BLADE RUNNER (1982) | FIRST TIME WATCHING | Reaction & Commentary | woah

[@one1charlie643]

the whole reason for the four-year lifespan was to stop them before they developed emotions. The climax at the end is Roy reaching that point, but he has no idea what to do with those emotions. We humans have all of our childhoods to learn to cope with emotions, but Roy has no such luxury. you see the full gamut of emotions flooding in, sorrow at the loss of his love Pris, howling with anger and rage as he hunted Deckar, power as he toyed with his prey, pity as he watched him dangle over the precipice and mercy as he saved him and finally as he was dying acceptance. a masterclass in movie making

[@donkfail1]

I never saw it as pity to save Deckard. I thought Batty just didn't want to die alone, and after Pris had been killed Deckard was the only one to share his last thoughts with. When everyone you love is dead, even an enemy may be company you rather not be without.

[@francischambless5919]

@@donkfail1 Even as a kid (I was 7 when this came out), I took Roy's last decision as an act of defiance to his creation. Roy was a combat model. He was designed to be tough, determined, intelligent and formidable. With all he had done killing and fighting, to me he felt his last decision was to not kill someone completely at his mercy, which this act of mercy might grant him forgiveness if a God could let a Replicant into heaven, or at a minimum, the one he could so easily kill might remember his mercy and sharing of just a bit of his life.

[@jasonmarcy1313]

You put it together just right. Perfect.❤

[@donkfail1]

@@francischambless5919 And with that thought of Batty maybe hoping for God's forgiveness gives the dove flying off at hid death another dimension. The dove historically used in art often symbolising either The Holy Spirit or someone's soul ascending to heaven.

[@Patriot009]

His body is also starting to malfunction, as evident by his hand seizing up. He was using the nail to crudely fix and unseize it.

[@CrashTestPilot]

This is still my favorite movie after all these years. Roy's monologue gets me right in the feels every single time. Peak Rutger Hauer.

[@sonofspock1]

Ah.. Rutger and that ad lib for the ages.

[@Hackspear214]

I think that the ‘Tears in Rain’ line is a perfect visualization of memories dying.

[@pssthpok]

@@sonofspock1 Exactly this. Hauer modified his monologue the night before filming, and surprised Scott with it the next day. He tightened up the text of it, removing some stuff, and adding the iconic "All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain" . From Wikipedia: "After filming the scene with Hauer's version, crew-members applauded, with some even in tears." I am not surprised that it hit so hard. Beautiful.

[@o0pinkdino0o]

I miss him.

[@palasta]

Yea. He is one of those who brought a certain "i don't know what" to the screen.

[@JonahPedersen-tz3uk]

I showed this to my son when he was about 12. After it was over I asked what he thought. “It wasn’t their fault. They were made that way.”

[@ThePowerCosmic3555]

I saw the original version at the theatre in '82, and was stunned by everything. In the theater, I didn't get why Roy was biting his hand and pushed a nail through it. At the time I thought he was just sardonically thrilled by the fact that he wasn't human. It wasn't until years later that it dawned on me that Roy was at the end of his life; he knew it; and his arm was seizing up. It was the first of his "death throes", and he punctured his hand to get feeling back into it. RIP Rutger Hauer, a phenominal actor

[@mbpoblet]

And then he used that failing hand to save Deckard.

[@IndyCrewInNYC]

It was to give him an instant shot of adrenaline.

[@SathReacts]

Potential Jesus/sacrifice imagery too

[@t0dd000]

Adrenaline.

[@mikesmicroshop4385]

The reason he was causing himself pain was to keep himself focused as he was dying he was starting to lose consciousness! By biting himself and pushing the nail through his hand he was keeping himself awake and aware long enough to go after Deckard.

[@TheOutcast05]

"It's too bad she won't live, but then again who does?" I love that line so much.

[@Yora21]

There are so many great lines in it. "Quite an experience to live in fear? That's what it means to be a slave."

[@robertcartwright4374]

Pure film noir.

[@notjustforhackers4252]

The 50's 'look' is a call back to the classic detective "Film Noir" movies of the 40's and 50's. Nope, no CGI in this one, just great miniature and optical effects, it looked this good on first release. The Vangelis score is an absolute classic, early "Synthwave" you could say. I first saw it on VHS but did see the "directors cut" on a massive cinema screen in the 90's, this is a big screen movie, stunning. One of the most influential films ever made... and they're still borrowing from it to this day.

[@johnplaysgames3120]

Also, tbh, it's not that far-fetched that older looks and styles will come back again and again. They generally have a little twist to them but all styles repeat.

[@kjmorley]

@@johnplaysgames3120 “I'm a take your grandpa's style. No, for real. Ask your grandpa. Can I have his hand-me-downs?”

[@robertcartier5088]

It had lots of influence on the look of the first season of The Expanse... Particularly scenes of Miller on Eros. Ty Franck is a big fan of this film. ;-]

[@KabukiKid]

Oh yes... Japanese anime borrowed like crazy from the look of Blade Runner. It's all over the place in cyberpunk Japanese fiction.

[@kuldas9299]

@@kjmorley I'm a grandpa. My grandson cops my style all the time.

[@davidpax]

What makes this film special is the combination of the visuals and the music. It's Tech Noir (film noir with colors and futuristic sets) combined with an electronic soundtrack by Vangelis. It's a perfect match. Never has dystopia looked and sounded so beautiful.

[@donkfail1]

I can only agree. I bought the soundtrack on CD in the early 90s and played the crap out of it. As an album it wasn't very well put together, but it took me back to the movie in my head and in my memory it was even more noir than the real thing.

