Blade Runner - Appreciation Thread

It's a case of photoshop-layering overload, I think.

Louis Armstrong wrote:

Mr. Trevelyan wrote:

I don't know, Ford's face is kinda messed up. And is that supposed to be Rutger Hauer in the background? :shock: WTF?!

Have you seen Ford on the original?



I don't like the addition of Rutger Hauer in the corner - I thought the cigarette smoke against black looked pretty cool - and I'm not sure about the introduction of so much purple...but other than that, the composition and rendering on the new one are far superior IMO.

Well, it's not perfect, but at least I can handle it though. The newer one just blows, although Sean Young looks better.

Sean Young and Harrison Ford look better in the new one (ie, actually like them) but the rest of it didn't need to be altered or changed at all. I'd like a halfway mark.

Salomé wrote:

Still prefer the original release, though some consider me a philistine for that.

I agree with you, to me the voiceover was a natural part of the future-noir style of the film
many critics seem to have a knee jerk dislike of voiceovers, but I thought it worked well

Lazenby. wrote:

Arkadin wrote:

When the editor is talking about BLADE RUNNER in the "Dangerous Days" documentary, he specifically states that the unicorn footage did exist back in '82

Yep, I figured there'd be something someone had said in DD, but my memory's hazy on it, haven't seen it since it came out three years or so ago. Still, George Lucas pulls s*** like this; There's no doubt a well-paid guy called Rick who'll tell you that it was always "George's Original Vision" to have some EMO punk turn up in the ghost lineup in ROTJ. ;)

Which I guess just lumps me in the "conspiracy theorist" category on this, the water's still warm from last time.
Still....
Watch BR in "Deck-a-rep" mindset = Questions, stuff that doesn't make sense.
Watch BR in "Deck-not-a-rep" mindset = No questions, bloke just had a coincidental dream about a unicorn.

as I always say “show people make notoriously unreliable witnesses”

I personally prefer the story with Deckard as a human

Lazenby. wrote:

Still, George Lucas pulls s*** like this; There's no doubt a well-paid guy called Rick who'll tell you that it was always "George's Original Vision" to have some EMO punk turn up in the ghost lineup in ROTJ. ;)

Sure. But I don't think that's the case with this, especially since plenty of people on the BLADE RUNNER crew are willing to contest the Deck-a-rep idea, and the film has multiple voices confirming that the unicorn stuff was shot as a special shoot during BLADE RUNNER's production.

Arkadin wrote:

Lazenby. wrote:

Still, George Lucas pulls s*** like this; There's no doubt a well-paid guy called Rick who'll tell you that it was always "George's Original Vision" to have some EMO punk turn up in the ghost lineup in ROTJ. ;)

Sure. But I don't think that's the case with this, especially since plenty of people on the BLADE RUNNER crew are willing to contest the Deck-a-rep idea, and the film has multiple voices confirming that the unicorn stuff was shot as a special shoot during BLADE RUNNER's production.

It doesn't really matter if the unicorn dream was shot during production or not -- the smoking gun is the unicorn origami at the end of the film, present in all versions, but making no sense if you don't have the unicorn dream from earlier to tie it to.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Arkadin wrote:

Lazenby. wrote:

Still, George Lucas pulls s*** like this; There's no doubt a well-paid guy called Rick who'll tell you that it was always "George's Original Vision" to have some EMO punk turn up in the ghost lineup in ROTJ. ;)

Sure. But I don't think that's the case with this, especially since plenty of people on the BLADE RUNNER crew are willing to contest the Deck-a-rep idea, and the film has multiple voices confirming that the unicorn stuff was shot as a special shoot during BLADE RUNNER's production.

It doesn't really matter if the unicorn dream was shot during production or not -- the smoking gun is the unicorn origami at the end of the film, present in all versions, but making no sense if you don't have the unicorn dream from earlier to tie it to.

I think the origami still makes sense on it's own
after all we've seen it before, earlier in the film
but the fact that it's an origami unicorn in particular, is suggestive

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

- the smoking gun is the unicorn origami at the end of the film, present in all versions, but making no sense if you don't have the unicorn dream from earlier to tie it to.

