What is Digg?101 Comments
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+26Please God let this come to theaters.
- mandarin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16it was the first of its type. Nothing came close to its detail during that time.
- korashime2001, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16The movie speaks to the human experience almost at its core. What does it mean to be human? If we made really good fake humans, why wouldn't they deserve the same rights and respect that we enjoy? What is it to be a slave? What is it to be a master?
- bitt3n, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13oh I agree. we must have the same tastes. clearly it's no City Slickers 2.
- mourne, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10For being a movie with "***** dialog, terrible acting and lots of filler in exchange for decent special effects", you sure have seen it a helluva lotta times. I saw AvP.... oh say, about .20 of one time because I stoped watching it the first time.
- markho, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10it's one of the few sci-fi films which poses deep questions of the viewer. like "what does it mean to be human?" most sci fi films settle for some flashy effects, 'futurisic' costumes and ray guns / spaceships / etc. (of course, this was diluted to a great extent in the narrated, cinematic-release version - it will be interesting to see how the new version improves on the "original" director's cut - or if it's just a money-grabbing exercise, a la star wars).
on top of the story/philosophy, it has excellent direction, cinematography and music.
that's why i like it, anyway. - jknevitt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Hm. So Deckard was a replicant after all.
- kushed, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10agree, I would gladly pay to experience this movie on a big screen.
- inexion, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9you're probably just one of those people that need a dulled down story line with lots of flashy things and fancy effects, don't worry Blade Runner can't compare with your taste so no loss.
- Uhhh, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10It's the best science-fiction movie ever made. Obligatory for anyone who enjoys that genre.
- wild, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8I was influenced by NWA growing up.
- mbthompson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Yeah, hence the little paper unicorn. It was a subtle cue, but still.
- meepus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Ridley Scott didn't imagine Blade Runner in the first place. Phillip K. Dick did when he wrote Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
The novel was adapted into the screenplay "Blade Runner" by Hampton Fancher and David Webb Peoples. Ridley Scott directed the film. The novel was a lot more fully realized as a concept than the film. Look up the disambiguation on Wikipedia if you don't believe me. - mbthompson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6There's always some douche that has to grandstand and bring up politics. In the words of Smeagol, "Leave now, and never come back!"
- Rimrock, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6"It's the best science-fiction movie ever made. Obligatory for anyone who enjoys that genre." Ditto! Based on a greater book. Nuff said.
- mourne, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Phillip K Dick's short stories are incredible. I don't think Blade Runner was overrated either.
I love how 'hardcore' sci fi buffs get all uppity about certain things, like it's going to hurt their man hood if they don't play certain things down and other things up (translated obscure ***** no one's ever heard of). - tjr7n, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6I saw that, too, and was really disappointed. I mean, i couldn't believe it when Hogan held Goldberg up against the bottom rope while Ridley Scott smashed him over the back with a chair when the ref wasn't looking. WTF, amirite?
- jknevitt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5"I've… seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those… moments will be lost… in time… like… tears… in rain."
- SineCurve, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5When did you first watch the movie? You have to take it in context with the time it was made.
- pAq6Swad, on 09/16/2008, -1/+6Vangelis' soundtrack for this movie is also among the best ever made. No other composer, electronic or not, could have given the movie *this* atmosphere. And I'm hardly a science fiction enthusiast.
The Final Cut release will have a brief run in L.A. and New York theaters this month. It'll be released on DVD, HD-DVD, Blu-ray on Dec. 18. I won't be seeing the preview but am very anxious to see it in a way that Ridley can say fits his vision (so maybe he will stop complaining for once! haha. . .) -- he was voicing his disappointment with the Director's Cut release almost immediately after it hit the shelves. - pAq6Swad, on 09/16/2008, -0/+4The script is a very small part of what made this movie work, but yes Scott isn't in any way the only contributor.
- directive0, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Please leave pointless political rhetoric out of philosophical debates in the future. It doesn't make you look smart or informed.
- lazyfisherman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I didn't really "get" this movie for a long time. Then I saw the "tears in rain" scene again, something clicked and I understood why it was so great. It's about machines that are so close to human that they start to ask questions about life and death like we do. It's a thinking man's movie and isn't intended for audiences who want to see non-stop fights and explosions.
Easily among the best and most influential sci-fi movies ever made. - markp93, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3The goods in question:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000K15VSA/ref=wl ... - HiddenCanuck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Scott thinks he is a replicant. Ford does not!
- breadbin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Look, clearly the whole thing went over your head despite having seen it so many times (you still haven't told us why you've watched it on every format going if it was so terrible the first time around). You've stated your dislike for it, many people disagree with you, so why not leave it at that?
- mbthompson, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5If any of you haven't caught NUMB3RS on CBS yet, you really should check it out. It's co-produced by Tony and Ridley Scott. Probably my favorite show on network television.
- pAq6Swad, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3I agree, that scene really made the movie, the speech and the music were incredible. Not to mention the look on Deckard's face, haha
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3"Time... enough... time..."
"I've seen starships on fire near the moons of Orion..."
They don't make sci-fi art pieces like this anymore. Nowadays they would throw a rock guitar over the chase scene with Deckard and Zora, while bumping into famous rappers making cameos with dyed hair, eye shadow, and ghetto accents. Thank God for the classics. - PATSCRU, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I don't know man, 2001 could easily take that title, but blade runner is amazing as well.
