Movie Theater Blade Runner

[5RWill]

I just finished this for the first time and it is kind of hitting me like Tinker Tailor. At first a bit underwhelmed but the more i think about it the more i like it. Hell i already want to watch it again.

What are your thoughts on Deckards situation

Spoiler

At first he struck me as hypocrite, it was simply strange to me to see him falling for Rachel. Which honestly before the reveal that she is in fact a replicant, i was trying to figure out if she was human or not.

What's the significance of the origami guy? And the unicorn at the end how did he know Deckards dream? I've seen some suggestions that Deckard is indeed a replicant. While feasible just doesn't add up in my mind. It states at the beginning plain and simple replicants were superior to humans in every way and equal in intelligence. He displayed emotions such as fear very human like as opposed to the replicants, conducted the voight test, was very combat ineffective against the replicants without a handgun, obviously reacted to pain like a regular human, etc.

I can see where it would explain some things and would make it very interesting if Scott would tie this loose end. Hell there are apparently alternate scripts saying he's a replicant.

Overall i watched it in spurts so i'm probably missing some things. I'll have to rewatch it again this week.
Edit
Shit...he's a replicant lol wtf.

Why is the collectors edition 114$

 

[kihnspiracy]

Excellent movie, especially the directors cut. That was a long time rumor that Deckard was a replicant also.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

That movie is so wonderfully nuanced, filmed, written, etc... that it is one of the true sci-fi classics.

There are entire Web sites devoted to Deckard is/isn't a replicant ;-) And Darryl Hannah... well, hubbahubba.

In some ways, I can see how it would be like Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy -- very cerebral. In other ways it's ground-breaking beyond all words. Remember, that movie is, what, 30 years old at this point? CGI was in its infancy, so most of it had to be done with models and animation... And yet the city-scapes and other scenes are just incredible. IMHO, better than anything done in pure CGI.

All I can say is that after you have seen it a dozen times, you will still be seeing 'new' stuff. The details are amazing.

And this is from a guy who is NOT a sci-fi fan by any stretch. So I'll recant my earlier calling it a sci-fi classic, and just call it one of the finest pieces of film-making ever.

Cheers,

Sirhr

 

[fw707]

So I'll recant my earlier calling it a sci-fi classic, and just call it one of the finest pieces of film-making ever.

Cheers,

Sirhr

Without a doubt.

 

[Papa Zero Three]

I never grow tired of watching this movie. I think i've seen every version/cut of this movie at least 3-4 times. It's timeless.

 

[fw707]

Has anybody read the book?

 

[Dogtown]

Yeah, but "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" has very little in common with the movie it's based on.

 

[SledDog]

I'm firmly in the camp of Deckard not being a replicant. My main issue is, if he were a replicant why would all the other have such a dramatic physical advantage? Pris nearly crushes his, he almost gets choked out by Leon, the other chick whacks him, and the entire finale with Roy is a mismatch.

 

[Veer_G]

I'm firmly in the camp of Deckard not being a replicant. My main issue is, if he were a replicant why would all the other have such a dramatic physical advantage? Pris nearly crushes his, he almost gets choked out by Leon, the other chick whacks him, and the entire finale with Roy is a mismatch.

It would make sense that service replicants destined for labor off-world would be built with different parameters than one intended for existence on-world.

And yes, OP, Gaff (Edward James Olmos) and his origami have been the subject of discussion (among other things from the movie) for decades. Want your very own origami unicorn? Gaff?s Unicorn

[video=youtube;3RR-j5jSx6o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RR-j5jSx6o[/video]

Not to brag, but my wife when I met her immediately made me think of Rachel. Talk about the effect of iconic movies!

 

[Dogtown]

I think the point is that, like Rachel, Deckard is a replicant design that is unaware it's a replicant.

 

[Papa Zero Three]

I'm firmly in the camp of Deckard not being a replicant. My main issue is, if he were a replicant why would all the other have such a dramatic physical advantage? Pris nearly crushes his, he almost gets choked out by Leon, the other chick whacks him, and the entire finale with Roy is a mismatch.

Kind of hard to argue that when Scott has publicly said that Deckard is a replicant. To address your points, Perhaps Deckard is an advanced model (like the woman)and is more human like than the models he hunted, which would mean he didn't have super strength,etc, which would account for his getting his ass handed to him by the other replicants. This is entirely supposition on my part of course.

 

[5RWill]

That movie is so wonderfully nuanced, filmed, written, etc... that it is one of the true sci-fi classics.

There are entire Web sites devoted to Deckard is/isn't a replicant ;-) And Darryl Hannah... well, hubbahubba.

In some ways, I can see how it would be like Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy -- very cerebral. In other ways it's ground-breaking beyond all words. Remember, that movie is, what, 30 years old at this point? CGI was in its infancy, so most of it had to be done with models and animation... And yet the city-scapes and other scenes are just incredible. IMHO, better than anything done in pure CGI.

All I can say is that after you have seen it a dozen times, you will still be seeing 'new' stuff. The details are amazing.

And this is from a guy who is NOT a sci-fi fan by any stretch. So I'll recant my earlier calling it a sci-fi classic, and just call it one of the finest pieces of film-making ever.

Cheers,

Sirhr

Tinker Tailor is probably my favorite movie of all time. It's one of those that when it comes on HBO/cinemax/stars/etc. i end up watching it..again.

Did Harrison's voiceover bother anyone else at first? I got used to it but i'm also a huge fan of noir and it just didn't really feel noirish. It was more like him reading IMO. As i said i got used to it but when i think of film noire i think of Mel Gibson in payback it's a perfect example of film noire and seriously reminds me of Max Payne. Off topic Mel would've made a great Max.

Honestly i'm with you on that i find myself preferring the old models to CGI, this goes back to my feelings on the new Lord Of The Rings. CGI absolutely kills what the hobbit could/should be. I realize there are instances where it's needed but to make the goblins and everything like that CGI was a poor poor mistake. It detracts from the immersion.

Rutger was ridiculous at the end, he put on an astounding performance the chase scene was albeit frightening to me, Sebastians house was creepy to begin with though.

I like the question it raises as to what's humane and isn't humane. Reminds me of Moon somewhat, which is also a movie i highly recommend if you haven't seen it.

Also found myself noticing things i hadn't noticed when i rewatched the intro starting it over with a friend.

Kind of hard to argue that when Scott has publicly said that Deckard is a replicant. To address your points, Perhaps Deckard is an advanced model (like the woman)and is more human like than the models he hunted, which would mean he didn't have super strength,etc, which would account for his getting his ass handed to him by the other replicants. This is entirely supposition on my part of course.

I forgot where i read the alternate scripts but there were some very awesome endings. I wish they would've filmed them all some would've been great to see.

 

[Dogtown]

If you didn't like Ford's voice over, then you should definitely watch the director's cut (or actually the "Final Cut") as the movie studio had him add it and a happier ending to the theatrical release.

As for CGI vs practical models, I can appreciate the sentiments about it, but we're not going back any time soon. There is a light years of distance between the best we can do with practical models today vs what we can do in the computer, and that gap gets wider all the time. If anything, your complaint has more to do with directors and VFX Supervisors and how they overuse CGI these days. It's gone from being a niche tool to the main VFX production tool and now is the fix-it tool. We are now forced to fix things that were shot on set or location that were screwed up for any number of reasons and the best and only reasonable tool for that is CGI. There's an entire generation of directors and VFX Supervisors who lack any experience with practical models and miniatures. To this day, there are still reasons to shoot stuff practically and a good supervisor will know when to employ it (though that window is closing rapidly).

But if you want to move away from CGI, go watch movies from the 80s.

 

[5RWill]

If you didn't like Ford's voice over, then you should definitely watch the director's cut (or actually the "Final Cut") as the movie studio had him add it and a happier ending to the theatrical release.

As for CGI vs practical models, I can appreciate the sentiments about it, but we're not going back any time soon. There is a light years of distance between the best we can do with practical models today vs what we can do in the computer, and that gap gets wider all the time. If anything, your complaint has more to do with directors and VFX Supervisors and how they overuse CGI these days. It's gone from being a niche tool to the main VFX production tool and now is the fix-it tool. We are now forced to fix things that were shot on set or location that were screwed up for any number of reasons and the best and only reasonable tool for that is CGI. There's an entire generation of directors and VFX Supervisors who lack any experience with practical models and miniatures. To this day, there are still reasons to shoot stuff practically and a good supervisor will know when to employ it (though that window is closing rapidly).

But if you want to move away from CGI, go watch movies from the 80s.

I understand CGI is needed in certain aspects and when done right (Tron/Oblivion) it's well received but it also depends on the movie. Your right it's become the go to tool it seems for visual effects and to fix things. Don't get me wrong it has it's perks but when it's blatantly done like it was in The Hobbit it detracts from the immersion of watching the movie, where as the old costumes were much more visceral. My problem as you've pointed out isn't so much CGI as it is the overuse of it. My point is there are some movies where it seems the director is thinking "hell we'll just CGI this bit so we don't have to do all the work to make it look real".

I'm not a huge 80s fan i don't think, honestly can't recall how many movies i've seen that were done in the 80s. The 90s/early 2000s however is a different story those movies albeit lacking the overblown use of CGI up to todays standards are leaps and bounds in quality of cinema over the movies we have today. Regarding the movies themselves though not necessarily visuals or effects. They just don't make movies like Se7en, the matrix, L.A. Confidential, Miller's Crossing, Black Hawk Down, Fight Club, etc. the list goes on.

Then again there is always the saying "that people see the past as better than it was, the present worse than it is, and the future less resolved than it will be."

As for Blade Runner i'm hoping if i were to buy the five set collectors edition it would have all the endings of the final and theatrical?

 

[Papa Zero Three]

As for Blade Runner i'm hoping if i were to buy the five set collectors edition it would have all the endings of the final and theatrical?

I hear you. I own several versions of this film, original,directors cut, kraft food lady's cut, you name it. Every year it seems like a different "cut"/version comes out, most having very little or small changes to it. I wish they would just collect all the different versions...all of them and put them on one DVD box set but I doubt that will happen.

 

[Dogtown]

Yeah, even the nostalgia was better back then

ETA: Correct, if you get the super duper edition "Blade Runner" it has all of the endings and versions of the film. The main difference between the theatrical and director's cut is the voice over and ending. There's also a short dream sequence for Deckard that's part of the Director's Cut and a bit of a clue on the replicant debate.

Oh and I'm afraid you'll have to excuse PJ on "The Hobbit", he's like a kid in the biggest candy store in the world when he comes to work.