Blade Runner 2049

I recall reading somewhere that PKD was better for concepts than the storytelling.

Whoever wrote that was/is an imbecile. UNLESS, the person who wrote your paraphrasing meant it as a great compliment; I.e., that "nobody" could actually write as brilliantly as his concepts have been.
 
Without the voiceovers, IMO, the movie is confusingly to new viewers.

I think the voiceovers get in the way of the Deckard replicant/human question. I read a long time ago that your observation is the reason the producers wanted the voiceovers. It's a better movie w/o them. YMMV.
 
Last edited:
hard for me to say if orig BR would be confusing w/out voiceover as that is how i first saw it. however, the test screenings of the version w/out voiceover yielded harsh comments from audiences (and led to panic by scott and producers). of course, film has really ended up being seen as an art film; no one really expects godard film to completely make sense to everyone in the audience!
 
hard for me to say if orig BR would be confusing w/out voiceover as that is how i first saw it. however, the test screenings of the version w/out voiceover yielded harsh comments from audiences (and led to panic by scott and producers). of course, film has really ended up being seen as an art film; no one really expects godard film to completely make sense to everyone in the audience!

IIRC, Scott didn't want to add the voiceovers or the final scene.
 
Last edited:
I first saw BR in a theater with the voice over. I loved the movie but I remember thinking the voice over was not a good idea and that they must think the audience are dolts to need explanations for what they are watching.

I saw it later on a satellite network without the voice over and with several extended scenes and new ones. Some of those scenes didn't even make it to the Director's Cut disk. They were a bit gory. I was very happy to find it an even better film without the annoying voice.
 
Last edited:
hard for me to say if orig BR would be confusing w/out voiceover as that is how i first saw it. however, the test screenings of the version w/out voiceover yielded harsh comments from audiences (and led to panic by scott and producers). of course, film has really ended up being seen as an art film; no one really expects godard film to completely make sense to everyone in the audience!

I saw the film on its 1st limited release, it was in & out and gone in under a month. I would swear it had no voiceover. I followed it fine as the visual storytelling is quite good. Further, as I was a sci-fi junkie, I filled in a lot of the blanks myself. My GF at the time however was totally lost and literally had no idea what was going on. My attempts to explain it to her were completely wasted. Nearly 2 years went by and it was re-released and I saw it again with several buddies. It was a very different film, far more understandable, and the voiceover present. It was also watered down from the uber-violent version I'd seen previously. I liked the first version better and as best can tell closely matches the Criterion edition on laser disc.
 
I saw the film on its 1st limited release, it was in & out and gone in under a month. I would swear it had no voiceover. I followed it fine as the visual storytelling is quite good. Further, as I was a sci-fi junkie, I filled in a lot of the blanks myself. My GF at the time however was totally lost and literally had no idea what was going on. My attempts to explain it to her were completely wasted. Nearly 2 years went by and it was re-released and I saw it again with several buddies. It was a very different film, far more understandable, and the voiceover present. It was also watered down from the uber-violent version I'd seen previously. I liked the first version better and as best can tell closely matches the Criterion edition on laser disc.

If you weren't living in Dallas or Denver you saw the US theatrical release. :thumbsup:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Versions_of_Blade_Runner

Based on wiki, I'll now be watching the Final Cut version in 2019. Maybe a local theater will show this version. Probably not so I just bought a blu ray..
 
Last edited:
I think the voiceovers get in the way of the Deckard replicant/human question. I read a long time ago that your observation is the reason the producers wanted the voiceovers. It's a better movie w/o them. YMMV.

IMO, the "replicant question" is nothing more than Scott looking for some more money. The movie has, essentially two themes: "What IS the nature of memories"? The second being, "At what point does a machine become a human"? The film was shot as a "film noir", so the voiceover is totally appropriate. As for the "replicant question", it's Scott's use of a "Mugguffin to pad the wallet.
 
Whoever wrote that was/is an imbecile. UNLESS, the person who wrote your paraphrasing meant it as a great compliment; I.e., that "nobody" could actually write as brilliantly as his concepts have been.

I'm wondering if the person who wrote this wasn't coming from a film perspective. Quite a few of Dick's stories are out there as movies and those movies stray far afield from his stories. A lot of the best parts of PHK's stories are stripped away and/or marginalized because of box office. But the concepts of his stories make a great framework for a good SF movie. BR is great thanks to the book which provided the framework, how much of the book's viewpoint was retained, and what was added by Scott and the writers. Especially making Deckard an android.

FWIW, novel titles don't get any better than Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep
 
I'm wondering if the person who wrote this wasn't coming from a film perspective. Quite a few of Dick's stories are out there as movies and those movies stray far afield from his stories. A lot of the best parts of PHK's stories are stripped away and/or marginalized because of box office. But the concepts of his stories make a great framework for a good SF movie. BR is great thanks to the book which provided the framework, how much of the book's viewpoint was retained, and what was added by Scott and the writers. Especially making Deckard an android.

FWIW, novel titles don't get any better than Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep

Really excellent points, although I'm not convinced that the logic in the film allows for Deckard to be a replicant. EXCEPT, for Scott's contrivances, which IMO, are bogus (using Sean Penn's best stoner tone).
 
I'm wondering if the person who wrote this wasn't coming from a film perspective. Quite a few of Dick's stories are out there as movies and those movies stray far afield from his stories. A lot of the best parts of PHK's stories are stripped away and/or marginalized because of box office. But the concepts of his stories make a great framework for a good SF movie. BR is great thanks to the book which provided the framework, how much of the book's viewpoint was retained, and what was added by Scott and the writers. Especially making Deckard an android.

FWIW, novel titles don't get any better than Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep

P.S., I have to reread the book, maybe I missed something?
 
On the way to Thanksgiving dinner I stopped off and saw Blade Runner 2049. I enjoyed it and as far as sequels go it was pretty good. Better than the follow-up novel, Blade Runner 2: The Edge of Human.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom