Blade Runner Final Cut

obeygiant

macrumors 601
Original poster
Jan 14, 2002
4,021
3,818
totally cool
"Blade Runner" returns, definitively
Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:20AM EDT

"Blade Runner: The Final Cut" will get a brief theatrical run in Los Angeles and New York, beginning October 5, before its December 18 DVD release through Warner Home Video.

Scott went back into postproduction to complete the new version of the film, which has been restored and remastered from original elements and contains never-before-seen and extended scenes. The film also includes new and improved special effects, director and filmmaker commentary and an all-new Dolby Digital audio track. Three DVD editions are coming to stores, in two-, four- and five-disc configurations.
reuters


YT link to the trailer.

I thought the Directors Cut was pretty good. I can't imagine what they'd do to a new cut. i can actually.
 

telecomm

macrumors 65816
Nov 30, 2003
1,371
8
Rome
Soo... what exactly is new in that trailer, aside from the updated font for "Blade Runner"? And how many more of these can we expect? :rolleyes: Did he manage to get it right this time?
 

0098386

Suspended
Jan 18, 2005
21,576
2,907
Spooky. I just realised a few days ago that I haven't seen Blade Runner yet. I'll be waiting for this now.
 

DAC47

macrumors 6502
Mar 1, 2007
408
14
Cardiff
December 18
Three guesses what I'm getting for Xmas then

I hope Mark Kermode's "Edge of Blade Runner" Documentary is included somewhere on the discs

More details

link

 

Keebler

macrumors 68030
Jun 20, 2005
2,944
191
Canada
WOW! while i'm a huge fan of BR, did Scott go to the Lucasarts school of overmarketing-and-continous-money-grabbing???

honestly, ANOTHER verion? wtf...

it never ends....

but of course, i'll half-fall victim to the scheme and end up renting it.. :)
 

telecomm

macrumors 65816
Nov 30, 2003
1,371
8
Rome
WOW! while i'm a huge fan of BR, did Scott go to the Lucasarts school of overmarketing-and-continous-money-grabbing???

honestly, ANOTHER verion? wtf...

it never ends....

but of course, i'll half-fall victim to the scheme and end up renting it.. :)
Exactly. But I'll probably go out and buy it (the cheapest version) anyway.:eek:

Such a cool movie.
 

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
May 7, 2004
13,686
2,707
Sod off
A side effect of the DVD era has been the proliferation of "Director's Cuts" and "Special Editions", many of which consist of nothing more than fancy packaging or crappy commentary track...only to be followed by "Final Cuts" or "Ultimate Editions".

I haven't seen Blade Runner yet, so should I get the original theatrical cut, the Special Edition, the Ultimate Final Cut, or the boxed set with the puffy shirt? (maybe I'm confusing that last one with Seinfeld:rolleyes:).
 

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Jul 4, 2004
21,922
169
I haven't seen Blade Runner yet, so should I get the original theatrical cut, the Special Edition, the Ultimate Final Cut, or the boxed set with the puffy shirt? (maybe I'm confusing that last one with Seinfeld:rolleyes:).

I understand the cynicism but in this case, given the film's history, it's forgivable. The theatrical release was compromised by studio meddling. See the Director's Cut or the Final Cut.

The 1982 American and European theatrical versions released by the studio included a "happy ending" (using stock footage from Stanley Kubrick's The Shining) and a voice-over added at the request of studio executives during post-production after test audience members indicated difficulty understanding the film.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner#Versions
 

Counterfit

macrumors G3
Aug 20, 2003
8,201
0
sitting on your shoulder
The most recent Director's Cut of Blade Runner (out of the three or so I think there have been) is the only one that Ridley Scott actually had a hand in, so it's the way it should be.
 

telecomm

macrumors 65816
Nov 30, 2003
1,371
8
Rome
The most recent Director's Cut of Blade Runner (out of the three or so I think there have been) is the only one that Ridley Scott actually had a hand in, so it's the way it should be.
Wow, hadn't realized that. At least it's better than the original theatrical release. :D
 

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Jul 4, 2004
21,922
169
The most recent Director's Cut of Blade Runner (out of the three or so I think there have been) is the only one that Ridley Scott actually had a hand in, so it's the way it should be.

Scott has since complained that time and money constraints, along with his obligation to Thelma & Louise, kept him from retooling the film in a completely satisfactory manner. While he is happier than before with the 1992 release of the film, he has never felt entirely comfortable with it as his definitive Director's Cut.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner#Versions
 

Mitthrawnuruodo

Moderator emeritus
Mar 10, 2004
13,802
174
Bergen, Norway
Nah... one of the main problems with the so-called Director's cut (the DVD version) is that even though the voice over has been removed, many of the scenes where there were long voice overs hasn't been edited, so, IMO, there's a couple of unnaturally long pauses here and there making it a bit odd to watch. Hopefully a few of those may be tightened a bit on an ultimate ( :rolleyes: ) release...
 

telecomm

macrumors 65816
Nov 30, 2003
1,371
8
Rome
Nah... one of the main problems with the so-called Director's cut (the DVD version) is that even though the voice over has been removed, many of the scenes where there were long voice overs hasn't been edited, so, IMO, there's a couple of unnaturally long pauses here and there making it a bit odd to watch. Hopefully a few of those may be tightened a bit on an ultimate ( :rolleyes: ) release...
Hmmm... some of the long shots over the cityscape are particularly effective, I hope those aren't shortened.
 

