Blade Runner

Swifty

doesn't negotiate with terriers
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
28,811
Reaction score
40,030
Points
284
It just doesn't make much sense when you watch the later versions.
Do you mean the voice over was over explaining or the voice over comments weren't relevant? .. I confess it's a long time since I've seen the voice over version so I can't remember most of Harrison's voice over.
 

Naughty_Felid

kneesy earsy nosey
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
7,445
Reaction score
9,425
Points
294
Do you mean the voice over was over explaining or the voice over comments weren't relevant? .. I confess it's a long time since I've seen the voice over version so I can't remember most of Harrison's voice over.
Yeah sorry I mean the original voice-over one didn't make much sense.
 

Anome

Bibliomancer
Joined
May 23, 2002
Messages
5,533
Reaction score
598
Points
194
Location
Left, and to the Back
Have you seen the Harrison Ford voice over version of Blade Runner? .. essentially we hear Deckard's thoughts film noir style throughout the film .. Captain Bryant is telling Deckard there's some 'skinjobs' walking the streets which in the Blade Runner world is a racists term for replicants .. we then hear Ford's voice over say "Skinjobs, what's what he called them .. in history books he was the kind of man who'd call black men n*****."

That was about five to ten minutes into the film.
The real problem with the Voice Over in general, and that line in particular, is that it was completely unnecessary. You could tell Bryant was a racist arsehole, because "skinjob" is clearly not an endearing term, and meant you didn't need to have anyone say the n-word to prove the point.

Of course, people were more willing to use that kind of language in the 80s. I don't feel we lose anything by not using it these days, personally. There are other ways to say "This guy is an arsehole." than have hime be explicitly racist or sexist.
 

Swifty

doesn't negotiate with terriers
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
28,811
Reaction score
40,030
Points
284
The real problem with the Voice Over in general, and that line in particular, is that it was completely unnecessary. You could tell Bryant was a racist arsehole, because "skinjob" is clearly not an endearing term, and meant you didn't need to have anyone say the n-word to prove the point.

Of course, people were more willing to use that kind of language in the 80s. I don't feel we lose anything by not using it these days, personally. There are other ways to say "This guy is an arsehole." than have hime be explicitly racist or sexist.
The only thing that's never sat right with me in Blade Runner, even back then, is when Deckard pretty much sexually assaults Rachel in his flat by refusing to let her leave and cornering her for that kiss.
 

Frideswide

Fortea Morgana :) PeteByrdie certificated Princess
Staff member
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
12,204
Reaction score
13,749
Points
284
Location
An Eochair
The only thing that's never sat right with me in Blade Runner, even back then, is when Deckard pretty much sexually assaults Rachel in his flat by refusing to let her leave and cornering her for that kiss.
yeah - but I see that as clever characterisation. Deckard /isn't/ the paladin hero. :)
 

Swifty

doesn't negotiate with terriers
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
28,811
Reaction score
40,030
Points
284
yeah - but I see that as clever characterisation. Deckard /isn't/ the paladin hero. :)
Agreed .. he's usually the anti hero in fact. Here's a load of his characterisations .. Blade Runner grumblings are at 8:30 ..

 

Lb8535

Very charming snow person
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
1,098
Reaction score
1,959
Points
159
I just want to point out that Ford unless he's a producer has limited control over his scripts. Earlier less to none. You take the part say thank you (or no thank you) and say what they give you. So comments really should be titled "...in American action movies."
 

GNC

King-Sized Canary
Joined
Aug 25, 2001
Messages
30,563
Reaction score
16,862
Points
309
The trouble with the Scott recuts opposed to the original version was his preoccupation with Deckard being a replicant, which messes up the anti-prejudice theme. If the replicants were actually people of colour, would having Deckard find out he was a black guy be a credible twist? I doubt it.
 

Anome

Bibliomancer
Joined
May 23, 2002
Messages
5,533
Reaction score
598
Points
194
Location
Left, and to the Back
The only thing that's never sat right with me in Blade Runner, even back then, is when Deckard pretty much sexually assaults Rachel in his flat by refusing to let her leave and cornering her for that kiss.
That is just one uncomfortable thing in that relationship. I love this movie, but it has its flaws, and the Deckard-Rachel relationship, or at least how it's shown - is a part of that.
 

Swifty

doesn't negotiate with terriers
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
28,811
Reaction score
40,030
Points
284
That is just one uncomfortable thing in that relationship. I love this movie, but it has its flaws, and the Deckard-Rachel relationship, or at least how it's shown - is a part of that.
Apparently there was absolutely no chemistry between the actors on set either going by what I've read, she couldn't stand Ford.
 

