Friday, October 26, 2007

Jayne's Addictions

Today marks the beginning of a limited run of ‘Blade Runner: The Final Cut’ at the Cinerama theater on 4th & Lenora. Twenty five years after this film was first released as Blade Runner has now had two additional cuts released and is now considered one of the great films of all time (#97 on AFI’s 100 greatest films). Not bad for a film that was initially a box office and critical disaster.’

In anticipation of the new ‘Final Cut’ of Blade Runner, I thought I’d offer up a little primer for the lodge.

First off, there’s the obvious question: “If they’ve already done a directors cut, what the hell is this ‘Final Cut’ bull@#$%?”

The simple answer is that the directors cut, wasn’t actually the directors cut. A little back story...

‘The Original Version’

The producers of Blade Runner were very nervous about the film. Test audiences found Ridley Scott’s initial cuts to be too confusing. So they took the film into their own hands and made a lot of alterations to make the film more clear.

Most notably was the addition of a voice over narrative by Harrison Ford. Very noir-ish, the voice over works stylistically with the film, but they don’t tell you anything you can’t figure out for yourself, making it somewhat redundant (unless you just prefer someone to tell you what you just saw). Some cuts were made to tone down the violence, although most of these cuts were included in international versions of the film, and the dream was also cut, as it was deemed ‘too artsy’. The other big change was the addition of a happy ending, in the form of Deckard and Rachel driving into the country to be together. Interestingly enough this footage is actually taken from Stanley Kubrick’s ‘The Shining’.

‘The Directors Cut’

This is where things get tricky, as to call it a ‘Directors Cut’ isn’t exactly true. Back in 1991, someone came across a work print of Blade Runner that somewhat resembles what we now know as the directors cut. It made the rounds at various film festivals to enthusiastic responses. Ridley Scott himself, wasn’t exactly pleased about it, because Work Prints by nature are very rough, and really isn’t designed for public viewing.

Warner Brothers, got the idea of doing a directors cut of the film and offered it to Ridley, who at the time had to refuse at the time as he was in preproduction on another film. So armed with some notes from Ridley Scott and the work print, Warner Brothers set out to make the ‘Directors Cut’ in what ended up being a very rushed manner.

Most notably the Directors Cut removes Deckard’s voice over and the happy ending, and reintroduces the Unicorn dream sequence implying Deckard’s true nature.


‘The Final Cut’
While Ridley Scott has said he is happier with the Directors Cut of the film, he never felt entirely comfortable with the cut and wanted the opportunity to truly re cut the film himself with 100% artistic control. Back in 2000, he finally got his chance, completing the new cut in 2001, the film suddenly found itself in a tangled legal dispute until 2006 (If I recall, it had to do with Warner Bros wanting to ensure that they were able to secure full rights to the film at a time when the rights were getting close to reverting to another party).

As for what has changed...here’s a list of what I’ve read about so far...

  • Cables have been digitally removed from the Spinners.
  • Bryant now says that TWO Replicants were fried, thus eliminating that annoying "6 - 1 does not equal 4" equation. This dialogue was originally recorded.
  • Tyrell's thumb has been removed from Roy's shoulder in the phone booth.
  • Snake scale serial number has been corrected.
  • Zhora crashing through plate glass windows - Joanna Cassidy's face has been refilmed and edited onto the stunt woman.
  • When Roy releases the dove, it now flies into a darker cloudy sky, more in keeping with the rest of the film.
  • When Deckard "takes a moment" out on the balcony of his apartment, there is now a geisha girl displayed on the building in the background.
  • The shot of Deckard waiting to eat at the White Dragon has been shortened, its editing reminiscent of the workprint version of the shot. This was done due to the removal of the voiceover.
  • All the violent scenes in the International Cut that were deleted in the U.S. theatrical release and Director's Cut are restored to the Final Cut.
  • When Bryant and Deckard are looking at the Nexus-6 profiles, Bryant gives a description of Leon's job. This was from the workprint.
  • When Gaff and Deckard first appear at Leon's apartment, the landlord now says "Kowalski". Another small bit originally from the workprint.
  • Deckard's conversation with the snake merchant Abdul Ben Hassan has been altered so that the dialog is no longer out of sync; Ben Ford's mouth (lip-syncing the spoken dialog) was digitally placed over his father's.
  • A shot of the busy crowds in the streets was restored. Immediately after that, a shot of two strippers wearing hockey masks was restored. Finally, there's a shot of Deckard talking to another police officer. These three shots had previously appeared in slightly different form in the work print version.
  • The original full-length version of the unicorn dream has been restored. This is a much different version than the one that appeared in the Director's Cut, and has never been in any version seen by the public prior to this one.
  • When Batty confronts Tyrell, he says, "I want more life, father." (from the workprint version and used in television broadcasts of the film), as opposed to the original line "I want more life, @#$%er."
  • After killing Tyrell, Batty says "I'm sorry Sebastian. Come. Come." when before he merely approached the desperate Sebastian. This is also from the workprint.

