franz bolo
Sr Member
No, that wasn't Phil's ID.
FB
FB
Blade Runner ID comparisons
- Thread starter juno
- Start date
franz bolo
Sr Member
I'm not sure either. I posted an image of the I.D. that is believed to be the original that Phil used to create his I.D.
FB
FB
exoray
Master Member
<div class='quotetop'>(franz bolo @ Sep 13 2006, 04:55 PM) [snapback]1319527[/snapback]</div>
It's that pesky Blad Runner Mafia...
Or it could be simply the fact that there are other parts of "the original" that don't match the screen used prop...
Oh well once again it appears the flow of information on the RPF is being restricted by what can only be assumed is personal gain...
It's that pesky Blad Runner Mafia...
Or it could be simply the fact that there are other parts of "the original" that don't match the screen used prop...
Oh well once again it appears the flow of information on the RPF is being restricted by what can only be assumed is personal gain...
franz bolo
Sr Member
The one I posted looks just like Phil's. So it's obvious that the reference he had was NOT of the screen used ID. This is for certain.
I guess the only other questions are, "Who owns the screen used ID" and "Is the one I posted a fake or is it authentic".
With no other information about the original being shared, we will have to make our own minds up.
FB
I guess the only other questions are, "Who owns the screen used ID" and "Is the one I posted a fake or is it authentic".
With no other information about the original being shared, we will have to make our own minds up.
FB
Miniaturizer Ray
Well-Known Member
So what was the ID that you posted a picture of (meaning who owns it, how did they get it, etc)?
franz bolo
Sr Member
To many things still don't add up. I hope one day to be proven wrong. :lol
FB
FB
AnsonJames
Sr Member
<div class='quotetop'>(Noeland @ Sep 14 2006, 02:45 AM) [snapback]1319699[/snapback]</div>
The one indisputable fact that's come out of this thread is that Phils ID is a reproduction of a fake.
There's no possible way anyone can explain the tri-mark coming from anywhere else other than a screencap.
If the photos of the Worldcon ID hadn't shown up we never would have known...
The one indisputable fact that's come out of this thread is that Phils ID is a reproduction of a fake.
There's no possible way anyone can explain the tri-mark coming from anywhere else other than a screencap.
If the photos of the Worldcon ID hadn't shown up we never would have known...
MattMunson
Master Member
<div class='quotetop'>(AnsonJames @ Sep 15 2006, 08:27 AM) [snapback]1320315[/snapback]</div>
Thought I've agreed with virtually everything you've said so far, I must offer a contradictory opinion to that claim, only because it is not a proven or demonstrable fact that the id that phil used as a base is a fake. What I think we all feel confident in is that it wasn't the ID seen on screen in the Zhora scene, or the vid-fon scene. on that, i think we are all pretty confident.
But we don't know AS A FACT that the base for Phil's project was a fake. We seem to feel pretty confident in this assertion, but it certainly hasn't been PROVEN.
Unless I missed a post
Thought I've agreed with virtually everything you've said so far, I must offer a contradictory opinion to that claim, only because it is not a proven or demonstrable fact that the id that phil used as a base is a fake. What I think we all feel confident in is that it wasn't the ID seen on screen in the Zhora scene, or the vid-fon scene. on that, i think we are all pretty confident.
But we don't know AS A FACT that the base for Phil's project was a fake. We seem to feel pretty confident in this assertion, but it certainly hasn't been PROVEN.
Unless I missed a post
franz bolo
Sr Member
<div class='quotetop'>(MattMunson @ Sep 14 2006, 06:21 PM) [snapback]1320361[/snapback]</div>
Good point and I think most people agree. I think people just mean the one used and seen in the movie is the "REAL" one and anything else that claims to be and isn't would indeed be "FAKE" for that specific claim.
It hasn't been proven it has any ties to the movie either, so I think it's a symantical thing at this point.
I don't know what to call it. Maybe OG-ID for the screen used and NO-G-ID for the one Phil based his on.
FB
Good point and I think most people agree. I think people just mean the one used and seen in the movie is the "REAL" one and anything else that claims to be and isn't would indeed be "FAKE" for that specific claim.
It hasn't been proven it has any ties to the movie either, so I think it's a symantical thing at this point.
I don't know what to call it. Maybe OG-ID for the screen used and NO-G-ID for the one Phil based his on.
FB
outlander
Sr Member
>even a production made claim at this point is vague as the secret society won't talk...
I hate to break out an old chestnut, but:
Who controls the British crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We do, We do.
Who keeps Atlantis off the maps?
Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
We do, we do.
Who keeps back the electric car?
Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
We do, we do.
Who robs cavefish of their sight?
Who rigs every Oscar night?
We do, we dooooooo.
I hate to break out an old chestnut, but:
Who controls the British crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We do, We do.
Who keeps Atlantis off the maps?
Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
We do, we do.
Who keeps back the electric car?
Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
We do, we do.
Who robs cavefish of their sight?
Who rigs every Oscar night?
We do, we dooooooo.
Last edited by a moderator:
