Slashdot Mirror
(Another) Cut of Blade Runner
dereferenced writes "Director Ridley Scott is set, once again, to re-edit Blade Runner for the Special Edition DVD due for release later this year. He discusses his plans for the new version briefly in an interview in Empire Magazine, excerpts of which can be read here.
It's getting so it's hard to count all the different versions of Blade Runner out there; We have the original theatrical release, the Home Video version originally released on VHS, the Director's Cut, and now the Special Edition DVD, to say nothing of the various LaserDiscs, and pre-release screenings. I can't wait for the next version where, in addition to being a replicant, we find that Deckard was actually the first female president of the United States."
It still gets me rather mad to think that Ridley Scott was denied any kind of Oscar because people thought the use of computers in movies "was cheating". Can't they give him some kind of honorary award for changing movies forever?
- ufcker.com -
Ridley Scott is just doing what George Lucas mastered a long time ago. Gouging the sucke... eh, fans.
The owls are not what they seem
Yes, there is a limit to how many re-edits an artiste ought to do of their work. But the limit is probably more in what the audience tolerates, not really in what they ought to do. Coding of software continues to fine tune the points. And we can't see the defects that Ridley Scott sees in his creation as major: it just doesn't create the story he wanted to tell. So why shouldn't he be allowed to do a re-write or re-edit and try it again? Even if it is just to get a bunch of fans and fanatics to buy yet another version.
New edit...present day digital technology...is anyone thinking what I'm thinking?
::Falls down and starts farting::
Jar-Jar Binks: "Mesa not a replicant! Mesa a Gungan!"
They know they've got fans and they do this to us. Worse, we're supporting the devils in the MPAA buy buying it. Damn...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Damn if I am going to buy yet another DVD that is mostly silent. The theater version was so many times better than the Director's Cut. It seemed as if so much of the story was discarded.
The voice over advances the story, gives the audience something to latch on to. All I see is a director who feels more important that his film.
Let him have his version, but at least give us the choice. I don't need to have more of the movie hacked out because of the silence (as he comments on the blimp scene... yes it would drag if you left it in without voiceover... shouldn't that be a clue?)
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Deckard was a REPLICANT?
Oh my GOD...
- undoware.ca
Seriously, this is greatly needed. The director's cut DVD comes across as a template based, thrown-together piece of crap. The movie itself is fine but they paid zero attention unique menus, special features or anything else. Oh wait, it has scene selection... gee wiz.
What I would like to see is packaging similar to the Brazil collector's edition:
It has THREE DVDs:
- Original theatrical release
- Terry Gilliam's intended release
- An entire disc of extras
Maybe there isn't enough behing-the-scenes footage to support extra material, but damnit the menus could be more then texture maps.
I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it.
I'm betting that the release is nothing but a rehash of the last laserdisc version with the director's commentary, the 4th side having tons of still photos and the outtakes.
:-)
Hmmm, and I have no pesky region coding or CSS to hamper my biewing pleasure
and because I bought a used commercial laserdisc player last year I dont have macrovision either.
What is the advantage of DVD's again? other than not getting laser-rot on the discs?
(note: they are STILL pressing new releases on laserdisc.. I have to mail order them from Japan, but hey, I had episode one in english 2 weeks after it hit VHS.
)
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Another director's cut? But I want the *original* theatrical release on DVD! Complete with voiceover!
If for no other reason than to confirm my suspicions that the original was better than the later cut.
Of course, I'm probably wrong, but it'd be nice to find out for sure...
Read my online journal: http://chris.carline.org
guess there is something to be said about Lucas waiting eons to release on dvd. see this is why I wait till a prolific author is dead before I start readin their series. Look at the foundation series. not that I'm very glad asimov is dead but at least when I finished reading the foundation series I knew it was finally done. course then you have thigns like herbert's son writing prequels. just can't win.
-
I was really looking forward to this special edition. I had been under the impression that he was going to make this like the Terminator 2 SE DVD -- that is, make most or all of the multiple cuts of the movie availible via seamless branching, Harrison Ford voiceover on a second audio track, etc., etc.
Now this looks like it will just be Yet Another Director's Cut(TM), with maybe some EPK shit thrown in for good measure. Maybe this rant is right after all, and quality DVD special editions are on their way out the door as DVDs continue to get dumbed down for non movie connoisseurs.
From the interview, it seems the only actual video editing (ie, taking stuff out/putting it in) will be sot shorten the scenes with the voice over. He does make a good point, why would Ford be staring up at a ballon with no voiceover? He's just removing/shortening scenes that were purposefully lenghtened for something that's not there anymore.
Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
Blade Runner has an "atmosphere".
A lot of later made SF movies had some "great" aspects or are even best selling movies like Star Wars but lack that atmospheric density.
However there are only two or three movies for me which are relay awesome: Blade Runner, Dune and Allien.
For me those movies are not beaten so far in the way they create a "mood" or an atmosphere for the visitor.
Regards,
angel'o'sphere
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Read the articles- the only changes he's even considering making are to shorten some shots and sequences that only existed to give time for the Harrison Ford voice-over (which has been deservedly gone since the director's cut). Doing a new digital transfer and a new sound mix really doesn't count as a new edition- it's par for the course for new releases of older movies.
If you want to see movies with too many pointless versions, look at the Star Wars films- not only is the DVD edition of episode I different from the theatrical release, but Lucas has confirmed that he will be modifying and adding to the original trilogy again before they, in turn, are released on DVD.
"Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" -Salvor Hardin
When it it was first released, it was impressive. Now its not. I enjoyed it back when, but now, its time to move on. Why anyone who has any of the earlier versions would buy this is beyond me. Why anyone who does not have an earlier version would buy this is also beyond me. Its not like its even a different rendition of "Thick as a Brick".
while (people.buy()) remaster(blade_runner); if (blade_runner.findCharacter("Jar Jar")) ::YouShouldNotMessWithClassics = true;
The voice-over is what made the film intelligible to first-time viewers. That's why you get both the original and director's cut. The real beauty of a DVD would be BOTH tracks on one disc, but it doesn't sound like he's doing this. :(
The only ones of those that I can even stand to watch are Blade Runner, Alien, and to a lesser extent Hannibal. Yeah - BR and Alien are outstanding, utter masterpieces. But why the hell does he have such a reputation for 'excellence' when he hasn't made a drop-dead, universally recognized classic since 1982?
Then again, maybe I'm missing something. Did anybody else absolutely love any of his other movies?
First of all, Blade Runner's importance is obvious from the influence it has had on other more recent major Sci-Fi movies. Think about The Fifth Element (the huge cityscape with flying cars, seen it in BR) and The Matrix (Gothic style buildings, lots of rain, style of clothing.)
:)
:) (Besides, I don't mind seeing it in a theater again :))
And he got it right the very first time, but the PHBs didn't like the unicorn dream that is so vital to the story (they thought it would be deemed "too artsy" by the general public), the open ending (it's supposed to end when they step into the elevator, not the ridiculous happy ending... I mean why would anybody live in cities like those when other places still exist and are within reasonable distance?) and they also forced him to put in the stupid voiceover, which just doesn't fit here.
So then he did the Director's Cut, which fixes these issues but is still not perfect (especially the parts where they're messing with how many replicants they're looking for - this has to do with some original scenes where Deckard chases some other replicants, they were removed because of budget but in scenes shot earlier they're mentioned in the dialogue. Supposedly there were fixed retakes of those scenes but somehow they didn't make it into both the original and the Director's Cut...) So more PHB messing, this time involving budget
The other versions of the movie were the broadcast version which removes some profanity, an international version which is more violent (more gore when Batty kills his creator for instance) and some workprint versions which were shown to test audiences' responses - which is probably why so much was changed before the movie made it to release.
All in all I think Ridley Scott had a clear vision of how he wanted this movie to be straight from the start. So what if it took him a while to get it into a final product? Is Linux finished yet?
Are all gone and dead I heard. My father called it the blade runner kiss of death, and I think there were a few articles about it. Basically all the big skyscrapers with the company logo's on them (i.e. Atari) all went extinct. Just something interesting I wanted to point out.
