These sand dunes are unrealistic. I don't mean that they formed indoors. That's part of the science fiction...

The dunes in Dune are obviously desert dunes, while in Stalker the dunes are deliberately made indoors as the entrance to a fucking magical irradiated wish grant room. It's supposed to look "off". It's supposed to look uncomfortable and not natural. Literally everything about it is deliberately pointing out that this is not a regular environment.

I don't believe someone is literally this retarded, you have to be baiting.

>Aliens would conceive of dunes in a very different manner than humans do
straight facts and logic here from this alien dune doctor

Is this the new curved glass meme?

imagine if every post you have made in this thread was made by somebody else, about a different movie. And that movie is about paint drying. The movie claims that paint dries at a rate of 28X per minute, but the user ranting about it knows that it only actually dries at 27X a minute.

What is your reaction to seeing his posts? Do you think he is a sad man? Do you think he has mental problems? You should.

We should stop calling them "dunes" and instead use the phrase "heaps of dirt obviously piled up by stagehands."

Let me try to explain this. It's like if a movie called for a rock. So instead of using a real rock, or even looking at a rock, someone made a paper mache lump from memory and painted it flat grey, then put it in a movie where a rock should be. If you showed that movie to a geologist, he would immediately say, that is a terribly fake looking rock and I am taken out of the experience, while perhaps someone with no knowledge of geology at all would not even notice. Or say a horror movie calls for a skeleton. Human skeletons are difficult to come by in this day and age, so the director instead uses a plastic Halloween store skeleton as a prop, where the proportions are all wrong. Then you show this film to an osteologist and ask what they thought of the terrifying skeleton, and they say that the number of phalanges on each hand should be five and the eye sockets are usually at the midpoint of the face instead of three quarters up and bones are not usually made of shiny plastic. That is what these heaps of dirt obviously piled up by stagehands look like to me.

Do you think alien children draw houses with chimneys with smoke coming out and suns with smiles? Do you think aliens would create dunes that are simply piles of dirt smoothed with a rake?

I would think that user knows inaccurate depictions of paint when he sees them and would not presume to criticize him personally.

>Poor dune understanding
Literal autist. Wow.

Attached: regnum_picture_1545412231462291_big.jpg (640x477, 283K)

Why are you trying this much to look autistic ?

It's not supposed to look natural or made by natural forces you dumb fuck. All your le geologist or le ostelogist meme examples mean absolutely nothing since this is not supposed to represent nature made dunes.
Sometimes a narrative needs a "fake looking rock" or "a plastic Halloween skeleton", you expecting all films to only portray naturalistic 1:1 narratives only shows your absolute mental midgettry, especially since it's a science FICTION film, not a documentary.

>d-dude it's supposed to look like shit!
Lmao @ these fucking zoomers getting so assblasted over legit movie criticism. OP is maybe taking it a bit far but those dunes do actually look like shit and it's obvious that Tarkovsky intended it to be a surreal indoor desert, although that intention obviously fails due to the dunes look like, as I said, shit.

The forces that allow spiders to walk on walls don't scale to such size.

Attached: shelob-tom-carlton.jpg (900x720, 131K)

I have refrained from giving you a technical explanation or using specialist terminology in order for my point to be more relatable to a layman. I understand that not everyone shares my passion for dunes, and I understand that you have your own interests and so I do not want to overburden you with my complaint, which I'm sure seems very minor to you. And my knowledge is not strictly encyclopedic. I understand dunes and their place in popular culture on a mythopoetic level. You will note that the foregoing facts run counter to the clinical symptoms of autism. My issue with this film is not symptomatic of any disease, but rather a healthy interest, which sadly has manifested in this instance as a deep-felt grief over a flaw in what I consider an otherwise artistically impeccable accomplishment, minor as that flaw may be, which tragically conflicts with my personal area of expertise to a degree which shatters my sense of verisimilitude in this work. I feel like I have been shut out from enjoying one of the cornerstones of the film canon. This thread is my lament.

I believe that my understanding of dunes allows me to recognize when someone has attempted to create an artificial dune that looks to their untrained eye natural, but to the eye of an expert such as myself fails utterly. I believe STALKER is the clearest such instance of such a failed attempt that I have ever encountered. I don't believe that the inaccuracies are intentional, or else they would be inaccurate in ways other than they are.

I think it looks cool and it goes with the tone and themes of the film. The dunes give a sense of mysticism, for me it looks like a mine field.

>an artificial dune that looks to their untrained eye natural
IT DOESN'T LOOK NATURAL TO ANYONE, IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO LOOK NATURAL
Can you comprehend such a thing?

true

This is the weaponized Yea Forums-tier autism that John Travolta tried to warn us about.

I would presume to criticise him personally, as he is clearly demonstrating that he cannot define fiction in a way that lets him enjoy it (unless it is perfect; unless it is photo realistic; unless it is less fiction and more fact)

>zoomer
I'm in my 30s, young man. It's not legit movie criticism to say "those mystical alien indoor sand dunes do NOT work like our regular earth outdoor sand dunes!" and then sperg out because you lack a balanced personality.

Yes, I've considered that possibility and discarded it for reasons given above. I've already prepared a series of diagrams explaining the 31 reasons exactly why I believe these supposed "dunes" were a failed attempt to mimic natural sand dunes, but I fear that they would be most incomprehensible to a layman as the drawings are quite detailed and complex and the terminology somewhat obscure. Would you like me to scan them?

There you go, OP, a video showing how sound can shape stuff like sand into unnatural formations. Case closed.
youtube.com/watch?v=wvJAgrUBF4w

autism now has new symptoms
theres no other explanation

I would like you to stop talking like a robot trying to prove it is sentient.

You're beyond saving. So you legitimately think Tarkovsky wanted to portray natural desert sand dunes that just so happen to be indoors and just to happen to be next to a magical NOT NATURAL wish granting room in a science fiction film filled with non natural occurrences?
And these supposed """"natural""" dunes are so natural that two of the characters are beyond terrified by them scared to even go near them?

Your autism is astonishing.

what is it about dunes that you like so much?

How come those 'mystical alien indoor sand dunes' look like something made by stagehands then?
Those 'dunes' still look more like what you'd expect formations of sand to look like than the ones in the OP.

omgggg but that's not how the desert looks????!?!?!?!?

>Those 'dunes' still look more like what you'd expect formations of sand to look like than the ones in the OP.
Maybe different arrangement of sound waves, magnetism, who knows? It's not beyond the realm of possibilities is what I am saying. The zone is not a natural place. Why would you have naturally occuring dunes?

>l-listen you guys, I'm totally not an autistic sperging out about dunes, the only thing I know and love
>I'm telling you this movie was completely ruined because these dunes are not realistic
>they can't exist like that inside a building, and they look so artificial that this movie is now garbage for me
>i-it's not like and alien force shaped them, thus making them look artificial and fake, Tarkovsky was a hack, good for nothing no dune knower

based dune aficionado not afraid to wear his passion with pride

Take your meds.

You like dunes so much because they remind you of you're mom tetas

>How come those 'mystical alien indoor sand dunes' look like something made by stagehands then?
because it is a movie
because in movies, things are made by stagehands
because there is no mystical alien world
because the creation of this film was an endeavour in entertainment, not in ultra realistic accuracy (and definitely not an attempt at recreating perfect sand dunes, in accordance with the beliefs of one internet sand dune expert)

If you are honestly not trolling - if you honestly think that this sand dune issue is an issue for anybody but you - you honestly have a problem. I mean this in the nicest way, please get yourself checked out.

>ITT: one healthy user BTFOs hordes of spiteful Tarkovsky incels with his scientific knowledge

>ITT: autism

>ITT: transexualism

/thread

They don't make floors out of a massive, thin plate of metal which can be resonated anywhere.

Maybe they don't have to look like naturally occuring dunes, but at least look like something which looks like sand formations caused by some force rather that isn't stagehands propping them up.

Perhaps I do have too much of my personal identity wrapped up in the study of dunes. But please try to sympathize with me as one man to another. I have toiled very long and hard to reach the level of dune expertise that I currently possess. My sister, you see, she fell into prostitution in order to help support me in attaining my bachelor's degree in geology. She sold herself to pay for me to attend various dune expeditions and dune conferences in my youth. Of course I didn't know. I only found out that she had been exposed and taken her own life on the day of my PhD conferral. For many years after that I studied the dune, every intricacy, sacrificing any hope of a normal life. Countless hours of my life I have dedicated to publishing impeccable scientific papers on dunes, always innovating in my field, sometimes resulting in furious disputes with my colleagues that left me in such a state of exhaustion and stress that I could not raise a single arm from the bed sheet, but my theories always triumphed in the end. Do you know the theory of transverse leeward gain spillage? That was mine, and was a paradigm shift. Some would say that I am the foremost living expert on dunes, although I would ask what is life to the greats who have come before me but already passed into darkness, who eclipse my own humble light? And then I watched this movie. Yes, I watched in rapturous delight until these lumps of fucking dirt started staring out the screen at me.

What if it was made my human hands? What if someone enterered the room, got his wish granted and he left the room spending an entire week shaping all these dunes in that room?

bravo.

>BROOOOO SAND DUDES INNNDOOOORS BRUUUUH THATS CRAZY
fuck this shitty movie and fuck the pseudointellectuals who like it

based and dune pilled

>because in movies, things are made by stagehands
That's not an argument, a movie prop is supposed to look realistic, not take you out of immersion because it doesn't look realistic.
>if you honestly think that this sand dune issue is an issue for anybody but you
I'm not OP, I just agree that these dunes actually do look bad.
>- you honestly have a problem
As opposed to the people who somehow keep insisting that their beloved movie is absolutely perfect? Normal people can like flawed pieces of art.

woah settle down there Mr freud

Then the movie does a bad job at hinting that this happened.

>this triggers the pseud

Attached: natural_dunes.jpg (729x425, 32K)

Wonderful thread.

Attached: 1453181667276.jpg (1280x720, 121K)

>a movie prop is supposed to look realistic
NO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO LOOK REALISTIC, ESPECIALLY IN SCIENCE F I C T I O N FILMS

>a film should explain the occurence of every single thing or objects that appears
mental midget proof #53

>hurr, it doesn't need to make sense, it's sci fi
This is the same as saying a movie doesn't need internal logic because there are dragons in it.

realistic =/= internal logic

ahhhhh tarkovsky no!

Attached: this kills the autist.jpg (2125x1417, 1.56M)

in this case it is, because those dunes don't make sense.

Nope that's not what I said. Rather, if such a far-fetched explanation as what suggested actually did happen, the movie should have indicated so. The fact that you seem to be unable to process any criticism towards a beloved movie indicates to me that it is in fact you who is a 'mental midget'.

>movie with obvious anomalies
>why isn't this one thing how I expect it to be

Attached: 1562640661825.png (1200x800, 43K)

why

How don't they make sense? The entire Zone is filled with anomalies. Next door is a magical wish granting room. Barely anyone or anything is acting "normal" or realistic there.

As this thread has already established, anybody with such passion for dunes that he would spend his wish on them, would construct immaculate, natural looking dunes, indistinguishable from the expanse of the sahara desert from both an aesthetic and mathematical standpoint.

It's meant to look like a bunch of dead bodies that were barely covered by sand

He spent his wish on making unnatural looking dunes so he can trigger dune autists till eternity.

This. It's almost like a graveyard.

Then they should have made look anomalous, instead they look like they were placed there as a prop. Unless the zone is aware that it's in a movie and decided to communicate it to us by deliberately forming dunes that look like movie props, it's a clear oversight.

>Take as a counter example the novel Dune, which in the structure of its story and its philosophical themes reflects the geological formation and transformation of a dune. Frank Herbert understood how dunes are made. He was a genius.

I know you THINK you just explained it all for us. But you didn't, you're babbling. Almost incoherently. He didn't understand how dunes are made, got it. What's the point though, he was a film maker of fictional stories, not some twat who studies sand dunes.You think actual chefs and cooks can sit through movies that feature kitchens without squirming? Stop being so autistic.

>Aliens would conceive of dunes in a very different manner than humans do.
Well then, case closed. Op isn't a faggot after all

>this fucking thread

Attached: 1472151782708.jpg (235x224, 15K)

one anomaly is telekinesis, how do you know it wasn't literally a kid playing with sand like in this pic , then it would looks just like that

This beautiful man has the right to make threads about dunes looking shitty. Why the fuck did you even reply, you bitch? Stop talking shit about this guy for getting upset about dunes when you can't even resist typing out a response to a Yea Forums post.

So how would you have constructed the scene? Waited a million years for the dunes to form?

Maybe it isn't just sand and nothing else. Maybe it's certain objects that were covered with sand. Maybe even bodies, the entire room full of bodies.
The only thing you can be sure is that it isn't supposed to look like natural made sand dunes.

why are you so aggressive? do you hate dunes, or something?

>The only thing you can be sure is that it isn't supposed to look like natural made sand dunes.
This was never established

>the people who somehow keep insisting that their beloved movie is absolutely perfect? Normal people can like flawed pieces of art.
are you absolutely batshit insane? Yes, normal people can like flawed pieces of art, you are totally correct. And this is THE EXACT REASON why we're having such a hard time understanding how this fellow is so hung up about sand.

it really is very, very simple. This movie was not made for anybody to obsess about the sand. You are free to obsess about the sand, of course you are, that is right. But if you do, you are interacting with film in an objectively incorrect manner, and should address what it is about such a minor thing that makes you so jumped up.

>PS no movie is perfect. Nothing man made is perfect. That's the beauty of art. The imperfections that remind us of our ability, that remind us of our humanity.

>while you were partying, I studied the sand dune

Attached: berdabros.jpg (320x320, 19K)

Holy shit princess, I didn't mean to assault you with my aggressive words, are you okay??

>are you absolutely batshit insane? Yes, normal people can like flawed pieces of art, you are totally correct. And this is THE EXACT REASON why we're having such a hard time understanding how this fellow is so hung up about sand.

He isn't that upset, he just wanted to point out that the dunes are wierd. I am ecstatic that he has done so, this has made my day 10x better

>unrealistic
>in the zone
bruh

A kid playing with dunes is essentially working on the same principle as a full grown desert. The time scale is all skewed up, of course, since dunes made by a desert take way longer to form, but the underlying principles remain the same. The fact is, if a child were to fool around with sand long enough, he would produce the same dunes the Sahara would, albeit at a different scale. The science doesn't just change because there is an active architect behind.

I am merely curious how someone can get so flustered by naturally occurring sand formations, is all.

Imagine calling another man beautiful and then asserting the opposite party is the bitch. How many other pretty guys you see in here princess?

Shut up retard, if the mic boom swung into frame, you could call that bad film-making.
If this scene was full of egregious CGI, you could call that bad film-making
If the actors glanced at the camera every so often, you could call that bad film-making.
AND IF THE DUNES DON'T LOOK RIGHT, YOU CAN CALL THAT BAD FILM-MAKING
Just because it's "the zone" that doesn't excuse poor realism. You wouldn't defend terrible CGI by saying it doesn't need to look realistic because it isn't real, so shut up about this.

>This was never established
So the anomalies mean nothing? The Zone means nothing? The characters literally screaming not to move when they enter the room? Them throwing those metal nuts at the dunes and throwing themselves on the ground as if there will be a huge explosion right there and there? All of that and they and you as a viewer are supposed to think that room and those formations on the ground are nothing but natural normal dune formations?

Damn, replying again? Where's that self-control you demanded out of OP? Making a whole post because I called a guy beautiful? Gay month was only a few weeks ago, bigot.

I think you're baiting the wrong poster. I don't give a shit whether the film maker "nailed" sand dunes or not.

no, but you are squirming like a mad woman at the thought that someone would offer discussion about said sand dunes.

Imagine that, I replied to a post on Yea Forums! You proved I really do care!! The sand dunes weren't natural, what other retardo shit shall we zoom in on? What do you think of the way they tied their laces?

>if the mic boom swung into frame, you could call that bad film-making.
Not if it fits the narrative of the film.
>If this scene was full of egregious CGI, you could call that bad film-making
Not if it fits the narrative of the film.
>If the actors glanced at the camera every so often, you could call that bad film-making.
Not if it fits the narrative of the film.
>AND IF THE DUNES DON'T LOOK RIGHT, YOU CAN CALL THAT BAD FILM-MAKING
Not if it fits the narrative of the film.

Attached: this kills the realism autist.jpg (1223x898, 86K)

what fucking narrative permits this? a story about a shit director?

Jesus Christ, again you respond! Now I really have to question what validity you have in criticising OP. Oh, what's this an actual argument?

This isn't a review site. OP is not beholden to staunch regulations to ensure unbiased and balanced discussion of movies. If he could make a thread about shoelaces as funny as this one, I would be down for it.

>defends bad film making by calling it 'narrative of the film'
Genuinely lol'd.

Imagine being a retard with no brakes

The story of a man who emptied bags of sand on periodically marked intervals on the floor of a set.

They were doing that because they were in the zone, not because of the dunes looking bad. If they were totally accurate dunes they would have done the same.

He's being autistic about indoor sand dunes in a film about an area or "zone" affected by weird physics and anomalies.

>what fucking narrative permits this?
A mic boom swunging into frame would fit the narrative of a film where there is a scene being filmed in the film itself. Watch Man Bites Dog.
Egregious CGI can fit the narrative of a film where the said effects are meant to look uncomfortably out of place. Watch David Lynch work.
Looking at the camera can fit the narrative if the film is deliberately wanting to go beyond the fourth wall and reach the viewer in a certain way. Watch Come and See.
Dunes looking like they were not made by wind can fit the narrative if the film is portraying an almost alternate dimension reality with inexplicable occurences. Watch Stalker.

Please continue to explain just what kind of site 4 channel is as you reddit-space your paragraph you insincere midget

>They were doing that because they were in the zone
I don't remember them throwing themselves at the ground as if they threw literal grenades in previous scenes when they throw the metal bolts.

All I can hear is a pseud reaching in order to defend a stupid post.

I accept your capitulation.

>in real life people dont throw metal bolts to prove the area is safe, therefore movie bad
I was totally drawn out of any immersion when they did this, you see, Im an expert in metal bolts

Does

This

Offend

You

As

Well?

Because they are closer to the centre of the zone now. It's building tension.

OP is a based retard

The irony here is that in your attempt to look like an autist sperging over sand dunes not looking too artificial when trying to look real, you yourself now look too artificial. These posts are unrealistic. I don't mean that they formed autistically. That's part of the artistic works of falsehood. I mean that the word choice and melodrama of them betrays the fact that they were constructed deliberately by a troll and didn't form by any natural process. I studied the formation of autistic posts. This thread is ruined for me.

most fascinating thread on the entire board

obviously

truly

I didn't even realize that was supposed to be sand until this thread. I always thought it was molded clay or snow.

Please, make this thread often so in a few years we can remember you as the Stalker Dune Autist.

He's not a real autist. A fake. An imposter.

>the absolute state of OP

Attached: xkVrv0m.jpg (640x380, 28K)

How do newfolks still not understand that reddit spacing is a meme to out them as new.

Seriously using "poor realism" as a critique of a Tarkovsky film would get you beaten up on my childhood playgrounds.

I have been studying dunes for over 20 years and i can guarantee you with the right set of controls this is very natural.

I just want to post this so that I can prove to my grandchildren how transcendently autistic Yea Forums is after I save this thread. God bless you magnificent retards.

Everyone just isn't as cool as you

they aren’t sand dunes

Well thats understandable but I remember back when I started Yea Forums we just copied forum spacing by default.

Cope.

The fact that they look like movie props is an anomaly. For fucks sakes, they throw nuts in case they get pulled like a metal chair in an MRI room. Where the fuck would all the sand come from? It's the building itself falling apart and sticking together thanks to alien remains.

What you're going to whine a about empties that are full next?

Doesn't matter if the dunes look good or not. The film is a shitty, ruski, kindergarten-level philosophy flick
The book and the games are far superior.

Autism, autism never changes.

>its shit
it’s a triumph of the visual medium, every frame is beautiful

You can get dunes like that in shoreline environments that don’t have a consistent direction of water flow.
>t. geologist

Ignore the autist. Let's talk about how fucking amazing the ending was.

>muh visuals
The braindead Nolan/Snyder generation at work.

that’s what the director was going for, visuals are the heart of film and he nailed it

user, your post is poignant because the point of the movie is there are forces beyond our comprehension

If you want to make something that is purely visually stimulative and has zero substance to it, go paint a fucking picture.

That shit look underwater to you bigshot?

It could have been underwater before the picture was taken. ;)

>shoreline means underwater
t. dunelets

A painting isn’t a moving picture, a movie is, that’s why it’s called a movie. To each there own, I think it’s a great movie, though I can’t watch it unless in the mood for that type of pacing, introspective content etc

WHERE IN THE FILM IS IT STATED THAT THEY ARE DUNES?!
THEY ARE MOUNDS OF SAND, YOU SPERG.

You idiots, OP is just shitposting.

*their

Holly shit, really?

Attached: 1542924934037.jpg (645x729, 84K)

Time is a critical element. Painting is static. Also "zero substance" in a film about hope and faith, cool take there Mr modernist.

They’re moguls

Imagine being a fucking SAND DUNE expert. What the fuck, man... I'm sorry OP...

>paintings have zero substance
Are you 12?

>he doesn’t know about tides
wew lad

> it's obvious that Tarkovsky intended it to be a surreal indoor desert
How is this obvious? Secondly, wouldn’t ‘surreal’ imply that it’s not bound by realism?

>hope and faith lmao
Go read some knight-slays-a-dragon type fairy tail, you hole for a head traditionalist.

I can't believe I need to explain this, but the "zone" is a place where nature doesn't behave in a normal way. There are all kind of anomalies and such. Nowhere in the world will you find sand dunes like that, WHICH IS EXACTLY THE FUCKING POINT.

Attached: 1523477569054.jpg (250x250, 13K)

>fairy tail
pajeet pls

>paintings have zero substance
To non brainlets, yes.

If your entire understanding of the existential problems with doubt is "lol read a kids book" I assume you are spiritually dead and an unbearable nihilist.

>fairy tale
Now I look like a weeb. Great. Fucking dunes.

>Nowhere in the world will you find sand dunes like that
But you will. In a movie studio to be precise, and that's the problem.

>he doesn't want any positive theme in his art
Damn, wouldn't want to be you.

lmao
and let me guess, literature is for faggots am i rite

Attached: 800px-Caspar_David_Friedrich_-_Wanderer_above_the_sea_of_fog.jpg (800x1024, 169K)

They were formed by the obsessive -ology defying entity that inhabits the Zone, the very wish giver itself, the phantasm that exists in all knowledge.

Those are graves

I'd rather be "spiritually dead" than a naive slave to wishful thinking.

t. soulless tranny

Not when it's bland and so surface level to the point of it being laughable

sand is just yellow gravel

tell me which part is surface-level my dear phoneposting newfriend

Not enough brain cells to read, it seems

let me guess, "not bland" for you means a canvas filled with period blood?

How very enlightened. Just because you think mainstream Christians aren't thinking for themselves doesn't mean you are.

>capitalizing letters = phoneposting
The theme of hope and faith, as discussed above.

cringe

It very much is, that's why I don't understand why you are claiming its artistic superiority.

Dude they state it like a million times over that the zone does not operate in a way we can comprehend.

Was the oasis in call of pripyat a reference to this room

Motherfucking Black Dynamite you pleb

Kubrick would have had realistic dunes

Where in the fuck did I say that "menstrual blood on a canvas" is superior to a overrated russian sci-fi film?
Stop shoving your head so far up your ass and you might not be so schizophrenic.

Tell me how is a giant floating space baby realistic

How can you be this autistic over fucking sand?

obviously

I'll take your outburst as an admission of guilt.

>thought he was such a genius for 'sculpting in time', the most challenging material to sculpt
>turns out he couldn't even sculpt in sand, one of the easiest sculpting material ever
Hack exposed

The sand dunes represent the coordinated manipulation of the citizens of the Soviet Union by the various "lumps" of media and government trying to convince them of a non-existent reality of prosperity and fulfilled desire which they can either willfully embrace or ignore.

The hypernormalisation of sand dunes.

How is sand one of the easiest sculpting materials ever

Pathetic showing, /pol/tardetty

Attached: 34999691533_561d0a280d_b-e1501805438630.jpg (680x371, 61K)

Why bring politics into this at all?

I think you mean clay you fucking retard

>t. retard that has never been to the beach

Attached: molding pottery clay.jpg (1600x1200, 727K)

I make over 200k a year being autistic about turbidite flow modeling

Keep in mind the movie was shot on a very tiny budget after the original film was damaged or in the wrong format, can't remember which.

bump

Very very interesting points have been brought up concerning the mini-dunes, but an important observation has eluded you all. The key to the dunes, lies in the owl. Every time the owl flies, it shifts the sand, which in turn goes flying into one of the invisible portals, all the portals have a fixed zero point, meaning that overtime, the sand begins to accumulate in fixed spots without the help of wind. All the dunes represent zero, the beginning, because that’s where you return, the well at the center represents the lonely oasis in the desert, a mirage for the thirsty traveler. All this was laid out to tell us that the Wishgranter will not serve as a source of respite like an oasis, it is merely our own presumption projected onto it, in reality we all will still wander aimlessly looking for something more to fill the eternal thirst.

WOAH

Attached: 1538076056123.gif (198x200, 1.1M)

What the fuck is going on in this thread.

it's been a few years since a saw this quality in a thread on Yea Forums

really?

since classic Paul Danoposting

I dont think you watched the movie, or you watched it without subtitles.