• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Blade Runner: I don't get it

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

ThLunarian

Member
I've heard for years that Blade Runner is supposed to be one of the best sci fi movies ever, so finally yesterday I watched it for the first time (Final Cut edition).

I was floored by how terrible it was.

The overall plot was achingly simple and the main character had the personality of a wet rag. Things and people happen that make no sense and are never explained (such as the guy with the long nose who's tied up in Sebastian's basement, and the gang of little people who decide to attack Harrison Ford's police car with no consequences).

Three of the four evil robots have ample opportunity to eliminate Harrison Ford easily and without any chance for him to stop them, but in each case they fuck it up for no reason and end up dying because of it. Stripper robot actually starts choking him, but inexplicably stops to run away; gymnast robot could easily snap his neck with her legs but instead wants to get more space so she can do her backflip bullshit; the main bad guy actually SAVES him from falling off of a building. Only Leon did his best to try to kill Harrison Ford, which indicates to me that they all actually WERE trying to kill him, but are incompetent for the sake of deus ex machina.

Then there's Tyrell, who is supposed to be a genius. So, there's a menacing, very dangerous, fugitive robot who wants you to do a procedure for him that will probably make him have to go offline and be completely helpless, putting you at his mercy, and you actually ARGUE with him about it?! Seriously?

Someone please tell me why I'm wrong, and why I should appreciate this movie, because as the title says, I just don't get it.
 
G

glaurung

Member
Some movies are out of reach for certain viewers. It is an inherent flaw in the human reproductive system that gets carried over from parent to sibling.

You might try to read the book that the movie is based on, but I doubt it would improve the situation.

Here are some movies that might be more up your alley: shit.
 
S

Secret Fawful

Member
Roy Batty, the villain did not want to kill Deckard. He wanted to prove a point to the Blade Runner how fricking terrifying and heart-wrenching it is to be hunted and to know that your life is about to end. Batty and all his comrades had a built-in fail safe life span: they were going to die within a short set amount of time: forget the exact amount...something like five years. Batty's time was up: so killing Deckard had no meaning to him. He wanted to prove a point.

Tyrell saw Roy as a sort of a son....he had no reason to believe Batty was just going to go nuts and kill him. Batty, as a Replicant, should have seen more reason in accepting his fate, but he was so taken aback with disappointment, and wretched spite and anger that his creator could not grant him more life that he killed him in a fit of fury. Think of it like this: imagine you went up to a god who had created you and asked for more life, and it turned out he just didn't have the power to grant you any more. He was only as good as what he had made, and he wasn't the all-knowing, all-powerful creator you thought he was, and you were going to die knowing what a disappointment he was. That is what Roy felt in his meeting with Tyrell. Not only that, but your creator made you to die having only lived the lifespan of a CHILD, a cruel fate, and would neither grant you more nor could he, resigning you to a horrendously short, unfulfilled existence.
 
S

Seanspeed

Banned
I'm with you OP. Maybe it was cool for its time, but it was horribly dated(corny) and generic to me when I saw it for the first time not too long ago. Really disappointed.
 
J

Jimothy

Member
glaurung said:
Some movies are out of reach for certain viewers. It is an inherent flaw in the human reproductive system that gets carried over from parent to sibling.

You might try to read the book that the movie is based on, but I doubt it would improve the situation.

Here are some movies that might be more up your alley: shit.
Click to expand...

Classy.
 
H

Hypertrooper

Member
Seanspeed said:
I'm with you OP. Maybe it was cool for its time, but it was horribly dated and generic to me when I saw it for the first time not too long ago. Really disappointed.
Click to expand...
Dated? You used the wrong wording, you meant aged well. The visual effects are still top notch and looks better than some stuff from these years.
 
M

Mr Cola

Brothas With Attitude / The Wrong Brotha to Fuck Wit / Die Brotha Die / Brothas in Paris
i too watched it recently and was very very disappointed, mostly because it felt unfinished which is ironic for the "final cut". The relationship between Deckard and the Nexus girl had no weight to it so in the end i just did not care about either of them. After watching it I talked to a friend who asked me "so did you think Deckard was an android or not" and I questioned how anyone could possibly come to the conclusion he was, then i did some searching and found site after site of people overanalysing the film to death. Thats fine, that is their right but I really really dont think the film earns the right to be interpreted as much as it has because at its core it feels sloppily made.
 
T

ThLunarian

Member
Secret Fawful said:
Roy Batty, the villain did not want to kill Deckard. He wanted to prove a point to the Blade Runner how fricking terrifying and heart-wrenching it is to be hunted and to know that your life is about to end. Batty and all his comrades had a built-in fail safe life span: they were going to die within a short set amount of time: forget the exact amount...something like five years. Batty's time was up: so killing Deckard had no meaning to him. He wanted to prove a point.

