According to the blog counter, this is my five hundredth post. When I first began some four years ago, I had no goal or target to shoot at. I just started posting and assumed that I would eventually lose interest or burn out or get interrupted by fate or some chance event. I even wondered whether I would be able to come up with enough material to make more than a few posts. I still may burn out or lose interest some day, and fate may still interrupt me, but I definitely won't run out of material. One day years from now I may even reach 1000, maybe.
This does give me an opportunity to do something I've been thinking about for some time--compare the list of my favorite posts and the posts, according to the Blogger Stats, that have received the most visits. I've often wondered how much overlap there really is.
The Ten Most Visited Posts (according to Blogger Stats)
N. Scott Momaday The Way to Rainy Mountain
May 23, 2010 2422 visits
Shirley Jackson "The Lottery"
June 27, 2010 1286 visits
Brian Aldiss "Super-Toys Last All Summer"
March 25, 2011 679 visits
Robert Frost "Storm Fear"
Feb. 3, 2011 521 visits
Alfred Bester "Fondly Fahrenheit"
August 14, 2008 442 visits
Thomas Mann The Transposed Heads
Nov. 3, 2011 428 visits
Robert Frost a terrifying poet?
Sept 16, 2008 182 visits
Friedrich Durrenmatt The Pledge, novel and film
Jan. 16, 2009 165 visits
Theodore Sturgeon Three By Theodore Sturgeon
Jan 16, 2010 151 visits
Tales of Times Past Japanese medieval stories
March 6, 2011 148 visits
It's a rather mixed collection. I don't see much of a pattern here, except for some slight predominance of SF and fantasy, but that may be due to a predominance of posts about SF and fantasy. I haven't really ever taken a genre census.
The following is a list of some of my favorite posts. I'm not certain exactly why they are. Maybe some day I will be enlightened. They are in no particular order.
The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam --a series of posts, one for each quatrain in the first edition which has 75 quatrains. I'm now up to Quatrain LXII, so I have thirteen to go to finish the work.
Kim Stanley Robinson: four or five posts about his "Three Californias" series: The Wild Shore, The Gold Coast, and Pacific Edge. Each of the three novels depicts a different future for Orange County, California--a post holocaust future, a continuation of the cold war and the dominance of the military-industrial complex in the US, and an ecological/environmental oriented future, respectively.
Blade Runner--five versions of the film.
Shirley Jackson--"The Lottery"
Gregory Benford--The "Galactic Center" series: six posts, each of which is about the six novels in the series, which is one of the greatest SF series (if not the greatest) ever written, in my view anyway. It begins in the late 1990s on Earth and ends somewhen about 35,000 (yes, thirty-five thousand) years in the future around the black hole at the center of our galaxy..
N. Scott Momaday: The Way to Rainy Mountain, part history of the Kiowa people, part legends of the Kiowa people, and part personal history of Momaday.
The Rashomon posts, several posts about the film by Akira Kurosawa and the stories of Ryunosuke Akutagawa that formed the basis of the film.
The Maltese Falcon: a post discussing the three versions of Dashiell Hammett's novel, The Maltese Falcon.
William Hope Hodgson: The Night Land, a post about one of my favorite fantasy novels.
King Kong: a post comparing the three versions of the film.
Ikiru: a post discussing one of my favorite films, directed by Akira Kurosawa.
Robert Frost a terrifying poet?--a slightly different view of the poet
Robert Frost: "For Once, Then Something"
Thomas Hardy and Robert Frost: "Hap" and "Design"
and others.
Not much overlap is there?
I've enjoyed the ride so far, so I guess I'll stay with it for a while longer.
And thanks, to you and the others who have visited me here and had something to say about what you read here. Hearing from you is important and I think most every blogger would agree with me.
Showing posts with label Blade Runner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Blade Runner. Show all posts
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Natural City: an SF film from Korea
A Korean SF film--
That was what intrigued me most about this film when I first read about it. I don't think I have ever watched a Korean film before, and I'm positive that I haven't seen an SF film from Korea. I didn't bother reading the rest of the description and simply placed it in my Netflix queue.
When Natural City arrived, I again didn't bother reading the brief paragraph about it and loaded it into my DVD player. It was a bit confusing at first; part of the problem was adjusting to simultaneously reading the subtitles and following the action . However, some of the opening scenes began to make sense after I had watched a bit more of the film. It was then that I started to notice some rather familiar themes, which surprised me. If I had read the brief description, I would not have been as surprised as I was.
