JsARCLIGHT

I got mine in under 4 weeks door to door. One of my people in my office got his in around six, and that was from the "Second Offer" that had different movies. I could have sworn we posted the phone numbers to call in and check status of your orders either in this thread or the High Def thread. If your "order" goes more than five weeks I'd call the punks and ask what's up.

Was there any truth to the internet rumor that the PS3 and it's cell processor are "blacklisted" for sale to "hostile countries" (kind of like night vision and some computer technology)?

OK Hurin, I'm going over your helmet. This is me locking this thread and not Hurin. If anyone has to blame someone, blame me. This serves no real purpose at this point other than as a dick measuring contest.

2 gigs of game, 48 gigs of long, boring FMV sequences and radio back and forth bits.

I'd actually like to see Lance Guest and Catherine Mary Steward reprise their roles if this is going to be a sequel. Lord knows they don't have anything else going on.

If this means they DO NOT redesign the gunstar and we can finally get some decent toys of it... I'm all for it. But you know that isn't going to happen. They will heavily redesign it into some Flight of the Navigator looking soap turd then give the toy license to Jakks Pacific or something so we end up with musclebound Alex and Pole Stripper Maggie and a mis proportioned gunstar with "light and sound action".

We all knew this was coming though. The question was then as it is now: how badly did you want to get boned? Some of us said "not at all" and waited... others said "I love HD DVD" and bought heavily into it... and others still went "purple" and bought both players and both formats (like myself). Now that the dust is settling those three camps are not screwed, screwed and indifferent. The people who held off were denied HD media but they are not out any money, the people who bought only HD DVD are boned in that they are out money and own a dead format, meaning they have to buy Blu Ray now, but they had their HD media for a time. Then the people like me spent the money and had both formats, meaning we lost money yes but we had our HD media entertainment while others did without or waited. I actually will keep my Xbox HD DVD drive up and running and I still will probably buy more HD DVDs. Heck I just bought Beowulf on Tuesday... and I probably will start buying more HD DVD as the clearances and sales start up. It's kind of a boon that HD DVD died right now when it did, because Blu Ray is kind of in a slump at the moment with no really good releases coming out for a while. I can concentrate on buying up the last few HD DVDs I want and not have to worry about buying many (if any) Blu Rays for a few months.

Well if all replicants are manufactured products, I'd expect all of them to have the same "data cards" that the four in the movie had. Kind of like serial numbers on a car. And when a replicant goes rogue I'd think they'd know which one went rogue fairly easily. I've always looked at the Voigt Kampf test more as an excuse to "sell" the concept of replicants in the story rather than as a feasible tool. The only time I'd think the VK machine would prove it's worth was if say you had a bunch of illegal replicants... replicants made with no authorization or record. Or if you had replicants who escape then somehow have massive plastic surgery to completely replace their faces. Either way the movie has plot holes you could drive a truck through... I mean if Tyrell kept records of their product which included photos you'd think someone would notice a "Leon" model applying for a job in waste management. I mean, that would be like a Ford Taurus driving up to a Ford plant and applying for a job. Aren't you a Ford Taurus? No, you must have me confused with someone else.

Not to sound like a tool or anything but how hard can it be to "detect replicants" when he is shown photos of all of them right off the bat? I mean, Deckard knows who is going after, knows what they look like and knows how to kill them. It seems to me his "super skill" is that he's quick, meaning he has good reflexes and instincts that allow him to kill them before they kill him... which he barely manages to do in every encounter, showing that his "quickness" is human and inferior to the Nexus series. In all actuality he lucks out of almost every replicant kill. He doesn't get strangled by Zhora because someone else enters the room, Leon pretty much has him at his mercy until Rachel intervenes, Priss beats the tar out of him before she makes the mistake of putting distance between herself and a guy with a gun and Roy pretty much hands Deckard his ass and is basically toying with him with the (eventual) intention of not killing him but making him "live in fear". Deckard seems to me to be an above average human who is good at tracking and killing replicants out of nothing better than luck coupled with his own tenacity. If we take other things into consideration, Gaff walks with a limp which as others have pointed out possibly came from an injury on duty, which implies a replicant got the better of him... and Leon got the better of Holden. My take on all that is that all the Blade Runners are human and their human strength and skill pales against the replicants, except that the humans have better luck (in Deckard's case). Which possibly stands to reason why there are so few Blade Runners seen in the movie... perhaps "Blade Runner" is an occupational hazard like human mine detector and only the lucky survive. Which may place a big reason why Deckard left... having a job like that would give anyone "the shakes".

