Movie Trailers: Blade Runner - 30th Anniversary Trailer

Blade Runner - 30th Anniversary Trailer

Now watch Harrison Ford hunt replicants in Blu-Ray clarity.

Watch Video

I... don't get it... What is new THIS time? I mean, I own the Blu-ray edition of Blade Runner for quite a while, and it has about 5 versions of the movie, including the "Ultimate" version, that Ridley Scott said to be the final version. So let's see, my box has ALL versions, ALL of them in Blu-Ray... So I'm not missing anything but the limited edition spinner? Is that it?

I would certainly hope so. I've shelled out way too many shekels for various editions already!
It has to stop somewhere... or maybe somebody could remake it starring Taylor Kitsch?

So awesome...

Milanezi:
I... don't get it... What is new THIS time? I mean, I own the Blu-ray edition of Blade Runner for quite a while, and it has about 5 versions of the movie, including the "Ultimate" version, that Ridley Scott said to be the final version. So let's see, my box has ALL versions, ALL of them in Blu-Ray... So I'm not missing anything but the limited edition spinner? Is that it?

I believe that this is specifically for the 30th anniversary of the film and it has apparently been on a 10 month moratorium.

Best movie ever, but, God, what an awful trailer.

I didn't understand Blade Runner. I read the book first and didn't get that either.

I never got the impression that Ford was a replicant.

I didn't really like any of the "bad" replicants; finding them neither intimidating or supportable.

The setting of the film looks horrible - is it supposed to?

Deckard forces himself on Rachael in the most uncomfortable way imaginable.

The fact that no one brought this up before I watched it worried me most.

What was so great about it?

(That's a genuine question; I would like to be able to understand and enjoy the film the next time I see it.)

I love that movie! Especially in the directors cut/final cut versions.
I read the book afterwards and large sections didn't make a lick of sense to me either, other elements were simply too far fetched for my ability to suspend disbelief.

Harrison Fords character is supposed to be a replicant, at least according to director Ridley Scott. Harrison Ford always stated the opposite and there is evidence in the movie to support both sides. Its the 30th anniversary after all, thats how long the debate has been going on I guess.

Now for the "bad" replicants - remember, they are trying to blend in, trying to appear as normal as possible. Considering that the absence of Lecter-like creepiness or Dwayne Johnson like physicality makes sense to me. Besides that, its one of the major points of the movie that they ARE actually capable of portraying kindness and pity much like humans do. They are not supposed to be outright monsters. That said, I found Pris and Roy profoundly threatening.

The visualization of the setting is the main thing about the film, the element that has arguably contributed to its status as a classic in the science-fiction genre. The story could essentially be set anywhere. Get some sleek looking Ford-prototypes for the background, some available B or C-list actors, say during the title sequence that its 2025 and film the whole thing somewhere in a shiny california business-park. BAM! Instant forgettable Sunday-afternoon TV-movie fare. It was the depiction a dystopian future that was impressive back then and is still head and shoulders above anything CGI-created today. ANd yes, its supposed to be horrible. A true nightmare of urban decay.

Finally, the scene between Deckard and Rachel. I guess that one comes down to personal taste and sensitivities. I had no problem with the scene, other opinions are certainly available and in this case no less valid.

I'm sure that there is far more exhaustive information and discussion available on the net, can't believe that its hard to find.

Cheers
DA MAISTA!

AlexWinter:
I didn't understand Blade Runner. I read the book first and didn't get that either.

I never got the impression that Ford was a replicant.

I didn't really like any of the "bad" replicants; finding them neither intimidating or supportable.

The setting of the film looks horrible - is it supposed to?

Deckard forces himself on Rachael in the most uncomfortable way imaginable.

The fact that no one brought this up before I watched it worried me most.

What was so great about it?

(That's a genuine question; I would like to be able to understand and enjoy the film the next time I see it.)

You're not alone here. I don't see it as the miracle of cinema that a lot of others do, but I kind of understand why it was a big deal back then, lots of symbolism etc.

But I definitely never got the impression Deckard was a replicant either.

Team Hollywood:
Blade Runner - 30th Anniversary Trailer

Now watch Harrison Ford hunt replicants in Blu-Ray clarity.

Watch Video

But it has already been on bluray...

That was a terrible trailer. The echo effect at the end of every single piece of dialogue was quite annoying and the music didn't fit the tone of the film at all. How can you make a Blade Runner trailer and not use Vangelis' original soundtrack?

What was wrong with the 25th Anniversary Final Cut Bluray with limited edition Spinner, origami unicorn, concept art, and other plastic objects made in China fest?

Milanezi:
I... don't get it... What is new THIS time? I mean, I own the Blu-ray edition of Blade Runner for quite a while, and it has about 5 versions of the movie, including the "Ultimate" version, that Ridley Scott said to be the final version. So let's see, my box has ALL versions, ALL of them in Blu-Ray... So I'm not missing anything but the limited edition spinner? Is that it?

you are not the only one. only i have the dvd version.
still one of the best sci-fis ever (i my opinion) but this trailer was awful. the echo was annoying and why the hell they dint use the original music from the movie???
so the only difference is with this version is the spinner??!! i think i cna pass. happy with my 5 version collection and the cheap plastic stuff inside it.

Good thing I've been eating rice for the last 6 months... now I can afford stuff like this...

Hell yes... Blade Runner is one of my favorite movies ever... Totally gonna get it...<.<

Movie:
Scott made the replicant claim and it was against the canon (if it could be called that) from the book. Ford agreed with the book and said it wasn't so. I suspect it was just stupid arteest moment when he realized they had red-eye on Ford, "Leave it in! Maybe he is a replicant!". In "Do Andriods Dream of Electric Sheep", Deckard was married to a money hungry woman that was driving him nuts, he slept with one replicant who dragged his electric sheep to the edge of his apartment roof and tossed it over the side.

