Wonder Woman

[Taem]

I have never seen Bladerunner before. Is it worth a watch, i.e. does it hold up to modern cinema in terms of a good story? I also want to see Ghost in the Shell. I guess those both fall under sci-fi, and not superhero, so I guess I'm derailing the thread right now, lol.

[kandrathe]

I have never seen Bladerunner before. Is it worth a watch, i.e. does it hold up to modern cinema in terms of a good story? I also want to see Ghost in the Shell. I guess those both fall under sci-fi, and not superhero, so I guess I'm derailing the thread right now, lol.

I'm usually dubious of films derived from books, although they tend to have better themes, they also try to cram too much story into too short a time. The original Bladerunner was derived from a Philip. K. Dick short story, so has the best of just enough story, and plenty of time to tell it. It had a great cast, and was passionately directed by Ridley Scott, even so the film started at 4 hours before editing and creative control was wrested from Scott.

Philip K. Dick first came up with the idea for his novel 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?' in 1962, when researching 'The Man in the High Castle' which deals with the Nazis conquering the planet in the 1940s. Dick had been granted access to archived World War II Gestapo documents in the University of California at Berkley, and had come across diaries written by S.S. men stationed in Poland, which he found almost unreadable in their casual cruelty and lack of human empathy. One sentence in particular troubled him: "We are kept awake at night by the cries of starving children." Dick was so horrified by this sentence that he reasoned there was obviously something wrong with the man who wrote it. This led him to hypothesize that Nazism in general was a defective group mind, a mind so emotionally flawed that the word human could not be applied to them; their lack of empathy was so pronounced that Dick reasoned they couldn't be referred to as human beings, even though their outward appearance seemed to indicate that they were human. The novel sprang from this. And, interestingly enough, it is now thought that some people are "Occupational Psychopaths" due to low-functioning amygdala, the fear centres of the brain's limbic system.

I would like to see the original 4 hour version, before it was repackaged with the voice over.

[DeeBye]

Here's my bucket list of under rated films I need to find and watch again (or that were recommended I never saw).
Moon

Moon was really good.

There are a bunch of other movies with the same sort of theme that I really liked. Sunshine, Pandorum, Event Horizon, Europa Report, Interstellar, Ex Machina, 2001, Apollo 13, just to name a few. I really like creepy sci-fi.

[LavCat]

Here's my bucket list of under rated films I need to find and watch again (or that were recommended I never saw).
Moon

Moon was really good.

There are a bunch of other movies with the same sort of theme that I really liked. Sunshine, Pandorum, Event Horizon, Europa Report, Interstellar, Ex Machina, 2001, Apollo 13, just to name a few. I really like creepy sci-fi.

How about Airplane 2?

[kandrathe]

I really like creepy sci-fi.

Same. Some of my favs...not all spacey, but creepy dystopian... Dark city, Dredd (Karl Urban not the Stallone one), Fahrenheit 451 by Truffaut, Battle Royale by Kinji Fukasaku, Soylent Green, Thx 1138, Equilibrium, Joss Whedon's Serenity...

[DeeBye]

I really like creepy sci-fi.

Same. Some of my favs...not all spacey, but creepy dystopian... Dark city, Dredd (Karl Urban not the Stallone one), Fahrenheit 451 by Truffaut, Battle Royale by Kinji Fukasaku, Soylent Green, Thx 1138, Equilibrium, Joss Whedon's Serenity...

I like your taste in movies! I'll add more. Gattaca, Children of Men, Snowpiercer, The Road, 12 Monkeys, Looper, City of Ember, and of course the Mad Max movies.

[Occhidiangela]

Looper was a fun watch, all time travel loop holes considered.

Logan was a good movie.

[Chesspiece_face]

I would like to see the original 4 hour version, before it was repackaged with the voice over.

I own all released versions of Blade Runner. I was originally an outlier as I preferred the theatrical version with the voice over as it played more as a neo-noir detective film. Having seen Blade Runner 2049 now (Which is absolutely fabulous), there is no argument that the "canon" version of the original Blade Runner is now the Director's Cut. The voice over version just doesn't jive with the sequel at all.

I also want to see Ghost in the Shell

I'm probably also an outlier in this respect as I really enjoyed this movie. I highly recommend checking it out if you are interested in sci-fi in the vein of Blade Runner. Not as good as either of the BR movies, but still warrants a watch.

