I'm sure most of you are aware of or have seen at least one version of Blade Runner. Some of you might not be aware that there are at least five different versions of the film that range from minimal to dramatic differences in tone and pacing, for instance, the theatrical release contains a voiceover dub from the perspective of replicant hunter Deckard, while many of the subsequent cuts do not.
Since the film's initial release, there has always been an argument among fans as to whether or not Deckard is himself a replicant, provided memories (much like the character of Rachael), and sent to hunt his kind. There were always minor ambiguities that could reasonably lead a person to consider this as a possibility, though in the initial theatrical cut, as well as most of the other releases over the years, it's only ever vague conjecture.
About a decade ago, Ridley Scott released the "Final Cut" of the film, which incorporated stock footage from an entirely different film of a unicorn, and the way this footage is cut implies that Deckard dreams of this unicorn regularly. Later, the character Gaff, another detective and minor antagonist of Deckard, places an origami unicorn in Deckard's apartment. The implication clearly being that Gaff somehow has knowledge of Deckard's dreams, which could only be the case if he were briefed on the memories that make up Deckard's "programming". When asked about the possibility of whether Deckard is a replicant, Scott enthusiastically agreed, stating that this was ALWAYS his intention, much to the confused headshaking of every other member of the cast and writing team.
Honestly, if you consider Deckard as a replicant for even a moment, the entire philosophical POINT of the film is ruined. We NEED Deckard to be human because his lack of emotion and "humanity" at the beginning of the film is exactly what he is taught to appreciate by the "andy" Roy who saves him in the end of the film. Essentially, Roy becomes "a real life boy" by choosing to save Deckard, truly becoming "more human than human" (it's not just a company slogan; IT'S THE POINT OF THE FILM). If we don't have that interesting component of empathy and grief and loss that Roy, an android struggles with and eventually achieves, and if we also don't have the re-awakening of Deckard's own humanity, his renewed appreciation for life and its impermanence, we don't have a fricking movie.
God I (sometimes) hate Ridley Scott.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
100%. I could MAYBE forgive the shitty CGI vampires, but the entire point of the story is the realization of both the character and the audience that Neville is himself the "legend" and monster of this new society. The book ending at his hospital bedside looking out at the protestors is amazing. I still remember that even though I've only read the book once, about six months before the movie came out.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
And the thing is, Matheson didn't write incredibly complex stuff that would be too difficult to convert into film and tv. I mean shit, how many Twilight Zone (OG series and probably many eps of the various revivals) have been DIRECTLY taken from Matheson's other works?
The first strike to me was Will Smith. I don't think he's a great actor. He's got a great amount of charisma, but after the butchery that was I, Robot, it seemed clear they cast him to bring some "cool factor" to an otherwise straightforward story. I'll never understand why studios think they have to add new shit (a cure for cancer???) to an already good recipe, but I also don't snort blow off of my secretaries titties, which I guess in 2006 was the thing to do as a major studio executive.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Right, blackwashing or gender swapping purely to pander is annoying when obviously done for that purpose, but so long as the material itself is handled appropriately, most reasonable people don't care all that much. I remember when they made that shitty Dark Tower movie, I wasn't bothered at all by Idris Elba playing Roland. I thought that was actually pretty interesting, and played in with some of the notions of repetition / loops that the actual Dark Tower series emphasized. What DID bother me was just how horribly they mangled the fricking story and lore of the Dark Tower.
God darn, that reminds me-- any script bearing the name Akiva Goldsman should be burned on sight, and the person who delivered it should be castrated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Goldsman
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
In a way, the "death" of movie theaters for all but the biggest blockbusters is probably a good thing for long-form book conversions. I think most novels of >400 pages could probably be better served with a limited series of 8 episodes, about 45 minutes apiece.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
The alternate ending is a little closer to the spirit of the original story
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context