Blade Runner Message Board
Voilmzoot posts on 4/11/2010 2:08:24 PM
How To Pack Your China And Crystal
Use a strong, sturdy box that will withstand the bumps and grinds of the moving van. Double boxing fragile items is recommended.
A few weeks before your move, start collecting and saving clean newspaper for wrapping your fragile items. Tissue paper is not recommended for packing since it doesn't offer enough protection. Your moving company should also be able to supply you with packing paper and Styrofoam peanuts (at a nominal charge).
Fill the bottom of the carton with the peanuts or crumpled-up newspaper to a depth of several inches.
Starting with the largest plate, wrap the item securely in flat newspaper sheets. Use several sheets per dish, bowl or cup. Secure with tape, or in the case of the cups, tuck the loose ends inside the cup and around the rim.
Stack the plates in the center of the box on their ends, not flat. Make sure there is plenty of crumpled newspaper or peanuts between each layer and around the sides. The stack should be stable and not move from side to side.
When packing crystal stemware, use the same technique for wrapping. Starting at the corner of the newspaper, place the stemware at the outermost triangle and roll inward to the other side. Use caution when wrapping the paper around fragile rims and stems.
Never stack stemware without using cushion material between each glass.
When the carton is full, surround the contents on the top and sides with more packing material or peanuts.
Seal the inner box. Place the carton inside a larger, sturdy box and surround with packing material. Seal and label.
Finishing Touches
Sarah T (UMD) posts on 4/4/2010 3:24:50 PM
Watching Blade Runner for the second time really helped me understand the movie better. I still am intrigued by the way in which Los Angeles is displayed, and why the director chooses to use a “china town”-like setting. Along with that I wonder about the significance of the advertisements that are shown multiple times with the woman in traditional Japanese (or Chinese, I’m not sure which) dress. Maybe this has to do with the US’s fear of a rising global power in Asia? I also liked how there were advertisements for Coca-cola. Although the Coca-Cola corporation has made its mark in other cultures, I think that having a representation of coca-cola in the film ads an “American” element to the otherwise Asian-American setting. I also wonder about the relationship between Deckard and Rachael. The fact that he knows that she has a limited life-span yet decides to run away with her anyways is confusing to me. I suppose our culture sometimes holds higher significance in love then rationality, so maybe that is what the director was hoping to get at. Or possibly, Scott was trying to point to a science/nature dichotomy in that with the evolution of technology, we lose the ability to decipher between what is real, and what is machine. With the accelerated advancement of technology, is Scott saying that we will create intimate relationships with man-made machines and live unfulfilling lives of loss and misery? That is the message I got from the film. I would also like to point out the significance of the kiss of death that we see between Roy and Tyrell. I thought it was a gruesome scene but very important because it describes how the technology we create can be our own demise. Even if we create things with good intentions, they are still unnatural, again touching on the science/nature dichotomy and how science can (and possibly inevitably will) be the downfall of humankind.
Row Bots posts on 3/21/2010 8:34:53 PM
I wonder if I had sex with a replicant woman she would end up crushing my Tool flat as an egg noodle or crack my skull between her thighs if I tried sampling the wares from her fruit cage? Deckard surved when Pris tried crush his skull with her thighs but if Deckard was a replicant its possible his skull was made thicker than a normal human. Hopefully they never try and remake this movie - classics like Blade Runner should be left alone !!! Im still shaken by the awful Planet of the Apes and Time Machine remakes. Remakes only work if the original was awful - one example The Thing 1982 was far superior to The Thing from Another Planet.
Lisa - UMD posts on 3/19/2010 3:02:42 PM
I liked this movie, but I had to watch it twice to understand it better.
My favorite part was when the woman at the noodle stand took out a microscope and analyzed the genetically engineered snake scale. She announced it had "superior quality..." and then you could see the maker's signature on the molecular level. That was cool, but actually kind of creepy, because humanity's future could include a lot of genetic engineering.
On the subject of genetics, I thought it was so sad that Sebastian wasn't allowed to leave the planet due to his disease. That seems like a cruel form of discrimination, and yet, if humans do colonize other worlds, who will be allowed to go? It seems like eugenics. If only "perfect" humans are selected, they are, in a way, starting a new race! Sebastian was a brilliant scientist, though, and he would have a lot to offer a team of colonists even if he had a disease.
I completely missed any notion of Deckard being a replicant. Where are the hints of this? Does he know he is one? He would have to, right? If he is one, why would he be willing to kill other replicants? For his own survival? Because he knows they don't have a chance anyway? Does his employer know he is one? That would make it even more interesting, if they knew he was a replicant, and therefore he was the only one suited for the job of retiring the target replicants.
Melissa Rothstein - UMD posts on 2/13/2010 9:22:28 PM
I was really impressed with Blade Runner. I think it was ahead of its time with special effects, and the story is heart-wrenching. I plan on reading the book now as well; I'm hoping that'll give me a deeper understanding. the issues brought forth in this movie are especially relevant today, I think, with advances in genetic engineering and the possibility of cloning. The replicants are a lot like us, though; their lives are limited, and they don't really understand the nature of life. They have the benefit of knowing where they came from, but are they soulless?? Is there really any difference at all between replicants and humans? I have read several different posts about the unicorn, and it still confuses me. I think it's meant to be ambiguous and open to individual interpretation.
Lindsey L UMD posts on 2/13/2010 12:37:39 PM
I was not very in to this film at first, but it started to get very exciting for me later on. They were quite a few things I didn't understand during the movie, but I was able to catch on to most of it. I actually thought it was very intense. This film was the first science fiction film I've watched and it wasn't too bad. I wouldn't have thought Deckard to be a replicant, but the way his and Rachel's relationship resulted, I wouldn't say it is totally out of the question. I think the replicants could very well resemble some people in our society, metaphorically speaking.
Kelsey Krawiecki posts on 2/8/2010 4:43:58 PM
At first I was not very into this movie. I don't watch a whole lot of science fiction so it took me a while to get the hang of what was going on. About half way through I thought it got real interesting. It never occured to me that Deckard would be a replicant. However after finding out how real the replicants could be such as Rachel, it was hard to know who was and who wasn't. I found her very convincing. This movie was a lot more "in depth" than I thought it could be. The fact that I could pull out meaning about my own life and how it can be so short without you knowing is pretty cool to me. It is interesting that most science fiction of the future shows the world as such a dark place (and quite depressing). That is unfortunate, it would be of real interest to me to watch a science fiction film of the future as it being a bright and cheerful place. After taking the time to put thought into what this movie entails rather than just watching it for the sake of watching it I can honestly say it is the first science fiction piece I have enjoyed.
Dillon Malay (UMD) posts on 2/4/2010 11:50:32 AM
Overall I would say I enjoyed this movie. I am a big Harrison Ford fan and I had never seen Blade Runner before. After watching the movie I would definitely recommend it to someone else. The cinematography was excellent, I think the dark shadowy feel of the movie reflected some of Deckard's inner struggles. I can always appreciate a classic science fiction movie for the types of vehicles and this one had some great crafts. The film is filled with themes and symbols like the threat of an overpowering corporation running the world, the issue of what it is to be human, the emphasis on how short life can be and that heroes aren't always wearing red tights and a cape. I had the looming suspicion Deckard was a replicant and as I can tell other people did too.
chris millner posts on 2/3/2010 4:41:42 PM
I thought the movie was very boring from a theatrical perspective. Though it did have good production and cinemetography, trying to get beyond that and into the movie was difficult. Looking in to the movie deeper i realized how in depth it really was. The idea that we need to start living our lives, not knowing when the end is and remembering our memories is something we forget to do. After reading some of you feeds i thought it was interesting how all the different perspectives came about. I never thought of Deckard as a replicant but their is convincing evidence to say. For
Dylan McDonald (UMD) posts on 2/1/2010 10:04:04 PM
I myself have very little science-fiction knowledge coming into a sci-fi class I am taking a the University I am attending. I enjoyed movies such as Star Trek and Star Wars growing up as a kid but never really took an interest beyond them. Blade Runner really drew me in I think mainly because of some similarities to the movie Moon (2009) in which I recently watched. I will try not to spoil that movie for anyone who has seen it but for those who have will know of the similarities I am referring to. I am always intrigued by the possibility of humans being able to create "faux-souls" as they might be. Something that feels so human, yet far from wholesome nature. I do have one question though: Is there a premise for dystopian L.A. or does it leave that to the viewers/readers imagination?
If anyone has any other movies similar which they could recommend it would be greatly appreciated.
Click Here for Messages:
1 - 10
11 - 20
21 - 30
31 - 40
41 - 50
51 - 60
61 - 70
71 - 80
81 - 90
91 - 100
101 - 110
111 - 120
121 - 130
131 - 140
141 - 150
151 - 160
161 - 170
171 - 180
Note: the views expressed here are only those of the posters.
