Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

What's New in Blade Runner - The Final Cut?

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the he's-a-replicant-please-deal dept.

Sci-Fi 380

tripper700 writes "25 years since its original release, a definitive version of Ridley Scott's science fiction masterwork Blade Runner, Blade Runner: The Final Cut, has been released. So what exactly has changed? And is it worth all the fuss? SFFMedia describes each change in detail. Is it just a patch up job attempting to cash in on a cult film? Or like an oil painter retouching a masterpiece, or a novelist polishing prose, is Ridley Scott simply trying to perfect his original vision?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

That's nothing. (5, Funny)

palegray.net (1195047) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636297)

When "Tron - Final Cut" is released, it's gonna smash every box office record for the next 10 years. Just you wait.

Re:That's nothing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636393)

I believe there was a south park episode on this topic.
Protect these movies from their creators!!

Re:That's nothing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636423)

No, there is going to be a Seinfield final cut which is a porn movie, released next summer. Believe me, I read it on an earlier story.

Re:That's nothing. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636585)

"You're telling me, that a supermodel hit on you?" said George, shaking his head in disbeleif,"How do you do that?"

"I didn't say she was a supermodel," said Jerry, he was holding a rolled up newspaper "But the option was certainly available to her."

"You're telling me that you were hit on by a woman who is so beautiful, she can choose whether or not she wants to be a supermodel or not!" cried out George,"Great, just great - why I can't have such luck is beyond me."

"Just listen," cried Jerry, "Is that so much to ask that you listen?"

"Oh, I can listen pal - I'm the king of the listeners. If they held a competition for best listenerm I would even enter - because I'm so assured of victory, it would ruin it for everyone else."

"You can sure talk for a listener."

"Haha wiseguy."

The buzzer went of, Jerry walked over to it and held down the button,"Yeah?"

"It's me," came Elaine's voice.

"Come on up," he buzzed her in and opened the door.

"So anyway," he continued,"She walks up to me on the street and says to me 'Could you do me a favour and hold this paper for just a second, I'd be really grateful."

"Hang on," interupted George,"How did she say 'really grateful'?"

"It was kind of a deep throaty 'promise of things to come' 'really grateful'"

"You're sure, she didn't have the flu?"

"No she didn't have the flu, now listen."

"I'm listening!"

"So I say 'no problem' and she walks inside the building, and I'm waiting, thinking about the great sex I could possibly be having......."

"Now see, I never do that, thinking about get's you all hyped up and you're bound to be disappointed in the end."

"What are you talking about? Fantasy doesn't build you up."

"It build's you up!"

"Just shut up and listen!" Jerry cried out.

"I'm listening!"

"So I'm waiting like five minutes......"

"Five minutes?"

"Five minutes, how long would you wait?"

"Well it depends on the person, but a woman as beautiful as that......at least till Christmas."

"Christmas?"

"Hey, for sex with a beautiful woman I think she at least deserves until Christmas."

"You're pathetic."

"Finish your story," said George,"I do have a date tonight you know."

"You love telling people that don't you?"

"You wanna tell the story or not?"

"Okay then, so I'm getting impatient and I look through the glass, and I see her hugging this guy!"

"What? she asked you to hold her paper, told you she'd be grateful and now she's hugging another guy?"

"Exactly, she's temptress, I think she does it for thrills, leaves guy's hanging around outside in the cold for hours on end....."

"Five minutes."

"Okay, five minutes, hours on end, what's the difference?"

"I said that to my first girlfriend, beleive me, it makes a difference."

"But can you beleive it? She's in there hugging another guy."

"So what did you do?"

"I left."

"And the paper?"

Jerry smiled and held up the paper in his hand,"She'll have to buy a new paper for holding me up, my time is money!"

"What, a nickel a minute?"

"You're a real understanding guy you know that?"

Elaine stepped into the apartment, she slammed the door shut and stared at George and Jerry fiercely.

"Wow, aren't you a little Xena Warrior Princess here?" joked Jerry

"You know, that Lucy Lawless is really attractive, I would like to go out with her."

"Are you kidding, you couldn't get Lucy Lawless," said Jerry.

"Why couldn't I get Lucy Lawless?"

"She's way too tall for you."

"You think?"

"I know."

Elaine shook her head and cried out,"Shut up, I have something to say here!"

"Tell George," said Jerry with a smile,"He's a great listener."

George smiled,"At least I don't steal papers from supermodels."

"Supposed super......."

"You wouldn't beleive what happened to me last night," Elaine cut in.

"Huh? what?" asked Jerry.

"You know that guy Alex I've been seeing, tall, handsome intelligent."

"Yeah, he's a nice guy," said George.

"He's scum!" said Elaine, staring George in the eye.

"Scum?"

"Scum."

"I wouldn't say anything Georgey boy,"said Jerry,"When she gets back with him she'll hate you for anything you say against him."

Elaine shook her head,"Not this freak, you know what he told me last night."

"Yes, yes I do," said Jerry,"I'm a mind reader you see........"

Elaine shoved past him and sat next to George on the couch,"We were in my apartment and I had invited him up for coffee....."

"Coffee?" asked George,"Coffee.......or Cof-fee."

"Cof-fee."

"I want to make sure, you asked him up to have sex with you right?"

"Yes George," she said,"I wanted to bump hips."

"Charming," said Jerry,"Didn't you graduate first in you class at Lady's finishing school."

"Lookit comedian," she said, grabbing Jerry by the collar,"One more funny remark and I'll rip your tongue out - you never use it for it's right purpose anyway."

"What's that supposed to mean," said Jerry.

"Listen and you might find out."

"See," said George,"I would kick your ass in a listening competition."

Elaine glared at him,"So we're making out on the couch, and he pulls away and says to me,'Are you like me, do you love foreplay?' and I think 'Thank God, maybe I'll get an orgasm for once.'

"So what did you say?"

"I said,'Sure I love it,' and I sit forward to kiss him, but he stands up and takes off his pants, and there it is, sitting right in front of me."

"His soldier?"

"Yeah, but this wasn't a soldier, this was a green beret, I'm talking special forces here, and I say,'What do you want me to do with that?' and he says,'You know Lainee, I want a blowjob."

"Just like that," cried out George,"Just like that he says I want a blowjob!?!"

"Yeah, and I just stare at him, thinking he's joking, but he says,"Come on Lainee, let's get going, it's cold in here."

"Did you?" asked George, Elaine smacked lightly over the head.

"No I didn't, I said to him,'What if I say no?' and he says,'Then no sex."

"Idiot," said Jerry,"You can't threaten to withhold sex from a woman, it's crazy."

"What'd you say then?" asked George.

"I said to him,'And if I do that for you, will you do something for me?,' and he says,'What?' like's he's really confused and I say,'Give me one.'"

"So what did he do?"

"He said no, and I told him he'd have to leave, but he said he was glad to go, he thought I was sick - I'll tell you I wanted to decap his soldier!"

Jerry and George winced.

"So," said Elaine,"Have either of you ever?"

"No," they said at the same time.

"Why not?"

"Well, that's where your soldier is going," said Jerry,"When you send your man into the field he'll get covered in your own saliva, it's like licking your........."

George shuddered,"Ewww."

"But would you expect a woman to give you a blowjob?"

"Yeah, I don't see why not," Jerry replied.

"Well, isn't that like me licking my own.......?"

"Nothing wrong with that," said George,"Nothing whatsoever."

"You two have such a double standard, are all men like this?"

"Pretty much yeah," said Jerry.

"Have either of you ever had a blowjob?"

Jerry and George looked at each other and sighed,"No."

"Ha," laughed Elaine.

Kramer rocketed into the room, he slipped the door shut and walked over to the fridge, he pulled out a banana and peeled it, he noticed Elaine staring at him.

"Want some?" he asked, holding out the banana to her.

"Oohh!" she cried out, throwing her arms in the air,"Is that all men think of?"

"What?" cried Kramer,"A guy can't offer a girl a banana?"

"Kramer, have you ever had a blowjob?" asked Jerry.

Kramer smiled,"Oh yeah."

"And did you give the woman one in return?" asked Elaine.

"Of course," said Kramer,"I'm not an animal."

Elaine beamed triumphantly at Jerry and George,"See."

"But don't you feel........like..your kind of licking your own.......you know?"

"What, banana?" said Kramer with a grin,"No I don't feel like that, besides, most of your saliva is washed away by the female orgasm."

"What are you talking about?"

"You know, the juices get flowing......" he waved his arms around,"Things get moving....."

Elaine smiled,"There's hope for your lot yet."

George looked at his watch,"I better get going, or I'll be late for my date tonight."

"Oh you got a date?" asked Kramer.

"Yes I have a date," said George,"Does that surprise you?"

"Well frankly yes," said Kramer, biting into the banana,"You strike me as more of a Friday night at home with your parents kind of guy."

"No that was in high school and college," said Jerry smiling.

Later on Jerry, Elaine and Kramer sat in the restaurant, they were chatting about the movie they had just seen - Necropolis.

"That was a great movie," said Jerry, he slapped the paper he held in his hand against the table,"The reviews in this rag are all wrong."

"I hated it," said Elaine,"That bit where Michael Douglas cut's Charlie Sheen's rope when they're climbing the mountain, then swings down and catches him was a load of crap."

"Are you kidding," said Jerry,"That was great."

"Michael Douglas must be over 50, how could he catch and support Charlie Sheen?"

"How did you like it Kramer?" asked Jerry,"Kramer?"

"Wow," said Kramer,"Look at that beautiful woman over there with that guy."

Jerry looked back and then slumped down in his seat,"Oh my God."

"What," said Elaine,"What's wrong?"

"That's the woman whose paper I stole!"

George kissed Sheryl passionately, he put his best effort in and she seemed to respond to it, he pulled away and grinned at her,"You like that?"

"I like that alot," she whispered.

"There's alot more where that came from." he said, he sounded confident but inside he was thinking,'Should I ask her into the bedroom, oh God, what if she yells at me, oh God oh God, I asked her up for coffee but does she think I meant coffee or cof-fee........'

"George," she said,"I think we should move things into the bedroom."

"If you want to," he said,"I don't want pressure you, you know I'm happy with things as they are," inside he was screaming,'Yes, yes, yes!"

But her face dropped,"You don't want to have sex with me?"

'Idiot! idiot! his inner critic screamed, it had returned from an early retirement from exhaustion to yell at him,"Of course I do," he said,"Are you kidding, you're a beautiful woman with a great body, but I want you to know that as great as that would be, I can live with this if you want it to go no further."

She seemed to think about it and he thought,'That was my best line ever, please, take the bait, take the bait.'

"George, I want to take things to the next level."

'Reel her in baby,' he thought ecstatically.

"Just slip past her," said Jerry,"Listen to their conversation, he might be her brother?"

"I'm not going to do it," said Elaine,"You had your chance with this woman and you blew it."

"I'll do it," said Kramer, he slipped on some sunglasses and made to stand up.

"You can't do it," said Jerry,"I've seen you try to be silent, it's pathetic."

"What?" said Kramer,"I can be silent like the night."

"You're about as silent as Newman in a potato chip factory," Jerry said,"I'll take a chance," he stood up, picking up the paper and walked towards the table with the woman and man at it, then he put a look of surprise on his face.

"Look at that," said Elaine,"It's pathetic, simply pathetic."

"Yeah," said Kramer,"I could have done a much better job."

"Hi!" said Jerry,"Remember me?"

"Oh it's you!" said the woman,"We were never introduced - I'm Marlene and this is my brother Martin."

"Oh," said Jerry,"Your brother? Hi," he put out his hand to Martin,"I'm Jerry Seinfeld."

"I know," he said,"I've seen you on the Tonight Show and Letterman."

"Hey," said Marlene,"What happened to you the other day?"

"Oh right," said Jerry,"Didn't you see the hit and run?"

"Hit and run? no."

"Right after you went in this guy got hit by a car, he was in real pain, I called out for someone to call an ambulance but no one listened, you know what New Yorkers are like."

"Yeah, it's terrible," said Marlene,"So what happened?"

"Well my car was parked around the corner so I drove round and picked him up, then took him to the hospital."

"Oh you're so brave, did you get there in time?"

"I was faster than a speeding bullet."

George stood in front of Sheryl, she was completely naked and lay on the bed, legs spread,"Take me George," she said.

George was about to go to work, then Elaine's voice came into his mind,'You men have such a double standard.'

"You know, there's something I'd like to do for you first."

"Hmmm? what."

"So I felt guilty about rushing of with the paper, it's not much, but you can take this evening one of mine."

"I'm grateful Jerry," she said,"But that paper had a number written on it about a modelling job?"

"You're a model."

"It was my first job, but it would have paid a lot."

"I still have the paper in my apartment, I could go get it, it's just across the street."

"I'll come with you," she said,"You don't mind?"

"No, no of course not."

Marlene turned and kissed Martin on the cheek,"I'll see you tomorrow."

"Seeya sis," he said.

Jerry and Marlene walked past Kramer and Elaine, Kramer looked at them,"Where are you two going?"

"Just up to my apartment," Jerry said with a smile, he and Marlene walked out.

Elaine stared at Kramer,"Can you beleive that?"

George licked and probed, Sheryl moaned and gasped in pleasure, she reached down and pressed his face down against her vagina. George rubbed his nose around as he tried to turn his face for breath and she squealed in pleasure.

