A Few Questions About "Blade Runner"

[Rob J in WNY]

Originally Posted by Valkyr47

im not sure how i feel about the ending... i watched the final cut and it seemed... abrupt? i mean it left the doors wide open for a sequel, but i guess in a good way its open for you to imagine the outcome

was the other ending any better?

The Final Cut is an excellent stopping point, although all the other versions do leave it open. I'm glad there was no sequel. Blade Runner is just one of those movies which is nice left as is, without a sequel. Leaving the meaning of Blade Runner open to your own interpretation is one of the best aspects of this film, and contributes to its very high regard in cinematic sci-fi.

Now that you are absorbing the film, take the time to watch "Dangerous Days - Making Blade Runner." It's a very good special production which will give you really interesting personal insights by most everyone involved, including the actors. You may want to watch it in parts, as it is well over 3 hours long, but it's worth it.

[Grumpz]

I've watched them all now except the "working print".

There's literally only seconds different between all the versions and of course the narration, however "The Final Cut" is the cleanest most spectacular version on the disk...for obvious reasons. That is why It's my favourite version.

The Final Cut is my benchmark for all other Blu's. So far, I haven't come across a live actoin film that holds a candle to it's quality, neither new releases or new transfers of older movies.

It's visually amazing. Please feel free to direct me to another film that looks that good, I'd gladly check it out.

[Variable]

I really should watch this again. my ability to properly discuss it has crapped out on me as my memory of it wanes.

[doctorsteve]

Originally Posted by Rob J in WNY

The Final Cut is an excellent stopping point,

I consistently disagree on this point. The first version I ever saw was the Theatrical version that included the much-hated Deckard voice over (I happen to like it, and it CAN make some things easier to understand), and the 'happy' ending.

I strongly recommend a viewing of the theatrical as well.

Doc

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by doctorsteve

I consistently disagree on this point. The first version I ever saw was the Theatrical version that included the much-hated Deckard voice over (I happen to like it, and it CAN make some things easier to understand), and the 'happy' ending.

I strongly recommend a viewing of the theatrical as well.

Doc

i too recommend the theatrical, but AFTER the directors/final cut (i.e. a cut without the voiceover/happy ending). i thought the happy ending was pretty ridiculous and didn't fit into the movie at all, felt out of place. but it's still fun to see the movie how everyone else in theaters saw it. i prefer the final cut tho.

glad you liked it Valky!!

[Rob J in WNY]

Originally Posted by doctorsteve

I consistently disagree on this point. The first version I ever saw was the Theatrical version that included the much-hated Deckard voice over (I happen to like it, and it CAN make some things easier to understand), and the 'happy' ending.

I strongly recommend a viewing of the theatrical as well.

Doc

That's no problem, fellow WNYer! The Final Cut represents a nearly entirely new vision for the film. Whereas Ridley Scott originally intended for Deckard not to be a replicant, the idea of his being a replicant is totally and deliberately insinuated in The Final Cut. This, the fixing of previously (and well-documented) movie errors, and ending the movie without the "happy ending" sequence leaves more to the imagination - we don't know if the ending was happy or not as we roll into the credits (although there was much more tension with The Final Cut's ending). It was, IMHO, a great way to leave the movie.

I certainly don't mind agreeing to disagree with you. I do agree that the theatrical version is worth watching (all of them are).

[wallendo]

Originally Posted by doctorsteve

I consistently disagree on this point. The first version I ever saw was the Theatrical version that included the much-hated Deckard voice over (I happen to like it, and it CAN make some things easier to understand), and the 'happy' ending.

I strongly recommend a viewing of the theatrical as well.

Doc

It is probably best to watch the theatrical version FIRST. I suspect that most people who rave about the Director's Cut and The Final Cut saw the theatrical version first. As a result, we know the content of the voiceover without having to watch the voiceover.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by wallendo

It is probably best to watch the theatrical version FIRST. I suspect that most people who rave about the Director's Cut and The Final Cut saw the theatrical version first. As a result, we know the content of the voiceover without having to watch the voiceover.

i didn't...

plus, there is only 1 "first time" viewing. even if the movie is slightly altered, the first time you see it is what makes the impact imo. if you watch a movie and hate it, watching another version with minor changes is not going to drastically affect your opinion. that being said, i would watch the superior/preferred directors version first, the final (or directors) cut.

obviously if your tastes change over time and you watch the movie in a different light, that's completely different from what i'm talking about...dont get the 2 confused