Just watched 'Blade Runner'. Eh.

[ZombieGenesis]

Am I wrong to be dissapointed?

I've heard nothing but extraordinary things about this movie, and I love the concepts of Phillip K. Dicks original works, but this movie just felt like a let down. It wasn't BAD it was just, pretty average, not very interesting.
Maybe it's because the movie isn't aging well, maybe I'm just pessimistic or too picky. As much as I liked the setting and the plot's general 'direction' I just don't think it was pulled off well, and I didn't find the characters interesting.
I don't even get the point of the 'special' android girl.

Am I wrong to think my opinion is minority, or have I just heard very bias opinions?

 

[erbkaiser]

What version did you watch, the one with the voiceover or one of the many re-releases?
I agree the release (voiceover) version is a mess, but the later cuts improve the movie a lot.

 

[w@rew0lf]

Am I wrong to be dissapointed?

I've heard nothing but extraordinary things about this movie, and I love the concepts of Phillip K. Dicks original works, but this movie just felt like a let down. It wasn't BAD it was just, pretty average, not very interesting.
Maybe it's because the movie isn't aging well, maybe I'm just pessimistic or too picky. As much as I liked the setting and the plot's general 'direction' I just don't think it was pulled off well, and I didn't find the characters interesting.
I don't even get the point of the 'special' android girl.

Am I wrong to think my opinion is minority, or have I just heard very bias opinions?

Just because everyone else is enjoying themselves in the pit of fire doesn't mean your wrong for disliking it because it burns.

 

[SultanP]

I guess it just didn't appeal to you that much. I don't know though, Blade Runner is one of, if not my favourite film. I know that some aspects of it are sub-par, but there are just some things in it that strikes a chord with me, like the mood, the setting, the soundtrack, and more. But then again, we all have different things that appeal to us, so if the bad parts of the film weighed more with you, your reaction is understandable.

Edit: And I'm talking about the Remastered Director's cut here. I've watched it over and over again.

 

[Ganthrinor]

Keep in mind that film is nearly thirty years old.

To today's standards, yes it is a long, sub-par movie with bad pacing with a poorly introduced concept. But back then, man, it was cutting-edge.

 

[ZombieGenesis]

Actually I have the special case (five different versions) and I DID watch the voice-over edition, however I wanted to watch the latest cut (Final Cut) but despite being fresh out of the box, the disk is scratched beyond repair.

 

[Darkwolf9]

I've been trying to get around to watching it. I have the final cut just waiting to be watched. In the same vain I have problems getting into Monty Python movies. I think there are some funny parts in the movies, but they all feel really awkward to me and generally like all forms of comedy.

 

[BonsaiK]

Am I wrong to be dissapointed?

I've heard nothing but extraordinary things about this movie, and I love the concepts of Phillip K. Dicks original works, but this movie just felt like a let down. It wasn't BAD it was just, pretty average, not very interesting.
Maybe it's because the movie isn't aging well, maybe I'm just pessimistic or too picky. As much as I liked the setting and the plot's general 'direction' I just don't think it was pulled off well, and I didn't find the characters interesting.
I don't even get the point of the 'special' android girl.

Am I wrong to think my opinion is minority, or have I just heard very bias opinions?

You're not as alone as you think. Blade Runner was mostly panned critically when it was released. Most critics lashed out at the lack of chemistry between the male and female leads, the one-dimensional characters as well as the slow pace of the film. Blade Runner also performed badly at the box office, it was far from a "hit" with the public or critics. The large majority of the adulation heaped on the film has been in retrospect.

Also, you saw the narrated version, which is generally regarded as the worst version of the lot. The thing has been changed and edited and re-edited again for a reason. The final version is the one to see.

I liked it, it was the first realisation of cyberpunk on film (and definitely the only good one) and therefore it struck a chord with me when I was a teenager and heavily influenced by that culture at the time. The film has definitely dated, as has cyberpunk ideas in general, which makes it hard to explain its appeal to people who are watching it after many of the concepts visualised in the film have become part of many people's everyday lives. Although for me, that actually strengthens the appeal, so who knows. How about the video calling and that snake-dancing music for foresight?

 

[Arsen]

It was very, very strange for me. The characters who played the antagonists acted extremely strange even for my tastes.

 

[octafish]

Describe in single words only the good things that come into your mind about... your mother.

If you saw the version with the shitty studio ending and the awful narration, you haven't seen Bladerunner yet.

 

[Susan Arendt]

Keep in mind that film is nearly thirty years old.

To today's standards, yes it is a long, sub-par movie with bad pacing with a poorly introduced concept. But back then, man, it was cutting-edge.

Well, I'm not sure that's entirely true - I certainly don't consider it "sub-par" - but a lot of what made Bladerunner special when it was released has since become commonplace. Its futuristic look, for example - the neon reflected in water, the umbrellas, the gritty cop leaving the noodle bar to fly away in a cop car - has all been done many, many times and naturally isn't going to have the same impact on someone now that it did back then. Same for Harrison Ford. He was still very fresh back then, and to see him as something other than Han Solo was very startling. Now, not so much.

 

[Valksy]

Seen several versions (always with the promise of this one being the director's vision or the definitive cut) and found them all mediocre and not at all that special. I mentally file it as OK but forgettable and not at all the movie nirvana that some people seem to think it is.

But I suppose that is the joy of taste and opinion.

 

[Quaxar]

I agree to this, I didn't find it that appealing either. Then again I have this problem with every Philip K. Dick book, last time I tried Martian Time-Slip I stopped half-through because I couldn't stand it anymore.

 

[Ganthrinor]

Keep in mind that film is nearly thirty years old.