"George," she gasped,"You're fantastic."

George smiled and bit lightly on her clitoris, maybe this wasn't such a bad idea after all.

"Okay Alan, I'll be there Wednesday at 9am, thanks."

Marlene turned and smiled at Jerry,"Thanks for letting me use your phone, you're a life saver, how can I repay you?"

"I'll think of a way," said Jerry.

"I can think of one right now," she said, she placed her arms around his neck and pulled him to her, she kissed him lightly on the lips,"You'll love this."

She lowered herself to her knees and unzipped his fly, she slipped his half erect cock out and licked it lightly, then she took the entire thing in her mouth and began to deep throat him.

Sheryl came, her juice flowed around George's mouth and down her thighs, he sat up and she smiled at him,"I am so lucky to have met you," she said grinning.

"So," he said, smiling,"Do you have a little something for me?"

"I sure do," she said,"Come over here."

He moved over to the bed and she sat up, she kissed him, her tongue snaking deep down his throat, then she lay back and spread her legs,"Fuck me George."

'What!' his mind screamed,'Fuck me? fuck me? what about his blowjob?

Marlene's tongue bobbed up and down on Jerry's shaft, his breath began to come faster and faster now and she abruptly stopped, she removed her mouth from his cock and smiled,"Gotta save that cum for the best sex you'll ever have."

Elaine's voice flooded through Jerry's mind,'You men have such a double standard."

"There's something I'd like to do for you first," he said.

"What?" she asked, confused.

"How about," he said, making his voice sound generous,"I give you a blowjob?"

She stared at him, then she said,"Are you crazy? That's sick, when you fuck me it'll be like you're licking your own cock!" she yelled out, she stood up and stormed to the door, she opened the door, startling Kramer, who was about to walk in.

"He's sick!" she yelled out,"He wanted to give ME a blowjob!"

"Oh there there," said Kramer, putting an arm around Marlene's shoulder, he winked at Jerry,"Tell Kramer all about it," he led her into his apartment.

"I can't beleive it, said Jerry, sitting in the restaurant"I got a fantastic blowjob and ruined sex by offering to give her a one, I'm so stupid."

"Well I don't know about you," said Kramer,"But I feel great, that Marlene is dynamite in bed."

"Thank you very much Don Juan DeMarco," said Jerry,"Here's George, hey Georgie, how was the date?"

George sat down and looked at them with a glum expression,"We had sex."

"So? how was it?" said Elaine.

"It was the greatest sex I ever had," said George in a dejected tone,"She said I was the best lover she had ever had."

"That's great," cried Elaine,"But she can't have had much experiance."

"Haha," he said,"The thing is though, I gave her oral sex, but then she gave me nothing but sex - I feel so cheap."

"Congragulation Georgie Porgie," said Elaine, a satisfied smile on her face,"Today you are a woman."

Re:That's nothing. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636497)

Lets establish a timeline for these movies:

Theatrical Release > Extended Version > Uncut Version > Director's Cut > Aniversary Edition > Remastered Edition > Final Cut > Final Cut: Pro

I hate films with more versions than the software used to edit them.

Re:That's nothing. (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636691)

George Lucas feels your pain. ;)

Re:That's nothing. (1)

palegray.net (1195047) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636731)

Rocky Balboa is just glad it's all over.

Re:That's nothing. (5, Interesting)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636953)

I thought Tron totally rocked when I was a kid. It was full of stupid stuff, like the Master Control Program's AI, and the laser that digitizes Flynn and sucks him into the computer. The "kiss" scene was gross. (I've written plenty of "ugly chicks" that I hope aren't making out with anybody in the hidden cyberworld.) Even I knew that an arcade game that took quarters wouldn't be interfaced to the Master Control Program at Dillinger's headquarters (this was the early 80s). And while the "bit" was an interesting character, it wouldn't be able to emphasize no as "no no no no" in a tight situation. Talk about TMI.

But what a pretty movie it was, even if it was stupid. The old 3D graphics were actually pretty cool- it was a weird world full of square clouds and straight blue lines. You just don't see stuff like that anymore. The quality of today's CGI is so good and so photorealistic that anything produced now is unimpressive and boring. It's evolved into junk for commercials: whales jumping up out of freshwater lakes where financially secure guys are fishing, expensive cars performing risky ballet moves while cruising down empty superhighways, etc. It's sucked the magic out of almost everything you see- if it looks incredible, you know instantly you're looking at CGI crap. Soon, even pornography will be ruined.

I wanted to see Tron again but my mother didn't care for it, so I dragged my father (mainframe programmer) to see it. He hates movies. But he liked it so much he dragged me there to see it again so I saw it three times. END OF LINE

Re:That's nothing. (4, Funny)

xSauronx (608805) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637009)

Soon, even pornography will be ruined.

You blasphemous motherfucker, take it back!

Re:That's nothing. (2, Interesting)

palegray.net (1195047) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637023)

I agree with you on the effect of overdosing the population with CG. I still remember seeing Jurassic Park in the theater as a kid, and having to pick my jaw up off the floor every few minutes (coupled with having to wipe the drool off my shoes from seeing all those shiny SGI boxes). I don't get that feeling from CG film sequences anymore. I actually get more of a kick out of browsing still-image sites like Digital Blasphemy [digitalblasphemy.com] .

Yeah, it's kind of sad, but it was inevitable. Look at the bright side: we're getting closer and closer to realtime immersive photorealistic worlds. When I get to build my own universe, that will be cool.

P.S. John Arnold from JP is still one of my personal heroes :).

Re:That's nothing. (4, Funny)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637053)

Personally, I'm waiting for Duke Nukem Forever: The Now Cut.

Riddle me this: (2, Interesting)

imstanny (722685) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636299)

If I never saw the movie, which 'cut' should I watch?

Re:Riddle me this: (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636347)

just the director's cut back from when it was first released

Re:Riddle me this: (3, Informative)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636363)

IMHO, watch the one with the voiceover. Certainly watch that one first. Like most Hollywood movies, the transition from book to movie was made clumsily, protestations of "art" notwithstanding. Deckard's voiceover is done tastefully and serves to focus the movie in many places where it becomes meaningless and context-free in the "director's cut."

One of the best 2-3 SF movies ever made in the voiceover version.

Re:Riddle me this: (3, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636459)

Harrison Ford openly tanked the voice-over because he fought with the director on doing it. He thought it was stupid, and mailed in a poor performance in that regard. Many fans hate the voice-over, and thusly it was thankfully later removed.

Storytelling 101 - show, don't tell. Especially don't tell poorly.

The movie stands up quite well without the narration.

Re:Riddle me this: (1)

Shrubbman (3807) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636755)

Ridley Scott was fighting the studio tooth and nail to keep that voice over out as well, hence it's complete removal from the Director's Cut and Final Cut versions.

Re:Riddle me this: (5, Informative)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636871)

There are some great articles around that detail the whole Blade Runner saga--definitely worth looking up. In short, due to the original production being over-budget, ownership of the movie went to the underwriters, who decided to add in the voiceover and happy ending after the movie tested poorly. This was a rush job, and both Ford and Scott were against the changes. When the first Director's Cut came out, they reverted some of the stuff back, but again, it was a rush job, so Scott didn't get an opportunity to really go back over it the way he wanted to (apparently he wasn't even really involved in this). There was supposed to be a big 20th anniversary release, but there were still legal wranglings over ownership. Finally, for the 25th anniversary, the ownership issues were sorted out, and Scott was given ample time to really sit down and polish the movie the way he wanted to originally. Since technology had advanced so much, they took the opportunity to clean up the effects a bit (using the original assets--no Special Edition crap here). The end result of all of this is the Final Cut.

Re:Riddle me this: (1)

7Prime (871679) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636531)

I actually sorta agree. Even though I like the Director's Cut better, because of it's huge implications of Deckerd, the voiceover is great, and helps tie it back into the Film Noire genre that it owes so much of it's style to. The final voiceover was a little corny, the writing isn't very good there, but the rest of it is pretty damned good, don't know why he took it out with the DC.

It's hard to imagine not hearing the voiceovers (4, Insightful)

podperson (592944) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636729)

I loved the original movie, but always thought it should end when the elevator doors close (which the first "Director's Cut" did) and should lose the voice overs. With those two changes, I'd be happy.

That said, when I watch the first "Director's Cut" I hear the voiceovers in my head ... so there's no point. I can't tell whether the movie would hang together well without the voice overs because I can't get them out of my head. And I don't think the voice overs make the movie easy to understand the first time through because I can remember not understanding it the first time I saw it. It seems to me the one thing they could have done with the voiceovers and didn't was patch the continuity error caused by cutting the original opening scene (where Deckard "retires" the mysterious fifth replicant).

I disagree about that "the transition from book to movie was made clumsily". The only thing I really object to, although I understand it, is the cinematic differentiation of replicants from humans displayed by Leon removing an egg from boiling water. If you can stick a replicant's hand in boiling water without hurting them, then the VK test is kind of pointless. Frankly, I'd cut that scene.

From TFA: In the scene where Batty confronts Tyrell, the line, "I want more life, fucker" has been replaced with "I want more life, father".

Bad change, IMO. In a movie with zero profanity, that line really hit hard.

Also from TFA: Equally, if Deckard really is a Nexus 7 created to work as an exterminator, why is he lacking the strength of the inferior Nexus 6 models he is chasing? He seems to spend a large part of the film being bashed to a pulp.

True, if you assume "Nexus 7" vs. incredibly illegal experimental Nexus 5 ... or whatever ... which would make perfect sense.

Re:It's hard to imagine *SPOILERS* (5, Interesting)

east coast (590680) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636955)

I can't tell whether the movie would hang together well without the voice overs because I can't get them out of my head.
 
IMHO, "I don't know why he saved my life. Maybe in those last moments he loved life more than he ever had before. Not just his life, anybody's life, my life. All he'd wanted were the same answers the rest of us want. Where did I come from? Where am I going? How long have I got? All I could do was sit there and watch him die." is the best line in just about any film ever.
 
This one line makes anything else in the film worth enduring (not that the film isn't good without the line) and is the crux of the entire film. I guess other people see it in other lights but it's hard for me not to see the entire film leading up to this one line. I just can not accept that this film is about anything outside of the questions that artificial life will dwell on in the future when we produce it. I think it's great that science fiction discusses these questions. All of the robot/alien junk is just crap in comparison to the hard questions that will arise from our journey from natural human beings into a synthetic society where anything goes. With the stem cell debate being what it is we are kinda starting to ask these questions today in a round about way.
 
Still, see the film for what it is but it's still fantastic that all of the crap about cops and killing skin jobs and the Tyrell corporation comes down to one beautifully made point about our inevitable future. These questions are neat to address in fiction but warns us of the moral puzzles we will have to solve in the future.
 
I'm left wondering everytime after the movie; what will we decide and who will we answer to when the question becomes more than hypothetical.
 
That's science fiction to me. Again, just my humble opinion.

Re:It's hard to imagine *SPOILERS* (5, Insightful)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637119)

IMHO, "I don't know why he saved my life. Maybe in those last moments he loved life more than he ever had before. Not just his life, anybody's life, my life. All he'd wanted were the same answers the rest of us want. Where did I come from? Where am I going? How long have I got? All I could do was sit there and watch him die." is the best line in just about any film ever.

Arrrgh where were you when Roy Batty uttered his last words as his biological clock killed him right before that in the same scene? [youtube.com]

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 memories will be lost in time like tears in the rain... Time to die.
Were you in the theater bathroom taking a piss?

OK granted "C-beams" and the Tannhauser Gate whatever that is sounds like total bullshit but that was way better than the graceless and forgettable voiceover from Harrison Ford that followed.

Re:Riddle me this: (2, Interesting)

Papabryd (592535) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636735)

I have to disagree. I watched the 1992 director's cut first and it's the version I've come to associate with "Blade Runner." The voice over is kludgey, awkward, and unnecessary. There only reason it's there is because the production went over budget and Ridley Scott lost control to the bondsman. Given control of the movie they decided that test audiences were getting too confused by the narrative and demanded a voice-over against Scott and apparently Harrison Ford's protest. The rumor is that Ford thought if he performed it poorly enough they would opt against using it. Obviously they went ahead and used it anyway. Granted this is just a rumor, but consider what the rumor is trying to say.

I think the voice-over ruins the subtlety of the movie and if you have the opportunity to watch it more than once, which I suggest you do if it turns out to be your cup of tea, new moments and discoveries will appear with each viewing. Hell I watched it for probably the 20th time last week and noticed something for the first time. In the scene where Deckard and Gaff check out an apartment they are let it by a landlord wearing some oxygen mask apparatus on his chest. And he's on screen for half a second!

The attention to detail and texture in Blade Runner is why it still holds together today, not just the sets and props, but the music, acting, and storytelling. I don't think the voice-over does anything to improve upon what Ridley intended, it ends up only marring a beautiful finish.

Re:Riddle me this: (1)

PoderOmega (677170) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636959)

I watched the director's cut first and when I saw the original I couldn't stand the voice overs. The movies feel completely different. I can see someone liking it the other way though.

Re:Riddle me this: (1)

MrPloppy (1117689) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636829)

How can anyone SERIOUSLY like the voice over version. Surely this should be 'Funny'. Personally I voice over insulting. If you cant work out whats going on from the movie alone then I think this movie is NOT for you.

