Sign In

imperialscum

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
7-Mar-2013
Last activity
17-Oct-2017
Posts
3211

Post History

Post
#1113412
Topic
Parroty Thread
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Why would anyone give him the benefit of the doubt? He’s got a proven track record.

What would that track record be? Staying on topic. Never breaking the forum rules. Being civil, even when people throw insults at me.

Post
#1113352
Topic
The upcoming movies thread (alternatively: the trailer thread)
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

Why’s it easier to cut the origami shot? The dream comes out much more cleanly, and the origami shot still has meaning without the dream (Gaff is telling Deckard that escaping with Rachel is just a fantasy that can never be real). The dream, on the other hand, means nothing without the origami shot at the end.

Deckard falling for Rachel is being a unrealistic and unicorn nicely represents that. But this can apply to both the origami and the dream. The difference is that the dream would imply that Deckard himself subconsciously knows it, while with origami, Gaff is relying that fact to him. So, the dream can stand on its own just as easily.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1113320
Topic
The upcoming movies thread (alternatively: the trailer thread)
Time

darthrush said:

NeverarGreat said:

darthrush said:

Jeebus said:

New Blade Runner 2049 trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZOaI_Fn5o4

Not a fan of this trailer. Firstly, why the hell does this trailer start with a 5 second trailer for itself?

I’m not averse to action at all, but the action scenes presented in the trailer seem fundamentally un-Blade Runner. I think that’s partly due to the way the trailer was edited. This trailer is trying to market the movie as an action film for mainstream audiences, so it follows the mainstream trailer formula. It’s always a landscape shot or two, someone talking (sometimes to another person), action clips with overbearing drums, repeat ad infinitum.

The cinematography is gorgeous and the soundtrack is killer, though.

Agreed. But hands down the most disappointing aspect of it was that they basically confirmed that Deckard was a replicant, and I DESPISE that theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_2049
"When Scott was asked about the possibility of a sequel in October 2012, he said, ‘It’s not a rumor—it’s happening. With Harrison Ford? I don’t know yet. Is he too old? Well, he was a Nexus-6 so we don’t know how long he can live. And that’s all I’m going to say at this stage.’"

The general consensus is that Deckard being a Replicant diminishes the story of the original film, and though I have never much cared for the Blade Runner universe, I agree. It seems like Ridley Scott has entered the phase where his interpretation is the right and valid one, even at the expense of the basic theme and continuity of his franchises. Sounds like another director I know…

Exactly. Everything works better in the Blade Runner when he’s a human which is why the final cut minus the unicorn dream is the perfect cut of the movie for me.

You can keep the dream and just cut the origami shot. It is easier.

Anyway, Scott has proven to be horrible when it comes to story and ideas. He is good when good ideas and story is handed over to him and he sticks to it.

This post has been edited.

To the top