Scientists crown "Blade Runner" champ.

[stellar]

Scientists: 'Blade Runner' best sci-fi
Thursday, August 26, 2004 Posted: 2:42 PM EDT (1842 GMT)

LONDON, England (AP) -- A British newspaper survey of top scientists has chosen "Blade Runner" as the world's best sci-fi film.

Sixty scientists were questioned, including evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins and Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker, The Guardian newspaper said Wednesday.

In the 1982 film, a retired policeman played by Harrison Ford hunts down renegade human replicates in a dark futuristic vision of Los Angeles.

"It was so far ahead of its time and the whole premise of the story -- what is it to be human and who are we, where we come from. It's the age-old questions," said Stephen Minger, a stem cell biologist at King's College, London.

Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" came in a close second, followed by George Lucas' "Star Wars" and "Star Wars Episode V -- The Empire Strikes Back."

The list also includes "Alien," the original "Solaris" (1972), "The Terminator," "Terminator 2: Judgment Day," "The Day the Earth Stood Still," "War of the Worlds," "The Matrix" and "Close Encounters of the Third Kind."

Link (http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/08/26/people.runner.ap/index.html)

Please release the special edition DVD without the voiceover!!!

Hey, that might make a good poll question. :)

[grinner]

ditto. I own both copies on VHS tape... but I prefer the Director's cut in wide screen.

[LT Garrix]

what? No STII:Wrath of Khan? I loved that one. I'm gonna assume they meant SW IV:A New Hope. If it's SW I I'm going home.

[who45]

I also prefer the Director's cut.

[StephX]

I love Blade Runner, but, I think I'd still have to pick The Empire Strikes Back as my favorite.

[La Bomba]

I'm confused, stellar. They do have the director's cut without the voiceover on DVD. Is there a new edition coming out soon?

[waltersgirl]

that's interesting that someone did that.

i, btw, can't stand the director's cut. the voiceover is what fully makes Blade Runner a film noir.

[MrVesham]

wg, I feel the same way. Original!

[trubador]

Visually, I like the director's cut better. Most of the voice-over isn't necessary, but some of it is (in certain parts) and I miss it in the D-cut.

[Lord Loser]

Hmmm... never seen the D-cut, in fact, I've only seen it on TV, am I missing something?... :P

[vhsiv]

Please release the special edition DVD without the voiceover!!!

Hey, that might make a good poll question. :)EXACTLY - NOT. stellar, you ought to be in hog-heaven, since the version *without* the voiceover is the only version that is commercially available these days. Others of us have to suffer through 20 year-old foolscreen VHS editions and weak-kneed bootlegs if we want to watch it at home.

Given that you posted this article, I'd have to say it's rather mean and un-scaperly of you to say such things... you ought to be forced to watch all your DVDs in 4:3 screen ratio without crucial voiceovers, from now until the end of time - AND be forced to re-watch a Lucasfilm over again, every time he chooses to tamper with one.

And those unicorn inserts are the bollocks... more appropriate to 'Legend' than to 'Blade Runner'.

Did you know there was much more to the 'BR' mythology, that the film only hinted at - about 'offworld' and a 90% extinction-rate for animals. And that Dekert is supposed to be married? Read the book...

[stellar]

i, btw, can't stand the director's cut. the voiceover is what fully makes Blade Runner a film noir.

I understand your point in that the Film Noir/Science Fiction meld is made stronger by the voiceover, but I'd argue that Dark City is Film Noir and has no voiceover.

The DVD that's out now is subpar. It's the Director's Cut, but the quality and features don't do it justice.

How about 2-disc set with both versions?

I remember hearing about some legal hurdle that is standing in the way of the next DVD release; I'll try to google it.

[scrape_medic]

Hmmm... never seen the D-cut, in fact, I've only seen it on TV, am I missing something?... :P
The whole unicorn thing.......