...which is unfortunate, because I was hoping for more. :D
However, I'm glad he's gotten the chance to re-do it, yet again. Blade Runner is one of those movies which so truly thrives off of the director's vision, it has been unfortunate to have Scott's vision somewhat confounded by various industry restrictions.
On a related note: Vangelis, who did the music for Blade Runner (to me, a truly impressive score), was finally able to release his version of the soundtrack in 1994. If it is still available, try to pick up a copy if you love the movie. I'm not sure how CDs are catalogued, but the number on the disc is 4509-96574-2. Vangelis had this to say about this soundtrack (CD liner notes):
Most of the music contained in this album originates from recordings I made in London in 1982, whilst working on the score for the film BLADE RUNNER. Finding myself unable to release these recordings at the time, it is wih great pleasure that I am able to do so now. Some of the pieces contained will be known to you from the Original Soundtrack of the film, whilst others are appearing here for the first time. Looking back at RIDLEY SCOTT'S powerful and evocative pictures left me as stimulated as before, and made the recompiling of this music, today, an enjoyable experience. - Vangelis, Athens, April 1994.
You and me are the only people who feel that way.
Best Slashdot Co
DVDs are supposed to have all the stuff that VHS does not; in other words, everything you can't experience by just watching the movie alone.
.
In this vein of thought, if Scott is going to do a re-release of Blade Runner, it should be some kind of mega consolidation, with everything you could possible want for BR: audio tracks with Deckard's voice-over AND without; deleted scenes, commentary, behind-the-scenes footage, etc.
If Ridley Scott is releasing a new DVD, it had better be because he wants to include/improve all these things, not just because he feels "some scenes are too long" and wants to second-guess a great movie 20 years later. Personally, I love BR, and I like the scenes at their current pacing (without the voice-over). And no amount of promotion is going to make me buy a DVD just to see some random artistic air-brushing without the previously mentioned additional features.
But then again, some people will buy just about anything, as long as it has a sticker that says "NEW!!!!" on it. .
Hard work has a future payoff. Laziness pays off now.
Yes, the director's cut should be the version that the director wanted to make, rather than the one the studios / MPAA / marketroids required. The director's cut should probably also have alternate versions (different beginnings / endings, directors version vs. released version, etc.) - but you can only fit so much on a DVD.
Also, you need to realize that things end up on the cutting room floor for a number of reasons, not just because they suck. Even on high budget movies, they are always trying to cut costs. (I worked on an effect on the new Spike Jonze movie, Adaptation, and even though it's a $100M+ budget, they still needed (or wanted) to cut out as much as possible from the cost of the effect. They need the money to pay the actors' exorbitant wages and the myriad little expenses that crop up in a production.) So the "junk" that gets put into the special edition may be scenes (or visual effects, or surround effects...) that couldn't be used for reasons other than artistic failings. Actually, one of the main drivers for cutting pieces of a film is the overall duration of the movie. The longer the movie, the a) more it costs to print, b) less the theaters can show it (since there are a fixed number of hours per day), and c) less today's 8-minute-attention-span teenagers will want to see it.
So, it's possible that Mr. Scott et. al. are just trying to milk a successful franchise fora ll it's worth, but there may be true artistic reasons for making a revised version of the movie.
- The Sigless Wonder
I wish they would recut more movies just to so I could buy them to enjoy.
I bet someone with talent could turn Home Alone into a dark action flick...
------
Today's Top Deals
Ah, what you suggest makes way more sense.
I think what Ridley Scott will do is an edition with maximum-quality images, and also might even include a lot a bonus materials along with it.
Let's call this the Definite Edition and end it at that.
I personally think that the final installment should resolve the question that I've had in my head since I saw the first in '79.
Where the hell did these critters *evolve* ferkrissake? What predator types would eat _them_?
An adventure on THAT planet would be really cool!
Brak: What's THAT?
Thundercleese: A light switch.. of TOTAL DEVASTATION!
I think almost every director of a movie could tweak and retweak his movies. That has come even more so aparent after listening to more and more director's commentary.
At some point, it needs to be "final" - but since I dont own any version, I dont mind.
