CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › BLADE RUNNER 2 Pre Release
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

BLADE RUNNER 2 Pre Release - Page 19

post #901 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Macken View Post

Thanks for settling that for us, Ambler.

 

Don't take my word for it.  I'm not the only one who feels that way.

post #902 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

Don't take my word for it.  I'm not the only one who feels that way.

The beauty of the internet is literally everyone can say that about every single thing they believe.
post #903 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaz View Post
 


Not a fan of Hauer's performance? Here is a fun bit of triva, after Anne Rice wanted Hauer to play Lestat after watching Blade Runner. The movie is also referenced in Queen of the Damned.

 

He's great.  Great in everything.  But alot of boring movies have great performances.  I actually don't even particularly like Ford in it.  He was miserable during the shoot and it shows in his performance.  He literally came off Han Solo and Indy before this film, and they are vastly better performances.  It's becoming clear I don't really like this movie, isn't it?  God bless the people who do.

post #904 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post

The beauty of the internet is literally everyone can say that about every single thing they believe.

 

People can also say they like stuff.  Weird, huh?  Damn opinions!

post #905 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post
 

Blade Runner is a boring, pretty looking movie that was saved by its production design.


BOOOOOOO

 

BOO THIS MAN!

post #906 of 1173

If Johnny was still here I'd call for him to be banned.

post #907 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Oh, wow, the Village Voice review does give away some stuff. Delicious spoilers.

 

Well it does... and it doesn't. Ultimately it reveals details that frankly should have been a part of the official plot synopsis. Stuff that we're going to find out within the first 5 minutes of the film. Everything being kept so damn secret and hearing these "the plot is a spoiler" remarks is alarming.

 

I want the film to be good. But all these "IT'S A MASTERPIECE!" claims (from geeks outlets, of course) are setting it up to fail. 

post #908 of 1173

Not if it's a master work.  

post #909 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post
 

If Johnny was still here I'd call for him to be banned.


What did happen to Johnny?

post #910 of 1173

he left us

post #911 of 1173

 That is a drag. I enjoyed all of his postings in the Trump thread.

post #912 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post
 

he left us

post #913 of 1173

Ambler's not wrong.

post #914 of 1173

Blade Runner?

Swipe right.

post #915 of 1173

Blade Runner's torpid pace and boring characters?

 

Swipe left.

post #916 of 1173
Serious question.

No snark. No dismissiveness.

Why is Blade Runner #97 on AFI's Top 100 list?
post #917 of 1173
Could we maybe not entirely relitigate the first film in a thread for the new one?
post #918 of 1173
Slim.

You dumb.
post #919 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

Why is Blade Runner #97 on AFI's Top 100 list?

 

Because people are allowed to have opinions.

post #920 of 1173
Edited: I take back the takeback. Sorry, move along.
Edited by Bartleby_Scriven - 9/30/17 at 8:05am
post #921 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

Serious question.

No snark. No dismissiveness.

Why is Blade Runner #97 on AFI's Top 100 list?

Because it's a beautiful, visual feast chock full of iconic painterly shots and an extremely compelling cold, almost inhuman-feeling mood and setting. And Hauer is fucking great.

Jerk.
post #922 of 1173

I'd second that assessment. My own take is that it's on the list due to its impact on film afterward - but that impact is almost entirely visual, or peripheral (worldbuilding) rather than making any kind of real impact WRT how characters are depicted or the story is told.

 

That's why it's on the list but not very high.

post #923 of 1173
Hold on. Film is a visual medium. Visually is how the story is told.

Obviously it's held up over the years because people are still talking about it, dissecting it, analyzing it, because there's a lot going on in it. Whether you dislike it is your own prerogative, but at this point it is considered a science-fiction classic. That's not an opinion. I might dislike Citizen Kane or The Godfather, but I can't deny it's here to stay. You don't see Tron on that list or any other "best of" lists, do you?
post #924 of 1173
Blade Runner is influential beyond just the visuals, any story that uses the idea of robots indistinguishable from humans as a way to question how we define and categorise humanity is going to get compared to it at this point. The 00's Battlestar Galactica owes Blade Runner a heavy debt, for example.
post #925 of 1173

Film is primarily a visual medium but sound plays almost as important part. Dialogue is also a huge portion of it. The actual choices of the actors are a big part. And so on.

post #926 of 1173

shit. I think I"m just gonna go watch Blade Runner again.

