Blade Runner...would it be the same without Vangelis music??

[Jack G]

Originally Posted by SoCal Sam

"You see a turtle and it is on its back. What do you do? You do know what a turtle is?"

The music makes the movie and the movie makes the music. I have the Director's cut and it didn't have the same impact the original had. I'd like to get the theatrical version to compare them. Still, one of my all time favorites.

While its called the "director's cut", it isn't really. Some changes were made, but apparently Ridley Scott wasn't allowed complete freedom at the time to make the all changes he wanted. There is now a third and (supposedly) final version coming out this year (spring?) with Scott's blessing.
Jack

[SoCal Sam]

Originally Posted by soundmotor

That is thought provoking comment.

I must consider it further.

When I saw the original Blade in the theatre, it was a genre bender in the way the first Matrix was. I'm not saying the Director's cut dilutes the concept like the sequel Matrices but I am saying the impact of the original is what sticks with me.

[Combwork]

[QUOTE=rca2000]Blade Runner is a good movie,IMHO. BUT..with some "other type"of music...I DO NOT think it would have made the impact it has. Vangelis Soundtrack adds a LOT to this movie, I think.

Anyone else care to comment??[/QUOTE]


I see this film every time it shows on television; every time I come away thinking `What the **** was that all about?' I know it's a good film; everyone says it is so they must be right.......... To me, it's a reasonable plot wrecked by so many clichéd dark and moody bits as to make it almost unwatchable. I've seen the `directors cut', and it was worse; just added another layer of clever clever photography. Beautifully filmed and dutifully applauded, it's the `almost unwatchable' that means that next time it's on TV, I'll no doubt waste another couple of hours trying to figure it out............. Jim. (AKA Marvin the Paranoid Android)

[Jack Lord]

Well, on the surface its a Film Noir set in the not so distant future. Like some earlier and even current Sci-Fi films, it deals with environmental catastrophe, although it does not get too deep into that theme. It also seems to suggest a merging of ethnic groups that, in reality, is well on its way.

Its main points, at least as I see them, deal with existence and consciousness vis a vis comparing Replicants to Humans. The book deals with that a bit better as the humans set out to retire (i.e. kill) the androids, yet happily keep android animals as pets seeing as most living animals are extinct. Obviously, there are light allusions to slavery as the Replicants must work in the off worlds but cannot enter Earth. And perhaps to Nazism as well with its use of euphemisms for killing.

The only true way for Decker to ascertain that the Replicants are not human is to give them a test that reveals they have no empathy. Yet eventually Decker realizes that humans themselves have no empathy for the Replicants, who, while being artificial, strive to stay alive- to exist. Explains Roy's statements of what he has seen and experienced. We are all the sum of our experiences and Roy, although a Replicant, is no different.

Add fantastic sets and locations (the Bradbury Building in LA) plus excellent acting and you have one of my personal favorites.

[slow_jazz]

blade runner is one of my all time favorites. especially the director's cut without the voice over. the music is very dark and brooding and really helps the film. you have to remember this movie is almost 25 years old. at the time the score was very futuristic. although i'm not a big vangelis fan his music really suited this movie.

i read where harrison ford didn't like this movie which i consider one of his best. sean young never looked better either.

[rca2000]

I have the directors cut. Got it on DVD, one of the first DVD's I got, in late '98 or so (maybe THE first.) I didn't like it NEARLY as much as the "normal" version.

And I also agree that this is a film where one sees a "little more each time" they watch it. One or two views will NOT be enough to catch all of the "underlying messages" and such of this film--I still have probably not caught them all in probably 20 times of seeing it or more.

I hope the one that is released at the movies this year will NOT be a directors cut without Voice over. I think the VO adds a bit to the move, (not as much as the music) but it is NOT the same without it.

[Duffinator]

Originally Posted by wajobu

The film and soundtrack are inseparable...

I agree. Bladerunner is one of my all-time favorite movies. I have the directors cut on DVD, the VHS version with the voiceover on DVD, and the LD Criterion edition with the voiceover and the added violence on DVD. The LD version is the best for sure. I have the soundtrack on CD and it stands by itself very well. I also have Chariots of Fire soundtrack on vinyl and it's also excellent. I'm a big Harrison Ford fan and think this is one of his best movies but Rutger Hauer is the star of this movie.

[Scorpion8]

In theory though, this is a kind of non-sensical question. If the original movie had come out with different actors and it sucked, it wouldn't have been a great movie and whoever scored the soundtrack wouldn't matter. The fact is the total sum of actors+soundtrack+storyline+whatever is what made Blade Runner great. Yes, the soundtrack adds to it, but that's also not to say that someone else couldn't have done a better one, and if you'd never been exposed to the original, you'd think THAT's the way it's supposed to be.

I'm a die-hard Blade Runner guy. I love the flick, watch it every chance I get, and it's great all around. But I'd never say a movie couldn't have been better by changing something here or there. Things either fit or they don't.

[SoCal Sam]

Originally Posted by slow_jazz

blade runner is one of my all time favorites. especially the director's cut without the voice over. the music is very dark and brooding and really helps the film. you have to remember this movie is almost 25 years old. at the time the score was very futuristic. although i'm not a big vangelis fan his music really suited this movie.

i read where harrison ford didn't like this movie which i consider one of his best. sean young never looked better either.

That's right, the stupid voice over is gone as is the feel good fly away scene at the end.

[Jack Lord]

I like the voice over. When Decker expresses slight regret over shooting Luba in the back, its the first foreshadowing of how his attitude will change. And I like how he comments on Roy saving his life.

[Duffinator]

Originally Posted by SoCal Sam

When I saw the original Blade in the theatre, it was a genre bender in the way the first Matrix was.

I've never thought of BR as a genre bender. When I think of genre benders or paradigm shifts in what is capable I think of Star Wars, T2, and then The Matrix. From my perspective those three movies made huge leaps forward in what was possible in a Sci-Fi flick. For me BR was a more thought provoking movie, that looked really really cool, but not one that created a paradigm shift for what would follow.

[soundmotor]

It's Deckard, not Decker. He shot Zhora in the back.

[goldear]

It is hard to imagine this movie having the same dark, techno feel without the Vangellis music. It fit perfectly. But it is possible that somebody else coud have done it just as well or better; although I think that the "feel" of the movie would have changed.

Whatever the case; I now know which DVD is going to get spun again tonight!

[mg196]

No, it would not be the same movie. And honestly, no one else could have done it better. That would be like asking if John Williams was the right pick to do Star Wars!

[Jack Lord]

It's Deckard, not Decker.

True. That is what I meant.

He shot Zhora in the back.

In the book, her name is Luba Luft. I have read the book more recently than seeing the film.