OP when I first saw the movie I felt the same as you, I just didn't get it, But, that had more to do with my expectations after hearing the movie hyped so much I was expecting more of an action movie. However, once I started reading some analysis' of the movie and rewatching it again I fell in love with. Blade Runner is a masterpiece and you really need to pay attention to every shot in the movie as the movie is carefully crafted scene by scene to get its theme across, for example the consistent eye motif.
I suggest reading some of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Themes_in_Blade_Runner
People aren't ragging on the rest of the replicants though.
No.
That's... no.
If you tell somebody a joke and they don't laugh at it, is the correct course of action to carefully and painstakingly explain that joke to them and then ask them if they get it now? Do you think they'll laugh if you tell them the joke again?
Movies need to stand on their own, not be accompanied by a stack of academic papers to carefully parse through.
Is this on Netflix? I haven't seen it and it's always sounded like one of those must watch movies.
No.
That's... no.
If you tell somebody a joke and they don't laugh at it, is the correct course of action to carefully and painstakingly explain that joke to them and then ask them if they get it now? Do you think they'll laugh if you tell them the joke again?
Movies need to stand on their own, not be accompanied by a stack of academic papers to carefully parse through.
No.
That's... no.
If you tell somebody a joke and they don't laugh at it, is the correct course of action to carefully and painstakingly explain that joke to them and then ask them if they get it now? Do you think they'll laugh if you tell them the joke again?
I loved Ford's performance. He and Rutger Hauer were great, as were most of the supporting actors. Even ones with small roles. They all brought something special to the movie in my opinion. Eddie Olmos barely has any lines, but he made the Gaff character memorable. Or Joe Turkel as Eldon Tyrell. He's only in two scenes if I recall correctly, but he's fantastic.Why are people ragging on Ford for this movie? He's a Replicant, he's supposed to be as weird and alien as the rest of the androids.
Maybe? What if they didn't get it? Not everyone gets everything? Including jokes.
I loved Ford's performance. He and Rutger Hauer were great, as were most of the supporting actors. Even ones with small roles. They all brought something special to the movie in my opinion. Eddie Olmos barely has any lines, but he made the Gaff character memorable. Or Joe Turkel as Eldon Tyrell. He's only in two scenes if I recall correctly, but he's fantastic.
The problem is the movie keeps demonstrating how emotional the replicants other than Deckard have become.That doesn't make any sense. I'm saying people are criticizing his performance as wooden when I think that was exactly what the director was looking for since he's an android and not a human.
Watch it, don't expect it to be like the book, enjoy it.The book its based off ("Do Androids Dream of Electric Sleep") is absolutely amazing. A true sci-fi classic.
Never seen Bladerunner, though. I've heard mixed opinions on it. If it's half as good as the book, I'll love it.
You've never disliked something only to have your appreciation of it grow through conversation/further knowledge about it? Ever?
The problem is the movie keeps demonstrating how emotional the replicants other than Deckard have become.
If Deckard wasn't a replicant, I would actually appreciate the performance better because a human who acts like a machine makes a good contrast to someone like Roy Batty. As a replicant... His subdued performance feels out-of-place.
I've just watched Blade Runner for the first time. Maybe I was hyped and that is why I did not like the movie. The movie is boring. I liked Terminator & Star Wars and other old Sci Fi movies so I thought I would like Blade Runner, but I was wrong.
So does everybody agree that the movie does not hold up or is it just me?
No.
That's... no.
If you tell somebody a joke and they don't laugh at it, is the correct course of action to carefully and painstakingly explain that joke to them and then ask them if they get it now? Do you think they'll laugh if you tell them the joke again?
Movies need to stand on their own, not be accompanied by a stack of academic papers to carefully parse through.
Laughter vs understanding or appreciation are wholly different things. Overexplanation of a joke can ruin the impact it has and its goal (laughter), but more knowledge about something followed by a 2nd or 3rd viewing of that something can make for a deeper understanding and possibly a deeper appreciation of it.
The OP brings up Terminator and Star Trek. That mindset going into Blade Runner was destined to ruin the movie. If he researches what it's really about and gets an understanding of its tone and where it fits in sci-fi, there can definitely be a change in the way the movie is perceived a few years down the line. Blade Runner is like the poster boy for "I didn't like it the first time but now..." reactions in the genre.
The problem is the movie keeps demonstrating how emotional the replicants other than Deckard have become.
I still haven't seen Blade Runner. Someone remind me: the Director's Cut is the version to watch, yes?
I still haven't seen Blade Runner. Someone remind me: the Director's Cut is the version to watch, yes?
I don't believe so. I mean, if you're watching a movie while suffering from Ebola and coughing up blood every five minutes, that might legitimately interfere with your initial viewing experience. But outside of that... no. If I watch a movie and it doesn't work on the first viewing, then that movie has fundamentally failed in its purpose.
I don't believe so. I mean, if you're watching a movie while suffering from Ebola and coughing up blood every five minutes, that might legitimately interfere with your initial viewing experience. But outside of that... no. If I watch a movie and it doesn't work on the first viewing, then that movie has fundamentally failed in its purpose.
If we let Terrisus decide then nothing is funny.
I love you Terrisus and I think you are great.
OP, if you didn't enjoy Blade Runner, then never, ever, under any circumstances, watch Stalker or Solaris.
Totally! "You know the score, pal. You're not cop, you're little people." That little exchange illustrates so much about Blade Runner's society in just two sentences. That's one of the great things about the script I think. It's not overly wordy or heavy on dialogue, but you still get to know the world and its inhabitants fairly well. And all the actors do a great job with the material.M. Emmet Walsh's Bryant is my favorite small part. The way he act's so nervous in his smoky office trying to convince Deckard to take on the case is great. He's trying to persuade a Replicant, an illegal android probably just activated, to go after other Replicants that his detectives have no chance of taking on.
Laughter vs understanding or appreciation are wholly different things. Overexplanation of a joke can ruin the impact it has and its goal (laughter), but more knowledge about something followed by a 2nd or 3rd viewing of that something can make for a deeper understanding and possibly a deeper appreciation of it.
The OP brings up Terminator and Star Wars. That mindset going into Blade Runner was destined to ruin the movie. If he researches what it's really about and gets an understanding of its tone and where it fits in sci-fi, there can definitely be a change in the way the movie is perceived a few years down the line. Blade Runner is like the poster boy for "I didn't like it the first time but now..." reactions in the genre, especially from people who've seen everything Blade Runner's spawned since 1982 (pretty much the cyberpunk aesthetic as we know it today)
didnt like it either. maybe expectations were too high. its also pretty dated
It was more of a "wink wink nod nod hint hint" comment. I almost included the years in parenthesis, but I thought it was going to make it too obvious. I always bring up those two movies up every time classic sci-fi movies are being discussed.I hated Blade Runner and Stalker and Solaris are among my most favorite movies of all time (Stalker being my favorite movie of all time and I'm not sure just where I'd place Solaris but it's in the top 10 for sure). Ridley Scott ain't no Tarkovsky.
He shouldn't need to research what it's really about. The movie should be able to convey that by itself. I repeat, a movie needs to stand on its own. You don't go read a paper to gain an understanding of a movie's tone, the tone should be appreciated by how it's used in the movie's scenes.
It was more of a "wink wink nod nod hint hint" comment. I almost included the years in parenthesis, but I thought it was going to make it too obvious. I always bring up those two movies up every time classic sci-fi movies are being discussed.
Laughter comes from understanding and appreciation of the joke. It's not that different. You just don't usually laugh when you watch a good movie, unless it's a comedy.
A joke relies on an impact and overexplanation can ruin that. Sure. But a movie relies on the impact of its visuals and acting and storytelling. If that movie doesn't make an impact with the initial viewing, then something has gone terribly wrong with the execution of the movie.
He shouldn't need to research what it's really about. The movie should be able to convey that by itself. I repeat, a movie needs to stand on its own. You don't go read a paper to gain an understanding of a movie's tone, the tone should be appreciated by how it's used in the movie's scenes.
Laughter comes from understanding and appreciation of the joke. It's not that different. You just don't usually laugh when you watch a good movie, unless it's a comedy.
A joke relies on an impact and overexplanation can ruin that. Sure. But a movie relies on the impact of its visuals and acting and storytelling. If that movie doesn't make an impact with the initial viewing, then something has gone terribly wrong with the execution of the movie.
He shouldn't need to research what it's really about. The movie should be able to convey that by itself. I repeat, a movie needs to stand on its own. You don't go read a paper to gain an understanding of a movie's tone, the tone should be appreciated by how it's used in the movie's scenes.
But some people won't have to research to get it. Others yes, maybe the will. It's not the fault of the movie not ***everyone*** will get it.
But some people won't have to research to get it. Others yes, maybe the will. It's not the fault of the movie not ***everyone*** will get it.