>I've seen things you people wouldn't believe... Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion... I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.
Dude says "I've seen things you wouldn't believe" and then literally just describes space combat. Are we to assume that this is so uncommon in the Blade Runner universe that it would somehow be seen as "unbelievable"?
 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
|
They used replicants for war too.
Tannhäuser could also be a wormhole or a portal but the word comes from a Poem and Opera about and myth of Venus and her subterranean realm and a story of unfree nobles or German Imperial ministerial
Things I don't know what they look like in this sentence
>shoulder of Orion
>C-beams
>Tannhäuser Gate
So yeah I can hardly believe
i know what they look like
Found the replicants
That's not how it works, you're supposed to ask me about my mother.
Well, the shoulder of Orion refers to the shoulder of the constellation Orion. It's something you can see from Earth. Then the C-beams look like beams, and the Tannhauser Gate looks like a gate. So I don't think it's too hard to imagine.
What kind of beams do the C-Beams look like? beams of light? wooden beams used for support? Load beams used in securing cargo in a vessel? How about the Tannhauser gate? is it a physical gate, like one made from masonry and stone, or is it more of a sci-fi style gate like in Stargate, something more thematically related to the Blade Runner setting?
Well from the use of the word "glittering" it seems pretty obvious that they're beams of light. And since he's already established that he's in space for this situation, the Tannhauser Gate is presumably a "gate" in space, used for space travel.
Here, have a picture of C-beams glittering in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate.
clearly not in space
the hint of fog indicates atmosphere
That is clearly a nebula, which is basically a cloud in space.
>closest known nebula is 700 lightyears away
let's assume the Tannhauser Gate is the "exit" gate, so there would be an "entrance" gate close to earth to allow for space travel
what the goddamn everloving frick is humanity doing anywhere remotely near a nebula? trying to mine the gases or something? BEFORE it becomes a star and annihilates everything around it?
That makes sense to me. Humanity is known to be greedy to the point of danger to others. Now let's add on that in this particular universe they use replicants for dangerous tasks, whose lives they are shown not to particularly care for, and I think you have your answer.
>blah blah blah I assume this I'm guessing that none of it is confirmed but I'm assuming what I think is true to make it simpler in my mind
The inability to figure out simple things like this from context clues may be a sign of autism.
>fire
>space
They had giant video advertisements on skyscrapers, so it's fair to assume they had surviving cinemas and home video. I don't see why there wouldn't be kinos depicting one of these "star wars" - and replicants open interesting possibilities as actors and stunt doubles too.
I wouldn't watch them. I'm so tired of all these star wars.
in the second film they take dekker “off world” by going across the ocean, ridley knows the world is flat (so did orwell)
>so uncommon
Stories were so much better when it was. They're all so bland and boring when anyone can just hop on a tiny ship and fly to the other side of the galaxy in a day.
How can the Earth in Blade Runner be so dystopian and degraded if there's a whole epic scifi universe happening outside it?
That's not too different from Earth today, you have the dystopian and degraded United States of America, then just to the north you have a technologically advanced paradise known as Canada.
I thought it was strongly implied that going "offworld" was a one-way trip and that basically nobody on Earth except Batty and his gang would know what any of that shit looked like with their own eyes.
It's fair to assume that some slum cop who only sees rain and shitty noodles every day wouldn't be able to imagine epic space battles
1981 wasn't just yesterday, op.
The actual things he describes aren't as relevant as the idea of the lived experience behind them. You can imagine the destruction of an attack ship, but you can't know the actual feeling of witnessing something so huge with meaning being destroyed; thousands of (android) lives lost, tons of sheer mechanical bulk jettisoned into space as the ship implodes. The context behind the events that lead to Batty's life are more important here than their physical descriptions. It's the difference between reading about D-Day and BEING there, immersed in the event as well as everything that leads to it.
Another factor is (idk if its like this in the film) but in the novel those who are still living on Earth are either too biologically/mentally unsound or too poor to move off-world. Those people marooned on Earth are truly unaware of the kind of system-spanning journeys that are taking place elsewhere.
The original script, while not as catchy, is better. The chopped up version sounds like a travelgay thinking he is le deep for looking at things.
>I've known adventures, seen places you people will never see, I've been Offworld and back… frontiers! I've stood on the back deck of a blinker bound for the Plutition Camps with sweat in my eyes watching stars fight on the shoulder of Orion... I've felt wind in my hair, riding test boats off the black galaxies and seen an attack fleet burn like a match and disappear. I've seen it, felt it...!
The guy who wrote the screenplay for this is pretty good, he also wrote Unforgiven which has a lot of great lines in it.