filfre.netThe Digital Antiquarian

filfre.net Profile

filfre.net is a domain that was created on 2009-05-29,making it 16 years ago. It has several subdomains, such as amiga.filfre.net , among others.

Discover filfre.net website stats, rating, details and status online.Use our online tools to find owner and admin contact info. Find out where is server located.Read and write reviews or vote to improve it ranking. Check alliedvsaxis duplicates with related css, domain relations, most used words, social networks references. Go to regular site

filfre.net Information

HomePage size: 288.166 KB
Page Load Time: 0.355749 Seconds
Website IP Address: 173.236.193.142

filfre.net Similar Website

LEARFIELD Digital Publications, digital.learfield.com
digital.learfield.com
Digital Asset Management Software (DAM)| Organize Digital Assets
revrvgroup.lariathub.com
Transform Your Digital Marketing Strategy with Flipp's Dynamic Platform for Digital Shopping Experie
corp.flipp.com
Access-Home - Barna Digital - Barna Digital
access.barna.com
Herald Marketing - Print Media, Digital Media, & Digital Marketing Services
marketing.capemaycountyherald.com
Clayton County's Digital Equity Initiative | Clayton County Digital Equity
digitalequity.claytoncountyga.gov
Digital Inclusion Resource library - National Digital Inclusion Alliance
library.digitalinclusion.org
Digital Workplace Experience | Best Digital Workplace Conference : DWX
hub.dxsummit.com
Technology and Digital Solutions | Technology & Digital Solutions | Stanford Medicine
tds.stanfordmedicine.org
Kitcast Digital Signage Blog: News, Articles and Digital Signage Tips
blog.kitcast.tv
Barclays Digital Wings | Digital learning - your way
digital.wings.uk.barclays
TCG Digital Life Science - TCG Digital Life Science
lifescience.tcgdigital.com
Jisc digital insights - Investigating student and staff expectations of the digital environment
digitalstudent.jiscinvolve.org
Digital Rights Check - Digital Rights Check
digitalrights-check.bmz-digital.global

filfre.net PopUrls

The Digital Antiquarian
https://www.filfre.net/
Archives › 2016
https://www.filfre.net/2016/
shelley
https://www.filfre.net/tag/shelley/
aol
https://www.filfre.net/tag/aol/
carmack
https://www.filfre.net/tag/carmack/
ultima
https://www.filfre.net/tag/ultima/
cinemaware
https://www.filfre.net/tag/cinemaware/
id
https://www.filfre.net/tag/id/
wizardry
https://www.filfre.net/tag/wizardry/
st
https://www.filfre.net/tag/st/

filfre.net DNS

A filfre.net. 300 IN A 173.236.193.142
AAAA filfre.net. 300 IN AAAA 2607:f298:5:118a::7fe:ad7b
MX filfre.net. 300 IN MX 0 mx1.mailchannels.net.
NS filfre.net. 14400 IN NS ns1.dreamhost.com.
TXT filfre.net. 300 IN TXT v=spf1 mx include:netblocks.dreamhost.com include:relay.mailchannels.net -all
SOA filfre.net. 300 IN SOA ns1.dreamhost.com. hostmaster.dreamhost.com. 2024031300 15416 600 1814400 300

filfre.net Httpheader

Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 13:41:31 GMT
Server: Apache
Upgrade: h2
Connection: Upgrade
Last-Modified: Tue, 14 May 2024 13:41:23 GMT
ETag: "3cebd-6186a286007d8"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 249533
Cache-Control: max-age=3591, public, public
Expires: Tue, 14 May 2024 14:41:23 GMT
Vary: Accept-Encoding,Cookie
Referrer-Policy: no-referrer-when-downgrade
Pragma: public
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8

filfre.net Meta Info

charset="utf-8"/
content="max-image-preview:large" name="robots"/
content="WordPress 6.5.3" name="generator"/

filfre.net Ip Information

Ip Country: United States
Latitude: 37.751
Longitude: -97.822

filfre.net Html To Plain Text

A history of computer entertainment and digital culture by Jimmy Maher Home About Me Ebooks Hall of Fame Table of Contents RSS This Week on The Analog Antiquarian 10 May The Voyage of Magellan, Chapter 6: The Atlantic Crossing Comments Off on This Week on The Analog Antiquarian Posted by Jimmy Maher on May 10, 2024 in Uncategorized Blade Runner 03 May Blade Runner has set me thinking about the notion of a critical consensus.” Why should we have such a thing at all, and why should it change over time? Ridley Scott’s 1982 film Blade Runner is an adaptation of Philip K. Dick’s 1968 novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? , about a police officer cum bounty hunter — a blade runner” in street slang — of a dystopian near-future whose job is to retire” android replicants” of humans whose existence on Earth is illegal. The movie had a famously troubled gestation, full of time and budget overruns, disputes between Scott and his investors, and an equally contentious relationship between the director and his leading man, Harrison Ford. When it was finally finished, the first test audiences were decidedly underwhelmed, such that Scott’s backers demanded that the film be recut, with the addition of a slightly hammy expository voice-over and a cheesy happy-ending epilogue which was cobbled together quickly using leftover footage from, of all movies, Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining . It didn’t seem to help. The critical consensus on the released version ranged over a continuum from ambivalence to outright hostile. Robert Ebert’s faint praise was typically damning: I was never really interested in the characters in Blade Runner . I didn’t find them convincing. What impressed me in the film was the special effects, the wonderful use of optical trickery to show me a gigantic imaginary Los Angeles, which in the vision of this movie has been turned into sort of a futuristic Tokyo. It’s a great movie to look at, but a hard one to care about. I didn’t appreciate the predictable story, the standard characters, the cliffhanging clichés… but I do think the special effects make Blade Runner worth going to see.” Pauline Kael was less forgiving of what she saw as a cold, formless, ultimately pointless movie: If anybody comes around with a test to detect humanoids, maybe Ridley Scott and his associates should hide. With all the smoke in this movie, you feel as if everyone connected with it needs to have his flue cleaned.” Audiences do not always follow the critics’ lead, but in this case they largely did. During its initial theatrical run, Blade Runner fell well short of earning back the $30 million it had cost to make. Yet remarkably soon after it had disappeared from theaters, its rehabilitation got underway in fannish circles. In 1984, William Gibson published his novel Neuromancer , the urtext of a new cyberpunk” movement in science fiction that began in printed prose but quickly spiraled out from there into comics, television, and games . Whereas Blade Runner ‘s dystopic Los Angeles looked more like Tokyo than any contemporary American city, much of Gibson’s book actually took place in Japan. The two neon-soaked nighttime cityscapes were very much of a piece. The difference was that Gibson added to the equation a computer-enabled escape from reality known as cyberspace, creating a combination that would prove almost irresistibly alluring to science-fiction fans as the computer age around them continued to evolve apace. Blade Runner ‘s rehabilitation spread to the mainstream in 1992, when a director’s cut” of the film was re-released in theaters, lacking the Captain Obvious voice-over or the tacked-on happy ending but sporting a handful of new scenes that added fresh layers of nuance to the story. Critics — many of them the very same critics who had dismissed the movie a decade earlier — now rushed to praise it as a singular cinematic vision and a science-fiction masterpiece. They found many reasons for its box-office failure on the first go-round, even beyond the infelicitous changes that Ridley Scott had been forced by his backers to make to it. For one thing, it had been unlucky enough to come out just one month after E.T.: The Extraterrestrial , the biggest box-office smash of all time to that point, whose long shadow was as foreboding and unforgiving a place to dwell as any of Blade Runner ‘s own urban landscapes. Then, too, the audience was conditioned back then to see Harrison Ford as Han Solo or Indiana Jones — a charming rogue with a heart of gold, not the brooding, morally tormented cop Rick Deckard, who has a penchant for rough sex and a habit of shooting women in the back. In light of all this, surely the critics too could be forgiven for failing to see the film’s genius the first time they were given the chance. Whether we wish to forgive them or not, I find it fascinating that a single film could generate such polarized reactions only ten years apart in time from people who study the medium for a living. The obvious riposte to my sense of wonder is, of course, that the Blade Runner of 1992 really wasn’t the same film at all as the one that had been seen in 1982. Yet I must confess to considerable skepticism about this as a be-all, end-all explanation. It seems to me that, for all that the voice-over and forced happy ending did the movie as a whole no favors, they were still a long way from destroying the qualities that made Blade Runner distinct. Some of my skepticism may arise from the fact that I’m just not onboard with the most vaunted aspect of the director’s cut, its subtle but undeniable insinuation that Deckard is himself a replicant with implanted memories, no different from the androids he hunts down and kills. This was not the case in Philip K. Dick’s novel, nor was it the original intention of the film’s scriptwriters. I rather suspect, although I certainly cannot prove it, that even Ridley Scott’s opinion on the subject was more equivocal during the making of the film than it has since become. David Peoples, one of the screenwriters, attributes the genesis of the idea in Scott’s mind to an overly literal reading on his part of a philosophical meditation on free will and the nature of human existence in an early draft of the script. Peoples: I invented a kind of contemplative voice-over for Deckard. Here, let me read it to you: I wondered who designs the ones like me and what choices we really have, and which ones we just think we have. I wondered which of my memories were real and which belonged to someone else. The great Tyrell [the genius inventor and business magnate whose company made the replicants] hadn’t designed me, but whoever had hadn’t done so much better. In my own modest way, I was a combat model.” Now, what I’d intended with this voice-over was mostly metaphysical. Deckard was supposed to be philosophically questioning himself about what it was that made him so different from Rachael [a replicant with whom he falls in love or lust] and the other replicants. He was supposed to be realizing that, on the human level, they weren’t so different. That Deckard wanted the same things the replicants did. The maker” he was referring to wasn’t Tyrell. It was supposed to be God. So, basically, Deckard was just musing about what it meant to be human. But then, Ridley… well, I think Ridley misinterpreted me. Because right about this period of time, he started announcing, Ah-ha! Deckard’s a replicant! What brilliance!” I was sort of confused by this response, because Ridley kept giving me all this praise and credit for this terrific idea. It wasn’t until many years later, when I happened to be browsing through this draft, that I suddenly realized the metaphysical material I had written could just as easily have been read to imply that Deckard was a replicant, even though it wasn’t what I meant at all. What I had meant was, we all have a maker, and we all have an incept date [a replicant’s equivalent to a date of birth]. We just can’t address...

filfre.net Whois

Domain Name: FILFRE.NET Registry Domain ID: 1557484930_DOMAIN_NET-VRSN Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.dreamhost.com Registrar URL: http://www.DreamHost.com Updated Date: 2024-04-28T08:20:22Z Creation Date: 2009-05-29T20:31:46Z Registry Expiry Date: 2025-05-29T20:31:46Z Registrar: DreamHost, LLC Registrar IANA ID: 431 Domain Status: ok https://icann.org/epp#ok Name Server: NS1.DREAMHOST.COM Name Server: NS2.DREAMHOST.COM Name Server: NS3.DREAMHOST.COM DNSSEC: unsigned >>> Last update of whois database: 2024-05-17T20:13:26Z <<<