The setting is the future, 2080 to be exact, just after a devastating war. The action takes place in a futuristic city, set side by side with the ruins of a city destroyed in the war. We first encounter Cyon, a young woman who lives in the ruins along with numerous other outcasts who either can't live in the city or have fled it. She lives by her wits--a thief at times, a prostitute at times, and a fortune teller most of the time.
We also encounter the lovers, one of whom is a member of the MPs, which apparently stands for Military Police. The woman, Rea, is a dancer, a cyborg created to be a superb dancer, far superior to anything humans can do. Cyborgs are created humans, who resemble "born" humans so closely that one can't tell the difference.
Warning: I discuss a number of significant plot elements and issues. However, I do not reveal the ending.
The first action scene provided some wake-up clues: a group of cyborgs led by a combat cyborg attacks the medical center and have to be driven off by the MPs, led by an officer called Noma. A member of his unit is his closest friend, "R," who happens to be the MP who is in love with the cyborg dancer. The cyborgs, while in control of the medical center, do a complete scan of the DNA records for the human citizens of the area.
The humans are not certain as to why the cyborgs wanted this information, for it didn't seem to have anything to do with what they knew about Cyper, the combat cyborg who is the leader of the cyborg group. Cyper's actions have always been connected with the cyborgs' termination date. While the cyborgs are physically superior to the humans, they are cursed with the knowledge that they have been created with a limited life span. Cyper's past actions had concentrated on finding ways to extend his termination date.
R's cyborg lover carries a small device, about the size of a cell phone, around with her that she occasionally places against her skin. She then hears a voice that tells her that she has only three days, __ hours, __ minutes, and 15 seconds left--14 seconds--13 seconds--12 seconds . . . before her termination date.
Cyborgs indistinguishable from humans? Cyborgs physically superior to humans? Cyborgs with a termination date? A combat cyborg struggling to find a way to cancel or somehow get around this termination date?
And talking billboards soaring high above pedestrians in the city streets extolling the beauties of a vacation on a paradisaical planet?
And several scenes that take place in a noodle shop in a mall, but in the background one can see the crowds pass by?
Blade Runner?
Imagine Rick Deckard split into two characters: Noma (no man?), an officer focused solely on his job; and R (strange name--he's the only one with just a letter for a name--R--Rick?) who is in love with a cyborg and finds that it interferes with his job with the MPs. Ironically, he and Cyper, the combat cyborg, have the same problem--the cyborg termination date. The conflict between Noma and R regarding R's lack of focus on his job caused by his distress over Rea's coming termination could be seen as coming from Deckard's own ambivalence regarding his job of terminating replicants and his affection for Rachel, a replicant. Rachel and Rea--the cyborg love interest in the two films.
A solution has been found--neuronal transfer. A classic mad scientist has created a way of transferring the consciousness of one being to another. In this way, the cyborgs, or anyone else I gather, could have immortality by just transferring their consciousness to a younger and healthier human.
There is a catch though--the two involved in the transfer must have similar DNA. This is where the young woman in the opening scenes, Cyon, becomes important. She alone has DNA similar to the cyborgs. Once this is discovered, then both Cyper and R search for Cyon. R's dream is to transfer Rea's consciousness into the body of Cyon and then escape to the paradisaical vacation planet.
Three battle scenes split the film into thirds--one at the beginning, one roughly in the middle, and one at the end, naturally. The humans, physically outclassed by the cyborgs, rely on firepower. The cyborgs focus on attacking the humans with superior martial arts techniques. Unfortunately for the humans, the cyborgs can be stopped only by a direct hit to the head, which is almost impossible given the cyborgs' superior agility and strength. The battle scenes are quite impressive.
The only problems I have with the film are the subtitles, of course, and some plot problems. But, it is possible that the plot problems are the result of being distracted by the subtitles. For example, at one point in the film, I thought that Cyon had been captured by the cyborgs, but in the next scene she is free, back in the ruins where she lives. Another viewing might resolve this problem.
I want to be sure that all understand that I do not see Natural City as a remake of Blade Runner. Byung-chun Min, who is both director and screenwriter, has taken a number of elements from Blade Runner and constructed a different film with them.
Overall Reaction: A very interesting, intriguing, and entertaining homage to Blade Runner. Recommended for those interested in SF films, especially foreign SF films, for Blade Runner aficionados curious about a different interpretation of some common themes, and for those looking for something unique.
