The Director's Cut of "Blade Runner" will have a limited theatrical release on October 5, and several multi-disc box set versions will be released in December. "But the Director's Cut was already released in 1992," you say. Yeah, that's what I said too. Even though the 1992 version was billed as a Director's Cut, Ridley Scott apparently wasn't completely happy with it, so another "Director's Cut" is being released, this time presumably with Scott's seal of approval.
"Blade Runner" is a film that I happen to love but which a lot of people apparently don't get. It seems too well-liked among too many circles to be really labeled a cult film, but it's not quite popular enough to be mainstream. I love the bleak look and just all the atmosphere everywhere. I don't know that Sean Young, Daryl Hannah or Joanna Cassidy have had finer moments in any other performances. Edward James Olmos has a very understated role, but he's perfect. This is the role that I most remember Harrison Ford for - not Han Solo and not Indiana Jones. But of course, the person who stole the show was Rutger Hauer. As maligned as the film has been over the years, "Blade Runner" is the proverbial lightning-in-a-bottle.
Many people much preferred the 1992 version of the film since it omitted the voiceover by Harrison Ford at the beginning of the film and also eliminated the so-called "happy ending" at the conclusion of the film. I can see the merits of both versions. I didn't mind the voice-over. Many people said that Harrison Ford hated having to do it so much that he did it in a monotone voice - but even if that's true, it fits in perfectly with Deckard's state-of-mind and character. As for the "happy ending" - it reminds me of the ending of the 1946 film "Gilda", starring Rita Hayworth and Glenn Ford. It's a "happy ending", but it's merely an illusion. Same goes with "Blade Runner".
Even more enigmatic than the film is the original book that the film is based on, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" by Philip K. Dick. Those who loved the film tried to then read the book, and most were disappointed and baffled. "Blade Runner" is not really the film version of the novel. Rather, it takes characters and ideas from the novel and makes a film of them, but the novel is much different in many ways, not the least of which is that it's much more cerebral. I'm not sure you could actually make a film of the novel. But I do enjoy the novel. It's thought-provoking and requires a lot of work, even moreso than the film.
I'm looking forward to seeing the new version of the film. But no matter what comes out of it, in my book, Deckard will never be a replicant.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment