Blade Runner Cinematography Analysis || Geoff Boyle/Nic Knowland

Here we have Geoff Boyle and Nic Knowland taking a look at Blade Runner. Deconstructing the film and some of their favourite shots.
---
Cooke Optics TV
www.cookeoptics.tv
Website www.cookeoptics.com
Facebook / cookeoptics
Twitter / cooke_optics
Instagram / cookeoptics
Linkedin: / 2831810
Thank you to the British Society of Cinematographers (BSC). www.bscine.com/
Filmed with a Sony FS5 and Cooke Mini S4/i Lenses.
Produced by ImageNova. www.imagenova.co.uk.
Email [e-mail] for enquires or leave a comment!

[@runemauland9821]

I need to get myself a mega motherfucker of a backlight...

[@raksh9]

Rune Mauland And something to bounce the backlight back at the talent.

[@TobyHoffmanDP]

"Concentrate on your story", that's what I learnt from this one..

[@Ov3rTheTop]

Best quote ever: "you know what, concentrate on your story."

[@theboofin]

Yes, no one wants to hear that...

[@savedfaves]

@@theboofin Especially filmmakers who hang out on Reddit. Story is the last thing on their mind.

[@savedfaves]

"You're not paid to make accurate pictures, you're paid to make pretty pictures". YES YES YES YES YES. 1000%. Netflix filmmakers need to learn this.

[@alex0589]

*Calls rental house* "Hello, do you any of those mega-motherfucker lights available for next week?"

[@joealderson7790]

LOL!!

[@bj0ernaa]

Would guess making a Baton-light out of 18K ARRIs would qualify as a MMF backlight :D

[@OldshoeFilmsProductions]

Mega motherf**ker of a backlight..........lol............. Geoff Boyle is crazy.

[@Oceansta]

lol

[@feuerwerkgod]

everytime i will explain my lighting now im gonna use this term lol...

[@yw1971]

In a good way

[@richardpurves]

RIP Geoff. Thanks mate, you taught me a lot ... more as a director. "Concentrate on the story..."

[@brushfuse]

These guys are great. Too many DOPs are going crazy with effects and copying others instead of thinking for themselves. "Concentrate on the story" - wise words!

[@ANigerianPrince]

This is like crack for aspiring cinematographers.

[@celo2043]

Nice mirror shot! pretty clever way to get the movie scenes and his face in a single composition

[@Anubis22774]

The cinematography in Blade Runner and 2049 are equally beautiful in different ways.

[@edgarbleikur1929]

2049 score haunts me... I watched it 3 times on the big screen just to be infused with that score...

[@adel616]

I find it completely dishonest the one in 2049. It screams attention whoring instead of serving the story and the movie like the original one.

[@88feji]

equally beautiful ? Not even close .... there are so many scenes in 2049 with bad lightings which are either too uninterestingly flat or too dark. For example the dark water fight is so dark you can hard see the vastness of the environment as they fail to even show the gigantic sea wall during the fight where its taking place. Its supposed to potentially be a scene showing the grandeur of the backdrop they are fighting in but fails to do so and therefore missed a great opportunity cinematographically. There is a poster of Deckard sitting beside K with the sea wall as the backdrop, I wonder what happen to that scene, I was expecting to see that scene after having seen the movie poster.. The orphanage scene and furnace factory had really flat lightings, not atmospheric at all, almost like it was shot for TV during the 80s and 90s .. The Las Vegas street's orange tone is so oversaturated you can hardly have a sense of depth ... and the street its too oddly empty like its just an big empty studio, where are the street lamp posts, road signs, loose cables, abandoned cars ... everything that suggests the abandoned human activities that people left behind in a hurry due to the intense radiation ? To me the sequel feels lazy in that they fail to fill in the little intricate details lof social activities of the environments. The first movie had all sorts of culture clashing of people selling ostrichs, snakes in the market, hare krishnan monks in the streets, dwarf street urchins tearing spare parts from cars etc etc ... the sequel had none of those, zero. Instead 2049 just put lots of bystanders and walking people who do nothing else except walking by or staring at K as he walks by, we have no sense of the cultural activities these people are engaged in ... they are just faceless figures like those unimportant human figures dotting an architect's blueprint drawing ... They make the scenes feel incredibly vacant. I know 2049 got best cinematography and thats why I think its overrated. Deakins had help from the fact that people sympathise with him not winning after getting like 8 or 9 nominations. But no, the cinematography is impressive only for a few short scenes in the movie (the giant hologram scene, a split second scene of K walking in front of giant road sweepers, maybe the rooftop scene with his girlfriend) ... most of the movie does not feel gold-worthy at all... that is in contrast with the original Blade Runner where almost every single frame can be framed up as a masterpiece ... if you play a digital copy of the original BR on your pc you can basically click anywhere along the time line and invariably get an exquisitely composed, wonderfully lit, atmospherically emotionally evocative cinematic still shot ...

[@bobh1782]

@@88feji mate seriously, you should shoot all the Hollywood features out there, you're a genius

[@savedfaves]

The original Blade Runner is a much better movie and looks better, too. More atmospheric and somehow more authentic. The new one feels digital and forced, or something.

[@Oceansta]

love that anamorphic vs spherical side by side test at 07:31. If u look closely, you can see how the characters appear squeezed and elongated in anamorphic but wider and more round in spherical.

[@theboofin]

Thinner is better!

[@savedfaves]

That anamorphic shot looked 50 times better.

[@christine9908]

this is brilliant. there was so much story that was told just through the lighting, it's stunning how the lights were done.

[@quinnls]

I could watch this a million times and learn something new every time

[@SuperHeroPeanut1]

Saw the thumbnail and just thought: "Yesss"

[@justimagine2403]

Amazing how much work went into the lighting. Smoke, no smoke, and subtle lens flares. It looks awesome as a viewer and you don't normally know why. Now I know why! Fantastic!

[@Maros_Mari]

concentrate on the story ... so true. Thanks for this, very inspiring to see how the DPs admire and analyse Jordan's work.

[@jaylamb218]

WOW!!! That’s why I love watching the videos from this site!!! You learn so much!!!

[@jiawenliTV]

2:30 Nic Knowland "ohh, a little wobbly there!"

[@RalphLindsen]

Please do more of these, just take different outtakes about different Blade Runner scenes. Or just put each interview online completely :D

[@savedfaves]

1,000,000%

[@StevieTheWanderer]

Watched this series on lighting twice! Thoroughly enjoyed it 😊😎

[@agfagaevart]

interesting to watch this, especially knowing that Bud Yorkin complained about the time Ridley took to film shots - and why he did so many retakes. He even wanted to take over directing Blade Runner.

[@EscapeCondition]

This was a lot of fun to watch

[@liberprimus6874]

Great watch!

[@whothetechknows]

I love this!

[@ludvigjuvodden7229]

This is great!

[@ThomasLuca]

Fantastic Thank You

[@DylanSaliba]

At least I'm not the only one that turns into a school girl when I talk about Deakins!

[@yw1971]

Knowland was the DP on "Vienna' video clip by Ultravox (& other clips of that band - Some are amazing). Respect

[@myemodiaries901]

Blade Runner 2049 is a genre defining piece of art. It is simply beautiful

[@88feji]

Disagree ... 2049 is quite boring when you compare it with the first movie and with all those magnificent cyberpunk art inspired by the first movie .. just try to google "sci fi art" or "cyberpunk inspired by Blade Runner", you will know what I mean ... 2049 pales in comparison with all those things ...

[@user-iy7jo7bq4f]

@@88feji Not really. 2049 may not have the same impact as BR, but it is an instant classic for this generation.

[@88feji]

+陳潔明 This generation has been badly starved of a great sci fi masterpiece for 10-20 years, thats why a slightly above average sci fi like 2049 is praised sky high ...

[@user-iy7jo7bq4f]

@@88feji Above average??? Lol.. don't get over yourself... BR was not without its imperfection, and so is this one, but I do think it truly expands the world of the setting while telling a really fantastic story. This is a movie about how man deals with fate... K, being a replicant (designed to serve us), was always told that he wasn't as real as humans (ex. "Should" be happy that he lacks a soul) and his life was filled with unreal subjects, like an AI girlfriend and holographic food. When he reported the potential discovery of a replicant child, his superior, shocked, ordered him to kill the child because its existence would shake the already broken world, (A very interesting yet realistic take on of how our view of the unknown.) because the child wasn't supposed, in any way, to exist. Originally, K viewed it as an ordinary, albeit unusual, retirement task. Until he realized, at least he thought, that he was the child himself. This shook his reality and worldviews; once thought that he was nothing but a machine being ordered around, and his greatest joy was his AI girlfriend that only he believed was real. He thought he was a miracle, something that broke the order of nature and destiny, like humans. (We are said to be able to shape their own fate.) However, the truth struck when he knew he wasn't the "chosen one". We felt his disappointment in life -- the hope that you could be something bigger was utterly demolished. Then the replicant lady said, "We all thought we could've been the one." Isn't that how life is? Don't we always think we are the master of our life, but fate always slap us right in the face with the realization of our situation and insignificance? Isn't life filled with the disappointments that we aren't the chosen one when we always think we are? K was seemingly defeated and chained by fate again. Then he heard about what the resistance wanted with Deckard (Deckard's fate.). K, knowing that he was deprived of the right of choosing his own path, choose to save Deckard from Leto and the resistance (not killing Deckard even though the Resistance wished him to), because Deckard deserved to have his own fate (Very similar to that Roy Batty accept the fact that he doesn't deserve life, but Deckard, a living person, does.). Ultimately, K couldn't escape his fate and died, but Deckard was able to live his life freely. Like Roy, a Replicant himself, gave life to Deckard by saving him while acknowledging that he he can't escape death and accepting his fate. "Being able to choose (ie. Not destined and programmed) the right thing is the most human ("We choose our own fate"...) thing we can do." K knew he ultimately couldn't choose for himself, but he chose to let others have the right to choose. The brilliance of the movie is that it always foreshadows its themes, hinting them here and there, but never stating them to the audiences. A lot of great films, like Nolan's movie, take Dark Knight and Inception, for example, would tell you what you should know in the forms of character monologue (DK's ending.) or the main plotline (Cobb's guilt with his wife's death and his desire to see his children were shown directly to our faces.). BR2049 does the opposite; never did it directly talk about the characters dealing with their supposed destination (Leto's view on humanity's destination for advancement, the chief's view on humanity's supposed downfall if they know about the replicant child, the resistance's view on their destination to rebel and Deckard's destination to die for the greater good, and K sees that even though he cannot choose his destination, Deckard does.), it lays out (not tell) its message with keywords ("You should", "We can",...), characteristic (K's being a Replicant, the child being a miracle...), and character choices (K's final action-- not take control of his fate but leave others the chance to choose.). This film is deep, and it doesn't tell you how; it wants you to see for your own. This film is equal to its predecessor, plot-wise, visual-wise, performance-wise, music-wise, and concept-wise, but the first BR was more impactful indeed.