[@MagsonDare]

@@donkfail1 Same for me, only I bought the casette tape becuz I didn't have a cd player yet ;-)

[@michaelcoulter1725]

You want to talk about a good movie what's good music and good visual effects The Matrix that is a damn good movie

[@freak5646]

Roy isn't enjoying himself. He's fighting death like a toddler fighting sleep. He's giving Deckerd the chance to go live the life Roy can't. The dove is Roy's soul. It's a variation on Rick and Renault at the end of Casablanca.

[@PerfectHandProductions]

A genuine masterpiece. That tears in rain speech is brilliant, gets me every time.

[@johnbernhardtsen3008]

improvised by Rutger himself!he said it would be too on the nose of a replicant just to die as a lifeless object, instead gave a farewell speech knowing the end is so close!!

[@jebVlogs556]

The tears in the rain speech 😅has so many layers: there's a video on it that holds the real meaning behind and once I find it, I'll post the link here 😅

[@RandomNPC001]

Roy was built by humans to be a killing machine against other human beings, so his last action of rebellion before dying was to save a human to prove he was better than us in the end.

[@donkfail1]

That's a nice thought. I like it. Maybe even more than my own interpretation that he simply didn't want to die alone. When everyone he cared for was dead, the thought of being alone with nobody to share his final thoughts with wasn't a price he was willing to pay for revenge.

[@matthewchew8826]

so poetic

[@hughjorg4008]

Both interpretations are plausible. He didn't want to kill in the last minute of his life (as explained in the narrated version) or he didn't want to die alone. 👍In either case the replicant made a decision as a free human being (rather than a slave).

[@finnmeister]

This is exactly why Deckard should not be a Replicant.

[@storkfletcher821]

But he wasn't any better since he killed people over the course of the film. Everything points to that he even killed JF Sebastian, who had tried his best to help him. So at best he saw another path at the very end of his life.

[@VilleHalonen]

The story's simplicity is kinda the movie's strength, I think. It's a meditation on mortality, not a plot-heavy detective story. The twist is in the emotions. The more I watch the movie, the more I feel for Roy and his emotional journey. He's the true hero of the film -- a tragic and dark one at that. For all intents and purposes a human, destined to die, raging at the injustice of his existence.

[@BirdBrain0815]

This!! So many people obsess about whether or not Deckard is a replicant, when this isn’t very relevant. The uncertainty of the viewer is just another way to highlight the central question: How do you even determine what a human is, or what makes a human human?

[@la_beatrice]

Yes! Which is why I hate the sequel. Sure, the sequel is an impressive movie on its own right, but it did away with my favorite things from the first one.

[@rikk319]

@@la_beatrice I love the original and the sequel. The sequel isn't supposed to be a copy of the original, like The Force Awakens is of the original Star Wars.

[@BirdBrain0815]

@@la_beatrice I wouldn't say it did away with it, but it could hardly have done the same thing all over again. What the second movie did was build on the original themes of defining humanity by showing a new step of evolution and also with Joy, who raises the same question of what it means to be human but this time not with a bio-engineered artificial body but no body at all. In my book, the sequel did what it was meant to do.

[@OneVoiceMore]

Can't walk with Roy as hero. Sympathetic puppet-villain who suddenly recognizes that human life has value (after killing dozens of people), then he dies. His last line is beautiful, poetic and scene-saving. Memorable. Kudos to the ACTOR who added grace to Roy that was missing in the script. His entire motivation throughout is self-interest. Not heroic. His plan is more rational than, say, Thanos' plan, but it is about self, not selflessness

[@zmarko]

It's a shame that the edits for YT in reactions to this movie are so fast, because in the last act of this film (primarily Roy's final scene) the silence and lack of action has SO much weight to it. Deckard sitting in the rain realizing exactly what just happened is deeply moving to me. Staring ones mortality in the eye. Impactful. Such an amazing film.

[@forestsmith1892]

The nail Roy drove through his hand was because his body was shutting down, and he was using the pain and adrenaline rush to basically defy death for just a little bit longer. The dove he was holding was symbolic, of the soul leaving the body.

[@bumblesquidsmurfgod8304]

I totally agree with you, and I just want to add that they must have been trying to evoke the Crucifixion, at least a little. Is auto-crucifixion a thing?!? OK I'm pretty sure I'm going to Hell forever, just for asking that... damn.

[@johnkominar8417]

The 80s didn't create this score , this score created the 80s

[@TheMarcHicks]

I always found it so poignant that the final act of a being designed to kill was to actually *save* a life.

[@ilthok]

Roy was beginning to die as he was chasing Deckard. He plunged a nail in his hand to keep himself alert and alive to stave that off.

[@corvuslight]

"If only you could see what I've seen with your eyes." -Roy

[@vincentpuccio3689]

The thing you gotta grasp is even though they call them robots, they’re actually organic they are living machines

[@Californyuhh]

Reminds me of the gen 3 synths from the fallout games. Or some of the hosts from westworld.

[@misterprecocious2491]

Yeah, not robots, not androids, not cyborgs just genetically manufactured lifeforms.

[@ChicagoDB]

Vangelis is best known for his score for the multiple Oscar-winning film “Chariots of Fire”

[@jebVlogs556]

I forgot about "Chariots of fire." Man the nostalgia 😅

[@j_clarkson]

I would say that, amongst synth players at least, his Blade Runner score is legendary.

[@davidpax]

And 1492 Conquest of Paradise.

[@harveybojangle475]

No CGI was used in any cut of this film. Rachael was meant to look like a 40's femme fatale to support the neo-noir look of the overall production. This movie/story is a meditation on what it really means to be human (i.e. If you go on a great vacation, but have no memory of it afterwards...Was it worth it doing? Did you really even go? Are we all just a collection of our own recollections? etc). And, interestingly, almost the entire film was made on the WB lot in Burbank, CA

[@joeblankenship377]

Classic Shanelle. Suspecting CGI in movies made before CGI.

[@Theomite]

I think there's *some* CGI in the Final Cut because they had to do touch-ups after the fact. The backdrop of the dove flying away into the city is CG I believe, but that's because it was shot 25 years later. The dove plate is real, but the cityscape is digital.

[@electronics-girl]

The first film to use any significant amount of CGI was The Last Starfighter (1984). So any film before 1984 didn't have CGI. And it didn't really become mainstream until Jurassic Park (1993). However, in the early 1980s, they had gotten really good with models, at least in films with a large enough budget. Blade Runner and the first three Star Wars movies looked incredible, using models and no CGI. (Although modern audiences probably don't realize how good the effects in Star Wars looked, because they've only seen the versions with added CGI. But the CGI in the new versions of Star Wars was primarily to add creatures and to make the explosions look bigger. All (most?) of the shots of spaceships in the original three Star Wars movies are unchanged from the original releases, and were done with models.)

[@IndyCrewInNYC]

Her look was inspired by Vivien Leigh.

[@Daveyboy100880]

Yeah, CGI was used to create a new backdrop for the dove flying away, as well as to tidy up a few continuity errors and obvious mistakes (visible wires, stunt doubles etc). It was all subtly done.

[@lbd-po7cl]

I saw this in the theater (original cut, obviously) when it first came out, and was stunned by how beautiful it was. An absolute masterpiece. I was 20 at the time, and 2019 seemed an eternity away, and I could well imagine that’s how a lot of the world would look in 40 year’s time.

[@UncleUncleRj]

2019 Seemed very far away in the 80's and early 90's, especially with how fast technology was evolving at the time.

[@caseybean1305]

I too saw this in '82, was nineteen at the time. 2019 did feel a long time away. Glad that things are not as dystopian as the movie portrays. The BR world looks like a beautiful HELL. At the time I thought the movie might be forecasting our future. Clearly, not so much. BUT....on the other hand, the way we continue to treat this blue marble, it still may come to pass. We may just need to change the date to 2119 😳

[@Baekstrom]

I remember the first time I saw this movie. I went with a class mate. I didn't know anything about the movie, other than the description in the news paper ad said that it was a sci-fi. I was immediately blown away by the atmosphere, the theme, the music, the acting, and not least the subject matter. Even though I was just a kid I understood right away that it was a story about what quality about humans that gives us human rights. I saw it many times since, and every time I noticed new details. It has always been my favorite movie of all time!

[@norwegianblue2017]

I saw it with my parents in the theater when I was 13 years old. Was completely engrossed with the film, but my parents made me leave with them when the replicant woman in the clear jacket was getting shot. Too graphic for them at the time. I was so bummed!

[@brucelamberton8819]

Same here. I was 16 when I first saw it (the version with Ford doing the narration) at the cinema, and was absolutely blown away by it. I remember my school friend and I having a discussion/argument afterwards as to whether Deckard was also a Replicant.

[@Tonyblack261]

I love the book this is based on: "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" by Philip K Dick. Well worth a read to get an idea of the back story.

[@gazoontight]

Absolutely.

[@riseoflibertarianism]

Honestly, reading 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep' is pretty much required before watching this film. Not that you cannot watch the film before reading the book, but the book does give somewhat a better description of the society in general. Like, the animals in the film. All of them are manufactured, hence the manufactured snake scale found in the tub and the manufactured owl that Rachel asks Deckard about when he meets her at the Tyrell building. That, and Phillp K. Dick was a visionary and one of the best Science Fiction writers of all time.

[@Richard_Ashton]

The phrase ‘Blade Runner’ was the name of a wholly unrelated book, the rights of which were bought solely to provide this movie’s title.

[@FloridaMugwump]

@@riseoflibertarianism If you read the book you would know that all animals are NOT manufactured. As a matter of fact, owning a live animal is their equivalent of "keeping up with the Joneses" and is a requirement of their new religion.

[@john0constantine]

The quality of the special effects in this movie is amazing

[@John_Locke_108]

I was around 10 or 11 when I first saw this back in the late 80's. It was the middle of the night which really set the mood perfectly. Been one of my favorite movies ever since.

[@TheJamieRamone]

5:57 - Again: it IS real. It's a miniature filmed close up, with blue-screen shots of the flying vehicles composited onto it. Why would it "have to" be computer generated? By the way in '81 (when they were making it) that tech was like 10 years away.

[@donkfail1]

Imagine how bad this movie could have been if it was made a decade later and full of really bad early CGI. This was in a way the best time for practical effects. Not only was there not the decision whether to make it a practical effect or CGI, but lately the practical effects have to be cheaper and cheaper to compete with the CGI, only resulting in worse effects all together almost being the norm. Back in the 80s a small budget movie could have some fantastic practical effects. Maybe people took more pride in their work back then? I don't know.

[@arandomnamegoeshere]

@@donkfail1 we forget all the crap practical effects that exist out there. We remember fondly the times an artist had insight and budget to pull it all off. Just like CGI.

[@TheJamieRamone]

@@donkfail1 True, but then again, being it was made by Ridley Scott who was making it, having had CGI, he might have made judicious use of it. Think Steven Speilberg with Jurassic Park. 😉

[@TheJamieRamone]

@@donkfail1 Oh, and as to the point of competing on price: it'll never happen. The cost of the hardware necessary to make CGI (CPU, GPU, memory, the software, etc) is dirt cheap, whereas for practicals you have material costs, highly skilled artists, and so on that keep the cost high. 🤷‍♂

[@cutthr0atjake]

The cityscapes are models. In fact, one of the buildings is the Millenium Falcon sruck on its end.

[@paperbea]

the documentry they made for the final cut is worth watching.

[@rodentnolastname6612]

The FX weren't cleaned up, they were THAT convincing at the time I saw it in the theater. 😯

[@mauz4588]

Yes, most of the clean up was in the dialog. Lines that referenced things that ended up on the cutting room floor, or were originally roughly overdubbed in the original and didn't quite match the lips of the actors or the tone of their voice.