Re:Riddle me this: (1)

thegrassyknowl (762218) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637039)

The voiceover is excellent. I felt that was the most involved I've even been watching any movie.

There's been a lot of debate whether this is about perfecting the movie or making a boatload more cash. I don't think that there's that many die-hard fans out there who would just go out and purchase yet another release of the movie. Would they really continue to milk it for all it was worth?

Someone elsewhere in the thread compares it to the revised Starwars movies. At least Lucas only really only did one major revision to bring the film more in line with his original dreams. It could be more easily argued that Lucas did that to fanfare the three new movies he was making and probably make a boatload of cash along the way to help pay for them. For me, being comparatively young, I was glad to see the movies on the big screen again being old enough to actually enjoy the experience properly.

If Blade Runner makes a serious worldwide theatrical release with the new version I'll go see it just for the sake of watching it on the big screen and enjoying it. If it stays on DVD I'll just skip it as will probably a lot of people.

Re:Riddle me this: (4, Informative)

greg1104 (461138) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636525)

Some people recommend watching the theatrical release first, presumably because they agree with the studio that the film was too hard to follow otherwise. Unfortunately that version also loses much of the atmosphere of the film, as the voice-over added interrupts and masks the music and visual work that you can appreciate better in the director's cut (or this final version). As long as you can follow the plot this final cut should be the best version yet to watch. So as I see it, this turns into a slightly different question: how to lower the risk that you may get annoyed at not knowing what's going on when you watch the movie?

Watching the voice-over version first is one way to do that, but if you like it you really need to turn right around and watch the final one to get the good version. What I suggest instead to those who like reading Science Fiction books anyway is to read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" first, then see the best available version without the voice-over--that will now be this Final Cut version. That way you will know what's going on but won't have your first viewing distracted by the voice-over. The book and movie have many shared elements but plenty of things that are different between the two; both have unique elements worth experiencing, and it's not the case that the book "ruins" the movie or anything.

Re:Riddle me this: (1)

Bonobo_Unknown (925651) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637035)

But the voice over is so film noir. It's so atmospheric. It really does make the film in my opinion. Similar to Apocalypse Now. And I don't normally like voiceovers.

Re:Riddle me this: (1)

goodbadorugly (837673) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636615)

Having never seen the film, I recently saw this latest release in theaters and have since fallen in love with the movie. It seems to me that from trying to track all that has been reworked and modified from the original film, you could loose the simple enjoyment of just watching the damn thing. Pick up a copy and watch it, then you can go ahead and obsess over minute detail if thats your cup of tea.

Re:Riddle me this: (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636983)

Just read the story- Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep by Philip Dick. Its far better- the movie version lost most of its overtones. On top of that it hasn't aged well, despite being mediocre from the beginning.

Stlll boring, I bet (-1, Flamebait)

rastoboy29 (807168) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636301)

It was boring when it came out, it'll be boring now.

And I'm a sci-fi nut.

Re:Stlll boring, I bet (2, Insightful)

ludomancer (921940) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636473)

You may be a Sci-Fi nut but I am pretty certain the Film Noir genre has to appeal to you a great deal too in order to enjoy this (assuming it doesn't already).
I felt Blade Runner was a masterful work. It did not bore me because what it lacked in action (if action can be "lacking", since it's not a prerequisit for a good film anyhow), it made up for in atmosphere.

Re:Stlll boring, I bet (1)

goodbadorugly (837673) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636743)

I completely agree, since watching the film I've since talked about it with a few people and pretty often I hear "I just cant stay awake through that damn movie". The movie is dark, has very little dialog, and hardly any action. The movie really is a visual masterpiece, and half the fun of watching it comes from interpreting the world that Deckard lives in when theres nobody to cut in every few seconds to explain what is going on on-screen. Also, I really love noir films, so the movie really was a perfect fit.

Re:Stlll boring, I bet (1)

Futile Rhetoric (1105323) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636483)

A sci-fi nut with ADD, you forgot to add.

Re:Stlll boring, I bet (1)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636751)

A sci-fi nut with ADD, you forgot to add.
Heh. "Now wait, there are several very good reasons why Blade Runner is boring. A few of which HEY LET'S GO RIDE BIKES!!!!"

Re:Stlll boring, I bet (3, Insightful)

Zarjazz (36278) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636653)

Being a sci-fi nut myself, along with most of /. readers at a guess, I have to admit that while I appreciate the film it never blew my away when I first saw it - good but not great.

I blame the "Citizen Kane" affect, i.e I only got around to watching the 'great work' after first seeing so many films that were based upon the original, that when I did finally see it with high expectations I was underwhelmed and like "Oh I've seen this before". Sure this may of spoiled my enjoyment, but even so I never had that "wow" moment when watching Blade Runner, even the newer versions. Compare that with a film like 2001 or Alien, I could watch those again today and still be amazed.

Re:Stlll boring, I bet (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636887)

i'm guessing that either you're into sci-fi and not science fiction or that you're just a dumb asshole... or both.

Re:Stlll boring, I bet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21637069)

You would have a lot in common with Roger Ebert, who gave the movie a thimbs down when it forst came out.

Money (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636305)

All the better to line Ridley Scott's pockets while beating a dead horse that has actually gotten worse with each new edit and release.

Re:Money (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636409)

On the other hand, Scott has brought us enough quality entertainment [imdb.com] over the last forty years that I, for one, don't particularly mind. I garnered a lot of respect for the man after the original Alien film. When I look back, I'd say that Alien and Star Wars are the two movies that stick out in my mind from the Seventies.

Re:Money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636803)

How many times has he redone Alien? How many times has he redone Thelma and Louise? Has Scott released the Unexpurgated and Ultimate Definitive Director's cut of Black Rain? Where's the Digitally Remastered and Re-Edited Legend with CGI Tim Curry and four more hours of never-before seen material? Surely Blackhawk Down could outshine its original theatrical offering with heavy edits and rescripting the entire movie.
To be brief, Blade Runner wasn't that good and everything that's been done to it since the original release are pearls before swine. Ridley Scott knows neckbeard fanboys fapping in their mother's basement will buy every single incremental edit and release of a science fiction film for the sake of completeness.
It truly is the search for more money.

Toasted Monkey Balls (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636309)

All squishy in your mouth

Presenting it to a new generation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636321)

The two-disc edition [amazon.com] is certainly worth getting if you've never seen the film before. I like how even if this successive re-editing of the film is getting ridiculous, the hype around the release of this version is bringing Blade Runner to the attention of a new generation. The larger box, however, is overkill for any but completists.

Doesn't matter. (4, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636331)

The man is releasing different versions of his film. If the changes aren't to your liking, fortunately for you, there's still the original right at your fingertips. What does it matter, then, if he's cashing in or trying to perfect his work?

Hell, not like these changes are generally of any real significance (although, given how extensively different the director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven was, Blade Runner may be significantly different). For all the bitching that was done about Star Wars, for example, barely anything was changed in those movies. I just really don't see why this is worth getting worked up over, as people inevitably will.

Re:Doesn't matter. (5, Insightful)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636369)

The original version isn't always kept available. The original ending of Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove is available only on an old laserdisc; no subsequent DVD issue had it. The only version of Star Wars available on DVD is the Special Edition. Now, you are right that the changes are few, but they are infuriating. Lucas claimed that in adding digital special effects he was only making the film closer to his 1970s dreams, that's fine. But having Greedo shoot first was a significant change to Han Solo's characterization, and really it seems that Lucas was looking more to direct marketing of the film towards a gullible child market than preserve a solid artistic vision.

Re:Doesn't matter. (3, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636445)

George Lucas never had a solid artistic vision in his life, and I agree that he was going for the action-figure market, particularly in the last three films and the re-releases of the original trilogy.

That said, however, this is the Age of the Tracker. Everything is available, and if you can't get if from legitimate channels, well ... there are other means. That often plays hob with the studio's desire to control the re-release of films in order to target the next generation of moviegoers, but that's just too bad.

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636503)

I don't know about that. I think that while the original Star Wars trilogy is 6 hours of cliches from start to finish (terrible, terrible plot), Lucas created an excellent universe to set his awful plot in. The Star Wars movies have an artistic vision in that sense, I think. Having an excellent world with a crappy story isn't as good as having an excellent world and an excellent story, but it's still impressive in its own right.

Ironically, in the prequels, the setting didn't have as much charm, but the plot was legitimately good and interesting. I guess that Lucas can only write good plots or good settings, not both.

Re:Doesn't matter. (1, Redundant)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636689)

Well, I look at the term "artistic vision" as being a sort of holistic concept ... you have to get it all right if you want to be remembered for having such a vision. Saying that you can write a good plot -or- a good setting doesn't really cut the mustard the way I see it. The original Alien would be an example of a sci-fi film that truly had an artistic vision: H.R. Giger's work combined with Scott's production values resulted in a classic motion picture.

Personally, I'd say the first three of Lucas' efforts came much closer to that goal than the last batch. Certainly I enjoyed the prequels far more (heck, my girlfriend fell asleep during Episode III: I only stayed awake 'cause I'd just paid twenty bucks and dammit I was going to get my money's worth.)

I will say this: so far as the cliches are concerned, truthfully those films created many of those cliches! Star Wars one liners have become an integral part of our pop culture, much as Star Trek before it. Not that Lucas' scripts were anything to write home about, but we've certainly absorbed a lot of them.

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636449)

Actually, that's specifically the plot point I hate hearing about in Star Wars, because in my opinion, it changes nothing about Solo. It matters to the character about as much as what times he takes a piss. Strictly my opinion, of course, but no matter who shoots first, he's still a bad-ass mercenary who's only looking out for himself.

Re:Doesn't matter. (3, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636737)

It moves his motive from self-defense to murder. If you can't see that being a difference I can't help you.

But at least ask yourself this: if it makes no difference why did they change the order?

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636781)

That's an excellent question. I don't have an answer. However, I will say that it does not change the motive. It's still self-defense, in either version. A pre-emptive strike is not generally considered as ethical, but that doesn't make it murder. If someone was going to shoot me and I knew it (and Han obviously would've), you'd better damn well believe I'd shoot them first... and I'd still consider it self-defense.

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

Bemopolis (698691) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636893)

If someone was going to shoot me and I knew it (and Han obviously would've), you'd better damn well believe I'd shoot them first... and I'd still consider it self-defense.
And that tells us something about you. You might even call it a *characterization* about you, which distinguishes you from someone who wouldn't fire first. And that's why the change matters. And even if I were to allow that it did not change the characterization of Han, it ruined the pacing of the scene, so the mod isn't even defensible from an artistic standpoint.

But that is all dust in the shadow of the suck that is Jar Jar Binks.

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637057)

You are technically correct that it's a change in the characterization. But the foul that is cried is that it's a major change in the characterization, not that it's merely a change. I think that it's a quite minor aspect in the character, slightly more important than something like the color of his eyes or his hair.

Agreed about Jar-Jar, though. I was sincerely hoping that Lucas would offer up some fanservice in the form of him being a casualty of Anakin's fall to the dark side. :(

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636481)

The only version of Star Wars available on DVD is the Special Edition.
Sorry to double post, but I only noticed this as I hit submit. What you say isn't true. Something like 6 months after the initial DVD release, they released the original cut as well.

At any rate, I probably unintentionally caused confusion when I mentioned my two points so close to each other. While you're correct that the original isn't always available, I didn't mean to say it was. In this case it is, and that's why I say the changes don't matter. The final cut could be full of Teletubbies, and one could still easily fall back on the original cut.

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636607)

The only version of Star Wars available on DVD is the Special Edition.

Sorry to double post, but I only noticed this as I hit submit. What you say isn't true. Something like 6 months after the initial DVD release, they released the original cut as well.


Sort of. They released a copy of the Laserdisc masters on DVD, including the matted 4:3 presentation and terrible aliasing. But hey, it's better than nothing, I suppose.

Re:Doesn't matter. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636675)

or you can go be a geek and find the original VHS, then transfer over using whatever you wish to do in post production...

I would do this, but I allready own it on VHS, why bother punting it to DVD in the first place. :0

Re:Doesn't matter. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636823)

You had me until you used "artistic vision" and "Star Wars" in the same context. I mean, COME ON. There was a wolf man in the bar scene for crying out loud.

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

ucblockhead (63650) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636833)

They are releasing a multiple disk set [amazon.com] that includes the original theatrical release, the original "Director's Cut" and this new changed cut. (Much like Criterion did for Brazil, where they give you both Gilliam's original edit and the shitty happy-ending hack-job, so you can see exactly how bad it is.)

Gilliam and Scott, both far better directors than Lucas, aren't afraid of putting everything out there and letting the viewer decide which is best.

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636943)

Han Shot First!

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637081)

The original trilogy is available as a sort of bonus disk with "limited edition" release of the "enhanced [amazon.com] " versions. They look like shit, but they are available.

For some reason they chose to record them in masked 4:3 instead of anamorphic.

I didn't even know that I have never seen the original cut of Dr. Strangelove. That's a real disappointment.

-Peter

Re:Doesn't matter. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21637135)

Any of the 5-disc ultimate collection versions of Blade Runner: The Final Cut include the original theatrical, international, director's cut, and workprint cut of the film.