 

Which cuts?

 

ALL OF THEM!!!

post #927 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post

Film is primarily a visual medium but sound plays almost as important part. Dialogue is also a huge portion of it. The actual choices of the actors are a big part. And so on.

Sound, like the famed Vangelis soundtrack? Dialogue like the oft-quoted tears in rain speech? Choices of the actors like in a certain iconic Rutger Hauer performance? Blade Runner is meeting these standards pretty well.
post #928 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
 

I'd second that assessment. My own take is that it's on the list due to its impact on film afterward - but that impact is almost entirely visual, or peripheral (worldbuilding) rather than making any kind of real impact WRT how characters are depicted or the story is told.

 

That's why it's on the list but not very high.

 

The story is told visually. The characters are conveyed visually and through small, detailed moments. This is an area where film can separate itself from other mediums. Delivering a narrative visually. To focus on visual storytelling, detail, meaning through images, etc. is to focus on maximizing what the medium of film can be as opposed to other art mediums.

 

Tarkovsky's wonderful book Sculpting in Time describes this philosophy towards filmmaking. It is certainly not the only way to approach filmmaking, but it is an important one and once they took the voice-overs out, the original Blade Runner is a great example of it. There are intricacies of meaning, connection, and emotional resonance just through the way the film uses light and shadow, through shifts in lighting like in the final rooftop sequence, through aesthetic choices made like with the unicorn insert, or the ways in which a moment that would normally be glossed over in a traditional action film, such as the shooting of the first replicant, is allowed to stretch out in time, and we are permitted to just look at Deckard's reaction and not be told what to feel or think about what he's feeling. 

 

I understand that a lot of people don't connect with the movie, and if you don't connect with it then, sure, you're gonna call it boring or whatever. But for others it is a cherished piece of cinema, and that is not without reason, or not just because it is a triumph of mood and design.

post #929 of 1173
wasp gets it.
post #930 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post

Hold on. Film is a visual medium. Visually is how the story is told.

 

Slow down there cowboy.  Film is a visual medium, but the visuals are a storytelling AID, they are not the story.  The script and actors, their dialogue, inflections, sound, etc... all huge parts of a story unfolding.

post #931 of 1173

Blade Runner is like the Matrix sequels to me.  Unremarkable plot and acting, done better in other movies.  Chock full of existential philosophical ideas about machines and humans, and bold visual FX and imagery, but we'd seen that before. 

 

It committed the cardinal sin of not being first.  If they'd been released in '82 instead of Blade Runner, we'd be having a different conversation.

post #932 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post
 

It committed the cardinal sin of not being first.  If they'd been released in '82 instead of Blade Runner, we'd be having a different conversation.

 

What's the "it" referenced here? The Matrix? Or another film? 

post #933 of 1173

The sequels.

post #934 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post
 

The sequels.

 

Loud, clunky, ham-fisted.  The third one anyway. The first one is fantastic.

post #935 of 1173

Revolutions has that whole intro section which doesn't payoff much, but I otherwise dig it. Reloaded is better, though.

post #936 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by neil spurn View Post

 

Loud, clunky, ham-fisted.  

 

My point is being made.

post #937 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post
 

 

Slow down there cowboy.  Film is a visual medium, but the visuals are a storytelling AID, they are not the story.  The script and actors, their dialogue, inflections, sound, etc... all huge parts of a story unfolding.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post
 

Blade Runner is like the Matrix sequels to me.  Unremarkable plot and acting, done better in other movies.  Chock full of existential philosophical ideas about machines and humans, and bold visual FX and imagery, but we'd seen that before. 

 

It committed the cardinal sin of not being first.  If they'd been released in '82 instead of Blade Runner, we'd be having a different conversation.

 

As far back as the Embassy VHS, I've tried to get into Blade Runner. To no success. 

 

God is there a lot to appreciate (yes the visuals, production design, score which incidentally I have in my car, Hauer and William Sanderson's performances, etc.) but it's left me cold every time. Of course I will refresh my memory before the lovely love wife and I see 2049 this coming weekend.

 

In terms of Scott's filmography, I'd actually say this has more in common with Legend than even his hardest of hardcore fans want to acknowledge. Visually awe-inspiring, a great antagonist but leaves a lot to be desired in the story department.

post #938 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie View Post
 

In terms of Scott's filmography, I'd actually say this has more in common with Legend than even his hardest of hardcore fans want to acknowledge. Visually awe-inspiring, a great antagonist but leaves a lot to be desired in the story department.

I actually think that's kind of fair, though BLADE RUNNER has certainly had a far greater influence on other movies and television.

 

BLADE RUNNER, to me, has always been a visual spectacle bolstering a fairly pedestrian story (albeit one with an interesting thematic thrust... before Ridley decided to ruin that with his Deckard-Replicant stuff).  The strength of the filmmaking is enough that I fully enjoy the movie every time I see it, but I totally get why it leaves people cold.


Edited by Belloq87 - 9/30/17 at 2:51pm
post #939 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post

I actually think that's kind of fair, though BLADE RUNNER has certainly has had a far greater influence on other movies and television.

BLADE RUNNER, to me, has always been a visual spectacle bolstering a fairly pedestrian story (albeit one with an interesting thematic thrust... before Ridley decided to ruin that with his Deckard-Replicant stuff).  The strength of the filmmaking is enough that I fully enjoy the movie every time I see it, but I totally get why it leaves people cold.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

My point is being made.

It takes a kaleidoscopic vision to compare Blade Runner and Matrix Reloaded on any kind of level. Truly crazy pills talk going on here. Everyone's entitled to an opinion.... but yikes.
post #940 of 1173
I hope there's an after credits scene that shows an aged Todd (Kurt Russell from Soldier) having returned to Earth and living with the colonists he saved farther out in that wasteland where Deckard seems to have been chilling for a while. Hohohoho!!*




*....as if I wouldn't watch that follow-up..
post #941 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post
 

I actually think that's kind of fair, though BLADE RUNNER has certainly has had a far greater influence on other movies and television.

 

BLADE RUNNER, to me, has always been a visual spectacle bolstering a fairly pedestrian story (albeit one with an interesting thematic thrust... before Ridley decided to ruin that with his Deckard-Replicant stuff).  The strength of the filmmaking is enough that I fully enjoy the movie every time I see it, but I totally get why it leaves people cold.

 

In both cases, the leads are fine. But I think the films as a whole would have improved with Dustin Hoffman in Blade Runner and... someone else in Legend (I have no idea who else was up for Jack).

post #942 of 1173
In Legend? Atreyu (whatever his name is) from the original Neverending Story. Unless he was fantasied out by that point..
post #943 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post

It takes a kaleidoscopic vision to compare Blade Runner and Matrix Reloaded on any kind of level. 

 

Ho hum plot, amazing visuals.  Where's the crazy?

post #944 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

In Legend? Atreyu (whatever his name is) from the original Neverending Story. Unless he was fantasied out by that point..

 

For no reason, Timothy Hutton comes to mind? 

 

Crispin Glover hadn't popped yet and even if he had... yeah, a little too weird there.

post #945 of 1173
I stand by either him or Ralph Macchio..
post #946 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post



It takes a kaleidoscopic vision to compare Blade Runner and Matrix Reloaded on any kind of level. Truly crazy pills talk going on here. Everyone's entitled to an opinion.... but yikes.


I wasn't comparing BLADE RUNNER to THE MATRIX.  I was responding to FNJ comparing it to Ridley Scott's LEGEND.

post #947 of 1173
Blade Runner and Legend are most definitely cut from the same cloth..
post #948 of 1173

Except that LEGEND is unwatchable.

post #949 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malmordo View Post
 

Except that LEGEND is unwatchable.

 

Not really.

post #950 of 1173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malmordo View Post
 

Except that LEGEND is unwatchable.


Tim Curry, Rob Bottin's makeup designs, and the production design beg to differ.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › BLADE RUNNER 2 Pre Release