Mitthrawnuruodo

Moderator emeritus
Mar 10, 2004
13,802
174
Bergen, Norway
Hmmm... some of the long shots over the cityscape are particularly effective, I hope those aren't shortened.
I like those (and I don't think there was much talking over those, but it's been a while since I saw the "original"**), I'm thinking more the places where there are long pauses in the dialogue where the voiceover used to "explain" something...


** must dig out the old VHS tape... and VCR... ;)
 

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
May 7, 2004
13,686
2,707
Sod off
I understand the cynicism but in this case, given the film's history, it's forgivable. The theatrical release was compromised by studio meddling. See the Director's Cut or the Final Cut.
Excellent, that's what I wanted to know. I'd like to see it first as the producer/director meant it to be seen, and then (if I'm interested), take a look at the the other versions.

That "happy ending" part is just the kind of crap that represents the very worst of Hollywood.
 

obeygiant

macrumors 601
Original poster
Jan 14, 2002
4,021
3,818
totally cool
Nah... one of the main problems with the so-called Director's cut (the DVD version) is that even though the voice over has been removed, many of the scenes where there were long voice overs hasn't been edited, so, IMO, there's a couple of unnaturally long pauses here and there making it a bit odd to watch. Hopefully a few of those may be tightened a bit on an ultimate ( :rolleyes: ) release...
I hear ya on the long pauses. But I think the pauses are good because as a viewer it gives me time to drink in what I'm looking at and make my own inferences. Like when he's waiting for a spot at the noodle shop before he meets Gaff, the trip to the police station, and right before he meets Bryant. I hope they don't touch those parts.

One part I wish they'd fix is when Dekker goes to the Snake Dealer and pressures him for who bought the snake. The audio doesn't match right there and the scene seems a little turnicated.

Also the slow-mo of Zhora crashing thru the glass after she gets shot. The person is obviously a stunt-man with a wig on. I really don't expect them to re-do that part however.

There is a shot of Roy Batty in the beginning before he goes to "eye-world" where its taken from the scene where he encounters Tyrell. The film is just 'flipped' to match a look direction. It seems they could use another shot IMO.

One of the most beautifully photographed films if I do say so. Jordan Cronenweth was one of the best ever. His son, Jeff, shot Fight Club, and One Hour Photo.
 

stainlessliquid

macrumors 68000
Sep 22, 2006
1,625
0
This provides hope that theyll release it in Bluray... This has always been my top choice for a movie in HD, by far. I just hope the "added special effects" arent lame and unnecessary like the ridiculous Special Edition versions of star wars. Adding cut/lost scenes is always good, adding new low budget CG scenes to a classic movie is blasphemy.
 

telecomm

macrumors 65816
Nov 30, 2003
1,371
8
Rome
Also the slow-mo of Zhora crashing thru the glass after she gets shot. The person is obviously a stunt-man with a wig on. I really don't expect them to re-do that part however.
I'm pretty sure they're not going to touch that, given that it's one of the most famous scenes in the film.
 

Nermal

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 7, 2002
18,739
1,211
New Zealand
Spooky. I just realised a few days ago that I haven't seen Blade Runner yet. I'll be waiting for this now.
A friend and I watched the first hour (Director's Cut) then gave up because nothing had happened.

I actually have a slip advertising the Final Cut, which came with my Matrix HD DVD set.

Edit: I apologise, I have no idea what inspired me to post that! :eek:
 

RedTomato

macrumors 601
Mar 4, 2005
4,029
324
.. London ..
So er, which one do you recommend - Director's Cut, or Final Cut? I don't think I've ever seen the film in one go.

And if Scott went back to redo the Director's cut, doesn't that rather make a mockery of the concept of 'Director's Cut'? (or does it mean he didn't really have artistic freedom when he did his Director's cut?)

Ingmar Bergman died today. You didn't see him going back to redo his final cuts of his films.

In related films, I'm still struggling to work out which version of Dune I should see. I got the 3 hour Extended edition, thinking it was David Lynch's own cut, sat down to watch it.

It started with some strange hand drawn storyboard shots, like they couldn't be bothered to build the set, then some remarkably moronic cutting. After an hour, I gave up and checked the reviews for it. Surprise, surprise, it was a studio re-cut! Lynch took his name off the edition in protest, and yes, in the credits, it is credited to 'Alan Smithee' as director :)

I love Dune (the book series) and David Lynch, but I'm still baffled as to which Dune film to watch to get the full experience.
 

telecomm

macrumors 65816
Nov 30, 2003
1,371
8
Rome
So er, which one do you recommend - Director's Cut, or Final Cut? I don't think I've ever seen the film in one go.
I think Blue Velvet's links to Wikipedia above summarize the situation pretty clearly—see the Final Cut (when it's out), since it's the proper "directors cut." See the "Directors Cut" if you must watch it now, it's meant to be the next best thing, and let your mom watch the original, it's got the simple happy ending.

Then again, if Scott's been hanging out with Lucas and he decides to add burping aliens to fully realize his vision... ;)