TCSTigersClaw
Greek Special Forces B' Company "Naoussa" 2007-200
He is right you know
Favorite Wing Commander Movie Scene
- Thread starter Chris Blair
- Start date
- Status
TCSTigersClaw
Greek Special Forces B' Company "Naoussa" 2007-200
"He is right" just a comment , I didnt meant that LeHa is right but Dougie.
Dougie , relax man. Personally I never listen to LeHa cause he is off-topic or ironic ! - no offence LeHa
Dougie , relax man. Personally I never listen to LeHa cause he is off-topic or ironic ! - no offence LeHa
TCSTigersClaw
Greek Special Forces B' Company "Naoussa" 2007-200
What is the point Ghost?
About what TC said, I dont see Knight alive again IN THE MOVIE again so...
we are talking about what happened to Knight in the movie!
About what TC said, I dont see Knight alive again IN THE MOVIE again so...
we are talking about what happened to Knight in the movie!
LeHah
212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
Um, I have a DVD, a VHS, a screener VHS and a bootlegged VCD of the Wing Commander movie. I know the movie pretty well enough.
Yes, we don't see Knight again in the movie... but we also see Sansky get injured on the bridge and never see him again either. That doesn't mean he's dead... just we never see him again. (Though Sansky's fate is confirmed in the novel, this is conjecture if only because the traitor subplot was removed from the movie.)
Could Knight be alive? Definitely. Angel's ejection pod was pretty speedy when she took out the Skipper Missile. Theres a definite possiblity of Knight surviving if only because the law that "if you don't see it means it doesn't happen" does not apply.
Dear Lehah, I'm afraid i am simply asking you to agree with my interpretation of the shots in the movie. LOAFs was an ambiguous answer, mine was more specific. Do you agree with my re-telling of the shots in the film, or do you have no eyeballs? It's not a hard question. I'm not saying LOAF has no eyeballs, his answer is simply vague, but you choose, basically, to trust a vague description over a specific description without even consulting the seemingly anal abundance of material you have about the source.
Hey, maybe you can tell me what the book says about Knight's death/mircaculous houdini escape act. A direct quote (with no fudging) would do great.
I never denied that it wasn't possible that night survived, with a little sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting 'i can't hear you' loudly in the face of the blinding logic that:
-knight is still in his chair 0.0 seconds before the shot where his broadsword is suddenly a ball of vapour. This is surely UNDISPUTABLE.
-When angel ejects, the camera focus is much closer on her fighter, yet it takes much much longer for her rapier and her ejection pod to move to separate fields of view, which leaves the possibility of Knight surviving as close to zero as you can get without it actually being zero. So going by the filmamaking techniques, it is clear that Knight in the movie is very, very dead.
Therefore it is extremely likely that Chris Roberts wasn't thinking 'gosh, this has to tie in with the continuity of the games' when making the movie.
I truly, honestly, painfully would love someone to give me anything to help me believe that Chris Roberts produced this movie with the intention of it fitting in with the games. I respect you people for coming up with ways of making the continuity fit, I really do, but if you start believing your fantasies you really are deluding yourselves. I really would love to believe otherwise. Although not too much because the movie is one of the lamest bags of arse I've ever seen.
And Ghost, congratulations. You've brilliantly learned how to quote out of context, thus adding absolutely nothing to the conversation.
Hey, maybe you can tell me what the book says about Knight's death/mircaculous houdini escape act. A direct quote (with no fudging) would do great.
I never denied that it wasn't possible that night survived, with a little sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting 'i can't hear you' loudly in the face of the blinding logic that:
-knight is still in his chair 0.0 seconds before the shot where his broadsword is suddenly a ball of vapour. This is surely UNDISPUTABLE.
-When angel ejects, the camera focus is much closer on her fighter, yet it takes much much longer for her rapier and her ejection pod to move to separate fields of view, which leaves the possibility of Knight surviving as close to zero as you can get without it actually being zero. So going by the filmamaking techniques, it is clear that Knight in the movie is very, very dead.
Therefore it is extremely likely that Chris Roberts wasn't thinking 'gosh, this has to tie in with the continuity of the games' when making the movie.
