Blade Runner - there's two hours of my life I ain't getting back

That's crap.

It looks just as good now as it did back then. It's as visually stunning as it always was and story aside it's just about as close to cinematic art as you can get, it looks perfect.

Even now almost 30 years later it visually beats the piss out of all the over cgied crapfests we get today.
 
I'd just like to say I hate people who rip up excellent movies (like saying the graphics in Avatar are shit, for example) just because they think it makes them look clever - it really does my nuts in too. I truly truly am not one of those people - I was just so horribly disappointed with Blade Runner given the build up it's had. I'm sorry if my OP read like one of those posts!

I just found it so boring, contrived and pointless - and I'd like to know what others thought of it.
 
I didn't appreciate Blade Runner when I first watched it, when I was about 15.

Watched it again at 19, after reading some critical theory on it for a University course, with fresh eyes and thought it was fantastic for the time.

It's a movie on more than one level really, the storyline now probably seems old hat, there have been many newer movies since that have ripped it off. The special effects seem a little dated to younger eyes as well.

However, it is a good example of cinema history, a good post-modern film, which was ground-breaking at the time. It was one of the first films to be completely inspired by futurist design. Movies which have copied aspects of the film since include The Matrix, Batman, The Fifth Element and I, Robot. I personally find it quite interesting how they have presented what is essentially a Sci-fi movie in a 1950's film noir format.

If you watch over it again - there are some interesting themes as well - the eye motif is particularly interesting, the use of simulacrum - a post-modern idea that was only appearing in film from the 1980's, the entire motif of the film - what does it mean to be human?

Did you watch the Original Version or The Directors Cut? The Directors Cut is far superior in my opinion.
 
The directors cut is a definite improvement,but it's still not that great,as a movie in general.

Brilliant production design,cool dialogue,originality and influence doesn't in itself make an excellent movie,unless it's pieced together to perfection and not restictive to all genre fans.Blade Runner just doesn't do this and is truly appealing only to a certain a fanbase (e.g Sci-fi enthusiasts,film noir fans).These people (and there are millions) rate it very highly.
 
Are you saying that a movie that has brilliant production design, great dialogue, is original and influential cant be an excellent movie because it doesnt appeal to the masses?

Surely an excellent movie is an excellent movie, regardless of how many it appeals to.
 
I think you will find that even those who like the movie will concede it has many faults.

It had a much troubled production history, and over the years various versions have surfaced...with narration, without narration, scenes re-edited/reinserted etc. (The recent documentary that went with the box set, Dangerous Days, is the definitive account of the making of the movie and is essential).

It was hardly a box office success on first release, and indeed took a critical pounding as well. But it has achieved a cult following over the years, and many will testify that it does improve with successive viewings, and it can be enjoyed on it's own terms, warts and all.

I guess the most talked about aspect of the movie is the production design - and I would say that when you consider what they had to work with in those pre-cgi days, what they achieved was phenomenal.

12th doctor, if you are serious about your intentions, I would say try and give it another whirl at some point in the future, but make sure you watch it on a big screen TV with a good sound system, you really need to see it properly presented to fully appreciate it.
 
Framkly, anyone who still used that tired old, pathetic, ooh-look-aren't-I-witty 'can I have that 2 hours of my life back please' cliche should be slapped around the face with a large, wet, smelly haddock.

This is not genuine critiscism, this is indeed trolling.

He thinks going onto a movie forum and trashing a classic movie is funny, and will wind people up.


Just ignore it.
 
Wonderful painterly work of art, its the nearest cinema has got to emulating the depth of say Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio.

The Final Cut with the print cleaned up looks stunning.
 
Interesting comments about the film, but the book is so much better. And the unasked question of the film has caused 'heated' debate through the years. Is Deckart a Replicant? (even a higher model than Sean Youngs character?)
Can an inanimate object gain a soul?

Got the film sat on the Sky box to be watched soon. It is a remarkable film, it has in part stood the test of time, but why so man re-cuts always get to me.
 
Back
Top