Bladerunner, what am i missing?

purple_hatstand

L31mr0d wrote: »

I'd agree. But I accept my reasons for disliking both of these movies is that I'm watching them out of context. I only watched both of them in the last couple of years for the first time and neither made a lasting impression on me. Had I watched them when they where released my opinion might be different.

Bladerunner has not aged well, and when I watched it first recently the incongruities between current tech and the supposed future tech shown in this film proved to be to much of a distraction and kept breaking my ability to immerse myself. Every few minutes my mind would switch to saying "man that stuff looks old"... making me aware I was looking at a movie set from the early 80's.

Bladerunner may well have been a masterpiece upon release but for me it never will be now.

In 1997, Lucas decided that the original 'Star Wars' trilogy looked dated and revisited it with a load of new sfx and enhanced the soundtrack etc...12 years later it looks pants and the 70's/80's original versions are probably most fans' favourites.

But then 'Star Wars' is a space opera and not science fiction. Decent Sci-Fi is not about gadgets and laser guns; it's a method of story-telling like any other - just with a greater requirement for imagination and the suspension of disbelief from both creator and audience.

'Bladerunner' is existentialist philosophy which does not pretend to know the answers. It is dark and, in places, grim. It is terse, dystopian and realistic. It is at least as much a representation of the present (any present) as it is one of the future. It does not have 'good guys' and 'bad guys' - we are supposed to sympathise with Deckard and empathise with Batty (that's why the rooftop ending is so important). In doing so, we are encouraged to question ourselves which leads to the many ambiguities of the film's narrative. It is not glib and it is not 'Hollywood'.

One ought not complain that the timeless has become outdated.

Sean Quagmire

I started a thread on this a while back where I tried to watch the film 3 times and each time I fell asleep!! I tried watching it at various times in the day aswell.

I love films but my god I hate this movie.

TonyD79

[quote=[Deleted User];61557234]I liked Blade Runner. I enjoyed it but it's not my favourite movie, or my favourite sci movie for that matter. IMO i think The Fifth Element is a better sci fi film. Sure Harrison Ford gives a great perfomance and bla bla bla, but I just found the whole thing a little boring. There are classic scenes and a brilliant score and wonderful screenshots but it doesn't outway substance, of which it had none.

p.s. The Godfather is sheet.:D[/QUOTE]

Thats like saying Batman & Robin the film is better than The Dark Knight

CL7

purple_hatstand wrote: »

'Bladerunner' is existentialist philosophy which does not pretend to know the answers. It is dark and, in places, grim. It is terse, dystopian and realistic. It is at least as much a representation of the present (any present) as it is one of the future. It does not have 'good guys' and 'bad guys' - we are supposed to sympathise with Deckard and empathise with Batty (that's why the rooftop ending is so important). In doing so, we are encouraged to question ourselves which leads to the many ambiguities of the film's narrative. It is not glib and it is not 'Hollywood'.

One ought not complain that the timeless has become outdated.

Sums up Blade Runner perfectly for me. It's my favourite film and reading the above make me want to watch it again. That's what ima going to do, right now!

tricky D

In addition to purple_hatstand's post, there's a few other things not which are not always as appreciated as they should be or just get plain overlooked:

The excellent original Vangelis soundtrack (had just done the Chariots of Fire one)
It's Ridley Scott's next outing after Alien
The detail, even down to the newspaper lining the drawers
Rutger Hauer's performance in the last scene. He made the speech up himself - no one on set knew what was coming, so they say.

(let's have it again)

'I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain... Time to die.'

ahhhhhh

davenewt

Dude I should be doing other stuff this weekend...!

stateofflux

tricky D wrote: »

(let's have it again)

'I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain... Time to die.'

ahhhhhh

truly byronesque....gives the spine an old shiver everytime i watch that scene....:)

L31mr0d

purple_hatstand wrote: »

One ought not complain that the timeless has become outdated.

