Has there ever been a better opening to a film?
Has there ever been a better opening to a film?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtu.be
twitter.com
my nigga i'm telling you i saw lasers
Lord of War
It's grandiose with the music. It's ironic Ridley Scott never bested his own work after all these years, it's pale in comparison to BR
Apocalypse Now
Police Story
Lord of War
Four Lions
most reddit answer imaginable
Couldn't tell ya, never go there. But you seem like quite the expert.
Touch of Evil
Gladiator is also pretty grandiose
Alien has a great opening too.
The opening of First Man was the best thing I experienced in a theater in a long time.
>they remove the video with the intro of The Two Towers. Fucking youtube man...
Ask and ye shall receive:
youtube.com
Yeah, it's called "Predator 2" pleb
I had a visceral, horrible reaction to this the first time.
It's perfect.
whose eye was it? the replicant's?
This legit makes me cry sometimes if I'm in the right kind of mood when I watch it. And I'm not the type to just start bawling at anything.
The music is probably responsible for more than half of its beauty though. Vangelis totally nailed it.
It's Holden's eye. He's looking out at the industrial landscape from his office window, before administering the Voigt-Kampff test on Leon (who shoots him).
youtube.com
youtube.com
And unironically:
youtube.com
Couldnt find the full version
user, you're in a desert, walking along in the sand, when all of a sudden you look down a see a tortoise...
Comedian's death and then this
youtube.com
youtube.com
Predator 2's is actually quite good thinking about it
Whats a tortoise?
Ridley's best two films were his first two films and I'm convinced he's only capable of greatness if the rest of the team is also amazing
>ive seen spaceships and shit
kwl dude.
>OMG BEST MOVIE EVER
The Duellists and Alien?
You don't know what a tortoise is?
You know what a turtle is?
The Duelists is his first movie
what did he mean by this?
In all honesty, why is this such an iconic line?
He just starts spouting off about a bunch of shit that has no relevance to anything that has happened, and that the audience has no idea about. It isnt even a profound statement
>sea beams? Huh? Whats that?
Yes Alien and BR as the best without hesitation. It's crazy that he made these back to back and even more crazy that BR was a financial disaster. It's possible that is the reason why he quit sci-fi for so long. It's also crazy that it all happen in the late 70s early 80s when there was Star Wars and Indiana Jones. There is like a small window of time where Hollywood produced the best kino and then endless mediocrity.
Yes
Duellist and Alien
basically damn dude I've seen some cool shit and you probably haven't please acknowledge my existence lmao
Holden's, but that's beside the point. The entire movie is based around the idea of a soul and what makes someone human. Are we just the sum of the activity in our brains or is there something more? The eye being the "window to the soul" is the setup for this theme.
>It isnt even a profound statement
It is a profound statement excatly because noone knows what hes talking about. Hes describing things we literally and figuratively couldnt imagine. He saw crazy spaceship fights. He saw crazy astronomical events, he saw events of such enormous scale that our puny human minds couldnt comprehend.
His delivery and the mystery/unknown elements are what makes it such a good monologue.
Imagine having no imagination, NPCs live hollow lives
Well we know why he says all that stuff. To emphasize the point that he has "lived".
t.
>memories and unrepeatable events in the live of a being are not profound
I agree, a nice quip would be better in than moment.
no
no there has not
t.
NPCs love it because from the outside it sounds deep but if you look closely its hollow, just like their lives
Thats either great bait, or incredibly ironic.
tears in rain is poignant because it implies that he is crying
Never actually thought of this before. Feel retarded now.
the fact that you don't understand what he is talking about is the point
>i've seen things you people wouldn't believe
his experience is incommunicable to deckard (and you), but he tries to communicate it anyway because he's realized that's the essence of the human life he desires.
Because the movie is empty of content and a terrible adaptation of a good book in anything but it's visuals
M
That movie has a pretty incredible opener. Idk why it's so often overshadowed by Metropolis.
so the point is that its bunch of gibberish? so why is it iconic again?
saving private ryan
>Star ships
He's talking about memories. Are his memories worth nothing because he isn't human? Will those fantastic events really have happened if they die with him? Do his memories and therefore his life deserve to be destroyed because he isn't human? Are his tears any less real? Is he any less human than a real human? He breaks the fundamental argument behind the Blade Runner system. How is one tear different to a entire storm of rain? What is the difference? Does the difference matter? He might as well be human.
>tears in rain is poignant because it implies that he is crying
Was just about to make this point.
People seem to have missed this for some reason. Thankfully it hit me when I first saw it - that even this apparent killing machine replicant is suffering and reveling in the most human way possible. It was far more effective at communicating their sense of sadness than the basic message we get of them wanting to live longer. That came across almost like a malfunction on their part, but the roof scene hammered home the point of their humanity.