From what I've read there are actually a lot of little tweaks. A shot is slightly shortened here, a shot is switched around there, etc. One of the big reasons for this actually goes back to the original version with the narration. A lot of shots had to be adjusted to fit all the narration in. When the directors cut came out the narration was removed, but the shot wasn't re-worked. Should be an interesting experience....

There really isn’t anything I could say about this movie that hasn’t been said a hundred times before. It’s quite simply one of the greatest films ever made, and one of my favorites. It’s nice to finally see it really get the treatment it deserves. The DVD that originally came out for it was never a great transfer, and I’ve never really seen a well re-mastered print of the film. You’d think that a film as visually renowned as this one would have had the full treatment by now...but, better late then never I suppose. As excited as I am to see it on the big screen, I’m also really looking forward to see how it looks in HD-DVD.

28 Comments:

Blogger Jimbo said...

nice write up, I'm with you on this being in my top three...sounds like the changes are subtle and hopefully create an overall effect and mood...I'm going to try and get out next week to see this on the 'Rama screen let me know how it goes...thinking it's going to be a full house tonight...

Fri Oct 26, 12:42:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Casey said...

Yeah, it sounds like it's close to the directors cut but just a lot tighter. It'll be nice to truly see it as it was meant to be. From what I've gathered most of the cuts are subtle enough that you really don't notice them. I'm really looking forward to the DVD release so that I can compare this with the directors cut side by side.

It's so hard to guage these types of screenings. Cinerama hasn't really done any press or advertisements that they are showing it outside of a poster outside the theater. I heard Top Gun was pretty empty...hopefully Ghostbusters will get some seats filled.

Fri Oct 26, 12:47:00 PM PDT  
Blogger theDUKE said...

I enjoy blade runner a great deal. The human dystopia image versus the struggled enlightened android psyche is a big ploy. The movie is drastically different from the orignal Philip K. Dick novel. As much as the film may be improved, the headtwists and nuance of the book is superior.

Your write-up of the changes for Blade Runner is already so concise, I no longer have a need to see the Final Cut.

Fri Oct 26, 12:54:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Casey said...

I wouldn't go so far as to call the book superior. They're so different that it's really an apples to oranges kind of thing.

Fri Oct 26, 12:58:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Unknown said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

Fri Oct 26, 01:00:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Unknown said...

I've avoided the Director's Cut up until now because I heard it wasn't Ridley Scott's cut and it was over 3 hours long.

This is good news though and I might Netflix this bad boy. Interesting, indeed, Casey.

Speaking of Harrison Ford... most of you probably have seen this leaked photo of Indiana Jones shot by Spielberg himself on set of Indiana 4. Old. But still bad @ss.

Fri Oct 26, 01:06:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Jimbo said...

I'm going to call you out 2.0 for that photo...Late August called and they want their breaking news back...

I'm amazed to hear that Top Gun was empty...perhaps a comment on our present day relationship with Libya...

What's funny about the book/movie comparisons is that apparently Scott only got through the first twenty pages of the book...

Fri Oct 26, 01:22:00 PM PDT  
Blogger theDUKE said...

Electric Sheep tottally blew my mind after thinking I understood the movie story in Blade Runner. The same would also go for Dune (w/TOTO soundrtrack) vs. Dune by Frank Herbert. Both visually stunning, but storywise = lacking the landmark art of the book.

As for Indy4 - I WANT JOHN RHYS-DAVIES!!!

Fri Oct 26, 01:28:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Casey said...

The basic story of both versions of Dune is the same, where both versions of blade runner are miles and miles apart. They're like two different meditations on a very basic idea.

...the Directors Cut was only 2 hours. I think it's only about 3 minutes different than the running time of the theatrical cut.

And Joe...

"This is good news though and I might Netflix this bad boy"....that, is why you fail.

You're in LA, where it's been playing for two weeks now in a state of the art digital theater. That's just sad...

Fri Oct 26, 01:34:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Unknown said...

Ya, I agree with Casey, Devo. The Dune comparison was way off.

Yes, they are playing it at a digital theater. But I'm not a big fan of Blade Runner on the whole. It doesn't even crack my Top 5 Best Sci-Fi movies of all-time.

Tonight I'm going to the premier of Bella for my Film class. Apparently the movie won the audience award at the Toronto Film Festival.

Fri Oct 26, 01:48:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Train said...

Wow, I think the comment,

" I'm not a big fan of Blade Runner on the whole. It doesn't even crack my Top 5 Best Sci-Fi movies of all-time."

gets you two weeks in the lodge dog house.

