Support NeoGAF

[StudioTan]

Is it not reasonable to say the whole cyberpunk/bleak futuristic look (designed in great part by Syd Mead) that's so common place today? Were there any films or animation that had that look before Blade Runner? Isn't Blade Runner a cinematic archetype now, at least visually?
If nothing else that's a hell of a legacy.

Of course it is, that's why you get people in this thread saying crap like:

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.

It becomes "generic" because it's been copied so many times.

 

[Wario64]

This movie was boring.

 

[jtb]

Blade Runner is decent, but you know it's an issue when the director has no idea what the best cut of his own film is. Alien might be less ambitious, but it's such a perfectly tight constructed film that it stands as far and away as Ridley Scott's best.

 

[Dead Man]

I don't agree, I think it works in both cases.

The Voight-Kampf test is an empathy test, and Deckard shows complete lack of empathy in the world movie, until near the end. Rachel completely fails the test too. But after she finds out she is a replicant with a short life span she starts to act more human. Same for Deckard after he almost dies.

Also the photos he has are like 1950s photos, as if someone thought that making the photos look old would work better on his psyche.

In that respect, yeah, sure. But in terms of plot, why is Deckard working for the police? What is his backstory? Why is he so weak physically compared to the Nexus 6? At what point do his memories become false? How did he get inserted into society? Rachel doesn't work, she is shown as a wealthy socialite. Deckard was working for the police.

 

[Death Dealer]

Is it not reasonable to say the whole cyberpunk/bleak futuristic look (designed in great part by Syd Mead) that's so common place today? Were there any films or animation that had that look before Blade Runner? Isn't Blade Runner a cinematic archetype now, at least visually?
If nothing else that's a hell of a legacy.

I read just before he died, they showed Phillip K. Dick some of the special effects shots, like the future city skyline and stuff, nothing with the actors, and he told them it's exactly how he envisioned in the book. So yeah they did a good job in every sense.

 

[Suairyu]

Blade Runner is decent, but you know it's an issue when the director has no idea what the best cut of his own film is.

er, Final Cut.

He only did two cuts - the original and final. All of the cuts in-between were not done by him.

 

[Death Dealer]

Yeah, I've always heard that, if Deckard was indeed a Replicant, he was most likely a different model, and thus didn't possess the same advantages that a Batty or someone similar did.

Well I don't think he would necessarily have to be a different model. It's been a while since I last saw the movie, but I remember near the beginning there were computer screens that rated the replicants on different abilities. Batty had an A for both physical and mental abilities, Leon was an A for physical but only a C for mental, Priss was an A physical B mental, and I think Rachel was an A for mental and maybe only a C for physical etc.. So Deckard didn't have an A physique. It might have only been a C, which I think we are to infer is average human ability or something like that...

 

[Phat Michael]

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.

This post, combined with your avatar made me lol hard.