When did you watch Bladerunner first?

nyarlothothep

Its a visual masterpiece, apart from Kubrick I can't think of any director who rivals Scott for making each shot a cinematic painting, hes a master of lighting, hue and saturation. It may not have been the first cyberpunk film, I'm not an aficionado of the genre, but I imagine it certainly brought it to the mainstream and is a seminal piece. Again there may have been other films but it combined the aesthetics and motifs of manga with the hollywood blockbuster format which makes it pretty innovative. The soundtrack is way ahead of its time and sheer genius, especially the rave-esque music with the indian strings in the opium den. Furthermore its got great performances and an excellent plot with some heavy philosophical themes. Its unique for capturing a universe in such a fully realized way, many books and films fall short of this, where the universe seems incomplete, but in Bladerunner this is another fully fleshed out world. Probably not true but apparently the game Snatcher was an adaptation of book which Blade Runner took its cue from.

mike65

tricky D wrote: »

Rutger Hauer's performance in the last scene. He made the speech up himself - no one on set knew what was coming, so they say.

Not quite true, he read a page of dialogue by David Peoples and decided it needed severe editing he did come up with the denoument "All those moments will be lost in time. Like tears in rain. Time to die’.

Originally it was a bit longer, like a half-page of dialogue. So I said to Ridley the night before we shot it, ‘This is way too long. If the batteries go, the guy goes. He has not time to say good-bye, except maybe to briefly talk about things he’s seen’ Life is short – boom! I truly felt that the ending of this picture should be done very quickly, I mean, we’d already seen this opera of dying replicants; I didn’t think the audience would stand another protracted death scene. So I said to Ridley, ‘Let’s do it very fast, and do it as simply and profoundly as possible. But also, let Batty be a wiseguy for a second’. Ridley said, ‘Yes, I like it’. So when we filmed that speech, I cut a little bit out of the opening and then improvised these closing lines, ‘All those moments will be lost in time. Like tears in rain. Time to die’.

But you know, everyone always writes about me and that speech, and ignores the screenwriter. I thought David Peoples, the man who wrote that version of Batty’s soliloquy, really did a beautiful job. I mean, I loved those images he came up with -’c-beams glittering near the Tannhauser gate, attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion‘. I thought they were really interesting, even if you didn’t understand them. The whole idea there, is that once he stops talking, the dove flies. You never really see the moment of Batty’s death, the dove says it for him.

krudler

How can anyone think this looks dated? its still the best vision of the future ever put on screen

L31mr0d

krudler wrote: »

How can anyone think this looks dated? its still the best vision of the future ever put on screen

The city wide shots still do look fantastic. It's the personal technology the people are using that looks dated, like CRT screens and equipment.

As a piece of film it is timeless, but as sci-fi it is dated. If someone expects to make a sci-fi and have it look current for eternity then they are fooling themselves.

davenewt

Just got around to watching again. Found the screenplay online there during the week... didn't read it really but made me want to watch it again. Deep stuff... or maybe that's just because it's 1am!

Edit: not sure about the product placement tho, kinda spoils it for me...

Capt'n Midnight

I like'd the voiceover in the original

yeah it's one of those films you can just sit back and watch the scenery

stateofflux

to the op....make sure you watch the directors cut as well as the original edited version.....its a way better film and the way it was supposed to be according to ridley scott....it does'nt have the voiceover of the edited version which does give it a cool film noir feel....but the directors cut is a far superior film and has deeper twists and turns and a better ending.....

LiamMc

littleemperor wrote: »

ok nig sci fi fan and eventually got to watch bladerunner. rated the best sci fi movie ever. fair enough. watched it, did not get it at all. liked the tears in the rain bit at the end but i feel i must be missing something. anyone help

I just posted Blade Runner in the 'Worst Ending... ' thread, but I don't wish to be accused of double-posting.

We are talking about a Director who previously had made the brilliant (IMO) The Duellists and Alien and later used the landscape in Thelma & Louise to great effect. But has also made the racially dubious Black Rain, Black Hawk Down and later placed Jerusalem (Kingdom of Heaven) in the middle of a flat Moroccan desert. Someone should tell him about the Temple Mount and Mount of Olives.

I think Ridley Scott has more misses than successes.

Flamed Diving

Just watched it, I would give it six thumbs up.

mike65

Which version? BBC screened the Final Cut a few weeks back, it was stunningly good.