That was what intrigued me most about this film when I first read about it. I don't think I have ever watched a Korean film before, and I'm positive that I haven't seen an SF film from Korea. I didn't bother reading the rest of the description and simply placed it in my Netflix queue.
When Natural City arrived, I again didn't bother reading the brief paragraph about it and loaded it into my DVD player. It was a bit confusing at first; part of the problem was adjusting to simultaneously reading the subtitles and following the action . However, some of the opening scenes began to make sense after I had watched a bit more of the film. It was then that I started to notice some rather familiar themes, which surprised me. If I had read the brief description, I would not have been as surprised as I was.
The setting is the future, 2080 to be exact, just after a devastating war. The action takes place in a futuristic city, set side by side with the ruins of a city destroyed in the war. We first encounter Cyon, a young woman who lives in the ruins along with numerous other outcasts who either can't live in the city or have fled it. She lives by her wits--a thief at times, a prostitute at times, and a fortune teller most of the time.
We also encounter the lovers, one of whom is a member of the MPs, which apparently stands for Military Police. The woman, Rea, is a dancer, a cyborg created to be a superb dancer, far superior to anything humans can do. Cyborgs are created humans, who resemble "born" humans so closely that one can't tell the difference.
Warning: I discuss a number of significant plot elements and issues. However, I do not reveal the ending.
The first action scene provided some wake-up clues: a group of cyborgs led by a combat cyborg attacks the medical center and have to be driven off by the MPs, led by an officer called Noma. A member of his unit is his closest friend, "R," who happens to be the MP who is in love with the cyborg dancer. The cyborgs, while in control of the medical center, do a complete scan of the DNA records for the human citizens of the area.
The humans are not certain as to why the cyborgs wanted this information, for it didn't seem to have anything to do with what they knew about Cyper, the combat cyborg who is the leader of the cyborg group. Cyper's actions have always been connected with the cyborgs' termination date. While the cyborgs are physically superior to the humans, they are cursed with the knowledge that they have been created with a limited life span. Cyper's past actions had concentrated on finding ways to extend his termination date.
R's cyborg lover carries a small device, about the size of a cell phone, around with her that she occasionally places against her skin. She then hears a voice that tells her that she has only three days, __ hours, __ minutes, and 15 seconds left--14 seconds--13 seconds--12 seconds . . . before her termination date.
Cyborgs indistinguishable from humans? Cyborgs physically superior to humans? Cyborgs with a termination date? A combat cyborg struggling to find a way to cancel or somehow get around this termination date?
And talking billboards soaring high above pedestrians in the city streets extolling the beauties of a vacation on a paradisaical planet?
And several scenes that take place in a noodle shop in a mall, but in the background one can see the crowds pass by?
Blade Runner?
Imagine Rick Deckard split into two characters: Noma (no man?), an officer focused solely on his job; and R (strange name--he's the only one with just a letter for a name--R--Rick?) who is in love with a cyborg and finds that it interferes with his job with the MPs. Ironically, he and Cyper, the combat cyborg, have the same problem--the cyborg termination date. The conflict between Noma and R regarding R's lack of focus on his job caused by his distress over Rea's coming termination could be seen as coming from Deckard's own ambivalence regarding his job of terminating replicants and his affection for Rachel, a replicant. Rachel and Rea--the cyborg love interest in the two films.
A solution has been found--neuronal transfer. A classic mad scientist has created a way of transferring the consciousness of one being to another. In this way, the cyborgs, or anyone else I gather, could have immortality by just transferring their consciousness to a younger and healthier human.
There is a catch though--the two involved in the transfer must have similar DNA. This is where the young woman in the opening scenes, Cyon, becomes important. She alone has DNA similar to the cyborgs. Once this is discovered, then both Cyper and R search for Cyon. R's dream is to transfer Rea's consciousness into the body of Cyon and then escape to the paradisaical vacation planet.
Three battle scenes split the film into thirds--one at the beginning, one roughly in the middle, and one at the end, naturally. The humans, physically outclassed by the cyborgs, rely on firepower. The cyborgs focus on attacking the humans with superior martial arts techniques. Unfortunately for the humans, the cyborgs can be stopped only by a direct hit to the head, which is almost impossible given the cyborgs' superior agility and strength. The battle scenes are quite impressive.