[@corbomite1138]

Douglas Trumbull RIP 2001 a Space Odyssey. Close Encounters. Star Trek The Motion Picture. A legend of special effects.

[@Tampahop]

When this came out, it immediately became my favorite film of all time. Unlike any previous sci-fi films, this movie looked so real. I felt like I had been transported into this world and nothing broke the mood. I was totally immersed from beginning to end. As dreary and depressing as it seemed, I wanted to live in that world (I'm still waiting for my sky car). It is one of those rare movies I would call "perfect."

[@markmcgee2417]

When Anne Rice wrote Interview with the Vampire she modelled the vampire Lestat after Rutger Hauer's character from this film. She was perticularly impacted by the scene where he meets his maker and crushes his skull and also when he lets Decker live because he had discovered something beautiful about a limited existence. She wanted a vampire who was brutal, eloquent and complex who easily could take life but sometimes appreciated the fleeting lives of mortals now that he had immortality. An interesting converse to Rutger Hauer's character who was struggling with a shortened existince but in the case of Lestat was struggling with an unending sea of existence.

[@Emalythe]

Cool idea, but the Interview with the Vampire novel was released in 1976, several years before the Blade Runner movie was released. The novel the film was based on, Philip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, was released in 1968, so perhaps the character in the novel had some influence on Anne Rice.

[@Cau_No]

Funny thing about this is, Rutger Hauer actually played a vampire in the movie of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, before it went on to become the TV show. The character of Spike later in that show seems to be more of a lookalike to Roy Baty, although I think he was more based on Billy Idol, who was at the heght of his career around the time Blade Runner was made.

[@NestorCaster]

8:55 Man… I’m 35 and James Hong’s career from his start, up to 1990 alone, is 1 year older than me… and now, we’re in 2023-- and my man here is still going strong, much respect to the legend, James Hong!❤🎉🫡✊🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾

[@richardpetty9159]

Love that guy.

[@Bar-Lord]

This one took me a few screenings to fully appreciate. I didn’t care for it the first time and I wanted to give it a fair shake, so I gave it another go. Things just clicked that second time.

[@CSM100MK2]

agree

[@ericjohnson9623]

Yup. I watched the director's cut on VHS as a teen and thought it was okay but didn't really "get it." Seeing it in my early 20s was a completely different experience.

[@richardpetty9159]

The movie is deep. Repeat viewings are great.

[@arthurcamargo8416]

The dove symbolizes the soul in many mythologies. As a replicant, but with "human" emotions, it must have come up in Roy's mind if he had what humans called or referred to as a soul. His clutching the dove at the end was a symbolic gesture of Roy clinging to life, holding his "soul" close to his body. Great fun, especially because you asked a lot a good questions!

[@maxducoudray]

One of my all-time favorites. I get that it’s too slow-paced for some people, but I love the vibe and can watch it endlessly. So glad to see Shanelle’s take on it.

[@andrewsmith8715]

I love the noir feel to it.

[@DMichaelAtLarge]

I have no respect for those people who don't like compelling slow-burn stories. They're people of arrested development with short attention spans.

[@monacaravetta]

This film has so much meaning to me. I was 18yo, moving from NJ to Oklahoma to attend college. My grandmother had died, and I went to visit my grandfather in Canada on the way. I was leaving my family, my mother, my siblings and a very toxic, abusive stepfather who made life hell for all of us. Instead of saying "I love you, we are here for you, his parting words to me were, my arms are never to short to come get you." It was a threat. But I made it out. My grandfather was in terrible grief. He had lost the love of his life. He cried constantly. We cried together. While there, he asked what I wanted to do. I said to see Blade Runner , which was just released. We drove to Plattsburgh, NY to watch it at a drive-in. I was floored by its meaning, its visuals, and its story. Ridley had managed to change me not once, but twice. Alien, Ridley and HR Giger had forever changed my consciousness, and here he did it again. I'll never forget those moments. I hope that they will not be lost in time. The true villain was the Tyrell corporation. The replicants just wanted what we all want- freedom, dignity and the right to exist. Thank you for reacting to this very very important film.

[@cstephen98]

It's aged amazingly for a 40+ year old movie. I've always said you could release this today as a nee movie.

[@IanHillan]

Original and iconic line is "I want more life, fucker." The "tears in rain" speech is even more iconic, and possibly Rutger Hauer's finest moment. That huge building was a model, not CGI, which would have looked fake AF in 1982. The unicorn is a clue that Gaf knows that Decker dreams of unicorns because he's seen the dream implants.

[@bodine57]

Regarding the scene in Deckard's apartment when he says "kiss me" to Rachel - it's not that Rachel is NOT attracted to Deckard, but, knowing she is a replicant, she cannot trust that her feelings are real. Many reactors cringe during this scene, but there is subtext that must be taken into account as well. Good reaction for a first viewing!

[@colbyboucher6391]

I think another aspect of that scene is Deckard trying to avoid cognitive dissonance. To him, replicants need to obey "real people" so he puts himself in control of the situation. He _tells her_ to say "kiss me" rather than letting her make that decision because he doesn't want to accept that replicants _are_ people just yet, and she's making him question things. I think Ridley Scott intended for it to be uncomfortable. Contrast that with the end of the movie where Deckard _asks_ Rachel if she loves him. After his encounter with Roy he accepts that replicants are people with their own inner worlds.

[@dcanmore]

This is all practical effects with models, matt paintings, studio sets and locations around Los Angeles. The movie was shot on 35mm and 65mm film, this is probably the 4K digital scan version of the film stock.

