Bladerunner

[almaster88]

Before I start, I just wanna say this is my personal opinion.

So, I rented Bladerunner ( directors Cut) from Blockbuster last weekend, and I always see stuff on the internet about people saying how great it was and all this stuff. Then I saw it.

I have no idea why people think it was so great? I was so BORED in it, it was so slow starting off, then harrison ford had like no leads to find these replicants or whatever they were. Also, the Replicants (Spoiler*)


They are supposed to be like androids basically, but there is nothing that shows that they are anything but human, except for the weird gleam in their eyes when they are in the dark.
The only real character relationship I could get into was that of sean young's character, but there wasnt all that much to get into except right at the begining and the end. Darryl hannah was just freaky looking, and the blonde guy must have some faulty wiring or something cause he's going after the bladerunner the whole ending, then changes his mind?

Anyway, I want to hear what you guys think, and if I'm totally wrong and it was the greatest movie ever, why?

 

[magicmonkeybars]

replicants are made to be as human as possible.

 

[Lukeje]

Read the book (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?).

 

[Anachronism]

the blonde guy must have some faulty wiring or something cause he's going after the bladerunner the whole ending, then changes his mind?

Roy does that to teach Deckard the value of having a long life, while he, by contrast, is about to die. The reason he does this is because Deckard is not a Replicant!

Also, you appear to have quite spectacularly missed the point of the film.

 

[Reaperman Wompa]

I didn't like the movie either. But that's the same with most movies that are based on books, they lose the real emotion from the book, probably cutting out stuff which helps the story at the same time.

 

[captainfuzzy]

the blonde guy must have some faulty wiring or something cause he's going after the bladerunner the whole ending, then changes his mind?

Roy does that to teach Deckard the value of having a long life, while he, by contrast, is about to die. The reason he does this is because Deckard is not a Replicant!

Also, you appear to have quite spectacularly missed the point of the film.

Deckard is totally a replicant. Ridley Scott said so himself. What did you think the origami unicorn at the end means?

 

[almaster88]

Ahh, well from the begining when sean young didnt know she was a replicant, I thought Harrison ford might be one too and not know it, but meh.

I suppose also that you could say the point of the film was to show the value of life, and not to waste it blah blah blah, its been done dude, and in-case you didnt know, bladerunner bombed at the box-office... although so did scarface so that point in void..

 

[Krakyn]

What did you think the origami unicorn at the end means?

I've never seen the movie, but from each of your inputs about it, this seems pretty obvious. The paper unicorn imitates life in shape, but it's not truly living. Is it anything less beautiful though? Should we think less of it because it's not flesh and blood?

 

[Strafe Mcgee]

Before I start, I just wanna say this is my personal opinion.

So, I rented Bladerunner ( directors Cut) from Blockbuster last weekend, and I always see stuff on the internet about people saying how great it was and all this stuff. Then I saw it.

I have no idea why people think it was so great? I was so BORED in it, it was so slow starting off, then harrison ford had like no leads to find these replicants or whatever they were. Also, the Replicants (Spoiler*)

You do know it's a thinkpiece, right? Not like the Matrix or anything? Anyway, Blade Runner's regarded as a classic for being stylistic, visually sumptuous, intelligent and for having a lot of debate about whether or not Deckard's a replicant (which he is by the way).

 

[smartalec]

Deckard is totally a replicant. Ridley Scott said so himself. What did you think the origami unicorn at the end means?

I've never liked the idea of Deckard being a Replicant. The entire point of the movie, or the point that I took away from it, spins on one dichotomy. The Replicants are supposed to be emotionally inferior to humans, and yet Roy and his band of rebellious Replicants are in fact more compassionate (and from a certain point of view, decent) than Deckard, the Blade Runners and the system that they live in, which essentially sanctions murder of thinking beings under the euphemism 'retirement'.

If Deckard is a Replicant, then that kind of messes that up.

 

[Cathosach]

the blonde guy must have some faulty wiring or something cause he's going after the bladerunner the whole ending, then changes his mind?

Roy does that to teach Deckard the value of having a long life, while he, by contrast, is about to die. The reason he does this is because Deckard is not a Replicant!

Also, you appear to have quite spectacularly missed the point of the film.

Deckard is totally a replicant. Ridley Scott said so himself. What did you think the origami unicorn at the end means?

Does this argument REALLY have to take place again?! I thought the Final Cut was supposed to put an end to this kind of thing...

 

[Lord Kofun]

You're not alone. I fell asleep during that movie. Sure, it was late and I didn't sleep too much, but I would never have dreamed of falling asleep during the Dark Knight or the Usual Suspects. So... yeah. I hated it. I actually laughed at the ending sequence. I would imagine that was my death sentance, oh well.

 

[Inverse Skies]

I remember watching it a long time ago and thinking it was alright, if not great. One of my best mates loves it. It's one of those movies where you really have to think about the plot and the symbolism of it all, in other words it's very arty and requires more thought that just simply sitting down and watching it for entertainments sake.

 

[Nmil-ek]

We had this exact same thread yesterday did we really need another?

 

[fix-the-spade]

Deckard is totally a replicant. Ridley Scott said so himself. What did you think the origami unicorn at the end means?

But Scott was only the director, the star and the writer say he absolutely wasn't, conspiracy to disagree to maintain interest? (cue twilight zone music)


Anyway, I confess to having never seen the film all the way through, I either see the beginning or the end but the bit in the middle always escapes me.

 

[tiredinnuendo]

So, I rented Bladerunner ( directors Cut) from Blockbuster last weekend, and I always see stuff on the internet about people saying how great it was and all this stuff. Then I saw it.

I've spotted your problem.

Ridley Scott clearly did not understand the point of the story, and his cut reflects this. He made Deckard a replicant, which removed any meaning from the idea that Roy learned to be more human than Deckard was. He cut out the internal monolouge, which made it much, much harder to follow what the hell was going on and made the opening of the film tedious and slow. He removed so much and added zero value. In fact, the only footage I can remember him putting in that wasn't in the original cut was the unicorn dream, which was stupid.

Others in this thread are right, you should read the book. But even that aside, you should never, ever watch the director's cut. I still have my copy of the original cut, and after seeing the director's version, I refuse to see any other "cuts" of the film aside from the original. I've heard some decent things about the "Final" cut, so maybe that's better, but I refuse to care about anything besides the original.

- J

 

[solidstatemind]

Deckard is totally a replicant. Ridley Scott said so himself. What did you think the origami unicorn at the end means?

But Scott was only the director, the star and the writer say he absolutely wasn't, conspiracy to disagree to maintain interest? (cue twilight zone music)


Anyway, I confess to having never seen the film all the way through, I either see the beginning or the end but the bit in the middle always escapes me.

Uh guys? I hate to burst your bubble, but Philip K. Dick absolutely, positively did NOT say that Deckard was or was not a replicant. One of Dick's most common themes was the nature of reality, and if we can truly know that what we perceive is, in fact, real. In many of his stories, (particularly the brilliant "Impostor", which was turned into a turd of a movie starring Gary Sinese) the crux of the plot is "how can we even know that we really are who we think we are?"

Same theme applies to Blade Runner... or more accurately, 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?' The movie is substantially different from the story, just FYI. You want to better understand what is going on in the film, it would help to read the story, but the truth is that there is very little translation (and ffs, make sure you read the story, not the novelization of the movie).

As to why most people hail Blade Runner as being a breakthrough movie, as others have noted, it is primarily for the stylistic elements. In re: the OP being disappointed, you have to understand that it is absolutely not an action movie, like virtually every sci-fi film since then: it was a hardboiled film-noir detective story. Basically, it has more in common with the Maltese Falcon than it does with Star Wars or Aliens.

And everyone hails it as groundbreaking because it was: nobody had done anything like it before. But if you didn't care for it, that's cool. But you should recognize that BR has a very broad impact on our chosen recreation (gaming). Games like the Syndicate series, System Shock 2, even FEAR have taken substantial stylistic cues from BR, so you should at least watch it once, even if you don't care for it.

 

[joystickjunki3]

I've made it a point to see every version of the film and I have yet to enjoy it as much as I thought I would. I understand completely why it's heralded as such an amazing movie, but I ultimately found it lacking. The most enjoyable version was the one w/ the internal monologue. And I'd rather that Deckard was not a replicant because, as everyone else has pointed out, it takes away from the dehumanizing factor of Deckard's character contrast w/ Roy.

 

[almaster88]

You know thats like the most civilized and clear response I've gotten. I'll try renting the original, thanks