Blade Runner 20th Anniversary Fun

dx

dx

1
I think it no suprise to anyone here that I'm a BIG fan of the 1982 motion picture "Blade Runner" (hint: look at my Avatar and signature). I marvel at how visually stunning this film still is after so many years. It seems that even after 20 years, this vision of mankind's future is still imitated in recent forays like Steven Spielberg's "Minority Report."

It is in this vein, that I would like to celebrate the 20th Anniversary of this film by starting this thread. Once a week I will give a new link or file to honour this visionary film. If you have any links, pictures, files, stories, or comments... please feel free to share them as well.

The first thing I would like to share is a link. It comes from animator Onur Yeldan from Turkey. His "Tears in Rain" animation is one of the most unique tributes I have seen in a long time. Check it out here:

h**p://www.3dluvr.com/onuryeldan/Animation.htm

And while you are at his site check out his other animation.
Great Fun!
 
P

php

1
I also like this film, but not the original version, but the director's cut version. it really gets on my nerves, how everything is explained, just because Hollywood was afraid that nobody would notice that the film is actually about the discrimination against minorities in our present time society. these stupid explanations are not there in the director's cut version.
also I hate the happy end. it's not there in the director's cut, and that's good so. It's obvious that the girl will die soon, but Hollywood was afraid that nobody would watch a film with a sad end.
dxkim, if you are really a fan of Blade Runner, here's a really difficult question for you I have been thinking about the last couple of years:
Is Dekker a replicant himself? you know, the girl asks him, "have you tried the replicant test on yourself?", but he (pretends?) to be asleep, and doesn't answer.
This is an interesting assumption, because it reminds me of one of Mark Twain's novels, where a racist and slave-holder recognises that he has been swapped with a white baby, meaning that he himself is a black and a slave, while everyone incl. himself was sure that he is the master. and there's also a russian film about a antisemite, who turns out to be a jew himself. the further development of these characters after the revelations is really interesting. unfortunately Scott doesn't concentrate on this, he just hints at the possibility that Dekker might be one of the outcasts himself. maybe the director wanted to say that everyone is a foreigner in present time multicultural society. in the time of globalisation and the dissolution of national states, which results in the creation of nationalist movements, which are marked by the Us vs. Them ideology (exclusion of the respective Other as the way to define oneself as part of one specific group, which discriminates against all others; think of the current negative development in Germany, France, Holland), this film becomes more important than at the time of its creation, when globalisation was less important, the EU wasn't created yet etc. etc.
 
Last edited:
dx

dx

1
Your interpretations are a good read bud!

Yes, I agree that the "Director's Cut" is superior than the original American theatrical release. However this version is in fact not a true Director's cut.

This a long story...but this cut is based on the 70mm Workprint which was discovered in 1991 and was shown at various theatres in the Los Angeles area in 1991-92. BTW, yes I saw it at the NuArt theater in Oct '91. Warner Brothers basically made its own cut based on this Workprint and marketed it as the "Directors Cut."

Ridley in fact, was upset at this release and had threatened to denounce it. But after some negotiation and changes to the cut Ridley was happy enough not to denounce it when it was released to video and LD in '93.

Fear not...there is a "true" Directors Cut DVD that is being worked on at this time and it is Ridley's cut. It is reported to contain about 20min of "cut" footage, no narration, and that neat little "unicorn" scene. It is also rumored to be a 2 or 3 disc collection with multiple cuts (American, International, and true Director's cuts) and lots of extras. Sadly, it seems that this release has been pushed off until next year...missing the 20th Anniversary. :(

-------------------

As far as Deckard being a replicant...this has long been a controversial subject. The signs are sure there...his glowing eyes (in his apartment with Rachael), his obsession with photographs (decorating his piano), his unique sickening feeling when he kills "skin jobs," the constant "dehumanizing" treatment by Gaff including the tinfoil unicorn left by him, and the Unicorn Dream that goes with it.

But as with all interpretations of this film, its subjective...hence the arguments that have happened for years on this subject. However in several interviews since the "Director's Cut" release in 1993, Ridley answered the question as "yes."

After all... this concept was in the original book "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep." And the name of the movie, "Blade Runner" could be interpreted as the concept of a guy who "runs" on the "knife's edge" of humanity and inhumanity.


A good book on the subject is Paul M. Sammon's "Future Noir: The Making Of Blade Runner." It's an informative and well researched book, by a hell of a nice guy.
 
C

catachresis

1
I can't claim to be a P.K. Dick afficianado. I've read a few -- "Valis" was my favorite. My sense was that Dick's vision is not merely hard-boiled but usually brutal: I find it very hard to identify or empathise with any of his characters, and this is very strange considering that "Do Androids. . ." is a novel about the problem of maintaining empathy.

What's great (IMHO) about "Bladerunner" is that it's possible to empathise with nearly every character in the movie, because none of them are truly invulnerable to pain and humilation. A movie like the Matrix is full of Hollywood-style characters -- tough as teflon and textured like cardboard. Bladerunner's full of the saddest must f*cked-up killers in the movies. Three-quarters of the characters are terminally homesick (and they're just the ones who never had a home). Brilliant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top