That fits with the line that Gaff uses his origami to taunt or rebuke Deckard. In previous scenes he folds a "chicken" when Deckard is hesitant to rejoin the Blade Runner unit and he folds a "little man with a boner" after Deckard meets Rachel, as they search Leon's apartment. In that vein the unicorn origami is the final piece, but does it say that Rachel is the unicorn or Deckard? After all, the two previous origami uses reflected Deckard, why wouldn't the last one as well? Which then raises the ugly question of the unicorn dream... Which can be taken two ways, literally and figuratively. Does Deckard indeed dream of a literal unicorn running through a forest, implying some kind of implanted memory or dream of which others are aware (making him a replicant)? Or is his dream simply a manifestation of his own personal insecurity, feelings of "being different or unique" or his personalization of the emotions and feelings of the replicants he himself is "hunting to extinction"? Gaff's use of a unicorn as his final origami in the literal sense can be seen as him saying "I know your dreams", hence introducing the question of Deckard being a replicant. But if Gaff's unicorn is a figurative symbol, like his previous uses of origami and like Deckard's figurative dream, then it can be taken as a statement of how Deckard is "the last of his kind" and will be hunted like the mythical unicorn, placing Deckard in the role of his dream. I tend to believe the latter because our dreams are nebulous in nature and rarely do we dream in literal instances. We instead dream in emotions and feelings that our mind gives figurative shape to. For all we know Gaff's use of the unicorn was coincidental to Deckard's dream. He could have folded a manticore or a griffon, but few people would probably recognize those or associate the mythical symbolism as the ubiquitous unicorn.

But in order to be redeemed one has to have fallen to begin with. IMHO the character of Gaff is one dimensional, he is pretty much a "front office cop" who is more concerned about attire and attitude than solid police work. In cut materials and briefly mentioned in the new cut he has his eyes on a promotion. I have always seen Gaff as a manipulator who himself is being manipulated. He has no practical skills other than dressing snappy and being a loyal errand boy, yet he thinks he deserves so much more without actually possessing the abilities or skills to achieve it. If Gaff was a competent investigator or Blade Runner, Bryant would never have needed to call Deckard back in. Instead Gaff is what he is, Bryant's "bitch". Also, Gaff's actions can be seen two different ways. As before, everything can be interpreted differently. Gaff returning Deckard's gun to him, his comments of "too bad she won't live" and his origami unicorn can mean two different things. On one hand they can mean "I know and I let you both live" or they could mean "Finish the job or I will". It's that lovely ambiguity again. I guess I have never seen Gaff as a sympathetic character, I've always seen him as an embodiment of human greed, undue opulence and ambition without effort. A man obsessed with his rank and believing his position should afford him status above others.

If my several years of English and literature classes taught me nothing, it's that you can see nearly anything you want to see in a work of art... it's only the college English professors who will say "WRONG!" to your interpretations. The old saying of "all you have is what you bring with you" works well for interpreting creative endeavors as people will see patterns in things akin to their own experience or world view. IMHO "what the creator is saying" is important but it kind of takes a back seat to "what the viewer perceives". All a creator can do is arrange the pieces, it's up to the viewer to interpret them. Some say that art fails when the viewer does not come to the same conclusion the creator intended, but I for one believe that art succeeds when multiple interpretations can be gained from the same creative endeavor. In layman's terms, Blade Runner is what you yourself see despite the "creator's intent". To some, they see a human in a mechanical world, to others they see a machine becoming human. The ambiguity of the finer points of the story only make me like it more. I enjoy material that does not spell everything out with a heavy handed mallet or beat you over the head with the "creator's intent". The best stories in the world are the ones that involve the viewer by making them ask these questions, which in turn make them wonder about not just the movie but themselves and their world. I can see how the story works on both angles, Deckard as a human and as a replicant. I myself lean towards the human angle simply because I feel his character is more sympathetic when viewed as a human regaining his humanity. A machine that "breaks it's programming" and becomes human is not epic, because it doesn't imply recovery from failure, it implies "breaking bonds" or "freedom of choice". Whereas a man who lost his humanity and regains it is far more compelling and fits the archetype of the "epic hero" ala Gilgamesh or Dante which IMHO is the soul of "human"... to rise, then fall, only to rise again. Deckard as a replicant implies no fall, only a rise... a simple character evolution. Whereas Deckard as a human lets us see him at his "lowest", implying he had a previous "glory" from which he fell, only to watch him rise in the course of the story. That in my opinion is more compelling.

To reflect the passing of our beloved HD DVD and to signify the greater scope of this thread, this is now titled the High Definition Media & Technology Thread.

Like it or not the competition between the formats drove the hardware prices down artificially fast. All these "cheap" players were not really "cheap"... they still cost a grand to $500 but Sony was giving them the fire sale treatment like Toshiba was doing to push their format. Now that they are the "winner" Sony doesn't have to fight as hard so I bet they will not lower their hardware prices as fast as everyone is wanting. I think they will probably poop out the BD Live 2.0 players, call it a wrap and then those prices will hold through Christmas and later until they find a way to build the players for much cheaper. I also think that BD media prices will hold for a year plus as well. If anything, it seems to me that Blu Ray disc prices have been slightly rising in some cases (many new release BD movies are now $34.99 MSRP rather than $29.99 or lower).