The only problems I have with the film are the subtitles, of course, and some plot problems. But, it is possible that the plot problems are the result of being distracted by the subtitles. For example, at one point in the film, I thought that Cyon had been captured by the cyborgs, but in the next scene she is free, back in the ruins where she lives. Another viewing might resolve this problem.
I want to be sure that all understand that I do not see Natural City as a remake of Blade Runner. Byung-chun Min, who is both director and screenwriter, has taken a number of elements from Blade Runner and constructed a different film with them.
Overall Reaction: A very interesting, intriguing, and entertaining homage to Blade Runner. Recommended for those interested in SF films, especially foreign SF films, for Blade Runner aficionados curious about a different interpretation of some common themes, and for those looking for something unique.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Blade Runner: Five film versions
Blade Runner is one of my favorite SF films, but it has taken multiple viewings to get me to the point where I begin to understand why. The story is a classic SF/Police procedural mix with a film noir atmosphere. Only recently have I been able to spend time away from the central action and concentrate on the background. It is this, the imaginative and painstaking attention to the setting, that makes Blade Runner the outstanding film that it is: the various people on the streets, the clothing, the introduction of animals in an urban environment, the stores, the various small and unique businesses (snakes and owls and llamas? made to order), and the dark and brooding atmosphere so reminiscent of films of the 40s and 50s.
Of course, when I heard of the Director's Cut, I had to see what Riddley Scott, the director, now thought should be in the film, and then when the Final Cut came out, I decided to run my own Blade Runner film festival. I started by renting them or getting them from the public library, which had the theatrical version. I then learned there was a collector's edition out and decided that this was something I should have in my own private collection of DVDs, of which I now have six. I investigated and found the 5 Disc Collectors' Edition at a reasonable price.
What really sold me on it was that it claimed to have five versions of Blade Runner. Now this I had to see. It arrived with five DVDs: three with the various versions of the film, but also two DVDs with extras-- Dangerous Days: Making Blade Runner and The Enhancement Archive. This was in addition to the Special and Bonus Features found with the various film versions. To be honest, I haven't watched the two DVDs yet. I keep getting distracted by the films, but one of these days . . .
I will not be writing about Philip K. Dick's novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, which was published in 1958. The changes are so significant that it would take a book to adequately discuss them.
I shall discuss significant events and the endings of the film versions.
The Five Faces of Blade Runner
THE WORKPRINT: this version has never been released for viewing in the theaters. It is, as the label suggests, a working version of the film, made prior to the release of the theatrical versions. Aside from a few minor technical problems with color and the sound track, it is a version that is very acceptable. When I saw it, I thought that if I had seen this in a theatre, I would have guessed that it was an older version that had become a bit tired over the three decades since its release.
THE THEATRICAL RELEASE: US Version, 1982. This is the first release of the film, and frankly, it is still my favorite. It bombed when it came out. Film-goers weren't ready for it; I wonder if there's an audience for it today, some three decades later.
THE THEATRICAL RELEASE: International Version, 1982. This version was for theaters outside of the US. The only differences I can see are minimal: in the International version, some of the fight scenes are a few seconds longer and the violence more explicit, and some brief nudity in the dressing room of Zhora, the snake dancer. These differences are included in the Director's Cut and the Final Cut.
THE DIRECTOR'S CUT: 1992. This appeared a decade after the theatrical release. Generally a re-release such as this would include some scenes that weren't in the first release and possibly the editing or even the outright deletion of scenes that the director now felt didn't work. The major differences, that I can see, are the loss of the voice-overs (a serious error by Riddley Scott, as far as I'm concerned), the bewildering introduction of the unicorn scene, and the truncated ending. My opinion is that Scott's changes weakened the film.
THE FINAL CUT: 2007. This version came out some fifteen years after the Director's Cut. The changes in this version had to do with several technical flaws and didn't introduce anything new to or take anything out of the Director's Cut.
1. In the scene when Deckard talks to the creator of the snake for Zhora, the sound track didn't match up exactly with the visual scene. Since Ford was busy, they got his son to come in and reshoot the scene. They filmed Ford's son as he lipsync'd (is there such a word?) to the audio track and then inserted that into the film.
2. The second reshooting took place in the scene where Deckard shoots Zhora as she goes crashing through the plate glass in the store. Apparently, Scott? felt that the face of the double for Zhora was too noticeable. To solve this problem, Joanna Cassidy came in and they filmed her face as she twisted and turned to match the positions of the double's face in the film. This was then inserted into the film, so that it is now Joanna Cassidy's face one sees crashing through all that plate glass.
