• 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.

Just saw Blade Runner for the first time (Final Cut)

It doesn't change a thing. In a way it strengthens the end. Batty passes the empathy test. One of the questions at the start to Leon is paraphrased as "You see a tortoise flipped over, its belly baking in the hot sun, and it can't flip over, not without your help...but you're not helping." What do we think that Batty views a man dangling on the edge of a building? He doesn't care if its a human, animal, robot, etc. he just saves it.

I didn’t say it changed anything.

My point is that Deckard being human serves the overarching thematic better because the film is largely rooted in the question of what it means to be human.

Roy’s decision to save Deckard is still poignant, regardless of whether Deckard is a skin job, but if Deckard is human and Roy knows this and saves him regardless, he is acting with more empathy and subsequent humanity than the human being who has been hunting him and his kind.

I don’t think Deckard being a Replicant destroys the ending, as some have posited, but I certainly feel that his decision to help a human carries more significance than helping a fellow Replicant who has been fooled into working against his own kind.
 
I know the last time Blade Runner was on Netflix, it was the Theatrical. Narration and everything.

Yeah I changed it apparently they've had Director's Cut, Theatrical Cut, and Final Cut as various times on Netflix. I agree though the international and workprint are both worth watching especially for people who are fans of the final cut.
 

Ushojax

Should probably not trust the 7-11 security cameras quite so much
Hasn't Villeneuve basically said the opposite though? Hopefully Ridley was too busy on the wine to win the argument. I can't see Ford coming back with it going Ridley's way.

Ridley came up with the story for this movie and is the exec producer, it's going to be based 100% on his concepts.

If you've seen the most recent trailers then you will have a pretty good idea of where we are headed with regard to the central thrust of the film. It's
"can replicants reproduce/live longer?", and presumably Deckard is part of the answer to that question.
 

teiresias

Member
You should read Future Noir. Deckard was not written as a replicant. He was not acted as a replicant.

This is all rather secondary, since this happens fairly frequently. For example, Terry O'Quinn was not told he was actually playing MiB in the penultimate season of Lost, so obviously could not act it, yet, we all know where that character went in the last season.
 
D

Deleted member 102362

Unconfirmed Member
Hey all it's a Blade Runner thread just wanted to roll in real quick and let you know THE WORKPRINT CUT IS THE BEST CUT okay back to your drinks thanks for your time bye
I can't live without my closeup shots of Deckard's meal at the White Dragon or the sequin on Zhora's dress. :p

But real talk Paul Sammon agrees with you, it's rough, gritty, and grimey, and fascinating to see, both to get a slightly different take on the movie and as a significant piece of BR's development. I wish the San Diego workprint still existed, that would be cool to watch.
 
I can't live without my closeup shots of Deckard's meal

NwqsK.jpg


...shit. Wait, I misread. You said Deckard's meal. I thought you said begga—

—yunno what, nevermind.
 
I just couldn't make it through this film. Certain parts just dragged on for too long that it took me out of the movie and I got bored.

Loved the aesthetic though, and the philosophical implications, but those weren't enough to hold my interest.

I don’t think it drags a bit. However it is an adult film for adult sensibilities. Every line and every shot is important. I thought it was dull in my teens. Then I lived through the cold, lonely, urban, drunken, wet and I understood the tone and mood. It isn’t an action movie. It’s a romantic noir drama.
 
D

Deleted member 102362

Unconfirmed Member
...shit. Wait, I misread. You said Deckard's meal. I thought you said begga—

—yunno what, nevermind.
I certainly hope Deckard didn't pay $30 for two shrimp and some noodles, but you know how bad prices can be in the city...
 

NateDog

Member
I watched it myself for the first time recently too despite owning it for a year or two. I enjoyed it but also felt it dragged in places. I feel like I should go and watch some of the other cuts (or just the theatrical even though lots of people didn't like it) to get a better feel for it. It feels like a movie that needs a second watch.
 

ZeoVGM

Banned
Villeneuve is great but let's not act like he's perfect. He did make Prisoners after all.

You mean the movie that's at 81% on RottenTomatoes, ended up on multiple critics' top ten lists for 2013 and was nominated for a number of awards?

That Prisoners?
 
I've watched this multiple times now (originally for a class in college, later because my wife was interested) and just never enjoyed it. I thought I'd love it so it was a very confusing experience. I love sci fi, but this just did nothing for me. There are lots of great movies that explore what it means to be human, but this just seemed incredibly slow, and surprisingly shallow. I didn't get anything out of this movie that I didn't get in a nicer package with Terminator 2. Clearly I'm in the minority on this but I figured I'd throw in my two cents.
 

RSB

Banned
My favorite movie of all time.

Which is funny, considering the first time I saw it I didn't like it at all (I barely made it 40 minutes into the movie) Luckily, I decided to give it another chance a few years later and I absolutely loved it.

Personally I'm not really expecting anything (good or bad) from the sequel, but I will watch it for sure.
 
My favorite movie of all time.

Which is funny, considering the first time I saw it I didn't like it at all (I barely made it 40 minutes into the movie) Luckily, I decided to give it another chance a few years later and I absolutely loved it.

Personally I'm not really expecting anything (good or bad) from the sequel, but I will watch it for sure.

Out of obligation I need to see it.. I'm surprised I liked it on my first go, yet again I'm a old soul trapped in a 29 yr old XD.
 
I love sci fi, but this just did nothing for me. There are lots of great movies that explore what it means to be human, but this just seemed incredibly slow, and surprisingly shallow. I didn't get anything out of this movie that I didn't get in a nicer package with Terminator 2.

This was not the reference I was expecting to see waiting at the end of that sentence.
 

KodaRuss

Member
I really do not understand the cynicism about the sequel.

Villeneuve is one of the most talented filmmakers in the business making a sequel starring Harrison Ford.

And the film looks absolutely gorgeous.

I agree. I think we have a lot of reasons to be optimistic for this sequel, the cast is superb outside of a possible Jared Leto try hard performance and like you said Villeneuve hasn't really let us down yet imo.

Ryan Gosling
Robin Wright
Dave Bautista (really interested in seeing him in this even if it is a small role)
Mackenzie Davis (She is great in Halt and Catch Fire)
Lennie James
Edward James Olmos
 

KodaRuss

Member
You mean the movie that's at 81% on RottenTomatoes, ended up on multiple critics' top ten lists for 2013 and was nominated for a number of awards?

That Prisoners?

Seriously? What the hell Prisoners was very well received.

It had some issues but damn did he create some incredibly intense scenes and characters that most filmmakers could never get close to creating.
 
I've watched this multiple times now (originally for a class in college, later because my wife was interested) and just never enjoyed it. I thought I'd love it so it was a very confusing experience. I love sci fi, but this just did nothing for me. There are lots of great movies that explore what it means to be human, but this just seemed incredibly slow, and surprisingly shallow. I didn't get anything out of this movie that I didn't get in a nicer package with Terminator 2. Clearly I'm in the minority on this but I figured I'd throw in my two cents.

T2 is a great film but it doesn’t possess a tenth of the intelligence or complexity of Blade Runner.
 

LiQuid!

I proudly and openly admit to wishing death upon the mothers of people I don't like
Blade Runner is one of my favorite movies of all time. It's a seminal work of cyberpunk, literally defining the look and feel of the entire genre. I consider it as high art as a genre picture can be. It's literary in ways that most movies don't even attempt to aspire to. It has such an incredible sense of place and purpose. It is, in my opinion (in the Final Cut version) a flawless experience.

I don't think I'll be watching the sequel. I don't think I have anything to gain from revisiting that world and don't really have a desire to see it turned into an expanded universe. I'm very cynical about its existence, but I've been let down by many MANY reboots/sequels of cherished sci fi from my youth (Robocop, Total Recall, Mad Max, etc), none of which I cherish as much as I cherish Blade Runner. If it comes out to universal acclaim from fans and non-fans alike I won't rule it out, but I've just been rolling my eyes a lot every time I see a new piece of media come out related to it, like the shorts on Youtube and the announced anime. I don't need that stuff in my life.
 
I agree. I think we have a lot of reasons to be optimistic for this sequel, the cast is superb outside of a possible Jared Leto try hard performance and like you said Villeneuve hasn't really let us down yet imo.

Ryan Gosling
Robin Wright
Dave Bautista (really interested in seeing him in this even if it is a small role)
Mackenzie Davis (She is great in Halt and Catch Fire)
Lennie James
Edward James Olmos

Wha? This is the first I heard they got Olmos back.
 

kaister

Member
Funny thing, I also saw it for the first time two weeks back.

It's not what I'd imagine. It has this arthouse feel to it. I mean I like it, feels very special. Definitely a film I want to revisit a few more times.
 
T2 is a great film but it doesn’t possess a tenth of the intelligence or complexity of Blade Runner.

Eh, all I really got from Blade Runner was, "All replicants are evil, so we kill them. Turns out, plenty of them AREN'T evil. And what's more, the people hunting them are the evil ones!" Sure, that's simplifying it, but it's not completely off. T2 covers that--showing that humans can do evil things (Sarah Connor trying to murder Dyson in front of his family) while machines can be heroic (Arnold defeating the T-1000 and sacrificing himself to stop judgement day) despite the audience's contrary assumptions going into it. I think people tack more onto Blade Runner because it's a slow burner, and has a moody/unique atmosphere with little action. It doesn't actually explore that much, it's just a slow reveal.
 
Mad Max: Fury Road?

Fury Road succeeds mostly as it's own entity and less so as a sequel, since its a) a quasi reboot to begin with and b) much more concerned with being a 2 hour car chase film than expanding on the world it built 30 years ago

Movies like Blade Runner have far more at stake, especially after that long.
 