Tyrell saw Roy as a sort of a son....he had no reason to believe Batty was just going to go nuts and kill him. Batty, as a Replicant, should have seen more reason in accepting his fate, but he was so taken aback with disappointment, and wretched spite and anger that his creator could not grant him more life that he killed him in a fit of fury. Think of it like this: imagine you went up to a god who had created you and asked for more life, and it turned out he just didn't have the power to grant you any more. He was only as good as what he had made, and he wasn't the all-knowing, all-powerful creator you thought he was, and you were going to die knowing what a disappointment he was. That is what Roy felt in his meeting with Tyrell. Not only that, but your creator made you to die having only lived the lifespan of a CHILD, a cruel fate, and would neither grant you more nor could he, resigning you to a horrendously short, unfulfilled existence.
Click to expand...

Thank you, this actually makes some sense.

Oh another thing I didn't get is why Roy stuck that knife through his hand, and why that made things better for him.

Edit:
After watching it I talked to a friend who asked me "so did you think Deckard was an android or not" and I questioned how anyone could possibly come to the conclusion he was
Click to expand...

Same thing happened to me. At no point did I get any hint of the possibility that Deckard was a robot. My friend who watched it with me (also for the first time) said "Yeah I thought I got spoiled by reading that he was a robot, and now that the movie is over I'm just confused."
 
The Elite

The Elite

BOSS
ThLunarian said:
I've heard for years that Blade Runner is supposed to be one of the best sci fi movies ever, so finally yesterday I watched it for the first time (Final Cut edition).

I was floored by how terrible it was.

The overall plot was achingly simple and the main character had the personality of a wet rag. Things and people happen that make no sense and are never explained (such as the guy with the long nose who's tied up in Sebastian's basement, and the gang of little people who decide to attack Harrison Ford's police car with no consequences).

Three of the four evil robots have ample opportunity to eliminate Harrison Ford easily and without any chance for him to stop them, but in each case they fuck it up for no reason and end up dying because of it. Stripper robot actually starts choking him, but inexplicably stops to run away; gymnast robot could easily snap his neck with her legs but instead wants to get more space so she can do her backflip bullshit; the main bad guy actually SAVES him from falling off of a building. Only Leon did his best to try to kill Harrison Ford, which indicates to me that they all actually WERE trying to kill him, but are incompetent for the sake of deus ex machina.

Then there's Tyrell, who is supposed to be a genius. So, there's a menacing, very dangerous, fugitive robot who wants you to do a procedure for him that will probably make him have to go offline and be completely helpless, putting you at his mercy, and you actually ARGUE with him about it?! Seriously?

Someone please tell me why I'm wrong, and why I should appreciate this movie, because as the title says, I just don't get it.
Click to expand...

Harrison Ford wasn't a huge fan of the character either. For me, the only reason the film is good is for its visual style. If it didn't hit a home run with that, and Rutger's performance, it would have been forgettable.
 
D

Dark Octave

Banned
glaurung said:
Some movies are out of reach for certain viewers. It is an inherent flaw in the human reproductive system that gets carried over from parent to sibling.

You might try to read the book that the movie is based on, but I doubt it would improve the situation.

Here are some movies that might be more up your alley: shit.
Click to expand...
Ice cold.
 
S

swoon

Member
ThLunarian said:
Thank you, this actually makes some sense.

Oh another thing I didn't get is why Roy stuck that knife through his hand, and why that made things better for him.
Click to expand...



he's dying and his hand is cramping up, cutting his hand relieves it for awhile.
 
R

replicashooter

Banned
Secret Fawful said:
Not only that, but your creator made you to die having only lived the lifespan of a CHILD, a cruel fate, and would neither grant you more nor could he, resigning you to a horrendously short, unfulfilled existence.
Click to expand...

Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."
 
T

Teddman

Member
Reading your post, you probably would have preferred a version with the narration intact. This is why I recommend the international theatrical cut for first viewings.
 
D

Dyno

Member
What's to get? You just play the movie in a dark room. Let the mood and ambiance wash over you. The movie makes plenty of sense if you need to think about stuff like that. Who can say what motivates humans, or androids, to do the things they do.
 
S

Secret Fawful

Member
ThLunarian said:
Oh another thing I didn't get is why Roy stuck that knife through his hand, and why that made things better for him.
Click to expand...

His hand was seizing up because he was actively dying right then and there. He stuck the knife in it to get it working again long enough for him to continue to make his final point. It was an act of will power- pushing off his bodies natural final moments as long as possible. Whether or not it makes any physiological sense for a cybernetic being to go through this is unknown to me, at which point I have to say....eh, the idea is probably complete science fiction.

I also can't really say in regards to the other replicants how incompetent they really were- I'd say Batty's girlfriend definitely was....but she wasn't that bright to begin with if you ask me. I can easily see that being a fluke on the movie's part though.
 
D

double jump

you haven't lived until a random little kid ask you "how do you make love".
Secret Fawful said:
Roy Batty, the villain did not want to kill Deckard. He wanted to prove a point to the Blade Runner how fricking terrifying and heart-wrenching it is to be hunted and to know that your life is about to end. Batty and all his comrades had a built-in fail safe life span: they were going to die within a short set amount of time: forget the exact amount...something like five years. Batty's time was up: so killing Deckard had no meaning to him. He wanted to prove a point.

Tyrell saw Roy as a sort of a son....he had no reason to believe Batty was just going to go nuts and kill him. Batty, as a Replicant, should have seen more reason in accepting his fate, but he was so taken aback with disappointment, and wretched spite and anger that his creator could not grant him more life that he killed him in a fit of fury. Think of it like this: imagine you went up to a god who had created you and asked for more life, and it turned out he just didn't have the power to grant you any more. He was only as good as what he had made, and he wasn't the all-knowing, all-powerful creator you thought he was, and you were going to die knowing what a disappointment he was. That is what Roy felt in his meeting with Tyrell. Not only that, but your creator made you to die having only lived the lifespan of a CHILD, a cruel fate, and would neither grant you more nor could he, resigning you to a horrendously short, unfulfilled existence.
Click to expand...


I like this post because it it explains things instead of insulting the op. I had no ideal there was a book. Definitely going to check that out.
 
J

Jackpot

Banned
Have read the book and seen the movie. Neither are especially striking. Maybe it was because its portrayl of the future (dated by today's standards) was initially ground-breaking and that left a big mark on people?
 
E

Eidan

Member
I'm with you OP. I watched it recently and was blown away by just how much I didn't like it. Ford seemed to just be going through the motions, all of the characters fell flat, the romance between Deckard and Rachael was juvenile and creepy, and the final confrontation between Deckard and Roy was...ugh.

I plan on watching it again, but I can say the only things that really impressed me were the visuals (the movie still looks beautiful today) and the score, which was phenomenal.
 
D

Dark Octave

Banned
I saw it maybe 5 years ago following hype. Maybe because of it's age, but it didn't do much for me either. I am glad I saw it though.
 
S

Secret Fawful

Member
To be fair, I used to dislike Blade Runner a lot. I found it rather boring, and only really watched at first for Harrison Ford, who I also found pretty boring in it. But it grew on me, and I've since seen a lot of subtlety to Ford's performance as Deckard. Another thing about it is that it's such a different, quiet, even overly vulnerable character to the kind I'm used to seeing Ford portray. It was like a shock to my system because when I first watched it: I felt like I hadn't watched Harrison Ford at all.
 
J

jon bones

hot hot hanuman-on-man action
it really shines upon revisits. the first time i liked it alright, and each time after i just love it more and more. it's a beautiful film and it sucks you can't see that.
 
T

teruterubozu

Member
Jackpot said:
Have read the book and seen the movie. Neither are especially striking. Maybe it was because its portrayl of the future (dated by today's standards) was initially ground-breaking and that left a big mark on people?
Click to expand...

To be fair, it is far from the best Philip K. Dick novel and odd that it was made into film.
 
A

Arcteryx

Member
ThLunarian said:
I've heard for years that Blade Runner is supposed to be one of the best sci fi movies ever, so finally yesterday I watched it for the first time (Final Cut edition).

I was floored by how terrible it was.

The overall plot was achingly simple and the main character had the personality of a wet rag. Things and people happen that make no sense and are never explained (such as the guy with the long nose who's tied up in Sebastian's basement, and the gang of little people who decide to attack Harrison Ford's police car with no consequences).

Three of the four evil robots have ample opportunity to eliminate Harrison Ford easily and without any chance for him to stop them, but in each case they fuck it up for no reason and end up dying because of it. Stripper robot actually starts choking him, but inexplicably stops to run away; gymnast robot could easily snap his neck with her legs but instead wants to get more space so she can do her backflip bullshit; the main bad guy actually SAVES him from falling off of a building. Only Leon did his best to try to kill Harrison Ford, which indicates to me that they all actually WERE trying to kill him, but are incompetent for the sake of deus ex machina.

Then there's Tyrell, who is supposed to be a genius. So, there's a menacing, very dangerous, fugitive robot who wants you to do a procedure for him that will probably make him have to go offline and be completely helpless, putting you at his mercy, and you actually ARGUE with him about it?! Seriously?

Someone please tell me why I'm wrong, and why I should appreciate this movie, because as the title says, I just don't get it.
Click to expand...

Was this REALLY that big of a deal for you? Because honestly, I can pick apart ANY movie based upon "what-ifs" or "why-nots"...
 
K

krypt0nian

Banned
I feel bad for you. This is the best sci-fi movie made. It's honestly a taste test for people who I meet.


Emwitus said:
It's always amazed me how nostalgia elevates crap movies to awesome-tier status. No offense.
Click to expand...

This movie was one of if not the most influential sci-fi movie. In terms of anime, comics, other sci-fi there are few that can claim more of an affect. So calling it crap is simply ridiculous.
 
J

JB1981

Member
glaurung said:
Some movies are out of reach for certain viewers. It is an inherent flaw in the human reproductive system that gets carried over from parent to sibling.

You might try to read the book that the movie is based on, but I doubt it would improve the situation.

Here are some movies that might be more up your alley: shit.
Click to expand...

hahahahahahahahah
 
R

Replicant

Member
It took me a few viewings before I could really appreciate it but it's now one of my favorite films. But yeah, I fell asleep the 1st and 2nd time I tried to see it.
 
D

devilinanewdress

Banned
I back the OP to some extent (and I'm a top critic on Rotten Tomatoes). Aesthetically it works as Ridley Scott's vision of the future is one of the most perfectly realised and striking in the history of cinema but the film's greatness is distorted by its uninteresting and thematically depthless narrative. I resist it on that level.
 
P

Petrichor

Member
ThLunarian said:
I've heard for years that Blade Runner is supposed to be one of the best sci fi movies ever, so finally yesterday I watched it for the first time (Final Cut edition).

I was floored by how terrible it was.

The overall plot was achingly simple and the main character had the personality of a wet rag. Things and people happen that make no sense and are never explained (such as the guy with the long nose who's tied up in Sebastian's basement, and the gang of little people who decide to attack Harrison Ford's police car with no consequences).

Three of the four evil robots have ample opportunity to eliminate Harrison Ford easily and without any chance for him to stop them, but in each case they fuck it up for no reason and end up dying because of it. Stripper robot actually starts choking him, but inexplicably stops to run away; gymnast robot could easily snap his neck with her legs but instead wants to get more space so she can do her backflip bullshit; the main bad guy actually SAVES him from falling off of a building. Only Leon did his best to try to kill Harrison Ford, which indicates to me that they all actually WERE trying to kill him, but are incompetent for the sake of deus ex machina.

Then there's Tyrell, who is supposed to be a genius. So, there's a menacing, very dangerous, fugitive robot who wants you to do a procedure for him that will probably make him have to go offline and be completely helpless, putting you at his mercy, and you actually ARGUE with him about it?! Seriously?

Someone please tell me why I'm wrong, and why I should appreciate this movie, because as the title says, I just don't get it.
Click to expand...

The original realisation of a dystopian future is what makes it so popular. I agree with you that the plot is pretty run of the mill.
 
D

Deadly Cyclone

Pride of Iowa State
How's the book all? Worth reading?

Emwitus said:
It's always amazed me how nostalgia elevates crap movies to awesome-tier status. No offense.
Click to expand...

Well, except this isn't one of those times. It's not perfect, no, but it is one of the most influential sci-fi movies of all time for the genre.
 
A

Alvarius

Banned
Arcteryx said:
Was this REALLY that big of a deal for you? Because honestly, I can pick apart ANY movie based upon "what-ifs" or "why-nots"...
Click to expand...
Maybe, but science-fiction lives and dies on the plausibility of its vision of the future, and the critical eye you bring to evaluating that aspect of the story naturally extends to other aspects, e.g., the way characters act.

Edit: To anticipate objections, when you're talking about shit in space that isn't plausible... that's called fantasy. Space fantasy.
 
K

Kola

Member
In terms of atmosphere, design and sound (Vangelis!) this movie is still some of the best stuff I've ever seen. At times it's mesmerizing watching that movie. But it's certainly not for everyone; if I remember correctly the movie didn't even have good box-office results.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem - Do any real people like this movie?
2
87
7K
DeafTourette replied
Phantom Blade Zero Game Length Is 30-40 Hours, Multiplayer Confirmed
News
28
2K
MR ARCADE FOREVER replied
Law Enforcement is Fucking Nutty
Opinion Clickbait
12
2K
Mossybrew replied
Phantom Blade Zero Game Length Is 30-40 Hours, Multiplayer Confirmed, Combat Scenes Captured In-Engine
Game Dev 2
52
3K
March Climber replied
Is there a single game with non-human bosses that don't "roar before beating"?
47
2K
peronmls replied
Top Bottom