Blade Runner 4K UHD (1982)

[brian9229]

I rewatched the Rachael scene several times in 2049 and each time I got a giddy, don't believe what I'm seeing, kind of feeling. Just totally convincing. Im glad they didn't do a featurette on it, I don't want to know.Tarkins cg was unsettling. Especially in one shot he looks back at a leaving krennic and his head almost seems to shift ever so slightly. Creepy. Not in a good way..

[koberulz]

I didn't even realise it was CG, but I came in not knowing.

I knew about Tarkin and Leia beforehand, and they looked worse. The only issue for me though was the corners of Tarkin's mouth, everything else looked pretty convincing.

[gnj1958]

Originally Posted by musicbreath

Wow is this grainy! I understand a movie having grain, but this much? It's distracting as hell! Looks blurry too. Are there bad discs out there? This can't be how this looks in 4k.

The grain is a bit excessive in a few scenes but overall it looks great. I'm not noticing any blurriness though.

[KcMsterpce]

As for de-aging... it's done AGAIN in "Ant-Man and the Wasp".

This isn't really a spoiler... it's the opening scene of the movie, but I'll be polite anyway:

[Show spoiler]I'd say Michael Douglas looks pretty damned good, with slight oddness on the lips/mouth when he's talking, as he bends over a kid and says something.
Michelle Pfeiffer looks really, really REALLY good.

[4kUltraBD]

Well, I finally received my special edition 4k UHD box set from AMZ UK a few days ago. Needless to say, I am beyond thrilled to finally have this in my collection.

I have watched the final cut roughly 5-7 times in the past year, and am extremely familiar with it at this point. My cousin was over for the holiday, and she is somewhat of a film buff herself, so my girlfriend and I were discussing it with her.

We were talking about Deckard being human vs a replicant. I had myself convinced that the story line in both films works best if you think of him as human. I know Ridley Scott states he is 100% replicant without question, but I honestly felt the idea of him being human made both films even more profound.

Tonight I watched the workprint version for the first time, and thought about the idea of Deckard as a replicant, with zero room for interpretation otherwise. I wanted to watch this first cut closely for clues that confirm Deckard truly is a replicant, and not something that Ridley thought up later and pasted into later cuts for whatever reasons he had.

I must admit that I am fully convinced that Deckard is indeed a replicant, that Ridley really did have that planned all along (at least before studio meddling), and that both story lines actually work even better this way. Especially when you take a look at 2049 and the character of Wallace.

I have watched 2049 3-4 times since it was released on home video, and I really struggled ascribing a motive to the Wallace character. This bugged me, and I couldn't figure out what I was missing. I realize now that Wallace simply has a serious God complex, as well as an insane ego. I also feel that he is extremely jealous of Tyrell's accomplishments with Deckard and Rachael. Hence the relentless desire to create life.

I will not drone on about all the things I spotted and thought about, nor will I get into spoiler territory with all of the pieces that fell into place inside my head upon this viewing.

I will say, however, that as much as I already loved both of these films, my appreciation for them has increased considerably from the realizations I had tonight.

I highly recommend casual fans, or those that do not already hold these films in high esteem, to please watch them both repeatedly (if necessary) and take the time to consider what is being said by all characters at all times.

I feel repeated viewings really give the opportunity to digest things, an opportunity to catch different lines that you may have dismissed or not think much about, and also watch with a new/different understanding every time you go through it again.

I seriously cannot imagine that anybody who enjoys intelligent sci-fi would come away from doing so without considering these two films to be true classics and two of the best movies ever made.

At this point, I can sincerely say that BR and 2049 are my favorite films of all time. (dethroning the lotr extended trilogy for me).

[JimDiGriz]

Originally Posted by Mitchings

The only logical conclusion when you have an LG C7 + Samsung S9 + a copy of Blade Runner 4K...






The rest in in spoiler tags to avoid congestion (data heavy!):

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

I have too much time on my hands..

And this is a good example of why I hate the net sometimes...

[JimDiGriz]

Originally Posted by 4kUltraBD

Well, I finally received my special edition 4k UHD box set from AMZ UK a few days ago. Needless to say, I am beyond thrilled to finally have this in my collection.

I have watched the final cut roughly 5-7 times in the past year, and am extremely familiar with it at this point. My cousin was over for the holiday, and she is somewhat of a film buff herself, so my girlfriend and I were discussing it with her.

We were talking about Deckard being human vs a replicant. I had myself convinced that the story line in both films works best if you think of him as human. I know Ridley Scott states he is 100% replicant without question, but I honestly felt the idea of him being human made both films even more profound.

Tonight I watched the workprint version for the first time, and thought about the idea of Deckard as a replicant, with zero room for interpretation otherwise. I wanted to watch this first cut closely for clues that confirm Deckard truly is a replicant, and not something that Ridley thought up later and pasted into later cuts for whatever reasons he had.

I must admit that I am fully convinced that Deckard is indeed a replicant, that Ridley really did have that planned all along (at least before studio meddling), and that both story lines actually work even better this way. Especially when you take a look at 2049 and the character of Wallace.