In the movie Scott had to do something different, arteest mode, and wasn't able to settle with the fact that replicants having emotions, feelings and the very things that made them not human was not enough ... something. It was for Dick and everyone else though.

BluRay:
The existing BluRay is good. I got one during some promotion and it is the only BluRay I own, besides PS3 games, and it the only movie that I have watched on my PS3.

That said it is nice to have all the releases on one disc even if it is an over priced format. This one is not worth the cash to me, I have six versions of this film and although a second BluRay would double my BluRay collection this is just another grab by producers.

Another version!? The Final Cut on Blu-Ray was just fine, I don't understand why we need another collection.

Don't get me wrong, I love me some Blade Runner I just see no point in--ooooh Spinner.

-slaps self-

I'm willing to bet this is meant to hype up the sequel that Scott is working on. And, you know... cash grab.

Team Hollywood:
Blade Runner - 30th Anniversary Trailer

Now watch Harrison Ford hunt replicants in Blu-Ray clarity.

Watch Video

ShutUpAndTakeMyMoney.jpg

Seriously, though - that looks awesome. It has both endings, I assume. And perhaps some interviews with Mr. Scott?

Edit: **reads more** All the versions! Very nice. And I haven't yet gotten a BluRay version - just the Directors Cut DVD.

Darkness665:
Movie:
Scott made the replicant claim and it was against the canon (if it could be called that) from the book. Ford agreed with the book and said it wasn't so. I suspect it was just stupid arteest moment when he realized they had red-eye on Ford, "Leave it in! Maybe he is a replicant!". In "Do Andriods Dream of Electric Sheep", Deckard was married to a money hungry woman that was driving him nuts, he slept with one replicant who dragged his electric sheep to the edge of his apartment roof and tossed it over the side.

In the movie Scott had to do something different, arteest mode, and wasn't able to settle with the fact that replicants having emotions, feelings and the very things that made them not human was not enough ... something. It was for Dick and everyone else though.

BluRay:
The existing BluRay is good. I got one during some promotion and it is the only BluRay I own, besides PS3 games, and it the only movie that I have watched on my PS3.

That said it is nice to have all the releases on one disc even if it is an over priced format. This one is not worth the cash to me, I have six versions of this film and although a second BluRay would double my BluRay collection this is just another grab by producers.

Erm well it wasn't an eletric sheep that gets tossed...Deckard buys a real animal(a goat I think or a real sheep (He had a real sheep before the events of the book but it died) by that point in the book and thats why he's so hurt by Rachel killig it. Also the book and the film are different beasts. The replicants in booke don't become "more human" Deckard becomes less human. Until he has a breakdown combined with the revelation that his relgion is a farce. I don't want to give away to much plot so I'll cut this short.

Team Hollywood:
Blade Runner - 30th Anniversary Trailer

Now watch Harrison Ford hunt replicants in Blu-Ray clarity.

Watch Video

Is it me or does this trailer suck balls through a straw? I mean really, they made the movie seem boring, quite an achievement considering the source material.

What next the 31st anniversary uber special directors money grabbing take one cut?

Still a remarkable film. The first film that pretty much captured cyberpunk as a film genre

alrekr:
... snip ...
Erm well it wasn't an eletric sheep that gets tossed...Deckard buys a real animal(a goat I think or a real sheep (He had a real sheep before the events of the book but it died) by that point in the book and thats why he's so hurt by Rachel killig it. Also the book and the film are different beasts. The replicants in booke don't become "more human" Deckard becomes less human. Until he has a breakdown combined with the revelation that his relgion is a farce. I don't want to give away to much plot so I'll cut this short.

It has been decades since I read it. Probably 40+ years so the details have certainly faded. I had forgotten the distinction of his desired sheep and his existing pet goat subsequently murdered by the vindictive Rachael. I remember what a piece of work his wife was. Since that detail escaped the movie it enabled the ridiculous notion of Deckard as replicant. A replicant with a nut job, bed ridden wife that turned her mood control to depressed would be consistent with JK Dick however.

His entire trips into the unreal was interesting as he would disappear and return with these fantastic stories of authoritarian governments, religious themes and the dystopian future. At least it was dystopian to me. I came from the reading of pure Science Fiction based, mostly, on hard science. Through a scanner darkly was a hoot even though Wikipedia claims it was his first novel without drugs. Since it was based on drugs I hadn't realized that when I read it, if ever before now.

I remembered waiting for his books or stories to be published but not to the level that I waited for Zelazny or Vonnegut. I introduced my son to Vonnegut with Cat's Cradle. He was probably scarred by the encounter but we had a definite connection regarding books after that. A significant amount of what I knew about JK was through my literature obsessed son. I did point out that as crazy as the book was here was an author getting paid to write about ice-nine and the end of the world so something must be okay to have it happen at all.

AlexWinter:
I didn't understand Blade Runner. I read the book first and didn't get that either.

I never got the impression that Ford was a replicant.

I didn't really like any of the "bad" replicants; finding them neither intimidating or supportable.

The setting of the film looks horrible - is it supposed to?

Deckard forces himself on Rachael in the most uncomfortable way imaginable.

The fact that no one brought this up before I watched it worried me most.

What was so great about it?

(That's a genuine question; I would like to be able to understand and enjoy the film the next time I see it.)

I cant sort of see why people like it...but I don't "get" it...it did nothing for me, somtimes you get things and you don't

like ghost in the shell..I GET that..thats like my bladerunner

So... if I only ever watch one version of Blade Runner- which should it be?

I'm not even sure which version(s) I've already seen...

AlexWinter:

I never got the impression that Ford was a replicant.

His eyes flash for a split second in one scene, like all the other replicants.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here