Naughty_Felid

kneesy earsy nosey
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
7,445
Reaction score
9,425
Points
294
I just want to point out that Ford unless he's a producer has limited control over his scripts. Earlier less to none. You take the part say thank you (or no thank you) and say what they give you. So comments really should be titled "...in American action movies."
Ford had quite a bit of influence on how the film was made off the back of the success of Raiders. He hated the idea of being a replicant and hated the voice over.

I just found this piece from Vanity Fair a really interesting account of how the film and the script were made.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/09/the-battle-for-blade-runner-harrison-ford-ridley-scott
 

Lb8535

Very charming snow person
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
1,098
Reaction score
1,959
Points
159
Ford had quite a bit of influence on how the film was made off the back of the success of Raiders. He hated the idea of being a replicant and hated the voice over.

I just found this piece from Vanity Fair a really interesting account of how the film and the script were made.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/09/the-battle-for-blade-runner-harrison-ford-ridley-scott
Well everyone except the studio hated the voice over. The Director's cut which Scott finally got to issue has some studio dumbing-down removed. One of the points of the film is the total ambiguity. I didn't think to look at the dates, this doesn't count as early in Ford's career but he still didn't get to alter characterization and wholesale line-change. Look at what it took them to get a script to start with, and Scott is pretty much of a tyrant. I suspect that Ford sees himself somewhat as an Indiana Jones (he flies a helicopter with the mountain rescue folks wherever it is he lives) but I don't think we can blame him for attitudes towards women in his films. Thanks for the article, now I understand that I'm not just tone-deaf in really disliking Sean Young in the movie. The casting of Joanna Cassidy because she already owned a python was wonderful. I've heard of casting someone because they fit the costume but this is a step further.
 

Mythopoeika

I am a meat popsicle
Joined
Sep 18, 2001
Messages
41,320
Reaction score
31,007
Points
309
Location
Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
Apparently there was absolutely no chemistry between the actors on set either going by what I've read, she couldn't stand Ford.
Pretty much nobody liked her.
 

Naughty_Felid

kneesy earsy nosey
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
7,445
Reaction score
9,425
Points
294
Well everyone except the studio hated the voice over. The Director's cut which Scott finally got to issue has some studio dumbing-down removed. One of the points of the film is the total ambiguity. I didn't think to look at the dates, this doesn't count as early in Ford's career but he still didn't get to alter characterization and wholesale line-change. Look at what it took them to get a script to start with, and Scott is pretty much of a tyrant. I suspect that Ford sees himself somewhat as an Indiana Jones (he flies a helicopter with the mountain rescue folks wherever it is he lives) but I don't think we can blame him for attitudes towards women in his films. Thanks for the article, now I understand that I'm not just tone-deaf in really disliking Sean Young in the movie. The casting of Joanna Cassidy because she already owned a python was wonderful. I've heard of casting someone because they fit the costume but this is a step further.
Totally agree - I don't think Ford was to0 blame for any of the dodgy decisions that made it to the film. I still think he would have had a say.
 

GNC

King-Sized Canary
Joined
Aug 25, 2001
Messages
30,563
Reaction score
16,862
Points
309
As far as I can tell, the buck stops with Ridley Scott on a Ridley Scott set. If the studio are stupid enough to meddle with the results, he does his damnedest to fix the damage (see also Legend and Kingdom of Heaven).
 

hunck

Antediluvian
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
5,341
Reaction score
7,305
Points
284
Location
Hobbs End
Got to the end of watching BR2049 after starting a chunk of it several weeks ago. Determined to see the whole thing again having watched once in a cinema when it came out & forgotten some of it.

A long sprawling mess, drags in numerous places, a couple of ridiculous punch-ups, very uninvolving. Looks good but that's as expected these days. Clichèd characters, especially the women. Having said that, the best character in it was Joi

I can add to the list of films I don't ever need to see again.
 

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
2,568
Reaction score
3,980
Points
154
Got to the end of watching BR2049 after starting a chunk of it several weeks ago. Determined to see the whole thing again having watched once in a cinema when it came out & forgotten some of it.
Yeah, Hollywood sequels are generally terrible, and while not utterly terrible BR2049 was very underwhelming. Bad writing.
The central idea of a child born of a human replicant union is interesting, but it was very badly realized in this movie.
 

