Why Blade Runner Makes Guys Cry
- Thread starter Firefilm
- Start date
It might be out of the scope of this sort of article, but some of the "minute" changes between versions of Bladerunner actually have a pretty large impact on the actual story being told, particularly in terms of Deckard. While it is definitely funny how many versions of Bladerunner do exist there are some pretty good reasons why and what that means for the movie itself.
I guess it was only a matter of time until this column stumbled onto my favorite movie of all time.
Good choice, I think you nailed some of the more important points and hyped Roy's final scene enough. But good lord, how could you forget Rachael?
P.S., The version(s) without Deckard's narration are the best, quiet time does the ambiance and soundtrack of this movie justice.
Good choice, I think you nailed some of the more important points and hyped Roy's final scene enough. But good lord, how could you forget Rachael?
P.S., The version(s) without Deckard's narration are the best, quiet time does the ambiance and soundtrack of this movie justice.
I'm really liking what you're doing with this column. Now do Jaws. Or the Dirty Dozen.
I dare you.
I dare you.
Great article guys! 
I bought the 5 versions of Blu-Ray Blade Runner collection a few years back. I gotta be honest though, I never made it through more than two of them. I love Blade Runner as much as the next nerd, but I just couldn't make it through all the versions. I watched the theatrical cut and the Director's Cut (I think). And over the years I've seen most of the versions that have made their way out, but not all of them obviously.
Maybe some day I'll make it through the other 3 versions. I dunno.
I bought the 5 versions of Blu-Ray Blade Runner collection a few years back. I gotta be honest though, I never made it through more than two of them. I love Blade Runner as much as the next nerd, but I just couldn't make it through all the versions. I watched the theatrical cut and the Director's Cut (I think). And over the years I've seen most of the versions that have made their way out, but not all of them obviously.
Maybe some day I'll make it through the other 3 versions. I dunno.
As I understand it, that was intentional. They didn't want a voice over, but they were told they had to, so they tried making it really bad so it'd be dropped...which backfired.UberPubert said:
Just wait. An incredibad reboot adaptation of the type you don't want to see will almost certainly surface within our life times. And it won't be bad because of inevitable comparisons to and nodding knowing winks toward one of the greatest (IMO) movies of all time, but in spite of them!Tanis said:
Also:
Chu 'I design your eyes'
Roy 'If only you could see what I've seen with your eyes'
I thought this was a pun I was supposed to wait for in the article. And like an idiot I actually waited for it to be quoted. Not that it's a real pun, just a brilliant play on a tired phrase.
Jaws is on the list, don't you worry. Dirty Dozen might have to be viewed again, it's been a while. Or I could just make things up.grey_space said:
"That part where Elwood Blues comes down from heaven and gives everyone baths so they aren't dirty anymore? Man did I cry!"
I heard something similar, it having to do with audiences getting bored, or not understanding Deckard without the internal monologue. I really dislike it, and unfortunately the first time I tried showing the movie to a friend, that was the version we had (and it had the "happy" ending, which I also dislike).thaluikhain said:
Yes. Blade Runner.
I am a strong advocate of the "Deckard is NOT a replicant" side.
To me, him being a Replicant dillutes the movie's experience greatly.
To me, the story is all about how the androids are "more human than human". Deckard who is supposed to be an "bona fide" human is cold, unhappy, insensitive (I love the scene when he tells Rachel she is not human... With no respect for her feelings, not softening up, no empathy... She is just a thing, that deserves no more respect than what we would give to Siri).
Deckard just does his job and lives an lonely, empty life. He only becomes HUMAN after he falls in love with a robot.
The Nexus 6 just want to live. Deckard (as in the first half of the movie, seems to just want to die.
I am a strong advocate of the "Deckard is NOT a replicant" side.
To me, him being a Replicant dillutes the movie's experience greatly.
To me, the story is all about how the androids are "more human than human". Deckard who is supposed to be an "bona fide" human is cold, unhappy, insensitive (I love the scene when he tells Rachel she is not human... With no respect for her feelings, not softening up, no empathy... She is just a thing, that deserves no more respect than what we would give to Siri).
Deckard just does his job and lives an lonely, empty life. He only becomes HUMAN after he falls in love with a robot.
The Nexus 6 just want to live. Deckard (as in the first half of the movie, seems to just want to die.
This article is full of errors.
-First it is never implied that the man at the freezer dies, when the camera cuts he is still breathing.
-Sebastian is the one who ages fast, not Tyrell (the creator). Both of them die anyway.
-All the versions change Deckard's nature which is a main theme of the film, (also the Director's Cut is not the directors cut, Ridley Scott had nothing to do with it, he made the Final Cut).
-REPLICANTS ARENT ROBOTS. Synths yes, but they are not more mechanical than humans are
-The final monologue was not improvised, actually, it was larger and with more SciFi, im sure i saw the writer talk about that in the bonus content of the Final Cut edition.
-First it is never implied that the man at the freezer dies, when the camera cuts he is still breathing.
-Sebastian is the one who ages fast, not Tyrell (the creator). Both of them die anyway.
-All the versions change Deckard's nature which is a main theme of the film, (also the Director's Cut is not the directors cut, Ridley Scott had nothing to do with it, he made the Final Cut).
-REPLICANTS ARENT ROBOTS. Synths yes, but they are not more mechanical than humans are
-The final monologue was not improvised, actually, it was larger and with more SciFi, im sure i saw the writer talk about that in the bonus content of the Final Cut edition.
I remember Bladerunner. It sure as hell didn't make me cry, but it did make me yawn. I always had heard it was a good classic, but I found it more boring and uninteresting then anything unfortunately.
Ylla said:
1. You mean it doesn't implicitly show he dies. It Implies he does, because it's up to the audience to put that together.
2. Fair enough
3. For the purposes of what I wrote about, the differences in the versions do not change my conclusions
4. I called them Robots as a joke. However one of the definitions of Robot is ?a person who acts and responds in a mechanical, routine manner, usually subject to another's will? The synthetics were supposed to be on a mining colony off world, and the fact that they refuse to be subject to human will doesn?t change the fact that they were designed for that purpose. One reason they were designed more heartily than humans is to survive where we could not?to do labor for us.
5. The tears in the rain part was improvised in Roy's final speech:
"As he reminisces about his past he says, "All those moments will be lost in time...," but then Hauer adds the unscripted and philosophical phrase "...like tears in rain.""
Actually, I find the Tyrell illness thing interesting to bring up since it is only in an unshot scene that we find that he is dying. After crushing his head, Batty goes into a back room and see the real Tyrell in a chamber like Holden was in for another cut scene. So the different versions do matter to making part of your point. But there are so many. Deckard in a dress didn't really work as well as expected.
I thought writing is what sets the tone? Do you mean the writing does not match the subject matter? And if so, would you rather no comedy at all, a straight-forward approach to pointing out the emotional cores of these movies?Draconalis said:
I worry no one would read it without the comedy, which lightens the mood to allow more easy access to the delicate subject matter. Do you have an alternative viewpoint?
in retrospect, I don't think it's the comedy mingled with a more serious subject. I think it's delivery.Firefilm said:
I might just not like your brand of humor.
As an avid fan of the Blade Runner movie (I literally went to sleep watching this movie every night during my deployment in Afghanistan), I am not a fan of this article. Some of the facts were off (as pointed out by Ylla), the humor was dry, and it all seemed thrown together just to have an excuse to say "I cried when Roy died." That being said, I love seeing my favorite movie of all time being discussed in any way. Lastly, I wouldn't say this movie is a "bro" movie at all. I am the only person I have met in person who loves this movie. NONE of my friends like it. They claim it doesn't have enough action. Don't be discouraged by my criticism!