 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blade Runner's narration... in/out? Deckard is a replicant... in/out? That's not auteur, that's confused.
In 1982, a confused audience gave Blade Runner a thumbs down after several test viewings. So the new producers, who took control after the production got into financial trouble, felt a narration might save the movie. The same producers also told Scott to cut the unicorn sequence. The DC and FC rectify this. Scott didn't change his mind, as you seem to imply here. The DC of 1993 was a hasty job not overseen by Scott. The FC is the first proper 'Director's Cut'.
I don't know what the deal is with the music of Alien.
During a conversation with Kevin Reynolds, Ridley Scott said he only made two auteur films and that's The Duellists and Blade Runner. (What a coincidence! Those happen to be 2 of the 3 Ridley Scott films that I love. The third one is Alien, of course)
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
|
When "Blade Runner" was first released, I went to see it, and just HATED the narration, which I found unnecessary and annoying, and was happy to find that many others felt the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
When "Blade Runner" was first released, I went to see it, and just HATED the narration, which I found unnecessary and annoying, and was happy to find that many others felt the same.
I liked the original narration and HATED the director's cut which deleted it and I know many others who feel the same!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Nov 5, 2013 - 4:05 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
pp312
(Member)
|
During a conversation with Kevin Reynolds, Ridley Scott said he only made two auteur films and that's The Duellists and Blade Runner. (What a coincidence! Those happen to be 2 of the 3 Ridley Scott films that I love. The third one is Alien, of course)
If I had to choose 3 Scott films for a desert island, and I hope I never do, they would be The Duellists, Alien and Kingdom of Heaven. Never had much time for Blade Runner--altogether too dark for me. The Duellists was quite fascinating, but I think that had more to do with Joseph Conrad than Scott. Kingdom of Heaven gets a pass for the great atmosphere and of course battle scenes, though the script was pretty awful and Orlando Bloom was pretty but awfuller. 
(BTW, why did he slap that boy, the 'Servant of the Patriarch'? Never got that).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Nov 6, 2013 - 2:10 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
pp312
(Member)
|
Never had much time for Blade Runner--altogether too dark for me.
Buy a new screen! 
PS: All kidding aside, you don't have time for Blade Runner, one of the best films ever, but you want to see Troy?! Shame on you!
Yes, I took Obi Wan's advice and stayed away from the dark side. Besides, nothing in BR connected with me. Repellent (or is that replicant?) characters, rain dripping endlessly from giant industrial fans, Rutger Hauer bending people's thumbs backwards...if that's the future I may just commit suicide and spare myself.
I never felt Troy was as bad as many critics made out, despite its constant attempts to find pragmatic explanations for the workings of the gods (and of course, the presence of Orlando Bloom. Does that man ever quit ruining expensive movies with his insipidity?). It was at least decent, and certainly better than Scott's Roman effort with that Oz thug Russell Crowe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I maintain that Scott has a really bad eye/ear for what works. Kingdom Of Heaven a bad script too eh? And a terrible theatrical cut? Quite a trend emerging. I see nobody really talks about Legend which - Goldsmith, Tim Curry and Mia Sara aside is monumentally bad.
Anyone can get a movie right after 2 or 3 recuts. Well, apart from George Lucas!
As with Blade Runner, it was out of his hands. The movie that Scott had in mind with KOH was more than 3 hours long but the studio didn't want that (for it would result in less showings per day) so they agreed to cut one (!) hour. They probably already made that agreement on the length of the feature when the contract was signed. In return, the studio allowed for Scott to make any cut he deemed necessary for later theatrical releases and for the home entertainment market (DVD and Blu-ray). The DC of KOH is the true director's cut, the version he originally made. I remember Scott being pretty comfortable with that agreement. What matters is that his preferred version is out there. The rest is commerce.
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puleeeeeeeeeeze! Ridley Scott has made it clear that he didn't intend "Prometheus" to be a 100% prequel to "Alien" -- otherwise the ship Prometheus would have been even more primitive than the Nostromo in "Alien" and David wouldn't have been the sleek robot eons removed from Ian Holm's in the first. Why get so hung up on such trivialities? Those of us who love movies, and I include you too, must suspend disbelief every time the curtain comes up, and to use something like that to justify not liking "Prometheus" is rather silly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puleeeeeeeeeeze! Ridley Scott has made it clear that he didn't intend "Prometheus" to be a 100% prequel to "Alien" -- otherwise the ship Prometheus would have been even more primitive than the Nostromo in "Alien" and David wouldn't have been the sleek robot eons removed from Ian Holm's in the first. Why get so hung up on such trivialities? Those of us who love movies, and I include you too, must suspend disbelief every time the curtain comes up, and to use something like that to justify not liking "Prometheus" is rather silly.
This exactly.
The idea that sci-fi movies are going to be subjected to microscopic scrutiny is an absurd notion. Does one like or dislike Star Trek or Star Wars (or any other sci-fi movie) based on the believability of the details is definitely silly.
In the original Alien the zero gravity issue is solved with one line "activate artificial gravity" and they move on. I don't think they ever bothered with that in Star Wars. But who cares?
Yup, I don't think any science fiction film I've ever seen would stand up to any kind of scrutiny, but that doesn't mean you can't call out a film that's beyond stupid, esp. when it's a big budget A list film...but there's two kinds of bad movie, one you like & one you don't like. I have quite a few dodgy films in my collection which I like very much, but at least I know they're bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CS:
Re: "Yup, I don't think any science fiction film I've ever seen would stand up to any kind of scrutiny, but that doesn't mean you can't call out a film that's beyond stupid, esp. when it's a big budget A list film"
I like the first part of that but sincerely hope you weren't referring to "Prometheus" in the second part, i.e. "beyond stupid." There are just too many people who like that movie to tar it like that. Maybe Terrence Mallick's most recent, "Tree of Life," which some of us found soooooooo boring, but then again, there are a lot of other people who seem to admire it, so, by my own logic, I'll have to withdraw it as an example here. Frankly, I am so weary of the know-it-alls who seem to take almost perverse delight in ripping "Prometheus" AND Ridley Scott apart. "Prometheus" was in no way "beyond stupid," however much perverse pleasure it gives some of the holier-than-thous to call it things like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