To today's standards, yes it is a long, sub-par movie with bad pacing with a poorly introduced concept. But back then, man, it was cutting-edge.

Well, I'm not sure that's entirely true - I certainly don't consider it "sub-par" - but a lot of what made Bladerunner special when it was released has since become commonplace. Its futuristic look, for example - the neon reflected in water, the umbrellas, the gritty cop leaving the noodle bar to fly away in a cop car - has all been done many, many times and naturally isn't going to have the same impact on someone now that it did back then. Same for Harrison Ford. He was still very fresh back then, and to see him as something other than Han Solo was very startling. Now, not so much.

I personnaly don't consider it sub-par either, but that could just be our nostalgia talking =)

Compare it objectively to one of last year's huge movies, like say, District Nine, or *shudder* Avatar, Blade Runner isn't going to fare too well. Then again, back in the 80's, everyone was content to sit in a theater and actually watch a story unfold without having something explode or the latest Hollywood Hot Girl flashing some skin every ten minutes.

I think Star Wars provides a fairly accurate example of how movies have changed from what they were. The Original trilogy leans very heavily of story telling and the emotional involvement of the audience while still having cutting-edge (for it's time) special effects. The newer movies are all about annoying talking geckos and 'sploding robots with shiny fully 3D rendered environments.

Blade Runner was (again, for it's time, and to some of us it still is) an amazing movie, and a very important step in the careers of Harrison Ford, Ridley Scott and the Science Fiction movie genre as a whole. Just think what we may be missing if it wasn't for these guys and this movie.




Also, I wuz quoted by a senior editor! /swoon

 

[Susan Arendt]

Keep in mind that film is nearly thirty years old.

To today's standards, yes it is a long, sub-par movie with bad pacing with a poorly introduced concept. But back then, man, it was cutting-edge.

Well, I'm not sure that's entirely true - I certainly don't consider it "sub-par" - but a lot of what made Bladerunner special when it was released has since become commonplace. Its futuristic look, for example - the neon reflected in water, the umbrellas, the gritty cop leaving the noodle bar to fly away in a cop car - has all been done many, many times and naturally isn't going to have the same impact on someone now that it did back then. Same for Harrison Ford. He was still very fresh back then, and to see him as something other than Han Solo was very startling. Now, not so much.

I personnaly don't consider it sub-par either, but that could just be our nostalgia talking =)

Compare it objectively to one of last year's huge movies, like say, District Nine, or *shudder* Avatar, Blade Runner isn't going to fare too well. Then again, back in the 80's, everyone was content to sit in a theater and actually watch a story unfold without having something explode or the latest Hollywood Hot Girl flashing some skin every ten minutes.

I think Star Wars provides a fairly accurate example of how movies have changed from what they were. The Original trilogy leans very heavily of story telling and the emotional involvement of the audience while still having cutting-edge (for it's time) special effects. The newer movies are all about annoying talking geckos and 'sploding robots with shiny fully 3D rendered environments.

Blade Runner was (again, for it's time, and to some of us it still is) an amazing movie, and a very important step in the careers of Harrison Ford, Ridley Scott and the Science Fiction movie genre as a whole. Just think what we may be missing if it wasn't for these guys and this movie.




Also, I wuz quoted by a senior editor! /swoon

Very well said. Tastes and appreciations change as movies change how they choose to tell stories. Can you imagine what a remake of Blade Runner would be like? All chase scenes and shootouts, and at least one scene of Rachel taking a shower.

 

[Ganthrinor]

Snippage

Very well said. Tastes and appreciations change as movies change how they choose to tell stories. Can you imagine what a remake of Blade Runner would be like? All chase scenes and shootouts, and at least one scene of Rachel taking a shower.

It would be awful. They'd probably get some hack like Michael Bay to direct it >.<

 

[SultanP]

Snippage

Very well said. Tastes and appreciations change as movies change how they choose to tell stories. Can you imagine what a remake of Blade Runner would be like? All chase scenes and shootouts, and at least one scene of Rachel taking a shower.

It would be awful. They'd probably get some hack like Michael Bay to direct it >.<

Wow, just the thought of a modern remake of it, especially by Bay, had me laughing out loud. You know, lol'ing, except I actually did it instead of just saying I did. All this talk of Blade runner is making me want to see it again.

 

[Usurpurus]

I felt the same way after watching it. But that's is probably because I like more modern movies and this felt a bit dated.

 

[Anachronism]

Am I wrong to be dissapointed?

As others have said, if you've only seen the theatrical cut, then it's understandable that you're disappointed; it isn't that good. Go back and watch the Final Cut: it doesn't have the voiceovers or the studio-imposed happy ending (which featured leftover footage from The Shining, incidentally), and is much better for it.

I was in the exact same position the other week with 2001: A Space Odyssey ... I thought it was pretty rubbish except for the part on the ship with HAL.

Blade Runner is like 2001 in a lot of ways. They're not films that you can watch and instantly appreciate (especially 2001) unless you're very, very good at interpreting imagery and symbolism, which both films are rife with. You need to go away and think about what the films are trying to say for a while, debate their meaning with people, and then go back and watch them again. You'll appreciate them much more for it. Trust me.

 

[Nemu]

I enjoyed it more later on as an adult. When I first saw it I was a kid who had a crush on Han Solo, so I watched EVERYTHING Harrison Ford was in.


But, similarly, I felt a big old bunch of "Biiiig deeeeal" when I watched The Shining, 2001 and many other "classic" movies.

Times change, tho, and like previously stated, older movies (music, tv shows, et al) don't necessarily hold up with each new generation.