[@88feji]

+陳潔明 "..This is a movie about how man deals with fate....." uhh ...which movie is not about how man deals with fate ? Its not like 2049 is the first such movie, 99% of movies are about man dealing with fate ... describing the movie in a dramatic way will not change how disappointing the movie actually is to people like me who have a different kind of appreciation from you ... The topic of replicants being regarded as emotionally less than humans is an already been there done that topic in the first movie and in the many other sci fi movies since then ... Its not particularly interesting to me anymore ... And I dislike the fact that they took the coolness of the unique characters from the first movie and made them mundane and dowdy in 2049. Now Rachel and deckard is turned into a pair of papa and mama with a long lost child, now Gaff has gone from city speak mysterious shadowy detective to become an old retiree sitting in an old folks hospital facility and even lost his city speak uniqueness ... previously he was this guy who kind of treats Deckard rudely and coldly and suddenly in 2049 he's talking about Deckard like they had some sort of buddy buddy cop brotherly relationship , there's so much illogical stuffs going on ... The cinematography is nice in 2049 only in a few handful of scenes, and by nice I do mean moderate nice, not great... most of the rest of the movie have very flat uninteresting lightings and locations (the orphanage, the furnace factory, the casino, the casino lounge, the completely featureless black water fight, the orange tone is so flat its not like a heavy evening haze at all etc etc) I get that you love the weepy aspect of K's story, but frankly thats exactly one of the main reasons I dislike 2049 ... it feels more soap weepy mellowdrama than actual groundbreaking sci fi.. in contrast, the sorrow of Rachel discovering she's a replicant and the admiration of life of Roy Batty is a portrayed with a lot more elegance and sophication... And why would they have so much trouble with creating a working reproduction organ for the replicants when they have already engineered the far more complex brain, eyes and even memories ? Even today's scientists have already have clone animals which have successfuly reproduced naturally through natural means ... There are a lot more things I am unhappy with 2049 but I won't go into everything its a long list of things ...

[@Skanda1111]

Not paid to paint accurate pictures. We are paid to make pretty pictures. Kurosowa was so particular about making a pretty picture..man he was so ahead in his thinking. Story is key but showing it beautifully is also important atleast when youve got a cinematographer involved. Story is for the director to think and their ego less collaboration is important.

[@888marin888]

Priceless vid'

[@michaelsetiawan2746]

I recognized that reel rattling sound in the opening of this video from somewhere.

[@JoaoSolimeo]

Honest Trailers?

[@BlackWinterProduction]

Thank you! Though 2049 looks good, the original, filmed with magical anamorphics, looks much more gorgeous and impressive to me. More contrast, richer colours, more flares, more bokeh, more character. Was especially noticeable on a big screen when they showed the old clip of Rachel :)

[@MystikalScopeProductions]

Black Winter but it was a reflection of Ridley Scott-Jordan Cronenweth’s collaboration and their vision, Scott didn’t want the sequel to borrow too heavily from the first film as it it supposed to have its own identity and feel hence what Denis Villenueve-Roger Deakins did. It’d be cheap to try and imitate a filming style 30 years later but they did great to homage to it with the lighting in certain scenes and framing

[@BlackWinterProduction]

Yes, probably. Yet in some cases I do not mind borrowing :) The new identity is much weaker, IMHO. For instance, I absolutely LOVE the look of Star Wars: The Force Awakens which I think struck the style/homages the right way (DP Dan Mindel).

