Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Well apparently he went back and gave us the other version because the studio meddled with it and forced the "happy" ending. The altered version is a far superior as a film.

I think that's why it got a cult following mid 90's because the new edit really made it a much more appealing film.

It's a bit weird for him to go to the effort of making it completely unambiguous then to go back on it for the crappier original cut.

I think Deckard being a replicant hunter who isn't aware he is a replicant makes for a more interesting story than if he is human, although leaving it completely ambiguous like you said would have worked just as well.

You're really having trouble reading my posts aren't you?

 Medium of Death wrote:
You're really having trouble reading my posts aren't you?

I'm just commenting I'm not trying to counter what you're saying.

 Orlanth wrote:
I like both versions of the film, both with and without the talkover.

The first release (talkover) is very ambiguous as to what Deckard is, and therrefore implies he is human due to the lack of evidence to the contrary.

The directors cut added in the unicorn dream sequence, changing the meaning of Gant's comments, which in the original mean - I will let her go, because she is doomed anyway. In the directors cut it means - I will let you both go, because you are doomed anyway.

Thank you for that clarification.

 adamsouza wrote:
I saw the movie more than once. Never thought Deckard was replicant. Years later the director pulls douche creative type move and says it was obvious he was replicant.

This is what makes me worry about the sequel. I've always liked the version with the voiceover narration and the ending where they're driving away from LA and all the other Blade Runners. Is he a replicant? Maybe but the ambiguity is what makes it work.

I don't get it...was there a Do Androids Dream of Electric Sleep sequel?

This divergence from the source material perplexes me.

Pretty simple- Harrison Ford is now a late model Deckard replicant. You build them at all stages of life to optimize their roles, and to see if they can operate sanely longer in the later stages of life. Maybe his memory is misfiled, or maybe all replicants enjoy Cylon style reincarnation, and Roy didn't know that. Robot bodies are expensive! Don't tell them it doesn't matter if they die.

I still can't believe that people are buying the idea Batty saved Deckard because Batty wanted his memories preserved! It's nonsense and RS said so himself!!!

The next person who brings up the idea will be dry humped into submission!!!


As for the unicorn - I dreamed about a unicorn once. Doesn't make me a bad ass cop!!

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I still can't believe that people are buying the idea Batty saved Deckard because Batty wanted his memories preserved! It's nonsense and RS said so himself!!!

After inflicting Prometheus on us, Ridley Scott isn't allowed to have an opinion on anything, ever.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I still can't believe that people are buying the idea Batty saved Deckard because Batty wanted his memories preserved! It's nonsense and RS said so himself!!!

Then what was his motive for doing so?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I don't get it...was there a Do Androids Dream of Electric Sleep sequel?

This divergence from the source material perplexes me.

Blade Runner had tie in novels separate from Dick's book which replaced Deckard with a female protagonist and continued the plot IIRC.

Uh, though the original book was convoluted as hell, so I'm fine with the film filling in the blanks.

 Spacemanvic wrote:
That's what I hear, I've got mixed feelings.

On the one hand, Id love to see what happens to Deckard. on the other, why mess with a classic?

After what he did with Prometheus all I can say is NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!

I need to go back and watch my copy of this, I don't know what you guys are saying about Deckards eyes.

As far as his girlfirend, I do remembeer them saying that she was special, no experation date on her. If Deckard IS a replicant, maybe hes the same way. Why waste a good hunter after only 4 years?

As it is, I never thought that he was anything other than human. The thought of a sequel makes me crenge at the thought of all the crappy CGI they would use in it instead of tyhe simple dark noir themed sets.

Small piece of trivia, the movie Soldier was made with the idea that it took place in the same universe as Blade Runner. Tattooed on Todds arm are several of the battles that Batty talked about, meaning they served in the same wars. Also, one of the blue spinner cars is seen on top of one of the junk piles in the end fight between Todd and the young soldier. The poducer talked about it in the commentary.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Please no, not after Prometheus. Leave the classics alone.

This. I honestly just don't trust the Hollywood machine to produce a worth-while sequel. The system is broken for story and what we'll get will have a fortune spend on visuals and graphics and explosions and then - well - nothing for story. Or if there is a story its going to be pepper potted with plot holes - likely scenes missing and sliced in half for time constraints and probably using a LOT of theories (comedy character) on overdrive mode which makes them silly.

The other side is that the original worked because it asked questions, produced a block of information and left the viewer with enough information to debate multiple lines of thought. The film didn't answer all the questions and leaving them up in the air is what made the film more popular and more lasting. A sequel is going to have to follow down one line of thinking; that will instantly negate all that previous dreaming and thinking and debating on the part of fans. Unless they pick the right on they could alienate a majority proportion of the population; and if they pick something wildcard that doesn't work we'll have another mess of a sequel that should never have been.

