|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Oct 9, 2012 10:07:02 GMT -8
Available via WinAmp now too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2012 15:58:45 GMT -8
And iTunes!
|
|
freyki
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 86
|
Post by freyki on Oct 9, 2012 16:02:35 GMT -8
I will check my beyondpod feed now, here's hoping!
-Freyki-
|
|
willh
Journeyman Douchebag
Posts: 220
|
Post by willh on Oct 9, 2012 17:29:38 GMT -8
Bruce Willis was dead all along. It's a cookbook. Snape kills Dumbledore. Vader is Luke's father. The chicken was really a baby. Deckard was a replicant. It was all just Tommy Westphall's imagination The Planet of the Apes is really Earth. Soylent Green is people!
|
|
|
Post by kaitoujuliet on Oct 9, 2012 18:10:09 GMT -8
Wow, Stu, you're really baiting Tolkien fans, aren't you? Okay, here's my gauntlet: The last two Harry Potter books bit worse than Twilight.Oh, and Cowboy Bebop is a better space western than Firefly.I am sooooooo getting shunned for this, but that felt good. :-P Well, depending on who you ask...
|
|
daniel
Journeyman Douchebag
Posts: 217
|
Post by daniel on Oct 9, 2012 19:28:58 GMT -8
Here willh fixed that
Bruce people! It's a Willis was dead all along. Snape cookbook. kills Dumbledore. Vader kills Dumbledore. The chicken is Luke's father.. Deckard was really a baby. It was all just replicant. The Planet of Tommy Westphall's imagination Soylent Green is the Apes is really Earth.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Oct 9, 2012 22:11:56 GMT -8
Well, depending on who you ask... If anyone reads the book by Phillip K Dick, and considers the man and his literary mission, the issue is not whether Deckard is or isn't a replicant it's about considering the nature of humanity and being human. . . There is no conclusive answer because there was never meant to be one. That was always PKD's style: open ended, debatable and designed to make you question the nature of everything like an Ouroborus . . . PKD was a fascinating man in real life with a lot of very unusual personal ideas of his own.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Oct 10, 2012 3:41:33 GMT -8
I had to laugh when you guys were describing the validity of making a virtually impregnable fortress for an NPC. To the point of setting killer traps to snare the unwary and to promote player creativity in problem solving. I agree . . . But then I recall the vitriol of scorn placed on The Tomb of Horrors for doing exactly that . . . It is, if I recall, the last resting place of the most powerful lich to walk Oerth . . . So powerful as to be the first Demi lich in AD&D (not to mention being a challenging module designed for tournament play). Not criticising your observations or opinions I just felt compelled to point out this small disconnect
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Oct 10, 2012 5:05:40 GMT -8
Okay, here's my gauntlet: The last two Harry Potter books bit worse than Twilight.That's a bit like saying a Big Mac is better than a Whopper. Fast Food is shit don't eat it. Well, depending on who you ask... *NERD RAGE!* Only if they never read the book! Deckard in the movie and in the book are not the same character. Movie Deckard = Frank Martin "The Transporter" Book Deckard = John McClane "Die Hard" Also Ridley Scott doesn't give a shit that there was a book ever written, a Prometheus deleted scene indicates that Sir Peter Weyland once knew Dr. Eldon Tyrell. So now Aliens and Blade Runner take place in the same universe. Great. I imagine this is so Scott can put Weyland-Yutani in his new Blade Runner Sequel. If anyone reads the book by Phillip K Dick, and considers the man and his literary mission, the issue is not whether Deckard is or isn't a replicant it's about considering the nature of humanity and being human. . . There is no conclusive answer because there was never meant to be one. That was always PKD's style: open ended, debatable and designed to make you question the nature of everything like an Ouroborus . . . PKD was a fascinating man in real life with a lot of very unusual personal ideas of his own. I would say the story is more than some stupid twist of whether or not Deckard could possibly be a Replicant, but a look at what is means to be human and I think Isidore is a big part of that journey, so of course he is not in the movie.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Oct 10, 2012 5:29:47 GMT -8
Bruce Willis was dead all along. It's a cookbook. Snape kills Dumbledore. Vader is Luke's father. The chicken was really a baby. Deckard was a replicant. It was all just Tommy Westphall's imagination The Planet of the Apes is really Earth. Soylent Green is people! On the subject of Spoilers. There is a statute of limitations it's a simple mathematical equation (Release Date x Popularity) + DVD release - Book Release x Go Fuck yourself = how long I have to wait before I can speak my mind Also I think this is Important, any story that is only good/enjoyable based on one aspect/twist that can be easily spoiled is a bad story. Here's an example "The Game" by David Fincher it's twists and turns and you can't quite be sure until the end who is behind it. Then once you find out either that was what you thought or you were surprised. Now trying watching it again. Ugh. All the suspense and mystery is gone. The character are kind of bleh and not much happens. You could say well it's that way for mysteries and suspense. I would point to the BBC Sherlock show, or an old Mystery Green For Danger. In both of these there are twists and turns but the story is not hinged on them there is more to story. Characters with paths you enjoy watching. If it is a good story you can't spoil it. When I was a film student I watched tons of movies, now I can see every trick in the book. I knew who was going to die in the Avengers movie based on certain script cues and character uses. I still enjoyed it. I didn't need to be surprised.