Fri Oct 26, 02:01:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Jimbo said...

The Dutch audience never gets "it"...I'm sure 2.0's top five Sci-Fi list includes the following:

5) The 6th Day
4) Timecop
3) Cyborg
2) Johnny Mnemonic
and of course...the combination of the originators of Sci-Fi
1) Universal Soldier

You just lost massive points in the Lodge movie house...

Fri Oct 26, 02:14:00 PM PDT  
Blogger seatownshawn said...

i'll bet that Hollywood 2.0 will cite his newfound expertise from his film course for some incredible analysis and breakdown that he is surely typing this very minute....

Fri Oct 26, 02:16:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Casey said...

The closest Joe gets to Blade Runner is the Kurt Russell flick 'Soldier'.

Fri Oct 26, 02:21:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Jimbo said...

hey...leave Snake Plisken out of this...2.0 drove his own bus off the cliff...

Fri Oct 26, 02:27:00 PM PDT  
Blogger seatownshawn said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

Fri Oct 26, 02:30:00 PM PDT  
Blogger seatownshawn said...

I believe that he also ranks 'Flesh Gordon Meets The Cosmic Cheerleaders' very highly as well....

Fri Oct 26, 02:31:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Casey said...

btw 'Soldier' is often considered a side-quel to Blade Runner, taking place in the same universe but having nothing to do w/the original.

Fri Oct 26, 02:48:00 PM PDT  
Blogger theDUKE said...

I have had a post sitting on my draft board for a while of one possibly redeeming sci-fi sequel, but I will promo it here... Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem. The Lodge can judge this as they please...

Fri Oct 26, 02:56:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Casey said...

I thought AVP2 was gonna be cool until I saw the pic of the rasta-alien. Now I know it's probably just gonna suck.

Fri Oct 26, 03:57:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Casey said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

Fri Oct 26, 03:57:00 PM PDT  
Blogger seatownshawn said...

Looks like a nice dose of gratuitous violence though....throw in a gratuitous boob shot and it's a winner.

Fri Oct 26, 04:15:00 PM PDT  
Blogger theDUKE said...

...but that would be unnecessary and wrong shawn.

Fri Oct 26, 04:26:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Unknown said...

Or possibly very necessary depending on the film, Devo. When's the due date for the kid anyway? You and your Devo-dubbed "future wife" have been on my mind.

I knew my comment would cause a riot in the Lodge... so I'll back up my statement with my Top 5. As you will see, Ridley Scott does make the list... but with a different movie altogether... for the record, Blade Runner would probably land in the Top 10 after Star Wars: A New Hope, The Thing and Aliens.

Joe's Top 5 Sci-Fi Films

5. Terminator 2 -- The Govenator. Shape-shifting cyborgs. Mission to save the world. What does this movie not have?

4. 2001: A Space Odyssey -- Remember, this movie was made in '68. Besides the fact the date has past, it still holds up. Creepy as hell. Kubrick's patience is what makes it work.

3. Solaris -- Soderbergh remade this classic from '72 a few years ago but didn't do it justice. The original is a better version of 2001.

2. Alien -- I'm not sure why people enjoy Blade Runner over the far superior film. Now iconic set design, creativity in the acid blood, and great story-telling set it apart.

1. Star Wars: Empire Strikes Back -- Evil wins! I shouldn't get any arguments from the Lodge on this one. It's a Lodge HOF flick.

Sat Oct 27, 10:55:00 PM PDT  
Blogger theDUKE said...

I'm disappointed Joe, Matrix 1 not even denting into the top 5 or top 10? And before you say its not classic, Matrix was monumental for what it did initially.

As for future wife and child -- baby shower on sunday. All lodgers may come for free horse devores and pop. Contact me for more info.

Baby Girl on the way. She's gonna be a looker, so she's not going to date until she's 30.

Mon Oct 29, 10:48:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Casey said...

Alien - Great, great film.

Aliens - Truly top 5 of all time worthy. Call it blasphemy if you like. It's the truth.

I've always had a hard time putting star wars into my top sci-fi lists. I just look at it so much differently than any other sci fi film that it doesn't feel right including it.

Mon Oct 29, 10:52:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Jimbo said...

always thought it was sort of a cop out also...but then again it's 2.0's list...have to disagree with the 2001 and Solaris...I've tried about 20 or so times to get through 2001 wi/o falling asleep and no go...that doesn't qualify as a top five...

no argument on Aliens...although the crimes perpetrated by Aliens 3 & 4 should disqualify it...

Mon Oct 29, 03:36:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Unknown said...

Matrix is in the Top 10, Devo. Just not Top 5 since Keanu is involved.

Mon Oct 29, 04:41:00 PM PDT  

Post a Comment

<< Home