[@ThatSchmoGuy]

The soundtrack to this film is, in my opinion, one of the finest soundtracks ever crafted for cinema. Expertly conducted by the late, great composer Vangelis

[@Wolf-ln1ml]

Vangelis made some _awesome_ movie soundtracks indeed 🥰

[@bumblesquidsmurfgod8304]

The music is almost synesthetic. You can feel it as much as you hear it. I always feel like some notes can be reached out to and touched, and some parts of the soundtrack create large shapes hovering around me as I listen. Even when it's creepy, it's beautiful.

[@PeteHummers-my3kv]

After Roy makes his "tears in rain" speech, he says, "Time to die" and he just ... dies. His time was up

[@John_Locke_108]

That speech gives me chills everytime I watch it. Such a beautiful improvised scene.

[@TheJamieRamone]

15:01 - It's called a "strip club". Patreons go there and pay to see the ladies, known as either "strippers" or "exotic dancers", depending on how upscale the joint is, dance and slowly remove most or all item of clothing. The more you know! 😁

[@TheJamieRamone]

13:40 - I really hope that "further research" means seeing the location spelled out for you at the beginning of the movie. 'Cause, uh...they haven't changed location. 😁

[@TheJamieRamone]

2:23 - They're also real. That opening shot is a composite of a real aerial shot and a collection of miniatures. The flaming spires are from some industrial area, a refinery I think (can't remember well). 😉

[@joeldf6859]

They also "composited" those elements by simply re-winding the film in the camera and shooting the next pass with different elements. The building elements in one pass, the lights in another pass, the flames in another pass, and on and on, with the camera dollying in each time with motion control computers. That way you don't get matte lines around the separate elements - they are all exposed the same piece of film. This also prevents the typical generational loss you get with the composite of separately filmed elements. With this method, you keep the same first generation of exposed film. In this case, usually 65 mm film using Super Panavision 70 cameras.

[@TheJamieRamone]

@@joeldf6859 Are you sure? Cause I remember Ridley talking about this shot in an interview, and he said it was a mix of an aerial shot with some miniatures (particularly the Tyrell Corp. building). I think it was The Directors on TNT. Also, wouldn't you get transparency in all the newly added elements, and over-exposure the way you described? That's what blue screen existed for: to be able to do multi-exposures.

[@paulstroud2647]

The opening scene was inspired by Scott's childhood memories of the industrial landscape around Middlesbrough in the NE of England, which at the time had a lot of heavy industry, steelworks and refineries etc.

[@Theomite]

*ANSWERS (no spoilers):* The Replicants aren't robots. They're genetically engineered humans assembled from grown parts. They were robots in the novel, but that was changed for the film, but not well-explained. Philip K. Dick wrote the Replicants as a warning about what humans could become, but Ridley gave them the humanity that humans lost, which makes it more poignant: humanity has lost itself, but the Replicants have gained it and cherish it. Most people believe Deckard is a Replicant, but Harrison Ford doesn't. So to avoid pissing him off, they've never officially said so. Accidentally, it makes things more interesting. But having a Replicant think it's human as a way to trick it into killing its own kind is EXACTLY the kind of thing Philip K. Dick would've thought of, which is why I believe he is. The "r*pe scene" isn't so much assault as it is a tutoring situation. Rachel has emotions and desires, but she has no experience with using them or expressing them. Deckard's "instructions" are him prompting her how to communicate in a sexual situation. She has to ask for what she wants, but she doesn't know how to say it, so he's giving her the script, albeit VERY clumsily. That said, there's a lot of predatory romance in Harrison Ford movies, and there's videos on YT about it. The production of this film is legendary. The bible for it is _The Making of Blade Runner_ by Paul M. Sammon. Thee documentary DANGEROUS DAYS: THE MAKING OF BLADE RUNNER, which also has tons of deleted scenes which are equally amazing. Absolute must-sees and reads. BLADE RUNNER 2049 is an absolutely outstanding sequel. Denis Villaneuve knocked it out of the park, as usual.

[@jamesridley8565]

I don't think Deckerd was a replicant at all. The point was to make u question the difference between being a human or replicant. And would u be able to tell the difference as man's advancement in science and technology continues.

[@johnmrog]

@@jamesridley8565 I agree. If Deckerd was a replicant, then he was made intentionally weak for some reason (which, to me, would be an odd design decision for something you are creating to kill other powerful replicants). The replicants in the movie were kicking his ass on the regular.

[@jamesridley8565]

@johnmrog exactly 💯 percent what I was thinking. He was way to weak to be a replicant. They were supposedly made superior in almost every way

[@Theomite]

@@johnmrog Deckard would very likely be an older model, maybe made during the days when they were still legal on Earth, and maybe made for reasons other than brute labor, so maybe not all of them were made equally powerful; the Nexus 1 models might've been not much different than regular humans. Pris' strength was unnecessary for a pleasure model because she could be dangerous to a john that got rough with her, which would make her bad for business. So making them all uniformly strong might've been a later decision.

[@jamesridley8565]

@Theomite But the later model would have been who Deckered ended up falling in love with that had fake memories not Deckerd himself. Besides someone would have been assigned to kill Deckerd also being that he was assigned to destroy the renegade models. Deckard was retiring why let him live.

[@n.johanness7451]

Ridley never disappoints. Alien and Blade Runner are my two favourite movies of all time.

[@greenbeech3055]

The actresses from this era were stunning.

[@hannahpumpkins4359]

Maybe Rachael is the unicorn... The dove represents peace - so when Roy grabbed the dove he was saying that he had found peace.

[@russiandude1851]

Shanelle, I could be wrong, but the last scene of the movie DOES reveal that he is a replicant - the unicorn was made by another character (detective most likely) who is aware of Deckard's dreams and memories...

[@jack_m100]

It's more of a 30's / 40's femme fatale and not 50's. In the 80's there was a bit of a 30's/40's nostalgia thing. And also a punk/ 'new wave' fascination. So Blade Runner merged those two 80's fads. All the smoking is a 40's thing, too.