Sgt Girth

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
101
Reaction score
174
Points
43
We all have our own opinions I suppose. Personally I think that BR2049 is an excellent film..... I also particularly enjoyed the three interlinking(!) short films; Black Out 2022, 2036: Nexus Dawn and 2048: Nowhere to Run.
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
11,920
Reaction score
5,155
Points
284
Yeah, Hollywood sequels are generally terrible, and while not utterly terrible BR2049 was very underwhelming. Bad writing.
undefined
I agree. It's a good film but far too ponderous. It captures the look quite well, and the opener with Gosling and Bautista echoed the original cleverly, but after that it kind of ambles along. It's a criticism I level at many films, but it really doesn't warrant nearly three hours. The original is a shade under two and works perfectly for that. They could trim a good 40 minutes of fat from 2049, but done properly it wouldn't alter the dream-like feel.
 

Bigphoot2

Not sprouts! I hate sprouts.
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
7,921
Reaction score
23,910
Points
309
I agree. It's a good film but far too ponderous. It captures the look quite well, and the opener with Gosling and Bautista echoed the original cleverly, but after that it kind of ambles along. It's a criticism I level at many films, but it really doesn't warrant nearly three hours. The original is a shade under two and works perfectly for that. They could trim a good 40 minutes of fat from 2049, but done properly it wouldn't alter the dream-like feel.
You beat me to it. I don't think there was a scene in the movie that couldn't have been trimmed by a few seconds.
 

Moth Twiceborn

I am a wizard, you know...
Joined
Sep 26, 2020
Messages
39
Reaction score
76
Points
18
Location
Reading
Plus, I am of the opinion that Jared Leto seems determined to try and ruin every film he's in. :)
 

Bigphoot2

Not sprouts! I hate sprouts.
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
7,921
Reaction score
23,910
Points
309
I think the problem is that the movie's makers seem to think, "Wow, we've got some really great images, let's show them off!" And then completely kill the pace of the movie.
I did a video production course years ago and when it came to editing, the tutor always said "Be ruthless, no matter how pretty the scene is, no matter how much it cost or how much you like it, if it doesn't contribute - it goes!"
 

Lobeydosser

Devoted Cultist
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
143
Reaction score
350
Points
79
New film is instantly forgetable for me I'm afraid, very pretty but meh. original with voiceover is still the best by a long way - though the ending for the directors cut with the origami figure on the ground works better. "My Cut" would be the original with some of the extra scenes put back in from the directors cut.
Voice over and Rutger Hauer are what make the film for me - one of the very few films I went to see in the cinema more than once on release - it wasn't massively popular on release either, but did well in Glasgow and got an extended run compared to elswhere as I recall.
By all acounts Harrison Ford is a bit of an arse, actors often are in my experience, who cares ?
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
11,920
Reaction score
5,155
Points
284
I think the problem is that the movie's makers seem to think, "Wow, we've got some really great images, let's show them off!" And then completely kill the pace of the movie.
I did a video production course years ago and when it came to editing, the tutor always said "Be ruthless, no matter how pretty the scene is, no matter how much it cost or how much you like it, if it doesn't contribute - it goes!"
Yes, I work in Training and do a lot of instructional presentation production for my job (and writing, obvs) which completely relies on keeping the audience's attention, as a result the former falls into categories each of which has a boundary regarding duration (single topic no more than six minutes, two linked topics twelve max but preferably ten, etc) meaning I have to be quite clinical as to what stays in and what goes. We do other stuff such as straight training and promos for the industry in which I have more latitude regarding time but have to adhere to much stronger tonal control, however audience engagement is always the key element.
By all acounts Harrison Ford is a bit of an arse, actors often are in my experience, who cares ?
From what I've read he's an absolute professional on set, but doesn't suffer fools and as a very private person really doesn't like the publicity side of things. For proper all-round 24/7 arsiness Bruce Willis is the go-to guy, apparently.
 

Sgt Girth

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
101
Reaction score
174
Points
43
I can’t really confirm if Mr Ford is a bit of an arse because I don’t know the chap but I can say that he took the reporting of his aircraft taxi-way landing incident like an absolute gent......He was totally in the wrong so he had no real defence to fall back on but he took it well all the same.
 

GNC

King-Sized Canary
Joined
Aug 25, 2001
Messages
30,563
Reaction score
16,862
Points
309
so what you're saying is that we should be hanging on for the non-director's cut :D
Apparently the director's cut was two hours long, and the studio demanded he make it closer to three so it would seem more epic and important.
 
Top