Blade Runner: Final Cut

[promethuem5]

See, I find the setting and the JP-Corp world understandable... it's where the film goes within this proto-typical Sci-Fi setting that I can never click with.

[Duke Togo]

Uh, Tyrel isn't Japanese...

[Necron_99]

As a science fiction movie nerd, this is what I should have bought myself for Christmas.....

Instead, I just spent $70 on standard DVD Toho films..... Yes, I await the barbs.

Eventually I'll get this.

[Alpha OTS]

This probably has more to do with the copy you were watching and what you were watching it on.

Exactly what I was thinking. It's filmed dark, but not *that* dark.

Blade Runner is one of those movies that, like a classic book assignment that I would put off as long as possible, that when I do immerse myself in it, I wonder why the hell I was so apprehensive. I guess it's some of that pretentiousness it posesses that does that to me. It knows it's "smart" at times, I can't deny that. I also can't deny that when I'm done, I've watched a good science fiction movie that's hit on multiple levels of the human condition and that I think we need more movies/stories done with this attitude in mind.

[Alpha OTS]

Hey, I deserved more of a barb than that! One of the movies I ordered is Frankenstein Conquers the World.

[Mr March]

As DT pointed out, Tyrell Corporation is not Japanese. However, I fail to see the dated premise. There are far more eastern asia influences in North America, now more than ever. Anime's popularity is just one small aspect of that. However, there is also major population movements as well. As a Canadian, I find Blade Runner almost prophetic in a way, if one compares how Chinese immigration has affected the ethnic makeup of Vancouver in the decades since the film (mostly due to immigrants from Hong Kong). I'm also lost on this darkness thing. The film is brilliantly visible. It has a dark palette to be sure, but it's nothing that can't be seen. Methinks some lousy copy is too blame. Still, if some don't get it, that's alright. It's not really hard to get and there isn't anything that is beyond anyone. Blade Runner is just one of those films that tends to polarize people.

Edited December 19, 2007 by Mr March

[eugimon]

I definitely think it's overrated. That said, it's got some good sci fi at it's core. Too many of it's premises are dated now, though... Especially the whole Japanese-Corporate-run-future thing.

I can understand people not liking it, I'm not a big fan of film noir myself, but blade runner is hardly overrated. It only set the visual look and emotional tone of near future sci-fi for the next 25 years.

[yellowlightman]

If anyone has ever read William Gibson's Neuromancer, Blade Runner is kind of similar. I don't mean in the commonly used cyberpunk parallels (Blade Runner isn't cyberpunk), but in the sense that a lot of the work goes towards creating this really amazing world setting. Blade Runner's story is on the simple side, which bothered me when I first saw it too, but when you pay attention to this complete world that's been imagined and you kind of realize that's a lot of the appeal. Blade Runner could be about Deckard buying groceries and eating all noodles for all I care, the world and the visual detail is what makes it amazing.

[EXO]

If compared to other movies set in the futuristic where technology has gone out of control, there's none that has surpassed it. And they all try to emulate it. I-Robot, Minority Report, Fifth Element, Brazil, Lost in Space, Matrix, Johnny Mnemonic, Total Recall, Robocop... nothing... nothing has even come close to being this groundbreaking. Maybe Alien if they showed cityscapes... I'm waiting for Cameron's Avatar.

[-JP-]

Blade Runner is a cinematic masterpiece period.

and as far as content is concerned

i feel the entire film builds and culminates into Batty's

final speach where it becomes much more profound and enlightening.

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe

Attack ships on fire off the

shoulder of Orion

I watched C-beams glitter in the dark

near the Tannhauser Gate

All those moments will be lost

in time

like tears in rain.

Edited December 19, 2007 by -JP-

[Keith]

If compared to other movies set in the futuristic where technology has gone out of control, there's none that has surpassed it. And they all try to emulate it. I-Robot, Minority Report, Fifth Element, Brazil, Lost in Space, Matrix, Johnny Mnemonic, Total Recall, Robocop... nothing... nothing has even come close to being this groundbreaking. Maybe Alien if they showed cityscapes... I'm waiting for Cameron's Avatar.