I have watched 2049 3-4 times since it was released on home video, and I really struggled ascribing a motive to the Wallace character. This bugged me, and I couldn't figure out what I was missing. I realize now that Wallace simply has a serious God complex, as well as an insane ego. I also feel that he is extremely jealous of Tyrell's accomplishments with Deckard and Rachael. Hence the relentless desire to create life.

I will not drone on about all the things I spotted and thought about, nor will I get into spoiler territory with all of the pieces that fell into place inside my head upon this viewing.

I will say, however, that as much as I already loved both of these films, my appreciation for them has increased considerably from the realizations I had tonight.

I highly recommend casual fans, or those that do not already hold these films in high esteem, to please watch them both repeatedly (if necessary) and take the time to consider what is being said by all characters at all times.

I feel repeated viewings really give the opportunity to digest things, an opportunity to catch different lines that you may have dismissed or not think much about, and also watch with a new/different understanding every time you go through it again.

I seriously cannot imagine that anybody who enjoys intelligent sci-fi would come away from doing so without considering these two films to be true classics and two of the best movies ever made.

At this point, I can sincerely say that BR and 2049 are my favorite films of all time. (dethroning the lotr extended trilogy for me).

Blade Runner is my favourite film of all time period. Has been for oh...at least 25 years now.

2049 is great but its not up to the original. It is as good as anyone could have reasonably expected though.

[Nothing371]

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

Blade Runner is my favourite film of all time period. Has been for oh...at least 25 years now.

2049 is great but its not up to the original. It is as good as anyone could have reasonably expected though.

I mean, if it was your favorite film for 25 years then yeah! It would be hard for something new to uproot your firm belief in less than a year.

[NotASpeckOfCereal]

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

2049 is great but its not up to the original. It is as good as anyone could have reasonably expected though.

It is. It could have been a lot worse and usually is with these things. I'm thankful for what it is.

[4kUltraBD]

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

Blade Runner is my favourite film of all time period. Has been for oh...at least 25 years now.

2049 is great but its not up to the original. It is as good as anyone could have reasonably expected though.

Admittedly, I am also partial to the first film, but that could simply be due to that fact that I have spent more time watching and analyzing it.

I need to do a "deep dive" into 2049 as well. I am sure there are many things I have still yet to glean upon further viewings.

[JimDiGriz]

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

It is. It could have been a lot worse and usually is with these things. I'm thankful for what it is.

Even Villeneuve admitted he had created a "monster". I think he was implying that he'd lost sight of making a film to appeal to as many people as possible and ended up creating a hardcore sequel that Blade Runner fans would love which explains the box office returns.

Im glad he did though! And lets hope he creates another "monster" with Dune. 15 certificate please!

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

Even Villeneuve admitted he had created a "monster". I think he was implying that he'd lost sight of making a film to appeal to as many people as possible and ended up creating a hardcore sequel that Blade Runner fans would love which explains the box office returns.

Im glad he did though! And lets hope he creates another "monster" with Dune. 15 certificate please!

I hope Dune is done properly. I enjoy Lynch's version, but it could have been much more.

[gnj1958]

Originally Posted by 4kUltraBD

I know Ridley Scott states he is 100% replicant without question

He didn't write the book and he didn't write the script. He's in no position to decide whether Deckard is a Replicant or not.

[SwaGGInTheShadows]

Originally Posted by gnj1958

He didn't write the book and he didn't write the script. He's in no position to decide whether Deckard is a Replicant or not.

Another great rebuttal.
(Im in the 'Deckard is NOT a replicant. Though i might know the truth deep down after all. .....)

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by gnj1958

He didn't write the book and he didn't write the script. He's in no position to decide whether Deckard is a Replicant or not.

Yeah, he only directed the film.

[BluProofie]

And the book is irrelevant since it’s so different from the film.

[SwaGGInTheShadows]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

And the book is irrelevant since it’s so different from the film.

Another good one.....
This is why i refuse to debate this anymore lol

[Nothing371]

Debate it all you want; there is not a definitive answer.

It doesn't even matter what Ridley Scott thinks. There's a mountain of on-screen evidence to the contrary, and several things to support his claim as well. Personally I think it's foolish when directors take the paradox (ending) approach, and then later act as if they were clearly stating things one way.

[SwaGGInTheShadows]

Originally Posted by Nothing371

Debate it all you want; there is not a definitive answer.

It doesn't even matter what Ridley Scott thinks. There's a mountain of on-screen evidence to the contrary, and several things to support his claim as well. Personally I think it's foolish when directors take the paradox (ending) approach, and then later act as if they were clearly stating things one way.

That's exactly why i refuse to debate it.
There is NO DEFINITIVE ANSWER!!!

Up until a conversation i had this morning, i wore it with an S on my chest, that Deckard was NOT. Then a fellow forum member brought some points, that i myself would use to question my stance, then i went back on the fence.

Then reading this page again.... makes me go back to Deckard is NOT a replicant. I appreciate the story more, for myself, if Deckard is not.

Then comes the theory of "What if Deckard and Rachel were the only N7. And the true test Tyrell wanted was BR2049".....

Have i mentioned i LOVE this universe?

[Mobe1969]

Originally Posted by gnj1958

He didn't write the book and he didn't write the script. He's in no position to decide whether Deckard is a Replicant or not.

That's a good philosophical point. Who is the final arbiter of a movie story? For an auteur, like Scott, I could argue it is him.