The ultimate network admin tool needs HELP!
This sounds an awful lot like Valve's marketing strategy for Half-Life. You know, the various editions and all, including:
Half-Life
But hey, whatever works....Half-Life: Game of the Year Edition
Half-Life: Opposing Force
Half-Life: Blue Shift
Half-Life: Counter-Strike
Half-Life: Platinum Edition
Half-Life: Let's Make Some More Money Edition
Half-Life: Wait, Let's Just Release the Same Game with a Slightly Changed Name Edition
This is the NFL, which stands for "Not For Long" if you keep making those bulls*** calls.
I liked the voice-over. It's the hard-boiled detective genre, dammit. I WANT MY VOICE-OVER!
You can argue that a laserdisc only has 480 horizontal lines, compared to a standard 525 lines for DVD (it supports more using various techniques, but most movies still even only use 480). Yes, there are laserdisc players with S-Video out--these are nothing more than filters. You cannot get around the fact that the video is stored as a true composite signal on the disc. Inversely, you cannot get around the fact that a DVD, being compressed, will have artifacting--you may even be able to argue that this artifacting hurts the luminance quality more so than being limited to a composite signal (I would wager that in this scenario, component video would only serve to remind you further of the artifacts!).
So what's the real issue here? Don't get me wrong, I find everything about the LaserDisc to be very ingenious, but the fact is: I don't have to get my lazy ass off the couch, or potentially ruin a special 'moment' (either with myself or someone else
Not getting into the audio differences. More information:
:P
LD vs CD under microscope
Home Video Format Comparison
Jason Fisher
As an excellent example of selling the same !@#! thing over and over again, perhaps the copyright holders of abandoned software could take a lesson?
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Which one of these versions of the movie is closest to the Philip K. Dick novel, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"
It's been years since I read the book or watched the movie, but I remember being appalled at how butchered the storyline was, especially the much-maligned ending.
In the book, Deckard starts doubting where he is or not a replicant. Of course, he never takes the test himself but IMHO that's the ultimate argument of the book.
Um... are you SURE you actually read the book? That's certainly not what happens in DADOES... maybe you read that horrific "sequel" written by Jeter (which is one of the worst pieces of crap I've ever read, and has little more than the title and character names in common with either the movie or the book).
Deckard DOES take the test in DADOES, and passes it. Additionally, the entire subplot involving Mercerism is absolute proof that Deckard is human. Replicants cannot use the empathy boxes that are the key to Mercerism, and Deckard is shown to use them in several instances throughout the book.
--The Rizz
"You will be required to do wrong no matter where you go. It is the basic condition of life, to be required to violate your own identity." --Philip K. Dick
Someone, somewhere, is thinking about a remake.
Lord, please stop them.
yes, we have no bananas
Have you not seen a film called Metropolis? It's one of the first films ever made and (I think) the first sci-fi film made. It's in black and white with no sound, so it's not quite the CGI masterpiece modern sci-fi is :) It does however have a lot of the standard features: evil overlords, flying cars, etc, etc.
Blade Runner is a well-presented film in its own right, but in the scale of things, it's just another step in the genre. Standing on the shoulders of giants, and all that.
For me, the voiceovers gave the movie its whole character. They were just so well done! Seeing the movie without them just leaves me cold.
I've tried to track down the laserdisc of the original, but it's long gone.
If they put the original version on the new DVD, I'll buy it. If they don't, it's no deal.
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
Right. Because Hilary is a replicant. She needs to find her creator soon too, she's only got a couple years in the Senate.
Despite most Slashdot posters negative response to this, I for one shall jump on Mr. Scott's bandwagon, and buy it. It's a great story, retold...again. But a great story non the less.
John, I'm Only Dancing!
HEAR HEAR!!!!
:)
I watched the original Video so often that I can actually hear the Voice Over in the Directors Cut. It is so much part of making it sound like a Raymond Chandler novel.... I don't know what the heck he was thinking about. I can't believe this is a case where the Studio knew better than the Director
Winton
I though the next release was going to show Al Gore as the actual inventer of Replicants.
hardy har-har
_______
2B1ASK1
First question: Will you include the original theatrical release on the new DVD?
