[Karmillo]

Continuing from this thread
I was enjoying this discussion so lets continue it here

The last 3 posts concerning this were:

Originally Posted by RLacey

And the removed voiceovers. And a couple of scene cuts or something, if I remember rightly.

Either way, without the voiceovers the film made close to zero sense. I kept wondering why characters had suddenly gone to a different location and were no entering mysterious buildings (or something like that; it's been a long time so I may well be misremembering).

Originally Posted by Snarky

Let's not turn this into a Blade Runner discussion, please?

Differences between the theatrical and (so-called) DC of the movie are mainly that the DC removes the voice overs by Deckard, adds in a dream sequence with a unicorn, and cuts the ending short. More changes were planned, but it was rushed out for business reasons. If you've seen the movie only in the last fourteen or so years, it's almost certainly the DC.

(And yes, the film is brilliant and the DC is much better than the theatrical version, but as I said, let's not turn this into a Blade Runner discussion.)

Originally Posted by Crunchy in milk

Who wouldn't retire from the job of Bladerunner, the replicants are more human than human and its your job to murder ("retire") them... how long could you do that job and still retain a conscience?

I thought the novel Bladerunner 2 was utter shit, not at all in tune with the characters and utterly anathema to the film. Throughout the original flick we're hit with constant messages about the value of a life well lived and asked to question what differentiates skinjobs from humans. But in BR2 its all chucked out the window. Deckard cryofreezes his lover-bot and thaws her out for love now and then (ugh), and later dumps her upon the miraculous return of Rachel 1.0. It reads like a bad fan novel with nothing of the poetry or moral questioning in the movie.

[Kolzig]

Originally Posted by Crunchy in milk

Who wouldn't retire from the job of Bladerunner, the replicants are more human than human and its your job to murder ("retire") them... how long could you do that job and still retain a conscience?

I thought the novel Bladerunner 2 was utter shit, not at all in tune with the characters and utterly anathema to the film. Throughout the original flick we're hit with constant messages about the value of a life well lived and asked to question what differentiates skinjobs from humans. But in BR2 its all chucked out the window. Deckard cryofreezes his lover-bot and thaws her out for love now and then (ugh), and later dumps her upon the miraculous return of Rachel 1.0. It reads like a bad fan novel with nothing of the poetry or moral questioning in the movie.

So who wrote the Blade Runner 2 book then?
It sure as hell wasn't Philip K. Dick.

[nikoniko]

I'm still curious about the Special Edition:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Scott has since complained that time and money constraints and his obligation to Thelma and Louise kept him from retooling the film in a completely satisfactory manner, and that while he's happier than before with the 1992 release of the film, he's never felt entirely comfortable with it as his definitive Director's Cut.

Partly as the result of those complaints, Scott was invited back in mid-2000 to help put together a final and definitive version of the film, which was completed in mid 2001. During the process, a new digital print of the film was created from the original negatives, special effects were updated and cleaned, and the sound was remastered in 5.1 Dolby Digital surround sound. Unlike the rushed 1992 Director's Cut, Scott personally oversaw the new cut as it was being made. The Special Edition DVD was slated for a Christmas time 2001 release, and was originally rumored to be a three-disc set including the full international theatrical cut, the 1992 director's cut and the newly enhanced version in addition to deleted scenes, extensive cast and crew interviews, and the documentary "On the Edge of Blade Runner".

However, Warner indefinitely delayed the "Special Edition" release after legal disputes began with the film's original completion bond guarantors (specifically Jerry Perenchio), who were ceded ownership of the film when the shooting ran over budget from $21.5 to $28 million. As of 2005, the legal issues remain unresolved. Rumor and speculation suggests that the studio is hoping to settle the dispute so that the set can be re-assembled for release on a next generation High Definition home video format (either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray). For the time being, Warner Bros. remains the film's distributor and is authorized to release the 1992 Director's Cut on video. Warner Bros. also acts as distributor for the original 1982 theatrical version, which remains in circulation on television (albeit edited for the medium).

[Karmillo]

so theres been another version that has been waiting to be released for 5 years now?

[Kolzig]

Yeah, that's what I've been basicly hearing too.

The whole set is ready for release but that one guy, Jerry Perenchio is the one who is holding the whole project down.

[Ninth]

Blade Runner is my favorite movie, no matter what the edition. I've probably seen it 10 times or so.

But then again, I think the version without the voice-overs, and without the weird ending, is much better. I can still still see Deckard's sardonic smile, as the terrific ending music begins.

[squarejawhero]

Before we start Perenchio bashing - think about it. The guy has the rights and is probably witholding it for reasons we don't know and the film originally would never have been finished without his money. Maybe Warners gave the go-ahead without even consulting him first or offering a cut of the backend profits, of which he would be entitled to, which would be illegal and unprofessional. No doubt there's an enormous amount of money at stake, and unfortunately business being what business is, its inevitable that wrangling would ensue.

And before any of you start shooting your mouth off about me being soft on this situation, my future project coming up is looking increasingly like they can't give me work for legal wrangling with money. I hate it but accept it as a fact of life, even in the entertainment industry... the money comes from somewhere. The real problem is when the money men start trying to be creative.

[Kolzig]

I don't really care about that Perenchio guy at all, I'd just finally want to see the version that Scott has been thinking about for almost 24 years now.

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by Kolzig

I don't really care about that Perenchio guy at all, I'd just finally want to see the version that Scott has been thinking about for almost 24 years now.

Same here.

[RLacey]

But Scott DC versions suck! Just look at Alien!

j/k

[Karmillo]

Im not to thrilled about it, it probably wont be that much of a difference and will give us less background on deckard...


Another one of my gripes with Blade Runner is some of the acting...i dont know if its good or bad or what...
One scene specificly is when hes pretending to be the civil rights guy, the voice he puts on is great but the face...it looks like he has a life grudge against this woman even though its the first time theyve met, i know he knows shes a replicant but I dont see why he would be staring into her soul with infinite rage or whatever the hell hes doing. no wonder she figured him out...

[nikoniko]

Originally Posted by Kolzig

So who wrote the Blade Runner 2 book then?
It sure as hell wasn't Philip K. Dick.

K. W. Jeter, a friend of Dick's. He tried to create a bridge between the story and the movie but failed to please some fans, three times in a row: Blade Runner 2, 3, and 4.

[SamandMax]

The man is always keeping Ridley Scott down. Apparently there's a director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven that makes that movie actually good.