Tuesday, October 10, 2017

Blade Runner 35th Anniversary - 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror - Day 4



            Chris Stuckmann, one of YouTube’s most popular movie critics, asked the question “How many times do you need to watch a movie before you decide whether you like it or not?” This was something that was asked during his talk about the original “Blade Runner” and his experiences with the movie, along with its numerous cuts.

            If I was to make a list of directors that I think are overrated, one of the first names you will always hear me say is Ridley Scott. And I know what some of you might be asking why I think this, and they go on to list some of Scott’s most acclaimed accomplishments, such as “Alien” and “Thelma & Louise.” But I do agree that those are good films, but they’re only a few of the ones that I actually liked from Ridley Scott’s filmography. The one that has left my friends upset with the most was when I said that I wasn’t a fan of “Blade Runner.”

            It had been a while, but I remember flipping through channels one day, and finding that AMC or TNT was playing “Blade Runner.” I don’t remember which version it was, but considering it had the narration in it, I’m probably guessing it was the theatrical cut, or at least the tv broadcast of it. A lot of fans have discussed that the versions of the film that have the narration and or the “happy ending” for our protagonists, is the version that people really hate.

When I had discovered the different cuts of the film, I made the decision to not check it out. Why you may ask? Because I’ve grown this distrust with film makers and studios that release a different cut of a movie that is different from what we saw in theatres. That to me is a sign telling me that the people behind the film are not proud of what they gave audiences. And it’s either the excuse of studio meddling, clashes with the director, or maybe because they had the completely wrong test audience to view it. Ridley Scott isn’t the only director who’s known for this, as other film makes like Spielberg, Coppola, Snyder, and especially Lucas are guilty of similar actions. Sometimes, they even will go out of their way to personally HIDE the original film for the latest cut that they released, that has a few extra shots of some other irrelevant plot point. To me, unless you’re satisfied to show the original cut we know of, or at the very least give us the option of choosing which version to watch without having to do research on which has what, I’m really not one to always approve of a director’s cut.

This brings us to today, with the recent release of “Blade Runner 2049,” a lot of people are curious about which version of the original film the sequel will connect to, and if it keeps any of the answers we’ve pondered about for over thirty years. AMC and Regal Theatres gave us the opportunity to catch the 4K re-release of “Blade Runner: The Final Cut,” as a way for fans to freshen up as they watch this new film. At first, I was hesitant on the idea, but I decided to be optimistic and give this film another chance, catching the double feature at only ONE of the Regal Theatres in my town…weird.

So what are my current impressions of “Blade Runner,” now that I’ve witnessed what’s considered the DEFINITIVE version to watch? Probably a lot of you are going to be delighted to hear this, but I did enjoy this cut of “Blade Runner,” and thus, I do think it’s a good movie. However, you’re going to be a little upset to hear, that I still believe this film is overrated and hasn’t exactly aged as well as they would believe.

For example, the first act of this film feels incredibly slow. That’s not to say the rest of the film’s pacing is better, because it isn’t, but the first act in particular feels like a giant slog to get through. I wasn’t instantly grabbed by the characters as we’re introduced to them, and the romance between Rick Deckard and Rachael wasn’t as riveting as the movie would think. That, and I didn’t really see much use out of the Sebastian character. He feels like he was there, just to be a play thing for Daryl Hannah and then die.

Aside from that, just about everything else of the film is still pretty impressive. The visuals of this movie are awe-inspiring, like we’re seeing a new interpretation of the movie, “Metropolis.” The foggy and metallic look of Los Angeles in 2019 has such a vibrant presence to it, and the rain you see adds onto the unsettling mood that it creates in just about every scene. And while the film is dated, showing that Cocoa Cola and Atari are the big advertised kings, you still feel yourself grounded in this reality that you’ve been taken to. And with the narration taken out of the film, the audience is now free to soak in the striking cinematography that just feels, for lack of a better term, captivating. Even if the film took place in the future, turning it black and white still allows you to feel like you’re watching a film noir. It still feels like something you would see from Warner Bros. in the late 30’s.

While I may not have been immediately grabbed by the characters, they do start to grow on you as the film progresses. You can’t help but listen in on Deckard and Rachael’s conversations, and have yourself pulled in by how deep and meaningful their dialogue is with one another. What does it mean to be human in a world of cybernetics? Can replicants be just as fulfilling as humans are now? Could we still be happy without knowing whether or not we are human? But the main question that you may now be curious about is, “did I think Deckard was a replicant?” Well…I don’t know. Considering this is a film that has had people talking about the philosophy and ambiguity of it all, I’m certain it could be either one or the other. Sure, there’s the eyes subtly changing and the origami unicorn at the end, signifying that the dream could have been implanted, even the police chief using the term “blade runner” like an insult, but I can’t really decide for myself. However, I’m okay with that. I like that a film can still have me questioning a lot that has to do with this reality, in a way that makes me interested and wanting to study more of it.

There’s not much else to add that everybody else hasn’t said. I guess what I needed with “Blade Runner” was a little bit of time to mature and have the proper mindset to go in. While I do still think the film is overrated, with issues involving the pacing and first act, it still manages to leave a significant impact on you after you’ve left. If you do want to watch the original “Blade Runner,” put yourself in the right mindset for it, and experience one of the most inspiring films of the 1980’s. Oh, and I’d suggest “The Final Cut.”

Rating: 8/10


Now, what are my thoughts on “Blade Runner 2049?” Well…we’ll get to that, when we get to that.

No comments:

Post a Comment