- Snyder, on 10/10/2007, -1/+32001 FTW. but Bade Runner is close to the top.
- Otnip, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Alien anyone?
- macwac, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I love Blade Runner.. bought the PC game a long long time ago and couldn't stop playing it as it had multiple endings, over 1 GB which was a lot for PC game at that time. The whole movie is beautiful in every way!
- jonnyeh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Apparently, the Kingdom of Heaven Directors cut was 2 stars better than the theatrical version, and is quite an amazing movie. American Gangster is also getting some good buzz. Hannibal sucked, and I can't see myself watching A Good Year (it looks like a "might as well make a movie while on vacation" film)
- wild, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Dugg, just for the joy of seeing old media supporting a new space.
And reminding me that I read this article sitting on my ***** this morning, in classic print edition. - mourne, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Alien is awesome. I was dispointed in the directors cut that was re-released to theatres a few years back, because the sound didn't really sound like it was any better. Pretty crackly and such. But how much can they really do to 'fix up' a movie so old.
It was AWESOME seeing it on the big screen though. Now I just want a chance to see Aliens on the big screen. (i'm only 24, so the first alien move i saw in the theatre was Alien3, which sucked.) - geodescent, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Holy god it was fantastic in the theater. But like the parent comment, if only it had the audio fidelity of Alien 3. Still one of my all time favorites though.
- meepus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2There's nothing wrong with stating your opinion and all, but could you detail -why- you liked the film better than the book for the rest of us who don't share your opinion can at least understand it?
- pAq6Swad, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2Not really the same thing here -- Ridley had fought with Warner Bros. since before it was released. In the end, the first release was nothing like what he wanted, because the execs tried to change it to fit the interests of the most viewers. The second release also had a lot missing for the same reasons, budgeting and timelines. It was when he started complaining after the release of hte Director's Cut and the fact that it was selling so well that Warner decided it may pay off to let him make it the way he wants this time.
Lucas just upgraded the special affects every 5 years. - lazyfisherman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3And one day, if we don't destroy ourselves first, we're going to actually create machines that can think and have feelings. These are issues that will need to be addressed in the future.
- pAq6Swad, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2True, but. . .initially I'll say that the comment I replied to stated an *unsupported* position that the book was better than the movie. So I'll assume your post was duly directed. THAT SAID:
There are a couple of reasons I can think of that I'm not a fan of Dick, but these are directed toward his books in general because I don't have Do Androids Dream. . . here with me to cite. First, Dick has a style of dialogue that makes several 'mistakes' (matters of opinion) that are generally agreed by experienced readers to be sort of B-grade. There are inappropriate tags throughout the work -- these are examples of "he EXCLAIMED" or "she SHOUTED" or "the man SAID WITH DISDAIN". For instance, I'm looking at Minority Report:
'Nonsense,' Lisa retorted. 'The originals have been in his hands from the start. He could have destroyed them any time he wished.'
'That's true.' Anderton conceded. 'Quite possibly he didn't know.'
Also Dick focus very rarely on atmosphere -- which is something that plays a HUGE part in Blade Runner. The descriptions of the city, of the cars and the sort of chinese stench that is everywhere. The mixture of the music from Vangelis and amazing attention to detail on the part of the director got me -- this is the stuff that matters in both books and movies. The attention to the atmosphere -- for sci-fi this is extremely important.
I was also about to say that the dialogue itself in Dick is reminiscent of a cheap '80's flick, but Blade Runner also suffers from this, I will admit that. - tdogg241, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It's currently only scheduled for limited engagements in NY and LA: http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=61 ...
- vbellian, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Not just the Unicorn, the look on his face when he's asked if he's ever been given the test as well. Off subject but the interviewer for wired was pretty ***** dense, not understanding when Scott was talking about editing his paintings. Plus it seemed like he was trying to bait Ridley, just to piss him off with his nitpicky, superficial questions... He was totally missing the point. I thought wired was supposed to be an intelligent person's magaizine... guess the computer nerds don't get metaphor.
- TheEclipse, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Whats the canon version of Blade Runner? I've never seen it, but I've been meaning to. There's several versions, but there doesn't seem to be any agreement. Is there a "Greedo shot first" version?
- MacEnvy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2What's wrong with 1940s detective movies? Film noire kicks ass.
- graviplana, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1First off, Blade Runner is a favorite film of mine. It's definitely in my Top Three. I've written a paper on this film at Uni. I've read all of Dick's writing before 1990. I've read all sorts of books on this film and seen all of the interviews RIdley has given on the topic.
The interviewer from WIRED is a MORON.
I don't buy that he was trying to let Ridley do all the talking. You would think WIRED magazine would require ALL of their staff to memorize the frickin' film. They suck balls and just want to sell magazines. Gizmodo, Slashdot and Arstechnica do a much better job than WIRED, but I digress. I wish I could've done the interview, I would've done it right. At least the Work Print on Disc 5 is finally going to be released on DVD. I'll be buying this but the briefcase packaging is a little unnecessary, IMO. - JAGUART, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I want a new, story driven Bladerunner game with DX10 graphics! The 1999 game was great for its time.
- HappyScrappy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Agreed. This is the sole reason I'm buying this release. To get the theatrical release on a new format (the last format I had it on was LD).
-
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is