Actually I can. My mother is old, in her 60s, and she has an Ipod and Itunes on her computer. She loves it... loves the heck out of it... because it is A) simple, B) easy for her to access (it's one click on an icon on her Mac and then if you can use an internet browser you can use Itunes) and C) far cheaper and easier for her than going to a music store. All MS or Apple has to do is find a way to get a big hard drive into a set top box for under $100 that hooks into your wifi or computer network (or even better one that just plugs into your computer via USB or something and lets you do all your downloading on your computer then just plug it into it's 'dock' at your TV to play it) and they are golden. Apple has already jumped the hurdles of digital downloads by using proprietary formats and other trickery, as has Mircosoft with their Xbox 360 downloaded movies. The whole problem is price and overhead... if they can get it cheaper, faster then they will "win".

I fully expect Microsoft to begin the push for digital downloads in the near future. If you read MS'es "response" to Toshiba's towel throw it kind of hints at things to come. If you believe internet rumor and fanboy speculation, Microsoft has been funding the HD DVD camp simply to oppose Sony and force them to fight a protracted format war. Now that the "format war" is over, the content war can now begin. As much as people are going to love to shout "the war is over" in the coming days, I have this nasty feeling that the real war is about to begin. The HD market is still so niche and given the right push by the right people Blu Ray cold topple just as easily as HD DVD did... all it takes is money to back it and people to buy it, and folks (and when I say "folks" I mean the unwashed, uneducated "I ain't payin' no thirty dollars for a movie when I can get it as a 'just as good' download fer ten!" masses) seem to gravitate towards digital downloads.

I actually can't wait for someone to get a BD Transformers and compare it to the HD DVD. I have this strange feeling that the video will look nearly if not identical. You know they are just going to use the same transfer to hasten it's release into the market... then I wonder what will Bay say to that? Because after all, it was that shoddy HD DVD technology that ruined his beautiful picture quality.

A video of Michael Bay rubbing one of the Blu Ray discs on his junk and moaning.

Upscaling is more or less a benefit if you have a very high fixed resolution display. If you view an unfiltered 480i signal on the newer 1080p LCD or Plasma TVs that picture will look pretty bad. An upscaler basically takes that horrible low res picture and smooths it out, stretches it and takes some of the "ugly" out of it so your old DVDs don't look like complete crap on your new TV. Kind of as a test I took my old DVD player and my PS3, both hooked into my new 1080p TV (one by old school RCA video cable and the other by HDMI) and played the same DVD (Road Warrior) at 480i and upscaled to 1080p. The upscaled DVD looked appreciably better on the new TV than the non upscaled one. Just to put the issue to bed I then put in my Blu Ray of the same movie (Road Warrior) and played it back at 1080p and it looked even better than the upscaled DVD.

Well, Amazon has been running a 50% off sale on a ton of HD DVDs for a little while now. I keep looking at the list but none of them really jump off the page at me and the others I already own. Amazon 50% off HD DVD sale

It's not really Toshiba/Microsoft's fault that their stable of studios failed to release their super titles on HD DVD. I am actually kind of suprised that certain Universal movies like the Back to the Future series, Blues Brothers, Jaws, the Jurassic Parks, Gladiator and on and on and on never made it out of the gate. The same goes for Paramount... the HD DVD camp just seems to have drug it's feet. Then again the same can be said for Blu Ray... the back catalogs are just not getting released... and that is what a great number of people want. New movies are fine and good but folks really want their classics in HD. And instead of big name catalog titles we get... Streets of Fire. Now, I own Streets of Fire on HD DVD... it's a decent movie to those of us who where teens in the '80s and loved that weird '80s rock opera thing... but come on.

Report says Toshiba to "abandon HD DVD"

I thought Indy smashing into the truck windscreen was actually pretty funny. IMHO while it does not yet "feel" Indy it has the right elements in place. The shot structure is very Spielberg and, for what it's worth, the dialog is very Lucas. Then again the only dialog we are hearing are the typical movie trailer expositional snippets... stuff that is supposed to "hook" us with catchy "one liners". On the negative side (dialog aside) the shots seem very dark, almost ominous. I know the Indy franchise has it's fair share of ominous but this trailer seems top heavy with "brooding" darks.

You guys are not getting my drift here. The Clone Wars cartoon was a Genndy Tartakovsky creation using his design, pacing, story style, etc. Lucas just had the "idea"... Genndy Tartakovsky took it from there and gave us a wonderfully quirky cartoon. If Lucas wanted to continue the story or add to it why not hire Tartakovsky and his team again and make more animation? This whole thing to me looks like Lucas taking a good idea and co-opting it into his own studio. I like Tartakovsky's style and productions and I don't see his name anywhere on this "new" clone wars that is supposed to be continuing his original creative efforts. Hence to me it is a redo as the original "creator" and style are not involved anymore.

When you do something once in one medium then redo it again in a new medium, it's a redo. If they would have kept the same animation it would have been a continuance. If Lucas was to suddenly say "you know, I didn't get to tell the stories I wanted to tell with the show Droids so I'm going to make more 'stories' using the world, setting and general plot elements of Droids but in CG". To me, that is a redo. You are "re-doing" something you or someone else did. Would it have not bent fanboy nerves if I had used the word "interpretation" instead? My underlying point is: more clone wars? Can't they think of something else?