:)
Cheers,
Winton
Black Hawk Down is a return to form if you ask me. (5/5 for Movielens)
:-) (2/5 Movielens)
Gladiator was a beautiful looking flick. (4/5 Movielens)
GI Jane was kind of sucky
Winton
Dammit, a half-dozen versions of the movie available for home viewing, and the only (real) soundtrack available are pirates from Eastern Euro. Thanks God for MP3: I nearly wet myself when, a couple of years ago ago, wnile browsing some of the alt.binary.sounds.mp3 hierarchy I stumbled across the entire set. I'd waited for years for that music. However, although they sound good, I believe they were ripped from vinyl or, at most, from Audio CDs based on sub-standard originals. If we could just get Vangelis's originals remastered..... Not sure what it was that set Vangelis and Scott at odds, but sure wish they'd bury the hatchet and give the public a chance to enjoy (legally) one of the greatest soundtracks of all time (second, at least, to "The Graduate").
A side note: I enjoy Japanese traditional music and, several years ago I purchased a CD by Ensemble Nipponia (can't remember the name). After listening to it I was certain that I'd heard one of the tracks before, but couldn't place it. It wasn't untill I next saw Bladerunner (at an old theater in Waterloo, Canada that specialized in classic/cult movies) did I realize that it was exact same vocal track from the "Blimp Advertising" song sung by a Japanese female. Very haunting, and perfect as a device to complement the heavy asian influence of Scott's future LA.
Just to comment a bit on what you wrote.
The name of the book is indeed "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" which is a pretty far cry from "Blade Runner". The story is:
When Ridley Scott made his 1982 film based loosely on the novel he eliminated the electric sheep (along with much else), and Dick's title no longer made sense (nor would it have been very effective on a marquee). The film company bought the rights to another novel by a different author and threw away everything but the title--Blade Runner--a term which occurs nowhere in the book. The film eventually gained great fame, and the novel was eventually retitled to match.
I can't really decide which title I like better. Considering the differences between the book and the film, I actually like the fact that Ridley Scott (or whoever) chose a different title.
BTW, as fan of PKD it bothers me that I don't recognize the qoute in your sig. Where's it from?
Hurra for Knark!
original version left some things to your imagination, not spoonfeeding and helping you to see Deckard as a replicant.
No, no no!! The original version had an intrusive irritating voice-over that spoon-fed the audience and ruined the mystery and ambience of the story. It also left out the "unicorn scene" which /might/ have indicated that Deckard was a replicant.
As far as being JAFHAF it is still miles better in atmosphere than most of the genre, mainly due to the great Vangelis soundtrack.....but also due to the wonderful cinematography. I can't get enough of the "do you like our owl?" scene with the huge bars of sunlight slanting into the massive, almost Mayan room.
Actually, the best part of the stupid happy ending was how the entire movie has flying cars, and then all of a sudden they're driving what looks like a new Lexus down a well-maintained highway! Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there another ending where he takes her out into the snow and shoots her?
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Am I the only one who feels that Ridley's stupid obsession with making Deckard a replicant ruins the whole plot arc of the movie?
For years, Scott was silent on the subject, then in the '90s he began telling anyone who asked that, yes, Deckard was definitely a replicant. I don't buy it. I believe this idea only blossomed in Ridley's head long after the movie was released.
Part of what made Blade Runner powerful for me is that Deckard redeems himself in the end by rejecting the idea that replicants are morally less than human. Make Deckard a replicant and his moral victory becomes nothing more than faulty programming.
It's a shame Ridley seems hellbent on destroying the philosophical significance of his work just for the sake of an idea on par with, "Wouldn't it be cool if Superman and Batman fought?"
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
The local IMAX here plays 'Hollywood Classics' as they call them every weekend. seeing as the IMAX screen is almost square, and movies aren't, you get a mixed bag: shows done in 16:9 take up almost the entire width of the screen, and it's like watching a letterboxed/WS dvd on a tv, but really BIG. Movies that are more square (DVD buffs fill in the proper terminology) tend to actually take up less of the screen, especially the older and more deteriorated prints (Ghostbusters was a particular disappointment).