3. At the end of the film, at the point when Roy dies, he releases the white bird which then flies up into the sky. As the camera follows it up into the clear blue sky, I wondered what had happened to the rain. Had it suddenly stopped? Well, that doesn't happen in the Final Cut. That bird now flies upward into the rain falling from a dark sky (it was a dark and stormy night--sorry, couldn't resist that).
The white bird: Scott said that it originally was just a sign that Roy had died and had let go of the bird, but everybody else took the bird as symbolic of the freedom that Roy finally achieved. For many viewers, the white bird is Roy's soul ascending to heaven. He had developed a soul and was now human.
This has been just a brief overview of the five films. Following is a discussion of some of the major differences that appear among the five versions, or at least I see them as major. There may be other differences equally important, but they've escaped me so far. Perhaps I'll finally see them in subsequent viewings.
The Voice-overs: these appear only in the initial theatrical releases. They are not found in the Workprint (with one interesting exception which I will bring up later), and were removed from the Director's Cut and were not restored in the Final Cut. This is a major error in judgment on Scott's part, for, in my opinion, it weakens the film. One of the film's strengths is its dark, gloomy atmosphere, for many scenes take place at night and in the rain. Harrison Ford's first scene is outside on the street on a drizzly night. Take a close look at Rachel's clothing, hairstyle, and makeup, and then look at photos of women taken during the 1940's and 1950's. Rachel's appearance puts her much closer to that period then to the 1980's or the early 21st century when the story takes place. The voice-over is a powerful reminder of the noir films that appeared after WWII, many of which were crime films in which one man was depicted on the trail of criminals or on a mission of revenge. Blade Runner clearly fits in with these films.
Reaction: removing the voice-over was a mistake. I think it weakens the film It is the single most important reason why I rate the theatrical version higher than the Director's Cut and the Final Cut.
The Unicorn: the unicorn appears only in the Director's Cut and the Final Cut. Rachel has just left Deckard's apartment (her first visit in which she argues that she isn't a replicant). After she leaves, Deckard is shown sitting at the piano, picking out a few notes when he suddenly and inexplicably thinks of a unicorn running through the woods. He then gets up and begins to use his computer to work on one of Leon's photos.
In one of the bonus features, I learned that the brief appearance was actually shot especially for the film and wasn't borrowed from another film. I also learned that it supposedly supports Scott's idea that Deckard is a replicant. It's intended to tie in with the unicorn origami (I think that's what it is) that Gaff leaves by Deckard's apartment at the end of the film. How else would Gaff know about Deckard's unicorn daydream if a unicorn hadn't been placed in Deckard's memory? Huh!
I gather that this was an afterthought on Scott's part because people weren't getting Scott's idea that Deckard is human. Frankly, I don't get it either. There are too many other ways for a unicorn to appear in Deckard's memory without the need for a memory implant. A unicorn traditionally is a symbol of virginity, for only a virgin could capture one. Rachel certainly comes across as innocent and naive and perhaps virginal? OK, it's a stretch, but no more so than the "official" interpretation.
Reaction: I see no reason for this scene. It doesn't convince me that Deckard is a replicant, which is why it was inserted in the last two releases. It doesn't work. To be honest, when a friend mentioned the unicorn in the film, I didn't remember it, even though I had just seen the film a few weeks earlier. I either wasn't watching the film those few seconds it was on or I considered it irrelevant and simply forgot about it.
Roy's Death: the scene of Roy's death is the same for the four releases. It differs only in the workprint version. It is also the only example of a voice-over other than in the initial theatrical releases. In the workprint, Roy doesn't die when he says "Time to die," ironically using the same words Leon used when he was about to kill Deckard, and when the white bird flies upward, but he struggles against death for several hours afterwards. Deckard in the voice-over comments that Roy's death took hours. He also thinks about why Roy saved his life. Perhaps Roy, his own death so imminent, realizes how important life is, even a blade runner's life.
The Escape at the End: The theatrical versions are the only ones that have the final scene out in the countryside. The others end with the closing of the elevator doors. I guess that the prejudice against a possibly happy ending is responsible here. If so, then somebody has forgotten a short but significant conversation between Deckard and Rachel. They are back in his apartment, now for the second time. Deckard is cleaning up when Rachel mentions leaving the city and heading north. She asks him if he would come after her, would hunt her down. Deckard replies that he wouldn't for he owes her one. . . but that somebody would.