[@modern_memory]

I saw this when it came out. This was during a time when sci-fi movies were at their peak, and visually, it didn't seem like anything special, at least on the surface; this movie really flew under the radar and didn't leave much of a mark, but it really stuck in your head once you saw it. If you were a fan of Heavy Metal comics and Enki Bilal, this was like a dream come true

[@DeronMeranda]

The interior shots in J.R.Sebastian's home were inside *The Bradbury Building*, an architectural masterpiece in Los Angeles, a mix of Victorian ornate ironwork, rich woods, and exposed elevator mecahnics. The first floor is still open to the public. The interiors of Deckard's home were from Frank Lloyd Wright's *Ennis House*, also in LA.

[@davidanderson1639]

I visited LA in 2010 & went to The Bradbury Building purely because it had been used in Blade Runner. It’s such an incredible building. Also the structure that was used for Bryant’s office still sits in a corner of Union Stations foyer.

[@michaelhall2709]

Also used to great effect in the original “Outer Limits” episode “Demon With a Glass Hand.”

[@GoSolar]

I always took the origami unicorn to be a pretty strong hint that Deckard is, in fact, a replicant (because how does Gaff know to make it?) And Deckard's knowing nod as picks up the unicorn says that he understands now.

[@Klee99zeno]

Blade Runner was a major moment in film history. It was not a success in its theatrical release but became a cult classic once it was available on VHS. It helped to develop the genre called cyber-punk, which has appeared in countless films, tv, novels, comics, and games. It was common in the early 80s to have a soundtrack of electronic music. It didn't suit some movies, but it does fit this one because the whole film is full of techno stuff. You should certainly watch the sequel soon.

[@henriklarsen8193]

Roy pushed the nail through his hand because death was setting in and his hand was getting numb. He chose pain over death.

[@halcundiff6886]

Did you not notice. The cop making origami was a young Edward James Olamos, Adama = BSG75.

[@mypl510]

Rachael is the Unicorn. One of a Kind!

[@cthulhucollector]

Blade Runner was the 1st movie I ever bought on DVD when that format came out.

[@technofilejr3401]

19:16 Despite the almost nonconsensual framing of the scene, yes Rachel does want to have sex with Deckard. But as she was about to say she couldn’t rely on her memories of past experiences. Rachel literally doesn’t know if her memories of sex are hers or Tyrell’s niece. So that is why he asked her to say “Kiss me, touch me”. Deckard is engaging with her here in the moment and not whoever she remembers herself to be.

[@Martman5150]

The original version of this had a voiceover that explained quite a lot.

[@BreetaiZentradi]

By the time I saw it in the theater I had read the original novel and the Marvel Comic created for the movie. With the addition of the voice over plus the actual movie, I had a lot of things going on trying to harmonize all of these things.

[@Martman5150]

@@BreetaiZentradi I actually read the Mad Magazine version first. Isn't that funny?

[@BreetaiZentradi]

@@Martman5150 I wish that was on my reading list as well.

[@stvpett]

I know a lot of hardcore fans hated my favorite version. There were several cuts, but the one I liked had a voiceover and a shot of Deckard and Rachel flying away somewhere in the end. It said that Tyrell had told Deckard that in addition to Rachel having been given memories and not knowing she is a replicant, she also had no artificially imposed lifespan. The implication was they could live happily ever after. I know so many people (including Ridley Scott) hated that version, but I'm a sucker for a happy ending and I've always liked it best.

[@Henrik_Holst]

They didn't fly away, they drove in a car (since the end scene is simply copied from The Shining).

[@StormhavenGaming]

The voice over was only in the original cinematic release (and subsequent TV versions I think). It was forced on Scott by the studio and both he and Ford hated the lines. That's why Ford sounds like he's being forced to read them at gunpoint. I also liked the noir feel that they gave the film, but they were pretty badly written. For example, right after Roy's final lines, the voice over has Deckard say "I don't know why he saved my life..." WHAT!? Weren't you listening, Deckard? He just told you exactly why he saved you! The line turned Deckard into a bumbling idiot.

[@petercollingwood522]

I agree. The original theatrical release with the voice over, no Unicorn dream, and the "happy endin" was what made the impression the first time I saw it. This version dissapoints me.

[@Therap1ssed]

Blade Runner 2049 is a very worthy sequel. Same screen writers as the first but with Denis Villeneuve at the helm and a Hans Zimmer score.

[@petercollingwood522]

I have to say I disagree.

[@stumilesyt]

2:42 There is a very satisfying term for this - Retrofuturism! Worth an internet deep dive, the artwork alone is stunning.

[@goldean5974]

Roy Batty’s dying words always make me tear up. Rutger Hauer improvised that whole soliloquy. He was such a great actor. RIP

[@mrtveye6682]

This is one of the most visually stunning movies ever made. The sets, the lighting, the cinematography is just stunning, and it really is timeless, can't do any better today with all the CGI in the world. Ofc the story is a classic too.

[@sellingacoerwa8318]

Ehh, Ridley really fumbled the love story between Decker and Rachel, never Scott's strong point "just slam her around the room a few times, ok now you love him" is everything else is classic.

[@mrtveye6682]

@@sellingacoerwa8318 That's true, love stories are not his strong point. Though I have to say, I think it works pretty good in this movie, as it's not a classic "boy meets girl and the fall in love, and it's so romantic"-love story. In the context of this movie, I think the rather "cold" and "unromantic" portrait of their relationship fits their characters and the overall theme of the story.

