Kevin's Watch

dANdeLION wrote:I'm still a bit unsure as to whether or not Cail preferred the book to the movie, or vice-versa.......

yeah and i'm still waitin for him to unsticky everything in vespers too.

Actually, I take it back. The dumb show of BR is the best I've ever seen

Lucimay wrote:yeah and i'm still waitin for him to unsticky everything in vespers too.

And give you more dirty laundry to air in public forums?

I think not.

i like your title!

Lucimay wrote:because it was a gritty detective story set in a vision of the future that seemed so familiar as to be possible?

i don't know why everyone else liked it, i only know i did. i hadn't read any pkd when i saw the film. this film led me to read pkd. when i read do androids dream of electric sheep i was amazed at the story. and i felt that the screenwriters of Bladerunner had "extracted" a portion of that story and Scott translated it to screen brilliantly. certainly there is a MUCH larger story in the book. but i'm a big detective story fan. this film satisfied me on that level.

i'm a stickler for screen adaptations sticking to the novel. most screen adaptations don't accomplish that half so well as Bladerunner. yes, the whole story is not there, but the "extracted" story stands alone beautifully.

so, i respectfully beg to disagree and say that, for me, the film is great.

hear hear!

I've yet to see a movie that ever came close to a good book, and for all that you get in a great book story, you'd need a 20 hour movie with subtitles and thought pop-ups just to know whats supposed to be going on in any scene or sequence....I think the brilliance of BR was that you didn't need to read the book to enjoy the movie, and to make a movie as brilliant as PKD's DADOES was, and is, beyond any screenwriters or cinematographers ability to create. A Clockwork Orange is my best defensive example regarding books vs movies and the need to let each stand on its own within its native medium.....

excellent example, Es.

Cail wrote:

Lucimay wrote:yeah and i'm still waitin for him to unsticky everything in vespers too.

And give you more dirty laundry to air in public forums?

I think not.

To quote Captain Kirk: "You of all people should be aware of the dangers of reopening old wounds."

Yes, because I'm certainly the one who's picked this particular scab......

ok. sorry. guess it was too soon to make that particular joke.

sorry Cail. sorry.

Cail wrote:Yes, because I'm certainly the one who's picked this particular scab......

Dude, lighten up. That quote was not aimed at you, you bloody git!

Is it safe to come back to this thread now? I've never seen the movie in a theater, I've never read the book. I just know that I'm excited about finally being able to see it in the theater. All I've seen has been on TV and the two different versions I have on laser disc. Beautiful and moving, imo.

No one has mentioned Darryl Hannah on this thread. I think she is the one who gives the movie its pathos. All four main actors are outstanding, imo, and so are the two "corporation guys".

Visually, the movie is definitely extremely well executed.

Of course, I'm biased because the first time I saw the movie it was the VHS version and I dropped some really good acid right before it started. With the narration and Rutger Hauer dropping science, it was a very heavy pseudo-epiphany experience. Whoa.

The director's cut, which is more or less the same but without the narration, is probably a "better" movie in terms of art but it is a lot more ambiguous and dark (and much more "noir").

Actually the narration was a last-second decision that had to do with a poorly-received test screening of the original cut; after inserting the narration it tested much better (having a fairly happy ending as opposed to a more bleak and "realistic" one).

Personally I'm interested to see how the original version plays because it's been so long since I've seen it. I'll probably buy the collector's set and see it in theaters if it comes out here. Anybody know where I can get some really great acid?

exnihilo wrote:Anybody know where I can get some really great acid?

Uhm...

It's easier to find cut stuff, with the bane of "madhouse" as you come down...

Menolly wrote:

exnihilo wrote:Anybody know where I can get some really great acid?

Uhm...

It's easier to find cut stuff, with the bane of "madhouse" as you come down...

So I take it the answer is Titletown, USA.

More like Micanopy, but close enough.

Especially if Phish were to come to the O'Connell Center again...

BLADE RUNNER - THE FINAL CUT (Update)

Okay, first let me get this out of the way: I was disappointed that the Final Cut never made it to theatres in Winnipeg. The 1992 Director's Cut got the theatrical treatment here, so I had been expecting the same with the Final Cut. I hope those of you who wanted to see Blade Runner on the big screen again (or for the first time) managed to do so, and liked what you saw!

Happily, my disappointment over the no-screening of BR was more than compensated by the incredible multi-disc DVD release which followed. A month ago on December 18, I bought the 4-disc set...and for the rest of December I was blown out of my mind. Attention all Blade Runner fans: this is the real deal!

Disc One: The Final Cut

I suppose this could be considered the "definitive" version of the film at last. In Ridley Scott's eyes it is. In terms of picture and sound quality, it truly is. Blade Runner has never looked better - and I'm one of those BR freaks who've seen the movie in almost all its incarnations over the years. One might say that this edition finally does justice to the late Jordan Cronenweth's exceptional cinematography. BR was already one of the best-looking films ever made, but in watching the Final Cut, you just have to sit back and go WOW!