Have they really escaped? I doubt it, for all they have done by leaving the city is to delay being tracked down. If Deckard also is a replicant, then surely the authorities would go after them, especially since Rachel, an experimental model, has no termination date. She could live for decades. They are too dangerous to allow to live free. Other blade runners will soon be on their trail, if they weren't already on their way.
Is Deckard a replicant? This is probably the point that is most controversial. I've seen numerous commentaries that argue both sides. I've come to the conclusion that there is no concrete evidence clearly and unambiguously supporting either position. Riddley Scott, the director, says that Deckard is a replicant. While he says Deckard is a replicant, his film suggest something quite other than that.
If Deckard is a replicant, then he must be the most incompetent replicant in existence. He can't be a Nexus, the same type as Roy and his friends are, for there is no comparison between them. He is slower than them, clearly weaker than them, and is always caught by surprise by them.
Zhora: in the dressing room, she catches him by surprise, even though he knows she's a replicant, and is about to kill him when others walk into the dressing room. She flees, and Deckard then shoots her in the back as she flees through the store. He fires and misses several times before he finally hits her.
Leon: Deckard has just killed Zhora and is leaving the scene when Leon catches him offguard. Deckard pulls his gun, but Leon merely flicks it away, says "Time to Die," and is just about to kill him when Rachel appears, picks up Deckard's gun and shoots Leon in the head from a distance of twenty or thirty yards, hitting him with one shot. Of course, she's a Nexus model and functions competently in this situation. It's Rachel who kills Leon, not Deckard, who is the best blade runner in the city, according to Bryan, his boss.
Pris: Deckard is wandering around Stevenson's apartment looking for replicants, his gun still in its holster. He gets suspicious of one of the large dolls and goes over there without pulling his gun. Pris jumps him and is about to kill him when she decides to have some fun. This gives Deckard a chance to finally get his gun out and kill her as she tries to stomp him to death.
Roy: Deckard has the gun and Roy has no weapon. Deckard becomes the prey, even if he is armed, and at the end, Roy has to save Deckard's life. Roy dies because he has reached his termination date and not because Deckard kills him.
All four Nexus replicants are superior to Deckard. All four could have killed him, but three were prevented by chance, and the fourth chooses to save Deckard's life instead. What kind of replicant is Deckard? Surely not a Nexus.
Deckard is told that the Tyrell Corporation is determined to build replicants that become more and more human. Perhaps Deckard is a Nexus 7, next year's model that is so human that it is as incompetent as the average human.
Riddley Scott says Deckard is a replicant; his film says no, Deckard is human.
Overall Reaction: the theatrical versions get a 5 on a five point scale; the others a 4.
Of course, when I heard of the Director's Cut, I had to see what Riddley Scott, the director, now thought should be in the film, and then when the Final Cut came out, I decided to run my own Blade Runner film festival. I started by renting them or getting them from the public library, which had the theatrical version. I then learned there was a collector's edition out and decided that this was something I should have in my own private collection of DVDs, of which I now have six. I investigated and found the 5 Disc Collectors' Edition at a reasonable price.
What really sold me on it was that it claimed to have five versions of Blade Runner. Now this I had to see. It arrived with five DVDs: three with the various versions of the film, but also two DVDs with extras-- Dangerous Days: Making Blade Runner and The Enhancement Archive. This was in addition to the Special and Bonus Features found with the various film versions. To be honest, I haven't watched the two DVDs yet. I keep getting distracted by the films, but one of these days . . .
I will not be writing about Philip K. Dick's novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, which was published in 1958. The changes are so significant that it would take a book to adequately discuss them.
I shall discuss significant events and the endings of the film versions.
The Five Faces of Blade Runner
THE WORKPRINT: this version has never been released for viewing in the theaters. It is, as the label suggests, a working version of the film, made prior to the release of the theatrical versions. Aside from a few minor technical problems with color and the sound track, it is a version that is very acceptable. When I saw it, I thought that if I had seen this in a theatre, I would have guessed that it was an older version that had become a bit tired over the three decades since its release.
THE THEATRICAL RELEASE: US Version, 1982. This is the first release of the film, and frankly, it is still my favorite. It bombed when it came out. Film-goers weren't ready for it; I wonder if there's an audience for it today, some three decades later.
