»How did Neo kill those squiddies...«

CaptPostMod wrote:

max314 wrote: People who look for MWAM are like those who wish Deckard was a replicant in Blade Runner. It's nothing more than a hollow twist in my view. And it has even less grounding than the BR conspiracy. Whoa! MWAM might be a fairly unproductive concept in terms of the current Matrix trilogy. But Deckard being a replicant is hollow? What have you smoked! Ridley Scott himself said Deckard is a replicant. How much more proof do you need? Have you seen the director's cut? I actually prefer the theatrical cut (with voice-overs), but the director's cut is considered the official version. What did you think the unicorn dream was meant to symbolize in that cut? (Hint: Ridley Scott said it symbolizes that Deckard is a replicant) BBC News wrote: In Channel 4's documentary On The Edge Of Blade Runner, Scott discusses the scenes and asked what they mean, he confirms with a grin: "He's a replicant".

Yeah, I'm aware of all that.

But when Harrison Ford was asked about his character's replicancy, he said that the very idea was absurd. He said that him and Ridley had never discussed the idea even once, and it had not ever arisen as an issue.

It's been suggested that Ridley was amused and intrigued by the fans' interpretation of the theatrical cut and just went along with it because he liked the idea.

I have seen the director's cut (it's the version I own), and I have also seen that Channel 4 documentary (caught it on telly a few years back), but I still think that the idea of Deckard's replicancy isn't definitive (although it is plausible) for the reasons stated above. I also acknowledged in my above post that there is more reason to believe this 'Deckard is a replicant' theory than the 'MWAM' one.

P.S. - Those origami pieces that Gaff leaves behind could just be a result of him knowing Deckard's thoughts. Think about it: if Rachel was implanted with the memories of Tyrell's niece, then that means that the memories had to somehow be extracted from Tyrell's niece.

Furthermore, that last origami piece at the end could mean nothing more than 'Gaff was here and let Rachel live'.

Spinak wrote:

matrix-explained.com...

A lot of that is extra-contextual conjecture.

For example, you took the line "this is about Zion" completely out of context from the situation within which it originated.

well well i dont know if zion is a program or not but if it is....holy shit!

max314 wrote:

Spinak wrote: matrix-explained.com... A lot of that is extra-contextual conjecture. For example, you took the line "this is about Zion" completely out of context from the situation within which it originated.

How is that? The Arch is explaining the newest version of the Matrix (choice, 1%, if left unchecked, etc....) and Neo understands what he is talking about....Zion. He is explaing that Zion is a form of control. How is that completely out of context? Please explain

Nice to see you again, Spinak.
Greetings to you, Shimma, and the rest of the "Awakened".

But I'm going to have to go with Max on this one. Zion is the 1% that Arc is talking about. Not the newest Matrix that he is talking about.

The newest Matrix is the program that is still designed based on our history and varyingly grotesque nature (20 century, peak of "your" civilisation). The difference is that it allows people to leave it. This new install feature gave meaning to the 1% who would make that choice. They wake up and as Zion constitute a growing threat to the machine world.

To be honest I never saw Blade Runner. I have an idea of what it's about. Maybe I will someday. I wonder if the Bros-W expected so many people to delude to that theory after Neo's stopping the squiddies. They're probably getting a good laugh out of it now.

Keanu Reeves' opinion might count for something too, mainly because he spent so much time with the Wachowskis. And he was one who said that Zion is Zion, there is no bigger bubble to escape from, basically.

so this blade runner is a movie. what is it about, i've never seen it. some one break it down for me plz.

Never saw Blade Runner? *rubs index fingers to both of you*

That's okay. I think both of you will like it, though. I haven't seen that for a looong time. All the references make me want to watch it again.

{Morpheus} wrote:

so this blade runner is a movie. what is it about, i've never seen it. some one break it down for me plz.

It's an amazing film. I'd invite you all over to my place to watch my laserdisc copy of the theatrical version, but I don't have any money for plane tickets If you get the DVD, understand that it is the directors cut which alters the film considerably from its original version. There's a huge debate on which is better (original or directors). If you want to see the original you'll have to buy yourself a laserdisc player (unless you're okay with pan & scan, then you might find the VHS though it's not easy).

The movie is about a detective in the year 2019. He is a very special kind of detective called a blade runner.

The Earth that Deckard lives on is a bit of a distopian wasteland and much of Earth's population has moved off world. In space and on other planets bio-organic androids called "replicants" are used to do the jobs no human wants (soldiering, prostituting, mining, etc...) These androids are made of flesh and look and sound just like humans. However, they are stronger, faster, and maybe even smarter than your average human. And they have a four year life span. They are born looking and thinking like adults, they live four years, and they die. This is to keep them from uprising. It is also illegal for these replicants to be on Earth.

Blade runners are bounty-hunters. When a replicant is reported on Earth, a Blade runner is sent to verify the report and then execute the replicant on the spot. This is not called murder, it's called retirement...

Spinak wrote:

max314 wrote: Spinak wrote: matrix-explained.com... A lot of that is extra-contextual conjecture. For example, you took the line "this is about Zion" completely out of context from the situation within which it originated. How is that? The Arch is explaining the newest version of the Matrix (choice, 1%, if left unchecked, etc....) and Neo understands what he is talking about....Zion. He is explaing that Zion is a form of control. How is that completely out of context? Please explain

"...Zion is a form of control."

I agree with that.

It's like an underground dump for the humans who reject the program, and is useful because they are handy in locating the One and bringing him to the Source to restart the sycle.

But at what point do we hear anything about another Matrix?

The answer is: "never".

Is Zion 'a Matrix'? In a metaphorical sense, yes it is.

Is Zion 'a virtual Matrix'? Shit, no.

There's no evidence of this, no claim, no event that cannot be explained by the terms and exposition given in the movies.

Marsoullis wrote:

To be honest I never saw Blade Runner. I have an idea of what it's about. Maybe I will someday.

You must. It is essential viewing for any science fiction fan, and especially fans of The Matrix.

But don't go in expecting a bullet-timin', rip-roaring, break-neck actioner. It's a slow, detective noir that takes place in a bleak future Los Angeles. To be honest, I think that it has more in common with The Matrix Revolutions than perhaps any other part of the Matrix trilogy, although its relevence does underpin the entire saga.

It deals with issues of sentiency, the place of a human in a world where his tools exhibit the same qualities as himself, etc...the key concerns of cyberpunk, and one of the biggest influences on the style and thematic substance of The Matrix Trilogy.

Marsoullis wrote:

I wonder if the Bros-W expected so many people to delude to that theory after Neo's stopping the squiddies. They're probably getting a good laugh out of it now.

Laughing their asses off.

I never bought that theory, even back in mid-2003. It never looked like anything more than Neo generating what looked like an EMP from his body.

Marsoullis wrote:

Keanu Reeves' opinion might count for something too, mainly because he spent so much time with the Wachowskis. And he was one who said that Zion is Zion, there is no bigger bubble to escape from, basically.

Physically, yes.

{Morpheus} wrote:

so this blade runner is a movie. what is it about, i've never seen it. some one break it down for me plz.

Mm...okay.

Blade Runner is based on the novel by renowned science fiction writer Philip K. Dick, 'Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?'.

If his name sounds familiar, that's because it bloody should! His sceptical view on the nature of our reality is one of the prime influences on the Wachowski Brothers' Matrix trilogy. Other of his cinematically adapted works include the short story of 'Minority Report' and that of 'We Can Remember It For You Wholesale!' (which became Total Recall). Blade Runner was the first cinematic adaptation of a Philip K. Dick novel.

The protagonist of the story is a man called Deckard.

Deckard is an ex-'Blade Runner'.

In the future world of Los Angeles, artificial humans - known as replicants - are used to do jobs considered too hazardous or degrading for human beings. They now work only 'off-world' (i.e. they work on Earth's colonies in outer space) after one of the Tyrell Corporation's most recent replicant models (the 'Nexus 6' model) killed humans on Earth. Blade Runner units - of which Deckard was once a part - were created to hunt down and kill (the politically correct term was 'retire') any replicants that are on Earth.

The Nexus 6 models are the most human-like replicants ever created. They are utterly convincing. The only thing that can give them away is something known as the 'Voigt-Kampff test': a machine that someone is hooked up to to test whether they are a human or a replicant. This is due to the fact that they are 'created' instead of born, and are forced to work in and experience very harsh conditions since their inception. As a result, their emotional state is in high flux, meaning that they do not react to things in the same way as a stable, experience human being would. It is also this inherent, potentially-dangerous flaw that lead their creators at the Tyrell corporation to fit every Nexus 6 model with a 4-year lifespan.

The story of Blade Runner starts when five Nexus 6 replicants hi-jack an off-world ship and make it to Earth. One of the five is killed. The remaining four - two male, two female - are somewhere on Earth. More specifically, they are somewhere in Los Angeles.

The now-retired Deckard is picked up by his old task-master, who tells him that "this is a bad one, the worst yet". "I need your magic", he says. "I need the old Blade Runner".