In the directors cut you see Dekard's Unicorn dream......makes sense of the Unicorn origami figure that Gaff makes and drops on the floor in the hallway outside Dekard's appartment.

It makes the suggestion that Gaff is aware of the implanted memories in Dekard's brain and therefore the suggestion that Dekard is an android; something that is eluded to in the original Phillip K Dick book.

[stellar]

But in the original version, the voiceover at the end removes the possibility that Dekard is a synthetic.

The Directors Cut is clearly better in that regard.

[scrape_medic]

In what way....trying desperately to remember the voice over at the end.......If you mean the bit about how she survived...then it could have been that he too did not have a longevity problem either.

[Paul Cousins]

I understand your point in that the Film Noir/Science Fiction meld is made stronger by the voiceover, but I'd argue that Dark City is Film Noir and has no voiceover.

The DVD that's out now is subpar. It's the Director's Cut, but the quality and features don't do it justice.

How about 2-disc set with both versions?

I remember hearing about some legal hurdle that is standing in the way of the next DVD release; I'll try to google it.

Okay the story about why the DVD Collectors Edition to BR is being held up. One of the heads of Univision (Spanish channel) partly owns the copyrights to BR and he hates the BR film (all versions) and does not want it released. Warner Brothers though still wants to release and are in negotiations to convince him to change his mind with some more cash.

You can for info on the situation here: http://www.brmovie.com/BR_News_and_Views.htm

By the way, does anyone here besides me have a copy of "Future Noir: (The Making of Blade Runner)"?

Because I enjoyed reading it.

[waltersgirl]

I understand your point in that the Film Noir/Science Fiction meld is made stronger by the voiceover, but I'd argue that Dark City is Film Noir and has no voiceover.

i put Dark City happily in the film noir category and yet, within that subgenre, it feels stylistically different to me than Blade Runner.

Dark City isn't told from the point of view of a hardened, burned out, now retired "gumshoe", the classic protagonist in written film noir. the theatrical version of Blade Runner is. that classic style of written film noir is narrated by the protagonist. when Blade Runner was released, the protagonist narrated the story. the cinematography, production design, lighting, costumes, makeup, all underlined that "gumshoe" storytelling. the voice over worked.

the director's cut is a completely different film. it's still "film noir" in the Dark City sense, but it's not the same film as the theatrical release. just like, for completely different reasons, the extended version of LOTR: Fellowship is a completely different film tonally from the theatrical release.


But in the original version, the voiceover at the end removes the possibility that Dekard is a synthetic.

The Directors Cut is clearly better in that regard.

ah...perhaps then, what you have is a problem with the adaptation of the film, and the director's cut holds truer to the book for you?

that, for me, would make no difference whatsover. a book is a book and a film is a film. they are completely different storytelling mediums and i don't compare them. as long as the film stays true to the underlying spirit of its source document, i have no problem with it, adaptation-wise.

[trubador]

The BR threatrical release also had that lame "The Shining" outtakes tacked into the end of the film (the flying over the sunshiny horizon). Neither versions, though, clarify who the 6th replicant is. In the Director's Cut, it's alluded to that Ford's character may be a replicant, but he ain't THE missing replicant. Early on in the flick, Dekart is told that there were SIX replicants who escaped - one was killed, and four are tracked down by Dekart. And HE can't be the 6th one because none of the others ever interact with him in a way to suggest that he was one of the 6 who escaped. I was surprised (and disappointed) that they took the time to do the Director's Cut, yet never fixed that glaring point. That, and the badly dubbed-over interrigation scene through the shop window. (I know-I know... these are pet peeves of mine.... where is that Pet Peeves thread anyway???) :eh:

[Owlman]

I always considered "The Crow" a noir film as well (same director as Dark City).

[Jul]

I must be a freak, because I've never seen Blade Runner..

[Frellster]

I like the original

[faustus]

original

[TheBladeRoden]

director's cut!

[witchdoctor]

I want the two DVD set with both versions, assuming it is ever released. I like the directors cut, but I haven't seen the theatrical release since it was released theatrically. i think I would have to agree with the fans of the film noir narration and would like to re-watch the original now that they mention. No reason you can't enjoy both versions.

I would also hope they include something about the production as an extra. I especially like the special feature that mutes the movie sound down and adds a commentary voice over by the director/producer/writer on why they did things the way they did. Those are always interesting to listen to.

[stellar]

I must be a freak, because I've never seen Blade Runner..

It only hurts the first time.

[BaseLine]

ah...perhaps then, what you have is a problem with the adaptation of the film, and the director's cut holds truer to the book for you?

Actually, in "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" he's also not a replicant. Deckard gets subjected to the Voight Kampff empathy test and comes out negative, so he is human.

But Blade Runner is only loyal to the basics of the book. The story in the movie differs greatly from the story in the book...in a good way.

[BillFrugge]

But Blade Runner is only loyal to the basics of the book. The story in the movie differs greatly from the story in the book...in a good way.

The best adaptations are like that. Look at 'Total Recall.'

[Digger]

I still prefer the original version. The voice-over worked for me, because it really made it feel like a true film noir. I could imagine Dashell Hammet writing some of that.

[BaseLine]

I still prefer the original version. The voice-over worked for me, because it really made it feel like a true film noir. I could imagine Dashell Hammet writing some of that.

But the ending was pathetic. Who wants to live in a dark city, plagued by continuous rain, when you can also live outside the city in a beautiful forest? Anti-climax...

[Digger]

Yeah, but there will always be people who prefer to live in cities, no matter what the living conditions, to living in the country. All that open space? Ick!

[stellar]

But the ending was pathetic. Who wants to live in a dark city, plagued by continuous rain, when you can also live outside the city in a beautiful forest? Anti-climax...

They don't have those cool Chinese restaraunts on the side of the streets in the mountains.

[scrape_medic]

Actually, in "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" he's also not a replicant. Deckard gets subjected to the Voight Kampff empathy test and comes out negative, so he is human.

But Blade Runner is only loyal to the basics of the book. The story in the movie differs greatly from the story in the book...in a good way.
It does not state in the book that he is not a replicant, rachael passed (almost) the Voight Kampff test, so there is no reason why Dekard could also pass the test. But thats what I love about P K Dick...there are no rules that you can feel comfortable snuggling up to at night. There is always the possibility that you may be wrong.

[BaseLine]

It does not state in the book that he is not a replicant, rachael passed (almost) the Voight Kampff test, so there is no reason why Dekard could also pass the test. But thats what I love about P K Dick...there are no rules that you can feel comfortable snuggling up to at night. There is always the possibility that you may be wrong.

It's been a while since I read it, but my interpretation was that Deckard is human. It's true though that the Voight Kampff test isn't 100% waterproof and that they have to do a bone marrow test to support it's result. But there are also a lot of other elements that suggest Deckard is human like his desire to own a real animal or Mercerism.

Then again, what is the difference between a human and a perfect replicant, when a perfect replicant would be exactly like a human. Mmm, have to read it again. :D

[Owlman]

I never understood:

Are Replicants organic or robotic? (never got that about Farscape's Bioloids either).

I was pretty sure that they were genetically engineered humans.

[scrape_medic]

Organic
Rachael said 'Or we could live in sin, except that I'm not alive'

'Legally your not. But really you are. Biologically. You're not made out of transistorised circuits like a false animal; you're an organic entity.' And in two years, he thought, you'll wear out and die. Because we never solve the problem of cell replacement as you pointed out.Phillip K Dick 'Do androids dream of electric sheep'

Then again, what is the difference between a human and a perfect replicant, when a perfect replicant would be exactly like a human. Mmm, have to read it again. Yeah, but at least you could programme an android to remember aniversaries :rolleyes:

See I got to re-read the book now too.....what a hardship:D