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

WhoBeDaPlaya (984958) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636479)

Yes it does. Greedo shot first! :P

The obvious question... (4, Funny)

mrsam (12205) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636361)

Does Han shoot first in this one?






(...sorry)

Re:The obvious question... (1)

murderlegendre (776042) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636501)

This is a very up-beat version, so - Nope, Pris shoots first and we get to hear a LOT about Leon's mother.

Also, get ready for replicans.

Re:The obvious question... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636519)

And second and third...

Re:The obvious question... (5, Funny)

Robber Baron (112304) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637061)

Does Han shoot first in this one?
It could be worse...

"Meesa seen things, yousa wouldn believe!"

All I Really Care About (2, Interesting)

His Shadow (689816) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636371)

Clean up the video, go CD quality on the sound, and get rid of the dialog artifacts artifacts that were only in there to further the voice over, which I hate with a passion after seeing the first Directos Cut.

Big Deal (0)

explosivejared (1186049) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636379)

Having seen the film already, I know what to expect from the film. I know what I enjoy about the film. Unless there is some new change to the plot or style of the film, which there doesn't appear to be from the article, I'm not buying. This seems like an attempt to cash in under the guise of finally giving Scott full artistic control. Maybe it's just me, but the film already has a meaning to me, so I could care less about whatever minor tweaks Scott wants to make. I loved the film and think Scott made a masterpiece, but I just don't see the need for the incessant revision and releases.

Re:Big Deal (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636915)

I'm not particularly interested in the plot tweaks, but I am VERY interested in the extensive remastering and sound improvements. The DVD I have now is a pretty poor transfer, almost unwatchable. A good quality remaster in MOST welcome.

Changed or not? (3, Insightful)

Thornae (53316) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636415)

From TFA: In the scene where Batty confronts Tyrell, the line, "I want more life, fucker" has been replaced with "I want more life, father".

I'm wondering if this is actually a change. In the original, it's a beautiful bit of ambiguity: Hauer slurs the word, so that it sounds halfway between "father" and "fucker", neatly summing up his feelings towards Tyrell.
If they've actually re-dubbed that, I'll be a little disappointed.

Oh well, Scott's still unlikely to mess things up as much as Lucas did ...

Re:Changed or not? (1)

Txiasaeia (581598) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636597)

Regardless, so long as you spend a bit more on the 4-disk version, you'll be getting *all* of the versions of the film. It's about time!

Re:Changed or not? (1)

Thornae (53316) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636695)

True, but it's something I'd like to see kept in Scott's final ultimate no-this-time-I-mean-it-really edition.

Anyways, I recently placed an order for the 5-disc version, with the work print as well, so it's not like I'll be missing out.

I think it's well worth having the original version, too, as with the narration it's an excellent piece of modern noir (if you ignore the happy ending).

Re:Changed or not? (2, Interesting)

murderlegendre (776042) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636661)

I'm wondering if this is actually a change. In the original, it's a beautiful bit of ambiguity: Hauer slurs the word, so that it sounds halfway between "father" and "fucker", neatly summing up his feelings towards Tyrell.

I've watched this film thirty-plus times, and it sounds like 'fucker' to me, every time. Really not sure where people get this idea of a slurred / doubled pronunciation. Don't forget that Hauer is a Nederlander by birth and despuie all his work and training, isn't immune from occasional inflections.

FWIW, wikiquote "I want more life, fucker" points to an IMDB 'trivia' entry, which could have been added or edited by just about anyone. Personally, I just don't hear this..

"So what exactly has changed?" (0, Flamebait)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636419)

It has a beginning, a middle, and an end.

I want more life "father"?? (3, Insightful)

NotZed (19455) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636437)

WTF? The guys' gonna die and he goes to the arsehole who made him and calls him father? Why cut out 'fucker', it makes much more sense.

Re:I want more life "father"?? (1)

RFaulder (1016762) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636705)

It was originally supposed to sound muddled, so you could not tell if it was father or fucker. I guess we'll see if it's still ambiguous.

Personally I'm holding out for the (3, Funny)

sammyo (166904) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636441)

Revised Ultra Final Re-Revisited Very Very Final Directors Special Absolutely Final Cut

i saw it at the ziegfeld two months ago (2, Interesting)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636443)

i don't remember many changes. dancer chicks in hockey masks, more unicorns running around

and?

doesn't f***ing matter what they changed in minutaie

if i love the film for the same reason so many slashdotters do, it's one of the best f***ing movies ever made, and the minutaie doesn't matter, the whole of its incredible existence does

and it really is best in the theatres. 17 inch crt monitors don't do it much justice. if you missed it in the theatre 2 months ago, all i have to say to you is

if only you had seen what i had seen with your eyes

or something like that ;-)

Re:i saw it at the ziegfeld two months ago (1, Insightful)

Bottlemaster (449635) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636651)

and it really is best in the theatres. 17 inch crt monitors don't do it much justice
Maybe I have a too-short attention span, but I always thought the movie was paced a little slow and had too many long boring shots of just the LA cityscape and weird music (I did, however, enjoy the film).

Then I saw the Final Cut in a theater last night. The scenery is breathtaking when you can actually see it, and, with the soundtrack, really accents the mood of the film. I was constantly engaged and was surprised (because I've already seen it five or six times) at my reluctance each time I ducked out of the theater to grab another beer. Blade Runner is amazing on a big screen.

Re:i saw it at the ziegfeld two months ago (1)

blagger99 (473150) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637037)

I totally agree. Vangelis' music and the future LA scenery have a huge impact in the Final Cut . The voiceover in the original just distracts from that. Plus the voiceover is redundant anyway, there is plenty of exposition through Deckers conversations with the police chief and the head of the replicant corporation. Really, I thought the scenery was great in the theatrical release, but in the Final Cut it takes on a whole new dimension. For that alone the Final Cut comes out as way superior than the theatrical release.

Re:i saw it at the ziegfeld two months ago (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636681)

Oh yeah, the dancer chicks in the hockey masks. I forgot to mention that in my other post. After seeing it last month, some friends and I were like "And what was up with the hockey mask chicks?!?"

SPOILER ALERT! (1)

CranberryKing (776846) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636489)

Do not read below lest ye wish spoiled know[..ledge]:

I saw this recently. It's good and worth seeing. I've seen too many versions including the original in theatres (when it came out via flickering candle light) to remember all the differences. As far as I can tell there is really just a few small scenes added and maybe some lighting/mood appears different. All with the exception of one small but key scene. Deckard has a dream in which he sees a unicorn. This gives more significance to the epiphany he has when he picks up the origami unicorn left by Gaff outside his door. This is conveying to him that he (Deckard) too is a replicant and that Gaff knows this. This idea has been discussed and I am told (haven't read it) is true in "Do Androids..". If anything it is worth seeing again on the big screen.