[@donkfail1]

@@sellingacoerwa8318 Sure, it seems a bit too brutal to be believable. But if you look at it as just another element of the homage to old noir movies it fits right in. Just look at Humphrey Bogart in The Maltese Falcon. When Mary Astor asks him "What else is there I could buy you with?" he just grabs her and kisses her. That scene wouldn't have been done that way today unless they wanted his character to be seen as a villain. On the other hand, if Deckard was to go by the book he would kill Rachel rather than doing what he does. And besides, they are both replicants and don't have the time to hesitate when it comes to love. Yes, I'm in the Deckard-is-a-replicant camp. Don't argue that point. I've "known" that from the first time watching the movie.

[@joeblankenship377]

There was hardly any blue screen at all. All the shots were done in camera on one piece of film. They would do multiple passes, and expose the film for each little piece that made up the shot. It's time consuming, but that's why it still holds up as well as it does.

[@storkfletcher821]

The movie holds up visually for sure, although I wouldn't say that we can't do better today on a technical level. Set crafting, CGI and cameras have all gotten better with time (artistic design is very subjective so no point in comparing that) so you could do things today that you really couldn't back then. But as said, it holds up for sure so it doesn't matter when watching it. As for the love story, I do agree that it's handled poorly. Not just the aggressive behavior to make her submit, but also that they have a scene with professing love which is far too soon to develop such feelings. The answer above regarding both people being replicants doesn't hold up for me since Rachel is so extremely human-like that it took several times more questions than usual to make Deckard think (he didn't declare it, he asked Tyrell) she was a replicant.

[@robertobrien5709]

The reason it looks real is because it is real, 40 year old SFX still far superior to CGI.

[@lowrivera]

For being a film person, Shanelle misses out. Watch the Bladerunner doc, Dangerous Days. 3 hours long, amazing to watch, it’s from 2007.

[@NOLAgenX]

This was the top performance by Rutger Hauer (RIP) IMHO. And that’s in a very nice handful of nice performances by him. This is the standout. Love the film still, after 40 years. I still won’t turn down an opportunity to watch.

[@ChicagoDB]

@Shanelle Riccio - try “Gattaca” starring Ethan Hawke, Jude Law, Uma Thurman, Ernest Borgnine and Tony Shaloub…I think you’ll love it. Beautiful cinematography and soundtrack too!

[@leftcoaster67]

No other movie had the perfect look, even now it looks stunning.

[@stefanhuddleston6816]

The unicorn suggests Gaff knew Decakrd's dreams and the only way he could do that was if those dreams were implanted making Deckard a replicant.

[@shainewhite2781]

4:29, I think this is THE FINAL CUT of Blade Runner.

[@walternullifidian]

That guy, Leon, in the opening scene, played General Munro in The Fifth Element! 🙃

[@MzQTMcHotness]

Finally! Some folks don’t like the Noire style. But I lOVE this film! I have waited for so long for you to get to this!!!

[@robertdnero2217]

The genius of Ridley Scott.

[@GSErnie]

I saw this in a theater as the studio-approved version, with the narration and an extra scene tacked on at the end. The extra scene was a brightly sunlit scene with Deckert and Rachel flying in a car together, presumably north. In my audience, when it transitioned from the dark film-noir of the movie to sudden sunlight, someone audibly cheered. They could not handle the non-stop darkness that Ridley Scott intended. It failed commercially at the time because I don't think people knew what it was. Now it is considered a classic, though people still don't respect the original version that I saw and liked at the time.

[@paulstroud2647]

The final scene in the original cut, with the car driving along the mountain valley, is actually an outtake from The Shining depicting the Torrances heading to the Overlook Hotel...

[@MadMattInc1]

Final cut removed a few things Mr. Scott didn't want in the movie, but the studio shoved into it after he was done. But also Ridley kept the negatives for every element of the movie, as well as a few effects he had shot to fix up, or add into the movie, that couldn't be finished. When given the chance to upgrade the movie to HD, and Blue Ray level video quality, he was able to hand them heavily cared for material, and then was even allowed to finish those effects, hence the Final Cut. One of the biggest fixes was the Replicant smashing through glass as she's being shot at. In the original if you looked close, you could tell it was a stunt actor in a bad wig since it was shot slow mo. They were able to edit the original actress's face and hair into those shots, and bring the original effects shots up to HD level, and give it slightly more polish, keep it looking as good as original film, but now at higher levels of resolutions.

[@TheJamieRamone]

28:29 - Well, you could try *WATCHING* the movie to find out. 😁

[@inmate1614]

I'm very surprised you have never seen this superb film until now, Shanelle.

[@foljs5858]

Wrong on the score "dating" it though. The score is even more timeless than the movie (and considered a timeless classic, still inspiring musicians from Daft Punk to obscure electronica artists. There's no person in modern electronica that doesn't revere it). You might think it's dated because in that scene you mentioned that it plays a "jazz/blues sax" theme, but it's not trying to do an 80's style sax score, it's intentionally making electronic "jazz/blues" to sound like a futuristic version of a film noir score. It's the same idea behind the noir/future look of the city, the 40s clothes of the Rachael and so on

[@gregorygant4242]

You just watched a classic. One of the best film noir 80's sci-fi films depicting a dystopian future of humanity. Fantastic score by Vangelis ! A masterpiece film !

[@yourthaiguy]

BEST SOUNDTRACK EVER! The effects were way ahead of their time and hold up to CGI even today. Remember Shanelle… this movie tanked in 82 and only found an audience later. Still Ridley’s most visually stunning movie and raised the bar for visual effects for decades…

[@johnpittsii7524]

Hi Shanelle hope you are having an great and awesome day ❤

[@kj6446]

Fun fact: Joanna Cassidy (the dancer replicant) came back years later to do reshoots of her death scene for the re release because in the original version you could clearly see the stunt double's face.

[@BobStock-n8h]

Soldier (1988) with Kurt Russell is set in the same universe as Blade Runner; both movies had the same writer and there are references to Blade Runner in Soldier including, I believe, a wreck of a hover taxi.