Points of interest:
Matrix is far and away the most popular to be shown so far. It sells out for every showing they've done (and they've had it at least 10 weekends now).
The screen (at least here in Winnipeg, Canada) is something like 5 stories high, well over 70 feet. Even if the movie frame doesn't entirely fill it, a good print plus the AMAZING audio systems they have really make for an experience (Saving Private Ryan anyone?)
The obvious choice, the Star Wars trilogy, has never been shown. I assume Lucas and his cash machine figure they can't make enough here, so why give the fans something they'd love?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Uh, the original soundtrack by Vangelis IS out -- at least in the U.S. It came out in '94
Yes, I own it, yes, it IS the Vangelis one and not the crappy New American Orchestra rendition (The booklet even has a statement by Vangelis saying how glad he is to finally be able to release this), and yes, it kicks ass.
If you don't see it under the soundtracks section, try the New Age section under Vangelis.
FWIW, Vangelis has an alternate version of the End Titles on his album titled Themes which is pretty good also. That album also has the Love Theme and Memories of Green (The song from the Unicorn dream sequence if I remember correctly), both of which are on the soundtrack as well.
Ooh, I just remembered this little anecdote!
If you listen carefully, you can hear some beeping in the background of the piece. When I first heard this, I was stunned: It was the sound from the very first handheld video game I ever owned (and still do!): The UFO Master Blaster Station by Bambino.
How cool is that!
...because I still really like the voiceovers.
Ford does sound grumpy, maybe like he doesn't want to be there, but that actually dovetails with Deckert's situation, and intentionally or not, really sells the character.
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
XML causes global warming.
Soldier, starring Kurt Russell, is one of those action movies that's not supposed to be funny, but turns out to be hilarious. (This is the one where "I'm going to kill them all!" is Kurt's longest line in the whole movie.)
One of the directors is on record -- on the DVD, I believe -- as saying the movie takes place in the same universe as Bladerunner. There are some references, but you have to be quick to catch 'em.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Spoliers ahoy! If you have not seen the film, read no further.
I rather liked the voice-overs that Scott can't stop telling us he hates. Yes, a few of the lines over-explain a little too much, but it adds to the "Noir" feel that made Bladerunner such a unique sci-fi flick. The line "I didn't know how much time we would have, but then again, who does?" was a pretty good closer for the film, too. That said, the narration does get annoying after you've seen the movie a few times and just want to take in all the eye candy.
The "Director's Cut" seemed to be a case of addition by subtraction. The narration was taken out, but without revisiting the music or pacing of the film, making the experience very slow and ponderous. People who did not see the original theatrical version first did not enjoy it nearly as much as we geeks did. Also, you can't possibly tell me that the close-up of Deckard as the elevator door closed could possibly be the shot that Scott really inteded to end on. It leaves the viewer hanging, and not in a good way. Also, the "Unicorn Dream" seemed to be stock footage from Legend, or something. (Yea, yea... I know... the original ending used leftover footage from The Shining... but at least it was a less obvious recycle job.)
For all of Scott's protests about how the producers of Bladerunner screwed up his movie, it became a classic, and was well loved long before he ever got around to re-doing it. Besides, whenever he's allowed to make a movie his way you end up with stuff like that piece of shit "1492: Conquest of Paradise." Maybe a strong hand from the studio is what he really needs to do good work.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
In a related news: Philip K. Dick announced that he would rewrite the book "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep." to make sure it would come along the lines of the new Ridley Scott's director's cut release.
Seriously: Fuck you Ridley Scott! Why don't you show us something new rather than adding 3 frames every years to your 1982 movie.
Do I have an opportunity to work on the piece of software that I wrote 20 years ago? No, so get a f...ing life Man.
PPA, the anime girl next door.
-- I feel better now. Thanks for asking.
I've always liked the original release of this film... and it still blows me away to this day. Every rehash since has generally offended me as crap... I would only consider the DVD if they did for it like Scott is planning to do for Legend... (basically the same thing Criterion did for Brazil). As disc set with the original print and the final directors cut included...
oh well...