The new surround sound mix is arguably even more of a startling improvement than the picture. Because while the visuals had become familiar to us over the years, all that time we had been stuck hearing the film in 2.0 stereo half-heartedly expanded to "pretend" surround. But now we're presented with full 5.1 audio, and oh my, it's fabulous. Vangelis's musical score also shines through more powerfully than ever before. It's intoxicating just listening to Blade Runner now, never mind watching it.

However, those hoping that the Final Cut is significantly different from previous versions will have to look elsewhere (but then, I'm sure true BR fans would not be unduly bothered by this). The Final Cut isn't a drastic re-interpretation by Scott; rather, it's a refinement of his original vision for the film.

Those who never liked Harrison Ford's voiceover will be pleased to know that it remains absent on the Final Cut. The infamous "happy" ending is also absent. In these two major respects, the Final Cut keeps faith with the '92 edition.

The most noteworthy changes: a slightly expanded version of Deckard's unicorn daydream sequence, additional shots of Taffy Lewis's joint, and most welcome of all, a "reshoot" of the sequence where Zhora (Joanna Cassidy) is shot by Deckard and crashes through storefront glass. In the original movie, Joanna's stunt double's face was rather too obvious for all to see, since the sequence was in slo-mo. So...for the Final Cut, Joanna Cassidy was invited back to re-do the scene - to copy her stunt double's moves exactly so that the digital wizards could then insert Joanna back into the footage seamlessly. As I said, the Final Cut isn't about earthshaking changes, but about subtle tweaks to make this the most polished version of the film ever.

The Final Cut also includes three (!)) different audio commentary tracks. I'd say the best one is by director Ridley Scott. He is as intelligent and insightful a filmmaker as you could hope for in being able to explain his ideas and motivations. There are many ways to do an audio commentary; Scott takes a serious nuts-and-bolts approach. He asserts that the director should be somewhat of a dictator - that that is what is required if you want to make YOUR movie, not the studio's, not the producer's - or the writer's. Unfortunately, Scott's unrelenting perfectionism on the set of BR led to much friction with his American crew whom he had not worked with before. (BR was his first film shoot in America.)From Scott's point of view, after the box office success of Alien, he thought he had earned the right to do things his way as a filmmaker without being questioned over every little decision. And yet it seemed to him that was exactly what was happening on Blade Runner.

The film's behind-the-scenes conflicts (and many, many other things) are explored in-depth in the astounding Dangerous Days documentary feature on Disc Two. I think this doc is the real treasure of the set. It is a stupefying three-and-a-half-hour (!) epic that delves into just about every aspect of Blade Runner. It is one of the best making-of documentaries I have ever had the pleasure of watching. I'd say Dangerous Days by itself is worth getting this DVD set.

I'll post some more about Dangerous Days and the remaining discs in the next couple of days, but I'll stop for now. Perhaps Lucimay could chime in with her thoughts, too, being a BR aficionado herself. Our Literati games became BR discussions, with Creator wondering what the hell we were going on about. (But he did get the DVDs himself eventually.) Everyone is, of course, welcome to add their thoughts.

well...

i had totally forgotten this was coming out. when MM got it and told us about it in literati, i made SURE santa knew it would not be a good christmas without the dvd set in my stocking!!

first thing i did was watch the documentary. i'm telling you, this thing deserves some kind of award.
it is virtually a teaching tool for filmmakers. every aspect of this production is talked about in detail.
its so fascinating i simply could not turn it off. and wanted to watch it again immediately.
theres just so much there.
this is NOT your average "the making of" film.

and i agree whole heartedly with MM on his assessment of the Final version of the film.
Scott says, in the brief opening comments prior to the film, that its his favorite version of the film and he hopes it will be ours too.
and it definitely is.

i agreed with the choices to leave out the voice over tho i never noticed it bothering me with it in. but in the final scene when roy dies, i realized i did NOT want to hear any dialogue from Deckard. there was none necessary.
also, i want to rave, once again, about Rutger Hauer. the man is brilliant.


i want to mention Syd Mead. what an extraordinary artist. syd mead is the man that gave this film its "look."

imdb wrote:Syd Mead is a former designer for Ford Motor Company, U.S. Steel, and Philips Electronics. After establishing himself as a "Futurist" consultant, he has visualized technology and products for companies like Sony, Chrysler, Mechanix Illustrated, and Playboy. Syd's movie designs have appeared in 'Star Trek - The Motion Picture" (V'ger), "2010" (the spaceship 'Leonov' and all of its interiors and attendant craft), "Short Circuit" (the robot 'Johnny 5'), "Blade Runner" (the 'Spinner' police car, the dingy cityscapes, and Decker's apartment), and "Timecop" (the headquarters of the Temporal Police, and Van Damme's car)

i was overjoyed to hear of PKDick's reaction to the film when he saw it.
he asked Ridley Scott "how did you get inside my head?!!!"

i enjoyed, in the documentary, hearing tony scott talk about how much of ridley and their childhood was in the film.

this truly is a most personal film for Scott.

i'll talk more about it as i watch more.

next thing i'm going to watch is the director commentary.
i've never watched a film all the way through with commentary
and am looking forward to it.

back to you MM.