THE THEATRICAL RELEASE: International Version, 1982. This version was for theaters outside of the US. The only differences I can see are minimal: in the International version, some of the fight scenes are a few seconds longer and the violence more explicit, and some brief nudity in the dressing room of Zhora, the snake dancer. These differences are included in the Director's Cut and the Final Cut.
THE DIRECTOR'S CUT: 1992. This appeared a decade after the theatrical release. Generally a re-release such as this would include some scenes that weren't in the first release and possibly the editing or even the outright deletion of scenes that the director now felt didn't work. The major differences, that I can see, are the loss of the voice-overs (a serious error by Riddley Scott, as far as I'm concerned), the bewildering introduction of the unicorn scene, and the truncated ending. My opinion is that Scott's changes weakened the film.
THE FINAL CUT: 2007. This version came out some fifteen years after the Director's Cut. The changes in this version had to do with several technical flaws and didn't introduce anything new to or take anything out of the Director's Cut.
1. In the scene when Deckard talks to the creator of the snake for Zhora, the sound track didn't match up exactly with the visual scene. Since Ford was busy, they got his son to come in and reshoot the scene. They filmed Ford's son as he lipsync'd (is there such a word?) to the audio track and then inserted that into the film.
2. The second reshooting took place in the scene where Deckard shoots Zhora as she goes crashing through the plate glass in the store. Apparently, Scott? felt that the face of the double for Zhora was too noticeable. To solve this problem, Joanna Cassidy came in and they filmed her face as she twisted and turned to match the positions of the double's face in the film. This was then inserted into the film, so that it is now Joanna Cassidy's face one sees crashing through all that plate glass.
3. At the end of the film, at the point when Roy dies, he releases the white bird which then flies up into the sky. As the camera follows it up into the clear blue sky, I wondered what had happened to the rain. Had it suddenly stopped? Well, that doesn't happen in the Final Cut. That bird now flies upward into the rain falling from a dark sky (it was a dark and stormy night--sorry, couldn't resist that).
The white bird: Scott said that it originally was just a sign that Roy had died and had let go of the bird, but everybody else took the bird as symbolic of the freedom that Roy finally achieved. For many viewers, the white bird is Roy's soul ascending to heaven. He had developed a soul and was now human.
This has been just a brief overview of the five films. Following is a discussion of some of the major differences that appear among the five versions, or at least I see them as major. There may be other differences equally important, but they've escaped me so far. Perhaps I'll finally see them in subsequent viewings.
The Voice-overs: these appear only in the initial theatrical releases. They are not found in the Workprint (with one interesting exception which I will bring up later), and were removed from the Director's Cut and were not restored in the Final Cut. This is a major error in judgment on Scott's part, for, in my opinion, it weakens the film. One of the film's strengths is its dark, gloomy atmosphere, for many scenes take place at night and in the rain. Harrison Ford's first scene is outside on the street on a drizzly night. Take a close look at Rachel's clothing, hairstyle, and makeup, and then look at photos of women taken during the 1940's and 1950's. Rachel's appearance puts her much closer to that period then to the 1980's or the early 21st century when the story takes place. The voice-over is a powerful reminder of the noir films that appeared after WWII, many of which were crime films in which one man was depicted on the trail of criminals or on a mission of revenge. Blade Runner clearly fits in with these films.
Reaction: removing the voice-over was a mistake. I think it weakens the film It is the single most important reason why I rate the theatrical version higher than the Director's Cut and the Final Cut.
The Unicorn: the unicorn appears only in the Director's Cut and the Final Cut. Rachel has just left Deckard's apartment (her first visit in which she argues that she isn't a replicant). After she leaves, Deckard is shown sitting at the piano, picking out a few notes when he suddenly and inexplicably thinks of a unicorn running through the woods. He then gets up and begins to use his computer to work on one of Leon's photos.
In one of the bonus features, I learned that the brief appearance was actually shot especially for the film and wasn't borrowed from another film. I also learned that it supposedly supports Scott's idea that Deckard is a replicant. It's intended to tie in with the unicorn origami (I think that's what it is) that Gaff leaves by Deckard's apartment at the end of the film. How else would Gaff know about Deckard's unicorn daydream if a unicorn hadn't been placed in Deckard's memory? Huh!
