balance5050 wrote...
majinbuu1307 wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
CerealWar wrote...
majinbuu1307 wrote...
Consider this, the beam to the Citadel illuminated everything with a blue glow. There was no such glow when we see him. We don't see sky, or anything like that. I believe its the rubble from explosion he made when he shot up the...whatever the hell he was shooting at. Addition information-If you look at the picture at the bottom of this post, you will see the same cable from the citadel near shepard when he takes a breath.
The bottom picture depicts Shepard's body bathed in a blue light.
Hmm, I wonder where the blue light is coming from? Couldn't possibly be the same blue light that Shep and Co. were running straight for before Harbingers beam knocked him out.
No, it is coming from the conduit, In London,
Or you know, lights from either the citadel or something else. Or just simply the lighting chosen for that clip. More logical than what indoctrination theory or falling to earth theory suggests.
It's funny watching you struggle. How did Shepard get into an enclosed area? He was surrounded by nothing but open space at the end. The destroy endings destroy the relays and Reaper tech, the citadel is both of these, and both were supposably destroyed. The emergency lighing has traditionally been red, thats how it was in ME1. I.T. makes way more sense, that's why it's 1400 pages long.
One thing I will say. Upon reviewing the actual scene, I find that there is a complete lack of blue lighting. Therefore, my original statement is incorrect.
However, the post-elevator scene had Earth in the background, causing the entire scene to be brightly lit. The breathing scene is poorly lit. Objects like the cable/ rebar aren't shown in great detail. It is also difficult to discern whether the rubble is a metal/ proteic composite, or what ever the Keepers use, or concrete/ marble. It should be noted that Shepard runs over concrete/ cobble stones during the "beam run" sequence. Whether the laser that hits Shepard is landing near an area containing concrete is debatable.
Due to the ambiguous nature of the evidence available, it is unreasonable for the OP to off-handedly dismiss the idea of IT. There just isn't enough information available to make a solid conclusion. Lots of speculation.