I wouldn't lump Brazil in with those, as it actually does succeed on many of the same levels, but in many different ways, that Blade Runner does. One of my earliest memories is of watching Blade Runner when I was 4. While I didn't understand much of anything that was going on then, I was definately awestruck by the visuals. And as Duke said, it's deeply engrained in almost all anime since then, and easily one of the most subtly influencial movies in general.

It's a movie that couldn't be made in any time other than it was, if something like that was tried now, it'd be bogged down in explosions & excess CG. Speaking of which, I still need to watch my copy of Natural City...

[eugimon]

I wouldn't lump Brazil in with those, as it actually does succeed on many of the same levels, but in many different ways, that Blade Runner does. One of my earliest memories is of watching Blade Runner when I was 4. While I didn't understand much of anything that was going on then, I was definately awestruck by the visuals. And as Duke said, it's deeply engrained in almost all anime since then, and easily one of the most subtly influencial movies in general.

It's a movie that couldn't be made in any time other than it was, if something like that was tried now, it'd be bogged down in explosions & excess CG. Speaking of which, I still need to watch my copy of Natural City...

meh, Childrenof Man is very much a spiritual successor to blade runner and I don't think it falls into the usual hollywood cliches.

[Keith]

Children of Men bored the hell out of me, and I turned it off after 20 minutes.

[eugimon]

Children of Men bored the hell out of me, and I turned it off after 20 minutes.

that's too bad. I would humbly suggest you give it a try. I think it's a very worthwhile film and one of the better science fiction films out there.

[EXO]

I wouldn't lump Brazil in with those, as it actually does succeed on many of the same levels, but in many different ways, that Blade Runner does. One of my earliest memories is of watching Blade Runner when I was 4. While I didn't understand much of anything that was going on then, I was definately awestruck by the visuals. And as Duke said, it's deeply engrained in almost all anime since then, and easily one of the most subtly influencial movies in general.

It's a movie that couldn't be made in any time other than it was, if something like that was tried now, it'd be bogged down in explosions & excess CG. Speaking of which, I still need to watch my copy of Natural City...

Brazil was awesome, but it was still somethng that aspired to Ridley Scott's vision of the future. Something that prolly would have never been achieved pre-BR.

Children of Men bored the hell out of me, and I turned it off after 20 minutes.

Children of Men is easiestly one of the best movies of the last 10 years. but the setting still doesn't compare to Blade Runner's futuristic vision. The sets were great and believable, but offered nothing breath-takingly new. The only one that has came close to it is probably Masamune Shirow's Olympia in Appleseed. But the movies don't represent it at all. I was hoping Chris Nolan's Gotham would take it to a new height, but it didn't.

Gore Verbinski is probably someone that could match Ridley's ingenuity. The Pirates movies had amazing imagery... as bad as the sequels were.

[Radd]

I do not understand any of these comparisons between Brazil's setting and Blade Runner's? Other than falling under the very broad moniker of "dystopian", they head off in pretty fundamentally different directions. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the comments, though.

[JsARCLIGHT]

I'd have to agree. Brazil is very "quirky" and very Terry Gilliam. Gilliam himself has said that Brazil was a "spiritual successor" to Time Bandits, which itself preceded Blade Runner by a year. So if anything Brazil was only marginally influenced by Blade Runner. If you watch Time Bandits you can see a lot of the same visual cues and "flavors" that get expanded upon in Brazil. While the two movies (Brazil and Blade Runner) have somewhat similar subject matter (dystopian future, out of control corporations, etc.) they diverge quite drastically in tone and flow.

As for folks "not getting" Blade Runner or finding it "boring", I agree as well. It is a very niche title that bombed on it's original theatrical release. Blade Runner is a modern success story illustrating the power of home video and how it can give a good movie that audiences ignored originally a second chance to shine. I personally feel that as time has gone on and Blade Runner has molted time and again into it's "true form" it has become less and less "mass market acceptable". Each new version of the film that I have seen has retreated further and further into it's own style, lore and "world"... while that is not a bad thing, IMHO the movie is becoming more and more "aloof" and difficult for general audiences to watch and understand. I mean, if I were to show my mother the original '82 theatrical cut with the narration she would probably understand it... but if I was to show her the director's cut she would probably be completely lost and disinterested. To a degree the Blade Runner audience has "grown up" beside the movie as it itself has "grown up", we the fans have evolved with the film and as such there is this kind of deep bond that exists that people coming to this "world" now probably will not understand or appreciate.

[promethuem5]

Aright, I checked, and what I have is the Director's Cut... maybe the version I have has something to do with it?

[yellowlightman]

Now that you've seen it, it might be worthwhile to do some reading on the movie (both on the themes in the film itself and the backstory behind the production) and try rewatching it. Shortly after I first saw Blade Runner and disliked it I was given a copy of BFI's Modern Film Classics' volume on Blade Runner and it helped me appreciate the film a lot more. Repeated viewings helped as well.

On the other hand, maybe you just don't like it? Nothing wrong with that, either.

[JsARCLIGHT]

The director's cut omitted the narration, changed the ending and added in a few new elements from the '82 theatrical cut. The original theatrical cut from 1982 is far more "general audience accessible" than the newer director's cut. The narration, while not Ridley Scott's intention, clears up a lot of things as well as adds "movement" to the film's slower spots. IMHO I am waiting to see the "final cut" on this new set... I have always felt the original theatrical cut was a bit too hoaky and the director's cut was a tad laborious and plodding. It will be interesting to see how the "final cut" feels.

[bsu legato]

For those expecting the Final Cut to be some sort of drastically altered version of the movie, you're going to be massively disappointed. I watched it last night. What Ridley Scott has done is essentially tweak the '92 Directors Cut in terms of audio, clean up a few continuity errors due to dialog looping, remove some matte lines and the wires on the full-scale spinners. That's about it. There's still a unicorn dream, although it's cut differently than the '92 version and uses slightly different footage (the original footage Scott wanted to use was unearthed a few years ago).

Edit: The '92 directors cut was based on the original domestic theatrical release, but the Final Cut uses the few extra seconds of violence from the international cut.

Edited December 19, 2007 by bsu legato

[JsARCLIGHT]

The final cut is more a "feel" thing for me. I fully expect to gain most of my "wow" simply from the HD Blu Ray media and to see the few tweaks. Then hopefully to see a decent semi clean workprint.

[Dangard Ace]

Damn UPS! My copy is sitting in KY somewhere!

Location Date Local Time Description

LOUISVILLE,

KY, US 12/19/2007 6:42 A.M. THE PACKAGE WAS LEFT IN A UPS FACILITY CAUSING THIS DELAY

US 12/18/2007 6:38 P.M. BILLING INFORMATION RECEIVED

[JsARCLIGHT]

Count yourself lucky. Mine has yet to even ship.

I'm almost to the point of just canceling the Amazon order and just driving to Best Buy and buying it. If it doesn't ship today I may just do that.

Edit: An interesting note for those like me who ordered off of Amazon and have yet to see their movie ship. Their site has updated with this message on the Blu Ray Collector's edition:

Production Delay: Due to production and shipment delays from the studio impacting all retailers, this title will not be available to ship by the street date indicated above. We are working with the studio to get this product in stock as quickly as possible. We apologize for any inconvenience.

[bandit29]

Uhoh

Warner Brothers Blu-ray Blunder... Again

Posted December 18, 2007 by Josh

Warner Bros. One of the most anticipated releases on Blu-ray this quarter is the Blu-ray release of 'Blade Runner'. Demand for the release has left many retailers sold-out, leaving fans of the iconic Sci-fi film empty-handed. Unfortunately, some fans lucky enough to get a copy have found that the fifth disc is actually the same as the first disc, instead of the being the labeled "Work Print".

Fans are reporting that, while the fifth disc is labeled as the "Work Print", when they play the disc they are finding it to be the "Final Cut" of the movie. To find out if you have the correct version of the film on the fifth disc, play the movie and see which audio options you have in the set-up. If you only have an English track, you're ok. If you see the option for a Dolby TrueHD track, you have a bad disc (only the "Final Cut" has a Dolby TrueHD cut).

Warner Home Video has yet to make an official announcement, and with low supplies, returning for replacement copies might not be an option. We'll keep you updated when we hear from the studio.

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=766

[Hikuro]

thank god I'll never get a blu-ray player then.

[eugimon]

thank god I'll never get a blu-ray player then.

this has nothing to do with the format, just bad production values. same as the craptastic BSG HD-DVD set.

[JsARCLIGHT]

Yeah that mistake is on Warner Brothers and not the format. This is the second "goof" in a row for them on high profile HD media sets. The first was the Blu Ray Harry Potter 1-5 set which some accidentally had an HD DVD stuck in them instead of a Blu Ray disc. IMHO Warner needs to improve their quality control a tad more.

[Duke Togo]

Ok, mine is here, going to watch now.

[David Hingtgen]

What about POTC? Wrong framing. But that's Disney---do the various companies' engineers/encoders etc just not understand Blu-Ray, or is it simply random screw-ups? Have any HD-DVD's had similar problems?

[JsARCLIGHT]

There have been errors in both camps, both in packaging and content. One notable screwup of Paramount on HD DVD was the "Jack Ryan Collection" HD DVD set that listed tons of special features on the box but the discs themselves contained zero special features.

[eugimon]

What about POTC? Wrong framing. But that's Disney---do the various companies' engineers/encoders etc just not understand Blu-Ray, or is it simply random screw-ups? Have any HD-DVD's had similar problems?

well, the PoTC framing issue has nothing to do with the encoding or the format... the scenes in question play fine, it's just the heads are cut off in frame, that's a human error and could have happened on DVD or HD-DVD.

[Vermillion21]

So for those of you who bought the 5-disc uberversion .... how was the 'workprint' version of the movie?? Is it worth it?

I was originally planning on just buying the 2-disc set, but am now torn between the 4-disc and 5-disc sets. The price difference between the 2 sets is approx $20 and I could care less about the suitcase packaging, promo pics, and the 2 toys. So I'd like to hear opinions on the 'workprint' version of the movie. And yes, I did read the review on DigitalBits.

Thx in advance.

[Duke Togo]

Final Cut is gorgeous, the fixes aren't noticible except for the fact that certain things don't look bad anymore. Its more seamless. I still don't like the Unicorn vision and the glowy eyes on Deckard. The story doesn't work if he's a Replicant, I don't care what Ridley Scott says. Harrison Ford maintains Deckards humanity.

Dangerous Days is fantastic, and clocks in at nearly 4 hours. The good, the bad, and the ugly, its all there. Honestly, they could have made it twice its length, and it probably would have been worth it. Better than Hearts of Darkness? You decide.

Deleted scenes are... interesting. A TON of new voiceover that cuts out large segments of dialog. It really seemed like there was a version of BR that might have been put out, with these voice overs, that clocked in at 90 minutes. You'll see when you watch these deleted scenes.

Workprint is up next, then the commentaries.

Edited December 20, 2007 by Duke Togo

[JsARCLIGHT]

I like to pride myself on being patient... but waiting for this set is eating out the back of my eyeballs. Mine finally shipped from Amazon today with a predicted delivery date of the 24th (like that will happen) so it will most likely be after the holidays before I get to see it.

BUT what gives me hope is I ordered my new TV today and it is supposed to getting into town about the same time... so Blade Runner may be the first Blu Ray to be seen on my new 1080p set.