I gather that this was an afterthought on Scott's part because people weren't getting Scott's idea that Deckard is human. Frankly, I don't get it either. There are too many other ways for a unicorn to appear in Deckard's memory without the need for a memory implant. A unicorn traditionally is a symbol of virginity, for only a virgin could capture one. Rachel certainly comes across as innocent and naive and perhaps virginal? OK, it's a stretch, but no more so than the "official" interpretation.
Reaction: I see no reason for this scene. It doesn't convince me that Deckard is a replicant, which is why it was inserted in the last two releases. It doesn't work. To be honest, when a friend mentioned the unicorn in the film, I didn't remember it, even though I had just seen the film a few weeks earlier. I either wasn't watching the film those few seconds it was on or I considered it irrelevant and simply forgot about it.
Roy's Death: the scene of Roy's death is the same for the four releases. It differs only in the workprint version. It is also the only example of a voice-over other than in the initial theatrical releases. In the workprint, Roy doesn't die when he says "Time to die," ironically using the same words Leon used when he was about to kill Deckard, and when the white bird flies upward, but he struggles against death for several hours afterwards. Deckard in the voice-over comments that Roy's death took hours. He also thinks about why Roy saved his life. Perhaps Roy, his own death so imminent, realizes how important life is, even a blade runner's life.
The Escape at the End: The theatrical versions are the only ones that have the final scene out in the countryside. The others end with the closing of the elevator doors. I guess that the prejudice against a possibly happy ending is responsible here. If so, then somebody has forgotten a short but significant conversation between Deckard and Rachel. They are back in his apartment, now for the second time. Deckard is cleaning up when Rachel mentions leaving the city and heading north. She asks him if he would come after her, would hunt her down. Deckard replies that he wouldn't for he owes her one. . . but that somebody would.
Have they really escaped? I doubt it, for all they have done by leaving the city is to delay being tracked down. If Deckard also is a replicant, then surely the authorities would go after them, especially since Rachel, an experimental model, has no termination date. She could live for decades. They are too dangerous to allow to live free. Other blade runners will soon be on their trail, if they weren't already on their way.
Is Deckard a replicant? This is probably the point that is most controversial. I've seen numerous commentaries that argue both sides. I've come to the conclusion that there is no concrete evidence clearly and unambiguously supporting either position. Riddley Scott, the director, says that Deckard is a replicant. While he says Deckard is a replicant, his film suggest something quite other than that.
If Deckard is a replicant, then he must be the most incompetent replicant in existence. He can't be a Nexus, the same type as Roy and his friends are, for there is no comparison between them. He is slower than them, clearly weaker than them, and is always caught by surprise by them.
Zhora: in the dressing room, she catches him by surprise, even though he knows she's a replicant, and is about to kill him when others walk into the dressing room. She flees, and Deckard then shoots her in the back as she flees through the store. He fires and misses several times before he finally hits her.
Leon: Deckard has just killed Zhora and is leaving the scene when Leon catches him offguard. Deckard pulls his gun, but Leon merely flicks it away, says "Time to Die," and is just about to kill him when Rachel appears, picks up Deckard's gun and shoots Leon in the head from a distance of twenty or thirty yards, hitting him with one shot. Of course, she's a Nexus model and functions competently in this situation. It's Rachel who kills Leon, not Deckard, who is the best blade runner in the city, according to Bryan, his boss.
Pris: Deckard is wandering around Stevenson's apartment looking for replicants, his gun still in its holster. He gets suspicious of one of the large dolls and goes over there without pulling his gun. Pris jumps him and is about to kill him when she decides to have some fun. This gives Deckard a chance to finally get his gun out and kill her as she tries to stomp him to death.
Roy: Deckard has the gun and Roy has no weapon. Deckard becomes the prey, even if he is armed, and at the end, Roy has to save Deckard's life. Roy dies because he has reached his termination date and not because Deckard kills him.
All four Nexus replicants are superior to Deckard. All four could have killed him, but three were prevented by chance, and the fourth chooses to save Deckard's life instead. What kind of replicant is Deckard? Surely not a Nexus.
Deckard is told that the Tyrell Corporation is determined to build replicants that become more and more human. Perhaps Deckard is a Nexus 7, next year's model that is so human that it is as incompetent as the average human.
Riddley Scott says Deckard is a replicant; his film says no, Deckard is human.
Overall Reaction: the theatrical versions get a 5 on a five point scale; the others a 4.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)