Everyone jerks this movie off for “inventing cyberpunk” and the pretty neon-soaked rain shots, but if you actually sit down and watch it without the nostalgia goggles it’s kind of a slog.Plot? Barely exists. Deckard doesn’t “detective” shit, he just gets spoonfed info until it’s time for the next setpiece. The “hunt” has zero tension.Characters? Cardboard. Ford looks like he’d rather be anywhere else, just mumbling through the role. Rachel is basically a prop with nice hair. The only ones with actual presence are the replicants, which kind of undercuts the whole thing because the humans feel less alive than the robots.Dialogue? Clunky as hell. Depending on the cut you’re watching you either get cringe exposition voiceover or long stretches of silence that feel more like production issues than artistic choice.Pacing? Glacial. Half the runtime is “wow, look at the rainy cityscape.” Yeah, we get it Ridley, it’s wet. Move on.Final scene with Batty? Saved entirely by Hauer hamming it up. Without his improv speech it would’ve been pure cheese. The dove flying away is laughably on the nose.Yes, it looks gorgeous. Yes, it set the template for “rainy neon future.” But as an actual film it’s paper thin. It hints at big themes (what is human, memory vs identity, mortality), then drops them the moment Ridley wants another beauty shot of smoke and neon.It became a cult classic because of the aesthetic, not because it’s well-written. Strip away the atmosphere and you’re left with a slow, boring, undercooked sci-fi flick with one good monologue.
Is this pasta? Either way OP is a fag and OG Blade Runner is one of the greatest films ever made.
>>214489842AI most likely
>>214489842nah it's shitit's like prequels, kids watched and liked them but because they were kids, they didn't know bettersame with blade runner
It's like 7/10 but 9.5/10 if you drink every time Deckard drinks and also when Deckard isn't drinking
>>214489806It's all about the atmosphere and aesthetics anon, plus reflecting on post-humanism and were our shit industrial technological society is leading. Thinking of this in terms of plot beyond Marlowian tropes is fucking moroninc.
>actinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFYcVh4mltI
>>214489806Its a good movie, has pacing problems, by good is it slow but sometimes it does help to build the atmosphere it has really good things that are way to overshadowed by DUDE THIS IS ONE OF THE GREAT MOVIES EVA MADE great execution and production until now i think the style has influenced a lot of futuristic movies
>>214489806>The “hunt” has zero tension.doesnt have to>The only ones with actual presence are the replicants, which kind of undercuts the whole thing because the humans feel less alive than the robots.nah that's fine. it set up urban alienation as a mold for cpunk> Yeah, we get it Ridley, it’s wet. Move on.no ridley dont listen to OP he's a faggot. let's linger and explore the setting some more>Final scene with Batty? Saved entirely by Hauer hamming it up. it's fine really>It became a cult classic because of the aesthetic, not because it’s well-written. it's not well-written for those who want traditional hollywood cinema, as evidenced by your hunt remark. that's also why it flopped initially. it IS well-written to those who love the setting and who love watching a character in it do his job
>>214489872>kids watchedah yes, blade runner is that most elusive of beasts ... the r-rated kids film. kek.
>>214489872i saw it first between 16 and 18 when it became available on VHS>>214489923...and about the setting
>>214489806>The only ones with actual presence are the replicants, which kind of undercuts the whole thing because the humans feel less alive than the robots.Whoa... you almost get it.
Why is there no option to report AI posts?
>>214490254sir, this is 4chan
>>214490254Hiro probably pays the bills by letting AI spooks run their bot tests on 4chan.
>>214489806>Yes, it looks gorgeous>It became a cult classic because of the aesthetic, not because it’s well-written. Strip away the atmosphere and you’re left with a slow, boring, undercooked sci-fi flick with one good monologueThe looks, aesthetic, and atmosphere ARE the point. By stripping them away you're trying to force the film to be something it isn't; it's like reading James Joyce and complaining that the prose is better than the plot. No shit, the plot was never the point, it's just a vehicle and it serves its purpose admirably enough. If I wanted a well-written story I'd read the book, but this is one of the rare cases where the film's actually better in terms of capitalizing on the strength of its respective medium (the book has mediocre prose, whereas the movie has gorgeous visuals and music). Magical experience, wish to see it in cinema someday.
>>214489806>The only ones with actual presence are the replicants, which kind of undercuts the whole thing because the humans feel less alive than the robots.Imagine missing the point like this in a movie whose primary theme is "what does it mean to be human." They were supposed to feel more alive than the real humans so that you question why they are being hunted.
>>214489806>The only ones with actual presence are the replicants, which kind of undercuts the whole thing because the humans feel less alive than the robots.Wait...
>>214489806>But as an actual film it’s paper thin. It hints at big themes (what is human, memory vs identity, mortality), then drops them the moment Ridley wants another beauty shot of smoke and neon.you're a moron. stfu and go back to pleddit. you need to be 18 to use this board faggot.
>>214489806'filtered' is usually a midwit cope around here but...>The only ones with actual presence are the replicants, which kind of undercuts the whole thing Sersiouly OP, do you watch the Godfather, and go "erm the mafia are meant to be about family, but Michael just keeps alienating his family, PLOT HOLE
>>214489806I agree, it's a movie only teenagers wanting to be seen as intellectual like, then they grow up but haven't expanded their intellectual tastes at all so they still cling to it as one of the greatest movies ever. It does everything half-assed but has an iconic look. Scott has never directed actors well. If you like the themes, read the classics of scifi. If you like the aesthetics just get a poster series of the iconic shots and it's like having the entire movie on your wall. 2049 is better as a movie in any way.
