algroth

I think Criterion's most recent Blu-Ray release of Brazil has both 142 and 132 minute cuts actually. At the very least the former 142-minute Director's Cut is in it. https://www.criterion.com/films/211-brazil

Brazil's an all-time top 5 for me. I personally enjoyed the descent to madness the film goes through during its second half, I'm a sucker in general for Kafkian nightmares and this paired alongside Gilliam's usual mastery for visuals as well as his very sardonic sense of humour just makes it a film I love returning to time and time again, and one of those watershed viewings when I was a teen. Glad you enjoyed it, if with some reservations.

An old one, not sure if it's been uploaded here before.

It's pretty much as you'd split up the descriptions: foe AoE affects only foes, friendly AoE affects only allies, AoE affects everyone. Also worth noting that when you use a spell or abilty you'll get a circle with an AoE indicator. For these, Foe AoE will be yellow, universal AoE will be red, friendly AoE will be blue. Hope it helps!

Star Trek Beyond is the last I watched. I was on two minds about the film: I enjoyed some of the banter between the characters, some of the set-pieces are alright, Idris Elba is charismatic as ever even behind a wall of cosmetics... But frankly I had a very hard time following the action, I feel no time was given at all to set each scene and location. It felt like the film was rushing through action set-pieces at the expense of pace and the actual sensation of space exploration and adventure. What few interesting shots and compositions there were got lost when the editors decided to let a meatgrinder do their jobs. This aside, I recently acquired some blu-rays, which I'll surely be getting to watch soon: A Brighter Summer Day, Paris Belongs to Us, The American Friend, Don't Look Now, Emigrants and The New Land. Of these I have only seen A Brighter Summer Day in a very low-quality online copy so I'm looking forward to rewatching it in a cleaner, more proper remaster instead.

I reckon non-sapient forms can't be Awakened because they probably can't process a situation or event in a way that would allow them to become Awakened, as in, they'd likely be unable to establish that similarity between what they experience at a given point and a memory from a very distant past. The stag that was once Persoq likely wouldn't have understood what Sagani was saying to it either. I reckon vithrack, dragons and the likes most likely could however, and that we haven't seen an Awakened non-kith isn't an indicator that it couldn't happen for other species (maybe in the sequel we'll see more about this?). I'm also under some impression that the Matron Beregan could be a Watcher, given her dreams and her ability to foresee the Eyeless invasion. I could definitely have misunderstood this, but if not, can she peer into her past lives, and has she suffered an Awakening like Maerwald and the protagonist have? She doesn't share enough to know either way, but it would be an interesting possibility too. I could be way off-base though.

These are some interesting parallels you caught on. I'd personally say that these are all more related to the usual traits of many hermetic groups and esoteric disciplines and not just Scientology specifically though, what with the idea of a linear soul being reincarnated over many lifetimes for example extending beyond the beliefs of Scientology. I met during a trip to Córdoba, Argentina a man who claimed to be an Indigo child, and that he had a clear memory of all the lives he'd lived in the past; yet his general outlook was more a hodge-podge of religions and spirituality that probably had some shared root with Scientology but was not it either (it's called Harwitum, I think), and employed more often than not codes more related to ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamic beliefs instead (the guy in question is called Matías de Stefano, he's a bit of a public figure too due to this aspect). Meanwhile the structure and ideology of the Leaden Key reminds me somewhat of the Tres in Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum, which is itself a satirical representation of a hermetic society. It seems more to share the qualities these usually have: the idea of guarding great otherwordly truths and secrets even from themselves, being these secrets that should not be revealed to the world lest they put it in danger, or put the secrets themselves at risk of being corrupted and distorted through misinterpretation and misapplication instead and so on.

This year's been pretty slow/lacklustre so far, but I'm really looking forward to some of the upcoming titles. Arrival looks particularly superb, but so do Nocturnal Animals, Loving, Moana, Jackie, La La Land, Manchester by the Sea, Paterson, Certain Women and The Red Turtle. I'm expecting it'll be the best awards season since 2013, most likely.

Done! I'm not sure what the rules are with regards to this, but I'm going to copy what I replied to in the thread about the earlier survey because I feel it still applies for this one: So... I just finished this survey. I have to say, I'm very wary of the information and ideas the company gets out of these results, I for one found many of the responses and questions a little too vague to really be in agreement or disagreement of. Meanwhile, the slides and questions regarding tone just made my heart sink. What if I don't want fantasy to be thought of in terms of "light" or "dark"? To my mind, one of the great successes about the likes of Planescape: Torment (to my mind the best game I've ever played) is that it didn't need to assume itself as being dark, it simply was thanks to the thematic content. It is a much more affecting and disturbing game than the likes of Dark Souls or Dragon Age: Origins, which on the other hand do try so hard to dress their rather standard fantasy tropes in a dark and cynical outfit, and pretend they're so much more serious for doing so. The matter of tone is complicated, because you can ONLY pick your tone in accordance to the content you have before you: if we don't know what this hypothetical upcoming RPG is about, how are we supposed to know which style works best for it? It is best to let the tone develop naturally from the content and the story opposed to reinforcing it just because it's what the playerbase wants to see. My two cents, anyhow.

So... I just finished this survey. I have to say, I'm very wary of the information and ideas the company gets out of these results, I for one found many of the responses and questions a little too vague to really be in agreement or disagreement of. Meanwhile, the slides and questions regarding tone just made my heart sink. What if I don't want fantasy to be thought of in terms of "light" or "dark"? To my mind, one of the great successes about the likes of Planescape: Torment (to my mind the best game I've ever played) is that it didn't need to assume itself as being dark, it simply was thanks to the thematic content. It is a much more affecting and disturbing game than the likes of Dark Souls or Dragon Age: Origins, which on the other hand do try so hard to dress their rather standard fantasy tropes in a dark and cynical outfit, and pretend they're so much more serious for doing so. The matter of tone is complicated, because you can ONLY pick your tone in accordance to the content you have before you: if we don't know what this hypothetical upcoming RPG is about, how are we supposed to know which style works best for it? It is best to let the tone develop naturally from the content and the story opposed to reinforcing it just because it's what the playerbase wants to see. In terms of worlds I'd like to see adapted to isometric RPGs, I'd much rather see original content the likes Pillars of Eternity and seemingly the upcoming Anarchy offer; however, I did suggest that looking into the Hollow Earth/Agartha myth may also make for a pretty interesting 'original'/adapted setting. Looking forward to Tyranny anyhow.