What would be in the interest of preventing an otherwise formidable instance without the means.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
I'll tell you about my mother...
OK, so I saw the re(re?)release of Blade Runner. And yup, I'm one of those guys who liked the studio cut better. (Interestingly, the voiceover in the original theatrical release wasn't something arbitrary that the "suits" just tacked on, no indeedy that voiceover was in an earlier draft of the brilliant script.)
Anyways -- Rachel seemed to have a lot more of that weird "cat eyes" (or, I suppose, "owl eyes") effect going on in the version I just saw in the movie theater (which is like the "Final Super-Duper Director's Vision" version of the movie). But then again, there seemed to be a lot more rain too. (I bet that rain is one of those things which just disappears in standard definition.) In any case, it seems like they maybe added some more eyes in post.
One funny thing I'd never noticed. Deckard wears goofy shirts in the movie. Like muted versions of a 50's color-TV-Western singing cowboy's shirt. He's usually wearing a jacket over them so you don't really see them.
And there's still, of course, a big and glaring plot issue which (I think) was even an issue in the book (but got resolved differently). Deckard goes to a lot of trouble to get (for instance) a picture of Nora even though they already know what the replicants look like. I mean, his boss shows him Batty, Nora, and Priss after they watch the footage of Holden getting shot. But hey, it's Noir, nobody cares about actual plot anyway.
Up until recently I'd assumed that Nora was the "standard pleasure model" or whatever and that Priss was on the kick-murder squad. Because that's what their characters were like. Nora works as an exotic dancer and tries to strangle Deckard and then run away. Priss fights Deckard and uses her legs. But I was wrong. Very rong. I think dramatically it should have been the way it was in my mind though...
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment