0362: "Blade Runner"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
bbctol
Super Deluxe Forum Title of DESTINYâ„¢
Posts: 3137
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 10:27 pm UTC
Location: The Twilight Zone
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby bbctol » Wed Dec 26, 2007 5:30 pm UTC

This comic made me laugh. A lot. There's no punchline, and nothing specifically funny, but for some reason, I find it hilarious.

wintermute
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 5:19 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby wintermute » Wed Dec 26, 2007 5:36 pm UTC

Lathe wrote:As for the movie itself, I liked it but never thought it was great. The amusing thing is that BladeRunner comes in so many different versions: with voice-over narration and without, with tacked on happy ending and without, etc. I'm still waiting for "BladeRunner: It's a desert topping no it's a floorwax Edition".


Until now, there have been precisely two editions: The theatric release with the narration and happy ending, and the Director's Cut, without either.

But the Director's Cut was made without Ridley Scott's direct involvement (he was busy with Thelma and Louise at the time), so he gave other people instructions on how to re-edit it. So, he's spent the last seven years making his definitive director's cut, which he has titled The Final Cut.

The Workroom Print (also available on the new 5-disc set) was never officially released, but was an early pre-release edit. It got a bootleg release just before the director's cut, and so was included because people have seen it before.

So I think you'll be waiting a long time for a new edition, after this.

User avatar
BrainSlugs83
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:32 pm UTC
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby BrainSlugs83 » Wed Dec 26, 2007 5:47 pm UTC

I was never bored enough to sit through the entire movie... but a good strip today, none the less.

jrod
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 9:05 pm UTC
Location: The hemeroid of the south

Re: Blade Runner

Postby jrod » Wed Dec 26, 2007 6:40 pm UTC

I've never seen Blade runner but I got it for Christmas. :shock:

User avatar
Nuage
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:03 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Nuage » Wed Dec 26, 2007 6:55 pm UTC

I had a professor in college (a Greek mythology type class) who livened things up by showing clips from Blade Runner about once a month and extolling its sources in greek mythology. I remember he was big into the kleos theme.

Code: Select all

while(1) fork();

User avatar
Eleyras
Posts: 131
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 6:56 am UTC
Location: the computer lab

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Eleyras » Wed Dec 26, 2007 6:58 pm UTC

So with all that about different versions - which version should I, who has never seen the movie, watch?
At some point, I will remember to sig quotes I find amusing or something.

...once I stop laughing.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Belial » Wed Dec 26, 2007 7:01 pm UTC

I've only seen the director's cut and the theatrical release. I heavily recommend the director's cut.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

Kestral
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 10:57 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Kestral » Wed Dec 26, 2007 7:08 pm UTC

Ashbash wrote:
wes wrote:Blade Runner was based on Philip K. Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?


I though AI was based on that novel. Were both of them based on that novel? Or are you just not really into pokemon?


No, it wasn't. It was based off a series of short stories. The first is "Super Toys Last All Summer Long", the second is "Supertoys When Winter Comes" and "Supertoys in Other Seasons" which are all by Brian Aldiss. Much of the basic themes and scenes are the same, but being a total of perhaps 100 pages over all three stories, it's far more compressed than A.I. is. I'd suggest checking out the stories and leaving the movie to the trash heap.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Belial » Wed Dec 26, 2007 7:36 pm UTC

Eh. AI was quite good, if you just stop the movie where it was *supposed* to end, as opposed to where Spielberg ended it.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
swifty360
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2007 6:30 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby swifty360 » Wed Dec 26, 2007 8:43 pm UTC

That particular comic made me think of Douglas Adams, Orson Scott Card, Hubbard, and Orson Welles. Has to do with a mass confusion starting with Kevin Smith's Clerks 2 Randall bit about how he confuses Anne Frank and that deaf dumb and blind chick. Helen Keller, yeah, it was Helen Keller.
My two cents.

RaisedByMongrels
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 7:20 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby RaisedByMongrels » Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:35 pm UTC

I can respect classics like Blade Runner that supposedly influenced modern movies, but I've found that I usually can't watch them. They may have started the cliches, but they still feel just as cliche to me.

And I'd agree that The Matrix will probably be the scifi classic of our generation, if only for it's then-groundbreaking special effects. Future whippersnappers will watch it and say "wow, that's the worst wire gag I've ever seen," and "good grief, bullet-time again?" At least they won't be falling asleep in the middle of it, though.

User avatar
TappingTheLine
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:07 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby TappingTheLine » Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:41 pm UTC

You know, the term "cult movie" used to mean something important. Cult movies were created mostly around midnight showings near college campuses, and actual cults would develop around the movies. Rocky Horror is the best-known example, with people going every week and dressing up, but Casablanca had a cult around it for a while, with people wearing trenchcoats to go see it and singing along with the characters in that famous scene I'd know if I had actually seen the movie. Blade Runner is called a cult movie because it's dark and has a loyal following, but wasn't very well received when it first came out. Blade Runner, in fact, is one of the earliest examples of a movie becoming popular through video rentals and not when it was actually in theaters.

Blade Runner isn't really that much of a noir movie, or so I've heard. I've talked to a couple of people who are big fans of original, black and white and Bogart noir, and who've seen BR, and none of them consider it to really be noir. If you want a good, high-quality modern noir, rent Brick. Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Nora Zehetner are the two top names from the film, which I love.
"My parties are clothing optional, if you are offended by casual nudity I'm not entirely sure how you manage to get along with me...." -chaosreigns.com/quotes

wintermute
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 5:19 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby wintermute » Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:52 pm UTC

TappingTheLine wrote:You know, the term "cult movie" used to mean something important. Cult movies were created mostly around midnight showings near college campuses, and actual cults would develop around the movies. Rocky Horror is the best-known example, with people going every week and dressing up, but Casablanca had a cult around it for a while, with people wearing trenchcoats to go see it and singing along with the characters in that famous scene I'd know if I had actually seen the movie. Blade Runner is called a cult movie because it's dark and has a loyal following, but wasn't very well received when it first came out. Blade Runner, in fact, is one of the earliest examples of a movie becoming popular through video rentals and not when it was actually in theaters.

Blade Runner isn't really that much of a noir movie, or so I've heard. I've talked to a couple of people who are big fans of original, black and white and Bogart noir, and who've seen BR, and none of them consider it to really be noir. If you want a good, high-quality modern noir, rent Brick. Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Nora Zehetner are the two top names from the film, which I love.


Rocky Horror never did that well in its first release in theatres, either. But after people saw it on video, it built up a following of people who were prepared to go see it at midnight in drag.

Equally, Blade Runner had on-campus showings after it built up a following in which people would wear Pris' raccoon makeup, or Gaff's helmet, or other outfits from the movie. I've been to several, myself.

And, as a big fan of Noir (both film- and neo-, and even its Expressionist precursors), I would say that Blade Runner absolutely fits into the genre. Brick is a different direction, but no more noir than BR. Equally for Following (Chris Nolan's debut), a neo-noir film that more people really ought to see.

(And the scene in Casablanca that you're thinking of is Deuschland Über Alles vs Le Marseillaise. You really ought to see it)

User avatar
jjane
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 7:37 pm UTC
Location: sacramento, ca

Re: Blade Runner

Postby jjane » Wed Dec 26, 2007 10:20 pm UTC

If you liked Blade Runner, check out other movies based on PKD novels: Total Recall, A Scanner Darkly, Minority Report, and Impostor.


or just read the books.

personally i liked flow my tears the policeman said ...
but then again, i also like blade runner.

User avatar
mikesty
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 6:02 am UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby mikesty » Wed Dec 26, 2007 10:41 pm UTC

I <3 Blade Runner. I'm a middle-of-the-road Sci-Fi fan, not a big movie buff, but generally a guy with a deeper taste than most people. I've got a few rips of the Blade Runner directors' cut, including a 4GB AVI that claims to be HD (I don't care about the specifics, it looks really nice). I absolutely love it. The final scene with Roy is my favorite - quite deep.

The question is: Should I buy the Final Cut?

Great comic, BTW.
Have A Nice Day :)

JoshuaOst
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:27 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby JoshuaOst » Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:29 am UTC

This is an awesome comic. Got the 5-disc Collector's Edition for Christmas with all the crap included.

Coert
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:15 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Coert » Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:22 am UTC

Just happened to watch it today! Total coincidence xkcd writes a comic about it :D Awesome movie ...

ashnur
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 4:49 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby ashnur » Thu Dec 27, 2007 4:59 am UTC

i really never ever liked the fact that sometimes a good novel's movie version gets more hype than the novel. lazy people:(. ok, i know there are movies which are better than the novel, like fight club, forrest gump (anyone, any more?), but blade runner just isn't one of them.

so everyone go and read the book :). like smart people do :mrgreen:

btw. someone mentioned that our generation doesn't have stories like blade runner, because you can't sell it. and it's maybe right when you talk about movies, but if you want REALLY good sci-fi with the i-never-ever-know-what-the-ending-will-be-like feeling, then go read Iain M. Banks stories. M. means sci-fi, he writes very good stories but not sci-fi under the name Iain Banks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iain_Banks

or.. noir feeling, you have Neil Gaiman, see the stardust movie was a crap but i read the novel, and it's great, i couldn't stop reading it :roll:

User avatar
Vandole
Posts: 845
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:04 am UTC
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Vandole » Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:54 am UTC

jayhawk wrote:Mary Kate and Ashley were in "Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle" with Robert Patrick, who was in "Firewall" with Harrison Ford.
It's probably a good thing I don't remember this.

EDIT: And also, anyone who mourns that all endings must be happy-go-lucky, I suggest you check out Arlington Road. It's from 1999 (wow, that was almost a decade ago... scary though) and you will be so angry at the end.
Last edited by Vandole on Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:01 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Vandole wants you to read An Intimate History of the Greater Kingdom (NSFW text).
Oh, I'm no end table. I'm a nightstand.
Gelsamel wrote:Don't ever sig me..... ever.

User avatar
Surgery
Posts: 628
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:22 am UTC
Location: Western New York

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Surgery » Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:54 am UTC

this made me laugh because it reminds of people who put forth false information just to get a rise out of fanatics for any subject. notable examples being accusing Nine Inch Nails of covering AFI's Head Like A Hole in the comments section of the music video for HLaH on youtube, or pointing out that Linux is stupid because it's based on Windows 2000 in a chatroom full of linux geeks. In both cases hilarity ensues quite rapidly.

User avatar
Tanuki
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 4:37 am UTC
Location: Seattle or something
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Tanuki » Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:37 am UTC

I really like AI. Mostly for its ending. It seems complete. Like, instead of being left to wonder how the story ends, you actually get to see it end. That is a major plus, to me.

Blade Runner I saw once, on TV, when I was quite small. I don't remember much. The usage of the term "noir" in relation to it by its own fans makes me not want to see it again.

The pivotal scifi movie of our generation is Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure, and nothing anybody says or does will ever change that.

Star Wars Movies, In Order of My Liking of Them, One Being Highest:

1 - Revenge of the Sith
2 - The Empire Strikes Back
3 - A New Hope
4 - Return of the Jedi
5 - The Phantom Menace
6 - Attack of the Clones
7 - The Ewok Adventure
8 - The Battle for Endor
9 - The Star Wars Holiday Special

I swear, I'm not a troll. These are actually my opinions on the subjects^^

User avatar
stzein
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:15 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby stzein » Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:39 am UTC

Can somebody explain to me why they think blade runner is slow? It's an action movie! :?
Maybe those who call it slow only watch hollywood blockbusters, and never something like 2046 (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0212712/) or conte d'été (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115940/) or any other movie with no action whatsoever. (Those are both very good movies in my opinion, and the first one has a science fiction theme too!)
DragonHawk wrote:
AbalidothAscendant wrote:I'm still waiting for our generation to get a sci-fi classic like Blade Runner.

Not really sure how you're defining "our generation", but The Matrix comes to mind as a relatively recent movie that's likely to be considered a "sci-fi classic" by some large segment of the population.

How about just watching the older stuff? I really don't understand why something needs to be new to be exciting, or to be able to relate to it. Didn't you read any stories about king Arthur, or maybe the bible, or Shakespeare? Just naming a few of the best-known old stories that have shaped more than one generation. Or are you really that desperate for an own identity that you need to wait for hollywood to give you one?

hellcat
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 2:29 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby hellcat » Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:00 pm UTC

ashnur:
How about a clockwork orange? Sure the movie is missing the last chapter of the book which changes it dramatically but the visuals and music....perfection.

Tanuki:

Ugh, revenge of the sith first? Why no Clone Wars animated series? It's a billion times better than the new movies and those ewok/holiday specials.

Domovoi
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 9:37 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Domovoi » Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:09 pm UTC

ashnur wrote:i really never ever liked the fact that sometimes a good novel's movie version gets more hype than the novel. lazy people:(. ok, i know there are movies which are better than the novel, like fight club, forrest gump (anyone, any more?)


The Lord of the Rings.


TappingTheLine wrote:Blade Runner isn't really that much of a noir movie, or so I've heard.


Blade Runner is definitely a noir movie. Moral ambiguity, low key lighting, hard-boiled crime stuff, it's all there. The problem is that there isn't a simple definition of 'noir', but if you compare it to stuff like The Big Sleep or The Maltese Falcon it fits in very well with that genre.

(Cue discussion about how The Maltese Falcon isn't really noir)

ashnur wrote:i really never ever liked the fact that sometimes a good novel's movie version gets more hype than the novel. lazy people:(.

[...]

so everyone go and read the book :). like smart people do :mrgreen:


I never got why it's generally considered 'better' than watching a movie. Surely they're both fully grown artforms?

stzein wrote:How about just watching the older stuff? I really don't understand why something needs to be new to be exciting, or to be able to relate to it. Didn't you read any stories about king Arthur, or maybe the bible, or Shakespeare? Just naming a few of the best-known old stories that have shaped more than one generation. Or are you really that desperate for an own identity that you need to wait for hollywood to give you one?


What gives? The question was simply "what will our generation's classic SF movie be." Nobody ever said anything about 'needing' a new movie because the older ones aren't exciting or difficult to relate too. And nobody said anything about being desperate for an own identity either.
Last edited by Domovoi on Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:15 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

xabram
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:53 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby xabram » Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:26 pm UTC

Although I never saw blade runner and therefore dont get the humor of the comic, this conversation of uncommonly ended movies interests me. The kingdom was a recent movie that was very much open ended, and IMO, brilliantly done.

User avatar
stzein
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:15 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby stzein » Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:41 pm UTC

Domovoi wrote:
ashnur wrote:i really never ever liked the fact that sometimes a good novel's movie version gets more hype than the novel. lazy people:(. ok, i know there are movies which are better than the novel, like fight club, forrest gump (anyone, any more?)


The Lord of the Rings.

Are you trolling or haven't you read the books?

Domovoi wrote:
ashnur wrote:i really never ever liked the fact that sometimes a good novel's movie version gets more hype than the novel. lazy people:(.

[...]

so everyone go and read the book :). like smart people do :mrgreen:


I never got why it's generally considered 'better' than watching a movie. Surely they're both fully grown artforms?

They are, but they are obviously different from each other. Reading tends to be more intellectually engaging. If you haven't experienced this then either you get more out of a movie than I do or you get less out of a book. :twisted:

Domovoi wrote:
stzein wrote:How about just watching the older stuff? I really don't understand why something needs to be new to be exciting, or to be able to relate to it. Didn't you read any stories about king Arthur, or maybe the bible, or Shakespeare? Just naming a few of the best-known old stories that have shaped more than one generation. Or are you really that desperate for an own identity that you need to wait for hollywood to give you one?


What gives? The question was simply "what will our generation's classic SF movie be." Nobody ever said anything about 'needing' a new movie because the older ones aren't exciting or difficult to relate too. And nobody said anything about being desperate for an own identity either.

I was just wondering why our generation should have a classic SF movie. If one is made, fine, but I don't think it should matter when it is made. I know this DOES matter to many people, hence my reaction.

InsertUsernameHere
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:47 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby InsertUsernameHere » Thu Dec 27, 2007 4:02 pm UTC

For me the problem with Blade Runner was never that it was slow, but that it was so dark. I really had trouble seeing what was going on, to the point that it was quite distracting.


Oh, and the book is almost always better, except in a few rare cases.

User avatar
BrainSlugs83
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:32 pm UTC
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby BrainSlugs83 » Thu Dec 27, 2007 5:45 pm UTC

InsertUsernameHere wrote:For me the problem with Blade Runner was never that it was slow, but that it was so dark. I really had trouble seeing what was going on, to the point that it was quite distracting.
Yeah, that too.

InsertUsernameHere wrote:Oh, and the book is almost always better, except in a few rare cases.
Yeah, but whoever said "Lord of the Rings" was one of those cases is a damned fool. :shock:

/me queues flame war

EtzHadaat
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 4:04 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby EtzHadaat » Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:22 pm UTC

It's hard to say. The book was unfathomably boring, but at least had interesting language stuff to think about while wondering if he was ever going to tell us anything interesting, while the movie was unfathomably boring but boring movies are a decent segue into making out, and there was enough hype behind it that there was an excuse to watch it.

Hmmm...


Btw, I have made a list of movies that I sorely need to see that I've been slowly but surely chipping away at, spoilered for length:

Spoiler:
Anchorman
Children of Men XxX
Clueless
2001: A Space Odyssey
Superbad XxX
Dr. Strangelove
Office Space
Sin City XxX
This is Spinal Tap
Blade Runner
Gangs of New York
The Fifth Element
Equilibrium
Breakfast at Tiffany's XxX
Maltese Falcon
Talladega Nights
Wedding Crashers
Empire Records
Back to the Future
Boondock Saints
Bourne trilogy
Shaun of the Dead
Amadeus XxX
Hunt for Red October
Hedwig and the Angry Inch
Boogie Nights
The Shawshank Redemption
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Life is Beautiful
Seven Samurai
Casablanca

XxX denotes a particular friend will get mad at me if I see them without her.

III_Demon
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:39 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby III_Demon » Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:42 pm UTC

every once in a while, xkcd says hi to me. with this comic, i finally thought i should say hi back.

hi! =]

User avatar
jayhawk
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:03 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby jayhawk » Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:52 pm UTC

Hi! Now go introduce yourself in the introductions thread or you'll make the mods very angry. And you won't like them when they're angry.

(says the long-time lurker who made his second post in this thread)

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Belial » Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:51 pm UTC

Actually, we've pretty much given up on making people in this particular subforum post in the intro thread, since it attracts so many wander-throughs. It's just not worth it to us or them.

What you said goes for the rest of the forum, though.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
electoralfraud
BRUTALLY Bolshy!
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:05 am UTC
Location: London (UK)

Re: Blade Runner

Postby electoralfraud » Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:51 pm UTC

This thread made me feel very old. I can't believe just how many people who read this comic haven't seen Blade Runner. And how many people seem to not have bothered watching it all the way through at least.

Kids these days... And I bet you all thought the new 'I am Legend' film was really good as well. Now theres really a story with the heart and soul torn out of it on the silver screen.

And I just got a working computer again: Now I feel like I should have kept living without home internet.

:(
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!

Domovoi
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 9:37 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Domovoi » Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:26 pm UTC

stzein wrote:
Domovoi wrote:
ashnur wrote:i really never ever liked the fact that sometimes a good novel's movie version gets more hype than the novel. lazy people:(. ok, i know there are movies which are better than the novel, like fight club, forrest gump (anyone, any more?)


The Lord of the Rings.

Are you trolling or haven't you read the books?


I've read the books, but I thought the movies were better. I just didn't like Tolkien's writing style. Also, the constant songs got annoying fast, and the parallel storytelling in The Two Towers just didn't work for me. (Maybe it was that way in ROTK too, I just remember it specifically from TTT. It's been years since I read the books and didn't care to read them again.)

I just felt the whole narrative worked much better in the movies. Also, the female characters were at least somewhat fleshed out, as opposed to completely ignored like in the books.

And for those reasons, I felt that the movies told the story in a better way than the books did. Your mileage, of course, may vary.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Belial » Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:34 pm UTC

I'm pretty much in agreement with Domovoi here.

For one, I can actually stand to watch the movies.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Cin
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:40 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Cin » Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:48 pm UTC

electoralfraud wrote:This thread made me feel very old. I can't believe just how many people who read this comic haven't seen Blade Runner. And how many people seem to not have bothered watching it all the way through at least.

Kids these days... And I bet you all thought the new 'I am Legend' film was really good as well. Now theres really a story with the heart and soul torn out of it on the silver screen.
:(

I feel old too... except that I'm 21 and made a point of watching Bladerunner some years back. I liked it but never really LOVED it until I got to see the Final Cut in theaters last month with my ex. I dragged her to go, since she'd never seen it and had no interest in it (though she loves scifi). It really is SO much better than any of the other versions imo, and I was glad that that was the version she was seeing for the first time. She loved it and even got the DVD when it came out.

On a side note, I liked the beginning and premise for the film I Am Legend (as well as the film's main character) more than the book, but I thought the book's ending was significantly better, as well as the vampires.

InsertUsernameHere wrote:For me the problem with Blade Runner was never that it was slow, but that it was so dark. I really had trouble seeing what was going on, to the point that it was quite distracting.


I take it you saw the Director's Cut DVD right? It was a first generation DVD and as such, has terrible quality. They fixed that for the Final Cut.

PS- I liked the book better for the most part, but I seriously disliked the book's ending. It felt anti-climactic, and the film's ending is epic by comparison. I think both are meaningful, but both have to be looked at separately, because all they really have in common is an overall premise and some details, and a lot of the rest is wholly different.

PPS- I made an account just for this thread because I couldn't help it. <3 cyberpunk films

Domovoi
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 9:37 am UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Domovoi » Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:02 pm UTC

Cin wrote:I feel old too... except that I'm 21 and made a point of watching Bladerunner some years back. I liked it but never really LOVED it until I got to see the Final Cut in theaters last month with my ex. I dragged her to go, since she'd never seen it and had no interest in it (though she loves scifi). It really is SO much better than any of the other versions imo, and I was glad that that was the version she was seeing for the first time. She loved it and even got the DVD when it came out.


What makes the final cut so much better than the director's cut? I love the director's cut, and I'm wondering wether I should get the final cut.

User avatar
shadebug
Posts: 425
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:21 pm UTC
Location: Ceredigion/Essex, UK
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner

Postby shadebug » Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:59 pm UTC

so much to cover. First off, the alt text is dead on. I watched this lat year as part of a law and cinema module and was falling asleep at bits, granted I was really tired, but it was really slow. That said, it was also pretty good and the discussion later (we were equating it to immigration laws, it actually works really well if you bring in places like Britain (I was in Spain at the time so I got to explain this to them) where there are tests for ctizenship which no natural citizen could ever complete (eg. what's the new year's tradition in wales? I live in Wales, nobody knows)) was good and interesting which I would suggest means that had I actually paid attention it would've been interesting.

That said, i think it'll still be slow on a rewatch and i'd have to watch it in an honest to goodness cinema to really enjoy it (that or build me a projector). Take a film like Brazil, on the other hand. Only the most ridiculously up themself art buffs would ever suggest that it was a good film first time round, we watched it in the same course and i was laughing my head off because I'd already seen it and I could see the looks of despair on everybody else's face as the film dragged on and on, whereas I was loving it, because once you've seen it it suddenly becomes a beautiful work of art and I would totally consider getting it on DVD now.

The point is that it is a slow film, it may be action but it isn't action paced, it's more about setting the mood, which is all very well and good but will drive people away, especially those of us who grew up with epic future landscapes and find it about as awe inspiring as highlander II: the quickening.

This leads us nicely onto the idea of modern scifi classics. The need for a modern scifi classic is not because of the current generation being unwilling to watch the oldies, but purely because we want more, we want something new to push the envelope and give us something to strive for. The matrix was not a modern scifi classic, it was a modern action classic, even if all anybody quotes is the lack of a spoon or glitches in the matrix it'll be remembered for the lobby shoot out to the tune of propellerheads because even the hardest hearted of movie buffs will have been transformed into a wailing mush of 5 year old child, giddy with excitement because shit is blowing up. It just worked.

Either way, the search for a modern classic is a search for the last glimmer of hope, the search for some clue that there might still be some talent and imagination left in the world. The thing is, that that's always been the case. The reason we want a modern classic as opposed to looking for the old ones is that the vast majority of old films, much like most new ones, are just bad. Hollywood has, since its inception as an entitiy somehow controlling our entertainment, consistently managed to drown out originality and pad every corner that could possibly cause new and unexplored feelings, they know that the public wants monotony, and for the most part they're probably right. We the people who enjoy films 'properly' are quite a minority and it just doesn't do to pander to us. Looking back at the work of Fritz Lang is a nice example of this. Now I'm no Fritz lang buff, but I have seen M and Fury (yes I've seen metropolis and everybody else is just a hack ripping him off but then he was a hack ripping off HG Wells and so on and so forth, so let's not go there, though i will say that metropolis is the only silent film I've seen thus far (the others being battleship potemkin (interesting historically, but not good) and intolerance (terrible, just awful, seriously, wtf, how did anybody ever think this was great, even in the day, is this what the matrix will look like in 90 years?)) which has been legitimately interesting and worth watching, i'm kinda glad I lost the free DVD I got to watch it on because I'll get to buy it for real) adn they show how hollywood worked back then. Both films are essentially the same, angry mob tracks down somebody suspected of doing a terrible crime, however, one is made in germany and the other in hollywood. the german one manages to pull your morality in all sorts of directions and leaves you somewhat confused but also quite certain that, terrible sound quality aside, you've just watched a great film. The hollywood one has clearly defined good people and bad people and any lingering moral ambiguity is neatly tied up in a happy ending, making for a lovely popcorn film, but not one you'll be blogging about, at least not extensively.

So, back to the point, the fact is that all thoughout cinematic history there have been fantastic films, well worth watching, but they're drowned out in the pap that hollywood (and they're not alone, bollywood has some good stuff too but you'd never know it) feeds us. Now, people will tell us that certain films are classics, but the fact is that a lot of the time you have to be there and if you try and watch it now you'll find yourself at a loss for why it was great. you might eventually reealise that it's seminary and iconic and that it has historical importance to film making as a whole, but the fact is that you're missing out on the hype and the cinematic experience. The cinema has a lot to do with it. I watched back to the future in the cinema a few weeks back, a film I have watched and considered good and fun, but never great. We watched original reels, some of them were so badly damaged they had to skip entire scenes, that said, I came out of there thinking I had just watched the best film ever. It's an experience you can only get from the cinema and t makes a lot of difference.

So, why do we need the modern classics? So that the modern generation can walk into a cinema and walk out knowing that they've just been part of something that will change culture as a whole, that they've participated in something huge. they may not be able to sit through a space oddysey:2001 , but when their grandkids start talking about children of men (assuming that were a genre breaking epic, which it probably isn't but it was pretty good) they'll be able to say 'I remember watching that, that was the day i got this chocolate stain on my tshirt' and then ramble on about crap for two hours.

As for books being better than films, I'd say that half of the six lord of the rings books were good, these ones involved the fellowship going off and having fun and meeting ents and kicking ass, the other half involved sam and frodo exploring the true meaning of guy love between two guys and was boring as all get out. In the end the film and the books were on a par with each other, the films managed to spare us hours of reading about how gay sam and frodo aren't but we also got to see the ents being a bunch of pussies (seriously, you call that storming isengard? I've seen goldfish do a better job of breaking down defences) and tom bombadil be relegated to worthless addition to the tale as opposed to secret badass we all knew he was, sure he never did anything, but he could've and that made all the difference.

Generally books will be better than films for a couple of reasons. the first is that you become the director and the important bit is the quality of the plot, take star wars, for instance. I've not read the novelisations and the rest of the books around it all, but I'd be willing to bet that they're better than the film, if only because I can't stand George Lucas as a director, he's the only man in the world who can squeeze 2 hours of solid crap acting out of ewan mcgregor (not to mention being the most useless technophile in the history of the world), but I do like the basic premise of the stories, and I'm sure if it were in a book it'd be oodles of fun. A similar thing happens when films are dubbed. Generally I'm quite militant about watching films subtitled, but I spent a year in spain, where everything's dubbed, watching films pretty regularly and I never saw a bad US/British film, why? because there was no bad acting, there was just neutral voice over acting and it meant I got to enjoy the story in a purer form. of course it meant I never saw any truly great films either, but there we go.

The second reason and my parting thought because apparently not having a blog anymore has made me write far too much at the drop of a hat, is that hollywood, once again, will stifle decent books if they get half a chance. For proof read timeline, then watch the film. Actually, buy a braille keyboard first, because you'll have gouged your eyes out by the end of it.
Heaven is for the hedonist

User avatar
Cin
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:40 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Cin » Fri Dec 28, 2007 1:17 am UTC

Domovoi wrote:
Cin wrote:I feel old too... except that I'm 21 and made a point of watching Bladerunner some years back. I liked it but never really LOVED it until I got to see the Final Cut in theaters last month with my ex. I dragged her to go, since she'd never seen it and had no interest in it (though she loves scifi). It really is SO much better than any of the other versions imo, and I was glad that that was the version she was seeing for the first time. She loved it and even got the DVD when it came out.


What makes the final cut so much better than the director's cut? I love the director's cut, and I'm wondering wether I should get the final cut.


The video is cleaned up A LOT. You can actually see what the hell is going on compared to the Director's Cut. Plot holes have been fixed (ie, an unaccounted for replicant that the chief mentions, some dialog that made no sense, etc). The effects were redone, some scenes were reshot (Zhora smashing through the glass), and and a whole lot of other little things that make it much easier to watch. Some scenes were shortened, especially in the beginning, because they were only the length they were at due to the voiceover, so it's also much more watchable and doesn't feel as slow as the Director's Cut.

Lathe
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 8:36 pm UTC

Re: Blade Runner

Postby Lathe » Fri Dec 28, 2007 1:55 am UTC

wintermute wrote:
Lathe wrote:As for the movie itself, I liked it but never thought it was great. The amusing thing is that BladeRunner comes in so many different versions: with voice-over narration and without, with tacked on happy ending and without, etc. I'm still waiting for "BladeRunner: It's a desert topping no it's a floorwax Edition".


Until now, there have been precisely two editions: The theatric release with the narration and happy ending, and the Director's Cut, without either.

There have been more than two editions for quite a while. Wikipedia lists 7, though some of them are the silly "we've shown it once at a film festival so we'll count it as an edition".


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: plytho and 98 guests