Messages

Oh is it? I felt it was a little smoother in this prog. Maybe on account of the 'heavier' covers? I'll have another look.

The psychological effects of paper stock are very strange. I worked on a magazine that was printed on 90gsm paper throughout. As a cost-cutting exercise, we dropped the paper stock to 60gsm but left the covers on 90 gram. Everyone who handled the magazine after we changed the paper thought it was printed on better paper than the previous issue.

Cheers

Jim

That's a really interesting story Jim, no doubt I was probably under that psychological effect too, probably because of the cover, and as Sheldipez pointed out there's no difference between prog 1850 and 1849 stock wise. But I was very convinced there was!

[Blade Runner]

It's as simple as that.

With a film like Blade Runner its never 'as simple as that', 

Explain how Gaff knew Deckard's unicorn dream then.  Go on!!!    

I'll concede that in the original release it seems pretty clear that Deckard is a human.  The bloody voiceover overrides any subtle nuance that may have led people to think otherwise.  Plus there was no unicorn at the end.

There are some who say that the Unicorn dream isn't Deckard's at all! I think it was Paul S. Sammon who proposed that view and gave quite a convincing theory .I'll try to see if I can dig it up from my Blade Runner 'Bible'! 

Hi mate,

I sent you a P.M.

Mabs

Sorry Jim, I meant contrast, not contradt.....bloody typo's! 

The speech in Blade Runner is like the chocolate chip in the cookie - you know it's coming but it's still the good bit.

What keeps me coming back to Blade Runner is the feeling that if I watch it one more time, I'll understand why Batty saves Deckard on that rooftop.

Cheers

Jim

Just as Deckard's about to fall, Batty grabs him (thus saving him), but right at that instant if you listen carefully, Batty cries "Kinship". A lot of Blade Runner enthusuasts cite this as proof that Deckard is a replicant, hence Batty uttering that word. Batty knows what Deckard is, but he himself doesn't know.

But, I am from the school of thought that believes Deckard is human. Because if he were to be a replicant, then the contradt between Deckard's soulless humanity and Batty's poetic, lifely inhumanity would not work. And it's that contradiction about these two characters I find absolutely fascinating, that Batty is a replicant and yet he craves for life, quoting (or mis-quoting!) William Blake and so on. And yet Deckard, the human is more like an android, devoid of feelings (albeit for some small instances).

Ulimately the reason why I feel Batty saves him, is because as death approaches him he wants to seek some sort of affirmation, that he has a soul. And this in turn is symbolised with him holding the dove, and it flying off towards the heavens as he dies. An allegory perhaps of Batty's own soul ascending to heaven.

Oh dear! Not to mention mis-quoting Roy Batty's speech....that's unforgiveable in my eyes. 

Sea Bee's.......tsk tsk (shakes head disapprovingly).

Rutger Hauer= Legend.

He's the star of the show, the beating heart of Blade Runner.

Thanks for posting the 'tears in the rain' speech, SB. I've almost got my own tears welling up (minus the rain) reading that! 

Aww, heart melting stuff Sideshow Bob! He's beautiful (so's yours Shaolin Monkey!) 

[Blade Runner]

Watched Blade Runner last night. One of the versions without the narration. Definitely one of the best movies I've ever seen.

Don't get me started on Blade Runner! My favourite movie of ALL time. This film is my idea of cinematic nirvana. From Vangelis' soothing synth score, Ridley's masterful direction to Webb-Peoples' superb script; everything comes together to create a unequivocal masterpiece. A beautiful nightmare. From the opening Hades landscape with fire bellowing out from black towers, to the neon lit streets awash in perpetual rain and darkness, to the design of Tyrell's buildings, like great Aztec temples looming over everything, or the dark, hallways of the Bradbury building, littered with mannequins, statues inside a desolate temple , occasionally disturbed by flittering lights from outside - it is quite possibly, the most visually breath-taking film I have ever seen. And of course the story is another, from which a whole myth has built up. The Deckard vs Replicant debate. The Unicorn. The motif of the eye. Roy Batty as Jesus (he does create stigmata by driving the nails through his hands).

And of course, that speech. Pure poetry.

There is no other film quite like it. By the way, I have a soft spot for the voice over version as it was the version I watched first as a youngster. But overall, the Final Cut is the definitive version for me now.

Yeah, I do hope we see a follow up- it'll be really interesting. I really enjoyed the storyline.

Haaaang on - who let Locust back in here?! 

Thanks to me, I would say! 

Lost Girls is among a handful of Alan Moore stories I've yet to read. I'm not the type to get embarrased easily though,  I'd happily walk into a busy bookshop and purhchase it! 

You won't really be missing out if it remains unread you know mate. And don't think about the embarrassment because if there is any, it's soon forgotten and replaced whenever you notice Lost Girls on your bookshelf and think "I wasted close to £30 on that..."

Don't know about the £30 price tag, but it's going for really cheap right now on eBay. As a Moore completist, I feel I must have a look even if its more later down the line.

Conan the Barbarian (2011) on Channel 5 tonight.

It's on at the same time as Citizen Kane (BBC Four, 9pm). I've only seen one of them, can anyone who has seen both offer an opinion on which is better?

Citizen Kane, without a doubt.

But Conan is quite fun too! I like it, I've talked about it far too often on here as to why I like it, so we'll leave it at that!

Check your PM for an inquiry mate.

Conan the Barbarian (2011) on Channel 5 tonight.