Ahhh, but don't get me started on LOTR, it had some serious scenes that could have been wrapped up in seconds, but instead droned on for minutes.
For instance, the 'fellowship getting together and deciding to go scene'... I was saying, "oh, shut the fuck up and get on the horses, assholes. You're holding up the mystery, action, and suspense."
I could have slapped Peter Jackson for making me sit through that yakkity-yak crap. If I wanted to talk about the intricacies of the elves and dwarves, I would have read the book, now wouldn't I?
The 'elven love scenec' should have been put in the next movie, it did nothing for the plot.
There is no use putting in footage in for people who could probably quote the novel in their heads, and bore the ones that could care less and just want to see Frodo triumph in an adventure. A good director knows when to get to the point.
-Alex
check out the recent anime version of Metropilis. It's on limited release, but well worth it if you can make it.
While I never actually hated the voice overs, they added nothing to the film. Certainly, they did not add as much as the scene extensions and the true ending.
Deckard seeing Gaff's little calling card, the elevator doors close and, bam, credits. That's the perfect ending to the movie.
He found his humanity with a little help from technology and chooses an uncertain life, over quiet wait for the grave. As opposed to some fruity fly by, and silly voice over as epilogue, it's no contest.
I think Ridley's statements that the unicorn dream was intended to show that Deckard was really a replicant are a little suspect. (After all, the rest of the movie doesn't really support that view, the interaction with Gaff and Captain Bryant (I think), but there is certainly nothing wrong with using the dream to suggest it, and the unicorn, particularly in that part of the film can be interprited to have other symbolic significance.) But that said, while the dream isn't exactly what I would consider anything remotely like a dream as I have experienced them, I don't think it particularly detracts from the movie. I must say I can't recall a movie I've ever seen that did what I would call an accurate depiction of a dream.
I and the other Good Twins agree, the director's cut of Bladerunner is vastly superior, mostly due to the true ending. And it's a damn shame that the studio interfered, but I consider myself fortunate that as hobbled by studio fools as it was, Bladerunner gathered enough of a following, and ment enough to Scott that I eventually got to see it done right. Look at what the studio system did to Fincher with Alien 3. The movie as released is fairly unremarkable, but if you've ever had the good fortune, or perhaps misfortune, to see the work print for the movie, you'll see what you missed out on. Even incomplete and lacking a score, Fincher actually accomplished the impossible, with inadaquate resources no less, only to have executives, who appearently don't watch movies for recreation, ruin parts of it for no discernable reason.
I could point out your foolish assumption by saying that when Steven Speilberg is allowed to make a movie his way you end up with stuff like that piece of shit 1941. But really, what's the point?
--Jimmy has fancy plans; and pants to match.
It lost a *lot* of the flavor. Bizarrely, the later cut didn't come across as dark as the original; even having read the book, the voiceover set the tone--somethings are justplain better (and more clearly) done with words than images . .
hawk
Perhaps, but that would be a pity--given that his version was correct
>Second, you haven't seen the Original Theatrical
>Release since it came out some twenty years ago.
Neither have I, but . .
>Are you sure you remember it all that well?
Ahh, swell. Now I'm admitting to remembering things that occurred before the average slashdot reader was born . .
ANyway, I also haven't seen a video of it since the director's cut first came out--what, 10 years ago?
My preferred reading is dystopian science fiction. At times I (briefly and not seriously) regret the fall of the Evil Empire and the recovery of western culture in the U.S., if only because it put an end to what Pournelle wrote so well in the 70's [but I realize the futility of regretting the win because we miss the struggle.].
I'm one of those fanatics that turns the chromo controls down to eliminate color on colorized movis [Ok, so I once did this on a movie that turned out to have won an award for its use of color, because I thought it *looked* colorized . . . ]
With the voiceovers, this movie was a far better dystopian work. Maybe something *could* have effectively replaced them, but the tone was *far* too light without them.
hawk
The mind does funny
things sometimes... given those are your real memories.
After 9-11, that's what the public wants; it's hardly surprising that the Patriotic Thriller has become the top genre.