I truly, honestly, painfully would love someone to give me anything to help me believe that Chris Roberts produced this movie with the intention of it fitting in with the games. I respect you people for coming up with ways of making the continuity fit, I really do, but if you start believing your fantasies you really are deluding yourselves. I really would love to believe otherwise. Although not too much because the movie is one of the lamest bags of arse I've ever seen.
And Ghost, congratulations. You've brilliantly learned how to quote out of context, thus adding absolutely nothing to the conversation.
WildWeasel
Spaceman
Just what are you trying to prove? Knight's fighter explodes. He appears to die. However, he's in Wing Commander I. Therefore, he doesn't die in the movie. It's as simple as that.
DoomsdayPlague
Spaceman
I thought the movie was suppose to be WC1
WildWeasel
Spaceman
No, it takes place prior to the game.
DoomsdayPlague
Spaceman
Thats real messed up since bossman had already died before Blair even made it to the ship in the movie. But doesn't die in the game for a long while in. With enough time for you to get a feeling for the character
WildWeasel
Spaceman
Bossman was assumed to be dead in the movie. He was later recovered.
Phillip Tanaka
Swabbie
Banned
The movie is meant to be the be all and end all, from what I understand. Therefore, what happens in the games is pretty moot if that is the case.
WildWeasel
Spaceman
No.
TC
SubCrid
Yeah, we all know LeHah's stupid.
I'll get you a quote later
It's perfectly disputable that knight was not in his fighter when it turns to vapour... since it takes more than no time for the ship to completely explode.
You just said it's possible, though. This possibility is what happened since, as I stated before, Knight cannot be dead.
Um... why does it matter what the intention for Knight was? Roberts had stated that it was part of Wing Commander... and since he's still alive later in the series, he didn't die in the movie.
Thanks, that's a relief.
It takes about one second I estimate for the ship to turn from a ship to absolutely nothing at all, which fits in with the games quite well (except the 'strangely my fighter is taking time to die i'd like to take this moment to wish you the best' extended deaths).
Incidentally, it takes around 3 seconds in wing commander 3 (which i've been playing as a homage in-order thin to lead me up to WC:UE when i fetch the prophecy disks from home so my c.ops can run) to eject, including reaching to the D-ring.
Now when the shot switches from Knight to the broadsword it is fair to assume that, up until the end of that shot of knight, that Knight is still very much in the ship, since we see him there, hello knight, hi guys, QED etc.
-We can assume that that section of the fight is shot in real-time more or less i.e. no time-cuts (i'm going to contradict myself in a second), demonstrated by how Knight's death(?) scream and the background sounds remain constant throughout the whole second or so of footage.
- to quote an earlier point i made, "When angel ejects, the camera focus is much closer on her fighter, yet it takes much much longer for her rapier and her ejection pod to move to separate fields of view." There is no sign of a pod, and the switch to Paladin's face isn't enough time for a pod to launch and escape from the field of view. Indeed (and this is where I kind of contradict myself on the real-time thing) the actual camera footage seems to overlap itself before and after paladin's headshot.
Yes, that's kind of like a biblical fundamentalist going 'no see that bit of the bible can't be wrong, because it says here in the bible that everything written in it is perfect'. You're using a circular argument. I say that the movie isn't part of the continuity, and it's demonstrated by things *such as*, and especially, Knight's death. Therefore that totally irrelevent point you make, and you would know it was irrelevent if you read everything more carefully and maybe perhaps look at things from *another point of view* for a change, holds no water whatsoever, and isn't therefore as simple as 1+1=2, so your point is totally irrelevent, thank you come again.
With equal logical deduction i could say
Knight is blown up in the movie
Knight is later seen alive in Wing Commander 1
Ergo: the movie is not part of the timeline.
That's um kind of an ambiguous comment TC, no offense intended. 'Part of' Wing Commander doesn't mean the same continuity, in fact it doesn't mean much at all. Can you quote it in context please? An equallyvague and un-backable quote i remember is Roberts saying he wanted to make a 'fresh start' or something with Wing Commander, from which could plausibly be interpreted he wasn't concerned whatsoever with the games in any way.
- Status