Raven911 - also raises a valid point - CGI is too clean. Blade Runner was dark, gritty and had that hazy realistic feel to it - CGI will just smother it in cleanliness and crisp clear sharp lines.

I don't think Harrison Ford has it in him any longer his acting is getting worse and worse.

See, I never thought of Deckard as a replicant (admittedly, I haven't seen the narrated cut version).

I always thought that the origami unicorn was confirmation that the other cop had been there already and chose to let her live...which is why we hear his voice saying "Too bad she won't live. But then again, who does?" I believe that was because he didn't know that she didn't have an expiration date, and so he thought that she would expire.

 mega_bassist wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Please no, not after Prometheus. Leave the classics alone.

This is how I feel about it.

I liked Prometheus….

Prometheus was an ok action film so long as you can totally not associate it what so ever with the original Alien films. Rather like the AvP films because they all kind of break the whole Alien story setup by having the rare Aliens EVERYWHERE

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I don't get it...was there a Do Androids Dream of Electric Sleep sequel?

This divergence from the source material perplexes me.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Blade-Runner-Edge-Human/dp/0752803603/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1409587736&sr=1-4&keywords=kw+jeter

I have this and have read it, but so long ago, don't ask me to comment on it's quality nor it's content!

 TheMeanDM wrote:

I always thought that the origami unicorn was confirmation that the other cop had been there already and chose to let her live...which is why we hear his voice saying "Too bad she won't live. But then again, who does?" I believe that was because he didn't know that she didn't have an expiration date, and so he thought that she would expire.

That's how I understood it as well.

Raven911 wrote:
I need to go back and watch my copy of this, I don't know what you guys are saying about Deckards eyes.

Not the best pic, but you get the idea.

 Overread wrote:
Prometheus was an ok action film so long as you can totally not associate it what so ever with the original Alien films. Rather like the AvP films because they all kind of break the whole Alien story setup by having the rare Aliens EVERYWHERE

Prometheus was absolute crap that couldn't hold together if you used duct tape.

The problem with Prometheus IMO is that it originally WAS an Aliens screenplay and script. You can easily find the script with a Web search. In that script, the planet WAS LV-426, the ship WAS the same one as in Alien, etc. I think it's an interesting read.

If Scott really wanted to do something different, he should have started more from scratch. A lot of the stuff from the Alien script is in Prometheus, making for a confusing and half-baked Aliens film.

Lost of jump the shark nonsense:
*How is a person who just had major abdominal surgery running around minutes after?

*Whats with the old guy - aka why is he a secret?

*Why does everyone in this movie make decisions like they are on drugs? And not the good ones but the "BUGS ARE CRAWLING ON MY ARMS!" kind of drugs?

*Why does the biologist want to touch the freaking snake thing? That seems to violate every rule he would have, almost like you don't do that because THAT ALIEN might kill you..oh wait.

*Why is the android doing weird stupid gak all the time?

*Why would they bring a head on board and then zap it with a probe until it exploded? What are they...two?

*Why are they going to the Engineer world when clearly its been thousands/tens of thousands of years? Wouldn't they all be all dead or something?

*Why would the Engineer wake up and then kill them all? Why would it pursue the two humans back to their life pod and not just hop another Engineer ship?

*So are they saying that Engineers were around when life began? Thats hundreds of millions of years, and no evolution on their part?

*So the secret to life on earth is to just drink acid so your DNA goes in the water? Thats er...sounds like someone was dropping acid when they thought of that.

I also always wanted to like Blade Runner, but always thought it was just way too boring.

If Harrison Ford is gonna be in part 2, he's gonna be old.. so no reason why we can't have old rutger hauer and old sean young too? Even if a replicant is dead, they can just make a new one that looks old. I'm sure there's an app for that.

I don't hate him for wanting to do sequels. Scott is better than Lucas or Abrams recently so I have faith. I fear for Star Wars in Abrams hands.

Actually I think Abrams will do much better with SW than ST. You can tell its what he actually wanted to do.

 Frazzled wrote:
Actually I think Abrams will do much better with SW than ST. You can tell its what he actually wanted to do.

Yeah, plus the few sneak peaks we've had have shown a lot of physical props (X-Wing, Millenium Falcon etc.) which is good. I've never seen CGI which looked better than a well done physical prop. Having the actual thing there which the actors see and can interact with makes it a lot easier to get a good performance, I think.

 Frazzled wrote:
Actually I think Abrams will do much better with SW than ST. You can tell its what he actually wanted to do.

I think he'll do better with SW than ST, too... but that's still damning with faint praise considering how bad he did with ST. And I swear, if he jizzes lense flare all over SW like he did with ST I'm gonna do something ill-advised and probably felonious in nature.