[Occhidiangela]

there is no argument that the "canon" version of the original Blade Runner is now the Director's Cut. The voice over version just doesn't jive with the sequel at all.

That's depressing to hear. The fusion of the noir genre with SF was part of what made the original so good when it come out in theaters.

[kandrathe]

there is no argument that the "canon" version of the original Blade Runner is now the Director's Cut. The voice over version just doesn't jive with the sequel at all.

That's depressing to hear. The fusion of the noir genre with SF was part of what made the original so good when it come out in theaters.

Which is why it might be good to evaluate the Directors Cut. I sat thru Heavens Gate (1980), I can endure most anything now.

They just might be two different works, with contrasting artistic visions.

[Lissa]

there is no argument that the "canon" version of the original Blade Runner is now the Director's Cut. The voice over version just doesn't jive with the sequel at all.

Actually, according to Denis Villanueve, 2049 is based on the European Theatrical cut and not the Final Cut. Denis said that in 2049, Deckard being either a replicant or a human is never decided. The only thing for sure is that Rachel was (and this is a minor spoiler that is found out in the first 15 minutes) and that she and Deckard had a child.

Plus if you add in Philip K. Dick's thoughts on Deckard along with the screenwriter for Bladerunner and Harrison Ford, all three say that Deckard was human. It is only Ridley Scott that is forcing the situation stating that Deckard is a replicant.

[Jester]

Plus if you add in Philip K. Dick's thoughts on Deckard along with the screenwriter for Bladerunner and Harrison Ford, all three say that Deckard was human. It is only Ridley Scott that is forcing the situation stating that Deckard is a replicant.

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep is really not compatible with Blade Runner. There are loads of things that are not true of one, but are true of the other. Fancher, meanwhile, has maintained (a la Borges) that ambiguity is the whole point, and to have it decided one way or the other ruins it. It's really only Harrison Ford who insists Deckard is human.

-Jester

[Chesspiece_face]

there is no argument that the "canon" version of the original Blade Runner is now the Director's Cut. The voice over version just doesn't jive with the sequel at all.

Actually, according to Denis Villanueve, 2049 is based on the European Theatrical cut and not the Final Cut. Denis said that in 2049, Deckard being either a replicant or a human is never decided. The only thing for sure is that Rachel was (and this is a minor spoiler that is found out in the first 15 minutes) and that she and Deckard had a child.

I was speaking more of the feel of the movies and not any context that was added or removed with the voice over. After seeing Blade Runner 2049 I can see myself going back and watching both consistently, but I can't see myself wanting to watch the voice over release and then following it up with the sequel. Either the 1992 Director's Cut or 2007's Final Cut would be a much cleaner transition in tone and pacing.

[Lissa]

Plus if you add in Philip K. Dick's thoughts on Deckard along with the screenwriter for Bladerunner and Harrison Ford, all three say that Deckard was human. It is only Ridley Scott that is forcing the situation stating that Deckard is a replicant.

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep is really not compatible with Blade Runner. There are loads of things that are not true of one, but are true of the other. Fancher, meanwhile, has maintained (a la Borges) that ambiguity is the whole point, and to have it decided one way or the other ruins it. It's really only Harrison Ford who insists Deckard is human.

-Jester

Except from excerpts from Fancher and Dick on their viewing of Bladerunner, both concurred with Ford that Deckard was a human. I would need to find it, but there's an interview with Fancher where he states that unequivocally.

---

there is no argument that the "canon" version of the original Blade Runner is now the Director's Cut. The voice over version just doesn't jive with the sequel at all.

Actually, according to Denis Villanueve, 2049 is based on the European Theatrical cut and not the Final Cut. Denis said that in 2049, Deckard being either a replicant or a human is never decided. The only thing for sure is that Rachel was (and this is a minor spoiler that is found out in the first 15 minutes) and that she and Deckard had a child.

I was speaking more of the feel of the movies and not any context that was added or removed with the voice over. After seeing Blade Runner 2049 I can see myself going back and watching both consistently, but I can't see myself wanting to watch the voice over release and then following it up with the sequel. Either the 1992 Director's Cut or 2007's Final Cut would be a much cleaner transition in tone and pacing.

The European theatrical release is the US theatrical release without the voice over. It leaves the situation ambiguous and is the version that Denis Villanueve saw growing up. As such, that is the version of the Bladerunner film that he is using as the basis for 2049. Thus the reason for Deckard being ambiguous on whether he's human or replicant in 2049.