Counting replicants (3, Insightful)

starglider29a (719559) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636795)

Since we have the Spoiler Alert above, I can say this...

In the Director's Cut, RS added the possibility that Deckard was a replicant, while the original (with voiceover) made us assume he was what PK Dick calls "An authentic human", and frankly, not a very good one. I and my BR fan peeps debated whether or not Deckard ***was*** a replicant, based on evidence from the movie. But we didn't really debate whether or not RS wanted us to debate it. He clearly wanted us to think that he POSSIBLY was. There were MANY clues in the Director's Cut that supported his Replicantshipiness. Not the least of which was the missing replicant, one of which "got fried." Some (not I) thought that Deckard was the missing replicant, re-programmed to kill the others. I always thought it was a continuity gaff. (Sorry for the pun)

I saw it in LA on the huge screen, and aside from the sheer grandeur of enhanced city effects, the most significant change was that they changed the numbers of replicants that arrived and were fried. THERE WERE NO MISSING REPLICANTS after this new, improved release. By changing that gaff, RS sent a clear signal that Deckard's Replicanticity was ***NOT*** a foregone conclusion. It is STILL left to the viewer to decide.

But I gotta tell you, I still prefer the voiceover. Although they fixed the "dead air" when Roy dies and Deckard just stares stupidly (sans voiceover), there is still too much lost without the voiceover. We really have no clue WHY Roy tried to kill Deckard, then saved him.

I was PRAYING that they at least added the original finale, with the "best line that most people have ever heard in a movie..." "We didn't know how long we had... who does?

Someday, I'll get a bottle of Johnny Walker Black (notice the label on deckard's booze... AND ROY'S!!!) rip both versions into an iMac (with voice command... Enhance 34 to 46. k'ch k'ch k'ch beep beep beep) and make my own cut. Or, maybe someone has already beat me to it?

Five versions (5, Informative)

magunning (1177371) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636543)

The box set released in a few weeks will contain five versions of the movie.

Workprint version - pre-release test screening version
US original cinematic version
International original cinematic version
Directors cut - 1992 version - approved by Scott, but he was not directly involved
Final cut - Scott had complete control over this version

Re:Five versions (1)

MidnightBrewer (97195) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636719)

Here's the important question - I am toying with buying the HD-DVD or BluRay version, but I haven't committed to a player yet. As an American living in Japan, region locking is a big issue for me. From what I can Google, BluRay is still region-locked, but in a way that works for me (Japan and the US are lumped together.) I see conflicting information that HD-DVD was supposed to be region free, but now maybe it's not, and there's no news more recent than 2006 to help me decide. Does anybody know how this finally settled out?

Re:Five versions (2, Informative)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636807)

HD DVD is region free, which is kind of nice since some of the BluRay exclusives in the US are released on HD DVD elsewhere in the world. Xploited Cinema [xploitedcinema.com] specializes in these releases for those of us in the States.

f@!$er (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636573)

What's new? Lessee:

"I want more life, father."
and
"Two of them got fried..."
were two of the biggest things that stood out to me.

Apparently some of the cuts where they removed the voiceover were shortened a bit, too. (Since the voiceover was simply removed for the original Director's Cut, the scenes where Deckard was previously talking now hung a bit long with nothing going on).

What's new in blade runner (1)

luder (923306) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636641)

The price tag?

Riddley Scott vs The Script Writer (2, Interesting)

MrSteveSD (801820) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636697)

It always seems to me that Scott was going against what the scriptwriter intended. He keeps adding in clues that Deckard is a replicant but the script really doesn't support that idea at all.

Re:Riddley Scott vs The Script Writer (1)

starglider29a (719559) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636847)

Let's Get His Ridleyness on an Ask Slashdot and have our way with him!

First question... What's with you and Unicorns!? (Anyone see Legend?)

The Digital Bits' Review (3, Informative)

antdude (79039) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636703)

Yesterday, The Digital Bits [thedigitalbits.com] posted its long review on this set.

See It (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636819)

I saw this latest _Blade Runner_ remaster a couple months ago at the Ziegfield, the biggest screen in NYC. I'd seen it there about 7-8 years ago, the last time it was rereleased in theaters. It was a tremendous spectacle, perfectly balanced in pace and quiet inevitability. Like a light sculpture at the end of a huge room, telling a story about humans and our creations.

Don't miss it if you can catch it. I hope they do remaster it again sometime, just so there's an excuse to show it at the Ziegfield again.

perfect this vision, jerk (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636825)

All I want to know, does Harrison Ford still shoot first?

Changes (1)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636837)

1) All the guns have been replaced with walkie-talkies.
2) All the replicants have been replaced with Ewoks.

So does this mean ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636845)

So, in this cut, does Decker stop getting his ass kicked so thoroughly and repeatedly by virtually every character he encounters?

Elite operative indeed.

Brazil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21636885)

Blade Runner is cool, but Brazil is far better IMHO.

Still waiting for E.T. The Final Cut (2, Funny)

ivoras (455934) | more than 6 years ago | (#21636971)

Personally, I'm still waiting for "E.T. - The Final Cut", where the walkie-talkies get replaced with plush Teletubby toys!

Yet another cut... (0, Troll)

JackMeyhoff (1070484) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637019)

.. this movie has been cut more than a Jew.

Stupid comment (2, Informative)

glwtta (532858) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637049)

"Equally, if Deckard really is a Nexus 7 created to work as an exterminator, why is he lacking the strength of the inferior Nexus 6 models he is chasing?"

Well, gee, if he is not supposed to know he's a replicant, super-human strength might be a bit of a give-away, no?

Cash in? (2, Informative)

Lahiru (839803) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637101)

Blade Runner has only been released once on DVD, over 10 years ago; as you can imagine, that DVD isn't exactly a top of the line release anymore. If they wanted to cash in easily they could've just issued a new edition with a clean transfer and sound and a few obligatory special features. If you look at the specs for these releases, they are quite comprehensive! And from what I've read about this new release it's been in the works for some time and a lot of work has gone into it... While, obviously, the studio released a new version to make money, they seem to have done a good job [wikipedia.org] with this one.

First-hand account (1)

Philotic (957984) | more than 6 years ago | (#21637109)

For those of you that haven't seen that Final Cut yet, the changes are all pretty minor. The biggest change is an alteration of a line of Roy's dialogue. In the scene between him and Dr. Tyrell, in the original versions of the movie he says, "I wan't more life, focker." In the new version, it was changed to "father". Other than that, the out of place blue sky at the end is made cloudy, and there are various sub-5 second shots throughout, which mostly serve to strengthen the romance between Deckard and Rachel. I can't speak to the quality of the re-mastering, as a theater is a poor place to compare to dvd.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?