Excellent anecdote, metaphorical sibling...

Wow anon that is very cool. More of this plz

>>2
It's not an anecdote, anon. I have experienced worlds you can not imagine in your most fevered dreams. My mind is the stuff of raw chaos.

>>4
nobody ever expect the Liechtensteiner inquisition...

Wow that is so KEWL. Kin I be in your gang? We can haz embroidered leather jackets and everything.

...yeah, yeah, yeah, and I've seen attack ships on fire off the shores of Orion, so I think that kinda trumps it all.
Seriously... unless you are Olivia herself, your Rutger-Hauerisms have no meaning, and I can only wonder at your motivations for starting this thread, unbidden, in apropos of nothing, on 71. Are you playing a game of 'Mental Illness Bingo', and are trying to cry out 'house' for having ticked all the boxes?

>>7
Rutger Hauer did NOT, contrary to "Blade Runner" fanboy lore, come up with those beautiful lines (nor with the immediately following "tears in rain" thing) himself (he's far too muscular and good-looking to possess any poetic aptitude or cognitive ability worth mentioning),

Pedrobear is NOT a girl,

and - much to my surprise - several posts on this thread indicate that .71 is NOT as devoid of intelligence and a sense of humour, and NOT as easy a mark for risible pompous poseurs, as I've been assuming it to be for a couple of years now.

>>8 who is "Alex"

lol even when he makes a constructive post he still can't keep the condescension from dripping off of every word.

>>assumes Cracky fags would not know about Philip K. Dick.

Alex K. Dick, more like it.

>>8 YOU of course would be the least witty "pompous poseur" of them all. You've yet to raise even a mild chuckle among an audience you inveterately assume to be Cro Magnon. I suppose you can take pride in that. I haven't seen anyone anywhere on the internet who could compete with you as King Pompous Poseur.

>>9
I suppose this is a bit of a "lose-lose" situation, since if I now go on to explain why I WASN'T being pompous and condescending, then that's being pompous and condescending.

But since, yes, I guess I DO have an EENTSY inclination in that direction, I WILL point out that:

The pontificating about what "Rutger Hauer" could possibly and could not possibly have said was, far from being a condescension toward you, a condescension toward myself, i.e. a bit of self-deprecating humour at the expense of my own deficiencies.

That Rutger Hauer DID himself compose the "attack ships on fire off the shores of Orion" speech is one of the things I have very definitely LEARNT in the "Crackyverse" - and I don't consider it to be a merely trivial thing, as I remember being moved by the speech, at age 20 or 21 when the movie came out, to a degree that I'd been moved by few things I've encountered in the cinema.

(It's poetry of an equal rank with Rimbaud's
"Mais, vrai, j'ai trop pleuré ! Les Aubes sont navrantes.
Toute lune est atroce et tout soleil amer :
L'âcre amour m'a gonflé de torpeurs enivrantes.
Ô que ma quille éclate ! Ô que j'aille à la mer !" and certainly better than anything of that poet's that was included in the rather bad movie of his life that was made around that time with Sylvester Stallone in the title role).

The first time I saw a post on Crackyhouse directing me to a site where the information was given that those lines were NOT actually in Dick's book and that Hauer had improvised them on set, I don't think I was even being ironical in replying "What? A guy who looks like THAT can have and express emotions like THOSE?" But I followed the link and was able to indeed assure myself that the lines ARE Hauer's. Since then, any allusions on my part to "This will all be lost, like tears in rain" etc. tend to be allusions to how I have been forced indeed to recognize that there are certain limits to my purported omniscience and that I suffer from the prejudices natural to an unathletic, cerebral guy who has suffered all his life from a seething resentment against the athletic and the physically impressive.

And yes, of course, I'm back deep in the no-win double-bind right now, because I've just taken up, talking about myself, several inches of space on .71 that could have been used for arguing about child pornography.

I don't know how much of an asshole that makes me.

But then, who does?

>>11 Touche. In all honesty I'm glad to see you in a jovial mood. Informative explanation of the Hauer-Dick controversy at .71

Don't be hatin' on Rutger Hauer, or pigeonhole him as some Dolph Lugren type. I've seen some films that would have stunk to high heaven without his august presence. He seems merely to have taken on these roles for next to no pay, on the condition he gets to wear black and and make cryptically philosophical comments. His persona in those famous Guinness ads does not seem too far from the 'real Rutger Hauer'...

>>13 lrn2 spell me rite.

>>12
Well, thankyou.
And just in case anyone is STILL confused, let me add that the post which first referred to Hauer (no. 7) wasn't mine, by the way.
I wish it HAD been, because drawing a comparison between this dire, preening, "look-at-what-a-crazy-edge-y-guy-I-am" bullshit at the top of this thread and one of the finest expressions in popular culture of something like a GENUINE sense of the beauty and horror of experience was a very apposite move, and one that was decidedly called for at this juncture.

I know that most of you are of the view that there is no place for polemics, or even for polemically-intended satire and irony, here. But I think that there is a call and a need in EVERY culture, now and again, for the service provided, say, by the great Karl Kraus in Austria-Hungary circa 1900, and that he himself described as consisting

"nicht in das, was ich bringe, sondern in das, was ich UMBRINGE."