RedEyedGhost Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 10 hours ago, Slurktan said: Hm? If you haven't seen it you have no idea what I am talking about. Exactly. Now my viewing of the movie is irrevocably altered because I won't trust anything through the back half of the movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S John Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 Saw it last night. The atmosphere of the film was great, awesome visuals, great cast, really felt true to the original in tone. I liked it, enjoyed it as a movie experience... but I didn't love it. I don't know if it is the reboot element (I tend to not like those in general) or what but I would say that based on the reviews that I saw I expected it to be a little better than it was. I felt like some key parts of it are underdeveloped which is a bit of a head-scratcher in an almost 3hr movie unless they are ultimately gunning for another sequel to expand on the world, in which case... eh. Wasn't overwhelmed or underwhelmed, just regular old whelmed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 My God. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 5 hours ago, Myrddin said: Skipping all reviews. Just want to hear what Theda thought. Well? Okay I'm on phone a sec...wont get to a computer until later on if I borrow my nans or a couple days if I don't but might attempt to write a review on my phone anyway BECAUSE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Фейсал Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 On 10/5/2017 at 2:05 PM, boojam said: Running 94% at Rotten Tomatoes , that's among 108 'professional' critics who have seen it. So I am interested. A.O. Scott's review in the NY Times is always interesting (Scott is probably most prominent genre* friendly critic around ). Scott says a funny thing: ". As sumptuous and surprising as it is from one scene to the next, it lacks the creative excess, the intriguing opacity and the haunting residue of its predecessor." Well, except for the predecessor part, that a criticism that has been leveled at the first film, in the past! I remember when Roger Ebert first reviewed Blade Runner (Ebert one of the few major film critics at the time who was also genre friendly) he was quite hard on it , which I thought was odd, later when the various versions of the films where out on video he changed his mind 90 degrees and then finally 180 degrees , and to my eye the narrative visual drama really didn't change much at all. *Used to be 30 years ago, no matter the quality of a fantasy or science fiction film it was automatically Bilge! among major film critics. That has changed. The movie cannot hope to replicate the impact of the original; anyone who thinks it's going to do that is sorely mistaken but it can certainly be a worthy follow up. Also the original cut for BR is just straight up garbage, no two ways about it. Going to see this Monday, I think. Unbelievably psyched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 The original cut of Blade Runner is absolutely nor garbage though. It isnt as good as the final cut but it is not garbage at all. It's still a phenomenal and important piece of cinema and one of the greatest Science fiction movies ever made? 1 hour ago, Фейсал said: The movie cannot hope to replicate the impact of the original; anyone who thinks it's going to do that is sorely mistaken but it can certainly be a worthy follow up. Also the original cut for BR is just straight up garbage, no two ways about it. Going to see this Monday, I think. Unbelievably psyched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boojam Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 13 hours ago, Фейсал said: The movie cannot hope to replicate the impact of the original; anyone who thinks it's going to do that is sorely mistaken but it can certainly be a worthy follow up. Also the original cut for BR is just straight up garbage, no two ways about it. Going to see this Monday, I think. Unbelievably psyched. By original cut do you mean the theatrical release? I have have all versions on DVD and seen them all , the work-print is included. My favorite is Scott's first directors cut, which is mostly , maybe only, the theatrical cut without the voice over. I am not so taken by the final final directors cut, but did not find it bad. Frankly there some weakness in the dramatic narrative of all the versions... but the world building and milieu setting is one of the most extraordinary works of film art ever done and the film can stand on that merit alone. I always agreed with Harrison Ford, screen writers Hampton Fancher and David Peoples that the story should keep Philip K Dick's original question of "what is it to be human?" Seemed Scott got some adolescent tomato surprise idea and wanted to make all the characters replicants? That does not work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 I've written a bit more in the Spoiler thread. I want to watch it again before I try and attempt a coherent review here. Suffice to say I thought it was excellent and a more than worthy sequel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 I thought it was fantastic. I was gripped and it made some choices that I very much agree with. Highly recommended to anyone who likes PKD and enjoys his view of the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 If anyone is interested Blade Runner, director's cut is airing today on Syfy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Antony Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 Thought it was epic. Really hope Deakins finally wins for this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Фейсал Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 10 hours ago, boojam said: By original cut do you mean the theatrical release? I have have all versions on DVD and seen them all , the work-print is included. My favorite is Scott's first directors cut, which is mostly , maybe only, the theatrical cut without the voice over. I am not so taken by the final final directors cut, but did not find it bad. Frankly there some weakness in the dramatic narrative of all the versions... but the world building and milieu setting is one of the most extraordinary works of film art ever done and the film can stand on that merit alone. I always agreed with Harrison Ford, screen writers Hampton Fancher and David Peoples that the story should keep Philip K Dick's original question of "what is it to be human?" Seemed Scott got some adolescent tomato surprise idea and wanted to make all the characters replicants? That does not work. I think the point at the end is it doesn't really matter and Deckard being a replicant makes the message all the more impacting. Batty proves his quintessential humanity in the end; and so do all the characters. 22 hours ago, Theda Baratheon said: The original cut of Blade Runner is absolutely nor garbage though. It isnt as good as the final cut but it is not garbage at all. It's still a phenomenal and important piece of cinema and one of the greatest Science fiction movies ever made? The narration killed any semblance of subtlety the film had. The ending was god awful and a complete antithesis of all the movie was about - a lot of narrative depth was lost in that cut. the original BR was not a good movie. It was an interesting movie - and the world building holds up no matter the version you're watching but BR wasn't a good movie till Scott and co. removed all the nonsense plaguing the original cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 Okay, I'm watching the "director's cut" and it still has the narration......so does it just have less than the theatrical release? I honestly don't remember there being that much difference, but I've not watched them back to back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boojam Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 3 hours ago, Cas Stark said: Okay, I'm watching the "director's cut" and it still has the narration......so does it just have less than the theatrical release? I honestly don't remember there being that much difference, but I've not watched them back to back. That's interesting because the 2nd release of the film was 'a' directors cut, and my version of that has no voice over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myrddin Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 13 hours ago, Theda Baratheon said: I've written a bit more in the Spoiler thread. I want to watch it again before I try and attempt a coherent review here. Suffice to say I thought it was excellent and a more than worthy sequel. That is great news! Going to try to get out to see in in the next week or so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 @Cas Stark I don't know what it is you're watching or where you got it from, but the director's cut should have no narration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 10 hours ago, Myrddin said: That is great news! Going to try to get out to see in in the next week or so... It was a genuine sequel to the original. Not just a film set in the same universe -it was a continuation of the story from the first which I thought worked really well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 So despite rave reviews... it is pretty much an unmitigated box office flop. Thats a very real disappointment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Antony Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 Not thaaat surprising. Original Blade Runner was a flop as well right? Loads of people probably have never even watched the original. Plus it’s pretty damn long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 4 hours ago, Rhom said: So despite rave reviews... it is pretty much an unmitigated box office flop. Thats a very real disappointment. Really? I would have gone this weekend if people weren't filling up the theaters. I assumed it would be packed, and as I have so much to do before even beginning to pack for a couple of weeks out of the country, I thought it would be OK to wait. Maybe I better get to it this week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.