Same here (with directors cut instead of original version). Saw it at a theater even - they had a ‘classic sci-fi film’ Thursday with a film professor introducing the movie and then Q&A after. Me and my buddy brought our SOs who had never seen the film and they both enjoyed it quite a bit.
In all fairness, Blade Runner didn’t do very well in the box office and wasn’t well received originally.
I still find the world of Blade Runner richer and fuller than many of the CGI-scapes that proliferate modern cinema. It’s a world that actually looks “lived in”. Most CGI future-cities look like levels for a videogame.
Why do conclusions have to be meaningful?
I certainly prefer that they do. But in this case it’s the part that everybody seems to love so much, and yet as far as I can tell it renders the entire movie moot. I am talking about when Rutger Hauer talks bollocks about what he’s seen, or whatever-the-fuck.
That doesn’t make the movie moot; it makes the movie tragic. Deckard being a replicant would render the movie moot.
By the way. the guys at redlettermedia discussed BR a while back. Their take is amusing.
IIRC, it was Rachel who, somehow impersonating a Tyrell Corp executive or claiming some special rights as a relative of the corporation’s founder/owner, delivered a rather scathing performance review directly to Leon.
If she’s doing my reviews, I’d rather just be given a pink slip and a cardboard box for my personal effects. :eek:
–G!