>>214489806>Yes, it looks gorgeous.so you are saying it's a good movie?there are these things called books, if you want great stories you should try reading some, that's what they excel at because this is the sole thing the author should focus onlet movies be movies
>>214489806Most "greatest movies of all time" are judged that way for their cinematic quality instead of their narrative quality. So visual things like cinematography, lighting, set design, etc. matter far more for critics. Blade Runner has undeniably mastered these elements, every shot is perfect.
>The dove flying away is laughably on the nose....>The only ones with actual presence are the replicantsi think you're onto something there...
>>214489806>Ford looks like he’d rather be anywhere else, just mumbling through the role.thats basically his whole career. Why did this lil nigger even started acting?? I know money, but he had a 99% to end up as the next LA hobo who wanted to act.But it fits in this instance, cause deckard literally doesn`t want to do it
>>214489806>nostalgia goggles>Clunky>cringe>hamming>cheese>aestheticZoomers have this very insecure desire to tear down any film they don't immediately understand on first viewing. Instead of trying to approach it on any intellectual level they resort to meaningless buzzwords in a vain attempt to hide their own ignorance.
>>214489806>The only ones with actual presence are the replicants, which kind of undercuts the whole thing because the humans feel less alive than the robots.literally the whole point of the movie kek>>214489858ai slop is the new copypasta
>>214489806>It became a cult classic because of the aesthetic, not because it’s well-written.Tbf many cult classics have worse aesthetic and aren't any better written. Writing is just one aspect of filmmaking and usually a secondary one to the visual-related technical qualities.It looks nice, has a few good performances and some ideas that could've been interesting if properly explored, that's still well above average for a famous Hollywood production.
why do zoomies think the only way to tell a story is to move at breakneck speed? Every scene has to be flying at you at 100 mph. They can't comprehend slow, contemplative, thoughtful movies. And what kind of stupid criticism is "he doesn't do any detecting!"? The guy is interviewing witnesses and leads, looking for clues, analyzing the clues thoroughly, etc. You even whined about that because it's getting in the way of the running and shooting you crave. You somehow want more AND less of that?!
>>214489806>plotfag Aesthetics trumps story in this case.It’s more a series of moods, each scene strikes a specific mood.
>>214492794man those ucc coffees are good
>>214492716Skibidi Rizzlers don`t watch 80s or 90s movies, even 2000s is "old ah Unc shit", they only watch tik toks about movies on 2x speed and comment AYO DIS MOVIE OLD AH SHIT or something
the curse of blade runner is that by being set in the future it attracts an audience looking for the kind of power fantasy escapism that "nerdy" films usually offer, who then proceed to discover it's a movie for adults that has more in common with chinatown than star wars. so when they say things like>nothing happens! it's just pretty pictures! there's no plot!they actually mean that it's not about a loser finding out he's actually the chosen one and so on. it's the one thing they relate to so when it's missing they go "nothing's happening!"
>>214493640Honestly, you have no idea what you're talking about. >power fantasy escapism>"nerdy" filmsPick. One.
I just want a camera following a blade runner in this strange setting, recording him doing his job
>>214493877Then play the game
"all the movies it inspired decades later that i saw first are much better"
Bladerunner is lost even on most of its actual fans. Not that they don't get it, but they clearly don't have the words for it.
>>214493941We've already thoroughly explained it to you. You didn't get it the last three dozen times. Why would you get it this time?
>>214493904i did that in the 90s
>>214493814don't act dense. star wars, harry potter, the matrix, every other superhero story etc etc are all stereotypical nerd entertainment that feature a loser protagonist finding out he's special and defeating bad guys with his newfound power. that's an escapist power fantasy for shy nerds.
>>214494028but you never saved Lucy and escaped with her as your new girlfriend
>>214494054Idk. Maybe I come from an older world than you, but to me "nerds" have far more nuanced taste. Nerds have more interest in ideas than escapism. Like John Carpenter's "The Thing" is definitely nerd-core and I could hardly call that escapist. People with taste for comic book sensibilities used to be called "geeky" which denoted low brow obsession with escapism. "Nerds" were people with too many points in INT. Subtle difference sure, and often these two overlapped, but a nerd would read Issac Asimov. A geek would read Punisher comics.
>>214493990No, I am saying (You) don't get it. I've seen all the reads of it people give, and very very vanishingly few people actually have a handle on what it is.
>>214494156>"Nerds" were people with too many points in INT.That's what nerds tell themselves.In fact most nerds are average to below intelligence. They are just autistic and prefer to retreat into a world of goblins and sorcery rather than attempt to deal with the real world that roundly rejects them at every turn.
>>214489806Don't care, I'm still watching Blade Runner® - The Final Cut™.Have fun autistically nitpicking every minuscule oversight, I'll be too busy having fun watching the movie to even notice them.
>>214494194You seem unwilling to meet me halfway. Sorry for your asspain.
>you're in an image board, browsing along when all of the sudden->which one?>what?>which image board?>it doesn't make any difference which image board, it's completely hypothetical>but how come I'd be there?>maybe you're fed up, maybe you wanted to be by yourself, who knows? You scroll down and see a soijak, anon, it's staring at you->-soijak, what's that?>know what a wojak is?>of course>same thing>I've never seen a soijak...but I understand what you mean
>>214494231it figures you'd pick the shittiest version to enjoy most
Watch the deleted scenes. Some are pretty good. Deckard goes to the hospital to visit his friend Holden who was shot in the opening scene. They discuss how scary the new replicants are.
>>214495609>you fucked a refrigerator and turned it off, what's the problem?
>>214489806I bet you play call of duty