Deckard is a man who has 'retired' many-a-replicant in his time...and he has an inner hatred for himself and what he has become. Despite his experience, he still gets "the shakes" each time he takes one out. They may not be human. But that doesn't change the fact that Deckard feels like he's a killer.

Deckard tells his old task-master that he should "give it to Holden: he's good". But he has suffered a punctured lung after one of the replicants, Leon, shot him in the chest.

Reluctantly, Deckard takes the job.

The rest is for you to see!

CaptPostMod wrote:

{Morpheus} wrote: so this blade runner is a movie. what is it about, i've never seen it. some one break it down for me plz. It's an amazing film. I'd invite you all over to my place to watch my laserdisc copy of the theatrical version, but I don't have any money for plane tickets If you get the DVD, understand that it is the directors cut which alters the film considerably from its original version. There's a huge debate on which is better (original or directors). If you want to see the original you'll have to buy yourself a laserdisc player (unless you're okay with pan & scan, then you might find the VHS though it's not easy). The movie is about a detective in the year 2019. He is a very special kind of detective called a blade runner. The Earth that Deckard lives on is a bit of a distopian wasteland and much of Earth's population has moved off world. In space and on other planets bio-organic androids called "replicants" are used to do the jobs no human wants (soldiering, prostituting, mining, etc...) These androids are made of flesh and look and sound just like humans. However, they are stronger, faster, and maybe even smarter than your average human. And they have a four year life span. They are born looking and thinking like adults, they live four years, and they die. This is to keep them from uprising. It is also illegal for these replicants to be on Earth. Blade runners are bounty-hunters. When a replicant is reported on Earth, a Blade runner is sent to verify the report and then execute the replicant on the spot. This is not called murder, it's called retirement...

Ah, you're explanation is so much more succint than mine...I envy you

max314 wrote:

Ah, you're explanation is so much more succint than mine...I envy you

Thanks

It's also worth noting that while the script for Blade Runner was originally inspired by the Philip K. Dick novel, it also takes some elements from William S. Burroughs screenplay adaptation of Alan E. Nourse's novel The Bladerunner. The Nourse novel and Burroughs screenplay are not overly represented in the film, but they were influences.

The Dick novel is so different from the film as to be virtually unrecognizable. But it is a fantastic read. It adds some very Matrix-y elements to the Blade Runner world. Buster Friendly and Mercer (two major characters/elements in the book) seem very in the spirit of the Matrix films.

ps. I think Ryan Seacrest and Buster Friendly are the same guy Does Seacrest ever go off the TV/Radio?

holy hell thx for all the replies i now know what it is about, but still need to see the actual movie...any ideas where i can find it? anyone?

CaptPostMod wrote:

It's also worth noting that while the script for Blade Runner was originally inspired by the Philip K. Dick novel, it also takes some elements from William S. Burroughs screenplay adaptation of Alan E. Nourse's novel The Bladerunner. The Nourse novel and Burroughs screenplay are not overly represented in the film, but they were influences.

Kewl. I'd heard about the stuff to do with the screenplay, but the Alan E. Nourse novel is news to me. I guess it makes for a more poster-friendly title, eh?

CaptPostMod wrote:

The Dick novel is so different from the film as to be virtually unrecognizable. But it is a fantastic read. It adds some very Matrix-y elements to the Blade Runner world. Buster Friendly and Mercer (two major characters/elements in the book) seem very in the spirit of the Matrix films.

According to Gibson, he had almost completed writing 'Neuromancer' (another highly influencial force in The Matrix Trilogy) and was all set to publish it in 1982. Of course, the highly-influencial book was then delayed by a number of years after Gibson felt that his printing of 'Neuromancer' would lead to people accusing him of ripping off the Ridley Scott epoch

{Morpheus} wrote:

holy hell thx for all the replies i now know what it is about, but still need to see the actual movie...any ideas where i can find it? anyone?

*cough*download*cough*

*eh ehm* what off limewire or what if it full lenght theatrical i dont know if i can download it. *mmm ehm!*

{Morpheus} wrote:

*eh ehm* what off limewire or what if it full lenght theatrical i dont know if i can download it. *mmm ehm!*

I used *cough*limewire*cough* to get the director's cut of the film.

It's damn good quality, complete with Dolby Surround

If you can, get it.

If not, try renting it, or buying it second hand.

Alternatively, there is always the special edition that has been promised for years and that always seems on the verge of an official announcement. Apparently, 2007 is what we're looking at.

*ehm* thx i'll try later im at school right now and their firewalls r hot as hell and restrict pretty much everything*ehm ehm*