|
|
|
Post by inflatus on Oct 10, 2012 5:39:35 GMT -8
Someone died in the Avengers movie?!
You bastard!
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Oct 10, 2012 5:50:08 GMT -8
Okay, here's my gauntlet: The last two Harry Potter books bit worse than Twilight.That's a bit like saying a Big Mac is better than a Whopper. Fast Food is shit don't eat it. Well, depending on who you ask... *NERD RAGE!* Only if they never read the book! Deckard in the movie and in the book are not the same character. Movie Deckard = Frank Martin "The Transporter" Book Deckard = John McClane "Die Hard" Also Ridley Scott doesn't give a shit that there was a book ever written, a Prometheus deleted scene indicates that Sir Peter Weyland once knew Dr. Eldon Tyrell. So now Aliens and Blade Runner take place in the same universe. Great. I imagine this is so Scott can put Weyland-Yutani in his new Blade Runner Sequel. If anyone reads the book by Phillip K Dick, and considers the man and his literary mission, the issue is not whether Deckard is or isn't a replicant it's about considering the nature of humanity and being human. . . There is no conclusive answer because there was never meant to be one. That was always PKD's style: open ended, debatable and designed to make you question the nature of everything like an Ouroborus . . . PKD was a fascinating man in real life with a lot of very unusual personal ideas of his own. I would say the story is more than some stupid twist of whether or not Deckard could possibly be a Replicant, but a look at what is means to be human and I think Isidore is a big part of that journey, so of course he is not in the movie. [/quote] I absolutely agree that the book is about 'being human' and what constitutes it . . . But PKD would leave the answer with the reader alone. Isildore is there, in the movie, as an amalgam of several other characters. What really annoys me was the sequel books that were written to follow on from the first edit of the movie - the author bravely attempted to resolve the two interpretations onto a single cogent whole . . . And failed miserably because of a lack of consideration for the actual question PKD was poising to reader (replicant night was one of the books). I like PKD, even more when read about his real life . . . his mind expanding experiments certainly contextualise a lot of his fiction.
|
|
willh
Journeyman Douchebag
Posts: 220
|
Post by willh on Oct 10, 2012 6:03:33 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Oct 10, 2012 7:53:40 GMT -8
Except Harrison Ford played him as a human and the original script writer . . . It's better left open ended as PKD intended then no one is right or wrong . . . Ownership of the story belonging to each individual person and the perceptions they bring with them in interpreting the end result. This argument has haunted university halls and the Internet for decades . . . English lit at my old alma mater used to do a course using the book and the movie as a study base. Be a shame to ruin all that effort for and against with a definitive answer. I prefer to treat it as Shrodingers Cat - Deckard is and is not a replicant at the same time until you set his state by looking at him (I love the Copenhagen School of thought on indeterminacy in quantum theory . . . It's a hobby)
|
|
willh
Journeyman Douchebag
Posts: 220
|
Post by willh on Oct 10, 2012 8:43:31 GMT -8
I do not consider the book to have any relevance to a discussion about the movie. Theyre different works.
|
|