Precisely. It also makes Gaff a much more significant character.

Changing the focus, I'm not sure many films have assembled such a stellar cast as Blade Runner. I don't think there's anyone I'd change.

I'd change out Ford. Man, is he a snooze in this film.

Everybody else, though, is first-rate.

The best film of the 1980's.
Scott's finest hour.
Harrison's finest performance.
One of the finest examples of cinematography ever. Stunning use of scope.
A one of a kind haunting score.
Set design that would make Ken Adam weep.
Sits atop with 2001 and Star Wars as the greatest of science fiction films.
Unforgettable. Endlessly revealing and fascinating.
One of the greatest films ever made.
If you don't get it, sorry-let me tell you about my mother.

I became fascinated with the ideas behind the film in high school, after hearing about the film for years. Then i stumbled across Dick's novel which I still re-read to this day. Fantastic book btw. The found the good ol' scuzzy flipper DVD from 1997 and preceded to have my head blown off. This was one of those Apocalypse Now type films where I was dazed for days afterwards. Then came the intense research into the troubled production, various cuts and of course pre-Final Cut trying to assemble the various cuts and editions which was actually quite a feat in those days.The narration to me is completely alien to the film and has no reason for being there. And I adore noir narration, so for me as a huge Chandler-ite and devotee of Out of the Past, it takes a lot to dislike a narration.

The Final Cut is the finished version and despite the color push is the version to stick with. The WP is a fascinating curio, and the DC is the original as intended but sadly missing the extra bits from the International cut. I counted down the days, waited in line at a Best Buy on a school day-yes I skipped, and got my UCE briefcase DVD set which is still bar none the finest ever released in the format.

I also bought the Lasers of the International and DC for the Dolby Stereo sound mixes which I might mux to the Blu-ray at some point just for curiosity's sake.

I also got to see the rare 35mm screening of the Final Cut on the 25 anniversary tour. Imagine the BD on unbelievable steroids with sound that was pulverizing to the bone. New Year's Day 2008. I must have gone about 15 times that week.

I understand those who prefer the 82 release, and those who insist Deckard is human. These seem a bit more in line with Dick's novel but then again the book and film are essentially alternate universes of the same story and thus both fascinating.

As for me, Deckard is 100% undeniably a replicant. That completes the story arc in a perfect and completely unexpected way and pulls the damn rug right out from under you so perfectly that you begin to reflect on your own robotic existence.

Future Noir is an essential read, and Dangerous Days is a one of a kind miraculous doc that is THE Making of to end all making of's.

If only we could get a full release of Vangelis's score. I can't count how many boots and audio extractions I've gone through.

Have a better one.

Good point about the novel. I'm still of the opinion you could make a fairly faithful film from the novel and it could stand on its own, apart from BR. I think scale-wise it would best be done for TV, because Dick's world is just not as visually interesting, and it doesn't need to be. The Mercerism stuff has fascinated me for 30 years (read the book about the same time the film came out and have reread it about a dozen times, which puts it way behind the number of times I've seen all the various cuts of the movie.)

I watched the directors cut, last week. I'd only seen the original theatrical version before this.

I think the combination of the unicorn dream insert and the unicorn origami cinches that Deck is indeed a replicant. It does seem that Gaff was trying to tell him just that by leaving the origami behind. And also letting him know that he and Bryant were giving him and his replicant girlfriend a pass, for services rendered, out of the kindness of their hearts, sort of. It also seems that their egos might have dictated that they needed to let him know that they had been playing him all along, now that they were letting him out of their clutches. Inotherwords, "we've been the Boss of you, all along", so yes, "you're welcome"

The original version was planting this Deckard-as-rep-seed all along too I think. Rachael seems to suspect. She asks him if he had ever performed the test on himself. Dr Tyrell also seemed to be toying with him, checking him out, when they met, like he knew something.