Fury Road succeeds mostly as it's own entity and less so as a sequel, since its a) a quasi reboot to begin with and b) much more concerned with being a 2 hour car chase film than expanding on the world it built 30 years ago

At this point I'd rather entertain the bizarre "T2 is more philosophical than Blade Runner" argument than I would the notion that Fury Road can (or should) be reduced to "2 hour car chase film"

At least the T2 thing is new.
 

AcridMeat

Banned
While I like the movie, I vastly prefer the book because what Ridley Scott did regarding Deckard completely negates the impact of the themes it tackles.

The book's version of JF Sabastian is also way more interesting and fleshed out.
 
This was not the reference I was expecting to see waiting at the end of that sentence.

I purposely chose that movie because I find that in general, there's a lot of clever and well constructed character arcs that give the movie more depth than most ascribe to it since it's primarily seen as an action movie. Also because I find Blade Runner surprisingly shallow for all the high regard for it so I figured I'd highlight that point by choosing a movie that appears contentious rather than saying 2001: A Space Odyssey or something. My point wasn't to derail this into a T2 conversation, but to point out that movies about "what does it mean to be human?" have been done plenty of times, and I chose one that I thought was simply better (and heck, just way more fun to watch) than Blade Runner.
 
At this point I'd rather entertain the bizarre "T2 is more philosophical than Blade Runner" argument than I would the notion that Fury Road can (or should) be reduced to "2 hour car chase film"

At least the T2 thing is new.

Alright, I concede that was a dumb way to try and go about my argument.

What I am saying is that I really don't think the universe of Mad Max had the weight and scrutiny on it that the Blade Runner story does.

Yes, Fury Road is full of great themes, subtle character development, and a haunting world. But a good chunk of it, and what a lot of people get out of it, has to do with things exploding as much as it does Furiosa's tragic backstory.

I think it's far easier to resurrect Max than Deckard.
 
Yeah, there's no spoilers in here.

But he's noped out anyway I guess so he doesn't know that.

What I am saying is that I really don't think the universe of Mad Max had the weight and scrutiny on it that the Blade Runner story does.

Yeah, I can see (and agree) with this, and with the idea that continuing Max's story (which is a lot more archetypal) would be an easier task than continuing Deckard's. Especially when you take into account the amount of in-universe time that will have passed. Fury Road's got a bit of a handicap there because the continuity really doesn't matter, and the sense of time is pretty wibbly-wobbly no matter what.
 

DeathoftheEndless

Crashing this plane... with no survivors!
Ryan Gosling
Robin Wright
Dave Bautista (really interested in seeing him in this even if it is a small role)
Mackenzie Davis (She is great in Halt and Catch Fire)
Lennie James
Edward James Olmos

I read a rumor yesterday that
Sean Young
is going to make an appearance. Its not from the greatest of sources though.
 
Eh, all I really got from Blade Runner was, "All replicants are evil, so we kill them. Turns out, plenty of them AREN'T evil. And what's more, the people hunting them are the evil ones!" Sure, that's simplifying it, but it's not completely off. T2 covers that--showing that humans can do evil things (Sarah Connor trying to murder Dyson in front of his family) while machines can be heroic (Arnold defeating the T-1000 and sacrificing himself to stop judgement day) despite the audience's contrary assumptions going into it. I think people tack more onto Blade Runner because it's a slow burner, and has a moody/unique atmosphere with little action. It doesn't actually explore that much, it's just a slow reveal.


Replicants aren’t being hunted because they are evil; they were being hunted because they went rogue and tried to blend into the human population.

They were essentially being hunted because they were intended to be lifelike automatons and instead developed a sense of free will, which was entirely unacceptable to their slavers.

But that’s just the surface narrative.

Mine the film and you discover a myriad of deeper philosophical questions and issues, including existentialism, the inevitable progression of life into death, what it means to be human, and how much responsibility and control we as a species should have over our sentient creations.

Then you have the relationship between Deckard – who may or may not be a Replicant – and a woman who most assuredly is. That relationship alone is a soft but poignant deliberation on love, attraction, and the notion that we are all, ultimately, just a collection of impulses, responses and electrical stimulations.

Not to mention the larger ambiguity that Deckard’s unknown origins brings to the table, which is a broader suggestion that ANYONE could be a Replicant and not realize it, again shaking if not outright obliterating the presumptions of what actually makes up human.

That isn’t to say T2 doesn’t possess some interesting philosophical underpinnings but those are mostly placed in between action sequences. By contrast, Blade Runner’s deeper themes are the crux of the narrative and are only occasionally interrupted by small moments of action.

Also, I would be shocked if Blade Runner didn't inspire Cameron on at least some level when making both Terminator films.
 

Big Nikus

Member
You should read Future Noir. Deckard was not written as a replicant. He was not acted as a replicant. All of that Unicorn crap is post production Ridley Scott nonsense, and it destroys the entire theme of the movie if he is a replicant. I personally feel like Scott is a bit of a hack that doesn't understand his own movies, but, that's just me.

It's not just you.
 

Jetman

Member
If Deckard ends up being a replicant in 2049, I'm gonna get up and walk out of the theater.

SeinfeldTheater.gif
 
Top Bottom