[@danielpeckham5520]

Yep. Alot of people forget about Soldier

[@Billy-zv6gv]

Old Asian feller is James Hong, helluvan Oscar winning actor, and best "multi-villian" movie is Big Trouble in Little China with Kurt Russell, a martial arts & black magic comedy. Thanks for this! Please enjoy that!

[@charlize1253]

And most recently the grandfather in "Everything Everywhere All at Once."

[@patrickholt2270]

The original soundtrack had that line as "I want more life, fucker!" (22:21). That's what I always hear when I watch this, even though they changed it for these re-releases. The story is adapted from Philp K. Dick's _Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?,_ where the set-up is that there was an atomic war a few decades ago which has left the world significantly irradiated, and this is why people are having to leave Earth for the Off World Colonies leaving much of the cities depopulated. That's why JF Sebastian's apartment building is largely empty except for himself. The Replicants were developed for conquering and terraforming alien planets, which is why they are faster, stronger, resistant to extreme temperatures and corrosives. In the meanwhile a new religion has taken over where people reflect on a story about a man who sacrifices his life to protect and care for a wild animal, so now there is massive demand for artificial animals for people to adopt as their piety. Thus Electric Sheep, and in Blade Runner, the genetically-engineered animals like the snake. Real animals have become rare due to the radiation and the dust in the atmosphere reducing plant life. The remaining cities have become multi-ethnic and polyglot because the remaining population of earth is relocating to the few locations where they can still find a functioning economy. It's not just ordinary US immigration, it's the final merging of every Earth country into these isolated cities where people are still leaving Earth from. "Wake up! Time to die!"

[@rodentnolastname6612]

The building Sebastian lives in was The Bradbury Building in IRL downtown LA. It's still there and you can visit it 😯 304 S Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90013

[@rodentnolastname6612]

And I believe the elevator is still functioning 😯

[@imcrazedandconfused]

Iconic movie. Timeless because of timeless topics. AI. Life and death. Reality and the imperfection of memories. Slavery. Racism. Death penalty. P.K. Dick was visionary and mental (seriously, most probably schizophrenic with paranoid episodes). What is the reality behind what you see and remember? This was an existential question for him, and it is present in almost all of his stories. Best role of Rutger Hauer, probably the best role of Daryl Hannah, epic soundtrack by Vangelis, style-building optics for dystopian sci-fi, incredible acting, incredible camera and light, and an early Ridley Scott movie... It was fun to watch you experiencing it for the first time. So much appreciation for the details. I really like that. Best regards!

[@BillyBillyBixby]

I had seen this on TV a bunch of times when I was a kid in the late 80s and it was always the version with the voiceover, but I still loved it and watched it whenever it was on TV. In my senior year of high school, I took a media studies course and the teacher played the uncut version for the class for us to analyze and I remember thinking that if this is anything like film school, I'm in!

[@1ListerofSmeg]

Fun Fact: Roy Batty & Rutger Hauer BOTH died in 2019 I love(& saw in the theater) the theatrical release of this(w voiceover- Still own it)❤❤The later versions are good also (but are different). This movie hopefully inspires you to ask yourself: What does it mean to be human? What is essential to ones humanity?

[@brom00]

Shanelle, the Final Cut is not as restored or remastered as you would think. Watch the original theatrical cut and you will see. The changes were more like "fixes" to shots. The biggest changes from original are the removal of a "40'd style film noir narration by Ford that provided exposition and a change to the ending that left it more open ended. I you know someone that has the 5 Disc "Special Edition", as to borrow it. It has both versions of the film. A wealth of BTS material, and a look at the shots they corrected that involved the help of one of Harrison Ford's sons and of Joanna Cassidy. Alsu the Tyrell Building is a real model and shot upside down.

[@John_Locke_108]

The 5 disk set also has the workprint version of the film. Been meaning to watch it but I keep forgetting.

[@brom00]

@@John_Locke_108 I had it for a time. It also has nearly an hours' worth of alternate and deleted scenes. like Deckard visiting Holden in the hospital.

[@djashley2002]

​@@John_Locke_108If you've got the original 5-disk DVD release (unfortunately it doesn't work for the Blu-ray or 4k releases) select play all for the Deleted and Alternative Scenes on Disc 4 and there's an almost perfectly watchable additional cut that comes in at around 45 minutes!

[@psterud]

Although an '80s kid, I didn't see this movie until the '90s, in an arthouse theater for a midnight show, and it was a revelation.

[@shainewhite2781]

8:42, James Hong, he's still living and still making movies at 94.

[@johnbernhardtsen3008]

Pos father in Kung Fu Panda series!

[@bekindandrewind1422]

There's quite the contention if Deckard was a replicant or not.. Some say he was and his memories of the unicorn are like a touchstone.. They might have been Gaff's memories which is what makes the origami unicorn mean something at the end.. Because how could Gaff KNOW about that?

[@a.duncan4790]

This was the first movie to portray the future as not all clean with new buildings. It showed old buildings along with new which makes it so much more realistic. I never think of that music as 80's. I guess since it was emulated by so many movies after that that were very 80s it tainted it? This is my favorite movies and I visited the Bradberry Building location and its story is amazing.

[@Lethgar_Smith]

talking crosswalks were not yet a thing in '82 so, that's one thing they got right.

[@Caroline_Tyler]

Saw it in the cinema with the voiceover intro which I actually quite liked as the 'forties detective, Philip Marlow' sort of fitted with the styling. Loved this film ever since.

[@goldenageofdinosaurs7192]

I think the voiceover (original version) is much better for first time viewers. So many reactors complain of not understanding what’s happening & they ask questions that are answered throughout the film in the theatrical, voiceover version.

[@jrobwoo688]

Happy Thanksgiving, Ya Replicant! Feeling Thankful for this upload!