The Harrison Ford commentary ruins this silence afterwards though. Without the commentary break, the scene retains this surreal dreamlike feel with Ford's work colleague showing up and making an inappropriately profound remark about living.
>*record scratch*
>Yep, that's me. You're probably wondering how I got here.
>Well, in order to get here, we first need to go back a little.
>*fast rewind effects*
>[ORION]
>Little more
>*rewind effects*
>[TANNHAUSER GATE]
>That's the sweet spot. Now it all started that day I first saw them. C-Beams, they called 'em. Of course, I didn't know it at the time...
>People seem to have missed this for some reason.
Are you retarded? Noone missed that.
jesus christ go backto reddit with this dumb shit
how is this not first post?
no, he's right, Lord of War fucking sucks
Yes, a shitty plot point even for it's time, in the book the replicants are very much different, the main robot character is a psychopath who has zero regard for human life, and certain actions even make you feel like he extends this to all life. Shit, I actually can't explain to you how thematically different both works are because the movie is made for pretentious intellectuals and as such all the best material from the book is cut off.
why do ppl unironically do this?
You don't think it because Batty is such a strong character and behaves inhumanly cold throughout the movie. That's why it's a good line. The implications are profound.
He's been behaving like a robot the whole time but it's an act. Beneath the cold exterior he is just as human as everyone else, and feels the same emotions as you and me. It's merely the fact that he has been robbed of a real life which turned him into a ruthless murderer.
>Noone missed that
No, I'm not the retard here.
It's pretty good and even if you don't like the movie the intro is still pretty great.
In the morning I read Mass, then we descended through the clouds.
I never found out if this was edited or not
truly hope it isn't cause not only would having that tattooed incorrectly on your body be real fucking shitty but the embarrassment from being posted on the internet to everyone in the fandom you're pretending to be a part of would suck even more
oh no at least one of them doesn't have the proper quote
She would've been cute if she had just kept her weight down and lost the dyke cut. And obviously not ruining her body with tattoos goes without saying.
Women literally have one job. Don't be fat. Why is that so difficult for them
The movie felt the need to clearly tell the viewer "replicants good! they behave like machines but they were human all along"
The book actually leaves you wondering, the same way it leaves Deckard wondering until he finishes the job, wether the replicants were humane and acting as cold machines to ensure their own survival, or wether they were cold machines who sometimes act like humans to ensure their own survival.
The conclusion in the movie is spoonfed to you, the conclusion in the original work is more stoic and aims at leaving you with your own choices, the most important message being that any being in this world will one day have to betray themselfs and become their darkest shadow, therefore not mattering wether they were humans or replicants at all, cause both replicants can act human (their shadow) and humans can act like replicants (their shadow).
The ending finishes with Deckard returning home after this literal spiritual enlightenement with a frog that he thinks is organic, he falls asleep on the spot and his wife remarks that the frog is indeed mechanical and wonders how Deckard could've missed such an obvious thing.
The implied ending is that it didn't matter to Deckard anymore, but this comes from his own experience and revelation after he finished the job.
This is how you write good fiction, "tears in the rain" is literal capeshit tier writting
because even if they're fat there's some degenerates who find them attractive
being a woman is living on easy mode
Interesting fact. The original script went like this before Rutger rewrote it.
I’ve seen things… seen things you little people wouldn’t believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion bright as magnesium… I rode on the back decks of a blinker and watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments… they’ll be gone.
>rewrote it
he did just wing it on set no?
No. He took it to Ridley beforehand because he thought it sounded more natural and sad.
>I rode on the back decks of a blinker
Not surprised he omitted this bit
Why get a giant quote and not a portrait? Fucking tacky
Too bad it was the only good part of that shit movie.
two words
Conan .
Napoleon Dynamite
Neat
youtube.com
The virgin Vangelis
The Chad Basil
fpbp as per usual
>that has no relevance to anything that has happened
Did you even watch the film brainlet?
>Has there ever been a better opening to a film?
Inglorious Basterds.
Argument was for the intro, which is really good.
and my anger is against the intro, which is overrated as fuck
it's just How It's Made for a bullet, only it's Also, Who It's Sold To
super self-satisfied
youtube.com
saw it in the theater, don't care about this movie
Nic Cage has been in a dozen movies at least that are ten times better than this one
I fucking hate modern movies for that shit. Your shitty ad libs aren't funny fuck off.
>that movie is 10 years old
where did the time go
>sea beams
Are you fucking retarded user? He says C-Beams, I'm not even a native English speaker and I know this.
C-Beams are used in construction.
Not necessarily better but very memorable
C is scientific notation for the speed of light, as in beams of light
this is clearly cityspeak for giant fucking lasers
Contact
L O N D O N
The quickest way to explain it is: Humanity and life is not made, it is experienced
Easy, tiger. Don't worry, the remake (the real one) will make the movie according to your kind. Including cast and dialogue.