really the internet's "infancy"... anybody here remember the "alt.starwars" days? THAT was the internet's infancy. Thank you, Al Gore.

 

alt.starwars?

It was all about the Rec.Arts.SF.Starwars.Misc (RASSM) madness, man.

That's where things got crazy

 

We get it. YOU trust the media and think its changed over the last 10 years. Others don't and I've seen plenty of more recent films where the spoilers a year out that claimed to be from respected sources were quite far off.

For example, a year out from X-Men: Days of Future Past one of the repeated plot points, originally appearing in Vulture.com that showed up everywhere from Comic Book Review to MoviePilot.com was...

"In Singer's take, Ellen Page returns as Kitty from the Brett Ratner–directed X-Men: The Last Stand, but this time she uses her powers to send Hugh Jackman's Wolverine back into the past, where he encounters the younger mutants played by James McAvoy, Jennifer Lawrence, and Michael Fassbender. However, something bad happens to Kitty during the time-travel trance, and while Wolverine is still under her spell, the other X-Men must race to find a mutant who can siphon Kitty's powers and bring their friend back to the future. Could that be the plot development that brings Anna Paquin's power-copying Rogue into the fold once again?"
Source: Vulture.com - July 15, 2013

People were certain of it. Only the movie came out and... NOT SO MUCH.

That was last year and not a decade ago. Spoiler sites still get it wrong ALL THE TIME. There's nothing particularly credible about Devin that says we should be listening to every word he says and taking it as gospel truth.

 

That's directly referencing a sequence starring Anna Paquin that was cut from the film. That was written and shot. It existed and was in the movie until...

http://www.vulture.com/2014/04/why-they-couldnt-cut-anna-paquin-from-x-men.html

That article is before even further trims were made that took even the tiny cameo they're referencing out of the picture, leaving only a single appearance at the end of the film, which I don't want to spoil. Anyway - that's not a good example for refuting my point, in that the scene described did exist, and was shot. The report wasn't far off. It is, and was, accurate, especially at the time it was reported.

Vulture isn't a "spoiler site" - they're a legitimate news source due to their affiliation with New York magazine, who must adhere to stricter journalistic standards than any fansite does. Citing Comic Book Review and MoviePilot.com isn't a good look - those sites aren't much more than repeater signals, link collectors with no real credibility on their own. They're exactly the kind of site I wouldn't recommend you rely on at all beyond pointing you to legitimate news sources like industry trades. And again, so far as speaking to Devin's credibility goes - he's yet to be wrong about any of his Star Wars stories specifically, and if you'd like to broaden that scope to film in general, you can do a search at Badass Digest and note that 1) he doesn't specifically run too many "scoop" type reports and 2) when he does, they pan out.

That's because he doesn't run with things unless they're multiple sourced and he's certain he's not going to end up getting his site, and his site's reputation for accurate reporting, all dirty.

 

Oh, man. I was googling old SuperShadow stuff for a nostalgic laugh and this thread popped up. The girlfriend thing was hilarious, but I think my favorite was when he posted a head shot of Ray Park and claimed it was a picture of him.

 

You know, it didn't bother me that SS claimed to know all this insider info and facts and whatnot. It's what he claimed HOW he knew them...that he was a close personal friend of Lucas and is closely involved with the production of the movies themselves and how he, himself, would be making ep 7-9 when it eventually came around. he even had scripts for them up.