Another reason I think Deckard is a replicant, and that it was alway intended that way, is the way that Gaff and Bryant talk to him, and look at him. It's as if they know something, that he doesn't. Gaff in particular seems to give him a knowing, appraising look on more than one occasion.

That Deckard can't fight with the same physical prowess as the others would be necessary to maintain his ignorance as to what he was.

When Bryant presses him back into action, Bryant also seems very sure that this is the only option. He doesn't seem to even humour the notion that Deckard might have some legitimate objection that might be reasonably entertained. As he knows that Deckard is a replicant created for the sole purpose of tracking and killing other replicants, bringing him on board, seems like a mere formality. Just a chore that needs to be done in a smooth and effective manner. If Deckard was human, Bryant might not be so sure of his purpose, as Deckard would have to be treated as a human with a life. But Deckard as replicant is really just his tool, to be manipulated. There are no human concerns about the "rightness" of pressing him back into action. Rather the only question, is how to finesse the pitch, so he goes along with optimal enthusiasm.

Deck's a Rep.

Because of this thread I re-watched the DC for the first time in years. It was the first version I ever saw and was nice to go back to.
I watched it on LD for the first time, and it is without a doubt one of the best titles ever done in the format. Outstanding (though with bad side breaks) with the original sound mix.
I do miss the bits of violence from the International cut, but for this being the first version to reinstate the unicorn dream, remove the heavy handed narration and ending and be my introduction to the film it is priceless.

I always thought it was intended around the original production, especially after the reveal in Dangerous Days that Tyrell was supposed to be a replicant himself. When Roy crushes his head, parts were supposed to fly out and then Roy was to wander deep into the complex to find the comatose body of Tyrell, kept alive by the very machines he had created and thus Roy met his "mother".
Then I noticed the fact that Bryant has photos scattered prominently throughout his office, and could be a replicant himself. The notion knows no bounds, because it could be anyone for any reason.

International cut for me, all the inferences and clues are in place the viewer is left to sift them without any heavy bias and come to a conclusion that works best for them. The narration really doesn't affect any material aspect of the story or concept, its easily disposable but has a place in identifying some aspects of the world for the viewer to follwo the journey as it plays out. The unicorn sequence is very heavy handed and anachronistic to the style of the remainder of the film, its as unworthy of the rest of the elements as it is unnescessary.

All things being equal I would have the Final cut sans dream sequence...but with the narration from the workprint.

I've always liked to look at things as though Deckard's a human, though. It's been a while since I've seen it, but I liked the idea of Deckard finding some of his own humanity by dealing with these "non-humans". But that's probably just a baseless reading on my part. Not that I view the whole film that way, but I liked the idea of it. I guess it could still work if he's a Replicant anyway.

Anyone else not like the green tint on the Final Cut?

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Anyone else not like the green tint on the Final Cut?

Just as annoying and pointless as the blue tint on the director's cut of ALIEN.

Largo's Shark wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Anyone else not like the green tint on the Final Cut?

Just as annoying and pointless as the blue tint on the director's cut of ALIEN.

Which is probably on the Quadrilogy and Blu-ray, right? Since it's a seamless branching thing. A small annoyance to me is that any newer TV I deal with is set to "cool" colors, and I have to set it to "neutral". Just an odd thought that popped to mind.

Oh damn, OHMSS is up next on my Bondathon, and I hate the blue.

My favourite film as well! I grew up with the International Cut and still like it above the others. I see no reason for disliking the voice over that much, as it has an echo of the original noir detectives monologues that inspire the film. Also, I'm more partial to the "human Deckard" school of thought.

Just re-read tiffanywint's thoughts, above, on why Deckard has to a replicant and he's spot-on. Don't think I've seen the argument 'for' encapsulated so well before.

All that may be by the by as, judging by BR2049's disappointing box office, Blade Runner has no appeal to anyone under 25 even though the singularity appears imminent.

Anyone else rewatched Blade Runner in the run up to BR2049?

I can't say I'm too surprised that the Marvel generation didn't turn up for "Blade Runner 2049".