[@88feji]

I really find the 2049 scenes like the zen office, the casino, the furnace factory, the orphanage factory and many of the foggy aerial shots to be eith too foggy (which erases all the beautiful textures that the artists painstakingly added to the buildings and sets) or too boring looking ... many scenes just feels very hollow and soul-less, its mind numbing when the whole movie lacks variation of style where every is just a one-note style of big empty spaces minimalism ..

[@Anubis22774]

Steve C I especially loved the shots of K’s apartment and the police station. Surreal in a more modern way.

[@88feji]

+Anubis22774 But don't you think K's apartment's interior looks like most hotel rooms we currently have in most cities ? Nothing unique looking about it .. The interior is not very futuristic looking or interesting, the only thing that helps the apartment scenes is how the outside of the apartment looks which has a nice neon mood but again, not great, especially if you compare with the scenes of Deckard's apartment ... (Deckard's apartment have all sorts of interesting angles, tiles, shadow play, moving lights from outisde and the scene where Deckard stands at the balcony looking at the outside Blade Runner City with flying cars flying among the gigantic walls of giant skyscapers is breathtaking, its cyberpunk at its pinnacle best) Its the same problem with the police chief's office room, not very interesting interior with a outside view which is kind of moody but not great.. The lighting for both scenes are seriously uninteresting ...

[@TheStoenk]

1:05 well that was unexpected lol

[@NoNameNo.5]

Maybe the most beautiful looking movie ever. NeoNoirFuturePunk mega scene

[@steveashlee]

No one even mentions Jordan Cronenweth. Yikes.

[@88feji]

The mentions are probably edited out ...its hard to describe what Jordan Cronenweth has created cinematographically and he did it while dying of an illness. As an artist myself I will always hold what he said about lighting to heart, one of the most precious enlightenments he has brought to my aesthetic understanding of light is that lights are everywhere around us ... from the sun to the artificial lights to the reflected lights off surfaces of glasses, buildings and cars etc. His understanding of lighting made Blade Runner probably the richest looking movie I've ever seen as he did not restrict himself the way other cinematographers rigidly do, he created not only static lights but also made moving shimmering lights with mysterious unknown light sources a feature of many scenes in the movie.. the moving shafts of lights shimmering bizarrely through the window blinds never looked so intereting ...

[@305kubrick]

Does anyone know where one can purchase a semi silvered mirror? Is there also another name for it?

[@yannickp3085]

"mega-mother-fucker of a back light" lol

[@metsot]

I prefer the slightly grainier image of dvd against bluray with this movie.

[@dramares]

7:14 THERE IT IS... "So much nicer."... POSSIBLY.

[@simoniousfrizze9309]

Which Blade Runner are they talking about ?

[@CookeOptics]

Ridley Scott's 1982 classic

[@goitegi]

“Mega motherfucker of a backlight”

[@milovarquiel]

What does he means by a piece of poly?

[@Oceansta]

Polystyrene sheet used to bounce light off

[@milovarquiel]

@@Oceansta Thank you very much.

[@michaelfrymus]

Oh, they are showing different blade runner movies... I was watching this and I was like uhh, I dont remember this . This wasnt in the movie..

[@theboofin]

Well anamorphic makes people a little thinner. Always a better idea to have thinner people....

[@enricht]

Are you sure this is a bounce? It seems too directional, and doesn't light up the blinds..... kzbin.info/www/bejne/fn6rm2akirhmfJI

[@renderdreality]

Please get better mic's

[@mrei8464]

why is the guy talking about the first shot like it was hard to come up or to figure out? no condescending just want to know

[@agfagaevart]

because IT WAS hard back in the early '80s. it took skilled people like David Dryer (FX supe) and Doug Trumbull and their team a lot of time and effort to complete those shots

[@valpro99]

he likes her... Who?... Rachael...

[@dejib.3930]

Just a masterpiece of cinema. The new one is far behind this (story not image ).

[@a-g3003]

I don't think the language was necessary.

[@cleoncleoncleon]

No... Open your mind a bit and you'll realize they are JUST WORDS, and in this context, it disarms people, humanizes them a bit.

[@a-g3003]

Cleon Arrey I was watching it with my Daughter and wasn't expecting it that was all.

[@cleoncleoncleon]

That's fair, for sure.. haha yea.. no ratings on the internet! definitely got to keep your guard up .

[@a-g3003]

Cleon Arrey - Great content either way!

[@a-g3003]

Keep the enthusiasm Geoff, your input is inspirational. I was just embarrassed to hear my daughter ask me what a mega mother*****r of a backlight was :) In front of my wife! Thanks for sharing your knowledge!